In Malibu, a city that’s lately been marked by a growing divide between slow growth preservationists (sometimes given the unflattering nickname “NIMBYs”) and pro-development activists, it appears all that’s needed to bridge the two groups is one 41-inch native sycamore tree.
Commissioners voted 5-0 to preserve the tree, though its future is still not totally secure.
Malibu residents young and old packed City Hall Monday night to hear the fate of a beloved 150-year-old sycamore that was slated for removal to allow for increased development in the Civic Center. The removal of the tree would allow for a widening of Pacific Coast Highway to create a right turn lane at Cross Creek Road, which in turn would allow for increased traffic into the Civic Center caused by new development.
Impassioned residents testified to the importance of the sycamore, pleading with Commissioners to save the tree and five eucalyptus trees near it, which were all slated for removal.
“They’ve survived fires and floods, but will they survive your vote tonight?” resident Steve Woods asked.
As the hours ticked by, what was once a development-versus-preservation argument transformed into a development-versus-safety one.
“I think that intersection needs to be safer. I think these historic, iconic trees need to be saved. I think both,” said Commissioner Mikke Pierson, summing up the feelings of the Planning Commission. The Commission went on to vote unanimously in favor of mitigating traffic at the intersection of Cross Creek and PCH, while prohibiting the removal of the sycamore — without a plan for what to do with the intersection.
It appears the sycamore, along with the five eucalyptus trees, will live to see another day. However, if a solution isn’t to be found, the trees may still have to go.
“If there’s absolutely no mitigation measure that can be thought up … we think there may be some, but if there’s absolutely no mitigation measure that might be thought up, the project has to go through,” said Assistant City Attorney Tarquin Preziosi, describing the development agreement secured by the owners of the proposed La Paz project. In other words, per their agreement, the project will be greenlighted whether or not a safe solution can be found for the intersection.
The lack of a safe alternative to tree removal didn’t sit well with Commissioners or Caltrans traffic engineers, who cautioned that proposed methods, like lane narrowing to fit the tree, could result in skimping on safety.
“It’s a couple of feet, can’t you do something?” Chair David Brotman asked Caltrans District 7 Office of Permits Chief Omid Ghaemi.
“If I’m being honest, maybe in the future, someone will come to me and say ‘why didn’t you just add those two feet and save my daughter or save my son?’” Ghaemi said.
La Paz spokesperson Don Schmitz concurred.
“If you deny this intersection, the only thing you deny is the public safety,” Schmitz told the Commission, later adding, “We’re talking about the tragedy of the tree. What about the tragedy of the people who are dying?”
Commissioners worked with Preziosi to find a solution that would allow the Commission to return to the tree removal plan if alternatives aren’t found.
“If it turns out that Caltrans will not accept what we’ve done, and the City cannot come up with any other equivalent mitigation, will we have another bite at this apple,” Commissioner Jeffrey Jennings said.
The length of time the La Paz project has been dragged through various permitting and planning stages has frustrated developers, who see Monday’s decision as a step backward.
“I think the City is getting very close to a breach of the development agreement,” Schmitz said.
“I appreciate that you’ve spent four years, we’ve spent four hours. So you’re going to need to give us a little more time,” Pierson told Schmitz.
