View restoration wins Malibu council approval

0
386
From left: City Manager Jim Thorsen, Councilwoman Laura Rosenthal, Mayor Pro Tem Joan House, Mayor Lou La Monte and Councilmen Skylar Peak and John Sibert. 

The Malibu City Council fulfilled a long-running request from voters last week, when it voted 5-0 to draft a citywide ordinance granting residents a right to restore views that have been obstructed by foliage on neighboring properties. 

Sixty percent of Malibu voters in 2008 approved an advisory measure that asked if the council should adopt an ordinance requiring the removal or trimming of foliage “in order to restore and maintain primary views from private homes.” 

Under the ordinance, neighbors would settle view obstruction conflicts through a “private right of action” program first through informal discussions, then arbitration or mediation and, if that fails, a civil lawsuit. Should the dispute progress to a lawsuit, the city would issue an advisory opinion in favor of one of the parties, but would not enforce the opinion. 

The move toward the ordinance is a key step for many who recounted fruitless tales of neighbor disputes over view obstructions. 

“We have a peek-a-boo view. But [our] house was designed to have a massive view,” said Claudia Taylor, who said she started with an expansive ocean view at her Sea Lane Drive home when she moved in 12 years ago—until a neighbor planted unsightly oak trees. 

“You’re forced to become some kind of a midnight gardener or you’re in a contentious relationship with your neighbor,” she told the council. 

Taylor is among 234 Malibu property owners who submitted applications to the city last year expressing interest in passing a view restoration ordinance. With an ordinance in place, residents would be granted the right to restore an old view if there is photographic evidence of a view dating as far back as cityhood incorporation in 1991. 

Taylor said she has gone as far as offering to pay for her neighbor to remove the oak trees that block her view. But her attempts have been unsuccessful, and she now turned to the city for a solution. 

“I’m asking you how I can be a good neighbor and I need your help,” she said. 

Avoiding vulnerability to lawsuits was a major point of emphasis for Councilman Lou La Monte, who sees the merits of the ordinance but wants the city to avoid legal pitfalls. 

“I want us to do it legally so that we don’t wind up defending our actions in court and so that [Public Works Director] Bob Brager doesn’t have to go [to an affected property] with a chainsaw and get a tree chopped down,” La Monte said. 

Associate Planner Ha Ly explained how the city’s “advisory opinion” would work in a view conflict.

“During initial discussion [in a Private Right of Action case] staff could answer questions regarding view restoration rights provided in the ordinance, we could explain required procedures and conduct site visits to document primary views…If binding arbitration is rejected, staff could assist property owners by issuing an advisory opinion. This could be included as evidence in a private civil action case,” Ly said. 

Ly and Planning Director Joyce Parker-Bozylinski cited the success of a similar view restoration ordinance and program in Rolling Hills Estates, a town in the South Bay where residents similarly covet majestic views of the Pacific Ocean. 

“The Rolling Hills planning director said 99 percent of the time neighbors work everything out in the initial phase,” Ly told the council. Rolling Hills has not had to issue an advisory opinion to date, meaning neighbors are able to settle view disputes and avoid legal proceedings, Ly said. 

That revelation came as a surprise to Councilwoman Laura Rosenthal, who strongly supported enacting view restoration rights, as she is among the hundreds of Malibu residents struggling to regain a view. Her neighborly encounters have been largely negative, she said. 

“People are not being good neighbors. I had a view when I moved in 24 years ago. I no longer have an ocean view,” Councilwoman Laura Rosenthal said. “I have trees that go …25 feet above someone’s roofline in the back of their home. The notion of them saying it’s for privacy reasons is ridiculous.” 

But without first getting an ordinance in place, residents have nothing to back them up at this point. 

“Sometimes you really do need a stick, i.e. an ordinance, to get people to respond,” she said. “[In Rolling Hills], most people are choosing to work together rather than getting the city involved. That just isn’t happening right now [in Malibu] without an ordinance.” 

Ly said the drafted ordinance would have to be taken back to the Planning Commission before it goes back to the council. She could not estimate when the first draft would be completed.