As you may know, there is an advisory vote on the April ballot asking whether Malibu residents want their City Council to enforce the cutting of trees and hedges to provide views to back lots.
The City of Malibu has tried to be ecology sensitive, yet proposing the destruction of mature trees which will certainly have an adverse effect on our local environment is one reason to oppose this current proposal. Is sacrificing trees that have taken years to mature and that benefit our environment by reducing CO2 a fair trade off for maybe a distant view of blue water that one might impose on days when there is no coastal mist, fog or haze? I would hope not.
The state of California has no easement for light or view, yet the City of Malibu proposal suggests we should enact and enforce such an ordinance. The cost of enforcement is not mentioned in this proposal. Trying to determine each property’s primary view, which neighbors’ trees obstruct, will be a very selective and time consuming process, expensive and fraught with legal peril. The city already has limited resources. The ballot proposal does not mention these costs.
Privacy is a very important issue to most residents of Malibu. Drive down any street in Malibu, especially Pacific Coast Highway, and this becomes apparent. Should one person’s view become more important than another’s privacy, thus causing the person who desires privacy to sacrifice their trees? I would hope not.
On a personal note, I recently had 40 trees on my property poisoned. Why? It seems obvious from the trees that were poisoned that someone was trying to obtain a view. Should this proposal pass, it might encourage more such acts of eco-terrorism.
I recommend a “no” vote on proposition E.
Dr. David Frankle