Drivers swerving out of control, smashing into parked or traveling cars and knocking down power poles seems to be a daily occurrence in Malibu lately.

Four cars traveling on Pacific Coast Highway in the Carbon Beach area slammed into each other like tumbling dominos on Tuesday morning, injuring three people, including a child. A BMW had stopped for a crossing pedestrian and was rear-ended by a pickup truck.

According to Dep. Doug Duvall of the Lost Hills Sheriff’s Station, “The BMW shot across traffic, clipped a car in the oncoming traffic lane and then hit a parked car.”

After it hit the BMW, “the pickup truck careened into a parked trailer and knocked the trailer into traffic.”

Traffic on PCH encountered yet another delay after an accident occurred in the late afternoon on Saturday, while beachgoers and residents crowded local beaches.

Two people were injured and traffic was backed up significantly when a vehicle hit a telephone pole between Rambla Vista and Carbon Canyon.

“A person in a van apparently drifted off the road and smashed into a telephone pole,” said Duvall. “Deputies arrived to find two people injured at the scene.”

However, the identity of the driver is not yet known. “At this time they are still determining who the driver was,” said Duvall.

After the accident, the power lines were deactivated for a while, and although Duvall said the accident was cleared in about 45 minutes, traffic was delayed for several hours on PCH, according to witnesses.

Another injury accident occurred Aug. 13 on PCH at Topanga Canyon during morning rush hour, when a driver careened headlong into a power pole and then into a parked car. On the same day, a cement truck overturned on Stunt Road, downing power lines for much of the afternoon. In yet a third incident that day, a driver crashed into a power pole on Kanan Dume Road at Castle View Drive, which fell into the road. Southbound traffic was diverted into northbound lanes and it was midnight before all lanes were open again.

The California Coastal Commission’s local coastal plan (LCP) for Malibu is moving ahead as planned and will be ready for review and comment in the first part of September, according to Chuck Damm, commission senior deputy director.

The LCP will spell out what the city can and cannot do in the way of developing much of its own land, regulating commercial usage along the coastline and even how to control sewage waste. The Coastal Commission was required by law to submit an LCP for Malibu after the commission rejected the city’s own draft plan last year.

The fate of a new and revised Malibu city-drafted LCP, submitted to the Coastal Commission on July 26, is unclear. City Attorney Christi Hogin said it appeared to her that “there is resistance to accepting our plan” by the commission.

The city rushed its plan to completion in the hope its provisions would be considered for inclusion in the commission’s draft. But deputy director Damm, in an Aug. 7 letter to Hogin, listed several requirements that were missing from the LCP submittal.

In essence, Damm’s letter cited failure to include:

• Copies of relevant zoning ordinances and zoning maps.

• Copies of public notices that were sent out prior to the many hearings that were held on the LCP in the past few months, and “speakers’ slips” indicating who participated.
• Supporting documents for environmental impact reports that were submitted.

• An indication of “whether the LCP will take effect immediately upon Coastal Commission approval or will require formal city adoption after commission approval.”

“It was pretty nit-picky … they were basically asking for a copy of our mailing list,” Hogin said. And she speculated the commission was resisting acceptance of the city plan because once it is formally on file, the commission must then begin a 90-day period of hearings and recommendations for changes. In other words, they would be under a time pressure to get their own draft ready for scrutiny.

“I think they’d like to avoid it (the Malibu LCP) altogether. That’s the message,” said Hogin.

But Damm denied any such motive. In fact, in his letter to Hogin, Damm wrote: “Notwithstanding the inadequacy of the city’s submittal for filing, staff will review what was submitted and will incorporate those provisions that are deemed appropriate for inclusion in the LCP” being drafted by the commission. He reaffirmed that commitment in a later interview.

Hogin said the list of missing requirements would be easy to comply with, and that there should be no further cause to delay the LCP’s filing.

The Stanford 9 test scores results are out and the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District continues to improve in nearly all areas of studies in all schools, said SMMUSD Superintendent John Deasy after looking at preliminary results.

However, Malibu school numbers show increases in some areas and grades while indicating a small decrease in other grades and areas of studies.

And, except for math scores for Malibu High’s ninth grade, high school level testing scores turned out lower overall than the elementary and junior grade levels.

This was the fourth year of testing in the state’s STAR Program for students in grades 2 through 11. Students in grades 2 through 8 took the reading, mathematics, written expression and spelling sections of the Stanford Achievement Test (Stanford 9). Grades 9, 10 and 11 did not take spelling, but took tests in science and history-social science.

These tests were designed to help the state monitor the progress of school districts throughout California.

But Deasy noted that the Internet results, which were posted on Aug. 15, should be regarded as preliminary until they have been reviewed.

“Our test coordinator and entire leadership team will be checking the results for any reporting problems,” said Deasy in a press release.

But for now, test results indicate that SMMUSD’s results are improving in some areas while others have lost some ground.

Math scores were notably higher at Juan Cabrillo Elementary’s third grade level where scores improved from last year with a jump from 69 percent to 91 percent. These numbers reflect the percentage of students scoring at or above the national average on the 2001 Stanford 9 test. A 50 means that half the school’s students were at or above the national average).

The third grade improved in spelling as well, which went from last year’s numbers of 56 percent to this year at 75 percent.

Webster and Point Dume elementary schools, overall, stayed steady in most areas of study. However, Point Dume’s fifth grade class was at 100 percent in reading, 13 percent higher than last year.

As with elementary testing scores, junior high and high school scores showed mixed results.

However, big differences were seen from the jump to the 9th, 10th and 11th grades, where scores in reading, math and language were notably lower than junior and elementary grades, with Malibu High school scoring in the 60th and 70th percentiles.

The district, in its press release, concurred that the results, after four years of testing, will help the school district gather data with other achievement information to see if its efforts to strengthen curriculum and instruction are having an impact overall.

Demographics, English proficiency, economic status and varying student needs should also be taken into consideration since they can have an impact on the overall scoring system. Results are also reported separately for different groups such as boys and girls.

Sheriff’s Dept. explains high cost

of crime fighting.

By Ken Gale / Special to The Malibu Times

Violent crime has fallen dramatically in Malibu since the city incorporated 10 years ago. From a high of 840 incidents in 1991 to a low of 315 in 1999 and 316 last year, the latest figure available, violent crime is down 63 percent in this affluent city by the sea, according to the L.A. County Sheriff’s Dept.

Violent crimes are labeled “Part I” crimes by the Sheriff’s Dept. They include homicide, assault, rape and theft.

The Malibu pattern roughly followed the national downward trend in violent crime during the 1990s. The high-flying economy, with more people working and making higher wages, is often given as a significant factor in the crime drop.

However, local sheriff’s officials cannot attribute the drop in Malibu violent crime to any one specific factor.

Sheriff’s Capt. Jim Glazer said candidly, “I don’t know why” crime went down in Malibu. Glazer is commander of the Lost Hills Sheriff’s Station, which polices Malibu and many other cities on both sides of the Santa Monica Mountains, as well as the canyons in between. “My department does not take credit,” he said.

Still, noting the apparent downturn in the economy, Glazer said, “When it (crime) turns around and goes up–and it surely will–it won’t hurt to have a good law enforcement program in place.”

Glazer made his comments at a recent meeting of the Malibu City Council Subcommittee on Finance and Administration. The subcommittee was reviewing the sheriff’s budget, looking for possible ways to cut back.

In the past, Councilmember Jeff Jennings has suggested the city might divert money from the sheriff’s budget to spend on its own youth programs.

Sheriff’s Det. Todd Kosisko touted the department’s juvenile intervention teams in high schools, involving students in law enforcement role-playing scenarios and a teen court program in which students judge and sentence their peers cited for minor offenses for possibly helping with the downward trend in local crime.

Such programs, Glazer said, give students the confidence to “come forward freely” if they have information about a crime on campus.

At $4.34 million, Malibu’s contract with the Sheriff’s Dept. eats up more than one-fifth of the entire city budget. That about equals the budget percentages of two neighboring cities, Agoura Hills and Calabasas, which also contract with the Sheriff’s Dept.

Malibu has a much smaller population than either of those cities (13,300 compared to 22,150 for Agoura Hills and 20,450 for Calabasas).

A big reason that Malibu pays a much higher dollar figure for law enforcement, according to Lt. Tom Bradstock, commander of the sheriff’s substation in Malibu, is traffic–especially on Pacific Coast Highway.

It is estimated that more than 35,000 cars travel through Malibu each day on PCH.

In the year 2000, Malibu had a total of 356 traffic accidents (including PCH), compared to 140 for Calabasas and 86 for Agoura Hills (these figures do not include accidents on the 101 Freeway). Traffic ticketing also requires more deputies. It takes more traffic deputies to patrol Malibu roads than for Agoura Hills and Calabasas combined.

Despite its lower population, Malibu also had a higher percentage of Part I crimes: 37 percent for Malibu, 34 percent for Agoura Hills, and 29 per cent for Calabasas.

These higher crime figures are largely attributed to beachgoers and other transients passing through the city on PCH. There are no statistics on how many of those crimes are against Malibu residents, but Glazer said “better than half of the crimes” committed in Malibu are burglaries from cars, and most of those occur in beach parking lots.

Due to the extra visitor/transient activity in Malibu, it takes about twice as many deputies to police the city than are used in either of the other two cities. In a 24-hour period Malibu employs 19.4 deputies over two shifts. Calabasas has 10.4 deputies, Agoura 9.4.

The subcommittee, led by councilmembers Jennings and Tom Hasse, will report its findings and recommendations regarding the sheriff’s budget to the City Council at a later date.

Public expresses concern over number of variances required and traffic problems in the area. Some request an environmental impact review before going forward with approval of the development.

By Sylvie Belmond / Staff Writer

A proposed office building in the Point Dume area that has been the center of controversy among homeowners and councilmembers lately was the center of attention at a Planning Commission meeting on Monday night.

This planned 14,950 square foot semi-circular office complex, to be located on a 2.29-acre lot on Portshead Road between Kanan Dume and Heathercliff Roads, would require eight discretionary approvals from the commission before going forward with construction.

The project consists of four attached structures that would house approximately 12 offices and provide 60 parking spaces for tenants.

But while opponents to the project say they appreciate the discreet and well-designed building, created by architect Edward Niles, they also expressed concerns about how traffic will impact the area, which already has a hazardous traffic pattern.

A nearby elementary school, existing businesses and the Pacific Coast Highway access already create traffic problems on certain days.

Neighbors also want the commission to consider future developments on nearby properties, such as the adjacent Malibu Bay Company’s (MBC) parcel, which may be developed into athletic fields, and a recreation center if the development agreement goes through, before they approve this project.

But as he presented the project, Niles emphasized that Malibu has a great need for office space.

“There is a big demand for office space in Malibu because Malibuites don’t want to commute,” said Niles.

This complex would provide office space for local attorneys, accountants, writers and headhunters, he said, reassuring neighbors and commissioners that this building is not designed for large corporations or customer-serving businesses like restaurants or stores.

However, to get the project built, the applicant is requesting:

• A site plan review for a height increase above 18 feet

• A conditional use permit for construction exceeding 500 square feet

• A variance for exceeding the 1,000 cubic yard grading limit

• A variance for placing the parking lot in the required front yard setback

• A minor modification for reducing the Environmental Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA) setback

• A minor modification for reducing front yard setbacks

• A sign permit

These variances made the neighbors uneasy because they did not want any precedent to be set.

To mitigate the possible impacts, neighbors asked the commission to require an Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

Of the three commissioners who were present, only Andrew Stern seemed uncomfortable about the possible impacts. He indicated that he may opt for an EIR to have a more thorough examination of the matter.

“How can we ask for a mitigation project on somebody else’s property?” asked Ed Lipnick, commission chair, as he spoke about the problematic intersection, which is under the jurisdiction of Caltrans, not the city or the property owner.

California Environmental Quality Act requirements were also brought up by Ozzie Silna, an active community member, who said this project and the MBC proposed project on the adjacent property might include some contradictions with state rules.

Moreover, parking issues on Portshead were also touchy because the California Coastal Commission is opposed to no-parking signs in coastal zones.

After testimonies from the public and from the applicant, the commission continued the matter to October, giving time to both parties to thoroughly evaluate the impact of this development and possible mitigation measures.

The commissioners also considered a resident’s concern about lack of notification, and agreed it may be a good idea to start posting large signs on properties where impending commercial developments may take place to be sure nearby residents are properly notified, which is the current procedure in the cities of Santa Monica and Calabasas.