Is it Possible to Make PCH Safer, and Malibu Saner

Without question, the PCH is the bane of Malibu, given the highway’s daily accidents, capricious gridlock and conspicuous distracted drivers.

It is the price the city’s 13,000 residents must pay living in a self-anointed coastal paradise, through which 80,000 commuters pass every day, and up to an estimated 400,00 beach-bound visitors descend on sunny days.

After years of endless complaints, and years of studies, the city gave its blessing last week to an exacting 900 page report, recommending some 150 improvements with a price tag totaling 20 million dollars plus, presumably to make the roadway safer.

As detailed by consultants, the improvements include synchronized traffic signals, realigning several intersections, straightening sections of the road, an underpass, and bolder stripping and signage.

The improvements will fine-tune the highway, and no doubt make the intersections less prone to rear end collisions. .

But not solved is the conflict trying to accommodate bike lanes and on street parking in the eastern stretch of PCH, or more critically slowing traffic. Despite the praises of the City Council and others, there is no silver bullet to solve the harsh realities of the PCH.

Indeed, many of the recommendations might be counter intuitive. Traffic will probably increase.

Improving roadways almost always generates more traffic; traffic being like water, flowing downhill, to find its way into the most conducive channel.

And in Malibu, the PCH is the one and only channel, a lone connect linking the 21-mile long sausage-like city squeezed between an ocean and a mountain range.

Putting on my planner’s hat, as I have in past commentaries, and in remarks before the City Council, I feel the PCH should no longer be considered a highway, with speed limits of 45 and 55, in particular through the civic center.

Reevaluating the speed limit for the 4-mile stretch between Webb Way and Las Flores Canyon Road is way down the consultant’s priority list.

I suggest a high priority, and lowering the speed limits there to 35, and further down to 25 edging the Civic Center Way. That are the limits for the PCH where it passes through downtown Laguna Beach, Corona Del Mar and other coastal towns.

In effect, this section of the PCH would become Malibu’s main street, and as such, Caltrans urban standards would apply, not incidentally protecting the hallowed trees. Also encouraged would be cross walks, and other amenities, lending the commercial clutter and park there a more welcoming identity.

In tweaking the PCH, the traffic study also needs some tweaking.

I’m Sam Hall Kaplan, and this is the City Observed, on 97.5 KBU FM, radio Malibu. Dot COM.

To be aired 6.27.2015

 

Will Saving The Trees Save Malibu?

aired 6.17

It seems as long as I can remember in my two decades as a concerned citizen of misanthropic Malibu, the coastal city is at a crossroads, literally and figuratively.

The crossroads physically is at the intersection of the Pacific Coast Highway –the PCH –and Cross Creek Road, in what is euphemistically called the Malibu Civic Center. In reality, however, it’s really a clutter of scattered suburban mini malls, the civic element consisting, of an uninviting park, with an isolated library and city hall on its fringe. All have their adjacent segregated parking.

The crossroads in question is not incidentally an accident magnet, marked by a Shell station on the northeast corner, and the south side by a cluster of tall trees, a venerable Sycamore and five Eucalyptus.

Before the city’s Planning Commission the other evening was a plan to upgrade the crossroads, a so-called mitigation to satisfy a condition of approval for a commercial center the city green lighted way back in 2008. Approval of the mitigation would finally put a bow on the elaborate 112,000 square foot package, known as La Paz.

Many in the growing cadre of anti development forces across Malibu thought if the trees could be saved, the mitigation would fail, and therefore project stopped. Not so, contended the developer’s rep, who said he also loved the trees, but try and try again to get Caltrans to agree to an alternative failed.

If anything distinguishes Malibu residents, is that they have seldom heard or heeded the word no. do not They testified for three hours to save the trees, which they saw as a rare icon for a city “and repeatedly quoted from its land use plan the historical willingness of residents “to sacrifice urban and suburban conveniences in order to protect that environment and lifestyle, and to preserve unaltered natural resources and rural characteristics;”

This resonated with the commission, which came up with it thought is a Solomon–like decision. It approved the mitigation needed for public safety, but with an amendment to somehow save the trees. A Caltrans functionary there was typically evasive.

The commission in its decision suggested several modification that could be explored, including narrowing the lanes, taking a slice off the shell by relocating or eliminating one bank of pumps.

Let me add that this could be viable, if Shell was confronted with the alternative of losing all to eminent domain.

Putting on my planner’s hat, let me further suggest that PCH from the bridge over Malibu Creek to Webb way can be treated as a downtown Main Street, such as it is Laguna Beach, Corona Del Mar among other coastal towns. With speed limits lowered from the present 45 to 25, and cross walks and sidewalks lit, Legacy Park edged to become more inviting, among other improvements, the scene also could lend itself to a more amendable civic identity.

Also raised at the commission was the question why was the city not taking more initiative in exploring alternatives and lobbying for them with Cal trans; why in these cases why the city also seems to be yielding to the applicant and their lobbyists.

This question places the city at a figurative crossroads. Will the city council with and the city bureaucracy step up and become proactive and less timorous in the fulfilling its obligations, particularly in the wake of a more demanding electorate? The passage of measure R certainly was a message that all is not well in Malibu. So was the commission hearing Monday night.

Ever Desirable and Threatened Malibu

Aired 6.13.15

Today, its my ever real estate desirable Malibu, where the planning commission and council are under pressure pondering the future of the civic center.

As the heat of the summer builds, and the heat of development bubbles , focus is on two proposed projects: a whole foods market and shops sweetened by a park, and the second, a commercial cluster that actually was approved by the city in 2008, but still must resolve some environmental issues.

Whatever, we can expect these developments will be with us for some time, tied up by appeals and law suits.

Meanwhile, a citizens task force is completing a draft of design guidelines for new commercial development, which most likely will recommend further study, on a broader plan , to weave a more attractive and accessible center, for residents as well as tourists.

But this continuing debate over the civic center can be distracting, for Malibu, after all, is primarily a residential community, which to be sure is also under development pressure, one project at a time. And this being a desired address for the deep pocket crowd, where big is considered better, the projects sadly are often egregious.

I feel they are compromising Malibu as much as the excessive commercial.

Consider the proposal of 29042 Cliffside Dr to be aired before the planning commission Monday. It takes a bad faux Mediterranean style house and attempts to convert it to a bad faux modernist structure.

From my perspective as an architecture critic, the design looks cheap.

I also feel the indicated construction of 49% is a blatant attempt to have the project declared a remodel and not a new structure, with its additional reviews and fees. The result is what I would label a macmansion .

However, my prime objection is based on my experience as the past chair of the city”s View Preservation Task Force, and from years as a planning consultant, to private corporations and public agencies.

I fear that if this application is approved, and however it compromises the blue water view of any neighboring property, it will also clearly affect their property values. That in turn will constitute what is known in planning as a taking; the taking away of value from one party to benefit another. This could be the basis for a costly law suit against the city.

My view is not affected, but if those of my neighbors are, and with the result of lowering their property values, mine also would be affected, and also that of all Malibu. Macmansions are a plague to be avoided. Tune in next week for the results

Im Sam Hall Kaplan, on 97.5 KBU and Radio Malibu, dot com.

 

Paint this project the color of SHAME

Aired 6.6.2015

Today, some head shaking, stomach churning, nausea really, brought on by an immodest building project.

In the continuing supercilious competition among the bigger-is-better boys, a residential compound is rising in the high class hills of Bel Air that takes “Mac mansion” up a few immoderate notches to what can be labeled “macro-mansionization.”

Priced at 500 million dollars, it is being developed by real estate speculator Nile Niami, a fringe film producer. The project on a 4 acre site is not to be mistaken for gentrification, an up scaling of sorts of a community, but more like an act of a neighborhood-based “lebensraum.”

Foundations already have begun on the 74,000 square foot main residence, including a 5,000 sq. ft. master bedroom. Also indicated in the L.A. city approved plans are three adjacent structures, presumably for guests and household help, which would bring the architectural conceit to an excess of 100,000 sq. ft.

This would make it equivalent in size to, say, a 100-unit apartment house. For further comparison, in nearby Beverly Hills, the Spelling mansion, which drew much derision when built nearly 30 years ago, is 56,000 sq. ft.

The historic Hearst Castle on the central California coast is 68,500 square feet, and in Washington, the White House accommodating the president plus a large staff in its west wing, is a mere 55,000 square feet.

Architectural renderings indicate a boxy machine-like, two story modern design of light horizontal volumes accented by cantilevers, displaying extensive glass walls, and squatting in a moat, above what appears to be the garage, for an estimated 30 cars.

With four swimming pools, a lawn the size of a football field, are indicated in the plans, and landscaping one can only imagine for a Jurassic Park. The number of employee needed to maintain this extravaganza no doubt will be in the dozens and generate many daily trips. It is not known whether an E.I.R. was required .

The developer is quoted saying the project will feature “almost every amenity available in the world,” including a “Monaco-style casino.”

For this conceit, I’m painting it the color of shame.

I’m Sam Hall Kaplan, on KBU.FM

City Observed Launch

Intro: Here in Malibu, as part of our local news package, today we inaugurate an occasional commentary, the city observed, by long time resident Sam Hall Kaplan, a venerable print and broadcast journalist., teacher, author and activist.

Text: This being my initial commentary, I thought a review of some pending planning issues would offer an introduction to my professional perspective and personal prejudices.

Locally in Malibu, there is a constant parade of proposals before the Planning Commission and City Council that deserve attention, for I am convinced that cities are shaped and misshaped not by the sweeping plans heralded by political pronouncements, but by small projects, weighed one at a time.

For an illustration, we have the city of Malibu spending a half a million dollars plus on a study of urban design guidelines for the Civic Center, now not much more than a scattered collection of suburban mini malls and an isolated library, city hall and empty park.

The over the top retail stores and restaurants are popular among tourists, but not particularly residents. An attractive folksy village, which most residents say they want, it is not.
However conscientious the paid consultants, the study seems headed for a diffused debate, and then the shelves of city hall to collect dust.

More pertinent, and personal, are those seemingly less important planning items, such as an application by the new owners of an oceanside house on Cliffside Drive house to remodel it into a questionable Modernist styled structure.

Unfortunately, the remodel will compromise the blue water views of several homes on the landslide of Cliffside, and therefore is being protested by the streets strident residents, my neighbors. The city’s Planning Department has recommended the commission reject the application at an upcoming hearing.

Other controversies smolder, small and big, locally and beyond: does Malibu need, or want, another supermarket; the dearth of affordable housing in Southern California, the challenge of traffic, mass transit, and street life, and is spending one billion dollars on a vanity redo of LACMA the best way to serve art and the public?

Keep tuned. I’m Sam Hall Kaplan, and this is the City Observed, on 97.5 KBU.FM,.

You’ve been listening to the latest addition to our public radio news team, Sam Hall Kaplan, whose experience includes metropolitan reporter for the New York Times, architecture critic for the L.A. Times, Emmy award winning TV commentator, for Fox News, on air on KCRW, KPCC , among other radio stations, and generally a nosy newsy with a bent for design and planning, in Malibu, and everywhere.

5.2.15

The Promise of the L.A. River

Aired 5.30. 2015

Today, some thoughts on the perennial potential of the L.A. River.

Prompting me was attending a recent workshop under the banner of Yale’s annual Day of Service, which had gathered a well-intentioned gaggle of talents to brainstorm an arts project to grace the river.

Orchestrated by Elaine Rene Weisman, an architect who has been involved in several River related projects, and aided by Esther Margulies, the river’s fractured past, and present problems and promise, were put into perspective.

Several loosely defined art projects and venues were suggested, and are to be further explored, with eventually one selected bearing the imprimatur of Yale, to be sited, designed and funded.

If the river generates anything, it is the hope that such efforts can be pursued, individually, with each its own advocates, and in time be strung together to become the region’s focal point it once was when it attracted settlers to the Southland some 250 years ago.

To be sure, there is an ambitious plan for the 51-mile waterway slicing through a multitude of municipalities. Displayed is the promise of promenades, bike paths, pedestrian bridges and so called “opportunity areas” for convenient food stands and much needed housing.

The renderings are engaging, as is the plan and other pronouncements from the usual think tank sinecures.

But given the region’s fractious political history, the plan cannot be considered more than a long range blueprint. We are talking here 50 years or so implementing a variety of comprehensive improvements to make the River a prized regional resource.

And no one seems to know exactly where, when and how the needed funds will be forthcoming, beginning with the one billion dollars plus promised by the federal government.

As for Los Angeles stepping up to the plate, as those with institutional memories remind us, the city is notoriously long on promises, and short on delivery, particularly under term limits where politicians play musical chairs and toot their horns, while projects languish.

That is why most of us long time River advocates are looking with humble hope to individual projects such as the Yale initiative.

And personally, I like small public projects, spaces and places that are comfortable, clean and safe, where you can also if need be keep an eye on the kids.

I’m Sam Hall Kaplan, and this is the city observed, heard on KBU 97.5 fm, and streaming everywhere.