Real Malibu

Lumber Yard Center Issued Notice of Violation by Regional Water Board

div align=”center”strong• Complex Exceeded Standards for Effluent Compositionbr /br /BY BILL KOENEKER/strong/divdiv align=”justify”br /br /The executive officer of the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board issued a notice of violation last month for wastewater problems at the Malibu Lumber Yard mall.br /The upscale shopping center is owned by the City of Malibu and was developed and is operated by Weintraub Financial Services.br /RWQCB executive officer Tracy Egoscue made the announcement at a board meeting on July 16. She commented in her executive report. “During the month of April, the dischargers violated important effluent limits for nitrogen and phosphorus, as well as several other waste discharge requirements,” Egoscue told the panelists.br /The NOV directed compliance with all limits and provisions of the WDR and documentation of corrective action by July 15, 2009.br /“The applicant Wientraub Financial is putting together the required report,” said Malibu City Manager Jim Thorsen. When asked what that contained, he said, “It is being prepared.”br /The commercial center located in the Civic Center area opened for business in April 2009. Under the WDR adopted by the board in December 2008, the dischargers, who are both the city and Weintraub, were allowed to discharge a maximum flow of 17,000 gallons per day. Since no restaurants have opened yet, as well as some other businesses, the “native” flow from on-site activities during April was only 300 gallons per day to 600 gallons per day, according to the RWQCB staff.br /“However, the discharger did accept 90,000 gallons of sewage from off-site businesses during April,” the report notes.br /Thorsen explained that the added flow was for testing. He said the system was in testing mode and there needed to be enough of a flow to make sure the system is operating at top peak performance. “It is a complicated, high efficiency, state-of-the-art system. It is to make sure it is flowing [properly],” the city manager added.br /Thorsen was asked if the board had been informed in advance of what is being described as testing when it considered its NOV. “It was technically out of compliance. I concur it doesn’t make a lot of sense. There are always a few tweaks during testing,” was his response.br /This is not the only time the Lumber Yard has been discussed at regional board meetings during the delivery of the executive report. At the May 7 board meeting, members were told the information presented to RWQCB from the dischargers contained “significant deviation from the material required in the WDR.”br /The laundry list of deficiencies includes the groundwatering plan, which the RWQCB staff reported only identifies wells under the leachfield, not downgradient of the irrigation at the building or in Legacy Park. “The groundwater program is not sufficiently detailed to include a design for continuous monitoring,” the report noted.br /The operations and maintenance plan does not include any mention of irrigation. “The only option described for the operator is to truck water offsite in the event that the disposal capacity is not available,” the report goes on to state.br /The water conservation plan assumes some usages and does not include any additional detail about tenant space, “despite ongoing construction of those spaces. The plan and lease do not contain any specific method of accounting tenant water usage or practices.”br /“The ultraviolet equivalency report does not constitute a measure of equivalency and in fact, it does not represent a portion of a Final Title 22 report which must be approved by the California Department of Public Health before discharge can begin,” the report concludes./divdiv class=”blogger-post-footer”img width=’1′ height=’1′ src=’https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/29088688-8575344329531651509?l=malibusurfsidenews.com%2Fblog’//div

http://malibusurfsidenews.com/blog/2009/07/lumber-yard-center-issued-notice-of.html

Labels: Malibu News

City Council Says No to Putting Retail Formula Ban on the April Ballot

div align=”center”strong• Majority Says Proposal Needs Workbr /br /BY BILL KOENEKER/strong/divdiv align=”justify”br /br /Should the voters get to decide whether the Malibu City Council will draft an ordinance regulating retail formula stores?br /Not yet, answered council members who contend that the proposed law, as currently written, would not do what it was designed to do.br /Councilmember Pamela Conley Ulich has pushed for such regulation for over three years, going so far as to prepare an ordinance herself.br /“This is a great solution for a problem that does not exist,” said Mayor Andy Stern, who said people in Malibu complain about the proliferation of high-end retail outlets rather than chain stores.br /“But that has nothing to do with this,” he added, noting that stores Malibu residents say they like, such as Starbucks, would not be allowed in Malibu.br /Shopping center owner Michael Koss, who in the past has expressed opposition to the proposal, insisted there was already strong opposition to the measure and to take the matter to a vote is too costly.br /Koss said the majority of shoppers like chains because they offer the best quality and prices.br /Koss also said the proposed law could lower residential property values because a retail formula ban could ultimately bring an inferior shabby shopping experience to Malibu. “The majority does not want to exclude high quality,” he added.br /Councilmember Sharon Barovsky said she believes many of the problems in Sacramento were caused by ballot initiatives and the unintended consequences of the popular measures being enacted into law.br /“What if Ace Hardware was willing to come to La Paz or somewhere else? We could not have it. We could not have Ruby’s. The public is entitled to know what are the possibilities. What is being presented tonight is very vague,” she said, suggesting the matter should be sent back to a council subcommittee.br /Councilmember John Sibert said it was the first time he had seen the proposal. “It is complicated. Even if we did decide for a vote, we have to craft the language. I don’t think we have thought this through. I’m not sure why this issue should go to the voters. We were elected to do this. I would love to do this, but it is not ready for the ballot,” he said.br /Councilmember Jefferson Wagner said he concurred the drafting of the ordinance would be difficult.br /The council continued to debate the merits of the measure. Conley Ulich defended it saying there was already a proliferation of chains in Malibu counting out four Starbucks, two Subways and expected others.br /However, Barovsky continued to maintain, “I don’t see how this ordinance will save mom and pop stores. You will get high-end, one-of-a kind arts and jewelry stores.”br /Conley Ulich originally proposed continuing the agenda item until Sept 14 since critical pages of the ordinance and staff report are missing, but that failed, whereupon Barovsky made a motion to not put it on the April ballot and send it back to the committee where it came from. That passed on a 4-1 vote with Conley Ulich dissenting.br /The proposal was heard by the council in 2007 which initially sent it to committee and subsequently called for the measure to be included on a priority list for future zone text amendments.br /Subsequent to that, the issue, while still in committee, was recommended for voter consideration before it made its way to the planning commission and council.br /Proponents of the ordinance, including Conley Ulich, suggest something is needed to allow Malibu to keep its small town atmosphere and cite the city’s General Plan mission statement as authority for keeping Malibu’s “special natural and rural setting.”br /When the measure was initially proposed it met with a firestorm of criticism from shopping center owners and other real estate interests, who attributed many other factors to the demise of mom and pop stores rather than chain stores.br /One of the arguments used by opponents was that the low floor area ratio restrictions on commercial development resulted in increased price per square feet for commercial space chasing away mom and pop stores./divdiv class=”blogger-post-footer”img width=’1′ height=’1′ src=’https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/29088688-7429343752513054016?l=malibusurfsidenews.com%2Fblog’//div

http://malibusurfsidenews.com/blog/2009/07/city-council-says-no-to-putting-retail.html

Labels: Malibu News

Planning Panel Gives Tentative OK to Project after a Surprise Size Cutback

div align=”center”strong• Opponents Wore Shirts Saying ‘Don’t Cross Creek Trancas’br /br /BY BILL KOENEKER/strong/divdiv align=”justify”br /br /After a surprise announcement that the owners were withdrawing plans for development of the old Riders and Ropers site, the Malibu Planning Commission last week tentatively approved permits and entitlements for the Trancas shopping center expansion by a unanimous vote.br /At the outset of the meeting, Dan Bercu, an owner of the Trancas Country Market located on the corner of Pacific Coast Highway and Trancas Canyon Road, declared he was withdrawing the application for the nearly 11,000-square-foot, stand-alone building, which requires a General Plan amendment and zoning change. The commission is scheduled to formalize the vote at its meeting next week, on Tuesday, Aug. 4.br /At the beginning of the meeting, before Bercu’s announcement, which was praised by almost everyone, the commission had been set to simply make recommendations and turn the approval process over to the city council.br /However, planning panelists were told that with the General Plan amendment and zoning change requests for the parcel located east of Trancas Creek out of the way, the commission could choose to grant the approvals sought by the applicant.br /Consequently, the commission directed the staff to bring back a resolution reflecting the added conditions they wanted imposed and the reduced expansion plans.br /The tone of the hearing was in sharp contrast to previous meetings before the city council on the proposed Trancas Canyon Park, when west Malibu residents jeered and cheered during what everyone described as raucous sessions.br /However, at this hearing, Planning Chair Ed Gillespie insisted there would be no noise and demonstrated that the standing-room-only crowd should show their favor by putting their hands in the air and flailing them, or show their displeasure by putting their hands and arms in the air and crossing them. It worked.br /Supporters, who wore baseball caps emblazoned with Trancas Country Market sat in the front and the opponents sporting T-shirts that proclaimed “Don’t Cross Creek Trancas,” sat in the back.br /In an apparent effort to show that Bercu and his architects and consultants were regular citizens, none wore suits or ties. They were all dressed casually, much like the opponents. The only suit and ties to be found in the crowded council chambers that the fire marshal could have closed down for exceeding its occupancy were on the dais.br /Planning Commissioner Mazza was the only panelist who made a reference to the outfits of the crowd, saying he had just been to the North Shore of Oahu Hawaii and recognized the slogan on the back of the T-shirts, “Keep the Country Country.”br /Bercu said he lives in “the country,” as far west in Malibu as possible on Deer Creek Road. “I know about not being comfortable with change. I get it,” he said. “My kids go to Trancas [shopping center], and they say there is nothing to do, nothing to eat. Ninety percent of the people opposing us go to Starbucks,” he said.br /Bercu noted that he wanted to create a park or common green where folks from Broad Beach could walk to, customers from Malibu West could bike to the shopping center and equestrians from Malibu Park could ride to the market—a focal point for the west end of Malibu.br /However, several individuals from Malibu West and its homeowners association, who put on an organized presentation, said they had come to the conclusion that the project was too large for the site and required an Environmental Impact Report.br /They ticked off a laundry list of items during a Power Point presentation that they maintain had not adequately been studied, such as air quality, noise, public services, water and evacuation plans.br /They insisted an EIR is needed because the project is growth inducing, represents a near 100 percent increase in commercial space, would attract beachgoers and the traveling public, create a problem for bus service and encourage jaywalking because of the off-site parking lot.br /They also noted the proposal does not have enough on-site parking, intrudes into an Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area buffer, creates building heights that are too high, lacks adequate visual setbacks and is an inadequate site design.br /Other viewpoints arose. Melanie Beck, from the National Park Service, said their concerns were addressed when the Riders and Ropers site was withdrawn from development plans. The NPS wants to purchase the site and restore Trancas Lagoon. Bercu has repeatedly said he is a willing seller.br /Some of the other business owners currently at Trancas praised Bercu and said he is the only hope for local businesses to survive in Malibu at the shopping center.br /Joey Escobar, who runs a karate instruction business in the center, talked about how times had changed when contrasted with his youth. “Cross Creek was not a bad name. We went on dates there,” he said. “It is great the kids are talking about surfing, but what about jobs? Dan is a great landlord. I see dream homes and dream cars in Malibu. When I saw the plans, I saw my dream karate studio,” he said.br /Another set of opinions was offered by an entourage of male teenage surfers sporting the T-shirts, who appeared at the speaker’s podium together, and all spoke about wanting to maintain clean water at Zuma Beach and said they feared expansion plans could add pollution to one of the cleanest beaches in Malibu.br /A contingent of younger females, also sporting the T-shirts, voiced the same thoughts and said, though they liked shopping, they too worried that the traffic and water quality would worsen. “We already have the Malibu Country Mart. Don’t wreck our ocean,” they said.br /There were over 40 speakers, who told planning panelists what was on their minds and expressed either opposition or support for the plans.br /Malibu Park resident Carol Bretonne talked about how much Malibu has changed and said the change planned for Trancas is good. “I worked at Malibu Lumber. Now it is a big concrete box with stores. I and my friends can’t afford to go there. I want to shop here. I don’t want to go over the hill. When I had my business, it was the locals who kept me in business, not the tourists,” she said.br /Then it was time for planning panelists to deliberate. Commissioner Joan House said she could support parking across the street for employees and could also support the side yard setbacks. “I wish the market was going to be bigger. I’m looking for a nice community center in Malibu for the twenty-first century,” House added.br /Commissioner Regan Schaar said she was amazed that the developer was not trying to reach the building threshold allowed by city codes. “This is 40 percent of what you can do. I am surprised anyone would oppose that,” she said.br /Mazza said he had several conditions he wanted the commission to support, and members went through each one of them. He had earlier said he wanted to put forward a motion requiring an EIR, but decided not to do so, saying he did not think he had the support.br /Mazza asked why a 2002 EIR prepared for the Malibu Bay Company proposal could not be used. He was told it could not.br /Most of the rest of the meeting time was taken up with Mazza’s motions for additional conditions on approval. The panel agreed to require the offsite parking lot to be gated and for employees only. Mazza failed to get three votes banning outside service windows, but got a majority for a requirement for the number of loading docks to comply with city codes, and then failed to get a majority for prohibiting parking for outside events.br /Mazza dissented during the vote to certify the mitigated negative declaration, but voted with the majority approving the permits and entitlements./divdiv class=”blogger-post-footer”img width=’1′ height=’1′ src=’https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/29088688-3904291863443121165?l=malibusurfsidenews.com%2Fblog’//div

http://malibusurfsidenews.com/blog/2009/07/planning-panel-gives-tentative-ok-to.html

Labels: Malibu News

Another Carbon Beach Access Issue Is Brewing

div align=”center”strongBY BILL KOENEKER/strong/divdiv align=”justify”br /br /Another battle between the California Coastal Commission and a Carbon Beach homeowner has broken out over vertical and lateral public access easements.br /This one has quietly moved along, compared to the media attention that was stirred up when the coastal agency took on media mogul David Geffen, who fiercely fought the state agency over opening easements next to his Carbon Beach compound.br /At its July meeting, the coastal panel approved a notice of violation issued to Lisette Ackerberg, declaring she violated the Coastal Act by allegedly allowing unpermitted development that obstructs vertical and lateral public access easements.br /The commission found that Ackerberg allegedly installed riprap, a nine-foot high wall and placed a generator and associated concrete slab, fence and railing, planter, light posts and landscaping, which all allegedly violated the conditions of her permit, which requires vertical and lateral public access easements. The commission also issued a cease and desist order.br /“The intermitted items completely obstruct public access within the vertical easement and partially obstruct access across the lateral easement, and the items are therefore inconsistent with the existing permits and the easements established to conditions of the existing permits,” a CCC staff report states.br /Access for All accepted the offer to dedicate for the vertical easement in 2003 and now holds the legal easement, according to the commission staff. “AFA is ready to open and maintain the easement for public use. However, due to the presence of the unpermitted material and structures within the easement area, AFA cannot open the easement to the public, and thus the public is precluded from using the public easement to access the beach. The proposed cease and desist order would direct Mrs. Ackerberg to comply with the permits to remove the unpermitted items… thereby allowing AFA to open the easement to provide the valuable public access that the commission found was required when it authorized the construction of the current Ackerberg residence and seawall,” the commission staff report goes on to state.br /Ackerberg indicated she was willing a assist in opening the Los Angeles County-owned easement located at 22548 Pacific Coast Highway but insisted she did not want to remove the development on her property.br /According to a CCC staff report, negotiations went on for a couple of years and reached the executive director Peter Douglas, who along with the commission staff, continued to maintain they were unwilling to extinguish the existing public access easements on the Ackerberg property for assistance for opening the county-owned easement.br /At this impasse, Douglas initiated enforcement proceedings too “finally resolve the violations and allow AFA to open and manage the easement.”br /Ackerberg, through her attorney, continued to argue the targeted access on her property “has inherent limitations that seriously affect its utility to provide meaningful or viable public access,” and argued that the county-owned easement is a better solution for the public.br /The coastal staff also noted county officials have repeatedly told them they do not intend to open any easement areas in the future beyond the 11 that are currently owned and operated by the county.br /Consequently, the commission authorized both the notice of violation and the cease and desist order at its recent hearing./divdiv class=”blogger-post-footer”img width=’1′ height=’1′ src=’https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/29088688-2684796112118926035?l=malibusurfsidenews.com%2Fblog’//div

http://malibusurfsidenews.com/blog/2009/07/another-carbon-beach-access-issue-is.html

Labels: Malibu News

Council Member’s Email Perceived as Threat

div align=”center”strong• ‘Intimidating’ Email Is Read at Monday Night Meetingbr /br /BY BILL KOENEKER/strong/divdiv align=”justify”br /br /Activist Lynn Norton came to Malibu City Council chambers this week, she said, to not talk about Trancas Canyon Park, but to discuss political and administrative process.br /Norton has repeatedly challenged Councilmember Sharon Barovsky’s statements about some of the outcomes of various meetings and workshops.br /Norton has also challenged how decisions were made about the highly controversial park that has split the west Malibu neighborhood and left many wondering if the final version approved by the city council reflects the vast majority of residents who participated in the increasingly acrimonious debate.br /At the same time, Barovsky has complained that Norton’s attitude has been to personally attack her.br /Norton, who has been singled out by Barovsky at various meetings, said she wanted to read into the record an email she received from Barovsky.br /“Lyn [sic], I’ve kept quiet about your statements until now. But your slander of my position had finally caused me to respond. I realize I’m a ‘public figure’ and you have some latitude in what making [sic] false statements. However, I have spoken to an attorney and am now putting you on notice that much of what you said is simply not true and unless you either prove your accusations, retract them, or defend them in court. Sharon Barovsky.”br /“I object to that. You are trying to intimate people from speaking out,” said Norton from the podium.br /Barovsky said Norton had come to her about setting up a meeting and out of that came another public workshop. “You got everything you wanted,” she said.br /The council member said she has been on the council a long time and is accustomed to the “slings and arrows [but Norton] went over the line in [accusations] of abuse of power,” Barovsky insisted.br /The council member went on to talk about how she is convinced the decisions arrived at by the council for Trancas Canyon Park were based on what people had weighed in on./divdiv class=”blogger-post-footer”img width=’1′ height=’1′ src=’https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/29088688-2429934200581612216?l=malibusurfsidenews.com%2Fblog’//div

http://malibusurfsidenews.com/blog/2009/07/council-members-email-perceived-as.html

Labels: Malibu News

Publisher’s Notebook

div align=”center”• Snarky Shark Sniping •br /br /ANNE SOBLE/divdiv align=”justify”br /br /Fortunately for the status of shark-human relations, close encounters in local waters usually go unnoticed or, even when they are noticed, are relatively benign. Ironically, when there is a shark sighting, it is the media that usually bite—hook, line and sinker. They not only bite, but swallow and disgorge shark sightings again, and again, and again.br /This time, what started out as a randomly fortuitous shark sighting that could have been a timely reminder that the ocean is home to a diverse array of species was transmogrified into a virtual bloodbath between sharks and humans after it was filtered through the fingers of a couple dozen bloggers and translated into twice that many languages.br /Last Thursday’s great white sighting also turned out to be a publicist’s dream of free publicity for an absolutely dreadful movie showing on cable two days later that started out as “Goblin Shark Attack” but was renamed “Malibu Shark Attack” for all the reasons anything is ever named after the community.br /This latest blight on Malibu’s reputation was ostensibly produced Down Under and should have stayed there. The prehistoric goblin sharks looked like critters my son used to draw when he was four years old. The performers were rejects from central casting and subjected our fair town to enough stereotyping to make the local paparazzi palatable.br /We were compelled to find out whether the recent white sighting was a stunt for the movie, but the local videographer who shot the footage said he bemoans the fact that the sighting became entangled with the movie premiere, as bloggers arbitrarily blurred the lines between fact and fiction.br /When one watches the human reaction to great white sharks, either in movies or when a captured animal is subjected to public display, it’s clear why they need to be a protected species. The fear of these creatures is out of proportion to the danger. Being attacked by a great white is even less likely than being struck by lightning and far more preventable.br /If the latest shark to-do has any redeeming social value, it’s a reminder that we share the ocean with beings much smaller and much larger than we are, and they all have a place. Instead of fear and caricature, there should be cautious respect and appreciation. The great white is a perfect work of design for its role in the balance of marine life.br /The irrational fear of sharks that is stoked by the media and others should be seen for what it often is—an attempt to prey upon the human subconscious because doing so is a sure-fire moneymaker. /divdiv class=”blogger-post-footer”img width=’1′ height=’1′ src=’https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/29088688-8721517365208589524?l=malibusurfsidenews.com%2Fblog’//div

http://malibusurfsidenews.com/blog/2009/07/publishers-notebook_29.html

Labels: Malibu News

Local Activists Support Point Dume State Marine Reserve Designation

div align=”center”strong• Community Members Plan to Speak Out at MLPA Blue Ribbon Panel Meetingbr /br /BY SUZANNE GULDIMANN/strong/divdiv align=”justify”br /br /As the Marine Life Protection Act Initiative gears up for the official South Coast Region blue ribbon panel meeting in Santa Monica later this week (after the Malibu Surfside News goes to press), a grassroots group of local environmental activists are working to gather local support and dispel what they say are misconceptions about the process.br /A major misconception, MPLA supporters say, involves the fear that the highest level of marine protection will mean that access to the water could potentially be limited. Not so, supporters of the plan state emphatically.br /The MLPA is a state law that was passed in 1999. It requires California’s marine protected area system to be redesigned to better protect marine life, habitats and ecosystems. The MLPA Initiative was established to achieve the goals of the MLPA through the use of “the best readily available science, as well as the advice and assistance of resource managers, policy experts and the public,” according to the MLPA Initiative website.br /In Malibu, the coast between Paradise Cove and Westward Beach is one of several areas being considered for the highest level of protection as a State Marine Preserve.br /According to the Department of Fish and Game’s official website, State Marine Reserve restrictions state: “It is unlawful to injure, damage, take or possess any living, geological or cultural marine resource, except under a permit or specific authorization from the managing agency for research, restoration or monitoring purposes. While, to the extent feasible, the area shall be open to the public for managed enjoyment and study, the area shall be maintained to the extent practicable in an undisturbed and unpolluted state. Therefore, access and use (such as walking, swimming, boating and diving) may be restricted to protect marine resources.”br /However, according to MLPA stakeholder group member and Heal the Bay coastal resources director Sarah Sikich, no one in the South Coast Region stakeholders group is discussing limiting access to anything other than extractive—fishing—activities.br /“A lot of people are confused,” Sikich told the News. “ In terms of access, we are just talking about [restricting] fishing.” Sikich explained that part of the confusion comes from the fact that some State Marine Reserve areas, primarily in the north or central coasts, could potentially be closed seasonally to accommodate certain highly protected species, but that such closures would be extremely unlikely in the highly urbanized South Coast Region, which extends from Point Conception to the Mexican border.br /“Some people are calling [Heal the Bay] anti-fishing, but we’re not anti-fishing at all. Our marine ecosystem is damaged. We need to do what we can to protect it, keep it sustainable, so that there will continue to be fish. There are various levels of understanding, people have been scared, but I think this can be done in a thoughtful way.”br /Members of a small but growing group of Point Dume grassroots advocates that have been gathering to discuss the MLPA in private homes agree.br /“It’s important to find out facts,” Malibu resident Tamra Davis told The News. “What are the sources of facts? What are the options? We who live here on Point Dume really appreciate what we have. We moved here to be at this beach. We’re blessed. Anyone who becomes aware of the facts really supports the idea of a reserve.”br /According to lifelong waterman and Malibuite Dusty Peak, the Point Dume area is the ideal SMR, with a deep canyon, shallow and deep rock habitats, kelp beds and sheltered waters.br /“It’ll be like a state park on land,” Peak said. ‘You can hike in the parks, you just can’t shoot the animals. This will be the same way. We’re not being asked to give up surfing, swimming, diving or anything, it just means you can look, but not take.”br /“That’s a good way of looking at it,” Sikich told The News. “It really is an underwater park. MPAs have worked all over the world, we’re behind on it. In New Zealand the fishers were completely opposed, now they are the biggest proponents. It’s worked really well.”br /“Sometimes you have to give things up [to protect what you have]” Davis said, adding that her two young sons enjoy fishing in Little Dume cove, but that the family is willing to give that up.br /“It’s important that we’re good stewards. We have a voice in this issue, as a community we have a chance to say what it is we want.” /divdiv class=”blogger-post-footer”img width=’1′ height=’1′ src=’https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/29088688-8890737794687041698?l=malibusurfsidenews.com%2Fblog’//div

http://malibusurfsidenews.com/blog/2009/07/local-activists-support-point-dume.html

Labels: Malibu News

Multi-Agency Effort Eradicates Pot Caches in Local Mountains

div align=”center”strong• Largest of Three Marijuana Plantations Was Located in the Trancas-Zuma Areabr /br /BY SUZANNE GULDIMANN/strong/divdiv align=”justify”br /br /Malibu was the scene of a multi-agency drug bust last week, when a team of Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department officials, federal agents, National and State park rangers and Mountains Recreation Conservation Authority personnel descended on a trio of illegal marijuana plantations hidden on state and national parkland in the Santa Monica Mountains. The LASD was the lead agency and is reported to have initially uncovered the illegal operations.br /The largest of the three plantations was located on National Park Service land in Trancas-Zuma Canyon in an area that officials are describing as a wildlife corridor. Law enforcement agents discovered and eradicated 1421 plants at the site, according to a press release.br /National Park Service Public Affairs Specialist Lauren Newman told the Malibu Surfside News that cleanup at the site is still underway, and that the exact location is not being released for security and safety reasons.br /Although rumors are circulating that the pot growers may have been accessing the location from the Edison service road, the participating law enforcement agencies were observed using helicopters to airlift the bundled contraband out of the rugged and remote area.br /Newman confirmed that fertilizer and pesticides, including rodenticide, were discovered at the site. Irrigation piping, camping equipment, propane tanks, car batteries and quantities of garbage and human waste were also reportedly removed from Zuma Canyon site.br /Two additional plantations were located and eradicated at Malibu Creek State Park during the same sting operation. A press release states that officials estimate that the cost to clean up one cultivated acre is between $10,000-$12,000.br /An NPS representative confirmed that the harm caused in the Zuma Canyon location by vegetation clearing, soil disturbance, pesticides, synthetic fertilizer, human waste contamination and the potential impact of rodenticide on predators, ranging from mountain lions and bobcats to hawks and owls, is “incalculable.” There are unconfirmed reports that there was also evidence of a campfire at the site.br /No arrests were reportedly made during the sting. Authorities say that operations of this type are generally operated by organized drug cartels.br /“It’s a good idea to stay on the trail when you’re hiking,” Newman told The News. “If you see something suspicious, call 911 or tell a ranger. Don’t investigate on your own.” Authorities say those suspicious things may include irrigation pipes in remote areas, dams placed in creeks or streams, or even an absence of wildlife.br /In 2007, approximately 3900 marijuana plants were found on National Park Service land in Trancas Canyon. In 2005, 28,000 plants were destroyed in Malibu Creek State Park. In 2008, 3,641,328 marijuana plants were seized on state and federal public lands in California.br /Park officials have called the illegal farming activity a serious threat to the environment and to the safety of wildlife and park visitors.br /Additional air and land surveillance is expected to remain ongoing throughout those areas of the Malibu mountains that would be suitable locations for harvesting one of the state’s largest cash crops, irrespective of its legal status./divdiv class=”blogger-post-footer”img width=’1′ height=’1′ src=’https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/29088688-2677209497192729158?l=malibusurfsidenews.com%2Fblog’//div

http://malibusurfsidenews.com/blog/2009/07/multi-agency-effort-eradicates-pot.html

Labels: Malibu News

Malibu Real Estate Deals Start to Show

I’ve seen a few great deals pop up this week and the cash buyers are starting to come out of the wood work. If you want to discuss where the deals are at give me a call. There is a lot more to…

[[ This is a content summary only. Visit my website for full links, other content, and more! ]]

Link to story
The Malibu Real Estate Blog

Labels: Malibu Real Estate

The Art of Compassion, April 10, 2010, Malibu, Calif: Purchase tickets

Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine President Neal Barnard, M.D. Along with Event Chairs Kathy and Tom Freston and Honorary Committee Co-Chairs Cindy Landon Richard Donner and Lauren Shuler Donner Maria and Wolfgang Petersen Invite you to The Art of Compassion PCRM 25th Anniversary Gala at the Landon Estate in Malibu Art of Compassion …

http://www.topix.com/city/malibu-ca/2009/07/the-art-of-compassion-april-10-2010-malibu-calif-purchase-tickets?fromrss=1

Labels: Malibu News