Dear Residents,
Below is a letter from ~Two Retired Guys outlining a path for Council to seek legal protections afforded to us under State Law and perform their own impact studies before making a decision on Highrose.
What say you Manhattan Beach? Email us your opinions after reading this letter below. We will publish your opinion in our Newsletter (personal information optional). MBStrong2021@gmail.com
Summary to Council: Hold on a vote; do your own impact studies; use the findings from the studies as evidence to make a decision on Highrose as provided by state law to protect the city and the residents to whom you took an oath to protect.
City Council will review Highrose again on Tuesday, Sept. 6, at 6:00 PM.
Attend in person: 1400 Highland Ave.
Attend via Zoom: [Click Link Here].
Give a 2 min. public comment during the meeting.
Email City Council your opinion citycouncil@manhattanbeach.gov
Over the last month, Council received hundreds of emails opposing this project at this site.
MB neighbors formed a resident group called ChillTheBuild.com to address the Highrose project and protect the community. The community owes a debt of gratitude to these neighbors who have spent money and endless hours (while attending to their jobs) to serve all of us. They are truly a grassroots, bi-partisan group stepping up for MB. Bravo! Email address: info@chillthebuild.com
~MBStrong
HIGHROSE: A Legal Path to Protect Our City
~Two Retired Guys
Show Me The Evidence!!!
Borrowing a line from the movie “Jerry Maguire,” City Council must show us the evidence! If they are thinking of approving this project before doing their own impact studies, they should think again. Their vote on Tuesday should be to do their own impact studies and bring forth evidence for their decision.
Council swore to promote, protect and preserve our City’s fundamental character and its local atmosphere. Our culture is unique: beach, family, ocean, recreation, and fresh air. It’s worth preserving. Our great zoning laws have made sure we remain that oasis, until now.
Council owes its residents a fight against the destruction by Goliath. But they don’t even have a slingshot in this fight if they fail their duty to conduct their own impact studies, and determine whether this project will have an adverse impact on the city, environment, culture, and vision of Manhattan Beach. It’s only such official findings that will allow them to stand in resistance.
Councilmember Hildy Stern pointed out at the last Council meeting that City staffers labored over 18 MONTHS to review the developer’s Highrose proposal to see if it meets the requirements of state density and affordable housing laws.
However, now it’s time for Council to reciprocate to the ‘residents’ the same labor intensity to see if this will have an adverse impact on our environment and atmosphere, to ensure that if Highrose passes, it brings no harm to the community now or in the future. Council should perform its own impact studies to investigate and discover all possible adverse impacts of building an oversized project on this scale near a refinery, which Sacramento will soon pass a bill against such health hazard developments. State law requires evidence from these studies to support any decision Council makes on Highrose, especially if it is rejected.
The developer’s studies fall short of informing our city. For instance, their traffic study failed to address how Highrose would change current traffic/parking in the area. No actual soil assessment that focused on the actual site was done, they used that of an adjoining property. No soil samples down to the 45’ depth the developer needs to dig for the very large underground parking structure. Much less any study of how any of this affects the atmosphere, groundwater, and nearby ocean. What peril lies below especially on the border of a refinery?
During the last Council meeting, it was evident that the majority of residents are against building Highrose at the proposed location; however, the meeting mainly centered on establishing that the project qualified for special treatment under state density laws. Mayor Napolitano warned residents about the high cost of legal battles if Council voted against the project, but failed to mention that submission will encourage repeated assaults on the Zoning limits of MB until our shorefront/beach is all 5 stories high or higher. Unless the city has evidence of the adverse impact this zoning causes, it is neutered to fight any of this. Lawsuits will rightly be launched against the city.
Council Missed a Protection in a Bad City Ordinance
Virtually every reference guide on Municipal Law begins with the premise that a city has the police power to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of its residents. This power allows cities to establish land use and zoning laws which govern the development and use of the community. This right of the City is set forth in the California Constitution (XI, Sec 7).
The ability to enact ordinances and zoning laws to protect the health, safety, and welfare of citizens is a power constitutionally given to Cities, it is not derived from State Legislature. That is unless the city voluntarily gives up its Constitutional powers to the State. And, that is precisely what the MB City Council did in 2013.
In 2013, MB City Council surrender the City’s rights under the Constitution of California to maintain control over its zoning powers. They capitulated by passing Ordinance No. 13-0006. The ordinance relinquished city control over its zoning laws and yielded its power to the State of California to determine the density and use of MB real estate. It is what allows projects like Highrose to bypass local zoning laws. Hence we now have a 5-story, 79-unit apartment complex 2 blocks off the beach simply because the developer was smart enough to designate 6 out of 79 apartments as affordable housing units.
But there is a way to maintain local control over zoning. Yes, and for that, we turn to the protections contained in the State Law.
A Legal Path to Protect our City
The 2013 MB city ordinance, passed by former Council Members Amy Howorth, David Lesser, and Mark Burton (yes, the same ones running again this election), in relinquishing the City’s constitutional rights, went on to emphatically declare that STATE LAW GOVERNS, where the city law and state law conflict (Sec. 10.94.010, subsection A of the ordinance).
State laws provide municipalities certain protections and our Council should use these protections. These protections require Council to do its own impact studies. These findings are required to provide a basis for the decision to either accept, modify or reject the developer’s application to build a project like Highrose, which flouts local zoning restrictions. Just saying “I am a NO” without official evidence/findings of an adverse impact on the community gives the courts no choice but to confirm the project. In a recent test court case involving the City of San Diego, the residents were rebuffed by the court for failing to present any evidence or official findings of facts of an adverse impact of the assault on their zooming laws. See court case [HERE].
The State law provisions are contained in Gov. Code Sec. 65915, subds. (d)(1)(B)-(C), with the following protections:
Protection against a specific adverse impact upon public health [such as quality of air, groundwater, and nearby beaches and ocean] and safety [impair the flow of police, fire, and medical vehicles] or the physical environment [magnify the existing shortage of parking spaces in the area and the addition of an abnormally high building that far exceeds the 30’ height limit imposed on all existing multi-family buildings since the City was founded over 100 years ago]…
If the zoning and planning concessions related to the project would be contrary to state or federal law, then standard approval requirements could be imposed [such as adherence to our Coastal Program and following the basic rules and regulations of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that would mandate a current environmental study of the actual site where a large 45’ deep hole would be dug out for a large parking structure under the full footprint of the apartment building].”
Summary
We hope this letter will educate the residents and point the way for City Council to take the actions described above to protect our city’s land use laws, and its residents.
If this project is approved without City Council exercising its fiduciary duty to conduct independent impact studies and using those findings as the support to making those decisions, especially on Highrose, it will leave the city defenseless in any lawsuits against the City and its officials.
Further, once the city is identified as a pushover on Zoning restrictions, a floodgate will open for more developers to exploit this weakness and promote the development of high-density apartments throughout the city, including the beachfront.
This would completely destroy the well-thought-out zoning plan of our beautiful little beach city, and zap the oasis.
~Two Retired Guys - 35 years combined MB residents
WHAT SAY YOU MB? MBStrong2021@gmail.com
About MBStrong…
Our subscribers are MB residents from moderate Democrats to conservative Republicans.
Add MBStrong.substack.com to your email contact list to keep our emails out of your spam folder!
MBStrong is not a political group or a campaign arm for candidates, measures, or bonds. We do not collect money or spend money on campaigns. We love our city and simply provide a free, informative Newsletter on issues that most impact MB.