Measure Q raises questions of property rights, sincerity of purpose, and the reality of outcomes.
On the ballot for Laguna Beach in the upcoming Nov. 8 election is Measure Q, which proposes to create “an Overlay Zoning District covering all property in the City located within 750 feet of the centerline of either State Route 1 (Coast Highway) or State Route 133 (Laguna Canyon Road/Broadway).”
What is interesting about Measure Q is that it really calls into question the issue of property rights. The measure is being brought in by political action committee Laguna Residents First, who are well connected with Village Laguna, and seeks to dictate how other property owners can use, modify, develop, and improve their properties. Laguna Residents First also hopes through this ballot measure to dictate future property development and uses of commercial property owners.
Diving deeper, Measure Q proposes to establish special requirements for any development Project within the Overlay District. Development is not to be misunderstood as only new large construction projects, as its definition includes all current property in the overlay zone.
For example, existing properties of any kind that need to be renovated would fall under this ordinance, such as a property owner wanting to renovate a building for commercial purposes.
According to those who are concerned about Measure Q, bureaucracy, red tape, and other hoops imposed by this ordinance could become a costly deterrent.
Let’s imagine that a property owner does have the resources and proceeds to navigate the ordinance anyway. He may have followed all procedures such as square feet requirements, adding parking spaces, and keeping his building to one story only – yet is still unable to renovate his building.
As some residents have noted previously, even a tiny coffee shop would require a resident majority vote to build.
The ordinance will require that all other projects over the prior eight years, within a half mile of this property, be considered to determine the “Cumulative Effect.” Approval therefore rests on what other building owners have done or proposed to do eight years prior.
The figurative property owner may now find himself in a tenuous position. He requests a rezoning by the city council, and after several notices, including one in the newspaper, a meeting is held to determine his request.
Even if the rezoning request is approved by the city council, the owner must now get voter approval. He can opt to wait for the next regular election which could take up to two years, or a special municipal election could be called if he agrees to foot the bill of up to $150,000.
With the election, the owner must get a majority vote by the Laguna Beach electorate – i.e. the total number of registered voters, not just a majority vote from voters who showed up to vote on that day.
Laguna Residents First, who are in favor of the measure, say the ordinance “will moderate what developers ask for and what city council gives away.” They argue that residents will get to determine the size, shape, and scope of their community and keep Laguna’s “unique charm.”
Those against the measure refute this, saying it makes development so tedious to undertake renovations of small businesses, hotels, and restaurants along PCH and downtown, and equally expensive for anything beyond what already exists, that few would venture to pursue even small improvement projects to the end, making the town look dilapidated over time.
Phillip Kohn, Laguna Beach City attorney, states in his impartial assessment, “Such requirements, including the extent of needed voter approval, add an element of uncertainty in the development process. The voter approval requirements increase the risk that a project will not be approved, require an investment of capital prior to placing the proposed project before the voters, and by prolonging the process, may decrease the likelihood that these types of projects will be brought to the City.”
