Hedge Owners Get Reprieve

By Blair Clarkson
Staff Writer

June 10 -- Property owners outraged by the City's recent proactive enforcement of a long-dormant hedge law requiring them to cut back their beloved greenery can rest a bit easier. At least, for now.

Following impassioned pleas from residents on both sides of the thorny
issue, the City Council on Tuesday voted unanimously to halt enforcement of
the controversial ordinance that limits the heights of private hedges until
staff can conduct a more detailed analysis and review possible amendments to
the law.

The council, however, instructed staff to retain the limit on front yard foliage in order to promote a more open community and asked staff to enforce the law in cases of "demonstrable safety issues," such as blocked driveway sightlines.

"We should just wait until we have the (whole) ordinance together," said Councilman Ken Genser. “The city is not going to fall apart if we put this off for five months. We should go about this more calmly and in a more organized fashion."

The divisive ordinance, which has pitted neighbor against neighbor in the fight for privacy and open space, currently limits the height of front yard hedges to 42 inches and side and back yard hedges to eight feet -- standards commonly violated throughout the city.

Under the council’s direction, staff will return with "liberalized" standards for side and back yard hedges and a streamlined process that allows certain exemptions, including neighbor agreements.

Staff will also reword a letter that warns property owners of possible violations before threatening them with hefty fines unless they chop off the offending growth.

"I don't believe we ought to be going into side and rear yards on a proactive basis," said Council member Herb Katz. "This is a city that has prided itself on being green, and I personally want to see it maintained green.

"But I think the front yard is a different problem," he said. "We like an open city, we've always had an open city, and I believe the 42-inch law should hold."

Planning Director Suzanne Frick cautioned that it could take until late fall to wade though the jungle of variables and possible exemptions before returning with new standards.

The council action, which capped a spirited four-hour hearing, was greeted by relieved applause from many in the in the tense and packed chamber who feared their hedges would come down next week. But it dismayed those hoping to score a complete victory for hedge owners.

"I find it to be a very acceptable compromise," said Richard Coltin. "The people who expected to come out of there getting everything they wanted had no business going in there."

After lying quietly on the books for decades, the City's hedge law has garnered increased attention in the past year, as added planning staff and stepped-up enforcement measures resulted in an explosion of citations throughout the City.

The compliance orders sent to residents threatened daily $25,000 fines until the problems were corrected. City Hall was flooded with complaints, forcing the City Attorney's office to halt enforcement.

In reality, the maximum imposed penalty for hedge violations is $2,500, according to City Attorney Marsha Moutrie. The "generic" letter that shocked
so many green thumbs is one of the first things the Council asked to be fixed.

Following the furious uproar from residents on Tuesday about the need to maintain their privacy and protect against current dangers, the Council agreed that parts of the law appear "out-dated" and in need of modernization.

"We have a changed community," said Katz. "The community in which this hedge ordinance started in the 1940's was basically a one-story community. We're a very two-story community now, and people are looking down each other's throats. There is a need for privacy."

"An eight-foot hedge was enough to give you privacy in 1948," agreed resident Pat Farrell. "It's not anymore."

City officials argued that in addition to trimming overgrown hedges around driveways and on corner properties for traffic and pedestrian safety, the height of hedges, especially those in front, should be limited to boost social interaction and the character and quality of the neighborhoods.

"Having large hedges or walls in the front yard is problematic," said Frick, "and runs counter to all of the land use objectives in the community we're trying to create."

With side and rear yards, she said, tall hedges block sunlight and airflow into adjacent properties, requiring them to use more electricity and energy.

Katz countered that, like so many aspects of this contentious issue, the light and air argument has two sides.

"If you have large hedges in the side yard you might block light and air," he said. "But if you're facing west, that can be an asset and save energy. It's a double-edged sword to say that."

The vast majority of the 40-odd residents who appealed to the council, many
of whom were cited for hedge violations, spoke out strongly against the indiscriminate restrictions.

"A lock-step, one-size-fits-all height limitation ignores the practical needs of the security and privacy of the people who live in the city," said Rosario Perry, a local land use attorney.

As for Frick's belief in better social contact in open neighborhoods, Perry noted: "Clearly the turnout tonight shows us that the staff's vision of what the community wishes is not the same as what people here today are saying they want."

Daniel Bleiberg, who lives on busy 26th Street, said his hedges are also needed to combat car noise and pollution and to keep strangers from staring into his living room.

"As our society becomes more urban, private space becomes more dear, and hedges help create a private and peaceful environment," he said. "The
owner's right to privacy trumps the public's right to curiosity."

Yet sprinkled among the vociferous opposition to the hedge law was a handful
of residents who made a case for curtailing the City's plant life.

"Since 1996 we've been complaining about the three-story high hedge of our neighbor," said Manju Devgan. "It's so high that even though I live on Palisades Beach Road, I've not seen a sunset since then.

"We use electricity 24 hours a day," she added. "It's like living in a cave."

Devgan's husband, Baldev, worried that the Council might be bowing to the interests of the City's wealthy homeowners in the ornately manicured neighborhoods north of Montana Avenue at the expense of taxpaying apartment
renters whose views and access to light and air are diminished.

"I do not like favoritism to well-heeled people," he said. "I feel that this is not fair to all the ordinary citizens of Santa Monica."

The need to balance the competing interests of public and private rights, property owners and apartment renters, and even next-door neighbors makes the hedge law a strikingly divisive problem for City officials.

Council members openly disagreed over the allowable height of rear hedges, whether to enforce proactively or react only to complaints and if neighbors should be allowed to mediate hedge heights between themselves.

What’s more, developing common standards isn’t easy in a City where single-level homes sit next to three-story apartment buildings, residential zones abut commercial areas, houses face highly trafficked streets and odd-shaped parcels lack back yards.

The contentious debate is expected to rage on until City staff returns later this year with recommendations, and most likely for some time after that.

"This has been an interesting and energizing evening," said Mayor Richard Bloom. "We've heard a debate about an issue that really does have two sides, and to some degree they're not reconcilable.

"By the action that we're about to take, we try to meet the needs, in some
fashion, of both groups," Bloom said.