Ritz-Carlton Half Moon Bay Fined $ 1.6 Million For Restricting Access To Public Beach



[ad_1]

Nothing but blue skies on our horizon. Join us for a relaxing getaway at Half Moon Bay.

Posted by The Ritz-Carlton, Half Moon Bay on Friday, May 17, 2019

The Ritz-Carlton Half Moon Bay has been fined $ 1.6 million to the California Coastal Commission after years of violation of coastal legislation by states, including blocking access to the beach.

The hotel, which has $ 1,000 rooms per night, Silicon Valley retreats, a golf course, and a spa, agreed to pay the fines on Thursday after approval. by a meeting of the commission held in San Diego.

The battle has been tough for the hotel since construction plans were reviewed by the public. Built in 2001, previous years have been dedicated to the fight against environmentalists and residents of San Mateo County, who said that this luxury hotel would prohibit them access to two beaches, to which they are legally entitled in California.

according to The Mercury News, in the 1990s, when the coastal commission issued the building permit to the hotel giant with some reservations: "the agency asked the Ritz to build a free 15-seater public car park overlooking the beach of CaƱada Verde , one south of the hotel. The commission also gave the hotel the opportunity to build a second public car park one kilometer north of Redondo Beach or to allow the public to park for free in the hotel garage. The owners of the hotel have chosen to reserve 25 public spaces in his garage for beach lovers. "

However, over time, these public parking spaces have become less public. The valets regularly parked the cars of the hotel guests or made the public run away. The Coastal Commission regularly fined them for these violations, but as is often the case in very wealthy societies, paying fines was easier than solving the problem. . The hotel also neglected to place posters expressly indicating to the public that they were free to use the beach.

In 2004, the Ritz-Carlon paid $ 50,000 for violating many California coastal laws. He had promised to change, but then continued his activities as usual. Twice as much, in 2007 and 2011, the hotel was forced to pay for its mistakes, but that still has not changed. After years of frustration, the coastal commissioners were livid.

"When I see these inheritance violations, there is contempt and exhaustion," said Commissioner Brownsey. "You think of families, locals and local visitors who have not been able to go to these beaches for almost a generation."

The Surfrider Foundation is not happy either. At least one representative thinks it's no coincidence that the Ritz-Carlton is not transparent to the fact that residents are allowed to access the beach. "Maybe creating the illusion of a private beach can help justify the exorbitant cost of the rooms," said Mandy Sackett, director of state policy at the Surfrider Foundation.

Hotel owners have agreed to a $ 1.6 million fine following a lengthy negotiation that followed the end of the years before the courts. Six hundred thousand dollars will go to a land conservation group based in Palo Alto called the Peninsula Open Space Trust. This money will be used to lower the price of buying a property close to 27 acres, where access to the public beach will, at least, hopefully at least, easily accessible. The rest goes to the Coastal Commission's "chests providing signs, trails, stairwells and other amenities to help the public use the beaches around the state".

In addition to the $ 1.6 million, the Ritz-Carlton must also build its parking on the beach to accommodate 22 public spaces, install signs indicating to the public that they are allowed to go to the beach and, what is interestingly, do a study on how to reduce the amount of plastic that he uses.

However, in the wake of the hotel's troubled past, the commissioners will not be satisfied until all the necessary conditions are met. "Past behavior is a predictor of future behavior," said Commissioner Aaron Peskin. "Not always, but often. I do not want it to be another Charlie Brown, Lucy and the football situation. "

[ad_2]

Source link