|
|||||||
KUSP LandWatch
News |
|||||||
|
ogo.gif" width="108" height="109" border="0"> "Listen Live" |
KUSP provided a brief Land Use Report on KUSP Radio from January 2003 to May 2016. Archives of past transcripts are available here.
Week of February 3, 2003 to February 7, 2003
The following Land Use Reports have been presented on KUSP Radio by Gary Patton, Executive Director of LandWatch Monterey County. The opinions expressed by Mr. Patton are not necessarily those of KUSP Radio, nor of any of its sponsors.
Monday,
February 3, 2003 – Mitigation Fees in Gonzales
Gonzales is a small town in the middle of the Salinas Valley. This
evening, the City Council will consider a couple of planning-related
items.
Agenda Item #6 is a proposed Ordinance that would allow the collection of Circulation System Facilities Mitigation Fees, and a Resolution actually setting such Fees. Agenda Item #7 is similar, focusing on Storm Drainage Facilities. If you’re a developer, this is a meeting you might not want to miss. If you’re a member of the public, this might be a meeting for you, too!
You probably understand what’s going on here. The growth occurring in Gonzales is now starting to affect local infrastructure. Traffic congestion and local flooding are starting to be a problem. One solution is to stop growing. If the local community doesn’t think that’s desirable, then it makes sense to start raising the money necessary to pay for the needed street and storm drainage improvements. That’s what the City is considering this evening. The proposal is to charge a fee on all new development.
Typically, developers oppose such mitigation fees. Even more typically, they argue that they should be set lower than may be necessary to pay the full costs of development impacts. That’s why the public has such a big stake in the decision. If impact fees are not imposed, or if the fees are set too low, then the quality of life in the local community will decline, as growth proceeds. The City Council meets at 6 o’clock this evening, at the Gonzales City Hall.
For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
More Information:
City of Gonzales
http://www.gonzales-ca.com/
Tuesday,
February 4, 2003 – The Monterey County Board
Today, the Monterey County Board of Supervisors has two important
items on its agenda. This morning, the Board will decide how to
deal with a proposal by the five cities of the Salinas Valley. The
Valley cities are anxious to set up a new system of city-centered
growth, which would channel development into the existing cities.
In effect, the cities would like to get paid for their willingness
to absorb new residential development. They would also like to expand
into surrounding farmland, and not in any minor way. There is a
lot to think about in what the cities are proposing. Come to the
County Courthouse at 11:00 o’clock to hear what I am sure will
be an informative discussion.
Come to the Courthouse at 10:00 o’clock if you’d like to be heard on the future of the County’s portions of Fort Ord. Agenda Item #S-7 is a proposed Option Agreement that would transfer a great deal of control over Fort Ord from the Board of Supervisors to a private construction company, Woodman Development. Unfortunately, the proposed agreement is extremely complex. You can get a full copy from the County’s website, or by clicking on the Land Use Report link at www.kusp.org. You can also use that link to send me your questions and suggestions. One listener recently contacted me precisely to discuss affordable housing opportunities on Fort Ord. If that’s a topic of interest to you, then you’ll probably want to follow closely what the County does with its Fort Ord lands.
For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
More Information:
Monterey County
http://www.co.monterey.ca.usMonterey County GPU
http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/gpu/Staff Report on Cities Proposal
http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/gpu/news/
feb%204%20Housing%20Allocation.pdfWoodman Development Option Agreement
http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/opt_agr_012103_clean.pdf
Wednesday,
February 5, 2003 – Walkable Communities / State Budget
Yesterday, the Marina City Council considered an item that could
have a profound effect on that city’s future. The Council considered
a consultant contract with a nationally-known firm of urban planners,
Walkable Communities, Inc. A link to the firm’s website is
available at www.kusp.org. Just click on the Land Use Report link.
Walkable Communities, Inc. makes the argument that the economic and social vitality of American communities can be significantly improved by paying more attention to how transportation facilities are designed and built. The fact that a Monterey Bay Area city is going to try to put such progressive planning principles into practice could have a big payoff. The City of Marina could not only benefit itself. It could provide a real model for other communities. This falls into what I’d call the “good news” category.
In the “not good news” category, a statewide group has just issued an analysis of what the state’s budget problems may mean for “smart growth” planning. Elimination or reduction of Vehicle License Fee payments could be particularly devastating. These payments are allocated to cities and counties based on the number of residents, and are therefore the only revenue incentive provided for higher density housing. The proposed cut will make both single family and multi-family housing development more financially infeasible. Again, you can get the complete story on the KUSP website.
For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
More Information:
Walkable Communities
http://www.walkable.org/Local Government Commission
http://www.lgc.org/“Smart Growth” and the State Budget:
http://www.landwatch.org/pages/issuesactions/
stateplanning/012403lgcmemo.htm
Thursday,
February 6, 2003 – Soledad Development Agreement
The City of Soledad is two cities to the south of Salinas, in the
middle of the Salinas Valley. Tonight, at 6:30 p.m., the Soledad
Planning Commission will be holding a Special Meeting, to consider
a proposed Development Agreement between the City and Shaw Development.
The project at issue is a major new shopping center, which has been
in the planning stages for quite some time. Approval of the Development
Agreement would represent the end of the process, and the actual
construction of the shopping center would then commence. At least,
that’s the expectation.
A “Development Agreement” is a contract between a public entity and a private developer that provides guarantees to the developer that the public won’t change its mind about the rules and regulations that apply to a particular development. Properly used, development agreements can be a powerful tool for good planning. Improperly used, such agreements can represent a “give away” of the public’s right to impose reasonable conditions on development. In other words, members of the public need to pay close attention whenever a Development Agreement is proposed, because by signing the Agreement, their elected officials cut off the right of the public to legislate directly, through an initiative or referendum, or for subsequently elected officials to impose different requirements, to respond to changed conditions. If you’d like to see the process in action, come to the Planning Commission meeting at the Soledad City Hall tonight!
For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
More Information:
City of Soledad
http://www.cityofsoledad.com/The law on Development Agreements is found in Government Code Section 65864 and following.
State Codes Online
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html
Friday,
February 7, 2003 – The TPL Planning Process
Last Thursday, in Santa Cruz, the Trust for Public Land held a “focus
group” session with a number of local residents. TPL is a large
national and even international group that specializes in conservation
acquisitions. TPL is developing a strategic plan, to guide its activities
in the California Central Coast, and was seeking advice from persons
active in the conservation community. The Santa Cruz meeting was
one of several meetings held in counties stretching from San Francisco
to Santa Barbara.
TPL is often able to move quickly to acquire lands threatened by inappropriate development. TPL raises money, makes the “deal” that removes the development threat, and then usually places the property with some public agency that will be able to manage and maintain it, consistent with good conservation practices. The importance of this ability to deploy in the real estate market to “save” threatened lands was very much appreciated by focus group participants. As one participant said, Santa Cruz County has a two-part approach to preserving and protecting its most important environmental assets. First, the community has been willing to adopt and maintain strong regulations. That’s vital. Then, it has usually been possible to obtain money for acquisition when the time is right. TPL has helped out with that second, critically important step, as for instance in the Coast Dairies acquisition on the Santa Cruz County North Coast. Acquisition and regulation: they’re both necessary. Santa Cruz County efforts have proved that.
For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
More Information:
Trust for Public Land
http://www.tpl.org/
Archives of past transcripts are available here
|
CONTACT 306 Capitol Street #101 PO Box 1876 Phone (831) 759-2824 Fax (831) 759-2825 |
|
