|
|||||||
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 December 15, 2003 to December 19, 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,
December 15, 2003 – Marina Coast Water District
Senate Bill 610, state legislation adopted in 2001, requires cities
and counties, before approving residential developments of over
500 units, to obtain a Water Supply Assessment from the local water
district. This Water Supply Assessment must be included in the Environmental
Impact Report on the proposed project. As a practical matter, this
means that it must be available for public comment, prior to any
final decision on the proposed new development.
It appears that the Marina Heights project, in Marina, has run afoul of this new, and quite logical, law. The Marina City Council is poised to approve the Marina Heights project, but the water district has not yet produced its Water Supply Assessment, and the public has certainly not had its opportunity to comment. The issues involved aren’t “technicalities.” Water supplies in Marina are very scarce, and the groundwater aquifer from which that water comes is threatened by toxic contamination and seawater intrusion. If water is provided to the proposed Marina Heights development, which is essentially upper income homes, there may not be any water for job producing developments.
Tonight at 7:00 o’clock, the Marina Coast Water District will consider this controversial subject. You can get more information by clicking on the Land Use Report link at www.kusp.org.
For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
More Information:
Senate Bill 610
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/01-02/bill/sen/sb_0601-
0650/sb_610_bill_20011009_chaptered.htmlMarina Coast Water District Website
http://www.mcwd.org/City of Marina Website
http://www.ci.marina.ca.us/LandWatch Letter on Marina Heights Project
http://www.landwatch.org/pages/issuesactions/
marina/111903marinaheights.htmlLandWatch Letter on Water Supply Assessment
http://www.landwatch.org
Tuesday,
December 16, 2003 – Scotts Valley City Council
The Scotts Valley City Council will be meeting tomorrow evening
at 6:00 p.m. A couple of items are worthy of note, and those interested
in land use policy might well want to take in this meeting. The
Council meets at the Scotts Valley City Hall, right off Scotts Valley
Drive, and the City’s website has a complete agenda packet
available for you, so you can dig into the agenda in detail. By
the way, if there are any local officials listening, the idea of
making the entire agenda packet available on the web is a very good
idea. At least if you’d like the public to have a chance to
be informed, and to participate. The County of Santa Cruz does it.
Scotts Valley does it. But many public agencies don’t.
Tomorrow, the Scotts Valley City Council will appoint a creek habitat subcommittee to explore what sort of development standards should be established, to protect the city’s riparian creeks and habitats. Land use policies will either protect natural resources, or not, depending on what those policies are. This is an important effort by the City of Scotts Valley. It’s Agenda Item #2.
Agenda Item #3 is an update report on the draft population, employment, and housing units forecast prepared through the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments. Professional planners always begin with the numbers. If you’d like to understand how those numbers are developed, show up at that Scotts Valley City Council meeting tomorrow night.
For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
More Information:
Scotts Valley Website
http://www.scottsvalley.orgCity Council Agenda Packet for December 17, 2003
http://www.scottsvalley.org/cca.PDF
Wednesday,
December 17, 2003 – Tree Protection
Most of our natural resources, or maybe I should say our “remaining”
natural resources, are found outside of our cities. Once we’ve
decided to build a city, or to urbanize formerly open lands, we
expect to lose some, or most, of the natural features that might
have been there earlier. Good planning is actually based on the
idea that our communities should decide what areas need to be protected
for their natural resource values, and what areas should be urbanized
and developed. Then, it’s the job of our county governments,
generally, to say “no” to proposals to develop in the
natural areas. Unfortunately, county governments don’t always
do a very good job of “holding the line.” That gives us
the kind of sprawl that is all too familiar to us.
There’s another aspect to natural resource protection, however. Aren’t there some natural resources inside our cities that are worth protecting? This is the issue at the Scotts Valley City Council tonight, where they’ll talk about creek habitat protection, for riparian areas inside the city. It’s also the issue before the City of Santa Cruz Planning Commission, which will consider the proposed removal of a heritage tree. The City of Santa Cruz has decided that there are natural resources, inside the city, that are worth protecting. Large trees are one of them. If you’d like to get involved, the Planning Commission meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. tonight.
For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
More Information:
City of Santa Cruz Website
http://www.ci.santa-cruz.ca.us/City Planning Commission Agenda
http://www.ci.santa-cruz.ca.us/pl/cpc/agenda.pdfHeritage Tree Ordinance
http://nt2.scbbs.com/cgi-bin/om_isapi.dll?clientID=
206921&infobase=procode-1&softpage=Browse_Frame_PgCity Council Agenda Packet for December 17, 2003
http://www.scottsvalley.org/cca.PDF
Thursday,
December 18, 2003 – Carmel Valley Road Committee
I can remember talking, a few weeks ago, about the Multi-Agency
meetings that are held periodically in Big Sur. Those meetings are
often full of controversy and contention, as the residents of Big
Sur take on their governmental agencies, from CALTRANS to the Coastal
Commission, trying to make them respond to the concerns of the Big
Sur community. Those meetings in Big Sur are lots of fun, and truly
represent democracy in action.
Today, there’s a similar meeting coming up, but it’s a meeting of the Carmel Valley Road Committee, to be held in Carmel Valley. The residents of that area, like the residents of Big Sur, are not at all bashful about letting their governmental officials know what they think. What they think, by and large, is that Carmel Valley is one of the most spectacular geographic areas in the world, different from but fully equivalent to Big Sur, and they want to make sure it’s protected. Traffic issues, as in Big Sur, are a hot topic in Carmel Valley.
The meeting begins at 1:30 p.m., at the Mid-Valley Fire Station. If you’re a Carmel Valley resident, you might want to attend. On the agenda is a discussion of what I understand is a proposal to eliminate language in the draft General Plan Update that many Carmel Valley residents believe is vitally necessary to prevent the over-development of Carmel Valley.
Find out more by clicking on the Land Use Report link at www.kusp.org.
For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
More Information:
More information on the Carmel Valley Road Committee and its meeting on December 18th can be obtained from Monterey County Supervisor Dave Potter. Contact Supervisor Potter or his Aide, Kathleen Lee, at 831-647-7755 (from Monterey), or 831-755-5055 (from Salinas), or 831-667-2770 (from Big Sur). You can email Supervisor Potter at district5@co.monterey.ca.us.
Friday,
December 19, 2003 – The Seaside Lawsuit
The City of Seaside approved a major residential development for
KB Homes, one of the largest residential builders in the United
States. This development has been controversial, especially because
it contains absolutely no housing that is affordable to anyone with
an average or below average income. All the homes in “Seaside
Highlands” sell for more than half a million dollars apiece,
and many buyers are from out of the area, since there’s no
preference given to local residents or workers.
Most controversial has been the way that KB Homes acquired the property. The property is part of the former Fort Ord, and was purchased from the Army by the City of Seaside, which immediately resold the land to the developer. The City of Seaside made a profit of about $750,000 (total) on this sale. The City then approved a development of about 380 homes, and as I said earlier, all of those homes will sell for more than $500,000 apiece. $500,000 times 380 is $190,000,000. That’s the gross income to the developer. The people of the City get $750 grand. A lawsuit is challenging this financial arrangement as a giveaway of a public asset, and the Trial Court Judge has ruled the plaintiffs are likely to win. Today, at 10:00 a.m., KB Homes is making a motion to dismiss the lawsuit. Proceedings are at Judge Kingsley’s Courtroom, in Monterey, and you’re very welcome to attend.
For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
More Information:
Monterey County Herald News Story
http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/
news/local/6487489.htmLegal Documents in Seaside Lawsuit:
Archives of past transcripts are available here
|
CONTACT 306 Capitol Street #101 PO Box 1876 Phone (831) 759-2824 Fax (831) 759-2825 |
|
