The Pismo Beach City Council is holding a meeting tomorrow, May 30th, to discuss mixed use projects and parking in the downtown area. It’s a joint meeting, actually, between the City Council and the Planning Commission, and if you’re from down that way in San Luis Obispo County, and are interested in how planning rules and regulations can be used to stimulate a more economically vibrant downtown, it’s probably a meeting that will be of interest.

If you think about interesting, and economically successful big cities (New York City and San Francisco come immediately to mind), you will note that they almost always have “parking problems.” Those “problems” indicate a high demand for downtown access, and of course that’s a good thing. Downtown Santa Cruz, on a different scale, manifests something of the same phenomenon. Pismo Beach is trying to figure out what it thinks about the issue. In the words of the staff report, the meeting will focus on how to “provide a viable live/work atmosphere that is socially safe while enhancing the economic growth of the downtown.” The meeting is tomorrow at 5:30 p.m. at the Pismo Beach City Hall.

In other “city news,” the City of Marina is looking for citizens to serve on the Planning Commission and the Public Works Commission. If you’re from Marina, and are interested in improving planning and land use in that Peninsula city, check out the KUSP website.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

City of Pismo Beach Website
http://www.pismobeach.org/SITE/index/index.html

Agenda for Joint Meeting on May 30, 2006
http://www.pismobeach.org/SITE/pdf/
council/agendas/053006_sp.pdf

City of Marina Website
http://www.ci.marina.ca.us/

Commission recruitment notice
http://www.ci.marina.ca.us/news/2006/commissions.pdf

Online application form
http://www.ci.marina.ca.us/comissions/CommissionApp.pdf

The application deadline for the Marina appointments is June 7, 2006

Two major land use issues will be discussed at today’s meeting of the Monterey County Board of Supervisors.

Frequent listeners to the Land Use Report know that Monterey County land use issues have become incredibly controversial. All of the cities have their own controversies, of course, but the most energetic discussion and debate centers around what happens in the unincorporated areas, those areas under the control of the Monterey County Board of Supervisors. That’s the “dividing line” in land use regulation. If a parcel of land is inside the city limits, the elected city government is in charge. If it’s outside the city limits, the Board of Supervisors has control. LAFCO, the Local Agency Formation Commission, decides whether unincorporated land should be annexed to an existing city, and also oversees the process of creating a new city, when citizens want to do that.

In Carmel Valley, currently unincorporated, an effort is underway to create a new city, the prime motivation being a desire to escape from the pro-development land use decisions of the current Board of Supervisors. Today, the economic impacts of what a new city would mean will be the subject of a major discussion at 1:30 this afternoon. Plus, the Board is going to talk about water projects in the Salinas Valley, and who has to pay for those.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

Monterey County Website
http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/

Agenda, May 30, 2006 Meeting
http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/cttb/agenda052306.htm

Supplemental Agenda, May 30, 2006 Meeting
http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/cttb/suppagenda052306.htm

The Monterey County Planning Commission is meeting today, and at 10:32 this morning (and I kid you not; that’s what the agenda says; they’re planning their meeting down to the minute, I guess), the Commission will hold a discussion about the “process” to be used in connection with the Planning Commission’s review of the proposed Monterey County General Plan Update.

That’s an important discussion, and maybe some of you Monterey County listeners will want to show up at the County Courthouse today, at 10:32 a.m., so you can find out what’s going on. In fact, I wish I could be there personally, since I figure the discussion may be quite interesting.

Remember, this is the fourth version of the General Plan Update that will be coming before the Planning Commission. In the case of the third version, GPU-3 as it’s often called, the Planning Commission spent an incredible amount of time hearing from the public, going over the document themselves, modifying it, and then ultimately recommending it for adoption on a unanimous basis. GPU-3 was the document that took six years and six million dollars to produce, and the Board of Supervisors refused even to read it. They rejected it out of hand, and decided to “start over.” At the time, that was not a popular decision with the Planning Commission. Or the public. The County is now at the seven million dollar mark, and GPU-4 is the “pro-development” model of the General Plan. Find out about the process today at 10:32.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

Monterey County Website
http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/

Planning Commission Agenda
http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/pbi/cca/pc/
2006/05-31-06/pc05-31-06a.htm

A group of concerned Californians is working very hard, and very seriously, to remove the O’Shaughnessy Dam and restore Hetch Hetchy Valley. If successful, this effort would “undo” the project that reportedly broke John Muir’s heart, and would uncover a place, now buried under water, that is reported to be as spectacular as Yosemite. Dams, once constructed, are very difficult to remove, and restoring Hetch Hetchy is probably a “long shot,” though it’s not impossible.

I mention Hetch Hetchy for contrast purposes, because there is a local dam removal opportunity that is not nearly so much of a “long shot.” Studies are underway right now that might result in the removal of the San Clemente Dam, located on the Carmel River, right here on the Central Coast. The watershed and wildlife benefits of removing the dam could be enormous, and the reason it’s not a “long shot” is the fact that the current structure must be dealt with in some way, since it’s seismically unsafe. Something must be done about it. It could be “buttressed,” but removal is a real and viable option. An Environmental Impact Report, outlining the possibilities, is still open for comment. The review period runs through June 20th. If you’d like to get engaged in an exciting opportunity to restore the Carmel River watershed, check the KUSP website.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

Restore Hetch Hetchy Website
http://www.hetchhetchy.org/

The restore Hetch Hetchy feasibility study
http://www.hetchhetchy.org/pdf/
restore_hh_full_report_sept_2005.pdf

DWR San Joaquin District Website
http://www.sjd.water.ca.gov/index.cfm

Draft EIR/EIS
http://www.sjd.water.ca.gov/environmentalservices/
sanclemente/index.cfm

You can also get a copy of the EIR/EIS from Charyce Hatler, Department of Water Resources. Her telephone number is 559-230-3323, and her email is: chatler@water.ca.gov.

If you’d like to get personally involved in efforts to improve the Carmel River Watershed, please contact Planning and Conservation League Foundation staff member Monica Hunter at mhunter@pcl.org.

The Planning and Conservation League Foundation Website – http://www.pclfoundation.org/

The University of California at Santa Cruz is a major driver of growth and development in Santa Cruz County. UCSC is sometimes called the “City on a Hill,” because of its spectacular location, with its expansive views to Monterey Bay and the Pacific Ocean. Of course, UCSC isn’t actually a “city.” A “city” is a community incorporated under California state law, and you know you’re dealing with a genuine “city” if there’s an elected city council, in charge of the city’s land use and other municipal affairs. There is no such locally-elected body at UCSC. The campus is part of the centralized University of California system, run by a Board of Regents appointed by the Governor. Part of the campus is within the City of Santa Cruz, and part is outside the city limits.

Because it is part of the University of California system, local residents have no direct control over UCSC development decisions, and the University has not always been, unfortunately, sensitive to the local impacts that its development decisions cause, especially with respect to traffic, housing, and water.

Thanks to County Supervisor Mardi Wormhoudt and the Santa Cruz City Council, there may be a way for voters in the City of Santa Cruz to exercise some real influence in the future. Supervisor Wormhoudt and the Council are suggesting that a very creative referendum measure might be placed on the November ballot. Check the KUSP website for more information!

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

City of Santa Cruz Website
http://www.ci.santa-cruz.ca.us/

Check the City Council Agenda for the May 9, 2006 City Council meeting for more information. Contact Supervisor Wormhoudt to request a copy of the proposed ballot measure, as suggested to the City Council by Supervisor Wormhoudt’s letter dated April 28, 2006. Supervisor Wormhoudt can be reached by email at bds034@co.santa-cruz.ca.us.