The Monterey County Planning Commission will be meeting this Wednesday, August 9th, and the most consequential item on the agenda is what I suppose could be called a “perennial favorite,” the September Ranch project. This is a proposed subdivision in Carmel Valley, and is very controversial. Traffic and water are the key issues, but the ultimate question is really whether the character and quality of Carmel Valley should be protected and preserved, or whether this area (no mater how spectacular it is) should really be valued most as a site for new residential construction. The current General Plan draft wending its way through the county process (it’s been about seven years now) essentially says that there is no area really “off limits” to new development in Monterey County, with the possible exception of Big Sur. Carmel Valley is truly spectacular, geographically, but that has not led the current Board of Supervisors to want to give it special protection. Water and traffic are the “details,” and very important details, of course, but the big question is the future shape and direction of growth. The current Board is definitely of the “shotgun school.” Fire away is the motto, and don’t try to restrict the targets.

The Commission is also going to consider waiving slope and ridgeline restrictions for another Carmel Valley development. If you care about that area, plan to show up in Salinas.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

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

August 9, 2006 Planning Commission Agenda
http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/pbi/cca/
pc/2006/08-09-06/pc08-10-06a.pdf

September Ranch Planning Documents
http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/pbi/major/
september/sept_main.htm

Staff is recommending approval of the “Farrow” project, which waives slope restrictions and ridgeline requirements.

The Arroyo Grande City Council meets this evening, at 7:00 o’clock. You can get more informationbelow. The first public hearing this evening is consideration of an application for a vesting tentative tract map for a development that includes commercial retail, office and residential uses. I’m not familiar with this specific development, though in general it’s fair to say that many professional planners think that “mixed-use” developments, that include both a commercial and residential component in the same location, are a very “smart” way to accommodate new growth. Depending on how it’s done, this kind of mixed-use development can help reduce the need to use a car to carry out every daily task. When mixed-use principles are applied in a consistent fashion, and sprawl is contained, positive changes are really possible.

What I want to highlight is another aspect of the proposed project: the request for a “vesting” tentative map. State law allows, but does not require,a city or county government to approve a “vesting” designation when approving a new subdivision application. When a “vesting” designation is granted, this insulates the developer from any future change in the rules. It can be a terrific benefit to the developer, but can limit the public’s right to insist on new standards, as conditions change. That’s why granting a “vesting” designation should always be reviewed thoroughly.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

City of Arroyo Grande Website
http://www.arroyogrande.org/

I’ve placed a link to the Coastal Commission’s website, and to the Commission’s current agenda, in the transcript of today’s Land Use Report. You can find that below.

A review of the Commission’s website reveals what an impressive job the Commission does in dealing with policy issues affecting the California coast. On the website, for instance, is comprehensive information about the effects that human-generated noise has on marine mammals; a complete review of the legal and regulatory program that protects the coast (and that’s a draft, subject to public comment); extensive materials on a proposal to build a Liquefied Natural Gas import facility at Long Beach; and a host of documents about the federal government’s latest efforts to stimulate offshore oil production. That’s just a sampler. The quality and thoroughness of the documents presented to the Commission by its staff is legendary, and yet the Commission handles permit matters very promptly, with minimum delay.

Why is that? Mostly, I think, it’s because the establishment of the Commission, by a 1972 initiative measure, constituted such an impressive victory for the public interest, over private interests, that the Commission staff has been inspired to make coastal protection their life’s work. Many original staff members are still with the Commission, and are seasoned professionals. The Coastal staff combines experience with dedication, and you can see the results on the website.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

California Coastal Commission Website
http://www.coastal.ca.gov/

Current Coastal Commission Agenda
http://www.coastal.ca.gov/mtgcurr.html

The City of Monterey is steeped in history. It’s still visible in the city streets. And they’re protecting it. A proposed referendum measure, in fact, mentioned last week, would let the public decide whether or not to approve a major expansion of the city’s offices. One of the main concerns is a desire to preserve the historic character of the City of Monterey.

As frequent listeners know, the public has very broad powers to regulate private and public actions to achieve public benefits. That includes the right to make sure that such actions don’t damage the historic integrity of the community. If the public cares about historic preservation, the public can do something about it. But the public doesn’t have to. Deciding to protect and preserve historically important structures, or areas within a city, is not required, but it is an option. That’s true of most land use regulations.

When the public regulates private activities to achieve public benefits, the regulated parties often get mad, and of course the public can go too far, and be unreasonable. I’m inspired, however, when I see a community that has decided that it cares about something, and then has the discipline and perseverance actually to do something effective to achieve the community goal. Historic preservation in Monterey is a good example. Today, at 4:00 p.m., the City of Monterey Historic Preservation Commission is meeting. Check out this meeting if you want to see what happens when a community is really serious about historic preservation.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

City of Monterey Website
http://www.monterey.org/

August 10th Historic Preservation Commission Agenda
http://www.monterey.org/boards/hpc/
agendas/2006/0810hpcagenda.pdf

Information on the voter referendum is available at
http://www.montereyvoter.com/

You can also contact the campaign by telephone at 831-646-8142 or by email at info@montereyvoter.com.

Land use policies will, ultimately, determine what kind of food gets placed on our table, and most specifically where it comes from. If we pave over the Central Valley and the Salinas Valley (and the local governments in charge of land use in those regions seem to think that’s just fine) then we will eventually end up eating a lot more imported food.

Now that I’m working as the head of the Planning and Conservation League, a statewide organization, I hear regularly about what’s going on in the great Central Valley. Of course, I keep in touch with what’s happening in Monterey County, and keep Land Use Report listeners well-briefed on that. A local government prejudice in favor of new development over agricultural land protection is not confined to Monterey County and the Salinas Valley. The same destructive patterns of sprawling development onto farmlands is found everywhere in California. The only cure seems to be by citizen initiative.

There is a model of community sustainability that is based on maintaining agricultural lands in agricultural production in the immediate vicinity of existing urban areas. A couple of Central Coast nonprofit groups (the Community Alliance With Family Farmers and the Agricultural and Land Based Training Association) are proving this can work. I’m happy to report that the University of California at Santa Cruz is providing a market for such locally-grown organics. Find out more below.

For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.

More Information

ALBA Website
http://www.albafarmers.org/

ALBA’s CSA
http://www.albafarmers.org/CSA04final.pdf

Community Alliance With Family Farmers
http://www.caff.org/

Register Pajaronian Story
http://www.register-pajaronian.com/
main.php?story_id=2786&page=1