 |
Home | Issues & Actions | About |
Archive Page This page is available as an archive to previous versions of LandWatch websites. |
KUSP LandWatch
News
Week of January 8, 2007 to January 12, 2007
Week of January 8, 2007 to January 12, 2007
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 January 8, 2007 to January 12, 2007
- Monday, January 8, 2007
Monterey County and the Right To Vote
- Tuesday, January 9, 2007
The Transformation of Spreckels
- Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Arroyo Grande Development
- Thursday, January 11, 2007
Widening Highway One
- Friday, January 12, 2007
Neighbors Fight to Save the Roadhouse
The following Land Use Reports have been presented on KUSP Radio by Gary A. Patton. The Wittwer & Parkin law firm is located in Santa Cruz, California, and practices environmental and governmental law. As part of its practice, the law firm files litigation and takes other action on behalf of its clients, which are typically private individuals, governmental agencies, environmental organizations, or community groups. Whenever the Land Use Report comments on an issue with which the Wittwer & Parkin law firm is involved on behalf of a client, Mr. Patton will make this relationship clear, as part of his commentary. Mr. Patton’s comments do not represent the views of Wittwer & Parkin, LLP, KUSP Radio, nor of any of its sponsors.
| Monday, January 8, 2007 Monterey County and the Right To Vote |
 |
Last Wednesday, I raised a question whether the Monterey County Board of Supervisors would actually do what it said it wanted to do, and place both the pro-development GPU4 General Plan document and the more “smart growth” “Community General Plan” document before the voters, with neither version to go into effect until after voter approval. In fact, the Board did no such thing. Last Wednesday, the Board adopted the pro-development GPU4 document. While the Board tried to give the impression that they would let the voters decide, their official action would put the pro-development GPU4 policies into immediate effect (so that the developers of Rancho San Juan, and other developers, could immediately get project approval on the basis of these new, more “pro-development” policies). In order actually to honor the right of the voters to decide, a “referendum” of the GPU4 General Plan is now required. The community-based activists who have been trying to get Rancho San Juan and the Community General Plan to the voters (over the continued opposition of the Board of Supervisors) have now launched a referendum campaign, so the voters will get a chance to express their opinion in a meaningful way. A public announcement about the referendum will take place tomorrow, at 8:30 in the morning, at the County Governmental Center in Salinas. Think about attending, to provide a demonstration that the voters really do care about these issues! For KUSP, this is Gary Patton. More Information
| |
| Tuesday, January 9, 2007 The Transformation of Spreckels |
|
|
Tomorrow, the Monterey County Planning Commission will consider a proposal radically to change the historic town of Spreckels. The project to be considered by the Commission would increase the size of Spreckels by about 50%, paving over productive farmlands to allow the construction of 73 new homes immediately adjacent to this historic little village. Spreckels is one of the most picturesque places in Monterey County (or anywhere else for that matter), and was a former “company town” for the Spreckels Sugar Mill. Landowners immediately adjacent to the town decided that they wanted to “finish off” a plan that was originally adopted in the early 1900’s, but that had never been “completed.” A huge legal battle took place, over whether a so-called “ancient subdivision” map gave the current landowners the right to develop. Many local governments would have fought against the landowners’ claims, but given its generally pro-development views, it’s not surprising that the Monterey County Board of Supervisors sided with the developers. The Board said that the County should not have jurisdiction to review the creation of the 73 new home sites, and that the public should not have the right to be heard on the matter, and that there should not be any environmental review. The “big decision,” in other words, has already been made. The Planning Commission is paying attention to the details. You can get more information on the project using the links below. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Wednesday, January 10, 2007 Arroyo Grande Development |
|
Arroyo Grande is located in San Luis Obispo County. Yesterday, the City Council held a public hearing on proposed General Plan and Zoning Code amendments, and I looked up the addresses of the affected properties on “Google Earth,” a program that allows any interested person to see a satellite view of virtually any place on the planet, just by typing in an accurate address for the place you want to see. As I looked at Arroyo Grande in a satellite view, I saw that making the specified properties more “developable,” which is what was proposed, would quite likely lead to the infill of areas already committed to urban development. This is generally a better pattern for development than “pioneering” efforts to spread development out onto adjacent farmlands, or into natural areas, which is what a lot of proposed projects are all about. For those interested in land use issues, Google Earth is hard to beat. It lets you see what the written documents are talking about, so you can get a pretty good idea of how a particular proposed development might relate to adjacent properties, and how it might affect the surrounding environment. You do need to have a relatively up to date computer, with one of the “faster” CPU chips, but if you have the computer capability to use the Google Earth tool, it’s something well worth your effort. You can get a reference to the website where you can download a free version of Google Earth by clicking on the link below. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Thursday, January 11, 2007 Widening Highway One |
|
As you may remember, the Santa County Regional Transportation Commission has most recently been a strong advocate for the widening of Highway One. About fifteen years ago, when I served on the Commission, the philosophy was different. In that era, the Commission thought that we needed to solve our transportation and congestion problems by using our existing transportation facilities more efficiently. Most members of the Commission then believed that widening the highway (always very costly, of course) wouldn’t really provide any longer term congestion relief, because of the “induced demand” phenomenon. There is good evidence that increasing highway capacity only brings temporary relief for congestion, because the freer-flowing conditions that follow a widening project lead to more people getting out on the highway, ultimately jamming it up as before, but with more vehicles caught in the jam. That is emphatically not the view of the current Commission, which supports the widening of Highway One. Santa Cruz County voters have said that they will not pay for a Highway One widening, but if funding can be obtained elsewhere, the Commission and the State of California have the legal ability to proceed. The statewide bond measures passed in November may well provide the money, and if you care about the issue, you might want to attend today’s Commission meeting, where this mater will be debated. You can get information on the meeting, and the funding situation, on the KUSP website. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Friday, January 12, 2007 Neighbors Fight to Save the Roadhouse |
|
|
The City of Santa Cruz has West Cliff Drive. The County of Santa Cruz has East Cliff Drive. Both of these roadways provide scenic views, and both are intimately tied to the sport of surfing. A jog, or walk, along either West Cliff or East Cliff is bound to expose you to some of this area’s best surfing action (providing, of course, that the waves are up). Surfers in particular are rallying around a neighborhood land use issue affecting the Pleasure Point area off East Cliff Drive. The issue is whether a spot revered by surfers, and inhabited by surfers, too, will be protected and preserved as part of the area’s history, or whether the land owner’s desire to transform the property into a more conventional residential development will be honored. You can get the full story of the fight to save the “Pleasure Point Roadhouse” by clicking on the Land Use Report link on the KUSP website. If you’re supportive, you can sign a petition in favor of the efforts to provide an “historic” designation for the Roadhouse structure. Those spearheading the “Save the Roadhouse” campaign are hoping to have the “Roadhouse” declared of historic significance, which will provide the structure with some additional protections. Ultimately, though, saving the “Roadhouse” will mean finding funding to make this site into a community center and historic museum facility, which is what advocates are aiming for. For Pleasure Point and Live Oak residents, now is a good time to get engaged. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
Archives of past transcripts are available here
|
CONTACT 306 Capitol Street #101 PO Box 1876 Phone (831) 759-2824 Fax (831) 759-2825 |
|