 |
Home | Issues & Actions | About |
Archive Page This page is available as an archive to previous versions of LandWatch websites. |
KUSP LandWatch
News
Week of June 21, 2010 to June 25, 2010
Week of June 21, 2010 to June 25, 2010
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 June 21, 2010 to June 25, 2010
- Monday, June 21, 2010
Regulating Vacation Rentals
- Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Water And UCSC Growth
- Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Regulatory Reform in Santa Cruz County
- Thursday, June 24, 2010
The AMBAG “Clearinghouse Report”
- Friday, June 25, 2010
Clearinghouse II – A List Of Some Items
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, June 21, 2010 Regulating Vacation Rentals |
 |
Agenda Item #81 on the agenda of tomorrow’s meeting of the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors will be of interest to any Live Oak resident who either operates a vacation rental business, or who lives in a neighborhood where there are a significant number of vacation rentals. This agenda item is what is known as a “scheduled item,” which means that you can pretty much rely on not having to wait around for the item to be heard, if you show up on the 5th Floor of the County Governmental Center at 10:45 tomorrow morning. Supervisor John Leopold, who represents the Live Oak area, has brought this matter to the Board, and his letter, included in the agenda packet, is well worth reading. The bottom line on this item is that Supervisor Leopold is asking the Board to direct the Planning Department and County Counsel to develop a proposed ordinance regulating vacation rentals in Live Oak. The ordinance would include length of stay limitations, usage limitations, and provisions on occupancy, signage, management, geographic concentration, parking, payment of transient occupancy taxes, and enforcement. The Planning Department would consult with the Planning Commission, the Housing Advisory Commission, and the Coastal Commission, and the ordinance would be back before the Board for a public hearing on or before November 16th. If you care about this topic, you should be at the Board meeting tomorrow, at 10:45. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Tuesday, June 22, 2010 Water And UCSC Growth |
|
|
If you get your water from the City of Santa Cruz (and that includes all residents and businesses in the City of Santa Cruz, and in Live Oak and Pasatiempo), you will probably be interested in Agenda Item #84 on today’s Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors’ agenda. This item relates to the proposed expansion of the City’s Sphere of Influence. That proposed Sphere expansion would help the University obtain an additional 152 million gallons of water per year, to facilitate the construction of over 3,000,000 square feet of new buildings in what is now a natural reserve area located outside the area designated for development in both the City and the County General Plans. Agenda Item #84 is not a “scheduled item,” so it’s hard to predict exactly when the Board will discuss it. The issues, however, are of critical importance. In the transcript of today’s Land Use Report, you’ll find a copy of the very heartfelt remarks of outgoing City Manager Richard Wilson, discussing the City’s current water supply crisis. Bottom line, the City’s water supply is currently “inadequate” to serve current customers, to use the City Manager’s word. In view of that fact, does it make sense for the City to take on new water service responsibilities, to facilitate UCSC growth? Agenda Item #84 relates to that question. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
Remarks of Santa Cruz City Manager Richard Wilson, in his May 17, 2010 Budget Message to the Santa Cruz City Council, Addressing the City’s Water Crisis Water Department We have sixty years of rainfall data, which are meaningless. It is silly to think that the most challenging drought of the last 60 years is a real worst-case scenario. Both wet and dry periods can last for decades or even centuries. We have no idea what future rainfall will be; we only know that we are absolutely dependent upon it. In a modest drought, such as 1976–77, we are in trouble.12 In a severe drought, we are in deep trouble. It is not a stretch to imagine banning all outdoor water use and closing hotels and restaurants and other businesses in time of severe drought. Moreover, we have an over-stretched system in the best of times. We have an old water system. We have inadequate supply. We need to continue to invest large sums in the system and develop a supply for drought situations. If we do not, we will be risking the well-being of every one of our customers. In contrast to the budgets of other City departments, the Water Department’s budget is capital intensive. The fund balance is adequate to fund both operations and capital expenditures for the next year on a pay-as-you-go basis. Major capital projects such as desalination will require the issuance of debt in the future. We are developing cash flow projections for future capital expenses; it is not a simple task. Staff will keep the Water Commission informed as this work comes along, and will report to the City Council too. 12 We have three times more customers today than we had then. Our water supply is unchanged. |
|
| Wednesday, June 23, 2010 Regulatory Reform in Santa Cruz County |
|
This week, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors discussed issues relating to water and proposed growth at UCSC, and considered a proposal to regulate vacation rentals. Last week, the Board got a report from the Planning Director on land use regulatory reform. The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors, in other words, continues to focus a good deal of attention on land use, planning, and growth. For someone who thinks these issues are important, reading the Board’s agenda packet is a real pleasure. Naturally, I’d like to persuade some of you to get into that habit. If you look at the transcript of today’s Land Use Report, you’ll find a link to Agenda Item #40, from the June 15th Board Agenda, which discusses regulatory reform, and outlines upcoming efforts to make it easier for permit applicants to go through the permit process. Making the permit process work better is obviously desirable. Applicants sometimes think that the County has set up rules intended to frustrate them, but I am almost positive that this is not the case. Instead, the Board is always trying hard to balance the need for neighborhood and environmental protection with the desires of individual property owners to develop their properties, whether for profit or personal use. If you’d be interested in reading my own thoughts about permit reform, you’ll find a link in the transcript of today’s Report. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Thursday, June 24, 2010 The AMBAG “Clearinghouse Report” |
|
Frequent listeners may remember that I have previously mentioned the “Clearinghouse Report” published by the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (or AMBAG). This report is a periodic notice about significant land use items from all three of the AMBAG counties, Monterey, Santa Cruz, and San Benito. One of the big problems that faces anyone concerned about land use is finding out about significant land use items too late, which means after the decision has already been made, or with such short notice that you can’t really prepare. As an environmental and land use attorney, I can testify to the problems this causes. Generally speaking, if you want to be effective with respect to land use and planning issues, whether you are for or against a particular decision, you need to get your comments in during the public hearing held on the particular matter in which you have an interest. In legal parlance, this is called “exhausting your administrative remedies.” If you don’t make your comments, and submit your evidence, before or during the hearing on the matter, you are almost always precluded from bringing up the concern later, no matter how much merit your concern has. Obviously, if you find out about a decision only after the decision is made, you’re pretty much out of luck. If you get the word only a day or two ahead, you may not have the time to prepare adequately. AMBAG helps out, because the “Clearinghouse Report” is an early warning system for major land use issues. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Friday, June 25, 2010 Clearinghouse II – A List Of Some Items |
|
The AMBAG Clearinghouse Report provides a “heads up” on important land use items from all three AMBAG counties, Monterey, Santa Cruz, and San Benito. City as well as County items are included. Since getting advance notice of such items is critically important, for those who want to weigh in on land use and planning issues, you might actually think about subscribing yourself. I’ve provided instructions on how to do that in the transcript of today’s Land Use Report. Let me give you a sample of the kind of items that get covered in the Clearinghouse Report. All of these items relate to projects now being considered. In some cases, the official comment period has just closed, but the public hearings which are the actual deadline for comment and testimony are still in the future. A significant road project, the South Boundary/Gigling Road Improvement Project, is scheduled on lands under the jurisdiction of the Fort Ord Reuse Authority. The City of Monterey will consider revising its City Zoning Map to bring it into consistency with the City’s General Plan; this will affect both development and open space designations. CHISPA and South County Housing Corporation, both low income housing developers, have two proposals coming up. If you care, you need to be there, when decisions on land use matters are made. The Clearinghouse Report gives you advance notice, so you can participate effectively. 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 |
|