 |
Home | Issues & Actions | About |
Archive Page This page is available as an archive to previous versions of LandWatch websites. |
KUSP LandWatch
News
Week of August 8, 2011 to August 12, 2011
Week of August 8, 2011 to August 12, 2011
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 August 8, 2011 to August 12, 2011
- Monday, August 8, 2011
Negotiating With Railroads
- Tuesday, August 9, 2011
Alternative Redevelopment
- Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Checking In With The Coastal Commission
- Thursday, August 11, 2011
La Bahia
- Friday, August 12, 2011
An Interesting Planning Item In Pismo Beach
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, August 8, 2011 Negotiating With Railroads |
 |
In the 19th Century, the federal government gave away huge blocks of land to railroad entrepreneurs. The “railroad barons” who benefitted from this governmental largesse often became fabulously rich and powerful. In California, the officers of the Central Pacific Railroad (Leland Stanford, Collis P. Huntington, Mark Hopkins, and Charles Crocker) were called the “Big Four.” They dominated state government, and ensured that the laws were tilted their way. It was in reaction to the domination of our government by the railroads that California, under Governor Hiram Johnson, adopted those “populist” remedies of the initiative, referendum, and recall. The Octopus, a 1901 novel by Frank Norris, provides a great way to get the picture. Kings County farmers, battling a proposed high-speed train project that threatens to destroy their farms, are harking back to “The Octopus,” in describing the California High-Speed Rail Authority. Closer to the Central Coast Region, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors is finding out how hard it continues to be for governmental agencies to deal with the railroads. Efforts to work out a reasonable maintenance agreement with the Sierra Northern Railway is delaying efforts to make railroad crossing improvements in Aptos Village. For more information, check out Agenda Item #27 on tomorrow’s Board of Supervisors’ agenda. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.More Information: Gary Patton writes a daily blog, “Two Worlds / 365” Agenda For August 9, 2011 Meeting of the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors Staff Report, Agenda Item #27 Railroad references: The Octopus
The Big Four |
|
| Tuesday, August 9, 2011 Alternative Redevelopment |
|
The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors meets today. If you have been following the “redevelopment” issue, Agenda Item #41 should be of particular interest. I’ve placed a link to the staff report in the transcript of today’s Land Use Report. County staff is recommending that the Board utilize some recently enacted provisions of state law to enter into a “voluntary alternative redevelopment program.” By doing that, the Board will preserve various redevelopment powers for the County, and if it doesn’t, the County’s Redevelopment Agency and all of its powers will be eliminated, since the state decided, as part of this year’s state budget, to terminate “redevelopment” activities throughout California. In order to participate in the “alternative” program, the County has to agree to make a payment to the state. It’s a hefty payment, too, something around eight or nine million dollars for the 2011-2012 fiscal year. Various local governments are suing the state, claiming that the state’s decision to eliminate redevelopment agencies is illegal. It looks to me like the staff recommendation is intended to keep options open for the continuation of redevelopment activities in Santa Cruz County, until it becomes clearer what really lies ahead. While the long term remains cloudy, in the short term, there are lots of projects being planned in Santa Cruz County, with real construction coming soon. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Wednesday, August 10, 2011 Checking In With The Coastal Commission |
|
The California Coastal Commission is this state’s premier planning agency. While city and county local governments around the state make the vast majority of the land use decisions that will so profoundly affect the future of California’s local communities, the Coastal Commission continues to be charged with protecting the California coast, and the coast is still that part of the state where the stakes are highest, and where growth pressures are greatest. The Commission’s process for addressing the important issues that come before it sets a standard for what good staff work ought to be like. This week, starting today, the Coastal Commission is meeting in Watsonville, in the Watsonville City Council Chambers, located at 275 Main Street. If you don’t want to drive to Watsonville to attend the meeting, the Commission continues to provide a live webcast, so you can “tune in” from your home computer, or even see the meeting on your television, if you’ve set yourself up with the right equipment. There are lots of important Central Coast items on the agenda this week, mostly tomorrow. Here is a listing of some of them:
I will have more on that last item tomorrow. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Thursday, August 11, 2011 La Bahia |
|
The California Coastal Commission is meeting today in the Watsonville City Council Chambers, located at 275 Main Street in Watsonville. On their agenda is the proposed demolition of the La Bahia apartment building in the City of Santa Cruz, and its replacement by a hotel of substantially greater height and bulk. As the staff report says, there are really two sets of issues before the Commission: First, is the demolition of the existing La Bahia appropriate? Second, if the Commission decides that demolition of the existing structure is appropriate, what are the appropriate standards for redevelopment following such demolition? The Commission staff recommendation backs up the City’s determinations in each of these areas. Yes, demolition is appropriate. Yes, the bulk and scale of the proposed new structure is acceptable under Coastal Act policies. It’s not clear that the Commission itself will necessarily agree with the staff. The City and the developer want to ignore current requirements, and change planning standards to facilitate the developer’s desires, instead of requiring the developer to follow the existing plan guidelines. In general, this approach is the opposite of what good planning demands. If you care about the outcome, you should be at the Coastal Commission meeting today. Check out the staff report before you go. I’ve put a link in the transcript of today’s Land Use Report. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
|
|
| Friday, August 12, 2011 An Interesting Planning Item In Pismo Beach |
|
The Coastal Commission is still meeting today in Watsonville, in the Watsonville City Council Chambers. Yesterday, the La Bahia item was the big item on their agenda. Not insignificant in terms of its importance, however, was an item that you may not have read about in this morning’s paper. Application No. A-3-PSB-10-032 was the application of Jordan and Rachael Larson to demolish a garage and to construct a new garage and a single-family home at 202 Vista Del Mar in Pismo Beach. Here’s why this was an important item. There is a question whether or not the lot upon which the Larsons proposed to construct their new garage and new home is really a “legal” lot. The law firm with which I am associated has addressed this issue in cases in Santa Cruz County and San Mateo County. It’s an important issue all along the coast. There are lots of parcels in the Coastal Zone that “appear” to be legal lots, and thus susceptible for development, but that may not actually be independently existing lots at all. Both neighborhood and environmental impacts can result if owners are allowed to develop every lot that may appear as a separate parcel on an Assessor’s Parcel Map. In the case of the Larson lot, the Commission staff recommended that the lot not be considered to be a “stand alone” and “legal” lot, and thus that it was not buildable. 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 |
|