The Monterey County Board of Supervisors is closing out the year 2014 with an agenda tomorrow that includes lots of land use items. Last Tuesday, of course, the Board approved an extremely controversial and consequential development project, the so-called "Ferrini Ranch" development, off Highway 68. The roll call vote saw Supervisors Calcagno, Armenta, and Salinas voting "aye," with Supervisors Parker and Potter voting "no." Unless the courts intervene, the development will proceed as approved, and will add to the overdraft of local groundwater aquifers, add to the already horrific traffic jams on Highway 68, and spread suburban sprawl further along what has been called the "scenic" Highway 68 corridor.

The land use items on tomorrow’s agenda are not as "big" in their potential future impacts as Ferrini Ranch, but they are important. Item #14.2 would revise the guidelines for the County’s Mitigation and Monitoring Program. This program is supposed to ensure that environmental conditions placed on projects are actually followed. Item #15 makes an environmental finding about the proposed "Rooster Ordinance." Item #16 is an ordinance on noise control. And this is only a partial list! Check out tomorrow’s agenda by using the link found in today’s Land Use Report blog, at kusp.org/landuse.

More Information

• Land Use Links
• Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog
• Monterey County Board of Supervisors Agendas
• Monterey Bay Partisan Comment on Ferrini Ranch

When I first began representing the Third Supervisorial District on the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors (and that was, admittedly, a long time ago: forty years ago, next January, as a matter of fact), how the County government could best deal with the impacts of the operations of the Davenport Cement Plant was a major concern.

County government still has concerns about the Davenport Cement Plant, but the concerns now are about how the County government can best deal with the impacts of the cessation of operations at the Davenport Cement Plant. On the Board’s agenda tomorrow, as Agenda Item #47, is an interesting report that outlines a "Strategic Reuse Plan" for the Davenport Cement Plant. I have a link to the agenda item in today’s Land Use Report blog, and that link will take you to a copy of the forty-seven page "Strategic Reuse Plan." The Board is not going to be taking action on the proposed Plan today; instead, the recommendation is that the Board receive written public comments on the proposed "Strategic Reuse Plan" for the next sixty days, and direct the County Planning Department to consider the comments, and then to return to the Board in March 2015 with a recommended Plan, for official Board action.

I encourage all those who have an interest in the future of the Santa Cruz County North Coast to read through the proposed Strategic Reuse Plan, and to comment, if you have comments.

More Information:

• Land Use Links
• Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog
• Board of Supervisors Agenda – December 16, 2014
• December 16, 2014 Agenda Item #47

Last week, I tried to get KUSP listeners interested in land use actions taken at the "Zoning Administrator" level of government. As I explained then, the "ZA," which is the shorthand name given to the Zoning Administrator, is almost always a senior staff person in a City or County Planning Department. The ZA typically makes land use decisions on smaller land use items, and the ZA’s decisions can then be appealed to either the Planning Commission or to the City Council or Board of Supervisors.

Today, let me alert you to an upcoming hearing being conducted by the City of Santa Cruz ZA. That hearing will take place this morning, at 10:00 o’clock, in the Santa Cruz City Council Chambers. A proposed recycling center on Harvey West Boulevard is Agenda Item #1. A proposed thrift shop at 1305 Water Street is Agenda Item #2. Agenda Item #3, involving property located at 101 Frederick Street, is an application to cut down a heritage oak tree.

I would encourage City residents who think that our heritage trees should be protected to take in the ZA hearing this morning, to see the system in action. There is little, if any, protection for large heritage trees in the City of Santa Cruz. If you want to cut one down, the City almost always says "yes." It doesn’t have to be that way, of course, but unless people start caring, that’s how it’s going to continue to be.

More Information:

• Land Use Links
• Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog
• December 10, 2014 Land Use Report – "PC/ZA"
• December 17, 2014 City of Santa Cruz ZA Agenda

Whether you live in a city, or in the unincorporated area of the county, the "general" land use related decisions of the City Council or Board of Supervisors are bound to affect you. Land use decisions aren’t just about the new subdivision, or condominium project, or shopping center proposal in your individual neighborhood. The general rules that apply to all aspects of development will have a big impact. You should get involved in land use issues, and the best way to get involved is through a group that cares about the same things that you do.

A recent bulletin of the Carmel Valley Association discusses "Why Are County Roads Failing?" I have put a link in today’s transcript. Dr. Tim Sanders outlines the "level of service" issues that are so important in land use decision-making. You might want to check it out! Check out the LandWatch Monterey County website, too, for another group that can connect up Monterey County residents with important land use decision-making matters.

More Information:

• Land Use Links
• Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog
• Carmel Valley Association Website
• Carmel Valley Association: When County Roads Fail
• LandWatch Monterey County Website

"Development" always sounds great. Things are going to get better. But are things actually going to get "better" now that the Monterey County Board of Supervisors has approved the Ferrini Ranch "development"? Many would say "No." And what about "improvement" projects? Do improvement projects always "improve" our lives? Not necessarily! One of the things you always have to consider is what the long-term impacts will be of an "improvement" project that promises short-term benefits. I am not saying that "improvement" projects don’t ever improve our lives, but I do think it’s important to look at the longer-term impacts, whenever "improvements" are being proposed. One of the good things about the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, is that CEQA requires just this sort of a longer-term and cumulative impacts analysis.

I got to thinking about this philosophical issue recently, because of the "Prunedale Improvement Project" on Highway 101. You can find out more about this project at kusp.org/landuse, and if you click on the "Slide Show" link, you will get pictures of the groundbreaking, with lots of our local politicians and a musical accompaniment! Check it out!

More Information:

• Land Use Links
• Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog
• Prunedale Improvement Project Website
• Slide Show – PIP Groundbreaking Ceremony
• Transportation Agency For Monterey County Facebook Page
• Monterey Bay Partisan Report on Ferrini Ranch Approval