|
|||||||
KUSP LandWatch
News |
|||||||
|
ogo.gif" width="108" height="109" border="0"> "Listen Live" |
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 November 4, 2002 to November 8, 2002
The following Land Use Reports have been presented on KUSP Radio by Gary Patton, Executive Director of LandWatch Monterey County. The opinions expressed by Mr. Patton are not necessarily those of KUSP Radio, nor of any of its sponsors.
Monday,
November 4th – Proposition 51: Transportation Funding
Proposition
51, on the ballot tomorrow, is an extremely significant and controversial
initiative measure. If enacted, it will profoundly affect land use
and transportation in California. Its benefits include significant
amounts of dedicated new money for transit, rail, bicycles, pedestrians,
and school buses.
Proposition 51 does not authorize any new borrowing. Instead, it directs thirty percent of the state sales tax revenue generated from the lease and sale of new and used motor vehicles to a special new Traffic Congestion Relief and Safe School Bus Trust Fund. That’s expected to be about $810 million dollars per year, or less than one percent of the State’s current budget. Money will not be taken away from any current programs, because Proposition 51 applies only to future increases in state sales tax revenue.
Proposition 51 will reduce the flexibility that the State Legislature will have to spend current tax revenues. If you don’t like that, a “no” vote is indicated. However, if you’d like to override the priorities of the State Legislature, and you prefer the spending priorities in Proposition 51, then you may want to vote “yes.” You can get the entire story through the KUSP website. Check the Land Use Report link at www.kusp.org.
Tomorrow, I hope you’ll vote.
For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
More Information:
Official State Voters Guide – http://voterguide.ss.ca.gov/home.asp
Text of Proposition 51 - http://www.voteyesonprop51.org/text/text.html
Yes on Proposition 51 Website – http://www.voteyesonprop51.org/
Planning and Conservation League (Sponsor) Website – http://www.pcl.org/transportation/summary.html
Argument Against Proposition 51 – http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/bp_ge02/prop51_against.pdf
Tuesday,
November 5th – The Watsonville Urban Growth Measure
Throughout California, the polls are open. They’ll close tonight
at 8:00 o’clock. It would be hard to overestimate the significance
of this particular election. Many issues of critical importance
confront the voters. The choices aren’t always the ones we’d
prefer, but the decisions made in this election will have profound
effects on the future of our state and local communities. There’s
no question about that. This is my personal pitch: I hope you’ll
vote!
In the City of Watsonville, Measure U is on the ballot. This is a land use initiative that would establish an Urban Limit for the City of Watsonville, and direct future growth (for the most part) away from the most commercially productive agricultural land. In doing so, it would target new growth into the unincorporated Buena Vista area. That will definitely have a significant impact, and many Buena Vista residents oppose Measure U.
On the other hand, unlike many urban limit initiatives, Measure U is supported by a broad range of different interests, including environmentalists, the City Council, the Farm Bureau, and local business. It’s the outgrowth of a multi-year consensus-building effort by Action Pajaro Valley. You can get the full story, including pro and con arguments from the Sierra Club, by clicking on the Land Use Report link at www.kusp.org.
Once again, here comes the pitch! I hope you’ll vote.
For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
More Information:
Text of Watsonville Initiative – http://www.actionpajarovalley.org/initiative/initiative.html
City Attorney Analysis and Arguments on Measure U – http://www.votescount.com/nov2k2/u.htm
Sierra Club Pros and Cons of Measure U – http://ventana.sierraclub.org/back_issues/0205/measureu.shtml
Action Pajaro Valley Website - http://www.actionpajarovalley.org/
Yes on “U” Committee - http://www.actionpajarovalley.org/ballot_main.htm
Wednesday, November 6th – Fort Ord Housing
Monterey County residents with a particular interest in affordable
housing might want to mark their calendars for an upcoming meeting.
This Friday, November 8th, the Fort Ord Reuse Authority will meet
at 4:00 p.m. at the FORA Conference Facility located at 102 13th
Street, Building 2925, on the former Fort Ord. Among other things,
FORA will receive an update on its Work Force Housing initiative.
Congress Member Sam Farr, and others, have been pushing FORA to make affordable housing a higher priority, and FORA is beginning to respond. A consultant will be assigned to the task, and is scheduled to be in attendance at the upcoming meeting.
In terms of “smart growth” principles, which generally call for placing new growth in areas already committed to urban development, the former Fort Ord is an ideal place for affordable housing. This is particularly true because there is a lack of affordable housing on and adjacent to the Monterey Peninsula, where there are lots of lower paying jobs in the tourist industry. Affordable housing on Fort Ord could eliminate some long distance commutes for Monterey Peninsula workers, addressing some of the most critical transportation problems facing Monterey County.
In sum, building more affordable housing on Fort Ord may be a good idea whose time has finally come. If you’re interested, check out the FORA meeting this Friday.
For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
More Information:
Fort Ord Reuse Authority Website - http://www.fora.org/
November 8, 2002 Agenda - http://www.fora.org/
To get involved personally, contact:
Thursday,
November 7th – Coyote Valley Specific Plan
A couple of years ago, the City of San Jose approved a proposed
office park development in the Coyote Valley. This was the CISCO
Systems project. The proposal was for an office park to accommodate
20,000 new jobs, and with a 20,000-car parking lot. No new housing
was proposed.
The Coyote Valley is located in the southern part of the City of San Jose. Currently, it’s in open space and agricultural use. The CISCO project would have impacted that specific environment, and would also have spun off housing developments throughout the entire region. Although approved by the City of San Jose, the office park development has not yet been built, presumably because of the general downturn in the Silicon Valley economy.
So-called “Smart Growth” principles hold that jobs and housing should be developed together. Critics of the CISCO project definitely felt that San Jose could have done better on that score. Now, there may be a chance that the City of San Jose will rethink its strategy on the Coyote Valley. On Monday, November 4th, a special task force, established by the City, held a preliminary meeting, to consider drafting a new Specific Plan for the Coyote Valley. If you’d like to be involved in this new planning effort, you should check out the information on the KUSP website, at www.kusp.org.
For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
More Information:
Coyote Valley Specific Plan Website - http://www.ci.san-jose.ca.us/coyotevalley/links.html
Friday,
November 8th – The Monterey County GPU
State law requires that each city and county in California develop
a General Plan, to guide its future growth. The General Plan is
the most important policy document affecting local land use. It’s
often called the “Constitution” of land use. Every local
zoning decision, and every planning approval, must be found “consistent”
with the adopted General Plan. In other words, what those General
Plan policies say has to be followed. If the policies are specific,
and establish clear guidelines for growth, they’ll shape the
future.
As loyal listeners know, Monterey County has been working on an Update to its General Plan for several years. The policies incorporated into the Monterey County General Plan Update will profoundly affect the future of Monterey County. It now appears that very significant directions about the future of the General Plan Update will be adopted by the Monterey County Board of Supervisors next Tuesday, November 12th. Some important draft language from Supervisor Calcagno is specifically up for discussion.
If you are interested in these Monterey County General Plan issues (and particularly if you’ve been involved in the Monterey County GPU process) I recommend that you attend this important meeting. A detailed agenda is available online, and you can get access (and more information) at www.kusp.org.
For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
More Information:
Monterey County Board of Supervisors Agenda - http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/suagenda/
Monterey County General Plan Update Website - http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/gpu/
Supervisor Calcagno’s Proposed Language - http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/gpu/news/calcagno_1002.pdf
For details, contact Gary Patton at LandWatch: 831-759-2824, Ext. 10, or
Archives of past transcripts are available here
|
CONTACT 306 Capitol Street #101 PO Box 1876 Phone (831) 759-2824 Fax (831) 759-2825 |
|
