The Land Use Report

Friday, August 17, 2012 This November, voters in the City of Santa Cruz will get to decide if they want to have the final say on whether or not the City should help construct a new, $100 million dollar plus desalination plant. The so-called “Right to Vote on Desal” Initiative will be on the ballot on November 6th, though only within the City itself. As KUSP listeners probably know, the City’s water service area goes beyond the City limits, encompassing areas in Live Oak, the City of Capitola, Pasatiempo and Branciforte, not to mention agricultural areas on the County’s North Coast. The election in November will not really be on desalination, per se. It will be on whether or not City voters should have the final sign off on a desalination project that could be very expensive, and that could have some very significant environmental impacts. Keeping the debate focused on the “right to vote” question seems very appropriate at this stage. That is actually the question that will face the voters in November. Nonetheless, many KUSP listeners might like to start reading up on the desalination process itself. If you are in that frame of mind, I’ve placed a link to a recent report on desalination in the transcript of today’s Land Use Report. The report comes from the Pacific Institute, and is called Desalination, With A Grain of Salt. The link is available at kusp.org/landuse. More Information: Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog Pacific Institute Bulletin Desalination, With A Grain of Salt SCWD2 Desalination Project Website Right To Vote on Desal Coalition Desal Alternatives Website Gary Patton Two Worlds Blog – “This Is Desal….”

Thursday, August 16, 2012 You are very cordially invited to a community workshop, taking place tonight. The focus of tonight’s workshop is the Santa Cruz Integrated Regional Water Management Plan, sometimes called the IRWMP. The workshop goes from 7:00 to 9:00 p.m. at the Live Oak Elementary School, located at 1916 Capitola Road, right on the corner of 17th Avenue. I hope that at least some KUSP listeners will be able to attend. Doing good water planning for our region, after all, is critically important for the future of both our economy and environment. The plan being discussed tonight includes policies and projects to ensure sustainable water use, reliable water supply, better water quality, improved flood protection and stormwater management, and environmental stewardship. In other words, the IRWMP definitely aims at being comprehensive. In addition, the IRWMP is “non-regulatory.” That means that the plan will only work if people implement its provisions voluntarily. Funding for the development and implementation of the IRWMP comes, in part, through agreements with the State Water Resources Control Board, and the State Department of Water Resources. The County of Santa Cruz has been playing a leadership role, and so has the Regional Water Management Foundation, created by the Community Foundation of Santa Cruz County. You can get more information at kusp.org/landuse. More Information: Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog Santa Cruz IRWM Plan For more information, please contact: Chris Coburn (County) – Telephone: 831-454-2763; Email: chris.coburn@co.santa-cruz.ca.us Tim Carson (Foundation) – Telephone: 831-662-2000; Email: tim@cfscc.org    

Wednesday, August 15, 2012 The City of Soledad tagline used to be, “Feel The Momentum.” I am not sure whether the City is still using that tagline, but things are happening in Soledad, at least by way of planning. Right now, the City is undertaking an update of its Downtown Specific Plan, and there is still time for interested persons to comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Report, and then to participate in the Plan adoption proceedings. I’ve put some links in today’s transcript. One thing that the City is proposing to change is the boundaries of its Downtown Specific Plan Area. The City wants to expand those boundaries, and the overall objectives of the Plan are four:  First, to establish a vibrant hub for commercial activity, entertainment, and hospitality. Second, to create a pedestrian oriented downtown that showcases the City’s unique culture and history. Third, to create a compact, mixed-use downtown that capitalizes on existing resources. Fourth, to make the Soledad downtown memorable. I am not sure how much new and higher-density housing is part of the implementation strategy. The “momentum” that the City of Soledad used to talk about was the momentum of low-density sprawl on the agricultural lands surrounding the City. From a planning point of view, putting new residential growth in the City’s downtown core might have some very positive effects. More Information: Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog City of Soledad Website Community & Economic Development Downtown Specific Plan Update City of Soledad Downtown Vision Program        

Tuesday, August 14, 2012 The Transportation Agency for Monterey County, or TAMC, is seriously considering a proposal that would require motorists to pay a toll to use Highway 156, between Highway 101, near Salinas, and Highway One, near Castroville. Initially, the toll would pay for the widening of Highway 156. In the longer run, toll revenues might well provide an ongoing income stream for the Transportation Agency, which I am sure that TAMC would find quite attractive. If you would like to get more information, you can track down the transcript of today’s Land Use Report at kusp.org/landuse. In addition, you can attend a presentation on the toll road proposal today. That might be worthwhile. TAMC staff has been making the rounds, discussing the toll road proposal, and they will be giving a presentation to the Salinas City Council, during the Council meeting this afternoon. I’ve placed a link to the Council agenda in today’s transcript. The meeting will be held at the Salinas City Hall, 200 Lincoln Street in Salinas, beginning at 4:00 p.m. The toll road item is Agenda Item #1, so be sure to be there right on the dot. While TAMC says that it’s only a hypothetical schedule for the toll road project, there is a document showing that environmental review could be completed by next year, with the toll road actually in operation by 2019. More Information: Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog Salinas City Council Agenda, August 14, 2012 Informational Materials and TAMC Schedule For Toll Road Construction July 12, 2012 Land Use Report July 17, 2012 Land Use Report July 26, 2012 Land Use Report      

Monday, August 13, 2012 The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors meets tomorrow. Agenda Item #36 is a recommendation from the County Administrative Officer that the Board adopt a significant modification to County Code Chapter 17.10, relating to affordable housing. Measure J, enacted by Santa Cruz County voters in 1978, says the following about affordable housing: It shall be the policy of Santa Cruz County that at least 15 percent of those housing units newly constructed for sale or rental each year shall be capable of purchase or rental by persons with average or below average incomes. This policy directive is implemented by Chapter 17.10 of the County Code. While the Board has a good deal of latitude on “how” to achieve the policy, the voter-enacted policy on affordable housing must be followed by the Board of Supervisors. If you care about affordable housing, I invite you to review Item #36 on tomorrow’s agenda. The proposal is that the developers of larger housing developments should be allowed to defer selling newly-created affordable housing units for over seven years after construction, if units are rented to qualifying lower income persons in the meantime. After that deferral period, the developers could then pay a fee and escape the low-income housing requirement entirely. Again, if you care, tomorrow is the time to give the Board your views. More Information: Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors Agenda, August 14, 2012 Agenda Item #36 – Affordable Housing The Story of Measure J Measure J  

Friday, August 10, 2012 If the public changes its mind about a land use approval, and vested rights exist, then a property owner or developer may sue the public agency concerned, and say that the public has “taken” its property. If “vested rights” exist, the property owner or developer will win. But here’s the basic rule about “takings.” Absent vested rights, an unconstitutional “taking” of private property by way of a land use regulation only occurs if the public decision deprives the property owner of all economically feasible uses of its property. If the developer wants to build 100 new homes, and the zoning says that’s OK, but then the public changes the zoning, and says that the particular land can only be used for five new homes, that will probably not be a “taking,” absent “vested rights.” While the property owner won’t make as much money with five homes as with 100, there is still an economically feasible use of the property. Property owners can always “ask” for what they want, and maybe the public will “give approval” for what the property owner asks. However, you don’t have a constitutional right to any particular approval. The Constitution says that “taking” all economic uses from a property owner requires payment of just compensation. But there is no constitutional protection for “givings.” Permissions given can be taken away, if the public changes its mind. More Information: Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog LandWatch Pamphlet on “Takings” Law    

Thursday, August 9, 2012 Today, I am providing a quick course on “vested rights.” An interesting article about vested rights is referenced in today’s transcript. Consult that for a more extensive discussion. Probably, the term “vested rights” is somewhat familiar to you. In the land use arena, developers and property owners are always seeking ways to establish their “vested rights.” What “vested rights” mean is that the public can no longer change its mind about a particular development, and that the developer has a legally enforceable right to construct a particular project. The reason that “vested rights” are such a big deal for developers is that the basic rule is that the public can change its mind, even after a project has been officially approved, and tell a developer that the formerly approved project is no longer approved. The bias is in favor of the public having a right to change its mind, up until the point that a developer has demonstrated that it is relying on the public’s approval by obtaining a building permit and actually beginning construction. The key concept is that the public retains its ability to decide what land uses are most appropriate, up until actual construction begins, which is when “vested rights” are established. This rule is tough on developers. If you read the article I’ve referenced, you’ll see that there are some ways that developers can “contract” with public agencies, to get “vested rights” without actually beginning construction. More Information: Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog Contracting For Vested Rights      

Wednesday, August 8, 2012 As a former environmental lobbyist, based in Sacramento, I continue to read the Sacramento Bee newspaper, online. I pay particular attention to news about legislative and other actions that might have an impact on the environment, and on the state’s land use laws and regulations. A recent article in the Bee, discussing the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, definitely caught my attention. Governor Jerry Brown was quoted as saying, “I’ve never seen a CEQA exemption that I don’t like.” The article went on to report: “Less than two years into office, Brown has signed three bills limiting the ability to challenge projects under the act, and he is openly supportive of at least one more. Meanwhile, Brown’s top political adviser … is quietly advising a group of business leaders on ways to modify the law. According to the Bee, one-time environmentalist Jerry Brown is now undermining the state’s strongest environmental law, and he has become a booster of mammoth development projects, including facilities that would be able to divert almost the entire flow of the Sacramento River around the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, to benefit corporate farmers on the west side of the Central Valley. If you care about protecting and preserving the California environment, you need to start paying attention to what our Governor is doing. Nothing can happen without support from locally elected legislators, so think about getting in touch with your representatives. More Information: Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog Sacramento Bee Article on Governor’s Position on CEQA CEQA – The Statute and Related Materials Planning and Conservation League (PCL) Website          

Tuesday, August 7, 2012 The Pacific Grove City Council will be holding a special meeting tomorrow evening. I’ve put a link to the agenda in the transcript of today’s Land Use Report. The meeting starts at 6:00 p.m., and the big item on the agenda is Agenda Item #13, a public hearing that will focus on a proposal for what the developer is calling the “Holman Hotel.” If ultimately approved, the hotel would be located on the block bounded by Lighthouse Avenue, Grand Avenue, Central Avenue, and Fountain Avenue. That is an entire city block, right in the heart of Pacific Grove. The agenda indicates that there are two possible decisions that the Council could make tomorrow: First, the Council could decide to proceed with an election on November 6th, to let the voters determine whether or not to amend the C-1-T Zone, to permit the construction of the hotel, as proposed by the developer. Second, the Council could determine that additional time is required adequately to develop project related information, to address expressed concerns, and to inform the public. In that case, there would not be an election on November 6th, but there would be more public hearings, and probably the establishment of a Blue Ribbon committee to look at issues like size, water availability, off-site parking, and how to use the new revenues that the proposed hotel would generate. I’ve put links to more information in today’s transcript. If you care about the future of Pacific Grove, you should be there tomorrow! More Information: Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog August 8, 2012 Agenda, Pacific Grove City Council Agenda Report on Holman Hotel (Agenda Item #13)      

Monday, August 6, 2012 The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors is back in session after their summer recess during July. You can get a link to the agenda for tomorrow’s meeting in the blog entry for today’s Land Use Report. The Land Use Report blog always provides both a transcript and links to related materials. It’s located at kusp.org/landuse. A couple of items on tomorrow’s agenda are worth comment. First, I want to give you a “heads up” on a public hearing item scheduled for later in August. That’s Agenda Item #50. You should mark the date of August 21st on your calendar, if you have any interest in the future of Aptos Village. On August 21st, the Board will be considering an application by Barry Swenson Builder to develop a mixed use, residential and commercial project, right in the heart of Aptos Village. Sixty-three residential units and 75,000 square feet of new commercial space are being proposed, along with the closure and abandonment of an existing roadway. Agenda Item #68 is an appeal by Cove Britton. Mr. Britton is a local architect, and he contends that the County has gone beyond its legal authority in trying to regulate the placement of hot tubs on the edge of coastal bluffs. As you might imagine, the County’s Planning Director doesn’t see it that way, and recommends the denial of Mr. Britton’s appeal. You can get the details in today’s transcript. More Information: Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog August 7, 2012 Agenda of the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors Aptos Village Item – Agenda Item #50 Hot Tub Appeal Item – Agenda Item #68  

Friday, August 3, 2012 Next week, the California Coastal Commission will meet in the Monterey Bay Region, and specifically in the City of Santa Cruz. The Commission will be meeting on Wednesday August 8th, Thursday, August 9th, and Friday August 10th in the Chambers of the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors, located in the County Governmental Center, at 701 Ocean Street. I think that the Coastal Commission sets the “gold standard” for land use planning in California. You can watch them in action on their website, no matter where they’re meeting, but when they show up in your locality, I can’t help but recommend that you drop by personally, to see them in action. I have put a link to the agenda in the transcript of today’s Land Use Report, and I hope that you will actually stop by and see the Commission do its work. The state’s system to protect our coast places direct responsibility on local governments, but the Coastal Commission supervises and oversees how local governments carry out their Coastal Act responsibilities. That’s clearly what the agenda for Thursday is all about, as the Commission considers the following items relevant to the Central Coast region: Consideration of stormwater management standards in San Luis Obispo County. Consideration of changes to standards governing parking and changes of use for commercial structures in Santa Cruz County. Changes to Santa Cruz County geologic review procedures. Other “cleanup” changes to the Santa Cruz County Local Coastal Program.   More Information: Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog Coastal Commission Website Meeting Agenda – August 2012 Meeting

Thursday, August 2, 2012 Monterey County Supervisor Jane Parker represents the Fourth Supervisorial District, which encompasses the cities of Marina and Seaside, and includes part of the City of Salinas. There is lots of land use “action” in the Fourth District, partly because it has such a big piece of the former Fort Ord. Considering that so much new development is planned for the Fourth District, it’s nice to see that Supervisor Parker is trying to stimulate community involvement in land use and planning issues. Let me alert you to a great opportunity this evening. Starting at 5:30, Supervisor Parker will be hosting a meeting focused on “Designing Healthy and Sustainable Communities.” The meeting will take place at the Chartwell School, located at 2511 Numa Watson Road in Seaside. The Chartwell School is a LEED Platinum facility, and has received a number of “green building” awards. Speaking will be Doug Atkins, the Executive Director of the Chartwell School, who has been called a “green superhero.” Atkins will talk about “learning in a green building.” Gabriel Torres, from CHISPA, the Community Housing Improvement Systems and Planning Association, will talk about “green community living.” That’s just part of the program. I’ve put a link to more information in the transcript of today’s Land Use Report. It’s available online at kusp.org/landuse. More Information: Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog Jane Parker Website Meeting Announcement – Designing Healthy & Sustainable Communities Chartwell School Chartwell Green Building Awards CHISPA Website For more information about the meeting call 831-883-7570

Wednesday, August 1, 2012 Water policy “matters” where land use is concerned. Transportation policy “matters,” too. Tomorrow, the Santa Cruz County Transportation Commission will be meeting at 9:00 a.m., and I want to make sure you know about it. The “big item” on the agenda tomorrow is a 9:30 a.m. public hearing, to consider whether or not to call a special election on November 6th, to get voter approval for a $10 Vehicle Registration Fee. That fee, if approved, would help pay for local transportation projects. If you have thoughts about this topic, you should plan to attend, and testify. The staff recommends that the Commission place the measure on the November ballot, but only if the Commission determines that there is “strong support” for the measure. Your comments can have a significant impact on what the Commission decides to do. The proposed resolution specifies very clearly where the money will go (it will be distributed between the County and the four cities), and on what kind of projects the money can be spent (for road maintenance, and for pedestrian and bicycle facilities). This money won’t go to widen Highway One. By the way, I have an update on the removal of the La Fonda Bridge. Removal is now scheduled for August 6th and 7th, and August 13th and 14th. Traffic on Highway One will only be stopped in one direction at a time. There is more information at kusp.org/landuse. More Information: Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog SCCRTC Website SCCRTC Agenda, August 2, 2012 Meeting. The Staff Report on the tax proposal is Agenda Item #16. Update on the Highway One Soquel/Morrissey Widening Project

Tuesday, July 31, 2012 Yesterday, I told you that “water matters,” and advertised the Water Matters newsletter published by the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District. Water policy concerns in Monterey County, of course, are not just restricted to the Peninsula. A quick review of what the Monterey County Board of Supervisors is doing today makes that clear. Agenda Item #27 on the Board’s agenda relates to an assessment district for the Aromas Water District. The “real action” on water policy, however, is found in a separate joint meeting agenda for the Board of Supervisors of the Monterey County Water Resources Agency and the Monterey County Water Resources Agency Board of Directors. Here are the topics to be covered in that joint meeting: What to do about multiple lawsuits (all to be discussed in a “closed session”) Disputes with the San Luis Obispo Flood Control and Water Conservation District The Greater Monterey County Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Storm Water Management in Salinas The Pajaro River Bench Excavation and Flood Damage Reduction Projects The Salinas River Channel Maintenance Program Emergency Repairs on the Salinas River Diversion Facility The Carmel River Lagoon Project; and The Agricultural Discharge Order from the Regional Water Quality Control Board Get more information at kusp.org/landuse. More Information: Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog Monterey County Board of Supervisors Agenda Links Monterey Peninsula Water Management District Website Water Matters Newsletter To subscribe, send an email to outreach@mpwmd.net: “Please add me to MPWMD's Water Matters mailing list.”

Monday, July 30, 2012 Water and land use are related, and I try, here on the Land Use Report, to keep you apprised of some of the key water policy issues that are on the “front burner” in both Monterey and Santa Cruz Counties. If you’d like to keep abreast of important water policy issues in Monterey County, I have a suggestion. The Monterey Peninsula Water Management District, which does not itself “deliver” water, but which has an important role in overseeing water service on the Monterey Peninsula, is now publishing a monthly Email Newsletter called Water Matters. There is a double message in that title. The newsletter covers a broad range of “matters” related to water policy in Monterey County, and of course especially on the Monterey Peninsula. What those policies are very definitely “matters” to the future of our local economy and natural environment. If you would like to sign up for the Water Matters newsletter, go to today’s transcript, at kusp.org/landuse, and you will find out how to do that. This month’s edition, by the way, outlines how a new property tax charge will work, and provides water conservation tips, and give you a calendar of upcoming events, including the next Board meeting on August 20th. While you are tracking down today’s transcript, click on the link to the Water Management District website. That website provides a good outline of exactly what is going on at the District. More Information: Gary Patton’s Two Worlds Blog Monterey Peninsula Water Management District Website Water Matters Newsletter To subscribe, send an email to outreach@mpwmd.net: “Please add me to MPWMD's Water Matters mailing list.”