|
|||||||
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 February 9, 2004 to February 13, 2004
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,
February 9, 2004 – Coastal Review Tomorrow
Generally, local city and county governments establish the policies
that guide new development. That local decision making, however,
does take place within a framework of state law. In most cases,
the state gives broad discretion to local governments. For instance,
state law tells local governments what topics they need to address
in their local General Plans. The substantive policy choices, however,
are made locally.
That’s the basic rule, but there are some exceptions. The best
example is the California Coastal Act. In 1972, California voters
adopted an initiative measure to protect the coast, and there is
now a special procedure for land use policy making in the coastal
zone. Local government policy and project decisions in the coastal
zone are subject to review (and reversal, if necessary) by the State
Coastal Commission.
Tomorrow, the Coastal Commission staff will be appearing before
the Carmel City Council, at 12:00 noon, to present a staff report
on the City's proposed Coastal Implementation Plan, and to provide
policy direction on proposed amendments. At 3:00 o’clock, the
Coastal Commission staff will appear before the Monterey County
Board of Supervisors, with basically the same mission in mind. In
both cases, the Coastal Commission staff is suggesting that local
planning policies should be strengthened, better to protect our
coast.
For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
More Information:
California
Coastal Act
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?
WAISdocID=1660587643+5+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve
Monterey
County Board of Supervisors Agenda
http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/cttb/agenda.htm
Carmel-by-the
Sea Website
http://www.carmelcalifornia.com/
Tuesday,
February 10, 2004 – The Urban-Wildland Intermix Code
Last year, massive fires raged throughout Southern California. These
fires burned about 750,000 acres, destroyed more than 3,500 homes,
and killed 22 persons. 95,000 people had to be evacuated. Something
like two billon dollars of property damage occurred. Fire suppression
costs were on the order of $25,000,000.
Could something like that happen here? Well, it could, and the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors is considering how best to prevent such a disaster. Item #53 on the Board’s agenda today is consideration of a special “Urban-Wildland Intermix Code.” This bureaucratic-sounding item is a proposed amendment to the current County Code, to impose special requirements for proposed developments in the areas of greatest vulnerability to fire danger. The proposed code changes are the product of a great deal of consultation between the County Planning Department, the Office of Emergency Services, the Office of the State Fire Marshal, and the local Fire Chiefs Association.
I’ve posted references to this item on the KUSP website, along with some information about the Southern California fires. Just click on the Land Use Report link at www.kusp.org, and track down the transcript for today’s broadcast. Please feel free to send me your comments and suggestions, as well.
For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
More Information:
Pictures and Information About The Southern California Fires
http://fireupdate.com/index_update.htmhttp://www.esri.com/news/pressroom/firemaps.html
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/NaturalHazards/
natural_hazards_v2.php3?img_id=11799Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors Agenda
http://sccounty01.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/bds/Govstream/ASP/Display/
SCCB_AgendaDisplayWeb.asp?MeetingDate=2/10/2004Urban-Wildland Agenda Item
http://sccounty01.co.santa-cruz.ca.us/bds/Govstream/BDSvData/
non_legacy/agendas/2004/20040210/PDF/053.pdf
Wednesday,
February 11, 2004 – The Monterey County Planning Commission
This morning, at the County Courthouse in Salinas, the Monterey
County Planning Commission will receive a report on the status of
the County General Plan Update, including information on the soon-to-be-released
Draft Environmental Impact Report. After receiving the staff report,
it’s expected that the Commission will give direction about
the process it’s going to use to receive public comments on
the General Plan Update document. Here’s a quick overview of
the public hearing schedule currently proposed:
All of these hearings will be “daytime” meetings, scheduled from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., with a lunch break. On Monday, March 22nd, there will be an evening public hearing on “General” topics related to the proposed General Plan Update document.
I’ll talk tomorrow about some of the key issues confronting the county, and the public, as Monterey County moves ahead with its General Plan Update process. This process began over four years ago, and has cost over $4 million dollars so far. Your participation is definitely in order!
For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
More Information:
Monterey County General Plan Update Website
http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/gpu/Staff Report on GPU Process
http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/gpu/reports/pcreport_gpu_21104.pdfLatest Version of GPU Document
http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/gpu/reports/0104/index.html
Thursday,
February 12, 2004 – Getting Ready for the GPU
The future of Monterey County will depend, in a very significant
way, on the kind of land use decisions made by the Board of Supervisors
over the next twenty years. Up until 1997, Monterey County was a
rather slow-growing county. Now, it’s under increasing development
pressure. Farmlands in the Salinas Valley are particularly at risk.
While each “project” that makes a change in land use is considered individually, decisions on these individual projects are guided by the “policy” statements contained in the County General Plan. That’s why a General Plan is so important. No project can be approved, legally, unless it’s found to be “consistent” with the local General Plan. From the General Plan will flow a host of individual land use decisions that will determine the future of the county.
The current Monterey County General Plan was adopted in 1982. It’s outdated. It’s probably legally inadequate, in fact, because it is so out of date. The new County General Plan Update, in process for over four years, will determine what land is going to be made available for more growth, what sort of affordable housing requirements there will be, and whether developments will be allowed when water and road capacity are not sufficient. If you’re a Monterey County resident, you have a big stake in the General Plan Update. Get more information at www.kusp.org.
For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
More Information:
Monterey County General Plan Update Website
http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/gpu/Staff Report on GPU Process
http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/gpu/reports/pcreport_gpu_21104.pdfLatest Version of GPU Document
http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/gpu/reports/0104/index.htmlThese citizen and neighborhood groups are active in the GPU process:
LandWatch Monterey County
http://www.landwatch.orgSierra Club, Ventana Chapter
http://ventana.sierraclub.org/current/index.shtmlFriends, Artists & Neighbors of Elkhorn Slough (FANS)
http://www.saveourslough.org/Carmel Valley Association. (Contact: John Dalessio - dalessio@mbay.net)
North County Citizens Oversight Coalition (Contact Carolyn Anderson - carolynanderson@aol.com)
Highway 68 Coalition (Contact: Marit Evans - lilidog@earthlink.net)
Friday,
February 13, 2004 – AMBAG and the Clearinghouse
The Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (or AMBAG) is the
“regional government” for the Monterey Bay Region. AMBAG
doesn’t really “govern” very much, in the sense that
it can make decisions that override local city and county decisions,
but it does have a number of important responsibilities. AMBAG is
specifically charged with facilitating regional cooperation on air
quality, transportation, and housing issues, and also serves as
a “regional clearinghouse” for environmental documents.
If you’re interested in significant development projects proposed
anywhere in the Monterey Bay Region, you can find out about them
by reviewing the AMBAG “Clearinghouse Review.” The “Review”
provides a monthly notice of all of the environmental documents
produced by any of the local governments in the AMBAG region. It’s
officially placed on the agenda of each AMBAG Board of Directors
meeting.
The AMBAG Board meets next Wednesday, on February 11th, and on the agenda, as part of the “Clearinghouse Review,” is a “Mitigated Negative Declaration,” issued by the Monterey County Planning Department. This document claims that there is no need for an Environmental Impact Report on a proposed new agricultural processing plant, and office building, proposed for construction on land specifically designated as a “Farmland Security Zone,” to guarantee long term agricultural production on the land. Maybe some AMBAG member will ask how that could be right.
For KUSP, this is Gary Patton.
More Information:
AMBAG Website
http://www.ambag.org/AMBAG Agenda for February 11, 2004 Meeting
http://www.ambag.org/agendas/current/agenda.pdfLatest Edition of the AMBAG “Clearinghouse Review”
http://www.ambag.org/agendas/current/agenda5b.pdf
Archives of past transcripts are available here
|
CONTACT 306 Capitol Street #101 PO Box 1876 Phone (831) 759-2824 Fax (831) 759-2825 |
|
