 |
KUSP LandWatch
News |
 |
LandWatch provides a brief Land Use Report on KUSP Radio. Tune in every weekday at 6:33 or 8:49 am. KUSP is at 88.9 FM in General Coverage, 105.9 FM in Big Sur Valley, 91.3 FM in Palo Colorado Canyon, and 91.7 FM in San Ardo. Archives of past transcripts are available here. Week of November 11, 2002 to November 15, 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 11th – Carmel and King City If the Carmel Local Coastal Program is ultimately approved by the State Coastal Commission, then many decisions in the City of Carmel, now subject to Coastal Commission review, will not be subject to automatic supervision by the Coastal Commission. Depending on your point of view, this could be either good or bad. In King City, the Council will be deciding whether to support a so-called “bypass” option for Highway 101 improvements in the Prunedale area. If local transportation authorities ultimately decide to support the bypass, there will be very little money available for any other Monterey County road project. In each case, city governments are dealing with regional and state agencies, and are trying to influence their decisions. The local effects of the ultimate state level decisions will be very significant. You can get more information at the KUSP website. Click on the Land Use Report link at www.kusp.org. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton. More Information:
Tuesday,
November 12th – Decision Time For Monterey County GPU Today, the Board of Supervisors will provide very specific directions on affordable housing; on proposed new road projects; on the boundaries of Community Areas and Rural Centers, and will also say “yes” or “no” to 270 property owner requests to allow development on rural and agricultural lands. In addition, some very significant policy proposals advanced by Supervisor Calcagno, will be debated. These proposals could have a lot of benefits for agriculture, but could also have the effect of stimulating rural sprawl. The Board’s decisions today will not be final. Final decisions will come early next year. Today, however, the Board will be shaping the future of the county by the decisions it makes. Those decisions will be the basis of the final document. The staff and Planning Commission have recommended a strategy of focusing future growth in a limited number of urban areas. Many, in fact most, of the property owner requests go in the opposite direction. The choices made today will affect Monterey County for the next twenty years. The meeting starts at 10:00 o’clock. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton. More Information:
Wednesday,
November 13th – The Project Review Process For KUSP, this is Gary Patton. More Information:
Thursday,
November 14th – More On The Project Review Process Immediately below the Board or City Council, is the local Planning Commission. This is a group of persons appointed by the Board or City Council. The authority of the Planning Commission can be expanded or reduced somewhat, as the City Council or Board chooses, but state law does require that certain proposals go through the Planning Commission. In some cases, in Santa Cruz County for instance, the Planning Commission’s decisions are often final. Many local governments set up decision-making bodies that consist of staff. In Monterey County, which has a typical system, there is a Zoning Administrator, who is a designated staff person, and a Subdivision Committee, made up of staff people and a member of the Planning Commission. Usually, project level decisions made by these subsidiary bodies may be appealed to the Planning Commission, and then to the Board of Supervisors or City Council. Each local government is a bit different. Monterey County makes it particularly easy for interested persons to follow this process. If you go to the Planning Department website, you can sign up to receive email notice for each and every meeting of the Planning Commission, Zoning Administrator, and Subdivision Committee. It’s a good way to keep informed. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton. More Information:
Friday,
November 15th – Effects of The Watsonville Urban Limit In Santa Cruz County, which is unusual in this respect, commercially productive agricultural land generally can’t be developed or divided. Measure J, adopted by the voters in 1978, establishes this rule. Most of the productive agricultural land in Santa Cruz County is located adjacent to the City of Watsonville. No development can take place on such agricultural land unless it is annexed to the city. For many years, the City of Watsonville has been trying to annex various agricultural lands, to allow city expansion. But by and large, the city has not been successful. The final decision rests with LAFCO, the Local Agency Formation Commission, and LAFCO has placed a very high priority on preserving agricultural land, and on stopping urban sprawl. Very few annexations have been approved, which means that Measure J’s provisions have been effective. Measure U essentially proposes a compromise. If LAFCO will allow a limited annexation, the City of Watsonville will firmly bind itself not to ask for more, and to live within the urban limits established by Measure U. This is a creative and constructive proposal! LAFCO will still make the final call. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton. More Information:
Archives of past transcripts are available here |
Home | About LandWatch | Issues & Actions | LandWatch News
Citzen Resources | Membership | Publications | Calendar
Archives | Search | Links | Contact Us
Site Design and Management by
all materials ©1999