|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
| |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Listen to the reports each weekday at 6:49 am & 8:49 am To
suggest a topic for a future land use report, or to convey a comment,
.
|
| Past
Reports The opinions expressed on the LandUse Report are not necessarily those of KUSP Radio, nor of any of its sponsors. Note: The Land Use Report utilizes links provided by other entities and cannot guarantee that they will remain available by those hosting organizations. For broken links, please search via the website of the organization mentioned. Monday, March 29, 2010 – Blueprint Planning Something called “Blueprint” planning is coming to the Monterey Bay Area, with the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (or AMBAG) in charge.. The idea is to have a “blueprint” for future growth in the Monterey Bay Area that will provide housing for the region’s future population while preserving the most important agricultural lands and conservation areas. AMBAG says that if the “blueprint” is successful it will detail how the region will reduce both greenhouse gas emissions and Vehicle Miles Traveled, or VMT, through improved coordination between regional transportation and local land use planning. The “Blueprint” idea, in other words, is that “better coordination” will facilitate changes in travel behavior, with positive impacts on long term planning, and the impacts that ordinarily accompany growth. I don’t say that such efforts are automatically doomed to fail; however, it’s wise to remember that local communities, acting individually or through regional efforts, actually have the ability directly to “regulate” land use. Regulations, like urban limit lines, and agricultural land preservation provisions in the General Plan and Zoning Code, are proven to work. The track record of “voluntary” efforts is not nearly as good. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton. More Information: AMBAG Website - The “Blueprint” process - Tuesday, March 30, 2010 – Salmon Recovery And Land Use The National Oceanic And Atmospheric Administration (or NOAA) is a federal agency within the United States Department of Commerce. “NOAA Fisheries,” within NOAA, attempts to manage living marine resources in a way that ensures their continuation as functioning components of marine ecosystems, and to provide economic opportunities. So, what’s the land use “hook?” Under its jurisdiction, as just described, NOAA is going to be holding a public hearing in Santa Cruz, focused on a Draft Recovery Plan for Central California Coastal Coho Salmon. Not only will an effective plan for salmon recovery have impacts on the commercial fishing industry, it will also have a direct impact on how much water must be kept in local rivers and streams, and thus how much water will be available for growth. The City of Santa Cruz plans to commit virtually all of whatever surplus water it has to the future growth of UCSC. That may well run afoul of salmon recovery efforts. The upcoming hearing will be held on April 8th, from 2:00 to 4:00 p.m. at the Seymour Center at Long Marine Lab. Mark your calendars! If you’d like to find out more about water and growth, and air your own views, you can hear my thoughts on Bruce Bratton’s “University Grapevine” radio program. That’s tonight, from 8:00 to 8:30. There is more information on the KUSP website. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton. More Information: NOAA Website - NMFS Website - Get more information by email from: The draft plan can be found at – The Bruce Bratton “University Grapevine” Radio Show is on KZSC Radio - Listen “Live” to KZSC Radio - If you have been following discussions about the proposed Arana Gulch bike path, you’ve heard how its construction could conflict with the preservation of an endangered plant species, the Santa Cruz Tarplant. If you’ve been following the controversy, you may already know about ESHA. If you don’t know about ESHA, stay tuned, because I’m going to try to explain what ESHA is. ESHA stands for “Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area,” and the Coastal Act says that ESHA is “any area in which plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable … and which could be easily disturbed or degraded by human activities and developments.” The Coastal Act also says: Environmentally sensitive habitat areas shall be protected against any significant disruption ... and only uses dependent on those resources shall be allowed within those areas. That’s the problem for the bike path. It is not, clearly, a use that is “dependent” on the habitat. The Coastal Commission, the City, and concerned people on all sides are wrestling with a difficult legal problem. The possible “good news” is that the California Native Plant Society has proposed an alternative that would protect the habitat, and that People Power, the bicycle advocacy group, has said might work. Maybe there’s a win/win solution possible. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton. More Information: California Coastal Commission Website - Information on the Santa Cruz Tarplant - Coastal Commission Advisory on Endangered Resources - Coastal Act Definition of ESHA, Public Resources Code Section 30107.5 –
Coastal Act Restrictions on the development in ESHA – Thursday, April 1, 2010 – Hearings Soon On The Monterey County GPU I was out of the country for about two months, during January, February, and March, but I did not, I’m happy to say, miss out on any significant hearings on the Monterey County General Plan. The County’s General Plan Update process, which began in 1999, has still not reached the final decision point. Or, to be strictly accurate, it has reached that point on four different occasions, and on each occasion the Board of Supervisors has decided to “go back and do some more work” on what is supposed to be the “Constitution” for land use in Monterey County. The General Plan process in Monterey County always makes me think of one of my favorite songs from the 1960’s, the Lovin’ Spoonful’s “Did You Ever Have To Make Up Your Mind?” At any rate, it is now getting close to the time when the Board will get another chance to vote on a comprehensive General Plan Update document. The current version is called “GPU5.” Yesterday, the Monterey County Planning Commission held a “workshop” on the General Plan Update, and on the Final Environmental Impact Report that has been prepared on the latest version. I’ve placed links in the transcript of today’s Land Use Report to the staff’s twenty-eight page review, and to the Update document and the EIR. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton. More Information: General Plan Update Website - Monterey County Planning Commission Agenda, March 31, 2010 – General Plan Update Staff Report – The people of the State voted on November 4, 2008 to borrow almost ten billion dollars, and to make that money available for a high-speed rail project linking Los Angeles and San Francisco. Planning is proceeding, but not without controversy. The state agency currently in charge is the “California High-Speed Rail Authority,” and its plan is to bring the train over Pacheco Pass, and then through San Jose, and then up the Caltrain alignment through the San Francisco Peninsula. This routing decision was challenged in court, and the challengers won. The Authority is now redoing its so-called “Program Level” EIR, and the comment period will be open until April 26th. Local communities, and residents on the Peninsula, are trying to make sure that the new train won’t devastate their local business and residential areas, though I must say they are not finding that the Authority is very responsive. Environmental concerns are not only with community impacts; the route chosen is longer and seems designed to stimulate land speculation and new sprawl in the Los Baños area. If you’re interested in the high-speed rail project, check out the transcript of today’s Land Use Report. I’ve provided links to more information. You also might want to attend upcoming public meetings, to be held in San Jose on April 7th and April 8th at the Santa Clara County Governmental Center. For KUSP, this is Gary Patton. More Information Information on Proposition 1A – California High-Speed Rail Authority Website - Community Coalition on High-Speed Rail – Californians Advocating Responsible Rail Design - California High Speed Rail Blog - |