 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
CRA News June 2000
Selected articles from the newsletter of the Carmel Residents Association
| Would you like to eliminate utility wires? See below. |
CHECK OUT CRA'S SUMMER ACTIVITIES!
Barbecue to thank volunteers will follow June 24 cleanup
On Saturday, June 24,
following the monthly Beach Cleanup, the Forest and Beach Commission
and the CRA will host a barbecue at Cooke's Cove (foot of 13th Avenue)
to show their appreciation for the hard-working volunteers who make
sure our beach remains clean and white for residents and visitors.
Beach Cleanup
Saturday, June 24
10 a.m. - noon
Noon Barbecue at Cooke's Cove, 13th & Scenic
* Volunteers meet at foot
of Ocean Avenue
* Please bring gloves
* Coffee from Caffe Cardinale
* Pastries from Carmel Bakery
Congressman Farr will speak at U.S. Rep. Day on Sat., July 1
Once again Congressman
Sam Farr will join CRA members and the public for an update on
important activities happening in Washington, D.C. A favorite part of
this event is always the question and answer period that follows Farr's
talk. The event will be held at Vista Lobos on Saturday, July 1, from
11 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.
Delicious refreshments will be served, as well as cake to celebrate
Sam Farr's July 4 birthday.
CRA "Dines Out" on July 27 at the Outdoor Forest Theater
CRA members will dine at the outdoor
Forest Theater on Thursday, July 27. Come at 6:30 p.m. for another fabulous
catered dinner by Gwyn Romano and afterwards enjoy the Forest Theater
Guild's production of Camelot. This event was a big hit last year, so
mark your calendars!
The price for the dinner is $14 per person and theater tickets are $12
(group rate). All reservations must be made by July 21. Send your check
for $26, made out to "CRA," to: Dick Dalsemer, P.O. Box 2353, Carmel,
CA, 93921.
If you already have season tickets, you may send a check for dinner
only. If you purchase a theater ticket that evening, you will not be
given the group rate. If you have questions, call Dick at 620-1514.
|
|
|
Although this has not yet been placed on a City Council agenda, there has been enough talk about it to cause real public concern. It is puzzling to see this issue resurrected after so many years of peace and compliance. It was never mentioned in candidates' literature or at a public forum during the recent campaign. Where has this come from? Why? Because a majority of the current City Council did not live in Carmel-by-the-Sea in 1989, they may be unaware of the strong, broad-based outcry which led to this ordinance. It was supported by residents of all political persuasions, who universally agreed that we needed to take back our neighborhoods from the over-commercialization of short-term rentals with the accompanying cleaning services, linen deliveries, ever-changing occupants and loud weekend parties. When the ordinance, crafted by City Attorney Don Freeman, was challenged by a group of out-of-town homeowners and realtors, the case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. In declining to hear the case, the court supported the state and local law on this matter. Since that time, numerous California communities have passed ordinances modeled on Carmel's in order to preserve their neighborhoods. The California Appeals Court, in handing down its 1991 decision in favor of Carmel said, "It stands to reason that the 'residential character' of a neighborhood is threatened when a significant number of homes--at least 12 percent in this case, according to the record--are occupied not by permanent residents but by a stream of tenants staying a weekend, a week, or even 29 days ... such rentals undoubtedly affect the essential character of a neighborhood and the stability of a community. Short-term tenants have little interest in public agencies or in the welfare of the citizenry. They do not participate in local government, coach little league, or join the hospital guild. They do not lead a scout troop, volunteer at the library, or keep an eye on an elderly neighbor. Literally, they are here today and gone tomorrow--without engaging in the sort of activities that weld and strengthen a community." A change in this ordinance, even to two-week rentals, would once again encourage the purchase of our houses as rental investments. It would also be impossible to monitor, an enforcement nightmare. Former mayor Jean Grace brought up another problem: "If you're going to charge TOT, then you're acknowledging that you have a hotel use in the residential district. It's a severe conundrum. The minute you start charging TOT, you have to change the zoning to collect it." A letter to the editor by Planning Commissioner Bart Bartron summed up the situation eloquently: "Why the sudden urge to rewrite a good ordinance that is doing what it is supposed to do and one that has stood the test of review to the highest level? "To do away with our present residential rental policy is a lose-lose proposition. "The in-town residents lose because of increased transient use of our neighborhoods. "The commercial innkeepers, with declining occupancy rates, lose because of increased competition from short-term residential rentals. "Who wins? Out-of-town property owners who will gain income at the expense of their neighbors. "The present council, without exception, comes to office on the pledge of retaining and protecting the residential character of Carmel. They should, without exception, resist attempts to increase transient use of the residential neighborhoods." Bravo, Bart. We agree! |
|
|
President's Message
Thank you for so many positive comments regarding our general meeting programs. They have been planned to keep you informed on current as well as upcoming major issues in our community. In line with this approach, I would like to share with you some information from the city's May 25 budget meeting since we will not have a newsletter until fall. This is also a follow-up to our March newsletter article.CRA has a committee that attends budget meetings and analyzes the budget because this document is the city's most important planning tool in terms of fulfilling the council's and community's goals and objectives. At the May 25 meeting, the council and public learned that the city now has approximately $900,000 more at the end of fiscal year 1999-2000, up from the $600,000 projected on May 2. City Administrator Jere Kersnar stated that "This past fiscal year has been the strongest in a decade, in fact, ever for Carmel." One has to ask, what has so drastically changed in the last six to nine months when we heard words of gloom? The answer given by Mr. Kersnar is that no one expected the revenues from property sales and taxes to be as large as they turned out to be. Somehow the sale of the Carmel Plaza and its property transfer tax had not been accurately projected from last fall into the revenue side of the budget. Councilmember Dick Ely questioned staff about missing the budget estimate by so much and asked why tax figures were not available until now. Staff response was that they had just received information on the sale of the Plaza and were surprised by the huge activity in home sales.
Now the city finds that it has $1.1 million to spend on unfunded capital projects and deferred maintenance. Storm drainage projects, of great importance to residents, will be funded. Also, street repairs as well as a master plan for the Forest Theater and a business plan for Sunset Center are a few of the capital improvements to be funded from the increase. The entire budget was unexpectedly approved on June 8, as I finished this article.
There has been an excellent turnout for meetings, whether they be the City Council, Planning Commission or our own general meetings. This is gratifying because the most important foundation of the democratic process, no matter what level of government, is based on an informed and personally-involved public. If public participation is ever going to work, then our little village is where it should and can happen. Those of you who are attending meetings, please continue to do so and those of you who haven't, give it a try.
Have a delightful summer. We'll see you at our activities.
What is the proposed Business Improvement District?
There has been a lot of interest and many questions regarding this issue, especially since the recent article in the Pine Cone. We thought you might want some more background and an update. Hopefully, many of you remember the article in the November 1999 issue of CRA News.Last fall, when the Council was told that there would be a serious budget shortfall, one of the potential revenue generators being considered was a 2% increase in the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT). This would bring about $750,000 into the city's General Fund. Former Mayor Ken White and City Administrator Jere Kersnar met with the members of the Innkeepers Association to discuss this. Out of these talks, alternatives to the increase were explored. One was the concept of a Business Improvement District (BID), which is provided by state law to assist communities in revitalization and the creation of new jobs and businesses. Since that time last year, the city's Business District Advisory Committee (BDAC) has been asked by the Council to determine the feasibility of such a district for our community. The strong supporters of this proposal have been the major innkeepers.
Prior to its recommendation to the City Council in May, the BDAC invited the representatives of the residents groups to an informational meeting and to get our input. CRA reps were Shirley Humann, Jim Wright, Suzanne Paboojian, David Maradei and Melanie Billig. Noel Van Bibber sat in for the Northeast Neighbors and Pat Sippel and Mary Lippitt attended for Yes for Carmel. The meeting was very positive and constructive. There were a number of questions Mel Kline, Chairman of BDAC, and Gary Luce, chairman of the Innkeepers Association, could not answer at this time. However, they listened, took notes and genuinely appreciated everyone's input. The greatest concerns were:
- Who pays and what impact will this have on businesses downtown?
- Who ultimately controls the decision-making on the use of the funds collected, and how will the use of these funds impact our downtown?
- What kind of uses will the funds be put to? Destination marketing
(tourist promotion) will be a major funded program, in addition to landscaping
and sidewalk cleaning. Other proposed uses listed in the original proposal
were music in public places, street lights, decorations, fountains and
parking facilities. The city will also receive a percentage of the monies
collected annually from the levied assessments on businesses. According
to Gary Luce, the BID would save the city approximately $165,000 for
expenses the BID would take over.
At present, the BDAC has recommended the Council establish a Formation Committee, to be made up of 3 members of the Carmel Business Association, 3 members of BDAC and one member each from the residents groups, to develop the proposed structure of a Business Improvement District to ultimately be forwarded to Council. Mel Kline and BDAC should be applauded for their inclusion of residents in this process, since any changes will impact the business community, downtown and residents. The Council voted on June 6 not to include input from residents on the "formation committee," but they were supportive of residents being represented on the final BID advisory committee.
You will be kept informed on this issue. It is important to remember, though, that any plan developed will presumably have to go through the environmental review process and thus have ample public input. It must also be found to be consistent with the city's General Plan.
Would you like to rid Carmel neighborhoods of utility wires?
Please attend the Public Utilities commission (PUC) hearing on July 10, 4 to 7 p.m., at the Steinbeck Forum in the Monterey Conference Center. This Central Coast hearing is the result of the efforts of Councilwoman Barbara Livingston and Assemblyman Fred Keeley to ensure that the PUC hears from local residents on matters relating to the undergrounding of utilities, particularly the way these projects will be funded. The PUC is also mandated by the state legislature to address such issues as enhancing public safety, improving reliability and providing greater local control over undergrounding in their jurisdiction.This hearing is an excellent opportunity for you to let the PUC hear your thoughts about residential undergrounding, particularly the need for increased funding from PG&E for forested communities such as Carmel, Pebble Beach, Monterey, etc. Undergrounding is not just an aesthetic issue, but also one of safety and utility reliability.
In 1998, the City of Carmel established a Citizen Task Force [chaired by Melanie Billig] to study undergrounding for the residential neighborhoods and report its findings and recommendations to the Council. The city has virtually completed the commercial areas and should be congratulated for its sustained efforts over the years. The Task Force concluded that a residential undergrounding program was feasible and desirable for reasons of safety, reliability and aesthetics, and that it was financially feasible even for seniors and residents on limited incomes. Specific funding plans would depend upon how the city decides to handle the issue, but would probably involve an election.
Gary Kelly and the Forest and Beach Commission support undergrounding because the utility companies, especially PG&E, no longer would need to top and heavily prune the trees that are under or near utility lines. They also think that now is an appropriate time to begin our own local undergrounding program due to the age of our forest and the pitch canker problem. Many trees are getting near the end of their natural lives.
If you would like more information, call Public Works Director Jim Cullem, at 831-624-3543, and ask to look at the Task Force Report, or check the PUC's web site at www.cpuc.ca.gov. Look at the bottom right side of the home page for "Order Instituting Rulemaking..."
Notes from June 6 City Council Meeting
At its June 6 meeting, the City Council heard three appeals by the Carmel Preservation Foundation of Planning Commission decisions to demolish houses over 50 years old: the Hitchcock house on Mission, the Periwinkle and Sea Urchin cottages on Scenic, and the Baker house on Casanova. The first two were determined to be historic by the city's Historic Preservation Committee. New information submitted on the Baker house was not sent first to the Committee for their consideration.Discussion on all three houses was similar and each appeal was denied on a 4-1 vote with Barbara Livingston dissenting. The Council did agree with Barbara's recommendation that photo documentation be done on all houses before demolition. Councilman Dick Ely argued that because something is old or memorable does not mean it is historic and that the city should work on design guidelines for replacement houses. At the outset, Councilwoman Livingston stated that "... until the city adopts an Historic Preservation Program which meets my requirements to balance the needs of the individual property owner and the need of the city to preserve our historic character, I will not be supporting the demolition of homes that have potential historic importance. Furthermore, I believe that all three pending applications fail to take into account the judge's admonition re. the cumulative loss of our historic housing stock." [Judge O'Farrell's warning to the city that the court might impose a moratorium on the city if it continues to demolish older homes before passing an ordinance--in the past 3 years, the city has issued 171 demolition and substantial alteration permits.]
During discussions of the house replacing Periwinkle and Sea Urchin cottages, Mayor Sue McCloud registered concern for the Planning Commission suggestion that five trees be planted on the site, saying that it was not a "condition" and that she did not want to see trees planted which would hurt views. When City Attorney Don Freeman suggested that the landscape plan be left to staff, Councilwoman Hazdovac said that if "things don't go well with staff," the applicant could always come back to the Council.
The final issue before the Council was the request for an unusual water transfer. The city has no water for new development. It also has a priority system saying that any available water would go first to residential projects. And, the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD) has just voted to impose a moratorium on water transfers because it appears they end up using more water.
The Carmel Center, southeast corner of Dolores and 7th, wants to develop additional commercial space and a second-floor apartment. Jody LeTowt wants to sell this applicant the water rights from his Little Pizza Heaven site. Since 1) MPWMD has a moratorium on this type of transaction; 2) the city's first water priority is for residential development; and 3) the city of Carmel does not allow transferring commercial water to residential use, a plan was devised in which LeTowt would "donate" the water to the city and the city, in turn, would turn the water over to Carmel Center. During public comment, Dr. Sidney Widrow said, "This smells!." Councilman Ely said he had been concerned about problems with water transfers when he was on the water board. Barbara Livingston was concerned that it would send the community a message that "we are playing games with water." The motion to approve the transfer passed 3-2 with McCloud, Hazdovac and Rose supporting it, Ely and Livingston dissenting.
City department heads update CRA members on important issues
The May program was a great success with two excellent speakers--Gary Kelly, retiring Forest and Beach Director, discussed the Forest Management Plan which he has recently drafted. Our city maintains 12,000 trees, 7 miles of greenbelt and 36 public facilities. The large trees on private property have decreased 14% and we have only a 20% success rate of maintaining newly planted trees on private property. This rate must be improved as we continue working toward the goal of maintaining, preserving and protecting our urban forest, which enhances the natural beauty of our city. Thanks, Gary, for all your hard work on behalf of the city and its citizens. Enjoy your retirement. [Gary's retirement party will take place on June 23.]
Points stressed by Gary: Prune oaks in Sept. and Oct. when dormant; prune pines in Jan., Feb. and March when the incidence of bark beetle attacks (which spread the pitch canker virus) are minimized. For optimum tree health and beauty, we should only prune trees to control wind "sail." And, please only use a licensed, city approved tree surgeon.
Jim Cullem, Public Works Director, reviewed the storm water rule which applies to cities under 100,000 people and, under the Clean Water Act, will require the city to have a separate storm water sewer system. We have until March 2003 to abide by this requirement.
Storm water is the runoff from city streets, parking lots and construction sites after rain. It washes sediment, oil, grease and toxics into storm drains, eventually entering our Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary with dire results for our marine life. More than oil spills at sea or effluent from big corporations, storm water runoff is the leading threat to public health and the environment. Phase II will make rivers safe, prevent beach closures and increase the safety of seafood and shellfish consumption while reducing the cost of drinking water treatment. The necessary programs, operations and maintenance activities will impact our community and we will need to explore appropriate funding. Thanks for the update, Jim! We appreciate all that you do for us.
