UPDATES
 WHAT'S NEWEST with Measure "A" (November 2000)

8-29-07 - Calif. Coastal Commission has agreed to extend (or "toll") the deadline for 90 days, from Monday, August 13, 2007 to Tuesday November 13, 2007, for Monterey County and the Pebble Beach Co. to file suit challenging the Commission's June 13, 2007 action to deny the proposed amendment to the Local Coastal Program (MCO-1-07 Measure "A" 2000). This proposed amendment would allow major zoning and policy changes in the Del Monte Forest Land Use Plan to permit further expansion of commercial development in Del Monte Forest.


From the Monterey County Herald
Serving Monterey County and the Salinas Valley
http://www.montereyherald.com/opinion/ci_6183590

L E T T E R S
June 20, 2007

Scare Tactics

The June 16 article "Pebble Co. to decide next move" states that among the possibilities for the Pebble Beach Co. is "submitting a new project consistent with the current Del Monte Forest Coastal Plan." During the debate about the latest proposal, proponents argued that following this route could allow development of up to 800 home sites.

It is time to kill this myth.

There's not a remote possibility that 800 home sites would be allowed. The current land use plan has a table showing approximately 800 sites. However, it is nothing but a mathematically derived number, e.g., if a 25-acre tract is zoned for four lots to the acre, then 100 lots were included. This number bears no relationship to reality. Roads, setbacks, terrain, creeks, wetlands, slopes, environmentally sensitive habit, etc., reduce the number of buildable lots.

Pebble Beach Co. and its supporters are frightening people into supporting their proposals by saying if you don't want 800 home sites, support our development plans. This is fear mongering at its worst.

Carl E. Nielson
 Pebble Beach

To read the full history of Measure "A" (November 2000) on this website, click on these internal web pages:

6-18-07 - "We Won" email from David Dilworth with congratulations for those who have saved the Forest. (on this website.)

6-15-07 - P.B.Co. to regroup following denial of Measure "A" (November 2000) land use plan.

Commissioner Dave Potter said he thinks Pebble Beach Co. may seek reconsideration from the commission. His other comments: "Is everyone's backyard a (sensitive habitat)?", and, "That [rejecting the voter-approved initiative] is going to have to go before a judge."

  • For more details CLICK here for the Monterey County Herald's June 16, 2007 story, "Pebble Co. to decide next move" on their web site, www.montereyherald.com (an external link).

6-14-07 - Coastal Commissioners VOTED to DENY PEBBLE BEACH Co's MEASURE "A" INITIATIVE which saved the Del Monte Forest. The Commissioners unanimously denied certifying proposed major changes in land use policies and zoning for the Del Monte Forest Local Coastal Program at the public hearing in Santa Rosa on Wednesday, June 13, 2007.

After David Potter's motion to approve Measure A had failed 8 - 4, the commission then voted unanimously to deny certifying the ballot measure.

6-8-07 - Coastal Commission hearing will hear Pebble Beach Co. Measure "A" (November 2000). Read the story and see a video.

6-11-07 - Monterey Herald Editorial comments on Measure A (November 2000) by calling for "the whole proposal to be rejected", and "Pebble Beach residents and the larger community would be better served by an expansion that leaves the trees where they are."

• CLICK here to read the Monterey County Herald's June 11th, 2007 editorial, "More modest plan needed for Pebble" on their web site, www.montereyherald.com (on this website )

Correspondence from Concerned Residents of Pebble Beach and Monterey County

6-08-07 - Letter to the Editor of the Monterey Herald from Concerned Residents of Pebble Beach

June 8, 2007
Monterey County Herald
Royal Calkins, Opinion Page Editor

Letter to the Editor

On June 13th the California Coastal Commission will vote whether Pebble Beach Company’s Measure A will be the new Del Monte Forest Land Use Plan.  The Concerned Residents of Pebble Beach have opposed Measure A from the 2000 election to the present day.

Measure A is land use planning at it worst with destructive zoning changes.  While it purports to protect the forest it really allows destruction of 150 acres of intact, environmentally sensitive habitat and wetlands to permit building a 7th golf course in Pebble Beach. 

Measure A makes a mockery of binding agreements between government agencies and the Company by rezoning the Upper and Lower Sawmill Gulch sites to permit an equestrian center.  These sites were placed in conservation and scenic easements as conditions for approval of Spanish Bay Resort in the mid-80’s. These agreements were to be in perpetuity.  Twenty years later Pebble Beach Company wants to back out of its contractual agreements.

Measure A may be a good deal for the Pebble Beach Company but not for the residents of Pebble Beach and Pacific Grove.  We support the Coastal Commission staff report and have urged the Commissioners to find Measure A inconsistent with the Coastal Act.

Ted Hunter and Carl Nielsen, Co-chairs

Concerned Residents of Pebble Beach


6-06-07 - Letter to the Coastal Commissioners from Concerned Residents of Pebble Beach

June 6, 2007
California Coastal Commission
Attention: California Coastal Commissioners
Central Coast District Office
725 Front Street, Suite 300
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

Dear Commissioners:

Subject:  Monterey County Local Coastal Program Major Amendment
               Number 1-05 (Measure A) Agenda Item W13b, June 13, 2007

The Concerned Residents of Pebble Beach and Monterey County are pleased to submit comments on Measure A for your consideration.

We support the Coastal Commission staff’s recommendation to the Commission to deny Measure A because it is inconsistent with the Coastal Act policies that protect environmentally sensitive habitat areas and wetlands.  The Concerned Residents of Pebble Beach urge you to support the staff recommendation and declare Measure A inconsistent with the Coastal Act.  

There are three issues we find have especially compelling arguments in support of the determination that Measure A is inconsistent with the Coastal Act.  They are:

Rezoning to “Open Space Recreation” of major tracts of land that could ultimately be used for golf purposes. 

Rezoning to “Open Space Recreation” of the Upper and Lower Sawmill Gulch area to accommodate a potential relocation of the equestrian center.

Inclusion of Appendix A, List of Environmentally Sensitive Habitat, as the governing list is inconsistent with Coastal act provisions. 

Rezoning of Area MNOUV and Area C for golf course recreational purposes as envisioned by the Pebble Beach Company is inconsistent with the Coastal Act provisions defining Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA).  It has always been our understanding that both these areas are ESHA because of the large, nearly intact stands of Monterey pines, the presence of extensive wetlands, and the prevalence of endangered and rare plants and animals.  The staff report clearly supports this position.  The extensive disruption of these areas to construct golf facilities would destroy their environmental integrity.  For these reasons rezoning these areas to “Open Space Recreation” would be inconsistent with the Coastal Act.

Rezoning of the Upper and Lower Sawmill Gulch area from “Open Space Forest” to “Open Space Recreation” in order to accommodate a potential relocation of the equestrian center is inconsistent with the Coastal Act and previous Coastal Commission actions. 

When the County of Monterey and the Coastal Commission approved the Spanish Bay development in the mid-80’s the County imposed scenic and conservation easements on the Lower Sawmill Gulch site and the Commission imposed scenic and conservation easements on the Upper Sawmill Gulch site.  The zoning on both these sites was changed to “Open Space Forest” and the Upper Sawmill Gulch site was incorporated into the Huckleberry Hill Natural Habitat area.  These actions were clearly stated to be in perpetuity. 

Measure A has changed the zoning to “Open Space Recreation” and specifically allows for an equestrian center.  Construction of major equestrian-related facilities would be permitted.  Operation of such a facility would bring into the area substantial equestrian events, related vehicular traffic and equestrian and special event parking.  These uses are totally inconsistent with the easements and the Coastal Act since Huckleberry Hill Natural Habitat Area is clearly ESHA.

The Pacific Grove and Pebble Beach property owners in the vicinity of Sawmill Gulch have for at last twenty years relied on the zoning and the scenic easements as elements that protect their property values and quality of life.  The arbitrary zone changes in Measure A will undo this protection.

We believe the Commission has an obligation to maintain these easements and permit only low intensity activity on the Sawmill Gulch sites. 

The Pebble Beach Company has indicated that they are examining alternate sites for an equestrian center.  This possible change does not in any way alter the Measure A changes imposed on the Sawmill Gulch sites. 

We urge you to find these Measure A changes inconsistent with the Coastal Act and previous Coastal Commission actions.

Inclusion of Appendix A, List of Environmentally Sensitive Habitat, in Measure A as the governing list is inconsistent with Coastal Act provisions.  Title 20, Coastal Implementation Plan for Monterey County, in Section 20.147.020(AA) defines rare and endangered species as “those identified as rare, endangered and/or threatened by the State Department of fish and Game, United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service, the California Native plant Society and /or pursuant to the 1973 convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna”.  This definition is consistent with the Coastal Act definition.  This also means that the content of the list is not static but changes as species are added or dropped.  Measure A’s list is static and therefore inconsistent with both the Monterey County Coastal Implementation Plan and the Coastal Act.

For this reason we urge you to use the broadest definition of Environmentally Sensitive Habitat when acting on the issue of whether Measure A is consistent or inconsistent with the Coastal Act. If you do this we are confident you will find Measure A inconsistent with the Coastal Act.

Again, we urge you to find Measure A inconsistent with the Coastal Act.

Sincerely,

Ted R. Hunter                                     Carl E. Nielsen
Co-Chair                                             Co-Chair

Cc:      Coastal Commission Staff
            Peter Douglas, Executive Director
            Charles Lester, Deputy Director
            Rick Hyman, Central Coast Chief Planned
            Dan Carl, Coastal Planner

            Concerned Residents of Pebble Beach
            Virdette Brumm
            Bruce C. Belknap
            CRPB Steering Committee

 

6-05-06 - Pebble Beach attorney challenges Coastal Commission staff recommendation to deny Measure "A" (November 2000)

  • For more details CLICK here for the Monterey County Herald's June 5, 2007 story, "Coast panel report challenged" on their web site, www.montereyherald.com (an external link).

6-03-07 - Pacific Grove City Council reaffirms opposition to Measure A (November 2000).

• Click here to read HOPE email regarding this Public Meeting on Pebble Beach Forest Destruction Plans

6-02-07 - The Monterey Herald reports the Coastal Commission staff recommends denial of Measure A, the Pebble Beach development initiative in 2000.

Or click here to search for the entire article, "Denial of initiative urged", using the SEARCH feature on the new Herald web site (an external link).

6-01-07 - The California Coastal Commission staff has recommended denial of the Pebble Beach Co.'s proposed redevelopment plan (Measure A) due to inconsistencies with state Coastal Act policies. 

Upon opening this Staff Report, scroll down to Page 12. Look for the following antecedent documents. Click to begin downloading each of the followingLARGE FILE-SIZE Exhbits directly from the Coastal Commission website (an external link.)

 

June 1, 2007, 3:30 pm -- Click here to see the Coastal Commission Agenda for June 13, posted at www.coastal.ca.gov/mtgcurr.html. Scroll down to find item # 13 b.

Click the title, "LCP Amendment Request Number MCO-1-07 (Measure A in Del Monte Forest, Monterey Co)" to download the (1.6 MB pdf) from the Coastal Commission website (external website.)


5-23-07 - The Coastal Commission hearing on Measure "A" is set for June 13, 2007 in Santa Rosa. Let the Coastal Commissioners know you views on Pebble Beach Company's development plans. Send your comments to the Commissioners by Friday, June 8, 2007.

5-18-07 - PEBBLE BEACH PROJECT HEADS BACK TO COASTAL COMMISSION: One year after the Pebble Beach Company withdrew its application for a new golf course, equestrian center and 160 hotel rooms in Del Monte Forest, the California Coastal Commission is expected to revisit the ballot measure that cleared the way for the development and put hundreds of acres of Monterey pine forest into open space preserves when voters approved it in November 2000.

• HOME PAGE • LINKS • PEBBLE BEACH DEVELOPMENT • MONTEREY COUNTY • COASTAL COMMISSION •
• ACTION ON MEASURE "A" • LAND USE PLANS • PUBLIC HEARINGS • SCENIC EASEMENTS • WATER ISSUES •
• EDITORIALS • NEWS ARTICLES • NEWS FOR RESIDENTS • ABOUT CONCERNED RESIDENTS •   TOP OF PAGE