Unfortunate Events

This is a short list of some of the series of unfortunate events that have occurred before my final SLO County Planning Commission hearing on July 28, 2011 that have made building anything at Cave Landing difficult if not impossible. Coincidentally, all of these events were caused by the Planning Dept staff.

March 2001 – In the Avila Beach Specific Plan, on page 159, in the only place where the Avila Beach USL is defined, the Planning Dept staff included all of CSA 12 that is in the Coastal Zone as part of the Avila Beach USL – except the 5 parcels of Pirates Cove that include Cave Landing. If the comma and two words “, Pirates Cove” had been included in this one sentence, then Cave Landing Ranch would be inside of the of USL of Avila Beach as defined by the Planning Dept staff. This “mistake” by the Planning Dept is unfortunate because later the Planning Dept will argue that without the words “Pirates Cove” in that sentence, nothing can ever be built at Cave Landing.

August 2007 - the sale of all of the five parcels, including Cave Landing Ranch, to the “Trust For Public Land” falls apart due to some behind the scenes work by members of the Planning Dept staff. This is unfortunate because it means that the only way Barbara Baker and the other owners of the property can sell the land is by developing it. It has also cost SLO County $1.3 million – so far.

April 2009 – the Planning Dept staff recommended changes to delete CZ Framework pages that expressly compared a CSA Sphere of Service line to a USL. This is sent to the Coastal Commission for processing.

February 2010 – The Planning Dept issues a permit to drill a water well at Cave Landing, but the permit is only issued after we promise to never, ever use the water for domestic use. The is unfortunate because it means that even though Cave Landing now has a water well, the Planning Dept has ruled that it cannot be used to supply water for a house.

July 2010 – the Coastal Commission conditionally modifies the LCP to delete the paragraph referencing the equivalence of a CSA’s Sphere of Service line to a USL. No mention of this pending change was made to us or the Planning Commission during the 8 hours of Planning Commission hearings that happened a couple of weeks later.

August 2010 – before the Planning Commission hearings, the Planning Dept staff contacts the Coastal Commission staff to get the coastal staff to send in last minute hit pieces that reinforce the Planning staff’s position on requiring an LCP amendment. This is unfortunate because it virtually guarantees that the coastal staff will make sure that this project will be appealed to the Coastal Commission. Which is a nightmare.

November 2010 – the Planning Dept staff issues a “Application Accepted Letter” four months after the actual application accepted date of August 18, 2010. Because of this delay, the applicable LCP will change from the 2009 LCP to the April 2011 LCP. This is unfortunate because our arguments depended on language in the 2009 LCP which the staff has quietly deleted in the 2011 LCP.

April 2011 – the Coastal Commission certifies the new LCP. In this new 2011 LCP the Planning Dept staff has deleted the one paragraph from the Framework For Planning – section H that we quoted in our submittal to the Planning Commission that equates “Sphere of Service Lines” and “Urban Services Lines (USL)”. Because this one paragraph has been deleted by the Planning Dept staff, our argument to the Planning Commission on July 28th 2011 is rendered nonsensical.

Sept 1, 2011 – my county approved permit is appealed to the California Coastal Commission by the California Coastal Commission.