BIG SUR BYWAY ORGANIZATION (BSBO) – FULL COMMITTEE Special Meeting Tuesday, April 20, 2021 9:00 a.m. – 11 a.m.
Important Notice Regarding Covid-19 & Participation in the Big Sur Byway Organization
The Big Sur Byway Organization will held by teleconference in order to minimize the spread of the COVID-19 virus, in accordance with the State of Emergency proclaimed by Governor Newsom on March 4, 2020, Executive Order N-29-20 issued by Governor Newsom on March 17, 2020, and the Shelter in Place Order issued by the Monterey County Health Officer on March 17, 2020, as may be periodically amended. To participate in this meeting, the public are invited to observe and address the Committee telephonically or electronically. Instructions for public participation are below:
Participate via Zoom Meeting Link: https://montereycty.zoom.us/j/94408470398
Or Telephone: 1 669 900 6833, Webinar ID: 944 0847 0398
Public Participation Instructions:
The meeting will be conducted via teleconference using the Zoom program, and Committee Members will attend electronically or telephonically. The meeting will have no physical location to physically attend. The public may observe the Zoom meeting via computer by clicking on the meeting link listed above, or the public may listen via phone by dialing the phone number listed above and then when prompted, entering the Meeting ID Access Code listed above as well. You will be asked for a “Participant ID”. You do not need a Participant ID to join the meeting, press the pound key (#) again and you will be automatically connected.
Members of the public may wish to comment on a specific agenda item while the matter is being heard. When the Chair calls for public comment on an agenda item, they will then call on speakers and unmute their device one at a time. Public speakers may be broadcast in audio form only.
Members of the public who wish to make a general public comment for items not on the day’s agenda may submit their comment via email, preferably limited to 250 words or less, to [email protected].
Individuals with disabilities who desire to request a reasonable accommodation or modification to observe or participate in the meeting may make such request by sending an email to support staff at [email protected]. The request should be made no later than noon two (2) business days prior to the meeting date in order to provide time for the County to address the request.
The Chair may set reasonable rules as needed to conduct the meeting in an orderly manner.
BIG SUR BYWAY ORGANIZATION (BSBO) – FULL COMMITTEE Special Meeting Tuesday, April 20, 2021 9:00 a.m. – 11 a.m.
APRIL 20, 2021, 9am SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call District/Region Representative Attendance Highlands Resident Dan Keig Mid Coast Resident Martha Diehl, Chair Big Sur Proper/Valley Resident Butch Kronlund, Vice-Chair South Coast Resident Anneliese Agren Resident At Large Katie Moon CalTrans John Olejnik U.S. Forest Service Fin Eifert CA State Parks Marcos Ortega Big Sur Chamber Rick Aldinger
3. Approval of Minutes from the March 9, 2021 Regular Meeting Attachment 1 – Draft Minutes for March 9, 2021 4. Public Comment on Non-Agenda Items (May Be Limited To 3 Minutes Per Person) 5. Action Items a. Discuss and provide direction on potential correspondence to Board of Supervisors with BSBO recommendation on Point Lobos Hwy 1 East Side No Parking Pilot Ordinance Attachment 2 – Draft Comment Letter to the Board of Supervisors Attachment 3 – 2019 Monterey County Ordinance Materials Attachment 4 – Related Correspondence Received Since March 9th Meeting 5. Information and Discussion Items A. Member reports/comments (written reports preferred if possible) B. Committee check-ins – Mission & goals (Anneliese Agren & Rick Aldinger); Outreach – (Butch Kronlund) C. Update on Caltrans Current and Upcoming Activities, including Rat Creek and other recent Highway 1 storm damages (John Olejnik) D. Report on facilitation/administration/organization (Hardgrave/Diehl) E. BSBO 2021 Regular Quarterly Meeting Schedule, upcoming meeting dates I. June 8, 2021 II. September 7, 2021 III. December 7, 2021 6. Future Agenda Items (Discussion) – Currently proposed: BIG SUR BYWAY ORGANIZATION (BSBO) – FULL COMMITTEE Special Meeting Tuesday, April 20, 2021 9:00 a.m. – 11 a.m.
A. Study session on the Coast Highway Management Plan – Guidelines for Landslide Management and Storm Damage Response B. Study session on the Coast Highway Management Plan – Guidelines for Corridor Aesthetics C. Revisit Goals & Objectives Committee recommendations 7. Adjournment ATTACHMENT 1
Big Sur Byway Organization (BSBO) – Full Committee Tuesday, March 9, 2021 0900– 11:00 a.m.
REGULAR MEETING, DRAFT MINUTES
1. CALL TO ORDER Called to order at 9:03 a.m. with the Pledge of Allegiance
2. ROLL CALL
District/Region Representative Present Big Sur Chamber Rick Aldinger Big Sur Proper/Valley Resident Butch Kronlund, Vice-Chair CA State Parks Marcos Ortega CalTrans John Olejnik Highlands Resident Dan Keig Mid Coast Resident Martha Diehl, Chair Resident At Large Katie Moon South Coast Resident Anneliese Agren U.S. Forest Service Fin Eifert
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM FEBRUARY 3, 2021 SPECIAL MEETING • Correction to Butch Kronlund’s last name • Motion approve minutes with correction by Butch Kronlund, seconded by Dan Keig, motion passed unanimously
4. CONTINUED/DISCUSSION ITEMS A. COAST HIGHWAY MANAGEMENT PLAN (CHMP): Origin and Context • Written remarks from Lee Otter and Kenneth Wright regarding original intent & expectations for the CHMP shared by Martha Diehl • No public comment • COAST HIGHWAY MANAGEMENT PLAN: Overview - John Olejnik provided an overview of the organization and content of the CHMP and associated documents. Link to plan: https://407gch2w15qa2l74p92fpley-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/CMP- final-Mar2004.pdf • Link to Corridor Management Plan Guidelines: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1HiyxzjJGuQbOg0StIrYMwllVy7wgrYp0 • No public comment
B. Focused discussion of issues and ongoing efforts to address them in the Carmel Highlands segment: a. CARMEL AREA STATE PARKS GENERAL PLAN UPDATE: Related Policies and Projects • Discussion led by Marcos Ortega, overview of content and process by Brent Marshall • Link to Carmel Area State Parks General Plan, recommendation only, plan still requires approval: https://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=26868
PUBLIC COMMENT • Kate Daniels: Senator Laird is working to add State Parks Plan to State’s agenda. Asked why use plan must first be approved before shuttle program can be approved? Discussion ensued ATTACHMENT 1
Big Sur Byway Organization (BSBO) – Full Committee Tuesday, March 9, 2021 0900– 11:00 a.m.
regarding visitor management, equitable access; traffic management (correlates to shuttle concept). • Rick Aldinger: Asked that as capital projects are considered and approved ongoing maintenance requirements of such projects should be included • Butch Kronlund: Suggests BSBO become familiar with the State Parks plan before next meeting • Anneliese Agren: Inquired about improvement to facilities and updates at Piedras Blancas, South Coast and parks in neighboring jurisdiction, San Luis Obispo County.
b. PARKIT! PROP0SED PROJECTS • Presentation by Monta Potter and Rachel Saunders regarding ParkIt organization goals and partners. Overview of ongoing plans including pilot shuttle program, funding, interest and implementation • Email for interest list: [email protected]
PUBLIC COMMENT • Steve Martin: Noted Marathon Flats would only allow for 100 parking spaces and parking along the Westside of Highway 1 is over 160 cars at a time • Monta Potter: Responded with consideration to turnover throughout the day, Marathon Flats can accommodate more than 100 cars per day as it will be along the route of the shuttle which is intended to include a stop with additional parking opportunities at Rancho Canada (proposed)
c. MONTEREY COUNTY/CALTRANS POINT LOBOS AREA HWY 1 EAST SIDE NO PARKING PILOT ORDINANCE Discussion lead by Sarah Hardgrave and Kate Daniels regarding the upcoming end of the temporary ‘no parking on the eastside of Hwy 1 in the vicinity of Point Lobos’ ordinance intended to improve public safety. and requesting BSBO provide input to the MtyCo BOS regarding the extension of and continued support for such an ordinance. PUBLIC COMMENT • Monta Potter: Commented on importance of keeping east side clear to allow for access to emergency vehicles and reduce the number of pedestrians crossing the highway. • Kate Daniels: Noted that emergency vehicle consideration part of the temporary permit consideration
d. CARMEL HIGHLANDS REPRESENTATIVE PROPOSED SEGMENT VISION/PROJECTS • Discussion and presentation lead by Dan Keig regarding a community created proposal for coastal trail, bike lane and undergrounding of utilities within the Highlands section (between the Carmel River Bridge and Mal Paso Creek) • No public comment
5. ACTION ITEMS A. DISCUSS AND PROVIDE DIRECTION ON POTENTIAL CORRESPONDENCE TO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WITH BSBO RECOMMENDATION ON EXTENDING THE POINT LOBOS HWY 1 EAST SIDE NO PARKING PILOT ORDINANCE • Discussion ensued regarding a recommendation from BSBO to the MtyCo Board of Supervisors for their scheduled May consideration of extending the temporary ordinance. Several members spoke supporting extending the ban. Katie Moon requested data regarding the observed effects of the ATTACHMENT 1
Big Sur Byway Organization (BSBO) – Full Committee Tuesday, March 9, 2021 0900– 11:00 a.m.
temporary ban on park visitation, in particular equity issues, and about the effects of the temporary ban on pedestrian and vehicular safety. • The group decided to set a special meeting 09-1100 April 20th 2021 to further discuss this topic. • CalTrans representative may have to abstain from any support letters drafted and submitted by the BSBO, but can offer support in collecting information to inform the group’s decision • No public comment
6. INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION ITEMS A. STATUS UPDATE ON RAT CREEK AND OTHER RECENT HIGHWAY 1 STORM DAMAGES • Presentation lead by John Olejnik and Sara von Schwind regarding construction decision making, repair plan, and timeline • Discussion ensued regarding ability for public input in decisions and the importance of public access ASAP for people living on one side of the road closure and working on the other, particular given the closure of the Nacimiento Fergusson Road. Impacts on pedestrians and cyclists were also mentioned. • Notice of postponement of Big Sur International Marathon made, anticipating April 24, 2022
B. COMMITTEE CHECK-INS: MISSION AND GOALS AND OUTREACH • No current actions to report; further work on these items postponed
C. MEMBER REPORTS/COMMENTS • Anneliese Agren: Inquired about restroom map, calendar of highway events and suggested future plans/reports include greenhouse effects mitigation • John Olejnik: Discussed how to bring in San Luis Obispo County into efforts, noted updates on CalTrans’ social media accounts and gave mention to proposal of 25 housing units at Captain Cooper School • Sarah Hardgrave: Identified that the Byway Organization should plan to discuss the causeway bridge component of the Carmel River FREE project, proposed on State Route 1 south of the Carmel River • No additional public comment.
D. REPORT ON FACILITATION/ADMINSTRATION/ORGANIZATION • Discussion (brief) regarding administrative work going forward, lead by Sarah Hardgrave and Martha Diehl. Current resources allow Supervisor Adams’s staff to support four quarterly meetings per year plus potentially one special meeting per quarter. MCHA staff will provide minutes thru June 2021. • No public comment.
E. BSBO 2021 QUARTERLY MEETING SCHEDULE, FUTURE MEETING DATES • SPECIAL MEETING: April 20,2021 • June 8, 2021 • September 7, 2021 • December 7, 2021 • No public comment.
7. PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS None ATTACHMENT 1
Big Sur Byway Organization (BSBO) – Full Committee Tuesday, March 9, 2021 0900– 11:00 a.m.
8. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS A. Study session on the Coast Highway Management Plan – Guidelines for Landslide Management and Storm Damage Response B. Study session on the Coast Highway Management Plan – Guidelines for Corridor Aesthetics C. Brown Act ethics training D. Revisit Goals & Objectives Committee recommendations
9. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 11:08 AM ATTACHMENT 2
April 12, 2021
Monterey County Board of Supervisors – Via email
Dear Chair Askew and Members of the Monterey County Board of Supervisors:
We write to you as appointed members of the Big Sur Byway Organization, established via Resolution No. 19-127 by the Monterey County Board of Supervisors. The Big Sur Byway Organization was formed to implement a program of actions to carry out the goals and policies of the Big Sur Coast Highway Management Plan (2004).
On May 30th, 2019 the Monterey County Zoning Administrator approved a Coastal Development Permit to allow the installation No Parking signage along the east side of Highway 1 along Point Lobos State Natural Reserve to comply with Ordinance No. 5307 to prohibit parking in this location for a two-year period. Since installation of the No Parking signage:
1. Access to Point Lobos State Natural Reserve has remained steady, and attendance has not been affected by the No Parking Ordinance; 2. Congestion is limited to only one side of the highway and pedestrians are no longer running across Highway 1 to access the Reserve; and 3. There has not been a single pedestrian accident in the time that the ordinance has been in place.
As stated in Resolution No. 19-127, “Establishment of the Big Sur Byway Organization will promote and protect the public health, safety, and welfare of County residents by implementing and fulfilling the purpose of the Big Sur Coast Highway Management Plan. We believe that because of the public safety benefit and because access to Point Lobos State Natural Reserve has not been reduced, it is in the public’s best interest to extend the No Parking Ordinance at this time.
Sincerely,
Martha Diehl, Mid Coast Resident and Chair
Dan Keig, Highlands Resident John Olejnik, CalTrans
Butch Kronlund, Big Sur Proper/Valley Resident Fin Eifert, U.S. Forest Service
Anneliese Agren, South Coast Resident Marcos Ortega, CA State Parks
Katie Moon, Resident At Large Rick Aldinger, Big Sur Chamber ATTACHMENT 3 Monterey County Board of Supervisors 168 W. Alisal St., 1st Floor Zoning Administrator Salinas, CA 93901 Agenda Item No. 5 Legistar File Number: ZA 19-107 May 30, 2019
Introduced: 5/22/2019 Current Status: Agenda Ready Version: 1 Matter Type: Zoning Administrator
PLN190123/CALTRANS (COUNTY OF MONTEREY) Public hearing to consider the installation of “No Parking” signage along a 3,600-foot (0.68 mile) section of State Route (SR) 1 from post-mile 70.07 to post-mile 70.75 along Point Lobos State Natural Reserve, and to allow development within 750 feet of known archaeological resources. Project Location: SR 1, from post-mile 70.07 to post-mile 70.75, Carmel Area Land Use Plan, Coastal Zone Proposed CEQA Action: Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Zoning Administrator: a. Find that the project qualifies as a Class 1 Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines there are no exceptions pursuant to Section 15300.2; and b. Approve a Combined Development Permit, consisting of: 1. Coastal Development Permit and Design Approval to allow the installation of traffic control signage [seventeen (17) “No Parking Any Time” signs] along a 3,600-foot (0.68 mile) section of SR 1 from post-mile 70.07 to post-mile 70.75 along Point Lobos State Natural Reserve; and 2. Coastal Administrative Permit to allow development within 750 feet of known archaeological resources. A draft resolution, including findings and evidence, is attached for consideration (Exhibit A). Staff recommends approval subject to no Conditions of Approval.
PROJECT INFORMATION: Property Owner: State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Project Applicant: County of Monterey APN: 000-000-000-000 (Caltrans right-of-way) Properties on the east side of SR 1 fronting the affected section of road include APNs 243- 112-005-000, 243-112-015-000, 243-112-020-000, 243-112-024-000, 243-112-027-000. Zoning: Unclassified (Caltrans right-of-way) Parcel Size: NA Flagged and Staked: No - not a structure.
Monterey County Page 1 Printed on 5/23/2019 ATTACHMENT 3 Legistar File Number: ZA 19-107
SUMMARY: As visitation has increased to Point Lobos over time, patrons often park along the east side of Highway 1 and cross the roadway to access the park. This interaction of foot traffic and high-speed vehicles has created potentially unsafe conditions for drivers and pedestrians alike. The County has received multiple requests from local residents advocating that the County obtain approvals from California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and, if needed, the California Coastal Commission (CCC) to establish no parking at any time on the east side of SR 1. Permission has been obtained from Caltrans to install the signs. This Coastal Development Permit is being processed at the request of CCC staff for installation of seventeen (17) no parking signs along the east side of Highway 1 outside of Point Lobos State Natural Reserve.
DISCUSSION: On January 29, 2019, the County of Monterey Board of Supervisors (Board) adopted an Ordinance (Board Order 19-016 and Ordinance No. 5307; Exhibit C) prohibiting parking along this section of SR 1, and authorized the Resource Management Agency (RMA) to apply to Caltrans for an encroachment permit to install no parking signs in accordance with the ordinance. Subsequently, on March 28 and April 8, 2019, Caltrans approved an order prohibiting parking along this section of SR 1 (Exhibit D) and issued Encroachment Permit No. 0519 NSI 0136 (Exhibit E) to allow the installation of the signage as proposed by the County.
This Combined Development Permit would allow the installation of seventeen (17) “No Parking Any Time” signs along a 3,600-foot (0.68 mile) section of State Route 1. The signs would be placed on the shoulder along the northbound direction of travel, for a distance of 1,800 feet both north and south of the Point Lobos State Natural Reserve driveway. The proposed project will not physically alter the roadway and would only restrict parking along the section of SR 1 from post-mile 70.07 to post-mile 70.75. The “No Parking Any Time” signs would be spaced approximately 200 feet apart in the shoulder on the east side of the road. Vehicle traffic and visitors will be able to continue accessing the public parking areas for Point Lobos State Natural Reserve within the park by entering from either direction. The County’s intent is to balance the identified safety concerns with preservation of public access to Point Lobos State Natural Reserve.
Public Parking: CCC staff has contended that installation of the signs to restrict parking along SR 1 removes “public parking”, and therefore creates an adverse impact to public access. Further, CCC staff has stated that any parking “spaces” lost through installation of these signs will require an in-kind replacement somewhere else to offset the parking that was lost (CCC staff estimated 75-100 “spaces”). The County disagrees with this position. The area on the east side of SR 1, which has become de-facto parking, does not constitute parking based on the County’s adopted Local Coastal Plan (LCP), and Title 20 Zoning Code; therefore, no replacement parking would be required.
The parking section of Title 20 is clear about what should be counted as parking, and the area outside of the State Reserve does not meet the test. Sections 20.58.10 and 20.58.030 of the code both refer exclusively to “off street parking” in the Purpose and Regulations. Also, Section 20.58.50.D says that “All parking and loading shall be provided on the same site as the use to which it relates, unless a Coastal Development Permit is approved by the Zoning Administrator, Planning
Monterey County Page 2 Printed on 5/23/2019 ATTACHMENT 3 Legistar File Number: ZA 19-107
Commission, or Board of Supervisors”, which in this case has not been previously granted. The area in question is across a State Highway, and not on the same site as the State Reserve. Furthermore, Section 20.58.50.D reads that “Parking Spaces which are located within the required front setback shall not count toward the amount of required parking unless a Coastal Administrative Permit is first secured.” In this case, even if the spaces were on the same side of the road as Point Lobos, they would not be able to be counted towards parking under the LCP without an additional permit. For all these reasons, it is clear that the spaces on the east side of the highway do not constitute public parking.
Currently, the County is working with State Parks to review and provide input on pending potential projects to provide additional safe public parking for visitors outside of the park. These projects would be located in close proximity to Point Lobos and would help provide additional public access. If entitlements are required, the projects will be brought forward to the Appropriate Authority for decision. However, it should be noted that these projects are not related to the installation of these signs and are not intended to be in-kind offsets for the installation of no parking signs along SR 1. These projects are part of a larger program that State Parks is undertaking in response to increased demand for visitation to their facilities in the area.
Coastal Development Permit: CCC staff has requested that a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) be processed for the installation of the no parking signs. Initially, County staff determined that installation of the signs qualified for an exemption from a CDP under Section 20.70.130.R of Monterey County Code which exempts: “Repair and maintenance activities, and safety improvements on public or private roads that do not result in addition to, or enlargement or expansion of the object of such repair or maintenance activities (See Coastal Commission’s September 5, 1978 “Repair, Maintenance, and Utility Hook-Up Exclusions from Permit Requirements” document for further detail on which public road projects are exempt”. CCC staff took the position that the exemption referred to in 20.70.120 R did not apply. This position was based on reading the 1978 document, which states that projects are exempt from a Coastal Development Permit only when there is no risk for substantial adverse impact on public access. CCC staff believes the safety improvements (i.e., signs) will displace public parking to one of the area’s most popular visitor destinations, thereby requiring a CDP. As discussed above, the County does not agree that area being restricted constitutes “public parking” but agreed to process a CDP as part of the overall project.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15301 categorically exempts existing facilities, including the minor alteration of existing public facilities. This includes existing highways, streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities. The project consists of installation of signage to improve safety. There are no unique circumstances or significant effects resulting from the project. Therefore, the project is consistent with the 15301 categorical exemption.
Monterey County Page 3 Printed on 5/23/2019 ATTACHMENT 3 Legistar File Number: ZA 19-107
OTHER AGENCY INVOLVEMENT: The following County agencies or departments reviewed this project: RMA-Public Works Caltrans California Coastal Commission
Caltrans approved an order prohibiting parking on March 28, 2019 (Exhibit D) and approved and issued an encroachment permit (No. 0519 NSI 0136) on April 8, 2019 (Exhibit E). County staff has also consulted with the Coastal Commission staff regarding the coastal development permit requirement.
The project was not referred to the Carmel Highlands/Unincorporated Land Use Advisory Committee (LUAC) for review. On January 15 and 29, 2019, the Board of Supervisors conducted public hearings at which members of the public were provided the opportunity to comment. On January 29, 2019, the Board approved an ordinance prohibiting parking along this area of SR 1 (Order No. 19-016 and Ordinance No. 5307; Exhibit C).
Prepared by: Joe Sidor, Associate Planner, x5262 Reviewed by: Brandon Swanson, Interim RMA Chief of Planning Approved by: John M. Dugan, FAICP, RMA Deputy Director of Land Use and Development Services
The following attachments are on file with the RMA: Exhibit A - Draft Resolution, including: · Signage Design Exhibit B - Vicinity Map Exhibit C - Board Order No. 19-016 and Ordinance No. 5307 Exhibit D - Caltrans Order dated March 28, 2019 Exhibit E - Caltrans Encroachment Permit (without attachments) dated April 8, 2019
cc: Front Counter Copy; Caltrans District 5, Property Owner; California Coastal Commission; Carmel Highlands Fire Protection District; RMA-Public Works; RMA-Environmental Services; Environmental Health Bureau; Water Resources Agency; Joseph Sidor, Associate Planner; Brandon Swanson, RMA Chief of Planning; Craig Spencer, Interim RMA Services Manager; The Open Monterey Project (Molly Erickson); LandWatch; Project File PLN190123
Monterey County Page 4 Printed on 5/23/2019 ATTACHMENT 3 Carmel River State CARMEL AREA Beach C a r m e l B a y
Palo Corona Regional
Park S
200 a Carmelite n Monastary ! J o 1 s BLUEFISH ·|þ} e COVE C r The Pit 71 MP e e k 100 ! 100 1 200 E WHALERS T COVE U O R E T A T S
P O I N T L O B O S
Point Lobos State Reserve D R
N E L L A 700
100 200 L F W O R D 100 R E D
600
300 500
800
70 MP 700 ! Point Lobos Ranch
400
CHINA COVE
100 G i b s o n C r e e k A N 500
O R R D SANDY O 600 BEACH C 700
F
1000
E 800 900 R
N 69.5 MP C ! A D N R 200 Y O N 700
STATE OF CALIFORNIA (CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF APPLICANT: TRANSPORTATION & COUNTY OF MONTEREY) Affected parcels, east of SR1: APN: 243-112-005-000 and -015 and -020 and -024 and -027 FILE # PLN190123 ± 0 1,000
! Project Limits 2500' Limit 300' Limit Feet
PLANNER: SIDOR ATTACHMENT 3 Before the Zoning Administrator in and for the County of Monterey, State of California
In the matter of the application of: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CALTRANS) (COUNTY OF MONTEREY) (PLN190123) RESOLUTION NO. 19-015 Resolution by the Monterey County Zoning Administrator: 1) Finding that the project qualifies as a Class 1 Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines, and there are no exceptions pursuant to Section 15300.2; and 2) Approving a Combined Development Permit consisting of: a) Coastal Development Permit and Design Approval to allow the installation of traffic control signage (17 “No Parking Any Time” signs) along a 3,600-foot (0.68 mile) section of State Route (SR) 1 from post-mile 70.07 to post- mile 70.75; and b) Coastal Administrative Permit to allow development within 750 feet of known archaeological resources. SR 1 from post-mile 70.07 to post-mile 70.75, Carmel Area Land Use Plan, Coastal Zone (APN: 000-000- 000-000/Caltrans right-of-way)
The Caltrans application (PLN190123) came on for a public hearing before the Monterey County Zoning Administrator on May 30, 2019. Having considered all the written and documentary evidence, the administrative record, the staff report, oral testimony, and other evidence presented, the Zoning Administrator finds and decides as follows:
FINDINGS
1. FINDING: CONSISTENCY / NO VIOLATIONS - The project is consistent with the policies of the Monterey County 1982 General Plan, Carmel Area Land Use Plan, Carmel Area Coastal Implementation Plan – Part 4, Monterey County Zoning Ordinance - Coastal (Title 20), and other County health, safety, and welfare ordinances related to land use development. No violations exist on the property. EVIDENCE: a) The project involves the installation of seventeen (17) “No Parking Any Time” signs along a 3,600-foot (0.68 mile) section of SR 1 from post-mile 70.07 to post-mile 70.75. The signs would be spaced approximately 200 feet apart in the northbound direction of travel, for a distance of 1,800 feet both north and south of the centerline of the Point Lobos State Natural Reserve driveway. The project also involves development within 750 feet of known archaeological resources.
CALTRANS (COUNTY OF MONTEREY) (PLN190123) Page 1 ATTACHMENT 3 b) The project area is located along a 3,600-foot (0.68 mile) section of State Route (SR) 1 within the Caltrans right-of-way, (Assessor's Parcel Number 000-000-000-000), Carmel Area Land Use Plan (LUP), Coastal Zone. The project area is not zoned; i.e., Unclassified. The project involves the installation of roadway signage on a designated state highway; therefore, the project is an allowed land use for the project area. c) The adjacent properties on the east side of SR 1 fronting the affected section of road include Assessor's Parcel Numbers 243-112-005-000, 243-112-015-000, 243-112-020-000, 243-112-024-000, 243-112-027- 000. These properties fronting the project area are zoned Resource Conservation with Design Control and Special Treatment overlays (Coastal Zone) [RC/D-SpTr (CZ)], and Visitor-Serving Commercial with Design Control and Special Treatment overlays (Coastal Zone) [VSC/D-SpTr (CZ)]. d) The project has been reviewed for consistency with the text, policies, and regulations in the: - 1982 Monterey County General Plan; - Carmel Area Land Use Plan; - Carmel Area Coastal Implementation Plan (Part 4); and - Monterey County Zoning Ordinance - Coastal (Title 20). No conflicts were found to exist. No communications were received during the course of review of the project indicating any inconsistencies with the text, policies, and/or regulations of the applicable Monterey County Code (MCC). e) Monterey County RMA-Planning and RMA-Building Services records were reviewed, and the County is not aware of any violations existing on the subject property. f) Design. Per Evidence c above, the parcels adjacent to the project area have a Design Control overlay. Pursuant to MCC Section 20.44, Title 20 (Coastal Zoning Ordinance), the Design Control Combining District (D District) regulates the location, size, configuration, materials, and colors of structures and fences to assure the protection of the public viewshed and neighborhood character.
The project involves installing minimal signage to restrict parking on the east side of SR 1 along a 3,600 linear foot section of the highway. The County has minimized the number of signs to the extent feasible for public safety and to minimize impacts to the natural scenic character of the area. The proposed signs would be placed approximately 200 feet apart, and the signage is consistent with State guidelines and other highway signage in the area. Therefore, the design of the signage assures protection of the public viewshed, is consistent with neighborhood character, and assures visual integrity without imposing undue restrictions. g) Viewshed. The project site is within the General Viewshed, as identified on Map A of the Carmel Area Land Use Plan and must be consistent with the applicable visual resource policies in Chapter 2.2 of the Carmel Area Land Use Plan (LUP). The LUP visual resource policies are designed to protect the public viewshed, which is defined as areas visible from major public use areas including Highway 1 and CALTRANS (COUNTY OF MONTEREY) (PLN190123) Page 2 ATTACHMENT 3 Point Lobos State Reserve. Development visible from these areas is regulated to ensure minimum visual impact based on the visual policies. The Key Policy for Visual Resources (Policy 2.2.2) states that “all future development within the viewshed must harmonize and be clearly subordinate to the natural scenic character of the area” and that it “must conform to the basic viewshed policy of minimum visibility.” Specific policies include minimizing visibility and using appropriate materials to screen development.
Within the SR 1 viewshed, existing pole and ground mounted equipment is already visible within the common public viewing areas of the highway. The project involves installing additional signage to restrict parking on the northbound (east) side of SR 1 along a 3,600 linear foot section of the highway. The County has minimized the number of signs to the extent feasible for public safety and to minimize impacts to the natural scenic character of the area. The proposed signage is also consistent with State guideline requirements for highway signage, and all work will occur within the existing roadway. The subject signs would be placed approximately 200 feet apart and would be consistent with other highway signage in the area, including no parking signage along the southbound (west) side of SR 1.
As proposed and designed, the project minimizes development within the viewshed in accordance with the applicable goals and policies of the LUP, is consistent with applicable LUP visual resource policies, and would not result in adverse visual impacts. h) Public Access. See Finding No. 5 and supporting evidence. i) On-Site Parking and History of No Parking along SR 1. Current on- site parking facilities within the Point Lobos State Natural Reserve include spaces for 162 vehicles at three primary locations (China Cove, Sand Hill, and Whaler’s Cove). Previously, no parking was established on the west side of SR 1, from the park’s driveway entrance north to Riley Ranch Road, to ensure public safety due to the limited shoulder width in this area. Additionally, no parking was previously established on the east side of SR 1, across from the park’s driveway entrance, for the Monterey Salinas Transit bus stop. These two previous examples demonstrate that the establishment of no parking for public safety, resource protection, or other valid need, does not set a precedent. j) Cultural Resources. The project includes a coastal development permit to allow development within 750 feet of known archaeological resources. Based on the specific circumstances of a project, planning permits or entitlements (i.e., coastal development permits) in the Coastal Zone may be processed as either a Coastal Administrative Permit (CAP) or a Coastal Development Permit (CST). The circumstances and scope of this project warrant the processing of a CAP.
The project site is in an area identified in County records as having a high archaeological sensitivity and is within 750 feet of known
CALTRANS (COUNTY OF MONTEREY) (PLN190123) Page 3 ATTACHMENT 3 archaeological resources. Although located in an area of high sensitivity and known resources, the area of development is located entirely within the existing roadway. The proposed improvements consist of non-invasive work within the existing disturbed roadbed, so there is very limited potential to impact archaeological resources. The County determined the potential for impacts to occur to known archaeological resources to be very low and did not require submittal of an archaeological report in this case. k) No tree removal is proposed as part of this project, and no development will occur on slopes that exceed 30 percent. All work will occur within the existing roadway where there is no sensitive vegetation that would be impacted. l) The project was not referred to the Carmel Highlands/Unincorporated Land Use Advisory Committee (LUAC) for review. Pursuant to the LUAC Procedure guidelines adopted by the Monterey County Board of Supervisors, this application warranted referral to the LUAC because the project involves a Design Approval subject to review by the Zoning Administrator. However, the project was not referred due to public review that already occurred at the Board of Supervisors. On January 15 and 29, 2019, the Board of Supervisors conducted public hearings at which members of the public were provided the opportunity to comment. m) The application, plans, and supporting materials submitted by the project applicant to Monterey County RMA-Planning for the proposed development found in project file PLN190123.
2. FINDING: SITE SUITABILITY – The site is physically suitable for the use as built. EVIDENCE: a) The project has been reviewed for site suitability by RMA-Planning and RMA-Public Works. County staff reviewed the application materials and plans, as well as the County’s GIS database, to verify that the proposed project on the subject site conforms to the applicable plans, and that the site is suitable for the development. As designed, the County finds that no conditions would be necessary. b) The project involves the installation of standardized roadway signage on a designated state highway, and the site area has no physical or environmental constraints that would indicate that the site is not suitable for the use proposed. Therefore, the site is suitable for the project. c) The application, plans, and supporting materials submitted by the project applicant to Monterey County RMA-Planning for the proposed development found in project file PLN190123.
3. FINDING: HEALTH AND SAFETY - The establishment, maintenance, or operation of the project applied for will not under the circumstances of this particular case be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the County.
CALTRANS (COUNTY OF MONTEREY) (PLN190123) Page 4 ATTACHMENT 3 EVIDENCE: a) The project was reviewed by RMA-Planning and RMA-Public Works, and conditions have been recommended, where appropriate, to ensure that the project will not have an adverse effect on the health, safety, and welfare of persons either residing or working in the neighborhood. As designed and proposed, the County has determined that no conditions of approval would be necessary other than those required by the Caltrans Encroachment Permit No. 0519 NSI 0136, attached as Exhibit E to the May 30, 2019 staff report to the Zoning Administrator. b) As proposed, the project is necessary to safely facilitate the flow of northbound traffic southeast on SR 1. These improvements will occur within the existing improved right-of-way, and there are no plans to remove any portion of the right of way. c) As visitation to Point Lobos State Natural Reserve has increased over time, park patrons often park along the east side of SR 1 and cross the roadway to access the park. This interaction of foot traffic and high- speed vehicles creates potentially unsafe conditions for drivers and pedestrians alike. Additionally, there are periods with heavy traffic that create access issues for first responders and extend response times. The County has received multiple requests from local residents advocating that the County establish no parking at any time on the east side of SR 1. Pursuant to Board Order 19-016 and Ordinance No. 5307, the County’s intent is to balance the identified safety concerns with preservation of public access to Point Lobos State Natural Reserve. Prohibition of parking in this area along SR 1 stops unsafe pedestrian movements across the highway. Vehicle traffic and visitors will be able to continue accessing the public parking areas for Point Lobos State Natural Reserve within the park by entering from either direction. d) The application, plans, and supporting materials submitted by the project applicant to Monterey County RMA-Planning for the proposed development found in project file PLN190123.
4. FINDING: CEQA (Categorical Exemption) – The project is categorically exempt from environmental review and no unusual circumstances were identified to exist for the project. EVIDENCE: a) Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines categorically exempts existing facilities, including the minor alteration of existing public facilities. This includes existing highways, streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities. The project consists of installation of signage to improve safety. There are no unique circumstances or significant effects resulting from the project. Therefore, this project is consistent with the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, and no additional CEQA action is required by the County. b) Exceptions to exemptions listed in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2.a-f are inapplicable. The project does not involve: a historical resource, a hazardous waste site, unusual circumstances that would result in a significant effect, development that would result in a cumulatively significant impact, nor development in a particularly sensitive environment. CALTRANS (COUNTY OF MONTEREY) (PLN190123) Page 5 ATTACHMENT 3
The proposed project involves development located near or within view of SR 1, a designated scenic highway. However, as proposed, the project would not result in damage to scenic resources such as trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources as described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2. Furthermore, the County has minimized the number of signs to the extent feasible for public safety and to minimize impacts to the natural scenic character of the area. c) No adverse environmental effects were identified during staff review of the development application. d) The application, project plans, and related support materials submitted by the project applicant to Monterey County RMA- Planning for the proposed development found in project file PLN190123.
5. FINDING: PUBLIC ACCESS – The project is in conformance with the public access and recreation policies of the Coastal Act (specifically Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act of 1976, commencing with Section 30200 of the Public Resources Code) and Local Coastal Program, and does not interfere with any form of historic public use or trust rights. EVIDENCE: a) No substantial adverse impact on access, either individually or cumulatively, as described in Section 20.145.150 of the Monterey County Coastal Implementation Plan (Part 3) can be demonstrated. b) Public access presently exists along SR 1 (a public highway). The proposed project will not physically alter the roadway but would restrict parking of motor vehicles on the northbound (east) side of the highway. There is currently no parking along this same area of the southbound (west) side of SR 1, and this parking restriction would remain unchanged. c) The project site is identified as an area where the applicable Local Coastal Program requires lateral public access (Figure 3, Public Access, in the Carmel Area Land Use Plan). As proposed, the project would not obstruct lateral access along SR 1. The subject signs would be placed approximately 200 feet apart and would be consistent with State guidelines and other highway signage in the area, including signage along the west side of SR 1. Therefore, the project would not impede public lateral access along SR 1. Adequate space would remain for bicycle and vehicular access and travel along the highway, as well as pedestrian access and travel along the shoulder. d) The project area is located east of SR 1, and would not obstruct public views of the shoreline from the highway, nor obstruct public visual access. e) The County finds that this area on the east side of SR 1, which has become de-facto parking, does not constitute public parking based on the County’s adopted Local Coastal Plan, including Chapter 58 of Title 20 (Coastal Zoning Ordinance); therefore, no replacement parking would be required. Moreover, the County finds that this parking restriction does not create an adverse impact to public access.
CALTRANS (COUNTY OF MONTEREY) (PLN190123) Page 6 ATTACHMENT 3 Monterey County Code Title 20 defines what counts as parking, and the area outside of the Point Lobos State Natural Reserve does not qualify. Section 20.58.50.D states “All parking and loading shall be provided on the same site as the use to which it relates, unless a Coastal Development Permit is approved by the Zoning Administrator, Planning Commission, or Board of Supervisors”, which in this case has not been previously granted. The area in question is across a State Highway, and not on the same site as the Point Lobos State Natural Reserve. Furthermore, Section 20.58.50.D reads “Parking Spaces which are located within the required front setback shall not count toward the amount of required parking unless a Coastal Administrative Permit is first secured.” In this case, even if the spaces were on the same side of the road as Point Lobos, they would not be able to be counted towards parking under the LCP without an additional permit. f) The application, plans and supporting materials submitted by the project applicant to Monterey County RMA-Planning for the proposed development found in project file PLN190123.
8. FINDING: APPEALABILITY - The decision on this project may be appealed to the Monterey County Board of Supervisors and the California Coastal Commission. EVIDENCE: a) Board of Supervisors. Pursuant to Section 20.86.030 of the Monterey County Zoning Ordinance (Title 20), an appeal may be made to the Board of Supervisors by any public agency or person aggrieved by a decision of an Appropriate Authority other than the Board of Supervisors. b) California Coastal Commission. Pursuant to Section 20.86.080.A of the Monterey County Zoning Ordinance (Title 20), the project is subject to appeal by/to the California Coastal Commission because it involves development between the sea and the first through public road paralleling the sea (Highway 1), and development permitted in the underlying zone as a conditional use (i.e., development within 750 feet of known archaeological resources). The project does not involve development within 300 feet of the top of the seaward face of any coastal bluff, not within 300 feet of the inland extent of any beach or of the mean high tide line of the sea.
CALTRANS (COUNTY OF MONTEREY) (PLN190123) Page 7 ATTACHMENT 3
DECISION
NOW, THEREFORE, based on the above findings and evidence, the Zoning Administrator does hereby: A. Find that the project qualifies as a Class 1 Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines, and there are no exceptions pursuant to Section 15300.2; and B. Approve a Combined Development Pe1mit consisting of a Coastal Development Pe1mit and Design Approval to allow the installation of traffic control signage (17 ''No Parking Any Time" signs) along a 3,600-foot (0.68 mile) section of State Route 1 from post-mile 70.07 to post-mile 70.75; and a Coastal Administrative Pe1mit to allow development within 750 feet of known archaeological resources.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 30th day of May, 2019.
C:it/&dministrator
COPY OF THIS DECISION MAILED TO APPLICANT ON JUN 11 ,l.Q~~
THIS APPLICATION IS APPEALABLE TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
IF ANYONE WISHES TO APPEAL THIS DECISION, AN APPEAL FORM MUST BE COMPLETED AND SUBMITTED TO THE CLERK TO THE BOARD ALONG WITH THE APPROPRIATE FILING FEE ON OR BEFORE JUN 21 201 9 THIS PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE COASTAL ZONE AND IS APPEALABLE TO THE COASTAL COMMISSION. UPON RECEIPT OF NOTIFICATION OF THE FINAL LOCAL ACTION NOTICE (FLAN) STATING THE DECISION BY THE FINAL DECISION MAKING BODY, THE COMMISSION ESTABLISHES A 10 WORKING DAY APPEAL PERIOD. AN APPEAL FORM MUST BE FILED WITH THE COASTAL COMMISSION. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT THE COASTAL COMMISSION AT (831) 427-4863 OR AT 725 FRONT STREET, SUITE 300, SANTA CRUZ, CA.
This decision, if this is the final administrative decision, is subject to judicial review pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Sections 1094.5 and 1094.6. Any Petition for Writ of Mandate must be filed with the Court no later than the 90th day following the date on which this decision becomes final.
CALTRANS (COUNTY OF MONTEREY) (PLN190123) Page 8 ATTACHMENT 3 ATTACHMENT 3 ATTACHMENT 3 ATTACHMENT 3 ATTACHMENT 4
From: "Watson, Michael@Coastal"
Hi Martha, unfortunately I was committed in the morning yesterday but will do my best to participate in future meetings. Just an FYI, our office has lost two planners in recent months which is a third of our line planners, and those that remain have had to add to already busy schedules. Anyhow, I was able to meet with Dan and Lee on Monday. They talked mainly about focused improvements within the northern section of the byway (Carmel River to Malpaso) much of which seem to parallel the topics listed on the agenda for yesterday's BSBO zoom call. Commission staff has been coordinating with the County and various other agencies on these proposals (ie, State Park GP, Park It!, etc.) and as I mentioned to Lee and Dan, we believe much of it can be achieved via CDP without the need for an LCP amendment. That said, we have suggested recommendations to said proposals where we believe it necessary to ensure project conformance with the LCP. I've attached copies of a couple letters for your convenience.
You inquired specifically about parking along N/b Highway 1 adjacent to Point Lobos Reserve. The above comment letters go into additional detail on this topic but in essence, while we are supportive of efforts to improve safety and to protect natural and cultural resources from overuse, we must also be cognizant of the high valued access that this parking provides, and thus note the need to mitigate for the loss of this resource. We have further provided some suggestions on how this can be achieved, but recognize that there may be different ways to arrive at the same goal. Either which way, as we have indicated in the past, any future request to extend the temporary prohibition on parking must be predicated on a CDP that includes or is conditioned to require a) a new similarly-sized parking area be developed at Marathon Flats (or similar/better location) for free and unrestricted public access parking, and b) the development of a plan for connecting the new parking area to the Point Lobos State Reserve and adjacent parklands. In the example of Marathon Flats, all the proposed development will occur within the County's permit jurisdiction and Commission's appeal jurisdiction; both State Parks and Caltrans are co-applicants. Our preference is that we work collaboratively on the terms and conditions in advance of bringing this to the PC or Board for approval so that we can avoid any hiccups in implementation. That's kinda it in a nutshell. I'm sure there will be lots of questions and am available to discuss this and other possible iterations further upon request. Let me know and we can set something up.
Mike Watson California Coastal Commission Central Coast District ATTACHMENT 4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA — NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, GOVERNOR CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION CENTRAL COAST DISTRICT 725 FRONT STREET, SUITE 300 SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060 PHONE: (831) 427-4863 FAX: (831) 427-4877 WEB: WWW.COASTAL.CA.GOV July 8, 2020
Kathleen Lee Executive Director Point Lobos Foundation 80 Garden Court, Suite 106 Monterey, CA 93940
Re: Park It! Initiative
Dear Ms. Lee,
Thank you for the opportunity to learn more about the current iteration of the Park It! initiative. It’s been quite a while since the last meeting. In preparation of our upcoming zoon meeting and to help you gain some understanding of the Commission’s perspective, I’d like to reiterate some general thoughts/observations that have been provided in the past including via comment letters on the Carmel Area General Plan and in in-person meetings with Park It!
Park It! In general, the Commission staff is supportive of planned parking and shuttle operations at popular visitor destinations especially when it can be implemented in a Coastal Act and Land Use Plan (LUP) consistent manner, that maximizes public access and enhances coastal recreation opportunities for a broad segment of the visiting public. Currently, there is available mostly free and unrestricted parking at Carmel area parks and access into said parklands. As a result, persons and families of all economic backgrounds, including lower-income backgrounds, are able to enjoy these resources at little to no cost.
Over the course of the past few years, we have seen several concepts for revising public parking on Highway 1 to address traffic, safety, and resource degradation issues that are occurring. While we are supportive of safety for pedestrians and protecting the natural and cultural resource values of these areas from overuse, we must also be cognizant of the highly valued access that these parking areas provide and we therefore recommend that any loss of public parking opportunities be fully mitigated. For example, the removal of 100 free and unrestricted public parking spaces in the highway right-of- way adjacent to Point Lobos Reserve (Reserve) could address traffic and safety issues at this location. However, the loss of free parking spaces at this popular visitor destination would result in a significant adverse public access impact. This impact could be offset by the creation of a similarly sized free public parking lot elsewhere in the greater Carmel parks planning area. Together with a network of trail and pathway improvements, the new parking area would provide pedestrian and bicycle access to all ATTACHMENT 4 Letter to Kathleen Lee (Park It! Initiative)
of the adjacent park units, including the Reserve. In this way, the public safety issues could be addressed while at the same time preserving and enhancing public access and recreational opportunities for area visitors consistent with the Monterey County Local Coastal Program and the public access policies of the Coastal Act.
Further, as it appears that the ultimate goal is to remove parking from the highway right- of-way and from the Reserve itself, the program should identify the ways in which each of these actions can and will be mitigated, whether it be by identifying suitable off- highway parking locations, instituting shuttle operations from remote parking areas, constructing pedestrian and bike trail connections between remote parking areas and park lands, or some combination of these. Obviously, there is a great opportunity here to link the various public parklands and developed urban areas with appropriate levels of planned parking and a trail network that ties these popular locations together and incentivizes and facilitates alternative modes of transportation (i.e., pedestrian, bike, shuttles, etc.). The Park It! plan should include a comprehensive mapping of the locations of future parking and the amount of parking available at each location and should include the location of the pathway connections between parking and area parklands. The plan should also include a list of all access amenities and their locations and shuttle service details to ensure that the impacts of any parking removal along the highway and from within the Reserve are appropriately mitigated.
Regarding parking, Commission staff has concerns with new parking fees as such fees can be an impediment to public access and tend to disproportionately affect lower- and moderate-income individuals and families. Ideally, parking would be sited in appropriate areas throughout the Carmel State Parks area, and there also would be incentives and alternatives for those who wish to access the parks without driving their personal vehicle to them. We suggest that the optimal physical parking layouts (both on and off-site of park lands) be determined first, along with alternative transportation options, and then evaluate whether it is necessary to charge parking fees.
Lastly, it should be noted that all future improvements constituting new development (e.g., parking, pathways, shuttle operations, reservation system, visitor interpretation centers, etc.) will need an approved coastal development permit (CDP). The standard of review for the CDP and permitting authority will vary depending on location but will typically fall to Monterey County (Carmel Area LUP) with the Commission having appeal authority over said development. In certain limited instances, the Commission may have retained permit jurisdiction and the Coastal Act would be the standard of review.
Reservation / Fee System at Point Lobos State Reserve Parks’ staff has indicated that a reservation system and fees for those walking into the Reserve are needed as a means to address unrestricted access and issues of natural resource degradation but to date has provided few details on how the system will work and/or how to address impacts associated with visitor use management. Depending on 2
ATTACHMENT 4 Letter to Kathleen Lee (Park It! Initiative)
how the reservation system is implemented, together with the proposed changes in parking, there could be significant costs to access the Reserve. Currently, there is no charge for walk-ins (or for parking along the highway) and thus persons and/or families with lower or moderate incomes can afford to visit the Reserve. However, under the Park It! proposal there would be a charge for parking and/or for use of a shuttle, an individual entrance fee to the Reserve, and a reservation surcharge. While perhaps not exorbitant, together these fees could be enough to dissuade lower-income individuals from visiting the Reserve. The same would apply to local residents and visitors from nearby areas who prefer to hike in the Reserve. Without a reservation they would also be precluded from entering the Reserve.
Additionally, and perhaps most importantly, is whether the reservation system will have the desired effect of reducing natural resource degradation within the Reserve. While implementation of a reservation system may be effective in reducing the overall peak number of visitors at any given time, there is no information to suggest that the proposed system will distribute visitor use throughout the Reserve and reduce resource degradation in overused areas of the Reserve. The handful of destinations within the Reserve with parking and facilities will continue to host the majority of visitors and thus continue to suffer from the same overuse issues that are occurring today. It is our opinion that improved visitor management and expanded facilities within the Reserve (e.g., restrooms, improved trails through underused areas, an internal shuttle, park brochures that show additional destination points, additional interpretation, etc.) can have the same or better effect on distributing use throughout the Reserve, thereby reducing the natural resource degradation that is occurring now at overused areas within the Reserve but without the unintended access impacts.
Lastly, you had indicated that State Parks was considering implementing measures at Point Lobos in response to the current public health crisis. While we are certainly supportive of short-term measures to protect public health, it is important to recognize that the long-term planning and management goals identified for the Reserve are distinct and separate from any immediate measures that are necessary to address COVID-19.
Thank you again and look forward to meeting with you shortly.
Regards,
Mike Watson California Coastal Commission Central Coast District
3
ATTACHMENT 4 ATTACHMENT 4 ATTACHMENT 4 ATTACHMENT 4 ATTACHMENT 4 ATTACHMENT 4 ATTACHMENT 4 ATTACHMENT 4 ATTACHMENT 4