CITY COUNCIL AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING, November 23, 2020

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wgq3fUIkOVN3MLfMIHbNaPXLv6FWhRau/view?usp=sharing

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA 

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA 

CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING 

Monday, November 23, 2020

CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION, APPEAL FROM COASTAL PERMIT DECISION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT, Decision Being Appealed: Consideration of a coastal development permit and ordinance modifying the Beach Fire Management Pilot Program to prohibit wood-fuled fires on Carmel Beach and authorize propane-fueled fires only for a period of one year.

ABSTRACT: On June 20, 2019, the CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION CENTRAL COAST AREA received an APPEAL FROM COASTAL PERMIT DECISION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT, involving Consideration of a coastal development permit and ordinance modifying the Beach Fire Management Pilot Program to prohibit wood-fuled fires on Carmel Beach and authorize propane-fueled fires only for a period of one year by appellants LaNette Zimmerman, Dr Roy Thomas, Judy Refuerzo and Jeanne McCulloch.  A SYNOPSIS of APPEAL FROM COASTAL PERMIT DECISION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT is featured and the APPEAL FROM COASTAL PERMIT DECISION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT document copy is embedded.

SYNOPSIS 

APPEAL FROM COASTAL PERMIT DECISION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Appellant(s) LaNette Zimmerman
Dr Roy Thomas
Judy Refuerzo
Jeanne McCulloch

Decision Being Appealed

1. Name of local/port government:

City of Carmel by the Sea

2. Brief description of development being appealed:

Consideration of a coastal development permit and ordinance modifying the Beach Fire Management Pilot Program to prohibit wood-fuled fires on Carmel Beach and authorize propane-fueled fires only for a period of one year.

3. Development's location (street address, assessor's parcel no., cross street, etc.):

Carmel by the Sea Beach between 10th Avenue and Martin Way, Monterey County

Reasons Supporting This Appeal

The City Council of Carmel-by-the-Sea voted on June 4, 2019 to change the Beach Fire Management Pilot Program, in effect, cancelling all wood fires and implementing a propane-only alternative. This action was taken without seeking approval of the Coastal Commission for this change to the existing LCP. Therefore, this appeal is presented to the Commission for consideration to revoke this change and continue the present Beach Fire Management Pilot program in its current form until the end of the Pilot, which is November 30, 2020.

In addition, some other items to consider:

The City of Carmel by the Sea didn't properly notice item 11(CDP 19-194) under Public Hearings for the June 4th City Council Meeting (see attachment 4). For example: item 10 #2 clearly states waive reading in full. However, item 11 does not mention waiving the reading- but inside the packet states "Waive the first reading and introduce an Ordinance. Also, immediately before the vote Councilwoman Reimers amended the Ordinance to change the hours from 4pm-10pm to10am-10pm and the Council did not open the floor to public discussion.

The City of Carmel did not do a CEQA analysis on the use of propane only.

A propane only Ordinance for one year will severely limit the use of the beach during the late afternoon and evening hours. Not everyone one can afford to purchase a propane tank in addition to the propane fueled fire device. These can be very expensive and as such limit people from enjoying the beach. If visitors have traveled from a distance to visit the beach only to find out that wood burning fires are not allowed and even though they have the means to purchase a tank and device, the stores may already be closed or they may not know where to go to purchase such a device. If they do know about the Ordinance, they may not feel comfortable traveling with a large propane tank in their car for a long distance drive.

The current CDP approved Beach Fire Management Pilot Program is consistent with the LCP and does not expire until Nov 30, 2020. The City should see the current Pilot Program through to completion before trying a new program. The entire Council agreed during the June 4th meeting that the current program is working: improving air quality and keeping the beach sand clean. In Mr. Stedman's letter dated May 7, 2019, which was attached to the Council Packet he says, "regardless of which option the City chooses, the need for particulate monitoring should not be necessary as long as there is not a significant expansion to the number of beach fires allowed in Carmel-by-the-Sea"- basically confirming that air quality is not an issue. The only reason for approving a "propane only" pilot the Council provided to the 26 people who spoke that night in favor of continuing the pilot in its current form, was that they simply wanted to try other options. In fact, Carmel already has a "propane only" program, during at least six-months of every year when the fire containers are not out on the beach. The result of that "propane only" program is substantially less use of the beach during the late afternoon and evening. The City has had plenty of time to see how propane only works. This year they did not put out the wood burning devices until the week of May 13th- after: St Patrick's Day, Spring Break, Easter, Cinco-de-Maya, Mother's Day, and the Big Sur International Marathon -limiting people from all over the world the opportunity of enjoying an evening on the beach. With the City's late installation of the wood burning devices on the beach this year, the pits won't be on the beach for the normal 6 month period.

The Mayor and City Council members admitted that beach attendance is down in the evenings, which supports our position that beach public access has been reduced with the current CDP. Since the propane portion of the current CDP has been an unpopular option and a failure relative to the wood fire pits, evening beach access will be further eroded by forcing an all-propane plan. Further, shared wood burning devices are collegial and invite community activity. Beachgoers have voted overwhelmingly for wood fires as evidenced by their actual usage of the wood burning devices and their general disregard for the unlimited use of the propane option

APPEAL FROM COASTAL PERMIT DECISION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT

STATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
CENTRAL COAST DISTRICT OFFICE
June 20, 2019

PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA, July 12 , 2017

ABSTRACT: The CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA and Planning Commission Reports documents copies for July 12, 2017 are embedded. PUBLIC HEARINGS including, Beach Fire Pilot Program City of Carmel-by-the-Sea (Carmel Beach, bet. 8th and Martin Way, Beach Fire Pilot Program update and recommendations to the City Council), Consideration of a Final Design Study (DS 17-129) and associated Coastal Development Permit for alterations to an existing two-story, single-family residence to include adding 1,069 square feet of combined floor area to the upper and lower levels; an attached single-car garage; new stone terrace and glass railing; stone entry porch/walkway and stone wall with wood gate (McMills, John Mandurrago, Designer, Lincoln, 3 NW of Santa Lucia), Consideration of a Concept and Final Design Study (DS 17-133) and associated Coastal Development Permit for the construction of a 425-square foot single-story addition at the rear of a historic residence located in the Single Family Residential (R-1) Zoning District (Kuchman, Paul Walchli, Project Designer/Builder, Carpenter Street, 3 SW of 2nd Avenue), Consideration of a Concept and Final Design Study (DS 17-181) and associated Coastal Development Permit for the construction of a 235-square foot second-story addition and a 66- square foot first-story addition on an existing residence located in the Single-Family Residential (R-1) Zoning District (Hartong, Brian Congleton, Architect, SW Corner of Lincoln Street & 8th Avenue), Consideration of a Use Permit (UP 17-80) application to convert an existing restaurant (Carmel Coffee and Cocoa Bar) located in the Central Commercial (CC) Zoning District from a specialty restaurant to a full-line restaurant (Cocoa Bar, Mira Porges, Business Owner, Carmel Plaza), Consideration of a Use Permit (UP 17-230) application for a specialty food and retail store specializing in the sale of honey-related products located in the Central Commercial (CC) District (Carmel Honey Company, Becky Reisdorf, Business Owner, Carmel Plaza) and Preliminary concept review (DR 16-477) of a proposal to construct a second-story addition above an existing one-story building currently occupied by Cantinetta Luca and review of an associated Encroachment Permit (EN 17-067) application proposing to construct access stairs on the south side of Picadilly Park (Fink/Goodhue, David Fink, Applicant, Dolores Street, 4 NW of 7th Avenue).

PC AGENDA 07-12-17 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
July 12, 2017

A. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL

Commissioners: Don Goodhue, Chair
Michael LePage, Vice Chair
Julie Wendt
Gail Lehman
Stephanie Locke

C. ROLL CALL

H. PUBLIC HEARINGS

If you challenge the nature of the proposed action in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing.

1. Beach Fire Pilot Program
City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
Carmel Beach, bet. 8th and Martin Way
Beach Fire Pilot Program update and recommendations to the City Council
Beach Fire Pilot Program 07-12-17 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

Beach Fire Pilot Program update and recommendations to the City Council

2. DS 17-129 (McMills)
John Mandurrago, Designer
Lincoln, 3 NW of Santa Lucia
Block: 145; Lots: 25 & N 1/2 of 23
APN: 010-173-007
Consideration of a Final Design Study (DS 17-129) and associated Coastal Development Permit for alterations to an existing two-story, single-family residence to include adding 1,069 square feet of combined floor area to the upper and lower levels; an attached single-car garage; new stone terrace and glass railing; stone entry porch/walkway and stone wall with wood gate. The project site is located in the Single-Family Residential (R-1) Zoning District.
Corey McMills 07-12-17 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

Consideration of a Final Design Study (DS 17-129) and associated Coastal Development Permit for alterations to an existing two-story, single-family residence to include adding 1,069 square feet of combined floor area to the upper and lower levels; an attached single-car garage; new stone terrace and glass railing; stone entry porch/walkway and stone wall with wood gate. The project site is located in the Single-Family Residential (R-1) Zoning District.

3. DS 17-133 (Kuchman)
Paul Walchli, Project Designer/Builder
Carpenter Street, 3 SW of 2nd Avenue
Block: 22; Lot: 9
APN: 010-022-022
Consideration of a Concept and Final Design Study (DS 17-133) and associated Coastal Development Permit for the construction of a 425-square foot single-story addition at the rear of a historic residence located in the Single Family Residential (R-1) Zoning District.
Ken Kuchman 07-12-17 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

Consideration of a Concept and Final Design Study (DS 17-133) and associated Coastal Development Permit for the construction of a 425-square foot single-story addition at the rear of a historic residence located in the Single Family Residential (R-1) Zoning District.

4. DS 17-181 (Hartong)
Brian Congleton, Architect
SW Corner of Lincoln Street & 8th Avenue
Block 94; Lot: E 1/2 of Lots 1 & 3
APN: 010-193-018
Consideration of a Concept and Final Design Study (DS 17-181) and associated Coastal Development Permit for the construction of a 235-square foot second-story addition and a 66- square foot first-story addition on an existing residence located in the Single-Family Residential (R-1) Zoning District.
William a. Hartong Trust 07-12-17 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

Consideration of a Concept and Final Design Study (DS 17-181) and associated Coastal Development Permit for the construction of a 235-square foot second-story addition and a 66- square foot first-story addition on an existing residence located in the Single-Family Residential (R-1) Zoning District.

5. UP 17-80 (Cocoa Bar)
Mira Porges, Business Owner
Carmel Plaza
Block: 78; Lot: All
APN: 010-086-006
Consideration of a Use Permit (UP 17-80) application to convert an existing restaurant (Carmel Coffee and Cocoa Bar) located in the Central Commercial (CC) Zoning District from a specialty restaurant to a full-line restaurant.
Mira and Mathew Porgess 07-12-17 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

Consideration of a Use Permit (UP 17-80) application to convert an existing restaurant (Carmel Coffee and Cocoa Bar) located in the Central Commercial (CC) Zoning District from a specialty restaurant to a full-line restaurant.

6. UP 17-230 (Carmel Honey Company)
Becky Reisdorf, Business Owner
Carmel Plaza
Block: 78; Lot: All
APN: 010-086-006
Consideration of a Use Permit (UP 17-230) application for a specialty food and retail store specializing in the sale of honey-related products located in the Central Commercial (CC) District.
Owrf Carmel, Llc 07-12-17 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

Consideration of a Use Permit (UP 17-230) application for a specialty food and retail store specializing in the sale of honey-related products located in the Central Commercial (CC) District.

7. DR 16-477 (Fink/Goodhue)
David Fink, Applicant
Dolores Street, 4 NW of 7th
Block: 75; Lot: 13
APN: 010-147-003
Preliminary concept review (DR 16-477) of a proposal to construct a second-story addition above an existing one-story building currently occupied by Cantinetta Luca and review of an associated Encroachment Permit (EN 17-067) application proposing to construct access stairs on the south side of Picadilly Park.
Neil Goodhue 07-12-17 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

Preliminary concept review (DR 16-477) of a proposal to construct a second-story addition above an existing one-story building currently occupied by Cantinetta Luca and review of an associated Encroachment Permit (EN 17-067) application proposing to construct access stairs on the south side of Picadilly Park.

I. DIRECTOR’S REPORT

1. Update on Planning Activities

J. BOARD MEMBER ANNOUNCEMENTS

Eleven Noteworthy 6 December 2016 Regular Meeting Agenda Items

ABSTRACT: Eleven Noteworthy 6 December 2016 Regular Meeting Agenda Items are featured, including CLOSED SESSION, PUBLIC APPEARANCES, ANNOUNCEMENTS, Monthly Reports for October 2016. Adoption of a Letter Agreement between the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and Carmel Fire Ambulance Association and authorization of the City Administrator to execute Letter Agreement on behalf of City, Review of revisions to an approved Design Study (DS 15-217) and adoption of findings and conditions of approval for the demolition of an existing residence and construction of a new residence located in the Single-Family Residential (R-1), Beach and Riparian (BR) and Archaeological Significance (AS) Overlay Zoning Districts, Update on the Implementation of the Beach Fires Management Pilot Program, Receive project update on the Rio Park/Larson Field pathway project and provide direction regarding access agreements, Acceptance of FY14-15 Independent financial statement audit, Consideration of an Ordinance (First Reading) amending Title 8 and Title 15 of the Carmel Municipal Code and adopting the 2016 California Building, Residential, Energy, Fire, Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical, and California Green Codes with Amendments and Adoption of an Ordinance Authorizing an Amendment to the contract between the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and the Board of Administration California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS). CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REGULAR MEETING and Staff Reports document copies are embedded.

Agenda 12-06-16 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA

REGULAR MEETING

Tuesday, December 06, 2016

CLOSED SESSION 3:30 p.m.

OPEN SESSION 4:30 p.m.

CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL

CLOSED SESSION

A. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE REVIEW

Government Code Section 54957

Title: City Administrator

Title: City Attorney

PUBLIC APPEARANCES Members of the public are entitled to speak on matters of municipal concern not on the agenda during Public Appearances. Each person’s comments shall be limited to 3 minutes, or as otherwise established by the City Council, Board or Commission. Matters not appearing on the City Council, Board or Commission’s agenda will not receive action at this meeting but may be referred to staff for a future meeting. Persons are not required to give their names, but it is helpful for speakers to state their names so that they may be identified in the minutes of the meeting.

ANNOUNCEMENTS
A. Announcements from Closed Session
B. Announcements from City Council Members
C. Announcements from City Administrator
D. Announcements from City Attorney

CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are routine in nature and do not require discussion or independent action. Members of the Council, Board or Commission or the public may ask that any items be considered individually for purposes of Council, Board or Commission discussion and/ or for public comment. Unless that is done, one motion may be used to adopt all recommended actions.
3. Monthly Reports for October 2016.
Monthly Reports 12-06-16 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

Monthly Reports for October 2016.
Contracts with the City Administrator, Community Planning and Building Department Reports, Police, Fire, Ambulance, Beach Reports, Public Records Act Requests, Forester Report, and City Treasurer’s Investment Report

7. SR 2016-1210 Adoption of a Letter Agreement between the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and Carmel Fire Ambulance Association and authorization of the City Administrator to execute Letter Agreement on behalf of City.
Letter Agreement 12-06-16 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

Adoption of a Letter Agreement between the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and Carmel Fire Ambulance Association and authorization of the City Administrator to execute Letter Agreement on behalf of City.

8. SR 2016-1211 Review of revisions to an approved Design Study (DS 15-217) and adoption of findings and conditions of approval for the demolition of an existing residence and construction of a new residence located in the Single-Family Residential (R-1), Beach and Riparian (BR) and Archaeological Significance (AS) Overlay Zoning Districts.
Review of Revisions to an Approved Design Study Chadwick 12-06-16 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

Review of revisions to an approved Design Study (DS 15-217) and adoption of findings and conditions of approval for the demolition of an existing residence and construction of a new residence located in the Single-Family Residential (R-1), Beach and Riparian (BR) and Archaeological Significance (AS) Overlay Zoning Districts

ORDERS OF BUSINESS Orders of Business are agenda items that require City Council, Board or Commission discussion, debate, direction to staff, and/or action.

11. SR 2016-1214 Update on the Implementation of the Beach Fires Management Pilot Program.
Update Beach Fires Management Pilot Program 12-06-16 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

Update on the Implementation of the Beach Fires Management Pilot Program.

12. SR 2016-1215 Receive project update on the Rio Park/Larson Field pathway project and provide direction regarding access agreements
Update Rio Park-Larson Field Pathway Project 12-06-16 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

Receive project update on the Rio Park/Larson Field pathway project and provide direction regarding access agreements

13. SR 2016-1216 Acceptance of FY 14-15 Independent financial statement audit
FY14-15 Independent Financial Statement Audit 12-06-16 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

Acceptance of FY14-15 Independent financial statement audit

PUBLIC HEARINGS

14. SR 2016-1217 Consideration of an Ordinance (First Reading) amending Title 8 and Title 15 of the Carmel Municipal Code and adopting the 2016 California Building, Residential, Energy, Fire, Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical, and California Green Codes with Amendments.
Ordinance Amending Title 8 and Title 15 12-06-16 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

Consideration of an Ordinance (First Reading) amending Title 8 and Title 15 of the Carmel Municipal Code and adopting the 2016 California Building, Residential, Energy, Fire, Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical, and California Green Codes with Amendments

15. SR 2016-1218 Adoption of an Ordinance Authorizing an Amendment to the contract between the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and the Board of Administration California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS).
CalPERS 12-06-16 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

Adoption of an Ordinance Authorizing an Amendment to the contract between the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea and the Board of Administration California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS).

CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION, Mike Watson, Coastal Planner, Central Coast District Office, Correspondence dated July 27, 2016, to Richard Flower Subject: Your Appeal of the City of Carmel's Action on the Beach Fire Management Program: ‘The purpose of this letter is to inform you that you do not have standing to appeal in this case, and thus we cannot file your appeal. As a result, the City's CDP action on this project is now final.’

ABSTRACT: In response to Richard M. Flower’s appeal of the City of Carmel's approval of a coastal development permit (CDP) for the Beach Fire Management Program (City CDP application MP 15-100 RV01), Mike Watson, Coastal Planner, Central Coast District Office, sent a letter, dated July 27, 2016, to Richard Flower, stating, in part, “The purpose of this letter is to inform you that you do not have standing to appeal in this case, and thus we cannot file your appeal. As a result, the City's CDP action on this project is now final.”
“In order to appeal the City's decision, you must qualify as an "aggrieved person" under the Coastal Act (see Coastal Act Section 30801, attached). To qualify as an aggrieved person, you must have participated or made your views known as an individual in some manner during the City's local process (e.g., testify at a public hearing, submit a letter or email to the local government staff detailing your comments and concerns, etc.). In this case, although you edited an informational news brief on Carmel beach fires for the Carmel Residence Association newsletter, you did not participate in the City's local process (i.e., you did not make your concerns regarding the Beach Fire Management Program known to the local government) and you did not participate as an individual (i.e., the newsletter was drafted under the signature of the Carmel Residence Association not your individual signature), and thus, as an individual you do not qualify as an aggrieved person with standing to submit an appeal.” The letter document copy is embedded.

CCC Letter to Flowers Re Appeal Standing 7-27-16

CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION

Mike Watson, Coastal Planner, Central Coast District Office

July 27, 2016

Richard Flower

Subject: Your Appeal of the City of Carmel's Action on the Beach Fire Management Program

Richard M. Flower’s APPEAL FROM COASTAL PERMIT DECISION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT, ‘Carmel’s BEACH FIRES MANAGEMENT PILOT PROGRAM

ABSTRACT: On July 20, 2016, Carmel-by-the-Sea resident Richard M. Flower filed an APPEAL FROM COASTAL PERMIT DECISION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT involving the City’s Carmel Beach Fire Management Pilot Program in the California Coastal Commission district office having jurisdiction over the affected local government, namely CENTRAL COAST DISTRICT OFFICE, SANTA CRUZ, CA.  Appellant Richard M. Flower’s APPEAL FROM COASTAL PERMIT DECISION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT, Carmel’s “BEACH FIRES MANAGEMENT PILOT PROGRAM,” document copy is embedded. Appeal Information, namely, Frequently Asked Questions: The Coastal Commission Permit Appeal Process and APPEAL INFORMATION SHEET LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT PERMITS document copies are embedded.

Flower’s Request: Deny City of Carmel's Beach Fire Management Pilot Program
Reasons for Applicant’s Appeal of the Beach Fire Management Pilot Program
Overview summary:
Carmel's proposed Beach Fire Management Pilot Program ignores Science, endangers Health, prevents Access, and degrades the Environment. The Program does not support in fact the City’s Local Coastal Plan or Land Use Policies. It also is counter to the recent position taken by the CCC Commissioners, as reflected in Commissioner Shallenberger’s comment that wood-burning is carcinogenic. She stated. "…we're moving away from wood-burning fires. that's what you're hearing from the dais (from us).
The Pilot Program Publication states: The City's Land Use Plan provides broad guidance regarding beach use, protection, and management."
Our response: Because of this broad guidance, the City of Carmel could easily go to a Propane-only program, based on reasons of Science, Access, Health, and Environment. It already has the support of the Chair of the Coastal Commission. Steve Kinsey, and the other 4 Commissioners who spoke for the propane-only program and against the proposal of 26 wood-burning fires with fire rings.
The "Beach Fire Management Pilot Program" wood-burning fires component is dangerous for people's health. Wood-burning releases carcinogenic, toxic and dangerous particulate matter into the air. The reality is that Carmel Beach is all of our MUTUAL air, not to be controlled by bad public policy, by ill-informed individuals who disregard science and health and access for all. The Council's blatant disregard for the community is shocking, since they know that they are preventing people from accessing the beach for health reason. City Council members have heard extensive public testimony about citizens being prevented access. This program is adverse to the Coastal Commissioners' recent evaluation that wood-burning fires are carcinogenic, and prevent access, as expressed at the Coastal Commission meeting in Monterey, Dec. 11, 2015.

Flower Appeal of Carmel Beach Fire Pilot Program 07-20-16 by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

APPEAL FROM COASTAL PERMIT DECISION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Appellant: Richard M. Flower
Appeal: Carmel’s “BEACH FIRES MANAGEMENT PILOT PROGRAM”

Ccc Appeals Faq by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

Frequently Asked Questions:
The Coastal Commission Permit Appeal Process

CCC Appeal Information Sheet by L. A. Paterson on Scribd

APPEAL INFORMATION SHEET
LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT PERMITS

Time Frame for Filing an Appeal. An appeal must be filed by 5:00 P.M. of the 10th working day after a sufficient local government notice of final action on the permit application was received by the Commission. ( 14 Cal. Code Regs § 13111(c).) The appeal must be filed in the Commission district office having jurisdiction over the affected local government. The final date for filing appeal is available from the local permit decision notices posted in the Commission’s offices and may also be obtained by calling the local Commission district office.

Persons Eligible to Appeal. The applicant, any aggrieved person or any two members of the Commission may appeal. (Public Resources Code § 30625.) An “aggrieved person,” is any person who, in person or through a representative, appeared at a public hearing of the local government in connection with the decision being appealed, or who, by other appropriate means prior to a hearing, informed the local government of the nature of his/her concerns or who for good cause was unable to do either. (Public Resources Code § 30801.)

REFERENCE:

Coastal Development
Permit Applications & Appeal Forms
File an Appeal

Carmel Beach Fire Management Pilot Program: Correspondence from Dan Carl, Central Coast District Director, California Coastal Commission, to Mayor and Council Members

ABSTRACT: RE: Carmel Beach Fire Management Pilot Program Correspondence from Dan Carl, Central Coast District Director, California Coastal Commission, to Mayor and Council Members, dated December 30, 2015, May 9, 2016, and June 6, 2016 and June 29, 2016 document copies are embedded. Importantly, “As you know, on December 11, 2015, the Coastal Commission denied, on a 4-5 vote, the City's proposed propane-only beach fire management program. In so doing, the Commission also did not approve the staff recommended wood-fueled beach fire management program (essentially the City's prior proposal from last spring/summer that was originally appealed to the Commission). As a consequence, there is currently no beach fire management program in the City of Carmel with valid approvals under the Coastal Act or the LCP. In particular, the City's current weekend and holiday beach fire moratorium remains unpermitted.” (December 30, 2015 Letter) And “We strongly recommend that the Program be modified as recommended in this letter. If it is, we believe that it can be found LCP and Coastal Act consistent and that, barring unforeseen changes or additional information/understanding, we would recommend that the Coastal Commission not take jurisdiction over such a Program should the City's approval be appealed to the Coastal Commission.” (June 29, 2016 letter) At the June 30, 2016 Special City Council meeting, Council Members Hardy, Reimers, Richards, Theis, and Mayor Dallas conducted a Public Hearing, Item 7: Beach Fires Revised Pilot Program Coastal Development Permit Approval. According to DRAFT City Council Meeting Minutes June 30, 2016, Action: Upon a motion made by Council Member Richards, seconded by Mayor Dallas, the City Council of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea moved to adopt the findings and conditions of approval for a Coastal Development Permit for the Beach Fires Pilot Program with revisions to the program as follows:

• The staff will return to Council with an update in 120 days.
• City supplied wood fueled devices and user supplied propane devices will be allowed South of 8th Avenue.
• City supplied wood-fueled devices must be a minimum of 75 feet from the beach bluff.
• User supplied Propane devices must be a minimum of 25 feet from the beach bluff.
• Up to 12 City supplied wood-fueled devices will be provided evenly spaced 200 feet apart between 8th Avenue and Martin Way.
• Fifty percent of the City supplied wood-fueled devices available for public use at any time will be for communal use.
• Implement an educational outreach program to inform the public about proper use of propane devices.

Adopted, 4:1 (Council Member Reimers opposed)

CCC Carl Letter Carmel Beach Fire Management Plan 12-30-15

CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION

CENTRAL COAST DISTRICT OFFICE
December 30, 2015
Subject: Carmel Beach Fire Management Program

CCC Carl Letter Carmel Beach Fire Management Program 05-09-16

CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
CENTRAL COAST DISTRICT OFFICE
May 9, 2016
Subject: Carmel Beach Fire Management Program

CCC Carl Letter to City Re Beach Fire Mngt Plan 6-6 16

CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
CENTRAL COAST DISTRICT OFFICE
June 6, 2016
Subject: Carmel Beach Fire Management Program

CCC Carl Letter to City Re Beach Fire Mngt Plan 6-29-2016

CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
CENTRAL COAST DISTRICT OFFICE
June 29, 2016
Subject: Carmel Beach Fire Management Program

Two Noteworthy 30 June 2016 City Council Special Meeting Agenda Items

ABSTRACT: Two Noteworthy 30 June 2016 City Council Special Meeting Agenda Items including Authorization of the City Administrator to Execute an Amendment to the Agreement dated July 2, 2013 between the City and Sunset Cultural Center Inc. for Managing and Operating the Sunset Center for the Term of July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017 and Beach Fires Revised Pilot Program Coastal Development Permit Approval are featured. Agenda Bills document copies are embedded.

Agenda Special Meeting 06-30-16

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
SPECIAL MEETING
THURSDAY, June 30, 2016

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL

CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are routine in nature and do not require discussion or independent action. Members of the Council or the public may ask that any items be considered individually for purposes of Council discussion and/ or for public comment. Unless that is done, one motion may be used to adopt all recommended actions.

6. Authorization of the City Administrator to Execute an Amendment to the Agreement dated July 2, 2013 between the City and Sunset Cultural Center Inc. for Managing and Operating the Sunset Center for the Term of July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017.

Agreement Between the City and SCC Inc.06!30!16

PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearings consist of Zoning amendments, General Plan amendments, appeals of Commission decisions and other State-mandated items. If the Public Hearing is an appeal, appellants are allowed a total of 10 minutes to speak on their own behalf after the staff report and at the close of public comment in order to have an opportunity to rebut public comments. Other speakers will be allowed 3 minutes, or as otherwise established by the City Council.

7. Beach Fires Revised Pilot Program Coastal Development Permit Approval.
Beach Fires Revised Pilot Program 06-30-16

Beach Fires Revised Pilot Program Coastal Development Permit Approval.

REVISED Beach Fires Pilot Program, City Council, April 5, 2016

ABSTRACT: At the SPECIAL MEETING of the City Council on April 5, 2016, Agenda Item 8. AB 1115 Consideration of the approval of a Beach Fires Pilot Program and direct staff to return to Council in May with a Coastal Development Permit was considered. After staff presentation, public input and city council deliberation, City Council Member Victoria Beach moved to provide direction to staff on a revised Beach Fires Pilot Program:
- Effective this summer and lasting 3 years
- Adaptive management evolving as program progresses
- Phase 1 is a restoration year of user supplied propane only devices limited to areas south of 10th
- No more unlimited wood fires
- No more wood fires on sand
- Add initial, thorough sand sifting & cleaning from north to south boundary
- During phase 1, workshop possible wood fire containment devices, expansion of area, other means of expanding access, or other modifications for phase 2
- Eliminate existing moratorium on weekends and holidays
- Eliminate city provision of individual devices & six public devices
- Encourage the private sector to offer rental devices
- Recommend use of devices with a UL rating
- Reduce reports from monthly to semi-annual
- Written legal, insurance, fire, and public safety opinions
- Confer with Cities in southern CA that have completed similar projects
- CEQA review
- Include enforcement plan
- Include communications plan
- Explore options for monitoring access
- Document process undertaken for the development of Carmel’s Pilot Program
The motion was approved unanimously.
The City’s PowerPoint Presentation and documents of interest are embedded, including Beach Fires Management Pilot Program, CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION, APRIL 5, 2016 and correspondence from Tricia Dally, including L. Koteen Memorandum to M. Watson regarding Cannel Beach Air Quality Issues, Dec. 9, 2015, and Petition for Wood burning fires in Portable Pits on Carmel Beach with 502 electronic signatures as of April 5, 2016

Beach Fires Management Pilot - CC 040516

Beach Fires Management Pilot Program
CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION
APRIL 5, 2016

Dally E Mail

Tricia Dally Carmel Valley, CA
Letter regarding Beach Fires for City Council Meeting on April 5, 2016 with attachments

SUMMARY EXCERPTS:
I would like to state that those of us who support wood beach fires have already expressed our strong desire to reach a compromise with the City by limiting the number of wood fires on Carmel Beach. We have been repeatedly ignored despite the fact that the Carmel Beach monitor data does not support a total ban on wood fires.

To date, almost 500 Carmel Beach stakeholders have signed the petition requesting a compromise from the City of Carmel to include a limited number of wood beach fires in portable pits in their next proposal to the California Coastal Commission. This is more than twice as many who signed the petition to oppose wood fires.

Reducing the number of wood fires on Carmel Beach to 26, for example, as was proposed in the trial previously approved by the City in 2015, would have been an 80% reduction in the number of fires that occurred on the July 4 peak that caused concern. If emissions from July 4 would have been reduced by 80% as well, air quality would have been in the "Good" air quality category.

We respectfully ask again that you include a limited number of wood-burning fires, in portable or temporary pits, in your next proposal to the California Coastal Commission.

Conclusions.

To conclude, and to answer the questions posed above, yes, one exceedance of the Clean Air Act 24-hour PM 2.5 standards did occur over the five-month time period examined.  However, that exceedance occurred on a Sunday when the beach fire moratorium was in place, and there were no beach fires.  Thus, this exceedance was due to PM 2.5 sources other than beach fires.   This exceedance instead appears to have been associated with the large fires that occurred inland of Carmel Beach along Highway 68 at that time, and was definitely not associated with fires on Carmel Beach. 

Based on this analysis, I conclude that limiting the number of beach fires, and better beach fire management within the allowed beach fire area at Carmel Beach would be a prudent and cautious approach to help avoid exceeding “Good” air quality guidelines inland of that area, but that a ban on all such fires is not supported by the data. 

Conclusions Source: L. Koteen Memorandum to M. Watson regarding Cannel Beach Air Quality Issues, Dec. 9, 2015

Petition Beach Fires

Petition for Wood burning fires in Portable Pits on Carmel Beach
502 electronic signatures as of April 5, 2016

REFERENCE:
Video, City Council Meeting, April 5, 2015 

Three Noteworthy 5 April 2016 City Council Regular Meeting Agenda Items

UPDATE:
Special Meeting 04-05-16

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA

SPECIAL MEETING

Tuesday, April 5, 2016

ABSTRACT: Three Noteworthy 5 April 2016 City Council Regular Meeting Agenda Items, namely ANNOUNCEMENTS, PUBLIC APPEARANCES and Beach Fires Pilot Program Discussion, are presented. The CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA and Beach Fires Pilot Program Discussion Agenda Bill document copies are embedded.

Regular Meeting Agenda 04-05-16

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA

REGULAR MEETING

Tuesday, April 5, 2016

Beach Fires Pilot Program Discussion 04-05-16

AGENDA BILL
Beach Fires Pilot Program Discussion

Charles Lester, Executive Director, California Coastal Commission: ‘If you have a real, legitimate threat and you need to take emergency action to safeguard the public, you can take steps to do that,’ ‘But you can’t pretend there’s a nuisance just to avoid your Coastal Act obligations.’

ABSTRACT: RE: California Coastal Commission and “public nuisance”
In September 2015, San Diego Superior Court Judge Randa Trapp ruled in favor of the California Coastal Commission stating that “the court found that the city’s emergency ordinance was based on “nothing more than speculation, conjecture and fear mongering.”" “The decision is a significant victory for public access and clarifies that municipalities can’t circumvent the Coastal Act under the guise of protecting the public.” Moreover, Charles Lester, Executive Director, California Coastal Commission stated “If you have a real, legitimate threat and you need to take emergency action to safeguard the public, you can take steps to do that,” “But you can’t pretend there’s a nuisance just to avoid your Coastal Act obligations.” The STATEMENT OF DECISION and CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION Press Release document copies are embedded.

Statement of Decision - Dana Pt v California Coastal Commission 09-17-15

STATEMENT OF DECISION [CCP §632, Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1590]

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF DANA POINT, a California Municipal Corporation Petitioner and Plaintiffs, vs. CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION, a California public agency, and DOES 1 through 5, inclusive.
CASENO: 37-2010-00099827-CU-WM-CIL

Coastal Commission Dana Point Press Release 2015

STATE OF CALIFORNIA—THE RESOURCES AGENCY
EDMUND G BROWN, GOVERNOR
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
Coastal Commission Prevails in Dana Point Beach Access Case
Date: Sept. 18, 2015

CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION DECEMBER 2015 AGENDA ITEM: Appeal No. A-3-CML-15-0033 (Carmel Fire Management Program, Carmel) Appeal by Alexis Delehanty of City of Carmel-by-the-Sea decision granting permit with conditions to Carmel authorizing implementation of Beach Fire Management Program including installation of 26 fire rings, signage, maintenance provisions, and monitoring on Carmel Beach seaward of Scenic Road from 10th Avenue south to Martin Way, Carmel, Monterey County. (MW-SC)

ABSTRACT: On Friday, December 11, 2015, the California Coastal Commission is scheduled to consider Appeal No. A-3-CML-15-0033 (Carmel Fire Management Program, Carmel) Appeal by Alexis Delehanty of City of Carmel-by-the-Sea decision granting permit with conditions to Carmel authorizing implementation of Beach Fire Management Program including installation of 26 fire rings, signage, maintenance provisions, and monitoring on Carmel Beach seaward of Scenic Road from 10th Avenue south to Martin Way, Carmel, Monterey County. (MW-SC) at Portola Plaza Hotel, 2 Portola Plaza, Monterey, CA 93940. The APPEAL STAFF REPORT: SUBSTANTIAL ISSUE DETERMINATION & DE NOVO HEARING   document copy is embedded; the SUMMARY OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION section is reproduced. Importantly, Staff recommends that the Commission find that the appeal raises a substantial issue and that the Commission take jurisdiction over the CDP application. Staff further recommends that the Commission approve a CDP for a modified pilot program at Carmel Beach.

I. MOTIONS AND RESOLUTIONS

A. Substantial Issue Determination

Staff recommends that the Commission determine that a substantial issue exists with respect to the grounds on which the appeal was filed. A finding of substantial issue would bring the CDP application for the proposed project under the jurisdiction of the Commission for de novo hearing and action. To implement this recommendation, staff recommends a NO vote on the following motion. Failure of this motion will result in a de novo hearing on the CDP application,

and adoption of the following resolution and findings. Passage of this motion will result in a finding of No Substantial Issue and the local action will become final and effective. The motion passes only by affirmative vote of a majority of the Commissioners present.

Motion: I move that the Commission determine that Appeal Number A-3-CML-15-0033 raises no substantial issue with respect to the grounds on which the appeal has been filed under Section 30603 of the Coastal Act, and I recommend a no vote.

Resolution to Find Substantial Issue: The Commission hereby finds that Appeal Number A-3-CML-15-0033 presents a substantial issue with respect to the grounds on which the appeal has been filed under Section 30603 of the Coastal Act regarding consistency with the certified Local Coastal Program and/or the public access and recreation policies of the Coastal Act.

B. CDP Determination

Staff recommends that the Commission, after public hearing, approve a coastal development permit for the proposed development. To implement this recommendation, staff recommends a YES vote on the following motion. Passage of this motion will result in approval of the CDP as conditioned and adoption of the following resolution and findings. The motion passes only by affirmative vote of a majority of the Commissioners present.

Motion: I move that the Commission approve Coastal Development Permit Number A-3-CML-15-0033 pursuant to the staff recommendation, and I recommend a yes vote.

Resolution to Approve CDP: The Commission hereby approves Coastal Development Permit Number A-3-CML-15-0033 and adopts the findings set forth below on grounds that the development as conditioned will be in conformity with the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea Local Coastal Program policies and Coastal Act access and recreation policies. Approval of the permit complies with the California Environmental Quality Act because either 1) feasible mitigation measures and/or alternatives have been incorporated to substantially lessen any significant adverse effects of the development on the environment, or 2) there are no further feasible mitigation measures or alternatives that would substantially lessen any significant adverse impacts of the development on the environment.

REFERENCE:

CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION

December 2015Agenda

Portola Plaza Hotel
2 Portola Plaza
Monterey, CA 93940

SUMMARY OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION

The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea approved a coastal development permit (CDP) to allow the City to install 26 fire rings on Carmel Beach and to implement a new Beach Fire Management Pilot Program (Program) along the south end of Carmel Beach, seaward of Scenic Road between Tenth Avenue and Martin Way. The City’s CDP decision was appealed to the Commission, with the Appellant alleging Local Coastal Program (LCP) conformance issues with respect to hazards, public safety, public access and recreation, air and water quality, public views, and community character. After reviewing the local record, Commission staff believes that the approved project raises a substantial issue with respect to the project’s conformance with the City’s certified LCP and the public access and recreation policies of the Coastal Act.

Carmel Beach is a significant local and regional beach access destination. Its wide expanse of white sand extends along a mile of the City’s shoreline, and attracts beach visitors from far and wide who come to walk, sit, and play on the beach and in the ocean waves offshore. Many beachgoers also come to sit around a beach fire in the early afternoon and evening. These beach fires have long been a part of both the cultural fabric and recreational utility associated with Carmel Beach, and are called out as an important part of the beach recreational experience here in the City’s LCP. Per the LCP, beach fires are only allowed on the beach south of Tenth Avenue.1

The City’s Program is in response to concerns raised by the City and its residents that these beach fires are leading to both health issues and beach degradation. The former is associated with the smoke from beach fires, and the latter associated with the debris left on the beach, including because the beach currently does not have any fire rings and fires are made directly on the sand. The Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD), in concert with the City, has been monitoring smoke levels (actually PM2.5 levels)2 inland of the beach since late May of this year, for a total of 140 days monitored.3 Data from the smoke monitor shows that there was one exceedance of the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 24-hour PM2.5 standard during this time, which occurred on a day when wood beach fires were not allowed. Otherwise, the data shows PM2.5 levels to be fairly constant during the week, and generally increase on weekends, with ‘spikes’ in smoke levels roughly corresponding to spikes in the numbers of beach fires.4 Based on EPA guidelines for the 1-hour PM2.5 concentrations,5 the monitored smoke levels have predominantly fallen into the “good” air quality category 98% of the total number of hours in the monitoring timeframe, but there are instances when the ‘spikes’ have fallen into the “moderate” air quality category (1.3%), and even times where the data indicates “unhealthy”6 air (0.7%) (see Exhibit 7).7 Thus, and although there is a need for more robust data collection and development,8 it is clear that the monitor has identified some PM2.5 levels that extend into unhealthy ranges, and it is clear that there is an air quality problem in the surrounding Carmel Beach area to which beach fires appear to contribute that needs to be understood and addressed.

Originally, the City’s approved Program was based on limiting and managing beach fires to address these concerns, including no longer allowing unlimited fires directly on the sand, and instead limiting such fires to 26 fire rings. However, in the time since the City’s approval (and subsequent appeal of that approval to the Commission), the City instituted an “emergency” prohibition on beach fires on weekends and holidays, issuing an emergency CDP (that has since expired) and an urgency ordinance (which cannot authorize development under the Coastal Act and the LCP).9 In addition, the City has taken steps towards declaring a public nuisance and banning beach fires altogether.10 Instead of managing beach fires as the City originally proposed, the City’s modified approach would be to prohibit wood beach fires, but to allow propane fires on Carmel Beach. The City’s new proposal would provide for six City-provided propane-fueled fire rings in the area between Tenth Avenue and Martin Way along the beach,11 and unlimited propane fires south of Tenth Avenue on the beach if provided privately by the user. Fires would only be allowed in the City-provided fire rings from one hour before sunset to 10 p.m., and the user provided fires from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. Staff does not support the City’s proposal.

Staff concurs with the City that there are numerous problems associated with the current beach fire situation at Carmel Beach, including on air quality, water quality, and scenic resources, and that management measures are necessary to address and abate those problems. However, staff does not believe that the City’s proposed course of action to abate those problems is LCP and Coastal Act compliant, and therefore raises a series of coastal resource protection issues. In other words, there appear to be many ways to address the identified problem, but to institute a complete ban on wood beach fires at this time is not an appropriate solution, particularly considering the fact that a complete ban is inconsistent with the City’s own LCP, which expressly allows for and encourages beach fires. Furthermore, the City’s proposed propane-only program cannot be approved because the LCP explicitly prohibits flammable liquids (like propane) on the beach. In addition, the City’s post-prohibition monitoring data does not even show that such a proposal would make a significant difference in PM2.5 levels and spikes, thus undermining the justification for imposing a complete ban.12 To staff, a more appropriate response at the current juncture would be something more in line with the fire management Program previously approved by the City (i.e., the approval that is the subject of this appeal). Although this Program as approved by the City lacks needed detail (including in terms of the type, size, and design of the fire rings; the timing on seasonal removal/restoration of the rings; maintenance provisions; public education; and monitoring requirements), it can form the basis for an approved program that can be used to address the identified problems while continuing to provide for the rich experience and recreational utility associated with fires as has historically been the case at Carmel Beach.

Thus, staff recommends approval of a CDP that provides for the 26 fire rings originally approved by the City, and that provides associated parameters for the placement, signage, use, monitoring, and maintenance associated with those rings, including in terms of monitoring air quality. Staff believes this to be an appropriately measured response, and one that can allow for monitoring and adaptation over time to adjust Program parameters as warranted.13 Such a Program would appropriately limit beach fires (i.e., 26 allowed as opposed to the unlimited number of fires that are currently allowed), and can strike an appropriate balance to the issues presented. It will also address all of the other issues associated with unlimited fires built directly on the beach sand by confining them to 26 fire rings that can be appropriately maintained to avoid beach degradation.

Staff recommends that the Commission find that the appeal raises a substantial issue and that the Commission take jurisdiction over the CDP application. Staff further recommends that the Commission approve a CDP for a modified pilot program at Carmel Beach. The motion is found on page 6 below.

1 Fires are not allowed on the rest of the beach, meaning beach fires are already currently limited under the LCP to roughly 35% of the beach frontage.

2 The City and MBUAPCD are monitoring PM2.5, which is a type of particulate matter. Particulate matter is a generic term for particles suspended in the air, typically as a mixture of both solid particles and liquid droplets. PM2.5 is particulate matter with a diameter that is 2.5 micrometers and smaller. For purposes of comparison, a human hair is about 60 micrometers in diameter.

3 The monitor is located in the backyard of the house located at the corner of Scenic Drive and 13th Avenue, inland of the beach area where beach fires are allowed.

4 The City documented the number of beach fires occurring on weekends over a roughly 5-week period in late June 2015 through July 2015.

5 Based on the Revised Air Quality Standards for Particle Pollution and Updates to the Air Quality Index (US EPA December 14, 2012). There are no State or Federal standards for 1-hour PM2.5 concentrations, only these guidelines.

6 In terms of the 1-hour average, the monitor found PM2.5 concentrations to be at 153 one time, and thus in the EPA’s “Unhealthy” category, and the monitor also found 5 instances where the PM2.5 concentrations fell into the “Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups” category.

7 Standards for 24-hour PM 2.5 are not explicitly set by the California Air Resources Board. Instead, the California Air Resources Board references the National Air Quality Standards.

8 As indicated above, the single monitor is located in a residential backyard inland of Scenic Drive, and it does not collect the type of meteorological data to be able to conclusively demonstrate where the smoke is coming from (e.g., in relation to wind etc.). In addition, the City lacks baseline data against which to compare the current data.

9 The City’s action is being tracked by the Commission as a violation inasmuch as it is not authorized by a CDP.

10 The City Council adopted a first reading of a public nuisance declaration on November 3, 2015, but has not yet scheduled a time to finalize their public nuisance declaration.

11 Although the City’s new program is not completely fleshed out, as staff understands it currently, the City proposes to install six propane fire rings, as well as propane lines and propane tanks in or under the sand. It is not clear whether the City would provide propane for which users would pay a fee, or would provide propane for free, or some other mechanism.

12 Importantly, the monitoring data does not show much of a difference for the time period from before the City started prohibiting beach fires to after. Indeed, there continue to be roughly the same background values and the same types of ‘spikes’ even after beach fires were prohibited. And the one time that federal Clean Air Act standards were exceeded occurred on a Sunday after the prohibition was put in effect. This exceedance may instead be correlated with the Tassajara Wildfire in Carmel Valley that occurred around that time. See Exhibit 7.

13 Including allowing for propane options to be considered should the LCP be modified to allow for same.

CCC f12b-12-2015 City of Carmel Beach Fire Management Pilot Program

CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION

Appeal Filed: 5/27/2015

49th Day: Waived

Staff: Mike Watson - SC

Staff Report: 11/25/2015

Hearing Date: 12/11/2015

APPEAL STAFF REPORT: SUBSTANTIAL ISSUE

DETERMINATION & DE NOVO HEARING

Appeal Number: A-3-CML-15-0033

Applicant: City of Carmel-by-the-Sea

Appellant: Alexis Delehanty

Local Decision: Approved by the Carmel-by-the-Sea City Council on May 5, 2015

(City CDP application number MP 15-100).

Project Location: The portion of Carmel Beach between Tenth Avenue and Martin Way in the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, Monterey County.

Project Description: Implement the City’s Beach Fire Management Pilot Program, including installing 26 fire rings and Program signage, implementing new fire management and beach maintenance

provisions, and monitoring Program effectiveness.

Staff Recommendation: Substantial Issue Exists; Approval with Conditions