ABSTRACT: At a Special City Council Meeting today, Tuesday, June 16, 2009 at 4:30 P.M., the City Council will conduct a Protest Hearing regarding the discontinuance and abandonment of the Flanders Mansion Property as Public Park Land and may consider a Resolution Overriding All Protests Against Discontinuance and Abandonment of Use of the Flanders Mansion Property as Public Park Land and an Ordinance Calling and Fixing the Date of a Special Election to Submit to the City Electors the Question of Discontinuance and Abandonment of the Use of Public Park Land on Which Protests Were Overruled. The Flanders Mansion Property is an approximately 1.252 acre parcel located at 25800 Hatton Road in Carmel, Monterey County, California and situated within the Mission Trail Nature Preserve (APN 010-061-005). The Flanders Mansion is listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Selected excerpts from the Staff Report and Agenda Item Summaries are presented under each agenda item. If a 2/3 vote of the City Council overruling protests is realized, then a Resolution Overriding All Protests Against Discontinuance and Abandonment of Use of the Flanders Mansion Property as Public Park Land and an Ordinance Calling and Fixing the Date of a Special Election on November 3, 2009, to coincide with the General Election, can be adopted.
NOTICE OF SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Special Meeting
Tuesday, June 16, 2009 -- 4:30 p.m.
Council Chambers
East side of Monte Verde Street between Ocean and Seventh Avenues
Live and archived video streaming available
V. Protest Hearing
A. Receive protests regarding the discontinuance and abandonment of the Flanders Mansion Property as Public Park Land.
PROTEST HEARING
California statutes provide safeguards against the loss of public parkland. The public must first have an opportunity to protest, both orally and in writing. After hearing all protests, the City Council may decide whether or not to proceed with the sale. The Statute requires a two-thirds vote of the Council. A proposed Resolution for this decision is attached.
VI. Resolutions
A. Consideration of a Resolution of the City Council Overriding All Protests Against Discontinuance and Abandonment of Use of the Flanders Mansion Property as Public Park Land.
Description: The proposed resolution will override all protests received during the protest hearing and allow for the discontinuance and abandonment of the Flanders Mansion Property as Public Parkland.
Staff Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.
Important Considerations: California Statutes provide safeguards against the loss of public parkland. The public must first be given an opportunity to protest, both orally and in writing. After hearing all protests, the City Council can decide if it still wants to proceed with the sale. The Statute requires a two-thirds vote of the Council.
VII. Ordinances
A. Consideration of an Ordinance (1st Reading) of the City Council Calling and Fixing the Date of a Special Election to Submit to the City Electors the Question of Discontinuance and Abandonment of the Use of Public Park Land on Which Protests Were Overruled.
Description: The proposed Ordinance will allow for a special election to be set to allow the City Electors to vote on the discontinuance and abandonment of the Flanders Mansion Property as Public Park Land.
Staff Recommendation: Adopt the Ordinance.
Important Considerations: If the protests are overridden, the Council may then adopt an Ordinance calling for a special election.
(Note: “A proposed Ordinance would call the special election for November 3, 2009, to coincide with the General Election set for that date.”)
(Source: Special City Council Flanders Meeting Agenda Packet)
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Friday, June 12, 2009
City’s Villas de Carmelo Draft EIR Comment Letter to County
ABSTRACT: On behalf of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea, Planning & Building Services Manager Sean Conroy submitted a comment letter to the County of Monterey Planning Department on the Villas de Carmelo Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). The letter contains comments regarding Aesthetics, Cultural Resources, Hydrology & Water Quality, Land Use & Planning, Public Services & Recreation, Traffic & Circulation and Alternatives. Interestingly, with regard to Alternatives, Sean Conroy wrote of one alternative which should be evaluated, namely the rezoning of a small parcel containing the historic resource to High Density Residential and leaving the remainder of the site Medium Density Residential as currently zoned. The Villas de Carmelo Draft EIR Comments letter is reproduced in its entirety.
City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
COMMUNITY PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
POST OFFICE DRAWER G
CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, Ca. 93921
(831) 620-2910 OFFICE
(831) 620-2014 FAX
3 June 2009
County of Monterey Planning Department
C/O Elizabeth Gonzales
168 W. Alisal Street, 2nd Floor
Salinas, CA. 93901
Subject: Villas de Carmelo Draft EIR Comments
Dear Ms. Gonzales:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the Draft EIR for the Villas de Carmelo project. The City supports the rehabilitation of the existing historic buildings on the site, however, there are significant concerns about the impacts of the project on the residents of the City, particularly in the adjacent neighborhoods. I am submitting the attached comments for your review and consideration.
Section 4.1 – Aesthetics
The City concurs with the findings of the EIR that the removal of existing mature vegetation adjacent to Highway 1, and the buildout of the proposed project, is inconsistent with the site’s surroundings bordering a Scenic Highway.
The removal of 213 existing trees, many of which are significant Monterey Pines and Coast Live Oaks is also a significant impact. The Carmel-by-the-Sea City Forester identified at least 156 significant trees on the site in 2007. Mitigation 4.1-1 attempts to address this by requiring a Replanting and Landscaping plan be prepared and approved by the County. This does not adequately address the loss of significant trees, particularly as new landscaping cannot be guaranteed and can take many years to create the canopy that exists currently. A more appropriate mitigation measure would be to require modifications to significantly reduce the number of trees proposed for removal.
The Visual Assessments included in the EIR also seem to overstate the effect that the landscaping will have on the appearance of the proposed project from Highway 1. A more appropriate mitigation would be to require a greater setback along the Highway.
Section 4.5 Cultural Resources
The City concurs with the findings of the EIR that development of the project and the resulting rehabilitation and renovation of the existing structures would cause a substantial, adverse change to a historic structure.
The Draft EIR recommends several mitigation measures that reference the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Structures but defers determination of consistency with these standards to a future time. The EIR should include an evaluation of the project, as proposed, with the Secretary’s Standards. It is impossible to determine that all impacts can be mitigated without an analysis of the project using these standards. Below is a list of some of the Secretary’s Standards and potential conflicts with these standards.
2. “The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alternation of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided.”
The character of the property is being drastically altered. The sense of openness, the historic resource’s relationship with its surroundings, and the introduction of several buildings of similar architecture style conflicts with this standard.
3. “Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken.”
While additions and alternations to the historic structure are encouraged to be of similar, yet differentiated in design and materials, proposing several new buildings of similar architectural style creates a false sense of historical development.
6. “Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, and pictorial evidence.”
The project plans propose the removal, relocation and alternation of the fountain, stonewalls, stairways, terracing and stairwells, all of which can be considered character-defining. Page 4.5-26 states that existing safety hazards that are associated with some of these elements would be improved or eliminated. While the City does not disagree, features that require repair and or replacement should be done so in-kind in the same location as currently exist. The project conflicts with this standard.
9. “New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment.”
As previously stated, additions to the building should be similar in design. However, the new construction proposed should be differentiated to a greater degree from the existing building. The existing historic structure is attributed to two master architects and is an excellent example of the Spanish Eclectic style. To propose several buildings with some similar architectural design features seems to demean the historic resource and the character of the property and conflict with this standard.
Section 4.8 – Hydrology & Water Quality
It would be appropriate to include some discussion of Carmel Bay as an Area of Special Biological Significance (ASBS) in the setting information.
Section 4.9 – Land Use & Planning
The discussion on the regulatory environment should include an indication that the project site is located in the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea’s Sphere of Influence. While the City recently rejected a proposal for annexation, this does not preclude the City from annexing the property in the future. The City’s General Plan polices related to its Sphere of Influence encourage the continuation of existing low intensity development. The proposed project is inconsistent with this policy.
Section 4.12 – Public Services & Recreation
It should be noted that the project site is located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone as identified by CalFire. A mitigation measure should be included requiring new construction to be consistent with Chapter 7A of the State Building Code.
Section 4.13 – Traffic & Circulation
The City concurs that the project will degrade the Level of Service to an unacceptable level at several locations. The City is particularly concerned with the impacts on Carpenter Street and Valley Way. Does the payment of development fees to TAMC guarantee road improvements in the area of the project? If not, then the payment of fees does not mitigate the actual impacts in the area and additional mitigation measures must be identified.
There is no discussion in the EIR regarding the conditions of the roads themselves. The City is particularly concerned about the impacts the development will have on Valley Way. According to the Carmel City Engineer, Valley Way has no existing base rock, a minimal asphalt surface and shows current signs of numerous potholes in various states of repair. The roadway will likely require patching and about a 2 ½” asphalt concrete overlay due to aging alone. The proposed project will only increase the road deterioration. This should be addressed in the EIR and mitigations identified.
Section 6.0 – alternatives
One alternative that should be evaluated is to rezone a small parcel containing the historic resource to High Density Residential and leaving the remained of the site as currently zoned (Medium Density Residential). This would allow for the adaptive re-use of the historic resource, significantly reduce the number of required tree removals, minimize traffic and other development related impacts, and be more compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft EIR and we look forward to your response to the issues raised. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Sean Conroy
Planning & Building Services Manager
City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
COMMUNITY PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
POST OFFICE DRAWER G
CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, Ca. 93921
(831) 620-2910 OFFICE
(831) 620-2014 FAX
3 June 2009
County of Monterey Planning Department
C/O Elizabeth Gonzales
168 W. Alisal Street, 2nd Floor
Salinas, CA. 93901
Subject: Villas de Carmelo Draft EIR Comments
Dear Ms. Gonzales:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the Draft EIR for the Villas de Carmelo project. The City supports the rehabilitation of the existing historic buildings on the site, however, there are significant concerns about the impacts of the project on the residents of the City, particularly in the adjacent neighborhoods. I am submitting the attached comments for your review and consideration.
Section 4.1 – Aesthetics
The City concurs with the findings of the EIR that the removal of existing mature vegetation adjacent to Highway 1, and the buildout of the proposed project, is inconsistent with the site’s surroundings bordering a Scenic Highway.
The removal of 213 existing trees, many of which are significant Monterey Pines and Coast Live Oaks is also a significant impact. The Carmel-by-the-Sea City Forester identified at least 156 significant trees on the site in 2007. Mitigation 4.1-1 attempts to address this by requiring a Replanting and Landscaping plan be prepared and approved by the County. This does not adequately address the loss of significant trees, particularly as new landscaping cannot be guaranteed and can take many years to create the canopy that exists currently. A more appropriate mitigation measure would be to require modifications to significantly reduce the number of trees proposed for removal.
The Visual Assessments included in the EIR also seem to overstate the effect that the landscaping will have on the appearance of the proposed project from Highway 1. A more appropriate mitigation would be to require a greater setback along the Highway.
Section 4.5 Cultural Resources
The City concurs with the findings of the EIR that development of the project and the resulting rehabilitation and renovation of the existing structures would cause a substantial, adverse change to a historic structure.
The Draft EIR recommends several mitigation measures that reference the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Structures but defers determination of consistency with these standards to a future time. The EIR should include an evaluation of the project, as proposed, with the Secretary’s Standards. It is impossible to determine that all impacts can be mitigated without an analysis of the project using these standards. Below is a list of some of the Secretary’s Standards and potential conflicts with these standards.
2. “The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alternation of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided.”
The character of the property is being drastically altered. The sense of openness, the historic resource’s relationship with its surroundings, and the introduction of several buildings of similar architecture style conflicts with this standard.
3. “Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken.”
While additions and alternations to the historic structure are encouraged to be of similar, yet differentiated in design and materials, proposing several new buildings of similar architectural style creates a false sense of historical development.
6. “Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, and pictorial evidence.”
The project plans propose the removal, relocation and alternation of the fountain, stonewalls, stairways, terracing and stairwells, all of which can be considered character-defining. Page 4.5-26 states that existing safety hazards that are associated with some of these elements would be improved or eliminated. While the City does not disagree, features that require repair and or replacement should be done so in-kind in the same location as currently exist. The project conflicts with this standard.
9. “New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment.”
As previously stated, additions to the building should be similar in design. However, the new construction proposed should be differentiated to a greater degree from the existing building. The existing historic structure is attributed to two master architects and is an excellent example of the Spanish Eclectic style. To propose several buildings with some similar architectural design features seems to demean the historic resource and the character of the property and conflict with this standard.
Section 4.8 – Hydrology & Water Quality
It would be appropriate to include some discussion of Carmel Bay as an Area of Special Biological Significance (ASBS) in the setting information.
Section 4.9 – Land Use & Planning
The discussion on the regulatory environment should include an indication that the project site is located in the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea’s Sphere of Influence. While the City recently rejected a proposal for annexation, this does not preclude the City from annexing the property in the future. The City’s General Plan polices related to its Sphere of Influence encourage the continuation of existing low intensity development. The proposed project is inconsistent with this policy.
Section 4.12 – Public Services & Recreation
It should be noted that the project site is located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone as identified by CalFire. A mitigation measure should be included requiring new construction to be consistent with Chapter 7A of the State Building Code.
Section 4.13 – Traffic & Circulation
The City concurs that the project will degrade the Level of Service to an unacceptable level at several locations. The City is particularly concerned with the impacts on Carpenter Street and Valley Way. Does the payment of development fees to TAMC guarantee road improvements in the area of the project? If not, then the payment of fees does not mitigate the actual impacts in the area and additional mitigation measures must be identified.
There is no discussion in the EIR regarding the conditions of the roads themselves. The City is particularly concerned about the impacts the development will have on Valley Way. According to the Carmel City Engineer, Valley Way has no existing base rock, a minimal asphalt surface and shows current signs of numerous potholes in various states of repair. The roadway will likely require patching and about a 2 ½” asphalt concrete overlay due to aging alone. The proposed project will only increase the road deterioration. This should be addressed in the EIR and mitigations identified.
Section 6.0 – alternatives
One alternative that should be evaluated is to rezone a small parcel containing the historic resource to High Density Residential and leaving the remained of the site as currently zoned (Medium Density Residential). This would allow for the adaptive re-use of the historic resource, significantly reduce the number of required tree removals, minimize traffic and other development related impacts, and be more compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft EIR and we look forward to your response to the issues raised. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Sean Conroy
Planning & Building Services Manager
Thursday, June 11, 2009
‘MINUTES’ for Two Noteworthy 9 June 2009 Special City Council Agenda Items
“MINUTES”
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
June 9, 2009
IV. Orders of Council
A. Consideration of a Resolution approving the Memorandum of Understanding regarding the Maintenance of Effort requirements related to Proposition 172 funding
Council Member ROSE moved approval of the Resolution approving the Memorandum of Understanding regarding the Maintenance of Effort requirements related to Proposition 172 funding, seconded by Council Member TALMAGE, and carried by the following roll call:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: HAZDOVAC; ROSE; SHARP; TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
B. Consideration of a Resolution adopting the Fiscal Years 2009/10 - 2011/12 Triennial Budget.
City Administrator Rich Guillen presented a PowerPoint Presentation, including, as follows:
Proposed Changes – Revenues FY 2009/10:
Parking Citation Increases: $30,000
Library Funding: $54,000
Transfer Capital Project Reserve: $104,200
TOTAL CHANGES: $188,200
Proposed Changes – Expenditures FY 2009/10:
Library Costs: $80,000
SCC Subsidy Increase: $38,300
Marketing Exp. Increase: $16,250
Trolley Service (4th of July through Labor Day, Operation Holidays & Weekends, 8 hrs./day)
Capital Budget: $104,200
Department Adjustments ($63,150)
TOTAL CHANGES; $188,200
Capital Budget Additions (Projects not completed in FY 2008/09):
1, Forest Theatre Schematic Design: $38,300
(Note: Schematic Design not to be completed by June 30, 2009)
2. Parking Machines (3 Total, Sunset Center (2) and Junipero Av. (1)): $31,000
3. Library Mist Fire Protection System: $21,980
4. Scenic Rd. Restroom Design: $6,920
5. Mission Trail Nature Preserve Pedestrian Footbridge: $6,000
TOTAL: $104,200
Draft FY 2009/10 Budget: $13,552,850
Proposed Increases: $188,200
REVISED TOTAL: $13,741,050
City Council Adjustments:
Regional Destination Marketing: $128,750
MCCVB Contract: $113,652
Economic Revitalization Programs: $ 0
Council Member ROSE moved approval of the Resolution, as modified, to adopt the Fiscal Years 2009/10 – 2011/12 Triennial Budget, seconded by Council Member HAZDOVAC, and carried by the following roll call:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: HAZDOVAC; ROSE; SHARP; TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
(Source: Archived Videos, Special City Council Meeting, June 09, 2009)
NOTE: City received $291,000 from the State for the Fourth Avenue Riparian Habital and Pathway Project; approximately $70,000 remains “frozen.”
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
June 9, 2009
IV. Orders of Council
A. Consideration of a Resolution approving the Memorandum of Understanding regarding the Maintenance of Effort requirements related to Proposition 172 funding
Council Member ROSE moved approval of the Resolution approving the Memorandum of Understanding regarding the Maintenance of Effort requirements related to Proposition 172 funding, seconded by Council Member TALMAGE, and carried by the following roll call:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: HAZDOVAC; ROSE; SHARP; TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
B. Consideration of a Resolution adopting the Fiscal Years 2009/10 - 2011/12 Triennial Budget.
City Administrator Rich Guillen presented a PowerPoint Presentation, including, as follows:
Proposed Changes – Revenues FY 2009/10:
Parking Citation Increases: $30,000
Library Funding: $54,000
Transfer Capital Project Reserve: $104,200
TOTAL CHANGES: $188,200
Proposed Changes – Expenditures FY 2009/10:
Library Costs: $80,000
SCC Subsidy Increase: $38,300
Marketing Exp. Increase: $16,250
Trolley Service (4th of July through Labor Day, Operation Holidays & Weekends, 8 hrs./day)
Capital Budget: $104,200
Department Adjustments ($63,150)
TOTAL CHANGES; $188,200
Capital Budget Additions (Projects not completed in FY 2008/09):
1, Forest Theatre Schematic Design: $38,300
(Note: Schematic Design not to be completed by June 30, 2009)
2. Parking Machines (3 Total, Sunset Center (2) and Junipero Av. (1)): $31,000
3. Library Mist Fire Protection System: $21,980
4. Scenic Rd. Restroom Design: $6,920
5. Mission Trail Nature Preserve Pedestrian Footbridge: $6,000
TOTAL: $104,200
Draft FY 2009/10 Budget: $13,552,850
Proposed Increases: $188,200
REVISED TOTAL: $13,741,050
City Council Adjustments:
Regional Destination Marketing: $128,750
MCCVB Contract: $113,652
Economic Revitalization Programs: $ 0
Council Member ROSE moved approval of the Resolution, as modified, to adopt the Fiscal Years 2009/10 – 2011/12 Triennial Budget, seconded by Council Member HAZDOVAC, and carried by the following roll call:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: HAZDOVAC; ROSE; SHARP; TALMAGE & McCLOUD
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
(Source: Archived Videos, Special City Council Meeting, June 09, 2009)
NOTE: City received $291,000 from the State for the Fourth Avenue Riparian Habital and Pathway Project; approximately $70,000 remains “frozen.”
Monday, June 08, 2009
Two Noteworthy 9 June 2009 Special City Council Agenda Items
ABSTRACT: Two noteworthy 9 June 2009 Special City Council Agenda Items, namely a Resolution approving the Memorandum of Understanding regarding the Maintenance of Effort requirements related to Proposition 172 funding and a Resolution adopting the Fiscal Years 2009/10 – 2011/12 Triennial Budget, are presented. An ADDENDUM of links to articles related to Proposition 172
from the California Local Government Finance Almanac are provided.
Special City Council Meeting
Tuesday, June 9, 2009 @ 4:30 p.m.
Council Chambers
East side of Monte Verde Street between Ocean and Seventh Avenues
Live and archived video streaming available
IV. Orders of Council
A. Consideration of a Resolution approving the Memorandum of Understanding regarding the Maintenance of Effort requirements related to Proposition 172 funding.
B. Consideration of a Resolution adopting the Fiscal Years 2009/10 - 2011/12 Triennial Budget.
ADDENDUM:
Cal Facts: California's Economy and Budget in Perspective - State and Local Finances. Legislative Analyst's Office, December 2006 (PDF)
Proposition 172 Facts. A concise explanation of Proposition 172, the half-cent sales tax for Public Safety adopted by voters as a partial mitigation for ERAF. (PDF)
Net Impact of ERAF, Prop 172 and COPs (73k) ERAF, Proposition 172 and COPs apportionments for all cities, counties and special districts.
CARMEL
ERAF I&II FY 2007-08 - 430,085
Proposition 172 Funds FY 2007-08 + 10,199
COPS(SLESF) FY 2007-08 + 100,000
Net $ ERAF Loss FY 2007-08 - 319,886
Cumulative ERAF Loss - 4,065,222
CumulativeERAF/Pr172/ COPS Loss (+ = gain) - 3,081,135
from the California Local Government Finance Almanac are provided.
Special City Council Meeting
Tuesday, June 9, 2009 @ 4:30 p.m.
Council Chambers
East side of Monte Verde Street between Ocean and Seventh Avenues
Live and archived video streaming available
IV. Orders of Council
A. Consideration of a Resolution approving the Memorandum of Understanding regarding the Maintenance of Effort requirements related to Proposition 172 funding.
B. Consideration of a Resolution adopting the Fiscal Years 2009/10 - 2011/12 Triennial Budget.
ADDENDUM:
Cal Facts: California's Economy and Budget in Perspective - State and Local Finances. Legislative Analyst's Office, December 2006 (PDF)
Proposition 172 Facts. A concise explanation of Proposition 172, the half-cent sales tax for Public Safety adopted by voters as a partial mitigation for ERAF. (PDF)
Net Impact of ERAF, Prop 172 and COPs (73k) ERAF, Proposition 172 and COPs apportionments for all cities, counties and special districts.
CARMEL
ERAF I&II FY 2007-08 - 430,085
Proposition 172 Funds FY 2007-08 + 10,199
COPS(SLESF) FY 2007-08 + 100,000
Net $ ERAF Loss FY 2007-08 - 319,886
Cumulative ERAF Loss - 4,065,222
CumulativeERAF/Pr172/ COPS Loss (+ = gain) - 3,081,135
Sunday, June 07, 2009
Sunset Center 2009/1010 Season Launch Party
WHO: Sunset Cultural Center, Inc. (SCC)
WHAT: 2009-2010 Season Launch Party & Celebrate 25th Anniversary of Friends of Sunset Foundation
Refreshments and food provided by Il Fornaio and live music in the “festive” Sunset lobby, followed by audience questions and answers by Executive Director Peter Lesnik. The 2009/2010 brochure will be given to all attendees.
WHEN: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 @ 5:30 P.M.
WHERE: Sunset Center
E/s San Carlos St. @ 9th Av.
Carmel-by-the-Sea, CA.
WHY: Entice audiences with the “array of world-renowned performing artists, dancers and musicians,” including nineteen acts in six genres: Broadway, Global Sounds, Music Legends, Variety, Wit and Wisdom and Cabaret.
FOR RESERVATIONS & MORE INFORMATION:
Call (831) 620-2148 or email info@sunsetcenter.org
WHAT: 2009-2010 Season Launch Party & Celebrate 25th Anniversary of Friends of Sunset Foundation
Refreshments and food provided by Il Fornaio and live music in the “festive” Sunset lobby, followed by audience questions and answers by Executive Director Peter Lesnik. The 2009/2010 brochure will be given to all attendees.
WHEN: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 @ 5:30 P.M.
WHERE: Sunset Center
E/s San Carlos St. @ 9th Av.
Carmel-by-the-Sea, CA.
WHY: Entice audiences with the “array of world-renowned performing artists, dancers and musicians,” including nineteen acts in six genres: Broadway, Global Sounds, Music Legends, Variety, Wit and Wisdom and Cabaret.
FOR RESERVATIONS & MORE INFORMATION:
Call (831) 620-2148 or email info@sunsetcenter.org
Friday, June 05, 2009
Widewaters Villas de Carmelo Open House, Wednesday, June 17, 2009
ABSTRACT: Invitations to Villas de Carmelo Open House at the Carmel Women’s Club on Wednesday, June 17, 2009, hosted by The Widewaters Group, were sent to individuals recently; the Widewaters Group, the developer, and The Warner Group, the architect, will be present at the open house. The letter, dated June 1, 2009, is reproduced in its entirety.
WIDEWATERS
June 1, 2009
Dear [[First Name]] [[Last Name]],
The Widewaters Group would like to invite you to join us for a Villas de Carmelo open house to be held Wednesday, June 17th at the Carmel Women’s Club located at 9th Avenue & San Carlos Street in Carmel. We will be holding two sessions, 12:00 – 3:00 and 6:00 – 9:00, to enable you flexibility in attending.
The Widewaters Group, the developer, and The Warner Group, the architect, will be present and available to answer questions regarding the Villas de Carmelo development proposed for the historic Carmel Hospital site. The open house will also host a video and additional information on the project as well as visuals that address a number of neighborhood concerns.
If you are unable to attend or would like further information on the proposed project, please visit www.villasdecarmelo.com or call 831-372-2259 to schedule a meeting with us.
Thank you for your time and interest. We hope to see you on June 17th.
Sincerely,
Kevin Kane
Development Manager
The Widewaters Group
Ed Shagen
Director of Development
The Widewates Group
5796 Wildwaters Parkway, P.O. Box 3 DeWitt, New York 13214-0003 Phone: 315/445-2424 Fax: 315/445-8570
www.widewaters.com
WIDEWATERS
June 1, 2009
Dear [[First Name]] [[Last Name]],
The Widewaters Group would like to invite you to join us for a Villas de Carmelo open house to be held Wednesday, June 17th at the Carmel Women’s Club located at 9th Avenue & San Carlos Street in Carmel. We will be holding two sessions, 12:00 – 3:00 and 6:00 – 9:00, to enable you flexibility in attending.
The Widewaters Group, the developer, and The Warner Group, the architect, will be present and available to answer questions regarding the Villas de Carmelo development proposed for the historic Carmel Hospital site. The open house will also host a video and additional information on the project as well as visuals that address a number of neighborhood concerns.
If you are unable to attend or would like further information on the proposed project, please visit www.villasdecarmelo.com or call 831-372-2259 to schedule a meeting with us.
Thank you for your time and interest. We hope to see you on June 17th.
Sincerely,
Kevin Kane
Development Manager
The Widewaters Group
Ed Shagen
Director of Development
The Widewates Group
5796 Wildwaters Parkway, P.O. Box 3 DeWitt, New York 13214-0003 Phone: 315/445-2424 Fax: 315/445-8570
www.widewaters.com
Thursday, June 04, 2009
Carmel Art Association Presents TWO-PERSON SHOW FEATURING SMITH & TORRES, GALLERY SHOWCASE FEATURING FARINA, MARTIN & SLOAN AND NEW MEMBER GROUP SHOW
Carmel Art Association
“Celebrating 81 years of local art”
Voted “Art Gallery of the Year” by the Carmel Business Association three consecutive years.
W/s Dolores St. between 5th Av. & 6th Av.
10:00 A.M. – 5:00 P.M., Daily, except major Holidays.
Open to the Public at No Charge
“Founded in 1927, Carmel's oldest gallery features the work of more than 120 professional local artists, and is dedicated to presenting only the finest work for sale by artists living on the Monterey Peninsula.”
For more information, Online or (831) 624-6176.
Carmel Art Association Presents TWO-PERSON SHOW FEATURING SMITH & TORRES, GALLERY SHOWCASE FEATURING FARINA, MARTIN & SLOAN AND NEW MEMBER GROUP SHOW
Thursday, June 4 – Tuesday, June 30, 2009
TWO-PERSON SHOW “CONTEMPORARY SYNCHRONICITY” (Beardsley Room):
Artist Julie Brown Smith exhibits ink on canvas paintings and relief prints. View Artist Statement, et cetera, and Ink on Canvas and Linocut, including Bancroft Way, Berkeley (Sean & Jaymee #3), Santa Cruz Boardwalk (Sean & Sayard #3), Santa Cruz Boardwalk (Justin & Jaymee #1) and "Like a flowing stream, and a photo album of the past," "His words echo in your mind like a recurring dream," "Don’t know what I’d say if it were fall" and "In a conversation like a song" and "Contemporary Synchronicity" exhibit.
Artist Gustavo Torres exhibits textured, figurative bronzes reminiscent of antiquity, and the spirit of ancient cultures. View one bronze.
GALLERY SHOWCASE (Segal Room):
Painter Mark Farina exhibits watercolor landscapes and still life paintings. View brief biography, May 2009 Show "Recent Works" and May 2007 Show "Peninsula Views."
Artist Gerard Martin exhibits recent work featuring marine, landscape and still life objects in oil. View one painting.
Painter Tim Sloan exhibits figurative oil paintings. View Sloan’s brief biography, Recent Exhibits, Juried Shows, Art Organizations, Galleries and oil paintings including "Springtime on the Dunes I," "Springtime on the Dunes IV," "Bird Rock Pt. Lobos" and “Moss Landing Morning."
GROUP SHOW NEW MEMBER SHOW (Entry Room):
Painter Alice Geller-Robertson and sculptor Laurent Davidson introduce their work in the gallery's Entry Room.
Opening reception: Saturday, June 6, from 6:00 P.M. to 8:00 P.M.
“Celebrating 81 years of local art”
Voted “Art Gallery of the Year” by the Carmel Business Association three consecutive years.
W/s Dolores St. between 5th Av. & 6th Av.
10:00 A.M. – 5:00 P.M., Daily, except major Holidays.
Open to the Public at No Charge
“Founded in 1927, Carmel's oldest gallery features the work of more than 120 professional local artists, and is dedicated to presenting only the finest work for sale by artists living on the Monterey Peninsula.”
For more information, Online or (831) 624-6176.
Carmel Art Association Presents TWO-PERSON SHOW FEATURING SMITH & TORRES, GALLERY SHOWCASE FEATURING FARINA, MARTIN & SLOAN AND NEW MEMBER GROUP SHOW
Thursday, June 4 – Tuesday, June 30, 2009
TWO-PERSON SHOW “CONTEMPORARY SYNCHRONICITY” (Beardsley Room):
Artist Julie Brown Smith exhibits ink on canvas paintings and relief prints. View Artist Statement, et cetera, and Ink on Canvas and Linocut, including Bancroft Way, Berkeley (Sean & Jaymee #3), Santa Cruz Boardwalk (Sean & Sayard #3), Santa Cruz Boardwalk (Justin & Jaymee #1) and "Like a flowing stream, and a photo album of the past," "His words echo in your mind like a recurring dream," "Don’t know what I’d say if it were fall" and "In a conversation like a song" and "Contemporary Synchronicity" exhibit.
Artist Gustavo Torres exhibits textured, figurative bronzes reminiscent of antiquity, and the spirit of ancient cultures. View one bronze.
GALLERY SHOWCASE (Segal Room):
Painter Mark Farina exhibits watercolor landscapes and still life paintings. View brief biography, May 2009 Show "Recent Works" and May 2007 Show "Peninsula Views."
Artist Gerard Martin exhibits recent work featuring marine, landscape and still life objects in oil. View one painting.
Painter Tim Sloan exhibits figurative oil paintings. View Sloan’s brief biography, Recent Exhibits, Juried Shows, Art Organizations, Galleries and oil paintings including "Springtime on the Dunes I," "Springtime on the Dunes IV," "Bird Rock Pt. Lobos" and “Moss Landing Morning."
GROUP SHOW NEW MEMBER SHOW (Entry Room):
Painter Alice Geller-Robertson and sculptor Laurent Davidson introduce their work in the gallery's Entry Room.
Opening reception: Saturday, June 6, from 6:00 P.M. to 8:00 P.M.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)