Subject: Cannery Row Marketplace/Ocean View Plaza

February 28, 2008

Patrick Kruer, Chair,
Members of the California Coastal Commission
725 Front Street, Suite 300
Santa Cruz, CA 95060-4508
FAX (831) 427-4877

Subject:   March 6, 2008 meeting,  Item Th13b-3-2008,  Application No. 3-06-065 Cannery Row Marketplace, LLC

Dear Chair Kruer and Commissioners:

We would like to commend the Commission staff for its comprehensive history and analysis of the proposed Ocean View Plaza project.  The Commission’s staff report has identified important inconsistencies with the Coastal Act, including water supply availability and coastal access.  

The League of Women Voters of the Monterey Peninsula first submitted comments on the 2001 EIR, and on the 2004 Supplemental EIR. Although the plans have been modified, and improvements made, the project still raises concerns that we identified earlier.  In a letter to the Monterey City Council when it was considering the project in 2002, we noted the City had declined to respond to most comments, including ours, regarding consistency with the California Coastal Act, or with the City policy which has encouraged mixed-use in commercial areas mainly to provide rental units for local workers and residents.  Instead, the emphasis is on  expensive oceanside residential condominiums, which will be a “first” for the predominantly tourist-centered area of Cannery Row.  The project still does not clearly indicate the types of retail businesses planned. The unusually high cost of water service to tenants may in fact discourage small specialty shops, galleries and family-priced restaurants from renting space in the Plaza.  The monthly cost for residential units may make it difficult to find qualified moderate-income residents.

The project was approved even though the Monterey Peninsula is under the mandates of Order WR 95-10.  Although the project would be served by a desalination plant developed solely to serve this project, there is no assured long-term water supply in the event the desalination project fails.    Because of the potential cumulative impacts of several small water desalination projects within the Marine Sanctuary, it could further jeopardize efforts to address a long term water supply for the Monterey Peninsula by precluding development of a deslination project that would benefit all water users within the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District.   Finally, approval of a private desalination plant to serve one project would set a precedent that would have significant adverse impacts on coastal resources up and down the state. 

We strongly support the staff recommendation to deny the project application.

Sincerely,

Janet Brennan, President
LWV of the Monterey Peninsula