I TEM F11 B – A PPEAL N UMBER A-3-MCO Carmel Area Monterey County C ALIFORNIA C OASTAL C OMMISSION C ENTRAL C OAST D ISTRICT S LIDE 1

I TEM F11 B – A PPEAL N UMBER A-3-MCO S LIDE 2 P ROJECT L OCATION

I TEM F11 B – A PPEAL N UMBER A-3-MCO S LIDE 3 P ROJECT S ITE

I TEM F11 B – A PPEAL N UMBER A-3-MCO S LIDE 4 P ROJECT P LANS

I TEM F11 B – A PPEAL N UMBER A-3-MCO S LIDE 5 A PPEAL C ONTENTIONS 1. Noticing 2. Water supply resources 3. ESHA 4. Erosion and geologic hazards 5. Public health and safety Staff Recommends Substantial Issue

I TEM F11 B – A PPEAL N UMBER A-3-MCO S LIDE 6 S TANDING TO A PPEAL LCP requires mailed notice to local agencies expected to provide services to the project No notice mailed to Appellant LCP requires at least 3 public hearing notices to be clearly posted at public places where they are required to be accessible and visible to the public Notices posted where not publicly accessible or visible Disputed facts from Appellant and Applicant about other “notice”

I TEM F11 B – A PPEAL N UMBER A-3-MCO S LIDE 7 O THER SI I SSUES Project does not meet LCP water supply and intensification of water use requirements Project lacks LCP-required hydrological analysis and drought tolerant landscaping Project to provide irrigation for a lawn area and other non- native plants, all during an extended period of significant drought Project identifies expanded leach fields within ESHA and project biological analysis does not address potential impacts of the operation of the well on ESHA Project lacks LCP-required geologic report and does not address potential erosion and geologic concerns

I TEM F11 B – A PPEAL N UMBER A-3-MCO S LIDE 8 S UBSTANTIAL I SSUE R ECOMMENDATION Appeal contentions raise a substantial issue with respect to the approved project’s conformance with the Monterey County LCP (see top of staff report page 4 for SI motion)

I TEM F11 B – A PPEAL N UMBER A-3-MCO S LIDE 9 D ENIAL Project does not meet LCP water supply and intensification of water use requirements Project lacks LCP-required hydrological analysis and drought tolerant landscaping Project identifies expanded leach fields within ESHA and project biological analysis does not address potential impacts of the operation of the well on ESHA Project lacks LCP-required geologic report and does not address potential erosion and geologic concerns Project does not meet LCP notice requirements Project cannot be approved under LCP when there is an ongoing violation

I TEM F11 B – A PPEAL N UMBER A-3-MCO S LIDE 10 R ECOMMENDATION The proposed project is inconsistent with the LCP and the CDP needs to be denied (see bottom of staff report page 4 for denial motion)