Board of Supervisors vote unanimously to deny Carmel Valley canine club.

Forty-three. 

That's how many members of the public traveled to Salinas today to let the County Board of Supervisors know their thoughts about a proposed canine country club in Carmel Valley. 

That number comes by way of Supervisor Fernando Armenta, who said he counted every one, as well how many were opposed or in support of the project. 34 were against it, nine were for it.

That, in part, may have guided the supervisors in a unanimous 5-0 to deny the project, which had become a touchstone of controversy over the last two years. 

The concerns raised by the public were myriad, but most centered around water, traffic and zoning.

The project was proposed on 47-acres off Valley Greens Drive that was once used as an organic farm, and was approved 6-0 by the County Planning Commission Aug 26. That approval was appealed by both nearby residents and the adjacent Quail Lodge, which feared its business could be impacted.

The proposal was for a private club—Carmel Canine Sports Center—that would allow for up to 500 members to use the area to train their dogs in events like agility and herding.

As proposed, it would have also allowed for 24 event days per year that could bring in up to 70 RV's as well as vendors. 

While many public agencies and members of the public found numerous flaws in the project's environmental impact report, even the EIR stated that traffic impacts of the project could not be mitigated. 

For the supes to have denied the appeals and certified the EIR, they would have had to have found "overriding considerations" of public benefit to do that, which could have possibly opened up the county to legal liability 

Ultimately, despite the Planning Commission's unanimous approval of the project two months ago, the supervisors were not ready to do that. They did, however, like the idea of the project, just at a different location. 

Supervisor Dave Potter—who represents the district where the project's located—started by digging into the Planning Commission, which had three members recuse themselves from the August vote (including Martha Diehl, one of the project applicants).

"Commissioners have to make tough decisions," he said. 

He made a motion to approve the appeals of the Planning Commission approval and deny the project. 

Armenta spoke next, and he got fiery, attacking the commission and county staff. He said he watched the Planning Commission meeting twice, and did like what he saw.

"It was one big disappointment," he said. "It was like a joke."

Armenta accused staff of not answering the commissioners questions, and then the commissioners voting with inadequate information and clarification. 

Supervisor John Phillips agreed with his fellow supervisors. 

"I think it’s unfortunate to see a land use decision like this that divides the community," Phillips said. "It’s simply the wrong place."

Supervisor Jane Parker followed Phillips, and among her concerns was the intersection at Valley Greens Drive.

"I really wish this had been proposed in a different location," she said. "I foresee some serious accidents occurring there."

She also called out staff for "creative attempts" to make the project pass muster.

"I don't think it's a legal activity in the area," she added.

Simon Salinas spoke only briefly, concurring with previous comments, and the board made a swift 5-0 vote to deny the project, ending a years-long saga filled with several public meetings, hours of public testimony, a handful of attorneys and countless reams of paper.