State policy meant to jumpstart housing can also lead to bad planning.

Hundreds of pages of planning documents and three drafts, now two-plus years into an eight-year planning cycle, the County of Monterey is still lacking a certified housing element. The concept behind these documents, required by the California Department of Housing and Community Development, is for each jurisdiction to plan for housing needs based on existing and projected future population.

It should come as a surprise to no one that every jurisdiction in the tri-county region needs more housing. In the case of unincorporated Monterey County, the magic number to plan for is 3,326 units between 2023-2031. The state has so far sent back the county’s proposal twice for revisions. After the third draft closed to public comment on Feb. 24, the County resubmitted again, hoping for HCD’s blessing this time.

While that process is underway and the County is without a certified housing element, state law allows for developers to move swiftly and push forward projects under a provision called Builder’s Remedy. It forces agencies to approve projects that would otherwise probably never pass muster.

In concept, I think Builder’s Remedy is a great idea – it means less pushing paper, more shovels in the ground. But these fast-track projects can also be horribly misaligned. Such is the case of a proposal for 711 Viejo Road, just east of Highway 1 between Monterey and Carmel, that envisions a massive 11-story building, roughly the size of Seaside’s Embassy Suites, plunked down on a steeply sloped property where today there are mostly just trees. It would include 239 units of housing (191 at market rate and 48 low-income).

The Monterey City Council voted 4-0 on Feb. 17 to write a comment letter voicing a range of concerns including traffic, emergency egress, lack of water supply and the need for a septic plan.

The developer is Carmel Housing Group LLC, registered to Fullerton-based Ben Eilenberg, an attorney whose license has been suspended by the State Bar. I was unable to reach Eilenberg for comment, but in emails to County officials, he has already threatened litigation and declined to answer planners’ questions about basic things like the floor plan, drainage plan and so on. California’s environmental protections might be cumbersome, but Builder’s Remedy is not a substitute for sensible projects that take into account basic health and safety elements.

Speaking to Monterey City Council about the project on Feb. 17, City Community Development Director Kim Cole offered a theory: Eilenberg might be planning to negotiate a much smaller project. “This is clearly a chess play by the developer,” she said.

Eilenberg also has Builder’s Remedy projects in Carpinteria, Los Gatos and Santa Barbara, according to news reports. He seems positioned for a fight. Whether it’s to make a point or make money (or both) remains unknown.

Meanwhile, some Builder’s Remedy projects progressing in Monterey County are far more reasonable, proposed by developers actually willing to talk to the community. Big Sur-based Patrick Orosco of the Orosco Group is meeting at 6:30pm on Wednesday, March 18 with the Carmel Valley Association about his 90-unit Carmel Valley proposal. Jeff Damavandi of LA is proposing 127 units on the site of a nearly century-old hospital building near Carmel. The Diocese of Monterey has a proposal in the works.

Monterey Mayor Tyller Williamson signed the letter expressing concern about Eilenberg’s absurd proposal, but expressed frustration that he was being asked to do so at all. “It’s really disappointing that someone is taking advantage of a system that is meant to do good,” he said. “The last thing I want to do is make it appear as if the city of Monterey is anti-development, anti-growth. This makes the situation worse. When someone tries to take advantage of a situation to line their own pockets, it’s disgusting.”

Builder’s Remedy should be just that – a remedy that bypasses some of the zoning restrictions that make development too slow and too expensive, helping right-size California’s housing supply. But impossible projects are a distraction: We need real and buildable housing, not more lawsuits.

SARA RUBIN is the Weekly’s editor. Reach her at sara@montereycountynow.com