The trees are alright, at least for now, after the planning commission denies a Monterey home project.

David Schmalz here. I’ve covered a lot of land use stories, and one I still recall vividly is from 2015, when property owners Paul and Linda Flores applied for after-the-fact permits for the removal of approximately 25 trees on their Aguajito Oaks property in unincorporated county that the couple had removed the year prior. 

The Planning Commission denied the permit despite county staff’s recommendation to approve it, and ordered the couple to restore the property to as close as possible to its prior state; a subsequent appeal to the Board of Supervisors was mostly denied, although the supervisors allowed an unpermitted barn to remain on the property. 

Last week, I noticed the couple’s names crop up again, and once again it was for a permit for a project on a Laureles Grade property that would cut down even more trees, in this case, 30. 

The Planning Commission considered the application last Wednesday, July 10, and unlike the 2015 application, county staff recommended denying the project. 

Located on an undeveloped 3.8-acre parcel at 25836 El Paseo Real, about a mile west of Laureles Grade in the Hidden Hills subdivision, the primary point of contention is that the Floreses are proposing to build a home, pool and cabana on the property’s ridgeline, which is fully forested with protected coast live oaks. The proposed structures would also be on slopes in excess of 25 percent, which is discouraged by county land use policies unless there is no feasible alternative. 

In this case, there is—a large portion of the property fronting the road is unforested, and on a slope less than 25 degrees, and in their report, county staff recommended siting the project there. 

Martha Diehl, chair of the commission, noted, “The reason we have rules is because they are important.” She added, “I have to challenge our design community to comply with the existing rules. If [the property] was easy to develop, it probably would have been developed by now.” 

Other commissioners were likewise bearish on the project. Commissioner Kate Daniels echoed Diehl’s concerns, saying, “This applicant feels like the rules don’t apply to him.”

The commissioners voted unanimously to deny Flores’ application, though the decision is appealable to the Board of Supervisors. (The Weekly was unable to reach the Floreses for comment.) 

So for now at least, the trees are safe. 

Newsletter

Commission axes home-building plan. Strawberries supreme. Costly Covid treatment.