|
|
 |
|
| Best Practices: Real Estate |
Defeating the Developers
Jill Duman
12/01/2006
|
Two hours south of San Francisco, on California’s rugged Central Coast, lies
Carmel Valley, a sylvan refuge for exhausted urbanites and Silicon Valley
weekenders. Although this occasionally foggy, but always breathtaking, enclave
of golf courses, ranch estates and organic farms retains much of the beauty that
John Steinbeck described in the novels he set in the region, many residents
increasingly feel that the peace and quiet they pay considerable sums to enjoy
is being stolen from them by developers.
For Paula Lotz, the tipping point
was a winery. And not just any winery: a boutique, 5,000-case-per-year winery
located next door to her home in a residential zone. The company violated the
terms of its permit by hosting a vertical wine tasting and dinner for $100 per
person—and then advertising it to the general public in a local
newspaper.
“You can’t go in like
a pathetic supplicant. They have to know who you are
and whom you represent.” |
Lotz, the former owner of an Internet recruiting company who
traded Silicon Valley life for a beautiful home and a peaceful existence in
Carmel Valley, knew how to fight for her rights. When irate complaints to county
zoning officials failed to produce immediate action, she dug deeper,
scrutinizing other defects in the winery’s operation—including the illegally
steep grade of its vineyard slopes and the fact that the winery was violating
its permit by trucking in grapes for wine production and trundling the produce
down residential streets.
Lotz was particularly galled by a sense that county
zoning officials “basically blew her off” and dragged their feet while
responding to her complaints. Undaunted, Lotz financed her own campaign,
spending nearly $100,000 to sue the winery owner to force him to comply with
local zoning and permit rules. A year later, in November 2002, she settled the
suit, after the winery agreed to several new conditions, including notification
before pesticide spraying. Fortuitously, the vineyard also opted to move its
winery operations to the nearby town of Salinas.
Lotz is one of a growing
number of affluent homeowners who are fighting to save their residential quality
of life. Through legal action, ballot initiatives and political activism, these
individuals are pushing back against the tide of encroaching commercial and
private development that threatens their property values and their tranquility.
“Most people get involved because something really aggravates them,” Lotz says.
Looking back on the battle, she believes that the time and money she spent to
preserve her quiet life in the country was worth the effort it required. “I have
no regrets about the lawsuit or the money it cost, because I feel like I
increased my property value by getting rid of the nuisance and the noise and
traffic, thus returning my neighborhood to the quiet residential neighborhood
that my zoning allows.”
SURVEY THE BATTLEFIELD
For decades, environmentalists have shouldered the
lonely burden of battling urbanization in the United States. In communities
across the country, these citizen groups have been instrumental in putting a
number of quality-of-life measures before voters.
As affluent city dwellers
flee congested traffic, poor schools and cookie-cutter strip malls for homes and
estates in scenic, pastoral enclaves, environmentalist are finding natural
allies. These newcomers believe a seven- or eight-figure price tag on a home
should include freedom from the sprawl, growth and urban ugliness that they have
left behind. “It’s very typical that you have residents of affluent areas use
their money, power, time and sophistication to stop development they think will
be bad for their neighborhoods,” says William Fulton, founding editor of
California Planning & Development Report, a Ventura, Calif.-based monthly
newsletter covering land-use issues.
Building antisprawl
coalitions today often requires defying—or
ignoring—traditional political divisions. |
Yet, influencing public policy debates
requires vigilance, expertise and networking. Contrary to beliefs of political
cynics, strategic campaign donations do not always deliver desired political
outcomes, particularly on the local level. Veterans of antigrowth fights advise
those new to political activism to educate themselves in the basic mechanics of
local land-use policy—including the vocabulary of politicians and developers,
project approval processes and, most importantly, identifying the land-use
players who make official decisions. With this knowledge, homeowners can then
determine if there is a legal cause of action to pursue—as was the case for
Lotz—or whether to work through existing channels to resolve the
problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
