WAYMISH Revisited: What Are We Protecting?
Sade’s has been part of Carmel for generations. It lost its lease, and our three-bar limit and location-specific approvals make reopening elsewhere difficult. Rules intended to protect Carmel now stand in the way of a familiar gathering place finding a new home.
Last year, I introduced WAYMISH: “Why Are You Making It So Hard?” I encouraged City Hall to shift from “No, because…” to “Yes, if…” Sade’s shows why that question matters. But helpful service accomplishes only so much when the rules themselves may need attention.
Paul McAllister’s widely circulating YouTube video, “Why Nobody Lives in America’s Most Beautiful Town,” prompted me to connect several problems I have encountered as mayor. While it paints a darker picture than the Carmel I know, it does raise a question: Have our accumulated protections made it harder to sustain the community we want?
When Protections Become Obstacles
Each rule was adopted to protect something we value. Together, they can turn a reasonable proposal into an exhausting undertaking. A shop selling its own branded nuts and retail goods encounters our food-store and restaurant limit. A coffee business using bottled water remains caught in a water dispute. Others face sprinkler and ADA restroom upgrades triggered by a change of use.
Requirements come from Carmel, the state, and other agencies. Fire safety, accessibility, and water conservation matter. Meeting those requirements can involve complicated projects, mounting bills, and uncertain completion dates. Council and commissions also spend substantial time navigating these requirements, leaving less time to plan Carmel’s future.
In the end, these obstacles affect residents and influence what services are available and who can build a life here.
A Residential Community for Whom?
The statement behind our Council dais describes Carmel as primarily a residential community. Do our decisions support that goal? We want artists, teachers, first responders, and working families here, yet suitable housing is beyond their reach. Are our housing rules creating practical opportunities to build homes they can afford?
Parking affects residents, workers, and visitors alike. When adequate parking is unavailable, residents struggle to shop, workers struggle to reach their jobs, and visitors circle our streets. Residential neighborhoods absorb the overflow. Turns out, simply calling ourselves residential doesn’t substitute for actually addressing how Carmel functions today.
Choosing What to Protect
Carmel needs rules. Our architecture, forest, and village character deserve protection. But circumstances change. Early Carmel leader Perry Newberry opposed paving our roads; few would want that policy today. We also found that home addresses are a benefit to public safety and other changing circumstances.
Council and our commissions should review local rules affecting business openings, housing, visitors, and parking, listening to applicants, residents, and staff as time spent in hearings mount. What does each rule protect? Is it working? Could its purpose be achieved more simply? How does it interact with other requirements?
Our dedicated staff deserve clear, workable rules and support to administer them. The review should identify practical changes, assign responsibility, and set a timetable so these questions lead to action.
The goal is a village where a beloved bar can find a new home, a new business has a clear path to opening, a teacher can live near her school, and residents can park and shop in their own town.
WAYMISH? With fresh leadership in place and a new City Administrator expected in the coming months, let’s choose what to protect and make it easier to build a life here.
I would not trade places with any other city. Carmel has a wonderful future ahead, and I hope you’ll be a part of helping our CIty government shape it.
To hear a podcast generated from this column go to cli.re/easier.
Dale Byrne, Mayor of Carmel-by-the-Sea
Comments