Subscriber Comments for
A new development proposal promises to preserve most of More...

Comments in order of when they were received | (reverse order)

COMMENT 295890	2012-07-10 12:29 PM
Interesting spin by the developers. It's not a new housing development - it's a nature preserve. Makes it easier to swallow.
COMMENT 295904P	2012-07-10 12:56 PM
hmmm #890 that's not how I read it at all...perhaps you really didn't read the article, being anxious to give your OWN spin. Here's what I read: "the Holding family is actually endorsing a plan that would preserve 85 percent of the 265 acres they own. To get there, the community would have to get behind the development of 38 homes on 40 acres: 27 eco-minded, wellness-oriented, roughly 3,000-square-foot “casitas” clustered on a nine-acre parcel near today’s Mockingbird Lane, plus 11 mansion-ready parcels fringing the east and west borders of the landscape, with two reaching out closer to the western cliffs. " To me that is clear- they want to build houses- and they also want to offer a plan that preserves 85% of the land. I've lived in this area for over 40 years- used to go to the beach [by walking through what is now, coincidentally, the development that Valerie Olson lives in!]. I support the More Mesa Preservation effort. I also find this plan to be the most realistic opportunity to support the preservation of More Mesa. Lots of review ahead I'm sure. But realistically, this is a hopeful start.
COMMENT 295905	2012-07-10 12:57 PM
We are contractually last in line for state water and in a severe, protracted drought we will have to rely on local water only. Desal (90% of which was sold @ 10¢/$) and state water arewere a developers lie. We are built out and growth cannot be infinite with finite resources.
COMMENT 295910	2012-07-10 01:15 PM
I say sell off the 6 parcels and build 6 estates and fence out the public.
COMMENT 295963	2012-07-10 03:27 PM
It looks like the framework for a good compromise. There are some sticky issues. At present the homeowners along Mockingbird Lane consider the street private and they ban parking by others. Development within More Mesa should dictate that the lane be public and parking allowed. The locals will assuredly oppose this. It the area is publicly owned the stairs to the beach will be deemed dangerous and they will be closed. Will there be money to rebuild?
COMMENT 296185	2012-07-11 08:11 AM
The western edge encroachment is to aggressive on the waterfront. No to this proposal. There's no reason why the development cannot be on the northern edge with open space all the way to the cliff. Those home owners would have first hand access to a preserve at no cost to them. They'd have unobstructed ocean views. Allowing buildout along the western and eastern edge including the western cliff range effectively fences in the preserve and creates multiple reasons for owner complaints. Come on Noleta. It's time for a land purchase.
COMMENT 296212P	2012-07-11 08:46 AM
The southwestern edge proposal is probably not possible - too close to cliffs that are constantly eroding. "On one of the writer’s photographic visits, on a fine, windless day, several hundred pounds of rock suddenly broke free 15 or 20 feet above the beach, and certainly would have killed or seriously injured anyone sitting at the cliff base. Exactly such an event occurred at More Mesa, about a mile east of Isla Vista, in the early 1980s—a man and his dog were killed." http://www.coastandocean.org/spring_summer2005/pages/ five.html "California Coastal Act. The California Coastal Act Planning and Management Policies include provisions requiring minimization of risks to life and property in areas of high geologic hazard, bluff stability and shoreline protection, minimization of geologic instability and erosion along bluffs and cliffs, and safe construction of fill."
COMMENT 296254	2012-07-11 09:55 AM
As long as there are developers and politicians, there will be no such thing as "forever."
COMMENT 296258	2012-07-11 10:04 AM
Why does a guy that's worth 310 billion need more money?
AQUAHOLIC	2012-07-11 10:09 AM
It seems to be a start in the right direction, a compromise. There are so many hurdles to jump with the first draft, it will likely take many many years to realize a workable plan for the land owners and the public. The public will benefit from the preservation of one of the last glorious bits of coastal open space. My family has recreated on More Mesa for over 30 years, enjoying the trails, beach, flora and fauna. I particularly love photographing the nature and landscapes that abound there. This is a special place that deserves to be saved for everyone to enjoy.
COMMENT 295904P	2012-07-11 11:17 AM
My God, there is not even a plan submitted to the County yet the naysayers have already "analyzed" and rejected it. Or opined that perhaps the property owner would GIVE the property away because he doesn't "need more money". Really Santa Barbara? I consider myself a liberal and an environmentalist yet those extremist views in my mind negate any rational review of this or ANY project or policy.

36% of comments on this page were made by Edhat Community Members.

EDHAT COMMENTS POLICY