June 2007

Many of you may remember the long and protracted campaign concerning the Hacienda Vieja Project.  From 2004 to 2006, the More Mesa Preservation Coalition fought through all the public processes to ensure that this development was appropriate for More Mesa.  We were deeply concerned about the size, bulk and scale of the proposed structures, as well as the impact of five families in this small area abutting a sensitive wetland and More Mesa.  The decision makers and the community expressed their desire to have no more than three families on the parcels in question.  However, it was finally, and reluctantly, agreed to permit four new (large) houses and a 4500 square foot remodel, which was essentially a tear down and rebuild.  A compromise had been struck and was accepted by both MMPC and the community. Final permitting occurred in mid 2006.

A few months later, the developer, Jack Maxwell, applied for a permit to convert the “remodel” to a duplex, and then proceeded to build the remodel as if the permit already had been approved.  We were surprised and disappointed when the current Planning Commission voted to allow what is, in effect, a sixth residence.  Apparently, the logic behind their decision was that “If it’s legal, we must approve it.”

We depend on our elected and appointed officials to speak for us, protect our environment and be guardians of the community’s best interest (not an individual’s). The ability and wisdom of these officials to interpret laws on our behalf is critical to shaping a  community for people, not a community built by, and for, developers.   Because of this belief, the MMPC has filed an appeal of this decision to the Board of Supervisors. We feel that Planning Commission approval of a project that was vehemently opposed by the community and previous decision makers, while technically legal, was wrong.  Citizens look to our governing bodies to do, not only what is legal, but what is right! Santa Barbara County has broken trust with the community.  We are looking to the Board of Supervisors to rebuild that trust.

Similar Posts

  • July 2005

    HACIENDA VIEJA There has been no update from the Coastal Commission staff on the Hacienda Vieja Project. It is probable that they will not complete their analysis for several months. We will keep you posted on developments as soon as we hear anything. USAGE SURVEY As we reported last month, MMPC has been out on…

  • January 2010

    Happy New Year from the More Mesa Preservation Coalition ! Although there has not been much rain so far this season, More Mesa is already becoming green and lush.  Many of our friends and neighbors have been celebrating the holidays with their families by strolling, hiking and riding out on More Mesa. And, our winter…

  • June 2006

    Candidate Forum On May 11th, the More Mesa Preservation Coalition (MMPC) hosted a Forum for all the candidates seeking the position of Second District Supervisor. About 100 people were present to hear what each candidate had to say, with regard to specific questions about More Mesa, and Open Space in general. Feedback from supporters and…

  • April 2005

    GREAT NEWS! On April 13th, we passed the first hurdle on our Coastal Commission appeal of the Hacienda Vieja project! After a short presentation by MMPC, and one by the developer, members of the Coastal Commission voted overwhelmingly against their staff’s recommendation of “NO significant issues”. This means that, some time in the future, MMPC…

  • May 2015

    A Cautionary Tale In our Monthly News for October of last year we talked about the distinct difference between the cliffs of More Mesa on the east side and those of the west side.  In that issue we emphasized the danger involved in the steep, unstable and unpredictable west side cliffs of More Mesa, those…

  • May 2007

    Earlier this year, in the February News, the More Mesa Preservation Coalition reported that More Mesa was for sale … for $110 Million.  Shortly after this sale offering appeared in the “Multiple Listings”, the owner contracted with a local company to survey the property.  The “poles” and flags” that may be seen in various areas…