The Giant Among Us

Good column!

However, I'd like to add that some have expressed concern that as the number of UCSB faculty, students, administrators and other support personnel increases, the population necessary to support these added people will also have to increase. Increased UCSB population will need dry-cleaners, doctors, teachers…the list goes on. Some estimate that for every new UCSB-related person, two additional people will need to be added in our community. With housing already at a premium and traffic growing, one wonders where the additional necessary support people, not accounted for by the new University housing, will live or, alternatively, where will they commute from.

And there are also concerns about other impacts of increased UCSB population on our area. For example, where will we find the necessary water, recreational facilities, and other infrastructure not provided by the University?

The University needs to account for all of the impacts of its expansion plans on the community.

This is the most important development project of our era and the community needs to be engaged. We need to use CEQA and the Coastal Commission to keep the University in control. We cannot sustain the amount of development proposed. One CEQA alternative that is clearly reasonable and feasible is a campus enrollment of no more than 20,000 with the necessary faculty. Also the Universtity does not need to be a residential developer to the extent proposed. There should be a consolidation of the residential deveopment just recently approved for the IV Community Plan that is almost entirely University driven, with a tremendous downsizing of the amount of residential development proposed by the University. There is not enough water for the LRDP buildout. To delay that inevitable problem the University did not request a Water Supply Assessment from the Goleta Water District. The University did a Water Supply Assessment for the San Diego campus LRDP. There is no legitimate reason other than politics that they did not have one done here. It will be very interesting to see what the DEIR says about water. It is absolutely clear based on the Goleta Water District's Urban Water Management Plan that there is not enough water for all currently approved development and the LRDP buildout. This will be one of our strongest points in getting them to downsize. Margaret we will depend on you to keep the community informed.

Road Rage?

I've noticed that UCSB has been notoriously slow lately in fixing things basic like campus roadways. Sure they're going 100% building that expensive 5th Engineering building or whatever, but what about the fundamentals? Aren't fixing roads with major damage a top issue? Where are the priorities and planning and immediate response to things like this?

Several patches of the main asphalt arteries in the heart of the campus roads have needed repair for years. These have now become severely damaged due to the recent storm we had. I can't believe they're not at least temporarily filling the potholes with asphalt--it's been weeks! The main campus roads have tons of huge pot holes, some the size of kiddie pools, which are dangerous for cars that swerve to dodge them. They're also extra hazardous to motorcycle riders. Just ask one. They're probably missing a filling from the last one they survived head-on.

If this was off-campus those potholes would have been fixed immediately by CalTrans or whatever ASAP. Currently UCSB is working feverishly to complete some kind of cosmetic improvement to the HWY 217 gateway. Hello? What's going on UCSB? Anybody home? Let's make and keep our roadways safe for everyone.

Mike

"It is good then to see a commitment by the university to 'work closely with adjacent jurisdictions to design, fund, and build a superior infrastructure.' ”

Would that include the construction of bars...I mean "nightclubs" on campus to reduce the flow of students coming to downtown S.B. to fulfill their need for alcoholic socializing?

I don't know whether to laugh or cry when reading this, (No, I'm not laughing at the author of the article because I think she has presented a very well-written piece) but I'm referring to the suicidal policies of our local nabobs who talk talk talk about "sustainability" and the "impact" that unfettered development has while not standing up to this because of course, it's about "education".

Given the fact that many (maybe most) of those I encounter coming out of I.V. drive trucks or S.U.V's, I doubt if the idea of getting people to walk or bike will go over well, since transportation seems to be more about size than practicality, or should I say "sustainability".

I came into S.B. today and once again, the traffic on Foothill between 154 and La Cumbre was almost bumper to bumper. It seems there was yet another accident on 101. (Too many people, too many of them stressed out don't make for good road conditions) I'm getting more accustomed to seeing this. Such incidents are just a reminder of things to come.

I have a vague memory of seeing the movie Soylent Green back in 1973. I remember it had something to do with life in New York in about the middle of the 21st century. The scenario was a hellish nighmare of overcrowding and violence. When I got out of the theater I thought how luck I was to live in a small town where such a scenario seemed several lifetimes away. Now, with gang violence, road rage, and all the social ills we see growing around us, this doesn't seem so far off. In spite of this, those who control the goings-on here just keep encouraging more people to come in to this place.

I know I'm rambling, and will probably attract the usually snotty insults such a post draws, but I don't care. This never-ending growth policy is INSANE. All you have to do is look at the decline in the quality of life here and connect the dots.

I wonder of the slow-growth progressive types are willing to take this on, or would doing so go against the Sacred Cow of the education system many of them hold in such high regard?

The Goleta community forfeited its chance to influence UCSB development back in 2001, when the Goletans thoughtlessly rejected inclusion of UCSB and IV in the city of Goleta.