Goleta Beach 2.0

This article leaves out the fact that the Goleta Beach 2.0 "managed retreat" plan will allow the cycle of erosion to take most, if not all of the beach and lawn area away at times. Otherwise, why do the parking lot and utility lines need to be moved? Where is the parking going? To the airport?

What a spin job!!!

A sensible article on a plan that has taken years of study to develop. The real spin job is trying to defeat nature, a losing battle.

Much of the parking that would be relocated is used by UCSB students, not beachgoers.

Nobody ever seems to mention that beaches have a natural erosion cycle that sees them turn to mostly rock in winter and then gradually replenish as the swells get calmer. The reason the parking and sewer lines are threatened is because we've put something hard and permanent in the way of the erosion. I too am curious where the parking is going since there's no space between where it is now and Ward Dr.

All these plans sound fine, but I'm concerned about where the new parking will be located? Also, will parking still be free? Approx. how many parking spaces will be left at the beach and approx. how many spaces will be off-site at a new location? I've previously heard about some kind of water taxi, what exactly does that mean? Leaving these details out/not being clear makes me have reservations about plan 2.0, so I hope proponents of the plan are clear in their answers to these questions and others that community members have.

The Spinmasters...."enviros for hire" are back at it. Here are a couple of facts they don't tell you. First, this plan relies on "retreat" or "giving up to" or "letting wash away" that same area of beach they say we will be gaining by pulling out the parking lot. Second, they have stated For The Record that they will oppose this plan if a rear stop revetment "protective barrier" is placed 50 ft. from the the highway to protect the relocated utility lines, which are being moved at the expense of the rate payers for all these prospective utilities involved. A buried rear stop protective measure does not, I repeat, does not cause down coast erosion. Besides, all that would be left by then is the bikepath. No beach, no volleyball courts. Just more of the same BS from EDC and their nursemaid Janet Wolf.

BeachFan does not appear to be a true fan of the beach. Perhaps of the grass but not the beach. If he were a fan of the beach he'd support Goleta Beach 2.0 which is the best plan yet offered by the county to actually preserve and protect the beach, AND at the same time expanding recreational opportunities of various types throughout the park in a sustainable way. Sadly there seems to be a small group of zealots in this community who are the local equivalent of the "Drill baby drill"crowd. I call them the "Rocks, baby, rocks" crowd. Don't confuse them with the facts their minds are made up. The fact that the Coastal Commission will not allow the previous plan also seems to have escaped their notice. Goleta Beach 2.0 is a great plan, crafted after years of hard work by a lot of folks who have no evil ulterior or financial motives and just want to see Goleta Beach Park remain a fabulous park with a fabulous beach. We should all endorse it and move forward.

Noletaman. As constant as the sunrise. Always forgets to mention that without some type of protection, we will eventually lose all this area of the beach to erosion. Again, he displays an absolute lack of history. This beach was created artificially in the 1920's. The natural process Will. I repeat Will, result in the loss of this area eventually. This is a non disputable fact. The original goleta beach was a deep water harbor. This is what the natural process will want to revert too. What part of that are you having problems with? Cold hard facts??? You, like EDC love to ignore them. If we do go forward, a rear stop protective measure must be included. Where is your facts regarding a buried revetment that would only serve to protect the relocated utility lines and relocated coastal bike path once erosion reaches a certain point??? Fact. A buried revetment does not lead to down coast sand loss. Argue that. Also, the coastal commission shot down the permeable pier, not protective measures. Look up the minutes on the item. The discussion by the Coastal Commission, and by the way, I was there, focused on implementing some type of managed retreat. This was mentioned by at least 5 commissioners. Fair enough, but include back stop protection. If they aren't, then you can bet that sooner or later, all that will be left will be highway 154 and a rock revetment protecting IT. No bikepath, no beach. Yeah, great plan.