Comments by dontoasthecoast

Previous | Page 2 of 6 | Next

Posted on August 28 at 11:47 a.m.

There is great irony in this project. Environmental groups like Gaviota Coast Conservancy and Surfrider have been fighting the mansionization of the Gaviota Coast for years. Often finding the County less than helpful in this endeavor. Now, in large part because the Gaviota Coast has so few residents, the County feels it can site a huge industrial garbage processing and disposal project there. If there were a few hundred mansions in the vicinity of this monstrous facility you can be sure it wouldn't happen. Damned if you do....and damned if you don't. Thanks County.

On Trashy Summer Reading on Tajiguas Landfill

Posted on June 26 at 8:46 a.m.

Jackson's and Krop's hypocrisy is breathtaking. The claimed benefits of the PXP Project were just smoke and mirrors. But the real benefit was hundreds of thousands of oil dollars paid to EDC and Jackson by PXP.

On Teeing Off on Tranquillon Ridge

Posted on April 24 at 9:22 a.m.

A couple of points of clarity. First, fracking will never be used from Holly and not likely from any other local off shore platform. The shale under our area is already fractured by natural geologic processes. Venoco should have been required to process their sour crude oil and gas at the Los Flores Consolidated Facility. The only reason it is not doing so is because Exxon wants to much 'rent' from Venoco for the use of that facility. The County could have and should have demanded a fair tariff to allow Venoco to use the Exxon facility but declined. The problem never was 'capacity' at Los Flores. Also the pipeline from Holly should have been sub-sea to Los Flores. Much easier to install and far less risky. Had this been done Mr. Bennett's dream would now be a reality, the Venoco onshore property would be a Goleta park.

On Sweet Crude on the Seashore

Posted on April 15 at 10:45 a.m.

This is Jerry Brown's Coastal Commission. I seriously doubt this travesty would have occurred under the Schwarzenegger Coastal Commission. Something is very wrong with this picture.

On CA Coastal Commission Approves Paradiso del Mare Project

Posted on March 26 at 8:33 a.m.

The Goleta Water District has gone from an agency that protected the public it serves to an agency that promotes unlimited growth at the expensive of the public. One has to ask, why no moratorium? Why the approval of a 12 inch water main out on the Gaviota Coast to a two mansion development with 10 more on the drawing board? The lust for growth has infected our County decision makers including the Goleta Water Board.

On Speed of Drought Confounds Water Planners

Posted on February 20 at 10:12 a.m.

It is sad to see EDC sink to this low point in journalism. Anything to keep donations coming in I guess.

On Questions Remain Over Offshore Acidizing

Posted on February 17 at 7:08 p.m.

The law dictates that on a legal lot one can build a home. These two homes are on legal lots. But the law also says that if there are options as to where on the lot the home should, it must be on the site that has the least environmental impacts. And there is no law that says the County had to approve sprawling one acre plus home sites. Unfortunately demanding 'NO DEVELOPMENT' was never going to work. In the next round I am confident that the focus will be on location and home size. It ain't over folks!!!

On The Math on Paradiso del Mare

Posted on February 17 at 9:57 a.m.

The 'fumes' mentioned by bimboteskie are naturally occurring from methane leaks, aka, Coal Oil Point. It's the geology that is responsible for the oil and gas leaks, not Venoco. In fact Venoco has installed collection caps to collect some of the leakage. EDC never misses a change to hammer on the oil companies. Crying 'Wolf!' all the time may help their bottom line, but it hurts their image in the long run. When their staff stop putting gas in their guzzling Subaru 4WD cars and get on a bike maybe they will have some credibility.

On Venoco Denies Acidizing Off Goleta Coast

Posted on February 12 at 2:45 p.m.

The real issues is not 'two homes, yes or no' but rather the location of the homes. Put where they belong on the East end of the two parcels no seal or white Tail Kite problems. No mile long road or water line. Why are they on the far West end? Because that opens the door for development of some or all of their 25 Naples Township lots. A moron could see this coming. So what does that say about the Board Of Supervisors?

On Gaviota Homes Approved

Posted on February 4 at 4:23 p.m.

Just so everyone knows, our Board of Supervisors approved today a two mansion project on the Gaviota Coast that has permission to use 30 acre feet of Goleta water a year. Of course the LA developer promises to use drought tolerant plants and low flow toilets. Sure, wink, wink. Is it time to recall our pro-growth Supervisors?

On 'Mega-Drought' Looms

Previous | Page 2 of 6 | Next

event calendar sponsored by: