Ninth Inning Curveball Thrown at Noleta

The State cannot revoke the counties right to approve or disapprove of residential permits.

This is a bluff. A commonly used stratedgy for state and county planners, and developers to get there way, against the public's will.

Let the the state bureaucrats at the state housing comission try to take away the power to approve or deny any residential building permits.

This is aother example of government gone bad. Using state tax dollars to benefit the rich 1% (Towbes). His development plan to profit gives the other 99% more pollution and health problems and a lower quality of life.

Many concerned individuals living in and around the San Marcos Growers and San Marcos Farms property have been lobbying to SAVE that land from development for many years. I was privileged for some years to help nourish that land with the finest organic amendments and it produced the best organic strawberries, flowers and vegetables- especially celery- around! Farming in the Goleta Valley is our heritage, we have improved the soil there to a far greater value than it deserves by being paved over and made in to another "generic" housing complex. Also, people move here and remain living in this community because it has a rural and natural feel. Local, safe, petroleum-free food production and distribution may turn out to be a vital need in our future. I do hope and believe we will continue to fight for and maintain our citizens' right to determine our own community's development needs and wants. Has anyone been watching the housing market? It doesn't seem ready to be overrun with even more units- because of the vast development of UCSB, and the ridiculous high density 4 story buildings being rammed in to Isla Vista with NO parking requirements, and with no vote by the community there- although many did actually physically protest- with signs and all! Rentals and sales of housing have been and will likely continue to be soft with even lower prices on the horizon. Let us all please work to keep this local farmland respected and protected, it is the heart of our Valley. How about contacting Jerry Brown right away to voice deep displeasure with the State's unreasonable requirements, Governor Jerry Brown c/o State Capitol, Suite 1173 Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone: (916) 445-2841 . http://gov.ca.gov/m_contact.php

Dorothy. We aren't in Kansas anymore. Or for that matter, over the rainbow. Some project will be built there. It's just a matter of what. Yes, the market is soft....maybe that project in Isla Vista was built with no community input. That is on the Board of Supervisors and specifically Janet and Doreen, who are tied at the hip out there. Lower home prices??? How horrid!!! You mean people might be able to afford to buy a home in Goleta????

BeachFan, you are being intellectually dishonest. No amount of residential development on the South Coast of Santa Barbara County would provide enough supply to materially reduce the cost of real estate here. Even now, after a major contraction in prices, homes in Goleta, Noleta, Santa Barbara, Montecito, Summerland, Carpinteria, and the Gaviota Coast are expensive and out of reach for people who make a median range salary. That is just the way it is and the way it has been for a very long time. 25 years ago, I thought that my wife and I would never be home owners here. But we got some lucky breaks and squeezed into the market. That was luck, mostly. And without money or luck, no matter how many "affordable" units Towbes builds for a lucky few lottery winners, this area will always be way out of most people's price range. So why not protect the semi-rural ambiance and low density character of our neighborhoods? And why not protect the Gaviota Coast while we are at it?

Eckermann is exactly right. It is impossible to "build down" housing prices on the South Coast. Any assertion to the contrary is just fantasyland.

In case nobody has noticed the price of homes in Noleta has fallen dramatically in the past few years. Just how low must the prices be driven by over intensification and ruining the quality of life before the advocates for such things are satisfied. Converting ag land to dense housing is complete insanity. As much as the workforce needs reasonably priced housing those folks also need a livable environment and food. Thank you Janet Wolf for not being intimidated by a single letter.

Thank you Janet Wolf for standing up for the community, the people of the 2nd District.

The state and outside groups such as CRLA do not understand that the County's fair share of housing does not all need to be crammed into Goleta and Noleta.

All urban areas in the County should accept their fair share, so it is not all dumped in the 2nd District; how unfair!

Please protect our open spaces and ag lands, especially Caird (an organic farm surrounded by 2 sensitive creeks), South Patterson and San Marcos Growers.

Beach Fan, have you seen what "affordable" means around here? Upwards of a quarter million dollars. That is not affordable to most people, it just pencils out when you apply a standard formula. Eckerman is right; a few more units here and there will not make Santa Barbara an affordable place for most people. Why do you assert, "some project will be built there"? Not all development is inevitable. There's something there now: San Marcos Farms. Lots of people want it to stay ag.

"Affordable housing" is a misnomer - those units are NEVER built in this area in any number (usually 1 or 2 to get a macmansion project approved).

This eleventh hour letter does not represent what the people in the area want, but rather what developers want and have been lobbying for in Sacramento, not Santa Barbara.

I hope a response to this letter includes an evaluation of how many empty units there are in the entire Santa Barbara/Goleta area, what growth there has been over the last 10 years to provide a guideline of how many units are required in the future.

And then any lobbying in Sacramento should allow both sides to be heard, with sufficient time for adequate and researched responses. Eleventh hour action is just plain bullying.

Existing homes would suddenly become affordable if the federal government would stop subsidizing the jumbo mortgage market. The housing bubble has not yet deflated. It has been pumped up since 1970 when the federal mortgage agencies started. A huge part of the market is speculative. If that segment was wiped out by the retraction of federal intervention, then prices would fall into a range where a working family could buy a house by saving money.
Remember saving money?

Santa Barbara's real estate consortiums are able to keep those "available" and "for rent" signs up for years on commercial and retail properties, rather than reduce rents. I don't know if they're significant players in residential property sales.
Sotheby's annual report says there was a 20.8% decrease in price/sq ft between Dec. 2010 and Dec 2011 in SB.
One of the big problems with low-income housing is lack of controls to keep properties available. We can build an infinite number of low-income housing units and have none available to low-income buyers if they're bought by qualifying people and resold by them at market value.
San Marcos Farm and Fairview Gardens and similar agricultural use property should be preserved, but the only way to preserve open space is to allow high-density development in other areas.

14noscams, from what koolaide pitcher have you been drinking. The "smart growth" people (i.e., developers) have been telling us for so long that the only way to preserve open space is to allow high density development that this statement, which is not based on any science or even rational logic, has become a truism. This may be true of a place that is experiencing high and steady population growth rates, but the South Coast of Santa Barbara County is simply not growing at such a rate that we have to accomodate tens of thousands of new people each year in high density residential developments. Not only that, but walking around my neigborhood, there are at least six vacant homes with for sale signs in the front yards within about a quarter of a square mile. If there is such a pressing demand for housing, why are these perfectly fine homes in a nice neighborhood vacant? Vacancies (especially at the currently depressed prices) indicate a lack of demand. Economics 101.

Eckermann is absolutely right. Preserving open space only happens when you don't allow high-density development. For example, high density development is currently taking away ag-land in Goleta.

The people behind the "smart-growth" movement are the same wealthy developers and State and County planners who couldn't get around local zoning rules in the 1970's. They went to the State Govt. and took control of the housing agencies to usurp local control, so they could continue to get away with building in over-developed areas where property values are high. You don't see these same people moving to Barstow or other areas where affordible housing is not as profitable to create.

The Gaviota Coast becomes more vulnerable to development when high-density projects get passed. The higher, denser populations in the area don't stay content living in small, unhealthy high-density units.