6 Responses to “AERIE Vote Halted; Applicant Requests Continuance”
Comments
March 9th, 2011
A picture of this development mess is worth a 1,000 words. It's a monstrosity and the CC is having a little trouble drinking the cool aid that a thin majority of the pro- development City slurped to a close approval. When Commissioner Mark Stone says publically that, ‘it’s too big’, even after the high end lobbyist force feeds him a Kobe steak, one has to wonder what the yes votes at the City were thinking. How do you approve a pile of crap so immense that the keepers of the California Coast say, forget it- twice?
March 9th, 2011
thank you for covering this important story, comprehensively.
March 10th, 2011
I don't understand why this project has to be so much larger than what is already on the property. What is wrong with keeping the same footprint and simply doing new construction. The view is the same. Oh, but we must maximize profits, regardless of the impact to surrounding properties. The City voted to restrict construction of larger properties on most CDM lots - but yet the billionaires on the front row can do any old thing they please. You know this is getting old.
March 9th, 2011
Reply to
March 9, 2011
A picture of this development mess is worth a 1,000 words. It's a monstrosity and the CC is having a little trouble drinking the cool aid that a thin majority of the pro- development City slurped to a close approval. When Commissioner Mark Stone says publically that, ‘it’s too big’, even after the high end lobbyist force feeds him a Kobe steak, one has to wonder what the yes votes at the City were thinking. How do you approve a pile of crap so immense that the keepers of the California Coast say, forget it- twice?
Those keepers were expressing pros and cons on the project and they did not vote on it today!
March 10th, 2011
We were very encouraged at the meeting yesterday. The Commission clearly wasn't taken with the new set of plans as being 'everything they had asked for'. Had a vote been taken it was unlikely it would have been in the project's favor. But even if it had, the motion before them included a condition to pull back the project to the vertical 50.7 line, something the opposition has been asking for from the City throughout this process and City was unwilling to do. The comments by several of the Commissioners made it clear that the project is still too big and sets too great a precedent for development on this bluff. When the Applicant asked for 'direction' from the Commission it was made clear to him that they want to see something smaller, less invasive of the bluff and more in keeping with the surrounding area.
March 10th, 2011
I attended the OC Apartment Association Convention today at the fairgrounds. Guess who one of the speakers was? Richard Julian. It turns out he operates numerous apartment projects including over 6,000 units with over 100 million a month in cash flows. Who knew? So this isn't just a small time developer trying to make a buck, but the front man for a billion dollar real estate conglomerate intent on maximum profits regardless of the neighborhood impact.
