Margaret Chard, San Juan Capistrano

Okay. Let me get this straight. I can no longer keep my grass green (we are being encouraged to go native), I only flush when there is something other than pee in the bowl, I need to turn our fountains off, I limit myself to baths with four inches of water in the tub—or shower for two to three minutes—yet 14,000 homes can be built out on the Ortega? Each residence will have at least three toilets. That is 42,000 toilets alone, plus swimming pools. Do we really need 14,000 more residential homes?  Why not concentrate on remodeling existing homes? That way the trades can keep busy. I have read all about the reclaimed water etc., but still, all this building will be a great drain on our environment. At this critical time, there should be a moratorium on new building. And finally, something is really wrong in wasting all that water up north to protect smelt. If they live up to their name, we would be better off with them gone.

About The Author Capo Dispatch

comments (2)

  • Well said, Margaret, with the exception of your “really wrong in wasting all that water up north to protect smelt.” Smelt are part of the food chain. It’s bad enough that we are destroying the oceanic food chain via ocean acidification, over fishing, and pollution like the Deepwater Horizon debacle in 2010, or the recent Santa Barbara oil spill. There are two things we need to survive: water and food.

    The legislature and governor need to: 1) ban fracking, 2) shutdown the water bottling companies like Nestle, that are pumping our aquifers dry, 3) put a stop to water intensive agriculture and ranching–e.g.: Almonds, Beef, Walnuts, Alfalfa . . . . Check out:

    http://www.ecology.com/2014/08/29/water-intensive-food-impact-california-drought/

    and, of course, limit population growth via a building moratorium.

    Unfortunately, our current City Council are living a fantasy that will cost each of us dearly when we run out of water. You can’t lower water rates in the middle of an extended “exceptional” drought, when you have to purchase your water from the local water district, and the water districts are bidding against each other for water. Santa Barbara, for example, recently bid $1600 an acre foot. They were outbid by $700, or $2300 an acre foot.

    Personally, I believe we should recall Reeve, Ferguson, Patterson, and Perry (who was appointed, not elected) before they bankrupt the City and us, as well.

  • If I’m not mistaken, there are 400+ homes approved in the Pacific Ridge project (recently out of bankruptcy) above the golf course, 1400+/- in the Districo project, and a recently approved “affordable housing” project……that is over 2000 units! The City Council should, in good conscience, impose a freeze on building permits City wide. These already approved projects can remain “approved” subject to sufficient water replenishment of the groundwater sources. Anything else is a slap in the face to those residents being asked to curtail water uses.

comments (2)

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>