The Surf Nazi has spoken: No access for you

SteveT

Phil Edwards status
Apr 11, 2005
5,906
2,521
113
Funny no one noticed the date HR was supposed to open.
April Fools Day.
Good, keep the litigation going.

Hollister Ranch coastal access delayed again

State panel says environmental impact report is needed


An April 1 deadline for completion of the public coastal access at Hollister Ranch will not be met, the California Coastal Commission has determined.
Instead, a full programmatic environmental impact report will need to be compiled regarding the potential impacts of the public access project.
The State Agency Team will select a consultant and expects the process to take about 18 months before the EIR and revised Hollister Ranch Coastal Access Program plan will be brought back before the California Coastal Commission for review, according to a March 1 briefing report.
“This additional analysis will not only increase the public’s confidence that access won’t harm sensitive resources, it will enable the commission to better withstand legal challenges in the likely event that program approval is litigated,” Sarah Christie, legislative director for the California Coastal Commission said during a meeting earlier this week.
Ms. Christie also said the state had not yet made it clear “on how to secure public access across this private property” — thus resulting in the project missing the upcoming April 1 deadline.
“While this is a momentary setback in the timeline for access, we believe it will accrue in the long run to a more robust and successful outcome,” said Ms. Christie.
At the heart of the issue is legislation signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2019 that was supposed to open some of the beaches at Hollister Ranch — 14,000-plus-acre subdivision that includes about 8.5 miles of publicly-owned shoreline along the Santa Barbara Channel with no land-based access for the public.
The road into the ranch is private property, thus blocking the Gaviota Coast beaches from public use.
Sen. Monique Limón, D-Santa Barbara, championed the legislation that was meant to open the beaches and said she was “disappointed” in the additional delay.
“The original intent of my bill was to ensure a balance between equitable access and protections for the environment,” Sen. Limón told the News-Press in an interview. “This was always the intent: to balance public access while protecting our environment.”
Sen. Limón pointed specifically to the more than 60 miles of Gaviota coastline, calling it “unacceptable” that it is the least accessible stretch of coast in California with less than 2 miles of publicly accessible shore. Hollister Ranch is part of the Gaviota Coast.
“I certainly am disappointed, but I am hopeful that the state agencies will work as expeditiously as they can to be able to get public access to a public beach which is ensured by our state constitution,” Sen. Limón said. “I continue to be very committed to understanding what this state does to meet its constitutional obligation to provide access to the public.”
The Hollister Ranch Owners Association mounted a legal challenge in 2020 to the project, contending it “threatens to eliminate the ranch’s right to privacy and will upend the longtime conservation efforts, destroying a host of constitutional rights in the process.”
However, the lawsuit, filed by the nonprofit Pacific Legal Foundation, was ultimately dismissed.
The California Coastal Commission, California Department of Parks and Recreation, California State Coastal Conservancy and the California State Lands Commission have created an inter-agency team to oversee the HRCAP.
The issue began in the 1970s when Hollister Ranch owners wanted to construct individual houses on their land parcels. The California Coastal Commission imposed public access provisions along with permits — which were tied up in litigation.
The California Legislature later instructed the commission to develop a public access program while allowing homeowners to pay a fee instead of providing direct access. More legal challenges ensued, and the commission was not able to implement the public access program that was approved in 1982.
Sen. Limón’s bill also raised in-lieu public access fees to $33,000 for each permit.
“As Californians, respect and reverence for our beaches is in our DNA, so much so that we enshrined public beach access into our state Constitution,” Gov. Newsom told the Los Angeles Times when he signed the legislation. “I’ve long fought to protect these public treasures for future generations and to ensure any person can experience their beauty. That won’t change now that I’m governor.”
During Wednesday’s California Coastal Commission meeting, the EIR was billed as a measure that could mitigate further legal challenges.
“I share the sense of urgency and frustration that you all have that it’s not moving more quickly, but wow, is it important, particularly when it comes to Hollister Ranch, that we balance that sense of urgency with efficacy,” Meagan Harmon, a California Coastal commissioner and Santa Barbara city councilmember, said. “We’ve seen over time how important it is that we do it right, and we cross the ts and dot the is.”
“I’d love it to be done tomorrow, but doing it right is really, I think, the key to ensuring access long-term which I know is our shared goal and the outcome we will achieve,” Commissioner Harmon said.
According to the commission’s report, the Hollister Ranch Owners Association “continues to express a desire to provide some level of increased voluntary public access to the Hollister Ranch beaches prior to the HRCAP implementation.”
An advisory committee made up of members from various groups such as the Chumash tribes, Gaviota Coast Conservancy, and the Guadalupe Dunes Center has been established.
Homeowners have also invited members of the Chumash tribes to visit the Hollister Ranch beaches, where private ceremonial activities were conducted over the winter solstice, according to the report.
The Hollister Ranch dates back to 1869 and has been a working cattle ranch ever since, producing about 1 million pounds of beef each year, the News-Press previously reported. There are about 100 houses on large parcels of agriculturally-zoned land in the area.
 

bluemarlin04

Michael Peterson status
Aug 13, 2015
2,565
2,383
113
As the recent guest of an owner, and after a glorious session at Rights and Lefts, I drove away with the unshakable opinion that the place should be kept private:roflmao:
I kind of feel this way too. People would ruin it.

I feel the same way about military bases on oahu. if they were open it would prob be overbuilt and ruined by transplants.

I voiced this opinon once and got called an imperialist by my friend.
 

stringcheese

Miki Dora status
Jun 21, 2017
4,013
3,818
113
You mean other people would ruin it:LOL:

Laughing at the "chumash tribe" doing some "ceremonial activities", oh please. There are two actual chumash still alive, and a bunch of people getting a lot of money because someone in their ancestry was chumash. One private club getting invited to hang out with another private club isn't progress. "Hmm, give us another year and a half and we'll start the process of thinking more about it then"

Too many lawyers. Just make a path. No stairs, no facilities, no showers, no giant parking lot, no churro stand...just open a path. There is a difference in making beach access not private and changing an area to make it easily accessible, and it isn't a fine line. All people need is to be allowed in, not accommodated.
 

Duffy LaCoronilla

Duke status
Apr 27, 2016
39,139
28,690
113
It’s private property.

It’s not “beach access” they’re after. All of the beaches and all of the surf at the ranch is open to the public.

What the state is trying to do is force the owners to provide an easement through private property to allow automobile access. The state also wants to seize private property to create parking spaces, toilets, trash cans, trail.

This is a taking of private property without compensation.

Again, the surf and the beaches are public. They’re just not easy to get to.

Btw, if you drove to the ranch from the south you just drove by 20 miles of the undeveloped and publicly accessible beaches called the gaviota coast.
 

stringcheese

Miki Dora status
Jun 21, 2017
4,013
3,818
113
"open to the public" has to mean accessible by land, an easement through private property isn't taking private property without compensation, it's stopping people from blocking naturally accessible beaches with man made obstacles like fences and security.
I understand why no one who lives there would want the whole "welcome to Hollister beach" package, and think that is too much as well. That would be what you're claiming.
Just a path. You can park however far away the legal parking is, and if it isn't worth your effort, too bad for you. But none of this "below the mean high tide line" crap, an actual path. We do it everywhere else in the whole state.

And don't nobody want to surf no damn gaviota coast and you know it! This is about surfing, I don't care about beachgoers. Who wants to just sit in sand. Weird.
 
Last edited:

casa_mugrienta

Duke status
Apr 13, 2008
43,659
18,153
113
Petak Island
And close it off to the boat-ins too.

Ranchers should be looking into how to get a ban on anchoring in that zone. Sensitive environmental habitat.
 

Mr Pecker

OTF status
Nov 6, 2021
220
276
63
As the recent guest of an owner, and after a glorious session at Rights and Lefts, I drove away with the unshakable opinion that the place should be kept private:roflmao:
Hope it will stay restricted in some capacity. Please leave something..... Is nothing sacred.....
 

stringcheese

Miki Dora status
Jun 21, 2017
4,013
3,818
113
You're all, what was it, imperialists? Yeah, that's what you are! :LOL:
I want to be able to walk in and not get stopped by some douche on an ATV, and be able to get back if the tide is up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MathDebater

stringcheese

Miki Dora status
Jun 21, 2017
4,013
3,818
113
Is nothing sacred.....
No, nothing is. It's just a stretch of coast. You're not allowed to fence those off unless you're the military. You shouldn't have to put facilities and accomodations for anyone but residents, but you need to allow reasonable passage in a way that doesn't alter the landscape.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mandudebro

~rwright~

Michael Peterson status
Apr 14, 2015
2,539
967
113
Los Angeles~California!
heya duffy,
ya ever surfed in Los Angeles, at Topange, 1 of our So. Cal. surferz fun Pt. Breakz,
back when it wuz inhabited by beach~front home owners? i did, pic, below, l8 70's, b4 Thee State bought it allll,
1st Surfboard~02.JPG
+ tore them houses down. Thee State also bought Zero's, waaaay back when,
then too, tore alllll them houses down. musta sucked for them property owners, no?

Can ya imagine, sir,
if Rincon wuz to suffer the same fate, and it would be, a FULL public beach?!?
hmmm...

f**k' beach~side home-owners,
err, land~owners, who do not want any~one else to access Thee Ocean...

of course,
your opinion,
will indeed sir, most like~ly differ,
i'd betcha...
randy
:waving:

It’s private property.
It’s not “beach access” they’re after. All of the beaches and all of the surf at the ranch is open to the public.
What the state is trying to do is force the owners to provide an easement through private property to allow automobile access. The state also wants to seize private property to create parking spaces, toilets, trash cans, trail.
This is a taking of private property without compensation.
Again, the surf and the beaches are public. They’re just not easy to get to.
Btw, if you drove to the ranch from the south you just drove by 20 miles of the undeveloped and publicly accessible beaches called the gaviota coast.
 
  • Like
Reactions: frontsidegrab

Duffy LaCoronilla

Duke status
Apr 27, 2016
39,139
28,690
113
heya duffy,
ya ever surfed in Los Angeles, at Topange, 1 of our So. Cal. surferz fun Pt. Breakz,
back when it wuz inhabited by beach~front home owners? i did, pic, below, l8 70's, b4 Thee State bought it allll,
View attachment 126349
+ tore them houses down. Thee State also bought Zero's, waaaay back when,
then too, tore alllll them houses down. musta sucked for them property owners, no?

Can ya imagine, sir,
if Rincon wuz to suffer the same fate, and it would be, a FULL public beach?!?
hmmm...

f**k' beach~side home-owners,
err, land~owners, who do not want any~one else to access Thee Ocean...

of course,
your opinion,
will indeed sir, most like~ly differ,
i'd betcha...
randy
:waving:
The ocean and beaches at The Ranch are open to the public. You can walk in at low tide, boat, paddle, swim, fly in. The only access being “blocked” is private non-beach property with a privately maintained road.

Would you be cool with it if I just decided to park in your driveway, install a porta-potty in your front yard, without paying you?

Also, there’s a key word in your post that is missing in the situation with The Ranch.

”Bought”. The state bought Topanga and Zeros. The people at The Ranch will receive no compensation for this taking. Not to mention the millions spent defending their property rights….