Quantcast
Monday, April 14, 2014

Developer to update residents over Montecito Heights project

Officials seeking to develop a Montecito Heights hilltop owned by the church founded by legendary evangelist  Aimee Semple McPherson are scheduled to provide more details of the project at a meeting tonight (April 19) with residents. The Church of the Foursquare Gospel has put neighbors on notice that it wants to build a residential community on its hillside holdings – including Flattop, a popular neighborhood gathering spot and view point -  that it has owned for about 80 years. The proposal to build about 24 homes on the rolling hills has met with considerable opposition and prompted the formation of SOUL (Save our Undeveloped Land) of Flattop to fight the project. Tonight’s presentation is being hosted by the Montecito Heights Improvement Assn., which is advising folks to be polite in light of previous heated meetings over the same project:

The meeting includes Vince Daly and Greg Campbell representing the Four Square Church. They promise to provide more details of the development they are contemplating. MHIA has accepted their request to speak to the community for informational purposes. This is not intended to be a decisive, confrontational exchange. MHIA leadership will insist upon calm and respectful decorum.

The meeting, which will cover other topics, is scheduled to begin at 7 p.m. at the  Montecito Heights Senior Center.

Related Link:

  • Foursquare church to discuss “Flat Top” development Thursday. Patch

 

8 comments

  1. One problem with the name of your organization (Save Our Undeveloped Land).

    It’s not your land at all…

  2. Had SOUL been around (and successful) when their homes were built they would not live here.

    • If there was no need for more housing, people would stop building. Notice how certain areas, there is no more building going on. But other areas there is building going on? Supply and demand would be good for the SOUL.

  3. Don’t want to talk for SOUL since I am not in it but I think they are not trying to say that is their land (because it isn’t). They are trying to push the dumb church to look at other options (where the church would still make their money) but it doesn’t have to be ugly developement. It could be sold to some conservancy or made into a park, etc.

  4. Hello, everyone. Long-time reader, first-time poster.

    Have y’all considered for a moment that the decision to go with the word “our” might’ve merey been a result of poetic licensing for the purpose of the acronym?Personally, I don’t care for the acronym itself, but I think the misdirection here is leading to unnecessary confusion.

    As far as I understand, the big picture here is NOT that S.O.U.L. is staking claim as literal owners of the land in question; they’re simply making their voices heard regarding what happens to this plot in the community. (Of Montecito Heights. Where I reside. In my neighborhood. That said, I exhibit no delusions impressing upon anyone that I own this entire part of NELA. I just live here and have a self-proclaimed vested interest.)

    Full disclosure: I’m not a member of S.O.U.L., but I did attend the previous MHIA meeting where Foursquare’s “rep” “presented” their “vision.”

    • You are probably right. A better name would have been:

      S.O.O.W.W.T.I.O.P

      (Stay out of what we think is our park)

      Just doesn’t have the same snappy ring to it though…

Post a Comment

Please keep your comments civil and on topic and refrain from personal attacks. The moderator reserves the right to edit or delete any comments. The Eastsider's Terms of Use and Privacy Policy apply to comments submitted by readers. Required fields are marked *

*

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=""> <strike> <strong>