••• “The city and architectural team representing the developer [of Paseo Nuevo], Paseo Propco LLC, took a revised project to the Historic Landmarks Commission, and company officials were met with a strong message: It’s too big. […] The project is proposed under the state density bonus law, which allows developers to exceed local height limit restrictions if they build affordable housing. Developers plan to demolish the former Macy’s building and build a 7-story, 233-unit market-rate apartment building. The development would stretch from the corner of State and Ortega streets, around the corner to Chapala. […] The plan also calls for six levels of below-market rate housing on top of Parking Lot 2, on the corner of Chapala and Canon Perdido streets. […] Although state bonus density law allows the developer to exceed the height limit, the city actually has more control over the height limit in this case because it owns the land.” Maybe if the design wasn’t so blocky…? —Noozhawk
••• “County Proposes Changes to Zoning Ordinance to Clear the Way for More Housing [….] Revisions include allowing taller structures and more density, as well as expanding the definition of open space [….] The proposed changes are scheduled to return to the Planning Commission for a vote on Oct. 29.” —Noozhawk
••• “Sable Offshore Oil Company announced […] it would seek federal permission to install an offshore storage and treatment facility located in federal waters, three miles off the California coast. The oil will be pumped from its three offshore platforms also in federal waters. This will put the company safely beyond the authority of state or local regulatory agencies.” The oil would apparently be transported by barges, although to where is not known. “The company also announced that it had just submitted to the Office of the State Fire Marshal an official request to restart its Santa Ynez Unit. The unit, which includes the three platforms, a processing plant, and a 120-mile pipeline, has been effectively shut down since the catastrophic 2015 oil spill. At that time, its deeply corroded pipeline leaked 142,000 gallons of oil into the Pacific Ocean off the Gaviota Coast.” —Independent
••• Santa Barbara writer Ashleigh Brilliant has died at the age of 91. Of local note, from the obituary on Noozhawk (and there are also ones in the Independent and Montecito Journal): “Beginning in the 1970s Ash took part in a campaign to ban leaf blowers, blaming them for unnecessary noise and dust. He stepped up his game in the late 1990s forming BLAST or Ban Leaf Blowers and Save Our Town, whose ballot initiative in November 1997 led to a ban on the use of gas powered-leaf blowers in the city of Santa Barbara. This civic reform was one of Ashleigh’s proudest accomplishments.”
••• “Based on repair progress at the problematic Regent’s Slide site, Caltrans estimated this week that Highway 1 could fully reopen for through traffic from Cambria to Carmel by the end of March. As always, that estimate comes with caveats.” —Noozhawk
••• The tree of the month is the African tulip tree, “considered by many horticulturists to be the most beautiful flowering tree in the world [and] now putting on their best show of glorious blooms in Santa Barbara.” —Edhat (photo by David Gress, courtesy Santa Barbara Beautiful)
················
Sign up for the Siteline email newsletter and you’ll never miss a post.
“It’s worth noting that Exxon did operate an OS&T off the coast of Santa Barbara for many years. It was bitterly fought by local environmentalists and many county supervisors who worried that the barges offloading the oil and the facility itself posed serious environmental risks. The solution they settled upon? The pipeline”
LETS GO SABLE!
It’s also worth noting that said pipeline ruptured and sent 142,000 gallons of oil into our local waters just a decade ago. You must not be from around here… we don’t like bad actors ruining the environment and getting another shot. Fool me once, shame on you – fool me twice, must be named Christine!
Here since 1976- you?
Totally. It’s much better to have the oil extracted in a far off land, where there aren’t nearly the environmental restrictions and controls we have here, where the local population has no say nor derives any benefit from oil extraction, where a 142,000 gallon spill wouldn’t even be reported, then have that oil shipped via barges halfway around the world so we can use it here locally /s. Environmental NIMBY’s suck.
That project looks like Soviet Russia.
Not even close
Those first two posts seem pretty indicative of the choice Santa Barbara has to make to accommodate growth: either significantly increase housing and density in downtown and state street that can support many community businesses (yes, that project could use some step backs), or distribute that housing as sprawl across the city through moves like “expanding the definition of open space,” causing more environmental harm and missing the opportunity to evolve and improve what makes this city an amazing place to live.
I agree with you. Downtown is the place to grow.
Again we see the woke mind virus push the notion that “everyone deserves to live in Santa Barbara” with these massive complexes that are changing what people love about the town in the first place. The entire town will become affordable as we sit by and watch them destroy it. They can’t even figure State Street out.
What I love about this town are the friendly, welcoming people.
From the Paseo Nuevo article:
The city is “offering many concessions to the developer, including giving the land away to them, valued somewhere between $32 million and $39 million; offering a portion of its annual property tax at the site; and not fighting the 60-foot height limit in the city charter.”
Surely, some of this can be leveraged for better design that makes people want to live in and enjoy being near this project. As is, I agree with Sheila Lodge – It’s too big… and too boxy. Revitalization isn’t just build it and they will come. There are specific design parameters that create community spaces where people want to create, spend, and flourish. Use them!
Also, “Even with all of the concessions by the city, the developers said they only plan to see a 6% return. McAdoo said most developers won’t do a project unless there is a return of at least 8-10%. ”
This is absurd. They want/get all kinds of concessions and they want a hefty profit to boot. Please find a developer who actually cares about the community.
You think 6% is “hefty profit”, even 8-10%, for the amount of work and capital put at risk to develop an apartment building? You should start here: https://catalog.sbcc.edu/course-descriptions/fin/
That’s the same question I have. Why give away upwards of $39 million in property tax? This is a crazy bad use of Paseo Nuevo.
Dan – Yes, exactly. This developer – and apparently the one leading the La Cumbre mall redevelopment – might get a huge break on property taxes. They are providing much needed housing, which brings people (e.g. families with kids) into the local school districts. These districts are struggling to figure out how to accommodate a likely increase in demand for their services. Without ongoing contributions in the form of property taxes, that revenue stream that schools rely on will not be there.