A little correction anyone can verify by walking the Lane. There are very few euchs along Padaro Lane. The most abundant species on the west end where the side rail is planned are old Monterey Cypress.
The people making the environmentalist argument just flew in from Aspen on private jets.
Wow, great list. For a small town, we have a lot to offer. Lotusland is my favorite place on earth and the Music Academy is a rare gem that many aren't aware of. Other favorites are the Santa Barbara Zoo, Natural History Museum and tour of the Mission.
You beat me to it!
El Paseo walkway near the restaurant lobby?
This is a skylight in the hallway on the way to the historic El Paseo restaurant.
I find the architecture and hardscaping very boring. It looks like it belongs in LA or Orange County. Why can’t we keep more of the Spanish Colonial Revival aesthetic, which is timeless and has character?
Saturday Fisherman's Market on the pier (by Brophys), every Saturday 6-11a. Meet your fishermen and get the freshest local seafood available, sooo good!
While I sympathize with the Padaro homeowners there are two noteworthy reasons to remove the majority of the trees and add the additional mile of siding track. First, the majority of these trees are non native eucalyptus which are highly flammable and the most mature can consume up to eighty gallons of water from our depleted groundwater reserves per day. Second, the additional double track in this area will relieve congestion between Union Pacific freight trains and the SurfLiner service that will improve adoption of rail service for commuters between Ventura County and Santa Barbara. We should always take a societal or community perspective with these types of improvements.
I think those Padero Lane residents would be concerned about the loss of trees which currently largely block the view of the freeway and reduce noise more than the loss of some parking spots. Currently, with the trees, walking along Padero is much like walking down shady lane, and that will likely change dramatically. Of course, he track directly through Carpinteria was in place by June 22, 1887. The section running northwest from Carpinteria beside what is now Padaro Lane, toward Summerland and Miramar, was most likely laid during late June through early August 1887. So, it's not like they didn't know the train tracks were there when they moved into their homes.
Agree!
Many of these people who whine and cry about not enough housing are the same ones who bitch about losing trees in turn for improved infrastructure and public transportation that would actually support the type of population increase that would come with more housing. We don't need more permanent residents and we don't need people in other parts of the country buying SB homes they visit 1 week per year.
This is a disappointing take from the author. The railroad right of way, where this work will occur is where the railroad has a right to build. The fact that residents have illegally planted landscaping there for decades, should not hinder a modest public benefit project. This private encroachment has occurred along Padaro Lane (the road) as well, where private property owners have put landscaping, walls, and PRIVATE parking (with fake no parking signs), depriving the public of beach parking.
That’s a great list and going to check out the train museum with my 5 year old grandson. I would also add the natural history museum (mechanical dinosaurs are fun) and of course the Moxie in downtown.
You don't need a kid to go to the Sea Center - it's fun and informative, and will bring out the kid in any adult.
I’d like to get this as a tattoo. Or maybe a billboard. Probably a billboard. Bravo, regardless.
“ You should remember that where you’re sitting right now used to be a tree, a field, or open land at some point. You benefit every day from development that required change. Just because you’re comfortable with the changes that happened before you got here doesn’t mean everyone else should be denied the opportunity to benefit from improvements today.”
I suspect the residents of Padaro Lane are more concerned with losing their parking carve outs on Union Pacific property than with losing the trees.
Tony, I was just having a little fun with my morning coffee when I wrote that comment and didn't mean to trigger anyone.
Regarding action, I try to be a good steward of the land and support local regenerative agriculture and ecological efforts.
I really don't get the"just because you got yours doesn't mean that nobody else gets theirs" thing. One of the main reasons to preserve the natural environment is for future generations - perhaps even when it goes against current growth needs.
And lastly, MAGA doesn't have a great track record with the environment and LOVES concrete. Look no further than the Whitehouse rose garden. That's more factual and political. Plus the "MAGAfication of Montecito" rolls of the tongue nicely. Give it a try!
I appreciate your earnestness and tenacity and desire for process. I share it. But after 10 years of a huge vacancy, a dying mall, and then a horribly obnoxious idea from the current owner to put up 7 stories and tear down the entire beautifully designed mall, I think we have a good deal before us. I can assure you that when Macy's was offered up for lease, every broker worth a bag of beans was out there hustling every potential opportunity. A lot of money in brokerage fees was on the table for the taking. These brokers can sell ice to an eskimo - yet - they came up with nothing. If this is being rushed, it's because this is such an amazing opportunity for SB downtown. Many of us just want a bustling and fun city, with people around supporting good restaurants and retail. A meeting spot which for friends, family and strangers that is interesting and fun. The ever important third space. We see it in Europe everywhere but in the U.S. it's usually in tacky indoor malls. We get State street and our wonderful outdoor mall back with this.
Don’t ignore the opportunity costs of looking for other deals. Not only do you risk losing this deal, there’s no guarantee another deal would be better. And it would add at least 2 years until a new deal would happen. That’s years of delaying the direct parking revenue, indirect sales tax from more people in downtown, additional years of City staff time working on the RFP and maintaining the empty property, years delaying the projects the housing fund could spend the $6m on, risks losing other tenants in Paseo Nuevo, etc.
A bird hand is better than 2 in the bush
Exactly, Christian. Very well said. This project is needed, right now.
This modest project— the addition of one mile of siding— has the potential to greatly improve the reliability of the Surfliner, and make it more attractive and convenient for many thousands of passengers. The objections to this project are cynical and infuriating: a handful of uber-wealthy beachfront homeowners (a current listing is @ $40 ,000,000), who knowingly bought homes along the railroad tracks, object on “environmental” grounds to the removal of some trees. They think nothing, ever, should bother them in the slightest, least of all improvements in a rail line for the hoi-polloi.
Bottom line: there is an established process for these types of transactions that is designed to make sure the community residents get the best deal possible (at least in terms of affordable housing). Everyone involved with this seems to be doing all they can to keep this plan from going through that process. If this is all about the best interests of the community, why not just transparently go through the established process to make it happen? It is the collaborative effort to subvert the process that rings alarm bells for me.
I think development is just such a different animal. I've worked a little bit with very experienced developers. People who ONLY do RE development. They make mistakes all the time. They simply have more successes than failures. In other words, they get it right - costs, allowances, contingency, interest rates, recessions - about 70-75% of the time. The 20-25%, well, sometimes they lose money, sometimes they walk away. I believe Yardi's software is in regards to managing real estate that already exits. Procore is the software for managing real estate developments and construction. Very, very different businesses. I think if there were another interested party, they would have stepped up. I agree with you that competitive bidding is usually best. But don't think many people are crazy enough to put offices in that Macy's building. It takes some gumption, tenancy, community buy in. When you have large projects like this, there are not many players. Sometimes, only one. And why would we not want a local group doing this? Remember, the city eliminated mandatory low bid process for construction projects a while back for a reason. When you take the lowest bid, you get what you pay for. And it always goes to someone out of town who does not care about our community. I see it all the time with workers from LA. They don't give a rip. Yardi is local and seems like a quality company. They have a non-profit foundation. I know they treat their employees well. They probably don't even need this, they want this. It's not so much about profit. How could it be? The project is just kind of ridiculous, putting offices in a department store without windows on the second floor. They have great offices in Goleta. Where is Sonos? Where is Google? Where is Microsoft? Where are the Quantum Computer people who work for Google? Goleta. Surely they could afford to do this project if they really wanted to be downtown. They don't care about creating a great office environment for their people. Or about revitalizing downtown SB. The heads of these companies do not live in the area or care about it. Why make it so complicated. Take the win. It's great for everyone. We don't need more studies or hand wringing. I work nearby and I'm tired of seeing a dying mall. Sorry my patience is up. If they do indeed have a home run, which is highly unlikely, good for them. I don't disparage success or envy people who work hard and get a good outcome and help others along the way. Let's have some progress for a change. The enemy of the good is the perfect which never happens.
John: I think we should keep in mind that Yardi is a software company that sells software *and data* for *real estate property management*. The only companies who have their level of insight into real estate property values and costs of development, operation, etc. are their competitors like RealPage (and on a smaller scale, AppFolio). Let's also assume they want the best deal possible and are pushing for terms as much in their favor as possible (after all, that's how you become a company with multiple billions of dollars in revenue). The only way to discover the market value of this deal -- with all of the elements that are on the table now, land + improvements, no encumbrances) -- is to have a competitive bidding process, which has not happened here. At minimum, there should be disclosure of due diligence documents supporting valuation, which has not happened so far.
Circling back to my initial comment: the key question about this deal is whether or not the city should be using the competitive bidding exclusion they obtained for the ABC deal to this entirely different transaction. The competitive aspect of the bidding has been mandated to produce the maximum return in terms of affordable housing, but it would also reveal a lot about the true value of the property being transferred. If we look at the Yardi portion of the deal, it is delivering exactly 0 commitment to actually build or acquire any affordable housing. If the housing trust fund spends all $5 million on administrative costs trying to arrange the rest of the capital stack for the 100-200 projected units without success, I think that would still satisfy Yardi's affordable housing obligation under the current terms. A competitive bidding process would almost certainly produce more housing benefit.
