I spy my favorite little Summerland beach cottage !! Walk with Me is my favorite part of Siteline. It reminds me to stop and notice all the little things that make this city special.
great post!!!
Many commenters say this project won't be built because it must go through a CEQA review and there are too many possible negative impacts. Please be aware both Newsom and Weiner and their cronies in Sacramento are trying to gut CEQA. They and their new 'YIMBY' friends from the tech and real estate industries see CEQA as a 'barrier' or 'impediment' and are blaming CEQA for our housing 'crisis'. This argument has been proven false. SB residents need to get vocal about saving CEQA, as residents in many communities in CA. are already doing.
Precisely. Everything you listed (plus much more) will get flagged by the CEQA Environmental Impact Report and will open the door for endless lawsuits… this is how project gets killed
Any renderings the architect does are owned by them. But a third party with the right credentials and software can make an accurate rendering based on the plans the architect submits for approval. These can be done from different views to see what the project will look like.
This project is a garish parody of development. Eight stories behind the Mission, or anywhere in this town, should never be an option. You're not against development if you oppose this project. Anyone living here and who enjoys the lifestyle and the town would never want this project to proceed.
To separate fact from fiction and from the unfathomable:
1) When a city is out of compliance with the state, there is a provision called Builder's Remedy. A planner friend who passed on the contract for assembling and presenting the city's 'Housing Element' (due to the city's disorganization) told me when they missed their deadline with the State of CA. It sounded like a big deal at the time and so I wondered to myself, what happens now? Well, 505 E. Los Olivos for one.
2) This project is so ridiculous for our town that I think the B.E. law can, should, and will be challenged. So far it has been challenged in court anywhere in CA to my knowledge. We need to focus on how the city is planning on handling this. They have been justifiably sued 6 ways to Sunday before in similar ways - and lost much of our money most of the time. But this particular development is different, has to be opposed, and the case is ripe for challenge. This developer is a public enemy of the entire community. We need to know the city's plans on mounting the fight and hold them to it. We need transparency as the law allows and as is appropriate. Maybe they can't divulge everything, but we need to know they got this on the radar and won't fail.
3) I think the courts may rule the B.E. law can't be so draconian so as to cause ruin the aesthetics an entire community. The people of this community did not cause this problem and we should not bear the consequences of the city's incompetence. The ramifications of the law extend out for 50-75 years for innocent citizens. It is too punitive a solution and I suspect judges, who tend to mitigate damages, might try to find a middle road or reject the remedy due being so incongruous. It turns Nimby into Bhaaa! or Build Housing Almost Anywhere Anyway Anyhow. Sorry Roy, the answer to bad planning is not worse planning.
4) I like the other ideas. No stone should be left unturned. We should fight back with all options.
5) It is doubtful - though possible - that we could raise enough money to buy this property. The developers will not sell for what they bought it for. Getting 270 apartments here is a gold mine for them. If for instance they made $150,000 per apartment (if they sold out) that = $40 mil. Not bad a for few years work. However, we do have our resident billionaires here, and there is entitlement risk + many unknowns on this development. So it's worth exploring. Developers are optimistic by nature, so they probably think they'll make 55 mil. So, the stakes are high. At any rate, it would take 30m probably to get a place at the talking table. You would need a commercial broker to push this through, a good one. Hopefully they do it pro bono. I realize I'm throwing out big and general numbers, but they can be refined and things can be quantified better by the 'experts'. Building costs are extremely high and if the developers know they will face unrelenting opposition, they will start to consider other options. This is a war of attrition. Let's win it.
A few years back the city, county and the state tried to get the old bridge over Mission creek and its nearby roads and intersections upgraded to handle today's traffic along with the big concern, emergency access and evacuations. Money was allocated, designs were created, studies commenced. The entire project was stopped because of a few geriatric citizens who value their nostalgia more than our safety. They were able to squash the project regardless of its public safety necessity because, well, their feelings.
Today, there is a dilapidated old rusting fence, overgrown weeds and corrugated steel piled on an ugly old stone wall that all come together at a narrow bridge. No sidewalk, narrow access and monthly accidents.
So if a few 80 something year old activists could stop something as necessary as a new bridge and roadway because of their foggy memories, what makes you think this type of development will proceed?
1- It's in a high fire zone.
2- It's in the archeological protected area which requires a significant amount of site prep and monitoring, and the potential for significant finds.
3- It's in a historically designated area.
4- It's covered in protected oaks.
5- It's in Santa Barbara where there are 1000’s of retired and unemployed people with nothing to else to do but attend meetings and protest.
My guess is the developer is gaming to negotiate for something else altogether and this building, in its current form, is never built. But yeah, the rest of you are spot on. The city of Santa Barbara's employees continues to fail in their duties and responsibilities. They are inept.
Just to make my comment a little more useful, here's the contact info for the state lawmakers NL references.
Gregg Hart, Assemblyman: https://a37.asmdc.org/contact
Monique Limon, State Senator: https://sd21.senate.ca.gov/contact
To underscore why I disagree that complaining to the City "feel good, but it will accomplish nothing on a practical level," there are 120 other state lawmakers we need to convince beyond Gregg and Monique. Mayor Rowse and the City Council should be in Sacramento meeting these people and getting votes. We should expect more of our city leadership. I want them all to be as good as the people who work the parking lots :P
You are absolutely right about state lawmakers. But I think it’s an and, not an or. I doubt we as a city have exhausted every last possible option.
The City is restricted by the State Law. Those opposed to this should be talking to the State lawmakers who put this in place, and ask for immediate changes. Complaining to the City might feel good, but it will accomplish nothing on a practical level. The Builders Remedy ship has sailed no matter how much we wish it hadn't.
To all those commenters and interested parties, this will never be built. The developers are from out of town, I believe their name is Sm*%#h. Unlike well known local developer and landlord, Mr. St. George. . . Mr. St. George has dropped all of his pending projects even though he's as local as the Fig Tree.
So everyone, chill. If Mr. Ed is fleeing SB for greener pastures in SYV, then these kooks from LA don't have a prayer of building eight stories behind the Mission.
Is city council blind and other powers? Santa Barbara Old Mission is a National Historic Landmark. 90 feet towering apartments will loom over the Mission bell towers and decimate the photogenic church bell towers and site line. Esthetically, it will no longer be termed, Queen of the Missions. Also, traffic in and out of designated property will be thoroughly congested with Alameda Padre Serra converging with E. Los Olivos and Mission Canyon Rd. Some 15-20 years from now a round-about will be necessary.
Has the Mission Creek been EPAed?
Ironically, the developer has named this monstrosity, Mission LLC.
As a part time resident here for 5 years now it'd become quite apparent the SB city hall "leaders" don't have a f*cking clue what they are doing and the residents sit behind the hedge lined compounds in silence letting the town get picked apart by special interests and developers. It's mind boggling how difficult it is to get simple individual permits from the city but they readily give 2 thumbs up to build 8 story apartment complexes near the Mission and it's historic surroundings. Follow the money. Always follow the money.
Do the city administrators in charge of the housing element still have their jobs? It’s so sad that the citizens are stuck with this monstrosity because of government incompetence.
The travesty behind the Mission is a tipping point. This project is irreversible. Once built, there’s no Undo button.
It has pushed me past my limit of being able to sit on the sidelines (sitelines?) and do nothing but complain about the total leadership void in this city. We must act -- decisively and immediately -- to stop it. Whatever it takes. I call on City leadership to DO SOMETHING NOW, and tell us what the plan is. I won't hold my breath.
It's clear that our City leadership has totally abdicated. They've got no vision, are putting in no apparent effort, and aren't willing to fight for what needs to be done -- whether that's against internal inertia, or the overreach by the State of CA.
Have you tried talking to the City Council or Mayor, or head of a department? Every interaction with City leadership reeks of complacency. As one commenter here mentioned: there’s an excuse for everything. Often, blaming the State for why nothing can be done. If you aren’t willing to fight for what needs to be done, step aside.
We are creating a group of people who want to work together on a platform for the future of the city, and ultimately to select people we'll support in running for office. People who never want Santa Barbara to become an overbuilt LA suburb, but who also want it continuously improve. We’ll settle for nothing less than Santa Barbara being an absolutely world-class seaside small city.
If you want to join the mailing list, we'll email you as we progress updates and how you can get involved. The site is brand-new, so there isn't much yet, but join the mailing list to follow along: [www.vision4santabarbara.com](http://www.vision4santabarbara.com/)
Those developers are pure evil.
The geodesic dome - simply known at "The Dome" was longtime home of Summerland artist Dennis Spangler (and his partner Ron). We will be celebrating Dennis' life with a fantastic book of his hand painted fabrics, jewelry, bamboo paintings and other works of art at a party hopefully in August in Summerland. Will let Siteline know - and hope to see you there! Leslie
you just named two of the worst mexican joints in town...los arroyos..really? you must work there. that place is awful quality, tiny tourist portions, and high prices. Romantis was excellent mexican and central american foods mixed with some cuban accents. clearly you didn't eat there much. they have the absolute best mole i have ever had. lily's tacos trumps la super rica any day and Litos blows them all away. Want even better? Drive to Goleta and hit up Pepe's. Los Arroyos....lol that's hilarious
Unfortunate? That's weird to say. So you only want one burger place in town? lol ok...no thanks to that. While I was a HUGE fan of Romanti's and am sad it's closed (they still have their food truck!), i am super stoked this place is opening soon. The habit is awful now that they sold out, and every other burger place downtown charges between $15 to $25 for a burger(!!!). This place will slay it!
Bingo - why couldn’t City respond on time to State/Builder’s Remedy? Too busy trying to get homeless free wifi , too busy looking for new group to study State street and much to busy riding their ebikes.
You get what you elect…
Thank you for acknowledging where the proper blame for Builders Remedy lies - City Council and staff love to point the finger at the state, which to me is like blaming the speeding law when you get pulled for driving 90 mph. Staff and the council knew exactly what would happen if a compliant housing plan wasn't submitted in time, and for whatever reason chose not to devote enough resources/attention to it. Now they act all shocked and complain their hands are tied. Ultimately if the project behind the Mission does get built, it will be a colossal monument to the City's incompetence.
Re: the plans I believe you (or any member of the public) can still view the submitted plans by appointment, the City just can't publish them online.
Roy, yes we need more housing, but this project is way too big. There is nothing "wrong with people" we just want to preserve our town and the mountain views that make it so very special. The last sentence in your comment is incredibly insensitive. There is already way too much traffic near the mission.
Come on Rob, you should know by now that changes are a sensitive topic in this town… lol especially in Housing.
There should be an open conversation but people already fight it, not even knowing how it looks like and what really the scope is…
This was the plot of at least one Parks and Recreation episode.
Why are people always against projects like this? Are hey not aware of the housing shortage in Santa Barbara?? What’s wrong with people?? I hope this project gets approved. So what if there’s more traffic in this area.
R.
