Anonymous
By an edhat reader
A four-story mixed-use development at 825 De la Vina was given final approval by the Architectural Board of Review on March 22, 2021.
The owner, JDC Construction Development Group from Chatsworth, hired DMHA Architecture from Santa Barbara to develop the current 17,911 square foot surface-level parking lot using the Average Unit-Size Density (AUD) program.
They are proposing a 21 unit rental complex to include five, 2-bedroom, ten, 1-bedroom, and six studio units ranging in size from 483 to 1,419 square feet with an average unit size of 776 square feet. Two of the units will be designated as “moderate-income inclusionary units.”
Residents living adjacent to 825 De la Vina stated they were not properly notified of the January 2021 meeting when the initial approval occurred because the city suddenly changed its meeting notification process right in the middle of COVID, and just prior to this primary and key decision making meeting.
The proposal includes 23 parking spaces and 32 bike parking spaces. Concerned residents have stated this is not enough parking for the already limited street spaces in the area and the massive size of the building will affect surrounding residents.
Residents will be protesting this project on Monday, June 21st at 1:30 p.m. at 825 De La Vina Street while the city council views the site.
Mixed use? What is the 380 sq ft of “commercial space” going to be used for? this is an abomination to include this very boxy building in this neighborhood where there are historic ‘Structures of Merit’ in the same block. There are no apartment buldings of this style, size and density close by. The design is definitely not compatible with the neighborhood. Much too dense for this area and there not enough current parking for residents and businesses in this area. More units just adds to the parking/traffic issues. We could use housing for the “missing middle” in this area. This will not be affordable and only 2 affordable units will be provided.
380 sq ft is perfect for a neighborhood cannabis dispensary. 🙂
LMAO…. “32 Bike parking spaces….” What a joke!
Only two moderate-income units included? Not even any low-income ones. It will be interesting to see how much they charge for the 483 square foot apartments. I hope they don’t let any of them become vacation rentals. I feel for the neighbors; sad to have a big three-story building squished into the neighborhood.
I prefer 21 housing units built two blocks off State compared to having 21 units built in one of the neighborhoods.
Sorry that should read 32 Racing style bikes? Followed the posted link waited the allotted 10 minutes for the SB.gov pdf file to load, oh look they are using “https://www.dero.com/dero-decker/” lifts… If you note in all their beautiful pics/videos: skinny tires??? They offer an “Fat Tire Tray” that fits up to 5″ tires, woop de doo… Point being if your bike has panniers/loaded rear rack/anything that makes it “Top heavy”, you’re looking a new wheels every few weeks. Their “Brochure” pictures a “Track” bike (so like maybe 16 lbs.) & the “Commuter” way in the back no load but visibly tilting> so CW was way more concise than me, obviously, I have issues, when somebody says you can just park your bike like this or that, knowing nothing about your bicycle. Not that I “Approve of E-Bikes” or anything but charging & weight could be issues? This rant is only regarding the “Bike parking”… all that & I’m sure I didn’t even get the actual point across,
20% of the current housing stock in this city is already dedicated low and very low income housing. This is a limit that cannot be exceeded or else it sickens the entire economy. Problem is there is very little turnover, once someone gets one of these units. And they often make sure it gets handed down to other family members. The other problem is people think they have a right not to commute. Which means few will ever be happy with the available housing stock. Can’t keep adding “affordable” units with no turnover. However in fact, all local housing is affordable when it rents or sells at the market price. Just may not be affordable to you, but if the offer is taken the housing unit is de facto affordable. Prices are high here. But the city has already dedicated a huge amount to subsidized fixed price housing. Come back when you qualify for subsidized senior housing – because one can expect a little more turnover of units in that market.
Part of UCSB freshman orientation needs the warning that after four years you may not want to leave, so pick your major with care, will it let you earn what you need for your lifestyle choices; investigate early what the local housing prices and availability are; and be realistic about whether you will have a future in this town after you graduate. The local area has no capacity to absorb 5000 or so new UCSB graduates every single year, who simply do not want to leave. How does your chosen major match local job needs that will provide sufficient income that allows you to stay, if in fact there is any housing available? Prepare for this eventuality now.
Good advice. You will also earn more respect from SB employers if you leave town after graduation, get a big city job, and then come back with a work history and experience.
This 4-story development at 825 De la Vina has NOT undergone the scrutiny and long view planning that it should be required to undergo when a development of this size imposes itself on the city and its residents.
If unquestioned–What’s next?
Where else could this happen in Santa Barbara?
What about all the empty buildings downtown and all over Santa Barbara?
Why is the City approving NEW construction when Santa Barbara is overflowing with increasing numbers of VACANT buildings?
825 De la Vina St. needs further critical review before moving forward.
Glad to see more apartments being approved in the downtown area. Keep them coming!
NO NO NO! Stop cramming more and more people into a town with streets already at gridlock, running out of water, power outages and generating more trash and sewage. It’s no longer trying to “live within our resources” it’s all about the higher property tax dollars generated with new buildings. Our city “leaders” are VERY short-sighted!
When the Land of the Lotus Eaters has more eaters than Lotus, and the lovely lotus needs much water to thrive, what then? We so enjoyed the Sublime Dream.
It is currently a parking lot. The proposed project is an upgrade.
No Mr Ahchooo, I disagree with you. Housing costs will finally drop in this area as it becomes more of a crime infested sewer (think Oxnard or Detroit). Projects of this ilk hasten the downfall and accomplish what the city has been pushing for so hard – affordable housing at any cost (because nobody in their right mind would want to live here).
Limon is likely to say yes to these bills. So sad…
Limon, and her “progressive caucus” probably helped write both SB 9 and SB 10 . Why did we elect her? She represents a very narrow, highly politicized agenda, but not this local area at large. A huge disappointment to have wasted this position on someone who fails to represent this unique area independently.
They don’t care about the city , that’s why we need new council members .
I know of people who plan to ‘show up’.’ The mayor and council need to see there are plenty who are mortified with what they are allowing to happen to Santa Barbara.
Check out how much they care about their own ‘yard.’ Has any one seen de la Guerra Plaza? Ragged flags, grass worse than how it appears after El Mercado . . . Disgraceful!
If this property was so important to you LovesSB, why didnt you buy it and preserve it? Progress is a basis for Progressives, unless its rebuilding or improving an old building or actually helping alleviate the lack of rentals.. Then Progressives become Conservatives wanting to conserve what they feel is valuable to them…. Interesting dichotomy.