SBWomanBy an edhat reader
SBCC wants more student housing built: 55% of 16,000 students come from outside of SBCC District Service Boundaries. (On Thursday, 4/11 Trustee Agenda at 4p: Request from Donors) SB City is adding more Housing in response to CA State Mandates to build, and in to respond to employee Housing needs. An estimate 4,000 additional units. Infrastructure is inadequate in Santa Barbara. As experienced when 101 closes, safety and delivery of survival supplies is an issue. What is SB’s carrying capacity? Who gets the additional housing units: students, workers, or both? Can SB accommodate 10,000 more housing units than currently exits?
I read an article that said A geologist from way back when said Santa Barbara would be most comfortable at no more than 70,000 people. We’re almost at 100,000, NO we don’t have the infrastructure for any more homes or 500 sq ft boxes that they are calling homes these days.
All of this angst would end if you SB folks would embrace your obvious future and let progress have it’s way. Resistance is futile. You are destined to become North Santa Monica whether you want too or not. So let’s put the pity in the potty , grab some gumption and get to building The Mesa Towers! Just picture it – 25 stories high of gleaming glass and metal with some IPE wood accents on the balconies for that hip organic vibe. How beautiful it will be reflecting the sunrises and sunsets while providing safe haven for the students destined to be Future Leaders of America- You’ll be famous!
PARVOPUP. Your sarcasm is lost on Edhatters.
I very much agree with the comment about the geologist’s opinion. But it doesn’t even take an educated opinion, just logic, to figure out that Santa Barbara’s unique topography imposes limits on the amount of population that can safely be crammed into a narrow, bowl shaped area between high mountains and ocean. There is only one road in and out–101–not even any frontage roads etc. that go much distance. Hard to evacuate in emergency, and limited space. Many other factors also limit the extent and places that houses should be built, including areas hard to defend from fires, and areas on unstable earth. (places like Colorado are built on solid granite that never slides, unlike California coast ) I know lots of people who loved SB are now wanting to leave.
And goodness knows that our neighborhoods, roads, etc would be safer without these 20-something drivers flying all over town. They should reside on campus and stay on campus. Where I went to school, freshmen could not bring cars to school and students who did had to park in a lot that was a mile away. We walked everywhere and only used our cars to go home a few weekends per semester.
Santa Barbara has an ordinance for high rises because that’s what the people wanted. Don’t like it? The east coast awaits you. Bye Felicia.
1554994301 – why not a high rise at SBCC , like you’d expect on the East Cosdt? This is CA where we have 114- community 2-year colleges to serve every resident near their home for the student to live at home with their family. Only 11 campuses have a travel distance of more than 60 miles to justify a dorm. (College of Siskiyou in Weed is one example). We don’t do high rises in SB County. The first 7-story was the Granda Bldg; the next was the Prudential Bldg (a retirement home) in Isla Vista that became “Francisco Torres student housing” after seniors chose to remain in SB. The developer had to buy the Fire Truck to gain project approval because there wasn’t one with a ladder to access the height! This is a beach community. A lifestyle sought by many at a cost.
I vote for NO student housing. Shame on City Council (except for a Randy Rowse) for prioritizing foreign and those coming from outside of the SBCC District over workers who need to live in Santa Barbara.
You must be elected to City or County office! YES!! We need a cost study. These students who do not live at home with a property tax paying person need to pay a $500+ Tax for fire, police, ambulance, street,infrastructure, social, water services that students get FREE paid for by US. It’s simply wrong to make us cross subsidize them. They pay $150 for an activity card. Charge them a City/ County Card gre. BTW, CA was the only state to pay for 2.7M enrolled student ObamaCare Premiums . In other states, NO enrollment in college without proof student or family paid health care premium. CA residents will pay for anything and everything. Next up: free SBCC Housing . Wait. You’ll see it.
Earhtquakes.
This is a two year community college!!! Not a university. Housing and the “no car rule” for freshman should not be part of this picture!
Earthquake argument is invalidated by tall dorms at UCSB. Can design for EQs.
Unless we change the state law, we are required to allow SBCC to grow as large as they want. Building housing is then the only way to minimize the impact of the numbers of students on our town. Too bad there isn’t another location where they could move to. That property along the waterfront is probably worth billions.
OK, so maybe not “high-rise” in the east coast sense, but SB high-rise (35′ – 45′?) could still house students in a dormitory-style efficient accommodations on campus that would be controlled by the SBCC – not weirdo greedy landlords. Secondly, it is certainly possible to build earthquake-safe high-rise buildings. Building Codes these days make it so expensive to build, that we should build more efficiently – not less.
…because a geologist is the most qualified person to weigh in on the matter….are 30,000 more people going to make SB sink into the ocean?