CityofSantaBarbara
By the City of Santa Barbara
After weeks of weather delays, repairs are underway at the Alameda Park Bandstand, one of Santa Barbara’s oldest public entertainment venues.
Last restored in 1981, the designated City Landmark was built in 1888, after residents petitioned for its creation.
The project, led by the Parks and Recreation Department, will allow the Landmark to return to community use as a place for free public concerts, just as it did 135 years ago. “There is nothing better than seeing a historic structure being used and loved,” said Nicole Hernandez, the City of Santa Barbara’s Architectural Historian. “The Bandstand, with all its intricate details, is a beautiful and unique structure, and this project will let the space be a part of the modern era while connecting people with the past.”
The repair project includes the replacement of the structure’s roof, ceiling, and floor and repairs to stair treads and guardrails. Seismic and waterproofing improvements will also be made to extend the longevity of the repairs. The Bandstand will be repainted to match the existing colors once structural repairs are complete. No changes will be made to the structure’s unique Folk Victorian craftsmanship and architectural details.
The project is funded by a $216,118 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and $110,979 from the City’s general fund. Repairs are expected to be completed this spring, pending weather conditions.
More information about the project can be found at SantaBarbaraCA.gov/BandstandRepair.
Efforts to restore another historic outdoor venue, the Band Shell at Plaza del Mar, are expected to begin later this year.
“The project,” as I understand this term in the article infers the cost to refurbish this bandstand will be $327,097. Or, will the combined CDBG and City’s General Fund monies be used to refurbish this bandstand and the Band Shell at Plaza Del Mar?
This is a nice public benefit action. I would hope that the city would also return to us the pleasant Sunday concerts that it sponsored at this site back in the 90’s or early 2000’s. I know that these ended because they did not attract tourists but only locals. It would be nice to know that the city wants to serve locals, however.
When I read about projects like these that state “The project is funded by a $216,118 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) from the U.S. Department of Housing … ,” where these “Block Grants” are treated like free money, I am always reminded that this really isn’t free money. These “Grants” are tax dollars paid by the entire country and then a small amount is given back to various locales AFTER a large bureaucracy is paid to administer the program. Would it not be better if we didn’t have to pay the bureaucracy and were able to retain the tax dollars at home?
This project will cost over $300,000. It seems the public will have few objections to this renovation, as long as locals benefit from the project as it is public monies that are being spent, hopefully wisely.
Let me be clear, I’m not objecting to this work.
I do find it ironic that when a rental property provider has to renovate and tenants must be noticed to move that there is a massive public outcry against the very landlords that need to properly maintain their property. They are called heartless, money hungry, and driven by greed for noticing tenants to vacate in order to do this work safely.
Repairs of this Bandstand project include replacing the structure’s roof, ceiling, floor stair treads and guardrails. If this minor project is costing over $300,000, imagine what a rental property provider is having to pay to re-roof a building many times greater than this project!They may also require ceiling repairs if water has leaked in. This bandstand renovation has no plumbing, electrical, or concrete work, not to mention, no bathroom and kitchen remodels with appliances!
If this simple project is amounting to over $300,000 I doubt that many landlords are going to take on renovations, unless absolutely necessary, especially when they have to pay tenants 3x’s the rent in relocation fees, building permit fees, and the costs of today’s inflated construction and labor costs! I’m not seeing a massive influx of developers rushing in to build more housing, especially in light of tenant representative groups demanding more restrictive rent control and vacancy decontrol. But hey, let’s keep demonizing the very people that almost 60% of Santa Barbarians rely on for housing! How’s that working for tenants?!