Anonymous
By Randy Rowse, Mayor of Santa Barbara
This past Tuesday, City Council opted to play a rousing game of “kick the can,” thereby sentencing State Street to a minimum of three years of continued closure. The consultant-aided future design process continues unabated, but the current configuration of the downtown has languished in stagnation due to the indecision of the council. This is not a design issue, but a management problem. The eventual design is not dependent on maintaining the current use of the downtown corridor. This will be our fourth summer of status quo without innovation, experimentation, or a return to aesthetic standards.
I was not in office at the time the street closure was authorized. It was the right thing to do, providing relief for the beleaguered restaurants who were fighting to stay alive. But, I don’t think anyone imagined we’d be facing our fourth consecutive summer with no changes, no trial configurations, and no cogent policies to handle this interim situation. While I’ve so far remained at arm’s length, thinking that current conditions were finite and that a strategy was forthcoming, it’s apparent that it’s not the case.
Yet another subcommittee was proposed to, ostensibly, move plans forward. The current subcommittee’s only tangible product, however, was a rent structure for State Street parklets, which they then joined council in voting against. That rent structure, by the way, was calculated and intended to recover the costs of maintaining the “promenade.” That vote resulted in a $350,000 per year shortfall in our General Fund budget. It was suggested that somehow, inaction was the fault of the administration. Nothing could fall further from the truth. The seven of us on the dais are precisely where “the buck stops.” Policy decisions don’t happen in advisory subcommittees nor by individual suggestion to the City Administrator. They only happen per a majority of the council.
Polling data might be a means by which one takes the political temperature, but it is not how policy is determined. Information gathering is valuable, but skirting tough decisions by hiring more consultants or seeking out agreeable polling data is not the leadership you deserve. The next formed subcommittee holds no promise of change.
Councilmember Eric Friedman proposed a stopgap measure to allow a more tightly defined “promenade,” while opening the rest of State Street to linear traffic. This would have the result of calming bicycle traffic — by the way, did we have a “bike problem” before the street was closed? — allowing for disabled persons to access the downtown business corridor and enticing those businesses that rely on traffic for their storefronts. At the very least, it would break the current pattern of an underutilized downtown, and it would allow property and storefront business owners the opportunity to recover. This, at least, would be a cogent interim proposal.
The eventual work of the State Street Advisory Committee and the consultant continues on pace. The completion of their task, however, doesn’t suggest a finite timeline for implementation, as we have found out with the numerous previous consultant efforts, architectural charrettes, and public forums. Change can be good, but only when it isn’t just for “change’s sake.” It must include diversity of needs, have a realistic financial plan, and, most of all, be devoid of politics, ideologies, or special interests. Our public commons require those characteristics if we are to be successful.
We need to move to improve our downtown beyond its current condition, and to act quickly, before the rate of exodus of businesses increases to the point of no return. Private properties and some types of businesses have arguably suffered loss of value by the continuation of the well-intended emergency mandate.
Being in business downtown for four decades doesn’t confer “genius” on anyone. I’m living proof of that. It does, however, give one perspective. Our policies must be inclusive, fair to a diversity of businesses, and encourage new enterprises. Our current status doesn’t provide that standard, and we must move decisively if we are to regain vibrancy and vitality in our downtown business corridor. The time is not three years from now, but now, right now.
Op-Ed’s are written by community members, not representatives of edhat. The views and opinions expressed in Op-Ed articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of edhat. [Do you have an opinion on something local? Share it with us at info@edhat.com.]
If you pay people to talk about it, they’ll talk forever. It sounds to me like the council is not able to manage. People in design know they need to distill choices down to at maximum 3 and preferably 2.
Focus groups are supposed to focus and not be allowed to spin in circles.
The Mayor can’t lead and/or the City Council won’t be led. This kind of BS is why I don’t care about diversity and who worked for what non-profit while checking all the boxes the party wants its candidates to hit. I want to choose to vote between people who can work together to narrow focus down to 2-3 options, eliminate the weakest of the three, debate the other two and then vote for the winner and all commit to giving the winning choice 100% support instead of doing a bunch of chicken “s” backstabbing and undermining.
Paseo Nuevo has aged out. Downtown is tired. That is OK. Not everything lasts for ever. What does matter is good leadership and vision. They say timing is everything, and the current timing in Santa Barbara is to have a near crisis situation occur with downtown at the same time we have a bunch of losers holding city and county political offices… which we deserve, because we did not pick them for their proven skills to work through issues like this.
And just how do you suggest that the mayor “lead”? He has one vote on the council, and he has consistently used that vote, along with whatever “bully pulpit” talk he can muster, to push for action and criticize the council’s inaction and deflection. He even wrote the opinion piece you are responding to. Don’t criticize him, support him – and let the council know that you do. He can’t practice leadership in a vacuum.
The mayor should lead by proposing specific items and lobbying the city voters to support them over the parochial interests of the individual district members. We created districts to allow them representation, we held on to a major elected by all to hopefully speak to an overview and to the general good. When the mayor simply objects or votes against something s/he becomes just like the others. So Rowse, decide a few things you want to see done to State and put them out there. Let’s have a debate outside the bureaucracy and behind the scenes lobbying.
Actually, he has done just that – and this op-ed is an attempt to rally the community, or at least express his frustration at his inability to move the council one way or another. He has expressed his desire to reopen the street until the community decides what it wants on numerous occasions, but the public that show up at meetings is made up mostly of interested parties. He is not simply voting no for the sake of voting no – but what is he supposed to do when the motions before the council are so counter to what he supports? And “behind the scenes lobbying” only works when you can offer something that is going the benefit those being lobbied. Not when one vote on the council is up against a roomful of parties who support the status quo. And with district elections, council members do not need to fear the wrath of the voters even if the mayor can successfully rally the people. Out of curiosity, have you attended the council meetings and expressed your view? (If so, you may have also heard the mayor express his.) A debate outside the bureaucracy would move no one.
“a major elected by all”
How soon people forget … Randy received only 38.6% of the votes. SB needs a runoff system so that the mayor is someone who actually receives the majority of the votes.
Totally agree Edney.
Restoration Hardware is pulling stakes. Employees say that cleaning human feces off the entryway every morning and then having homeless come in the store and lie down on the beds put them in a confrontational situation, daily. Save State Street Mayor before it is too late. Do something. Just reopen the street to the way it was for 100 years.
100% false why RH is leaving. It is a corporate decision to close many national stores based on the new direction of their business model towards a luxury retail/restaurant model, and nothing to do with Santa Barbara, and is actually opening in Montecito. The State Street location already had plans in motion to demolish the building and create a hotel; RH was gonna leave already and plans for the future there are not entirely certain.
I think State’s problems have WAY less to do with the issue of cars vs bikes (closed vs open streets) than the issue of what the place feels and looks like for those who go there to shop, eat, walk, whatever.
Who wants to go enjoy a night out surrounded by bums and their mess. Occasionally harassed, or worse. Not “clutching pearls” here for whoever is ready to throw that tired stuff out again.
The owner of the Natural Cafe nailed it when he announced he was calling it quits–his customers just didn’t want to watch homeless defecate in the planters in front of them while they ate lunch.
Rowse and the City Council are so predictable. Talk a ton, getting nothing done, swear up and down at neighborhood meetings and public events that they give a *#$% about progress, but don’t actually make the effort to maintain or improve the quality of life for their constituents. All the while getting paid, with outstanding benefits, and earning a pension.
Get in, make no waves, do nothing controversial or courageous, and announce to everyone that everything’s rosy. Seen it up close and now watching from the cheap seats again.
So are you joining the mayor in his criticism of the do-nothing council, or simply bemoaning your dissatisfaction with the state of things by blaming everyone (which really amounts to blaming no one)? “Rowse and the City Council”? Did you even read his letter? Believe it or not, the mayor and council are not of one mind on this issue – and simply blaming everyone from the sidelines is only going to keep the status quo, as you point out (“make no waves…” etc.) Please, learn the issues, pick a side and get involved – or at least make meaningful comments.
Gerry Dewitt,
A) I’m looking at the big picture. The city council argues and gets nothing done. Mayor Rowse blames the city council and gets nothing done. Their constituents and the visitors to Santa Barbara that bring in millions in tax revenue are the losers in this battle.
B) Yes, I read the letter. Twice.
C) I know the issues and I’m involved. My point about watching from the cheap seats is that I watched closely this behavior–as a staff member–by officials who’s job it is to make the quality of life better for the entire community make a bunch of noise and get nothing done, report to the constituency, governing board and employees that it’s all being handled, and actually accomplish very little. I’m involved in local community efforts to improve our neighborhood, and listened to our district’s councilperson profess how much he cares and how he’ll support our efforts then pawn off the hard work when we reached out to him for help.
I’m not choosing the mayor’s side or the city council’s side. I’m blaming those that were elected to work together and use the resources at their disposal to fix issues like this in their time in office. This isn’t a random rant.
I did not mean to imply that yours was a random rant – only to say that lumping everyone together doesn’t help promote or support a position. The mayor has taken a position, whether you agree with it or not; the council has not. It is not one position versus another. And with district elections, council members are really not elected to work together – but that’s a separate pet peeve of mine. You’ve watched as a staff member; I’ve watched as a council member – and I hope we can agree that things worked much better before district elections.
State Street was already in decline well before COVID. Articals can be found on the internet commenting on the vacant storefronts back to 2017 (and probably even earlier)
https://www.thechannels.org/opinion/2017/04/28/state-street-feels-empty-and-different-with-retail-apocalypse/
https://www.radiusgroup.com/noozhawk-bizhawk-santa-barbaras-anemic-retail-scene-needs-team-effort-to-survive-experts-say/
Ventura and SLO have vibrant downtown districts. Even smaller communities such as Arroyo Grande currently have more to offer than State Street.
SBsweetpea – agree, absolutely it was. State has had a steady downhill since WAY before COVID. After what, 2000 something it began its fizzle I think. So now what?
Forgive the Santa Barbara City Council Lord, they know not what they do. Besides Mayor Rowse, most have never written a business check and signed it. They do however have a talent for wasting millions of our hard earned tax dollars on consultents, ignoring much of their advice in the process. We all played “kick the can” as kids, but the Santa Barbara City Council has refused to give it up in their adult lives and they now use it as an excuse for governing.
221, When you say he “… must have never written a business check and signed it… you apparently don’t know, don’t care or forgot that the Mayor owned a business downtown for decades and was retired from business before he became Mayor.
Reading comprehension and misquotation … that’s the opposite of what 9:23 said. Perhaps a bug on your screen turned “most” into “must”.
7:53 and its upvotes (and the downvote of 9:23, with which 7:53 is in violent agreement) is emblematic of EdHate.
This essay makes sense to the degree that it doesn’t skirt the issues, which it does when the mayor doesn’t offer specific and actionable items for implementation. Everyone is good at criticizing everyone else it seems. Maybe the problem is too much “insider” language. Does the general public know what the council seems to “know” about who opposes a expeditious return to the pre-Covid landscape? I think not. But this is not rocket science. A couple of things I suggest, for example: 1. Anyone who is using public space should pay a market rate for that space at least equal to the cost of maintaining it. This would make the occupiers think twice about the viability of their encroachment and would almost certainly cause many to withdraw from the sidewalks and streets thereby freeing them for public use. 2. Once the street and sidewalks are reclaimed civilized transportation should resume. Minimally this is would be the old tram service and pedestrians and bicycles (maybe only non-electric mode?). Restoring this sort of traffic would allow businesses other than bars and restaurants a chance. I think the council knows this basic stuff and other professionals have offered plans based on this sort of thing but clearly the council members are beholden to or intimidated by the bar and restaurant owners who think of State Street as their private fishing pond.
Unfortunately, the issue of charging for the use of the public space has been before the Council, a couple of months ago, and they decided to charge very little with several of the Council wishing to charge nothing or next to nothing (Sneddon and Jordan) and deciding to charge a minimal rate. Maybe they can revisit it? But since the majority were so happy at the last meeting, it’s not likely to have a different vote.
Even worse, they changed the plan during the meeting! Shaking my head still at this one.
https://www.independent.com/2023/04/28/santa-barbara-meets-restaurants-halfway-with-2-parklet-rate/
Here’s what comes to mind for me on State…
City of SB, stop wasting our money on consultants unless you’re ready to move ahead with what they tell you.
And,
Sh-t or get off the pot.
Make those who get paid well to make these decisions commit to a path forward rather than having an endless debate involving consultants, polls, and workshops. Yeah, it’s not easy to know what to do but that’s why City higher-ups have a cush job (= hard to get fired, mucho benefits, zero accountability, never get sued…) I guess. Earn it ladies and gentlemen of the City. Take a direction and get it done. Not everyone will agree. That will never happen. Ever heard the saying “the emery of good is perfect”? This endless debate in the City Council is getting old, and businesses and people who actually spend money are losing interest fast. Lots of us have zero interest in State St. nowadays. Viva Goleta! Good luck SB. I’ll keep an eye out to see if you can get your act together.
I agree with RHS that people should pay “market rate” for the use of property. My concern is what is “market rate”? I haven’t looked at rent on State Street for a long time — but hypothetically if prime Street storefront is $5/sq foot/month – -what would be the “market rate” for parklet space? Wouldn’t it be less than $5/sq foot? I am always suspicious when the city looks at their costs — often I find their costs are way beyond reasonable. I would vote for the city to get bids on outsourcing the street cleaning and maintenance. Perhaps then we would know the market cost.
I have some questions for those who would like to see State Street opened to vehicular traffic again. Absolutely no sarcasm or snark intended because it might be a good idea and I’m just not understanding why. I will say I’ve lived here over 40 years and, to me anyway, the closed section of State Street feels more inviting now than ever before.
How does having State Street closed to vehicular traffic hurt businesses that are not restaurants or bars? It’s obvious how the closure has helped restaurants and bars and that might feel unfair, but I don’t understand why retail has suffered because of it. And how can we know that retail is suffering because of the State Street closure rather than because of Amazon and other e-commerce giants that don’t have to pay State Street rents?
If State Street were reopened to cars, wouldn’t it still only be able to handle a small fraction of the cars that the adjacent parallel streets handle? Wouldn’t drivers still be unable to park on State Street and have to use nearby parking lots and street parking as they do today?
Why do you feel that State Street is more inviting now? I found it more inviting before, with rules-based traffic for cars, shuttle, bicycles, and pedestrians. Due to the clear traffic rules, it was safer.
And there were more retail outlets. I actually went downtown to shop before everything got crazy But also to grab lunch, go to a movie, go to Yogurtland 🙂 etc.
YES, porkrind!! City Council should focus on the massive root cause of this issue, which is the local mega-landlords who essentially set the exorbitant market rate by owning so many properties, then reap tax benefits of allowing many properties to lie vacant for years. Vacancy tax, now!!! Capitalism sucks, we need regulation.
If State Street re-opens to traffic as is once was it will be the final act for downtown for a long time.
I agree with ALEXBLUE. State Street retail was dying off long before COVID hit and the street was closed. Hurting restaurants by reopening the street and removing their parklets is cutting of the nose to spite the face. It will just flush the remaining business down the toilet.
The real problem is the unwillingness of landlords to recognize that their ‘market rates’ are doing nothing but leaving empty buildings behind. We need a vacancy tax to force their hands.
It won’t! I think the older crowd has latched onto their memories of State Street of 20 years ago, and has forgotten that even before the road was closed, business was struggling. Their rose-colored memories cloud their judgment.
I say, put it to a local vote. Let the people decide what happens with it, not the loudest person/city council member/mayor. They are biased, whether they believe it or not.
I agree with -6623: I do not find walking now on State Street inviting. It’s boring, either avoiding the bikes in the street or the parklets on the sidewalks. Except for the Apple Store, the art museum, and Tuesday’s farmers market, there is nothing to invite. The coffee shops are gone; the bookstores are gone; the shops near the Apple Store are go or going. Even a map of the downtown is for sale . Except for the film festival, even the movie theaters in Goleta are more welcoming than the two on State Street. Maybe when the library’s plaza is completed there might be a reason. Councilmembers Harmon and Sneddon talked of “community”; what or which “community”?
If “the Apple Store” is your definition of inviting… Uh, wow. State Street has a lot more to give than the shiny clinical Apple Store, lol. Branch out!
“Due to the clear traffic rules, it was safer.”
This is a blatant lie. The statistics clearly show that State St. is safer now. Cars kill.
“The coffee shops are gone”?? If you mean “some blocks only have as little as one or two coffee shops” then yeah.
There is a pretty much perfect correlation between efforts made by the city to improve state street and the accelerating decline of state street. This trend has held for many years now, if not decades. I predict the trend will continue when the city implements its next plan to “revitalize” the area.
Take a look at any thriving place, it doesn’t include ugly parklets …cars, foot traffic, cycles, tables and chairs but not parklets get rid of them they are an eye sore and look dumpy…courtyards are better for non traffic areas…until we move to future planed cities it just doesn’t work blocking a main artery through town…
London
https://youtu.be/EpZjLFx0-l4
Paris
https://youtu.be/d-78bV2I2nU
Positano, Italy
https://youtu.be/KcYDl5mB9rs
Future Cities
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2IqG9WOk3w
As noted earlier by Kenchington, the city of Carmel by the Sea seems to be doing something right. Let’s find out what it is and see if we can do it, too.
Well said Mayor! I’m for Cass Ensberg’s recently proposed solution (see Noozhawk of June 25, 2023). Let’s do it!
Rather than pay a San Diego consultancy almost a million dollars for their advice on State Street, (who then send out surveys to us locals on what we think should be done! ) we should have sent a team 200 + miles up the 101 to Carmel to talk to retailers up there.
It is a vibrant tourist area: all the retail outlets, restaurants are extremely busy and the streets are spotless. Virtually all the shops are local, whether it be art from local artists, clothing stores, book stores, household goods, coffee shops and so on.
This could have been Santa Barbara. We have the tourists, and we have better weather most of the year.
Spoke to several stores up there about why there were no homeless people seen in a walking tour of several blocks downtown, and their comments were ‘ we in Carmel take care of our homeless people’. Not sure how they are doing this, but a field trip up the highway may yield some better advice than we are getting now.
Come on people, if other close by cities like Carmel and Ventura have figured it out, let’s take some action now before we completely lose our tourist ( and local) business.
Santa Barbara is NOT Carmel. Why does everyone keep making that comparison? Montecito is closer to Carmel, but Santa Barbara is like Monterey where their downtown area (Alvarado Street) is also struggling with empty buildings and a lack of patrons, as well as a large number of homeless people. Carmel Police have nothing to do than appease wealthy old white people and drops off any vagrant that wanders into the area back to Monterey.
So after years of talk, committees, design meetings we hire consultants at almost a $ million and yet we still don’t do anything. We could have achieved a lot if the Council had taken action years ago with what locals, and neighboring communities, suggested.
In business we have a saying about the definition of a consultant – “Someone that gets pair big bucks to tell you what you won’t listen to from your own people.”
True, but in the case of this consultant, the “solutions” they have proffered so far have certainly not been what our own people have been saying. This will be $800,000 down the drain, when and if it is ever finished.
I think much of the problem on State St is the high vacancy rate – which is what is leading to more and more unhoused residing in vacant building foyers. That’s simplistic, I know, but a commercial vacancy tax is worth exploring. We can’t force a landlord to lower rent, but we can say that if the building stays empty due to inflexibility or whatever, a supplemental tax is due. Other California cities are successfully implementing similar policies.
Secondly, the parklets that sprouted during COVID look like crap. If they are to stay – at least limit them in size and create a design standard. Clearly, the vital “downtown” is moving to lower State St, and if nothing is done, the current downtown will continue to degrade.
And third, State Street has not been a garden paradise for a long time. Things have gotten both better and worse. I worked in the building at the corner of State and Haley in 1990 (33 years ago), and the company I worked for provided self-defense/safety training for its employees, due to the percieved danger in walking to and from one’s car.
Agreed that vacant storefronts and absentee landlords breed undesirable activity. I like the phrase “Upscale Blight” to refer to high vacancy rates in super-high value properties, where the owners calculus in highly distorted by the tax and asset appreciation landscape.
That said, I think vacancy taxes are hard to pull off and often easy to game…. worth exploring though.
This won’t appeal to the socialists, but both businesses and cities run on fuel called cash. A downtown that does not produce a positive tax revenue vs. services to the city that hosts it is not wholistically vibrant. Even if downtown breaks even on tax revenue vs. services it is not vibrant. Vibrant is when downtown has joy, commerce, tourists spending, sales and occupancy taxes enough to have tax revenues that well exceed the need for services. This is because there are sections of town that by their nature do not generate revenues equal to their services needs. It is a little more egalitarian and productive than simply taxing the rich. Sales taxes are one area where everyone tosses the same % into the pot and financial viability of the city doesn’t depend on a small subset of people who can move to Montecito, Carpinteria and get the same weather.
Carmel ? You gotta be kidding. That’s like Montecito, as SBsurferlife said. Montecito is not SB. Go ask some shop owners in Cito why there aren’t homeless people everywhere and you might get the same Carmel answer (what was it … “we take care of them”?). That’s absurd, by the way. Anyways, the average person in Montecito would probably be more honest and state the truth – they’re all living around SB and Goleta, because that’s where they’re comfortable. Unhoused folks are very comfortable coming to SB and Goleta because of their access to resources. How many unhoused people do you see loitering outside of businesses along Coast Village or East Valley? Zero.
The main tourist street in Carmel has upscale shops and restaurants, and lots of tourists ripe for panhandling. There are at least two easy-access public toilets. Surely homeless people would hang out there if they could get away with it.
Hi Gerry, I feel like I’ve known you forever, but have never met you. (That was a compliment)
I was too loose in my writing.
I should have said
“Either the Mayor can’t lead and/or the City Council won’t be led”
I know Randy Rowse only has one vote and has to use his vote and voice in ways to move the needle.
His not being able to lead our current council is an an acknowledgement of that. Rowse certainly has not been able to lead the others, and as others point out, it may be that no one could. I tend to believe the current council is not made up of people who will agree to put aside personal agendas and political aspirations to the degree needed to come to a consensus and then commit to a whole hearted team based pursuit. My inclination is to think Randy Rowse would.
Your words and opinions mean a lot to me. You’ve given a lot to Santa Barbara and I hope everyone here gives your opinions and support due consideration
My opinions (just those, opinions) in no particular order:
– State St. is vibrant right now. Not perfect, but geez what I see is a TON of life, smiles, commerce, families, tourists.
– The question of enforcing rules is independent of design. We’ve made limited progress there. No design will be beautiful without further progress.
– Our surveys represent an overwhelming preference for closure to traffic. That’s the voice of locals, ours to respect.
– Fully agree that the endless commissions, consultants, are a lack of leadership. But it’s not only “one side” who uses endless procedure to try to massage where/when the roulette ball lands….
– Retail was in trouble pre-covid everywhere. (See Bed Bath n Beyond in Goleta closure announced this week.). We have and should keep inexpensive parking in closely adjacent lots. (Strongly disagree with recent rate hikes.) The wait street parking works, if you can’t walk half a block, you can’t get there anyway. We can’t plan around octogenarians circling blocks looking for the perfect spot.
– Handicap spots right off State on every cross-street (Victoria, Anapamu, Carrillo, etc) is a great solution to the accessibility concern I so casually dismiss above.
– I like Mr. Rowse, especially his forthrightness. I get the suspicion (could be wrong) that his directness isn’t on full display here, and that unless cars are back on State St. he won’t support.
Transparent, please do not mention “our surveys” without a footnote pointing out that the “our” was the established State Street bars and the established city bureaucracy that creates the present debacle. The survey was so biased as to make it almost impossible to provide input except what was proposed and then when the survey was presented the city actually had the gall to say that the survey respondents who had patronized the street were deserving of more weight than those who avoided it because of its circumstances! Hardly transparent.
The amount of outreach and community input, in diverse venues, has been astounding. In fact, half of Mr. Rowse’s argument (which I agree with) is that we’ve crossed a point where there is little benefit in further committees, meetings, etc.
With respect to cars, the emergent trend is best expressed by this quotation from a different article:
—
“The most clear direction or trend we are hearing from the community is to keep State Street closed to cars,” said Matt Shawaker, a consultant with MIG, the firm the city hired to help with the master plan. … He called the percentage of people who want the street closed to cars “astounding.”
—
How about 2 lovely, free old fashioned looking trollies that go up and down and esthetic sidewalk dining? It could be so nice but seems a bit hodge hodge to me now.The teens wizzing by on bikes is an issue.
I totally agree, those city people should figure out how to control those teens. Luckily pedestrians have no more danger than before it was closed to cars. They have options on where to walk. They have 26 feet of sidewalk width not shared with bikes, and 26 feet of street width to share with bikes. I miss riding trollies as opposed to the bus shuttle. (the trollies are not ADA compliant for my friends)
I absolutely believe there should be a housing component, but after seeing all the egos get involved in torpedoing the La Cumbre Plaza master neighborhood plan that had 2000 units, I’m skeptical these people at County/City really want housing. Here is why. Those elected people want it their way or not at all. The project has to pencil out to where everyone wins something which means no one gets everything they want. One thing I do not want to see is a project like El Zoco where the owners have to come to the City for a loan because they have no equity or responsible HOA fees built up over the years that can be used to borrow money for repairs. The City charges them 3% for the loan, why not let the owners accrue equity ate the same rate?
State St. is not closed.
Mr Mayor, you might want to forward this link to your planning staff. Until Santa Barbara develops a plan for downtown housing , the downtown will continue to decline. Our neighbor San Luis Obispo has prioritized downtown housing and is actively pursuing it. Since 2017, the local AIA has produced inspiring concepts for revitalization of Downtown with a focus on housing and mixed use. (For free, while 4 years later almost $1,000,000 is being spent on out of town ‘planning experts’ to develop streetscape and sidewalk plans,) There are numerous programs and incentive strategies to stimulate downtown housing that includes affordable units. The link here below is one of those from the State of California. Our city should be a leader for the idea of a livable downtown. Thank You
https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-and-community-development/prohousing-designation-program
This is quite an interesting position for the elected mayor of a city to take:
“While I’ve so far remained at arm’s length, thinking that current conditions were finite and that a strategy was forthcoming, it’s apparent that it’s not the case.”
Oookay, Randy.
Re-read the quote you cite. Mayor Rowse has been in office for less than a year – he was speaking of the time before between the “emergency” street closing for Covid and today, when he is certainly not keeping arm’s length. In fact, he ran for mayor, and has been consistent in his call for action and criticism of the council’s inaction and deflection.
Gerry, I truly appreciate your input on this thread and topic. I take your point. Thanks for all you’ve done in SB.
Oh the haunting death rattle of a fading boomer generation: “Brinnng baaack ooour traaaffic…”. Try walking instead of driving. You’ll live longer. Or don’t.
Not one mention of the funk zone redevelopment that has pulled away business from the downtown corridor of State St. I think the city needs is to remove the ugly parklets and develop a uniform design program for restaurants to have dining areas directly outside their business on the sidewalks so it doesn’t look so disjointed and moves the them off the streets. One of the better things the city did almost a year ago today was start power washing the sidewalks and streets downtown every week instead of every month to clean them up.
For as long as I can remember, there has been talk of a State Street Master Plan. I suspect that for as long as I live there will still be talk about it, yet it will remain vaporware.
It could be so good: Trolleys but no cars will help with transport issues, require parklets that conform to some city standard, keep rents at a level where retail can afford to compete with Amazon and stay alive, more foot and bike cops on patrol for general public safety, widen the sidewalks (or just ditch the planters), make it inhospitable to homeless, and so on. Locals would flock there.
And add housing above the shops!