Santa Barbara Politics, Media & Culture

Thursday, August 31, 2006

Canyon-ization of Chapala

Sounds like people are interested in this topic from Travis' editorial yesterday -- have at it here. Is the Chapala corridor getting too big? Were his FactsRight?


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Facts sloppy. Two projects are well under under construction, one the BDC property at De La Guerra and the other is the Levy project at Gutierrez. Both had years of approval process, hearings, etc. Both are large, but Chapala is WIDER than Anacapa and certainly wider than State Street. The height of these structures--which we may not like for other reasons--is appropriate to the street. Travis again is missing the points... He's making a career of getting the story wrong and then editorializing on it. Reminds me of Emily Latelle, the hilarious SNL character who would mis-understand an issue ("What's all this uproar about flea erections?") and then rail agains the debate until someone corrected her flawed understanding ("Emily, the issue is "Free Elections"...) to which she would deadpan and then say, "Nevermind." Oh how I wish Travis had the comedic sense or depth of character to say that...

8/31/2006 8:09 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Shocked, SHOCKED to find that building is going on here said...

Yes, I am Shocked, SHOCKED to find that building is going on here!

As usual, the Editorialist-Editor-Publisher is partially right so the real truth remains suspect in the August 30th editorial.

That editorial listed a long roster of building projects on and near Chapals Street, but many of them sank like a lead Zepellin when the City Council, Planning Commission, or other review boards actually reviewed and commented on those proposals during actual public meetings that already have occurred.

"Factswrong" lives up to his reputation again.

That is the problem with half-assed credibility at that newspaper, like being partially pregnant. Credibility is all or nothing, just like what to believe in an editorial or news article.

8/31/2006 8:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Spendy blog yesterday noted that it would be cleaned up with some of the older weirder stuff. If it were pulled entirely, the URL would be dead.

Check out this one, though:

The new comments at this wendypressmess are messed up in the blogspot formatting, but the link here gets to these very witty and analytical commentaries.

8/31/2006 8:20 AM  
Anonymous Cement Legacies-with Spanish tile said...

I have noticed the canyon-=ization effect just in the past few months, while driving down Chapala, below Carrillo. It's hard to miss, since I've been driving or walking that corridor for over 15 years. Impossible to see the sky in some places, or the trees, and getting worse. And I'm not a 'nimby' or CSP-er. This is not about agreeing with Travis. THis is about what I see with my own eyes.

I'm afraid the current council and Planning Commission may have a legacy in the works--- the Canyon Council, or Concrete Canyon's something that bears watching. Especially when envisioning all those bulky buildings filled with commuting people, cars, and other manner of densification. Just imagine what the intersections at Chapala/Haley/Cota/de la Guerra will be like once the projects are completely utilized.

8/31/2006 8:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The whole town is starting to look like a bunch of rather large Taco Bell's

8/31/2006 11:28 AM  
Anonymous hattie said...

Even if the facts were sloppy (I don't know if they were, but anons 8:09 & 8:17 a.m. sound more knowledgeable than me), I agreed with the sentiment of the piece. cement legacies with spanish tile, I really like what you wrote too. Also I thought the tone of the editorial was an improvement over that of many earlier editorials.

8/31/2006 12:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon 8:09 weighing in again...
Yes, there are many new buildings being constructed in the downtown, particularly on and near Chapala. Those who rail against THIS COUNCIL and P COMMISH fail to recognize that those projects took years to gain approvals, and the current council are not the ones who gave the nod(s). The public process is OPEN, transparent and turgid. Things do not get railroaded through under cover of darkness or speed in this town (unless you want to talk about CITY projects like Casa Esperanza!!). No, the public has ample opportunity to weigh in and weigh down any project. But in my experience as a council watching groupie, few among us know how the process works or have the resources (start with TIME) to monitor, attend, read, comment, dissent or lobby....most of those folk engaged in this are the paid consultants of the project proponents/applicant.

There is but one simple maxim for understanding how we get what we get in the way of developments and building projects: "Follow the money."

8/31/2006 11:18 PM  
Blogger cookie jill said...

You want to talk about "Canyonization"...if you yell "Hello" down State Street, you will hear quite the echo from all the businesses picking up and leaving.

Anyone taking bets on how long some of these spaces will sit empty or which chain crap will move in to sell trinkets to the UC Spoiled Brat crowd?

9/02/2006 8:29 AM  
Blogger Voice of Rezon(e) said...

"Canyonization"? Here we go again. Please...

All that's happening is that the downtown of Santa Barbara is going UP rather than out. This is the normal development of an urban area of a city. It's good, as long as the vertical development is balanced between retail, commercial and residential space. It should be following the urban "work/live" concept you see in cities like San Francisco, Chicago and New York.

I do agree with the post that says we're starting to look like oversized Taco Bells. Our old guard BAR and PC in SB is way too focused on the past - everything they approve must be a white or cream colored, pueblo/stucco exterior with a red tile roof. We need some more architectural innovation added into the mix.

I'm all in favor of well-designed structures going up downtown. We need to make sure and provide adequate pedestrian, bike and transit facilities along with these buildings so the residents and workers feel like they are not car-dependent.

9/02/2006 3:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Voice of REZONE [apt name]: Your references to "San Francisco, Chicago and New York" really betray your bias. Sorry, if a dense, "urbanized", cement canyon community is what you want, you are in the wrong place. Santa Barbara's character is unique from those major cities. We are tired of hearing displaced urbanites bemoaning the lack of high-rises.

9/02/2006 10:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Voice of ReZONE is living in a dream world----aahhh for those pedestrian-friendly days of yore........take a visit to the urban core of any city and see how much fun riding a bike--let alone walking--really is---not so much! The condo and loft residents LOVE their BIG cars and SUVs...lots of them! and so do their many friends who visit. So stop fooling yourself and those of us who have "been around". If this city wants high rise cement canyons---then let's call it what it is. If we don't---then don't shove it down our throats-----and call it affordable by design or some similar fictitious concept loved by developers.

9/03/2006 3:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Those who bemoan that Santa Barbara's character is changing need to stop having sex. The South Coast is a net exporter of people (see UCSB Economic Forecast) our growth is natural, not immigation. It's not the displaced San Franciscans, they are replacing the natives that moved to Texas or Colorado for affordable housing. It is the kids and grandkids of existing residents that are the drive in SB's growth. Or rather, it's that people are having kids or grandkids, and not moving away or dying like they used to. If you want to house your child, you'll need to go up or out. With Ventura County, Naples, Los Padres NF and the Pacific limiting your options outward, a few 4-5 stories in Downtown between State and the freeway seem pretty reasonable.

Stop having children (or stop living so long) and our housing crisis will go away, and we'll stop building, and you can put some stop lights on 101 and drive to La Cumbre Plaza for clothing.

9/03/2006 11:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sadly, 1109 anon, the people who are "bemoaning" the loss of Santa Barbara are not the ones double-and-triple populating this town. The ones with 3-5-7-9+ kids, I'm afraid, really could care less how it impacts the rest of us. Your comment that our growth is "natural not immigration" is laughable.

Much of the "new wealth" exploiting the local real estate market's greed in the past five years are child-less--baby boomers, and trust fund singles or couples from around the world.

We have every right to set the tone for how this town will be "built out"--it's called "General Plan". We don't have to indulge ever billionaire who wants his son to have a penthouse downtown in some faux-"mixed use" stucco monstrosity.

and we won't.

9/04/2006 10:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Stop building and start handing out condoms. Problem solved.

9/04/2006 11:43 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The 3-4 people and groups in this town (besides the developers and the billionaires) who favor high density housing and commerical building don't need to railroad the rest of us with their myths about "natural" population increases.

And we will not build ourselves out of the high real estate costs---greedy real estate agents and developers know no bounds.

The middle class is moving out in droves--and taking their kids with them. Not because of a lack of high density housing, but because of the greed of landlords and real estate agents.

The families with 3/6/9 kids are staying put---just drive through the westside or eastside when school gets out.

9/04/2006 12:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Those would be the growing non-native born population taking back their country.

9/05/2006 11:33 AM  
Anonymous Puzzled by double standard said...

so we should all go "take back" the countries from which we were displaced too! or does that only count if it's Mexico and the U.S. we're talking about?

9/05/2006 1:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

you took mexico, we are taking it back.

9/05/2006 3:56 PM  
Blogger TheDrew said...

Read the UCSB Economic Forecast. It seems it is neither big bad OC nor horny locals that cause growth. But the notion that SB is for the "newlywed and nearly dead" seems accurate:

Two things influence changes in the
County’s population over time: natural
increase (the net number of births and
deaths among existing residents), and
migration (the net of incoming and
outgoing migration). Migration may occur from within the U.S. or between countries.

• For several years in the 1990s, net migration was negative– more people left the County than entered it.
• However, by the 2000s, more residents have entered the County than have left.
• Natural increase, or the number of
births minus the number of deaths,
has been declining in Santa Barbara
County since 1990. Fewer children
are being born and raised in the
• The largest and most stable source of population growth is from international immigration.

9/07/2006 2:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Per the UCSB Economic Forecast: •

The largest and most stable source of population growth is from international immigration.

That's just reality, folks. Let's not try to paint it any other way.

9/07/2006 8:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Which would mean the town if for sale, and the highest bidders can do as they wish

9/08/2006 8:53 AM  
Anonymous 21st Century SB watch said...

...and they are doing just that.....Cottage Hospital, Bill Levy, Blankenships-----just tear it up, make it a two-class town--the haves and their willing and eager have nots who are the "critical workforce" [translate: indentured servants]

9/08/2006 5:34 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home