Santa Barbara Politics, Media & Culture

Monday, March 31, 2008

Downtown Update: Martinis No More, Chad's for Sale

I saw an article on this the other day in The Daily Sound and The Santa Barbara Independent followed up with the story this week. No more Orange Crush martinis? Perhaps Craig Smith would say this is the end of the sub-$18 martini...Chad's will be missed.

Labels: ,


Anonymous Chad's the community clubhouse said...

Participating in a survey about what one liked on Chapala Street, Chad's was the number one hit.

Not for its food because at best it was routine and mediocre and not for its drinks because they were hard and stiff. But for the spillover feeling of a community gathering spot that made the street lively and livable.

Will the city allow one more no-setback wall of concrete to replace it? If the new condo owners on Chapala are smart they will buy the place and keep it running out of their condo association dues because they will soon lose all breathing room on this street.

3/31/2008 7:36 AM  
Anonymous sa1 said...

Not to worry, I'm sure someone will come up with a plan to replace Chad's with a 60 foot tall Appleby's including low income rentals on top that get changed to high end condos at the last minute after it's been approved by the planners...That is our way, n'est pas?

3/31/2008 8:31 AM  
Anonymous the chupacabra said...

oh Chicken Littles the sky is falling all around you but in the real world since its a historical structure doubt that could happen. BTW did anyone else get a phone call from a group surveying about the proposed ballot measure height ordinance, somebody on one side or the other is burning cash through a survey group out of Boise.

3/31/2008 9:52 PM  
Anonymous Peel the union onion said...

Only the building industry (and trade unions) has those kind of bucks. Glad to see they are so scared. The tide has turned and they think they can overturn the vote of the people for their own personal reward.

Thanks for the heads up on this. Union money cannot buy this town.

Talk about the sky not falling, 45 feet is still too darn tall and the building industry can still do a lot of damage to our town and buy a lot of city council people to think otherwise.

But in this case the people are speaking, not the industry lackies on the city council. Dale, get ready to have some more friends sitting with you next election.

This town is getting turned back to the residents and not the outside interests.


4/01/2008 7:56 AM  
Anonymous the chupacabra said...


I dont support the building ordinance as currently envisioned which is what I told the person conducting the survey. And as for who paid for it Im guessing the supporters did by the fact that the first part of the questioning was in support of it. As for the unions, give me a break union construction jobs arent that big here in the first place except for municipal or state contracts. They are not like the public employee unions which do generally support those who live here so nothing wrong with that. BTW I oppose the measure and Im a lifelong resident (minus a few years for college and the big city thing).

4/01/2008 7:22 PM  
Anonymous Cry me a river said...

Building trades have a paid position person who shows up and yells loudly at every single public hearing. You under estimate the noise these people make and the willingness of the city council to take them for face value. Plus I suspect this trade organization person spends a lot of time schmoozing city planning staff who for reasons unknown operate as a separate branch of government here.

Hmmmmmm, should I suspect anyone discounting the power of the building trades in this town ...... is a wolf in sheeps clothing. And I don't mean the 2nd district debacle.

Pays never to snooze on any of these issues. "They" are out there and they too often get their way. Constant vigilance is the price of freedom on this issue.

4/01/2008 9:12 PM  
Blogger Eileen Hamilton said...

I too was surveyed about the proposed ballot ordinance. I know someone who is very involved with getting this ordinance on the ballot. She told me that they weren’t behind the survey and she was very interested in the survey questions. I think this survey was paid for by developers/architects. Although the first part of the survey considered the pro arguments, the last part (the part you’d be more likely to remember) cited all the con arguments.

4/02/2008 10:40 AM  
Blogger George said...

Ignoring the building height debate for a second, why such antipathy towards those workers in the building trades unions? First, they are local citizens trying to make a buck (instead of, oh, suing your soon-to-be-ex for it). Second, do you think carpenters, etc. make that much money that begrudging them some way to provide for some job protection is a bad thing? Third, can you automatically assume they all just think a job is a job and perhaps might not like huge ugly buildings in town, too, even if they got paid to build them?

4/02/2008 1:40 PM  
Anonymous the chupacabra said...


Im assuming you are right since you know someone involved in the effort. I based my thought that it was the pro side on my experience with it was the first part had more questions lasted longer. What did you think of the questions? I found most of the statements whether pro or con to be kind of light and superficial testing of slogans that just were not all that convincing and easily discounted whichever side of the argument one finds themselves on.

And just to try to veer back to the subject will miss chads hopefully a new owner will keep it up but glad sambos is still there,

4/02/2008 9:06 PM  
Anonymous Chapala Canyon Blight said...

Sounds like the building trades money is backing this "push poll" which is one (1) planting negatives and (2) testing negatives to use in a massive negative campaign. Funny thing, is there are no negatives.

The height petition is pure grass roots and never had to waste money testing the market to see which way to blow the wind, because the tsunami of opposition to huge buildings is already flooding out of the neighborhoods.

No one has anything against the building trades as long as they live by the rules and stop over-reaching demanding concessions, re-zoning and modifications to install their behemoths in our small town. Plus they consistently misrepresent the impacts and the market they expect.

Their favorite final gun is to whine they can't build the project if they don't get all their concessions even though they originally planned it way too big and greedily settle for much to big after their final bullying.

C'mon, we have been watching this crowd in action far too closely and it is one predictible dog and pony show. The council and their surrogates buy it because it is a source of campaign donations.

But the residents reached their tipping point after Chapala got grossed out. Sorry boys, your dog don't hunt anymore.

4/03/2008 7:31 AM  
Anonymous Eggs_Ackley said...

Ask the AIA(American Institute of Architects) who is behind the survey. They are one of the most entrenched pro-development lobby groups this town will ever see. One of their current mantras is "Save the Gaviota Coast, Build it bigger and higher so we can preserve open space elsewhere and protect the current zoning codes."

4/07/2008 1:10 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home