••• Next month, Trevor Madden and Tanner Richard are opening Santa’s Convenience Store at 3825 Santa Claus Lane. “The store will have traditional convenience items, such as candy, snacks, drinks and other must-haves before a long road trip. It will also have knick-knacks and souvenirs.” —Coastal View News
••• The “66-room hotel project proposed for two lots in the 700 block of State Street in downtown Santa Barbara has run into pushback from a Planning Commission majority that is openly calling for housing at the site. […] The commission voted 5-1 to delay consideration of the project until a seventh member was present.” If the city wants housing, it has to incentivize developers, not make housing less economical than other types of development. —Noozhawk
••• “City of Santa Barbara Responds to Goleta’s Airport Concerns [….] Santa Barbara Airport and Both Cities Will Work Toward Shared Goal of Decreasing Noise Impacts.” —Independent
••• “A Look Inside the Electric Bike Craze in Santa Barbara [….] As E-Bikes Gain Popularity, City Leadership Explores How to Make the Roads Safer for Everybody.” —Independent
••• “The Santa Barbara City Council decided Tuesday to conduct hearings about the promenade each month during regular council meetings” instead of in non-public subcommittee meetings. —Independent
••• “An upper Jesusita Trail closure was put in place after devastating winter storm damage. Property owners of a trail easement, Skylar and Voldis Gauss, believe it should remain closed until County Parks conducts a survey and relocates the trail route along that alignment.” —Noozhawk
••• The new Carpinteria Skatepark opens this Saturday. —John Palminteri
················
Sign up for the Siteline email newsletter and you’ll never miss a post.
It’s cute someone is bringing back the Santa to Santa Claus lane. I miss the funkiness of the old one that was relocated to Ventura.
As for the hotel/housing issue: maybe I’m just not interpreting the story correctly, but it seems incredibly unfair and convoluted that the planning commission can just suddenly decide any given project should be housing, versus a hotel. They’ve approved hotels and STRs all over the city recently so this feels arbitrary. And forcing developers to include a % of units as “affordable” does nothing but discourage them to build it at all, hence many of the applications for hotel projects. Ugh.
The planning committing is only pushing for the housing development because SIMA pulled their initial plan on the pretense their profit margins would be higher with a hotel versus an apartment complex. Of course a business owner wants to make as much money as possible, but their pitch to the planning committee is that a hotel is better for the community, which is clearly not the case. The planning commission is not suggesting it should be a housing project out of thin air, but rather stating that the original plan is a better fit for our community than the new proposed hotel. Santa Barbara does not need another hotel when Drift, Santa Barbara Hotel, and the Canary are all in walking distance and have a plethora of vacancies. Based on SIMA’s stance that this project is “better for the community”, they should also not be proposing demolishing long standing businesses such as the Press Room, a community centered legend of a pub.
Thank you for the additional information and context. I’m inclined to agree with you, especially re: demolition of existing established businesses in order to build yet another hotel. I’d personally love to see more housing here, and to keep the Press Room.