Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Comments
Bookmark This
del.icio.us.
Digg!
furl
google
newsvine
reddit
technorati
Facebook
Yahoo!Supporters of Measure B — the ballot initiative that would lower the maximum heights of new buildings allowed in Santa Barbara — disputed opponents’ claims that, if B passed, many of the city’s most iconic buildings could not be rebuilt without a popular vote should they be destroyed by natural disaster. Under existing city law, buildings that exceed the city’s current height limit of 60 feet cannot be rebuilt without a vote if they lose more than 75 percent of their value in a disaster. If B were to pass, that ordinance would apply to buildings more than 40 feet tall in El Pueblo Viejo and more than 45 feet elsewhere throughout the city. Mayor Marty Blum and Councilmember Dale Francisco — who is also running for mayor — announced they would introduce new ordinance language to delete the 75-percent requirement. Blum and Francisco support Measure B. But Brian Robinson — manager of the No on B campaign — said there’s no guarantee that the council has the five votes needed to change the ordinance, and the soonest such a change could take place is next year. In the meantime, he said, voters are being asked to approve a flawed measure. “Before, they said we were lying when we pointed this out. Now, two weeks before the election,” Robinson said, “they’re saying they’re going to fix it, but after the election. It’s ridiculous.”
Double-clicking on any word or phrase in this story will open a reference window with definitions and links to other reference material.
Previous Month
Comments
Discussion Guidelines
"disputed opponents’ claims"?
Huh? If they have to add new ordinance language, then clearly the claim is true. What Robinson said seems obviously true, but "fired back" and "disputed opponents’ claims" suggests some rebuttal that isn't presented here. Pretty bad journalism.
Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0
JayB (anonymous profile)
October 23, 2009 at 12:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Anyone who drives up Chapala can imagine what a runaway 60 foot corridor, on both side of the street, would look like. I cannot imagine what the opponents of MB are all about unless it is pure economic enhancement of their bottom lines. You can still do three stories in 40 feet, so what is the problem? Maintaining the indoor "Cathedral look" for the select few while making the rest of us feel like we are in an institution and not the Riviera of the coast?
Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0
contactjohn (anonymous profile)
October 23, 2009 at 2:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It's not about building heights, it's about making good decisions! Their are plenty of beautiful buildings over 40/45 feet which serve the community well. Saying that limiting build height to less than 40/45 feet will insure a beautiful SB is not seeing all the bad development, be it over or under 40/45 feet. Building Height is really just one factor among many that define good development. I'm not a fan of McMansions, maximum envelope density or anything blocking our beautiful views, but what will insure good development is good people making good decisions. These type of laws only serve to protect us from ourselves....
Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0
Mesarat (anonymous profile)
October 23, 2009 at 1:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yes, you can build 3 stories in 40', but you can't build four.
The current zoning allows a maximum of four stories, so Measure B represents a significant down-zoning in the part of town best suited for dense housing. And down-zoning in one part of town will simply increase development pressure in other parts of town. Will the Measure B supporters turn out in force to oppose the 45' apartment that may get proposed next to my downtown house? I doubt it; none of them bothered to appeal the PC approval of Chapala One to the City Council.
Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0
Steve_Johnson (anonymous profile)
October 26, 2009 at 7:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)
VOTE YES on B, if the Arlington burns down, don't panic. We concerned citizens can take a vote to change the building height to 60 feet so we can rebuild it! Why is this even an issue?
Readers say: Thumbs Up: 0 of 0 • Thumbs Down: 0 of 0
VOTER (anonymous profile)
November 2, 2009 at 8:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Post a comment