B is for Building Height

At least they didn't say "skyscraper."

Way to go Brian!!! That is really wonderful that you are doing this!!! THANK YOU

I hope this lawsuit goes the same way as Chapala one-bankrupt. Why are local builders so frightened of citizens voting. First they tried to stop the initiative with the Das Williams-backed poison pill. Now this. It's rare to see this blatant of an attempt to quash a grass-roots effort. Shame. Personally I haven't decided yet how I'm going to vote on this. But the more these kinds of shenanigans are pulled out of the hat, the greater my support for Measure B.

They say it is misleading to use the word "high-rise" in advocating for Measure B because it is misleading. Yet they advocate like mad for "smart growth" city development that builds "UP instead of out".

How the hell are they going to build "up", enough so that it satisfies their dreams of affordable housing, sprawl prevention, and aviodance of cars, without building high-rises?

The campaign for Measure B is not only about the specific limits it would impose, but derailing the efforts to turn Santa Barbara eventually into a dense "vertical" city.

Joer43

Great work, Brian! It's time for the silent minority in Santa Barbara to step up and defeat Measure B and let our voice of reason be heard.

I'm so sick and tired of a few old farts with too much time on their hands trying to determine the future for the rest of us.

"B" is for beautiful - keep Santa Barbara beautiful.

Interesting comment by city attorney Scott Vincent. That takes care of the can't-be-rebuilt red herring that some people have been dragging around! Hard to see when the "market value" of a non-conforming legal building, such as the Lobero, would be reduced to less than 25% of its pre-earthquake value.

And should that happen, then Mahan is right: there could be/would be a city election demanding that it be rebuilt, as was before the natural event.

This lawsuit is offbase. Ballot arguments should be in plain English, not in techno-speak. Who, except for architects and builders, ever reads the Building Code in order to understand building issues and concerns --- not to say one shouldn't read it, just not to expect a rarified meaning to be understood by 99% of voters!

"B" is for bored. I agree, I'm tired of old farts with too much time on their hands deciding the fate of MY city. Where I will be alive far longer than them. Pearl Chase would be laughing them out of her salon. What would Santa Barbara be without the Courthouse, the Lobero, the Granada, the Arlington? Stop hanging smart growth around "heights" as if it's the intent of every builder to smash up urban apartments. All builders/architects REAL PEOPLE want is "room" to design a good building. Get rid of all the crappy city requirements that stifle creativity... the inclusionary housing that forces builders to "maximize" profits by adding high-end luxury units. I never felt I was entitled to be "included" in prime downtown real estate... why do YOU? And yeah, let's ditch some of the old farts too.

I suppose it is fitting that an architect would file a lawsuit to stifle the will of the people. After all that is the crowd that has the most to gain by building tall buildings with more expensive condos that we don't need.

What ever happened to democracy? Many people live in Santa Barbara because they like the small town character and they like the open feeling and the views. They don't want the historic buildings over shadowed by tall or massive modern buildings. That is why 11,000 plus residents signed the petition.

People come to visit Santa Barbara because it is different. Our economic base is dependent on these visitors.

I would point out to this small minority that wants to stifle the will of the people and apparently has no aesthetic appreciation of Santa Barbara's unique character that there are plenty of other communities that have the tall big buildings they crave. Why don't they just move there and leave Santa Barbara to those who love it.

If someone were misidentifying my work and livelihood by using incorrect terminology in written public forum I am pretty sure I would file a lawsuit as well. The fact that these people use the term "high-rise" to define a 60 foot building should tell you something about the tactics they are using in this campaign.

High-rise indeed. Click here http://saveelpuebloviejo.org/pipeline...
for an idea of the kind of fear-mongering these folks have engaged in from the start. KNOW the actual number of buildings BUILT is about (and not during recession) 2 a year. REALIZE that any intelligent group of design review boards can analyze that small number of projects... wouldn't you think? NO, instead these folks want draconian measures, because what they really want is for Santa Barbara to never ever ever grow again at all! How enlightened... meanwhile, we'll be stuck with their flat boring vision? Not me. I vote NO.

Interesting how many people proclaim that their view is "the will of the people". Without a vote, just how do you know the "will of the people". But, in any case, the use of the term "high rise" to describe a 60 foot building is clearly intended to mislead....

The developers are likely to find a way to make $$$ even if Measure B passes. They always do in this town. If I were you I wouldn't turn to them for a neutral analysis of the facts either.

Ever seen a beautiful government-designed building? I offer the local Bankrupty Court building of what government design can bring us. Pure unadulterated ugly.

I support affordable housing and even I can't stand those horrible buildings on Chapala st.! I certainly understand why people got angry.

Indyholio wrote, "I'm so sick and tired of a few old farts with too much time on their hands trying to determine the future for the rest of us."

Oh, really? Old farts don't have a say in the future of SB? Because they have time to invest in their vision they should not have a say in our future? How do you know "the rest of us" differ with them?

After you get down off your soapbox, let me know.

JohnLocke wrote, "Ever seen a beautiful government-designed building? I offer the local Bankrupty Court building of what government design can bring us. Pure unadulterated ugly."

Now that is funny...and pathetic. Would you like to inform us, Mr. Locke, what that building contained before it became the bankrupty [sic] court?

I was told the gov built it. Given the tenor of your comment, perhaps YOU could inform us, rather than just sniping. Maybe the Bankruptcy Court just has extremely bad taste in architecture?

You guys gotta been kidding; how long you been around?

That "ugly government building" that now houses the bankruptcy court was, for eons, the posh I. Magnins deprtment store.

high rise is a perfect term for buildings over 60ft in SB compared to what we now have. I am a young fart (35), and the last thing I want to see is SB with more buildings that reach into the sky like the tower of babel. Plus, I don't have any sympathy for the architects and builders who make quite a nice living already when they cry about "misidentifying my work and livelihood by using incorrect terminology". High rise is not incorrect terminology but an opinion that happens to ring true to a great many people who live here. Then they cry about affordable housing as if they want to put the poor up in the sky, off the ground. PLEASE SPARE US! I see no affordable housing in some recently built apartment just off state street. Could somebody please show us the affordable housing? and what of the random comments by those who sound as if they were told to stop by the independent site and comment on this story to show support for the architect, fear monger about earthquakes and how we wouldn't be able to build historic buildings again if they fell (???!!!!) We are limited to space in this city by the mountains and the sea. Go build your castles elsewhere.

LoL, silent minority!!

That's a good one..

I'm pretty sure the reason most people live here is because they hate LA and maybe even Ventura. SO why don't you guys head back there if you like tall buildings so much??

Commenting on the previous comments and type of language used I offer the following. There was a fellow fishing at the ocean at the serf's edge. A few kids came along and looked in the white bait bucket behind him. "Hey, mister," one kid said. One of the crabs is trying to get out!" "Do not worry about it," said the fisherman. "They are like a lot of politicians. When one tries to crawl out, the rest of them pull him back down."

We grateful geezers regret the disparaging remarks made upon one's person because of age rather than addressing the issues at hand. If you called a black person a "ni**er," or a brown person a "sp*c," you would be condemned. Ditto old farts and other such put down names. How about young dumb? Never trust anyone under 30? Mark Twain said youth is wasted on the young. But, Mark, we respond, upon whom else would you waste it?

What is youth except a man or a woman before it is ready or fit to be seen? Evelyn Waugh

Aging is not 'lost youth' but a new stage of opportunity and strength.

Don't laugh at a youth for his affectations; he is only trying on one face after another to find his own.

Praise youth and it will prosper.

Santa Barbara's a beautiful city and I think it's wonderful that people want to protect that beauty, but let's be a little realistic and recognize that the population of SB will continue to grow. There are two ways that Santa Barbara can grow - either with more density or a larger city footprint. Unless your idea of a beautiful city is one that sprawls and claims as much land as possible, density is key. I would rather choose the 'greener option' (and it is the greener option) to protect nature as much as possible and keep the city perimeter pulled in. I fear seeing this 40' height rule pass when it seems that the future will eventually find it a silly rule necessary to discard in order to take care of its own people, and then where will the 60' buildings find themselves? They will be on the outskirts of the city - unraveling the 'heart of the city.' The downtown heart of the city is where the taller buildings should be, because that helps stamp it as the 'center' of the city. Think more long-term people, and recognize that it is IMPOSSIBLE for Santa Barbara to remain exactly the same size. Also, educate yourself on city growth - maybe try 'The Life and Death of Great American Cities' by Jane Jacobs - that's a good one to start you off.

The use of 'high-rise' is misleading propaganda, but then again suing over word-use is just as ridiculous - this is still America with the freedom of speech still intact.

Well said Gaijin.

One of my relatives who was raised in SB but lives in New York City called recently to say the use of the term "high rise" to describe a 60-ft building is ridiculous.

To me, its political rhetoric and I'm sure Bill Mahan and his cohorts know this. And as we know, political rhetoric doesn't have to be remotely near the truth. Remember Condoleeza Rice's use of "mushroom cloud"?

JohnLocke: "I was told the gov built it. Given the tenor of your comment, perhaps YOU could inform us, rather than just sniping. Maybe the Bankruptcy Court just has extremely bad taste in architecture?"

As joer43 has correctly informed you, it was a retail store.

Given the tenor of your bombast, perhaps you could use something other than rumor upon which to base your arguments.

Gaijin, thank you. Finally someone who gets it.

Having grown up here I am fine with the building heights as they are and think Chapala One is a nicer looking building that what was there. I am also curious as to what views were taken away by that building the mall? the telephone building?

As John Locke showed a lot of those advocating for this in the name of preservation have no idea of what the city was like even a short time ago. The bankruptcy court was never a stellar building back when it was a department store but if I recall right it used to have a pink exterior color. As for the lack of sales at Chapala One that seems to be more the interior layout, price, and ,market than the exterior and footprint of the building.

Applying a one size fits all design for the city is not the right solution.

The drama of special-interest theater is not gonna work. In the end Measure B will pass and the visionary architects will have to deal with the fact that people don't like or want their grand visions. Unlike some of the intellectual art we have to endure on State Street now and then, we know it will go away in a few months. But ugly tall buildings are permanent. They don't go away and should not be built. If you want to build high-rises, move to L.A. or San Francisco. In SB, 60ft is a high-rise. You can call it what you want, a sky-scraper, smart-growth worker housing project, ect., it's still out of character and not wanted.