BevMo! A Go-Go

Go.... BevMo! Count me in!

Unfortunate event for the process of local government. Most people will focus on the merits of BevMo and what they will or will not bring to the area. That is not the main issue with this case.
It’s the ability of the City of SB to serve the community in a safe and productive manor.

Staff stated in its report that it conducted a thorough environmental review of the possible impacts, but when you read the report further they starte that review was an environmental checklist. How thorough is a checklist?

Anyone with any common sense knows that area to be extremely sensitive to traffic. One little instant of trouble and it all comes crumbling down. Try to imagine coming down state and making that left turn at the light to get in to BevMo…..waiting for north bound traffic to end and just making it as the light changes. Then think of the cars behind you waiting for you…then the lane on the right that turns down de la Vina, moving at a slow crawl…what if your three cars back, all you get is the bottleneck effect and stuck in traffic. Then try to imagine all that and a semi trying to turn left onto state from just making a delivery, they can’t! Now imagine you’re a semi trying to turn into BevMo at the light and all that takes place. No way.You can’t turn left going south on state in that area!

At the hearing last minute reports are submitted that do not include the adjacent road that trucks will use as exit route. The city council should have stopped right there and said that staff made a mistake and the process was flawed. This project did not qualify as an exemption in CEQA because it had met the criteria for exception..15300.2 b,c. There is a significant impact that needs to be reviewed. Expert testimony had been provided that no study had been conducted by staff that would or could conclude an exemption was warranted.

This is a serious flaw for the City council not to grasp the ramifications of there actions and the process that CEQA gives direction too. Swayed by testimony that the ADR had done there job..well yes but the ADR had nothing to do with the exemption and are not qualified to address that topic of project designation.

Funny how the BevMo reps tried to say that no one brought up an issue till the last min. Keyt news had footage from Feb showing how it was a big issue for neighbors. Staff report shows 150 signatures were brought in that month too opposing the project. The community’s outcry is a sign of a significant economical and social impact, along with traffic long before approval. No one caught that sitting on the City Council.

It was brought up but the City turned a blind eye to the people it serves, the community the bad actions of staff, the overall planning process. Who do they work for really?

Ksen Sku

I watched that entire council meeting including the session on AB1998. I don't have an opinion on the BevMo issue, although I hope the store and the neighbors will be able to get along. Time will tell.

But it was the first time I've spent much time listening to Hotchkiss and Self. Boy, those two are horrible communicators and are just plain uninformed on some issues. I don't always agree with Francisco, but he is a much better communicator and rationally explains his decisions, however they may fall. Those two should take a lesson from Dale and the other council members. The mayor is an excellent leader and politely keeps the meetings running smoothly.

Ksen Sku's comments were very typical of most people in this area that think something should be denied simply because they don't like it. An environmental review cannot be required of any and all projects. That's why they have a checklist. If the checklist shows further study is merited then they go forward with a review. If it doesn't then they don't. Ksen's third paragraph is even worse. By that logic any store that locates there (even Thomasville) would cause excessive traffic delays due to anybody wanting to turn in there. Would you have State Street continue to see vacant spaces pile up? That'd certainly reduce traffic if it became a ghost area. The Honey Baked Ham store is closed, the pet store in the Ralph's center on De la Vina is closed, the Pizza Hut is closed, the Reid's Appliance store is closed, the tailor/dry cleaner store close by is closed. How many more vacancies do you want? I live in the area and I welcome BevMo! whole heartedly. They are a lot better than the pot shops, funeral parlors, massage parlors and the like that have been opening in that area lately. I shudder to walk my kids up and down State these days. A well lit party supply store like BevMo! certainly isn't as scary as some of the other stuff we've got up there and it will bring tax revenue, local jobs and a filling of a vacant space. Don't like the traffic? Try public transportation more often or walk or ride a bike. Or perhaps get more involved with the Plan Santa Barbara process and demand better transportation planning for the area.

The only thing that is keeping us from our "Breathe Easy" Santa Barbara in this case are the San Roque and Samarkand residents who think that the problem isn't their own V8 stinking diesel monster truck, classic piece of 196x or nasty choice of two wheeled motorized contraption. The problem isn't BevMo! or Trader Joes or Whole Foods.

EastBeach lulled by the great communicator Francisco? There are a lot of great communicators out there who are completely incompetent. This particular scarlet BevMo! bumper sticker idea is seemingly creative. But really it is bureaucratic and idiotic. I was surprised the city attorney didn't say something about it. As an example there are people who work at Trader Joes and live in the Samarkand neighborhood. If the same condition is used for Trader Joe's employees, does that mean that their car cannot be parked in front of their own home? There are other flaws in this solution. But the only real solution is for the surrounding neighborhoods is to enter into a bothersome but already established city administered "neighborhood parking program."

But the real story here was that Francisco, Self and Hotchkiss went back on their campaign promise to stop this kind of development that negatively impacts neighborhoods. We have three of the most ill-informed ideological council members because the public doesn't understand land-use and transportation especially when it comes to their own impact. The problem isn't staff or the previous make up of the council. The problem quite often is the general public.

The real story here is that for once the local government considered such things as jobs and tax revenue and didn't give the local whiners what they wanted. Maybe it's not so much about some councilmembers not understanding land-use (aka government seizure of private property rights, generally driven by the above mentioned whiners) as it is about wanting to rein it in. About time.

And, Don, aren't you a big Obama fan? How many of his campaign promises did he fail to honor. They all do, pal. How do you know a politician is lying? His lips are moving.....

The checklist should point out potential impacts, staff can tweek in many ways what is actually looked at, what the checklist is made up of, citing certain points are not relevant. This is where judgment comes into play. Mistakes are made right at this point.

Staff and everyone knows that any business that goes in that location should have a very close look at what kind of impact it would have to the neighborhood. This has nothing to do with allowing a business to go in or not. Wrong topic. In fact the way CEQA works is the community is supposed to review the merits and conformity of a project. Not leave it all up to staff and paid consultants to decide. When I hear people supporting staff mistakes blindly for some positive simple reasoning just means they really have no clue on how this all works.
Staff are human and they will make mistakes, this is where the public comes in to point theses things out and the City council should be knowledgeable enough of this fact to make corrections. To go back and say, hey we shoulda done a environmental review so that the community is aware of what the impacts are and through this process we can create mitigation measures that will help reduce the impacts in a way that is applicable to the highest extent, not just make random guesses at what will work cuz we want a job in the area. It is not about people whining about a wine shop. Its about being responsible.

This is what the government is supposed to do, look out for the community it serves. This doesn’t stop Bevmo from going into business nor anyone else for that matter. It is good common sense. CEQA was created to help reduce impacts and is monitored by the community.

As for traffic, that is not my concern, it is the lack of responsible planning is. I have been in the loop more than you know on the Plan SB.

This skirting of significant impacts as non significant with out any real data is just carelessness or deliberate. This is the crux of the problem, and having an unknowledgeable City on process just leads to whos got the prettiest colors to look at and how much tax can the City get for it.

KsenSku

SBdad I am not the typical commentor on projects.

I have no care about Bevmo one way or the other, the fact an outlet where booz will be sold attracts drinkers and the random potential drunk driver to an area next to a school is not my bag of complaints but i am the those M.A.D.D folks would gladly chime in on that point, its kinda obvious.

I see wine tasting events that go on and not a police car in sight, why because it is an accepted activity in this town. Cops would make a killing in tickets at one of theses events with a check point. Kinda silly I think the one activity that sells a product that has the greatest potential to takes lives is not as bad as massage parlor or medical mowie shop...but socially unacceptable so it is badddd....so silly. Doesnt the massage parlor bring economic growth, jobs taxes too? But that is not my concern.

My real concern is the governmental process for all development projects and how the process is carried out. If they get away with covering up a mistake now because of bullheaded stubborness then that impacts us all down the line.

The City council is wrong in this process.

KsenSku

"EastBeach lulled by the great communicator Francisco? There are a lot of great communicators out there who are completely incompetent. This particular scarlet BevMo!"
-- DonMcDermott

Haha, perhaps it was a moment of weakness brought on by a glass of wine (not obtained from a BevMo).

You anti business jerks are pathetic whiners.

Look what a business has to go thru when the property has been a retail establishment, is properly zoned and in an retail area.

Why don't you anti business jerks move somewhere like the Olympic Peninsula where there are hardly any businesses.

Or the middle of the desert?

Where are the "Red Shirts" when you need them?

Bev Mo will be, literally, one house away from Peabody Charter School! Certainly less than 500 feet as the crow flies! Cross the alley, go through the yard of one house and you would face Peabody!

As an adult child of an alcoholic, I say, shame on you Mr. Hotchkiss, Mr. Francisco, Ms. Self!! You claim collectives represent big drug lords. Hah!! Insane!! They represent little farmers. Remember them? We see who you support! MO LIQUOR, in fact, Bev Mo. For Heaven's sake, it's as plain as the noses on your faces!! Bigger money of course, who could blame you? Hmmmm......

Love being able to walk and ride bikes to the businesses on State and De la Vina, and, from experience, BevMo would be just another excellent destination, one of many along these corridors that make the area desirable, more thriving. For vibrant commercial areas, the more activity, the better for everyone involved. Variety is the spice of life.

De la Vina Liquor, San Roque Liquor, fear not, we Santa Barbarians love your craft beers, fine wines, snacks, and excellent service, and have plenty of love to go around.

In my youth I opposed commercial development, fearing it would make traffic unbearable. The developments were approved, and there was no visible impact on traffic. Here we have a building that was once a business that generated traffic, and it is now empty. When it reopens for business, it will have the same minimal impact it formerly had. Local neighborhoods always oppose development- it is the job of the city council to take the greater good into account.

anti business jerk pathetic whiner here to declare that when property rights are held above human rights, you're tampering with nature. Supreme Court anyone?
A liqour department store will be much more popular than the previous furniture store that was there. Out by Costco, sure. In San Roque, ridiculous.

KsenSku hits the nail on the head.

We have the same battle going on in the Santa Ynez Valley: it's all about how to make $$$ over public safety. All booze/drunk drivers, all the time. @sbdad: there is a reason we don't like these places, and KsenSku articulated the point very well.

I've lived in the area since 1973 and have not been impressed with the slick package of goods the people who sarcastically say "it's called progress" have managed to lord over on locals.

It's the old story of trying to fit ten pounds of sand into a five pound sack. If things are so much better these days, why is it that almost every person behind the wheel around here is frantic, running up the bumper of the person in front of them, and angry as opposed to about twenty years ago? You figure it out.

Once upon my youth smoking was very popular but then the irrefutable evidence about the dangers of smoking and second-hand smoking resuluted in many people quitting. Hopefully similar awareness about the dangers of drinking/drinking and driving will prevail.

Thanks BillClausen.

I am not anti business. I am against giving a free pass without looking at the proposal with data that is justified so that an INFORMED decision can be made. Not just tossing it up to it will all be alright just because.

There is a significant impact here. Not only trafic but it causes a domino effect and runs into other impacts. Just because you think it will be good for economy or bring vitality to the businesses doesnt mean you should ignore everything else? thats stupid. Thats the point here.

Thats why the planning process was created so we dont have screwed up development projects.The planning process was not followed properly in this case.

We can have construction and development but lets not be fools about it. we need too as a community be mindful of the stuff that goes on.

This specific area is a special case. it cannot be compared to all developments. It needs a closer look because of its specific make up of infrastructure.
The process in which the City conducts its review is just as important because if any project needed a review then this was it. How blind could they be? I know how blind they can be I have seen it. This project just proved how bullheaded they are. All about the $$

KsenSku

Here is the way it works: some developer or business person throws some $$$ out and comes up with some idea ostensibly to bring in "revenue" (that's the magic word) for the city. The city leaders pretend to listen to the complaints of the those negatively impacted by the idea but in the end, the "follow-the-money" adage wins out.

Santa Barbara's love affair with alcohol also ensured this victory. What else is new?

As I say, I've lived in the area for years and watched this process play out and turn S.B. from a laid back place to a gilded cage where angry scared people rush about hustling from one place to another frantically as they feel more and more caged in. The people opening this business and those who approved it obviously are not considering the impact it has on those who live in that area, but once again, it's a done deal.

For those who will sarcastically tell me "If you hate it so much in S.B., why don't you just get out", to them I answer "I did". I live in the North County and hopefully can live out my remaining years there before the same self-serving mentality destroys that area. If it does, I'm prepared to further escape.

What these people don't get is that sometimes it's best to leave something well enough alone, but rest assured there are those who will not be happy until they've purged this area of all that which makes it unique.

What would be amusing were it not so sad is this farce that somehow the people running this place are concerned with keeping the small-town atmosphere of Santa Barbara while allowing this monstruosity to pass.

I think of the the line from the song by the group Ten Years After: "I'd love to change the world, but I don't know what to do, so I'll leave it up to you".

I had a LOT of fun growing up in San Roque in the 70's, and I feel sad that today's kids growing up there won't have that experience.

Ho-ho, BevMo
Plying spirits to pimp & 'ho'
Now da winos got some place to go
Ho-ho, BevMo

Upscale, BevMo
Noses pass where winds won't blow
A thousand vodkas tinge the glow
Upscale, BevMo

Mo' mo', BevMo
Legal soma the social woe
Everyone drunk, brains run slow
Mo' mo', BevMo!

Sometimes Draxor, you have a tendency to be silly.