To the editor: The aerial view of the Santa Barbara Old Mission accompanying the article on the eight-story housing project proposed at 505 East Los Olivos St. is the perfect illustration of why this project is a terrible idea (“State lawmakers targeted a Santa Barbara development. Then came the fallout,” Dec. 2).
During the Jesusita fire of 2009, the entire mountainous landscape behind the mission was in flames. Eighty homes and numerous outbuildings were destroyed. People from as far away as Montecito were forced to evacuate via Foothill Road and Mission Canyon Road, which begins at East Los Olivos Street, essentially where the project is proposed. People were also streaming down Mountain Drive and Alameda Padre Serra. Both begin opposite the proposed project site.
The mission was seriously threatened by this fire and was saved because the erratic 40 to 60-mph winds shifted at the last moment.
At meetings and workshops that I attended at the time, traffic engineers testified during the 2015 “Mission Canyon Multimodal Improvement Plan” proposal that East Los Olivos Street and Mission Canyon Road cannot be widened. The reason is that this would create a choke point where East Los Olivos Street curves around the mission and funnels into a two-lane city street. It is better to keep traffic flowing at a constant rate.
Now, imagine at least 250 additional residents of the proposed eight-story project trying to evacuate at the intersection of East Los Olivos Street and Alameda Padre Serra.
Because Los Angeles recently experienced devastating fires in Pasadena and Altadena with conditions similar to those in Santa Barbara, it is easy to picture how a tragedy could unfold here near the mission. The article’s main focus was the horrendous aesthetic nightmare of a project of this scale looming over the historic mission. The fire danger is equally horrendous.
Susan Chamberlin, Santa Barbara
..
To the editor: Allow me to dispute some of the assertions in this article that downplay the potential impacts of the “builder’s remedy” projects here in Santa Barbara.
Firstly, although housing here is problematic and painfully expensive, and although there are certainly wealthy enclaves, Santa Barbara is not a strictly upscale community as the lines for the food bank and other data attest. It would’ve been nice to see that perspective reflected.
The proposed projects are so poorly and dangerously sited and designed that they would never pass muster under normal circumstances. Meanwhile, the city is moving forward with numerous additional housing projects through proper procedures.
The need for more housing should not enable the construction of inappropriately sited and designed buildings that would degrade the character of our community. The photograph of the mission should have included an overlay of the proposed project. That would say more than my words can express.
Michele Harris Padron, Santa Barbara
