An Old Town Goleta For Everyone

September 4, 2024, 12:21 pm 4.4k Views 83 Comments

Old Town Goleta has become a battleground on Nextdoor and other social media and a lot of misinformation is being spread for political gain. Notably, a slate of political challengers has formed to oppose the current Goleta City Council. They are doing this based on false information. It is time to set the record straight.

SHORT VERSION: SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT

The short version: It has taken decades finally to achieve a compromise in Old Town Goleta that provides safe bicycle lanes, safe pedestrian crossings and adequate parking for businesses and local residents.

Unfortunately, at the exact same time this reconfiguration happened, there were two major construction projects that have disrupted traffic in the area. Some political opportunists have used this traffic disruption to try to undo decades of work.

The State has mandated bridge replacements over San Jose Creek. One of these bridge construction projects is on Highway 101 and has caused traffic jams there for a long time. Motorists started using Hollister in Old Town Goleta to bypass that jam. Creating a new jam on Hollister in Old Town Goleta.

Just when things couldn’t get much worse in Old Town, the second State-mandated bridge project began. This one is at the east end of Hollister in Old Town Goleta.

The timing couldn’t have been worse. The reconfiguration of Hollister in Old Town Goleta happened at the same time. Yes, some slowing of traffic is due to that reconfiguration. But traffic moves fairly well most of the day through that area. The actual blockage occurs at the east end of Hollister in Old Town where the San Jose Bridge project is happening.

When I was a child, America knew how to invest in big projects and get them done quickly. Both parties were on board. Now, everything turns into a political battle. Money is rationed and projects take forever to complete. If we valued peoples’ time properly, then we would spend adequate money up front and get these projects done quickly.

It is often the same people who complain that the projects take too long who also try to limit government spending.

We should support the current courageous City Council and reject the rabble-rousing opponents who have nothing positive to offer.

HISTORY AND BACK STORY OF OLD TOWN GOLETA RECONFIGURATION

For those who are interested, I would like to provide some of the history of how we got where we are now in Old Town Goleta.

OLD TOWN GOLETA WAS A TERRIFYING PLACE

Old Town Goleta was a terrifying place for me since I came to UCSB in 1982 to attend grad school in the Department of Physics. There were no bicycle lanes and there were few safe places to cross the street.

There were seven lanes devoted to motor vehicles: Four traffic lanes. A center turn lane. And two lanes to store private motor vehicles, also known as on-street parking. But no bicycle lanes.

PUBLIC MEETINGS BEGAN 30 YEARS AGO

I was delighted when 30 years ago meetings were convened at the Goleta Valley Community Center to plan how to make Old Town Goleta safer for pedestrians and bicyclists. I was very busy with our new tech start-up, but I eagerly attended every meeting.

There was no City of Goleta, but the County provided staff to run the Goleta Old Town Advisory Committee (GOTAC) meetings, pay for studies and survey residents for their opinions and for solutions.

VISIONARY SOLUTIONS

The result: An array of possible visionary designs that would be a win-win for all residents. A comprehensive parking study was completed in 1996, showing that there was a way to address Old Town’s shortage of public parking. The study found that it would be relatively inexpensive to buy or lease parking areas on the south (ocean) side of Hollister Avenue and make them available to the public.

Here is that 1996 study and some related information: https://swt.org/pix/oldtowngoleta-2024/OldTownParking-1996.pdf

That one change would free up more than enough land on Hollister for wonderful changes:

Plenty of room for bicycle lanes. Room for wider sidewalks. For pedestrian islands for safely crossing the street. And room for landscaping with nice trees and some benches, fountains and other amenities.

The Old Town visioning also considered housing, commercial and business development. And plans for additional transportation routes and options. Notably, routes that would parallel Hollister Avenue and pass under or over Highway 217.

There was also a plan to close a block of Rutherford on the south side of Hollister to create a mixed use village. A movie theater, shops, restaurants and housing.

THEN EVERYTHING CAME TO A STANDSTILL

Just when it seemed we were close to action, Goleta became a city. Everything went on hold for years as the City struggled to take care of basic operations. The founding City Council members were more about opposing development than they were about long-term planning.

Then came a series of deaths in Old Town. Pedestrians and bicyclists hit by motorists.

This shows how deadly crosswalks are when they cross seven lanes of traffic with no refuge at all.

A workshop was convened in October 2003 to revive some of the discussion.

ENDLESS MEETINGS AND REPEATED STUDIES

But no meaningful changes happened. In 2009 it was determined that the 1996 parking study was too old, so it was deemed necessary to pay for a new one. The study cost about $30,000. Almost exactly what it would have cost simply to buy the land for all of the parking needed! And the 2009 study indeed showed almost no change since 1996. Such a waste. No action came from this.

Every time we seemed close to action, it was claimed that too much time had passed and it was time to start all over again with another round of public meetings and studies. Tens of thousands of dollars spent and years wasted.

2013 and 2014 brought another round of such meetings.

A MORE DRAMATIC PROPOSAL THAT HAD BROADER AGREEMENT

The Santa Barbara Bicycle Coalition had advocated for the changes listed above in the 1990s and into the 2000s: Keep four traffic lanes, but move a few parking spaces to make room for bike lanes and other improvements.

But by the 2010s there was a new generation that had a more dramatic proposal for Hollister Avenue. They wanted to keep the parking on Hollister, but remove a traffic lane in each direction. They argued that this would make it safer for pedestrians to cross the street. And it would slow traffic, making it safer for everyone.

This would still mean five lanes devoted to motor vehicles, instead of the existing seven lanes devoted to motor vehicles. But it would provide for bicycle lanes, safer pedestrian crossings and lots more on-street parking. Motorists would no longer have to share a lane with bicyclists.

I was skeptical that this would be acceptable to local business people. But the City of Goleta conducted more studies, public surveys and workshops. Surprisingly, a majority of Old Town Goleta business owners favored removing one traffic lane on each side, rather than moving some parking to off-street lots. The more dramatic proposal had the broadest agreement! Business owners, environmentalists and public safety advocates all were on board!

COVID

Then came COVID in 2020. Cities all over the country and all over the world were making dramatic changes. Downtown streets were being partially or completely closed to motor vehicles, mostly to make room for outdoor dining areas, but also to create pedestrian and bicycle friendly areas for safe outdoor activity. Many cities, including the City of Santa Barbara, found that this arrangement saved many restaurants and businesses from the pandemic downturn.

FINALLY – ACTION!

The City of Goleta was still hesitant. Finally, the community expressed its views more strongly to the Goleta City Council. An affordable compromise was reached: Restripe Hollister in Old Town Goleta to create safe bicycle lanes. It doesn’t have to be fancy. For now, no permanent structures. No wider sidewalks, landscaping or other “hard scape” changes. Just paint.

In July 2024, after 30 years and hundreds of hours of public meetings and hearings, we finally got bicycle lanes in Old Town Goleta!

Here is the beautiful result. Space for everyone. Five lanes for motor vehicles. And a safe refuge for bicyclists. Motorists no longer have to share a lane with bicyclists. And pedestrians finally have safe crossings. No more need to cross seven lanes with a single terrifying, death-defying bound.

WE MUST MOVE FORWARD

It didn’t take long for a few very vocal people to express their displeasure. They inaccurately claim that the reduction of traffic lanes is creating a traffic jam in Old Town Goleta. As explained above, the traffic jam is almost entirely due to the ongoing bridge construction projects.

Eventually, one or more parallel routes to Hollister will be needed. Passing over or under Highway 217. That requires long term investment in major projects that will cost a lot of money.

Here is what is not helpful: A slate of candidates is running against the existing Goleta City Council. The Goleta City Council that finally come through to increase Old Town public safety.

The San Jose Creek bridge construction projects have nothing to do with the Goleta City Council. Those projects are mandated by the State. It makes no sense to attribute the traffic delays to restriping or to punish Goleta City Council incumbents who are doing the right things for the benefit of Old Town residents, merchants and visitors.

We must not allow City Council challengers to play politics with our safety. If their slate is elected, it is very clear that these challengers will remove the bike lanes and take us back to the Dark Ages of managing traffic. Instead, with our votes, we must thank our Goleta City Council members for their courage finally to act where decades of their predecessors did nothing. This November, I urge you to vote to keep the incumbents so they can continue doing their jobs working for the public interest.

– Robert Bernstein

Avatar

Written by sbrobert

What do you think?

6 Points

Comments

18 Comments deleted by Administrator

Leave a Review or Comment

83 Comments

  2. Thank you for such a comprehensive background on this, Roger! As it was, Old Town was a bit of a mess and definitely not a great place for cyclists or pedestrians trying to cross it. I have yet to have a real traffic jam experience there, whether on a weekend or weekday afternoon. Sure they happen, but it’s not a constant state of blockage as many say. I do, though, take issue with the back-in parking. I opposed it by East Beach too. We have too many elderly and out of town drivers that lack the confidence and sometimes ability to maneuver safely into these spots. That’s where I see the traffic backing up. Also, unless you back in straight in your spot, there’s often no room for people to get in/out of their cars next to yours.

    I would love to see the parking redone, but the striping overall seems fine, in my opinion.

    4

    • Do people have more trouble backing into a parking spot than they have backing into traffic to get out of a standard spot? One way or another, there will be some backing. Are these back-in spots particularly narrow? Seems to me the back-in parking is safer because you can see the oncoming traffic when it is time to pull out.

      3

    • Sacjon, I respect your perspective on back in angled parking along with your assessment of the traffic concerns. That being said,
      The angled back-in spaces at East Beach were installed in 2019 & since that change there hasn’t been any serious car vs car or car vs bike accidents directly related to that parking arrangement.
      I do disagree with the belief/feeling/idea that operating a car in reverse, being a challenge for an aforementioned demographic of drivers, is reason enough to not have back-in parking.
      Nearly all vehicle parking requires the driver to safely operate the car in reverse at some point. If that’s something that some drivers are not capable of then perhaps operating a motor vehicle is not for them.
      I’ve been a licensed driver for nearly 60 yrs. I prefer to back in my car when I park wherever it’s a safe option. I have control over the situation from the start of the process because I can see any potential obstacles prior to beginning. And upon leaving I have better visibility of any pedestrian, cycle, or car that I need to be aware of.

      5

    • First of all, I think the back-in parking is a big improvement over the parallel parking that used to be there. It’s easier, and the high curbs on that side of the street meant you often couldn’t open your passenger side door after parallel parking.

      I tend to prefer back-in over head-in on busy streets. I find backing out of head-in spaces into traffic very difficult. If your car doesn’t have a reverse camera you have essentially no ability to see oncoming traffic before you back into it. But either would be better than the old situation.

      2

  3. I listen mostly to the majority of Old Town small business owners, not politicians, Robert. They aren’t happy with what’s been thrown upon them by Goleta. To me it’s been a very poorly managed project with zero upside. Your take is your take, but that’s my take.

    -4

    • I’m curious. Where do you get the chance to hear their voices? Do you frequent a few of the the businesses and ask them? Is there a Goleta Chamber of Commerce that you’re a member of? Are they all of the same voice, or when you say “they aren’t happy”, you mean…what, exactly?
      Like I said, I’m just curious about it

      5

      • Talking with business owners and employees in Old Town, and reading/watching the local news reports in which owners were interviewed. There have a been a number of these lately. The majority of business owners have gone on record opposing the street changes.

        -3

        • ok well thanks I guess. Sounds pretty vague to be honest. I read a lot (probably too much) commentary about this and a huge portion of it is mere complaining and kvetching based on their own personal inconvenience, and many people seem to feel they can speak for “the majority of business owners” without really having a factual basis for the claim. Seems like very fertile ground for confirmation bias.

          3

          • KIRK – Vague because it’s likely untrue. Some folks need to feel relevant on every topic. I get it, it’s nice to be well-versed. Thing is, some people also make things up, like a lot, and never provide any real evidence to back their claims even when shown conflicting data, reports, articles, etc.

            The internet is fun place to be whoever you want to be, for some…..

            2

          • Well, I’ll say this-
            Have you ever owned a small business?
            Go out and talk to some of them if you really doubt it, patronize their businesses, chat the employee or two up, etc.

            Or not, whatever. Up to you. The majority of small independent business owners in Old Town are on record as opposing what the City did, despite their objections and a circulated petition drive.
            I’m not making this up.

            -2

    • Have you considered public safety as an upside? For instance, the lives that will be saved by lowering the speeds of cars and providing dedicated space for those not in them? Are lives lost not a problem worth sacrificing for?

      4

  4. Thanks Robert. If anyone has issues with the project, please re-read the short version at the beginning of the op-ed and keep in mind three things: 1. the traffic congestion issue is the result of multiple extensive projects happening at the same time. Definitely a bummer. It’s how the funding happened. It will pass. 2. The striping is a test project, It is not etched in stone (or asphalt). Future roadway changes will reflect improvements, so hang on for the make-it-better part. 3. Old Town was looking very old and shabby and Hollister Ave was a clear and present danger to pedestrians and bicyclists. Preventing even one death is worth the work and in the end, there will be a more vibrant, financially viable and safer Old Town. Doing nothing was not an option.

    6

  5. As a long-time cyclist in the area, I would like to address some of your statements. First, I support the business owners of Old Town who have experienced a major impact on their livelihoods and their ability to provide for their families. Civil liberty is important here, and clearly, at this time, the restriping has infringed on the civil liberties of the business owners. To continue to hear those who prioritize a bicycle access route over families is insensitive. I have no problem with the project; I have a problem with the timing. A randomized experiment would violate ethical standards. Having a freeway undergoing construction, as well as roundabouts under construction, introduces two uncontrolled variables into the study and renders the data invalid. The timing was the choice of the council. It was bad timing; it was also a bad choice, and businesses are suffering. I have no problem with this project at another time, but I feel the statements you are making are inaccurate and, during an election, extremely unfair and concerning. It also in no way represents the Measure A funds that were moved to accommodate the funding of this project from Districts 3 and 4. Those funds were for pedestrian safety in those districts. These all are small issues compared to the damage that has been and continues to be done to Old Town business owners’ livelihoods. They need our help. I have stated before that we can revisit this project again after the bulk of the construction is complete. I wish to again appeal for assistance in helping those who have asked the council for action and received none.

    #takeitdown4oldtown

    Ethan Woodill
    Candidate, 3rd District Goleta City Council

    -4

  6. I also would like to quote from page 19 of the Strategic Economic Development Plan written in 2022 by the City Council, Staff, the South Coast Chamber of Commerce, and other contributors. This is just the first phase of many improvements to come for Old Town. The City Council one one of the first improvements rolled out broke one of the key objectives outlined in this plan. The fact that they have not acted is concerning that they are being driven by priorities that do not allign with the general public and small business owners. The County and City have approved 1234 units to be placed in and bordering my District. That constitutes approximately a 20-25% increase. My opponent Jennifer Smith was the head of the Planning department at this time. She wants to advocate for residents of a neighborhood she has occupied for 8 months. Mistakes like this and below affect the quality of life of many of our residents. This is a reason as to why I am running. Pg 19 2nd Paragraph

    “Study, identify, and implement anti-displacement tools and strategies for Old Town businesses and residents. As improvements take place in Old Town, the City and its partners must take careful steps to minimize the displacement of residents and businesses. As a neighborhood improves, rents will climb for both commercial and residential units. Identifying and implementing creative ways to enable businesses and residents to stay in the neighborhood despite these likely cost increases will preserve the unique character of Old Town while allowing for the growth and development that will create and maintain many jobs in Goleta.”

    Potential partners: City of Goleta Planning & Environmental Review Department, District Property Owners, District Businesses, District Residents

    Remember the business owners of Old Town need our help.

    #Takeitdown4OldTown

    -4

  7. The lighted crosswalks already worked. What doesn’t work is the dangerous parking and virtually empty bike lanes at the expense of a gridlocked single lane. Any minor disruption, parking, etc backs up traffic for the whole street where before you could just change lanes. It’s broken and I avoid it at all costs.

    -3

  9. I wish I lived in that area just to vote these people out of office. After all these studies and meetings and budgets and no one could figure out that doing two huge round about at the same time wasn’t the best idea? 🤷🏽‍♂️
    Your planning has only done one thing chased away people from the businesses there

    -3

  10. This is very well written and explains a lot of the background into the reasons for the current design. It changed my mind and I am willing to wait to see how the vehicle, bike and pedestrian traffic flows in the next year or two before any new changes.

    4

    • SBSUNNY – it changed my mind too. I don’t usually go much to Old Town, but the few times I have since this restripe, it wasn’t as bad (when I went) as all the usual complainers on Nextdoor, Facebook and here have been saying. It’s nice to hear from Robert, who has actually been involved with this to hear what exactly is going on.

      4

  11. Few will argue forever about this, despite not even spending much time in Old Town. Yes, I have experience with small business – my parents ran a local small independent business for 25 years in SB. I could speak the name and 90% of folks here would know it. And yes, I do shop weekly in old town and speak with folks who run and work in these businesses. You don’t, as you stated.

    Calling everyone you don’t agree with online fundamentally a “liar” is pathologic, sad, and useless. We’re seeing it a lot here. I’d say this – “take it easy Francis”. You’re losing it.

    -2

    • BASIC – “Calling everyone you don’t agree with online fundamentally a “liar” – Yeah, I don’t do that. I only liars, “liars.” Like you. Like you right there.

      It’s just pure laziness to keep saying I say that about people I disagree with solely because I disagree with them. Make an effort, Simon.

      2

    • Personally, I never go to Old Town so I have no experience with what’s going on there. To sum up my position on the success or failure of any traffic plan being implemented there–I have absolutely no idea, no first hand experience, no expertise, and therefore nor opinion on the topic.

      See how that works? You should try it some time.

      2

  12. Vision Zero is ridiculous even as it sounds reasonable and enticing: “Vision Zero is a strategy to eliminate all traffic fatalities and severe injuries, while increasing safe, healthy, equitable mobility for all.”
    Wow. Who could possibly be against that? “Eliminate ALL …fatalities and severe injuries” at the same time, ” increasing safe, healthy, equitable mobility for all”
    I am going to say something that is historically, statistically true and everyone can get as outraged as they like.
    We could go back to walking everywhere and someone would still die on the road from heatstroke. Someone will get high or drunk and fall off of a cliff.
    Another will get beaten, robbed and die.

    Life and travel involve risk. There is no zero
    I don’t want anyone to die needlessly, but humans are actually quite good at dying and will continue to achieve in this regard- even if we all go back to walking as our only allowed method of mobility .

    In 2023, 7,318 pedestrians died in a country that had more than 262,000,000 adults over the age of 18.
    That is 20 a day (more or less) but the numbers are statistically insignificant, while remaining tragic. If I look both ways and walk out into traffic, sober, in a crosswalk and/or on a green light, my chances of dying are of one of a very very very tiny fraction.

    2023 41,000 of Americans died in traffic accidents, 25% of those were due to drunk driving and another 25% were due to speeding
    So, if you don’t drink and drive and don’t speed, you chances of dying at the hands of another, or killing another are statistically next to zero. Same goes for the chances of being sober, cautious and still hit a crosswalk by a speeding drunk driver.

    -4

    • Completely lacking here is any indication of why or how strategies to reduce traffic injuries and fatalities are “ridiculous” … just a claim that people killed by cars are “statistically insignificant” (a misuse of that phrase: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_significance).

      “you chances of dying at the hands of another, or killing another are statistically next to zero”

      Perhaps (although I have been struck by cars while on my bicycle more than once, always entirely the drivers’ fault–once due to the driver making a sudden illegal left turn, and once when the driver didn’t curve when the road curved, driving into the bike lane and striking me), but not being a sociopath I don’t only care about myself.

      4

  13. Zero is ridiculously unachievable and saying so doesn’t make anyone a sociopath or prove they are uncaring toward others.

    An event can be statistically insignificant (you understand what I mean) and very tragic at the same time. If a tire falls off an airliner and lands on my mom, its a family tragedy. But it would be a larger societal mistake to go Vision Zero over it. Should we eliminate precious housing under runway take off and landing approaches because my family had a unicorn event? I’d like to believe I’m not so selfish. W

    I’m not against better lighting, better striping, warning flashing lights, crossing guards at schools for children etc. Human tragedy is heart wrenching.

    I can still think the Vision Zero vision of zero is ridiculous.
    So is the vision of “equity of mobility”. Everyone could be forced to walk, and walk on exactly the same paths, same routes, and the means of mobility would be equitable, but the results would always remain inequitable.

    -3

  14. So far, I love the changes to the road striping and parking.
    It is an improvement driving in my car and significantly better when riding my bike as I head to Santa Cruz market to pick up their salsa.
    It was super tight before and dangerous for the many people who ride bikes (like as their transportation).
    And very excited about the roundabout too.
    Let’s give the changes a few months before we condemn the changes.

    3

  15. Thank you to everyone who took the time to read my article and to make thoughtful comments. There is a lot more to the history. I mostly wanted to convey just how many opportunities there were for public comment to shape the changes that took decades to achieve. I also wanted to convey the courage of the current Goleta City Council finally to act where there had been so many decades of inaction.

    Safety is not just about how many people die. It is also about whether people feel welcome in the heart of their own community. We finally have a design where everyone can feel welcome.

    A clarification: The current construction has nothing to do with roundabouts. The current construction is about the bridge reconstructions over San Jose Creek. I personally think roundabouts are a barrier to most bicyclists. But I did not want to add unnecessary controversy in my article.

    It is unfortunate that there is no way to know who most people are on Edhat or to connect with them off line. In particular, I am curious who is dalgorf and would be interested in connecting with that person. I list my email address at the bottom of most of my photo spreads. Including this recent one:
    https://swt.org/hikehssb/sanantonio-2024-0824/

    3

Lucidity Festival Announces Cancellation, Unable to Offer Ticket Refunds

Sen. Padilla Announces $152 Million for Critical Roadway Safety Improvements Across California