State Street Promenade Gets New Look

Very creative idea. I like how you think. Thanks for sharing your thoughts here. My one concern is how would traffic be addressed when it coms to getting across the 101? That leaves only the route via Garden or all the way over on Castillo to cross over and access the ocean areas and I think that's really problematic from a traffic/flow perspective. I agree with you that if there is an area that is most suited to full closure of the lanes entirely to vehicular traffic, it could be the very newly redeveloped waterfront area. Yanonali to Cabrillo would be ideal to begin with. Very cool idea, just concerned about the number of people who actually do need to cross the 101 having only the Castillo or Garden throughways to do so.

ZERO - I'll agree 100% with you on this. As a native, hanging out on State in the 80s and 90s, I always wondered why anyone would need to drive up and down it for anything other than people watching. Shut it down permanently and keep it a promenade! We moved out to Goleta and I don't go downtown much anymore, but the last few times we did, it was awesome (before the recent lockdown)! Sitting in little mini "beer gardens" and walking in the street was great! There even seemed to be less "gamey" homeless out and about. It was cleaner and mellow. Keep it like this. No need to drive lower State.

I did add constructive ideas, Zero. I laid out my plan in detail, which I believe should please many people. :) Some things that seem like good ideas, aren't. I do think SB has lots of people who never want things to change. Ideally, we can change in ways that please the most locals as possible, and retains our local flavor while optimizing for success. Yes, you're right Third Street Promenade was bustling back then. So was State Street. I miss State Street and Paseo Nuevo of the '90s and even early '00s! It was amazing. The challenges facing downtown will not be solved by the promenade. We need a way to add housing on State Street, break up large retail spaces into smaller spaces, streamline permitting processes and get rid of arcane rules, and to increase pedestrian friendliness through stuff like widening sidewalks. We don't need to get rid of traffic entirely, and starting with the most extreme option with the least immediately verifiable ROI seems like an odd choice. I think there is something risky about sealing off a part of town to vehicles. It makes it hard for people to survey an area, take it in, and pinpoint stuff they want to come back to see, visit, shop at, etc. State Street can be quite beautiful, and limiting people's ability to see it by car and forcing them onto side streets is an odd choice. I actually think sealing off some of our side streets between State/Chapala and State/Anacapa could be a better choice overall.

and any comments about needing to drive down state...i'll toss this in now. Why? You can't park on state and no one cares if you're cruising in your 2003 SUV. No one cruises state anymore, that ended decades ago. Driving down state is pointless unless you're a 20something with a nice stereo and even then, it's pointless. That argument has made me laugh for decades. "I like to look at the stores" ok park and take a walk. "I like to see people" ok park and take a walk. "I like people to see my lame car and hear my lame music" oh ok...again...park and take a walk lol

I don't agree at all re: the promenade. I think it will fail, just like Third Street Promenade in Santa Monica, which prior to COVID had a 15% vacancy rate and developers have suggested spending 60-70 million to revamp it in order to "make it a success again." The real problem for SM, which will be the same thing here, are large spaces that are no longer relevant to contemporary retail environment. The promenade won't change that. What I definitely agree with you on is that having a bike lane in the middle is a bad idea, and doesn't contribute to the relaxed pedestrian flow that seems to be the entire point of this thing. I personally advocate for a hybrid model of a single lane of 10mph traffic headed toward the water, along with a dedicated bike line in that section. But without car traffic, having a bike lane mixed in with pedestrians seems kind of like a nightmare. Anyone who has been to Amsterdam can see how annoying it for locals who rely on the awesome bike highways to deal with tourist who end up getting in the way, etc. As well as how intimidating it can feel to a tourist there trying to navigate around hordes of Dammers whizzing by on their bikes. No shade to Amsterdam, it's awesome - and I wish we had bike paths everywhere like Holland. But this isn't Holland, and a bike path in the middle of an alleged pedestrian promenade seems to kind of ruin the whole vibe.

For sure, Duke. I personally don't see how the promenade addresses any of the existing problems: retail spaces that are way too large for contemporary retail needs, homelessness, difficult permitting processes for opening businesses, arcane and misguided rules that make business hard for people (example: Institution Ale's fight to keep its interior neon sign which looks awesome and clearly draws people in while paying homage to the streamline moderne era of the unique building it inhabits), landlords who hold out for corporate tenants that never come rather than rent to locals as it's better for their portfolios and bolsters their borrowing capacity to bag a corporate tenant, etc. It seems to me it might be easier to seem like we're "doing something" by putting in the promenade, than actually tackling the much bigger issues haunting downtown retail, including the biggest question of all: do we even need as much retail as we used to have? The answers seems to be no, and I am hoping we can see some redevelopment of retail and office space into some awesome downtown housing. By doing so, we wouldn't even necessarily need to build anything new to begin with, just repurpose. That should please the people who want more housing, and the preservationists who want nothing to change. In the meantime, we bolster the downtown population which leads to more feet on the ground to support businesses.

To play devils advocate here, the state of the street was pretty shaky pre-covid. Shuttered shops, grime and aggressive panhandling greeted you every time you visited. As much as I love SB of the 80's...where State street was in 2019 isn't something to be nostalgic about.

Thank you! I REALLY love this city. I have lived in numerous major cities across the world and I am so happy to have returned to my hometown. I believe we can preserve what is so special about Santa Barbara while coming up with some practical, real-world solutions to fix what is not going well, and do spur development that will not cause Santa Barbara to lose its sense of place. Unfortunately, I do not always feel that our leaders, representatives, and appointed officials (who run many of the committees) truly know what is best for us. I wonder if they read EdHat? Methinks not.

It shows flexible delineators in the middle of the bike lane so emergency vehicles could drive right over them.

Chapala Street is wider: parades can go there and people can eat and drink and bike on State Street.

Most of that stuff looks easy to move. No way SB will stop their parades. It's in our blood to love a parade.

When one door closes, another opens. New fun will be had.

That sure is disappointing to hear...

Of course I've seen those, VOR. Press Room redevelopment is scrapped is my understanding. And not sure why you think that those two proposals are indicative of what everything else can or would be? Yes, there are parking lots and inlets behind many of the frontages of State Street. I have, you know, lived here and been downtown. But a pedestrian thoroughfare could then end up dictating how housing is built downtown, which I don't view as a good thing. Enjoy your weekend.

Hahaha, thanks, Jon. I had fun with that one. Now I'm going to go make a negroni, officially kick off the weekend, and think about the piles of theory I've read, the case studies I've digested, the projects I've worked on, the successful changes I've seen in the cities I've lived in, and leave VOR with the fact that a rough assessment of pedestrian mall conversions in the US finds about an 80-90% failure rate, with those that do not succeed eventually converting back. I personally used to back this idea (and still definitely support major changes downtown) and thought it could work for years. Upon getting deeper into the literature and really researching this over the last three years, I've changed my stance and no longer support a full closure of State St. If anything, I think closing some side streets between Chapala and Anacapa could be better, or creating a total closer down toward the water in the "new" tourist area. Anyway, have a great weekend everyone!

With those credentials I'm surprised you assumed the multi-family component of a downtown mixed use project would be accessed from a pedestrian only street. The two designs I've seen, the one for the Staples and where the Press Room is are both accessed from the rear or side street.

SBTOWNIE - Mic drop! Dang, VOR, you got told haha!

Are you intentionally so patronizing, VOR? I have a degree in urban studies and a professional background in successful retail development in New York City and architecture and design in London. I am part of the third generation in my family to work in these industries, including property development, both residential and commercial. I have been involved in the town halls and about this issue, the city council meetings, numerous other meetings and committee hearings on related topics for years here. I'm not an imbecile but thanks for your input.

SBTown any residential component of a downtown mixed use building won't have it's main access on State Street so people and the packages would be dropped off on a side street or from back of the block. The ground floor State St. frontage would be used for the commercial part of the mixed use project. It's a good thing people more knowledgeable about urban planning are making the decisions and recommendations. I'd recommend your take a look at the "vision Santa Barbara" concepts put together by those very experienced in this area, they're put up in windows around downtown.

I agree, @2:19 that is is what they will say. However, having been a big city denizen in NYC and London for years (native Barbareña, however, and happy to be home) it is imperative residents have the ability to be dropped off in front of their homes. This is relevant for bringing home packages, etc. or for those with disabilities. Most New Yorkers and Londoners don't have cars, but there are times you must rely on taxi, Uber, etc. and you need access to the front of your building. This is only part of why I believe completely cutting off traffic on State St. with the hopes of reinvigorating it and adding housing is moronic.

Good points! But as for housing downtown and no vehicular traffic: if Rob Dayton has anything to say about it, and he's the traffic czar and has _a lot_ to say about it, he and his minions on the planning commission, Reed, Bonderson, Schwartz, and Higgins, with supporters on the city council, those living downtown won't have cars, no parking for them, except blocks away in pay-by-month parking. Deliveries can be made via Chapala St.

Great point. I hadn't thought of that.

I like your idea of one lane for cruising. It’s also needed for the shuttle bus.

Zerohawk, please take an accounting class. There are no write offs for shuttered buildings and any depreciation expense offsets income whether the space is occupied or not, it's always better to have more income coming in than less/none. I don't know about Saks but Macy's and Radio Shack had issues unrelated to Santa Barbara. I get how building owners are an easy target because many, like your self, have no idea the complexities with owning and managing commercial real estate and just assume if someone invests/owns commercial real estate they're uber rich.

Sail, the homeless are more abundant across the freeway, near SBCC and the marina, the ones downtown are fewer and far between compared to other areas of downtown. They won't see that as a problem for downtown corridor. The shuttered buildings is up to the building owners. The city has allowed this to happen for over 30 (40?) years. Do you remember Esaus? That building is still boarded up after 20 years, other buildings as well. Macys? Saks? Radio Shack and many many many more. This is the norm for SB. Let the land barons control downtown. They use the shuttered buildings as tax write offs....

Then they should paint “keep clear”. But I was thinking traffic traveling north to south cross state street. Civilian cars move over, but the black bollards would prevent them going down the center of the road.

The yellow traffic post is likely removable and provides access to emergency vehicles over the green bike path. I can't imagine that would be an issue.