“Disaster” is likely one of the most overused and misused phrases within the treasure chest of English vocabulary. So many challenges, inconveniences, and thwarted wishes at the moment are reflexively inflated to disaster standing. The housing challenge in Santa Barbara is one such instance of this. It was elevated to disaster standing years in the past and has been left up there ever since. Can a disaster be perpetual?
Not if it’s a actual disaster.
An actual disaster is a state of affairs that has reached a important level at which the end result might be disastrous. When was the important level reached the place Santa Barbara was teetering on catastrophe as a result of there wasn’t sufficient housing right here for everybody who needed it? Was it 1950, 1970, 1990, 2000, now?
There at all times has been, and can proceed to be, countless demand for housing in Santa Barbara, as a result of, all issues thought-about, it is likely one of the finest locations on earth. There have been wailings about inadequate housing right here for at the very least 70 years. There’s by no means sufficient, and there by no means will probably be.
What there may be, nonetheless, is a rising entitlement mentality that equates “want” with “deserve” — which means that housing right here should be offered for anybody who needs it no matter their monetary wherewithal, restricted important assets (e.g., water), or the irreversible degradation of what makes Santa Barbara so engaging.
The naively idealistic people-packers allied with the standard forces of greed usually ignore the truth of limits and the results of populating a spot past its protected carrying capability. Their imaginative and prescient is myopic, their wishes speedy. Left unchecked, they may ravage a spot like ravenous locusts devouring a discipline of wheat.
Misguided, myopic, state politicians are forcing housing quotas on communities whether or not the communities prefer it or not, and they’re primarily outlawing small cities and single-family neighborhoods. In the meantime, well-intentioned housing advocates moralistically argue for “inclusionary” housing, reciting the previous canard of impending financial doom if it isn’t offered. That boy has been crying wolf for many years now.
What to ask each people-packing politician and housing advocate is “what number of extra will we construct, when is sufficient, sufficient?” There appears to be a tacit delusion that the subsequent spherical of mandated housing will probably be it. Drawback solved. Has that ever been the case?
The CEO of Santa Barbara’s Housing Authority just lately made some telling observations that acknowledge the realities of the housing challenge right here. Constructing an excessive amount of housing “would trigger vital impacts to our metropolis’s assets and infrastructure.” And, “Santa Barbara is a singular housing market, a extremely fascinating place the place demand is extra inelastic and fewer delicate to cost. Anybody from anywhere on this planet can pay regardless of the worth it takes to maneuver to paradise.”
Nicely, not “anybody.” Housing is inexpensive right here, however not for everybody. Offering housing right here for everybody who needs it can destroy the place.
So, what number of extra residents ought to Santa Barbara accommodate?
Not too way back, wiser metropolis leaders set a inhabitants cap of 85,000 for the town. That has been exceeded, and if the people-packers and forces of greed have their manner, each nook and cranny of Santa Barbara will probably be filled with housing reaching to the sky.
Santa Barbara is price preserving for lots of the identical causes we protect particular locations, like nationwide parks; as a result of as soon as it’s gone, it’s gone for everybody — ceaselessly.
The actual housing disaster confronting us is just not too little housing, it’s an excessive amount of. We’re at a turning level.
Push again on development. Help the Our Neighborhood Voices poll measure to reverse the state’s misguided, ham-fisted, housing mandates.
