Have something to say? Lookout welcomes letters to the editor, within our policies, from readers. Guidelines here.
Is our broader community more concerned about the Santa Cruz Warriors playing in a state-of-the-art stadium and having wine-tasting bars and restaurants than in addressing the affordable housing crisis?
It sure seems that way.
The downtown expansion plan that city planners and council are promoting will attract well-off people who would love to own a retreat in our town because of the extraordinary natural beauty and great weather for outdoor pleasures. Bringing slews more people into this small area will only exacerbate what is already painful traffic congestion for locals and visitors.
It begs the question: How will high-rises impact our senses, the view of our mountainous skyline and increased congestion, and affect delivery of limited resources before and during looming climate disasters, rise in sea levels and epidemic emergencies?
Having lived in overcrowded New York City and Miami Beach, I chose Santa Cruz to make a home where nature, the arts and the one-of-a-kind Monterey Bay are valued and preserved. Understandably, over 42 years, the area has grown. However, like so many, I’m stunned by the mammoth, out-of-place buildings under construction.
This downtown expansion plan goes too far, as high-rise condos will not only block views of the mountains, they will also create shadows on our sunny streets, disrupt migration patterns and exacerbate traffic and congestion.
As a result of this plan and prior decisions, a substantial portion of city residents have lost confidence in city leaders. We see them placing corporate profits above resident priorities.
The city is now pushing to build multiple market-rate skyscrapers downtown and put a portion of the revenue into a new Warriors arena. Doing this will displace many low-income and disabled residents and increase profits for the multibillion-dollar Warriors franchise, the Santa Cruz Seaside Company and out-of-town developers at the cost of our citizens.
I dread seeing the campaign to convince us that the quiet residential community adjacent to the stadium will benefit from commercialization, traffic and noise. Additional commercial space on ground floors appears absurd as so many commercial spaces in town and other parts of the city lie vacant. National franchise companies can afford the high rent of new property, but local businesses cannot. These franchises usurp profits from local business owners who work hard to support their families.
In reality, these large, expensive housing solutions increase the need for more low-income service workers, without creating nearly enough affordable housing. Ironically, a single person earning $92,000 a year qualifies as low-income in Santa Cruz. Service workers cannot compete for housing at these levels, which underpins the dire need to find genuine ways to build low-income and affordable housing. When limited city land is used to build market-rate housing and expensive hotels, the cost to build affordable housing goes up. Each decision moves us closer to gutting out our middle class and essential workforce.
Grievously, the downtown expansion plan moves us in the wrong direction. The campaign hype is crafted to thrill voters about entertainment venues surrounded by high-rise ocean-view condos. Meanwhile, neighbors living in overcrowded conditions struggle to pay rent, and families worry about paying their mortgages with higher bills.
A new arena will use up prime downtown land near our transportation hub. This is where more affordable housing should be located. Will the disabled residents living in the footprint of the new downtown be forced onto the streets, or struggle like many UCSC students who have to live in their cars or couch-surf?
Is the multibillion-dollar Warriors franchise, along with well-off residents, second-home buyers and Airbnb visitors, more entitled than middle-and-low-income city workers?
Contrary to popular assumptions, new arenas do not bring in additional revenues to cities. An article in Arizona State University’s Global Sport Matters shows revenues of new arenas fall short of expectations when weighed against loss of revenue to current business and the costs to maintain them.
This plan to increase density does not provide for the real needs of residents.
With our premium landscape, we can attract and implement optimal “people-centered” systems at the forefront of city development. An example is the award-winning architectural firm MASS Design Group, which designs and builds structures based on sustainable options that enhance surroundings and ease of movement (flow) for increased sensual pleasure. The group’s book, “Justice is Beauty,” interweaves these principles by repurposing and refurbishing existing structures to lower costs. In Detroit, Strong Towns showcases incremental development with infrastructure adjustments.
Architect Jan Gehl, with offices in San Francisco, holds programs to develop “cities for people.’’ His book of the same name illustrates how buildings over five stories weaken peoples’ connection to the street. And building designs with setbacks and edges invite people to linger to reinforce social relationships.
Other nonprofit resources include the Congress for a New Urbanism in Washington, D.C., and Social Purpose Real Estate, based in Denver. Both educate community leaders about how to integrate sensible lower-cost design through renovation and innovative ideas. Turner Impact Capital, an NPO venture capital firm, supports communities that want to serve residents with sustainable solutions.
Santa Cruz officials would be wise to learn from these options. Particularly how each implements vigorous and accountable community input to guide decisions. Regrettably, this is sorely lacking in Santa Cruz.
I’d like to see a win-win solution for our community. This means an intelligent, sustainable vision that provides all levels of essential workers the ability to grow families here. But we have to stop thinking that taller is better. It is not a solution to affordable housing when 87-89% of that housing goes to build market-rate units.
We can do both, create profits and meet the needs of city residents.
The opportunity to strengthen democratic principles and values will be on the March 2024 ballot. What priorities will you vote to address?
Laura Carol Lee has lived in Santa Cruz since 1981. She and her husband, Jeffree, recently retired after 45 years in financial services. Laura holds bachelor of science degrees in psychology and education from the University of Pittsburgh and taught elementary school in New Jersey. After moving to California, she worked for Xerox in San Francisco as a corporate trainer. Once settled in Santa Cruz, she started teaching natural foods cooking, holistic health, then communication skills. Currently, she coaches individuals and small groups about the Enneagram system for personal and spiritual development.