Pixel Tracker

Saturday, February 23 , 2019, 9:22 pm | Fair 36º

 
 
 
 

UCSB, County Harden Stance Over Long-Range Plans

So far, both sides are far apart on the size of the required mitigations

UCSB’s Long-Range Development Plan was the center of attention Tuesday afternoon as the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors took in a staff presentation and public comment on the project’s environmental documents.

According to UCSB Executive Vice Chancellor Gene Lucas, the university and the county are deadlocked on the subject of mitigations UCSB should provide for the impacts expected as a result of the proposed development.

“We haven’t closed the gap between what the county is seeking in mitigations and what we feel is our fair share,” said Lucas, who added that some of the numbers on which the county is basing its projections came from a flawed study.

UCSB’s current LRDP calls for development on the campus to accommodate a total student body of 25,000 by 2025, up from about 20,000 today. On the academic side, UCSB will be adding buildings and repositioning others on campus while constructing additional housing to accommodate the students and the faculty and staff needed to support them. The LRDP’s recirculated environmental impact report has lately been the subject of scrutiny by local agencies and jurisdictions.

UCSB, one of the South Coast’s largest employers, is estimated to account for 10 percent of the local economy, resulting in an estimated impact of $1 billion per year. As a state agency, the university is not subject to all the development rules of local jurisdictions, but officials have tried to maintain open relations with surrounding communities.

Given the student population’s proposed increase by 5,000, county staff estimated that about 15,000 people (including the new students) will move to the area as a result: faculty, staff, families and the people needed to support the population and provide services.

Some of the main concerns county staff had tackled were a potential lag period between the increased enrollment and the housing to be provided by UCSB, as well as the increased noise and traffic in the area. Other issues county staff reported involved hazardous waste, blufftop retreat at one of its project sites, and degradation of the Goleta Slough.

“Facilities are going to need improvement,” said Derek Johnson, deputy director at the county’s Planning Department. There would also have to be a commensurate increase in the number of police and firefighters needed to service the increased population, he said.

According to Johnson, the total cost estimate for the capital improvements the county would need to make to serve the campus at current levels comes out to $137 million in one-time costs, and $8.2 million annually to maintain.

The disparity between UCSB’s estimates for mitigation and the county’s are stark at times. The county, for instance, estimates a need for $90 million in road improvements, the university, according to county calculations, is acknowledging a need for $1.9 million of road improvements in its mitigations.

Members of the public, meanwhile, turned out to comment on the staff report and the development plan’s recirculated comments.

“We already have serious problems in IV that remain unaddressed,” said Dianne Conn, president of the Isla Vista Recreation & Park District. Other commenters, like Heal the Ocean’s Hilary Hauser, aired concerns that the increased wastewater flow had not been adequately addressed.

The increase in cars was another issue as Caltrans planner Larry Newland suggested that freshmen not be able to have cars on campus, an idea Lucas said could not happen unless there were an Isla Vista Parking Plan to handle the vehicles parked off-campus.

Other UC towns, like Berkeley and Santa Cruz, said Lucas, agreed to far less in mitigations for their most recent LRDPs, including “a few million” in one-time capital costs and about $1 million annually to maintain. Those amounts were the result of litigation between the cities and UC, he said, adding that UCSB was not interested in going that route.

“We’d like to sit down at the table and work that out,” he said.

The county has less than a week to submit its comments for the recirculated EIR; comment period closes Monday.

“I’m hoping we can continue and improve the dialogue between the university and the county,” said 3rd District Supervisor Doreen Farr, whose district encompasses the campus.

Click here for more information on UCSB’s Long-Range Development Plan, or to comment on the recirculated environmental impact report.

Noozhawk staff writer Sonia Fernandez can be reached at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made using a credit card, Apple Pay or Google Pay, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments and a mailing address for checks.

Thank you for your vital support.

Become a Noozhawk Supporter

First name
Last name
Email
Select your monthly membership
Or choose an annual membership
×

Payment Information

Membership Subscription

You are enrolling in . Thank you for joining the Hawks Club.

Payment Method

Pay by Credit Card:

Mastercard, Visa, American Express, Discover
One click only, please!

Pay with Apple Pay or Google Pay:

Noozhawk partners with Stripe to provide secure invoicing and payments processing.
You may cancel your membership at any time by sending an email to .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click Here to Get Started >

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.

Daily Noozhawk

Subscribe to Noozhawk's A.M. Report, our free e-Bulletin sent out every day at 4:15 a.m. with Noozhawk's top stories, hand-picked by the editors.

Sign Up Now >