Pixel Tracker

Sunday, December 16 , 2018, 8:25 pm | Fair 54º

 
 
 
 

Santa Barbara Council Expands Planning Commission Review for Rental Housing Projects

The Santa Barbara City Council voted this week to expand Planning Commission review to include rental housing properties that are part of the Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program.

With extremely low vacancy rates for rental housing, Santa Barbara leaders approved the incentive program with a focus on non-subsidized rental housing made of smaller, more-affordable residential units within easy walking, biking and transit distance to parks and stores.

As part of the program, the planning review process left out the Planning Commission entirely, and had the Architectural Board of Review or the Historic Landmarks Commission evaluate each project’s design.

Heavy opposition to some of these projects made the city reconsider its review process.

The first two projects processed through this program were appealed to the City Council: the 40-unit Peoples’ Self-Help Housing Corp. affordable housing project at 510 N. Salsipuedes St., and the Arlington Village complex on Chapala and Sola streets.

Both appeals were denied.

The approved changes to the process set up “triggers” for automatic review by the Planning Commission, and allow the Architectural Board of Review and Historic Landmarks Commission to refer any project to the Planning Commission for review, with or without these criteria.

The HLC authority to send any project on a highly visible site to the Planning Commission now mimics the authority of the ABR, city staff said.  

Community Development project planner Allison DeBusk said the Planning Commission review will be triggered if a project has a high density or priority housing overlay, and a project site of 15,000 square feet or more (including all involved parcels).

That Planning Commission design review recommendations will not be appealable, but the final project approval is always appealable to City Council.

Councilman Bendy White, a former planning commissioner, said these rule changes are “a cleanup issue.”

“I think we’re bringing in our seasoned planners, our citizen representative planners, to help us make sure a project is appropriate in a whole bunch of ways,” he said.

Councilman Gregg Hart and Councilwoman Cathy Murillo voted against the changes, saying they were unnecessary and moved away from the program’s intent.

Adding another layer of review — which means extra time and money — makes it more difficult to build affordable housing projects, Hart said.

Councilman Dale Francisco said the Planning Commission review is vital, and it’s “how we’ve always done things in Santa Barbara.”

There have been 12 projects that are pending or approved through the Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program, DeBusk said.

Five of those projects would have met the triggers approved by the City Council this week:

The approved 89-unit market-rate rental housing project at 3885 State St., which is within the priority housing overlay and includes commercial development.

» The pending 60-unit affordable senior rental housing project at 3869 State St.

» The pending 90-unit affordable senior rental housing project within the priority housing overlay at 251 S. Hope Ave.

» The pending 29-unit market-rate rental housing project within the priority housing overlay at 604 E. Cota St.

» The approved 40-unit affordable rental housing project within the priority housing overlay at 510 Salsipuedes St.

DeBusk said projects that are pending won’t be subjected to the new rules if they already have had their first design review before the ordinance goes into effect, which will be 30 days from final approval, scheduled for next Tuesday.

Noozhawk news editor Giana Magnoli can be reached at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address). Follow Noozhawk on Twitter: @noozhawk, @NoozhawkNews and @NoozhawkBiz. Connect with Noozhawk on Facebook.

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.