Although neighbors have opposed the proposed self storage facility in western Goleta, the city Design Review Board said the design was improved and aesthetically compatible with the area.

The key issue from neighbors is that they don’t want another self storage facility in Goleta, however the DRB can only make comments regarding the aesthetic design of the facility. 

The board held a conceptual review hearing on Tuesday for the 1,322-unit facility which is proposed at 7780 Hollister Ave. next to Westmont of Santa Barbara, an assisted-living facility, and across the street from the Ellwood Mesa butterfly grove. 

Board members appreciated the new design and that the developers reduced the size of the project by 18 percent, but Cecilia Brown and Martha Degasis suggested adding more mature trees around the property to screen the buildings. 

“I’d like to see this project hidden by as much landscaping as you possibly can,” Brown said. “Most of the storage facilities I see where I live are devoid of landscaping and I think you’re on a good track here.”

Board chair Scott Branch said he appreciated that amount of landscaping and the changes to the architecture, calling it a “compatible aesthetic.”

“I think the amount of screening and landscaping you’ve got around this is more than two to three times what you would normally see around this kind of thing,” Branch said. “I think the style of architecture you changed it to is complementary to the agrarian feel of Goleta.”

Nearby residents spoke during public comment to say that a storage facility is incompatible with the neighborhood. 

“This project remains incompatible with our residential neighborhoods, each of the existing seven self storage facilities in Goleta are all appropriately located in industrial and commercial areas,” said Hideaway resident Robert Miller. “A self storage facility in the middle of our residential community is obviously the wrong use of this property and very much not appropriate.”

Tim Morphy said the facility is not right for the site and the proposed design doesn’t fit in the community. 

“To stick what is basically kind of an industrial commercial prison aesthetic right in the middle of a neighborhood like that just doesn’t make any sense and is inappropriate for what is really a residential neighborhood,” Morphy said.

Troy White, project developer with TW Land Planning and Development, said the storage facility should be considered a separate commercial neighborhood from the nearby Bluffs and Hideaway residential neighborhoods.

“Even if you were to say the Hideaway and the commercial should be joined together as one neighborhood, one must ask how self storage, which is intended to provide residents and businesses with safe and secure areas to store excess belongings and vehicles and equipment, is incompatible with residential?” White said. 

He added that storage facilities create more room in small housing accommodations and allows residents to clear out their garages to turn into housing. 

This was the development’s second review at the Design Review Board. The first review was in April and the board encouraged developers to scale back the size and go for a rural design that was more in character with Goleta. 

Since then, developers added brown paneling to the outside to contrast the dark grey on the rest of the buildings. They also scaled down the size of the project and reduced the number of trees set for removal. 

The current proposal includes storage units spread across three two-story buildings and three one-story buildings. 

Another two-story building would house the manager’s office, a 1,180-square-foot caretaker’s unit, and a one-car garage. The site would also include 15 parking spaces and four bicycle parking spaces. 

Additionally, out of the 159 trees on site, 27 would be saved. The original proposal only saved 14 trees. 

The preserved trees include three oaks, 23 eucalyptus and one Brazilian pepper tree, while 92 new trees are proposed to be planted.

Developers will return to the Design Review Board for a preliminary recommendation after an environmental review process for the project. 

Board member Tamesha Schumacher excused herself from Tuesday’s project discussion.