A new multi-family residential community is proposed for Goleta.

The Goleta Design Review Board recommended in a 4-0 vote on Tuesday that the proposed housing development at 7360 Hollister Ave. go to the Planning Commission, with some suggestions for various project components. 

Three of the seven board members were absent.

Project developer City Ventures proposes demolishing the current structures on site, combining three parcels into an almost 3.2-acre project site and subdividing it into 59 separate condominium lots.

The 59 units would be within 13 three-story modern farmhouse-style buildings. 

“We really wanted to blend ourselves into the city of Goleta and the history of Goleta,” said Nick Patterson, applicant representative for City Ventures.

The property is between a small shopping center and Ellwood Station, a mobile home park on Hollister Avenue.

“I hope whoever is next to Dioji (K-9 Resort & Athletic Club), in their homes, likes the sound of dogs barking because it is a pretty busy little place,” board member Martha Degasis said.

Patterson added that the property site’s rectangular shape is a great opportunity for the housing project.

While board members were supportive of the project, their suggestions were just advisory because the project qualifies for the state density bonus law by proposing three very-low-income units, according to the city staff report. 

Under the Housing Accountability Act and Senate Bill 330, the city’s authority to deny or condition the project is significantly restricted, according to the city staff report.

Additionally, using the state density bonus law, City Ventures is reducing the number of low-income units from 5% to 2.5%. 

It also proposes building the structures up to 41 feet tall, exceeding permitted height limits and reducing the amount of required private open space for the majority of the units.

“With our region’s ongoing housing shortage, this project is needed to advance housing feasibility for the local workforce and support the overall community,” Kristen Miller, president and CEO of the Santa Barbara South Coast Chamber of Commerce, wrote in a letter to the board. 

Board member Dennis Whelan said he believed that the project’s architectural design was lacking. 

“I don’t see it as moving the design needle along at all,” he said. “When we’re going to put this much time, materials, love and attention, I would like something that gives back as much as we put into it.”

He also said the project design plans lacked communal spaces.

“It does seem that the entire project was designed around maximizing the number of units, which I know is what you do really well, that’s your bread and butter,” he said. 

Whelan said a more “sensitive design” would have started with a communal space and an open space and worked out from there.   

The project does propose some shared outdoor spaces, including a central event lawn, picnic and barbecue areas, outdoor seating and a community garden.  

Each unit is designed to have its own private garage and patio. The project would include 118 garage parking spaces and 15 guest spaces. 

Board member James van Order suggested changing the materials of the private patio to a softer material.

“Maybe it’s a wood or something not as prison-like, for a lack of a better phrase,” he said. 

Neighboring Ellwood Station mobile home park residents spoke at Tuesday’s meeting and were opposed to the development, citing privacy and traffic concerns.

“With the three-story building height, the windows from the residences will be able to look right into a lot of the windows and public areas of (the mobile home park),” Lindsay Lopez said. 

Whelan called the story poles “impressive” and wondered if there was space to add trees along the site’s edge to “mitigate some of that very surprising height.”

Van Order suggested that the applicant look into Lopez’s concerns of having the units looking into the neighboring residences. 

Lopez also suggested that the proposed community garden area and activity space in the development get relocated adjacent to the mobile home park.

Patterson said relocating the amenity would not be possible under the site plans, but there would be privacy fencing. 

Similarly, resident Irene Russo had traffic and construction impact concerns and said the “construction will ruin the neighborhood.”

Since the board’s purview is just on design, concerned residents were urged to go to the Planning Commission, where the project next will be reviewed.