Pools should still require planning permits and all new or remodeled dwellings in Montecito should be subject to review by the Board of Architectural Review, the Montecito Planning Commission has recommended.

After three long meetings on the topic, the commission on Monday finalized its recommendations on a series of changes to the county’s project review process. 

The County Planning Commission will similarly review the proposed changes on Wednesday.

The Board of Supervisors will be the ultimate decision-maker. But the board is asked to consider the recommendations of both the Montecito and county planning commissions before making a decision.

The current round of changes is meant to streamline a somewhat cumbersome county project review process.

Currently, the vast majority of development projects in Montecito are reviewed by the Montecito Board of Architectural Review (MBAR), with limited exceptions.

Most projects also currently require a land-use permit if located in the inland area or a coastal development permit if located in the Coastal Zone.

Those permits look at consistency with county policy and dictate when a project can be appealed. They also determine when neighbors are notified of a proposed project, such as through a mailed letter or a posted sign. 

As proposed, an objective list of standards and criteria would help to simplify the review process by putting the final decision for approval or denial for some projects on county staff rather than the Montecito Planning Commission. Some permit requirements would also be downshifted.

Some smaller projects would no longer require MBAR review or notifications. The public would also no longer be able to appeal most smaller projects in the inland area of Montecito.

Removing the ability to appeal does not limit someone’s ability to file a lawsuit or challenge in Santa Barbara Superior Court, county staff clarified.

Projects must still meet basic objective standards such as setback and height. Permits from the Building and Safety Division or other Santa Barbara County departments may apply.

But those changes had drawn backlash over the past few weeks, notably from Montecito.

Some residents — including those on the Montecito Association board — thought the changes would allow “ugly” houses to be built and fundamentally change the area’s carefully crafted, semi-rural character. 

The review process for commercial spaces is complicated since shopping areas near the corner of East Valley and San Ysidro roads, all have different permit histories.

Staff said some parcels in that area, which were built at different times over the past several decades, had development plans; others just had permits.

Roughly a dozen or so people spoke out again against the proposed permitting changes in person or over Zoom on Monday.

Tom Bollay, a 40-year Montecito resident and MBAR and Montecito Association board member, urged the commission to retain some MBAR oversight to ensure neighborhood compatibility.

He also urged the commission to lower the area’s height limit from 35 feet to 25 feet and incorporate a maximum floor area for residential use to protect the Montecito community plan from state authority.

Nicholas Lundgren said he rebuilt his home after it was destroyed in the 2018 Montecito mudslides.

He said he did find the current review process “frustrating,” but in “hindsight, I know a lot of those reviews are there for a reason.”

A few others, such as Kaitlyn Earnest, an associate land use planner, supported the proposed changes.

She called the amendments a “thoughtful effort to cut unnecessary costs and processing time and let staff focus on projects that truly need discretionary review.”

Montecito planning commissioners — to some extent — agreed that the changes may harm the community’s character and recommended several modifications.

The initial proposal included doing away with planning permits for pools and requiring MBAR review only for dwellings over 2,500 square feet.

The commissioners recommended keeping pool permits, concerned that neighbor impacts wouldn’t be looked at, and agreed that all dwellings should have design review.

Among other things during Monday’s five-hour meeting, they also recommended limiting the criteria for structures eligible to go through a simple, director-level review process.

The recommendations approved by the Montecito Planning Commission on Monday can be seen here.

Commissioners also touched on staff and county discretion versus what is allowed under state law.

They asked clarifying questions about accessory dwelling units — which are now exempt from design review under state law — and how they factor into a proposed multi-family residential project.

A multi-family residential project is defined as two or more units under the state’s Housing Accountability Act. A single-family home and an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) would qualify as a multi-family residential project, per county staff.

For example, if an applicant is proposing a new home on the same vacant lot as an ADU, they are both currently exempt from design review under state law, per county staff.

Chair Bob Kupiec called that a “problem” that needs to be clarified.

“I have a live audience here of Montectians who I don’t think understand this law,” he said. “…It may not be part of this package, but understanding of the implication of what Sacramento has imposed upon our communities is significant.”

Staff and the commissioners agreed to discuss that at length at a later time. Public commissions are limited to what they can discuss during a meeting without prior public notice.

The commissioners also thanked the members of the public for speaking and staff for their work on the changes.

“Thank you for putting up with us and hanging in for this many hours,” Kupiec said. “…You’ve done exceptional work in putting this together.”

The County Planning Commission will separately review all the amendments. Montecito is unique; other unincorporated parts of the county, like Summerland or Isla Vista, don’t have their own specific planning advisory bodies.

The proposed changes are expected to go before the Board of Supervisors for approval, denial or modification before the end of 2026, per county staff.

The County Planning Commission will discuss this issue at its Wednesday meeting which starts at 9 a.m. at the Engineering Building, Room 17, at 123 East Anapamu St.