Schuyler Naphen is an environmentalist who is starting a family in Santa Barbara. He lives with his wife and 6-month-old baby, Acadia, along San Roque Creek.

Their home rests on a slope next to the creek, and the property includes an old, badly fading detached garage. Naphen has spent $30,000 on feasibility studies to redevelop part of his property, including a new garage and an accessory dwelling unit.

But an ordinance proposed by the city of Santa Barbara has the homeowner up the creek without a paddle. A proposed 50-foot buffer next to the creek will prevent him from redeveloping.

“This is an extinction-level event for homeowners who are within the creek buffer in terms of what they can do with their property,” Naphen said. “It is misguided on a number of fronts. There are entire properties, entire homes, within the buffer. If the creeks division just gets to just say no, literally, nothing will happen.”

Naphen, a self-employed CAD worker for the aerospace industry, is part of a growing number of people who live along Santa Barbara creeks upset about a new ordinance that quietly has bubbled to the surface — but has sparked a rush of opposition.

The city has proposed an ordinance that would prohibit new private property development within 50 feet of Santa Barbara’s 16 creeks. The ban would include buildings, patios, structures placed in the ground, non-native plantings and other development.

The city says: “new, replaced, or substantially redeveloped developments must adhere to the minimum required buffer regulations.”

Development that would be allowed in buffer areas without any city approval include planting of native vegetation and debris removal for flood control purposes. Existing non-conforming development would be allowed to remain.

“We’re really trying to maximize protections of the creek, while avoiding takings of property,” said Melissa Hetrick, resilience program supervisor for the city. “We really want to encourage redevelopment to reduce safety risks. In a lot of cases, especially downtown, we have a lot of structures that are very close to the creeks, and in the last few years we have seen several of those structures compromised.”

The city’s Creeks Advisory Committee met last week to discuss the matter. The project ultimately needs approval from the Planning Commission and the City Council.

“We really want to encourage people to redevelop so they can move their structures further away from the creeks,” Hetrick said.

Homeowners would be allowed to apply for approval for developments within the buffer through a modification. Accessory dwelling units would be allowed outside the 50-foot buffer with a geologist’s report to address safety.

“For constrained lots where application of the buffer regulations would result in an
unconstitutional taking of property, prevent redevelopment of the property, or would
prevent state-required housing types, the proposed ordinance allows the Planning
Commission to approve a modification to the required buffer regulations,” according to the city.

This modification could only be granted subject to several findings supported by hydrological, geological and biological technological reports.

Joan Fargas is an engineer who owns a home with his wife along San Roque Creek. He created a website and is working on a petition to help block the ordinance.

“If we had to rebuild the house, if this burned down for any reason, we can’t do it automatically,” Fargas said.

In such a scenario, a rebuild would have to take place as much as possible outside the 50-foot buffer zone. He has lived at the home for about three years.

“We really like it here,” Fargas said. “It’s kind of a like a hidden spot, no one knows it exists unless you come down our driveway. It’s great to have the creek.”

He said he understands why the city wants to protect the creeks. The neighbors also want to protect the creek, he said.

The city’s proposal, he said, doesn’t make sense.

“In my case in particular, 50% of my lot is gone, it’s not usable for anything else other than to let the native plants grow,” Fargas said.

Fargas said the city is trying to go back in time and return the area to how it existed more than 50 years ago.

“The city already exists, so what are we trying to do?” Fargas said.

According to the city, requiring a 50-foot buffer for development would enhance water quality and preserve scenic beauty. The ordinance would also increase public safety and reduce flooding erosion events.

Fargas worries that the ordinance could hurt property values and make it difficult for homeowners to get insurance if some buildings could not be rebuilt.

“You are essentially making huge parts of lots unusable,” Fargas said. “You are essentially pushing people out, that’s all you are doing.”

The ordinance also applies to “minor creeks,” which are defined as, according to the city, “any creek that is not a major creek or a flood control project reach.” For minor creeks, development would be restricted to 15 feet.

In addition, a 35-foot buffer would be required for “Flood Control Project” areas, defined as Arroyo Burro (reach between Hope Avenue and Highway 101); Las Positas Creek (reach between Las Positas Place and Veronica Springs Road); San Roque Creek from State Street to 350 feet upstream of State Street; and Mission Creek – Caltrans Channels (approximately Los Olivos Street to Mission Street and Arrellaga Street to Canon Perdido) and the concrete lined and walled portions of the Lower Mission Creek Flood Control Project.

Jarrett Gorin, a land-use planner, said the ordinance has many problems and also violates the city’s Housing Element.

“This ordinance bans uses, basically every use that people typically expect to be able to do in their own backyards,” Gorin said.

The ordinance makes ADUs up for discretionary review, he said, which is counter to state law.

“This ordinance ignores our housing problems and a lot of other priorities that the city has,” Gorin said. “It is focused on one single priority, and I can only hope that our elected officials have the common sense to understand that.”

Gorin said he sees a problem with banks lending money to people if the ordinance goes through.

“I don’t see how a lender can secure a loan with a house that you might not be able to rebuild,” Gorin said.

If the ordinance passes, it could mean that Naphen and his family have to leave the community.

“Our ability to stay on this property is frankly tied to our ability to develop this property,” he said. “We had been planning to do a whole redevelopment so we can stay here, but this would bar us from doing any of that. It would truly kill any development we could do.”

Naphen has lived in California his entire life. He said the housing situation has never been this bad. To propose this ordinance at this time “is crazy,” he said.

“Think about how many ADUs would be prohibited from being built from this,” Naphen said. “Any housing stock that we can build as urban infill is excellent, and this is one more thing where ‘oh, you can’t do that.'”