Article taken from the Santa
Barbara News Press
Published with permission
S.B. dives into Gaviota
coast battle
March 30, 2006 7:19 AM
 |
|
 |
Click Pictures to enlarge |
In a surprising twist, the city of Santa Barbara has suddenly waded into the contentious battle to save the Gaviota coast by considering four sites in the city where development rights for luxury housing on the coast could be transferred.
A developer wants to build up to 72 mansions on the Naples Townsite two miles west of Goleta. To preserve the pristine greenbelt along Highway 101, Santa Barbara County is studying whether the development rights for the area could be transferred to an urban location more appropriate for housing.
If such a transfer occurs, it would be the first of its kind in the county, according to 1st District Supervisor Salud Carbajal.
The county's consultant, Solimar Research Group, identified eight sites for a possible swap. The firm presented its findings to supervisors a week ago and then to the City Council on Tuesday night.
Santa Barbara has become a sudden key player in the decades-old controversy surrounding the Gaviota coast because it is the only agency that has shown interest in making a swap to save the scenic stretch.
The other four locations identified were in Montecito and near Goleta. The county has snubbed the idea, disputing the suitability of the proposed sites.
Santa Barbara City Council members said protecting the Gaviota coast is a top priority and they are interested in helping, but they expressed disappointment with other agencies for not doing more.
"For decades, leaders of this county have talked about preserving the Gaviota coast and thinking regionally, and now that we have an opportunity to take this seriously, the leaders in the county are not even entering a conversation about the topic," said City Councilwoman Helene Schneider. "The city of Santa Barbara should not, and cannot, be the only player in preserving the Gaviota coast. This is a regional concern that needs regional cooperation."
The debate sparks strong emotions because it pits two of the South Coast's most colossal issues against each other: the preservation of open spaces versus housing density in the neighborhoods.
The issue hits at the heart of elected officials' priorities and taps into the philosophical debate over what trade-offs are necessary to save open space while still respecting neighborhood concerns.
Further, the Naples site is the beginning of the long stretch known as Gaviota, and if Naples is heavily developed, some people believe the rest of Gaviota will follow.
The owner of the property, Matt Osgood, has proposed building up to 72 estates on the site. The nine blufftop homes that overlook the ocean are estimated to sell between $18 million and $23 million. The others farther back from the bluff could sell for around $3 million to $6 million, according to county officials.
The developer, who has the legal right to build homes on the site, has given the county up to 18 months to come up with a plan for transferring the homes elsewhere.
The next step for the Naples project is a public hearing at the county to review the draft environmental impact report.
he county's coastal plan states that because the Naples site is in a rural area and far from urban services, the county must encourage and help the property owner transfer development rights to a more appropriate area.
A transfer such as this occurs typically in rural agricultural areas to guard against the loss of open space. Essentially, the owner of the property sells the development rights to a second party, who then is allowed to build more housing in urban areas than the current zoning might allow. Because the value of an individual home on the Naples site is worth more than a house built on a downtown city parking lot, the developer who buys the development rights would be allowed to build several homes downtown in exchange for buying the rights for one home at the Naples site.
"If the receiving site can handle the density, it would be a win-win," said William Fulton, president of Solimar Research Group, the consultant group that performed the county's environmental impact report on the Naples project.
The report identified a city parking lot at Haley and Anacapa streets; another parking lot at Cota and Santa Barbara streets; a lot owned by developer Bill Wright; and another city lot near Calle Cèsar Chávez and Quarantina streets.
Four more spots were identified in the county. Two are near Highway 154, in Supervisor Susan Rose's 2nd District.
Two more are in Montecito, in Mr. Carbajal's 1st District.
Mr. Carbajal said he wanted to preserve the Gaviota coast, but that the sites identified in Montecito would upset those residents.
"The question is what do we tell those neighborhoods?" Mr. Carbajal said. "We are going to put all those development impacts on a neighborhood? Absolutely not. No matter how you look at it, we are still dumping traffic, we are dumping development, and we are doing it in your neighborhood."
He said more analysis of different sites is needed.
Ms. Rose also said that she is an advocate for the Gaviota coast, but that her first priority is her constituents.
"We all care about preserving the Gaviota coastline, but we also have our neighborhoods that we have to plan for," Ms. Rose said. "The whole idea is a good idea, but you have to find what works for the immediate community and the community at large."
Both said that the city of Santa Barbara is a better place to consider sites because it serves as the South Coast's urban core.
"The city's urban areas have better opportunities," Mr. Carbajal said.
The city of Goleta wasn't even studied because it only allows transfers of development rights within the city, according to its draft general plan.
Santa Barbara City Councilman Brian Barnwell said that he is upset with the county and Goleta's attitude.
"It is very disappointing that the county and the city of Goleta are unwilling to shoulder some of these burdens of saving our environment, and they are pawning them off on the city or just ignoring responsibility," Mr. Barnwell said.
He likes the idea of transferring development rights to properties in the city, even if he doesn't necessarily agree with the proposed sites.
"In 100 years from right now if we could have preserved the Gaviota coast, we would have the most unique California coastline from the Mexican border to Oregon," he said.
Councilman Roger Horton also is willing to look at transferring development rights from Gaviota into the city, but said the proposal is doomed if other agencies don't step up.
"I just don't see how this can work unless we use a regional approach," Mr. Horton said.
Mayor Marty Blum said Santa Barbara should take its share but not bear the whole burden of saving the Gaviota coast. She said she knew of parcels in Hope Ranch that would be good for housing development. She said Goleta, too, could also do more.
"I think Goleta should take its fair share," Mayor Blum said. "I could go there and find some places for them."