AnonymousBy Anna Marie Gott
Santa Barbara should join the growing list of cities such as Palo Alto, Goleta, and Ventura that provide online access to design plans and documents for projects coming up for design review. This simple change would provide the public with vastly better opportunities to participate in import decisions that affect their neighborhood and our community. In these cities the public is better informed and can make intelligent comments well in advance of meetings without having to attend a meeting in person, as is now required. – I want residents of Santa Barbara to have the same access and opportunities.
If you didn’t know it, the City requires development projects to be reviewed by a design board such as the Architectural Board of Review (ABR) or the Historic Landmarks Commission (HLC). This can trigger the only public notice that nearby residents and landowners ever receive of a project that will affect them. For those fortunate enough to be able to view plans in person at the City Planning Department there is typically a slim window of opportunity for the public to review them once the agenda is released. This can last from 1 to 4 business days, depending on which design board will hear the project. These plans are often only required to be made available in advance to the public for the initial concept review and for project design approval. For virtually all other meetings that take place, new plans never seen before by anyone, can be rolled out on a table during a meeting for review. This lack of transparency makes it difficult for the public to understand the impacts of projects and it cripples their ability to effectively comment on them.
The City is behind the curve when it comes to fostering public engagement and transparency of proposed development projects. I propose it follow the lead of cities such as Palo Alto (3200 El Camino Real), Goleta (180 N Fairview) and Ventura (Montalvo Center) and require PDF submissions of all plans and documents in advance of meetings. We should do more than merely comply with the Brown Act by providing an agenda that lists a description for a project. We should follow these cities examples to ensure that the public has complete access to the design files and other documents that will be discussed at the meeting so everyone and not just those attending the meetings can participate in meetings that affect their neighborhood and our community. Architects will confirm that virtually all plans are created using computer software nowadays and that it is simply matter of creating PDF versions and submitting them prior to meetings.
To accomplish this the City can simply change the submittal requirements to require electronic files, revise the due dates and post these documents online with the agenda. In the future the City can decide if it will use Accela Citizen Planning, which can be added to the City’s Accela software licensing, to provide a more robust system that will allow even more transparency and easier access.
If you would like to see the City of Santa Barbara make these changes and increase transparency and community engagement email our City Council and Planning Commission at: SBCityCouncil@santabarbaraca.
Definitely the citizens have a right to look at development plans. At times they only know about it when the developer starts the building process. Too late to give any input.
The current city budget created an insatiable need for ever-increasing city tax revenues. Rarely do you ever hear the city consider cutting city expenses. What did they do with the recent Measure C tax just passed? -They hired two more expensive city employees, when they promised they would use Measure C for city infrastructure. One more broken promise from our city. One of the biggest source for city tax revenues comes from the local property tax base. For this amount to increase substantially, it requires a constant turn-over of higher and higher home sales prices. To mask the city budget’s primary investment in higher and higher home prices, they toss out these highly unwelcome high-density massive “affordable housing” schemes which in fact ruin the city’s small neighborhood feeling for everyone else. The tail is wagging the dog when it comes to city budget decisions and their impact on the rest of us.. What does your local district city council member say about this – do they secretly support generating higher city and property taxes on the backs of higher and higher home prices, or are they willing to cut city expenses. Ask them. Make them commit, one way or the other. The city pension demands make this city budget problem even worse. Back in the 1970’s city voters said enough is enough – the advisory vote limited city development to only 80,000 residents. What happened to that directive? What would city voters say is now a maximum city size? What does your district city council representative think is a new population goal for our city? Did they tell you this, when they wanted your vote.
Well, at least you can still look it up on line when you see the sign!
They should change the name to “Translucent California”! Mrs. Gott I agree with your article and Localinsb has it right too.
I like the use of yellow notice signs posted on the property, where all salient information has faded away to nothing. They must use disappearing ink.
Great idea! Would love to see more use of modern tools and technology to reduce overhead and bloat as well as offer deeper visibility into all aspects of our community and city. But it sure seems like this city dislikes transparency though. So while it might offer the neighbors and concerned citizens a clear view, it will also shine a light on the bloated workforce and their consistent ineptitude and most definitely will come with a very expensive price tag, a few over paid consultants, at least 30 public meetings and a few new six figure positions to support the service. Dont worry though, they’ll just tag on another fee on developers and home owners to support the whole shebang.
The last thing that the city wants is transparency when it comes to development plans. The developers and the city unions are the ones contributing to the reelection coffers of the City Council. The more the public knows about the overdevelopment of their city the more they will resist. The developers, of course, reap their profits from overdeveloping properties and the city unions win their massive pay raises only with increased tax revenues that comes with overdevelopment.
Of course it is the city residents that get stuck with the increased crime, traffic, water shortages, and general filth that come with overdevelopment. The more they find out about such plans the harder it will be to sneak them through.
This request seems reasonable at first glance. I see it as another cry for citizens to be spoon fed at others’ cost. Demonstrate self sufficiency and get yourselves down to the CDB to do your due diligence. Being engaged does not mean sitting on the couch with your laptop potshotting every paint chip you find unappealing. Where is the community engagement in cloistering yourselves with a set of PDF plans that will put most users over their monthly data limit to download? Reviewing 30×42″ plans on the average computer screen? No. that’s why full size paper copies are used. There is ample opportunity to review plans and projects provided you are willing to do the legwork. I recommend starting by skimming the zoning ordinance and review board/commission design guidelines. Learn the difference between guidelines and rules. The city hates it when you hold staffs’ feet to the fire
Over-development=Every project that was built after I moved here.