annual revenue could be $12,480. This assumes that the user would also cover the full cost of custodial and monitoring services.
Auctioning historical elements of the house that do not specifically relate to its historic designation, primarily interior elements, would return some funds to the City to support construction of an interpretive pavilion. More work needs to be done to determine the amount of revenue that could be generated.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Pearl Chase Society
For the last two years, the Department worked closely with the Pearl Chase Society to review options and share information. In addition to attending two PCS Board meetings, the Department hosted a site visit to the house. The PCS dedicated resources to evaluating the cost to pursue stabilizing the house and restoring the exterior as outlined in Option 2. Given the costs to pursue Option 2 and difficulty of raising funds to support the project, on October 19, 2017, the PCS Board voted to support further evaluation of the interpretive pavilion option.
Riviera Association
The Department presented its work effort to the Riviera Association at a general membership meeting in May 2016. The Department met with the Riviera Board on January 22, 2018 to discuss the house options and the Department’s recommendation.
The Riviera Association Board voted to recommend that the City pursue Option 3.
Parks and Recreation Commission
Over the years the Parks and Recreation Commission (Commission) engaged in numerous discussions related to the options for Franceschi House and the various attempts to achieve house renovation. At its regular meeting on January 24, 2018, the Commission recommended that Council approve further evaluation of an interpretive pavilion to replace Franceschi House. The draft meeting minutes, included in Attachment 4, provide Commissioner comments and considerations.
Council Agenda Report
Review Of Franceschi House Options And Recommendation To Deconstruct Franceschi House and Develop An Interpretive Pavilion
February 13, 2018
Staff Recommendation
The Department recommends that the City further explore the feasibility of developing an interpretive pavilion as the preferred option for Franceschi House. It is unlikely that the City would secure grant funding to offset the General Fund revenues necessary to support house restoration. Restoration of the house would serve a very limited number of park visitors and would not generate sufficient revenues to support maintenance costs. While house stabilization and exterior restoration might be less costly, the Department would not recommend use of City funds for this purpose and the Pearl Chase Society does not have the capacity to raise funds for the project. Additionally, this option would not significantly enhance the visitor experience. The third option, while posing some challenges for design and environmental review due to the house’s status as a Structure of Merit, provides the most feasible approach to honoring Dr. Franceschi’s legacy while enhancing park resources and serving a broader park visitor population.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL INFORMATION:
The Parks and Recreation FY 2018 Capital Fund includes $202,076 for Franceschi House. The Department recommends that the City secure the services of an architectural/engineering firm to develop preliminary plans for an interpretive pavilion.
Updates to the Master Plan could be completed by Department staff along with community outreach and engagement during the design process. Further funding would be needed in the future to complete final plans and project construction.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. June 23, 2015 Council Agenda Report (without attachments)
2. Alternatives Matrix
3. Maintenance Service Levels
4. Parks and Recreation Commission Draft January 24, 2018 Meeting Minutes
PREPARED BY: Janice M. Hubbell, Parks Project Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Jill E. Zachary, Parks and Recreation Director APPROVED BY: City Administrator's Office
Agenda Item No. 12
File Code No. 570.05
CITY OF SANTA BARBARA
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA DATE: June 23, 2015
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: Administration Division, Parks and Recreation Department SUBJECT: Discontinuation of Efforts to Restore Franceschi House and Recommendation to Demolish
RECOMMENDATION: That Council
A. Receive a report on past efforts to restore the Franceschi House; B. Conclude the 2002 Grant Agreement #20,312 between the City and the Pearl Chase Society to rehabilitate the Franceschi House, and accept $138,593.02 from the Parks and Recreation Community (PARC) Foundation returning City granted funds for that project;
C. Increase estimated revenues and appropriations for the Franceschi House Rehabilitation project in the Parks and Recreation General Fund capital budget by $138,593.02; and
D. Provide staff direction to proceed with plans to demolish the Franceschi House and develop an alternate project on site to recognize the contributions of Dr. Franceschi and others associated with the park.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Dr. Franceschi’s residence, known as Montarioso or Franceschi House, and the surrounding acreage were donated to the City in 1931 for a City park. Dr. Franceschi is recognized for making many contributions towards Santa Barbara’s horticultural heritage and his role in Santa Barbara’s development in the early 1900s. Franceschi Park now comprises 15 acres of City parkland on the Riviera, in the foothill area above Santa Barbara. In 1981 the City Council designated Montarioso (Franceschi House) as a City Structure of Merit.
Over the years, various people have lived as tenants in the house including horticultural professionals, City employees, and Parks caretakers; however, no one has lived in the house since 1993. At one point, the house was in such a state of disrepair the City ATTACHMENT 1
Council Agenda Report
Discontinuation of Efforts to Restore Franceschi House and Recommendation to Demolish June 23, 2015
Building Department condemned the structure. Currently the interior of house is in a poor, unsafe condition, and access is restricted to staff on an as needed basis only. The exterior is maintained only to ensure graffiti is removed and the roof is repaired to guard against water intrusion. Located in the City’s high fire area, the park is surrounded by private residences. Both nearby residents and City Fire staff have expressed concerns for the fire danger the vacant house poses to the area.
Over the years, the City and community have struggled with the need to restore and preserve the park, including whether or not to restore Franceschi House, how the restored house should be used to support park and recreation purposes, and how to fund such efforts. Detailed in the history below, at least twice (1971 and again in 1998) the City has considered demolishing the house due to failed attempts to secure capital and on-going funding through City resources or through public/private partnerships. Most recently, in 2001, the City entered into an agreement with the Pearl Chase Society (PCS) whereby the PCS would raise the funds to rehabilitate the house and fund a $250,000 maintenance endowment, and the City committed $300,000 towards the project. That effort has been on hold since 2010 due to a number of fiscal challenges, and in a letter dated April 9, 2015, the PCS board concurred with City staff that the project should be terminated. Staff recommends concluding the agreement and returning $138,593.02 in unused project funds to the City.
Essentially, the City has three options going forward: (1) Continue efforts to restore the house in order to serve the public as outlined in the Franceschi Park Master Plan, (2) Rehabilitate and preserve the exterior of the house in order to recognize the contributions of Dr. Franceschi and others and, (3) Demolish the house and construct an alternative project on the site to recognize the contributions of Dr. Franceschi and others. Funding for Options #1 and #2 are a more significant funding challenge. Funding for Option #3, which is the least expensive of the three options would likely require $2-3 million or more of General Fund capital. With over $112 million of unfunded improvements identified in the Parks and Recreation General Fund capital program, funding for Franceschi House is a challenge regardless of the option selected. Additionally, Options #1 and #2 would have on-going operation and maintenance funding impacts on the General Fund.
With mixed feelings over the loss of a historic structure in one of our City parks, the staff recommendation is to proceed with Option #3, Demolish the house and construct an alternative project on site to recognize the contributions of Dr. Franceschi and others. For over 45 years, all efforts to fund and restore the house have failed. The City has not been able to fund the project through grants or the General Fund over that time. Several efforts to secure a public/private partnership to fund and complete the project have also been unsuccessful, including the most recent partnership between the City and the Pearl Chase Society.
Council Agenda Report
Discontinuation of Efforts to Restore Franceschi House and Recommendation to Demolish June 23, 2015
DISCUSSION:
Dr. Franceschi’s residence, Montarioso, also known as Franceschi House, and surrounding acreage were donated to the City in 1931 for a City park. The park has been a unique repository for growing all manner of special plants introduced by internationally significant horticulturist Dr. Francesco Franceschi and his successors. Dr. Franceschi is recognized for making many contributions towards Santa Barbara’s horticultural heritage and his role in Santa Barbara’s development in the early 1900s.
Franceschi Park comprises 15 acres of City parkland on the Riviera, in the foothill area above Santa Barbara. Located in the City’s high fire area, the park is surrounded by private residences. Known for providing some of the most beautiful vistas of Santa Barbara, the park features trails and picnic areas and has an old, non-ADA accessible park restroom and updated park caretaker residence separate from the now vacant Franceschi house. Over the years since 1931, various people have lived as tenants in the Franceschi House, including horticultural professionals, City employees, and Parks caretakers; however, there have been extended periods where the house has been vacant. At one point, the house was in such a state of disrepair, the City Building Department condemned the structure. No one has lived in the house since 1993.
Currently the interior of house is in a poor, unsafe condition, and access is restricted to staff on an as needed basis only. The exterior is maintained only to ensure graffiti is removed and the roof is repaired to guard against water intrusion.
City funding for maintaining Franceschi Park and the house has always been limited.
Although rehabilitation of the house has been included in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan for many years, the project has never been a high funding priority. Currently, the Franceschi House Rehabilitation project is funded at $150,000 in the General Fund Capital budget. With Parks and Recreation unfunded infrastructure improvements totaling over $112 million today, funding to restore the house will continue to be a challenge.
The City and community have struggled over the years with the need to restore and preserve the park; including, whether or not to restore Franceschi House, how the restored house should be used to support park and recreation purposes, and how to fund such efforts. Detailed in the history below, at least twice (1971 and again in 1998) the City has considered demolishing the house due to failed attempts to secure capital and ongoing funding through City resources or public/private partnerships. Most recently, in 2001 the City entered into an agreement with the PCS whereby the PCS would raise the funds to rehabilitate the house and fund a $250,000 maintenance endowment. That effort has been on hold since 2010 due to a number of fiscal challenges, and in a letter dated April 9, 2015, the PCS board concurred with City staff that the project should be terminated.
In 2003, the City Council approved the Franceschi Park Master Plan which addressed improvements to park, use of the house and grounds, as well as implementation and funding strategies. The Master Plan provides an overall vision for how the rehabilitated Council Agenda Report
Discontinuation of Efforts to Restore Franceschi House and Recommendation to Demolish June 23, 2015
house would serve the public, based on the house generating revenue sufficient to cover annual operation and maintenance costs. However, with the business plan now deemed infeasible, and three failed attempts to fund the house rehabilitation project through a public/private partnership, the City is at a decision point once again.
Essentially, City Council has three options going forward. Cost estimates for the three options have not been developed at this point. However, it can be assumed that Option #1 would be the highest financial impact, Option #2 less so, and Option #3, which has the least financial impact, could be as much as $1-1.5 million or more in one-time funding.
1. Continue efforts to restore the house in order to serve the public as outlined in the Franceschi Park Master Plan. With slim prospects for a public/private partnership, and limited opportunities for State or Federal grant funding, this may require prioritizing General Fund support for completing the required park site improvements and rehabilitation of the house. There will also be a need for annual General Fund support to offset operating and maintenance expenses not covered by revenue generated at the house.
2. Rehabilitate and preserve the exterior of the house in order to recognize the contributions of Dr. Franceschi and others. Cost for this option would be somewhat less than Option #1 in that no interior improvements or annual operating expense would be required. However, this option would still require funding the park site improvements, exterior rehabilitation, and annual house maintenance expense. No revenue would be generated at the house.
3. Demolish the house and construct an alternative project on the site to recognize the contributions of Dr. Franceschi and others. The Franceschi House is a designated City Structure of Merit. So, this option would involve determining how the loss of the structure might be mitigated, i.e., creation of an alternate project on the site which would educate the community about the history and contributions of Dr. Franceschi, Camillo Fenzi, and Alden Freeman to Santa Barbara. A proposal for demolition would involve completion of a focused Environmental Impact Report, and a plan to salvage notable resources and possibly display on site character defining features such as the medallions, for interpretation and education. The impact of the demolition would likely be found to be significant and unavoidable, and would require a statement of overriding findings by City Council in order to go forward. This option would require one time funding for the environmental report, demolition, salvage, and alternate project. Depending on the scope of the project, some or all of the park site structural improvements and ADA park restroom and access improvements may still be required. On-going maintenance expense would be provided through the existing Parks budget.
OVERVIEW OF FRANCESCHI HOUSE HISTORY
Council Agenda Report
Discontinuation of Efforts to Restore Franceschi House and Recommendation to Demolish June 23, 2015
The following information provides a brief overview of how the City has planned for and attempted to fund improvements for both the park and Franceschi House over the years.
The information is drawn from the 1986 Historic Structures Report prepared by Howard Wittausch for the City of Santa Barbara, the Franceschi House Master Plan, Phase 1 report prepared by Laura Bridley with Suzanne Elledge Permit Processing Services, and the Franceschi Park Master Plan, prepared by the Parks and Recreation Department and adopted by City Council in 2003.
History of Franceschi House and Park
The history of the Montarioso (Franceschi) House and Franceschi Park can be summarized into four periods:
1. Dr. Francesco Franceschi, who came to Santa Barbara in 1893 and began establishing nurseries in the area, purchased the property in 1903 and built the house in 1905 for his family. Dr. Franceschi developed the garden into what became known as Montarioso Nursery. Although he left Santa Barbara in 1913, his son, Camillo Fenzi, operated the nursery until 1918.
2. Camillo Fenzi, who lived on the property through 1927, sold a portion of the original property and constructed a number of modifications to the house to accommodate his family.
3. In 1927, Alden Freeman, a philanthropist and wealthy social reformer, bought the house plus an additional 16 acres, with the intent of establishing Montarioso as a monument to Dr. Franceschi. Mr. Freeman constructed a number of modifications to the house as well. He offered the property and land just south of Mission Ridge Road to the City as a park in 1929. The City was reluctant to accept the property due to a lack of maintenance funds. However, when the Mission Ridge Association agreed to provide $1,500 for two years of park maintenance the City agreed to accept the properties in 1931.
4. The City made few changes to the exterior structure, and some interior changes.
Over the years the house was occupied by people associated with the City and horticultural interests. In 1963, the City Building Department condemned the structure, and it remained unoccupied until 1971. Following modifications to the residence, the house was home off and on to City parks caretakers until 1993.
Efforts to Restore Franceschi House and Park over the Years Over the years, the City has undertaken a number of efforts to determine the future of the Franceschi House, including various restoration projects and two formal recommendations to demolish the house, first in 1971 and again in 1998. 1971 Franceschi Park Master Plan Recommends Demolition of House Council Agenda Report
Discontinuation of Efforts to Restore Franceschi House and Recommendation to Demolish June 23, 2015
In 1968, at the urging of the Santa Barbara Horticultural Society, City Council hired a landscape architectural firm to develop a Master Plan for the site. The plan recognized the need to preserve the botanic and horticultural values of the site, and included demolition of the house as it “had little architectural merit and restoration would probably be impractical and very costly.” The plan was approved by City Council in 1971. This recommendation, however, was opposed by Pearl Chase. Ms. Chase formed the Franceschi Mansion Restoration Committee which led to the City Council designating Montarioso as a Structure of Merit in 1981.
1985 State Grant Funded Restoration Effort Fails
In 1982, the Horticultural Society, with a 25-year lease to conduct trainings and horticultural work on the property, engaged Howard Wittausch to survey the building and prepare restoration plans. Mr. Wittausch’s 1986 Historic Structures Report recommended rehabilitation of the building in phases and included preliminary cost estimates for each phase. In 1985, City Parks received $170,000 in grant funds for structural stabilization of the building from the State Office of Historic Preservation and the Society. The Phase 1 (structural stabilization) final cost estimate exceeded the City’s available funding so the project was abandoned. The State funds were transferred to the Carrillo Recreation Center, another historic City facility. Nothing further was undertaken regarding Franceschi House until the mid-1990s.
Franceschi House Master Plan, Phase 1 (1998-2000) Effort to Secure Public/Private Partnership Fails, Recommendation to Demolish
In 1996 the Park and Recreation Commission formed the Franceschi Park Visioning Committee to develop a vision for the future improvements at the park. Directed by Council in 1998, staff formally began working with the Franceschi Park Master Plan Advisory Committee to develop a plan which would also come to a conclusion regarding the future of the Franceschi House. The Franceschi House Master Plan, Phase 1 report developed by Laura Bridley and Suzanne Elledge Permit Processing Services summarized past documentation completed for the House, updated cost estimates for restoration and maintenance of the structure and analyzed costs and benefits of retaining the house vs. removing it. Development of the report involved substantial public outreach and community input, particularly related to retaining the house, how the house would be used and funding to restore, maintain and operate the house. In addition to rehabilitation of the house, the report considered two other options: demolish with no replacement, or demolish, salvage and re-use.
With regard to rehabilitation, the report concluded that if the City (or a community organization) funded the full rehabilitation and subsequent operation it would save the historic fabric of the house, retain a City Structure of Merit and comply with the City’s historic preservation goals and policies, and extend the life of the building for another 25 years or more. In 1998 the cost estimate to rehabilitate the house was $1.1 - $1.2 million.
Council Agenda Report
Discontinuation of Efforts to Restore Franceschi House and Recommendation to Demolish June 23, 2015
The City commenced with soliciting proposals from community organizations to undertake restoration and operation of the house. None of the six proposals received were deemed viable. Thus, the Franceschi House Master Plan, Phase 1 report concluded that the cost effectiveness of saving the house was questionable given all the constraints, and that it did not appear that restoration would be fiscally prudent. Noting that only a few organizations responded and none were deemed viable, the report questioned that any non-profit group could be successful, and the recommendation was to move forward with demolishing the residence. The Franceschi Park Advisory Committee and the Parks and Recreation Commission supported the conclusion of the report. However, when the recommendation went to City Council in December of 2000, the decision to demolish was withheld while the Citizens Planning Foundation, followed by the Pearl Chase Society, developed proposals for rehabilitating the structure.
Franceschi Park Master Plan (1998-2003) Premised on Public/Private Partnership for Restoration of House and Self-Sustaining House Operations Developed over six years, the Franceschi Park Master Plan was formed through extensive public engagement, particularly with input from neighbors on use of the house and park property. The Master Plan was adopted by City Council in December 2003, including a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Plan. The Declaration assumed that various phases of implementation would undergo separate environmental review as appropriate.
Over the period 1998 – 2003, the decision on whether or not to restore or demolish the house went back and forth, and ultimately the 2003 Master Plan concluded with the recommendation to restore the house via the proposed public/private partnership with the Pearl Chase Society, discussed below. The components that make up the Franceschi Master Plan include the Franceschi Park Fire Plan, Programming (including the House Usage Plan discussed below), House and Park Improvements, Horticultural Improvements and Maintenance, House Operation and Maintenance, and Financing to implement the plan.
With regard to funding, State grants, private donations, public/private partnerships and City capital funding were identified for the house and park improvements. Fundraising would be the role of the Franceschi Park Advisory Committee (not active since 2010), PARC Foundation (never assumed a role in active fundraising), and the Pearl Chase Society. As directed by the City, the Plan was developed on the premise that the house operation would be self-sustaining and not require subsidy from the City’s General Fund.
The Plan proposed that on-going maintenance and operation would be offset by rental fees and fair market rent which would be paid by the resident in the upper floor of the house.
Franceschi Park Master Plan, House Usage Plan (1999-2003) Council Agenda Report
Discontinuation of Efforts to Restore Franceschi House and Recommendation to Demolish June 23, 2015
The Franceschi House Usage Task Group, a City Council-appointed committee, developed the Franceschi House Usage Plan which would be incorporated into the Master Plan. The plan was based on Franceschi House being rehabilitated to support three primary uses:
1. Public facility for educational and community uses
2. Interpretive center, museum, and library
3. Residence for city-employed docent coordinator or other tenant The Plan was developed following numerous outreach and public meetings. Many of the use restrictions were formed in response to concerns from neighbors related to fire emergencies, noise, and traffic. Key aspects of the House Usage Plan include:
• Designated portions of the house for rental space, educational and library space, tenant space (upper floor)
• Event rentals (limited to four days per week, 9:00am to 8:00pm, 30 participants and 13 parking spaces per group, amplified sound restrictions, and City event monitor staffing requirements)
• Interpretive museum hours, volunteer staffing, limited parking for guests and staff • House/Garden tours, frequency, group size, limit one school tour per day and three per month
• Horticultural library, access by appointment
• Upper floor residence, no more than two people
• Interpretive signage, volunteer park work days, park docent program Pearl Chase Society Proposal to Rehabilitate Franceschi House (2001-current) In January 2001, the City Council accepted the proposal submitted by the PCS whereby the PCS would undertake the planning, development and fundraising to rehabilitate the Montarioso/Franceschi House and provide a $250,000 maintenance endowment. In July 2001, Council approved Grant Agreement #20,312 between PCS and the City to (a) prepare a development application for the rehabilitation of Franceschi House, (b) commit City funding of $150,000 towards the development of the project description and the environmental review of the project, and (c) conduct the required environmental review of the project. It was agreed that the City would deposit the $150,000 into an account for the project with the PARC Foundation. In addition to that funding, City Council set aside an additional $150,000 in the City’s General Fund capital program towards the Franceschi House Rehabilitation project, for a total City commitment of $300,000.
From 2001 to 2009 the Pearl Chase Society actively pursued plans to restore the House and fundraising to complete the project. PCS undertook immediate actions to catalog all of the building’s architectural elements and preserve various resources. A number of improvements related to safety were undertaken, including lighting, flooring repairs, structural reinforcement and other interior improvements. PCS secured a $75,000 grant from the Santa Barbara Foundation to augment PCS and City funding for planning and development costs. Howard Wittausch updated his 1986 Historic Structures Report, and conceptual and architectural plans were submitted and approved by the Parks and Council Agenda Report
Discontinuation of Efforts to Restore Franceschi House and Recommendation to Demolish June 23, 2015
Recreation Commission and Historic Landmarks Commission. By 2006, the PCS had secured donations and pledges to cover more than half of the projected $2 million construction cost.
In 2007, the Parks and Recreation Department completed roadway, parking lot and drainage improvements in the upper parking area utilizing a $450,000 State Park Grant secured for that purpose.
Recommendation to Terminate City/PCS Effort to Rehabilitate Franceschi House As the Franceschi House rehabilitation project progressed a number of issues arose, all of which had financial impacts for the City related to the project.
1. The business plan to offset on-going house operations and annual maintenance by revenues generated at the house was deemed infeasible by the Parks and Recreation Department. Updated cost projections for annual maintenance exceeded the proposed maintenance endowment; and a fiscal imbalance in the business plan assumptions was created by the inability to generate rental revenue from the upper floor residence. Revenue from the residence was significantly reduced due to City Charter section 520 limitations on use of park property, park deed restrictions, and State Labor Code regulations limiting rent City employees can pay related to park caretaker residences. Event rental projections were also reduced due to the economy and competition from other local rental venues.
2. The City would have to fund and complete structural site stabilization prior to issuance of a building permit for the house. Work would include geotechnical studies and hillside stabilization, and drainage, patio and retaining walls improvements. At that time, preliminary cost estimates were well over $1 million.
Today those costs would likely exceed $2-3 million.
3. The City would also have fund and complete various ADA access requirements including paths of travel between the upper parking lot and lower House level, and possibly renovation of the park restroom, concurrent with the House rehabilitation project. (No cost estimate.)
The Parks and Recreation Department approached the PCS to see whether they might fund the latter two items. However, the board determined that, per the grant agreement, park improvements were the responsibility of the City.
By 2009, both the City and the PCS were feeling the impacts of the great national recession. The economic climate was not conducive to fundraising for a capital campaign, and grant funding sources were increasingly limited or non-existent. The Parks and Recreation Department lost both capital and operations funding over the next few years as the City responded to declining revenues. Based on these factors, and the likelihood Council Agenda Report
Discontinuation of Efforts to Restore Franceschi House and Recommendation to Demolish June 23, 2015
that the City fiscal situation wouldn’t change much in the next few years, City staff and PCS representatives agreed in 2010 to suspend further work on the project.
In April 2015, the PCS board of directors submitted a letter (Attachment 1) to the Parks and Recreation Director concurring with City staff that the project to rehabilitate the Franceschi House should be abandoned and that the current grant agreement should be terminated. The board expressed interest in partnering with the City on an alternative project in the park to honor Dr. Franceschi and Alden Freeman and others should the opportunity be available.
Disposition of Project Funds Held in PARC
A final accounting of funds held in the PARC Foundation account for the project was conducted by PCS Board President Barbara Lowenthal and the Parks and Recreation Director (Attachment 2). A total of $276,705.53 in revenue was deposited in the PARC account from grants and donations for the project. Authorized project expenditures totaled $115,866.58. A $20,000 donation by Theodore Gardner II for restoration of Franceschi Park perennial garden beds will be transferred to the PARC Park Improvement Fund account where those funds will be held until the current drought is over and the project can be completed by the Parks Division. Three unspecified donations in support of the project, totaling $2,245.93, will be returned to the PCS. As agreed by the City if the project was terminated prior to completion the PCS has responsibility to contact donors about returning donated funds or receiving authorization to apply the funds to an alternate project.
This leaves a balance of $138,593.02 which will be returned by the PARC Foundation to the City. Staff recommends that these funds be appropriated to the Franceschi House Rehabilitation project in the General Fund capital program. With a current balance of $150,000, this would bring the total project funding to $288,593.02; funds that would be available to support any future project involving the house.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
With mixed feelings over the loss of a historic structure in one of our City parks, the staff recommendation is to proceed with Option #3, demolish the house and construct an alternative project on site to recognize the contributions of Dr. Franceschi, Camillo Fenzi, Alden Freeman and others.
For over 45 years, all efforts to fund and restore the house have failed. The City has not been able to fund the project through grants or the General Fund over that time. Three separate efforts to secure a public/private partnership which would fund and complete the project have also been unsuccessful, including the most recent partnership between the City and the Pearl Chase Society. With the return of the unused project funds held in the PARC Foundation, City funding for the Franceschi House Rehabilitation project will total $288,593.02. Estimated project cost for Option #3 to demolish the house, the least Council Agenda Report
Discontinuation of Efforts to Restore Franceschi House and Recommendation to Demolish June 23, 2015
expensive option, is estimated at $1-2 million or more. Given that the Parks and Recreation Department unfunded infrastructure improvements total over $112 million with many competing priorities, opportunities for General Fund funding for the Franceschi House will continue to be a significant challenge.
Staff would also like to note that the continued deteriorating condition of the house has an increasing maintenance burden. The Department receives regular communication from neighbors and the Riviera Association expressing concerns about fire and vandalism. (See Riviera Association letter, Attachment 3) BUDGET/FINANCIAL INFORMATION:
With termination of Grant Agreement # 20,312, the City will receive a contribution of $138,593.02 from the PARC Foundation, which is the balance of funds remaining from the grant project. With appropriation of these funds to the Parks and Recreation General Fund capital project #67320, Franceschi House Rehabilitation, total funding will be $288,593.02.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. April 9, 2015, Letter from Pearl Chase Society to terminate the grant agreement with the City
2. PARC Foundation accounting report, Pearl Chase Franceschi House Rehabilitation Fund, 8/1/2001 through 4/15/2015
3. October 2, 2013, Letter from the Riviera Association regarding Franceschi House
SUBMITTED BY: Nancy L. Rapp, Parks and Recreation Director APPROVED BY: City Administrator's Office
1 ATTACHMENT 2
FRANCESCHI HOUSE AND PARK
ALTERNATIVES MATRIX – Proposed Changes and Use
Option 1
House Restoration
Option 2
Exterior Restoration
Option 3
New Interpretive Pavilion
HOUSE & Immediate
Area
House and immediate surroundings
would be completely restored to the
Alden Freeman period as outlined in
the Master Plan. Some elements such
as the porte-cochere and the rear
exterior staircase may be deferred for
later reconstruction.
House interior would be stabilized;
exterior and immediate surroundings
would be mostly restored to the Alden
Freeman period (except porte-cochere
and rear exterior staircase, which may
be restored in a later phase).
New pavilion replaces existing house.
House footprint outline installed or
use existing foundation. Incorporate
elements of house, interpretive
panels, and other improvements to be
determined. House deconstructed
after complete photo-documentation
and salvage of historic elements (such
as medallions, plaques, stained glass
windows, etc.).
House Use Limited use for small group events and
education, including:
• Public use up to 4 days/week
• House available from 9 AM to 8
PM
• Max group size: 30 guests
• Up to 6 docent-led house and/or
park tours/day w/max of 12
people
• Closed on Red Flag Warning days
No house access except for
maintenance.
Some elements of the house would be
preserved and/or replicated. People
would tour the house pavilion.
Pavilion secured at night.
2 Option 1
House Restoration
Option 2
Exterior Restoration
Option 3
New Interpretive Pavilion
PARK Site
Improvements
• Existing restroom and storage
shed removed in the long term1
• Geotechnical/structural
improvements of walls and paths,
including:
Existing paths across top of
slope restored between house
and upper parking lot in future
Existing path from west
turnaround to vista point
upgraded to meet ADA
requirements
Retaining walls south of the
house and westerly
turnaround
• New paths considered in the
future
• Interpretive signs, lighting, donor
recognition
• New benches & repair/replace
existing benches
• Install demonstration garden &
preserve most existing Franceschirelated plantings, including upgraded maintenance
Same as Option 1. Same as Option 1 plus Drainage
improvements to meet SWMP Tier 3.
Park Use • Self-guided tours daily
• School tours; up to 3/month
w/max of 50 students
• Community workdays up to twice
annually
• As allowed by Passive Park
designation – from sunrise to ½
hour after sunset
• Closed on Red Flag Warning Days
• As allowed by Passive Park
designation – from sunrise to ½
hour after sunset
• Closed on Red Flag Warning Days
1 Restrooms would be removed when one of the House options moves forward. New restrooms would not be built. 3 Option 1
House Restoration
Option 2
Exterior Restoration
Option 3
New Interpretive Pavilion
• SBCC horticulture classes on
Saturday mornings; scheduled to
avoid events
• As allowed by Passive Park
designation – from sunrise to ½
hour after sunset
• Closed on Red Flag Warning Days
• Community workdays up to twice
annually
• Community workdays up to twice
annually
Caretaker’s Cottage Continue to serve as residence for City employee with no more than 2
residents.
Continue to serve as residence for City
employee with no more than 2
residents.
Continue to serve as residence for City
employee with no more than 2
residents.
Environmental
Review required
Addendum to MND or Categorical
Exemption to reflect reduced use and
changes from earlier proposal, as well
as amended Historic Site and
Structures Reports.
Categorical Exemption as long as the
Secretary of the Interior’s standards
are followed, as well as amended
Historic Site and Structures Reports.
Focused EIR due to loss of historic
resource, including amendments to
the Historic Site and Structures
Reports, and a Conservation Plan.
Cost of
environmental
review
$6,000, including $4,000 for amended
historic reports (including staff time)
$5,000, including $4,000 for amended
historic reports (including staff time)
$150,000
Cost of technical
studies/plans to
date,
Geotechnical/Soils,
Hydrology/Drainage,
Infiltration Tests, and
Survey
$52,100 $52,100 $52,100
Additional Technical
Studies:
Foundation Structural Analysis:
$20,000
Foundation Structural Analysis:
$20,000
Foundation Structural Analysis:
$20,000
Cost to revise
Master Plan to
reflect changes
(staff time, working
with Parks and Rec.
$25,000 $25,000 $25,000
4 Option 1
House Restoration
Option 2
Exterior Restoration
Option 3
New Interpretive Pavilion
Comm., HLC, and CC
review)
Cost to complete
approvals
Preliminary Design: $225,000
HLC and City Council: No fees
Preliminary Design: $225,000
HLC and City Council: No fees
Preliminary Design: $225,000
HLC and City Council: No fees
Cost for final design2,
specs, and working
drawings, and issue
building permits
Design: $300,000 if foundation is
replaced
Building Permit/Inspection: $12,000
Design: $200,000; additional costs for
foundation replacement
Building Permit/Inspection: $10,000
Design: $300,000
Building Permit/Inspection: $8,000
Cost to carry out
house project,
including foundation
replacement
$4.5 Million $1.5 Million Cost of deconstruction: $65,000 (reduced by auction of appropriate
elements)
Cost of pavilion/interpretive displays,
including SWMP Tier 3: $1.4 Million
Cost to carry out site
improvements,
including final design
and permitting
$750,000 $750,000 $750,000
Cost of annual
grounds
maintenance
$215,000 $125,000 $125,000
One-Time
Maintenance Costs
$65,000 for waterproofing and
fumigation of house
Cost of annual
house/structure
maintenance
$66,000 $7,000 $5,000
Revenues $12,480/yr3 $0 $0
2 Most design work is complete for Option 1, but may be affected by change from foundation repair to foundation replacement. Option 2 may require additional design work based on recent site visit with Pearl Chase Society and may also be affected by change from foundation repair to foundation replacement. 3 Based on average use of 2-4 days per week, 2-4 hours per day at $30/hour rental. Also assumes that user also pays custodial and monitoring costs.
ATTACHMENT 3
FRANCESCHI PARK MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES
Current Maintenance Level Full Master Plan
(modified to exclude new pathways)
Revised Master Plan (Demonstration
gardens; improved maintenance of
existing landscaping, etc.)
Daily • Inspect/clean restrooms Inspect/clean restrooms Inspect/clean restrooms Twice Weekly • Pick up litter Pick up litter Pick up litter Weekly • Detail restrooms
• Inspect picnic tables & clean as needed
• Sweep off patio and paths
• Prune cycle by priority
• Inspect Franceschi House for
vandalism
• Detail restrooms
• Inspect picnic tables & clean as needed
• Sweep off patio and paths
• Prune cycle by priority
• Inspect Franceschi House for
vandalism
•Detail restrooms
• Inspect picnic tables & clean as needed
• Sweep off patio and paths
• Prune cycle by priority.
• Inspect Franceschi House for vandalism
Monthly • Sweep off entry road as needed
• Inspect irrigation system
• Complete monthly park-site safety
inspection
• Sweep off entry road as needed
• Inspect irrigation system
• Complete monthly park-site safety
inspection
• Combined horticulture work project:
pruning, tree trimming, edging
planters, etc.
• Sweep off entry road as needed
• Inspect irrigation system
• Complete monthly park-site safety
inspection
• Combined horticulture work project:
pruning, tree trimming, edging planters,
etc.
Annually • Combined horticulture work project:
pruning, tree trimming, edging
planters, etc.
• Parks staff mows grasses and weeds
• Parks staff mows grasses and weeds • Parks staff mows grasses and weeds Five year
Vegetative Fuels
Management
Plan
Contractors perform vegetative fuels
abatement annually
Contractors perform vegetative fuels
abatement annually
Contractors perform vegetative fuels
abatement annually
Acreage of
actively
landscaped area
6 acres 6 acres 6 acres
Current Maintenance Level Full Master Plan
(modified to exclude new pathways)
Revised Master Plan (Demonstration
gardens; improved maintenance of
existing landscaping, etc.)
Acreage of
actively
weeded/mowed
area
9 acres 9 acres 9 acres
# of people 2 2.5 1.5 to 2
# of hours
annually
525 hours 5,200 hours 3,120 to 4,160 hours
Full-Time
Equivalent (FTE)
.20 FTE 2.5 FTE 1.5 to 2 FTE
Annual Cost $59,000 $215,000 $125,350 to $169,500
Maintenance
Service Level (see
description
below)
MSL-3 around the House and upper
parking lot; MSL-5 for remainder of
property
MSL-1 for entire property MSL-1 around house and upper parking lot; MSL-2 or 3 for remainder of property
Park Maintenance Service Levels
Each City park is assigned a Maintenance Service Level (MSL). Level 1 is assigned to the most visible and popular sites and Level 5 is assigned to most open spaces and undeveloped parks. Maintenance frequency and quality standards are defined for each MSL in the Parks Maintenance Standards manual.
MSL-1 MSL-2 MSL-3 MSL-4 MSL-5
Site Maintenance Quality Very High High Mod-High Moderate Open Space Maintenance Visits 3 – 7
weekly
3 – 5
weekly
2 -3
weekly
1 weekly – 1
monthly As defined per site
Inspect Playgrounds & Clean
Restrooms Daily Daily Daily N.A. N.A.
Agenda Item: TBD
CITY OF SANTA BARBARA
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
Wednesday, January 24, 2018
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 735 ANACAPA STREET
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Beebe Longstreet called the meeting to order at 4:05 p.m. at City Council Chambers.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Chair Beebe Longstreet
ROLL CALL
Commissioners and Staff Present
Chair Beebe Longstreet
Vice Chair Nichol Clark
Commissioner Jacob Lesner-Buxton
Commissioner Andria Martinez Cohen
Commissioner Kathy McGill
Commissioner Roger Perry
Parks and Recreation Director Jill Zachary
Assistant Parks and Recreation Director Rich Hanna
Parks Manager Santos Escobar
Urban Forest Superintendent Tim Downey
Recreation Manager Judith McCaffrey
Senior Recreation Supervisor Emily Fox
Recreation Coordinator Julie Thomas
Executive Assistant Rose Nevarez
Public Works Project Engineer Alex Ubaldo
Commissioners Absent
Commissioner Tara Armbruster
CHANGES TO THE AGENDA: Item 5.A.1 will be delayed as applicants are attending another hearing. Item 7 was taken in advance of Item 6.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None
ATTACHMENT 4
2 PUBLIC COMMENT: None
YOUTH COUNCIL REPORT: None
COMMISSIONER COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENT REPORTS:
Commissioner Perry attended the Arts and Crafts Advisory Committee meeting.
Commissioner Martinez Cohen attended and reported on the Creeks Advisory Committee meeting on January 17th.
Vice Chair Clark attended the Street Tree Advisory Committee on January 4th, and the PARC Foundation Board meeting earlier today.
Chair Longstreet attended and reported on the Neighborhood Advisory Committee meeting.
COMMISSION AND STAFF COMMUNICATIONS: None
CEREMONIAL ITEMS:
1. Subject: Employee Recognition
Director Jill Zachary reported that Grounds Maintenance Assistant Robert Funai was recognized by the Santa Barbara Independent as a Local Hero for 2017 for his dedication to the A.C. Postel Memorial Rose Garden at the Santa Barbara Mission.
2. Subject: Kiwanis Club Recognition (Attachment)
Recommendation: That the Commission recognize the Kiwanis Club of Santa Barbara for their commitment, hard work, and leadership of the Annual Adapted Programs Thanksgiving Luncheon.
Documents:
-Staff Report dated January 24, 2018
Speakers:
-Senior Recreation Supervisor Emily Fox
-Kiwanis Club of Santa Barbara President Anita Ho
-Kiwanis Club Lieutenant Governor Ed Cue
-Kiwanis Club of Santa Barbara Member Lisa Gosdschan
Senior Recreation Supervisor Emily Fox recognized the Kiwanis Club for hosting the Annual Adapted Programs Thanksgiving Luncheon for the past 39 years, and extended the Department’s gratitude for their dedication and commitment, and for providing engaging activities for individuals with disabilities. 3 CONSENT ITEMS:
3. Subject: Summary of Council Actions – For Information (Attachment) Parks and Recreation Director Jill Zachary recognized that City Council awarded the construction contract for the Cabrillo Pavilion, a project started in 2011, on November 14, with the knowledge that there was still fundraising to be done. She also reported that City Council awarded the construction contract for the Cabrillo Ball Park on January 23.
Chair Longstreet stated she watched the presentation and the Cabrillo Ball Park project came out of meetings with the East Side Advisory Committee years ago. Many items in the plan came directly from the residents of the east side. The project has been vetted over a long period of time and addresses requests by the residents of Santa Barbara. She is happy to see it moving forward, and asked if there is a timeline.
Department Director Zachary said that it was likely a 3 to 4 month construction process, then a waiting period for the turf to establish and be in a position for people to withstand play. It will be closed for about 8 months. The Department is making sure that programs that would have taken place at the Cabrillo Ball Park can be moved to another location, as well as those that would have taken place at the Pavilion.
4. Subject: Minutes – For Action (Attachment)
Recommendation: That the Commission waive the reading and approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 15, 2017.
Motion:
Commissioner Martinez Cohen / Perry to waive the reading and approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 15, 2017.
Vote:
Majority voice vote (5/0/1) (Abstain: McGill)
STREET TREE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ITEMS
Any action of the Parks and Recreation Commission made pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 15.20, Tree Planting and Maintenance or 15.24, Preservation of Trees, may be appealed to the City Council within ten days, pursuant to provisions of Section 1.30.050 of the Municipal Code.
5. Subject: Street Tree Advisory Committee Recommendations – For Action (Attachments)
Documents:
-Staff Report dated January 24, 2018
-Staff PowerPoint presented by Staff
4 Speakers:
-Urban Forest Superintendent Tim Downey
-Public Works Project Engineer Alex Ubaldo (Item 5.A.1) -Consultant James Faber, T.Y. Lin International (Item 5.A.1) -Public Speaker Zoe Carlson (Item 5.C.1)
Recommendation: That the Commission:
A. Conditionally approve the following Street Tree removal requests:
1. 1700 block of E. Cabrillo Blvd. – (10) Washingtonia robusta, Mexican Fan Palms – Alex Ubaldo, City of Santa Barbara Public Works Engineering The Commission received the report, their questions were answered, and the following action was taken:
Motion:
Commissioner Martinez Cohen / McGill to concur with the Street Tree Advisory Committee recommendation to approve the removals on the condition that replacement trees with the different height designations as noted in the staff report be planted.
Vote:
Unanimous voice vote (6/0)
B. Partially approve the following Setback Tree removal requests with conditions:
1. 414 Chapala St. – (2) Archontophoenix cunninghamiana, King Palms – Jessica Harlin, Barefoot Design
The Commission received the report, their questions were answered, and the following action was taken:
Motion:
Commissioner Clark / Martinez Cohen to approve removal of the King Palm closest to the driveway on the condition two replacement Jacaranda trees be planted.
Vote:
Unanimous voice vote (6/0)
C. Conditionally approve the following Setback Tree removal request:
1. 726 N. La Cumbre Rd. – (10) total trees – Zoe Carlson, Dudek, Owner Agent The Commission received the report, their questions were answered, they heard testimony, and the following action was taken:
5 Motion:
Commissioner Martinez Cohen / Perry to concur with the Street Tree Advisory Committee recommendation to approve the removals on the condition they be replaced on a one-to-one ratio on private property, and the design of the roadway accommodate at least six street trees.
Vote:
Unanimous voice vote (6/0)
D. Approve the following change to the Street Tree Master Plan:
1. 600 block of Anacapa St. – consider co-designation – Arcadia Studio The Commission received the report and the following action was taken:
Motion:
Commissioner Clark / McGill to approve the change of the Street Tree Master Plan for the 600 block of Anacapa Street to include Magnolia grandiflora, Southern Magnolia.
Vote:
Unanimous voice vote (6/0)
2. 100 E. Ortega St. – consider co-designation – Arcadia Studio The Commission received the report, their questions were answered, and the following action was taken:
Motion:
Commissioner Martinez Cohen / McGill to concur with the Street Tree Advisory Committee and approve the co-designation of the Markhamia hildebrandtii, Markhamia.
Vote:
Unanimous voice vote (6/0)
3. 100 block of E. Sola St. – consider Handroanthus impetiginosus, Pink Trumpet Tree, for designation.
The Commission received the report, their questions were answered, and the following action was taken:
Motion:
Commissioner McGill / Perry to approve the designation of the Handroanthus impetiginosus, Pink Trumpet Tree, as the designated tree for the 100 block or East Sola Street and remove the Pittosporum. 6 Vote:
Unanimous voice vote (6/0)
4. 1200 Blanchard St. - consider adding Prunus cerasifera, Purple Leaf Plum, as the co-designated tree for the 1200 block of Blanchard St. – Kate Oberjat The Commission received the report, their questions were answered, and the following action was taken:
Motion:
Commissioner Martinez Cohen / Perry to approve the Prunus cerasifera, Purple Leaf Plum, codesignation for the 1200 block of Blanchard Street.
Vote:
Unanimous voice vote (6/0)
ADMINISTRATIVE AND STAFF REPORTS
6. Subject: Director’s Report – For Information (Attachment) Documents:
-Staff Report dated January 24, 2018
Speakers:
-Parks and Recreation Director Jill Zachary
Recommendation: That the Commission receive a report on the status of the various Parks and Recreation Department initiatives and activities.
Parks and Recreation Director Jill Zachary reported on the Chase Palm Park Carousel Carnival, the Annual Rose Pruning at A.C. Postel Memorial Rose Garden, the Santa Barbara Golf Club 60th Anniversary, and the ribbon cutting for the renovation of Kids World.
The Commission received the report.
OLD BUSINESS:
7. Advisory Committee Interview and Appointment – For Action (Attachments) Documents:
-Staff Report dated January 24, 2018
Speakers:
-Larry Saltzman
Recommendation: That the Commission hold an interview and make an appointment to the Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee.
7 The Commission interviewed the applicant and made the following motion.
Motion:
Commissioner Perry / Clark to reappoint Larry Saltzman to the Integrated Pest Management Advisory Committee in the Pesticide Awareness Committee category.
Vote:
Unanimous voice vote (6/0)
8. Franceschi House Options – For Action (Attachment)
Documents:
-Staff Report dated January 24, 2018
-Staff PowerPoint presented by Staff
Speakers:
-Parks and Recreation Director Jill Zachary
Recommendation: That the Commission:
A. Receive a presentation on the various options for Franceschi House; and B. Recommend that the City Council direct staff to further explore the feasibility and develop conceptual plans for the development of an interpretive pavilion.
Parks and Recreation Director Jill Zachary reported on the background of the Franceschi House, its current condition, past Council action and the various options explored for the site and their estimated costs. These options included a full rehabilitation of the house (interior and exterior), stabilization of the house interior with foundation upgrades or replacement, and deconstruction of the house and creation of an outdoor interpretive pavilion that integrates certain elements from the house, such as the medallions and stained glass windows. All options would include a variety of site improvements. Director Zachary discussed the feasibility of each option, current maintenance and costs, and possible revenue generation.
Upon reviewing the viability of all options, the Department recommends that the City further explore the feasibility of developing an interpretive pavilion as the preferred option for Franceschi House. This recommendation has the support of both the Pearl Chase Society and the Riviera Association.
Chair Longstreet reported the interior of the house is not salvageable in her opinion, and the Commission voted in the past to recommend to City Council that the house be demolished because of the condition, the limited use and limited access. She believes Dr. Franceschi’s legacy is horticultural. He only lived in the house for nine years and it was substantially modified over the years. She believes 8 the window for saving the house was 35-40 years ago, and it saddens her that they were not able to move forward at that point with the horticultural aspects of the park when it was salvageable. At this stage, it is the most realistic to look at the removal of the house, for safety reasons and aesthetics.
Vice Chair Clark is leaning toward supporting the staff recommendation due to safety and budgetary concerns, but is worried about over-sanitizing parks and playgrounds in our city. Although she understands that for budget and safety reasons the house probably needs to be removed, there’s a lot to be said for ramshackle mystery, and that’s what the house represents for her family.
Commissioner McGill stated that although being relatively new to Santa Barbara, she has spent time at Franceschi Park and it is beautiful and quite a gift. But looking at it objectively, she is afraid that budget and money will always be an issue, there will always be limited use, and is concerned that the history and emotional ties will always allow for good money to be thrown after bad because it will never quite get to the resolution that everyone would like. She is not opposed to the interpretive pavilion, but thinks even that may be too much, and that going back to the horticultural legacy might be more feasible.
Commissioner Perry believes Dr. Franceschi’s legacy is already spread throughout and deeply rooted in our city and preservation of that is important. He visited the park fairly frequently in the early 1970’s and saw the disrepair. It’s not really been touched and not really an asset, and a bit of a liability. He also has fond memories, but feels the house was almost a secondary item. He asked if the stairs to Alameda Padre Serra are included in the restoration. Parks and Recreation Director Jill Zachary replied that part of the park has not been addressed, the focus has been on the area of the vicinity of the house. That does not mean that it couldn’t be addressed in the future, because access and passive use of Franceschi Park is the highest priority. Commissioner Perry asked if a greenhouse has been considered, since the legacy is horticultural. Director Zachary stated that it had been discussed, but new structures are not planned for the park due to management issues. The goal is to not intensify the use, yet make it a more friendly and useful space for park going public.
Commissioner Martinez Cohen asked if the Structure of Merit designation means it’s a historical property. Does it have historic architectural design elements? Parks and Recreation Director Jill Zachary replied that it does have historical significance and that is one of the challenges that will be faced as the project moves forward if it includes putting something different within the site. An environmental impact report will need to be done focused on historic resources, and an update of the historic site structures report done, based on a concept plan to evaluate the extent to which the proposal mitigates the loss of that resource. There are steps to be taken under the Secretary of the Interior Standards when a resource can’t be restored or retained. That will be a significant undertaking to get to the next step no matter what changes are pursued. Our approach is to envision what it will be 9 vs what it’s not and what will go away, so that we can move toward something that will receive more community support.
Chair Longstreet believes it is time to move forward again, and to at least start the planning phase. She is happy to see this moving forward in this way. It was stalled in the fundraising phase for so long, and every winter brings more deterioration, even though the roof was replaced. She believes our resources need to be used for creating something useful to the community.
Motion:
Commissioner McGill / Martinez Cohen that the Commission support the staff recommendation to explore the feasibility and develop conceptual plans for an interpretive pavilion
Discussion:
Vice Chair Clark stated that by voting in favor of the recommendation, it does not mean that she is in favor of demolition at this time. She just agrees with moving forward with a feasibility plan and the development conceptual plans for an interpretive pavilion.
Vote:
Majority voice vote (5/1) (Nay: Perry)
NEW BUSINESS: None
ADJOURNMENT
At 5:43 p.m., with no further business to be addressed by the Commission, the meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Jill E. Zachary
Parks and Recreation Director
CITY OF SANTA BARBARA
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2023
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: Engineering Division, Public Works Department
SUBJECT: Design Services for the Fiscal Year 2025 Capital Pavement Maintenance Projects [Agreement]
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
A. Approve the extension of the selection of Flowers & Associates, Inc. to provide professional engineering design and construction management services for the annual Capital Pavement Maintenance Projects scheduled for Fiscal Years 2020 through 2024 to include Fiscal Year 2025; and
B. Authorize the Public Works Director to execute a City Professional Services contract with Flowers & Associates, Inc. in the amount of $371,028 for design services of the Fiscal Year 2025 Capital Pavement Maintenance Projects, and authorize $37,103 for potential extra services, for a total expenditure authority of $408,131.
DISCUSSION:
Background
The Engineering Division hires design and construction consultants to provide services for delivery of its annual Pavement Maintenance Project to make efficient use of staff time and increase the ratio of funds expended on construction. In recent years, a consultant has been selected to provide these services for a period of five years. Staff last sought proposals from local engineering firms for design and contract administration services for the City of Santa Barbara’s (City) annual pavement maintenance project in 2020, for Fiscal Years 2020 through 2024. Flowers & Associates, Inc. (Flowers) was selected to provide these services for Fiscal Years 2020 through 2024. Staff recommends an extension of their selection to provide professional engineering design and construction management services through Fiscal Year 2025.
Project Description
The Fiscal Year 2025 Capital Pavement Maintenance Projects (Projects) design phase services consist of capital planning, scoping, and prioritizing pavement maintenance Agenda Item No. 13
File Code No. 530.04
Council Agenda Report
Design Services for the Fiscal Year 2025 Capital Pavement Maintenance Projects [Agreement]
November 7, 2023
efforts on high priority streets throughout the City. This design contract includes evaluation of the condition of streets, identification and recommendations of repair and maintenance procedures, and preparation of construction contract documents.
The total construction budget anticipated for the Projects is between $8 and $10 million.
In order to most efficiently and effectively deliver such a large scope of work, staff expects that the Projects will be constructed in two phases: one phase for surface treatments, and one phase for more significant pavement rehabilitation. Construction is anticipated to take place in late 2024 through mid-2025.
The scope of services for the design contract includes the following:
Surveying existing pavement conditions;
Topographic survey of selected locations requiring detailed design; Marking streets for pavement repair work;
Estimating pavement repair costs;
Prioritizing pavement repairs;
Preparing specifications for pavement repairs (two bid packages); and Preparing construction cost estimates for all construction components, including pavement preparation, overlay, slurry seal, crack seal, concrete repairs, access ramps, and alternative repair options.
Pending funding availability, the potential streets included in the Projects for contracted paving are Anacapa Street (Micheltorena Street to Cota Street); State Street (Las Positas to Five Points); and Gutierrez Street (Milpas Street to State Street). The potential streets included in the Projects for contracted slurry sealing are portions of the Mesa and San Roque neighborhoods.
Design Phase Consultant Engineering Services
Flowers was selected as part of a Request for Qualifications process in which local engineering firms were solicited for Statements of Qualifications (SOQ). Six consultants submitted SOQs, and Flowers was selected as the most qualified consultant. On January 29, 2019, Council approved the selection of Flowers for design and construction monitoring services for the Fiscal Years 2020 – 2024 Pavement Maintenance Projects.
In order to most expeditiously and cost effectively begin design work for the next pavement maintenance construction cycle, staff recommends that Council approve the extension of the selection of Flowers to provide design and construction administration services for Fiscal Year 2025. Staff recommends that Council authorize the Public Works Director to execute a contract with Flowers in the amount of $371,028 for design services and authorize $37,103 for potential extra services, for a total expenditure amount of $408,131.
Council Agenda Report
Design Services for the Fiscal Year 2025 Capital Pavement Maintenance Projects [Agreement]
November 7, 2023
Flowers is experienced in this type of work and has successfully delivered design and construction management services for the City’s annual pavement maintenance projects for over 15 years.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL INFORMATION:
There are sufficient expenditure appropriations in Fiscal Year 2024 in the Measure C Capital Fund to fund the proposed contract, including potential extra services, with Flowers. Staff plan to propose funding the Fiscal Year 2025 design and construction management services in the Measure C Capital Fund during the annual budget process.
A copy of the contract may be requested from the Public Works Department for public review by contacting [email protected].
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The Projects require California Environmental Quality Act compliance and environmental permitting. California Environmental Quality Act environmental review and documentation will be conducted during the design phase and finalized upon award of the Projects’ construction contracts. The required environmental permits will be secured prior to the commencement of construction.
PREPARED BY: Brian D’Amour, P.E., City Engineer/AZ/sk
SUBMITTED BY: Clifford M. Maurer, P.E., Public Works Director APPROVED BY: City Administrator’s Office
CITY OF SANTA BARBARA
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2023
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: Engineering Division, Public Works Department
SUBJECT: Construction Management Services for Water Main Replacement Projects [Agreement]
RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
A. Authorize the Public Works Director to execute a City Professional Services contract with Flowers & Associates, Inc., in the amount of $1,288,176 for construction management and inspection services, and authorize $128,817 for potential extra services, for a total expenditure authority of $1,416,993 or the Fiscal Year 2023 Water Main Replacement Project; and
B. Authorize the Public Works Director to execute the Second Contract Amendment with Flowers & Associates, Inc., for construction management and inspection services for the Fiscal Year 2021B Water Main Replacement Project Contract No. 28,217, in the amount of $59,252, for a total expenditure authority of $438,287.
DISCUSSION:
Background
The Fiscal Year 2023 Water Main Replacement Project will replace approximately seven miles of aging and at-risk water mains at high-priority locations throughout the City of Santa Barbara (City). Water mains will be installed along portions of Alameda Padre Serra, Cliff Drive, State Street, La Marina, Meigs Road, and Lucinda Lane. Long-term goals include more efficient maintenance and isolation control within the water system, while also providing a safe and reliable water supply. Construction is anticipated to take place between January 2024 and October 2025.
The Fiscal Year 2021B Water Main Replacement Project is currently in construction and is replacing approximately two miles of aging and at-risk water mains at high-priority locations throughout the City, including Cliff Drive, Loma Alta Drive, Santa Barbara Street, and Anapamu Street. On November 15, 2022, Council approved Contract No. 28,217 with Flowers & Associates, Inc., (Flowers) to provide construction management services for this project. Construction work added to this project requires a contract increase to extend these services.
Agenda Item No. 14
File Code No. 540.06
Council Agenda Report
Construction Management Services for Water Main Replacement Projects [Agreement] November 7, 2023
Project Description
The Fiscal Year 2023 Water Main Replacement Project (Project) construction work consists of a combination of conventional water main replacement on various streets throughout the City and the installation of an above-ground transmission main over the Sycamore Creek bridge crossing along Alameda Padre Serra.
Flowers will be responsible for hosting the preconstruction conference and weekly meetings as well as preparing associated conference memos; reviewing submittals; scheduling testing services; distributing shutdown notices to affected businesses and residents; scheduling testing with the City for bacteria testing; maintaining records; responding to public inquires; GPS data collection; entering utility asset data on the City’s Cartegraph System; reviewing contractor pay requests; tracking Project quantities and costs; providing project monitoring and document monitoring with digital photographs and daily observation reports; and providing a final report at the end of the Project.
Construction Phase Consultant Engineering Services
Staff recommends that Council authorize the Public Works Director to execute a contract with Flowers in the amount of $1,288,176 for construction management and inspection services for the Fiscal Year 2023 Water Main Replacement Project, and authorize $128,817 for potential extra services, for a total expenditure authority of $1,416,993.
Staff also recommends that Council authorize the Public Works Director to execute the Second Contract Amendment with Flowers, for construction management and inspection services for the Fiscal Year 2021B Water Main Replacement Project, Contract No. 28217, in the amount of $59,252, for a total expenditure authority of $438,287.
Flowers was selected as part of a Request for Proposals process that included multiple qualified firms. Selected consultants were added to an on-call list. Flowers was selected from the on-call list to support both projects.
Community Outreach
Prior to construction, City staff will send public outreach mailers. City News In Brief and Nextdoor social media posts are sent out ahead of construction to alert residents, homeowners, and businesses of the pending work. During construction, door hangers are placed for those directly impacted by the work.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL INFORMATION:
The following summarizes all estimated total Project costs:
Council Agenda Report
Construction Management Services for Water Main Replacement Projects [Agreement] November 7, 2023
ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT COST
FISCAL YEAR 2023 WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT PROJECT
Design (by Contract) – Stantec Consulting Inc. $807,209 Design (by City staff) $137,229
Design Subtotal $944,438
Estimated Construction Contract with Change Order Allowance $15,573,505 Estimated Construction Management/Inspection - Flowers $1,416,993 Estimated Environmental Monitoring – NV5 $34,999
Estimated Construction Costs by City Staff (including Outreach) $242,281 Estimated Cost of City Procured Materials (including Delivery) $709,200 Construction Subtotal $17,976,978
TOTAL PROJECT COST $18,921,416
There are sufficient expenditure appropriations in the Water Capital Fund Budget in Fiscal Year 2024 to fund the contract, including extra services, and the contract amendment with Flowers.
A copy of the contracts may be requested from the Public Works Department for public review by contacting [email protected].
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
A Notice of Exemption was prepared for this Project and posted on April 20, 2023. The Project was determined to be exempt under the following two California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines:
1. Categorical Exemption, State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(a), (b), and (d) Class 1, Existing Facilities. The Project meets this section’s requirements as the Project consists of the repair and maintenance of existing water main facilities used to provide water to the City. The repair and maintenance activities do not result in an increase in capacity. The restoration of the deteriorated facilities will ensure a safe and steady supply of potable water to the community.
2. Categorical Exemption, State CEQA Guidelines Section 15302 (c) Class 2, Replacement or Reconstruction. The Project meets this section’s requirements as the Project involves replacing existing water facilities in the same locations and will not result in an expansion of capacity.
A Coastal Exemption Application is in progress and will be obtained prior to construction.
Council Agenda Report
Construction Management Services for Water Main Replacement Projects [Agreement] November 7, 2023
WATER COMMISSION
This item was presented to the Water Commission at its meeting on October 19, 2023, and the Commission voted 4:0:1 in support of staff’s recommendations.
PREPARED BY: Brian D’Amour, P.E., City Engineer/AS/VF/rl SUBMITTED BY: Clifford M. Maurer, P.E., Public Works Director APPROVED BY: City Administrator’s Office
CITY OF SANTA BARBARA
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2023
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: Engineering and Downtown Team Divisions, Public Works Department SUBJECT: Design Services for the Milpas Street Crosswalk Safety and Sidewalk Improvements Project [Agreement]
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council authorize the Public Works Director to execute a City Professional Services contract with GHD Inc. in the amount of $1,524,277 for design services of the Milpas Street Crosswalk Safety and Sidewalk Improvements Project, and authorize $152,428 for potential extra services, for a total expenditure authority of $1,676,705.
DISCUSSION:
Background
Milpas Street is a busy arterial street in the Eastside neighborhood. There are five lanes of traffic carrying over 23,000 vehicles per day. The Highway 101 interchange on the southern end of Milpas Street contributes to the high traffic volume. Milpas Street ranks second for the highest number of pedestrian-involved collisions in the City of Santa Barbara (City). Council designated Milpas Street as a Vision Zero Priority Corridor, aiming to eliminate severe injuries and fatalities along this corridor.
From 2019-2020, the City went to the Eastside on various occasions to receive feedback on the walking experience on Milpas and worked with the community to develop a project scope addressing their concerns and the collision pattern history. In 2020, Council directed staff to apply for a grant from the State's Active Transportation Program (ATP) for corridor-wide safety enhancements, and the City was unsuccessful.
California Transportation Commission Program staff advised making the grant application more competitive, so City staff revised the project to focus on safety enhancements at intersections. The community supported the revised scope in 2022 and Council again directed staff to apply for an ATP grant. In 2022, the ATP grant was successfully awarded for the design and construction of the Milpas Street Crosswalk Safety and Sidewalk Improvements Project (Project). Staff will continue to explore additional grant opportunities for larger corridor-wide improvements, which are anticipated to cost an additional $20 million.
Agenda Item No. 15
File Code No. 530.04
Council Agenda Report
Design Services for the Milpas Street Crosswalk Safety and Sidewalk Improvements Project [Agreement]
November 7, 2023
The Project creates a safe, comfortable corridor for residents with improved intersection sight lines, crossing enhancements and lighting, and widened sidewalks at street corners.
The Project is also paired with a Pavement Maintenance Project which includes grind and overlay, and significant sidewalk and accessibility repairs due to tree uplifts along Milpas from Hutash to Anapamu Streets. Many of the existing Ficus trees along Milpas Street have outgrown their planting area and encroach into the space required for pedestrian accessibility. As a result, tree removals are anticipated to be included in the Project scope.
Project Description
The Project includes the following enhancements:
New curb extensions at eight intersections;
High visibility crosswalks;
Additional street lighting;
Accessibility improvements between intersections;
Widened sidewalks at street corners and transit stops; Installation of leading pedestrian intervals at signalized intersections; Mast arm mounted rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs) at the Milpas and Yanonali Streets intersection;
Additional median refuge island and RRFBs at the Milpas and Ortega Streets intersection;
Three-foot-wide buffers added to the existing bike lanes between Cota and Canon Perdido Streets; and
Additional bicycle parking.
Design Phase Consultant Engineering Services
Staff recommends that Council authorize the Public Works Director to execute a contract with GHD Inc. (GHD) in the amount of $1,524,277 for design services and authorize $152,428 for potential extra services, for a total expenditure authority of $1,676,705. GHD is experienced in this type of work and was selected as part of a Request for Qualifications selection process that included a written statement of qualifications and interviews with two qualified firms.
Community Outreach
Community engagement along Milpas Street is documented in the 2006 Pedestrian Master Plan, the 2016 Bicycle Master Plan, and several project-specific engagements from 2019 to the present. In October 2023, City staff held a virtual webinar and an inperson meeting to review the Project scope timeline and receive additional feedback from the community. Additional community meetings will take place during the environmental/preliminary design phase and again prior to final design. Community meetings will continue to be both virtual and in person at accessible public facilities to maximize community participation.
Council Agenda Report
Design Services for the Milpas Street Crosswalk Safety and Sidewalk Improvements Project [Agreement]
November 7, 2023
BUDGET/FINANCIAL INFORMATION:
This Project is funded primarily by an ATP grant, with the City match funded by the Measure C Capital Fund. With the previously appropriated Measure C Capital Funds and the previously appropriated ATP grant funds, there are sufficient expenditure appropriations to cover the cost of this Project phase, including the proposed contract with GHD and extra services. Future appropriation recommendations will fund the remaining Project phases.
The following summarizes all Project design costs, construction contract funding, and other Project costs:
ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT COST
*Cents have been rounded to the nearest dollar in this table.
ATP
GRANT
CITY
SHARE
TOTAL
City Design Cost $0 $197,719 $197,719
Consultant Design Cost (GHD) $1,275,000 $302,281 $1,577,281 Design Subtotal $1,275,000 $500,000 $1,775,000
Construction Contract $4,461,219 $1,500,000 $5,961,219
Construction Change Order Allowance $1,192,243 $0 1,192,243 Construction Management (by City Staff) $210,000 $0 $210,000 Construction Management/Inspection (by
Consultant)
$757,114 $0 $757,114
Consultant Design Support (GHD) $99,424 $0 $99,424
Construction Subtotal $6,720,000 $1,500,000 $8,220,000
TOTAL PROJECT COST $7,995,000 $2,000,000 $9,995,000
A copy of the contract may be requested from the Public Works Department for public review by contacting [email protected].
SUSTAINABILITY IMPACT:
The Project will improve safety and accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists and will contribute to the City’s sustainability goals by encouraging more people to walk and bike, reducing energy consumption and air pollution. The Project is also consistent with the City’s Vision Zero Strategy.
Council Agenda Report
Design Services for the Milpas Street Crosswalk Safety and Sidewalk Improvements Project [Agreement]
November 7, 2023
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
This Project requires California Environmental Quality Act compliance and environmental permitting. Environmental review and documentation will be conducted during the design phase and finalized upon award of the Project’s construction contract. The required environmental permits will be secured prior to the commencement of construction.
ATTACHMENT: Project Location Map
PREPARED BY: Brian D’Amour, P.E., City Engineer/ANF/sk
Brian Bosse, Public Works Manager/JWG
SUBMITTED BY: Clifford M. Maurer, P.E., Public Works Director APPROVED BY: City Administrator’s Office
192
154
STATE STREET
LAS POSITAS
FOOTHILL ROAD
CANON PERDIDO STREET
STATE STREET
CLIFF DRIVE
CABRILLO BOULEVARD
POSITAS LAS
MISSION STREET
GARDEN STREET MILPAS STREET
CASTILLO STREET
101
HALEY STREET QUINIENTOS STREET
ATTACHMENT
192 VICINITY MAP
NTS 192
144 Milpas Street
ROAD
101
101
Crosswalk Safety and Sidewalk Widening
Project Location
(crosswalk and accessibility improvements
from Canon Perdido Street to Quinientos
Street)
144
101
ROAD101
101
101
101
101
101
PROJECT MAP
SCALE: 1" = 3000'
PROJECT LIMITS
CITY LIMITS
SCHOOL
CITY OF SANTA BARBARA
Milpas Street: Crosswalk Safety and Sidewalk Widening Project
LOCATION MAP
CITY OF SANTA BARBARA
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2023
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: Treasury Division, Finance Department
SUBJECT: Approval of Transient Occupancy Tax and Cannabis Audit Services Agreement [Agreement]
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council authorize the Finance Director to execute an agreement with Hinderliter De Llamas & Associates (HdL) for Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) and Cannabis Audit Services for three years, at an amount not to exceed $276,200.
DISCUSSION:
Tourism is a major source of revenue for the City of Santa Barbara. The City collects approximately $30.0 Million annually in Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) and Tourism Business Improvement District (TBID) from approximately 68 hotels, motels, and inns (excluding short term rentals). TOT and TBID are self reported by operators. HdL’s audit shall ensure that all taxes reported and remitted to the City are in compliance with the City’s municipal code and ordinances.
Approximately 20 hotels, motels, and inns will be audited per year of the contract, resulting in all establishments being audited at least once during this 3-year contract period. Periods to be audited will be Fiscal Years (FY) 2021 through 2023.
The City has conducted individual TOT audits on hotels in prior years. Staff recommend implementing an on-going audit and monitoring program to ensure accurate and complete TOT and TBID remittances to ensure the City is able to maximize TOT revenues.
HdL will also complete an audit for cannabis businesses. Cannabis revenue is a newer revenue source and needs to be audited for its standards and accurately. The City has six permitted Cannabis businesses, with a combined tax revenue of $1.4 Million in FY2023.
HdL will audit all six City cannabis businesses concurrently. The review period will consist of the most recent 36 months (3 years).
Agenda Item No. 16
File Code No. 220.03
Council Agenda Report
Approval of Transient Occupancy Tax and Cannabis Audit Services Agreement [Agreement]
November 7, 2023
BUDGET/FINANCIAL INFORMATION:
The table below summarizes the cost of each audit over the 3-year term of the agreement, including a small contingency.
Cost Per Audit Number of Audits Total
TOT $2,150 per hotel 68 $146,200
Cannabis $20,000 per business 6 120,000
Contingency 10,000
Total $276,200
The Finance Department FY2024 adopted budget includes $180,000 of expenditure authority for this audit program, which is adequate to support at least the first year of audit services. Staff will plan to request additional expenditure appropriation in the FY2025 budget for the remaining funds needed.
As required in Santa Barbara Municipal Code Section 9.44.120, all commercial cannabis businesses must obtain a cannabis business permit and renew annually. As part of the renewal fee, each business contributes funds that partially covers the cost of a periodic financial audit on the electronic point of sale system for cannabis businesses. These fees have been collected since businesses have been allowed to operate and will be used to partially fund this audit program.
Staff is unable to forecast how much additional TOT and cannabis tax revenue may be collected on an on-going basis as a direct result of implementing this audit program. Any additional tax revenues collected will be communicated to the City Council and budgeted accordingly in future budget cycles.
A copy of the agreement may be requested from the Finance Department for public review. Please email at [email protected] to request a copy.
PREPARED BY: Lyndsay Maas, Assistant Finance Director
SUBMITTED BY: Keith DeMartini, Finance Director
APPROVED BY: City Administrator's Office
CITY OF SANTA BARBARA
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2023
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: City Administrator’s Office
SUBJECT: Funding Recommendations for Community Arts, Organizational Development, and Events and Festivals Cultural Arts Grants RECOMMENDATION:
That Council review and approve the City of Santa Barbara Arts Advisory Committee and Community Events and Festivals Committee grant funding recommendations for Fiscal Year 2024.
DISCUSSION:
In the Fiscal Year 2024 budget, Council authorized $245,175 for the City of Santa Barbara Cultural Arts grant programs. The three programs, Community Arts, Organizational Development, and Community Events & Festivals, support diverse nonprofit organizations that: provide free arts access for underserved communities, offer arts programs and services for residents and visitors, and create events and festivals that enhance economic and community vitality.
As part of the annual City-County Arts Services agreement, the City contracts the Office of Arts and Culture to administer the Cultural Arts grant programs and provide staff support for the Arts Advisory Committee and Community Events & Festivals Committee.
The Arts Advisory Committee reviews applications and makes award recommendations to Council for the Community Arts and Organizational Development grant program. The Community Events & Festivals Committee reviews applications and makes award recommendations to Council for the Community Events & Festivals grant program.
With Council approval, grant contracts will be executed for a January 1, 2024 - December 31, 2024 program cycle. The Attachment includes the full list of Fiscal Year 2024 grant applicants, project descriptions and award recommendations.
Agenda Item No. 17
File Code No. 150.04
Council Agenda Report
Funding Recommendations for Community Arts, Organizational Development, and Events and Festivals Cultural Arts Grants
November 7, 2023
City of Santa Barbara Fiscal Year 2024 Cultural Arts Grant Program Summary Community Events & Festivals
The Community Events & Festivals Committee met on October 9 and 10, 2023 to review applications and interview applicants for the Events & Festivals Grant program. On October 18, 2023, the Community Events & Festivals Committee voted on recommendations to send to City Council. The base amount allocated by the City for this program was $85,250 in Fiscal Year 2024. This was supplemented with $3,000 in returned funding from an uncompleted Fiscal Year 2023 grant award, making the total amount available $88,250.
For Fiscal Year 2024, a total of $420,810 was requested by 33 nonprofit organizations to host and produce events and festivals. Groups applying for Community Events & Festivals grants are not eligible to apply for Community Arts or Organizational Development grants
Community Arts
The Community Arts grant panel met on October 4, 2023, to review applications and determine preliminary disbursement recommendations to present to the City Arts Advisory Committee. At the October 19, 2023, City Arts Advisory Committee meeting, the Committee voted on award recommendations for City Council review and approval. The base amount allocated by the City for this program in Fiscal Year 2024 was $38,975.
For Fiscal Year 2024, a total of $142,373 of funding support was requested by 25 nonprofit organizations. Groups applying for Community Arts grants are not eligible to apply for Organizational Development or Community Events & Festivals grants.
Organizational Development
The Organizational Development grant panel met on October 6, 2023, and reviewed all applications submitted to the Organizational Development Grant Program. The subcommittee’s recommendations were reviewed and approved on October 19, 2023, by the City Arts Advisory Committee. The base amount allocated by the City for this program in Fiscal Year 2024 was $120,950.
For Fiscal Year 2024, a total of $356,194 of funding support was requested by 21 nonprofit organizations. Groups applying for Organizational Development grants are not eligible to apply for Community Arts or Community Events & Festivals grants.
Council Agenda Report
Funding Recommendations for Community Arts, Organizational Development, and Events and Festivals Cultural Arts Grants
November 7, 2023
BUDGET/ FINANCIAL INFORMATION:
The City’s Fiscal Year 2024 adopted budget appropriated $245,175 for these grants.
Grant Categories Fiscal Year 2024
Community Events and Festivals Grants $ 85,250
Organizational Development Grants 120,950
Community Arts Grants 38,975
Total $ 245,175
The attachment contains a detailed report that itemizes all grant funding award recommendations to be administered through the City-County Arts Services contract.
ATTACHMENT: Community Cultural Arts Grant Funding Recommendations PREPARED BY: Sarah York Rubin, Exec. Director of County Office of Arts & Culture Hannah Rubalcava, Grants & Contracts Manager, Office of Arts & Culture
Brandon Beaudette, Senior Assistant to the City Administrator SUBMITTED BY: Rebecca Bjork, City Administrator
APPROVED BY: City Administrator's Office
ATTACHMENT
City of Santa Barbara 2023-2024 Cultural Arts Grants Award Recommendations
COMMUNITY EVENTS & FESTIVALS GRANT
The City of Santa Barbara Community Events & Festivals Re-Granting Program (EF) grants funds to local organizations for promotional development. The applicants to this program demonstrate the ability to provide events and festivals which contribute to the cultural vitality and promotion of the City of Santa Barbara. The City Community Events & Festivals Committee reviews grant applications and provides recommendations.
The maximum amount of a Community Events and Festivals Grant is $15,000 for new applicants and $10,000 for applicants who have received funding for more than three years.
COMMUNITY EVENTS AND FESTIVALS GRANT GENERAL INFORMATION Total EF Grant Funding Requested: $420,810
Total EF Grant Funding Available: $88,250
Total Number of Applicants: 33
Number of Applicants Recommended for Funding: 9
GRANT APPLICANTS, DESCRIPTIONS, AND AWARD AMOUNT RECOMMENDATIONS (Grant descriptions provided below are submitted by the applicants as part of their grant application.)
GRANT APPLICATIONS RECOMMENDED FOR FUNDING
Grace Fisher Foundation
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “The Grace Fisher Foundation is pleased to continue its 6th annual “A Winter Music Showcase”. We will provide an evening of music and Holiday spirit, celebrating people of all abilities. Many of Santa Barbara’s finest local musical artists have joined us in this endeavor. The set list for 2023 will include music from the Santa Barbara Folk Orchestra, Jackson Gillies, Chris Fossek, original music by Grace Fisher and more. The show will feature a new "Sing, Sign Dance" group from GFF classes.” Amount Requested: $15,000
Grant Award: $10,000
ATTACHMENT
2 Lobero Theatre Foundation
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Lobero LIVE is a series of 30+ exciting musical events at the historic Lobero Theatre with some of the best in blues, folk, and jazz. In 2024, we will celebrate the 100th anniversary of the current building designed by George Washington Smith and Lutah Maria Riggs in 1924. The series will benefit Santa Barbara by bringing shows that would normally be presented only in large cities like Los Angeles or San Francisco. Especially this year, Lobero LIVE will be known for big names in a small room.” Amount Requested: $10,000
Grant Award: $10,000
Mental Wellness Center
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “This request is for funding to assist with the production of Mental Wellness Center's 28th annual Artful Minds art fair, which will:
1. Showcase the artistic capabilities of individuals contending with mental illness who utilize creativity as part of their therapeutic process;
2. Enhance the economic impact of an art event on businesses located on or near the Cabrillo Boulevard boardwalk;
3. Continued engagement of past audiences and growth of new audiences through enhanced promotional outreach.”
Amount Requested: $15,000
Grant Award: $10,000
Pacific Pride Foundation ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Pacific Pride Foundation (PPF) has produced the Pacific Pride Festival each summer in Santa Barbara since the 1990s. The annual festival features live entertainment, exhibitors and nonprofits, local food, family-friendly activities, and affirming resources. We reach around 3,500 people from the Central and South Coast at this event each year.”
Amount Requested: $10,000
Grant Award: $10,000
Resilience Institute Program
ATTACHMENT
3 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Historically, Santa Barbara held the tradition of hosting Latino lead community festivals in the downtown corridor. 20 yrs have passed since these events took place, until now. the 2023 Cinco de Mayo festival was a success and is intended to grow in 2024 to the next scale in order to phase in and return these traditional events that supported our economy. Your partnership is key to our success in 2024.” Amount Requested: $15,000
Grant Award: $7,550
Santa Barbara Culinary Experience (Fiscal Sponsor: Santa Barbara Foundation) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “The purpose of the Santa Barbara Culinary Experience, in partnership with The Julia Child Foundation for Gastronomy and the Culinary Arts, is to shine a light on our local culinary, hospitality, tourism, artisan, and small business communities. Through the SBCE’s partnership with the Foundation, a portion of the proceeds from the Taste of Santa Barbara is used to make grants to local organizations making a difference in Santa Barbara County’s food system.”
Amount Requested: $15,000
Grant Award: $12,500
Santa Barbara Historical Museum
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “This grant would help fund the Santa Barbara Historical Museum’s 100 Years of Fiesta exhibition, chronicling a century of our community’s largest civic celebration, and corresponding public events.” Amount Requested: $10,000
Grant Award: $8,200
Santa Barbara Revels
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “This is our 16th year in Santa Barbara. We've created a full calendar of events including: a Pub Sing in March for Spring Equinox; a free May Day program; a Fall Equinox Concert; a Harbor Sing! in October, and performances of "The Revels" in mid-December. All our programming involves music, dance, story-telling, and customs from various countries and centuries. Santa Barbara audiences love how we bring tradition to their lives and help them make new traditions through their experiences with us.” Amount Requested: $10,000
Grant Award: $10,000
The Brazilian Cultural Arts Center of Santa Barbara
ATTACHMENT
4 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Brazilian Day Santa Barbara is quickly becoming the most anticipated shoulder season cultural event in Santa Barbara. Brazilian Day Celebrations throughout the nation attract hundreds of thousands of spectators to celebrate the vibrant culture of Brazil. BCACSB put Santa Barbara on the map of tourist destinations for Brazilian Day Festivals. Festivities include live bands featuring world renowned artists from Brazil, local artists, dance performances, kids fun zone, local vendors, and more.” Amount Requested: $15,000
Grant Award: $10,000
GRANT APPLICATIONS NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FUNDING
Alexandra King (Fiscal Sponsor: Performance Zone Inc dba The Field) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Seraglio (www.seraglioballet.com) is a love story, a three-act folkloric ballet performed in Greek and Turkish dance. We are in production reviving the ballet after its initial premier in 1989-1990, and will present it at the Arlington Theater on Saturday, March 2, 2024. Our fiscal sponsor is The Field, a not-for-profit, tax-exempt, 501(c)(3) organization that has been serving performing artists and companies in New York City and beyond since 1986.”
Amount Requested: $15,000
Grant Award: $0
ARTS District of Santa Barbara (Fiscal Sponsor: SB Center for the Performing Arts/Granada Theatre) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “To support local retail businesses during holiday shopping time, we intend to sponsor a holiday market in December 2024 on either the 1200 or 1300 blocks of State Street” Amount Requested: $15,000
Grant Award: $0
Deepwater Diving Monument (Fiscal Sponsor: Santa Barbara Maritime Museum) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “This is an all volunteer project to design, sculpt, construct and gift a bronze public art sculpture in the Santa Barbara Harbor to promote the City of Santa Barbara as the International Birthplace of Deepwater Diving. This began in our Harbor during the 1960s. Historians have long recognized our City in this regard as local abalone
ATTACHMENT
5 divers developed the technology, equipment and training that rapidly spread worldwide. The project has received approvals from Arts Advisory, Waterfront and ABR.” Amount Requested: $15,000
Grant Award: $0
Ensemble Theatre Company
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Ensemble Theatre Company (ETC) is respectfully requesting support to promote its 2023/24 performance season, which will run from October 2023-June 2024. ETC’s annual season of five productions features groundbreaking plays and inventive interpretations of the classics, which showcase the artistry of top actors, directors, and designers and engage audiences with entertaining, compelling, and thought-provoking theatrical productions.”
Amount Requested: $10,000
Grant Award: $0
Friends of State Street
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Our event offers an intimate glimpse into the tales, obstacles and triumphs of our cherished landmarks.
Original art posters, crafted by a local artist, will represent each venue in a 1930's poster style format depicting the venue as it looks today. Alongside each poster will be their curated history. The posters and history will form the heart of this traveling exhibit to engage every corner of the Santa Barbara community to enjoy our history through visual storytelling.”
Amount Requested: $15,000
Grant Award: $0
Healing Justice Santa Barbara
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “During Black History Month 2024, Healing Justice SB will host a community-wide free celebration of Black art, culture, and History. The festival, Black is Beautiful, will showcase local Black artists and cultural bearers. There will be live performances by Black artists as well as visual art by local Black artists displayed at the event.” Amount Requested: $10,000
Grant Award: $0
ATTACHMENT
6 Hula Anyone
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “The Santa Barbara Polynesian Festival 2024, scheduled for October 2024, will be a transformative cultural event designed to celebrate and promote Polynesian heritage in our community, hosted in the historic Presidio district.
Supported by the decades of experience and connections Angelita Eller and the Hula Anyone organization bring to the table, this festival will feature a diverse array of traditional music, dance, artisan crafts, authentic culinary experiences, and educational workshops.”
Amount Requested: $15,000
Grant Award: $0
Marti Correa de Garcia (Fiscal Sponsor: Santa Barbara/Puerto Vallarta Sister City Committee) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “This family communty event includes fun for the entire family, including the beloved family dog. The one-day event features old fashion family games & races, food, music and dance performances and a dog agility course and K-9 demonstrations. It will culminate with a dog & kids costume parades and contest.” Amount Requested: $10,000
Grant Award: $0
Music Academy of the West
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “The Music Academy of the West (The Academy) requests $10,000 to support our 77th annual Summer School and Festival. The Santa Barbara community and passionate classical music enthusiasts from around the region, and nationally, look forward every year to the Academy’s signature series of 170+ performances, masterclasses, and special events. As in years past, this season will positively enhance the cultural and economic vitality of our local community.”
Amount Requested: $10,000
Grant Award: $0
Noon Concerts at Trinity (Fiscal Sponsor: Trinity Church) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Noon Concerts at Trinity Santa Barbara is a chamber music series offering free diverse concerts to the downtown Santa Barbara community.”
Amount Requested: $15,000
Grant Award: $0
ATTACHMENT
7 Project Pit
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Movies & Music is a free family friendly outdoor event. Attendees will immerse themselves in a euphoric ambiance as live music fills the air, setting the stage for an unforgettable cinematic experience. Guest will relax on complimentary cozy mats, savor delectable movie snacks, and be delighted by the charming decorations that complete this immersive fusion of music and film.” Amount Requested: $12,000
Grant Award: $0
Santa Barbara Center for the Performing Arts
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “The Granada Theatre respectfully seeks funding for costs associated with our Centennial Festival Weekend, promoting the cultural and artistic vibrancy of the Santa Barbara Community.” Amount Requested: $15,000
Grant Award: $0
Santa Barbara Choral Society
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “The Choral Society seeks to inspire local youth through the choral arts by inviting them to participate in the Hallelujah Project at the Lobero. This year, 30 students from the Music Academy Sing! program will join us on stage, and will be given the opportunity to sing with a live orchestra to a sold-out house. This year, kids in the audience will receive an activities packet to engage them in the concert experience. SBCS provides over 200 free tickets to ensure arts accessibility to all.”
Amount Requested: $15,000
Grant Award: $0
Santa Barbara Festival Ballet ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “SB Festival Ballet will present the 48th production of Nutcracker at the Arlington on December 9 and 10, 2023. The cast includes internationally recognized guest artists, dance students from throughout Santa Barbara including UCSB and City college and contracts a full orchestra under the direection of conductor Elise Unruh. Our Outreach plan includes the Friends of Clara program whereby families with limited resources are provided with subsidized tickets sponsored by businesses and individuals”
ATTACHMENT
8 Amount Requested: $10,000
Grant Award: $0
Santa Barbara Museum of Art
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Organized by SBMA, this exhibition recreates the landmark 1965 show curated by critic and art historian Michael Fried. It features the original show's color-field painters (Jules Olitski, Kenneth Noland, and Frank Stella) complemented by later photography, sculpture, and a video by artists who continue to engage with color-field issues. Through 62 works borrowed from 27 lenders, audiences will see continuity between the most ambitious art of the 1960s and the values pursued in high modernism.” Amount Requested: $10,000
Grant Award: N/A. This application was not eligible for funding.
Santa Barbara Police Activities League
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “The Santa Barbara Police Activities League (PAL) requests a $12,000 grant to support our 2024 Trunk or Treat event, which brings together local law enforcement and community agencies with children and families. The free, youth-led event offers a safe venue for trick-or-treating, while allowing many community agencies to connect with local families, share resources and information, and build positive connections.” Amount Requested: $12,000
Grant Award: $0
Santa Barbara Public Library Foundation
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “The Santa Barbara Public Library is introducing a brand-new Community Arts Festival to celebrate the opening of the Michael Towbes Library Plaza! In Spring 2024, we invite the community to gather on the new Library Plaza for a Ribbon-Cutting event. The Library’s nonprofit partners and neighboring businesses will join in the festivities through performances, food, books, and connections with an estimated 4,000 people visiting the heart of Santa Barbara’s Cultural Arts District throughout the day.” Amount Requested: $15,000
Grant Award: $0
ATTACHMENT
9 Santa Barbara Running Association
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “The Santa Barbara Running Association ("SBRA") is requesting funds to coordinate our annual New Years' Day Resolution 5k/10k Run which help funds our youth running programs. SBRA provides critical support to underserved youth in the Santa Barbara community through running programs that would not be readily available to them without our support.”
Amount Requested: $6,810
Grant Award: $0
Santa Barbara Symphony Orchestra Association
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “The Symphony is requesting a $10,000 grant to promote its 2023-24 concert season from October 2023-May 2024, including seven concert weekends and our ever popular New Years Eve concert. As well as six Youth Ensemble concerts from November 2023-May 2024. This season showcases a diverse talent base and repertoire that will create a fantastic symphonic journey from classical traditions to genre-defying guest performers to accessible fan favorites, culminating in a season that is for everyone!” Amount Requested: $10,000
Grant Award: $0
Santa Barbara Wildlife Care Network
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Santa Barbara Wildlife Care Network (SBWCN) requests a $15,000 grant to support the Wildlife Film Festival, a half-day event to be held at a local theater in Santa Barbara. The festival will feature short films, wildlife shorts, a reception, interactive opportunities for attendees, and an award ceremony. The festival will raise awareness about local wildlife species, educate the public on how to live in harmony with wildlife, and bring together a community of conservation-minded individuals.” Amount Requested: $15,000
Grant Award: $0
Santa Barbara Zoological Foundation
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “ZooLights is a two-month long, immersive light festival featuring thousands of handcrafted silk-covered lanterns at the Santa Barbara Zoo (the Zoo).”
Amount Requested: $15,000
Grant Award: $0
ATTACHMENT
10 Illuminate Film Festival - Téana David (Fiscal Sponsor: Creative Visions) ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Dedicated to sharing inspiring stories that propel humanity forward, ILLUMINATE Film Festival offers an enriching destination event for meaning-seeking audiences while serving as a global hub for emerging filmmakers who seek to affect positive change. Our curation pillars are consciousness, environment, health, social action, and arts & culture. After nine years in Sedona, ILLUMINATE is moving to Santa Barbara, enhancing the city's cultural vibrancy under its new SB-based director, Téana David.” Amount Requested: $15,000
Grant Award: $0
UCSB Arts & Lectures
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Arts & Lectures (A&L) is the premiere multidisciplinary presenting program between Los Angeles and San Francisco. Our 2023-24 season includes performances, lectures, and special events to engage thousands of local and traveling patrons with world-class events that help define Santa Barbara as a culturally vibrant community. A&L helps make Santa Barbara a destination. Many of A&L patrons (25%-30%) have home addresses from outside the area and visit our City to participate.” Amount Requested: $10,000
Grant Award: $0
Westmont College
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “In February 2024, the Westmont College Theatre department will host a Shakespeare Mini-Conference & Festival as part of its presentation of Romeo & Juliet at the Community Arts Workshop (CAW). This event will provide distinctive artistic experiences for Westmont and the Santa Barbara community through collaborations with local and international theatre artists, offering the opportunity to develop personal, social, and artistic skills essential for becoming effective theatre makers.” Amount Requested: $15,000
Grant Award: $0
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT GRANT
The City of Santa Barbara’s Organizational Development (OD) grant program funds local arts organizations to improve organizational sustainability, capacity, and performance, enhance audience reach, and increase earned income. Grants support operational, marketing, and promotional expenses. Applicants must indicate
ATTACHMENT
11 the impact that grant funds will have on audience development and earned income. The City Arts Advisory Committee reviews grant applications and provides recommendations.
The maximum amount of an Organizational Development grant is $18,000.
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT GRANT GENERAL INFORMATION
Total OD Grant Funding Requested: $356,194
Total OD Grant Funding Available: $120,950
Total Number of Applicants: 21
Number of Applicants Recommended for Funding: 11
GRANT APPLICANTS, DESCRIPTIONS, AND AWARD AMOUNT RECOMMENDATIONS (Grant descriptions provided below are submitted by the applicants as part of their grant application.)
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT GRANT APPLICATIONS RECOMMENDED FOR FUNDING ARTSPACE INC DBA Center Stage Theater
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Produce 2 events during 2024 that support underrepresented artists: a Queer theater and dance festival in mid-September and a Latinx event in the late fall, conduct an accessibility update for our website and continue to develop and expand our marketing plan. Due to a variety of unanticipated issues these events that were planned for 2023 were replaced by alternative programming highlighting queer and BIPOC artists, and we are now excited to bring them back for 2024.”
Amount Requested: $18,000
Recommended Grant Award: $14,500
Boxtales Theatre Company
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Boxtales Theatre Company is seeking funding to support the work of our Booking/Administrative Assistant as they implement specific action items of Boxtales’ 2024 strategic plan. This support will strengthen our organizational sustainability as we focus on enhancing advertising/marketing, increasing earned revenue, building relationships, and expanding the reach of our arts education performances and programs, including a Boxtales 30-year Anniversary Theatre Festival.”
Amount Requested: $18,000
Recommended Grant Award: $12,500
ATTACHMENT
12 Camerata Pacifica
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Camerata Pacifica seeks funding for strategic social media marketing in Santa Barbara. The organization has made significant progress rebounding from the pandemic and is capitalizing on a lead generation campaign tested in 2022-23 that results in new customers."
Amount Requested: $18,000
Recommended Grant Award: $12,500
Everybody Dance Now! (Creative Netwerk)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Creative Netwerk will invest in collaboration between its Exec. Director, Creative Director, Operations Manager, Social Media Manager, and Santa Barbara Program Manager to develop a year-round marketing plan: with newsletters/program updates; social media content centering the voices and talents of CN teaching artists and the impacts of programming; PR/media relations strategy; professional photo/video; outreach tools including partnership dev. brochures and a volunteer recruitment toolkit.” Amount Requested: $18,000
Recommended Grant Award: $6,000
Museum of Contemporary Art, Santa Barbara ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “With the Organization Development grant, Museum of Contemporary Art Santa Barbara (MCASB) will work on strategic board development to ready the museum for structural change by adopting such tools as creating an accountability statement, centering systematically harmed and under resourced audience voices, engaging in the labor of personal unlearning and learning, deconstructing whiteness and patriarchy, and demonstrating transparency.”
Amount Requested: $18,000
Recommended Grant Award: $18,000
Notes for Notes
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Notes for Notes® is seeking $18,000 to assist in supporting ongoing programming and outreach efforts at the N4N Santa Barbara Studios. N4N Producers play a pivotal role in shaping the experience and success of each youth that enters our Studios. Santa Barbara Producers are local musicians, who bring an array of skills and talents to our organization. Hiring local artists not only contributes to the vitality of Santa Barbara's artistic scene but also bolsters the local economy.”
ATTACHMENT
13 Amount Requested: $18,000
Recommended Grant Award: $14,500
Out of the Box Theatre
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Out of the Box Theatre Company is a non-profit theatre company that has been a central part of Santa Barbara's theatre scene since 2010, bringing community-driven musical theatre to the local stage. Covid-19 and our resulting hiatus has negatively influenced our outreach and our audiences. We must adapt to the changes in our community in order to continue our work. We have designed a marketing plan for our upcoming season to assist us in this process and are in need of community support.” Amount Requested: $16,000
Recommended Grant Award: $6,000
Santa Barbara Arts Collaborative
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “The Santa Barbara Arts Collaborative at the CAW has advanced its strategic plan to include new programming that will enhance our ability to serve and support the artist culture and community of Santa Barbara. We are seeking support for the staff needed to develop these programs. We have a full-time Executive Director, a Programs and Development Fund Officer at 75% time, and we will add a Membership and Site Manager for events and the ArtZone App at 25% time.”
Amount Requested: $18,000
Recommended Grant Award: $12,500
SB Community Youth Performing Arts Center
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “The Luke is seeking a $18,000 grant for our Manager Director’s salary as she effectuates the goals and objectives of its 2023 Strategic Plan. This will enable The Luke to secure earned income, enhance audience reach, and to implement our marketing plan and strategic plan for long-term sustainability. The Managing Director critically creates collaborations with local arts organizations, secures rentals, and oversees operations, marketing, and development.”
Amount Requested: $18,000
Recommended Grant Award: $5,950
ATTACHMENT
14 Slingshot / Alpha Art Studio
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Slingshot / Alpha Art Studio supports the creative practice and professional visibility of artists with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) in Santa Barbara County.
This application outlines needed resources to complete the studio's catalogue and corresponding sales inventory to create comprehensive access to the studio’s extensive artwork inventory for the purposes of curation, promotion, and earned income opportunities.”
Amount Requested: $15,207.77
Recommended Grant Award: $6,000
State Street Ballet
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “After 29 years of leadership under retiring Founding Director Rodney Gustafson, State Street Ballet will welcome long-time employees Megan Philipp and Cecily MacDougall into the roles of Artistic Director and Executive Director (respectively). Support is needed as the new leadership team works with the board of directors to design a strategic plan for the next era of State Street Ballet, which will address improvements in development and marketing strategy, as well as organizational efficiency.” Amount Requested: $18,000
Recommended Grant Award: $12,500
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT GRANT APPLICATIONS NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FUNDING Amplify Arts Project (formerly Girls Rock SB)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “A part-time administrative associate + registrar would free up substantial time and energy from key leadership whose primary roles are to increase income, namely earned income from 2 fee-based programs.
This need is identified in our current strategic plan; in fact, per the plan this is the most timely opportunity to secure the long-term admin + registrar role because we’re poised to 100% fund the role ourselves beginning in late 2024, according to 2023 numbers and conservative 2024 projections.” Amount Requested: $18,000
Recommended Grant Award: $0
ATTACHMENT
15 Arts Mentorship Program
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “The Arts Mentorship Program’s mission statement is to provide creative guidance, mentorship, and financial support to young and emerging performing artists in Santa Barbara County who wouldn’t otherwise have the opportunity.”
Amount Requested: $18,000
Recommended Grant Award: $0
Bookchurch.org
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Bookchurch.org is a non-religious, non-profit, led by a Publisher with access to thousands of books, both used and new through their professional network. This includes: 2000 brand new, bilingual children's books in Q4 2023 - earmarked for us by the printer. 10,000-20,000 leftover books from the PPP booksale that are destroyed each year after the sale.
Thousands of private donations which we pickup, curate and save. We have rented space and just need funding to expand.”
Amount Requested: $18,000
Recommended Grant Award: $0
Children's Creative Project ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Thank you for considering our request for a $18,000 Organizational Development grant to support Children’s Creative Project (CCP) in creating a 2024-2027 strategic plan.” Amount Requested: $18,000
Recommended Grant Award: N/A. This application was not eligible for funding.
Flamenco Arts Festival ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “The Flamenco Arts Festival’s Mission Ambassador Program is part of the strategic business plan to improve the strength, sustainability, and longevity of the organization. It involves raising awareness and support (both here and abroad) of our organization and mission-critical programs.” Amount Requested: $13,490
Recommended Grant Award: $0
ATTACHMENT
16 Santa Barbara Blues Society
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “This request is to fund renewed marketing groundwork for community awareness and engagement with the Santa Barbara Blues Society, to keep alive and thriving the rich cultural benefits of the blues music genre, historically rooted in African-American tradition, in Santa Barbara County.” Amount Requested: $18,000
Recommended Grant Award: $0
Santa Barbara Gay Men's Chorus
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “If funded, this grant will be used to enhance the production value of our concerts to increase revenue by driving greater awareness of our existence and increase demand for attendance at our performances. It will enable us to retain our current artistic director, increase the number of musicians in our ensemble, further maximize the operational efficiency of the organization, and build capacity to expand our unique contribution to Santa Barbara.”
Amount Requested: $18,000
Recommended Grant Award: $0
Santa Barbara Master Chorale
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Having made a remarkable comeback from the ravages of Covid, the Santa Barbara Master Chorale is seeking grants and other funding to create and implement a strategic plan for growth and development. Our objective is to enhance every aspect of the organization, from expanding membership and audiences in numbers and diversity to fund raising to providing high-quality performances. The goal is to remain a vital and sustainable part of Santa Barbara's performing arts community.”
Amount Requested: $15,000
Recommended Grant Award: $0
Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “The Museum’s frontline staff are facing a short-tempered public that is challenging our member and guest policies. We have 150 people on payroll, and over 300 volunteers. More than 25% of managers are new to their roles. With so many new staff, navigating disagreements has become more difficult. We are requesting funding to provide our staff with the tools needed to successfully deescalate conflict to arrive at mutually beneficial outcomes that provide visitors with a welcoming experience.”
ATTACHMENT
17 Amount Requested: $12,300
Recommended Grant Award: $0
Santa Barbara Music Club
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Santa Barbara Music Club wants to increase its audience outreach and membership base, both of which suffered as a result of the COVID lockdown. We plan to use special themed programming in conjunction with targeted marketing during our 55th Anniversary Season to accomplish this.” Amount Requested: $14,196
Recommended Grant Award: $0
COMMUNITY ARTS GRANT
Community Arts grants are designed to support specific projects by arts organizations or individual artists who have a partnership with an arts or educational non-profit organization. The program supports projects that increase accessibility to the arts for under-served communities. The City Arts Advisory Committee reviews grant applications and provides recommendations.
The maximum amount of a Community Arts Grant is $6,000.
COMMUNITY ARTS GRANT GENERAL INFORMATION
Total CA Grant Funding Requested: $142,373
Total CA Grant Funding Available: $38,975
Total Number of Applicants: 25
Number of Applicants Recommended for Funding: 7
GRANT APPLICANTS, DESCRIPTIONS, AND AWARD AMOUNT RECOMMENDATIONS (Grant descriptions provided below are submitted by the applicants as part of their grant application.)
GRANT APPLICATIONS RECOMMENDED FOR FUNDING
A Dancing Net Skirt Project (Fiscal Sponsor: Santa Barbara Dance Institute) APP-003065 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ATTACHMENT
18 “We are planning a six-week pilot initiative focused on crafting a Chumash back skirt for traditional regalia, while also delving into the knowledge of indigenous plants and cultural traditions. The program will conclude with an exhibition hosted at a local library or another community organization.” Amount Requested: $6,000
Recommended Grant Award: $6,000
Debra Herrick Artist (Fiscal Sponsor: Santa Barbara Arts Collaborative) APP-003060 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Arts writing and publishing is an essential component of a vibrant arts & culture ecology. Focused on the here and now and based in Santa Barbara, Lum Art Magazine is fully dedicated to the work created by local artists and/or curated for area galleries and museums. Since 2018, Lum’s magazines, website and community events have served as a critical catalyst for connections, advocacy and discovery around art in Santa Barbara." Amount Requested: $6,000
Recommended Grant Award: $6,000
Gateway Educational Services APP-003003 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “GES will host the second annual Black Youth Summit in August 2024 for students, parents, and community allies. The annual summit will be hosted with the following goals: empower Black youth; create a safe space for Black youth county wide to meet one another; offer nonviolence teaching/workshops; and offer cultural music and art.”
Amount Requested: $6,000
Recommended Grant Award: $5,500
Mission Poetry Series (Fiscal Sponsor: Santa Barbara Foundation) APP-003009 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “This funding will be used to provide the greater Santa Barbara community with access to award-winning multicultural poets and authors from Santa Barbara, throughout California, and across the country through a free biannual reading series in partnership with the Santa Barbara Public Library.” Amount Requested: $6,000
Recommended Grant Award: $5,500
Performing and Visual Arts Camp (Fiscal Sponsor: Santa Barbara Dance Institute) APP-002943 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ATTACHMENT
19 “The Performing and Visual Arts Camp (PVAC) is a 4-week summer arts camp for underprivileged youth (aged 7 to 18) from Santa Barbara to experience the creative process of musical production. Campers meet daily with artists and educators in dance, theater, music, and visual arts. They rehearse and give several performances of a musical theater production. They also perform in the Fiesta Children's Parade.” Amount Requested: $6,000
Recommended Grant Award: $6,000
Poetry In Motion (Fiscal Sponsor: Santa Barbara Arts Collaborative) APP-002968 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Adding value to each rider’s experience, SB Poetry in Motion (working name) places route-specific original poetry in MTD buses in both English and Spanish. Written by current and former City Poet Laureates, these poems will be printed and placed in MTD buses on routes throughout the city for National Poetry Month, April, 2024. Modeled after the National Poetry In Motion Program, we anticipate the same success.” Amount Requested: $6,000
Recommended Grant Award: $6,000
Jana Brody (Fiscal Sponsor: Santa Barbara Arts Collaborative) APP-002962 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “I would like to offer art classes at non profit senior living facilities; 6 classes and a exhibition date twice a year; once in spring and once in the fall. Teaching previously at for profit senior living and would like to offer the class to low income seniors as it has boosts creativity and confidence and art access should be available to all.”
Amount Requested: $4,550
Recommended Grant Award: $3,975
GRANT APPLICATIONS NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FUNDING
After-School Generative Art Program (Fiscal Sponsor: NewGrit) APP-003077 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “The After-School Generative Art Program is a six-week pilot workshop at Santa Barbara High School, targeting eight economically disadvantaged students with latent artistic and mathematical talents. We introduce them to generative art, a groundbreaking art form, blending art with mathematics, offering a unique creative outlet.
Prioritizing accessibility, this initiative seeks to enhance multidisciplinary education and empower underserved youths with innovative artistic expression.”
ATTACHMENT
20 Amount Requested: $6,000
Recommended Grant Award: N/A. This application was not eligible for funding.
AHA! APP-003010 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “AHA! seeks funding to support our after-school creative arts groups for teenagers in Santa Barbara in 2024.
AHA! will engage 85 at-risk teens through three different no-cost, once-weekly after-school arts groups - Sing It Out, EQ Vibes Music, and Creative Groups - teaching them to practice self-awareness and creative expression through different mediums of art while learning vital social emotional skills such as mindfulness, awareness, connection, empathy, and resilience.”
Amount Requested: $6,000
Recommended Grant Award: $0
Clay Studio APP-003054 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “We seek funding to establish a ceramic arts program to enrich the lives of underserved communities in Santa Barbara, CA. Our project involves renting space at the Community Arts Workshop in downtown Santa Barbara and employing local instructors to host free monthly workshops through partnerships with organizations and schools needing access to ceramic arts education. This initiative will foster creativity, community engagement, and personal growth, contributing to a more vibrant Santa Barbara.” Amount Requested: $6,000
Recommended Grant Award: $0
Couture Pattern Museum APP-003013 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Couture Pattern Museum's 2024 exhibition, "James Galanos' 100th Birthday Celebration," displays California designer James Galanos' vision of accessible haute couture. By showcasing home-sewn garments & patterns alongside Galanos' authentic pieces, we reveal fashion's inclusive nature. With a commitment to free access, we invite underserved communities to experience and connect with home sewing's legacy. This grant will amplify our efforts, ensuring patterns remains a shared cultural treasure.” Amount Requested: $6,000
Recommended Grant Award: $0
Darrell & Sally McNeill (dba Santa Barbara Black Culture House) APP-003037 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ATTACHMENT
21 “The Santa Barbara Black Culture House is a seasonal pop up space showcasing a dynamic range of events in celebration of the art, culture, and history of the Black/African Diaspora. It was founded in 2020 by coproducers Darrell M. McNeill and Sally A. Foxen-McNeill to serve, not just as a spotlight on the vibrancy of Black life and culture, but a reminder of a once-thriving Black community in the City of Santa Barbara and Santa Barbara County.”
Amount Requested: $6,000
Recommended Grant Award: N/A. This application was not eligible for funding.
Frank Harlow (Fiscal Sponsor: Santa Barbara Dance Institute) APP-003028 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Drumming for Rhythm and Timing provides a sequential experience of creative arts in music and dance that is essential for health and vitality. We are able to reach over 600 students in Santa Barbara County and beyond, with a program that runs 4-6 weeks for the deepest integrative learning with sensory motor timing. Based on Drum and Dance Culture of African Djembe, we learn rhythms and dances that make up the foundation of modern music, from Jazz, Hip-Hop, Rock and Soul to Cumbia and Reggae.” Amount Requested: $6,000
Recommended Grant Award: $0
Grace Fisher Foundation APP-002989 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “The Grace Fisher Foundation would like to offer free of charge 2 additional after-school classes for kids with disabilities at our facility, the "Inclusive Arts Clubhouse". Art and STEAM classes would be offered in 4-week sessions twice a week for six months for an hour each. The programs would include a Painting and Art and Science fusion class.”
Amount Requested: $6,000
Recommended Grant Award: N/A. This application was not eligible for funding.
Hillside House Inc. APP-003069 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Hillside will engage a local artist to teach residents visual meditation through art. She will teach residents how to use painting as a means to evoke calmness, decrease anxiety, and regulate behavior disorders.” Amount Requested: $6,000
Recommended Grant Award: $0
ATTACHMENT
22 Friendship Center Adult Day Services APP-003036 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “This proposal seeks funding for two community events that celebrate and honor Latino culture: a Dia de los Muertos celebration in November and a Posada in December. These events are designed to engage the Spanish-speaking community and foster cultural awareness while introducing Friendship Center's services.
With a focus on art and culture, these celebrations aim to strengthen community bonds and introduce our forthcoming Spanish-language program for adults living with cognitive decline.” Amount Requested: $6,000
Recommended Grant Award: $0
Local Theater Company APP-003066 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “40-75 Santa Barbara high school students involved in theater-making will participate in a professional workshop production of Local Theater Company’s one-woman show acts of faith by David Yee. The workshop includes a live performance, an artists meet and greet and a facilitated conversation with the actress, director, choreographer, and playwright on the intersection of arts, activism, and the professional process of new play development.”
Amount Requested: $6,000
Recommended Grant Award: $0
Roosevelt Elementary Educational Foundation APP-003021 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “To commemorate Roosevelt Elementary School’s centennial year, Roosevelt's PTO (REEF) has petitioned an artist to paint a mural on a prominent wall of the school building. The mural will honor the beautiful surroundings of Roosevelt Elementary and its diverse student body. It will also include a student participation element, allowing the students to design part of the mural which the artist will then incorporate into his design.”
Amount Requested: $6,000
Recommended Grant Award: $0
Santa Barbara Chamber Players APP-003053 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “The Santa Barbara Chamber Players will present three professional-quality orchestra concerts in the City of Santa Barbara in 2024, performed by talented musicians living in our community. The grant funds will be used to pay for the musicians' services who live in our community.”
ATTACHMENT
23 Amount Requested: $6,000
Recommended Grant Award: $0
Santa Barbara Maritime Museum APP-002999 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “The Face of Empowerment: Maritime Women of Santa Barbara exhibit will be a transformative, enlightening bilingual experience that challenges preconceived notions about gender roles in the maritime world and in general. By highlighting the achievements and contributions of women in this male-dominated field, the exhibit seeks to inspire women and girls to explore and excel in maritime and other non-traditional careers, while fostering a more artistically inclusive, diverse Santa Barbara County.” Amount Requested: $5,500
Recommended Grant Award: $0
Santa Barbara Sister Cities/SB/Puerto Vallarta APP-003040 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Santa Barbara Sister Cities Board invites youth from local communities to submit innovative, thoughtful and impactful creations that emphasize various aspects of this year's theme "Resilient Cities for Tomorrow's Climate," through various lenses such as art, poetry, photography, etc.” Amount Requested: $3,000
Recommended Grant Award: $0
South Coast Kids Create (Fiscal Sponsor: SB Arts Collaborative) APP-002994 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “An exhibition of art from Santa Barbara area public, parochial, and private schools in the Community Arts Workshop gallery space to showcase student art creations.” Amount Requested: $3,323
Recommended Grant Award: $0
St. Vincent's APP-002992 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “This project seeks to enable low-income seniors and individuals without permanent housing to access opportunities for creative artistic expression, foster a community centered around appreciation of art in its various forms, and acquire essential skills for meaningful participation in the production of art. The project will
ATTACHMENT
24 provide low-income seniors and houseless individuals with tutoring and art supplies that they otherwise would not be able to afford.”
Amount Requested: $6,000
Recommended Grant Award: $0
The Crafter's Library Foundation APP-003061 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “With this grant, we hope to create a Public Access arts and crafts program that will teach arts and crafts to a wide audience that may not have access to in person classes due to distance, finances or health concerns. The program will be professionally filmed and edited and run on local public access TV channels in partnership with TVSB as well as uploaded to YouTube.”
Amount Requested: $6,000
Recommended Grant Award: $0
The Turner Foundation APP-002972 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “The Turner Foundation owns two low-income housing complexes on Santa Barbara's Westside, each with a Learning Center to house our after-school education, enrichment programs, and 6-week-long Summer Program. The Music and Imagination Program offers 7 innovative programs: Youth Blues and Jazz Band, EQ Vibes, Music Production, Individual Music Instruction, Music Exploration, Cross Curricular Studies, and Music Excursion, which provide free music education and cultural enrichment to our students.” Amount Requested: $6,000
Recommended Grant Award: $0
CITY OF SANTA BARBARA
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2023
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: Environmental Services Division, Sustainability & Resilience Department
SUBJECT: Change Order for Purchase of Public Trash and Recycling Containers
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council authorize a change order to increase Purchase Order No. 32301596 by $326 with public trash and recycling container vendor, Forms & Surfaces, for a final not to exceed amount of $100,246.
DISCUSSION:
On March 14, 2023, Council authorized five consecutive yearly purchase orders (PO) with Forms & Surfaces to provide custom public trash and recycling containers. Council’s sole source purchase approval established an annual not to exceed amount of $100,000.
Environmental Services staff issued PO No. 32301596 to Forms & Surfaces for a total amount of $99,920.61 in order to purchase 35 Urban Renaissance style trash and recycling containers and 10 replacement lids. Unforeseen freight and delivery costs resulted in a purchase order final total of $100,246.86.
In order to comply with existing City purchasing rules, staff recommend that Council approve a change order to increase PO No. 32301596 by $326.25 for a final not to exceed amount of $100,246.86.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL INFORMATION:
There are sufficient expenditure appropriations in the Adopted Solid Waste Fund budget in Fiscal Year 2024 to fund the additional change order costs.
PREPARED BY: Daniela Rosales, Environmental Specialist II SUBMITTED BY: Alelia Parenteau, Sustainability & Resilience Director APPROVED BY: City Administrator's Office
Agenda Item No. 18
File Code No. 630.02
CITY OF SANTA BARBARA
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2023
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: Facilities Division, Airport Department
SUBJECT: Approval of Purchase Order to Hali-Brite, Inc. to Provide Runway Light Emitting Diode (LED) Retrofit Assemblies for Four (4) Runway Closure Markers
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council find it in the City's best interest to waive the formal bid process, as authorized by Municipal Code Section 4.52.060, and authorize the City General Services Manager to issue a Purchase Order to Hali-Brite, Inc. for providing LED retrofit assemblies for the four Runway Closure Markers at Santa Barbara Airport in an amount of $40,000.
DISCUSSION:
The Airport Department purchased four (4) Runway Closure Markers (also known as “Lighted X’s”) in 2012 through the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA’s) Airport Improvement Program (AIP). The purpose of Runway Closure Markers is to facilitate the safe closure of a runway during repair, maintenance, or construction in low visibility conditions such as nighttime. Following a competitive bid process, Hali-Brite, Inc. was selected to provide this equipment. The purchased Runway Closure Markers each use 20 incandescent halogen bulbs which burn out easily and require frequent replacement.
In September 2022 the California Energy Commission adopted new regulations limiting the types of lighting fixtures that may be sold in California with a prohibition on incandescent bulbs beginning in 2025. This regulation has resulted in a significant increase in the cost of halogen light fixtures.
In 2019, Hali-Brite, Inc announced the availability of a retrofit kit to their existing Runway Closure Marker product that would replace the incandescent fixture with Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs). This product eliminates the need for frequent bulb replacement, improving resilience and reducing maintenance costs.
Agenda Item No. 19
File Code No. 560.04
Council Agenda Report
Approval of Purchase Order to Hali-Brite, Inc. to Provide Runway Light Emitting Diode (LED) Retrofit Assemblies for Four (4) Runway Closure Markers November 7, 2023
Hali-Brite, Inc. is the sole manufacturer of LED retrofit assemblies for Hali-Britemanufactured Runway Closure Markers. Consistent with the recommendation in the manufacturer’s manual for the Runway Closure Markers, replacement parts have been ordered exclusively from Hali-Brite, Inc.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL INFORMATION:
Funds available for this purchase order are available in the Airport Operating Fund.
PREPARED BY: Andrew Bermond, Facilities Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Chris Hastert, Airport Director
APPROVED BY: City Administrator's Office
CITY OF SANTA BARBARA
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2023
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: Human Resources
SUBJECT: Approval of Benefit Plans Effective January 1, 2024 RECOMMENDATION: That Council:
A. Approve the renewal rates for the CalPERS Health Plans; Delta Dental Plans; Vision Service Plans; Employee Assistance Program (EAP); Health and Dependent Care Flexible Spending Accounts (FSA) benefits, and the carrier change from the Hartford Term Life and Disability Insurance Plans to the Standard Insurance Plans; and B. Authorize the City Administrator to execute any necessary contracts or any amendments to agreements or contracts.
DISCUSSION:
Each year the City obtains renewal rates and new benefits for the benefit plans covering its eligible active and retired employees. These benefit plans include Medical, Dental, Vision, Employee Assistance Program (EAP), Health Flexible Spending Accounts (FSA), Dependent Care Flexible Spending Accounts (DCA-FSA), Term Life Insurance, and Disability Insurance programs. Staff coordinated this renewal process with the CalPERS Health Program and with the City’s benefits broker, USI Insurance Services. The Employee Benefits Committee (comprised of members from the various employee groups), have been apprised of the renewal information and the renewal rates. Staff recommends that the City renew its agreements with all current medical, dental, vision, and EAP plan providers. However, staff recommends that the City change its Term Life and Disability Benefits provider from the Hartford Insurance to the Standard Insurance.
Staff also recommends the addition of a new Universal Life Insurance Policy with Longterm Care Rider benefit plan through the Trustmark insurance company.
Medical Plans
The City joined CalPERS Health Program effective January 1, 2020, replacing direct contracts with private insurers such Aetna and Kaiser. The CalPERS Health Program Agenda Item No. 20
File Code No. 430.06
Council Agenda Report
Approval of Benefit Plans Effective January 1, 2024
November 7, 2023
allows the City to offer employees and retirees a variety of health plans that best fit their health care needs.
Under the CalPERS Health Benefits Program, retirees under the age of 65 have the same health plan choices as active employees and at the same rates. Medicare-eligible retirees have several Medicare Supplement plan options.
Health premiums for Region 2, which includes Santa Barbara and Ventura County, overall will increase an average of 6.6% for the HMO plans and 14.17% for the PPO plans.
Premiums for the CalPERS health plans remain competitive as they are one of the largest purchaser of health insurance in the state. Staff conducted a comparison of health plan rates against a competitor of CalPERS. CalPERS health plan premiums, over a three year period average, was 10.54% less than the competitor.
Dental Plans
There are three dental plans available for employees to select from. They are the DeltaCare HMO plan, the Delta Dental DPO plan, and the Delta Dental Buy-Up DPO plan.
The Delta Dental PPO plans are similar to a medical PPO model plan in that they have a larger provider network, and it indemnifies the enrollees to select a provider of their choosing without a primary care dentist pre-designation requirement. The DeltaCare HMO plan is similar to a medical HMO model plan with a small provider network, and the enrollee is required to select a primary care dentist within Delta’s network. For 2024, Delta Dental, provider of the three dental plans for the City, will keep the dental rates unchanged. Rates for all three plans are displayed on Attachment 2.
Vision Plan
There are two vision plans available for employees to select from. They are VSP Basic and VSP Buy-Up Option. For 2024, VSP, provider of the two vision plans for the City, has agreed to enhance some of the vision benefits for both plans while keeping the rates the same.
Employee Assistance Program (EAP) – Employer Paid Fees
OptumHealth Behavioral Solutions provides outpatient psychological services for the City’s EAP. No increase is proposed for the 2024 EAP rate.
Basic Life/AD&D – Employer Paid Premiums
Staff recommend changing carriers from the Hartford Insurance Company to the Standard Insurance Company. Early in the year, staff requested assistance from the City’s benefits broker, USI Insurance Services, to request a Request for Proposals from carriers for the City’s life and disability insurance plans. Several carriers responded but the Standard Insurance returned with the most favorable proposal. The Standard’s proposal for the Basic Life/AD&D includes a rate reduction from the current $0.08 per $1,000 to $0.070 per $1,000 with and estimated savings of approximately $25,321 annually over the next Council Agenda Report
Approval of Benefit Plans Effective January 1, 2024
November 7, 2023
three years. In addition, the Standard Insurance will provide to the City a 3.5% premium subsidy to assist with the cost of the BCC benefits administration fee (see Benefits Administration Fee below).
Employee and Spouse Supplemental Life Insurance Plans – Employee Paid Premiums Staff recommends changing from the Hartford Insurance Company to the Standard Insurance Company for the voluntary employee-paid Supplemental Life Insurance plans offered to all benefited employees. The Standard Insurance Company will match and guarantee the current rates until 1/1/2027. In addition, the Standard Insurance will provide to the City a 3.5% premium subsidy to assist with the cost of the BCC benefits administration fee (see Benefits Administration Fee below).
Long-Term Disability Insurance Plan – Employer Paid Premiums except for Police & Fire Staff recommends changing from the Hartford Insurance Company to the Standard Insurance Company for the City-paid Long-Term Disability Insurance plan offered to all employees except for Police and Fire employees (who may have coverage through their association). The Standard’s proposal for the Long-Term Disability Insurance plan includes a rate reduction from the current $0.38 per $100 to $0.29 per $100 with an estimated savings of approximately $58,883 annually over the next three years.
Short-Term Disability Insurance Plan – Employee Paid Premiums Staff recommends changing from the Hartford Insurance Company to the Standard Insurance Company for the voluntary employee-paid Short Term Disability Insurance plans offered to Management, Police and Supervisors. The Standard Insurance Company will match and guarantee the current rates until 1/1/2027.
Universal Life Insurance Policy with a Rider to Provide Long-term Care (LTC) – Employee Paid Premiums
Staff recommends approval of the addition of a new Universal Life Insurance Policy with a Rider to Provide Long-term Care insurance plan. This is a voluntary and employeepaid universal life insurance policy that has a “build-up of cash value over time” and may also provide up to 4% of the universal life policy face amount for each month the covered member is qualified for long-term care for up to a total of 25 months. Moreover, the enrollee may carry this policy at the same premium rate and coverage amount even after separation of employment. Based on available information, Staff believes that the State of California may impose a mandatory long-term care program via a payroll tax deduction in the coming years. As such, the State may allow those who already have long-term care coverage such as the this proposed voluntary Universal Life Insurance Policy with a Rider to Provide Long-term Care insurance plan to opt out of the State’s mandatory LTC program.
Benefits Administration Fee
As of July 1, 2020, the City contracted with Benefit Coordinators Corporation (BCC) for online enrollment and electronic benefits administration. There is an administration fee Council Agenda Report
Approval of Benefit Plans Effective January 1, 2024
November 7, 2023
of $7.04 per enrolled employee per month. The current agreement with the Benefits Administration vendor keeps those fees unchanged until June 30, 2025.
Summary
Staff recommends that the CalPERS Health Benefits Program along with the Delta Dental DPO plans, DeltaCare HMO plan, VSP Vision plans, Optum EAP, and Discovery Benefits FSA plans be renewed for 2024 at the proposed premium rates. Staff also recommends changing the Life/AD&D and Disability Insurance carrier from the Hartford to the Standard.
Proposed 2024 monthly rates for the CalPERS Health Benefits Program for Active employees and Retirees are listed in Attachment 1.
Proposed 2024 monthly rates for Delta Dental PPO, Delta Dental Buy-up PPO plan, VSP Vision, VSP Buy-up plan, Optum EAP, Discovery Benefits FSA, Hartford Life/AD&D and Disability Insurance Plans are listed in Attachment 2.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL INFORMATION:
Established City contribution amounts and employee pre-tax payroll deductions will fund the 2024 Plan Year (calendar year) estimated overall benefit premium increase.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. 2024 Medical Plans Monthly Premium Rates
2. 2024 Dental, Vision, Employee Assistance Program, Flexible Accounts, Life and Disability Insurance Plan Monthly Premium Rates
PREPARED BY: Charlie Lam, Benefits Analyst II
SUBMITTED BY: Wendy Levy, Human Resources Director
APPROVED BY: City Administrator's Office
Attachment 1 2024
Basic Premiums
Single 2-Party Family Single 2-Party
Anthem Blue Cross Del Norte EPO $1,200.12 $2,400.24 $3,120.31 $1,314.27 $2,628.54 Anthem Blue Cross Select HMO $1,128.83 $2,257.66 $2,934.96 $1,138.86 $2,277.72 Anthem Blue Cross Traditional HMO $1,210.71 $2,421.42 $3,147.85 $1,339.70 $2,679.40 Blue Shield Access+ HMO $1,035.21 $2,070.42 $2,691.55 $1,076.84 $2,153.68 Blue Shield Access+EPO $1,035.21 $2,070.42 $2,691.55 $1,076.84 $2,153.68 Blue Shield Trio $888.94 $1,777.88 $2,311.24 $946.84 $1,893.68 Health Net SmartCare $1,174.50 $2,349.00 $3,053.70 N/A N/A Kaiser Permanente $913.74 $1,827.48 $2,375.72 $1,021.41 $2,042.82 Peace Officers Research Assoc. of CA (PORAC) $825.00 $1,875.00 $2,300.00 $931.00 $2,117.00 PERS Gold $825.61 $1,651.22 $2,146.59 $914.82 $1,829.64 PERS Platinum $1,200.12 $2,400.24 $3,120.31 $1,314.27 $2,628.54 UnitedHealthcare SignatureValue Alliance $1,044.07 $2,088.14 $2,714.58 $1,091.13 $2,182.26 UnitedHealthcare SignatureValue Harmony N/A N/A N/A $937.39 $1,874.78 Western Health Advantage $760.17 $1,520.34 $1,976.44 $807.23 $1,614.46 Anthem Blue Cross Select HMO $765.37 $1,530.74 $1,989.96 $807.71 $1,615.42 Anthem Blue Cross Traditional HMO $935.12 $1,870.24 $2,431.31 $1,034.38 $2,068.76 Blue Shield Access+ HMO $842.61 $1,685.22 $2,190.79 $869.14 $1,738.28 Blue Shield Access+ EPO $842.61 $1,685.22 $2,190.79 $869.14 $1,738.28 Blue Shield Trio $760.71 $1,521.42 $1,977.85 $810.24 $1,620.48 Health Net Salud y Más $698.91 $1,397.82 $1,817.17 $684.77 $1,369.54 Health Net SmartCare $834.65 $1,669.30 $2,170.09 N/A N/A Kaiser Permanente $756.21 $1,512.42 $1,966.15 $904.95 $1,809.90 Peace Officers Research Assoc. of CA (PORAC) $820.00 $1,650.00 $2,100.00 $926.00 $1,863.00 PERS Gold $695.93 $1,391.86 $1,809.42 $799.44 $1,598.88 PERS Platinum $1,014.80 $2,029.60 $2,638.48 $1,151.50 $2,303.00 Sharp Performance Plus $764.96 $1,529.92 $1,988.90 $833.24 $1,666.48 UnitedHealthcare SignatureValue Alliance $793.63 $1,587.26 $2,063.44 $837.88 $1,675.76 UnitedHealthcare SignatureValue Harmony $781.58 $1,563.16 $2,032.11 $792.65 $1,585.30 Anthem Blue Cross Select HMO $737.91 $1,475.82 $1,918.57 $841.13 $1,682.26 Anthem Blue Cross Traditional HMO $942.73 $1,885.46 $2,451.10 $1,012.67 $2,025.34 Blue Shield Access+ HMO $738.29 $1,476.58 $1,919.55 $756.65 $1,513.30 Blue Shield Trio $661.49 $1,322.98 $1,719.87 $704.69 $1,409.38 Health Net Salud y Más $606.34 $1,212.68 $1,576.48 $630.13 $1,260.26 Health Net SmartCare $755.29 $1,510.58 $1,963.75 N/A N/A Kaiser Permanente $754.64 $1,509.28 $1,962.06 $865.41 $1,730.82 Peace Officers Research Assoc. of CA (PORAC) $820.00 $1,600.00 $2,100.00 $926.00 $1,863.00 PERS Gold $680.37 $1,360.74 $1,768.96 $785.28 $1,570.56 PERS Platinum $992.59 $1,985.18 $2,580.73 $1,131.47 $2,262.94 UnitedHealthcare SignatureValue Alliance $790.46 $1,580.92 $2,055.20 $826.44 $1,652.88 UnitedHealthcare SignatureValue Harmony $713.55 $1,427.10 $1,855.23 $734.76 $1,469.52 Kaiser $1,155.43 $2,310.86 $3,004.12 $1,312.45 $2,624.90 Peace Officers Research Assoc. of CA (PORAC) $935.00 $1,899.00 $2,250.00 $1,056.00 $2,144.00 PERS Platinum $1,003.90 $2,007.80 $2,610.14 $1,146.86 $2,293.72 Plan Name Single 2-Party Family Single 2-Party
Anthem Medicare Preferred PPO $413.59 $827.00 $1,240.77 $405.83 $811.66 Anthem Medicare Preferred PPO with Dental/Vision $451.59 $865.00 $1,278.77 $443.83 $849.66 Blue Shield Medicare PPO $361.90 $723.80 $1,085.70 $392.68 $785.36 Out of State
Medicare Premium Rates - All Regions
2023 2024
Region 1 (Generally, all northern CA counties such as Monterey, Napa, San Francisco, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, etc.) Region 2 (Fresno, Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Kings, Madera, Orange, San Diego, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Tulare, and Ventura counties) Region 3 (Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino Counties) Attachment 1 2024
Blue Shield Medicare PPO with Dental/Vision $399.90 $761.80 $1,123.70 $431.82 $824.50 Kaiser Permanente Senior Advantage $283.25 $566.50 $849.75 $324.79 $649.58 Kaiser Permanente Senior Advantage with
Dental/Vision $298.60 $581.85 $865.10 $340.45 $665.24
Peace Officers Research Assoc. of CA (PORAC)
Medicare Supplement $465.00 $1,030.00 $1,395.00 $465.00 $1,030.00 PERS Gold $392.71 $785.42 $1,178.13 $406.60 $813.20
PERS Platinum $420.02 $840.04 $1,260.06 $448.15 $896.30 UnitedHealthcare Medicare Advantage Edge PPO $357.70 $599.36 $899.04 $341.72 $683.44 UnitedHealthcare Medicare Advantage PPO with
Dental/Vision $325.71 $741.43 $925.07 $368.76 $710.48
Attachment 1 2024
Family
$3,417.10
$2,961.04
$3,483.22
$2,799.78
$2,799.78
$2,461.78
N/A
$2,655.67
$2,651.00
$2,378.53
$3,417.10
$2,836.94
$2,437.21
$2,098.80
$2,100.05
$2,689.39
$2,259.76
$2,259.76
$2,106.62
$1,780.40
N/A
$2,352.87
$2,371.00
$2,078.54
$2,993.90
$2,166.42
$2,178.49
$2,060.89
$2,186.94
$2,632.94
$1,967.29
$1,832.19
$1,638.34
N/A
$2,250.07
$2,371.00
$2,041.73
$2,941.82
$2,148.74
$1,910.38
$3,412.37
$2,540.00
$2,981.84
Family
$1,217.49
$1,255.49
$1,178.04
2024
pa, San Francisco, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, etc.)
San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Tulare, and Ventura counties) Attachment 1 2024
$1,217.18
$974.37
$990.03
$1,395.00
$1,219.80
$1,344.45
$1,025.16
$1,052.20
Attachment 2 2024
2023 Dental, Vision, Employee Assistance Program, Flexible Spending Accounts, Disability and Life Insurance Plans Monthly Premium Rates PLAN CURRENT 2023 PROPOSED 2024
Delta Dental DPO Plan
Employee Only $ 53.87 $ 53.87
Employee and One Dependent $ 95.34 $ 95.34
Employee and Family $ 152.82 $ 152.82
Delta Dental Buy-Up DPO Plan
Employee Only $ 58.40 $ 58.40
Employee and One Dependent $ 103.35 $ 103.35
Employee and Family $ 165.66 $ 165.66
DeltaCare HMO Plan
Employee Only $ 15.57 $ 15.57
Employee and One Dependent $ 27.85 $ 27.85
Employee and Family $ 41.21 $ 41.21
Vision Service Plan (VSP)
Employee Only $ 6.93 $ 6.93
Employee and One Dependent $ 13.76 $ 13.76
Employee and Family $ 21.10 $ 21.10
Vision Service Plan (VSP) Buy-Up Plan
Employee Only $ 9.04 $ 9.04
Employee and One Dependent $ 17.95 $ 17.95
Employee and Family $ 27.52 $ 27.52
Optum Employee Assistance Program (City Paid)
Employee and Family $ 1.78 $ 1.78
Discovery Benefits Flexible Spending Accounts Administration Costs (City Paid) Health Care Account/Participant/Month $ 3.75 $ 3.75
Dependent Care Account/Participant/Month $ 3.75 $ 3.75
Electronic Payment Card/Participant/Month $ 0 $ 0
Grace Period Processing/Participant/Month $ 0 $ 0
Long Term Disability Insurance – Hartford (City Paid)
All Employees except Police and Fire $0.38/$100 $0.29/$100 Short Term Disability Insurance – Hartford (Voluntary Employee Paid) Managers $ 22.02 $ 22.02
Supervisors $ 19.82 $ 19.82
Police $ 15.14 $ 15.14
Basic Life AD&D Insurance – Hartford (City Paid)
All Employees $0.100/$1,000 $0.100/$1,000
Supplemental Employee, Spouse & Child Life Insurance–Hartford (Voluntary Employee Paid) Paid) Voluntary Employee and Spouse Life Insurance Rates/$10,000 Rates/$10,000 Up to and including age 29 $ 0.68 $ 0.68
Age 30-34 $ 0.86 $ 0.86
Age 35-39 $ 1.24 $ 1.24
Age 40-44 $ 1.90 $ 1.90
Age 45-49 $ 3.14 $ 3.14
Age 50-54 $ 5.24 $ 5.24
Age 55-59 $ 8.46 $ 8.46
Age 60-64 $ 11.12 $ 11.12
Age 65-69 $ 17.48 $ 17.48
Attachment 2 2024
Age 70-74 $ 30.88 $ 30.88
Age 75 and older $ 51.50 $ 51.50
$2,000 Voluntary Child Life Insurance $ 0.33 $ 0.33
$5,000 Voluntary Child Life Insurance $ 0.55 $ 0.55
$10,000 Voluntary Child Life Insurance $ 0.89 $ 0.89
CITY OF SANTA BARBARA
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2024
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: City Administrator’s Office
SUBJECT: Cancellation of Certain Council Meetings in 2024 RECOMMENDATION:
That Council cancel the regular Council Meetings on the following dates: January 2, January 16, February 20, March 26, April 2, May 28, June 18, July 9, July 16, August 6, August 13, September 3, November 12, November 26, December 17, December 24, and December 31, 2024.
DISCUSSION:
Each year we review the calendar for the regular City Council Meeting dates. The Council meeting schedule has been established based on cancelling the Council meetings on the Tuesdays following a holiday and providing for a summer and winter break. Council cancelled these same meetings in 2023. We are now proposing the cancellation of meetings for the next year.
Using this criteria, the following meetings would be cancelled:
Tuesday, January 2, 2024 (Tuesday after New Year’s Day Holiday) Tuesday, January 16, 2024 (Tuesday after Martin Luther King Jr. Holiday) Tuesday, February 20, 2024 (Tuesday after Presidents Day Holiday) Tuesday, March 26, 2024 (Spring Break)
Tuesday, April 2, 2024 (Tuesday after Cesar Chavez Day Holiday) Tuesday, May 28, 2024 (Tuesday after Memorial Day Holiday) Tuesday, June 18, 2024 (Tuesday before Juneteenth Holiday) Tuesday, July 9, 2024 (Tuesday July 4th Holiday)
Tuesday, July 16, 2024 (Summer Break)
Tuesday, August 6, 2024 (Summer Break)
Tuesday, August 13, 2024 (Summer Break)
Tuesday, September 3, 2024 (Tuesday after Labor Day Holiday) Tuesday, November 12, 2024 (Tuesday after Veteran’s Day Holiday) Tuesday, November 26, 2024 (Tuesday before Thanksgiving Holiday) Tuesday, December 17, 2024 (Winter Break)
Tuesday, December 24, 2024 (Winter Break)
Tuesday, December 31, 2024 (Winter Break)
Agenda Item No. 21
File Code No. 120.09
Council Agenda Report
Cancellation of Certain Council Meetings in 2024
November 7, 2023
PREPARED BY: Nicole Grisanti, Administrator’s Office Supervisor SUBMITTED BY: Rebecca J. Bjork, Interim City Administrator APPROVED BY: City Administrator's Office
CITY OF SANTA BARBARA
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2023
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: City Attorney’s Office
Engineering Division, Public Works Department
SUBJECT: Resolution to Call a Special Election and Approve a Ballot Measure to Amend the City Charter to Modernize Public Works Contracting [Resolution]
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council adopt, by reading of title only, a Resolution of the Council of the City of Santa Barbara Approving and Calling for the Submission to the Voters of a City Council Proposed Measure to Amend City Charter Section 519 to Modernize Public Works Contracting at a Special Municipal Election to be Held in the City on Tuesday, March 5, 2024.
DISCUSSION:
Background
The Charter of the City of Santa Barbara (City) limits the procurement of contracts for construction or improvement of public buildings, works, streets, drains, sewers, utilities, parks, playgrounds, Harbor facilities, and Airport facilities (public works contracts), excepting maintenance and repair. With limited exceptions for certain water resources contracts, the Charter limits the award of public works contracts to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder following a public notice in a newspaper of general circulation. On October 24, 2023, Council directed the City Attorney to prepare a Charter amendment that would authorize the City to take advantage of the full range of its home rule authority over contracting for public works construction projects.
Proposed Charter Amendment
The proposed resolution accompanying this agenda report implements Council’s direction and would place before the City’s voters at the March 5, 2024, presidential primary election (statewide primary election) a proposal to amend Charter Section 519 to read as follows:
“The City Council by ordinance shall establish procedures for competitive procurement of contracts for public works and improvements not otherwise Agenda Item No. 22
File Code No. 110.03
Council Agenda Report
Resolution to Call a Special Election and Approve a Ballot Measure to Amend the City Charter to Modernize Public Works Contracting [Resolution] November 7, 2023
prohibited by law. The City may also procure contracts for public works and improvements by any procedure authorized by state statute.” The proposed resolution provides the complete text of the amendment to Charter Section 519, with deletions of existing text shown in strikethrough and additions shown by underlining. The resolution also states the text of the proposed ballot measure as follows:
“Shall the City Council proposed measure to amend City Charter Section 519 to modernize public works contracting be adopted?”
The proposed resolution also authorizes the mayor to file a written argument on the Council’s behalf regarding the measure, accompanied by up to four additional printed names and signatures of the persons joining the mayor in submitting it, pursuant to Elections Code Section 9282. The resolution includes directions to the City Clerk regarding selection of arguments for and against the measure pursuant to Elections Code Section 9285. The resolution also directs the City Attorney to prepare an impartial analysis of the proposed measure and to transmit the impartial analysis to the City Clerk to include in ballot materials.
Staff have developed a draft implementation ordinance that would enable specific additional methods of procurement. This ordinance would go into effect pending Council approval and passage of the ballot measure by a majority of voters. A copy of the draft ordinance is provided for reference. The draft ordinance is presented for informational purposes only. Staff will schedule the draft ordinance for review by Ordinance Committee and then introduction and adoption by City Council at at a later date.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL INFORMATION:
Expanding allowable procurement methods via a Charter amendment has the potential for significant cost savings and/or improved quality for the construction of public works projects.
Placing the measure on the presidential primary election ballot will require some one-time costs to the City. These costs include an estimate of $134,000 that must be paid to the County Elections office to run the special election. It is proposed that these funds come from an allocation of available expenditure appropriations from the Public Works Corporate Yard Master Plan Project, which is currently on hold, in the Measure C Capital Fund to reimburse the County for election costs. Staff plan to bring this allocation of available expenditure appropriations to Council for approval later this fiscal year.
ATTACHMENT: Draft Implementation Ordinance
PREPARED BY: Daniel S. Hentschke, Assistant City Attorney Brian D’Amour, P.E., City Engineer/sk
SUBMITTED BY: Clifford M. Maurer, P.E., Public Works Director APPROVED BY: City Administrator’s Office
ORDINANCE NO.__________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA
BARBARA AMENDING SECTIONS 4.52.050, 4.52.060, AND
4.52.200 OF THE SANTA BARBARA MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO CONTRACTING FOR PUBLIC WORKS
PROJECTS SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE VOTERS OF A
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CITY CHARTER SECTION 519
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA BARBARA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 4.52.050 of the Santa Barbara Municipal is amended to read as follows:
4.52.050 Contracting Authority.
A. The City Council is the awarding authority for all contracts governed by this chapter except as otherwise provided in this chapter. Contracts awarded by the City Council shall be executed as provided in Section 518 of the City Charter unless otherwise directed by the City Council.
B. The City Administrator is authorized to award and execute any agreement subject to this chapter in an amount established by City Council resolution.
C. The City Administrator may delegate such authority to a subordinate employee of the City.
D. The Purchasing Agent may award to the lowest responsible bidder and execute contracts made in accordance with Sections 4.52.060 and 4.52.070 when the contract is within the budget approved by the City Council.
E. The Public Works Director is authorized to award and execute contracts made in accordance with Section 4.52.165 except where the power to award and execute contracts is reserved by that section to the City Council.
FE. The City shall not be bound by or liable under any contract or purchase order subject to this chapter unless the contract is made and executed as provided in this chapter.
GF. Contracts of the City shall be made only by a duly authorized officer or employee of the City. Contracts for purchase of goods or materials having a value over $2,500.00 shall be in writing. Contracts for services having a contract value of greater than $10,000.00 shall be in writing. A purchase order duly authorized and issued by the Purchasing Agent may be used to satisfy the requirements of this section provided that the purchase order contains all the requirements of a contract under California law. The form of all contracts and purchase orders shall be approved by the City Administrator and City Attorney. When permitted by state or federal statute and authorized by procedures developed and adopted by the City pursuant to Section 4.52.030 (B)(3). electronic communication technology may be used whenever a written document is required by this chapter; provided, however, that the communication is capable of being translated into a record of the City capable of being retained, accessed and reproduced in accordance with the City’s policies governing records of the City.
HG. The Library Director is authorized to purchase library books and library periodicals under procedures established by the Director subject to the appropriations of the approved budget for the Library.
IH. The City Administrator is delegated the authority of the City Council to reject all bids for any contract. The Public Works Director may reject bids for any contract subject to bidding under Section 4.52.165.
SECTION 2. Section 4.52.165 of the Santa Barbara Municipal is amended to read as follows:
4.52.165 Public Works Contracts - ProcurementBidding.
A. City Projects may be performed by City forces or under contract as provided in this Section. The Public Works Director is responsible for the implementation and administration of work performed or contracted for under this Section. As used in this Section the term “City Projects” includes all public works affecting City buildings, facilities, or real property of whatever nature including construction of new buildings or facilities and maintenance and repair of existing buildings or facilities. Maintenance and repair projects of any value may be performed by City employees consistent with the budget approved by the City Council.
B. City Projects up to an estimated construction value of $75,000 may be let to contract through direct negotiation with qualified contractors on a list established and maintained by the Public Works Director or by bidding under the procedures of Section
4.52.060.
C, City Projects having an estimated construction value of $75,000 up to $500,000 may be let to contract under the procedures of Section 4.52.070, except that:
1. In lieu of a general notice inviting bids, when the Public Works Director has established a list of qualified contractors identified according to categories of work, all contractors on the list of qualified contractors established and maintained by the Public Works Director for the category of work being bid shall be delivered notice as provided in Section 4.52.070 unless the service qualifies for a best interest or sole source waiver.
2. The notice inviting bids under paragraph 1 of this Subsection may describe the project in general terms and provide instructions on how to obtain more detailed information about the project.
3. Notices under either paragraph 1 or 2 of this Subdivision must state the time and date for submission of bids and other bidding information required by Section
4.52.070.
D. City Projects having an estimated construction value over $500,000 may be let to contract under any of the following procedures:
1. Contract let under Section 4.52.070.
2. Contract let under the design-build procurement procedures established for the project under Subsection E of this Section whenever the City Council, upon recommendation by the Public Works Director, determines it to be in the best interest of the City.
3. Contract let under the best value or competitive negotiation procurement procedures established for the project under Subsection F of this Section whenever the City Council, upon recommendation by the Public Works Director, determines it to be in the best interest of the City.
4. Contract let under the construction manager at risk procedures established for the project under Subsection G of this Section whenever the City Council, upon recommendation of the Public Works Director, determines it to be in the best interest of the City.
E. The City may enter into design-build contracts, including design-build operate and progressive design-build contracts, as follows:
1. Before procuring a design-build contract, the Public Works Director will shall prepare a request for proposals setting forth the scope of the project that may include, but is not limited to, the size, type, and desired design character of the works, improvements, facilities, buildings and site, and performance specifications. The performance specifications shall describe the quality of construction materials, assemblies, and other information deemed necessary to adequately describe the City’s needs. The performance specifications shall be approved by the City Council before solicitation of proposals.
2. The Public Works Director may establish prequalification requirements consistent with the provisions of Section 4.52.210 of this Chapter.
3. Upon recommendation of the Public Works Director, the City Council will select one of the following methods as the process to be used for the selection of the successful design-build entity:
a. A design-build competition based on performance, specifications, and criteria stated in the request for proposals. Criteria used in this form of evaluation of proposals may include, but not be limited to, items such as proposed design approach, initial and life-cycle costs, project features, financing, quality, capacity, schedule, and operational and functional performance of the facility. However, any criteria and methods used to evaluate proposals shall be limited to those contained in the request for proposals. Any architectural firms, engineering firms, specialty consultants, or individuals retained by the City to assist in the development of criteria or preparation of the request for proposals shall not be eligible to participate in the competition with any design-build entity.
The award of a design-build contract shall be made to the design-build entity whose proposal is judged as providing best value meeting the interests of the City and the objectives of the project.
b. A competition based on program requirements, performance specifications, and a preliminary design or combination thereof stated in the request for proposals. Limited drawings and specifications detailing the requirements of the project may accompany the request for proposals. The Public Works Director shall establish technical criteria and methodology, including price, to evaluate proposals and shall describe the criteria and methodology of evaluation and selection in the request for proposals. Any architectural firms, engineering firms, specialty consultants, or individuals retained by the City to assist in the preparation of the preliminary design or request for proposals shall not be eligible to participate in the competition with any design-build entity. The award shall be made to the design-build entity on the basis of the technical criteria and methodology, including price, whose proposal is judged as providing best value in meeting the interests of the City and meeting the objectives of the project.
c. A design-build program competition based on program
requirements and a detailed scope of work, including any preliminary design drawings and specifications stated in the request for proposals. Any architectural firms, engineering firms, specialty consultants, or individuals retained by the City to assist in the preparation of the preliminary design or request for proposals shall not be eligible to participate in the competition. with any design-build entity.
Award shall be made on the basis of the lowest responsible and reliable bid.
4. When a progressive design-build contract is selected as the procurement method for a project the following provisions apply:
a. After selecting a design-build entity based upon qualifications, the City may enter into a contract and direct the design-build entity to begin design and preconstruction activities sufficient to establish a guaranteed maximum price for the project.
b. Upon agreement of the guaranteed maximum price for the project, the City, at its sole and absolute discretion, may amend the contract with the design-build entity to contract for the remaining design, preconstruction, and construction activities sufficient to complete and close out the project, consistent with the guaranteed maximum price. If there are unforeseen site conditions, the City may amend the contract with the design-build entity accordingly and consistent with the guaranteed maximum price, to enable the design-build entity to complete the remaining design, preconstruction, and construction activities sufficient to complete and close out the project.
c. If the cost for completing all remaining design, preconstruction, and construction activities sufficient to complete and close out the project exceed the guaranteed maximum price, the costs exceeding the guaranteed maximum price shall be the responsibility of the design-build entity. If the costs for these activities are less than the guaranteed maximum price, the design-build entity shall not be entitled to the difference between the cost and the guaranteed maximum price unless there is a prior written agreement concerning the sharing of these funds.
Costs include the design-build entity’s direct costs, general conditions, overhead, and fee.
d. If the City and the design-build entity do not reach agreement on a guaranteed maximum price, or the City otherwise elects not to amend the design-build entity’s contract to complete the remaining work, the City may solicit proposals to complete the project from qualified firms and award a contract on a best value basis.
e. The design professionals responsible for performing design services on behalf of a design-build entity that has been replaced pursuant to paragraph d. of this Subsection E. 5. shall have sole liability for their design errors and omissions, if the City elects to use their complete and stamped designs with subsequent design build entities or licensed contractors.
5. The City recognizes that the design-build entity is charged with performing both design and construction. Because a design-build contract may be awarded prior to the completion of the design, it is often impracticable for the design-build entity to list all subcontractors at the time of the award. It is the intent of the City to establish a clear process for the selection and award of subcontracts entered into pursuant to this Subsection E in a manner that retains protection for subcontractors while enabling design-build projects to be administered in an efficient fashion. All of the following requirements shall apply to subcontractors, licensed by the state, that are employed on design-build projects:
a. Each design-build proposal must specify the construction trades or types of subcontractors that may be named as members of the design-build entity at the time of award. All trades necessary to accomplish the purposes of the project must be specified. All subcontractors that are listed at the time of award of the design-build contract shall be afforded the protection of all applicable laws.
b. All subcontracts that were not listed by the design-build entity at the time of award shall be awarded by the design-build entity in accordance with a bidding process established in the design-build contract including requirements for the listing of subcontractors in the manner required by California statute for bidding of public works contracts.
6. All design-build contracts under this Subdivision E shall be awarded by the City Council.
F. Contracts let under the best value or competitive negotiation procurement must comply with the following procedures:
1. The Public Works Director will solicit formal proposals. Notice of request for proposals must be posted for not less than 30 days on the City’s website and may be given in any other manner determined by the Public Works Director to be appropriate for the project. The request for proposals must: specify the date, time, and place for submission of proposals; contain a description of the project and the location where plans and specifications for the project may be obtained; contain a description of the information to be submitted by each proposer: contain the factors for evaluation of each proposal including the relative weight to be given to each factor.
2. In addition to price, the factors for selection of a successful proposer may include the following:
a. Demonstrated experience performing the same or similar work; b. Experience of core personnel to be assigned to the project; c. Financial condition and stability;
d. Successful performance of the same or similar work;
e. Prior record of performance on projects for the City; f. History of compliance with local, state, and federal laws, regulations, and policies governing public works contracts; g. Proposed quality control and quality assurance plan for the project; h. Proposed mobilization, construction, and demobilization plan for the project;
i. Proposed public and traffic safety control plan for the project; j. Other factors the Public Works Director deems relevant to obtaining the best value for the City.
3. All contracts under this Subdivision F shall be awarded by the City Council.
G. A construction manager at risk contract means a successive combination of written contracts relating to a single project between the City and a construction manager at risk entity where the latter agrees to perform preconstruction services and construction services for the City at or under a guaranteed maximum price. A construction manager at risk entity must hold a California General Engineering Contractor’s License Class A; California General Building Contractor License Class B; or a General Specialty Contractor License Class C as appropriate for the project. The City may enter into construction manager at risk contracts as follows:
1. Before procuring a construction manager at risk contract, the Public Works Director will shall prepare a request for proposals that references an engineering design for the work prepared by City engineers or by design professionals under contract to the City. The engineering design need not be complete but must be sufficiently developed as to the project size, location, and anticipated construction cost and schedule so as to permit meaningful proposals to be submitted and evaluated. The request for proposal must indicate the scope of preconstruction services and construction services sought and identify the factors that will be used for selection of the construction manager at risk entity. Selection of a successful construction manager at risk entity must be based upon the selection factors stated in the request for proposals.
2. The Public Works Director may establish prequalification requirements consistent with the provisions of Section 4.52.210 of this Chapter.
3. Construction manager at risk contracts will be entered into with the same entity for preconstruction services and constructions services. The letting of a preconstruction services contract will not bind the City to enter into a construction services contract but does provide a priority basis for negotiation of a construction services contract with the same construction manager at risk entity through the negotiation of a guaranteed maximum price. If the City and the preconstruction services contractor cannot reach agreement on a construction services contract, as determined by the City Council, the City may award a construction services contract to a different entity.
4. Preconstruction services agreements and construction services agreements must have a guaranteed maximum price. Certain business terms for the construction services agreement may be conditionally agreed upon in the preconstruction services agreement but are limited to the costs of contract general conditions, hourly labor rates, overhead, and the construction manager at risk entity’s proposed fee. Cost of labor, equipment, and materials to be provided by subcontractors or self-performed by the construction manager at risk entity will not be included in the preconstruction services agreement but will be reserved for proposal, negotiation, and agreement on a guaranteed maximum price in the construction services agreement.
5. All subcontracts under a construction manager at risk contract will be procured according to a competitive procurement process as stated in the contract. The provisions of Public Contract Code Sections 4100 through 4144, as amended, apply to construction services under a construction manager at risk contract. In preparing its proposal for a construction services contract the construction manager at risk entity will provide a list of subcontractors in accordance with Public Contract Code Sections 4100 through 4144.
6. All contracts under this Subdivision G will be awarded by the City Council.
H. The Public Works Director is authorized and directed to establish and update on a regular basis, but not less than every two years, a list or lists of qualified contractors for use under Subsections B and C of this section. The Public Works Director is authorized and directed to establish minimum qualifications for contractors according to categories of work and a process for contractors to be included on the list by submission of a response to a publicly noticed request for submission of qualifications.
Notice of the request for submission of qualifications will be given in the manner for solicitation of bid and to any contractor that has submitted a written request for notices within one year of the solicitation for proposals.
I. The Public Works Director may establish administrative procedures for the implementation of this Section.
JA. The Public Works Director may promulgate procedures and requirements for notice, submission, and protest of bids and proposals under this Sectionconsistent with Section 519 of the City Charter, including use of electronic bidding. Notice of bids may be given in any manner, determined by the Public Works Director to be appropriate under the circumstances, in addition to notice by publication as required by Section 519
4.52.060 or 4.52.070 as applicable.
B. Contracts for construction of water-related projects may be exempted from the requirements of Section 519 by the affirmative vote of a majority of the total members of the City Council as provided in this subsection.
1. The City Council may determine by resolution that such a project may be solicited and contracted for using alternate project delivery methods, including, but not limited to, design-build, and design-build-operate, or competitive negotiation. Any such resolution shall set forth the reasons supporting the use of the alternate project delivery method for the project and describe the solicitation method to be used and the criteria for determining the party to whom the contract should be awarded. The Council may also authorize the reimbursement of the costs of proposers in participating in solicitations for such projects.
2. The selection process shall, to the extent feasible, be fair and open, encourage creative and innovative solutions, and ensure that the City receives the best value possible. During the selection process, the City may meet individually with potential proposers prior to submission of proposals in order to encourage creative solutions.
Such meetings may be recorded and the recording shall be made available as a public record after final contract award.
SECTION 3. To preserve the operation of Section 4.52.200 as it existed before approval of an amendment to Section 519 of the City Charter as it existed on March 5, 2024, Section 4.52.200 of the Santa Barbara Municipal Code is amended to read as follows:
4.52.200 Project Labor Agreements.
A. A contract for construction of public works or improvements, except maintenance and repair, subject to the advertising, bidding, and award requirements of Section 519 of the City Charter in an amount of $5,000,000.00 or greater, as estimated by the City Engineer, shall include a requirement for a project labor agreement. The requirement shall be included in the procurement documents and contract.
B. The City Council may approve a project labor agreement by resolution.
SECTION 4. This ordinance will be operative only if the voters approve a measure to amend Santa Barbara City Charter 519 to authorize the City Council to establish by ordinance procedures for competitive procurement of contracts for public works and improvements not otherwise prohibited by law. 1 RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA
BARBARA APPROVING AND CALLING FOR THE
SUBMISSION TO THE VOTERS OF A CITY COUNCIL
PROPOSED MEASURE TO AMEND CITY CHARTER
SECTION 519 TO MODERNIZE PUBLIC WORKS
CONTRACTING AT A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO
BE HELD IN THE CITY ON MARCH 5, 2024
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to submit a proposed City Charter amendment to the voters at the Statewide Primary Election/Presidential Primary Election on March 5, 2024;
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to call a Special Municipal Election to be consolidated with the Statewide Primary Election/Presidential Primary Election on March 5, 2024;
WHEREAS, the proposed charter amendment does not alter any procedural or substantive protection, right, benefit, or employment status of any local government employee or any retiree or of any local government employee organization; and WHEREAS, the proposed charter amendment is an exercise of the City’s Constitutional home rule power regarding a matter of municipal affairs.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA BARBARA AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That pursuant to requirements of the Charter of the City of Santa Barbara and California Election Code, there is called and ordered to be held in the City of Santa Barbara on Tuesday, March 5, 2024, a Special Municipal Election for the purpose of submitting a City Council charter amendment proposal to the voters for approval.
SECTION 2. That the City Council, pursuant to its right and authority under State Government Code Section 34458, and Elections Code Sections 1415 (a)(2) and 9255, does order submitted to the voters at the municipal election on March 5, 2024, the following proposed charter amendment:
2 CITY OF SANTA BARBARA CHARTER AMENDMENT
MEASURE ___ -2024
YES Shall the City Council proposed measure to amend City Charter Section 519 to modernize public works contracting be adopted? NO
SECTION 3. The City Council approves and adopts the complete text of the amendment of City Charter Section 519 as follows, with deletions of existing text shown in strike out and additions shown in underlining for convenient reference only:
Section 519. Contracts on Public Works.
Except as herein provided, every project for the construction or improvement (excluding maintenance and repair) of public buildings, works, streets, drains, sewers, utilities, parks, playgrounds, Harbor facilities and Airport facilities, and each separate purchase of materials or supplies for the same shall be let to the lowest responsible bidder after notice in a manner specified by ordinance. newspaper of general circulation by two (2) or more insertions, the first of which shall be at least ten (10) days before opening bids.
The City Council may reject any and all bids presented and may readvertise at its discretion.
In the interest of efficiency and fiscal economy, the City may dispense with public bidding if it makes either or both of the following findings:
(1) The project can be performed more efficiently and more economically by City employees or by City employees working in conjunction with private contractors or subcontractors;
(2) The materials, supplies or services can be purchased at a lower price in the open market.
In the event that If the City Council makes the appropriate finding or findings, it may cause the project to be performed pursuant to subsection (1) above and/or the materials, supplies or services purchased pursuant to subsection (2) above. Such contracts may be let and such purchases made without the aforementioned findings being made if such work or the purchase of such materials, supplies or services shall be deemed by the City Council to be of urgent necessity for the preservation of life, health or property, and shall be authorized by the affirmative votes of at least two-thirds (2/3) of the total members of the City Council.
Projects for the extension, replacement or expansion of the transmission or distribution system of the Water Department operated by the City may be excepted from the 3 requirements of this section by the affirmative vote of a majority of the total members of the City Council. The City Council by ordinance shall establish procedures for competitive procurement of contracts for public works and improvements not otherwise prohibited by law. The City may also procure contracts for public works and improvements by any procedure authorized by state statute.
SECTION 4. The City Council directs the City Clerk to transmit a copy of the proposed charter amendment to the City Attorney. The City Attorney is directed to prepare an impartial analysis of the proposal, not to exceed 500 words in length, showing the effect of the proposal on existing law and the operation of the proposal. The City Attorney is further directed to transmit the impartial analysis to the City Clerk within ten days of adoption of this Resolution.
SECTION 5. Pursuant to Elections Code Section 9282, the City Council authorizes the mayor to file a written argument on its behalf regarding the measure, accompanied by up to four additional printed names and signatures of the persons joining the mayor in submitting it.
SECTION 6. Pursuant to Elections Code Section 9285, the City Council authorizes the City Clerk to select the arguments for and against the measure, which will be printed and distributed to the voters in accordance with this Resolution and state law. The City Clerk shall send a copy of the argument in favor of the measure to the authors of any argument against the measure and copy of an argument against the measure to the authors of any argument in favor of the measure immediately upon receiving the arguments. The author or a majority of the authors of an argument relating to the measure may prepare and submit a rebuttal argument or may authorize in writing any other person or persons to prepare, submit, or sign the rebuttal argument. The rebuttal argument shall not exceed 250 words. A rebuttal argument may not be signed by more than five persons. Rebuttal arguments shall be printed in the same manner as the direct arguments. Each rebuttal argument shall immediately follow the direct argument which it seeks to rebut.
SECTION 7. That the City Clerk is authorized, instructed, and directed to procure and furnish any and all official ballots, notices, printed matter, and all supplies, equipment, and paraphernalia that may be necessary in order to properly and lawfully conduct the election.
SECTION 8. Notice of the time and place of holding the election is hereby given and the City Clerk is authorized, instructed, and directed to give further or additional notice of the election in time, form and manner as required by law. 4 SECTION 9. Pursuant to Elections Code Sections 10401 and 10403, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Barbara is hereby requested to consent and agree to the consolidation of the Special Municipal Election with the Statewide Primary Election/Presidential Primary Election to be held on Tuesday, March 5, 2024, for the submission of the measure.
SECTION 10. The County Elections Division is hereby authorized to canvass the returns of the Special Municipal Election. The election shall be held in all respects as if there were only one election, and only one form of ballot shall be used.
SECTION 11. The Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Barbara is hereby requested to issue instructions to the County Elections Division to take any and all steps necessary for the holding of the consolidated election.
SECTION 12. The City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this Resolution with the Board of Supervisors and the County Elections Division of the County of Santa Barbara.
CITY OF SANTA BARBARA
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2023
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: Planning Division, Community Development Department SUBJECT: Elimination of Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program Expiration Date [Ordinance Introduction]
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council introduce and subsequently adopt, by reading of title only, an Ordinance of the Council of the City of Santa Barbara Amending Santa Barbara Municipal Code Sections 30.20.030, 30.25.030, 30.30.30, 30.140.220, 30.150.010, 30.150.040, and
30.150.050 to Eliminate the Expiration Date from the Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Average Unit-Size Density Incentive (AUD) Program was established in 2013 to incentivize smaller rental units through increased density in select areas of the City, consistent with the General Plan's direction to encourage housing opportunities for the City's workforce. The Program, found in Santa Barbara Municipal Code (SBMC) Chapter
30.150, also includes development standard incentives related to parking, setbacks, open yards, and building heights. City Council adopted the AUD Program for a limited duration (trial period) to allow for evaluation and adjustments. The Program’s trial period was originally set to expire after eight years (in 2021) or after construction of 250 units in the High and Priority Overlay Zones, whichever happened first. The 250-unit cap was removed in 2020 and the trial period has been extended twice: in 2021 and 2022. The trial period is currently set to expire on February 15, 2024.
Per the terms of the AUD ordinance, if the trial period ends, multi-unit residential and mixed-use projects will revert to the previous variable density standards in effect before the AUD Program was adopted. Considering that none of the feedback received indicates a preference to return to variable density, staff recommends that the expiration date be eliminated. This will reduce the uncertainty and risk that applicants face when considering whether to propose a new housing project. It will also allow staff the opportunity to provide the Planning Commission and City Council with information on the success, limitations, Agenda Item No. 23
File Code No. 610.04
Council Agenda Report
Elimination of Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program Expiration Date [Ordinance Introduction]
November 7, 2023
and outcomes of the AUD Program so that they can provide educated direction on future amendments. This direction may include shifting focus to other housing programs more responsive to current needs identified in the Housing Element, such as prioritizing affordable housing programs, adaptive reuse, special needs housing, etc.
While staff identified a second option to the Planning Commission to extend the existing trial period deadline, on October 12th the Planning Commission unanimously concurred with staff’s recommendation and voted to recommend that Council amend the AUD ordinance to remove the expiration date, creating a permanent multi-unit housing program. Even though the AUD Program would no longer be considered a trial program, this does not mean that future zoning amendments cannot be made. Revisions, modifications, or improvements to the City’s multi-unit housing standards are ultimately determined by Council.
Staff recommends that Council amend the AUD ordinance to remove the expiration date.
DISCUSSION:
The AUD Program has been monitored and reviewed closely since 2013, with eight changes (seven ordinance amendments and one resolution) to provide course corrections to improve program implementation. Additionally, starting in 2020, staff invested significant time and resources in developing floor-to-lot-area ratio (FAR) standards that were ultimately rejected in February 2022. Although Council provided some direction on what amendments should be made in place of FAR, opinions and circumstances might have changed in the intervening years. Staff is requesting guidance from City decision-makers on the Program’s next steps—which may include a spectrum of options from least change to most change.
In support of this effort, staff recently completed an AUD Program Progress Report, which analyzed data from the AUD Program over its 10-year span. The City’s Planning Division produced this report to analyze data and gain insights on how well the AUD Program met its original objectives and to inform decision makers in order to provide guidance on potential Program amendments. Preparation of the AUD Progress Report included a survey and working group meetings to gain feedback and insights from architects, developers, planners, and neighborhood groups on the benefits and challenges of the Program. Some participants stated that the Program expiration date was a barrier to new projects coming forward; and the survey results showed that the AUD trial period sunset date was one of the main things they disliked about the Program. The expiration date introduced uncertainty that might have discouraged developers from proposing projects, especially given how long it can take from project conception to building permit. Rather than extend the program for another few years for staff to conduct more public outreach, receive feedback, and draft additional amendments to the Program, staff recommends eliminating the expiration date altogether, to signal to the community that we are committing to this program and its essential components. This should allow developers Council Agenda Report
Elimination of Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program Expiration Date [Ordinance Introduction]
November 7, 2023
to feel more confident proposing projects without fear that the basic premise and density of the Program could change midproject.
Additionally, eliminating the expiration date will give staff the flexibility to pivot to other ordinance amendments that Council determines might be more immediately responsive to community needs (e.g., adaptive reuse, micro-units, City density bonus program, addressing hotels, etc.) without the need to worry about requesting an additional extension of the expiration date, which requires extensive staff time and resources in preparation of the necessary ordinance amendment. For example, based on the number of public hearings, 30-day referendum period, and required internal review processes necessary to adopt a zoning amendment, staff began working on this ordinance amendment in September 2023 to ensure that the ordinance would be effective prior to the February 15, 2024 sunset date. The AUD Program is just one component of the City’s overall housing plan.
Eliminating the AUD expiration date does not mean that Staff will stop working on amendments to the Program. Based on feedback obtained through the AUD Program Progress Report, areas of improvement and change were identified. Staff anticipates that the most challenging aspect of amending the AUD Program will be addressing concerns that it has not resulted in an increased rate of housing production and it has not created enough housing at desired affordability levels. Critical to the Program’s success is balancing community concerns that we are not producing enough attainable housing with applicant and developers’ concerns that densities are insufficient to offset land and construction costs. Despite some perceived shortfalls of the existing AUD Program and the need for further refinement, none of the feedback received to date indicates that we should return to using variable density (using bedroom count to determine density) as the metric for multi-unit development.
Finally, the City’s General Plan contains several policies and implementation actions to be considered that relate to the AUD Program. Specifically, implementation action LG6.1 calls for creation of the AUD Ordinance, and LG6.2 identifies the initial expiration date.
These policies and implementation actions support staff’s recommendation to make permanent the AUD Program through removal of the expiration date so that future amendments can be made to meet General Plan policies and Housing Element Goals. (See Attachment 1.)
Extending AUD Trial Period (Not Recommended)
Staff understands that without a trial period deadline, some may be concerned there will be less accountability on staff to work on AUD amendments in a timely manner.However, setting an artificial expiration date does not necessarily lead to significant policy amendments, as demonstrated by the need for the two prior extensions and a shift in planning priorities (e.g. Housing Element update and other housing-related amendments related to the passage of state legislation). Planning staff intends for housing amendments to be a top priority in 2024 and beyond, as indicated by the timeframes Council Agenda Report
Elimination of Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program Expiration Date [Ordinance Introduction]
November 7, 2023
outlined in the draft Housing Element. In addition, the Housing Element requires staff to review and track housing programs annually through Annual Progress Reports and report back to City Council. The need to prioritize housing discussions will also organically arise as the State legislature continues to annually pass housing legislation that often results in necessary ordinance amendments.
Nevertheless, if an extension is Council’s preference, staff recommends that the expiration date be significantly greater than two years to address developer concern about uncertainty and reduce the likelihood that staff will need to request an additional extension. It generally takes at least one year to complete a single code amendment, factoring in the time for staff analysis, community engagement and public process. There are four public hearings, minimum, to amend the ordinance, equaling four months of “process,” plus another 30 days for the ordinance to become effective. For these reasons, staff proposes moving the expiration date to align with the current Housing Element timeline, which would be 2031. The Housing Element contains goals and policies that reference the densities established by the AUD Program, making the Housing Element and AUD Program a natural pairing.
Ultimately, however, staff does not recommend an extension because it may chill housing development based on the feedback staff received during the AUD Progress Report process, and because it limits the City’s ability to explore the full variety of options for future housing-related amendments.
Planning Commission
On October 12, 2023, the Planning Commission received a presentation on staff’s recommendation to amend the AUD Program to eliminate the trial period, and also an alternative and less preferred option that would extend the trial period expiration date.
The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend eliminating the expiration date and moving forward with a permanent AUD Program, with the understanding that the Program could be amended in the future to address the ongoing policy recommendations resulting from the AUD Progress Report, and future public outreach and possible housing affordability studies.1 (See Attachment 2.) Ordinance Committee
On October 31, 2023, the Council Ordinance Committee discussed the AUD Program trial period and expiration date. Ordinance Committee voted 2-1 (Sneddon dissenting) to forward a recommendation to eliminate the AUD expiration date. 1 On October 12, 2023, prior to the AUD trial period amendment item, the Planning Commission also received a presentation on the AUD Progress Report. Initial feedback was requested and staff anticipates returning to the Commission at least one more time for additional feedback, which is scheduled for November 9, 2023.
Council Agenda Report
Elimination of Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program Expiration Date [Ordinance Introduction]
November 7, 2023
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There are costs associated with making zoning ordinance amendments, including direct costs associated with required legal noticing. For ordinance amendments such as this, two display ads are required (one for Planning Commission and one for City Council introduction), which costs approximately $200. There are also significant staff costs associated with the time to prepare staff reports and ordinances for four separate meetings (Planning Commission, Ordinance Committee, City Council introduction, City Council adoption), and attend those meetings.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
This project is categorically exempt from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15305 [Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations] of the CEQA Guidelines and SBMC §22.100.070.C.5.c – Class 5: Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations. SBMC Section 22.100.070.C.5(c) specifies that categorical exemptions in this class include “Adoption or amendment of land use or development ordinances, regulations, standards, or guidelines that substantially maintain existing land use intensity or density.” Eliminating the expiration date from the City’s AUD Program would make the program permanent, which maintains the existing density and intensity of land use.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. General Plan Policies
2. Draft Planning Commission Minutes, October 12, 2023
PREPARED BY: Allison De Busk, City Planner
SUBMITTED BY: Elias Isaacson, Community Develompent Director APPROVED BY: City Administrator’s Office
ATTACHMENT 1
1 Applicable General Plan Policies – Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program LG4. Principles for Development. Establish the following Principles for Development to focus growth, encourage a mix of land uses, strengthen mobility options and promote healthy active living.
Focus Growth. Encourage workforce and affordable housing within a quarter mile of frequent transit service and commercial services through smaller units and increased density, transit resources, parking demand standards, targeted infrastructure improvements, and increased public areas and open space. Incorporate ideas as a result of an employee survey.
Mix of Land Uses. Encourage a mix of land uses, particularly in the Downtown to maintain its strength as a viable commercial center, to include retail, office, restaurant, residential, institutional, financial and cultural arts, encourage easy access to basic needs such as groceries, drug stores, community services, recreation, and public space.
Mobility and Active Living. Link mixed-use development with main transit lines; promote active living by encouraging compact, vibrant, walkable places; encourage the use of bicycles; and reduce the need for residential parking.
LG5. Community Benefit Housing. While acknowledging the need to balance the provision of affordable housing with market-rate housing, new residential development in multifamily and commercial zones, including mixed-use projects, should include affordable housing and open space benefits.
Possible Implementation Actions to be Considered
LG5.1 Affordable Housing. Develop standards and project level findings to encourage the development of Community Benefit Housing defined as:
Rental housing;
Housing affordable to low, moderate, or middle income households; Employer sponsored workforce housing;
Limited Equity Co-operative Housing;
Affordable Housing Downtown for Downtown Workers; and/or Transitional housing, single residential occupancy, and other housing for special needs populations including seniors, physically or mentally disabled, homeless, and children aging out of foster care.
LG6. Location of Residential Growth. Encourage new residential units in multi-family and commercial areas of the City with the highest densities to be located in the Downtown, La Cumbre Plaza/Five Points area and along Milpas Street.
Possible Implementation Actions to be Considered
LG6.1 Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program. Amend the Zoning Ordinance to incorporate an Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program in multi-family and commercial zones based on smaller unit sizes and higher densities adjacent to transit and commercial uses and to implement Housing Element policies for higher densities for affordable and/or Community Benefit projects.
LG6.2 Average Unit Density Components. The program developed under LG6.1 shall be in effect for 8 years from implementing ordinance adoption or once 250 units have been developed in the High Density areas, whichever occurs sooner. The program will include the following components:
a. The 250 unit limitation shall apply to projects developed in the High Density and/or Priority Housing Overlay;
b. All units within a project developed at either the High Density or Priority Housing Overlay will be included in the 250 unit maximum; c. The minimum parking requirement for projects using the Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program is 1 space per unit; and
d. A report to Council will be made to analyze the effectiveness of the program as part of the Adaptive Management Program for the General Plan, and as the trial period is approaching its end, the Council will consider whether to extend or modify the program. In absence of Council review before the trial period expires, the allowed residential density will default to the Variable Density standards allowed under SBMC 28.21.080. F as it existed in 2011.
LG6.3 Priority Housing Overlay. Encourage the construction of rental and employer housing and limited equity co-operatives in select multi-family and commercial zones where residential use is allowed by providing increased density (over Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program).
LG6.4 Public Housing and All Affordable Partnership Projects. Community Benefit projects such as public housing and partnership projects (e.g., El Carrillo, Garden Court) can be considered at higher densities on a case-by-case basis per the City’s Affordable Housing Policies and Procedures.
LG6.5 High Fire Areas. Limit new residential development in the High Fire Areas by offering incentives and/or an option for property owners to transfer development rights from the High Fire Area to the High Density residential land use designations.
LG6.6 Transfer of Development Rights (TDR). Develop a TDR (or densities) program that allows transfer of residential density to sites adjacent to frequent transit, within easy walking and biking, in order to reduce commuting and to preserve open space.
Program considerations include:
a. Development transfer from residentially zoned properties with severe site constraints; or
b. Preservation of open space, within residentially zoned areas as long as there is no increase in the overall allowed densities of the area and; or c. The regional transfer of development rights with local and regional cooperation to allow transfer of development from rural lands and important urban open spaces to higher density, urban in-fill sites.
LG6.7 Housing for Downtown Workers. Encourage affordable housing projects by expediting and facilitating downtown housing construction that includes provisions prioritizing downtown workers to the extent legally possible.
LG12. Community Character. Strengthen and enhance design and development review standards and process to enhance community character, promote affordable housing, and further community sustainability principles.
Possible Implementation Actions to be Considered
LG12.1 Design Overlays. Create Design Overlay areas for selected non-residential and residential areas of the city through Floor Area Ratios (FARs), building setbacks, landscaping and open space requirements, and design guidelines.
Commercial areas, historic districts, streets, or a single block with unique qualities can be evaluated for improved guidance to ensure compatibility in scale, bulk and size. Specific areas to receive priority evaluation for a Design Overlay area include:
1. Downtown
2. Coast Village Road
3. Upper State Street
4. Milpas Street
5. Haley/Gutierrez Streets
6. The "Funk Zone" (i.e., Yanonali and Helena Streets)
LG12.2 Building Size, Bulk and Scale. Ensure that proposed buildings are compatible in scale with the surrounding built environment. a. Standards and Findings. Strengthen and expand building size, bulk and scale standards and findings for development projects of 10,000 square feet or more in the commercial zones to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses, particularly historic resources and residential neighborhoods. b. Floor Area Ratios (FARs). Develop a set of maximum FARs for the nonresidential and High Density areas of the City, with particular attention to protecting historic resources and areas that are adjacent to single family zoned areas, maintaining Santa Barbara’s small town character, and encouraging small, affordable residential units.
i. Maximums. Develop a set of maximum FARs that permit the largest structures in the center of the city (adjacent to transit and commercial services), and reduce maximum building size/FARs moving outward from the center. (This approval would be similar to the “Parking Zone of Benefit” model);
ii. Buffers. On parcels adjoining historic structures, establish “buffers” using more restrictive FAR limits;
iii. Incentives. Consider higher FARs for multi-family rental projects and small, affordable residential units; and
iv. Guidelines. Consider FAR Guidelines for development models such as where parking is proposed at the ground or in basement floors. v. Development Community. Create a working group that includes local professionals from the development community when developing FARs. c. Development Monitoring. Develop a program to monitor the scale and pace of development within the City; take action where transformative developments may occur along a block or corridor to guide development along that corridor. d. Community Character Preservation. Include in design guidelines that as part of any major new in-fill development or remodel, consider the context of the proposed structure in relation to surrounding uses and parcels along the entire block; ensure that the proposed development will not eliminate or preclude preservation of the key visual assets of the particular block or corridor, including landmark structures, structures of merit, potentially historic structures, key scenic view points that provide unique or important views to the surrounding hills, and specimen trees and other important visual resources.
Require building design modifications as needed to preserve essential elements of the community character along that block or corridor.
LG12.3 Building Set-Backs. The frontage of commercial buildings Downtown should have variation in building setback along the street facades to make the streetscape more interesting.
a. Guidelines and Standards. Prepare guidelines and, as necessary, Zoning Ordinance standards for the use, design, and landscaping of the street frontage for commercial buildings in Downtown, consistent with the Pedestrian Master Plan and Urban Design Guidelines. Where suitable, the building setback should accommodate significant trees, consistent with fire safety and protection of public views.
b. Pedestrian Environment. Provide for a successful pedestrian environment including the promotion of canopy trees to be integrated into projects and along the public streets.
LG12.4 Building Height. Amend zoning standards to include special findings and super majority approval by the Planning Commission for Community Benefit projects that exceed 45 feet in height.
LG12.5 Coast Village Road. Establish a process to coordinate with the County, Montecito Association, and/or Coast Village Business Association regarding new construction in the Coast Village Road area subject to City design review and permitting.
LG13. Multi-Family Design Guidelines. Develop multi-family residential design guidelines and standards to address unit sizes, setbacks, open space, landscaping, building size, bulk and scale, and site planning (e.g., pedestrian-friendly design, front porches facing the street or courtyard, and parking located out of sight).
LG15. Sustainable Neighborhood Planning. Neighborhoods shall be encouraged to preserve and enhance the sense of place, provide opportunities for healthy living and accessibility, while reducing the community’s carbon footprint.
Possible Implementation Actions to be Considered
LG15.1 Sustainable Neighborhood Plans (SNPs). Develop comprehensive SNPs through-out the City (where desired by residents). A SNP may incorporate goals, objectives, policies and implementation actions addressing the following components, as applicable:
a. A variety of housing types and affordability ranges; b. Neighborhood-serving commercial uses, especially retail food establishments such as small markets, green groceries, coffee shops;
c. New grocery stores in underserved areas;
d. Parks, recreational facilities, trails;
e. Community gardens;
f. Street tree planting program;
g. Watershed protection, creeks restoration, public access to creeks; h. Transit, bicycle (including new Class 1 bike paths) and vehicle connectivity; i. Walkable streets with an appealing and comfortable pedestrian environment that promote physical activity and can be used safely by people of all ages or abilities including wheelchairs;
j. Traffic calming along walkable and bicycle routes to school; k. Reduced impervious area (such as street and parking areas); l. Community services (e.g., schools, branch library, community center, clinics, etc.);
m. Childcare and senior serving facilities;
n. General safety (e.g., lighting); and
o. Infrastructure needs.
LG15.2 La Cumbre Plaza Specific Plan. Prepare an initial framework for a future La Cumbre Plaza Specific Plan for the eventual redevelopment of the site based on the analysis in the Upper State Street Study, including identification of applicable parcels, and issues to be addressed in the future Specific Plan. Include consideration of a mixed commercial and residential village approach and possible public improvements such as a transit center, open space/public park, pedestrian connections, east/west vehicle circulation connections, and parking structures.
LG15.3 Institutional Uses. Review the permitting process for government public facilities and institutional uses and strengthen the findings as needed for neighborhood compatibility in residential areas.
LG15.4 Best Practices for Institutional Uses. As part of neighborhood planning, as appropriate, initiate and conduct studies in residential neighborhoods that have various established institutional uses. The purpose of the study is to engage those who manage these institutional uses in a discussion with neighborhood representatives and City officials to develop “best practices” for the conduct of activities associated with the institutional land uses in order to improve their compatibility with their adjacent residential neighbors on a voluntary basis. Such a study should be conducted in the Upper East Neighborhood that has a unique concentration of existing institutional land uses. Subsequent to this study, and the identification of best practices, these practices should be considered citywide, as appropriate.
Housing Element (2015)
H1. Social and Economic Diversity. Promote new housing programs that retain and support social, economic and ethnic diversity.
H2. Housing Opportunities. Promote equal housing opportunities for all segments of the community, with special emphasis given to extremely low, very low, low, moderate, middle income and special needs households.
Possible Implementation Actions to be Considered
H2.1 Special Needs Population. Continue to fund a wide range of housing, human and community service programs and capital projects that strive to meet the needs of children, families, seniors, disabled persons, homeless, victims of domestic violence, and others.
H2.2 Rental Housing Mediation. Continue to fund, staff and support the Rental Housing Mediation Task Force, and publicize Rental Housing Mediation Task Force services and information on tenant and landlord rights including evictions, terminations and fair housing issues.
H2.3 Promote Public Awareness. Continue using CDBG funds to promote equal opportunity provisions and remedies under state and federal law.
H2.4 Enforcement Against Discrimination. If budget allows, develop adequate staffing and funding to pursue and assist the State Department of Fair Employment and Housing staff in pursuing enforcement actions against discrimination in housing under Civil Code Section 52 (c) with emphasis on discrimination against families with children in rental housing.
H10. New Housing. Given limited remaining land resources, the City shall encourage the development of housing on vacant infill sites and the redevelopment of opportunity sites both in residential zones, and as part of mixed-use development in commercial zones.
Possible Implementation Actions to be Considered
H10.1 Early Project Consultation. Continue to offer and encourage early staff predevelopment consultations for residential development of opportunity sites and mixed use projects.
H10.2 Property Profiles. Continue to offer property profile services in the Planning Division that explain development potential and constraints for parcels in the City.
Property profile services generally involve the review of archive, street and planning files, and the preparation of a letter report containing information regarding the property’s permit history and development potential.
H10.3 Building Reuse. Encourage residential reuse of existing nonresidential buildings, for both ownership and rental affordable housing.
H10.4 Housing at Shopping Centers. Promote and encourage the development of mixeduse for ownership and rental housing at shopping centers such as La Cumbre Plaza shopping center, with an emphasis on affordability, by coordinating and/or partnering with property owners and housing developers.
H11. Promote Affordable Units. The production of affordable housing units shall be the highest priority and the City will encourage all opportunities to construct new housing units that are affordable to extremely low, very low, low, moderate and middle income owners and renters.
Possible Implementation Actions to be Considered
H11.1 Affordable and Workforce Housing. Explore options to promote affordable and workforce housing, including revising the variable density ordinance provisions to increase affordable housing (e.g., limit unit size), requiring a term of affordability, and reducing parking standards with tenant restrictions.
H11.2 Priority Housing Overlay. Encourage the construction of rental housing, employer sponsored housing, and co-operative housing in the Downtown, La Cumbre Plaza/Five Points area, C-M Commercial Manufacturing Zone and Milpas Street area by providing incentives such as:
Increased density overlays up to 63 du/ac as part of the Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program.
Higher Floor Area Ratios (FAR) when such standards are developed. More flexibility with zoning standards, (e.g., reduced parking standards). Expedited Design Review process.
Fee waivers or deferrals.
H11.3 Inclusionary Housing. Amend the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance to:
a. Consider a 15 - 25 percent inclusionary affordable housing provision in new residential ownership developments for affordable housing to accommodate workforce (middle) income earners:
• Temporarily suspend the inclusionary housing requirements or in-lieu fees during times of economic downturn if development costs are prohibitive. b. Amend the payment of in-lieu fees to include the following considerations:
Eliminate or reduce inclusionary housing in-lieu fees based on preferred development, such as affordable or special needs housing projects; Adjust the inclusionary housing in-lieu fee rate based on unit size (i.e., lower fees for smaller units); and
c. Require a Housing Mitigation Fee Program for commercial development.
H11.4 Density Standards. Develop density standards that permit greater densities for projects that provide a greater percentage of price-restricted ownership units than required by the inclusionary housing ordinance.
H11.5 Bonus Density. Continue to provide bonus density units above levels required by State law, to be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
H11.6 Private Sponsors. Continue to solicit proposals for low-, moderate-, and middle income projects from private sponsors and develop programs to assist in their implementation.
H11.7 Infill Housing. Continue to assist the development of infill housing including financial and management incentives in cooperation with the Housing Authority and private developers to use underutilized and small vacant parcels of land for new extremely low, very low, low and moderate income housing opportunities.
H11.8 Opportunity Sites. Assist, coordinate or partner with builders for the development of affordable housing projects by identifying in-fill and opportunity sites in the commercial zones, on public lands and under-developed R-2, R-3 and R-4 sites.
H11.9 Sweat Equity Projects. Continue to support special procedures for development, permitting, construction and early occupancy of “sweat equity” projects.
H11.10Large Rental Units. Encourage the construction of three bedroom and larger rental units for low-, moderate-, and middle income families, including the Housing Authority, in efforts to develop and/or acquire three+ bedroom units.
H11.11 Condominium Conversions. Continue to implement the Municipal Code’s Condominium Conversion Ordinance to provide opportunities for entry-level home ownership in a variety of locations while maintaining a supply of rental housing for extremely low, very low, low and moderate income persons.
H11.12 Surplus Land. Inventory all land in the City owned by County, State and Federal governments, the Santa Barbara School and High School Districts and public utilities, and actively pursue dedication of surplus land for development of low, moderate and middle income housing, and for qualifying employees of participating government agencies.
H11.13 Housing Opportunities. Look for housing opportunities on City-owned land or over private and public parking lots.
H11.14 Public Facilities. Pursue acquisition of the National Guard and Army Reserve sites in order to develop affordable housing, park, school or other public benefit facilities.
H11.15 Financial Assistance. Apply for, or support others in applying for, all available public and private funding and financial assistance for affordable housing projects.
H11.16 Property Transfer Tax. Increase property transfer tax to provide funding for pricerestricted affordable and workforce housing, in order to broaden the funding base.
H11.17 Alternative Revenue Sources. Explore alternative sources of revenue for Affordable Housing to replace the Redevelopment Agency tax increment financing since it was dissolved in 2012.
H11.18 Extend Redevelopment Project Area. Continue to explore and pursue potential legislative amendments or other opportunities for extension or replacement of the Redevelopment Project Area and its funding mechanism for affordable housing and other community benefit projects.
H11.19 Parcel Consolidation. Encourage the consolidation of small and underutilized parcels for the development of affordable housing, if appropriate based on neighborhood compatibility.
H12. Above Moderate Affordable Housing. Provide incentives for the private sector development of new housing opportunities affordable to households earning more than 120% of the Area Median Income, but not more than 200% of the Area Median Income.
Possible Implementation Actions to be Considered
H12.1 Above Moderate Housing. Encourage the development of housing for first time home buyers, including moderate and middle-income households.
H12.2 Large Employers. Encourage large employers to mitigate affordable housing impacts.
H13. Non-Subsidized Rental Housing. Preserve and promote non-subsidized affordable rental housing.
Possible Implementation Actions to be Considered
H13.1 Preserve Rentals. Explore ways to avoid condominium conversions, or alternatively, the creation of cooperative tenant ownership of previous rentals.
H13.2 Condominium Conversions. Amend section 28.88.120B of the Municipal Code to require all condominium conversions to conform to the density requirements of the General Plan.
H13.3 Rental Units. Allow the reconstruction or rehabilitation of existing rental apartments at non-conforming General Plan densities and zoning standards. The loss of some rental units may be considered to meet building code requirements.
H17. Flexible Standards. With the New Zoning Ordinance (NZO) Update consider changes to development standards to be more flexible for rental, employer sponsored workforce housing, affordable housing projects, and limited equity co-operatives, where appropriate.
Possible Implementation Actions to be Considered
H17.1 Parking Requirements. Consider incremental changes to the Zoning Ordinance parking requirements such as:
Reducing parking requirements for projects that develop under the Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program to 1 space minimum per unit. Allowing tandem parking
Providing more flexibility for constrained sites (e.g., allowing for more than one maneuver, use of car stacking devices or other space saving measures) Eliminating guest parking requirements for housing in the Downtown commercial area
Rounding down when calculating parking requirements
H17.2 Zoning Standards. Consider amending the Zoning Ordinance to change how, where and the extent of outdoor living space, yard and setback requirements for housing in commercial zones.
H17.3 Expedite Environmental Review. Develop and maintain a system for use of the City's Master Environmental Assessment Document as a means of expediting the environmental review process consistent with State law regarding housing.
H17.4 Development Review Process. On an ongoing basis, evaluate the current development review system and make recommendations for improvements.
Circulation Element (2011)
Circulation Element (1997, original 1964)
DOWNTOWN HOUSING
8.5 The City shall promote/facilitate the development of housing to decrease the need for parking through an increased walking/biking population that lives, works, and shops in the Downtown (See Chapter 13).
COMPACT DEVELOPMENT
13.2 Without increasing the City wide development potential as provided for in the existing Zoning Ordinance and General Plan, the City shall allow more compact, pedestrian oriented development along major transit corridors (see Traffic Standards Chapter, Implementation Strategy 11.1.1).
13.2.2 Consider amending the Zoning Ordinance to:
• allow increased residential densities and more compact, pedestrian oriented, nonresidential development along streets identified as major transit corridors, and • reduce parking requirements for properties near major transit corridors if it can be demonstrated that a negative impact will not occur. In conjunction with this reduction, the City shall evaluate and aggressively monitor the results to ensure continued use of alternative means of travel and to justify reduced parking demands.
City of Santa Barbara
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
OCTOBER 12, 2023
1:00 P.M.
City Hall, Council Chambers
735 Anacapa Street
SantaBarbaraCA.gov
COMMISSION MEMBERS:
Roxana Bonderson, Chair
John M. Baucke, Vice Chair
Lucille Boss
Donald DeLuccio
Sheila Lodge
Devon Wardlow
Lesley Wiscomb
CITY COUNCIL LIAISON:
Mike Jordan
STAFF:
Tava Ostrenger, Assistant City Attorney
Allison DeBusk, City Planner
Mariah Johnson, Commission Secretary
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Bonderson called the meeting to order at 1:02 p.m.
I. ROLL CALL
Chair Roxana Bonderson, Vice Chair John M. Baucke, Commissioners Lucille Boss, Donald DeLuccio, Sheila Lodge, Devon Wardlow, and Lesley Wiscomb
Absent: None
STAFF PRESENT
Tava Ostrenger, Assistant City Attorney
Allison DeBusk, City Planner
Ellen Kokinda, Senior Planner
Brenda Beltz, Administrative Analyst
Dana Falk, Project Planner
Rosie Dyste, Project Planner
Tony Ruggieri, City TV Production Supervisor
Janet Ahern, City TV Production Specialist
Mariah Johnson, Commission Secretary
II. PRELIMINARY MATTERS
A. Requests for continuances, withdrawals, postponements, or addition of ex-agenda items:
No requests.
B. Announcements and appeals:
ATTACHMENT 2
Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 2023 DRAFT Page 2 of 7 No announcements.
C. Review, consideration, and action on the following draft Planning Commission minutes and resolutions:
1. September 28, 2023 Planning Commission Minutes
MOTION: DeLuccio / Bonderson
Approve the minutes as presented.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: 5 Noes: 0 Abstain: 2 (Wiscomb and Wardlow) Absent: 0 D. Comments from members of the public pertaining to items not on this agenda:
Public comment opened at 1:03 p.m.
Written correspondence from Tim Werner and Anonymous was acknowledged.
Public comment closed at 1:05 p.m.
III. DISCUSSION ITEM
ACTUAL TIME: 1:04 P.M.
AUD PROGRESS REPORT
Application Number: PLN2023-00389
Discussion of the Average Unit-Size Density Incentive (AUD) Program Progress Report. July 2023 marks 10 years since adoption of the AUD Program, which was intended to encourage development of smaller, more attainable housing units in select areas of the city. The AUD Program Progress Report was prepared to analyze data and gain insights on how well the AUD Program met its original objectives and to inform potential amendments.
Allison DeBusk, City Planner; Dana Falk, Project Planner; and Ellen Kokinda, Design Review Supervisor gave the Staff presentation. Brenda Beltz, Administrative Analyst II; and Rosie Dyste, Project Planner were available to answer questions.
Public comment opened at 1:35 p.m., and the following individuals spoke:
1. John Campanella
2. Fred Sweeney
3. Mark Sherridan
4. Ron Robertson Jr
5. Jessica Wishan de L’Arbre
6. Steve Johnson
Written correspondence from Paulina Conn, Allied Neighborhoods Association, Pat Saley, League of Women Voters, Citizens Planning Association, and Joanna Kaufman on behalf of Strongtowns SB was acknowledged.
Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 2023 DRAFT Page 3 of 7 Public comment closed at 1:54 p.m.
* THE COMMISSION RECESSED FROM 2:50 TO 3:01 P.M. *
Commissioner comments:
Commissioner DeLuccio:
• Thanked staff for their comments and work on the presentation. • Stated that many topics brought up go beyond the Average Unit-Size Density (AUD) Program. The Housing Element hasn’t been approved yet but is a sound document. Once that document is adopted much of what staff brought up will be fleshed out. • Stated that the definitions of Workforce Housing and Community Benefit need to be clearly defined and updated.
• Suggested bringing back the concept of FAR.
• Stated that a lot of this is tied into the general plan.
Vice Chair Baucke:
• The AUD program is not an inclusionary or affordable housing program, and the Commission shouldn’t waste their time trying to make it one. • Thinks the city of Santa Barbara should consider establishing an affordable housing program and a density bonus program. This should be something that goes beyond the State Density Bonus Program. It is better to have applicants use the City’s program rather than defaulting to the State Density Bonus Program.
• The inclusionary percentage needs to be discussed and brought back to City Council because the world has changed; Santa Barbara has a low percentage. He recommends looking at Goleta’s inclusionary percentage.
• A definition of Workforce Housing is needed. The Urban Land Institute has a definition that is 60-120% of area median income. The Commission needs to establish the inclusionary percentage that the program is trying to accomplish. • There is a need for affordable housing; an enhanced infrastructure financing district may be the way to get there. Once the base access evaluation floor is established, that tax increment that could come to the City through an enhanced infrastructure financing district could be used for affordable housing.
• Deed restricted affordable housing is the only affordable housing that will last long term.
The city of Santa Barbara is in high demand and that is not going away. Staff and the Commission need to move the needle as far to the right as possible.
Commissioner Wiscomb:
• Doesn’t think rental housing needs to be taken out of the definition of Community Benefit, but the percentage of affordable, deed-restricted housing that qualifies for Community Benefit should far exceed the current inclusionary requirement. • Inclusionary needs to be reviewed. As mentioned in the staff presentation, applicants noted that it is difficult to get financing for deed-restricted units. Interest rates and construction costs have escalated and it’s important that staff and the Commission consider the economic environment when putting additional pressure on private developers.
• Agrees with Commissioner Wardlow that Santa Barbara’s in-lieu fund is small. There are other jurisdictions that have significant in-lieu fees from developers. Developing the program so that the developers have the choice of in-lieu fees would significantly increase Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 2023 DRAFT Page 4 of 7 the City’s in-lieu fund. This would enable the nonprofits and the City Housing Authority to maximize investments.
• It’s important that the Commission discusses planning and permitting. There are areas of the process that can be made easier for applicants.
• Workforce housing needs a definition.
• The Commission is interested in categories of affordability where there are huge deficits.
That is where efforts need to be concentrated.
• Hopes the Commission can come away from this conversation with recommendations to City Council that are not huge changes in policy, but instead tweaking the system. This could make a big difference in the Santa Barbara community and create more affordable housing.
Commissioner Boss:
• Appreciates reflecting upon 10 years of data because it helps the Commission make more informed decisions and recommendations.
• Agrees with the positive comments from other Commissioners about the report layout and content. It was very clear, comprehensive, and easy to read. • Appreciates the candid responses in the interviews and survey among stakeholders and applicants who have participated in the process. She especially liked the summary and data that distinguished the facts from the public perception. She also appreciated the comments in response to the survey and interviews. The data helps the Commission make objective changes or recommendations.
• Stated that some of the public comment that was submitted in advance also provided some specific changes and general feedback.
• Measurable targets, definitions, and other specifics are needed to improve this program, but it is clear what the needs are.
• Thrilled to hear that Community Development is becoming fully staffed. She is mentally prepared for and welcomes more dense and comprehensive reports and recommendations, so that the Commission can make specific changes and move the needle to produce more housing.
Commissioner Wardlow:
• The discussion and presentation provided by staff was very helpful. She appreciated the way staff laid out the questions as it was a very deliberate way for the Commission to be able to provide feedback.
• Thinks that looking at this program to address the affordability needs of Santa Barbara can be achieved through some of the topics that have been mentioned: increasing in-lieu fees, increasing the inclusionary requirement, and creating a pathway for 100% affordable projects to have more streamlined process.
• She is excited to see what staff comes back with from the direction the Commission gives. • Defining or redefining Workforce Housing is an important part of this program. • Agrees with Vice Chair Bauke on his references to other cities’ affordability/inclusionary percentages.
Commissioner Lodge:
• Stated that the goal of the AUD program was not affordable housing. She doesn’t think there is anything the Commission can do with the AUD Program that will change that. • The in-lieu fee needs to be increased.
• The inclusionary requirement needs to be increased.
Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 2023 DRAFT Page 5 of 7 • The only agencies that will create affordable housing are nonprofits. She thinks the City either needs a bed tax increase, a tax on vacant houses, or whatever technique can be developed to create a funding source for affordable housing. • Rents will be what the market will bear, there is no getting around that. • The goal of the Planning Commission originally was to adopt a general plan amendment that City Council could support. The AUD Program did achieve that because it was limited to rental housing, so it did generate rental housing.
Chair Bonderson:
• The AUD program needs to be renamed.
• Agrees that the definition of workforce housing needs work. Whether a whole new term is introduced or changed in the ordinance itself.
• The term Community Benefit needs work in order to guide the discretionary decisionmaking process, so that the Commission knows how to use it and when to apply it. • On page 50 of the AUD Progress Report Staff Report it says, “The inclusionary housing requirement is a greater burden on economics than most believe.” After hearing items and projects that Planning Commission has struggled with in 2023, she stated that she is beginning to feel more confident that economics need to be considered. The ordinance and housing element documents need to be updated to reflect current economic conditions. She thinks the City of Santa Barbara is facing a disconnect between the feasibility of building things and the actual economics behind them. The Commission has been seeing this recently with projects that could be housing yet return as a hotel. She stated that she knows staff is working on updating these documents, but when one document is far behind the others it creates a loophole. • Referenced Ms. Kokinda’s statement that, “Staff has a lot of options with the internal process such as assessing project completeness review, process timelines, and early input.” She thinks that coordinated effort internally will give relief to projects before they come to the discretionary decision-making bodies.
• Referenced page 36 of the AUD Progress Report Staff Report where it quotes a focus group, “To incentivize housing production, make residential developments more economically feasible than hotel developments to compete.” She is in support of whatever pathway staff can provide internally to help support that sentiment. • Agrees with Vice Chair Bauke in reference to ways other municipalities and cities have successfully updated their ordinances and process to ultimately increase inclusionary housing.
• Stated that when projects are unable to get financing to cover affordable units, they have to increase the cost of their market rate units and that pushes up the cost of rentals. This creates another problem that she is conflicted with promoting. • In-lieu fees need to be increased, so that it makes it worthwhile for the developer to get out of the affordable requirement, but also feeds back into the system to support nonprofits, the Housing Authority, and others that can provide the city of Santa Barbara affordable projects.
• Thinks that it’s important to have conversations promoting public-private partnerships.
She recently heard about the County of Santa Barbara teaming up with a private entity to improve projects having to do with affordable housing and homelessness. Ultimately, these types of partnerships could lend to public good, so staff should study that and encourage it more. There is a lot of money that can be harnessed for these uses.
Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 2023 DRAFT Page 6 of 7 • Staff should consider neighborhood by neighborhood development standards if it fits into their scope of work. She thinks it could help manage best practices for different areas of town, so that it’s not an umbrella standard for all.
• Suggests more conversation on moving the needle. She thinks it might be worth considering a sliding scale, so that there are more benefits when more affordable housing is provided all the way down to possibly 100% support. There were some comments made about reducing fees or making fees zeros. Incentivizing affordable housing is very important, but we don’t want to discourage market-rate housing. The “missing middle” is still missing.
• Thanked staff because there is a lot to be grateful for in this phase. • Shared a quote from the survey on page 50 of the AUD Progress Report Staff Report, “Adopt a city-specific density bonus program that is more in line with local priorities but has economics benefits that are equal or better than the State program.” She knows that the Commission can do this and believes that the City of Santa Barbara can work together to get there.
MOTION: Wiscomb / Wardlow
Continue indefinitely.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: 7 Noes: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0
* THE COMMISSION RECESSED FROM 4:46 TO 4:53 P.M. *
IV. NEW ITEM
ACTUAL TIME: 4:53 P.M.
AUD ORDINANCE AMENDMENT – TRIAL PERIOD
Application Number: PLN2023-00389
The City’s Average Unit-Size Density Incentive (AUD) Program was established in 2013 as a Trial Program related to multi-unit housing. The trial period has been extended several times since 2013 and is currently set to expire on February 15, 2024. The City Council must decide whether to extend the AUD Program again or eliminate the expiration date (thereby making it a permanent program). A recommendation from Planning Commission is requested.
Confirm the Environmental Analyst’s determination that the project is exempt from further environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15305, Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations.
Allison DeBusk, City Planner gave the Staff presentation. Dana Falk, Project Planner; Ellen Kokinda, Design Review Supervisor; Brenda Beltz, Administrative Analyst II; and Rosie Dyste, Project Planner were available to answer questions.
Public comment opened at 4:57 p.m., and the following individuals spoke:
Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 2023 DRAFT Page 7 of 7
1. John Campanella
2. Ellen Bildsten
Public comment closed at 5:06 p.m.
Written correspondence from Paulina Conn, Allied Neighborhoods Association, Todd Shea on behalf of Santa Barbara Association of Realtors, Pat Saley, League of Women Voters, Housing Authority of the City of Santa Barbara, and Citizens Planning Association was acknowledged.
Public comment closed at 5:06 p.m.
MOTION: Lodge / Wiscomb
Recommendation to City Council to eliminate the expiration date from the AUD Program.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: 7 Noes: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0
V. ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA
ACTUAL TIME: 5:32 P.M.
Item postponed until the next agenda.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
Chair Bonderson adjourned the meeting at 5:33 p.m.
Submitted by,
__________________________________________
Mariah Johnson, Commission Secretary
COUNCIL INTRODUCTION DRAFT
SHOWING CHANGES FROM CURRENT CODE 11/07/23
1 ORDINANCE NO. __________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SANTA BARBARA AMENDING SANTA
BARBARA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 30.20.030,
30.25.030, 30.30.30, 30.140.220, 30.150.010,
30.150.040, AND 30.150.050 TO ELIMINATE THE
EXPIRATION DATE FROM THE AVERAGE UNITSIZE DENSITY INCENTIVE PROGRAM
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA BARBARA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 30.20.030 of Chapter 30.20 of Title 30 of the Santa Barbara Municipal Code is amended to read as follows:
30.20.030 Development Standards.
Tables 30.20.030A and 30.20.030B prescribe the development standards for Residential Zones. Section numbers refer to other sections of this title, while individual letters refer to subsections that directly follow the tables. Additional regulations that apply throughout the City are located in Division III, Citywide Regulations.
TABLE 30.20.030.A: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS–RESIDENTIAL SINGLE UNIT ZONES
Zone RS-1A RS-25 RS-15 RS-10 RS-7.5 RS-6
Lot Size and Street Frontage
Minimum Net Lot Area for
Newly Created Lots (sq. ft.
unless noted)
See also Chapter 27.60, Parcel Maps for Urban Lot
Splits
Average Slope less than 10%,
and all lots with frontage on
the Pacific Ocean regardless
of slope
1 acre 25,000 15,000 10,000 7,500 6,000
Average Slope 10% to 20% 1.5
acre
37,500 22,500 15,000 11,250 9,000
Average Slope over 20% to
30% 2 acres 50,000 30,000 20,000 15,000 12,000
Average Slope over 30% 3 acres 75,000 45,000 30,000 22,500 18,000 100 100 90 75 60 60 Minimum Public Street
Frontage (ft.) See also §30.140.180, Street Frontage and Access; and §30.140.120, Location of Lot Lines
COUNCIL INTRODUCTION DRAFT
SHOWING CHANGES FROM CURRENT CODE 11/07/23
2 TABLE 30.20.030.A: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS–RESIDENTIAL SINGLE UNIT ZONES
Zone RS-1A RS-25 RS-15 RS-10 RS-7.5 RS-6
Maximum Base Residential Density
Maximum Density (per lot) 1 unit 1 unit 1 unit 1 unit 1 unit 1 unit Additional Residential Density Allowances
All lots, in compliance with the
applicable section
See §30.185.050, Additional Residential Unit
See §30.185.040, Accessory Dwelling Units
See Chapter 30.145, Affordable Housing and Density
Bonus and Development Incentives
Maximum Floor Area
Maximum Floor Area
(Floor to Lot Area Ratio) (sq.
ft.)
Applicable only to lots developed, or proposed to be
developed, with a building with two or more stories or
17 feet or more in height.
Less than 4,000 sq. ft. Net Lot
Area
2,200. See also A, Maximum Floor Area (Floor to Lot
Area Ratio)
4,000 to 9,999 sq. ft. Net Lot
Area
1,200 + (0.25 multiplied by the net lot area) = Maximum Floor Area. See also (A), Maximum Floor Area (Floor to
Lot Area Ratio)
10,000 to 14,999 sq. ft. Net
Lot Area
2,500 + (0.125 multiplied by the net lot area) =
Maximum Floor Area. See also A, Maximum Floor Area
(Floor to Lot Area Ratio)
15,000 and more sq. ft. Net
Lot Area Not Applicable
Structure Form and Location
Minimum Residential Unit Size
Studio: 220 square feet;
All other units: 400 square feet
See §30.140.150, Residential Unit
Maximum Height (ft.) 30, except as further limited in accordance with §30.140.170, Solar Access Height Limitations
Minimum Setbacks (ft.),
Residential Structures
See also §30.140.090, Encroachments into Setbacks
and Open Yards
Front 35 30 30 25 20
Portions of
structures 15
feet or less in
height: 15;
Portions of
structures
more than 15
COUNCIL INTRODUCTION DRAFT
SHOWING CHANGES FROM CURRENT CODE 11/07/23
3 TABLE 30.20.030.A: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS–RESIDENTIAL SINGLE UNIT ZONES
Zone RS-1A RS-25 RS-15 RS-10 RS-7.5 RS-6
feet in height:
20;
Street facing
covered
parking: 20
See also B, Setback Reduction for Sloping Lots
Interior 15 10 10 8 6 5
Minimum Setbacks (ft.),
Nonresidential Structures
See also §30.140.090, Encroachments into Setbacks
and Open Yards
Front Same as for Residential Structures
Interior (Conversion and
Alterations)
Conversions of existing residential structures to
nonresidential structures, or alterations of existing
structures that contain nonresidential uses, are subject to the setback requirements for residential structures. 30 20 20 12 12 10
Interior (New or Additions) Exception: Community Gardens are subject to the setback requirements for residential structures.
Minimum Setbacks, MixedUse
Portions of structures that contain residential uses are subject to the setback for residential structures, and
portions of structures used for nonresidential uses are subject to the setback requirement for nonresidential
structures.
Portions of structures used by both the residential and nonresidential uses are subject to the setback
requirement for nonresidential structures.
Minimum Setbacks,
Uncovered Parking
See §30.175.060, Location of Required Automobile and
Bicycle Parking
Materials
Roofing and siding materials shall be nonreflective.
Shiny, mirror like, or glossy metallic finishes are
prohibited.
Open Yard
Open Yards See §30.140.140, Open Yards
TABLE 30.20.030.B: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS–TWO-UNIT AND MULTI-UNIT ZONES
Zone R-2 R-M R-MH
Lot Size and Street Frontage
Minimum Net Lot Area for
Newly Created Lots (sq. ft.)
COUNCIL INTRODUCTION DRAFT
SHOWING CHANGES FROM CURRENT CODE 11/07/23
4 TABLE 30.20.030.A: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS–RESIDENTIAL SINGLE UNIT ZONES
Zone RS-1A RS-25 RS-15 RS-10 RS-7.5 RS-6
Average Slope less than 10% 7,000
Average Slope 10% to 20% 10,500
Average Slope over 20% to
30% 14,000
Average Slope over 30% 21,000
14,000 14,000
60 60 60 Minimum Public Street
Frontage (ft.) See §30.140.180, Street Frontage and Access; and §30.140.120, Location of Lot Lines
Maximum Base Residential Density
Less than 5,000 sq. ft. Net Lot
Area 1 unit 1 unit
5,000 to 5,999 sq. ft. Net Lot
Area 1 unit 2 units
6,000 to 6,999 sq. ft. Net Lot
Area
2 units if
average slope
less than
10%, 1 unit
otherwise
2 units
7,000 and more sq. ft. Net Lot
Area
Average Slope less than 10%
1 unit/3,500 sq.
ft. of net lot
area
Average Slope 10% to 20%
1 unit/5,250 sq.
ft. of net lot
area
Average Slope over 20% to
30%
1 unit/7,000 sq.
ft. of net lot
area
Average Slope over 30%
1 unit/10,500
sq. ft. of net lot
area
3 units, or 1 unit/3,500 sq. ft. of net lot
area, whichever is greater
Additional Residential Density Allowances
All lots, in compliance with the
applicable section
See §30.185.040, Accessory Dwelling Units
See §30.140.220, Variable Density in Certain Zones
See Chapter 30.150, Average Unit-Size Density
Incentive Program
COUNCIL INTRODUCTION DRAFT
SHOWING CHANGES FROM CURRENT CODE 11/07/23
5 TABLE 30.20.030.A: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS–RESIDENTIAL SINGLE UNIT ZONES
Zone RS-1A RS-25 RS-15 RS-10 RS-7.5 RS-6
See Chapter 30.145, Affordable Housing and Density
Bonus and Development Incentives
Structure Form and Location
Minimum Residential Unit
Size See §30.140.150, Residential Unit
30 45 45
Maximum Height (ft.) Except as further limited in accordance with §30.140.170, Solar Access Height Limitations
Minimum Setbacks (ft.),
Residential Structures
See also §30.140.090, Encroachments into Setbacks
and Open Yards
See Chapter 30.150, Average Unit-Size Density
Incentive Program
1st and 2nd Stories: 10
Portions of structures above 2nd story:
20 Front
Portions of
structures 15
feet or less in
height: 15;
Portions of
structures more
than 15 feet in
height: 20;
Street facing
covered
parking: 20
See also (B),
Setback
Reduction for
Sloping Lots
Covered parking: 10
Covered parking, street-facing: 20
1st and 2nd Stories: 6
Portions of structures above 2nd story:
10 Interior
Covered
parking: 3
Other
structures: 6
Covered parking:
● Single-Unit Residential and Two-Unit
Residential: 3
COUNCIL INTRODUCTION DRAFT
SHOWING CHANGES FROM CURRENT CODE 11/07/23
6 TABLE 30.20.030.A: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS–RESIDENTIAL SINGLE UNIT ZONES
Zone RS-1A RS-25 RS-15 RS-10 RS-7.5 RS-6
● Multi-Unit Residential: 6 except as
provided in C, Interior Setback
Reduction for Covered Parking on Lots
55 Feet or Less and D, Interior Setback
for Covered Parking Opposite the
Primary Front Lot Line
Minimum Setbacks (ft.),
Nonresidential Structures
See also §30.140.090, Encroachments into Setbacks
and Open Yards
Front Same as for Residential Structures
Interior (Conversions and
Alterations)
Conversions of existing residential structures to
nonresidential structures, or alterations of existing
structures that contain nonresidential uses, are subject to the setback requirements for residential structures.
Interior (New or Additions) 12
New nonresidential structures or
additions to existing nonresidential
structures are subject to the following
interior setback:
● 1st and 2nd Stories: 12
● Portions of structures above
2 nd story: 20
● Exception: Neighborhood Markets
and Community Gardens are subject to
the setback requirements for residential
structures.
Minimum Setbacks, MixedUse
Portions of structures that contain residential uses are subject to the setback for residential structures, and
portions of structures used for nonresidential uses are subject to the setback requirement for nonresidential
structures.
Portions of structures used by both the residential and nonresidential uses are subject to the setback
requirement for nonresidential structures.
Minimum Setbacks,
Uncovered Parking
See §30.175.060, Location of Required Automobile and
Bicycle Parking
Open Yard
Open Yards See §30.140.140, Open Yards
COUNCIL INTRODUCTION DRAFT
SHOWING CHANGES FROM CURRENT CODE 11/07/23
7 TABLE 30.20.030.A: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS–RESIDENTIAL SINGLE UNIT ZONES
Zone RS-1A RS-25 RS-15 RS-10 RS-7.5 RS-6
See Chapter 30.150, Average Unit-Size Density
Incentive Program
Additional Residential Zone Development Regulations
A. Maximum Floor Area (Floor to Lot Area Ratio).
1. Floor Area, Precluded Development-RS Zones. No application for a Building Permit may be approved for a project in an RS Zone that will: (1) result in an increase of the floor area on the lot; (2) change the location of any floor area on the second or higher story of any structure on the lot; or (3) increase the height of any portion of a structure on the lot to 17 feet or higher if any of the following will occur:
a. The floor area will exceed the allowable maximum floor area for the lot; or
b. The floor area will exceed 85% of the allowable maximum floor area and any of the following apply:
i. The average slope of the lot or the building site is 30% or greater,
ii. The height of any structure on the lot is more than 25 feet, or
iii. The lot is located in the Hillside Design District and 500 or more cubic yards of grading is proposed to occur outside the footprint of the main or accessory buildings. Soil located within five feet of an exterior wall of a main or accessory building that is excavated and re compacted shall not be included in the calculation of the volume of grading outside the building footprint.
2. Measuring Floor Area Pursuant to this Section. In determining floor area pursuant to this section see Section 30.15.070, Measuring Floor Area, and the following:
a. Below Grade Excluded. On any floor which is partly below and partly above grade, such as a basement, cellar, or understory, the total floor area of that floor may be excluded from the floor to lot area ratio (FAR) if no more than a cumulative total width of 12 feet per elevation has a distance from finished grade to ceiling greater than four feet.
COUNCIL INTRODUCTION DRAFT
SHOWING CHANGES FROM CURRENT CODE 11/07/23
8 b. Partially Below Grade Reduced. On any floor which is partly below and partly above grade, such as a basement, cellar or understory, the total floor area of that floor may be reduced by 50% from the floor to lot area ratio (FAR) if more than 12 feet, but less than one half the entire length of the perimeter has a distance from grade to ceiling greater than four feet.
c. All Other Floor Area Included. If more than one half the entire length of the perimeter of any floor has a distance from grade to ceiling greater than four feet, it is included in the floor to lot area ratio (FAR). d. Accessory Dwelling Unit and Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit Included. Floor area within a portion of a structure designed and permitted as an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit is included.
FIGURE 30.20.030.A.2: MEASURING FLOOR AREA
B. Setback Reduction for Sloping Lots.
1. Residential Single Unit Zones. In Residential Single Unit zones, where the average natural slope of the area within 50 feet of the front lot line is more than 20%, the required front setback for all stories is reduced by five feet.
2. R-2 Zone. In the R-2 Zone, where the average natural slope of the area within 50 feet of the front lot line is more than 20%, the required front setback for all stories is reduced to 10 feet.
C. Interior Setback Reduction for Covered Parking on Lots 55 Feet or Less.
The required interior setback for covered parking on lots in the R-M or R-MH zone less than 55 feet in width, measured at the location of the covered parking structure, and developed with multi-unit residential may be reduced to three feet by the appropriate Design Review body provided the covered parking opening does not face a street or alley and the interior depth of the covered parking structure does not exceed 20 feet.
COUNCIL INTRODUCTION DRAFT
SHOWING CHANGES FROM CURRENT CODE 11/07/23
9 D. Interior Setback Reduction for Covered Parking Opposite the Primary Front Lot Line. The required interior setback for covered parking on lots in the R-M or RMH zone developed with multi-unit residential may be reduced to three feet on the lot line opposite the primary front lot line. In the event of two or more front lot lines, the setback of only one opposite lot line may be reduced to three feet.
FIGURE 30.20.030.C AND D: INTERIOR SETBACK REDUCTION FOR COVERED
PARKING
SECTION 2. Section 30.25.030 of Chapter 30.25 of Title 30 of the Santa Barbara Municipal Code is amended to read as follows:
30.25.03 Development Standards.
Table 30.25.030 prescribes the development standards for Commercial and Office Zones. Section numbers refer to other sections of this Title, while individual letters refer to subsections that directly follow the table. Additional regulations that apply throughout the City are located in Division III, Citywide Regulations.
COUNCIL INTRODUCTION DRAFT
SHOWING CHANGES FROM CURRENT CODE 11/07/23
10 TABLE 30.25.030: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS–COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE ZONES
Zone O-R O-M C-R C-G
Lot Size and Street Frontage
Minimum Net Lot Area for
Newly Created Lots (sq. ft.)
None; except 3,500 sq. ft. of net lot area is required for lots that include residential uses
Minimum Public Street
Frontage (ft.)
None, See §30.140.180, Street Frontage and Access; and
§30.140.120, Location of Lot Lines
Maximum Base Residential Density
Less than 5,000 sq. ft. Net
Lot Area 1 unit
5,000 to 6,999 sq. ft. Net
Lot Area 2 units
7,000 and more sq. ft. Net
Lot Area
3 units, or 1 unit/3,500 sq. ft. of net lot area, whichever is greater
Additional Residential Density Allowances
All lots, in compliance with
the applicable section
See §30.185.040, Accessory Dwelling Units
See §30.140.220, Variable Density in Certain Zones
See Chapter 30.150, Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program
See Chapter 30.145, Affordable Housing and Density
Bonus and Development Incentives
Structure Form and Location
Minimum Residential Unit
Size
Studio: 220 square feet;
All other units: 400 square feet
See §30.140.150, Residential Unit
Maximum Height (ft.) 45 45 45
45;
60 for Community
Benefit Project or
Community Benefit
Housing Project
(§30.140.100.B)
See also A,
Theater Additions
Additional Height
Limitations Adjacent to all
Residential Zones
Height is further limited in accordance with §30.140.170, Solar Access Height Limitations
COUNCIL INTRODUCTION DRAFT
SHOWING CHANGES FROM CURRENT CODE 11/07/23
11 TABLE 30.25.030: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS–COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE ZONES
Zone O-R O-M C-R C-G
Minimum Setbacks (ft.)
See also §30.140.090, Encroachments into Setbacks and
Open Yards
See Chapter 30.150, Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program
Front
Residential only development: Same
as R-M Zone
Nonresidential and mixed-use
development:
● 1st and 2nd Stories: 10
● Portions of structure above
2 nd story: 20
Residential only
development:
Same as R-M Zone
Nonresidential and
mixed-use
development: 0
Interior, Adjacent to a
Nonresidential Zone
Residential only
development: Same as
R-M Zone
Nonresidential and
mixed-use development:
● 1st and 2nd Stories: 6
● Portions of structure
above 2nd story: 10
Residential only
development: Same as R-M
Zone
Nonresidential and mixed-use
development: 0
Interior, Adjacent to a
Residential Zone
Residential structures, and the residential portion of any mixed-use development: Same as R-M Zone
Nonresidential structures, and the nonresidential portion of any structure in a mixed-use development, 30 feet or less in height: 15
Nonresidential structures, and the nonresidential portion of any structure in a mixed-use development, more than
30 feet in height: 20
Portions of structures used by both the residential and nonresidential uses are subject to the setback
requirement for nonresidential structures.
COUNCIL INTRODUCTION DRAFT
SHOWING CHANGES FROM CURRENT CODE 11/07/23
12 TABLE 30.25.030: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS–COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE ZONES
Zone O-R O-M C-R C-G
Uncovered Parking See §30.175.060, Location of Required Automobile and Bicycle Parking
Open Yard
Open Yards
Any lot developed with residential uses shall provide open yard pursuant to §30.140.140, Open Yards.
See Chapter 30.150, Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program
Additional Commercial and Office Zone Development Regulations A. Theater Additions. A stage addition to a live performance theater shall not be considered as part of the height of the structure under the following circumstances:
1. The stage addition is devoted solely to rigging fly systems,
2. The addition is made to a theater that existed as of December 31, 2003, and
3. The stage addition does not exceed the height of the theater as such theater existed on December 31, 2003.
SECTION 3. Section 30.30.030 of Chapter 30.30 of Title 30 of the Santa Barbara Municipal Code is amended to read as follows:
30.30.030 Development Standards.
Table 30.30.030 prescribes the development standards for Manufacturing Zones.
Section numbers refer to other sections of this Title. Additional regulations that apply throughout the City are located in Division III, Citywide Regulations.
TABLE 30.30.030: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS–MANUFACTURING ZONES Zone M-C M-I
Lot Size and Street Frontage
Minimum Net Lot Area for
Newly Created Lots (sq. ft.)
None; except 3,500 sq. ft. of net lot area is required for lots that include residential uses
Minimum Public Street
Frontage (ft.)
None, See §30.140.180, Street Frontage and Access;
and §30.140.120, Location of Lot Lines
Maximum Base Residential Density
Less than 5,000 sq. ft. Net Lot
Area 1 unit
COUNCIL INTRODUCTION DRAFT
SHOWING CHANGES FROM CURRENT CODE 11/07/23
13 TABLE 30.30.030: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS–MANUFACTURING ZONES Zone M-C M-I
5,000 to 6,999 sq. ft. Net Lot
Area 2 units
7,000 and more sq. ft. Net Lot
Area
3 units, or 1 unit/3,500 sq. ft. of
net lot area, whichever is
greater
One Caretaker Unit
See §30.185.120,
Caretaker Unit
Additional Residential Density Allowances
All lots, in compliance with the
applicable section
See §30.185.040, Accessory
Dwelling Units
See §30.140.220, Variable
Density in Certain Zones
See Chapter 30.150, Average
Unit-Size Density Incentive
Program
See Chapter 30.145, Affordable
Housing and Density Bonus
and Development Incentives
None applicable
Structure Form and Location
Minimum Residential Unit
Size
Studio: 220 square feet;
All other units: 400 square feet
See §30.140.150, Residential Unit
Maximum Height (ft.)
45;
60 for Community Benefit Project or Community Benefit
Housing Project (§30.140.100.B)
Additional Height Limitations
Adjacent to all Residential
Zones
Height is further limited in accordance with §30.140.170, Solar Access Height Limitations
Minimum Setbacks (ft.)
See also §30.140.090, Encroachments into Setbacks
and Open Yards
See Chapter 30.150, Average Unit-Size Density
Incentive Program
Front
Residential only structures: Same as R-M Zone
Nonresidential and mixed-use development: 0
Interior, Adjacent to a
Nonresidential Zone
Residential only structures: Same as R-M Zone
COUNCIL INTRODUCTION DRAFT
SHOWING CHANGES FROM CURRENT CODE 11/07/23
14 TABLE 30.30.030: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS–MANUFACTURING ZONES Zone M-C M-I
Nonresidential and mixed-use development: 0
Interior, Adjacent to a
Residential Zone
Residential structures and the residential portion of any mixed-use development: Same as R-M Zone
Nonresidential, and the nonresidential portion of any
structure in a mixed-use development, 30 feet in height or less: 15
Nonresidential structures, and the nonresidential portion of any structure in a mixed-use development, more than
30 feet in height: 20
Portions of structures used by both the residential and nonresidential uses are subject to the setback
requirement for nonresidential structures.
Uncovered Parking See §30.175.060, Location of Required Automobile and Bicycle Parking
Open Yard
Open Yards
Any lot developed with residential use shall provide
open yard pursuant to §30.140.140, Open Yards.
See Chapter 30.150, Average Unit-Size Density
Incentive Program
SECTION 4. Section 30.140.220 of Chapter 30.140 of Title 30 of the Santa Barbara Municipal Code is deleted in its entirety as follows:
30.140.220 Variable Density in Certain Zones.
A. Applicability.
1. Applicable Zones. The provisions of this section are applicable only in the R-M, R-MH, C-R, C-G, M-C, and O-R zones, and where residential uses are allowed in the CO-HV and CO-CAR zones. Overlay zones shall not prohibit the application of variable density if variable density is otherwise allowed in the applicable zone.
2. Effective Dates. The provisions of this section shall be suspended for the period of time the Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program established by Chapter 30.150, Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program, is available. During the suspension of the provisions of this section, the following shall apply:
COUNCIL INTRODUCTION DRAFT
SHOWING CHANGES FROM CURRENT CODE 11/07/23
15 a. Projects developed or approved in accordance with this section while the Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program is in effect shall remain legal conforming land uses.
b. Alterations and additions to variable density projects are permitted, provided the alterations or additions do not add new residential units or add bedrooms to existing residential units in excess of the number of bedrooms that could have been developed on the real property under the Variable Density Program.
B. Allowable Density. Lots may be used as a building site for more units than the maximum base density of the applicable zone if the number of bedrooms in the residential unit is limited in accord with the following:
1. Studio unit: One unit per 1,600 square feet of lot area.
2. One bedroom unit: One unit per 1,840 square feet of lot area.
3. Two bedroom unit: One unit per 2,320 square feet of lot area.
4. Three or more bedroom unit: One unit per 2,800 square feet of lot area.
C. Exception. Existing lots with less than 5,000 square feet of net lot area shall not be used as a building site under this section for more than two residential units.
SECTION 5. Section 30.150.010 of Chapter 30.150 of Title 30 of the Santa Barbara Municipal Code is amended to read as follows:
30.150.010 Purpose.
The Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program carries out a key program directed by the 2011 General Plan. The Program facilitates the construction of smaller housing units by allowing increased density and development standard incentives in selected areas of the City. Housing types that provide housing opportunities to the City’s workforce are encouraged and facilitated by the program. The Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program will be in effect for a trial period until February 15, 2024. Pursuant to the General Plan’s Land Use Element Policy, Implementation Action LG6.2, as the trial period is approaching its end, the Council will consider whether to extend or modify the Program. In absence of Council action before the expiration date, the Initial Program Period will end and the allowed residential density will default to the Variable Density standards allowed under Santa Barbara Municipal Code section 28.21.080.F as it existed in 2011, and as presently codified in Section 30.140.220.
SECTION 6. Section 30.150.040 of Chapter 30.150 of Title 30 of the Santa Barbara Municipal Code is deleted in its entirety as follows:
COUNCIL INTRODUCTION DRAFT
SHOWING CHANGES FROM CURRENT CODE 11/07/23
16 30.150.040 Program Duration.
A. Initial Program Period. The Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program will expire on February 15, 2024. The City Council intends to conduct a noticed public hearing pursuant to state and local law to determine whether to extend or modify the program. In absence of Council action before the expiration date, the Initial Program Period will end and the allowed residential density will remain the Variable Density standards allowed under Santa Barbara Municipal Code section 28.21.080.F as it existed in 2011.
B. Pending Applications. Any application for new development that is deemed complete prior to the expiration of the Program term established in subsection A, Initial Program Period, above, may continue to be processed and potentially approved under the Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program. (Ord. 6052, 2022; Ord. 5954, 2020; Ord. 5890, 2019)
SECTION 7. Section 30.150.050 of Chapter 30.150 of Title 30 of the Santa Barbara Municipal Code is amended to read as follows:
30.150.050 Status of R-M and R-MH Residential Density.
Notwithstanding the provisions of Chapter 30.20, Residential Zones, for the duration of the Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program established in Section
30.150.040.A, Initial Program Period, the following incentive program is available regarding the residential density of new development projects in zones of the City which otherwise would apply the R-M residential density:
A. Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program. Projects developed in accordance with the provisions of the Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program established in Section 30.150.070, Average Unit-Size Density Incentives, hereof are exempt from the standard R-M residential density provisions specified in Table
30.20.030.B, Development Standards–Two-Unit and Multi-Unit Zones.
B. Development of Affordable Housing. Projects that meet the affordability criteria of the State Density Bonus Law or the City’s Affordable Housing Policies and Procedures may continue to propose development pursuant to the density incentives established in Chapter 30.145, Affordable Housing and Density Bonus and Development Incentives.
SECTION 8. Elimination of the program expiration date is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines [Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations] and Santa Barbara Municipal Code (SBMC) section 22.100.070.C.5 Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations. SBMC Section 22.100.070.C.5(c) specifies that that categorical exemptions in this class include “Adoption or amendment of land use or development ordinances, regulations, standards,
COUNCIL INTRODUCTION DRAFT
SHOWING CHANGES FROM CURRENT CODE 11/07/23
17 or guidelines that substantially maintain existing land use intensity or density”. In addition, SBMC Section 22.100.070.C.5(g) specifies that exemptions include “Extension of time limits on approved projects where circumstances have not changed.” Eliminating the Average Unit-Size Density Incentive Program expiration date continues a program that was previously analyzed without changes, and maintains existing land use intensity or density.
Agenda Item No. 24
File Code No. 120.04
CITY OF SANTA BARBARA
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2023
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: City Clerk’s Office, City Administrator’s Office
SUBJECT: Interviews for City Advisory Groups
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council hold interviews of applicants to various City Advisory Groups (Est. time 6:00 p.m.).
DISCUSSION:
Interviews of applicants for various positions on City Advisory Groups are to be held on November 7, 2023, at an estimated time of 6:00 p.m.
There are currently 66 vacancies. A list of eligible applicants and pertinent information about the City Advisory Groups is attached. Applicants have been notified that to be considered for appointment they must be interviewed. Applicants have been requested to prepare a two to three minute verbal presentation in response to a set of questions. Those questions are specific to the group for which they are applying. Applicants applying to more than one advisory group may have up to five minutes for their presentation.
Appointments are scheduled to take place on December 5, 2023.
ATTACHMENT: List of Applicants
PREPARED BY: Niko Lopez, Deputy City Clerk
SUBMITTED BY: Sarah Gorman, MMC, City Clerk Services Manager APPROVED BY: City Administrator's Office
Agenda Item No. 25
File Code No. 140.05
ATTACHMENT
1 Annual Recruitment 2023
ACCESS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Four vacancies.
Term Expirations:
All: December 31, 2027
Qualifications/Category: Members shall be residents of the City during their terms in office. They shall have a demonstrated interest, experience, and commitment to issues pertaining to disability and access. Members may fit into any of the following categories:
Members from the Disability Community;
Members from the Architectural/Engineering/Building Community; and Members of the Public at-large
Appointees may not hold any full-time paid office or employment in City government.
CATEGORY
(Number of Vacancies)
APPLICANT
Incumbent
Appt. Dates
(Years Served)
Notes
Michael Rassler
12/8/2020
(3 years) - City resident
Disability Community
Adelaida Ortega - City resident
James Marston
12/8/2015; 12/12/2017; 12/8/2020
(8 years) - City resident
Susanne Tejada
12/11/2018; 12/8/2020
(5 years) Architectural/Engineering/ - City resident
Building Community
Elizabeth Sorgman
- City resident
- Current member of Building & Fire
Code Board of Appeals
2 Annual Recruitment 2023
ARCHITECTURAL BOARD OF REVIEW
Two vacancies.
Term Expirations:
December 31, 2027 – Licensed Architect
Qualifications/Category: Either or both new appointees may be qualified electors of the County and must remain so during their terms on the Board. Members must be licensed architects, or possess professional experience in related fields, including but not limited to, landscape architecture, building design, structural engineering, or industrial design.
Appointees may not hold any full-time paid office or employment in City government.
CATEGORY
(Number of Vacancies)
APPLICANT
Incumbent
Appt. Dates
(Years Served)
Notes
Dennis Whelan* 11/12/2019
(4 years) - County resident
Carolyn Adams - City resident
Licensed Architect –
City/County (2)
Andrew Petrovsky - City resident
*Has confirmed that they are a Qualified elector of the City/County. 3 Annual Recruitment 2023
ARTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Two vacancies.
Term Expiration: December 31, 2027
Qualifications/Category: Members may be residents of the South Coast area of Santa Barbara County. Members should be persons who demonstrate an interest in and commitment to cultural and arts activities. Appointees may not hold any full-time paid office or employment in City government.
CATEGORY
(Number of Vacancies)
APPLICANT
Incumbent
Appt. Dates
(Years Served)
Notes
Margie Yahyavi* 12/09/2014; 12/8/2015; 11/12/2019
(9 years) - City resident
Teri Ball - County resident
Diane Mackenzie - City resident
Nicholas Ragheb - City resident
Sophia Rasura - City resident
George Yatchisin - City resident
City/County Resident (2)
Chryss Yost* - City resident
*Has confirmed that they are a Qualified elector of the City.
BUILDING AND FIRE CODE BOARD OF APPEALS – no applicants CITIZENS’ OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE – no applicants
4 Annual Recruitment 2023
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
Three vacancies.
Term Expirations:
December 31, 2027
Qualifications/Categories: Qualified elector of the City. Appointee may not hold any full-time paid office or employment in City government, and for one year after ceasing to be a member, shall not be eligible for any salaried office or employment with the City.
CATEGORY
(Number of Vacancies)
APPLICANT
Incumbent
Appt. Dates
(Years Served)
Notes
Alan Kasehagen*
11/25/2003; 12/18/2007;
12/13/2011; 12/8/2015; 11/12/2019
(20 years)
- City resident
Qualified Elector of the City
(3)
Donna Lewis*
6/28/2005; 12/18/2007; 12/13/2011;
12/8/2015; 11/12/2019
(18 years)
- City resident
*Has confirmed that they are a Qualified elector of the City. 5 Annual Recruitment 2023
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE
Six vacancies.
Term Expirations:
December 31, 2024 (Downtown Area Neighborhood);
June 30, 2026 (Business Community); and
December 31, 2027 (Human Services Organization; Latino Community; Westside/Lower Westside Neighborhood; Youth Oriented Services Organization).
Qualifications/Category: Members must be residents or employees of the designated organizations/neighborhoods, and be qualified electors of the County.
Business Community;
Downtown Area Neighborhood;
Human Services Organization;
Latino Community;
Westside/Lower Westside Neighborhood; and
Youth Oriented Services Organization
Appointees may not hold any full-time paid office or employment in City government.
CATEGORY
(Number of Vacancies)
APPLICANT
Incumbent
Appt. Dates
(Years Served)
Notes
Business Community (1)
Downtown Area Neighborhood
(1)
Human Services Organization
(1)
CONTINUED ON THE NEXT PAGE.
6 Annual Recruitment 2023
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE (cont’d) Six vacancies.
Term Expirations:
December 31, 2024 (Downtown Area Neighborhood);
June 30, 2026 (Business Community); and
December 31, 2027 (Human Services Organization; Latino Community; Westside/Lower Westside Neighborhood; Youth Oriented Services Organization).
Qualifications/Category: Members must be residents or employees of the designated organizations/neighborhoods, and be qualified electors of the County.
Business Community;
Downtown Area Neighborhood;
Human Services Organization;
Latino Community;
Westside/Lower Westside Neighborhood; and
Youth Oriented Services Organization
Appointees may not hold any full-time paid office or employment in City government.
CATEGORY
(Number of Vacancies)
APPLICANT
Incumbent
Appt. Dates
(Years Served)
Notes
Latino Community (1)
Westside/Lower Westside
Neighborhood (1)
Jenna Hamilton-Rolle** 11/12/2019
(4 years) - County resident
Youth Oriented Services
Organization (1)
**Has confirmed that they are a Qualified elector of the County. 7 Annual Recruitment 2023
COMMUNITY EVENTS AND FESTIVALS COMMITTEE
Four vacancies.
Term Expiration: December 31, 2027
Qualifications/Category: Members must represent one of the following categories:
Business/Lodging/Retail Industry; and
Cultural Arts.
Appointees may not hold any full-time paid office or employment in City government.
CATEGORY
(Number of Vacancies)
APPLICANT Incumbent
Appt. Dates
(Years Served)
Notes
Business/Lodging/Retail
Industry (3) Antoinette Chartier 11/12/2019
(4 years) - County resident
Cultural Arts (1)
8 Annual Recruitment 2023
CREEKS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Four vacancies.
Term Expiration: December 31, 2027
Qualifications/Category: Up to two appointees may be non-City residents. Members must meet the following categories:
Member from the Hotel/Lodging Industry; and
Members with some experience in ocean use, business, environmental issues, and/or provide community at large representation.
Appointees may not hold any full-time paid office or employment in City government.
CATEGORY
(Number of Vacancies)
APPLICANT
Incumbent
Appt. Dates
(Years Served)
Notes
Hotel/Lodging Industry
Representative (1)
Chris Cline 12/7/2021
(2 years) - City resident
Stephanie Moore 6/27/2023
(6 months)
- City resident
- Environmental/Land Use/Ocean
Use Category
Lee Heller
12/7/2021
(2 years)
- City resident
- Environmental Land
Use/Business/Community Issues
Category
City/non-City Resident (3)
Wendy Wittl
- City resident
- At-large representation category
9 Annual Recruitment 2023
DOWNTOWN PARKING COMMITTEE
Two vacancies.
Term Expiration: December 31, 2027
Qualifications/Categories: Residents of the City or of the County. All members shall demonstrate an interest in, and knowledge of, downtown parking issues.
Appointee may not hold any full-time paid office or employment in City government.
CATEGORY
(Number of Vacancies)
APPLICANT
Incumbent
Appt. Dates
(Years Served)
Notes
City/County Resident (2) Andrew Newkirk
6/26/2018; 11/12/2019
(5 years, 6 months) - City resident
10 Annual Recruitment 2023
HARBOR COMMISSION
Two vacancies.
Term Expiration: December 31, 2027
Qualifications/Categories: Qualified elector of the City; one member may be a qualified elector of the County. Appointee may not hold any full-time paid office or employment in City government.
CATEGORY
(Number of Vacancies)
APPLICANT
Incumbent
Appt. Dates
(Years Served)
Notes
Alexandra Benjamin* - City resident
Jaime Diamond - County resident
Merit McCrea* 6/28/2016; 11/12/2019
(7 years, 6 months) - City resident
Michael Nelson
11/12/2019
(4 years) - City resident
Jeff Escola - City resident
Conrad Metzenberg* - City resident
Amber Noelle* - City resident
Qualified Elector of the
City/County (2)
Richard Smalldon - City resident
*Has confirmed that they are a Qualified elector of the City. 11 Annual Recruitment 2023
HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION
One vacancy.
Term Expiration: December 31, 2027
Qualifications/Categories: All members shall have demonstrated interest in and knowledge of the history and architecture of the City. Appointee may be a qualified elector of the City or a non-City resident representing one of the following categories:
Licensed Architect;
Professional Architectural Historian;
Licensed Landscape Architect; or
Public at large.
Appointee may not hold any full-time paid office or employment in City government.
CATEGORY
(Number of Vacancies)
APPLICANT
Incumbent
Appt. Dates
(Years Served)
Notes
Sarah Boyajian* - City resident
- Public at large category
Michael Drury
7/1/2008; 12/13/2011; 12/8/2015;
11/12/2019
(15 years, 5, months)
- City resident
- Public at large category
Stephanie Farmer - County resident
- Public at large category
Rebecca Heald - City resident
- Public at large category
Licensed Architect;
Professional Architectural
Historian; Licensed
Landscape Architect; or
Public at Large (1)
Sophia Rasura - City resident
- Public at large category
*Has confirmed that they are a Qualified elector of the City. 12 Annual Recruitment 2023
HOUSING AUTHORITY COMMISSION
One vacancy.
Term Expiration: August 6, 2027
Qualifications/Category: Members should have some interest and background in housing development, management, or other comparable experience. Member may be a non-City resident representing the public at large. Appointees may not hold any full-time paid office or employment in City government.
CATEGORY
(Number of Vacancies)
APPLICANT
Incumbent
Appt. Dates
(Years Served)
Notes
David Rowell
6/18/2019
(4 years, 6 months) - County resident
Public at Large (1)
Hannah Sullivan - County resident
13 Annual Recruitment 2023
LIBRARY BOARD
One vacancy.
Term Expiration: December 31, 2027
Qualifications/Categories: Qualified elector of the City. Appointee may not hold any full-time paid office or employment in City government.
CATEGORY
(Number of Vacancies)
APPLICANT
Incumbent
Appt. Dates
(Years Served)
Notes
Leslie Dinaberg*
12/8/2020
(3 years) - City resident Qualified Elector of the City (1)
Brian Barnwell - City resident
*Has confirmed that they are a Qualified elector of the City.
LIVING WAGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE – no applicants
NEIGHBORHOOD ADVISORY COUNCIL – no applicants
14 Annual Recruitment 2023
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
One vacancy.
Term Expiration:
June 30, 2024 (Youth Intern*); and
December 31, 2027 (Qualified Elector)
Qualifications/Categories: Members of the Commission must be qualified electors of the City. *Youth Intern: One youth intern who is not a member of the Commission and is a high school student volunteer who resides within the Santa Barbara High School District or attends other high schools within the City limits and is nominated by the principal of the student’s high school. The student shall be either in their junior or senior year of high school and shall be and remain a student in good standing as is determined by the high school. A student that graduates shall not serve for more than three (3) months following graduation. Appointees may not hold any full-time paid office or employment in City government.
CATEGORY
(Number of Vacancies)
APPLICANT
Incumbent
Appt. Dates
(Years Served)
Notes
Youth Intern (1)
Qualified Elector of the City (1) Jacob Lesner-Buxton
6/28/2016; 11/12/2019
(7 years, 6 months) - City resident
15 Annual Recruitment 2023
PLANNING COMMISSION
Two vacancies.
Term Expiration: December 31, 2027
Qualifications/Categories: Qualified electors of the City. Appointee may not hold any full-time paid office or employment in City government.
CATEGORY
(Number of Vacancies)
APPLICANT
Incumbent
Appt. Dates
(Years Served)
Notes
Donald DeLuccio* 1/31/2023
(11 months) - City resident
Fred Sweeney - City resident
Rebecca Heald - City resident
Qualified Elector of the City
(2)
Sara Wylder - City resident
*Has confirmed that they are a Qualified elector of the City. 16 Annual Recruitment 2023
RENTAL HOUSING MEDIATION BOARD
Nine vacancies.
Term Expiration: December 31, 2027
Qualifications/Categories Two appointees must be City residents; remaining appointees may be City or County residents. Non-City residents must reside in a jurisdiction which contracts with the Rental Housing Mediation Program for services (currently Goleta and Carpinteria). All appointees must also meet one of the following qualifications:
Landlord Mediator who owns or manages residential properties for consideration or compensation, whether single or multiple units;
Tenant Mediator who rents or leases a dwelling with no ownership of residential properties; and Homeowner Mediator who owns and resides in a single-family residence with no ownership of other residential properties.
Appointees may not hold any full-time paid office or employment in City government.
CATEGORY
(Number of
Vacancies)
APPLICANT
Incumbent
Appt. Dates
(Years Served)
Notes
John Beardsmore 6/28/2022
(1 years, 6 months) - City resident Landlord Mediator
(4) Teresa Patino 6/28/2022
(1 years, 6 months) - City Resident
Marilyn Loperfido 11/12/2019
(4 years) - City Resident
Tenant Mediator (4)
Cathy Murillo - City Resident
Leesa Beck
11/12/2019; 12/11/2012; 6/28/2011; Prior
Service (2007 – 2011)
(16 years)
- County Resident Homeowner
Mediator (1)
Bruce Wollenberg - City Resident
17 Annual Recruitment 2023
SANTA BARBARA YOUTH COUNCIL
Four vacancies.
Term Expirations:
June 30, 2024
Qualifications/Categories: Members must be between the ages of 13-19 years. Appointees may be residents of the County or City.
Appointees must also meet one of the following categories:
One member must be a student attending a Local Private School or independent studies; Two members from a local alternative, community, or continuation high school; or One member representing the Public at Large.
Note: All applicants also fit the category of Public at Large. Applicants must appear for an interview before the Santa Barbara Youth Council and City Council.
CATEGORY
(Number of Vacancies)
APPLICANT
Incumbent
Appt. Dates
(Years Served)
Notes
Sophia Probstel - City resident
- Laguna Blanca student
Eloise Lowther-Phillips - County resident
- Laguna Blanca student
Local Private High
School/Independent Studies
(1)
Sindy Zavala - County resident
- Bishop Diego student
Local Alternative, Community,
or Continuation High School
(2)
Kaarlo Anderson - County resident; DPHS student
Evan Pinsker - County resident; DPHS student
Gabriele Scussat - County resident; DPHS student
Kavya Suresh - County resident; SMHS student
Alok Thakrar - County resident; DPHS student
Public at Large (1)
Parikshit Mehta - County resident; DPHS student
SISTER CITIES BOARD – no applicants
18 Annual Recruitment 2023
WATER COMMISSION
Three vacancies.
Term Expiration: December 31, 2027
Qualifications/Category: Members must be qualified electors of the City; one member may be a qualified elector of the County.
Appointees may not hold any full-time paid office or employment in City government.
CATEGORY
(Number of Vacancies)
APPLICANT
Incumbent
Appt. Dates
(Years Served)
Notes
Arturo Keller* 6/26/2018; 11/12/2019
(5 years, 6 months) - City resident Qualified Elector of the City/County (3)
Jeffrey Young 11/12/2019
(4 years, 1 month) - City resident
*Has confirmed that they are a Qualified elector of the City.
One applicant indicated they would be interested in any Advisory Group – Daiquiri Beebe – City Resident
CITY OF SANTA BARBARA
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2023
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: City Attorney’s Office
SUBJECT: Conference with City Attorney – Existing Litigation – Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)(1)
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council hold a closed session to consider pending litigation pursuant to subsection (d)(1) of section 54956.9 of the Government Code and take appropriate action as needed.
The pending litigation is Karen Barrows v. County of SB, et al. SBSC Case No. 22CV03508.
Scheduling: Duration 15 mins; anytime
Report: None anticipated
PREPARED BY: Sarah J. Knecht, City Attorney
SUBMITTED BY: Sarah J. Knecht, City Attorney
APPROVED BY: City Administrator's Office
Agenda Item No. 26
File Code No. 160.03
CITY OF SANTA BARBARA
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2023
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: City Attorney’s Office
SUBJECT: Conference with City Attorney – Existing Litigation – Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)(1)
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council hold a closed session to consider pending litigation pursuant to subsection (d)(1) of section 54956.9 of the Government Code and take appropriate action as needed.
The pending litigation is City of Santa Barbara v. 3M Company, et al. USDC Case No. 2:22-cv-00993-RMG (MDL No. 2873) and In re: Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation, Master Docket No. 2:18-mn-02873-RMG (MDL No. 2873).
Scheduling: Duration 20 mins; anytime
Report: None anticipated
PREPARED BY: Sarah J. Knecht, City Attorney
SUBMITTED BY: Sarah J. Knecht, City Attorney
APPROVED BY: City Administrator's Office
Agenda Item No. 27
File Code No. 160.03
CITY OF SANTA BARBARA
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA DATE: November 7, 2023
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: Human Resources Department
SUBJECT: Public Employment/Public Employee Appointment
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council hold a closed session, per Government Code Section 54957(b)(1), to discuss appointment for the position of Interim City Administrator and, if appropriate, make a decision regarding that appointment.
Scheduling: Duration: 30 minutes; anytime
Report: Report anticipated.
PREPARED BY: Wendy Levy, Human Resources Director
SUBMITTED BY: Nicole Grisanti, City Administrator’s Office APPROVED BY: John Doimas, Assistant City Attorney IV
Agenda Item No. 28
File Code No. 450.01