Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District says joint Station 62 partner has withdrawn; title and permitting issues slow other station plans
Summary
District staff told the board that Regency has decided not to proceed with the joint Station 62 project, Santa Barbara County is researching title on the Caltrans lot, and Station 63 and Station 61 planning remain unresolved amid zoning and cost questions.
District staff reported multiple setbacks in station planning that could delay where and when the district builds or expands fire facilities.
Fire management told the board that Regency, the private owner involved in the proposed joint Station 62 project, has notified the district that it is no longer interested in moving forward. Fire Chief and staff said the change in position will be reviewed by the joint station committee and then reported to the full boards of the partnering districts to determine next steps.
Staff also said the Caltrans lot tied to Station 62 appears to have a title question: legal counsel Mark Manion is researching whether title for the relevant parcel rests with Santa Barbara County rather than Caltrans. The title determination must be resolved before the district can negotiate next steps for that lot.
Separately, staff described preliminary outreach to Southern California Edison about a roughly 10-acre parcel on the 3500 block of Via Real that the utility has considered selling. The district said it expressed interest in a partial parcel for a temporary station if zoning or utility conversion makes the parcel available.
On Station 61's upstairs renovation, Logistics Battalion Chief Tunney reported the project is through development review and staff expects to submit a building permit application in the next two to three weeks; if all goes well, Tunney said the project remains on track for a March'April start. The district previously put the renovation out to bid and awarded it to contractor Godkin; staff said they held Godkin to its original bid and told contractors any material increase would require returning to the board for approval. A figure mentioned during discussion was about $623,000 for the project bid, and staff said compliance costs such as additional ADA work could push costs higher but would be reported back to the board before approval.
District legal counsel and staff will continue title research and will report recommendations to the board and the joint station committee at a future meeting.
