Santa Barbara design board: proposed second‑story at 1201 Palisades would exceed FAR; board urges design changes

The Single Family Design Board on Sept. 22 reviewed a pre‑application for 1201 Palisades Drive, where the applicant seeks a 266‑square‑foot second‑story addition (including a 52‑square‑foot balcony) atop an existing garage and accessory dwelling unit. Planning staff said the proposed total would bring the parcel to about 104 square feet over the allowed floor‑area ratio and to roughly 104 percent of the guideline maximum FAR.

Why it matters: The project proposes modest additional living space but would exceed the city's FAR limits; the board's comments will guide whether the applicant proceeds with a formal modification request and later design approval. Staff emphasized this was a conceptual, nonappealable pre‑application consultation and that neighborhood preservation findings will be required at project design review.

The applicant and homeowner described the proposal as a small master suite and balcony intended to increase southern light and to update an older kitchen and front entry. Owner Jennifer Balinski told the board that neighbors contacted in advance voiced support; she read a neighbor text praising the design. In public comment, one nearby resident said she was “in full support of it,” and the board did not receive written opposition at the hearing.

Board feedback focused on three items. First, members found the mass and scale of the addition generally compatible with the block when viewed with the proposed landscaping and setbacks. Second, several members said the balcony and the change in roof pitch at that location created an awkward “pitch break” that should be studied and resolved in subsequent designs. Third, the board asked the applicant to provide comparative FAR examples from nearby properties and visual precedents for a proposed hexagonal/round upper window so the board could better judge neighborhood compatibility.

Planning staff clarified a point of zoning procedure that repeatedly came up in the discussion: the project’s FAR calculation already includes the permitted ADU, so measuring the house without the ADU would not reflect the zoning review that staff would perform later.

The board formalized its comments in a motion calling the mass and scale appropriate, asking the applicant to study ways to resolve the balcony roof pitch break, and requesting examples of nearby larger homes (if any) that exceed 100 percent FAR and inspiration for the proposed upper‑level window. The motion passed unanimously.

What happens next: The board's recorded comments are advisory for this pre‑application phase. The applicant may proceed to file for a formal FAR modification and project design approval; when that application is formalized, the board and planning staff will expect revised drawings addressing the roof and window details and additional neighborhood FAR context.

Sources: Staff presentation and applicant statements at the Sept. 22 Single Family Design Board hearing; in‑person public comment recorded at the meeting.