Staff hearing officer approves ADU and oversized garage at 726 Surfview Road

The Santa Barbara City staff hearing officer approved two front-setback modifications and a garage-size modification July 9 to allow a two-story accessory dwelling unit (ADU) above a rebuilt garage at 726 Surfview Road.

The decision, made by Staff Hearing Officer Tess Harris, follows a staff presentation and Single-Family Design Board (SFDB) review. Harris said she agreed with staff’s recommendation and would make the environmental and zoning findings recorded in the staff report. "I agree with staff's recommendation to approve the project, and I will make the findings for environmental review," Harris said in announcing her decision.

The project site is a 15,567-square-foot corner lot at Surfview Drive and Island View Drive currently developed with a 1,412-square-foot, one-story residence and a 424-square-foot garage. The proposal calls for demolition of the existing garage and construction of a 749-square-foot garage with a 749-square-foot ADU above, producing a proposed total of 2,910 square feet (about 67% of the guideline FAR), according to the staff presentation.

Planner Miss Braddison told the hearing that the applications under review were: two front-setback modifications (one along Surfview Drive to allow the rebuilt garage and second-story ADU to encroach into the 30-foot front setback, and a second along Island View Drive to allow access stairs and a second-floor entry deck for the ADU to encroach into that 30-foot front setback) and a garage-size modification to allow a garage larger than the 500-square-foot limit in the municipal code.

Braddison said the site is already nonconforming to both front setbacks and that the Surfview encroachment would be limited to roughly 69 square feet of the northwest corner of the lot. She described the Island View encroachment as small: the stairs encroach by about 15 square feet and the second-floor entry deck by about 13 square feet, reducing that setback by roughly 5 feet to approximately 25 feet.

Braddison also explained the design history: the SFDB reviewed an earlier design that would have left the ADU cantilevered above a covered patio, but the board found that option visually "spindly" and suggested changes to reduce visual bulk. The applicant redesigned by expanding and enclosing the lower level so the upper story is supported without exposed posts; the SFDB supported the revised plans and recommended forwarding to the staff hearing officer.

The staff report concluded the project qualifies for exemptions under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines §§15303 (new construction or conversion of small structures) and 15305 (minor alterations in land use limitations), and that the proposal would not affect scenic highways, historic resources, or hazardous waste sites. Harris said she would make those CEQA findings at the hearing.

The applicant’s representative, Mr. Disicente of DMHA Architecture, thanked staff and noted the design changes responded to SFDB guidance. "We've been at this for a while... staff have been very helpful," he said, adding that similar two-story elements exist elsewhere on Island View in the neighborhood and that the applicant received one letter of concern at an earlier SFDB hearing but no new public comments for this hearing.

No members of the public spoke at the hearing and no written public comments were reported for this item. Harris stated the decision may be appealed to the Planning Commission within 10 calendar days; a planning commission member may also suspend the decision within that period.

The staff hearing officer approved the two front-setback modifications and the garage-size modification and made the CEQA exemption findings as described in the staff report. The approval is subject to the appeal period and any conditions listed in the staff report.

Additional procedural notes from the record: the staff report included a correction (Braddison pointed out an error in the setback chart on page 3 and provided an amended measurement for the Island View setback), and Braddison confirmed the project returned to the SFDB on June 30 but that the staff report had been prepared before the SFDB minutes were finalized.

Harris closed the item and adjourned the Staff Hearing Officer portion of the meeting.