Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Second Story Addition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board supports Paseo Del Refugio second‑story addition, waives FAR studies
Summary
Design board members found a modest second‑story bedroom addition at 3022 Paseo Del Refugio compatible with the neighborhood, recommended waiving additional FAR neighborhood studies, and moved the item toward project‑design and final review.
The Santa Barbara Single Family Design Board on May 19 reviewed a proposal for a modest second‑story primary bedroom addition at 3022 Paseo Del Refugio and recommended forwarding the project for staff and consent review while waiving additional FAR neighborhood studies.
The applicant, Joe Andralitis of Andralitis Mix and Architects, said the two‑story addition is a relatively small 561‑square‑foot second floor (plus an 82‑square‑foot first‑floor addition) on a 9,022‑square‑foot corner lot. The proposal would reach about 93 percent of the maximum allowed floor‑area ratio (FAR) for the site; the board agreed to waive the full FAR survey and story‑pole requirements and instead rely on site photos and the applicant’s context analysis.
Staff had asked the board to comment on compatibility, bulk and scale because the second story would encroach up to 12 inches into the front setback in line with an existing nonconforming garage. Board members said the addition is modest in both height (the ridge was confirmed at roughly 23 feet, 4 inches) and footprint and that the design’s offsets and the proposed Juliet balcony and chimney help break up massing. Members recommended small refinements — including a slight reduction of the east‑facing window proportions and verifying roof and façade details — but did not object to the front‑setback modification given the lot’s corner status and existing conditions.
The board moved to continue the item to the staff hearing officer and to the consent calendar for project‑design approval, with the board waiving the FAR submission requirements and requesting the applicant return with final material and window details. The motion passed unanimously.
Andralitis said the design team had chosen a hip roof and smaller second‑story massing in order to minimize perceived bulk; the board encouraged continued coordination with neighbors and noted that privacy (but not private view) concerns are within the board’s purview. The applicant will return for project‑design approval and final review that will include the material palette and detailed elevations.
