Ordinance committee forwards single-family streamlining amendments to Santa Barbara City Council

The Santa Barbara Ordinance Committee on March 17 unanimously voted to recommend that city council consider a package of ordinance and zoning amendments intended to streamline review of single-family projects.

Ted Hamilton, the city's design review supervisor, told the committee the changes were developed over three years with input from the Single Family Design Board (SFDB), the planning commission and community stakeholders and that staff is requesting the committee forward the amendments to the council for adoption. "We're here on the planning commission's recommendation for you to consider the ordinance amendments associated with the single family streamlining project," Hamilton said.

The package would exempt certain exterior alterations from SFDB design review if they add no new floor area and visually match existing development; it would also expand administrative approvals for minor projects, increase mailed-notice thresholds, and consolidate multiple review steps in some cases. Staff said administrative approval eligibility would be expanded in some cases up to an 800-square-foot first-story threshold and that site improvements with less than 50 cubic yards of grading would be exempt from design review.

Hamilton said the changes are intended to reduce the number of projects that must go before the SFDB and to front-load the substantive design review into a single project-design-approval hearing. "If these streamlining amendments are adopted, we anticipate at least a 24% reduction in SFDB projects," he said, noting the city currently triggers about 221 projects a year for SFDB review.

The amendments would also raise mailed-notice triggers for first-story additions from 500 to 800 square feet and for certain second-story additions from 150 to 250 square feet, a change staff said aligns with state ADU law. In several places, staff proposed limiting who may appeal final approvals: final approvals performed administratively by the community development director would not be appealable, and ABR and HLC final approvals would be appealable only by the project applicant, actions staff said support compliance with the Housing Crisis Act's limits on hearings.

The ordinance package includes zoning changes as well: it would allow required parking spaces to be uncovered, create ministerial review pathways for common minor zoning exceptions (MZEs), adjust front-yard fence height rules and material standards, reduce open-yard requirements (from 1,250 to 800 square feet for lots of 6,000 square feet or smaller), and set a 650-square-foot cap for new detached guest houses after Planning Commission direction to increase the initial cap.

Committee members asked staff to clarify appeal standing, the timing of mailed notices and how concept review and project-design approval interact with the state's 90-day permit-streamlining deadlines. Hamilton and other staff explained administrative approvals are final, that appeals of project design approval may be filed by any participant who took part in that hearing and that more detailed materials will be expected at the project-design-approval stage to avoid continuances.

A single public commenter, Timothy Bolton, a property owner, urged the committee to give homeowners more porch flexibility and offered three alternatives, including allowing full-width porches at the existing 6-foot depth or increasing a maximum width to 25 feet. "My recommendation is to provide our design community the most flexibility by allowing them to build a porch that's the full width of the building while retaining the existing 6 foot depth limit," Bolton said, adding that a prior zoning modification had cost him $20,000 and six months on another project.

Council member Jordan moved and Mayor Pro Tem Sneddon seconded a motion to forward the package to city council, finding the ordinance amendments consistent with the general plan and categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under Class 5 (section 15305). The committee voted unanimously to forward the amendments and to include the porch-related comments for further consideration.

The staff presentation said the amendments are tentatively scheduled for city council introduction on April 14, 2026, with possible adoption on April 28 and an effective date of May 28, depending on the council's action.