Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.

Staff hearing officer approves ADU at 122 Los Aguahes Avenue; decision not appealable

Santa Barbara City Staff Hearing Officer · April 29, 2026

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Staff Hearing Officer Tess Harris approved a coastal development permit for an accessory dwelling unit at 122 Los Aguahes Avenue, finding the project consistent with the California Coastal Act and exempt under CEQA Guideline Section 15303. Harris said the decision is final and not subject to appeal.

Staff Hearing Officer Tess Harris approved a coastal development permit on April 29, 2026, to allow an accessory dwelling unit at 122 Los Aguahes Avenue, saying the decision is final and not subject to appeal. Harris said she read the staff report and found the project consistent with applicable coastal policies.

Harris said the project — an accessory dwelling unit attached to an existing single-family residence — complies with ministerial design criteria and parking requirements because it is within a half mile of public transit. She cited staff findings that the project is consistent with the California Coastal Act, local coastal land-use plan policies, and neighborhood compatibility standards.

Harris noted the project is exempt from environmental review under CEQA Guideline Section 15303, which allows for the construction or conversion of small structures, and listed the staff-recommended coastal findings, including minimization of adverse impacts, flood-hazard and geologic-stability considerations, housing-affordability and parking consistency, and stormwater management.

"My decision would be final and, is not subject to appeal," Harris said when announcing the outcome. The decision was issued as an announcement at the hearing and the staff report served as the basis for the findings.

The action was described by Harris as a ministerial consistency finding based on staff analysis; no public comment or appeal was filed at the meeting.