A-4-STB VAN VLIET 1717 FERNALD POINT LANE, MONTECITO SANTA BARBARA COUNTY Item Th20b CCC Hearing April 12, 2012

Subject Area 2 California Coastal Records Project, Image Project Site

Project Location 3 Appellant’s Property (Dent) Appellant’s Property (Dent) Applicant’s Property (Van Vliet) Applicant’s Property (Van Vliet) Ocean

View from Frontage Street 4

View from Beach Fernald (Dent) Visible in foreground Subject Property 1717 Fernald (VanVliet) Not visible

Appeal Issues  Non-Conforming Use (Building Size)  Montecito Architectural Guidelines and Development Standards provide “general recommendations.”  County has discretion to determine appropriate size for single-family homes.  County found FAR to be consistent with residences in surrounding area. “ Based on a review of the project and the record, the project is consistent with the applicable LCP provisions regarding the size, bulk, and scale of residential structures in the Montecito area.” Staff Report, p. 10 6

Appeal Issues  Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA)  Site is not located in sensitive resource area.  Site located in dense residential neighborhood surrounded on all side by development and/or roadway.  Site does not abut sandy beach; an entire 1.45 acre developed parcel separates site from beach.  Minor residential addition will not impact any offsite ESHA.  Water quality and lighting conditions imposed by County to ensure protection of offsite resources. 7

Appeal Issues  Views and Privacy  LCP requires protection of public views and consideration of private views.  County found project would not have potential to block views from any public road or public viewing area.  Height of 2nd story addition less than max. allowable.  Construction-Related Impacts  County required several conditions to prevent project impacts related to parking and access during construction; construction noise and debris; and lighting. 8

Staff Recommendation  No Substantial Issue  Project conforms to policies and provisions of LCP related to non-conforming uses, ESHA, views, and construction-related aspects.  Extent and scope of project is minor.  Project compatible with surrounding development.  No coastal resources would be affected.  No precedent for future residential developments. Applicant in Agreement with Staff Recommendation. 9