Eastern Goleta Valley Coalition 
~ Neighborhoods Together for Responsible Planning ~
 
NEWSLETTER #1
October, 2011
 
CALL TO ACTION!!!

Hello EGV Community,

 

This is the first Newsletter for our group, Eastern Goleta Valley Coalition.

We are hoping that it will be a simple way to communicate and keep you apprised of current developments in the Eastern Goleta Valley.

 

IN THIS NEWSLETTER YOU'LL FIND:

  • MEETING DATES
  • WAYS TO RESPOND
  • 3 TOPICS ON AGENDA FOR OCTOBER 19th MEETING
  • ABOUT OUR ORGANIZATION
  • E-MAIL CONTACT LINKS TO PEOPLE AND THE MEDIA

 

 _______________________________________________________________
 

calendarCRITICAL MEETING DATES ...

 

There are 3 scheduled Planning Commission meetings that will focus on the Eastern Goleta Valley:

  • October 19th - 2:00 PM
  • November 2nd
  • November 16th

 Meeting location: 123 East Anapamu St., Santa Barbara, CA 93101

  - corner of Anapamu and Anacapa (parking available in city lot on Anacapa).

_________________________________________________________________________
 

WAYS TO RESPOND ...

  • Write letters to the 5 Planning Commissioners*.
  • Send a copy to Janet Wolf.
  • Send a copy to Cecilia Brown, our 2nd District Planning Commissioner.
  • Show up at the meetings!
    • Meetings are held downtown on Wednesdays (see dates).
    • It does make a big difference if a lot of us are there.
  • Be prepared to speak, or just be there so we have a strong representation.
  • Keep letters flowing to the newspapers.
For your convenience, at the bottom of this Newsletter are quick links to email Janet Wolf, the Planning Commissioners and the media.

 

* It is late to get letters to the Commissioners for the meeting on the19th.

  I will send out reminders well in advance of the following two meetings.
OCTOBER 19th MEETING - EGV AREA BEGINS AT 2:00 PM
 
This meeting will be addressing the future of Agricultural land and development in the Eastern Goleta Valley.  3 separate issues will be discussed.  See next section for details.
 
Review of the Cavaletto Tree Farm Housing Project will not begin prior to
10:00 a.m.

 

Review of the Draft Goleta Valley Community Plan for Eastern Goleta Valley: "Initiation of Recommended Project Description for Environmental Review" will not begin prior to 2:00 p.m.   

surveyTOPICS ON AGENDA FOR OCT. 19th MEETING:

 

#1 AG CONVERSION TO HIGH DENSITY HOUSING    or "THE 20 ACRES" ... 

The following is the last paragraph in the "Planning Commission Agenda" for the Wednesday meeting:
 

"Land use buildout analyses demonstrate the effect of land use decisions on the development capacity of an area for the purposes of impact analysis to inform long range decision-making. They identify the locations proposed for land use change and to demonstrate the maximum potential for additional development for environmental review purposes under CEQA, although these maximums are usually not implemented. They do not grant or deny property rights and do not determine zoning restrictions or opportunities. Rather, land use buildout analyses are helpful tools to determine the assumptions to study in the impact analysis to inform the development and approval of the policies and zoning restrictions post-environmental review." 
 (This is the last paragraph taken from "Agenda" - link below.)
 
Link for "Planning Commission Agenda" for October 19th meeting:
 
I recently spoke with a representative from the Dept. of Housing and Development in Sacramento.  He verified that we only need to consider 20 acres (at 20 dwelling units per acre) to keep the Housing Plan in compliance as we update the EGV Community Plan.  It doesn't mean that every square inch has to be build-able, but just 20 acres needs to be studied.  In addition, the acres can be spread out in different locations (not just one 20 acre site).  As you can see above, it appears that the County is aiming to study "maximum potential for additional development",  way beyond the 20 acres required.

The MTD property is 18 acres, and there are a few other 1-2 acre sites that can be added to meet the 20 acre requirement.  The Planning Commission has already recommended that the MTD property be studied at 20 units per acre density.
THAT IS ALL WE ARE BEING ASKED TO DO AT THIS TIME ...
Still, the County is seeking a "buffer" for the future State housing mandate.  No other area of the County has been asked to do this.  The better choice is to wait until the whole region gets new State mandated housing allocations in 2012 and look at sites throughout the whole County, not just in the Eastern Goleta Valley. 
WE NEED TO SAY "NO"!!!!
Also, the only acreage we have left would be large Ag parcels.  No community gives up Ag land if they don't have to, yet we are being asked to do this.
 
*** We need to be clear about this issue because it is a ***
pivotal point  for the proposed OVER-development of our area.  This will effect all of our neighborhoods.

orange #2 - NEEDLESS "URBAN AG" ZONING FOR

         SOUTH PATTERSON AG BLOCK...

There was discussion during the GVPAC meetings about how farmers/agriculturists could increase their income by allowing some farm related activities to take place on their land (i.e., a farm stand...). The GVPAC suggested creating a new zoning designation called "Urban Ag", which would allow for more expanded uses on Ag land as long as they were subordinate to Ag being conducted on the site, and the new activity was compatible with it.

 

However, the County's proposed new zoning is ill-defined and doesn't adequately describe the new "Urban Ag" allowed uses, nor does it allow for future public input.  Therefore, it is difficult to know what the impacts and consequences of the new zoning might be to Ag land.  Apparently, the intention is that this will be "figured out" in the Environmental Impact Review (EIR) process. This seems to leave things too open-ended and out of public view.

 

The GVPAC may not have been aware that the current Ag ordinance already allows for some additional uses. As well, if an Ag land owner wants to use their land for something that isn't currently listed in the ordinance, they can do so by applying for a "Conditional Use Permit". Apparently, the mechanism is already in place for doing what this new "Urban Ag" ordinance would do. So why does it need to be changed???

 

THE PROBLEM: 

This new "Urban Ag" zoning could be like a Pandora's box!  It might be used as a precedent if other farmers in the County, who are not located in the Patterson Ag block, want the same uses on their property that the "Urban Ag" farmers would be allowed. This could threaten Ag land throughout the County by encouraging non-agricultural activities on valuable farm land. It also diminishes the open space environment that characterizes the Eastern Goleta Valley.

 

If keeping these parcels in Ag is the true goal, the best way to do that is through the ordinances the County currently has.

 

BOTTOM LINE: The County's current ordinance protects Ag land, but also allows for other Ag-related uses, both of which the GVPAC wanted.

 

WE DON'T NEED AN "URBAN AG" DESIGNATION

#3 - UPZONING OF AG: MINI-MANSIONS AND PSEUDO-AG???

The current zoning for the South Patterson Ag block currently allows for one residential dwelling per parcel, and the parcels are relatively large. The County's new proposed up-zoning would allow one house per 5 acres. Thus, a 40 acre parcel could conceivably have 8 houses built on it, instead of one. Each 5-acre parcel could end up with a large house and a few fruit trees, rather than true, legitimate agricultural activity.

house

 

The net result is that the South Patterson Ag block could become a development of mini-mansions on estates rather than a viable agricultural area. It seems that the up-zoning could easily allow the de-facto conversion of farm land into a community of large homes, resulting in large quantities of Ag land lost forever.

 

It would be an attractive investment for a developer to buy large chunks of Ag land for building luxury homes, or land owners selling off their 5-acre parcels, bit by bit, thus eliminating all Ag use. Further down the road, the new property owners may want to break up their 5-acre parcels into smaller residential or multi-family units.

 

 BOTTOM LINE:

Allowing this unnecessary rezoning now clearly creates a slippery slope for eliminating Ag land altogether.  The best action to preserve farm land for our future is to leave the zoning as it is.  

A FEW THINGS ABOUT OUR ORGANIZATION ...

 

NEWSLETTER:

In this Newsletter we've tried to give enough information to understand some of the issues at hand without making this too long. With a plan this comprehensive it's difficult to know what to focus on. We've tried to pinpoint certain things that will be discussed in the upcoming meetings . By no means are these the only important issues, but we focused on these 3 because they deal with land use, which effects everything else we care about (open space, infrastructure, traffic, evacuation, safety, etc.)            This Newsletter was co-publised by Autumn Brook and Barb Kloos.

 

OUR ORGANIZATION:

We have established a core committee of about 15 people who have met a few times and are in regular contact through email. We plan on staying active until the Board of Supervisors vote on development in our area. We will regroup at that time and assess where to go from there.

 

NEW EMAIL SYSTEM:

We are attempting to phase out of our original email list and transfer to "Constant Contact" (an automated email service). The future emails you'll receive will show up as "Eastern Goleta Valley Coalition". You won't be able to "reply all" but you can always email me directly. Our current list will still be in operation until we get the hang of this new one.

 

THANKS TO ...

THANK YOU to all who helped distribute flyers. I estimate that we passed out between 2000-2500 flyers. Way to go!!!!!

One big hurdle we faced was bringing public awareness to the community, which we have done with the distribution of flyers and some newspaper articles.

 

Many thanks to the Coalition for Sensible Planning for distributing around 750 flyers, as well as many more of their own flyers.

 

Thank you to The Goodland Coalition for sending a letter to Janet Wolf and others in support of not developing our Ag land. Much appreciated.

 

AND LASTLY ...
PLEASE STAY INVOLVED!
We need everyone to help out at different times. Whether it's writing, walking, sitting in meetings, speaking, or just plain caring ... it all matters, and it helps to keep us going. Let's hang-in there together til the finish line!
Thank you for your support.

 

 Quick Links 

 

Janet Wolf  jwolf@sbcbos2.org

Cecilia Brown, 2nd District Planning Commissioner  brownknight1@cox.net

Planning Commissioners (Mr. Villalobos will distribute to all)   dvillalo@co.santa-barbara.ca.us

County Planning and Development   http://www.sbcountyplanning.org

 

News Press   voices@newspress.com    - must be exclusive to NP and 250 words max.

Independent   letters@independent.com

Noozhawk      news@noozhawk.com

Daily Sound   http://thedailysound.com

edhat              http://www.edhat.com/

 

Contact Information
Barb Kloos

barbk77@cox.net

(805) 895-9990

 

Our Website:  http://www.saveourvalley.net

Our Organization email:  egvalley@gmail.com