Action Alert July 13, 2008
Santa Barbara County Action Network INFORMATION & ACTION ALERT Greetings SB CAN members and friends! Please take a few moments to review the upcoming events and news. Here they are in brief: Now the Details 1. Special Meeting on Gaviota Coast Issues WHAT:Board of Supervisors Meeting on Gaviota Coast Issues WHEN:Monday, July 14th - 9:00 a.m. WHERE:The County Administration Building - 105 East Anapamu Street in Santa Barbara (fourth floor hearing room)
Background: The Board of Supervisors, at the request of 5th district supervisor Centeno, will hold a special meeting devoted exclusively to Gaviota Coast issues. This extraordinary session reflects the importance of Gaviota Coast issues and the necessity to formulate a comprehensive plan for the preservation of the Gaviota Coast. Several community organizations including the Gaviota Coast Conservancy, the Naples Coalition, and the Gaviota Coast Study Group will make presentations. SB CAN is a member of the Naples Coalition. This is a unique and extraordinary opportunity to bring our message of environmental and cultural integrity to the Board in an open and positive manner.Please join us!
2. Ballantyne Residence Hearing, Board of Supervisors Meeting What: County Board of Supervisors hearing on the Ballantyne Residential Project
When: Tuesday July 15, time TBA Where: Board of Supervisors Hearing Room (123 E. Anapamu St. 4th floor)
Project Background:
The Project includes a single-family residential compound involving over 15,000 square feet of structures, sited atop a prominent ridgeline on a 17 acre parcel located at the eastern gateway to the Gaviota Coast. The Planning and Development Department Director previously denied the project because of its inconsistency with General Plan and other policies. The applicant appealed the denial to the Planning Commission in the Fall of 2006 and the Commission reversed the Director's decision by a 3-2 vote. The Gaviota Coast Conservancy appealed the Planning Commission's approval to the Board of Supervisors in June 2007, and the Board determined the Project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The County hired Rincon Consultants to prepare the CEQA review document and Rincon prepared a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the residential project and associated water line. The Board of Supervisors will conduct a hearing to consider the adequacy of the MND and whether to approve the project.
For more information on this project and why SB CAN and other environmental organizations are concerned, go to:
http://gaviotaaction.org/
2. SB CAN opposes the Santa Barbara Height Limit Initiative
SB CAN has been closely following the proposed Height Limit Initiative and meeting with representatives from both sides of the issue to discuss its impact on the community. On the recommendation of our "HOT" Committee (Housing, Open Space and Transportation), we have resolved to oppose the initiative should it come to ballot for reasons summarized below. However, we would support efforts to formulate compromise or alternative measures calling for height limitations but with exceptions for projects of public benefit( including the provision of affordable housing). It appears that no initiative will be on the ballot this November, though one could appear at a subsequent election.
Meanwhile, we urge everyone in the city to attend the upcoming general plan workshops (see item 3, below) where this issue will certainly be discussed in the context of a broad range of planning options.
An interim ordinance which will reflect our views will be proposed to the City Council soon. SB CAN members are urged to support this ordinance, which will provide for a height limit, but with significant exceptions for affordable housing and public benefit projects.
SB CAN HOT COMMITTEE- RESOLUTION TO OPPOSE THE BUILDING HEIGHT LIMIT INITIATIVE (March 26, 2008)
Whereas:
-We believe that housing, open space and transportation must be viewed holistically and that density within the urban core discourages sprawl into undeveloped areas and encourages a non-car-centric culture by creating a more vibrant and walkable downtown;
-The development of new housing opportunities for moderate-income residents is dependent either on subsidization or on inclusion of below market units with market-rate units. This often requires a higher number of units/acre. Proposed height limitations would prevent such development/
-Mixed-use structures are appropriate and necessary for the downtown areas, including El Pueblo Viejo (EPV); City policies should do all they can to encourage the construction of rental units. Proposed height limitations would discourage such mixed-use development.
-"Ballot-box" planning is not a thoughtful, deliberative process. Indeed the City is in the midst of a General Plan Update (GPU) where design and planning decisions - which are then subject to environmental review - should be made. The proposed ordinance would shortcircuit the planning process and would, if passed, create rules not subjected to EIR.
-The number of projects now in various stages of consideration will not constitute an 'explosion' of tall buildings. In fact there is no discernible increase in the rate of such development compared with the past. The need for an ordinance that would undermine the established planning process is not evident.
Therefore:
The HOT Committee of SB CAN recommends the opposition to this Initiative. We would support efforts to formulate compromise or alternative measures that would provide for height limitations but with exceptions for projects of public benefit, including the provision of affordable housing.
3. Santa Barbara City General Plan Workshops WHAT: "Workshops" on the City of Santa Barbara's General Plan Update WHEN: Thursday, July 17 and Wednesday, July 23, 6-9 pm WHERE: Faulkner Gallery of the Downtown Library, 40 E. Anapamu The Plan Santa Barbara Development Trends Workshops held in April 2008 have been summarized. Comments from the Round 1 public outreach process have been summarized in The Community Input Summary Report. Both are now available online at
The latest round of "Workshops" in the City of Santa Barbara's General Plan Update will soon be taking place. Public participation is urgently needed.
The consultant's and staff report to the City Council will heavily rely on these public workshops. Too often, only the already engaged "players" attend and shape the dialogue.
IT IS VITALLY IMPORTANT that a more representative cross section of the community - especially young people and people of color - attend these meetings.
The future of the city's planning is to be determined: will it reflect the past, or look forward to a more sustainable, diverse, vibrant community? Can we explore new concepts like "form-based zoning" and reduced reliance on the automobile - or will we continue to export our housing needs to surrounding areas and call it "living within our resources"?
Come share your thoughts and ideas - and bring a friend! (Spanish simultaneous interpretation will be available at both workshops.)
4. SB CAN Comments on UCSB- Long Range Development Plan
The Long Range Development Plan for the University (UCSB) has been presented as well as their draft Environmental Impact Report. SB CAN has followed the process, testified at the hearing on June 4th, 2008, and subsequently submitted a written comment. University officials and environmental consultants are reviewing comments and questions received during the public comment period and preparing responses. Responses to the comments will be incorporated into the Final LRDP and EIR. Those documents are anticipated to be available in fall of 2008 and will be available on this Web site."
( http://www.ucsbvision2025.com)
While SB CAN would applaud this university for planning housing to match its own growth, we believe that there are significant flaws and problems that have been overlooked, and solution/ mitigation measures that have not been sufficiently explored
.The following are some issues that were raised by SB CAN:
- Insufficient justification for enrolling an additional 5000 students.( A key alternative project would involve a 3000 student increase)
- Overlooking the implications of replacing 550 faculty in the plan, in addition to the calculated 250 new faculty.
- UCSB water demand exceeds the known availability of water. Equally important, the plan would result in indirect growth effects that would unavoidably increase the jobs/housing imbalance in this region. It would also unavoidably worsen traffic in the surrounding area.
- The housing plan and timetable for the construction of housing is not concurrent with the timeline for the expected growth.
- The jobs/housing imbalance increases commuting problems. The EIR woefully underestimates these effects by focusing on commuting increases from out-of-county, but not accounting for the main commuting population, which travels to the south coast from north county.
- Returning to the smaller enrollment growth alternative, we were disappointed to see that this alterative was coupled with a reduction in the estimates of campus housing development. Another alternative not mentioned would be to retain the housing plans of the existing LRDP with a reduction in new enrollment and staff hires. This alternative would allow the university to house not only all newly added students, staff and faculty but also provide affordable housing options for existing faculty, staff, undergraduates and graduate students. It might also provide an opportunity for the university to offer retired faculty and staff housing options that would open up further housing in the wider community.
5. SB CAN Column - "Peak Oil Meets Global Warming"
Every second and fourth Friday, an SB CAN column appears in the Looking Forward column in the Santa Maria Times. Our columns also appear in the Lompoc Record and at Noozhawk.com. You can read recent columns posted on our website
www.sbcan.org under "SB CAN Editorials." The following column was printed in the Santa Maria Times on July 11, 2008.
The Perfect Storm: Peak Oil Meets Global WarmingBy Deborah Brasket, SB CAN Executive Director
"Four Dollar Gas: Change you can believe in!" reads the caption of a recent Times cartoon. It pictures ways people are finally taking fuel conservation to heart, including switching to a smaller car, riding a bicycle or taking the bus.
The irony is that if we had made those changes 10 years ago, as many environmental experts urged, we might not be paying over $4 at the pump now, or at least we might have been better prepared for the shock of it. Oil production is peaking worldwide, at the same moment that global warming has emerged as the greatest environmental threat of the 21st century. This perfect storm has finally convinced the world that the time to act to avert disaster is now. In this sense, the current crisis has positive benefits. When a major catastrophe hits any community, our gut reaction is to set aside our differences and help each other prepare for and weather the storm together. Here on the Central Coast, the work has already begun. The Community Environmental Council (CEC) sponsored a Tri-CountyEnergy Summit last month in Santa Barbara, bringing together a panel of national and local experts to help us plan for a fossil fuel-free future. Two of the panelists, Robert Hirsch and Robbie Diamond, gave us a global perspective on peaking oil. Hirsch, the internationally acclaimed author of "The Hirsch Report," painted a gloomy picture, referring to the clash between peaking oil and climate concerns as a coming "train wreck."
"Since the world is ill-prepared for declining oil production," he explained, "dire economic circumstances will ensue from 2010 and 2030."
He predicted that by 2050, the crisis would be mediated through the development of renewable energy, but in the meantime mitigation would be needed to bridge the gap to sustainability.
"Technology and price will not save us," he warned. Lower highway speed limits, carpooling, four-day work weeks, telecommuting, and fuel rationing will all be needed.
Diamond, president of Securing America's Future Energy (SAFE), emphasized the insecurity of the global oil market. There is "no free market for oil supply, "he pointed out, since 75-90 percent of all gas and oil reserves "are held by national oil companies that are . . . controlled by governments." The U.S. is the top oil consumer, gobbling up over 20 million barrels per day, while China, the next in line, consumes around 7 million. In the U.S., 67 percent of oil consumption goes to the transportation sector, with 79 percent of that fueling cars and trucks. Gas and oil imports accounted for 45 percent ($320 billion) of the 2007 U.S. trade deficit. He warned that improving U.S. energy security will demand "massive disruptions of the status quo," starting with Washington policy makers, right on down to you and me. It's a global problem, but acting locally can make a difference. Well ahead of the curve in lessening oil dependence are cities such as Portland, Ore. Susan Anderson, director of Portland's Office of Sustainable Development, described how local leaders were able to set and meet the challenge of returning to 1990 CO2 levels, while the rest of the U.S. went up 6 percent. Significant increase in the use of alternative transportation was one factor. Public transit use increased by 85 percent, and bicycling now accounts for 5 percent of all work commutes. Portland plans to be using 100 percent renewable power for all city buildings and vehicles by 2010. Now, that's forward thinking! How does all of this affect the tri-counties? I'll have more on how local experts are planning for a future free of oil dependence, and what you and I can do to help, in a subsequent column. Santa Maria Times- July 11, 2008
Olivia Uribe, SB CAN Associate Director 805-563-0463 / olivia@sbcan.org
Date:
17 Jul 2008 - 10:52pm