City to decide on stringent building standards

ERIC LINDBERG
DAILY SOUND STAFF WRITER

After tinkering and tightening language, the Santa Barbara City Council Ordinance Committee unanimously passed along legislation that, if approved by the full Council, will take local environmental building standards to a new level.
Dubbed the Architecture 2030 Energy Ordinance, the draft proposes some of the most stringent building requirements in the state. A coalition of local environmental and architectural groups, including the Community Environmental Council, lobbied for the legislation in late January.

"This is a great step for Santa Barbara," Dave Davis, executive director of the CEC, said on Tuesday. "There are other cities that have stringent energy ordinances, but what you've done is tie it to the 2030 architecture challenge."
That challenge involves reducing the fossil fuel standard for all new buildings to accomplish carbon neutrality by 2030. The ordinance aims to achieve that result by exceeding state standards for energy use by 20 percent for low-rise residential buildings, 15 percent for high-rise residential buildings and 10 percent for nonresidential buildings, among other measures.
At Tuesday's committee meeting, Councilmember Grant House questioned the sliding scale for taller buildings, and why the ordinance should even make a distinction between low-rise and high-rise.
"We don't have high-rise buildings here," House said. "Four stories is the highest that anything will be built."
Dr. Michael Gable, a consultant working on the ordinance, said the state standards for high-rise buildings are more stringent than low-rise standards, explaining that the suggested 15 percent increase for high-rise buildings translates to a 25 percent increase in low-rise standards.
House, expressing worry that the ordinance will suggest to developers that there is a benefit to building taller, said the public needs to be aware that high-rise standards are actually stricter than low-rise standards.
"I don't know where and how we get to say that, but it needs to be said," he said.
Questions were also raised by the committee about the expiration clause in the ordinance, which staff explained will coincide with changes in the state code and work as a stopgap measure to ensure conflicts don't arise between state and local building requirements. The expiration will simply trigger a review of the ordinance and possible alterations to match changes by the state, staff said.
Due to the early expiration date — state code is due to be updated in 2008 — the committee expressed concern that the ordinance will not give the appearance of a serious attempt by the city to improve environmental building standards.
"The notion that this is a permanent direction for the city of Santa Barbara is one that cannot be overstated," Councilmember Iya Falcone said. "...This is the future of Santa Barbara and there should be no mistake about that."
After further discussion, the committee decided to leave the expiration language in the draft ordinance after staff explained that the California Energy Commission, which will ultimately decide whether to approve the legislation, will be more likely to approve it with that clause.
The ordinance is expected to come before the full Council next Tuesday. If approved, it will go to the California Energy Commission before returning for final introduction. City staff hope it will go into effect by early 2008.