California’s cities may already seem ready to burst with people.

But between 2000 and 2030, the state Department of Finance expects more than 15 million new arrivals — equivalent to almost the entire population of New York state — said county planner Jeff Lindgren.

This presents a political and logistical problem: where to house all the newcomers.

The state says each county, Santa Barbara County included, must accommodate its share of this growth. County planners estimate that the South Coast alone is expected to see nearly 40,000 new residents by 2030.

Public input

A meeting took place Tuesday evening, in the Santa Barbara library’s Faulkner Gallery, whose purpose was to inform the public of the county’s update to the Housing Element of its General Plan.

The element must be updated every five years, according to state law.

Several attendees blasted the planning and development department for planning to zone for high-density housing near existing, lower-density neighborhoods — many in the Goleta Valley.

"It’s hard to imagine that [these projects] would be compatible" with existing neighborhoods, said Tim Schmidt, president of Patterson Area Neighborhoods Association (PANA).

Schmidt, who was not present at the meeting, lives near Noel Christmas Tree Farm, a 25.9-acre parcel on which the county proposes a "theoretical maximum" of 258 units. He says the farm’s neighbors consider the county’s proposal "extreme."

"I’m positive the neighbors would be very disappointed with that," he said.

At the meeting, critics of Planning and Development presenters Lindgren, Patsy Stadelman and Lisa Plowman also complained that the department failed to adequately notify the public of the meeting, and didn’t involve the public until a late stage of the planning process.

One man, whose backyard abuts a proposed high-density site, said he had only heard of the meeting through the PANA newsletter, "Speedbumps."

"It’s very late in the day for word to get out ... [and] for people to understand the implications of what you are proposing," said PANA ex-president Cecilia Brown.

Plowman replied that the county had taken out display ads in newspapers, and planned to place fliers in shopping centers.

The element itself is missing important parts, such as compatibility considerations, said Schmidt.

"It seems like a very rough draft right now," he said.

Planning process ‘in early stages’

Indeed, the element is still in draft form, and is currently undergoing a public-comment period.

"The planning process is still very much in its early stages of formulation," said Second District Supervisor Susan Rose, in whose district much of the element’s proposed development would take place.

Gov. Gray Davis’ administration has declared that each county must plan to build a certain number of new units over the next five years, to accommodate the forthcoming population growth.

In turn, the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG) divided its allocation — conservatively, 17,531 — among the county’s cities and unincorporated land.

Unincorporated land was allocated 6,064 units, for which the county must provide in its housing element. Very low-, low- and moderate-income housing should constitute 58 percent of the new units, according to the draft.

If the state does not certify Santa Barbara County’s housing element by December 31, the county will lose about $1 million in grant money next January.

There is also legislation in Sacramento to deny additional money — such as road improvement funds — to locales that fail to plan for the additional housing.

This money isn’t attached to actual construction. But to be eligible, counties must zone and plan for new housing.

‘Most people can’t afford’ houses here

State requirements aren’t the only reason to plan for more housing, especially affordable housing, said Lindgren.

There are more than 5,000 people currently on a waiting list for Section 8 subsidized housing in the city of Santa Barbara and another 5,000 in the unincorporated county, according to county housing authority boardmember Mickey Flacks, who was at the meeting.

"Most people can’t afford to buy the type of house that’s on the market now," said Lindgren. Currently, said Lindgren, fewer than 20 percent of locals can afford a house at the South Coast median price of $779,000.

The draft introduces and amends a number of policies, programs and incentives intended to create naturally-affordable and price-restricted units, and fulfill the housing needs of the several income categories.

To fit the unincorporated Goleta Valley’s allotment of houses on the various potential housing sites, developers would need to build "compact" — or high-density — housing.

High-density housing keeps development costs down, the planners said, and that makes the homes less expensive.

"Units are smaller and lots are smaller," said Lindgren, "so they generally have a lower price."

But some attendees dismissed that claim, saying that any market-rate housing becomes unaffordable very quickly, no matter how small or dense, in desirable areas such as the South Coast.

4,826 units in Goleta Valley

In the current draft of the housing update, the county’s Planning and Development department has identified several dozen parcels of county land for potential development.

More than 2,000 units are projected for 140 acres of county land near Goleta — mostly in the Patterson Road, Turnpike Road and Calle Real areas, and including Isla Vista.

The housing element deals only with unincorporated county land — but the traffic that the proposed dense housing sites would generate would certainly impact neighboring cities.

And cities have also been allocated housing. Last December, the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG) adopted a Regional Housing Needs Assessment. Goleta mayor Jack Hawxhurst, the city’s SBCAG representative, appealed the 2,388 units for which Goleta was required to zone, but lost.

The sum of the housing SBCAG has allocated to the Goleta Valley, including city and county land, is 4,826 units.

Montecito is slated for 20 units on just over two acres.

North County has been alloted nearly 4,800 units, mostly in the Orcutt area.

"Those numbers are a theoretical maximum," said Stadelman. "It doesn’t take into account any land constraints [such as flood susceptibility] ... or sewer constraints, things like that."

Resident concerns

High-density housing doesn’t have to be a design nightmare, said Lindgren while showing photos of high-density housing currently in place around the United States.

But residents of neighborhoods near some proposed sites have raised concerns. Current high-density developments don’t include nearly enough parking, they claim, resulting in spillover into nearby neighborhoods. Crowding and auto traffic have increased, as well, and would increase further with each high-density development.

Parking at commercial/residential mixed-use developments would ideally be shared: in the daytime, workers would use it, and at night, the residents would use the same spots.

Conflicts between the two might arise on weekends and holidays, though, said some.

Planners hope that alternative transportation — walking, bicycling, and mass transit — will lighten some of the traffic and parking load.

But critics say it’s unrealistic to expect people to give up cars, even if it means putting up with traffic jams and parking headaches.

The future

The planners said the draft will now go through various stages of public comment and revision.

It’s scheduled for final approval by the Board of Supervisors in November and December, after which it’ll go to the state for certification.

Schmidt and the county planners both encouraged the public to attend meetings and comment on the housing element.

"We appreciate the fact that they’re actually holding these public meetings, and people can comment," said Schmidt. "That’s nice."

"I’m looking forward to seeing the staff presentation and hearing what the community has to say," said Supervisor Rose.

The public may also send questions or comments about the housing element to Lindgren. His telephone number is 568-2069, and his e-mail address is jlindgr@co.santa-barbara.ca.us. Stadelman may also be reached at 884-8051, or pstadelm@co.santa-barbara.ca.us.