A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Board continues Alamita Padre Sarah garage/driveway project, asks for railing and landscape coordination

May 04, 2026 | Santa Barbara City, Santa Barbara County, California


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Board continues Alamita Padre Sarah garage/driveway project, asks for railing and landscape coordination
The Single Family Design Board continued consideration of a permit request to legalize an as‑built driveway extension and to permit an 800‑square‑foot garage/workshop at 1511 Alamita Padre Sarah on May 4, 2026.

Architect Jim Davis and property owner Dave Dwelly presented the site and design: a regraded driveway, new retaining walls, reworked paving, a pocketing garage door system and a green roof over the workshop. The applicant said parts of the paving and grading were completed without permits and explained the intent to regrade to a more functional driveway and to repave where needed.

Board members raised questions about existing and proposed site walls (roughly 8–11 feet at some points), whether portions of the driveway would remain permeable or convert to concrete, the adequacy of condenser clearance under an entry cavity and the need for compliant pool fencing and gates. Staff and the applicant discussed grading quantities; the applicant indicated cut and fill figures were substantial and clarified that civil quantities included fill underneath the structure. The board also asked the applicant to refine how the railing terminates near the stair and to consider how the railing integrates with plaster walls and the pool edge.

The board moved to continue the item indefinitely to the full board with comments requesting a coordinated landscape plan, further study of the railing and returns for safety, and clarification of the driveway paving and grading; the motion passed unanimously. During discussion the board found that a 3‑D grading model would not be necessary for the next review step.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee