Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Facebook
Twitter
Google+1
del.icio.us.
Digg!
Yahoo! Buzz
Diigo
google
newsvine
reddit
technorati
Yahoo!
MyspaceMonday brought yet another hearing for the Santa Barbara Botanic Garden’s Vital Mission Plan, the proposed project to erect more buildings and carry out other assorted improvements on the Mission Canyon property.
Less than two weeks after being approved by the County Planning Commission - a decision officially appealed to the Board of Supervisors last Thursday, October 5 by the opposition group Friends of Mission Canyon - this time the plan went before the County of Santa Barbara’s Historic Landmarks Advisory. The HLAC, which oversees the 23 acres of the garden that are designated as a historic landmark, has been rather hostile to parts of the project in the past, even once stopping the development of a meadow terrace mid-bulldozing. But the latest hearing turned out both well and badly for the plan’s proponents: The HLAC’s objections to the meadow terrace remained strong, but the commission approved the designs of those buildings proposed for the historic zone.
“It was a mixed bag. We were certainly disappointed on their decision about the meadow terrace,” said Garden spokeswoman Nancy Johnson, referring to HLAC’s 5-1 decision that the 2007 development be entirely removed and that the area be restored to the previous design. “But we were certainly pleased that they recognized the artistry of the new buildings, and that they were totally in keeping with the landmark resolution and the historic landscape design concept.”
Paul Wellman
Attorney Marc Chytilo
But Marc Chytilo, the lawyer representing Friends of Mission Canyon, also proved cheery on Tuesday afternoon, sounding as positive and victorious as Johnson. “HLAC did the right thing,” he said. “They disapproved the meadow terrace.” Chytilo also said that the commission tried to remove the controversial pavers that were put upon formerly dirt trails, but that county staff said it was out of the commission’s jurisdiction. The HLAC denied any future use of synthetic pavers in the historic area, calling for compacted soil instead. It did grant use of pavers around new and existing buildings, but only “naturalistic” ones.
HLAC also approved the new entrance, which angered history buff Paulina Conn, who helped write the resolution that made the 23 acres a landmark in 2003. “I was very disappointed that they just rolled over and said the new entrance is fine,” she said, though she was pleased that HLAC asked that the historic entrance be used “on occasion and when practical.”
Conn was also frustrated that HLAC approved the buildings without much debate. “At all of the hearings, I am very disappointed that there is no discussion about the buildings or their uses, or their intensification of use, or, in the case of the Historic Landmarks Commission, whether the use was a historic use,” said Conn.
Just as Friends of Mission Canyon appealed the Planning Commission decision, the Botanic Garden is able to appeal HLAC’s mandate to rip out the meadow terrace. Whether the Garden will in fact appeal remains unclear. “We’re looking at our options right now,” said Johnson.
In any case, HLAC’s input on the Vital Mission Plan is not yet complete; the commission will take action on the plans for fencing and temporary art exhibits at its December 14 hearing.
Previous Month
Comments
Well, preserving the Terrace was something in this bulldozing by the management of the SBBG of the property ... and the public process. Who was the one commissioner who voted no?
citti (anonymous profile)
November 10, 2009 at 10:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Such a shame to remove paving that allowed me to take my 88 year old Mom to the garden still. Does anyone think this is so harmful as to exclude those in wheelchairs (or even with difficulty walking on uneven surfaces) from accessing at least the front part of this garden. Back to rutted paths and no access. We visit botanical gardens all over the world and this one is certainly stuck in its own rut. Perhaps we should all think of how it will be when we can no longer enjoy the things we love so much (due to age or other problems) because of the few who deny us that privilege. How much does it hurt to have some appropriate surfacing in the main part of the garden? I am a member but have not taken anyone's side in this power struggle, this is strictly a personal statement. I do see this as nothing but a power play to deny change... as usual!! The hatred in this town is incredible, such energy (and money) would be well spent by working together and finding a mutually agreeable compromise for the good of the entire community, not just a few. Too bad, it could be an incredible place for all.
beachwalker (anonymous profile)
November 11, 2009 at 8:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The terrace was a mis-step from the beginning - If only we could now retrieve the old heritage oak that was "disappeared" to make way for the wedding and concert venue that this current management envisioned...
Wordman (anonymous profile)
November 11, 2009 at 8:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
SBBG tried for years and tried a number of different things to save the old oak, but it could not be saved. It did not disappear nefariously. It had to be removed because its large branches would become a safety issue as it continued to fail and die.
tabatha (anonymous profile)
November 11, 2009 at 9:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Hallelujah - thank goodness the County finally approved the Garden's plans. How long how this thing been dragging on? How long has our Botanic Garden had to endure with poor facilities and a below par trail system? Far too long. It's so sad that people continue to nag and complain about the Garden's plans for improvement. It's only for the good for research, education, better trail systems that accommodate wheelchairs and are easier to maintain, and more space for plants. I cannot wait to visit a new and improved Garden with my family.
radplace (anonymous profile)
November 12, 2009 at 9:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)