The Shelby housing project had mostly been on pause since 1978 when Dr. Gwynne Couvillion bought 14 acres above Cathedral Oaks Road, next door to what is now Glen Annie Golf Club. Zoning changes, growth wars, and drought took their toll, but the Couvillions applied for an expedited permit in 2023, which the city returned, resulting in the developers filing suit. In a ruling delivered on Wednesday, Judge Thomas Anderle told the City of Goleta he was ready to issue a writ of mandate to require that the project permits be processed, if not for one issue still remaining in the lawsuit between the Couvillion family and the city.
The Couvillions originally proposed 60 single-family residences in the early 2000s, but after California gave projects that included affordable housing a quicker path to approval, they modified the project in 2023. After voluntarily moving lot lines to respect creek setbacks, the project’s homes dropped to 56 in number, 13 of which would be for low-income families. They used the provisions of Senate Bill 330 to lock in city rules existing in 2023 but also expected to retain rights received in 2011 during the first iteration of its permit entitlements. Goleta disagreed.
The city argued that SB 330 applied only to new developments, while Shelby’s rights dated to 2011; the project had to choose one of the other. In his ruling, Anderle noted that California’s Housing Accountability Act (HAA), of which SB 330 is a part, intended to promote affordable housing. Interpreting the two time periods with an eye to adding housing was the correct way to look at this, he wrote.
“The clear legislative intent of the HAA is to promote housing by providing additional opportunities for approval based upon the status quo ante of rights and conditions,” Anderle’s ruling states.
Further, Goleta, by returning Shelby’s completed preliminary application, had in essence allowed it to be accepted. “The City is not free to ignore a complete preliminary application for a housing development project. The City must act upon it,” Anderle wrote. “The City has a ministerial duty to process the SPA [SB330 Preliminary Application] which may be compelled by writ of mandate.”
The writ could not be issued until all the allegations made in the Shelby Petition for Writ were final, the judge said, as he could only make a single judgment. Of the six original causes of action, only one remained. In the fifth cause of action, the petitioners claim the Housing Element that Goleta adopted in December 2023 was out of compliance with state rules and should be revised. Judge Anderle stated a careful review needed to be made before any conclusion could be determined.
An aerial map of the Shelby property | Credit: Courtesy
In a press release issued after the hearing, Goleta listed its issues with the project while noting its housing accomplishments. A major problem is the traffic congestion around Dos Pueblos High School down the block at Glen Annie Road. In building homes, the city’s objective was to avoid development on agricultural land; it would rather focus new development in “walkable, transit-oriented, in-fill” areas. To that end, Goleta approved more units in the previous Housing Element cycle than any other county jurisdiction: more than 1,300 homes. One, Heritage Ridge, including 100 low-income homes; another, Buena Tierra, added 60 units of transitional housing for people who were previously homeless. For the current Housing Element cycle, the city demonstrated 2,600 units of residential capacity, far above the allocated amount of 1,837 units.
As for the city’s next steps, the press release stated that Goleta’s council will be meeting in closed session for a discussion.
