Chapter 17.31 — FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT

The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the location of new development that could negatively impact the City’s floodways and drainageways. (Ord. 20-03 § 6)

This chapter applies to all areas of special flood hazards within the City’s jurisdiction as designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and as depicted on the Federal Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM).

(Ord. 20-03 § 6)

In all areas of special flood hazards the following standards apply in addition to the standards set forth in Goleta Municipal Code, Chapter 15.10 :

• A. Prohibited Development. Development is prohibited within the 100-year floodplain where the development would:

  1. Obstruct flood flow;

  2. Displace floodwaters onto other property; or

  3. Be subject to flood damage.

• B. Hazards Evaluation Report. A Hazards Evaluation Report may be required in compliance with Section 17.32.030 , Hazards Evaluation Report.

• C. Required Setback. Development must be set back at least 50 feet from the top of streambanks and flood control channels.

• D. Reduced Setback. If a project applicant deems their project infeasible due to the setback, the applicant must provide a site-specific engineering study, including recommended mitigation measures, which demonstrates a reduced setback does not expose development to unacceptable risk.

  1. Required Approval. Any reduction to the 50-foot setback must be issued through a Discretionary Approval or approval of a Land Use Permit or Coastal Development Permit.

  2. Required Finding. The Review Authority must find that, in consultation with the Santa Barbara County Flood Control District, the proposed lesser setback would be appropriate, in that it would allow access for flood control maintenance and enable proper operation of the channels.

3. ESHA Protections. Any reduction must also adhere to Section 17.30.070 , Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas—Streamside Protection Areas, when applicable.

(Ord. 20-03 § 6)

Chapter 17.32. HAZARDS

This chapter provides standards for development and land uses in areas with coastal, geologic, and high fire hazards to protect the public health, safety, general welfare, and coastal resources. (Ord. 20-03 § 6)

The provisions of this chapter apply to all development undertaken and proposed to be undertaken within coastal, geologic, and high fire hazard areas within the City. (Ord. 20-03 § 6)

• A. Initial Site Assessment. The City must conduct an initial site assessment screening for all permit applications to determine the potential presence of hazards. Hazards include fault lines; areas subject to tsunami run-up, landslides, liquefaction, episodic and long-term shoreline retreat (including beach or bluff erosion), high seas, ocean waves, storms, tidal scour, flooding; slopes averaging greater than 25 percent; unstable slopes; and flood hazard areas, including those areas potentially inundated by future sea level rise. The initial site assessment should include a review of reports, resource maps, aerial photographs, on-site inspection, and the City’s hazards maps.

  1. The City’s hazard mapping may be used as a resource for identification of hazard areas; however, absence of mapping cannot alone be considered absence of hazard. Local site conditions must be examined at the time of permit application using the best available sources.

  2. If no potential hazards are found during the initial site assessment, no additional analysis or studies will be required, unless specifically requested by the Director; however, a written statement of the absence of hazards must be provided as part of an application submittal.

  3. If a potential hazard is found during the initial site assessment or is specifically requested by the Director, a site specific hazard study will be required, pursuant to subsection B below.

• B. Site Specific Hazard Study. The hazards study must address all relevant General Plan policies and identify recommended mitigation measures to reduce the risk from hazards. The study may be peer reviewed, at the Director’s discretion. All costs of the hazard study and any peer review are borne by the applicant.

• (Ord. 20-03 § 6; Ord. 20-09 § 5)

• A. Applicability. This section applies to all development or expansion of existing structures or uses located on or adjacent to a beach or coastal bluff. In the event of any conflict between the provisions of this section and any other provision of this Title, this section will govern.

• B. Limitations on Development. Development must be safe from bluff retreat, waves, and flood hazards without the use of any shoreline protection devices. Piers, groins, breakwaters, drainages, seawalls, revetments, rip-rap, pipelines, and other shoreline structures are not permitted, except when required to serve coastal-dependent uses such as public access and

recreational uses, or to protect structures existing as of January 1, 1977, or public beaches in danger of erosion, and only when non-structured alternatives have failed.

• C. Application Requirements. Permit applications for new development or expansion of existing legal structures and uses proposed to be developed on or adjacent to a beach or coastal bluff must include the following:

  1. Coastal Hazards Report. The site-specific Hazard Study must include an analysis of beach erosion, wave run-up, inundation, and flood hazards under current and expected conditions due to sea level rise during the expected life of the project. The report must consider, describe, and analyze the following:

     • a. The cross-shore profile of the beach;

     • b. Surveyed location of the mean high tide line acceptable to the State Lands Commission;

     • c. Bluff geometry and site topography, extending the surveying work beyond the site as needed to depict unusual geomorphic conditions that could affect the site;

     • d. Historic, current, and foreseeable bluff erosion/retreat rate, including investigation of recorded land surveys and tax assessment records, in addition to the use of historic maps and photographs, where available, and possible changes in shore configuration and sand transport;

     • e. Geologic conditions, including soil, sediment, and rock types and characteristics, in addition to structural features such as bedding, joints and faults;

     • f. Evidence of past or potential landslide conditions, the implications of such condition for the proposed development, and the potential effects of the development on landslide activity;

     • g. Existing ground and surface water conditions and variations, including hydrologic changes that could be caused by the development (e.g., introduction of sewage, effluent, and irrigation water to the groundwater system, alterations to surface drainage, etc.);

     • h. The availability of public access to and along the beach and potential to impact public access and recreation over the life of the project;

• i. On lots with a legally established shoreline protection, a description of the condition of the existing shoreline protection device, identify any impacts it may be having on public access and recreation, scenic view, sand supplies, and other coastal resources, and evaluate opportunities to modify or replace the existing protection in a manner that would eliminate or reduce these impacts;

  - j. The area of the site subject to inundation, flooding, and wave run-up during at least a 100-year wave event, with high tide, elevated water level resulting from sea level rise, storm surge, and basin-wide events such as El Niño and Pacific Decadal Oscillation; 
  
  - k. A tsunami hazard assessment, including sea level rise and tsunami wave run-up calculations; 
  
  - l. A minimum of two future scenarios representing the range of projections of rise in sea levels, including a worst-case scenario based on the best available science; 
  
  - m. The long-term effects of the proposed development on shoreline sand supply and movement; 
  
  - n. The potential need for a shoreline protection device over the life of the development; 
  
  - o. Potential erosion of the site and any mitigation measures to be used to minimize erosion before and after construction (i.e., landscape and drainage design); 
  
  - p. Foundation design requirements to facilitate elevating or relocating the proposed development; 
  
  - q. Project alternatives designed to avoid or lessen impacts from and/or exposure to hazards; 
  
  - r. Adaptation strategies that could be incorporated into the development to reduce the long-term exposure to hazards; and 
  
  - s. Any other factor that might affect slope or bluff stability. 
  

• D. Bluff Face Development. No development will be permitted on a bluff face, except for engineered public beach accessways.

• E. Development Seaward of the Top of the Bluff. New development is prohibited seaward of the top of the bluff except:

  1. Wooden stairs and other lightly constructed structures that provide public beach access.

  2. Improvements necessary to provide access to the beach for emergency responders.

  3. Temporary structures, subject to approval of a Minor Conditional Use Permit, pursuant to Chapter 17.57 , Conditional Use Permits, and the following additional findings:

     • a. The temporary structure will not substantially interfere with lateral or vertical beach access or adversely impact coastal processes.

     • b. The temporary structure will not remain in place for longer than three years.

  4. Removal of existing beach and shoreline structures, such as seawalls, roadways, and riprap, and removal of remnants of shoreline oil and gas facilities where the removal area is restored to a natural condition.

• F. Structures on the Beach. No permanent structure will be permitted on a dry, sandy beach except facilities necessary for public health and safety.

• G. Site Planning and Setback Standards. New development must be sited to ensure that it is safe from hazards associated with coastal erosion and without the need for shoreline protection devices for the life span of the project, or 100 years for Public Works projects in the City’s Capital Improvement Program.

  1. Bluff-Top Setbacks. Where a lot line is adjacent to a bluff the following setback standards apply:

     • a. Principal Structures. Any principal structure must be set back from any bluff-top at least 130 feet.

       • i. A lesser setback may be considered by the Review Authority with the approval of a Major Conditional Use Permit.

         • (1) A site-specific geological or geotechnical engineering study demonstrates that the average annual bluff retreat rate at the site is less than one foot per year and that the proposed setback meets the 100-year bluff-retreat rate is required.

         • (2) A 30-foot safety buffer must be added to the reduced bluff retreat rate setback.

     • b. Accessory Structures. An accessory structure may encroach into the 130-foot setback but must be set back from any bluff-top 30 feet and must be easily moveable and replaceable.

       • i. Passive recreational structures, such as signs and benches, may be sited within the bluff-top setback.

     • c. Landscaping. Drought-tolerant landscaping must be installed and maintained in the required bluff-top setback. Grading, as may be required for drainage or to install landscaping and minor improvements (e.g., patios, fences, etc.) that do not impact public views or bluff stability, may be permitted.

  2. Non-Bluff Coastline Setbacks. For all structures proposed within 500 feet of the mean high tide line in areas that lack coastal bluffs, a site-specific shoreline erosion rate and shoreline hazards study is required, consistent with the following:

     • a. Existing shoreline protection may not be factored into the analysis unless otherwise directed by the Director.

     • b. The study must demonstrate that the proposed structure would not be expected to be subject to shoreline erosion or other hazards for the life of the structure or for 50 years, whichever is greater.

  3. Access and Recreational Area Setbacks. Additional setbacks may be required to accommodate public access and recreational areas in compliance with Chapter 17.25 , Coastal Access.

• H. Shoreline Protection Devices. Shoreline protection devices to protect development constructed after January 1, 1977 are prohibited. The following applies to shoreline protection devices to protect development constructed before January 1, 1977.

  1. Application Requirements. Any application for installation or repair and maintenance of shoreline protection devices must include an engineering or geological study that includes evidence and discussion for each of the following:

     • a. The shoreline protection device is necessary to serve coastal-dependent uses such as public access and recreational uses, or to protect principal structures existing as of January 1, 1977 or public beaches in danger of erosion.

• i. For existing shoreline protective devices that are being reconstructed and/or replaced, the application must include a re-assessment of the need for the device, the need for any repair or maintenance of the device. The application must, at a minimum, include an evaluation of the age and condition of the existing principal structure being protected; changed geologic site conditions including, but not limited to, changes relative to sea level rise; and impacts to coastal resources, including, but not limited to, public access and recreation.

  - b. Provide feasible alternatives to coastal shoreline protection devices as well as siting or design alternatives that would minimize impacts on coastal resources. 
  
     - i. The alternatives analysis must include, but not be limited to, the relocation of the threatened structure or development as well as the removal of portions of the threatened structure or development. 
  
     - ii. The alternatives analysis must identify the least environmentally damaging alternative and demonstrate the proposed shoreline protection device has been designed to eliminate or minimize adverse impacts on local shoreline sand supply, protected coastal resources, lateral access, and public recreation on the beach. 
  

  2. Required Findings. A shoreline protection device, including repairs, may be allowed by approval of a Major Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit approval, only when the Review Authority makes each the following findings:

     • a. The shoreline protection device is required to serve coastal-dependent uses such as public access and recreational uses, or to protect principal structures existing as of January 1, 1977 or public beaches in danger of erosion.

     • b. The proposed shoreline protection device has been designed to eliminate or minimize adverse impacts on local shoreline sand supply and protected coastal resources.

     • c. No other non-structural alternative, such as sand replenishment, beach nourishment, or managed retreat is feasible, and the device is the least environmentally damaging feasible alternative.

     • d. The size and scope of the shoreline protection device is the minimum necessary and least environmentally damaging, feasible alternative.

     • e. There will be no reduction in public access, use, or enjoyment of the natural shoreline environment, and construction of a shoreline protective device will preserve or provide access to related public recreational lands or facilities.

     • f. The shoreline protection device is designed to respect natural land forms and minimize visual impact through the use of visually compatible colors and materials.

• I. Monitoring. The shoreline protection device must be regularly monitored by an engineer or engineering geologist familiar and experienced with coastal structures and processes. Monitoring reports to the City and the Coastal Commission are required every five years from the issuance date of the effectuating Coastal Development Permit. The report will evaluate the effectiveness and impacts of the shoreline protection device.

protection device must be regularly monitored by an engineer or engineering geologist familiar and experienced with coastal structures and processes. Monitoring reports to the City and the Coastal Commission are required every five years from the issuance date of the effectuating Coastal Development Permit. The report will evaluate the effectiveness and impacts of the shoreline protection device.

• J. Maintenance. Maintenance and repairs must not enlarge the size of the shoreline protection device and will not encroach seaward of the existing device.

  1. Any maintenance or repair requires an engineering or geological study demonstrating that in the absence of maintenance or repair, the structure protected by the device would be further exposed coastal hazards.

• (Ord. 20-03 § 6)

The following standards apply to all development within areas with geologic hazards, including but not limited to, high and moderate landslide potential, medium-to-high liquefaction and seismic settlement potential, soil-related hazard areas, and areas with 25 percent slope or more.

• A. Geological, Geotechnical, Soil, and Engineering Studies. Site-specific geotechnical, geologic, soil, and/or structural engineering studies must be prepared for new development in areas with known geologic hazards. Studies must assess the type and degree of hazards on the site and recommend any appropriate site design modifications or considerations that would adequately address and minimize any potentially significant and/or negative impacts relating to the identified hazards.

• B. Setback from Active Fault. New development may not be located closer than 50 feet to any active or potentially active fault line to reduce potential damage from surface rupture. Nonstructural development may be allowed in such areas, depending on how such nonstructural development would withstand or respond to fault rupture or other seismic damage.

  1. Potentially Active Faults. Potentially active faults shall be subject to the same requirements as active faults unless and until a geologic or geotechnical study has adequately demonstrated that the fault is not active.

• C. Site Disturbance. All construction proposed for areas with 25 percent slope or more, or subject to soil-related and slope-related hazards, must minimize the area of vegetation removal, disturbance, and grading.

• (Ord. 20-03 § 6)

• A. Fire Fuel Modification Plans. Applications for projects that require fire fuel modification must include a Fire Fuel Modification Plan. This plan must be prepared by a landscape architect or resource specialist and include measures to minimize removal of native vegetation, protect ESHAs, and incorporate fire-resistant and/or fire-retardant vegetation in new plantings.

• (Ord. 20-03 § 6; Ord. 20-09 § 5; Ord. 25-05, 9/2/2025)

Prior History: Ord. 20-03 § 6; repealed by Ord. 25-10, 12/2/2025.