Preview
1 Law Office of Andréa Marcus, APC
Andréa Marcus (SBN 118098)
2 1482 East Valley Road, Suite 831
Montecito, CA 93108
3 Telephone: (888) 215-9021
4 Fax: (888) 215-9021
Email: andrea@andreamarcuslaw.com
5
Richard C. Solomon (SBN 41107)
6 2640 Las Encinas Lane
Santa Barbara, CA, 93105
7 Telephone: (805) 452-5839
8 Fax: (888) 215-9021
Email: rcsolomon42@gmail.com
9
Attorneys for Plaintiff/Petitioner
10
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
11 COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA
12
JANA ZIMMER, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ) Case No.: 24CV00199
13 TRUSTEE OF THE SOLOMON-ZIMMER )
LIVING TRUST, ) PLAINTIFF’S SUPPLEMENTAL
14 ) REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 32,
Plaintiff/Petitioner, ) 33; PLAINTIFF’S CORRECTION OF
15 v. ) ERROR; POINTS AND AUTHORITIES;
16 ) DECLARATION OF RICHARD C.
COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA, BOARD ) SOLOMON
17 OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF )
SANTA BARBARA, LISA PLOWMAN, ) Petition Filed: January 16, 2024
18 DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ) Hearing: July 1, 2024
DEVELOPMENT, ROB HAZARD, FIRE ) 10:00 AM
19 MARSHAL, TRAVIS SEAWARDS, )
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ) Judge: Hon. Colleen Sterne
20 DEVELOPMENT, DAS WILLIAMS, FIRST ) Dept: 5
21 DISTRICT SUPERVISOR, DOES 1-25, in )
their official and individual capacities, )
22 )
Defendants/Respondents. )
23 )
24
25 TO THE COURT, AND TO ALL PARTIES OF RECORD AND THEIR ATTORNEYS
26
1
27 PLAINTIFF’S SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE; POINTS AND
28 AUTHORITIES; CORRECTION OF ERROR; DECLARATION OF RICHARD C.
SOLOMON, AND RJN PROPOSED EXHIBITS 32-33.
1 Plaintiff, Jana Zimmer as Trustee of the Solomon-Zimmer Living Trust, through
2 her attorneys of record, requests that the Court take judicial notice of the additional records listed
3 below pursuant to California Evidence Code Section 451, 452(b), (h) and /or 453. These exhibits
4
are true and correct copies of the document referenced. (See, Declaration of Richard C.
5
Solomon, attached ) Each and all of them are relevant to dispute false, misleading or incorrect
6
assertions of fact or law in Defendants’ Reply, filed herein on April 22, 2024. These additional
7
8 documents are provided to assist the court in its review of the sufficiency of Plaintiff’s
9 allegations in her Complaint, and to harmonize applicable law, in its consideration of the
10 Demurrer. Plaintiff will be prepared to elaborate on these points, and Defendants’ new and
11 unsupported argument regarding “eligibility” at the hearing on Demurrer, as necessary. 1
12
1. RJN 32 Defendants ask the court to sustain their Demurrer to the Fourth Cause of
13
14 Action, claiming, in their Reply, that Plaintiff “.. still did not provide the agreement that is the
15 subject of this claim” (County Reply in Support of Demurrer p. 8 line 3-24). 2
Therefore, in
16 order to assist the court’s review and evaluation of this ground for Demurrer, Plaintiff hereby
17 offers her written agreement(s) with the County, collectively, as RJN 32: the written Planning
18
Application, written Authorization of Agent, and the written “Agreement for Processing”, which
19
is the subject of the Fourth Cause of Action and which was required to be submitted and was in
20
fact submitted simultaneously with the application materials. RJN 32 p. 11-17.
21
22
23
24 1
See, e.g., Defendants’ Reply at p. 6, line 23-27. As alleged in the Complaint, the “Building Official” (Plowman)
never made any finding, because she never made a decision to deny the application. See, e.g. Complaint, Para.
25 96, 66,73,80,110, and the Prayer.
2
Defendants have previously objected to all but five (5) of Plaintiff’s Requests for Judicial Notice. If Plaintiff is
26 required to amend her Complaint, these written agreements will be attached.
2
27 PLAINTIFF’S SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE; POINTS AND
28 AUTHORITIES; CORRECTION OF ERROR; DECLARATION OF RICHARD C.
SOLOMON, AND RJN PROPOSED EXHIBITS 32-33.
1 RJN 33 is the full bill text of SB 477, cited by Defendants in their Reply at p. 4 line 12-
2 14 to support their assertion that Gov. Code Section 65852.150 – and its statement of intent for
3 protections for the elderly, disabled, and others - was repealed. The full bill text discloses that
4
the substance of Section 65852.150 was contemporaneously restated as Gov. Section 66310(a)-
5
(h) . (RJN 33 p.33). More importantly, Defendants assert, at p. 4, line 5-14, of their Reply, that
6
“the only part of Section 65913.4 that is incorporated in Section 66411.7 are the site condition
7
8 restrictions in this case pertaining to fire hazard.” They fail to disclose the fact that SB 477 also
9 amended and restated Section 66411.7, including, specifically Section 66411.7(j)(2), which
10 states:
11 “For purposes of this section, “unit” means any dwelling unit, including but not
12 limited to a unit or units created pursuant to Section 65852.21 3, a primary dwelling, an
accessory dwelling unit as defined in Subdivision (a) or Section 66313, or a junior
13 accessory dwelling as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 66313.” RJN 33 p. 40.
14
Thus, SB 477 at SEC 21 specifically clarifies that “one unit” can be an ADU, or a primary
15
16 residence, and that this definition applies to SB 9 lot splits. Gov. Code Section 66411.7(j)(2).
17 RJN 33, p. 51. See, Declaration of Richard C. Solomon, attached.
18 Defendants thus fail to acknowledge that SB 477, which is also characterized as
19 declaratory of existing law, and as an urgency measure, (RJN 33 p. 19) is also highly relevant, if
20
not dispositive, of the County’s legal claims- on which their Demurrer and their defenses rely-
21
that neither the Permit Streamlining Act, nor any of the definitions and requirements of the
22
Housing Accountability Act and Housing Crisis Act, as amended (e.g. Section 65905.5) are
23
24 “applicable” in an SB 9 lot split, as Plaintiff specifically alleged: (See, Complaint Para. 27)
25
3
“A proposed housing development containing no more than two residential units within a single-family residential
26 zone shall be considered ministerially, without discretionary review or a hearing”
3
27 PLAINTIFF’S SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE; POINTS AND
28 AUTHORITIES; CORRECTION OF ERROR; DECLARATION OF RICHARD C.
SOLOMON, AND RJN PROPOSED EXHIBITS 32-33.
1 “Recent amendments to the Housing Accountability Act clarified that it applies to
2 development of only one new unit. Gov. Code Section 65905.5(b)(3)(C)” 4
3 2. Plaintiff hereby acknowledges her error and apologizes to the court for misidentifying
4
the title of Government Code Section 51178(a) at page 24 line 21 of their Opposition to
5
Demurrer, and respectfully requests this opportunity to clarify. That particular reference should
6
have been to Government Code Section 51182(a), the content of which is correctly set forth in
7
8 Plaintiff’s Opposition to Demurrer, p.24 line 22-25. This Section 51182(a) is part of Gov. Code
9 Chapter 6.8, “Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones, which includes Gov Code Section 51175-
10 51189”, and it also includes Section 51178(a). Section 51178(a), which is part of the chapter,
11 and was erroneously referenced instead of Section 51182(a), identifies procedural requirements
12
for the local agency, with which Plaintiff alleges the County also failed to comply. (See, e.g.,
13
Complaint Para. 60). The substantive requirements set forth at Section 51182(a) of Chapter 6.8
14
apply to all occupied structures, including but not limited to ADUs, and Plaintiff has alleged that
15
16 they were duly applied to Plaintiff’s building permit for her approved ADU by the Defendant
17 Fire Marshal and for which Fire issued an approval, 22 FPC 00163, on June 17, 2022.
18 (Complaint, Para. 14,24, 34,111).
19
Likewise, Defendants falsely represent, with respect to their demand for a so-called
20
“voluntary” lane widening Option, in their Reply at p. 6, line 21-22, that Plaintiff has not alleged
21
that she complied with their illegal demand to widen the lane to 15’. (“Zimmer does not allege
22
23 that she has or intends to achieve this alternative”) Plaintiff did specifically allege exactly this
24 very fact. See, Complaint Para. 9, as follows:
25
4
In context of the facts alleged Defendants’ assertion that Zimmer applied to create a ‘vacant’ lot is extremely
26 misleading.
4
27 PLAINTIFF’S SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE; POINTS AND
28 AUTHORITIES; CORRECTION OF ERROR; DECLARATION OF RICHARD C.
SOLOMON, AND RJN PROPOSED EXHIBITS 32-33.
1 “On December 13, 2023, Plaintiff notified all Defendants, and County Counsel, that she
2 would comply with their demand that she “voluntarily” widen Las Encinas Lane to 15’
3 by January 15, 2024. Thereafter, compliance was actually achieved by December 23,
4
2023.” (emphasis added)
5
6 Plaintiff also specifically alleged that the County never responded to her request that they inspect
7 and confirm her measurements. Para. 54.
8
Plaintiff will be prepared at argument on the Demurrer to respond further as necessary.
9
10 Respectfully Submitted,
11
12
__ __ DATED: June 17, 2024
13
14 Richard C. Solomon, Esq.
15 Andréa Marcus
16 Attorneys for Plaintiff
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
5
27 PLAINTIFF’S SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE; POINTS AND
28 AUTHORITIES; CORRECTION OF ERROR; DECLARATION OF RICHARD C.
SOLOMON, AND RJN PROPOSED EXHIBITS 32-33.
1 Declaration of Richard C. Solomon
2 I, Richard C. Solomon, declare:
3 1. I am a member of the State Bar of California, and I am the attorney for
4
Plaintiff/Petitioner Jana Zimmer, Trustee. I make this Declaration in support of Petitioner’s
5
Supplemental Request for Judicial Notice, filed herewith.
6
2. I have personal knowledge of the matters set forth in this declaration, and if called upon
7
8 to testify to those matters, could and would so testify.
9 3. A true and correct copy of the documents for which Petitioner/Plaintiff is requesting
10 judicial notice are attached to this Supplemental Request. These documents are relevant as
11 follows:
12
(a) RJN 32. A true and correct copy of the Written “Agreement for Processing”,
13
Written Application for SB 9 Lot Split, Written Authorization of Agent, which was signed by
14
Plaintiff on December 20, 2022 and submitted and received by the County on that date. Plaintiff
15
16 has also resubmitted copies of these Agreements, which have been in the County’s files since
17 December 20, 2022, to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and to County Counsel, to be
18 included in the record of the case as Plaintiff’s Exhibits 427 and 428. These are the agreements
19 referenced in the Complaint at Para. 30,99, and 101.
20
(b) RJN 33. A true and correct copy of SB 477, cited in Defendants’ Reply. I
21
downloaded this full Bill Text :CA SB 477/2023-2024/ Regular Session/Chaptered California
22
Senate Bill 477, from LegiScan on June 14, 2023. As clearly set forth in the Legislative
23
24 Counsel’s Digest, the bill made “nonsubstantive changes” and reorganized provisions relating to
25 creation and regulation of accessory dwelling units. It also included changes to SB 9, Gov. Code
26 Section 66411.7. Defendants assert that Gov. Code Section 65852.150, pertaining to the
6
27 PLAINTIFF’S SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE; POINTS AND
28 AUTHORITIES; CORRECTION OF ERROR; DECLARATION OF RICHARD C.
SOLOMON, AND RJN PROPOSED EXHIBITS 32-33.
1 benefits to disabled and elderly residents of ADU’s was repealed at p. 4 lines 11-14 of their
2 Reply. They fail to disclose that Gov Code Section 65852.150 was substantively restated at Gov.
3 Code Section 66310 (RJN 33, p. 22).
4
More importantly, SB 477, which is also characterized as declaratory of existing law, and
5
as an urgency measure, is also relevant to dispose of the County’s legal claims- on which their
6
entire Demurrer and their defenses rely- that neither the Permit Streamlining Act, nor any of the
7
8 definitions and requirements of the Housing Accountability Act and Housing Crisis Act, as
9 amended (e.g. Section 65905.5) are “applicable” in an SB 9 lot split. Plaintiff specifically alleged
10 that they do apply. (See, Complaint Para. 27):
11 “Recent amendments to the Housing Accountability Act clarified that it applies to
12
development of only one new unit. Gov. Code Section 65905.5(b)(3)(C)”
13
14 Nevertheless, Defendants continue to assert that there is no connection between SB 9 lot
15 splits, and provisions of the Housing Accountability and Housing Crisis Acts. SB 477 did
16
expressly include complementary changes to Section 66411.7, and it specifically includes, in
17
SEC 7, a provision authorizing HCD to notify the Attorney General if it finds that the County has
18
taken any action taken in violation of any of 22 listed provisions of the Housing Crisis Act and
19
20 Housing Accountability Acts and related provisions set forth at Gov. Code Section 65585(j).
21 Gov. Code Section 66411.7 is set forth as one of those provisions in Section 65585(j)(18).(RJN
22 33 p. 33)
23 Furthermore, Section 66411.7(j)(2), also included in the bill, expressly defines a
24
“housing unit” to include both a primary dwelling or an ADU or JADU, for purposes of the
25
specific density limits for a ministerial lot split under SB 9, as follows:
26
7
27 PLAINTIFF’S SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE; POINTS AND
28 AUTHORITIES; CORRECTION OF ERROR; DECLARATION OF RICHARD C.
SOLOMON, AND RJN PROPOSED EXHIBITS 32-33.
1 “For purposes of this section, “unit” means any dwelling unit, including but not
limited to a unit or units created pursuant to Section 65852.21, a primary dwelling, an
2 accessory dwelling unit as defined in Subdivision (a) or Section 66313, or a junior
accessory dwelling as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 66313.” RJN 33 p. 40.
3
4 Plaintiff specifically alleged at Paragraph 15 of the Complaint:
5 “Therefore, with Defendants’ concurrence, on December 20, 2022, over a year
prior to filing this Complaint, she applied for a ministerial lot split under SB 9 in order to
6 secure separate financing and insurance for the approved dwelling, on a separate lot.
Defendant Seawards represented that it did not matter whether she pulled her approved
7 Building Permit before or after recordation of the lot split. Plaintiff has offered to deed
8 restrict the new lot to one unit, and her entire property to two, rather than the four
potentially allowed under State law.”
9
The County seems to have forgotten their own general rule that the zoning ordinance
10
does not allow an “accessory structure” to be built on a lot with no primary dwelling. (See,
11
12 Complaint, Exh A, p. 7, where P&D asserted that an existing shed on the proposed new parcel
13 would have to be demolished. 5 ) It is clear from the allegations of the Complaint that the same
14 1200 square foot dwelling which has already been approved as an ADU will be built in the same
15 exact location as approved on the “new” lot as a primary dwelling, and that Plaintiff will retain
16
the existing residence and attached RSU/JADU. See, e.g. Complaint, Para. 27,30,35 .
17
18
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Santa
19
20 Barbara, California, on June 17, 2024.
21
22
23 Richard C. Solomon
24 Attorney for Plaintiff
25 5
P&D asserted: “7. Map Markup. Please refer to the attached parcel map with markup and address the
comments on the map: a. Will the existing shed on Proposed Lot 1 be demolished? There cannot be an
26 accessory use on the lot without a primary use.” See, Gov. Code Section 66411.7(i), Complaint, Para. 49.
8
27 PLAINTIFF’S SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE; POINTS AND
28 AUTHORITIES; CORRECTION OF ERROR; DECLARATION OF RICHARD C.
SOLOMON, AND RJN PROPOSED EXHIBITS 32-33.
PROOF OF SERVICE VIA E-FILING SYSTEM or EMAIL
1
Callie Patton Kim
2 ckim@countyofsb.org
3 Deputy County Counsel
Santa Barbara County Counsel
4 105 East Anapamu Street, Suite 201
Santa Barbara, California 93101
5 (805) 568-2955
6
7 I am employed in the city of Montecito, CA. I am over the age of 18 years and I am not a
8 party to the within action. My business address is 1482 East Valley Road, Suite 831, Montecito,
9 CA, 93108. PLAINTIFF’S SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 32,
10 33; PLAINTIFF’S CORRECTION OF ERROR; POINTS AND AUTHORITIES;
11 DECLARATION OF RICHARD C. SOLOMON was filed via the 1eFile filing system and
12 served by email from the email address ashley@andreamarcuslaw.com to the parties and email
address in the caption above. I did not receive, within a reasonable time after the transmission,
13
any electronic message or other indication that the transmission was unsuccessful. I declare under
14
the penalty of perjury under the laws of California that the foregoing is true and correct, and that
15
this declaration is executed on the date set forth below.
16
17
Dated: June 17, 2024
18
______/s/_____________
19
ASHLEY CASANOVA
20
21 LAW OFFICE OF ANDRÉA MARCUS
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
9
PROOF OF SERVICE
PLAINTIFF (SUPPLEMENTAL} REQUEST
FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 32
Santa Barbara County Planning and Development Department
Planning Application
STEP 1: SUBJECT PROPERTY STEP 3: DETAILED SCOPE OF WORK
023-250-020 Please attach a detailed scope of work that includes the existing uses
and structures, whether demolition of structures is proposed, and all
ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER(S)
proposed uses, structures, and additions. Please include square
2640 Las Encinas Lane, Santa Barbara CA. 93105 footages of all existing and proposed structures.
PROPERTY ADDRESS (IF APPLICABLE)
STEP 4: PROJECT & PROPERTY DATA
BUSINESS/ESTABLISHMENT NAME (IF APPLICABLE)
Is grading proposed? տ Yes ܆
✔ No If yes, cubic yards:
STEP 2: Z Yh/Z PROJECT CONTACTS CUT FILL TOTAL GRADING
Will grading bebalanced on-site? տ Yes տ No
PROPERTY OWNER
Jana Zimmer, Trustee, Solomon-Zimmer Living Trust If no:
NAME (if LLC or other legal entity, must provide documentation) QUANTITY OF EXPORT OZ IMPORT
2640 Las Encinas Road (Lane)
Is there a 16-foot drop in elevation within 100 feet of proposed
STREET ADDRESS
structure footprint? ܆Yes տ
✔ No
Santa Barbara, California 93105
CITY, STATE ZIP Are any trees or vegetation proposed for removal? տ Yes տ No
805 705-3784 zimmerccc@gmail.com
If yes:
PHONE EMAIL
NUMBER/ACREAGE & SPECIES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL
Is any work proposed within 6 feet of the dripline of any native trees?
APPLICANT
Jana Zimmer, Trustee, Solomon Zimmer LIving Trust տ Yes տ
✔ No
NAME (if LLC or other legal entity, must provide documentation) Are any air conditioning units proposed? ܆
✔ Yes տ No
2640 Las Encinas Road (Lane)
STREET ADDRESS Are any generators proposed? տ Yes տ
✔ No
Santa Barbara, CA 93105 See BP
Square feet of impervious surfaces: __________________________
CITY, STATE ZIP
EXISTING PROPOSED
805-705 3784 zimmerccc@gmail.com
Is this application related to cannabis activities? տ Yes տ
✔ No
PHONE EMAIL
Water Source: Sewer System:
տ
✔ Public Water ܆
✔ Public Sewer
FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTY տ PrivateWell տ Private Septic or Equivalent
Jana Zimmer տ Shared Water System
NAME (if LLC or other legal entity, must provide documentation)
same as above Evidence of Parcel Validity (attach relevant documents):
STREET ADDRESS տ Recorded Parcel/Final Map տ Recorded Official Map
տ Certificate of Compliance տ Conditional Certificate of Compliance
CITY, STATE ZIP տ Approved Lot Line Adjustment տ Recorded Voluntary Merger
տ
✔ Prior Zoning Permits տ Other: _________________________
PHONE EMAIL
Hazardous Waste & Substances
California Government Code §65962.5 requires all applicants for
development projects to provide the following information. Make sure
AGENT;ŝĨĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞͿ you check each list below and confirm whether the site is listed as a
Hazardous Waste Site:
NAME (if LLC or other legal entity, must provide documentation) տ Department of Toxic Substance Control EnviroStor Database
տ
✔ Water Board GeoTracker Database
STREET ADDRESS
տ
✔ CalEPA Solid Waste Disposal Sites
տ
✔
CalEPA Cease and Desist Orders and Cleanup and Abatement Orders
CITY, STATE ZIP
տ
✔
CalEPA Hazardous Waste Facilities
PHONE EMAIL Is the site listed as a Hazardous Waste Site? ܆Yes ✔ No
܆
11
G:\GROUP\DEV_REV\Zoning Counter\DRAFT Application Forms\Master Application Form.docx
STEP 6: OWNER/APPLICANT CONSENT
I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that I have read the information below and that:
1. I am the property owner or have obtained the property owner’s/ 10. I understand that it is the responsibility of the applicant or property
owners’ consent to the submittal of this application and contents owner to notify the Department of any changes to the project,
therein; and including change in ownership, which may require additional
information/documents/reports and fees and may cause delay to
2. I have carefully reviewed and prepared the application and plans in the processing of the project; and
accordance with the instructions; and
11. I understand that if there is a zoning violation on the property, plan
3. I provided information in this application, including all attachments, review may be delayed. Any unpermitted structures or uses must
which are accurate and correct; and either be removed or legalized at part of this application; and
4. I understand that the submittal of inaccurate or incomplete 12. I understand that all materials submitted in connection with this
information or plans, or failure to comply with the instructions may application shall become public record subject to inspection and
result in processing delays and/or denial of my application; and copying by the public. I acknowledge and understand that the
public may inspect these materials and that some or all of the
5. I understand that it is the responsibility of the applicant to materials may be posted on the Department’s website; and
substantiate the request through the requirements of the
application; and 13. Pursuant to California Civil Code Section 1633.5(b), the parties
hereby agree that where this Agreement requires a party
6. I understand that upon further evaluation, additional
signature, an electronic signature, as that term is defined at
information/documents/reports/entitlements and fees may be
California Civil Code Section 1633.2(h), shall have the full force
required; and
and effect of an original (“wet”) signature. A responsible officer
7. I understand that failure to submit any such required fees or of each party has read and understands the contents of this
information requested at a later time may result in processing Agreement and is empowered and duly authorized on behalf of
delays and/or denial of my application; and that party to execute it.
8. I understand that denials will result in no refunds; and 14. I understand that there is no guarantee – expressed or implied –
that an approval will be granted. I understand that such application
9. I am the property owner or have obtained the property owner’s/ must be carefully evaluated and after the evaluation has been
owners’ consent and expressly allow, authorize, and permit the conducted, that staff’s recommendation or decision may change
County of Santa Barbara to enter and inspect the subject property, during the course of the review based on the information presented.
with or without prior notice, to inspect, photograph, and/or process
this application. No additional permission or consent to enter upon
the subject property is necessary or shall be required. I further
certify and warrant that I am authorized to and, hereby do, consent
and allow such inspections on behalf of each and all owners of the
subject property; and
REQUIRED SIGNATURES
I have read, understand and consent to the submiƚƚĂů of this application.
Jana Zimmer
WZKW ZdzOWNER SIGNATURE PRINT NAME DATE
Jana Zimmer
APPLICANT SIGNATURE (only if different from OWNER) PRINT NAME DATE
Jana Zimmer
&/EE/>>zZ ^WKE^/> WZdzSIGNATURE PRINT NAME DATE
AGENT SIGNATURE (if applicable) PRINT NAME DATE
To submit your application, please contact the Zoning Counter to obtain a personalized submittal link.
For South County projects, contact us at front@countyofsb.org or (805) 568-2090.
For North County projects, contact us a nocounte@countyofsb.org or (805) 934-6251.
123 E. Anapamu Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93101 භ Phone: (805) 568-2000 භ FAX (805) 568-2020
Phone: (805) 934-6250
624 Foster Road, Santa Maria, CA 93455
12 භ භ FAX (805) 934-6258
www.sbcountyplanning.org
Santa Barbara COUNTY Planning and Development Department
Agreement for Payment of Fees
Check one: General Land Use □ Telecommunications □ Petroleum
COUNTY of Santa Barbara (hereinafter COUNTY) and ________________________,
Solomon-Zimmer LIving Trust, Jana Zimmer Trustee
the Financially
Responsible Party (hereinafter FRP) AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Agreement is in reference to permit processing costs for case(s) associated with the Project:
Site Address (APN if no address): 2640 Las Encinas Road, Santa Barbara CA 93015
Project Scope: SB-9 Lot Split
2. A security deposit or fixed fee will be collected at time of project submittal. Security deposit projects
will receive monthly invoices to be paid within 30 days from invoice date. Upon completion of project
review, any remaining security deposit will be refunded to the FRP. If a fixed fee project has unique
characteristics or raises complex issues which would make the case more expensive to process, it will
be converted to a monthly billing process, as detailed above. If it is necessary to utilize consultant
services, a deposit to cover consultant costs will be requested from the FRP prior to execution of the
contract with the consultant. If the FRP elects to utilize outside contractors to expedite permit
processing, consultant costs plus indirect overhead will be charged on an hourly basis.
3. The FRP is responsible for payment of all permit processing costs associated with the cases listed
above. If, during the course of processing, the financial responsibility changes, the new financially
responsible party must complete an Agreement for Payment which will release the previous FRP from
further financial obligations and designate the new FRP. The undersigned FRP remains financially
responsible until a new FRP signs a separate Agreement for Payment.
4. For projects that receive a monthly billing, the FRP will receive from the COUNTY a P&D Project Cost
Estimate Worksheet. This worksheet is informational. It is a good faith effort to provide the FRP with
an estimate of project costs for the duration of permit processing. If unforeseen circumstances arise
during permit processing which substantially increase the level of effort and estimated costs, COUNTY
will send the FRP a revised worksheet.
5. If an invoice is not paid within 30 days COUNTY may stop work and close the case.
6. FRP agrees to pay all fees applicable under the COUNTY’s fee schedule(s) prior to approval and
issuance of land use clearance; map clearance or clearance for record of survey; building permits; post
discretionary case clearance; services related to petroleum permits such as inspections, remediation,
research, violations, compliance and appeals. No clearances or permits will be issued without receipt
of full payment for fees applicable under the COUNTY’s fee schedule, unless waived or adjusted by the
Board of Supervisors upon showing of good cause. In a declared emergency or disaster, fees are
deferred until final building clearance, and must be paid by the FRP prior to the granting of final
building clearance.
7. If the FRP owes any amount due on any other processing case with the COUNTY, P&D will not accept
any subsequent permit applications from the FRP, unless waived by the Director of the Department.
13
8. If the Project involves the deployment of "Small Wireless Facilities" as defined in Title 17, Section
1.6002(1) of the Code of Federal Regulations, the FRP agrees to pay permit processing fees con sistent
with the requirements of the Federal Communications Commission' s Declaratory Ruling, adopted
September 26, 2018 (FCC-18-133), and the FRP reserves the right to challenge any fees collected in
excess of those requ irements through court action.
ACT INFORMATION AND SIGNATURE (if LLC or other legal entity, must provide documentation)
Jana Zimmer 12/20/2022
PRINT NAME DATE
0 Las Encinas Road, Santa Barbara CA 93015
CITY STATE ZIP
(805) 705-3784 zimmerccc@gmail.com
FRP TELEPHONE NUMBER FRP EMAIL
COUNTY Use Only
COUNTY PROJECT NAME COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE NAME
COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE DATE
CHANGE IN FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTY
If th is document supersedes a previous Agreement for Payment, due to change in financial responsibility, the previous
FRP must also sign to acknowledge release of responsibilities. Upon project completion, the security deposit balance
(if any) wil l be refunded to the FRP on record at that t ime.
PREVIOUS FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
SIGNATURE PRINT NAME DATE
FRP STREET ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP
FRP TELEPHONE NUMBER FRP EMAIL
DATE OF RELEASE OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
123 E. Anapamu Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93101 • Phone: (805) 568-2000 • FA,X: (805) 568-2020
624 W. Foster Road, Santa Marta. CA 93455 • Phone: (SOS) 934-6250 • FAX: (805) 934-6258
www.sbcountyplannlng.org
14
Santa Ba rbara County Planning and Development Department
Authorization of Agent
This form must be completed in its entirety by t he property Owner and/or Appli cant if they are represented by an agent.
I hereby authorize the following individual/entity to act as my agent while processing the required permit for the proposed
project:
2640 Las Encinas Road, Santa Barbara CA 9301 5
STRECT ADDqEss CITY. STATE ZI P CODE
023-250-020 SB-9 Lot Split
ASSl:SSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER PROJECl NAME
PROPERTY OWNER
Solomon-Zimmer Living Trust, Jana Zimmer Trustee
NAME NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNATORY (if LLC. LP, or Corparat1on) ENTITY# (it LLC, LP. o r Corporation)
2640 Las Encinas Road Santa Barbara CA 93015
MAILING ADDRESS CITY, STATE ZIP CODE
(805) 705-3784 zimmerccc@gmail.com
EMAIL AD DRESS
Jana Zimmer 12/20/2022
PRINT NAME DATE
A ORIZED AGENT FOR PROPERTY OWNER
Hugh Brownlee, brownleePM
NAME NAME AND Tll LE Of- SIG'IJA l"ORY (1f LLC, LP, or Corporation) ENl ITY # (1f LLC. LP, or Corporation)
5218 8th Street Carpinteria CA 930 13
MAILING ADDRESS CITY, STATE ZIP CODE
(805) 732-5429 brownleepm@gmail.com
PHONE NUMBER EMAIL ADDRESS
Hugh Brownlee 12/20/2022
SIGNATURE PRINT NAME DAT E
123 E. Anapamu Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93101 • Phone: (805) S68-2000 • FAX (805) 568-2020
624 Foster Road, Santa Maria, CA 934SS • Phone: (805 ) 934-62S0 • FAX (80S) 934-62S8
www.sbcountyplanning.org
15
8. If the Project involves the deployment of "Small Wireless Facilities" as defined in Title 17, Section
1.6002(1) of the Code of Federal Regulations, the FRP agrees to pay permit processing fees consistent
with the requirements of the Federal Communications Commission's Declaratory Ruling, adopted
September 26, 2018 (FCC-18-133), and the FRP reserves the right to challenge any fees collected in
excess of those requirements through court action.
ACT INFORMATION AND SIGNATURE (if LLC or other legal entity, must provide documentation)
Jana Zimmer 12/20/2022
PRINT NAME DATE
0 Las Encinas Road, Santa Barbara CA 93015
CITY STATE ZIP
(805) 705-3784 zimmerccc@gmail.com
FRP TE LEPHONE NUMBER FRP EMAIL
COUNTY Use Only
COUNTY PROJECT NAME COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE NAME
COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE DATE
CHANGE IN FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTY
If this document supersedes a previous Agreement for Payment, due to change in financial responsibility, the previous
FRP must also sign to acknowledge release of responsibilities. Upon project completion, the security deposit balance
(if any) will be refunded to the FRP on record at that time .
PREVIOUS FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTY:
SIG NATURE PRINT NAME DATE
FRP STREET ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP
FRP TELEPHONE NUMBER FRP EMAIL
DATE OF RELEASE OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
123 E. Anapamu Street, Santa Barbara. CA 93101 • Phone: (805) 568-2000 • FAX: (805) 568-2020
624 W. Foster Road, Santa Marla. CA 93455 • Phone: (SOS) 934-6250 • FAX: (805) 934-6258
www.sbcountyplannlng.org
16
STEP 6: OWNER/APPLICANT CO NSENT
I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that I have read the information below and that:
1. I am the property owner or have obtained the property owner's/ 10. I understand that it is the responsibility of the applicant or property
owners' consent to the submittal of this application and contents owner to notify the Department of any changes to the project,
therein; and including change in ownership, which may require additional
information/documents/reports and fees and may cause delay to
2. I have carefully reviewed and prepared the application and plans in
the processing of the project; and
accordance with the instructions; and
11. I understand t hat if there is a zoning violation on the property, plan
3. I provided information in th is application, including all attachments, review may be delayed. Any unpermitted structures or uses must
which are accurate and correct; and ei ther be removed or legalized at part of this application; and
4. I understand that the submittal of inaccurate or incomplete 12. I understand that all materials submitted in connection with th is
information or plans, or failure to comply with the instructions may application shall become public record subject to inspection and
result in processing delays and/or denial of my application; and copying by the public. I acknowledge and understand that the
public may inspect these materials and that some or all of the
5. I understand that it is the responsibility of the applicant to materials may be posted on the Department's website; and
substantiate the request through the requirements of the
application; and 13. Pursuant to California Civil Code Section 1633.S(b), th
Preview
1 Law Office of Andréa Marcus, APC Andréa Marcus (SBN 118098) 2 1482 East Valley Road, Suite 831 Montecito, CA 93108 3 Telephone: (888) 215-9021 4 Fax: (888) 215-9021 Email: andrea@andreamarcuslaw.com 5 Richard C. Solomon (SBN 41107) 6 2640 Las Encinas Lane Santa Barbara, CA, 93105 7 Telephone: (805) 452-5839 8 Fax: (888) 215-9021 Email: rcsolomon42@gmail.com 9 Attorneys for Plaintiff/Petitioner 10 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 11 COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA 12 JANA ZIMMER, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ) Case No.: 24CV00199 13 TRUSTEE OF THE SOLOMON-ZIMMER ) LIVING TRUST, ) PLAINTIFF’S SUPPLEMENTAL 14 ) REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 32, Plaintiff/Petitioner, ) 33; PLAINTIFF’S CORRECTION OF 15 v. ) ERROR; POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; 16 ) DECLARATION OF RICHARD C. COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA, BOARD ) SOLOMON 17 OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ) SANTA BARBARA, LISA PLOWMAN, ) Petition Filed: January 16, 2024 18 DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ) Hearing: July 1, 2024 DEVELOPMENT, ROB HAZARD, FIRE ) 10:00 AM 19 MARSHAL, TRAVIS SEAWARDS, ) DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ) Judge: Hon. Colleen Sterne 20 DEVELOPMENT, DAS WILLIAMS, FIRST ) Dept: 5 21 DISTRICT SUPERVISOR, DOES 1-25, in ) their official and individual capacities, ) 22 ) Defendants/Respondents. ) 23 ) 24 25 TO THE COURT, AND TO ALL PARTIES OF RECORD AND THEIR ATTORNEYS 26 1 27 PLAINTIFF’S SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE; POINTS AND 28 AUTHORITIES; CORRECTION OF ERROR; DECLARATION OF RICHARD C. SOLOMON, AND RJN PROPOSED EXHIBITS 32-33. 1 Plaintiff, Jana Zimmer as Trustee of the Solomon-Zimmer Living Trust, through 2 her attorneys of record, requests that the Court take judicial notice of the additional records listed 3 below pursuant to California Evidence Code Section 451, 452(b), (h) and /or 453. These exhibits 4 are true and correct copies of the document referenced. (See, Declaration of Richard C. 5 Solomon, attached ) Each and all of them are relevant to dispute false, misleading or incorrect 6 assertions of fact or law in Defendants’ Reply, filed herein on April 22, 2024. These additional 7 8 documents are provided to assist the court in its review of the sufficiency of Plaintiff’s 9 allegations in her Complaint, and to harmonize applicable law, in its consideration of the 10 Demurrer. Plaintiff will be prepared to elaborate on these points, and Defendants’ new and 11 unsupported argument regarding “eligibility” at the hearing on Demurrer, as necessary. 1 12 1. RJN 32 Defendants ask the court to sustain their Demurrer to the Fourth Cause of 13 14 Action, claiming, in their Reply, that Plaintiff “.. still did not provide the agreement that is the 15 subject of this claim” (County Reply in Support of Demurrer p. 8 line 3-24). 2 Therefore, in 16 order to assist the court’s review and evaluation of this ground for Demurrer, Plaintiff hereby 17 offers her written agreement(s) with the County, collectively, as RJN 32: the written Planning 18 Application, written Authorization of Agent, and the written “Agreement for Processing”, which 19 is the subject of the Fourth Cause of Action and which was required to be submitted and was in 20 fact submitted simultaneously with the application materials. RJN 32 p. 11-17. 21 22 23 24 1 See, e.g., Defendants’ Reply at p. 6, line 23-27. As alleged in the Complaint, the “Building Official” (Plowman) never made any finding, because she never made a decision to deny the application. See, e.g. Complaint, Para. 25 96, 66,73,80,110, and the Prayer. 2 Defendants have previously objected to all but five (5) of Plaintiff’s Requests for Judicial Notice. If Plaintiff is 26 required to amend her Complaint, these written agreements will be attached. 2 27 PLAINTIFF’S SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE; POINTS AND 28 AUTHORITIES; CORRECTION OF ERROR; DECLARATION OF RICHARD C. SOLOMON, AND RJN PROPOSED EXHIBITS 32-33. 1 RJN 33 is the full bill text of SB 477, cited by Defendants in their Reply at p. 4 line 12- 2 14 to support their assertion that Gov. Code Section 65852.150 – and its statement of intent for 3 protections for the elderly, disabled, and others - was repealed. The full bill text discloses that 4 the substance of Section 65852.150 was contemporaneously restated as Gov. Section 66310(a)- 5 (h) . (RJN 33 p.33). More importantly, Defendants assert, at p. 4, line 5-14, of their Reply, that 6 “the only part of Section 65913.4 that is incorporated in Section 66411.7 are the site condition 7 8 restrictions in this case pertaining to fire hazard.” They fail to disclose the fact that SB 477 also 9 amended and restated Section 66411.7, including, specifically Section 66411.7(j)(2), which 10 states: 11 “For purposes of this section, “unit” means any dwelling unit, including but not 12 limited to a unit or units created pursuant to Section 65852.21 3, a primary dwelling, an accessory dwelling unit as defined in Subdivision (a) or Section 66313, or a junior 13 accessory dwelling as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 66313.” RJN 33 p. 40. 14 Thus, SB 477 at SEC 21 specifically clarifies that “one unit” can be an ADU, or a primary 15 16 residence, and that this definition applies to SB 9 lot splits. Gov. Code Section 66411.7(j)(2). 17 RJN 33, p. 51. See, Declaration of Richard C. Solomon, attached. 18 Defendants thus fail to acknowledge that SB 477, which is also characterized as 19 declaratory of existing law, and as an urgency measure, (RJN 33 p. 19) is also highly relevant, if 20 not dispositive, of the County’s legal claims- on which their Demurrer and their defenses rely- 21 that neither the Permit Streamlining Act, nor any of the definitions and requirements of the 22 Housing Accountability Act and Housing Crisis Act, as amended (e.g. Section 65905.5) are 23 24 “applicable” in an SB 9 lot split, as Plaintiff specifically alleged: (See, Complaint Para. 27) 25 3 “A proposed housing development containing no more than two residential units within a single-family residential 26 zone shall be considered ministerially, without discretionary review or a hearing” 3 27 PLAINTIFF’S SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE; POINTS AND 28 AUTHORITIES; CORRECTION OF ERROR; DECLARATION OF RICHARD C. SOLOMON, AND RJN PROPOSED EXHIBITS 32-33. 1 “Recent amendments to the Housing Accountability Act clarified that it applies to 2 development of only one new unit. Gov. Code Section 65905.5(b)(3)(C)” 4 3 2. Plaintiff hereby acknowledges her error and apologizes to the court for misidentifying 4 the title of Government Code Section 51178(a) at page 24 line 21 of their Opposition to 5 Demurrer, and respectfully requests this opportunity to clarify. That particular reference should 6 have been to Government Code Section 51182(a), the content of which is correctly set forth in 7 8 Plaintiff’s Opposition to Demurrer, p.24 line 22-25. This Section 51182(a) is part of Gov. Code 9 Chapter 6.8, “Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones, which includes Gov Code Section 51175- 10 51189”, and it also includes Section 51178(a). Section 51178(a), which is part of the chapter, 11 and was erroneously referenced instead of Section 51182(a), identifies procedural requirements 12 for the local agency, with which Plaintiff alleges the County also failed to comply. (See, e.g., 13 Complaint Para. 60). The substantive requirements set forth at Section 51182(a) of Chapter 6.8 14 apply to all occupied structures, including but not limited to ADUs, and Plaintiff has alleged that 15 16 they were duly applied to Plaintiff’s building permit for her approved ADU by the Defendant 17 Fire Marshal and for which Fire issued an approval, 22 FPC 00163, on June 17, 2022. 18 (Complaint, Para. 14,24, 34,111). 19 Likewise, Defendants falsely represent, with respect to their demand for a so-called 20 “voluntary” lane widening Option, in their Reply at p. 6, line 21-22, that Plaintiff has not alleged 21 that she complied with their illegal demand to widen the lane to 15’. (“Zimmer does not allege 22 23 that she has or intends to achieve this alternative”) Plaintiff did specifically allege exactly this 24 very fact. See, Complaint Para. 9, as follows: 25 4 In context of the facts alleged Defendants’ assertion that Zimmer applied to create a ‘vacant’ lot is extremely 26 misleading. 4 27 PLAINTIFF’S SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE; POINTS AND 28 AUTHORITIES; CORRECTION OF ERROR; DECLARATION OF RICHARD C. SOLOMON, AND RJN PROPOSED EXHIBITS 32-33. 1 “On December 13, 2023, Plaintiff notified all Defendants, and County Counsel, that she 2 would comply with their demand that she “voluntarily” widen Las Encinas Lane to 15’ 3 by January 15, 2024. Thereafter, compliance was actually achieved by December 23, 4 2023.” (emphasis added) 5 6 Plaintiff also specifically alleged that the County never responded to her request that they inspect 7 and confirm her measurements. Para. 54. 8 Plaintiff will be prepared at argument on the Demurrer to respond further as necessary. 9 10 Respectfully Submitted, 11 12 __ __ DATED: June 17, 2024 13 14 Richard C. Solomon, Esq. 15 Andréa Marcus 16 Attorneys for Plaintiff 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 5 27 PLAINTIFF’S SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE; POINTS AND 28 AUTHORITIES; CORRECTION OF ERROR; DECLARATION OF RICHARD C. SOLOMON, AND RJN PROPOSED EXHIBITS 32-33. 1 Declaration of Richard C. Solomon 2 I, Richard C. Solomon, declare: 3 1. I am a member of the State Bar of California, and I am the attorney for 4 Plaintiff/Petitioner Jana Zimmer, Trustee. I make this Declaration in support of Petitioner’s 5 Supplemental Request for Judicial Notice, filed herewith. 6 2. I have personal knowledge of the matters set forth in this declaration, and if called upon 7 8 to testify to those matters, could and would so testify. 9 3. A true and correct copy of the documents for which Petitioner/Plaintiff is requesting 10 judicial notice are attached to this Supplemental Request. These documents are relevant as 11 follows: 12 (a) RJN 32. A true and correct copy of the Written “Agreement for Processing”, 13 Written Application for SB 9 Lot Split, Written Authorization of Agent, which was signed by 14 Plaintiff on December 20, 2022 and submitted and received by the County on that date. Plaintiff 15 16 has also resubmitted copies of these Agreements, which have been in the County’s files since 17 December 20, 2022, to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and to County Counsel, to be 18 included in the record of the case as Plaintiff’s Exhibits 427 and 428. These are the agreements 19 referenced in the Complaint at Para. 30,99, and 101. 20 (b) RJN 33. A true and correct copy of SB 477, cited in Defendants’ Reply. I 21 downloaded this full Bill Text :CA SB 477/2023-2024/ Regular Session/Chaptered California 22 Senate Bill 477, from LegiScan on June 14, 2023. As clearly set forth in the Legislative 23 24 Counsel’s Digest, the bill made “nonsubstantive changes” and reorganized provisions relating to 25 creation and regulation of accessory dwelling units. It also included changes to SB 9, Gov. Code 26 Section 66411.7. Defendants assert that Gov. Code Section 65852.150, pertaining to the 6 27 PLAINTIFF’S SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE; POINTS AND 28 AUTHORITIES; CORRECTION OF ERROR; DECLARATION OF RICHARD C. SOLOMON, AND RJN PROPOSED EXHIBITS 32-33. 1 benefits to disabled and elderly residents of ADU’s was repealed at p. 4 lines 11-14 of their 2 Reply. They fail to disclose that Gov Code Section 65852.150 was substantively restated at Gov. 3 Code Section 66310 (RJN 33, p. 22). 4 More importantly, SB 477, which is also characterized as declaratory of existing law, and 5 as an urgency measure, is also relevant to dispose of the County’s legal claims- on which their 6 entire Demurrer and their defenses rely- that neither the Permit Streamlining Act, nor any of the 7 8 definitions and requirements of the Housing Accountability Act and Housing Crisis Act, as 9 amended (e.g. Section 65905.5) are “applicable” in an SB 9 lot split. Plaintiff specifically alleged 10 that they do apply. (See, Complaint Para. 27): 11 “Recent amendments to the Housing Accountability Act clarified that it applies to 12 development of only one new unit. Gov. Code Section 65905.5(b)(3)(C)” 13 14 Nevertheless, Defendants continue to assert that there is no connection between SB 9 lot 15 splits, and provisions of the Housing Accountability and Housing Crisis Acts. SB 477 did 16 expressly include complementary changes to Section 66411.7, and it specifically includes, in 17 SEC 7, a provision authorizing HCD to notify the Attorney General if it finds that the County has 18 taken any action taken in violation of any of 22 listed provisions of the Housing Crisis Act and 19 20 Housing Accountability Acts and related provisions set forth at Gov. Code Section 65585(j). 21 Gov. Code Section 66411.7 is set forth as one of those provisions in Section 65585(j)(18).(RJN 22 33 p. 33) 23 Furthermore, Section 66411.7(j)(2), also included in the bill, expressly defines a 24 “housing unit” to include both a primary dwelling or an ADU or JADU, for purposes of the 25 specific density limits for a ministerial lot split under SB 9, as follows: 26 7 27 PLAINTIFF’S SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE; POINTS AND 28 AUTHORITIES; CORRECTION OF ERROR; DECLARATION OF RICHARD C. SOLOMON, AND RJN PROPOSED EXHIBITS 32-33. 1 “For purposes of this section, “unit” means any dwelling unit, including but not limited to a unit or units created pursuant to Section 65852.21, a primary dwelling, an 2 accessory dwelling unit as defined in Subdivision (a) or Section 66313, or a junior accessory dwelling as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 66313.” RJN 33 p. 40. 3 4 Plaintiff specifically alleged at Paragraph 15 of the Complaint: 5 “Therefore, with Defendants’ concurrence, on December 20, 2022, over a year prior to filing this Complaint, she applied for a ministerial lot split under SB 9 in order to 6 secure separate financing and insurance for the approved dwelling, on a separate lot. Defendant Seawards represented that it did not matter whether she pulled her approved 7 Building Permit before or after recordation of the lot split. Plaintiff has offered to deed 8 restrict the new lot to one unit, and her entire property to two, rather than the four potentially allowed under State law.” 9 The County seems to have forgotten their own general rule that the zoning ordinance 10 does not allow an “accessory structure” to be built on a lot with no primary dwelling. (See, 11 12 Complaint, Exh A, p. 7, where P&D asserted that an existing shed on the proposed new parcel 13 would have to be demolished. 5 ) It is clear from the allegations of the Complaint that the same 14 1200 square foot dwelling which has already been approved as an ADU will be built in the same 15 exact location as approved on the “new” lot as a primary dwelling, and that Plaintiff will retain 16 the existing residence and attached RSU/JADU. See, e.g. Complaint, Para. 27,30,35 . 17 18 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Santa 19 20 Barbara, California, on June 17, 2024. 21 22 23 Richard C. Solomon 24 Attorney for Plaintiff 25 5 P&D asserted: “7. Map Markup. Please refer to the attached parcel map with markup and address the comments on the map: a. Will the existing shed on Proposed Lot 1 be demolished? There cannot be an 26 accessory use on the lot without a primary use.” See, Gov. Code Section 66411.7(i), Complaint, Para. 49. 8 27 PLAINTIFF’S SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE; POINTS AND 28 AUTHORITIES; CORRECTION OF ERROR; DECLARATION OF RICHARD C. SOLOMON, AND RJN PROPOSED EXHIBITS 32-33. PROOF OF SERVICE VIA E-FILING SYSTEM or EMAIL 1 Callie Patton Kim 2 ckim@countyofsb.org 3 Deputy County Counsel Santa Barbara County Counsel 4 105 East Anapamu Street, Suite 201 Santa Barbara, California 93101 5 (805) 568-2955 6 7 I am employed in the city of Montecito, CA. I am over the age of 18 years and I am not a 8 party to the within action. My business address is 1482 East Valley Road, Suite 831, Montecito, 9 CA, 93108. PLAINTIFF’S SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 32, 10 33; PLAINTIFF’S CORRECTION OF ERROR; POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; 11 DECLARATION OF RICHARD C. SOLOMON was filed via the 1eFile filing system and 12 served by email from the email address ashley@andreamarcuslaw.com to the parties and email address in the caption above. I did not receive, within a reasonable time after the transmission, 13 any electronic message or other indication that the transmission was unsuccessful. I declare under 14 the penalty of perjury under the laws of California that the foregoing is true and correct, and that 15 this declaration is executed on the date set forth below. 16 17 Dated: June 17, 2024 18 ______/s/_____________ 19 ASHLEY CASANOVA 20 21 LAW OFFICE OF ANDRÉA MARCUS 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 9 PROOF OF SERVICE PLAINTIFF (SUPPLEMENTAL} REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 32 Santa Barbara County Planning and Development Department Planning Application STEP 1: SUBJECT PROPERTY STEP 3: DETAILED SCOPE OF WORK 023-250-020 Please attach a detailed scope of work that includes the existing uses and structures, whether demolition of structures is proposed, and all ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER(S) proposed uses, structures, and additions. Please include square 2640 Las Encinas Lane, Santa Barbara CA. 93105 footages of all existing and proposed structures. PROPERTY ADDRESS (IF APPLICABLE) STEP 4: PROJECT & PROPERTY DATA BUSINESS/ESTABLISHMENT NAME (IF APPLICABLE) Is grading proposed? տ Yes ܆ ✔ No If yes, cubic yards: STEP 2: Z Yh/Z PROJECT CONTACTS CUT FILL TOTAL GRADING Will grading bebalanced on-site? տ Yes տ No PROPERTY OWNER Jana Zimmer, Trustee, Solomon-Zimmer Living Trust If no: NAME (if LLC or other legal entity, must provide documentation) QUANTITY OF EXPORT OZ IMPORT 2640 Las Encinas Road (Lane) Is there a 16-foot drop in elevation within 100 feet of proposed STREET ADDRESS structure footprint? ܆Yes տ ✔ No Santa Barbara, California 93105 CITY, STATE ZIP Are any trees or vegetation proposed for removal? տ Yes տ No 805 705-3784 zimmerccc@gmail.com If yes: PHONE EMAIL NUMBER/ACREAGE & SPECIES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL Is any work proposed within 6 feet of the dripline of any native trees? APPLICANT Jana Zimmer, Trustee, Solomon Zimmer LIving Trust տ Yes տ ✔ No NAME (if LLC or other legal entity, must provide documentation) Are any air conditioning units proposed? ܆ ✔ Yes տ No 2640 Las Encinas Road (Lane) STREET ADDRESS Are any generators proposed? տ Yes տ ✔ No Santa Barbara, CA 93105 See BP Square feet of impervious surfaces: __________________________ CITY, STATE ZIP EXISTING PROPOSED 805-705 3784 zimmerccc@gmail.com Is this application related to cannabis activities? տ Yes տ ✔ No PHONE EMAIL Water Source: Sewer System: տ ✔ Public Water ܆ ✔ Public Sewer FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTY տ PrivateWell տ Private Septic or Equivalent Jana Zimmer տ Shared Water System NAME (if LLC or other legal entity, must provide documentation) same as above Evidence of Parcel Validity (attach relevant documents): STREET ADDRESS տ Recorded Parcel/Final Map տ Recorded Official Map տ Certificate of Compliance տ Conditional Certificate of Compliance CITY, STATE ZIP տ Approved Lot Line Adjustment տ Recorded Voluntary Merger տ ✔ Prior Zoning Permits տ Other: _________________________ PHONE EMAIL Hazardous Waste & Substances California Government Code §65962.5 requires all applicants for development projects to provide the following information. Make sure AGENT;ŝĨĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞͿ you check each list below and confirm whether the site is listed as a Hazardous Waste Site: NAME (if LLC or other legal entity, must provide documentation) տ Department of Toxic Substance Control EnviroStor Database տ ✔ Water Board GeoTracker Database STREET ADDRESS տ ✔ CalEPA Solid Waste Disposal Sites տ ✔ CalEPA Cease and Desist Orders and Cleanup and Abatement Orders CITY, STATE ZIP տ ✔ CalEPA Hazardous Waste Facilities PHONE EMAIL Is the site listed as a Hazardous Waste Site? ܆Yes ✔ No ܆ 11 G:\GROUP\DEV_REV\Zoning Counter\DRAFT Application Forms\Master Application Form.docx STEP 6: OWNER/APPLICANT CONSENT I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that I have read the information below and that: 1. I am the property owner or have obtained the property owner’s/ 10. I understand that it is the responsibility of the applicant or property owners’ consent to the submittal of this application and contents owner to notify the Department of any changes to the project, therein; and including change in ownership, which may require additional information/documents/reports and fees and may cause delay to 2. I have carefully reviewed and prepared the application and plans in the processing of the project; and accordance with the instructions; and 11. I understand that if there is a zoning violation on the property, plan 3. I provided information in this application, including all attachments, review may be delayed. Any unpermitted structures or uses must which are accurate and correct; and either be removed or legalized at part of this application; and 4. I understand that the submittal of inaccurate or incomplete 12. I understand that all materials submitted in connection with this information or plans, or failure to comply with the instructions may application shall become public record subject to inspection and result in processing delays and/or denial of my application; and copying by the public. I acknowledge and understand that the public may inspect these materials and that some or all of the 5. I understand that it is the responsibility of the applicant to materials may be posted on the Department’s website; and substantiate the request through the requirements of the application; and 13. Pursuant to California Civil Code Section 1633.5(b), the parties hereby agree that where this Agreement requires a party 6. I understand that upon further evaluation, additional signature, an electronic signature, as that term is defined at information/documents/reports/entitlements and fees may be California Civil Code Section 1633.2(h), shall have the full force required; and and effect of an original (“wet”) signature. A responsible officer 7. I understand that failure to submit any such required fees or of each party has read and understands the contents of this information requested at a later time may result in processing Agreement and is empowered and duly authorized on behalf of delays and/or denial of my application; and that party to execute it. 8. I understand that denials will result in no refunds; and 14. I understand that there is no guarantee – expressed or implied – that an approval will be granted. I understand that such application 9. I am the property owner or have obtained the property owner’s/ must be carefully evaluated and after the evaluation has been owners’ consent and expressly allow, authorize, and permit the conducted, that staff’s recommendation or decision may change County of Santa Barbara to enter and inspect the subject property, during the course of the review based on the information presented. with or without prior notice, to inspect, photograph, and/or process this application. No additional permission or consent to enter upon the subject property is necessary or shall be required. I further certify and warrant that I am authorized to and, hereby do, consent and allow such inspections on behalf of each and all owners of the subject property; and REQUIRED SIGNATURES I have read, understand and consent to the submiƚƚĂů of this application. Jana Zimmer WZKW ZdzOWNER SIGNATURE PRINT NAME DATE Jana Zimmer APPLICANT SIGNATURE (only if different from OWNER) PRINT NAME DATE Jana Zimmer &/EE/>>zZ ^WKE^/> WZdzSIGNATURE PRINT NAME DATE AGENT SIGNATURE (if applicable) PRINT NAME DATE To submit your application, please contact the Zoning Counter to obtain a personalized submittal link. For South County projects, contact us at front@countyofsb.org or (805) 568-2090. For North County projects, contact us a nocounte@countyofsb.org or (805) 934-6251. 123 E. Anapamu Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93101 භ Phone: (805) 568-2000 භ FAX (805) 568-2020 Phone: (805) 934-6250 624 Foster Road, Santa Maria, CA 93455 12 භ භ FAX (805) 934-6258 www.sbcountyplanning.org Santa Barbara COUNTY Planning and Development Department Agreement for Payment of Fees Check one: General Land Use □ Telecommunications □ Petroleum COUNTY of Santa Barbara (hereinafter COUNTY) and ________________________, Solomon-Zimmer LIving Trust, Jana Zimmer Trustee the Financially Responsible Party (hereinafter FRP) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. This Agreement is in reference to permit processing costs for case(s) associated with the Project: Site Address (APN if no address): 2640 Las Encinas Road, Santa Barbara CA 93015 Project Scope: SB-9 Lot Split 2. A security deposit or fixed fee will be collected at time of project submittal. Security deposit projects will receive monthly invoices to be paid within 30 days from invoice date. Upon completion of project review, any remaining security deposit will be refunded to the FRP. If a fixed fee project has unique characteristics or raises complex issues which would make the case more expensive to process, it will be converted to a monthly billing process, as detailed above. If it is necessary to utilize consultant services, a deposit to cover consultant costs will be requested from the FRP prior to execution of the contract with the consultant. If the FRP elects to utilize outside contractors to expedite permit processing, consultant costs plus indirect overhead will be charged on an hourly basis. 3. The FRP is responsible for payment of all permit processing costs associated with the cases listed above. If, during the course of processing, the financial responsibility changes, the new financially responsible party must complete an Agreement for Payment which will release the previous FRP from further financial obligations and designate the new FRP. The undersigned FRP remains financially responsible until a new FRP signs a separate Agreement for Payment. 4. For projects that receive a monthly billing, the FRP will receive from the COUNTY a P&D Project Cost Estimate Worksheet. This worksheet is informational. It is a good faith effort to provide the FRP with an estimate of project costs for the duration of permit processing. If unforeseen circumstances arise during permit processing which substantially increase the level of effort and estimated costs, COUNTY will send the FRP a revised worksheet. 5. If an invoice is not paid within 30 days COUNTY may stop work and close the case. 6. FRP agrees to pay all fees applicable under the COUNTY’s fee schedule(s) prior to approval and issuance of land use clearance; map clearance or clearance for record of survey; building permits; post discretionary case clearance; services related to petroleum permits such as inspections, remediation, research, violations, compliance and appeals. No clearances or permits will be issued without receipt of full payment for fees applicable under the COUNTY’s fee schedule, unless waived or adjusted by the Board of Supervisors upon showing of good cause. In a declared emergency or disaster, fees are deferred until final building clearance, and must be paid by the FRP prior to the granting of final building clearance. 7. If the FRP owes any amount due on any other processing case with the COUNTY, P&D will not accept any subsequent permit applications from the FRP, unless waived by the Director of the Department. 13 8. If the Project involves the deployment of "Small Wireless Facilities" as defined in Title 17, Section 1.6002(1) of the Code of Federal Regulations, the FRP agrees to pay permit processing fees con sistent with the requirements of the Federal Communications Commission' s Declaratory Ruling, adopted September 26, 2018 (FCC-18-133), and the FRP reserves the right to challenge any fees collected in excess of those requ irements through court action. ACT INFORMATION AND SIGNATURE (if LLC or other legal entity, must provide documentation) Jana Zimmer 12/20/2022 PRINT NAME DATE 0 Las Encinas Road, Santa Barbara CA 93015 CITY STATE ZIP (805) 705-3784 zimmerccc@gmail.com FRP TELEPHONE NUMBER FRP EMAIL COUNTY Use Only COUNTY PROJECT NAME COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE NAME COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE DATE CHANGE IN FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTY If th is document supersedes a previous Agreement for Payment, due to change in financial responsibility, the previous FRP must also sign to acknowledge release of responsibilities. Upon project completion, the security deposit balance (if any) wil l be refunded to the FRP on record at that t ime. PREVIOUS FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTY: SIGNATURE PRINT NAME DATE FRP STREET ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP FRP TELEPHONE NUMBER FRP EMAIL DATE OF RELEASE OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY 123 E. Anapamu Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93101 • Phone: (805) 568-2000 • FA,X: (805) 568-2020 624 W. Foster Road, Santa Marta. CA 93455 • Phone: (SOS) 934-6250 • FAX: (805) 934-6258 www.sbcountyplannlng.org 14 Santa Ba rbara County Planning and Development Department Authorization of Agent This form must be completed in its entirety by t he property Owner and/or Appli cant if they are represented by an agent. I hereby authorize the following individual/entity to act as my agent while processing the required permit for the proposed project: 2640 Las Encinas Road, Santa Barbara CA 9301 5 STRECT ADDqEss CITY. STATE ZI P CODE 023-250-020 SB-9 Lot Split ASSl:SSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER PROJECl NAME PROPERTY OWNER Solomon-Zimmer Living Trust, Jana Zimmer Trustee NAME NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNATORY (if LLC. LP, or Corparat1on) ENTITY# (it LLC, LP. o r Corporation) 2640 Las Encinas Road Santa Barbara CA 93015 MAILING ADDRESS CITY, STATE ZIP CODE (805) 705-3784 zimmerccc@gmail.com EMAIL AD DRESS Jana Zimmer 12/20/2022 PRINT NAME DATE A ORIZED AGENT FOR PROPERTY OWNER Hugh Brownlee, brownleePM NAME NAME AND Tll LE Of- SIG'IJA l"ORY (1f LLC, LP, or Corporation) ENl ITY # (1f LLC. LP, or Corporation) 5218 8th Street Carpinteria CA 930 13 MAILING ADDRESS CITY, STATE ZIP CODE (805) 732-5429 brownleepm@gmail.com PHONE NUMBER EMAIL ADDRESS Hugh Brownlee 12/20/2022 SIGNATURE PRINT NAME DAT E 123 E. Anapamu Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93101 • Phone: (805) S68-2000 • FAX (805) 568-2020 624 Foster Road, Santa Maria, CA 934SS • Phone: (805 ) 934-62S0 • FAX (80S) 934-62S8 www.sbcountyplanning.org 15 8. If the Project involves the deployment of "Small Wireless Facilities" as defined in Title 17, Section 1.6002(1) of the Code of Federal Regulations, the FRP agrees to pay permit processing fees consistent with the requirements of the Federal Communications Commission's Declaratory Ruling, adopted September 26, 2018 (FCC-18-133), and the FRP reserves the right to challenge any fees collected in excess of those requirements through court action. ACT INFORMATION AND SIGNATURE (if LLC or other legal entity, must provide documentation) Jana Zimmer 12/20/2022 PRINT NAME DATE 0 Las Encinas Road, Santa Barbara CA 93015 CITY STATE ZIP (805) 705-3784 zimmerccc@gmail.com FRP TE LEPHONE NUMBER FRP EMAIL COUNTY Use Only COUNTY PROJECT NAME COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE NAME COUNTY REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE DATE CHANGE IN FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTY If this document supersedes a previous Agreement for Payment, due to change in financial responsibility, the previous FRP must also sign to acknowledge release of responsibilities. Upon project completion, the security deposit balance (if any) will be refunded to the FRP on record at that time . PREVIOUS FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTY: SIG NATURE PRINT NAME DATE FRP STREET ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP FRP TELEPHONE NUMBER FRP EMAIL DATE OF RELEASE OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY 123 E. Anapamu Street, Santa Barbara. CA 93101 • Phone: (805) 568-2000 • FAX: (805) 568-2020 624 W. Foster Road, Santa Marla. CA 93455 • Phone: (SOS) 934-6250 • FAX: (805) 934-6258 www.sbcountyplannlng.org 16 STEP 6: OWNER/APPLICANT CO NSENT I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that I have read the information below and that: 1. I am the property owner or have obtained the property owner's/ 10. I understand that it is the responsibility of the applicant or property owners' consent to the submittal of this application and contents owner to notify the Department of any changes to the project, therein; and including change in ownership, which may require additional information/documents/reports and fees and may cause delay to 2. I have carefully reviewed and prepared the application and plans in the processing of the project; and accordance with the instructions; and 11. I understand t hat if there is a zoning violation on the property, plan 3. I provided information in th is application, including all attachments, review may be delayed. Any unpermitted structures or uses must which are accurate and correct; and ei ther be removed or legalized at part of this application; and 4. I understand that the submittal of inaccurate or incomplete 12. I understand that all materials submitted in connection with th is information or plans, or failure to comply with the instructions may application shall become public record subject to inspection and result in processing delays and/or denial of my application; and copying by the public. I acknowledge and understand that the public may inspect these materials and that some or all of the 5. I understand that it is the responsibility of the applicant to materials may be posted on the Department's website; and substantiate the request through the requirements of the application; and 13. Pursuant to California Civil Code Section 1633.S(b), th