Montecitans concerned about the future of the now defunct Miramar Hotel met on Monday, May 5, to offer commentary about the project being proposed by developer Caruso Affiliated. The company’s owner, Rick Caruso, has been courting neighbors of the Miramar property - which is currently in a state of disrepair bemoaned by many area residents - for the past two years with much success. But as the time comes for final decisions to be made regarding the development, divisions within the community are strong. While most people are in favor of some kind of development there, a fairly strong contingent contends that the scale of Caruso’s plans is too large and would compromise Montecito’s semi-rural character, as well as putting a strain on an already limited water supply. Others were concerned that postponing the project further would cause the developer to lose interest due to economic pressure.
From the start, Caruso Affiliated has seemed eager to please the Montecito community. Rick Caruso has held numerous meetings with community members and organizations, and even had a film made about the property to illustrate their vision of its potential. Caruso purchased the property from Ty Warner in 2006, after the famous toy maker and hotelier found the requirements of the Montecito Planning Commission to be more than he was willing to deal with. After a recent victory in courts against Glendale shopping mall owners who were opposed to a large mixed-use development he built there, Caruso appears to be a tough customer who’s capable of making his investments pay off.
No decisions were to be made at this meeting, however, as it was a somewhat informal airing of concerns prior to the actual hearing before the Montecito Planning Commission occurs on June 10. Due to the number of concerned community members that showed up, the meeting had to be moved from the public library to the church next door, where most seats were filled.
Many residents, calling Caruso a “class act,” said that of all the developers who have been interested in rebuilding the Miramar Hotel, Caruso is the best qualified. “I have three major concerns: delay, delay, delay,” said Bob Hazard, one of the neighbors of the property. Greg Huglin, who also lives adjacent to the property, was critical of those opposed to the project. “The majority of us full-time residents want this to happen,” he said.
For all of the comments urging the Planning Commission to move forward with the project, more were offered in favor of carefully reviewing and adjusting it before granting approval. Even the “let’s-get-it-right-the-first-time” camp wants to see the property developed, but comments by several heavy hitters - including Heal the Ocean ‘s executive director Hillary Hauser - cautioned against making hasty decisions. Tom Bollay, a former City of Santa Barbara Historic Landmarks Commissioner, showed scale drawings of the proposed new Miramar Hotel, and of the Biltmore, illustrating that the proposed design is nearly three times the size of the Biltmore. “The goal here is that this has to be compatible with neighboring facilities,” he said. “I’m hoping that the [Planning] Commission can look at size and bulk and comment on that.” Susan Petrovich, an area resident and well-known land use attorney, stated that the environmental impacts of the project have not been addressed adequately. “There’s never been an EIR (Environmental Impact Report), and that’s very serious,” she said. “I’ve been a longtime supporter of getting the Miramar back in business, but as itself, not as some mega project that mars Montecito’s south gateway.”
Aside from the size of the new buildings, much concern was voiced over water resources. Matt Middlebrook, Caruso’s vice president for government relations, said that they plan to get their water from the aquifer under the property, relying upon a monitoring system to alert the facilities manager if they are drawing too much. If such an event were to occur, he said that they would buy the water they need from the Montecito Water District. However, in the wake of a recent water conservation ordinance passed by the district - in which it was noted that per capita water consumption in Montecito has increased significantly - many residents thought that the new hotel would have too large an impact on the community’s water supply.
Other concerns addressed were related to traffic impacts, noise, and the presence of another 100 or so people - staff from the hotel - who would be living and working in the community. “Like almost everyone in this room, I want this project to go forward,” said Peter Melnick, who lives near the Miramar, “but I don’t think that there’s been adequate preparation for [the traffic] impact. If it’s not adequately planned for, the results will be catastrophic.”
Several people who live on the north side of Highway 101 commented on the potential noise impacts caused by traffic noise reflecting off of a large building near the freeway. Amidst audible protests from audience members, Middlebrook assured community members that a complete assessment of noise impacts has been made, and that no significant impacts were found. He also asserted that because a project was approved for the property in the late 1990s - a renovation proposal by Ian Schrager that was never realized - an EIR will not be required now. “All of the issues that were raised are adequately addressed in the analysis we’ve done and the documents that exist,” he said.
Comments
I donÂ't think the words "freeway" and "small-town" belong in the same story. Is Coast Village Road the "Main Street" of this imagined "ville?" Get real people. There are probably little purple pills for your dissonant self-image...freeway-front SoCal, imagined as the road less traveled.
Three Cheers for the Miramar Solution! Booooo to high-minded agents of the status quo.
lovechop (anonymous profile)
May 6, 2008 at 9:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What's more status quo than over development?
blackmagic805 (anonymous profile)
May 7, 2008 at 9:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Now I get it! The naysayer strategy has been to encourage the Caruso team along by appearing to agree with many of their modifications (I thought I read of general agreement on the last plan) and then bring up the same old objections (that include discounting the opinions of professional engineers and other fact-finders) when the project goes for formal approval. Another example of the tiny, but loud, minority controlling the broken land use process.
So here's an idea: The objectors should buy the property from Caruso for $40MM or whatever he has invested in it, clean it up, make it into their own private park, and pay the county the $1MM or so a year in foregone tax revenue. Then Caruso can take his money and build in a community more welcoming than Montecito.
RCMeltzer (anonymous profile)
May 7, 2008 at 9:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It's amazing that this continues on. I was at earlier planning meetings and do not believe Caruso has the patience to deal with this much longer. I bet we just get to keep our garbage dump named Miramar.
jb (anonymous profile)
May 8, 2008 at 10:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You can be a proponent of the Montecito Community Plan or the Caruso plan. Not both.
spike (anonymous profile)
May 8, 2008 at 2:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Have any of the Miramar Hotel's neighbors provided the County with contradictory engineering information to support their contentions about drainage and flooding? The answer is YES. And it's IN THE COUNTY FILES. Why isn't anyone talking about it?
spike (anonymous profile)
May 9, 2008 at 10:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
...along with the EIR that supports the project (available on the county planning website) and answers concerns pertaining to the drainage & flooding.
jb (anonymous profile)
May 9, 2008 at 11:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
There is no EIR in the County files because it does not exist: There has never been an EIR for the Miramar Hotel property -- not for Schrager, not for Warner, and not for Caruso.
Since the Jan. 25, 2007 announcement that the hotel had been sold again, our community has been drenched with one-sided information -- which is why so many people think an EIR exists. Combine that lack of information with unheard-of social and political pressure to get on board the express train to project approval, and you have an opportunity to make the biggest planning mistake this community has ever seen.
If this project is built as proposed, it will set a precedent for anything anyone ever wants to build in this community. For it ignores or demands exceptions to all the rules you and I and all of our neighbors have to follow when we want to add a small patio or replace a garage or reconfigure the windows in that upstairs back bedroom. And this isn't meant to say that if we couldn't do it, he shouldn't be able to either (although that's not a bad point). It's to remind you that what we all love about this community, what brought us or our ancestors here and what keeps us here--and what used to raise the furies of hell when someone tried to ruin it--was the semi-rural, human-scaled environment that has been protected until now primarily by the Montecito Community Plan. And while we could debate for days the issue of whether the past guardians were guilty of taking it too far, the point is that the system should not be tossed out the door simply because a large part of our small community has been convinced that this suitor will walk off and no one will ever again ask us to dance.
spike (anonymous profile)
May 10, 2008 at 2:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It blows my mind that people in the Montecito community are basing their arguments in favor of the Caruso plan on 1) fear that he'll leave 2) the mess that is there, and 3) money. There are legal requirements for development that are being purposely overlooked by both county officials (get the money, get the money), the developer (get the money, get the money) and now, a whole lot of Montecitans will sell their birthright for a mess of pottage? Whatever side you're on, there are legal requirements for development that no one can get around.
1) The new Caruso plan cannot be permitted on an old negative declaration for an old (Schrager) project, when the two projects are not even slightly alike.
2) CEQA law requires that ALL the studies - engineering, hydrology, compliance with Montecito plan, drilling of wells, taking away public roadway, etc. - are in place, and thoroughly reviewed, and approved, before a developer can dig the first hole in the ground. You cannot make it up as you go along. Caruso is not above the law, and for Montecitans to think he is, is just...strange....
HiAll (anonymous profile)
May 10, 2008 at 9:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Is anybody awake out there?
spike (anonymous profile)
May 10, 2008 at 1:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Nah, they're all sprayed with RC Pixie Dust.
HiAll (anonymous profile)
May 12, 2008 at 10:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Wake up is right!!!
Grace (anonymous profile)
May 13, 2008 at 1:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)