Paul Wellman (file)

Before the renovation: An El Encanto lotus pond, pictured in August 2007.

The second sinking of the Titanic barely registered with The Independent, but did not escape the eye of the representative throng in attendance as the dutiful Santa Barbara Planning Commission continued its laissez faire approach to Riviera development. At issue was the Orient Express Hotel project on the site of the old El Encanto, which started as an extensive renovation with no closure, quickly escalated to complete destruction of the hotel and historic structures, and now lies dormant with more requests for expansion, modification, encroachment, and development swaps. If the term “swaps” raises the hair on the back of your neck, it’s due to the association with credit default swaps; the land deal being worked with the Orient Express chain is also onerous. The Planning Commission has pledged to exchange development rights in one part of the city (the 200 block of West Yanonali Street) for those needed in the hotel project without public input from the residents or business owners of either effected area.

The new modifications paint a picture of relocated assets including the additional cotttages allowed in the original plan, the swimming pool, and the power and central heating/cooling systems.Relocation of the power and air systems from the main building to underground facilities at the northwest corner of the lot was necessitated by the larger equipment, concern over noise to the guests, and safety issues for the hotel workers and guests. Only one planning commissioner seemed concerned that the noise and safety issues were being transferred to the surrounding neighborhood. The larger equipment accommodates the additional cottages, yet no one inquired as to the capacitiy of the newly proposed equipment. Past experience should have cued the planning commission to ask several key questions, such as, how many units will the systems support? What are the expansion plans to get to this number of units? But the incurious commission seems intent on accepting anything that meets building code standards.

In the news plans, an odd arrangement of cottages around a traffic circle on the northeast corner that for no particular reason encroaches on the setback. Setbacks are critical to maintaining isolation between residential and business areas, and they provide for landscaping to mask noise, traffic and reflections. The odd arrangement makes little sense, unless it’s simply a placeholder. True, the new location of the power and air systems, the footprint of the new building and the footprint of the cottages look vaguely like a twin tower plan--but no one made any mention of that so we’ll banish the notion as non-constructive thinking, until more supporting evidence appears.

The beautiful swimming pool amid vine covered trellises, with an arbor entrance, is a distant memory. Plans now show the pool at the southwest corner, but anyone familiar with the site knows some of the oldest and best maintained Eucalyptus trees in Santa Barbara are firmly rooted there. Who would build a pool under such trees? There would be no sun for the bathers, and constant upkeep would be required to prevent the leaves and acorns from clogging the pumps, not to mention staining the pool and decks. This alone would be enough to deter anyone but the planning commission from approving it’s relocation to that spot. One dark side of such a pool placement would be removal of these majestic old trees to give hotel guests a broader, unobstructed view. The trees are a large part of the charm on that street corner, and would be sorely missed, especially if the hotel façade is the replacement view. But if the trees stay—then the hole where the pool was to go provides an ideal segue to multilevel parking. The final resting place of the pool will likely be the roof, where guests and staff alike can enjoy the expansive views, while the local residents are treated to the noise and glaring reflections.

Tourists don’t come to Santa Barbara for the modern mall or high rise hotel experience. That is best discovered in Las Vegas, Seattle, Chicago, New York, and Miami. Tourists come to the French Quarter of New Orleans, the Gas Light District of San Diego, Big Sur, Santa Fe, Sedona, and Santa Barbara seeking serenity, a reflection of past lifestyles, and architecture that is representative of the people and decades of adaptation to Mother Nature.

Here in one venue are some of nature’s most spectacular contrasts between sea, mountains, islands, skies, and landscapes—and if you haven’t witnessed the sun rising over Ventura and setting over San Miguel Island, then you haven’t experienced the Riviera. The residents pay a premium for this privilege and they expect the Planning Commission to preserve their views and serenity in exchange for the higher taxes. But time after time, encroachments, lot splits, multiple dwellings and a host of other planning and building issues have gone unrecognized and patently unenforced. Is it any wonder the residents are rallying behind this single cause?

I opened this retort with the exclamation this was the second sinking of the Titanic, and so it is, for the planning commission has delivered another project, this time to the heart of the Riviera, that promises delays, overdevelopment, strain on infrastructure, and no benefit for those most impacted. Yes, the Riviera can now claim its own Miramar Project, thanks in part to faults in the planning and development process that should have changed after the first sinking. Apparently, the Commission failed heed the adage, “Fool me once shame on you; fool me twice shame on me.”

Save for one soft-spoken, sagely Sheila Lodge, the Planning Commission passed the complete package of variances, modifications, and development swaps with no regard for what is to come. The floodgates opened, there is no stopping the wave of modifications until the developers finally get what they want: hundreds of units with spectacular, unobstructed vistas of the Channel Islands. The present variances likely provide them the infrastructure needed for such a hotel complex, while Riviera residents and the community at large are left to wonder when, what, and where.

Whether these actions were simple myopia, incompetence, or something more nefarious may be grist for the grand jury. To be certain, this cycle of getting past the permitting process, destroying the landmark, and then bombarding the community with orchestrated modifications that double the project size, necessitate more water and power projects, import more service workers with no hope of housing, and tax the traffic, police and fire services—it must stop! The original project had reasonable growth, fit within the infrastructure, maintained the basic charm of the hotel, and had modest impact on the neighborhood.

The Planning Commission needs to take a stance on these types of developments, starting with, “We don’t know what a variance is, and a modification cannot be issued until the project is complete.” Until then, the planning commissioners--save for Sheila Lodge—have no right to hold their heads higher than the Burghers of Calais.

Comments

Discussion Guidelines

Local Weather

Currently:
Clear Sky
Temperature:
50.0°
Wind:
3 NW

Surf Report