• CREATE AN ACCOUNT
  • LOG.IN
  • CONTENTS
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • ARCHIVE
  • INFO | ADVERTISING | CONTACT US

  • Home
  • News
    • News Main Page
    • NewsFlash
  • A&E
    • A&E Main Page
    • Movie Times
    • TV Listings
    • A&E Blog
    • Art Galleries
    • Best Bets
  • Opinion
    • Opinion Main Page
    • Columns
    • Voices
    • Letters
    • In Memoriam
    • Obituaries
  • Events
    • Today
    • Search
    • Submit
    • Best Bets
  • Living
    • Living Main Page
    • Outdoors
    • Travel
    • Sports
    • Peeps
  • Food & Drink
    • Food & Drink Main Page
    • All Restaurants
    • Delivery
    • All Bars & Clubs
    • Drink Specials
    • Open Now
  • Outdoors
    • Outdoors Main Page
    • Outside Insider
    • Spotlight On
    • Features
  • Classifieds
    • Real Estate
    • Jobs
    • Autos
  • Personals
  • Obits

Paul Wellman

A HARD SELL: Following the Montecito Planning Commission’s call for an SEIR on water issues, Caruso (front row, left) has stated that he is not interested in reducing the project, and selling the land is an option for him.


Caruso’s Miramar: What Now?

Developer Examines Options Pending Project Denial


Thursday, August 14, 2008
By Chris Meagher (Contact)
Article Tools
Print friendly
E-mail story
Contact an Editor
iPod friendly
Comments
Bookmark This
del.icio.us. del.icio.us.
Digg! Digg!
furl furl
google google
newsvine newsvine
reddit reddit
technorati technorati
Facebook Facebook
Yahoo! My Web 2.0 Yahoo!

Rick Caruso made one thing clear in a conversation earlier this week with The Independent: He will not be doing any more environmental review on the Miramar hotel project. “There’s no reason,” he said. “It’s a waste of time and money.”

His statement echoed some he made immediately following the Montecito Planning Commission’s (MPC) August 6 decision to have Caruso conduct a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) regarding water supply for his hotel plans. Despite clamoring from project opponents for a full EIR, Caruso has repeatedly stated his belief that satisfactory environmental analysis had been conducted.

Caruso, who inherited an approved plan —which never had a full EIR done — when he bought the land from Ty Warner in January 2007, altered it by removing the existing buildings and grading the land, among other things. Opponents suggested the changes warranted a new EIR. Caruso’s project, which calls for a 204-room hotel with 258-seat restaurants and a 300-member beach and tennis club, also needed height and setback modifications, commissioners decided, but their main issue was with the water supply.

Montecito Planning Commissioner Claire Gottsdanker led the call for a reduction of Rick Caruso’s Miramar plan.
Click to enlarge photo

Paul Wellman

Montecito Planning Commissioner Claire Gottsdanker led the call for a reduction of Rick Caruso’s Miramar plan.

There was much confusion prior to the first MPC meeting as to whether the Montecito Water District would be able to adequately supply the project. District General Manager Tom Mosby vowed that it could, to a tune of 45 acre-feet per year, with any additional water charged at a higher rate. But prior letters sent by Mosby to county staff were less certain about this matter, especially in light of the limitations being placed on water use in the Montecito area. County Counsel Mike Ghizzoni suggested a SEIR would give the county better legal standing, should it be sued. Caruso said he believed Ghizzoni was “overly conservative” in his advice to the commission.

Debate was also had about whether current infrastructure could handle the Fire District’s needs should a fire occur at the Miramar. Project manager Matt Middlebrook, however, pointed out that the property has five fire hydrants and that tests had ensured that these had adequate water pressure. While 1,500 gallons per minute are needed to fight a fire, the hydrants tested produced between 1,500-3,000 gallons of water per minute, Middlebrook explained. Regardless, the commission voted for the SEIR.

The MPC requested that other issues be resolved, and Caruso said that these, as well, made his project impossible.

These include the following:

• Forego including the railroad parcel running through the property in the property’s floor area ratio, a computation used to keep project sizes down. “I’m trying to get the mass, bulk, and scale down,” Commissioner Claire Gottsdanker explained in her motion. Not including that parcel would’ve taken the plan out of compliance with the Montecito Community Plan, which dictates building procedure in the residential village.

• Eliminate all two-story buildings sited in the setbacks along South Jameson Lane.

• Reduce the height of the main building — set at 49 feet — in order to fit in with the Montecito Community Plan, which has a height limit of 38 feet.

• Build a sidewalk between proposed diagonal parking and a wall along Jameson, to increase safety of pedestrians. Caruso had agreed earlier to this.

• Eliminate the use of lights at the tennis courts. Caruso had agreed previously to shut them off an hour earlier, at 9 p.m., but this was apparently not sufficient for the commission majority.

Caruso said the direction from the commission came out of left field. “We were in front of the same exact board in January and they were complimenting it,” Caruso said. Caruso said he isn’t interested in returning to the drawing board. “We’re not going to do anything that’s going to make the project uneconomical or unviable. It’s got to make financial sense,” he said. His top priority remains to get a project approved based on what’s already been designed. Another option is selling the property. Caruso indicated he has received calls from interested parties, but he hasn’t dealt with them directly. He didn't elaborate on who those parties were, but big-time developers Steve Wynn and Bill Marriott are both rumored to have expressed interest.

The commission didn’t make a final decision on the project as a whole, instead continuing the matter to its August 28 meeting, when it will likely be denied, opening the door for an appeal by Caruso to the Board of Supervisors, which he said he intends to do. Opponents have indicated they have the money to litigate the supervisors’ decision should it go against them.

The project comes at an interesting time for Montecito and the county in general. While the county is hurting financially, Miramar bed taxes are expected to bring in more than $1 million annually for the county, in addition to property taxes. Meanwhile, Montecito cityhood has recently been the focus of three community forums hosted by the Montecito Association. Should cityhood be achieved prior to the completion of the Miramar, the city wouldn’t have to include the project in any revenue neutrality agreement with the county, meaning it would receive all of the Miramar’s tax money. Certainly the potential to boost their bleak financial situation would be on supervisors’ minds if a project went before them.

And so it remains to be seen what will come of the site peeking over fencing next to Highway 101 at 1555 South Jameson Lane, currently home to tall grass, rats, and dilapidated buildings with fading blue roofs. There’s no question in anyone’s mind the site is an eyesore, but what, or who, will relieve the pain still is yet to be revealed.

Related Links

  • The ongoing saga of the Miramar property.
Story Help (Click-ability)
Double-clicking on any word or phrase in this story will open a reference window with definitions and links to other reference material.

Comments

Discussion Guidelines

The present pain of the sight/site for sore eyes should be cleaned up by the owner. Why hasn't the County fined him for allowing the property to go so derelict, forced him to keep up the property to reasonable health standards?

If I let my property get so rundown, the city (for me), hearing from my neighbors, would be on me in a flash! Why has Caruso been allowed to have the buildings be so dilapidated?

at_large (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2008 at 8:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)

one word: Cry Baby

Ricky's ego seems to be preventing him from withdrawing his project application even though he says he will not finish the environmental review that is part of the planning process.

Cannot have it both ways, dude

Santa Barbara, and Montecito, are so nice because we follow the planning process here. When that process slips, this place gets degraded. Plenty of examples on that in recent history.

David_Pritchett (David Pritchett)
August 14, 2008 at 9:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Yawn

lordleadbetter (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2008 at 9:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The next Montecito Planning Commission meeting is actually not August 27, but August 28. The above story has been changed to reflect the correct date.

Chris (Chris Meagher)
August 14, 2008 at 11:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

“We’re not going to do anything that’s going to make the project uneconomical or unviable. It’s got to make financial sense,”

If Caruso didn't pay too much for the property, it would be financially viable with a smaller developement. Obviously he's too stubborn to admit he got screwd (or screwed up) by The Beanie Baby. Must be why T.W. is a multi billionaire and Caruso is just a losing wanna-baby...

I'm sure if Caruso offered up the property for ...say...$20 mill, sombody might be able to come in and build a reasonably acceptable facility...and make money at it.

Come on Ricky, 30 million homeowners can't be wrong. Join the crowd...Short Sell that baby! Your credit rating will recover...eventually.

sa1 (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2008 at 12:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Santa Barbara, and Montecito, are so nice because we follow the planning process here. "

What about the "Jewel of the Riviera" David (underscore)Pritchett? What are you tryin' to say?

Adding 10K-15K new bodies to The Good Land with no infrastructure ain't good plannen? If UCSB and the Goleta CofC says it's smart growth, then it sho'nuff is. You got the COG's and the county's word onit. I swair. Jest wait and see how much tax rev'nue we pull in from all them rich students and the property taxes them faculty folks and the Uni will be a payin' fo all that subsidized housen. We'll soon have the last laugh on you po stubbern city types...

sa1 (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2008 at 1:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The people of Montecito who push back on this project should be ashamed of themselves. Now 3 different developers will have come and gone, by the time you've chewed up and spit out Mr. Caruso. Each developer has come to the table with good proposals to make your community better. To help beautify the beach front area of Montecito and add to the community. They will bring jobs for local people and taxes to the community. Yet you push back on every project. You are idiots with nothing better to do. This community is going to grow whether you like it or not. Mr. Caruso should have the right to develop his land as he pleases. Look at all the great big estates, big buildings around SB (i,e, granada, arlington, court house) those couldn't be built today because of all the stupid restrictions. Thanks for nothing. Look at what Ty Warner has done with the Biltmore, it looks better than ever, you really missed out on the Miramar with him. Here's some advice, let the project go through, stop watering your extra 10 acres of grass that you don't use at your estate and while you're at it, why don't you fix up the corner of coast village road, by the freeway where the gas station was, it's makes such a nice entrance into Montecito.

nuttyinsb (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2008 at 12:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Schrager managed to get a fully approved plan in 18 months. Reasonable by anyone's standards. Then the economy fell apart, 9/11 happened, tourism was in the toilet for years, and Schrager's financiers fled—so the property sat idle for years until Ty bought it.

Caruso seems to want us to believe that all those idle years were the fault of the planning process and those Montecito obstructionists.

They were not.

But if we swallow the relentless public relations effort that blames the process and a handful of residents, we'll believe that Caruso is the third developer in a row to suffer mightily at their hands. Next, we'll see Caruso as a victim (astonishing if you think about it). We'll believe the lie that the Miramar is a jinxed piece of property, that it'll never pencil out, that Caruso has finally come to understand that he made his first-ever buying mistake, that he'll walk, that no one will ever buy the property, and that it will forever be a rat-infested, blighted visual blot on our character, surrounded by a few whining, spoiled neighbors who want the beach all to themselves. Or, as my favorite rumor goes, the Chumash will buy it and turn it into a casino.

And we’ll net out where so many have: Hurry! Give him what he wants!

These guys are good. Keep that in mind.

Grace (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2008 at 1:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Rick Caruso is either being a big WUSS or doing the old Mexican stand off routine. (how was that for PC?) I am not sure how any reasonable person can tell me that the points of contention that he is wanking over would make the project financially unviable. What makes it unviable is putting the neighbors in danger in a flood situation. I don't think a rat is going to run over and lock on to any one in Montecito's jugular like the white rabbit in a Monte python movie. I think he is just having his fit and letting the pot sit on the stove and simmer for a bit. I think the the people of Montecito should be proud of the outcome and it proves the system works. I also think the county employees thrown under the bus should get their jobs back. Hopefully they don't get some crazed attorney and cost all of us taxpayers a chunk of change for questionable departure from their jobs. Don't let this guy bully you into something you will have to put up with forever. Just like any other bully, there is always someone bigger and badder(and with the financial resources to see the project thru properly) on the block. I wish the city of Goleta and County of SB had the nadz to get it together in the same regard with the Gaviota coast.

bimboteskie (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2008 at 9:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Mr. Caruso should have the right to develop his land as he pleases."

Really?? Just how would that work?

nuttyinsb indeed.

David_Pritchett (David Pritchett)
August 15, 2008 at 10:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Oh and after all the crap they guy went thru to get rid of old 76 gas station! What was Rick thinking? DUH!

bimboteskie (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2008 at 10:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Mr. Caruso isn't going anywhere. He's extraordinarily smart and he's played his supporters like a violin. Between blandishments and threats, he's gotten a good portion of Montecito scared he's going to throw away whatever massive sum he spent on the property and turn tail.

Not. Going. To. Happen.

I can only scarcely imagine the pressure behind the scenes on the MPC commissioners. I hope they can maintain their independence and do their job in this lynch mob atmosphere.

Where is the water going to come from, now that we're in a drought, and, if Montecito Water can ever get it, how much will the Miramar's water cost everyone else?

Where is the sewage going to go to (when the Miramar waste flows push the Montecito Sanitation District within a couple of percentage points of having to build new facilities)?

What is the real impact of importing 10,000 cubic yards (that's a thousand dump truck loads) of fill into a floodplain?

Why is Caruso allowed to build in the setbacks AT ALL? Schrager was because Schrager was rehabbing existing buildings. But Caruso's scraping the lot.

And on. And on. There are a lot of questions here, and few good answers. That these questions haven't been fully addressed in the past is a real shame. If they had been, we'd be a lot closer to a Miramar that we ALL can be proud of.

The MPC should keep digging for answers. If they deny without getting them, Caruso will take this to the Supes and this enormous under-parked, over-built monster will get a quick yes.

You just watch.

chubbco (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2008 at 2:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

For the straight facts, check out this site:
truthaboutmiramar.com

Grace (anonymous profile)
August 19, 2008 at 5:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

What now?

Let me tell you what now.

Oh, that what now. I tell you what now between the Miramar and Caruso. There is no Miramar and Caruso. Not no more.

Georgy (anonymous profile)
August 23, 2008 at 6:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am writing to you at the request of Caruso Affiliated because their mailing piece asked me to write my Supervisor and the Montecito Planning Commission. The mailer is called A Campaign of Misinformation. And that’s exactly what this has been.

The mailer says the Caruso plan has fewer rooms than the approved Schrager Plan and the same number of restaurant seats, ballroom capacity, and spa guests.” The whole truth? Obviously not. The Schrager buildings totaled about 132,000 square feet. The Caruso plan is a full 30% larger.

The mailer says, “The MWD has confirmed repeatedly in letters and at public hearings that they will have enough water and will serve the Miramar.” This defies reality. There is a water shortage—and we’re told that it will get worse.

The mailing piece repeatedly uses words like “restore” and “renew” when the proposal is to “scrape” and “reconfigure” the land. Words like “charm” and “history” are meant to mislead. There is no respect here for us or for our history.

The mailer asks the community “to take a stand and help clean up The Miramar." Isn’t it duplicitous to let a resource rot and then fire up the community to help clean it up?

We hope the Montecito Planning Commission will guide the developer to create a plan that works in harmony with its environment. Please don't bury it under landfill! It's not too late to correct the miscues that got us to this spot.

Keep in mind that Mr. Caruso did his due diligence before buying this project. He knows the score. But if he meant to twist the rules for his benefit, he underestimated the love and dedication of an enlightened, local community.

Don’t reject this project. Adjust it.

sbbulldog (anonymous profile)
August 26, 2008 at 8:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Post a comment

Username:
Password: (Forgotten your password?)

Comment:

EVENT CALENDAR

Previous Month | Next Month

Today's Events Best Bets Submit an Event

Local Weather

Currently:
Clear Sky
Temperature:
57.0°
Wind:
3 W

Surf Report
  • Specials
  • InPrint
  • Top Emails
  • Blue Green Guide 2008
  • Summer Camp Guide 2008
  • Wedding Guide 2008
  • SBIFF 2008 All Access
  • 2008 Election Coverage
  • Best of Reader's Poll 2007
  • Calendar of Fundraisers
  • Local Bands
  • Kid's Mother's Day Issue
  • Made in Santa Barbara
  • Tea Fire 2008
  • Tis the Season 2008
  • VADA Project at SBMA
  • Video Schmideo Set to Close
  • California's Prop. 8 Defeat: A Bungled Campaign
  • Zach Gill’s Timely Tidings
  • Holiday Plants
  1. Wendy McCaw Shuts Down Goleta Valley Voice
  2. Video Schmideo Set to Close
  3. Embers to Ashes
  4. I.V. Eatery Branches Into Downtown
  5. From Black Friday to Blessed Friday
  6. Local Heroes 2008
  • CREATE AN ACCOUNT
  • LOG.IN
  • CONTENTS
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • ARCHIVE
  • INFO | ADVERTISING | CONTACT US
Google
 
Independent.com Web
Copyright ©2008 Santa Barbara Independent, Inc. Reproduction of material from any Independent.com pages without written permission is strictly prohibited. If you believe an Independent.com user or any material appearing on Independent.com is copyrighted material used without proper permission, please click here.
This is our Privacy Policy.