- Home
- News Grid
- Local News
- Green Hawk
- Business
- Politics
- School Zone
- Nonprofits
- Missing Pets
- Multimedia
- Arts
- Movies
- Outdoors
- Sports
- News Releases
- Columnists
- Blogs
- Opinions
- Classifieds
- Advertise
- Donate
- Partners
Marriott Hotel Project Sent Back to Drawing Board — Again
Proponents of the embattled Marriott Residence Inn project in Goleta returned for another go at their proposed extended-stay hotel Tuesday at Goleta’s Design Review Board meeting. But they were sent back to the drawing board.
What was once a 140-room hotel was redesigned to occupy a smaller area at the 6300 Hollister Ave. address, via the relocation of some rooms and the elimination of others. According to the project’s planners, the building was set back another 22.5 feet from its Hollister Avenue frontage, and third-floor elements were modified to give the hotel a smaller profile against the mountain views north of the city.
Tuesday’s conceptual review came after years of wrangling among the applicant; rival hotel operators, who feared the competition to their bottom line; city officials, who expressed interest for more hotels in the area; environmentalists, who decried the effects of the project; and members of the local Chumash community, who protested the disturbance of known ancestral sites.
The hotel previously came close to moving forward, only to be withdrawn by the developer because of a lawsuit levied by members of the Chumash community represented by local land-use attorney Marc Chytilo.
Despite progress made by the current design, which is still three stories high but complies with the 35-foot height maximum in the city’s building policies, members of the public expressed lingering skepticism about the project. Three choices — A, B and C, which vary slightly in design and room count — were offered to the Design Review Board as alternatives.
“We’re a little disappointed that the plans today look like the plans of a few years ago,” said attorney Anna Citron, who works with Chytilo on land-use cases.
Local development watchdog Gary Earle said the design “just nibbles at the corners of the building.”
The most vocal commenter Tuesday, however, was Design Review Board planning chairwoman Cecilia Brown, irritated at the design’s apparent lack of deference for Goleta’s typically low-profile community character.
“Our community character is important and should be expressed by how your project fits into the community, not how our community fits your project,” she told the applicants. “Once this building is built, that’s it. We lose the view of the mountains.”
The mountain view along the Hollister corridor is designated a scenic view in Goleta’s General Plan.
As for the applicants, representing developer R.D. Olson, tweaking the hotel’s dimensions continue to be a challenge. They maintain that they need the rooms to remain a feasible operation, given land costs. A two-story building, they say, would result in a larger ground footprint.
The discussion of cultural resources or potential cuts to the bottom line of other hotels in the area did not come into play Tuesday, but at least one representative from another local hotel and Chumash spokesman Frank Arrendondo attended Tuesday’s meeting and took notes.
The project’s developers will return to the Design Review Board on Feb. 9 with a fourth option, which will involve more work with the hotel’s southwest third-story element.
— Noozhawk staff writer Sonia Fernandez can be reached at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).
Comments
Noozhawk's comments are moderated, but by posting here you accept your responsibility to follow our rules as part of Noozhawk's shared online community. Please keep your comments civil and helpful. Don't attack other readers personally, and do not use vulgar, abusive or discriminatory language. Use the "Report Abuse" link if a comment violates these standards or our Terms of Use.
» on 01.27.10 @ 12:54 AM
“Local development watchdog Gary Earle”?
More like a gadfly with nothing better to do, who doesn’t even live in the neighborhood.
I was wondering what Earle’s been up to since his mouthpiece, Travis, left the Newsless-Mess. Is Playgirl magazine not interested in him these days?
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.27.10 @ 09:28 AM
Yay to Chair Cecila Brown. We in Goleta cherish our mountain views and don’t want to give them up lightly. Mariott needs to adjust its sights and make necessary changes.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.27.10 @ 12:06 PM
I consider myself a fairly reasonable “left of middle” individual and I am frequently concerned with environmental, Native American, property, personal space, and esthetic issues, but our ARB/ABR (aka Design Review Board) very often can be labeled as a shameful lot of characters who “appear” to have more of an interest in being heard/seen/noticed than actually approving projects that might stand to benefit residents (this holds as true for SB as for Goleta, by the way). We are in an awful economic situation and there are some potential business projects that might, in their small way, help us all out. And certainly those involved in construction and tourism (all aspects, i.e.) might benefit from a reasonably designed inn.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.27.10 @ 12:22 PM
“Environmentalists”? You mean the paid representatives of “rival hotel operators” who are showing up to speak against what would be the highest quality affordable hotel rooms in Goleta?
You mean representatives of the same hotel owners that gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to two city council candidates in the last election, hoping to pre-buy no votes and kill competition?
You mean the same self interested rival hotel operators that are funding a Santa Barbara attorney to fight a Goleta project?
You mean mountain views from Santa Barbara Airport, the neighbor across the street? Isn’t the developer offering to protect these mountain views by moving the building back more that 2.5 times the city set back requirement?
In a time when local business is hurting and city revenues are being squeezed, Goleta needs projects like this that keep visitors in Goleta that eat at our restaurants and shop at our stores. Aside from being the only ‘extended stay’ suites hotel in town, this project will provide significant bed tax, property tax, and Old Town redevelopment tax revenue.
Instead of just getting airport, business & UCSB visitor traffic on Goleta streets driving to Santa Barbara’s higher quality hotels, let’s give extended stay visitors a reason to stay in Goleta and spend money in our stores!
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.27.10 @ 01:17 PM
Mr. Earle is concerned about community viewsheds? Didn’t seem to be the case in 1976!
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.27.10 @ 01:52 PM
God almighty! I get so tired of the same bunch of ignorant busybody do nothing obstructionists showing up to get in the way, starting with the ABR. Jerry, thank God some of you lefty’s are coming around to the money wasting lunacy of watchdog groups. Thanks Goleta Taxpayer for pointing out the painfully obvious. I know some of these types like infomaniac. You idiot, I grow trees in my yard twice the height of buildings allowed in Goleta so screw your stupid mountain views. Jeeze, what a waste. How did the country that invented the skyscraper and landed a man on the moon become such a dysfunctional bunch of cry babies that don’t do anything but get in the way. Most of the obstructionist do so to cover for their own sorry vacuous lives. Send them all to Europe where they can pretend to be an adult all day long. Meanwhile we can get back to being the once great country we were.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.27.10 @ 03:23 PM
One can’t help but wonder what AN50 and others are complaining about. Obstructionism? Where, when?
Note that in the last few years EVERY major development project in Goleta has had the green light and has either been built or approved. Let us count the ways:
- Sumida Gardens
- Haskell’s 200 units
- Villages at Los Carneros - potentially 600-800 units
- The business Park on Hollister
- The Shelby property.
OK, so Goleta did not take on the Golf Course boondoggle that no one else would touch either.
So you pro-development guys, let’s hear you cite exactly which projects have been stopped. Goleta can’t even deal with the traffic and other infrastructure issues we already got. They were supposed to help us out of this economic mess but instead they sink us deeper and deeper.
So be specific, please, what have enviros stopped???
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.27.10 @ 04:51 PM
Wow, you listed 5 projects out of 45. Oh no that’s not obstructionism! Have you ever been to a city council meeting and heard these money wasters whining, infomaniac? The pettiness, stupidity and irrational logic behind community crybabies are phenomenal. Yet these out of work “got no life” nut cases have cost us all a lot of money in legal fees, development fees, time wasted, material wasted and God only knows how many square miles of forest has been consumed for all the stupid idiotic environmental impact reports. You, infomaniac, in your stuffy superior environmental ideology are the one responsible for the horrific environmental damage done in the name of “saving the environment”. The environmental movement in this town cost tax payers in the neighborhood of 30 million dollars in traffic studies alone over the last 30 years that produced not one single traffic improvement and in fact worsened traffic way more than the growth these obstruction methods was supposed to prevent. So don’t lecture me about traffic problems that your stupid movement helped to create, make worse and clean the tax payers’ pockets with.
I’m not pro-development, but I sure the hell am not anti development either. Nor do I subscribe to the insane notion that you can have your paradise cake and eat it too.
As far as stopping development, you are right most are just dropped due to the enormous cost, but those that do get through are very expensive and we all pay that price. So I’m guessing you are a trust fund baby or idle wealthy so you don’t care how much your movement costs the rest of us. But the gig is up, we are gonna drag you proliferate wasters out in the sunshine where all can see what you have done!
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.27.10 @ 07:29 PM
AN50, despite your strident, disparaging remarks, did you notice that you didn’t name even one project that has been stopped?
Your name calling, belligerence and hyperbole betray the emptiness of your arguments. I challenge you to back up your claims with facts. Anyone can scream, yell and accuse. Perhaps you could rise above all that and in a calm rational way that could convince us of your claims, provide us with examples of projects that have been stopped in Goleta by enviros, liberals and all those you have accused.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.27.10 @ 09:43 PM
Like we don’t need the jobs and future revenue?
Detractors are all a bunch of NIMBY obstructionists, or worse, paid shills for competing hotel chains.
While we’re at it, drill baby drill.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.27.10 @ 10:26 PM
Having worked directly with the owners and managers of hotels in the Goleta area, I find it interesting just how exagerated and extreme, purely for effect, the amount of hundreds of thousands of dollars given to pre-buy no votes.
This is not fact. The facts are that the area has a higher occupancy percentage than Santa Barbara and higher than the state. The main reason is the mixed clientele of university parents, silicon beach businesses, UCSB, and being associated with Santa Barbara the American Riviera. Three hotels were approved before the last election, so the pre-buy no vote statement has no bearing. UCSB officials have been quoted as saying they would like more rooms close to the university so travels would not have to stay all the way in Santa Barbara. However, when travelers were polled as to why they did not stay in Goleta the response was lack of restaurant options, no main area to stroll such as State Street, and a lack of close activities.
If Goleta would develop a city center area with a sports/performance arena, we would have a place to put restaurants, multiple hotels, and dare I say, IMAX.
Back biting and name calling is the furthest from constructive and is only slightly more civil than violence. If we all want change, then do the work to make the changes. Help others to understand your passion. Nothing worth having ever comes easy. So suit up and show up, know your facts, speak to others as you would want to spoken to, and remember you will be remembered longer by how you helped others and not obstructed them.
But that is all just my opinion.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 01.28.10 @ 11:14 AM
Agree with “Concerned” - downtown Goleta is a shambles. BUT it’s naive to think that upgrading Goleta will ever compete with downtown Santa Barbara, the harbor, et al. The fact is that rooms closer to UCSB make a lot of sense. Folks can drive to area attractions (or even bus if they need to) when a hotel is on a main thoroughfare. There is NO good reason not to let Marriott build. And if it did, we WOULD have one more restaurant, bar, destination, etc. Get into the 21st century people. You can’t hold onto the past forever.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
More Local News »
SBCC Receives But Won’t Release Draft of Findings from State Oversight Commission
The college has 30 days to respond, after which the ACCJC is expected to issue a public decision
County Supervisors Approve First Reading of Oil Pipeline Agreement for Venoco
Next week's public meeting the last step before the company can begin operations
Goleta Seeks Public Input on Law Enforcement Services
Participants are needed for two focus groups scheduled for Feb. 15
City Council Authorizes Design Contract for Redevelopment of Cliff Drive Intersection
Tuesday's meeting is dedicated to Santa Barbara filmmaker Mike deGruy, who died in a helicopter crash; a memorial service is planned for Sunday
Goleta Woman Accused of Having Sex with Teen Boy
Sheriff's Department says victim recently came forward about 2008 relationship
Weather: Fair 44.0º
Search Noozhawk »
