A Montecito review board delayed final approval of the Four Seasons Resort The Biltmore Santa Barbara project Thursday, asking for more information before making a decision.
After receiving preliminary design approval from the Montecito Planning Commission two weeks ago, the Biltmore went back to the Montecito Board of Architectural Review for final approval of construction and design plans.
The board decided the drawings presented were not sufficient for final approval. It continued final approval until Nov. 14 so that the Biltmore team could come back with more detailed plans.
The last review board meeting got heated when board chair John Watson argued that the improvements would ruin the character of the Biltmore. The board denied the project approval, and sent it to the Planning Commission.
There, representatives for the Biltmore agreed to reduce the surface area of the family pool complex by 5% after commissioners expressed concern that it was a bit big and too close to the road.
The hotel, at 1260 Channel Drive, closed in early 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic and furloughed about 650 employees. That resulted in a lengthy legal battle between the Four Seasons and the workers.
Hotel owner Ty Warner decided to update the property a few years into the closure.
Changes to the iconic hotel include a new family pool complex, new bungalows, renovated guest rooms, new retail space and new back-of-house facilities.
Because the project already received preliminary approval, the Montecito Board of Architectural Review couldn’t focus on major design aspects of the project, but instead smaller details such as landscaping, materials, tile and ADA compliance.
On Thursday, board members said the designs weren’t fully fleshed out.
“These drawings are preliminary, but they are not final,” Watson said. “Many things are shown, but they are not flushed out to me. Preliminary approval is done. That’s behind us. I would expect your project to have the same level of drawing as every other project.”
Mark Lloyd, a land use agent working with the Biltmore, said they are in a tight timeline and asked the board for approval so that they could move forward with construction.
“There is a desire to get this up and going because of all the benefits for the community,” Lloyd said. “I ask that you do not hold this up.”
Other board members agreed that the plans were not detailed enough but that they didn’t have any major concerns with the design. However, vice chair David Mendro still expressed some concern over the pools.
“In my opinion, the pool area isn’t at the same elegance and level of the Biltmore,” Mendro said.
The Biltmore is scheduled to go back to the Montecito Board of Architectural Review for final approval on Nov. 14. The item will go on the board’s consent agenda instead of getting a full hearing. Once the project is approved, hotel representatives can get permits for construction.
The team working on the Biltmore hopes to have the hotel open again in July 2025.
