In a split-vote decision, the Carpinteria City Council — acting as a property owner — accepted revised project plans for the controversial Surfliner Inn on Monday night after hearing nearly 20 members of the public speak.
The proposed Surfliner Inn, at 499 Linden Ave. in Carpinteria, has been the subject of opposition by many community members who, for the past five years, have expressed dissatisfaction with the hotel’s size, scale, and community impacts.
In June 2018, the City Council entered into an exclusive negotiation agreement with developer 499 Linden Managers LLC to negotiate the scope of the project, according to the staff report. Through negotiations, the project was defined with the following features: 36 guest rooms and four suites, a public rooftop bar, a public event space, a “guest only” rooftop swimming pool, a street-level cafe with inside and outside dining, expansion of public parking lot No. 3 westward 60 feet, a new public parking lot at 399 Linden Ave., relocation of the public restroom from 499 Linden Ave. to 399 Linden Ave., and a new multipurpose trail from Linden to Holly avenues.
Then, in November 2020, the City Council, the Planning Commission and the Architectural Review Board held a joint concept review meeting to consider the proposed design for the project, and developers on Monday night brought back revised project plans attempting to address some of the changes wished to be made.
The revised plans included reducing the mass of the building by moving the cafe to the southern side of the lot to open the corner at Linden Avenue and Fifth Street.
“That was really something we came up with with the team here just to try to have that corner feel a little more open … and a little more inviting to the city and the community,” said Clay Aurell, an architect with AB Design Studio Inc.
The developers further opened the area along Linden Avenue by pulling the entire structure back 10 to 20 feet and making the original garden area a bit smaller, providing amenity space for the hotel guests, according to the staff report. They proposed adding trees to buffer the hotel from residential buildings across the street.
“(It’s) really just an area that we felt we could give back to the community and have it be an active space,” Aurell said.
The revised plans cut off one room from the original plan, making for a total of 39 guest rooms. The developers also made it so that the stairway on the right-hand side of the first floor is more visible and goes all the way up to the roof, serving as an “inviting way to get to the roof” so that community members who are accessing the roof don’t have to go through the hotel, Aurell said.
The upper portion of the stair towers was eliminated to create a scenario where people exit the roof deck on each end through a complete exterior staircase on the Linden Avenue side.
To decrease the height of the building, developers took off the rooftop restrooms and put them on the second floor. The revisions also included the relocation of the rooftop lounge area to the southwest corner so that it has more direct ocean views and switched from having two rooftop pools to one larger pool with a lounge area connected to it, Aurell said. Glass roof screening also was incorporated in the revision process to help mitigate potential sound transmission to the surrounding homes, according to the staff report.
The City Council’s acceptance of the revised plans was conducted in its capacity as a landowner, not as a regulator, and when the developer submits a formal application for the project, it would still go through the city’s development review process through which the city still has the authority and obligation to review, condition, and approve or deny the entire project.
The Community Development Department, the Architectural Review Board, the Planning Commission and the City Council still retain full discretion to evaluate the proposed Surfliner Inn application and public meetings. If the application receives approval through the development review process, then the city would execute the ground lease with the developer to permit construction and operation of the hotel.
The project’s preliminary proforma financial analysis indicates that more than $600,000 in direct revenue could be generated annually by the project, according to the staff report.
Nearly 20 community members spoke at Monday night’s special meeting, voicing both support and opposition to the project.
Critics of the project mainly took issue with the hotel’s size and scope, traffic and safety concerns, and leasing public parking lot No. 3 to a private developer.
“I’m a strong advocate of property rights with the caveat that development should be thoughtful, should honor the proposed site, should be environmentally and community sensitive,” one speaker said. “This development proposal does not meet those criteria.”
Multiple speakers mentioned a petition that has gained nearly 1,100 signatures calling for allowing Carpinterians to vote in November 2022 on how to use the city space.
“Never before in the 56-year history of Carpinteria have so many Carpinterians spoken up, rallied against City Hall, to fight for the preservation of our small town,” one speaker said. “You’re proceeding with this meeting as if Carpinterians’ voices don’t matter, our voices are insignificant.”
People supporting the project said the hotel has a beautiful design and will help make the city more accessible to residents and visitors alike.
“As I see it, it’s looking in line with what our small-town values are,” one speaker said. “All small and local businesses will benefit from this.”
The City Council ultimately voted to accept the project revisions with a 3-2 vote, with Councilmen Roy Lee and Gregg Carty and Mayor Wade Nomura in favor. Councilman Al Clark and Councilwoman Natalia Alarcon voted to deny the revisions on the grounds that the hotel is still too large.
— Noozhawk staff writer Jade Martinez-Pogue can be reached at jmartinez-pogue@noozhawk.com. Follow Noozhawk on Twitter: @noozhawk, @NoozhawkNews and @NoozhawkBiz. Connect with Noozhawk on Facebook.
