City officials still hope to decide on the Canfield/Swenson hotel plans for the La Bahia site before the November 4 city council elections. The final EIR hasn't been released yet (maybe this Friday?), but the City Council hopes to certify the final EIR, accept a complex set of findings, change a host of basic planning laws pertaining to La Bahia, permit demolition of a protected landmark, and approve a replacement project on September 9.
Meanwhile, on Wednesday July 30, the Historic Preservation Commission holds its final public hearing on the matter, and a week later on August 7, the Planning Commission does the same.
The issues surrounding this development are complex, with far-reaching effects, both positive and negative, on Santa Cruz and its population. Issues include significant changes to a range of planning documents and policies, removing environmental protections (as impediments to development), destruction of historic structures, zoning excesses, and disruption of public scenic views. Consider just these two facts:
To call Swenson's proposal "not in conformance" with the laws and policies that govern development of the La Bahia site would be seriously to understate the case. The EIR surprisingly doesn't actually say much about this stunning non-conformance. It concentrates its analysis instead on how well the project will conform, once all those pesky laws are changed. The reader is invited to believe that the necessary amendments are in the bag, and compliance will then be perfect (well, good anyway).
The public should take note that the laws to be changed (or ignored) include provisions of the general plan, the local coastal plan, the zoning ordinance, as well as state and local policies governing historic preservation, appropriateness of the size and scale of the construction in existing neighborhoods, and maintenance of public scenic coastal views. The La Bahia owners are counting on a City Council desperate for revenue to change all of these laws on September 9.
Of immediate concern to the Historic Preservation Commission on July 30 are proposed changes to the Beach Area Plan-the basic planning document that controls what happens to the buildings and landscapes on the La Bahia site. This Plan came into being ten years ago as part of the monumental Beach and South of Laurel planning process; it was long in the making and required the participation of many Santa Cruzans. Many no doubt believe that the Beach Area Plan can't be easily changed. Think again. Some important environmental protections in the Beach Area Plan may be terminated in September.
For example, under the Plan as it now exists, new development on the La Bahia site "must retain the character-defining elements" of the landmark. That's called historic preservation. The elements were defined, documented, and evaluated by expert opinion back in 1997. Even with very good attorneys, it would be hard to argue that the words "must retain the character-defining elements" allow one to demolish all the buildings and replace them with what Swenson has in mind.
Consequently, if the city decides to permit demolition of the La Bahia in September, it needs to eliminate that protective language from the Beach Area Plan (or interpret it away). The city is offering to water down the language (or drown it) by substituting language that will allow new development to "utilize similar elements" rather than "retain specific elements." Members of the Historical Preservation Commission are unlikely to fall for that. They will see it, quite rightly, as a cue for the bulldozers to start their engines.
Then there's the height limit. Current zoning permits three or four stories (up to 43 feet) on the La Bahia site. No building on Beach Hill is taller than three stories. But Swenson is planning five, six, even seven stories atop the hill on First Street along the back of the site, so the city needs to add thirty or so feet to the permitted height limits for the La Bahia site. The city is offering to add language to the Beach Area Plan that allows that extra thirty feet, along with a new zoning ordinance.
Among the character-defining elements to be retained at La Bahia (at least until September 9) is overall massing of new construction that is compatible with the original hillside village design of the landmark and with the adjoining neighborhood. This means that whatever part of the landmark is ultimately restored or reconstructed, it can't be enveloped by some modern architectural behemoth. That protection means that the scale of development is bounded by the distinctive hillside village design as well as the zoning law. No matter, the city wants them both gone.
Is it possible to design a profitable signature beachfront hotel within the four-story limit that incorporates the distinctive features of La Bahia? Of course. It's smaller than what the La Bahia owners want, but it's economically feasible and would meet most, if not all, of the project's stated objectives. So why aren't city leaders insisting on that course?
Well, La Bahia's owners want as many ocean view condos as they can possibly get. The project they've designed will dwarf whatever is left of the La Bahia (as little as possible); it will dominate the neighborhood; it will loom over the Main beach like the Dream Inn looms over Cowell. A seven-story La Bahia up on First Street will look like a ten-story building from the beach, much like the Dream Inn is a seven-story building on West Cliff Drive, but a ten-story down at the beach. Putting up story poles at La Bahia would have made this abundantly clear to a great many Santa Cruzans; city leaders didn't want that. They and their friends have looked at the drawings and they are satisfied. Is that good enough?
Well, at least members of the Historical Preservation Commission are unlikely to recommend changing the Beach Area Plan to include extraordinary new height limits. That's something. Commissioners are also being asked to approve (1) demolishing the landmark, (2) removing it from the official landmark list, and (3) replacing it with Swenson's project. Let's see: No, No, No.
But of course, the Historic Preservation Commissions only advises the Council. The Council can, and often does, reject their advice and do what it pleases. Councilmembers are tired of business people hitting them with a stick whenever they take a stand that results in stalling any project. God forbid they might do or say something that could later be viewed as having been fatal to a project. And naturally they're looking to increase the tax base; at 10%, the hotel tax must look like a pot of gold at the end of Swenson's rainbow at this point.
Still, it's sad to think that Santa Cruz city officials would rather change the law to conform to this project than insist the project conform to the law-especially to hard won environmental protections. Spot zoning-changing the zoning for one particular site to suit one particular project-is famously bad practice. That it looks like such a good idea to city officials is a signal of how times have changed.
But I ask you, what are the chances that any one of us (you or me, you know-the little people) would be able to get special permission to knock over a city landmark and built 30 feet above the height limit in our neighborhoods?
For those inclined to prevent the demolition of a city landmark, or the demolition of the height limits on one of the most visible parcels on our beachfront, or who care not to amend the Beach Area Plan as if it were a minor administrative cleanup exercise: this is one of your last opportunities to speak up.
The real action will be before the Council in September of course, but the Historic Preservation Commission will hold its final hearing on the La Bahia EIR on Wednesday July 30 in the Police Station community room at 7:30 p.m., and you are invited.