Coastal Commission to review Oceanside hotel

By: DAVID STERRETT - Staff Writer | Tuesday, May 8, 2007 1:02 AM PDT

Dave Bedker walks his dog, Ossie, on Monday through the field just north of the Buena Vista Lagoon on the west side of Highway 101 in Oceanside where a hotel is proposed to be built.
BILL WECHTER Staff Photographer
Order a copy of this photo
Visit our Photo Gallery

OCEANSIDE -- A controversial hotel proposed for the northwest end of the Buena Vista Lagoon in Oceanside will be reviewed by the California Coastal Commission on Friday.

The commission, which overseas developments near the state's beaches, will decide Friday whether there are substantial design or environmental issues with the project to warrant further review. Commissioners, who will meet in San Pedro, can either approve the 82-room hotel or schedule another meeting if it's not convinced the project meets all state and local regulations.

The City Council approved plans for a three-story hotel, restaurant and four condominiums on an undeveloped 3.8-acre site in southwest Oceanside in February, but opponents of the project appealed it to the commission in March because they want the state agency to overturn the council decision.

Following standard commission procedures, the public will not be allowed to address the commission at Friday's meeting. If the commission decides to hold another hearing, however, then residents would have the opportunity to comment on the development.

Staffers for the state agency have recommended that the commission hold another hearing this year to further review the project. A report prepared by staffers says the project doesn't fit well with the lagoon and surrounding community, and fails to "adequately address ... impacts to public views, adequate buffers, potential hazards, marine resources, public access, preservation of low cost visitor serving uses and public recreations."

But a consultant for San Diego-based developer Oceanside Three, which owns the property, said Monday that the project meets all regulations and shouldn't require further scrutiny.

"There is a lot of opposition to the project, but we don't think there are any substantial issues," said Roxayne Spruance, a consultant for Oceanside Three.

More than 140 residents packed into City Hall in February when the council voted 3-2 to overturn the planning commission's denial of the project. Mayor Jim Wood and councilwoman Esther Sanchez voted against the project and council members Rocky Chavez, Jerry Kern and Jack Feller voted for it.

About two dozen opponents said the project would harm the lagoon, block views and be an eyesore in southern Oceanside. About eight supporters said it would not harm the lagoon and that it would enhance the area and generate business and tax revenue for the city.

Two environmental groups, several residents and two coastal commissioners appealed the project in March to the state agency, which consists of a 12-member committee of citizens and local elected officials appointed by state leaders to "protect, conserve, restore and enhance environmental and human-based resources of the California coast."

"There are so many problems with this project," said Oceanside resident Dan DiMento, who lives near the proposed hotel and has helped spearhead opposition to the project.

DiMento and several other residents filed the appeal on the project along with Preserve Calavera, Friends of Buena Vista Lagoon, and Coastal Commissioners Patrick Kruer and Sara Wan.

"I hope the commission does its due diligence with the project," DiMento said Monday.

The Coastal Commission staffers identified several problems with the project in a report prepared for Friday's hearing:

  • The 36-foot-high hotel is "incompatible with the surrounding community."

  • The hotel would block views of the lagoon for vehicles driving south on Coast Highway.

  • A 100-foot buffer with the edge of the lagoon wetlands "may not be adequate."

  • The plans need to do more to address the possible flooding of the lagoon.

  • The project won't have enough hotel rooms available to the public.

  • The project could harm endangered birds living in the lagoon, such as the California least tern.

    Spruance said the commission may want to discuss the type of hotel proposed. The plans call for 70 rooms to be "condo-hotel rooms," which means they would be sold to investors who could stay in them for 90 days a year and no more than 29 consecutive days. The public could stay in the rooms when investors aren't using them.

    Condo hotels have spurred debate throughout California. Opponents of condo hotels say they limit the number of rooms available to the public, but proponents say they help pay for hotels because the sale of rooms provides money for construction.

    Spruance, the developer's consultant, said all the issues have been addressed and that staffers who prepared the report either misread or misunderstood plans for the hotel.

    Toni Ross, the coastal planner who prepared the report from the commissioner, said Monday that the report was based on information staffers have received from the city. If the commission decides to hold another hearing on the project, Ross said staffers will take a more thorough and critical look at the project.

    Ross said if the commission decides to hold another hearing it will most likely be in October, because that is the next time the state agency is expected to hold its monthly meeting in Southern California.

    Friday's meeting will be held at 9 a.m. at Crowne Plaza Los Angeles Harbor Hotel, at 601 S. Palos Verdes St. in San Pedro, a coastal community in Los Angeles.

    -- Contact staff writer David Sterrett at (760) 901-4067 or dsterrett@nctimes.com.

    Next Previous
  • Advertisement

    10 comment(s)[-]Go to Top

    No to the Hotel wrote on May 8, 2007 6:50 AM:I hope the Coastal Commission recognizes the error made by our Council and says NO to this project. This hotel should not be built at such a delicate and fragile location!

    Dave wrote on May 8, 2007 7:21 AM:The project definately will NOT have enough hotel rooms open to the public. The so-called hotel condo is, in the final analysis, simply another timeshare. Hotel condo just sounds better.

    Stephan wrote on May 8, 2007 9:40 AM:Here we go again... The city of Oceanside is selling out our best city resources to the timeshare developers for some quick cash. Probably because the bonds for the palatial city hall complex that was to be the center of the "new financial district" (yep, that is what they told us) are now coming due. The pier hotel project is a joke. They call it a hotel, yet there will be only 32 high priced hotel rooms and over 150 timeshare units. What are the citizens of Oceanside getting in return for closing the public street and blocking the view of the ocean and pier from downtown? We all know the answer. Now since they got away with that deal, the city wants to take our precious natural resource of the lagoon and rape it for a few more quick bucks. Someone should check and see if after these "hotels" are built if the city council people are not getting free rooms for life or some kind of other graft in return for their support, because I just cannot see how these guys are justifying what is going on here. My 2 cents.

    Surfer Girl wrote on May 8, 2007 10:45 AM:It's obvious that the Coastal Commssion will not approve this project in spite of Roxayne's heated defense of it. All of the issues that are listed make this project wrong for this location. The developer keeps clining to the ridiculous statement that they followed all the rules- sorry but you didn't follow the Coastal Act or the Local Coastal Plan. How stupid is that? Isn't that what you get paid for?

    Public Interest Lawyer wrote on May 8, 2007 11:38 AM:The Coastal Commission should be abolished. It is an unconstitutional abomination, violating all of the accepted principles of our Constitutional republic -- e.g. checks and balances, separation of powers, and consent of the governed. The fact that there is nothing any of us can do to change the policies of the Coastal Commission should cause everyone to be deeply troubled.

    Money is the root of all evil wrote on May 8, 2007 3:21 PM:Sorry Mr. Public Interest Lawyer, what is deeply troubling is the attitude that you and the rest of the money-hungry politicians have toward this planet. Why can't this developer scale down, listen to others, and be a generally decent human being? I'll tell ya why - money and greed! It's as black and white as that.

    Another Public Interest Lawyer wrote on May 8, 2007 4:25 PM:I love the Coastal Commission. They have done wonderful things to keep our beaches open for the public. What kind of public interest attorney are you if you don't believe in advocacy for the public? That's what the name means.

    Beach Babe wrote on May 8, 2007 4:28 PM:This project has too many issues that are real problems. It's way too close to the lagoon and will keep me and my family from ever staying there since most of the rooms will be private residences. I hope these people win and stop this horrible monster. Besides that it's ugly.

    Mike wrote on May 8, 2007 7:55 PM:Yes....lets make sure this area remains a blighted eyesore. Thank you self-serving residents.

    Resident wrote on May 8, 2007 9:13 PM:Is the hotel going to be built on public or private land? If it is privately owned, why don't the neighbors buy it and donate it as parkland? Then they could keep their views and be happy.

    First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.

    Submit Comment[-]

    (optional)
       

    Advertisement

    Videos