Development at El Capitan Canyon Resort Challenged to Protect Scenic Views Along Hwy. 101

[Update: Thu., Apr. 18, 2024, 12:50pm] Following their meeting on Wednesday, the Gaviota Coast Conservancy and El Capitan Canyon Resort’s project developer are jointly requesting to postpone the Santa Barbara County Planning Commission’s hearing on April 24 concerning GCC’s appeal of the El Capitan Canyon Resort Area F1-F2 project. 

According to the GCC, the two groups had a “productive” meeting yesterday where “both parties explored potential solutions to address the appeal.” 

“We are now collaboratively exploring whether we can reach a win-win solution that resolves the appeal issues and benefits both the environment and the campground,” the GCC said. “The public’s concerns regarding Area F remain a priority in these discussions. We will continue open dialogue with all stakeholders as we move forward in the coming weeks.”

As the appeal is already on the Planning Commission’s agenda, the Commissioners will decide on the postponement request at the meeting. The GCC said it is not seeking additional comments at this time.

The hearing is expected to be deferred to July 10, tentatively. 

---

[Original Story] Fearing for the character of Santa Barbara’s rural coastline, the Gaviota Coast Conservancy (GCC) is challenging the completion of a decade-old project at El Capitan Canyon Resort — a glamper’s haven of yurts and cedar cabins — arguing that it would disrupt scenic views of the mountains and ocean from Highway 101. 

The project was conceived more than 10 years ago to provide affordable campsites in Area F of the resort’s campground, situated above the canyon’s llama farm. So far, eight bike-in campsites have already been established. 

In September 2023, the project obtained preliminary design approval from the Central Board of Architectural Review (CBAR) to pave the way for the next phase: relocating 47 campsites (22 “RV Cabins,” 17 yurts, and 8 auto/bike campsites) to Area F and replacing two ranch support buildings with three new campground-support facilities and a “comfort station,” alongside adding new swimming pools and night lighting.

“In my opinion, there are dollar signs here for providing those campsites overlooking the Gaviota Coast, and that therein lies the rub for us,” said GCC Director Doug Kern. “It’s about the money and selling the views.” 

The debate centers on the CBAR design review process and the coastal development permit (CDP) issued for the project in 2011. The GCC argues that the permit expired in 2013 before viewshed protections were implemented in 2018 through the Gaviota Coast Plan. The new owners of the resort, SUN Outdoors Inc., who purchased the property in 2021, are accused of attempting to bypass these protections by reviving the project without obtaining a new permit.

“We think that the project should comply with the Gaviota Coast Plan, which was developed widely throughout the community over many years,” Kern said. He also suggested that certain developments, such as the “RV Cabins,” are “blurring the lines of what a campsite is.”

Hundreds of public comments opposing the project were submitted to the County Planning Commission ahead of its February 28 meeting, which was scheduled to address the GCC’s appeal of the project’s design approval. It was postponed to April due to late letter submissions, including one from the resort’s former owner, Roger Himovitz.

However, the project applicant and Himovitz assert that the resort has vested land use entitlements and valid permits that, under the Coastal Zoning Ordinance, cannot be revoked or expire after construction or the establishment of use. The completion and subsequent use of the project’s bike campground in May 2012 was deemed as the establishment of use, per Planning and Development Director Determination letters, so the permits remain valid. 

While GCC calls the project an “expansion” of the resort, Himovitz labeled that a “misnomer,” emphasizing that no expansion is happening — just the continuance of a preapproved project on land the resort already owns. Planning and Development staff back the project, its validity, and its design, saying in the February 28 staff report to the Planning Commission that the GCC’s appeal issues are “without merit,” especially since the GCC’s issues with the land use entitlements are “outside the scope” of the design approval on appeal. 

“GCC has attempted to hijack the CBAR’s approval of the design of a … fully approved and vested project to try to undo all of the County’s approvals of the last 20 years,” Himovitz wrote in his letter, adding that he “worked collaboratively” with GCC for almost two decades, including during the project’s development. 

“They [past GCC leadership] were definitely part of facilitated discussions and … part of trying to help find solutions, and they raised the same concerns that are being raised today,” Kern noted. He said that GCC wants to maintain a “good relationship” with Himovitz and the resort’s legal counsel and that GCC and the resort’s representatives scheduled a meeting for Wednesday, April 17, to discuss the issue. 

“We want these developments to be set back so they’re not visible. We want to protect the dark skies. We don’t want overdevelopment on the Gaviota Coast, because once you do it, it’s gone forever. It’s ruined.” 

The Planning Commission’s hearing of the appeal was rescheduled for April 24. Public comments will be accepted until April 22.