|
In This Issue...
|
|
Opinions
|
|
|
Capitola Needs to Move On
|
|
Capitola Needs to Move On
Rispin Hotel a No-Go
By Mike Termini
After the Sept. 29 extension expired, it's time to move on. Yes, it is true friends; I have supported the infamous Rispin project for years. Who, you ask, could blame me?
As a council we were promised the project would produce thousands in transient occupancy tax, rent payments, renovation of a historic building (more on that later), lots of yummy public improvements, and beautiful gardens.
I have sat through countless hours of hearings, debate, construction drawings and presentations, not to mention diatribes from several citizens that the plan was the devil's work! I have watched the project morph from a 35-room to a 22-room to a 24-room with spa to a 26-room hotel with no spa.
I've heard various developers argue that a spa is a money maker, a spa is a money loser, the conservatory is the only way to make it economically feasible, the conservatory costs too much and makes the entire project not economically feasible, the project will kill the butterflies, the project protects the butterflies (where the hell are the butterflies by the way?), the water tower is historically significant, the water tower is a hazard, the buildings are a blight on Mother Earth, the buildings will revitalize the area.
Enough already!
We need to be done. This is too hard. We must move on.
After a decade of changes, the Capitola Council should not sit through one more proposal for one moment longer. There is something too important at hand.
Capitola is at a crossroads. The state is looking for any way possible to reshape California's redevelopment agency law that has brought millions of dollars to local governments. Capitola has limited funds for the moment and may not get millions more into the future.
If Capitola invests its $3 million in redevelopment funds in a scaled-down Rispin Hotel, the city risks the chance of someday not being able to build a library, or developing a park ground or any other amenities that people should get with the tax dollars.
Remember, redevelopment money is supposed to be used to improve blighted properties and to improve property values.
If a hotel isn't going to produce revenues sufficient to its cost, then the blight on the site should be mitigated in some other fashion.
Tear It Down Now!
I am here today to tell you that after everything is said and done we have accomplished one significant goal —we know what will not work on the Rispin property, namely a hotel.
I believe Barry Swenson has been a great development partner. He was willing to take on a project with lots of conditions and a troubled history. He personally got involved and tried to talk the bank into financing the first deal. He has put in time and money, and should be applauded.
Still, can we move forward?
What to do, what to do; here is a start. We can all agree that this site has been a magnet for every high school clandestine party and wacko arsonist for over 30 years.
Let's fix the obvious and most urgent danger first: demolish the building and more importantly take down the wall. That wall has promoted the cozy hidden environment for years. I have it on good authority that the historic nature of the building is not paramount and we can make an honest case for demolition in the interest of public safety.
And while I am ranting here, we do not need a consultant to tell us how to demo a structure! Let me say that again because it is that important.
For what we might pay yet another consultant, we could have the building and wall removed and all the concrete recycled by a qualified demolition contractor.
How in the world will we ever get a price to tear it down without a consultant? Dry your eyes dear bureaucrats, all is not lost, let me tell you a secret… you get these bids for free.
What will we have left? A rural park. No manicured lawns, no swing sets.
Just a natural setting with clear sight lines from the street so the bad guys cannot hide. Contrary to what you may have heard, this will not be a tremendous drain on our public works department or the general fund.
And what else do we have? What else do we have?
About $3 million dollars of redevelopment money still in the bank.
How About a New Library?
There are those who will put forward the notion that we should shop around and find a developer who would like to proceed with this project. Not a good idea.
We have been down this road too long and I have personally spoken to others in the business. Well-respected builders and developers who unanimously agree – the hotel is a bad deal, not enough return on investment.
So let's not use the excuse that we have spent too much time and effort to let it go now. I refer you to the first paragraph of this little rant, water under the bridge, spilt milk.
There are those who will tell you that we are compelled by our exclusive agreement with Ron Beardslee (the hotel's original developer) to stretch this pain out for another 12 months. Not true.
What we are required to do is pay the developer $500,000, but only if we use his plans within the first year.
No plans, just a park and we don't have to pay anything. Get it? Please?
We will lose nothing by making it a rural park right now. Well, nothing except the eyesore we have come to know.
Give the open space to the people and if a better idea comes – like making part of the site home for a new library that is being promoted by many locals – then move ahead.
Until then, as always, your friend and neighbor, lover of our fair city, always at its service, Michael Termini.
[Editor's Note: Mr. Termini is a former city council member who earlier this year volunteered to mediate a revised lease agreement between the city and Barry Swenson Builders. He was not involved in the most recent negotiations. The city started negotiations to build a hotel on the site in the late '90s. Swenson Builders had signed the modified lease agreement with the city on May 26, before a two-alarm fire destroyed most of the originally built mansion on May 28. Mr. Termini is a member of a group trying to find a site for a permanent library in the city. The city is mandated to build a new library by 2018 by its redevelopment agreement with Santa Cruz County. In advance, the city has additional money put away for a library, but not sufficient funds to build a library without other funding.]
|
