Agenda packet, second session — Santa Monica City Council, April 26, 2022 (part 4 of 14)

percent increase in the floor area of the premises, or a 5 percent increase in the number of seats in any restaurant, but in no case shall the increase exceed any established seating limitation in the underlying zoning district.” (SMMC, § 9.27.050 E.)
Staff correctly concluded that the Oceana’s request to revise its Conditional Use Permit to allow both food and alcohol service to the general public would constitute an impermissible intensification of use under the zoning code’s provisions for nonconforming uses. The examples provided in the ordinance are not intended to be exhaustive of the possibilities for intensification, and it would seem that allowing the general public to dine at the hotel would have the same types of impacts as a small (5 percent) increase in floor area or seating capacity. Opening the hotel restaurant for non-guests will likely result in an increased number of people traveling to the hotel for the purpose of dining there who now do not have any reason to make this trip.

In fact, the 1996 CUP specifically based its conclusions on granting a license on findings such as, “the license type ensure alcohol service will be limited to hotel guests and their visitors thereby minimizing any potential impact on surrounding uses;” and “will not increase the demand for parking on-site.” (See Exhibit @, pp. 2-3.) The 1996 findings also note that “[t]he proposed use will not adversely effect the welfare of neighborhood residents in a significant manner in that the use will be allow[ed] for a Type 70 restricted license, allowing alcohol service to registered guests of the hotel and their visitors only, thereby not significantly increasing hotel related impacts.” (Id. pp. 3-4.) Staff’s conclusion that the change to allow for outside use is an impermissible intensification is well-supported.

The Applicant’s Proposal
The applicant has proposed a Zone Text Amendment to address the limitation in the nonconforming ordinance, suggesting text for a proposed amendment to section 9.31.040, creating an exemption that appears to be custom-designed for the Oceana. This proposal would create a new section in the code provision that discusses alcoholic beverage permits. The applicant alternatively proposes to add a new section to section 9.27.050 on nonconforming uses that specifies that a legal nonconforming hotel is permitted to change from serving guests to serving the general public without intensifying the use under the nonconforming use provisions of the zoning code. It would appear to be a more appropriate placement in the code to in the section on nonconforming businesses, since this is the reason for the need for the exception and it is better understood in that context.

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 782 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Santa Monica Planning Commission
May 19, 2021

Page 3 ends

conforming is like opening Pandora’s box for all of these properties and should be dismissed outof-hand without much more robust consideration and outreach for affected properties.

Policy Implications
What the applicant’s and the staff’s proposed approach have in common is that they make a hole in the existing nonconforming ordinance. As recently as 2015, the Council determined that existing nonconforming operations should not be intensified. This proposal does exactly that. And while it may be said that in this case, only a small change is permitted, this kind of action serves as a precedent to other nonconforming users who are watching. It is unknown what other types of proposals can be justified by other nonconforming businesses, but it can be said that for certain that this proposal will increase the incursion of the commercial environment into this residentially-zoned neighborhood. This is precisely what the zoning code attempted to avoid.

While the proposal here may be so narrowly crafted as to apply to only a single business, if it is adopted, what is to prevent other businesses to lobby for the enactment of similar exemptions, riddling the non-conforming ordinance with all sorts of loopholes? This is a path that has the potential for significant abuse. The nonconforming ordinance as it exists is simple and clear. The application for the zone text amendment should be denied because there is no need to create an exemption that guts the clear purpose of the ordinance.

Conditional Use Permit
The applicant has proposed two new Conditional Use Permits. Application 20ENT-0237 requests a new CUP for alcohol service to the general public, and Application 21ENT-0090 requests a new CUP for food service to the general public. In order to grant a CUP, the Municipal Code requires the following findings:

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 783 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Santa Monica Planning Commission
May 19, 2021

Page 4 ends

“A. The proposed use is conditionally allowed within the applicable Zoning District and complies with all other applicable provisions of this Ordinance and all other titles of the Municipal Code.

B. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan.

C. The subject parcel is physically suitable for the type of land use being proposed.

D. The proposed use is compatible with any of the land uses presently on the subject parcel if the land uses are to remain.

E. The proposed use is compatible with existing and permissible land uses within the District and the general area in which the proposed use is to be located which may include but not be limited to size, intensity, hours of operation, number of employees, or the nature of the operation.

F. The physical location or placement of the use on the site is compatible with and relates harmoniously to the surrounding neighborhood.

G. Based on environmental review, the proposed project has no potentially significant environmental impacts or any potentially significant environmental impacts have been reduced to less than significant levels because of mitigation measures incorporated in the project or a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been adopted.

H. The proposed use and related project features would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare.” (SMMC, § 9.41.060.) These findings require factual support. There is no record of any environmental review of the proposed zone text amendment or Conditional Use Permit, so there is no basis to conclude whether the intensification of use would have impacts that has not been mitigated. The applicant claims that opening the restaurant to the general public would have a net reduction in traffic because neighbors could walk to the restaurant instead of driving elsewhere to eat. This is pure speculation, not supported by any analysis. Isn’t it equally likely that patrons will drive from elsewhere to this restaurant? The neighboring residents already live within a short walk to downtown where there are numerous restaurants. It seems more likely that new driving demand will be created by opening a new restaurant at the hotel. No discussion is provided of how to accommodate the increased parking demand that this will impose in the area. While the staff report looks at some parking studies from 2006 and 2015 to conclude that the hotel has adequate parking, there is no evidence that traffic generation from similarly sized restaurants was studied in connection with this application.

The Planning Commission should deny the requested entitlements. The applicant knew that it owned a nonconforming hotel. The City has already made the decision that hotels are not a permitted use in this neighborhood, because such businesses have negative external impacts on

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 784 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Santa Monica Planning Commission
May 14, 2021

Page 5 ends

neighbor residents. While the existing hotels are permitted to continue operating, they should not be allowed to intensify their operations when the City has already determined that no other similar businesses should operate in those locations in the future.

Yours very truly,

STRUMWASSER & WOOCHER LLP
Beverly Grossman Palmer
Cc: Mayor Sue Himmelrich ([email protected])
Mayor Pro Tem Kristin McCowan ([email protected]) Councilmember Phil Brock ([email protected])
Councilmember Gleam Davis ([email protected])
Councilmember Oscar de la Torre ([email protected]) Councilmember Kevin McKeown ([email protected])
Councilmember Christine Parra ([email protected])

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 785 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Kevin Kozal
To: Planning Commission Comments; Melissa Zak
Subject: Fw: Planning Commission Hearing May 19th. Agenda Item 9A Text amendment and CUP applications for the Oceana Hotel
Date: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 11:23:57 AM
Attachments: PC 2021.05.14 (CUP and Text Amendment Apps.).final.pdf

EXTERNAL
Good Afternoon,
My apologies, I sent this email to the Planning Commissioners on Monday and forgot to cc both of you.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks,
Kevin
Kevin V. Kozal | Attorney at Law
1250 Sixth Street, Suite 200 | Santa Monica, CA 90401
O: (310) 451-4138 | F: (310) 392-3537 | [email protected]

HARDING LARMORE KUTCHER & KOZAL, LLP
NOTICE OF DISTRIBUTION: This e-mail message contains information that may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive messages for the addressee), you may not use, copy or disclose this message (or any information contained in it) to anyone. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail and delete this message. Nothing in this message should be interpreted as a digital or electronic signature that can be used to authenticate a contract or other legal document.

From: Kevin Kozal
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2021 2:06 PM
To: Elisa Paster <[email protected]>; Shawn Landres <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; Jim Ries <[email protected]>; Nina Fresco <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]> Cc: David Martin <[email protected]>; Jing Yeo <[email protected]>; Roxanne Tanemori <[email protected]>; Rathar Duong <[email protected]>; Heidi von Tongeln <[email protected]>
Subject: Planning Commission Hearing May 19th. Agenda Item 9A Text amendment and CUP applications for the Oceana Hotel
Dear Commissioners,

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 786 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Please see my attached letter in support of Staff’s recommendation for approval of the text amendment and CUP applications for the Oceana Hotel.

Thank you.

Kevin
Kevin V. Kozal | Attorney at Law
1250 Sixth Street, Suite 200 | Santa Monica, CA 90401
O: (310) 451-4138 | [email protected]
NOTICE OF DISTRIBUTION: This e-mail message contains information that may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive messages for the addressee), you may not use, copy or disclose this message (or any information contained in it) to anyone. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail and delete this message. Nothing in this message should be interpreted as a digital or electronic signature that can be used to authenticate a contract or other legal document.

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 787 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text (310) 451-4138
May 17, 2021

VIA E-MAIL
Santa Monica Planning Commission
1685 Main Street, Room 212
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: Hearing Date: May 19, 2021
Agenda Item: 9A (Oceana Hotel)
Application Nos. 20ENT-0090 (CUP for restaurant), 20ENT-0237 (CUP to amend 96CUP-009 for alcohol service), 20ENT-0236 (Text Amendment) Address: 849 Ocean Avenue
Applicant: OCBSM Owner LLC
Our File No. 20122.009
Dear Commissioners:

This letter is submitted on behalf of the ownership of the Oceana Hotel located at 849 Ocean Avenue. The Oceana is seeking an amendment to its existing alcohol CUP, a restaurant CUP, and a related text amendment to allow the Oceana’s existing guestonly restaurant to also serve the general public, with no expansion of size, seating capacity or hours of operation.

The Applicant is in full support of the Staff’s recommendations for approval of these applications and has no objections to any of the Staff Report’s proposed conditions of approval. We urge a favorable recommendation of the text amendment to the City Council, and the Commission’s approval of the CUPs to allow the restaurant’s food and alcohol service to patrons, regardless of whether they are hotel guests.

These applications merit your approval for several reasons:
• The Oceana’s restaurant already exists and will not be expanded. Serving members of the general public does not involve any new construction, enlargement of the existing restaurant facilities or the addition of seating.

Rather, it simply involves allowing neighbors and others from the general public to enjoy the restaurant.
• The Oceana’s restaurant has a proven track record and has not resulted in any adverse neighborhood impacts. As confirmed in the Staff Report, [email protected]

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 788 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Santa Monica Planning Commission
May 17, 2021

Page 2 ends

the Oceana’s restaurant has been serving meals and beverages to hotel guests and their invitees for many years. There have been no neighborhood complaints (most notably no noise complaints) related to the restaurant operations.
• Nearby residents wish to dine at the Oceana’s restaurant and this application responsibly advances the City’s goals of providing neighborhood-serving commercial uses and reducing vehicle trips. The Oceana’s request to open its restaurant to the general public is based in part upon nearby residents’ requests that they be allowed to dine at the restaurant, just as the hotel guests do. This outcome will be beneficial to the neighborhood in that it will provide a dining location that local residents can simply walk to without having to drive elsewhere in the City. This existing location advances the City’s goals of providing neighborhoodserving commercial uses that encourage walking and bike riding instead car trips. This will advance the following policies of the LUCE:
o Encourage uses that meet daily needs such as grocery stores, localserving restaurants and other businesses and activities within walking distance of residences to reduce the frequency and length of vehicle trips. (LUCE Policy LU4.2)
o Encourage commercial uses that provide goods and services to support daily life within walking distance of neighborhoods. (LUCE Policy N3.1).
• Allowing the Oceana’s restaurant to serve the public will not cause adverse neighborhood impacts. Because of the unique configuration of the Oceana’s guest rooms and restaurant, allowing the general public to patronize this restaurant will not adversely impact adjacent residents. o The restaurant does not have a separate entrance/exit to the outside.

The only way to access the restaurant is by entering through the hotel lobby and walking along the interior courtyard near the pool to the restaurant entrance. As such, there will not be any queuing or congregating outside an entrance to the restaurant along Ocean Avenue.
o There are no enclosed interior hallways to the rooms at the Oceana Hotel. Rather the hotel room doors open onto walkways surrounding and facing the pool. The restaurant opens to the pool deck. Thus, any

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 789 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Santa Monica Planning Commission
May 17, 2021

Page 3 ends

noise from the restaurant that would have an impact on nearby residents, would necessarily have a greater impact on hotel guests.

The Oceana Hotel has absolutely no interest in operating its restaurant in a manner that would interfere with the quiet enjoyment of its own hotel guests. In fact, the Oceana Hotel has a vested interest in making sure the restaurant operation is quiet and creates no adverse noise impacts.
o There cannot be any concerns about overconcentration because surrounding properties will not qualify for alcohol CUPs.

We respectfully urge the Commission to adopt Staff’s recommendations to recommend the City Council approve the text amendment and approve the Conditional Use Permits subject to the City Council’s approval of the text amendment.

Respectfully Submitted,
Kevin V. Kozal
cc: David Martin
Jing Yeo
Roxanne Tanemori
Rathar Duong
Heidi von Tongeln
F:\WPDATA\20122\009 (CUP and Text Amendments)\Cor\PC 2021.05.14 (CUP and Text Amendment Apps.).final.docx

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 790 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Doug Frampton
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: 849 Ocean Avenue (Ocean Hotel conditional use permits ) Date: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 11:24:20 AM

EXTERNAL
My name is Doug Frampton, I've shared the alley with the Oceana Hotel for the last 6+ years.

I'm writing to voice my opposition to Oceana's request to open its restaurant and bar to the general public. Since their most recent remodel, they've shown themselves to be inconsiderate neighbors. It started with weeks of construction workers killing time with too loud conversations in the alley before construction could start. Then to the two roll up gates that were installed in the alley, one for deliveries and one for parking, that open and close with a too loud metal cranking noise. Oceana claiming half the parking spaces in front of their building on Ocean Ave for their valets to use when they have their own parking garage seemed selfish in light of our neighborhood's limited amount of permit-only parking. They'd gotten better since March '20 for the most horribly unfortunate of reasons, the COVID lockdown. But even with the limited number of guests they've been receiving over the last few months, the amount and increasingly poor timing of their noise has returned.

Since the Wilmont neighborhood monthly meeting on April 6 in which I first heard about Oceana's expansion plans, I documented no fewer than ten deliveries to their alley facing, rolling delivery gate before 8AM, 4 of those arriving before 7AM, the earliest at 6:20AM.

One of these pre 8AM deliveries was today (5/19). My work has kept me from sleeping at home for ~10 days between 4/6 and now, it would seem safe to assume there were more.

Along with guests coming back to the hotel is the return of the alley facing, rolling parking gate welcoming cars into their underground parking without much regard to time of day. As more guests return to the hotel, that gate will only get busier. And now their request to open the restaurant and bar to the general public? I'm anxious to hear their plan on how and where they're going to legally park the additional amount of cars in the surrounding neighborhood.

I'm also dreading the subsequent increase in the amount of early morning deliveries. The Oceana has stated that they're only asking for the restaurant to stay open until 9PM, but if it's as successful as they're hoping it to be, it'll be only a matter of time before they'll want 10PM or beyond, adding to the nuisance.

Looking at this situation from a broader perspective, if the Oceana continues to win concessions to improve their situation to the detriment of the people living in the surrounding neighborhood, will all of the other boutique hotels around Wilmont start wanting their piece at our expense?
Thank you for your consideration.

Doug Frampton

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 791 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: alexb226
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED CHANGES FOR THE OCEANA HOTEL’S BENEFIT Date: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 11:51:10 AM

EXTERNAL
To Whom It May Concern:

Regarding 20ENT-0236, 20ENT-0237 and 21ENT-0090
I am writing to express my vehement opposition to the Oceana Hotel receiving approval from the city of Santa Monica to allow the general public (as opposed to only their hotel guests) to dine and drink in their restaurant, bar, deck or pool area. I have lived next door to the hotel since before its inception, and they have been inconsiderate neighbors throughout. They routinely break the law by having deliveries in our shared alley (First Court) outside of the permitted hours, frequently at 6am and midnight, for which I have often called the police. The trucks always sit with their engines on.

They slam open and close their back doors, which is incredibly loud and jarring, especially at 6am! The drivers themselves routinely and repetitively yell into the hotel’s garages to announce their arrival. Their two main garages that open onto our shared alley have pneumatic motors which are unreasonably loud. These garages are not only where deliveries enter the building, they are also where their valets park guest’s cars at ALL hours of the day and night. So it would be reasonable to assume the frequency of the piercing noise they make would increase significantly if they were to have more frequent guests to their property.

At the Wilmont neighborhood group’s April meeting, Mr. Yoon, the hotel’s manager, was asked repeatedly to offer any and all benefits to our neighborhood that these changes to the hotel might bring. The only benefit he came up with was having (yet another) restaurant and bar close to home where we could eat or drink. We already have dozens of these establishments. Even hundreds of them, depending upon your perspective.

The hotel currently has 70 rooms, and only 40 parking spaces. Where are they going to park the cars of all the additional guests they expect to have with a restaurant available to the general public? Parking in our neighborhood is already extremely difficult to find for us residents, and they would take away even more of those spots.

The city has already given them ample gifts, with 3 major renovations of the inside and outside of the hotel, and an entire half block of what used to be street parking for the public removed along Ocean Avenue, and given to the hotel for their valet area. The hotel

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 792 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text has routinely broken the law in the past, and now they want our zoning laws changed for them! Furthermore, they are seeking a CUP from the city so that they can upgrade to a 47 liquor license in a residential neighborhood. If the Oceana is allowed
these proposed waivers, permits and/or new laws, more properties in the immediate area and in the greater Santa Monica area will no doubt follow suit. This is a residential area, not a business area, and we residents ought to have a semblance of quiet enjoyment in our homes!
Thank you for your consideration in this matter,
Alexandra Baron
Wilmont neighborhood resident

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 793 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Albin Gielicz
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: Full support for Oceana Hotels CUP request
Date: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 11:55:20 AM

EXTERNAL
Chair Landres and Planning Commissioners,
As a local resident and community leader, I fully support the Oceana Hotel’s application for a text amendment and Conditional Use Permits that will allow non-hotel guests to access its restaurant. Please consider and support Planning Staff’s recommendation and vote in favor of those minor changes.

A neighborhood-friendly restaurant will encourage residents and visitors to have a meal within walking distance of their homes. This is especially important to Santa Monicans like me who love seeing reduced dependence on the car and more biking and walking in my neighborhood.

This hotel has always been and continues to be a great neighbor and asset to Santa Monica. It is well-managed and operates quietly and responsibly. I have no doubt that they will continue this culture as they welcome more guests into their restaurant.

Again, I ask you to vote yes on the Oceana’s proposal and allow it to move forward to the City Council for further consideration.

Thank you for your consideration.

Albin Gielicz
511 Montana

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 794 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Elizabeth Van Denburgh
To: Shawn Landres; Elisa Paster; Jim Ries; Nina Fresco; Leslie Lambert; [email protected]; Mario FondaBonardi; Planning Commission Comments Subject: Planning Commission - 5/19/21 - 849 Ocean Ave - Wilmont Board Opposes intensification of Ocean, a nonconforming use Date: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 11:55:56 AM

EXTERNAL
Chair Landres and Planning Commission Members,
The Board of Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont) opposes the approval of the two CUPs to provide alcohol and meal services to the general public given the intensification of a nonconforming business in the Wilmont neighborhood. As well, the application for the zone text amendment should be denied because there is no need to create an exemption that guts the clear purpose of the ordinance. The applicant's proposal is not an Interim Zoning Exemption based on the pandemic, but a permanent change to a nonconforming business in the Wilmont neighborhood. The intensification of Oceana in a residential neighborhood surrounded by multifamily housing and on an alley with multifamily housing will impact this neighborhood forever. There is no doubt that the Oceana which Hilton announced in January 2021 to be part of its LXR Hotels & Resorts will be marketing and intensifying its commercial impact on our neighborhood. This is not about a few neighbors stopping by for coffee, but the intensification of non-hotel guests' use of the facility be it for dining, conferences, functions or other non-hotel guest activities.

The Oceana's 1996 CUP specifically based its conclusions on granting a license on findings such as, "the license type ensures alcohol service will be limited to hotel guests and their visitors thereby minimizing any potential impact on surrounding uses;" and "will not increase the demand for parking on-site." The 996 findings also note that "the proposed use will not adversely effect the welfare of the neighborhood residents in a significant manner in that the use will be allowed for a Type 70 restricted license, allowing alcohol service to registered guests of the hotel and their visitors only, thereby not significantly increasing hotel related impacts."
In 2015, the Council determined that existing nonconforming operations should not be intensified. This proposal does exactly that. The use of a text amendment to change the code is custom-designed for the Oceana; it allows a legal nonconforming hotel to change from serving guests to serving the general public without intensifying the use under the nonconforming use provisions of the zoning code. This zoning change starts making "swiss cheese" or a "hole" in the existing nonconforming ordinance. This kind of action serves as a precedent for other nonconforming users to pursue other types of proposals that expand the commercialism in the neighborhood. This proposal will increase the incursion of the commercial environment into our residentially zoned neighborhood. And this is previously what the zoning code worked to stop.

This proposal may be so narrowly crafted as to apply to only a single business, if it is adopted, what is to prevent other businesses to lobby for the enactment of similar exemptions, riddling the non-conforming ordinance with loopholes. The two parking studies noted, 2006 and 2015, focused on the number of cars of hotel visitors, not the number of cars visitors who will be driving to drinks and meals at 849 Ocean Blvd. will be pushing to this destination. The announcement in January 2021, of the Hilton XLR marketing relationship, will put one of the

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 795 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text most powerful hospitality businesses to continue grow business - hotel guests and if this proposal is approved, non-hotel guests into our residential neighborhood.

Willmont members, for the past three membership meetings, have approved the following resolution: "Wilmont supports the halt of commercial invasion and expansion into residential neighborhoods and supports parking standards that allow existing residents to park on the street near their homes." Our residents continue to be surprised by the commercial invasion into our neighborhood including the 24/7 Palihouse at 3rd and Washington. What is next? The Sovereign and Charmont apartment buildings being sold so they can evict hundreds of residents and turn them into hotels? Please support Wilmont and the neighborhood residents and reject the two CUPS and proposed text amendments.

Thank-you
Board of Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont) Chair, Elizabeth Van Denburgh

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 796 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Marc Spilo
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: 9-A Support
Date: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 11:57:01 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Chair Landres and Planning Commissioners,
As a long term resident of a condominium located on Ocean Avenue, I support the Oceana’s application to make their restaurant available to the public.

The Oceana Hotel is a charming and peaceful hotel on the quiet end of Ocean Avenue. The hotel guests are fortunate to have access to the restaurant services, those of us living in the area would also benefit from having a walkable, intimate place to relax and see the lovely hotel, it’s views and enjoy a meal. If approved, the Oceana would be the ideal neighborhood “boutique” stop for those of us out for a walk in Palisades Park or on a bicycle ride on the City’s beautiful new bike path.

I respectfully urge you to arrive at a positive vote on the application and recommend that the City Council grant final approval.

Thank you for your time.

Marc Spilo

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 797 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Valerie Griffin
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: 9-A Restaurant at Oceana hotel
Date: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 12:03:04 PM

EXTERNAL
One of the things I like most about living in Wilmont is being able to walk to neighborhood dining. Opening the restaurant in the Oceana Hotel to include people who are not hotel guests would expand dining opportunities for Wilmont residents without making any other impact on the neighborhood!
It would allow the neighbors who have wanted to dine at that restaurant for years finally enjoy this dining experience in their neighborhood.

This is a unique opportunity to enhance the neighborhood.

Valerie Griffin
Wilmont resident for over 20 years

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 798 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Jim Pickrell
To: [email protected]; Jim Pickrell; Planning Commission Comments Subject: Oceana hotel request to convert residential property to commercial restaurant use Date: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 12:05:01 PM

EXTERNAL
Greetings,
My name is Jim Pickrell. I am at Santa Monica resident, at 927 6th Street, just a few blocks from the location where the Oceana Hotel has proposed to open a restaurant in a residentially zoned piece of property.

In my opinion, they are lucky to be able to operate a hotel in a residential neighborhood.

If Hilton Hotels, or whoever owns this property, wants to have a restaurant in the neighborhood, there are any number of empty storefronts on the 3rd St. Promenade where they would receive no objections at all.

There is no reason the city should feel on the defensive for enforcing residential zoning restrictions. No good reason for changing the zoning has been presented.

Thanks,
Jim Pickrell

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 799 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Edward
To: Shawn Landres; Elisa Paster; Jim Ries; Nina Fresco; Leslie Lambert; [email protected]; Mario FondaBonardi; Planning Commission Comments Subject: Planning Commission - 5/19/21 - 849 Ocean Ave.

Date: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 1:50:20 PM

EXTERNAL
Chair Landres and Planning Commission Members,
I oppose the request by the Oceana Hotel, at 849 Ocean Avenue, that it be allowed to serve alcohol and meals to non-hotel guests.

I acknowledge that Ocean Avenue is unique. But the Oceana Hotel is far north of the commercially zoned area of Ocean Avenue. And it is in an area of the avenue that remains zoned as residential, not commercial. Limitations of the current zoning should remain.

I oppose the request for the reasons outlined in our letter submitted by our Wilmont Board. As a resident of Santa Monica since 1980, I believe our reasoning aligns with the historical and cultural history of Santa Monica as a resident-centric beach town, and with the vision that many of us have held for several decades about what the future of Santa Monica should be.

Respectfully,
Ed Hunsaker
Wilmont Board Member
814 Idaho Avenue
Santa Monica, CA 90403

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 800 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Smartin007
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: 20ENT-0236 ( Text Amendment ) 20ENT-0237 ( Conditional Use Permit to amend existing 96CUP-009 ) 21ENT0090 ( Conditional Use Permit t0 open existing hotel restaurant to the general public ) Date: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 2:10:09 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Planning Commission,
Allowing The Oceana Hotel to open up to the public at large will have a detrimental impact on the surrounding residential community.

It seems like it will just take away from the area and result in more traffic and noise and less parking. I'm a member of the community near 4th and Montana not too far from the hotel and am concerned if free space for local residents is taken up by assorted cars from their valet parking service.

I would imagine they have constraints on how many cars they can fit in their garage so if they do open up to the general public, where is the overflow going to be? Thank you,
Stephen Martin

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 801 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Strumpell Kent
To: Mario Fonda-Bonardi; Nina Fresco; Leslie Lambert; Shawn Landres; Elisa Paster; Ellis Raskin; Jim Ries Cc: David Martin; Planning Commission Comments
Subject: 849 Ocean Ave. item 9A
Date: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 4:58:17 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Planning Commissioners,
I believe the request by the applicant to serve the general public in its restaurant is reasonable and should be considered for the following reasons. Restaurants, cafes, coffee shops, etc can be valuable neighborhood resources accessible by walking, biking and short car trips. Food services within the community, such as the restaurant at Oceana, can make our city more livable by allowing access to daily needs without having to use a car. The more we can create "complete communities" with a decent mix of daily needs close by, the more we can reduce traffic and meet other city goals for greenhouse gas reduction, etc.

Please consider the community benefits that this proposal could create in your discussions tonight.

Thank you,
Kent Strumpell
1211 B Michigan Ave.

Santa Monica

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 802 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Jim Pickrell
To: [email protected]; Jim Pickrell; Planning Commission Comments Subject: Re: Oceana hotel request to convert residential property to commercial restaurant use Date: Thursday, May 20, 2021 5:42:30 PM

EXTERNAL
It is my understanding that this meeting is postponed. I am resubmitting my comments.

Thanks
Jim Pickrell
On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 12:04 PM Jim Pickrell <[email protected]> wrote:

Greetings,
My name is Jim Pickrell. I am at Santa Monica resident, at 927 6th Street, just a few blocks from the location where the Oceana Hotel has proposed to open a restaurant in a residentially zoned piece of property.

In my opinion, they are lucky to be able to operate a hotel in a residential neighborhood.

There is no reason the city should feel on the defensive for enforcing residential zoning restrictions. No good reason for changing the zoning has been presented.

Thanks,
Jim Pickrell

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 803 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Joshua Canter
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: Public Comment - 849 Ocean Avenue
Date: Monday, May 24, 2021 11:06:23 AM

EXTERNAL
Hello,
I am a resident at 832 3rd St and would like to advocate for approval to allow the Oceana Hotel to serve the general public in their restaurant.

As a prime location, this hotel should serve both visitors to our city and locals alike. The benefit to the local community would help offset some of the more troublesome parts of a hotel in the area.

I encourage the Planning Commission to help mediate any concerns, but ultimately move forward with approval.

Thank you,
Josh Canter
832 3rd St
Santa Monica, CA 90403

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 804 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Juan Robles
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: RE: 20ENT-0236, 20ENT-0237, 20ENT-0090 - 849 Ocean Avenue - Oceana Date: Friday, May 28, 2021 12:17:45 PM

EXTERNAL
To the Santa Monica Planning Commission,
As a property owner and resident of less than a block away, I strongly oppose the expansion/change of the current designation of 849 Ocean Avenue. My concern is that such change will potentially change the character of the neighborhood which is meant to be residential. The sought after changes will increase traffic and make the area have a more commercial appeal which will disturb the residential nature of the neighborhood. For the June 9, 2021 5:30 PM meeting the proposal to change of the text from a designated "limited only to hotel guests and their visitors" overreaches the the nature of EXECUTIVE ORDER N-29-20 which is about social distancing. Therefore, again I strongly oppose the expansion/change of the current designation of 849 Ocean Avenue.

Please feel free to contact me:

Juan Robles
917 2nd Street 201
Santa Monica, CA 90403
(972) 740-8976
Thank you!

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 805 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: BRUCE GOLDSMITH
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: Oceana Conditional Use Permit
Date: Thursday, June 3, 2021 11:36:45 AM

EXTERNAL
To whom it may concern:

I live on the same block close to Oceana Hotel (Pacifican 801 Ocean Ave.). I am all in favor of of the hotel offering food and beverage service to the general public. I think it would be beneficial to neighbors to have access to the hotel's bar and restaurant.

Thank you.

Bruce Goldsmith
801 Ocean Ave.

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 806 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Kylie Dodd
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: 20ENT-0236, 20ENT-0237, 20ENT-0090
Date: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 7:10:48 AM

EXTERNAL
I am in full support of the Oceana Hotel receiving the necessary permits to open their restaurant to the public. I live at 850 2nd Street (right behind the hotel). The hotel is a great neighbor and operates a professional establishment. I often walk to Montana Ave or the Fairmont Hotel down the road for dinner - it would be wonderful to be able to support the business that’s right in my backyard.

Thank you for the consideration!
Kylie Dodd
Sent from my iPhone

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 807 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Sean Berman
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: 20ENT-0236, 20ENT-0237, 21ENT-0090
Date: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 7:20:49 AM

EXTERNAL
As a resident who lives within 1 block from the Oceana, I think allowing the Oceana to open their dining services to the public would be a terrific idea, especially in light of the fact that the city planners of Santa Monica have turned Ocean Avenue into a virtual parking lot with their insane new lane redesign that causes traffic to come to a crawl and making it impossible to travel south of Wilshire after 7pm (dinner time). Thus having another option to dine locally and not have to traverse this travesty of city planning gone wrong, Ocean Avenue, would be lovely. It would also be nice to allow the hotel to recover some of their certainly lost revenues they incurred during these unfortunate lockdowns.
-Sean

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 808 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Leslie Brothers
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: non-conforming use at Oceana Hotel
Date: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 12:03:32 PM

EXTERNAL
Hello.

I live on 12th St. and enjoy walks along Ocean Ave. in my neighborhood. The stretch overlooking the ocean is neighborhoodfriendly and walking-friendly at this time.

I oppose the variance Oceana Hotel is asking for to permit alcohol and dining service to non-residents of the hotel. More cars and traffic from outside would have a negative impact on the peacefulness of this stretch of sidewalk and street in Santa Monica.

Sincerely,
Leslie Brothers
937 12th., Santa Monica
(20 year resident of Santa Monica)

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 809 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: [email protected]
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: WE OPPOSE THE OCEANA"S TWO CUP"S AND TEXT AMENDMENT Date: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 2:05:25 PM

EXTERNAL
o: [email protected] by NOON on Wednesday June 9th (this Wednesday)
Subject: Planning Commission Mtg. 6/9/21 - Item 9A - OPPOSE Oceana CUPs and text amendment
Dear Chair Landres and Planning Commissioners,
I am a resident of the Wilmont neighborhood. I oppose approvals of the two CUPs and text amendment requested by the Oceana Hotel at 849 Ocean. I am against the intensification of a non-conforming use in my neighborhood as well as a text amendment that should be denied because there is no need to create an examption that guts the clear purpose of the ordinance. If you approve this variance to the ordinance, where will it stop? Our residents continue to be blindsided by the continuing commercial invasion into our neighborhood including the 24/7 Palihouse at 3rd & Washington, the event space being built at 4th & Montana as well as the ongoing battle against short-term vacation e.g, AirBnB and corporate rentals. What is next? The Sovereign and Charmont apartments buildings being sold so they can evict hundreds of residents and turn them into hotels? The city revenue to be generated from these CUPs will be minimal but the impact on traffic, parking and noise in my neighborhood will not. Please support Wilmont and the neighborhood residents and reject the two CUPs and proposed text amendment.

Sincerely,
Kay Ward
101 Calif. Ave.

Santa Monica

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 810 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Dr Michael Cahn <[email protected]>
Date: June 8, 2021 at 16:15:51 PDT
To: [email protected]
Cc: Wilmont Board <[email protected]>
Subject: Wilmont Opera sings again: The old Not In My Back Yard song revisited Dear Members of the planning commission.

Wilmont encourages residents to sing the old song into your inbox: Not in My Back Yard. This is a song of exclusion, of
entitlement, of purity of land use, of residents against outsiders, it is a song that has acquired a distinctive foul smell these days,
and I hope my friends at the Wilmont Board will adapt their tune to a more inclusive melody soon. The chorus of Protect Our
Neighborhood is now plain poisonous, the old LUCE adage that neighborhood character shall be maintained has revealed its
divisive and exclusionary face. I trust you will hear these pleas for what they are: the last remnants of a "get out of my hood"
attitude, a failure to share, and a deep lack of imagination to appreciate the benefits of development. The stale song of traffic,
parking, keep out does not represent the more welcoming residents, who do not see any variation as a threat to their continued
existence.

I hope these comments help
--
Dr Michael Cahn

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 811 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Kevin Kozal
To: Elisa Paster; Shawn Landres; Mario Fonda-Bonardi; Jim Ries; Nina Fresco; Leslie Lambert; Ellis Raskin Cc: David Martin; Jing Yeo; Roxanne Tanemori; Rathar Duong; Heidi von Tongeln Subject: Oceana Hotel Planning Commission Hearing June 9, 2021 Agenda Item No. 9A Date: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 5:17:20 PM
Attachments: PC 2021.06.08 (environmental review and traffic).pdf

EXTERNAL
Please see our attached letter.

Kevin V. Kozal | Attorney at Law
1250 Sixth Street, Suite 200 | Santa Monica, CA 90401
O: (310) 451-4138 | [email protected]
NOTICE OF DISTRIBUTION: This e-mail message contains information that may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive messages for the addressee), you may not use, copy or disclose this message (or any information contained in it) to anyone. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail and delete this message. Nothing in this message should be interpreted as a digital or electronic signature that can be used to authenticate a contract or other legal document.

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 812 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 813 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 814 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 815 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 816 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Aggi Raeder
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: Planning Commission Mtg. 6/9/21 - Item 9A - OPPOSE Oceana CUPs and text amendment Date: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 6:54:57 PM

EXTERNAL
To: [email protected]
Subject: Planning Commission Mtg. 6/9/21 - Item 9A - OPPOSE Oceana CUPs and text amendment Dear Chair Landres and Planning Commissioners,
I am a resident of the Wilmont neighborhood. I oppose approvals of the two CUPs and text amendment requested by the Oceana Hotel at 849 Ocean. I am against the intensification of a non-conforming use in my neighborhood as well as a text amendment that should be denied because there is no need to create an examption that guts the clear purpose of the ordinance. If you approve this variance to the ordinance, where will it stop? Our residents continue to be blindsided by the continuing commercial invasion into our neighborhood including the 24/7 Palihouse at 3rd & Washington, the event space being built at 4th & Montana as well as the ongoing battle against short-term vacation e.g, AirBnB and corporate rentals.

What is next? The Sovereign and Charmont apartments buildings being sold so they can evict hundreds of residents and turn them into hotels? The city revenue to be generated from these CUPs will be minimal but the impact on traffic, parking and noise in my neighborhood will not. Please support Wilmont and the neighborhood residents and reject the two CUPs and proposed text amendment.

Aggi Raeder

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 817 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Doug Sparr
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: Oceana Restaurant expansion
Date: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 8:52:39 PM
Attachments: IMG_4992.MOV

EXTERNAL
Hello,
My name is Doug Sparr. I live at 850 2nd street, the building that is directly across the alley from the Oceana Hotel. I am writing you to voice my concerns regarding the Oceana's desire to open its restaurant/bar to the public as well as an ongoing noise issue in the alleyway from their electric garage doors.

I have lived in this building since 2007. My unit is on the third floor, on the west side facing the Oceana. During my residency here the Oceana has undergone two major renovations, the most recent being about 2-3 years ago during which they installed two new electric garage doors in the alleyway, one of which, if not both appear to be primarily used for valet parking. The motors on these doors are extremely loud and are a major nuisance, particularly during the evening and overnight hours. I have heard the doors opening and closing at all hours of the night, and they frequently disrupt my sleep. The noise is obtrusive even with the windows closed. Moreover, given that my unit does not have air conditioning, and that I enjoy fresh air, I have my windows open close to year round.

I have attached a video I took some time between 2:00-3:00am as an example of the noise. It is louder in person. The video only captures the door closing after it had already opened to let a car in. It makes the same sound when it opens to let the car in or out so the noise per car is twice as long as seen/heard in the video. Regardless of the outcome of the vote on the restaurant, I, and my neighbors would like the hotel to install quieter doors to mitigate the noise, if not get rid of the electric doors altogether.

My concerns regarding the restaurant are that it will undoubtedly increase the number of cars both in the alleyway, and going in and out of those garage doors. Hotel ownership/management may argue that they expect the majority of public customers to be walk-in. No doubt, some may walk in off the street during the day on the weekends when there are a lot of people in Palisades Park, but undoubtedly a lot of customers will be driving to the restaurant, particularly at night. Except for the parking on Ocean avenue, most of the street parking in the neighborhood is permit parking, hence there is not much street parking for these added customers. Plus, given that the hotel is high end, it will likely attract customers who are more than willing to valet park rather than look for a space and then feed the meter. Consequently, this will increase the number of cars going in and out those garage doors. There is also the possibility that the valet parkers may leave some cars temporarily parked in the alley.

In the zoom meeting last month, the hotel general manager said the restaurant is only permitted to be open until 9:00pm. According to the GM, there is a big pent up

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 818 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text demand for the public to be able to go to the Oceana for drinks and/or meals. An additional concern I have is if the conditional use permit is amended to allow the restaurant open to the public, it will set a precedent for the hotel to seek to amend other conditional uses. That is, if the restaurant is as successful as the hotel hopes, they may at some point seek to extend the hours of use beyond 9:00pm increasing the noise levels when many of us are already retiring for the night.

I have loved living in this neighborhood. It is a fantastic location close to the beautiful beaches and coastline of Santa Monica, and it is very quiet despite its proximity to the promenade, the pier, and the beach. The Oceana has been in an unique position to be able to operate a commercial establishment in a residential neighborhood. We all have been able to co-exist relatively well. Let's keep it that way. There is no need for an increase in commercial activities in this area.

I will reiterate that my primary concern is the noise in the alley vis-a-vis the electric garage doors. At the very least, please make the hotel amend that issue.

Thank you for your consideration.

Doug Sparr

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 819 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Jim Pickrell
To: Planning Commission Comments; Jim Pickrell
Cc: [email protected]; to: betzi richardson; MANJU RAMAN; Smartin007; [email protected]; Alissa Finerman; Laurence Eubank; Alin Wall; Armen Melkonians; Edward; Elizabeth Brooks; Reinhard Kargl Subject: Comments against Oceana request for zoning changes Date: Wednesday, June 9, 2021 7:44:00 AM

EXTERNAL
Greetings,
As a member of the Wilmont Board, I have read the comments of Mike Cahn.

I disagree with him.

Really all he's saying is that he disagrees with us on the importance of parking and traffic and of preserving the residential nature of our residentially zoned neighborhood.

Developers complain of "NIMBY" opposition, but "NIMBY" means a person who cares about quality of life in their neighborhood. I refuse to apologize for this. I care a lot about the quality of life in my neighborhood. That means, I care about parking and I care about traffic, and I want to preserve the residential nature of our residentially zoned neighborhood.

Sometimes businesses will ask for permission to operate in a residential area because there is some massive benefit to the neighborhood, such as a pool, a library or public parking. No such public benefit has been mentioned here.

Please vote against further commercial development/restaurants/bars in our residentially zoned neighborhood. If the owners of the Oceana wish to open a restaurant there are plenty of open storefronts on the Promenade where they can open a restaurant and will have no opposition.

Many thanks,
Jim Pickrell
Wilmont Board
From: Dr Michael Cahn <[email protected]>
Date: June 8, 2021 at 16:15:51 PDT
To: [email protected]
Cc: Wilmont Board <[email protected]>
Subject: Wilmont Opera sings again: The old Not In My Back Yard song revisited Dear Members of the planning commission.

Wilmont encourages residents to sing the old song into your inbox: Not in My Back Yard. This is a song of exclusion, of entitlement, of purity of land use, of residents against outsiders, it is a song that has acquired a distinctive foul smell these days, and I hope my friends at the Wilmont Board will adapt their tune to a more inclusive melody soon. The chorus of Protect Our Neighborhood is now plain poisonous, the old LUCE adage that neighborhood character shall be maintained has revealed its divisive and exclusionary face. I trust you will hear these pleas for what they are: the last remnants of a "get out of my hood" attitude, a failure to share, and a deep lack of imagination to appreciate the benefits of development. The stale song of traffic, parking, keep out does not represent the more welcoming residents, who do not see any variation as a threat to their continued existence.

I hope these comments help
--
Dr Michael Cahn

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 820 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Pari White
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: Planning Commission Mtg. 6/9/21 OPPOSE Oceana CUPS and Text Amendment Date: Wednesday, June 9, 2021 8:42:26 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Chair Landres and Planning Commissioners:

My condo on the street level of Ocean Ave between what the approved, much-expanded Miramar Hotel and the Oceana.

Now the Council proposes to link the new Expanded Miramar to an Expanded Oceana to further encroach on the residential area of Santa Monica. Does Santa Monica take a % tax on all operations of hotels, including dining and meeting rooms? Yes, righ? This is all about money--money for Oceana, money for Hilton, and money for the Council.

Will the City's grasping of every single last dollar--without regard to Santa Monica's residents-- ever end?
The Council is expanding the commercial zone inch by inch, foot by foot. Thus, if you continue to do this there is no justification for restricting residents from a non-conforming use allowing them to unrestricted short-term rental of their condos, right? Why should Oceana/Hilton be able to get a waiver if we can't? I'll even pay a hotel tax--that is what this is all about--the City getting its money.

And no, don't start with the old saw that the money is for us, the residents; the City can't seem to wean itself from further subsidizing the low-wage, low-taxpaying real estate developers like Mr. Dell and Hilton).

So I oppose the approval of the two CUPS and text amendment by the Oceana Hotel at 849 Ocean Ave. There is no justification for intensifying a non-conforming use in my residential neighborhood. We do not need new restaurant goers or meeting sites, which will increase the auto and pedestrian traffic--YET AGAIN--in our residential neighborhood. All f Indeed, as stated above, if this is granted then I will propose that we Ocean Avenue residents be granted a non-conforming use allowing for short-term rentals of any duration for real property between California & Ocean and the Oceana. Or perhaps I should propose to our HOA that our vuilding be sold to a hotel chain? Oceanfront property is extremely valuable today. In fact, perhaps our HOA could propose a new "opportunity zone" from California Ave to Montana. Afterall, why should we residents be short-changed when real estate developers are allowed to expand into our residential neighborhood?

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 821 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text I oppose the two CUPS and proposed text amendments.

Sincerely,
P. White
101 California Avenue, Apt. 102
Santa Monica, CA 90403

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 822 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Elizabeth Brooks
To: Jim Pickrell
Cc: Planning Commission Comments; [email protected]; to: betzi richardson; MANJU RAMAN; Smartin007; [email protected]; Alissa Finerman; Laurence Eubank; Alin Wall; Armen Melkonians; Edward; Reinhard Kargl Subject: Re: Comments against Oceana request for zoning changes Date: Wednesday, June 9, 2021 9:42:30 AM

EXTERNAL
Well-said, Jim. Thank you.

Elizabeth B.

On Jun 9, 2021, at 7:43 AM, Jim Pickrell <[email protected]> wrote:

Greetings,
As a member of the Wilmont Board, I have read the comments of Mike Cahn.

I disagree with him.

Really all he's saying is that he disagrees with us on the importance of parking and traffic and of preserving the residential nature of our residentially zoned neighborhood.

Wilmont encourages residents to sing the old song into your inbox: Not in My Back Yard. This is a song of exclusion, of entitlement, of purity of land use, of residents against outsiders, it is a song that has acquired a distinctive foul smell these days, and I hope my friends at the Wilmont Board will adapt their tune to a more inclusive melody soon. The chorus of Protect Our Neighborhood is now plain poisonous, the old LUCE adage that neighborhood character shall be maintained has revealed its divisive and exclusionary face. I trust you will hear these pleas for what they are: the last remnants of a "get out of my hood" attitude, a failure to share, and a deep lack of imagination to appreciate the benefits of development. The stale song of traffic, parking, keep out does not represent the more welcoming residents, who do not see any variation as a threat to their continued existence.

I hope these comments help
--
Dr Michael Cahn

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 823 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: alexb226
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: Planning Commission Meeting 6/9/21 - Item 9A - OPPOSE Oceana CUPs and Text Amendment Date: Wednesday, June 9, 2021 10:55:43 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Chair Landres and Planning Commissioners,
I am a resident of the Wilmont neighborhood. I oppose approvals of the two CUPs and text amendment requested by the Oceana Hotel at 849 Ocean. I am against the intensification of a non-conforming use in my neighborhood as well as a text amendment that should be denied because there is no need to create an exemption that guts the clear purpose of the ordinance. This is not about a few neighbors stopping by for coffee. It’s about the intensification of non-hotel guests’ use of the facility, be it for drinking, dining, conferences, functions, tailored events, or other non-hotel guest activities which will negatively impact parking, traffic, and noise in our residential neighborhood. It is about the continued commercialism, invasion, and expansion into residential neighborhoods.

If you approve this variance to the ordinance, where will it stop? Our residents continue to be blindsided by the continuing commercial invasion into our neighborhood including the 24/7 Palihouse at 3rd & Washington, the event space being built at 4th & Montana as well as the ongoing battle against short-term vacation e.g., AirBnB and corporate rentals. What is next? The Sovereign and Charmont apartments buildings being sold so they can evict hundreds of residents and turn them into hotels? The city revenue to be generated from these CUPs will be minimal but the impact on traffic, parking and noise in my neighborhood will not. Please support Wilmont and the neighborhood residents and reject the two CUPs and proposed text amendment.

Thank you,
Alexandra Baron
850 2nd Street

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 824 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Doug Frampton
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: Planning Commission Meeting 6/9/21 - Item 9A - OPPOSE Oceana CUPs and Text Amendment Date: Wednesday, June 9, 2021 11:11:31 AM

EXTERNAL
I am a resident of the Wilmont neighborhood. I oppose approvals of the two CUPs and text amendment requested by the Oceana Hotel at 849 Ocean. I am against the intensification of a non-conforming use in my neighborhood as well as a text amendment that should be denied because there is no need to create an exemption that guts the clear purpose of the ordinance.

This is not about a few neighbors stopping by for coffee. It’s about the intensification of nonhotel guests’ use of the facility, be it for drinking, dining, conferences, functions, tailored events, or other non-hotel guest activities which will negatively impact parking, traffic, and noise in our residential neighborhood. It is about the continued commercialism, invasion, and expansion into residential neighborhoods.

Regards,
Doug Frampton
850 2nd Street

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 825 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Elizabeth Van Denburgh
To: Planning Commission Comments; Shawn Landres; Leslie Lambert; [email protected]; Nina Fresco; Jim Ries; Elisa Paster
Cc: David Martin; Jing Yeo
Subject: Planning Commission - 6/9/21 - Item 9A - 849 Ocean Ave. - Wilmont Board Opposes Intensification of Oceana Hotel, a non-conforming use in Wilmont
Date: Wednesday, June 9, 2021 11:47:17 AM
Attachments: image.png

EXTERNAL
June 9, 2021
Chair Landres and Planning Commission Members,
The Board of Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont) opposes the approval of the two CUPs to provide alcohol and meal services to the general public given the intensification of a nonconforming business in the Wilmont neighborhood.

As well, the application for the zone text amendment should be denied because there is no need to create an exemption that guts the clear purpose of the ordinance. The applicant's proposal is not an Interim Zoning Exemption based on the pandemic, but a permanent change to a nonconforming business in the Wilmont neighborhood. The intensification of Oceana in a residential neighborhood surrounded by multifamily housing and on an alley with multifamily housing will impact this neighborhood forever. There is no doubt that the Oceana which Hilton announced in January 2021 to be part of its LXR Hotels & Resorts will be marketing and intensifying its commercial impact on our neighborhood. This is not about a few neighbors stopping by for coffee, but the intensification of non-hotel guests' use of the facility be it for

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 826 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text dining, conferences, functions or other non-hotel guest activities.

The Oceana's 1996 CUP specifically based its conclusions on granting a license on findings such as, "the license type ensures alcohol service will be limited to hotel guests and their visitors thereby minimizing any potential impact on surrounding uses;" and "will not increase the demand for parking on-site." The 996 findings also note that "the proposed use will not adversely effect the welfare of the neighborhood residents in a significant manner in that the use will be allowed for a Type 70 restricted license, allowing alcohol service to registered guests of the hotel and their visitors only, thereby not significantly increasing hotel related impacts." In 2015, the Council determined that existing nonconforming operations should not be intensified. This proposal does exactly that. The use of a text amendment to change the code is custom-designed for the Oceana; it allows a legal nonconforming hotel to change from serving guests to serving the general public without intensifying the use under the nonconforming use provisions of the zoning code. This zoning change starts making "swiss cheese" or a "hole" in the existing nonconforming ordinance.

This kind of action serves as a precedent for other nonconforming users to pursue other types of proposals that expand the commercialism in the neighborhood. This proposal will increase the incursion of the commercial environment into our residentially zoned neighborhood. And this is previously what the zoning code worked to stop.

This proposal may be so narrowly crafted as to apply to only a single business, if it is adopted, what is to prevent other businesses to lobby for the enactment of similar

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 827 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text exemptions, riddling the non-conforming ordinance with loopholes. The two parking studies noted, 2006 and 2015, focused on the number of cars of hotel visitors, not the number of cars visitors who will be driving to drinks and meals at 849 Ocean Blvd. will be pushing to this destination. The lack of operational impact and how it would be mitigated is missing as well. With additional non-hotel guests arriving there will be additional noise, traffic and parking. How will a conference or onsite wedding of 50 people be addressed? These lack of details concern us and provide us no confidence that the arrival of non-hotel guests using the facility will not adversely impact the neighborhood. The announcement in January 2021, of the Hilton XLR marketing relationship, will put one of the most powerful hospitality businesses to continue growing business - hotel guests and if this proposal is approved, non-hotel guests into our residential neighborhood. We have applauded the city’s work in ensuring short-term and corporate rentals do not replace our neighborhoods and residents with tourists. Please support the same policy with respect to the expansion of a non-conforming use in our neighborhood.

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 828 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Thank-you
Board of Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont) Chair, Elizabeth Van Denburgh
2 6.A.c
Packet Pg. 829 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Doug Sparr
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: Objection to Oceana Hotel restaurant expansion Date: Wednesday, June 9, 2021 11:49:04 AM
Attachments: Rebuttal to Oceana Hotel.pdf

EXTERNAL
Hi,
Attached is a letter from a neighbor of mine at 850 2nd Street stating their objections to the proposed change in the conditional use permit at the Oceana Hotel. For privacy reasons they have asked me to submit it on their behalf.

Sincerely,
Doug Sparr

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 830 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text To Whom It May Concern:

Regarding 20ENT-0236, 20ENT-0237 and 21ENT-0090
This letter is intended to express my strong opposition to the applicant’s request for approvals of two Conditional Use Permits to provide alcohol and meal services to the general public for the property offered by the *Oceana Hotel at 849 Ocean Avenue in Santa Monica. The vision set out by the City of Santa Monica and documented on the City Manager’s website reads as follows:
“City Manager's Office leads the team of City departments and staff to achieve the City Council's vision of a thriving community of sustainable wellbeing. Our mission is to foster collaboration and innovation to create a 21st century city that works for everyone.” By permitting this hotel to add the above-mentioned Conditional Use Permits, the Department is not supporting the goals of our mission statement for the city.

I have lived at the building behind the hotel for over 30 years and so have a long-history with it as my neighbor. After completing multiple expensive renovations of the property, records suggest that they planned to hire the well-known chef in 2019, Raphael Lunetta, to run a guestonly hotel restaurant, consistent with their current licensure. Their business plan looks to have changed in response to the pandemic and its toll on hotel bookings, not the need or wish of its neighbors to add yet another restaurant and its potential for expansion.

For more information, please refer to the link below.
https://la.eater.com/2019/3/26/18282705/oceana-santa-monica Furthermore, it is my understanding that the hotel first applied for a limited license back in 1996.

Though records from the Alcohol and Beverage Control (ABC) records only reflect one violation within the past eight years or so, I understand that there have been complaints to the Santa Monica Police Department regarding business practice violations in relation to its operation of the hotel. I have witnessed continued problems with deliveries outside of permitted hours, loud noise from delivery and valet personnel, increased trash and cigarette butts against our building, patrons of the hotel who go in/out of cars late in the evening and early in the mornings (talking loudly, slamming doors), and more. I believe that adding the requested permits will increase the noise even more, decrease the number of parking spaces outside the facility available for homeowners, and increase the number of alcohol-related problems that have already take over Santa Monica. It is my understanding that the SMPD is already overwhelmed; more areas to closely patrol is not what they need at this juncture.

Page One

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 831 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Finally, there are about 41 long-standing hotels and hundreds of restaurants that have suffered greatly from the pandemic and need visitor help to survive. Our support should be to those establishments who have received government funding to support business maintenance, not to the opening of new ones in nonpermitted areas. This will only open the door to other small hotels that will follow the same requests. (*Of note, according to the Santa Monica Finance Department, this property holds a different business name than recorded on the Public Hearing Notice.)
The restriction of the permit for the property at the ABC Type 70 restrictions should remain as is or at minimum put on hold until the Santa Monica City Hall reopens for desk help. Most of the contact numbers, including the one given for this meeting (310) 458-8341, do not work to get a live person; this prevents acquiring needed information and documentation.

Respectfully Submitted anonymously,
I have intentionally not signed this letter and released my name for privacy reasons. I do not have access to the necessary technology and so asked a colleague to send it on my behalf.

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 832 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Page Two

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 833 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Cuppy TheCupGuy
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: Oceana Rezoning
Date: Wednesday, June 9, 2021 1:59:30 PM

EXTERNAL
Hi,
I would like to make an anonymous plea for the rejection of the rezoning of The Oceana hotel to allow public sale of food and alcohol. As a resident of the building directly behind the hotel, parking, littering and noise are already an issue. By allowing a bar and restaurant to open in a residentially zoned areas, filled with families, you jeopardize the ability to live in a quiet area where many residents have lived for decades. The sound of backing up trucks, intoxicated patrons and lack of parking for residents would cause many to reconsider why they moved here in the first place.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 834 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text From: Alin Wall
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: Planning Commission meeting 6/9/21-Item 9A-Oceana Hotel FOR CUP"s Date: Wednesday, June 9, 2021 4:23:06 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Planning CommissionI live in the Wilmont neighborhood and have no problem with allowing the general public to eat and drink in the Oceana’s hotel restaurant. I simply do not see hoards of people flooding our neighborhood to eat in a small hotel restaurant. I actually would love to be able to walk the 8 blocks from my home and have a nice quiet dinner at the Oceana and watch the sunset as we use to do several years ago. Please vote to approve their CUP’s.

Thank you,
Alin Wall, CPA
Of Counsel
Family Office & Business Management Services
[email protected]
11766 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 900 | Los Angeles, CA 90025
(310) 478-4148 ext 5704 main | (310) 745-5704 direct | (310) 709-2857 mobile | (310) 703-1104 fax LinkedIn | armaninollp.com
At Armanino, our purpose is to be the most innovative and entrepreneurial firm that makes a positive impact on the lives of our clients, our people and our communities. Achieving our purpose requires a culture that unleashes the power of diversity and creates an environment in which every member of the Armanino team feels respected, valued for their uniqueness and experiences, connected to their colleagues and the firm, confident to speak up, and comfortable to be themselves. Our differences make us stronger, smarter and more innovative. All are welcome at Armanino.

CONFIDENTIALITY AND PRIVACY NOTICE:

This communication, including attachments, is for the exclusive use of the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, proprietary and/or privileged information. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this by mistake, please contact the sender immediately. Check here for information about Armanino's use of certain personal information.

6.A.c
Packet Pg. 835 Attachment: Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text 1 STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL ACTION
City of Santa Monica
City Planning Division

PLANNING COMMISSION

STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL ACTION

PROJECT INFORMATION
CASE NUMBERS: 20ENT-0237 (Conditional Use Permit to amend 96CUP009 for alcohol service) 21ENT-0090 (Conditional Use Permit for restaurant)
LOCATION: 849 Ocean Avenue
APPLICANT: OCBSM Owner LLC
PROPERTY OWNER: OCBSM Owner LLC
CASE PLANNER: Rathar Duong, Associate Planner
REQUEST: The applicant requests approvals of two Conditional Use Permits to provide meal and alcohol services to the
General public offered by the Oceana Hotel’s existing
onsite restaurant. These services are currently limited only to hotel guests and their visitors. Conditional Use Permit 21ENT-0090 seeks to open the Oceana Hotel’s existing
restaurant to the general public within established indoor and outdoor dining facilities on the hotel property.

Conditional Use Permit 20ENT-0237 seeks to amend the
hotel’s existing Conditional Use Permit 96CUP-009
associated with the hotel’s existing ABC Type 70 alcohol license (On-Sale General-Restrictive Service) to provide alcohol service to the general public in conjunction with the hotel’s full-service restaurant meal service pursuant to a an ABC Type 47 License (On-Sale General-Eating Place).

The proposed project requires modifications to land use regulations contained in Article 9 of the Municipal Code.

Therefore, an application to amend the Santa Monica
Municipal Code (SMMC) will also be considered by the
DocuSign Envelope ID: 54A35E1F-109E-498F-8C48-1AA488CB249B

6.A.d
Packet Pg. 836 Attachment: Planning Commission Statement of Official Action, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text 2 Commission for formulation of a recommendation to the City Council. Text Amendment 20ENT-0236 seeks to
amend SMMC Section 9.08 (Multi-Unit Residential
Districts), specifically SMMC Section 9.08.020 – Land Use Regulations to establish a Conditional Use Permit
requirement for an existing legal, non-conforming hotel restaurant located within the R2 and R3 Zoning Districts to request approval to provide meal service to the general public provided that certain criteria are met. The Oceana Hotel is located in the R3 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District.

The approval of Conditional Use Permit 20ENT-0237 to
amend 96CUP-009 for alcohol service and Conditional
Use Permit 21ENT-0090 for opening the onsite hotel
restaurant to the public are contingent on City Council’s approval of Text Amendment 20ENT-0236.

CEQA STATUS: Projects that are denied are not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guideline
Section 15270(a).

PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
June 9, 2021 Determination Date
Approved based on the following findings and subject to the conditions below.

X Denied.

Other:

EFFECTIVE DATES OF
ACTIONS IF NOT APPEALED:

June 24, 2021

EXPIRATION DATE OF ANY
PERMITS GRANTED:
n/a

LENGTH OF ANY POSSIBLE

EXTENSION OF EXPIRATION
DATES*:
n/a
* Any request for an extension of the expiration date must be received in the City Planning Division prior to expiration of this permit.

Each and all of the findings and determinations are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the Project. All summaries of information contained herein or in the findings are based on the substantial evidence in the record. The absence of any particular fact from any such summary is not an indication that a particular finding is not based in part on that fact.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 54A35E1F-109E-498F-8C48-1AA488CB249B

6.A.d
Packet Pg. 837 Attachment: Planning Commission Statement of Official Action, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text 3 FINDINGS:

CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS (20ENT-0237 and 21ENT-0090) A. Upon consideration of the proposal and associated applications in a public hearing and after hearing public testimony, the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Alcohol Outlet findings required by SMMC Sections 9.41.060 and 9.31.040(C) cannot be made in the affirmative by the Planning Commission in support and approval of Conditional Use Permit applications 20ENT-0237 and 21ENT-0090 to amend an existing alcohol CUP (96ENT-009) to permit a Type 47 license in conjunction with opening up the existing onsite hotel restaurant to the general public for meal and alcohol service. 849 Ocean Avenue is located within the R3 (Medium Density Residential) District and the existing Oceana Hotel is a legal nonconforming use. A publicly-accessible restaurant and by extension, the service of alcoholic beverages with meal service are not permitted uses by the Zoning Ordinance within the R3 Zoning District and is specifically prohibited by SMMC Section 9.08.020, Table 9.08.020 – Land Use Regulations without first modifying certain permitted uses in the Zoning Ordinance through a Text Amendment to allow the existing restaurant meal service and associated alcohol service to be provided to the general public. The Planning Commission considered this proposed Text Amendment (20ENT-0236) and, by a vote of 3-3, did not recommend approval.

Further, use-related conditions specifying the following were not included in the staffrecommended conditions of approval for the two CUPs: 1) hours of operation that include a 10:00 PM closing hour on Sundays; 2) valet service that includes bicycle valet; 3) a requirement for multi-year annual review for evaluating compliance with conditions of approval that also includes a clear process for public participation, including an assessment of parking operations and parking demand generated by the restaurant; and 3) a condition addressing the limitation on private events.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 54A35E1F-109E-498F-8C48-1AA488CB249B

6.A.d
Packet Pg. 838 Attachment: Planning Commission Statement of Official Action, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text 4 VOTE for Denial of Conditional Use Permit 20ENT-0237
Ayes: Fonda-Bonardi, Fresco, Lambert, Landres, Raskin, Ries Nays:

Abstain:

Absent: Paster
VOTE for Denial of Conditional Use Permit 21ENT-0090
Ayes: Fonda-Bonardi, Fresco, Lambert, Landres, Raskin, Ries Nays:

Abstain:

Absent: Paster
NOTICE
If this is a final decision not subject to further appeal under the City of Santa Monica Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Ordinance, the time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6, which provision has been adopted by the City pursuant to Municipal Code Section

1.16.010.

I hereby certify that this Statement of Official Action accurately reflects the final determination of the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Monica. _____________________________ _____________________________ Shawn Landres, Chairperson Date
DocuSign Envelope ID: 54A35E1F-109E-498F-8C48-1AA488CB249B 7/21/2021

6.A.d
Packet Pg. 839 Attachment: Planning Commission Statement of Official Action, June 9, 2021 (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text

NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING

BEFORE THE SANTA MONICA CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: 20ENT-0236 (Text Amendment)
21ENT-0138 (Appeal of Conditional Use Permit 20ENT-0237) 21ENT-0139 (Appeal of Conditional Use Permit 21ENT-0090)) 849 Ocean Avenue
APPLICANT: OCBSM Owner LLC
PROPERTY OWNER: OCBSM Owner LLC
A public hearing will be held by the City Council to consider the following request:

Appeals of Planning Commission denials of two Conditional Use Permit applications to provide alcohol and meal services to the general public offered by the Oceana Hotel’s existing onsite restaurant. These services are currently limited only to hotel guests and their visitors. Conditional Use Permit 21ENT-0090 seeks to open the Oceana Hotel’s existing restaurant to the general public within established indoor and outdoor dining facilities on the hotel property. Conditional Use Permit 20ENT-0237 seeks to amend the hotel’s existing Conditional Use Permit 96CUP-009 associated with the hotel’s existing ABC Type 70 alcohol license (On-Sale General-Restrictive Service) to provide alcohol service to the general public in conjunction with the hotel’s full-service restaurant meal service.

The proposed project requires modifications to land use regulations contained in Article 9 of the Municipal Code. Therefore, an application to amend the Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) will also be considered by the City Council for approval and adoption. Text Amendment 20ENT-0236 seeks to amend SMMC Section 9.08 (Multi-Unit Residential Districts) to establish a new Conditional Use Permit requirement for an existing legal, non-conforming hotel restaurant located within the R2 and R3 zoning districts to request approval to provide meal service to the general public provided that certain criteria are met. At the time of the public hearing, the City Council will also be considering compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. The Oceana Hotel is located in the R3 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning District. After holding a public hearing on June 9, 2021, the Planning Commission denied the Condition Use Permit applications and did not make an affirmative recommendation to Council for the proposed Text Amendment.

On February 22, 2022, the City Council voted 7-0 to approve a settlement with the applicant that included holding a de novo public hearing to consider the proposed project anew.

DATE/TIME: TUESDAY, APRIL 26, 2022 AT 6:30 PM
LOCATION: City Council Chamber, Second Floor, Santa Monica City Hall, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, California
HOW TO COMMENT:

The City of Santa Monica encourages public comment. Members of the public unable to attend a meeting but wishing to comment on an item(s) listed on the agenda may submit written comments prior to the public hearing via email to [email protected] or via mail to City Clerk, 1685 Main Street, Room 102, Santa Monica, California 90401. Written public comment submitted before 12:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting will be available for online viewing. All written comments shall be made part of the public record. Please note the agenda item number in the subject line of your written comments.

You may also comment in person at the City Council hearing. Please check the agenda for more detailed instructions on how to comment in person.

Address your comments to: City Clerk
Re: Oceana Hotel Appeal
VIA EMAIL: [email protected]
VIA MAIL: 1685 Main Street, Room 102
Santa Monica, 90401

6.A.e
Packet Pg. 840 Attachment: Public Notification [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) MORE INFORMATION: If you want more information about this project, please contact Rathar Duong at (310) 458-2200 ext. 5114, or by e-mail at [email protected]. For disability-related accommodations, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (310) 458-8211 or (310) 917-6626 TDD at least 72 hours in advance. Every attempt will be made to provide the requested accommodation. All written materials are available in alternate format upon request. Santa Monica Big Blue Bus Lines serve City Hall and the Civic Center area. The Expo Line terminus is located at Colorado Avenue and Fourth Street, and is a short walk to City Hall. Public parking is available in front of City Hall, on Olympic Drive, and in the Civic Center Parking Structure (validation free).

Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65009(b), if this matter is subsequently challenged in Court, the challenge may be limited to only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Santa Monica at, or prior to, the public hearing.

ESPAÑOL : Esto es una noticia de una audiencia pública para revisar applicaciónes proponiendo desarrollo en Santa Monica. Si deseas más información, favor de llamar a Carmen Gutierrez en la División de Planificación al número (310) 458-2275.

6.A.e
Packet Pg. 841 Attachment: Public Notification [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins))

OCEAN AVENUE IDAHO AVENUE

FIRST COURT(PUBLIC ALLEY)
(E) PLANTING
MAIN

ENTRANCE

EXISTING

COURTYARD
(OPEN TO SKY) 150.20' ⅊
⅊
⅊
⅊
⅊
⅊
⅊ ⅊
⅊ ⅊ ⅊

ELEVATOR
(E) PLANTING
EXISTING 3-STORY

BUILDING WITH

BASEMENT PARKING

AREA OF PUBLIC

ACCESS AT ENTRY

LEVEL SHOWN COLORED
(SEE ENTRY LEVEL

FLOOR PLAN)

PUBLIC SIDEWALK

RESTAURANT

DINING ROOM
ELEV

VEHICULAR ACCESS

TO BASEMENT

PARKING
LOBBY

WAITING

PEDESTRIAN

ACCESS TO
HOTEL
STAIRS
ADA
LIFT

PATIO DINING

PATIO DINING
NORTH

OVERALL SITE PLAN
1" = 20'-0"
APRIL 19, 2021
Oceana Beach Club Hotel
849 Ocean Avenue
Santa Monica, California 90403

6.A.f
Packet Pg. 842 Attachment: Project Plans, Rendering, and Neighborhood Context Photographs (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 21
43 44
45 46
47 48 49
49 SEATS

COUNTER

SEATING
120 SQ. FT.

RESTAURANT
ENTRY

EXTERIOR

FACING STREET
PUBLIC

CIRCULATION
FAU

GUESTROOM
103
T
(E) EMPLOYEE
STAIR
(E) CHAIR LIFT
AREA
(E) LOBBY
(E) STORAGE/

LUGGAGE

RESTROOM
DINING
ROOM
T
(E) ELEVATOR
(E) ENTRY
(E) OFFICE
NEW

RESTROOM

WAITING AREA
3 4
5 1 6
2 PATIO DINING

PATIO DINING

FIRE PIT

TREE WELL

TO KITCHEN AND

RESTAURANT STORAGE
BELOW
5 1
2 4
1918 20
22 2423 2625
2827 3029
3231 3433
35 36
38 37
39 40
42 41
3 1 2
11 12
8 7
10 9

SWIMMING
POOL

OUTDOOR

COURTYARD
299 SQ. FT.
130 SQ. FT.
127 SQ. FT.
92 SQ. FT.
1295 SQ. FT.
227 SQ. FT.

RESTAURANT
60 SQ. FT.
892 SQ. FT

NOT ASSOCIATED

WITH RESTAURANT

NOT ASSOCIATED

WITH RESTAURANT
13 14 15
16 17 18
AREA AND SEATING COUNT:

WAITING AREA:

AREA 92 SF
SEATS 5
RESTAURANT DINING RM:

AREA (includes 1,072 SF
60 sf restroom
and 120 sf bar)
SEATS 49
PATIO DINING:

AREA 484 SF
SEATS 18
KITCHEN (ON FLOOR BELOW):

AREA ±1,800 SF
STAFF ONLY (STORAGE):

AREA (299 SF not associated
with Restaurant) NORTH

ENTRY LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
3/16" = 1'-0"
April 19, 2021
Oceana Beach Club Hotel
849 Ocean Avenue
Santa Monica, California 90403

PUBLIC DINING

SEATING
PUBLIC

CIRCULATION
STAFF
ONLY

6.A.f
Packet Pg. 843 Attachment: Project Plans, Rendering, and Neighborhood Context Photographs (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins))

OCEANA HOTEL PHOTOS FOR DISCRETIONARY PERMIT APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT April 19, 2021

6.A.f
Packet Pg. 844 Attachment: Project Plans, Rendering, and Neighborhood Context Photographs (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text

6.A.f
Packet Pg. 845 Attachment: Project Plans, Rendering, and Neighborhood Context Photographs (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text

6.A.f
Packet Pg. 846 Attachment: Project Plans, Rendering, and Neighborhood Context Photographs (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text April 19, 2021

6.A.f
Packet Pg. 847 Attachment: Project Plans, Rendering, and Neighborhood Context Photographs (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Existing 3rd Floor Patio

6.A.f
Packet Pg. 848
Attachment: Project Plans, Rendering, and Neighborhood Context Photographs (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Image of the existing 3rd floor patio

6.A.f
Packet Pg. 849 Attachment: Project Plans, Rendering, and Neighborhood Context Image of existing 3rd floor patio

6.A.f
Packet Pg. 850 Attachment: Project Plans,
BACKGROUND PARKING INFORMATION – OCEANA HOTEL
Excerpts from the 2006 Parking Study by Linscott, Law, and Greenspan • The study forecasted that with 70 guest rooms, the hotel would generate a peak parking demand of 49 parking spaces at 1:00 am when guests are typically in for the evening. This demand is below the 58 existing on-site parking spaces, in addition to 8 vehicles that could be stored in the parking drive aisles through the valet parking operation.
• With 70 rooms and 66 parking spaces (with valet), the parking ratio is 0.94 parking spaces per room; code requires one parking space per room. • The hotel provided data from its computer logs which confirmed that an average of 65% of the occupied rooms utilized the parking garage during the period of the parking study.
• The hotel also performed a guest arrival survey from August 23, 2006 - August 29, 2006 to determine:
1) the percentage of occupied rooms that used the parking garage and, 2) the percentage of guests arriving at the hotel who utilized the parking garage.

Over the 7-day survey period, when the hotel was operating at approximately 94% occupancy, an average of 68% of occupied rooms and arriving guests had vehicles parked in the garage.
• Approximately 1/3 of the guest arrivals each day are dropped off either by a taxi or private vehicle not parked at the hotel.
• Many guests are corporate travelers or families who rent multiple rooms, but share one vehicle.

Excerpts from the 2015 Parking Count by Linscott, Law, and Greenspan • The study surveyed parking spaces within the hotel’s garage from Thursday May 7 through Saturday May 9, 2015 between 6:00 AM and midnight each day. The peak hotel guest parking demand was 29 spaces and the hotel’s occupancy varied between 93% and 100%.
• Avante Agurs, Oceana’s Assistant Manager confirmed that even at 100% occupancy pre-pandemic, no more than 25 cars were parked in the garage at any one time (letter attached).
• Since 2015, ride-hailing services such as Uber and Lyft have increased in popularity and usage. The Oceana Hotel estimates that immediately prior to the pandemic, guest parking in the Hotel was slightly less than in 2015.

6.A.g
Packet Pg. 851 Attachment: Background Parking Information (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60

6.A.g
Packet Pg. 852 Attachment: Background Parking Information (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60

6.A.g
Packet Pg. 853 Attachment: Background Parking Information (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 Attachment “H”
Table 1. Summary of Relevant Zoning Designations and Regulations Timeframe Parcel Zoning Relevant Regulation
1948 – 1990 R4 Ordinance 148 (CCS) and subsequent zoning ordinanceamendments: Hotels are a Permitted Use
1990 – 1995 R3-NW Ordinance 1543 (CCS): Parcel rezoned from R4 to R3 andcreated the North of Wilshire (NW) Overlay
District.

Hotels are not permitted. Existing commercial uses in
certainresidential districts are subject to the municipal code’s termination of nonconforming buildings and
uses provisions (twenty years for the subject
property).
1995 – 2015 R3-NW / R3 Ordinance 1832 (CCS): Allows the retention and the replacementof a long-standing use that does not
cause adverse or significant impacts in the
neighborhood.

Hotels existing as of January 1, 1995 are determined
to be an Allowed Use: a Limited Use only authorized in
accordance with thestandards and limitations set forth
as additional land use regulations in the Multiple
Family Residential Districts. Hotels existing as of
January 1, 1995 are permitted to increase the number
of hotel rooms or rebuild subject to certain
requirements.

Ordinance 2131 (CCS): Eliminated the NW Overlay
District in 2004 and affirmed that hotels existing as of January 1, 1995 are determined to be an Allowed
(Limited) Use.
2006 – 2015 R3 Ordinance 2213 (CCS): Hotels existing as of January 1, 1995 arean Allowed Use (a Limited Use) and may
increase the number ofguest rooms subject to certain
requirements.

July 24, 2015 –
to the Present
R3 Current Zoning Ordinance for Multi-Unit Residential
Districts: Hotels and Motels are not a permitted use in the R2 and R3 Zoning Districts and are permitted after
review and approval of aConditional Use Permit in the
R4 Zoning District.

6.A.h
Packet Pg. 854 Attachment: Table of Relevant Zoning Designations and Regulations (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Bethany Longest <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2021 7:17 AM
To: Sue Himmelrich
Cc: councilmtgitems; David White
Subject: Stop Oceana Hotel

EXTERNAL
Mayor Sue Himmelrich,
I urge you to stop the Oceana Hotel from opening their restaurant and bar to the general public. I live in the same neighborhood as the Oceana Hotel. It’s a peaceful part of town, for the most part. I’m a nurse at Providence St. John’s Health Center who is raising my three year old boy with my husband. I bike to work. We take walks to palisades park daily to walk our dog and play with our son. I would love to be able to stay in this neighborhood and raise my son, who will eventually go to Roosevelt Elementary School.

My fears are this:

1. More congestion on Ocean Ave near the Hotel. We already have to be super careful on the pedestrian crosswalk due to cars not stopping for us.

2. Increase noise in the alley which backs up to our apartment building

3. More trucks making deliveries, possibly violating the 0700 am code.

I don’t know if I’m completely understanding this correctly, but it looks like one CUP is to allow non‐guests to eat and drink at the Oceana hotel restaurant/bar and another CUP is to extend the non‐conforming use zoning for Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition. As a tax‐paying, working member of the community, I urge you to stop these CUP expansions. I really feel strongly that it will negatively impact our quality of life in this neighborhood.

Sincerely,
Bethany Longest, BSN, RN &
Derek Longest
Item 6.A
11/23/21
1 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 855 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Bethany Longest <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2021 7:27 AM
To: Christine Parra; Gleam Davis; Kristin McCowan; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock Cc: Derek Longest; councilmtgitems; David White
Subject: Stop Oceana Hotel

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council Members,
I urge you to stop the Oceana Hotel from opening their restaurant and bar to the general public. I live in the same neighborhood as the Oceana Hotel. It’s a peaceful part of town, for the most part. I’m a nurse at Providence St. John’s Health Center who is raising my three year old boy with my husband. I bike to work. We take walks to palisades park daily to walk our dog and play with our son. I would love to be able to stay in this neighborhood and raise my son, who will eventually go to Roosevelt Elementary School.

My fears are this:

1. More congestion on Ocean Ave near the Hotel. We already have to be super careful on the pedestrian crosswalk due to cars not stopping for us.

2. Increase noise in the alley which backs up to our apartment building

3. More trucks making deliveries, possibly violating the 0700 am code.

Sincerely,
Bethany Longest, BSN, RN &
Derek Longest
Item 6.A
11/23/21
2 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 856 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2021 11:38 AM
To: councilmtgitems; [email protected]
Subject: CITY CLERK RE: Comments concerning 840 Ocean Avenue 20ENT-0236 21ENT-1038 20ENT-0237 21ENT-1039 21ENT-0090

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council.

I reside at 858 Third Street (Third Street & Idaho Avenue) which is two short blocks from the Oceana Hotel. I received notice of the hotel's appeal of previous denials to their Conditional Use Permit for the operation of dining facilities and an on-site bar which would be open to the public from 7:00 AM till 10:00 PM Sunday through Thursday and until 11:00 PM on Friday and Saturday.

This appeal opens up an entirely new set of circumstances for our residential neighborhood based on the added traffic and inconvenience caused by the possible approval of this project should it subsequently be approved at your November 23rd Meeting.

The objections I would like to make are based on the following points:
 The letter from the Oceana Hotel concerning their "surplus parking" in terms of present parking statistics does not take into account the added parking necessary for a restaurant and bar open to the public. Their estimates are based on the current situation of hotel guests only. It also does not consider that the only non-hotel guests are those that current guests invite into the hotel. Therefore, the hotel letter is irrelevant.  A restaurant / bar open to the public generates possible vehicle traffic equal to the number of patron on a particular evening. It is not unheard of for each of the patrons to drive their own vehicle to the hotel in order to dine or drink at the facility. A very high percentage of the patrons of the new restaurant will not be taking public transportation or arriving in an UBER, generating a high volume of vehicles for the Valet Parking Station.
 The hotel's parking estimate for unused parking spaces in based on one vehicle for each room. Generally, the guests in each room do not arrive at the hotel in individual vehicles and usually arrive in a single vehicle. A restaurant and bar generates many more vehicles per hour during business hours. Where are these valet parked vehicles to go during peak hours, especially if extensive advertising, promotion and social media campaigns are enacted to promote dining and entertaining at the hotel?  It is my belief that the Valet Parking attendants will certainly not turn away patrons once the available onsite parking spaces are filled, especially during the evening hours. In my experience, these valets will seek out street parking in the nearby neighborhood, in spite of Resident Only Parking restrictions that are currently in place, perhaps causing residential parking permit holders to be inconvenienced and prevented from parking near their apartments. These are important residents of the neighborhood where the Oceana Hotel wants to go into the restaurant and bar business.  In addition, the potential patrons, and the valet attendants themselves, will view the parking adjacent to the Palisade Bluffs as ideal for their use. Many of the residents use these parking spaces for second vehicles not permitted in their apartment buildings where they are limited to one parking space.  It is a fact that not all of the diners or bar patrons will use the valet service at the hotel. Many potential patrons are not comfortable with random valet attendants driving their vehicles. Assuming that most valets are trustworthy (although many are not), many patrons driving expensive and pristine vehicles do not want to take a chance on injuring their cars, especially since most valet contracts exempt them from damage to the vehicles they park.
 I am fairly certain that the existing downtown restaurants, those that obey the existing zoning laws, will not be pleased with the possible approval of this appeal. In addition, possible approval opens residential neighborhoods to similar requests. What is to say that, if this is approved, Pali House (a few blocks away) Item 6.A
11/23/21
3 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 857 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 2 will not request similar zoning variances? Perhaps Brookside (senior living a blockaway) will see an opportunity to open to diners after their senior residents finish dinner early in the evening?  Oceana Hotel's proposed count of dining room tables, poolside tables and bar seating does not take into account the ten seats in their nearby Conference Room, which adds more possible patrons to the mix.  The Oceana Hotel claims that it has been a good neighbor for many years. May I remind the City Council that this only happened because they did not operate a full service restaurant and bar during this time.

Therefore the chance for less than neighborly behavior was never a prior consideration.  While I appreciate the hotel's offer of free beverages and appetizers for those living nearby, having lived in this neighborhood for over forty years, I never found the hotel to be welcoming to those living around them. On may occasions I have watched most the hotel staff curtly deny questions concerning directions and other information from those walking near the hotel. Indeed, many were discouraged from even entering the lobby.On one occasion, I was turned away from their lobby when I stopped in to ask about their rates and room availability for one of my foreign clients. This may just have been a member of the hotel staff having a bad day but it is concerning to me nonetheless. Things may have changed but that is my impression of staff and management.

Therefore, I request that the approval of the zoning variances for Oceana Hotel be rejected based on the current zoning ordinances for Multi-Unit Residential Districts in R2 and R3 Zoning Districts and, in addition, the absence of planning for the above restaurant and bar problems pointed out. The neighborhood residents do not generally benefit from another restaurant and bar nearby, especially with so many established restaurants and bars exist a few short blocks from their homes (North of Montana) and apartments. The Fairmont Hotel., for example, is only a short walk away, and has been for decades.

The only institution benefiting from this request is the hotel itself without much concern for their neighbors.

James R. Firth
858 Third Street
Santa Monica, CA 90403
Item 6.A
11/23/21
4 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 858 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Marc Spilo <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2021 12:05 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Oceana Hotel dining

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Himmelrich and Councilmembers,
On May 19, I wrote to the Planning Commission to support the Oceana’s application to make their restaurant available to the public. I still strongly support the project and hope you will grant their appeal on Tuesday night.

The Oceana Hotel is a charming and peaceful hotel on the quiet end of Ocean Avenue. The hotel guests are fortunate to have access to the restaurant services. Those living in the neighborhood would also benefit from having a walkable, intimate place to relax and see the lovely hotel, its views and enjoy a meal. If approved, the Oceana would be the ideal neighborhood “boutique” stop for neighbors out for a walk in Palisades Park or on a bicycle ride on the City’s beautiful new bike path. I respectfully urge you to consider Staff's recommendation and grant the appeal.

Thank you for your time.

Marc Spilo
Item 6.A
11/23/21
5 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 859 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Doug Sparr <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2021 9:04 AM
To: Gleam Davis
Cc: David White; councilmtgitems
Subject: Oceana Hotel's CUPs to Open Restaurant to Public Attachments: garage door at night.MOV; No parking alley signs.jpeg; Delviery truck video.mov

EXTERNAL
Hi Ms. Davis,
My name is Doug Sparr. I am writing you regarding the two Conditional Use Permits to allow the Oceana Hotel to open their indoor and outdoor restaurant to the general public. I live at 850 2nd Street, the apartment building on the corner of 2nd & Idaho, adjacent to the Oceana. My unit is on the westside of the building facing the alley that we share with the Oceana. I have been in this unit for over 14 years.

The hotel is in an unique situation in that it is a commercial establishment operating in a residentially zoned area. I, and some of my neighbors, are opposed to this potential change in the Hotel’s operations. The following are some of the concerns that I personally have. 1) Increase noise in the alley.

There have always been constant noise issues in the alley related to the Oceana. They have gone through two major renovations since I have lived here. The first in 2007 and the second ten+ years later. Sometime after the 2nd renovation they installed two electric garage doors used primarily for valet parking and hotel deliveries. The motors on the doors are very loud and are disruptive both during the day while I work, and more importantly overnight. I have been awoken countless number of times at all hours of the night. I fear that the increased patronage at the restaurant will increase the number of valeted cars going in and out of the garages, particularly at night given they are trying to get the restaurant hours to the public extended until 11:00pm.

I have attached a video showing the door closing in the middle of the night after a car went in it. Note that motor has two cycles each time a car enters or leaves, going up and then closing. This video only captures the second part, so the noise generated is twice as long as you hear in the video.
2) More commercial trucks in the alley.

Expanded restaurant service may lead to increased trucks in the alley and on the streets. Delivery trucks and maintenance trucks park in the alley despite the fact that there are “No parking in the Alley” signs affixed to the hotel’s building as well as freestanding signs on my side of the alley (See attached photo). Delivery trucks frequently arrive and start offloading their deliveries well before 7:00am, which I am told is the allowable start of the workday. (see attached video) They also occasionally make deliveries at night. The expansion of their restaurant operations may lead to Item 6.A
11/23/21
6 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 860 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 2 increased truck deliveries, exacerbating this problem as well as adding congestion to 2nd street, where they sometimes park as well. If you don’t already know, at some point in the last 14 years, the hotel was able to get sole control of the parking on the block of Ocean in front of their hotel that they use strictly for valet parking. I do not understand why their delivery trucks can’t park and unload there. 3) Opening Pandora’s Box.

I am concerned that allowing the hotel to change this conditional use will potentially make it much easier for them to expand their operations even more in the future. One thing I love about my location is despite my close proximity to downtown Santa Monica, the pier, the beach, and the retail area on Montana Avenue, I live in a relatively quiet residential neighborhood. I don’t want it to change. The Oceana is now under the marketing umbrella of Hilton Hotels luxury brand LXR Hotels & Resorts. This deal occurred in early 2021 and no doubt, they will devote sufficient marketing and promotional resources to grow the hotel’s restaurant and lounge business. Some of the other hotels in the area, e.g. The Fairmont, The Huntley and The Shore Hotel have been successful in growing their nighttime bar and restaurant businesses, which brings with it increased cars, congestion and noise. I do not want that for my neighborhood.

Theoretically I would not typically be opposed to a hotel opening their restaurant to the general public. But given the hotel’s location in a residential area, I fear this change will adversely impact the quality of the life of nearby residents.

I am, however, a realist and understand there is considerable support among the council to approve this change. In that event, I urge you to attach strict, enforceable guidelines on the Hotel’s operations in the alley and on 2nd street, i.e. when deliveries can be made, where trucks can park, and to force them to retrofit their garage doors to make them much quieter.

Thank you for your consideration.

Doug Sparr
Item 6.A
11/23/21
7 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 861 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Strumpell Kent <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2021 2:19 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 6-A, Oceana

EXTERNAL
Dear City Councilmembers,
I believe the request by the applicant to serve the general public in its restaurant is reasonable, beneficial and should be considered for the following reason.

Restaurants, cafes, coffee shops, etc can be valuable neighborhood resources accessible by walking, biking and short car trips. (I wish there more such places within walking distance of where we live in the Pico Neighborhood). Far from being a burden on the surrounding community, I think this low‐key resaurant at the Oceana could prove to be a local gem, an amenity that nearby residents will come to value highly.

Food services within the community can make our city more livable by allowing access to daily needs without having to use a car. The more we can create "complete communities" with a decent mix of essential services close by, the more we can reduce traffic and meet other city goals for livability, greenhouse gas reduction, etc. Please consider these community benefits when you discuss the applicant's appeal and Staff's well‐reasoned recommendation to grant it.

Thank you,
Kent Strumpell
1211 B Michigan Ave.

Santa Monica
Item 6.A
11/23/21
8 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 862 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) November 19, 2021
Santa Monica Mayor and City Council
Item 6-A - Oceana Hotel Restaurant
Please accept this letter as my continued support of Staff’s recommendation regarding the Oceana Hotel’s appeal initially sent to Planning Commission last May.

My comments below remain rooted in a strong commitment to local, walkable and bikeable businesses in our neighborhoods, and are based on my own experience and those of others who advocate for a growing pedestrian and bicycle street culture.

I reside in mid city. For many years our neighborhood enjoyed eating at Le Petit Cafe, a small-scale, low-impact brasserie on Colorado Avenue operated by the Bourget family. The restaurant and staff were part of the fabric of our neighborhood. Le Petit Cafe closed a few years back but has recently and happily been resurrected as Le Petit Chez Mimi. The cafe provides a local and beloved alternative to the larger, corporate restaurants in the mid city area that have survived almost exclusively on the patronage of drivers who demand space to park - a valuable resource we’ve learned can be better utilized much more equitably.

I provide this background because I envision the Sandpiper restaurant at the Oceana Hotel as a similar kind of place where people can walk and bike from the Wilshire-Montana and north of Montana Ave neighborhoods — as well as from other parts of the city — to enjoy a meal in a more intimate setting than is offered in Santa Monica’s vibrant, but busier Downtown core or Montana Avenue. Even better, the chef will accommodate the needs of vegans and vegetarians, providing a welcoming and more sustainable menu experience for everyone.

Staff has recommended certain conditions that take needs of people walking and biking into consideration. The Hotel listened and has incorporated these items (I previously encouraged) into their application: incentives extended to pedestrian and bicycle customers and provision of a bike valet for restaurant patrons, for convenience and bicycle security.

Finally, quiet is an unexpected phenomenon that we all came to appreciate during the early days of the pandemic. A small restaurant incorporated in a low-key hotel is an ideal place to relax and actually converse in relaxed, good company. A publicly-available Sandpiper would provide an alternative to the higher volume (albeit exciting) environment easily found elsewhere in establishments downtown and along the boulevards.

Again, I support the Hotel’s proposal. I hope you vote to grant the Oceana Hotel’s appeal.

I appreciate your consideration.

Thank you,
Cynthia Rose
[email protected]
Mid-City Neighborhood
Santa Monica, CA
90404

CYNTHIA ROSE
Item 6.A
11/23/21
9 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 863 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) Item 6.A
11/23/21
10 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 864 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – 1 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2021 5:59 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Sue Himmelrich; [email protected]; Phil Brock; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra
Subject: ITEM 6A 11/23/2021 CITY COUNCIL MEETING

EXTERNAL
To: Mayor Himmelrich and Council Members
From: Kay Ward, 101 Ocean Avenue resident and Wilshire-Montana member Subject: Appeal by Oceana Hotel, a nonconforming use in Wilmont since 1990, of two CUP's and text amendment to allow food and drink to the general public which were denied by Planning Commission--DENY APPEAL
The appeal of the Oceana Hotel should be denied for the following reasons:
--Neighbors and many residents have expressed their concerns to you about the impact that parking, deliveries (usually early and late), noise and traffic will have. The residents of 850 Second Street, the apartment building across the alley, have also outlined that such interference in their lives in addition to staff talking and smoking in the alley and the lack of recourses deprives them of their right to a peaceful existence.
--This is spot zoning, as described by three Planning Commissioners. --Once the damage is done, there is no mitigation or return for the Wilmont neighborhood. --The 1996 CUP specifically based its conclusions on granting a license on findings such as "the license type ensure alcohol service will be limited to hotel guests and their visitors thereby minimizing any potential impact on surrounding uses."
--The issue is the increase in occupancy and turnover of those seats, not just the number of seats. --A reminder that in 2015 the Council determined that existing nonconforming operations should not be intensified. These CUP's and text amendment do exactly that. This 4-5 star hotel will also price out most neighbors.

The Oceana Hotel has exceeded its right as a non-conforming hotel to ask for any intensification in the Wilmont neighborhood and this appeal should be denied.

Thank you.

Kay Ward
Ocean Avenue resident
Item 6.A
11/23/21
11 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 865 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2021 11:05 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Kristin McCowan; Sue Himmelrich; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; David Martin
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: FOSP: Council 11/23/21 item 6-A -- Oceana Hotel appeal -- OPPOSE

EXTERNAL
November 21, 2021
To: Mayor Himmelrich and City Council members
From: Board of Directors, Friends of Sunset Park
RE: 11/23/21 agenda item 6-A – Oceana Hotel appeal – OPPOSE Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section

9.08.020; and Appeals of Planning Commission's Denial of Two Conditional Use Permits to Allow Meal and Alcohol Service to the General Public at the Oceana Hotel’s Existing Restaurant

The FOSP Board supports the Wilshire-Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont) in a) - opposing the proposed text amendment to the Municipal Code, and b) - opposing the appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial of Conditional Use Permits in order to intensify a nonconforming commercial use in a residential neighborhood. 1) In 1957, the Oceana was built as an apartment building.

2) In 1958, it became a hotel, which was allowed because it was zoned R4. 3) In 1990, the property was rezoned R3, which then made the hotel a “legal nonconforming commercial use” which was required to be discontinued and removed, or altered to conform to R3, within 20 years (i.e., by 2010).
4) In 1995, the Oceana got approval to allow hotels in existence as of 1/1/1995 to remain, but to not allow expansion of such establishments. The text amendment allowed up to 5% increase within an existing building envelope, but the staff report indicated that staff would not recommend for expansion of the hotel, but only allow improvements and repairs to be made.

Item 6.A
11/23/21
12 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 866 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 2 5) In 1996, the Oceana's CUP approval specifically based its conclusions on granting a liquor license on findings such as, "the license type ensures alcohol service will be limited to hotel guests and their visitors, thereby minimizing any potential impact on surrounding uses;" and "will not increase the demand for parking on-site."
6) Sometime after 2005, a restaurant was added to serve hotel guests. Before then, food was only allowed to be delivered to hotel.

7) In 2015, the City Council determined that existing nonconforming operations should not be intensified. 8) In 2021, the Oceana Hotel has been added to Hilton’s LXR Hotels & Resorts marketing, and the owners want to open the bar and restaurants to the general public – a further intensification of a nonconforming commercial use in a residential neighborhood.
“LXR Hotels & Resorts Celebrates U.S. Debut with Oceana Santa Monica” Exclusive retreat known for unparalleled, personalized service and immersive, local experiences to join LXR’s collection of independent, luxury properties.
https://newsroom.hilton.com/lxr/news/lxr-hotels-resorts-opens-oceana-santa-monica

“LXR Hotels & Resorts, Hilton’s collection of independent, luxury properties, today announced its U.S. debut with the addition of the recently redesigned Oceana hotel, an intimate 70-room coastal oasis situated along the coveted beach district of Santa Monica. The property is owned and operated by JRK Property Holdings, Inc.

“Steps from the pristine California coast yet tucked into an exclusive, residential enclave, Oceana provides a retreat for discerning travelers with the elevated comforts of a dream beach home coupled with the uniquely personalized service for which LXR Hotels & Resorts are known. "The resort exudes a glamorous yet sophisticated sensibility and inspires a captivatingly local and uniquely personal experience that engages guests with warm Californian hospitality, aligning with LXR’s core philosophy of providing a bespoke and immersive experience. The intimate property will connect each guest with a curated lens into Santa Monica design, wellness and lifestyle, creating memories that linger long after guests depart….
“Oceana joins the growing collection of more than 10 open or soon-to-be-open LXR properties in the world’s most sought-after destinations….Oceana provides a rare opportunity to experience Santa Monica like a local resident of the coveted beach district. Driving along Ocean Avenue, the first vision of Oceana is the hotel’s stately, ivy-clad facade, quietly at home among the neighborhood’s other beautiful residences….
"Following a nearly $30 million transformation of the former Oceana Beach Club Hotel, the stunning beachside home-away-from-home delivers a rare private residential experience in Santa Monica’s most coveted neighborhood north of Wilshire Boulevard….

Item 6.A
11/23/21
13 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 867 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 3 “Meals are always prepared to guest specifications and can be served in any of the dining venues.

Oceana’s dining experiences include:
 Sandpiper: Oceana’s main restaurant sets the scene for an intimate experience reminiscent of a private beach home with a picturesque seaside backdrop, but with the added comforts of five-star service and elegant cuisine.
 The Veranda: There is no better venue for al fresco dining at Oceana. Here, guests can enjoy full access to Oceana’s breakfast, lunch and dinner menus with the benefit of enjoying your meal poolside.

Whether reclining in James Perse chaise lounges or cozying up by the fire pit, The Veranda is the perfect space to exercise your refined palette while taking advantage of always sunny Santa Monica.  Sunset Terrace: With panoramic views of the Pacific Ocean, the Sunset Terrace is the perfect rooftop lounge location to relax, imbibe and enjoy the majesty of the sun sinking into the horizon. And for sushi lovers, we are excited to announce our exclusive Nobu Pop-Up Experience featuring some of the famed delicacies only Nobu chefs can provide.
 Oceana’s authentic expression of Southern California cuisine also includes rare tequila tasting flights in the spring in partnership with Casamigos.”
This is not about a few nearby neighbors, all living within walking distance, stopping by the Oceana Hotel for coffee.

The proposed CUPs and text amendment are about non-hotel guests using this high-end facility for dining, conferences, and other functions.

As one of the Planning Commissioners noted, before the Commission turned down the owner’s request for the CUPs, this request amounts to spot zoning.

Approval of the appeal and the text amendment could also serve as a precedent for other commercial interests that may want to expand into residential neighborhoods in Santa Monica.

The 2010 LUCE (Land Use & Circulation Element) said on page 2, “The LUCE conserves the City’s neighborhoods.” It continues on page 3, “The community identified the following core values: Preserve Existing Neighborhoods. The highest priority of the community was the preservation of the existing character and scale of Santa Monica’s neighborhoods.”

Again, the FOSP Board supports residents in the Wilmont neighborhood and the Board of the WilshireMontana Neighborhood Coalition in a) - opposing the proposed text amendment to the Municipal Code, and b) - opposing the appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial of Conditional Use Permits in order to intensify a nonconforming commercial use in a residential neighborhood.

Item 6.A
11/23/21
14 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 868 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 4 =
Item 6.A
11/23/21
15 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 869 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) November 22, 2021
Via electronic mail
Santa Monica City Council
City of Santa Monica
1685 Main Street
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Via email to [email protected]
Re: Opposition to November 23 Agenda Item 6-A: “Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section

9.08.020; and Appeals of Planning Commission’s Denial of Two Conditions Use Permits to Allow Meal and Alcohol Service to the General Public at the Oceana Hotel’s Existing Restaurant”
Dear Mayor Himmelrich and the Honorable City Council:

We write on behalf of Elizabeth Van Denburgh, a resident of the Wilmont community who is concerned about the encroachment of commercial enterprises, and in particular hotel uses, into the residentially-zoned neighborhood. The request of the Oceana Hotel is one such example, and should therefore be carefully considered lest it pave the way for other businesses in the area to undertake similar projects that expand previous entitlements. Permitting a zone text amendment for the benefit of this specific property that directly undermines the intent of the Council in adopting the zoning ordinance provisions in 2015 sets the City on a path towards other future deviations from the standards and weakens the provisions of the nonconforming ordinance.

The ordinance proposed by staff allows “an existing hotel use in the R2 or R3 district that includes an onsite restaurant that provides meal service for hotel guests and their visitors . . . shall be required to obtain a Conditional Use Permit to allow the existing onsite restaurant to provide meals service to the general public,” but only if the hotel was established prior to 1995 and the restaurant was operating since July 23, 2015. (See Draft Ordinance Amending Municipal Code Table 9.08.020 to add footnote 10.) This is a classic example of spot zoning:

Item 6.A
11/23/21
16 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 870 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) the exemption is written to apply only to one property in the City, giving it greater freedom than any other nonconforming hotel operation to alter its restaurant operations. Although written as if it is generally applicable, the law applies to class of one, and only one, business, and could never apply to any other given the operational dates included in the ordinance. Such legislation has the appearance of an arbitrary act, particularly given the specificity of the qualifying conditions. The Council should reject this spot-zoning and hold the Oceana Hotel to the same standards as other hotels that are operating in residential zones in the City.

Non-Conforming Hotel Operations
The applicant acknowledges that the Oceana Hotel is a legal nonconforming use. The City’s nonconforming use ordinance is intended to allow for “continued occupancy and maintenance of structures . . . so long as the uses, continued occupancy, and maintenance meet the provisions of this Chapter.” (SMMC, § 9.27.010.) For nonconforming uses, “a nonconforming use of a building or a portion of a building . . . shall neither be expanded into any other portion of the building nor changed except to a conforming use.” (SMMC, § 9.27.050 D.) The code has very specific rules regarding the intensification of nonconforming restaurant uses:
“A nonconforming use shall not be permitted to substantially change in mode or character of operation. A substantial change in mode or character of operation shall include, but is not limited to, addition of uses, a change in operational hours that extends past 11:00 p.m. any night Sunday through Thursday and/or midnight on Friday and/or Saturday or begins before 7:00 a.m., a 5 percent increase in the floor area of the premises, or a 5 percent increase in the number of seats in any restaurant, but in no case shall the increase exceed any established seating limitation in the underlying zoning district.” (SMMC, § 9.27.050 E (emphasis added.).)
Staff correctly concluded that the Oceana’s request to revise its Conditional Use Permit to allow both food and alcohol service to the general public would constitute an impermissible intensification of use under the zoning code’s provisions for nonconforming uses. The examples provided in the ordinance are not intended to be exhaustive of the possibilities for intensification, and it would seem that allowing the general public to dine at the hotel would have the same types of impacts as a small (5 percent) increase in floor area or seating capacity. Opening the hotel restaurant for non-guests will likely result in an increased number of people traveling to the hotel for the purpose of dining there who now do not have any reason to make this trip.

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 871 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) demand for parking on-site.” (See Exhibit A, pp. 2-3.) The 1996 findings also note that “[t]he proposed use will not adversely effect the welfare of neighborhood residents in a significant manner in that the use will be allow[ed] for a Type 70 restricted license, allowing alcohol service to registered guests of the hotel and their visitors only, thereby not significantly increasing hotel related impacts.” (Id. pp. 3-4.) Staff’s conclusion that the change to allow for outside use is an impermissible intensification is well-supported.

The applicant also proposes a more expansive alternative, that “hotels that existed as of January 1, 1995 in residential zones can be listed in Table 9.08.020 as permitted uses.” This change would be inappropriate to make without significant further discussion. The staff report lists several other nonconforming hotels in the City. Re-writing the code to make them again conforming is like opening Pandora’s box for all of these properties and should be dismissed outof-hand without much more robust consideration and outreach for affected properties.

Staff Proposal
The staff report for this item substantially revises the applicant’s proposal, creating a number of operational requirements that relate to the dates that the various uses at the property were rendered non-conforming. Instead of codifying these requirements as an exemption to the intensification provisions in the nonconforming ordinance, it places these requirements in the zoning code’s use table. Like the applicant’s proposal, there is a universe of only one property in the City that meets these requirements. None of these requirements has a specific bearing on the impact of the expanded operations. They simply assure that the operations have been extant at the current level for a number of years. This is a classic example of spot zoning: giving one property a more expansive use than is permitted at other similarly situated properties. This is particularly problematic because the conditions identified for the applicability of this exemption are unrelated to any meaningful zoning-related impacts of the changed use.

Item 6.A
11/23/21
18 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 872 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) June 9, 2021 Planning Commission Hearing Recognizes Spot Zoning Nature of Request At the June 9, 2021 Planning Commission meeting, several Commissioners noted with great concern the spot zoning nature of the text amendment. Commissioner Raskin noted that the zone text amendment was “so narrowly tailored,” and that it appeared to have “no rational basis” why this hotel could open to public dining but other hotels in R2 or R3 zones could not open a restaurant. Commissioner Raskin also noted that it would be difficult to justify the substantial public benefit of opening this non-conforming hotel to public dining. Commissioner FondaBonardi also commented that the proposal appeared to be spot zoning and that the purpose of non-conforming uses was to gradually phase-out non-authorized uses. This use would actually increase the operations of the hotel, in a neighborhood that is impacted by other commercial uses. Commissioner Fresco also found that the zoning ordinance was spot zoning and that any expansion of restaurant use in this area should be done in a more comprehensive manner.

Policy Implications
These proposals make a hole in the existing nonconforming ordinance. As recently as 2015, the Council determined that existing nonconforming operations should not be intensified.

This proposal does exactly that. And while it may be said that in this case, only a small change is permitted, this kind of action serves as a precedent to other nonconforming users who are watching. It is unknown what other types of proposals can be justified by other nonconforming businesses, but it can be said that for certain that this proposal will increase the incursion of the commercial environment into this residentially-zoned neighborhood. This is precisely what the zoning code attempted to avoid.

Item 6.A
11/23/21
19 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 873 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) “A. The proposed use is conditionally allowed within the applicable Zoning District and complies with all other applicable provisions of this Ordinance and all other titles of the Municipal Code.

B. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan.

C. The subject parcel is physically suitable for the type of land use being proposed.

D. The proposed use is compatible with any of the land uses presently on the subject parcel if the land uses are to remain.

F. The physical location or placement of the use on the site is compatible with and relates harmoniously to the surrounding neighborhood.

H. The proposed use and related project features would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare.” (SMMC, §

9.41.060.)
These findings require factual support. There is no record of any environmental review of the proposed zone text amendment or Conditional Use Permit, so there is no basis to conclude whether the intensification of use would have impacts that has not been mitigated. The applicant claims that opening the restaurant to the general public would have a net reduction in traffic because neighbors could walk to the restaurant instead of driving elsewhere to eat. This is pure speculation, not supported by any analysis. Isn’t it equally likely that patrons will drive from elsewhere to this restaurant? The neighboring residents already live within a short walk to downtown where there are numerous restaurants. It seems more likely that new driving demand will be created by opening a new restaurant at the hotel. No discussion is provided of how to accommodate the increased parking demand that this will impose in the area. While the staff report looks at some parking studies from 2006 and 2015 to conclude that the hotel has adequate Item 6.A
11/23/21
20 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 874 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) parking, there is no evidence that traffic generation from similarly sized restaurants was studied in connection with this application.

The Council should deny the requested entitlements. The applicant knew that it owned a nonconforming hotel. The City has already made the decision that hotels are not a permitted use in this neighborhood, because such businesses have negative external impacts on neighbor residents. While the existing hotels are permitted to continue operating, they should not be allowed to intensify their operations when the City has already determined that no other similar businesses should operate in those locations in the future.

Yours very truly,

STRUMWASSER & WOOCHER LLP
Beverly Grossman Palmer
Cc: Mayor Sue Himmelrich ([email protected])
Mayor Pro Tem Kristin McCowan ([email protected]) Councilmember Phil Brock ([email protected])
Councilmember Gleam Davis ([email protected])
Councilmember Oscar de la Torre ([email protected]) Councilmember Lana Negrete ([email protected])
Councilmember Christine Parra ([email protected]) Item 6.A
11/23/21
21 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 875 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins))

EXHIBIT A
Item 6.A
11/23/21
22 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 876 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) Item 6.A
11/23/21
23 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 877 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) �- .,,_ • •
EDECTIVE DATE(Sl OF ACTION(S) IF NOT APPEALED:

August 21, 1996
EXPIRATION DATE(S) OF ANY PERMITS GRANTED:

Fighteeo (J 8� Months Conditional Use Permit (CUP 96-009) LENGTH QF ANY POSSIBLE EXTENSION QF EXPIRATION DATE<.S.):

Any request for an extension of the expiration date m�t be re�ived in the Planning and Zoning Division prior to expiration of this permit.

One six (6) rnonfb extensioo Conditional Use Permit (CUP 96-009)

CONDITJONALUSEPERMIIFJNDINGS

1. The proposed use is one conditionally permitted within the subject district and complies with all of the applicable provisions of the "City of Santa Monica Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Ordinance", in that an alcohol license in conjunction with a hotel is conditionally permitted in the R3-NW district of the Zoning Ordinance.

2. The proposed use would not impair the integrity and character of the district in which it is to. be established or located, in that the R3-NW district permits existing hotels, and alcohol service will be ancillary to the function of the existing hotel establishment

3. The subject parcel is physically suitable for the type of land use being proposed, in that the . ·parcel is a standard lot witl>, no unusual characteristics.

4. The proposed use is compatible with any of the land uses presently on the subject parcel if the present land uses are to remain, in that the issuance of an alcohol license to allow alcohol �ervice to hotel guests and their visitors is compatible with the existing hotel use.

5. The proposed use would be compatible with existing and permissible land uses within the district and the general area in which the proposed use is to be located, in that the zoning of the site conditionally permits the issuance of an alcohol license in conjunction with an existing hotel facility, and that the license type _ensures alcohol service will be limited to hotel guests and their visit�rs thereby minimizing any potential impact on surrounding uses. 2 Item 6.A
11/23/21
24 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 878 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) -� • •

6. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public health and safety, in that the site is located in an urbaniz.ed area adequately served by existing infrastructure.

7. Public access to the proposed use will be adequate, in that parking will be provided in the existing hotel parking lot and that the proposed use will allow alcohol service to registered hof:el guests and their visitors only, which will not increase the demand for parking on-site.

8. The physical location or placement of the use on the site is compatible with and relates harmoniously to the surrounding neighborhood, in that the proposed alcohol license. will be for an allowed hotel in existence prior to January 1, 1995 which is consistent with the R3- NW district zoning which allows hotels in existence before January I, 1995 or their replacement with a new hotel.

9. The proposed use is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan, in that the Land Use Element of the General Plan classifies the land use as High Density Housing which 8:1Jows hotels.

I 0. The proposed use would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare, in that the proposed use would occur at an existing hotel and would not intensify that use.
) · 11. The proposed use conforms precisely to the applicable performance standards contained in Subchapter 9.04.12 of the City of Santa Monica Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning . Ordinance, in that no performance standard pennit is required.

12. The proposed use will not result in an overconcentration of such uses in the immediate vicinity, in that the proposed alcohol license will be for an existing hotel, and in that this type of outlet has not contributed significantly to alcohol related problems in the city.

ALCQHQL OUTLET FINDINGS

1. The proposed use and location are in accordance with good zoning practice, in the public interest, and necessary that substantial justice be done in that the alcohol license will be for a an existing hotel in the R3-NW district

2. The proposed use will not adversely affect the welfare of neighborhood residents in a significant manner in that the use will be allow for a Type 70 restricted license, allowing alcohol service to registered guests of the hotel and their visitors only, thereby not significantly increasing hotel related impacts.

3. The proposed use will not contribute to an undue concentration of alcohol outlets in the area in that a hotel use with alcohol service for hotel guests and their visitors only is not typically· ·3
Item 6.A
11/23/21
25 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 879 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) "'· • •
considered to contribute to objectionable problems associated with alcohol outlets. furthermore, this type of outlet has not contributed significantly to alcohol related problems in the city.

4. The proposed use will not detrimentally affect nearby neighborhoods considering the distance of the alcohol outlet to residential buildings, churches, schools, hospitals, playgrounds, parks, and other existing alcohol outlets in that the conditions for approval, such as the requirement that only registered guests of the hotel and their visitors -may be served alcohol, will minimiz.e the potential affect on the residential uses in the vicinity. s� The proposed use is compatible with existing and potential uses within the general area in that the hotel is in the R3-NW (North of Wilshire Overlay) district, and a hotel with an alcohol license is compatible with permitted uses.

6. Traffic and· parking congestion will not result from the proposed use in that parking for the use is available on-site and the proposed Type 70 alcohol license will not result in increased parking demand.

7. The public health, safety, and general welfare are protected in that conditions of approval to require responsible dispensation of alcohol are included herein.

8. No harm to adjacent properties will result in that the conditions of approval will ensure that the establishment operates as a hotel with ancillary alcohol service.

9. The proposed use is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan in that the Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the area as High Density Housing and the Zoning Ordinance allows for existing hotels within this area.

CONDITIONS QF APPROVAL

1. This approval is for those plans dated April 24, 1996, and amended July 9, 1996, a copy of which shall be �tained in the files of the Planning and Zoning Division. Project development shall be consistent with such plans, except as otherwisespecified in these · conditions of approval.

2. The Plans shall comply with all other provisions of Chapter 1, Article IX of the Municipal Code, (Zoning Ordinance) and all other pertinent ordinances and G�neral Plan policies of the City of Santa Monica.

3. To mitigate solid waste impacts, prior to issuance of a Certificate ·of Occupancy, project Management
owner shall submit a recycling plan to the ·Department of Environmental and Public Works for its approval. Toe recycling plan shall include 1) list of materials such as white paper, computer paper, metal cans, and glass to be recycled; 2) location of recycling 4 Item 6.A
11/23/21
26 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 880 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) Item 6.A
11/23/21
27 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 881 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) Item 6.A
11/23/21
28 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 882 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) Item 6.A
11/23/21
29 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 883 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) Mayor Himmelrich and City Council Members,
The Board of NOMA supports the Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont) in opposing the approval of the two CUPs to provide alcohol and meal services to the general public, which will cause the intensification of this nonconforming business in the Wilmont neighborhood. The application for the zone text amendment should be denied as well; there is no need to create an exemption that guts the clear purpose of the nonconforming ordinance.

The applicant's proposal is not an Interim Zoning Exemption based on the pandemic, but a permanent change to a nonconforming business in the Wilmont neighborhood. The intensification of Oceana in a residential neighborhood surrounded by multifamily housing will impact this neighborhood forever.

There is no doubt that the Oceana, which Hilton announced in January 2021 to be part of its LXR Hotels & Resorts, will be marketing and intensifying its commercial impact on the neighborhood. This is not about a few neighbors stopping by for coffee, but the intensification of non-hotel guests' uses of the facility, be it for dining, conferences, functions or other non-hotel guest activities.

The Oceana's 1996 CUP specifically based its conclusions on granting a license on findings such as, "the license type ensures alcohol service will be limited to hotel guests and their visitors, thereby minimizing any potential impact on surrounding uses;" and "will not increase the demand for parking on-site."
The 1996 findings also note that "the proposed use will not adversely affect the welfare of the neighborhood residents in a significant manner in that the use will be allowed for a Type 70 restricted license, allowing alcohol service to registered guests of the hotel and their visitors only, thereby not significantly increasing hotel related impacts." In 2015, the Council determined that existing nonconforming operations should not be intensified. This proposal does exactly that. The use of a text amendment to change the code is custom designed for the Oceana; it allows a legal nonconforming hotel to change from serving guests to serving the general public, without intensifying the use under the nonconforming use provisions of the zoning code. This zoning change will make "swiss cheese" or a "hole" in the existing nonconforming ordinance.

This kind of action serves as a precedent for other nonconforming users to pursue other types of proposals and thus will expand commercial uses in residentially zoned neighborhoods. This is exactly what the zoning code was designed to stop.

This proposal is so narrowly crafted as to apply to only a single business, the Oceana Hotel; if it is adopted, what is to prevent other businesses from lobbying for the enactment of similar exemptions, riddling the non-conforming ordinance with loopholes. The two parking studies in 2006 and 2015, only focused on the number of cars generated by hotel visitors, not the number of cars from visitors driving to drinks and meals at this property.

Item 6.A
11/23/21
30 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 884 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins))

The announcement in January 2021, of the Hilton LXR marketing relationship will enable one of the world’s most powerful hospitality entities to grow this commercial business – increasing hotel guests and, if this proposal is approved, non-hotel guests into our residential neighborhood.

NOMA applauded the city’s work in ensuring short-term and corporate rentals do not inundate our neighborhoods and residents with tourists. Please support the same policy with respect to the expansion of a non-conforming use in the Wilmont neighborhood.

The NOMA Board asks the Council to reject the two CUPS and proposed text amendments.

Item 6.A
11/23/21
31 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 885 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2021 1:11 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: FW: Shore Hotel
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: MICHAEL DE VILLIERS <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2021 11:35 AM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Shore Hotel

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
Please support Shore Hotel’s plans to bring affordable lodging and a cafe (licensed to serve alcohol) to the Second Street ground floor space of their property. As a 90401 resident, I welcome these amenities and the activation of the streetscape this will bring.

On a tangential note, retail space height should not be regulated. The 14’ minimum makes no sense and may well have contributed to current vacancies downtown. In this case, Shore’s ingenuity should be applauded for trying to turn their sow’s ear into a silk purse.

Thank you
Michael de Villiers
1115 Arizona Avenue
Item 6.A
11/23/21
32 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 886 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Elizabeth Lerer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2021 12:18 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Sue Himmelrich; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Lana Negrete; Kristin McCowan; Gleam Davis
Subject: Item 6.A. REJECT Meal and Alcohol Service to the General Public at the Oceana Hotel’s Existing Restaurant

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Himmelrich and City Council Members,
Residents are counting on you to stop commercial businesses from creeping into our residential neighborhoods.

I support my neighbors in Wilmont and oppose Oceana’s plan to open their restaurant services to anyone other than their hotel guest.

If my neighbors wish to eat and drink nearby, I recommend they patronize the businesses on Montana Avenue.

Please reject Ocean’s plans and prevent a portentous precedent.

Thank you,
Elizabeth Lerer
Resident in NOMA
Item 6.A
11/23/21
33 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 887 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Juan Robles <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2021 3:57 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Please block 849 Ocean Avenue from Becoming a Full Service Restaurant

EXTERNAL
To the Santa Monica City Council,
As a property owner and resident of less than a block away, I strongly oppose the expansion/change of the current designation of 849 Ocean Avenue. My concern is that such change will potentially change the character of the neighborhood which is meant to be residential. This hotel already offers valet service to their patrons and is quite busy. The regulations and restrictions where set in place in order to protect the character of the neighborhood. I strongly oppose any change that alters the residential character of our community. The amendment to sell alcohol and expand service to any person will certainly increase traffic to the business seeking for this change but will also certainly increase added traffic and will alter the residential zoning of out community. Santa Monica City Council Members please block any text amendments that will compromise the appeal of the residential nature of our neighborhood.

Please feel free to contact me:

Juan Robles
917 2nd Street 201
Santa Monica, CA 90403
Item 6.A
11/23/21
34 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 888 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Spedstur <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2021 4:49 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: FW: OPPOSITION TO OCEANA HOTEL -- STOP THE OCEANA HOTEL RESTAURANT AND BAR

EXPANSION

STOP THE OCEANA HOTEL RESTAURANT AND BAR EXPANSION

STOP THE EXPANSION OF THE COMMERCIAL ZONE NORTH OF CALIFORNIA AND INTO

OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD
I have been a resident of the 900 block of Ocean Avenue since 1985.

I write to vehemently object to and oppose the repeated efforts by the Oceana Hotel to open their restaurant and bar to the general public. I write to ask you to deny this new request by the Oceana to open its bar and restaurant to the general public.

The Oceana Hotel owners should be fined for continuing to waste taxpayer dollars with their repeated applications to expand their business and further destroy the residential neighborhood in which they are located.

The Oceana Hotel knew the rules when they opened the hotel. In fact, they have previously violated those rules when a number of years ago they illegally allowed non-guests to use their restaurant and bar.

From the get-go the Oceana Hotel has proven to be terrible neighbors, playing fast and loose with the rules to the detriment of local residents.

Adding insult to injury, the Oceana are THE WORST NEIGHBOR. THE WORST!  When the company which owns the Oceana Hotel purchased the apartment building and applied for permits to convert and construct the hotel, they were required to send out notices about their work to the neighborhood on multiple occasions. Most times notices were never received, or they arrived after the date by which we could object, respond or attend a hearing.

Item 6.A
11/23/21
35 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 889 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 2  Originally the Oceana had the equivalent of three or four spots for valets. Depending on the size of the car, there was one or two public spots immediately north of the valet section and, depending on the size of the car three or four public spots immediately south of the valet section. The public spots referenced above were almost always by their valet parked cars. I know this because I not only witnessed this, but because the valets put a sticker on the window or hanging from the rear-view mirror. Parking on Ocean Avenue is very limited and when no other public spots were available and hotel valets were asked to move their valet car(s) parking on public spots they always refused. They were prohibited from parking guest cars on the public street – but they did it anyway because it was easier than using their garage. When complaints were made to hotel management, they said valets were contractors and they had no control over them. Talk about shirking responsibility and being bad neighbors…Oceana management and owners are the worst neighbors.
 With the Fairmont the Huntley Hotel and other local hotels increasing their nighttime activities, the nighttime noise levels around the neighborhood have skyrocketed – especially after midnight when the hotel bars and clubs close down.
 The Oceana Hotel is a legal nonconforming use. The requests to allow both food and alcohol service to the general public constitutes an impermissible intensification of use under the zoning conde’s provisions for nonconforming uses. This is not a request for a variance but an intensification of a use in Wilmont.
 Valets often speed off with cars of visitors
 Valets often don’t look before leaving from the curb with visitor cars  Valets often double park visitors’ cars
 Valets often leave vehicles daily and overnight parked in valet spots instead of moving them to their parking lot
 When delivering cars to guests, valets often roll through the stop sign at Idaho/Ocean, almost causing accidents. I myself have narrowly avoided being hit by them numerous times.

If the noise and crowding and valet drivers are bad now…what will it be like if the Oceana is granted a permit to serve non-guests in its restaurant and bar? This doesn’t even address the issue of parking in the neighborhood and the dangerous driving by the valets.

When restaurant was first installed it was supposed to be for hotel guests only. They flagrantly violated that and allowed outsiders to use the restaurant. They were caught and told to cease and desist. I don’t know if a fine was issued, but it should have.

Then there is the increased traffic for deliveries, laundry and staff. As of now, early in the morning trucks park in the alley or on Idaho to unload/load food, linens and who knows what else…leaving the trucks idling spewing noise and pollution.

Add to that the staff that goes in the alley on their breaks – smoking cigarettes or weed and talking and laughing loudly among themselves an on their phones.

Its long past due for the city council to stop giving the business community – the Oceana Hotel in this instance —everything they want. What about us that live here? Especially those us on Ocean Avenue where noise is worse, where vendors, musical acts and food truck are now parking or setting up tables north of Washington. Complaints have been made, opposing views have been given as to what is legal without resolution and the devolution of this part of our once great Ocean Avenue continues. Allowing the Oceana to expand their operations would hasten that decline, making living here more of a nightmare then it has become..

Item 6.A
11/23/21
36 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 890 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 3 According to the pink notice we received asking for comment, it says, the Oceana is non-conforming…and that it “requests to provide meal service to the general public provided that certain criterial are met.” I can assure you that if past is prologue, they will ignore that criteria repeatedly…just as they did years ago when, despite their permits, they served non-guests in their restaurant.

Bottom line is – The Oceana Hotel is a bad neighbor and there is no reason to expect that their behavior or the impact on our neighborhood will improve.

We are hoping all members of the City Council will not disappoint us and will take the sides of residents and not business and developers.

Thank you.

Item 6.A
11/23/21
37 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 891 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Carl Hansen <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2021 6:56 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 6-A Support for Oceana Appeal

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Himmelrich and Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of Staff's recommendation to grant the Oceana Hotel's appeal, and allow the hotel to open its restaurant to the public.

I have resided in the Wilshire Montana neighborhood for almost a decade, and am strongly supportive of pedestrian‐ friendly, small‐scale businesses that serve the needs of the community ‐‐ especially pedestrians and cyclists ‐‐ and, just as important, help build relationships between the public and the people who own and operate those establishments, which are essential to the achieving the objective of the complete neighborhoods concept. I regularly use the bike path and walk with friends in Palisades Park, and it would be so great to have a local place to grab a bite or drink here.

Thank you for your consideration,
Carl Hansen
e: [email protected]
c: (760) 613 ‐ 4290
Item 6.A
11/23/21
38 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 892 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Jeremy Stutes <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2021 6:55 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 6-A

EXTERNAL
City Councilmembers,
I participated in the June 9 Planning Commission hearing as an enthusiastic supporter of the Oceana's CUP and text amendment application.

I am submitting this email to express my support of Staff's recommendation. Planning Commission's denial of the Oceana CUP and text amendment applications did not seem proportionate to what was being proposed ‐‐ opening a few tables at its restaurant, as available, to members of the public. I was glad when the hotel submitted an appeal.

In a neighborhood blessed with a safe and beautiful pedestrian experience, it makes sense to permit the Oceana to extend a quiet, intimate dining experience to its neighbors who pass by. Also, the Ocean Avenue bike path practically delivers bicyclists to the Oceana's door. A quick, casual breakfast or lunch at the Oceana would be a great experience in a city that values cycling.

I trust you will consider Staff's recommendation carefully, and vote to grant the hotel's appeal.

Sincerely,
Jeremy Stutes
Item 6.A
11/23/21
39 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 893 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: Albin Gielicz <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2021 6:16 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Sue Himmelrich; [email protected]; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Kristin McCowan
Subject: Item 6-A - Grant the Oceana's appeal

EXTERNAL
Mayor Himmelrich and Councilmembers,
As a local resident and community leader, I have supported the Oceana Hotel’s application for a text amendment and Conditional Use Permits that would allow non-hotel guests to access its restaurant, and expressed that support when the matter was before the Planning Commission. I urge you to consider and support Staff's recommendation to grant the hotel's appeal.

A small, neighborhood‐friendly restaurant will encourage residents and visitors to have a meal within walking distance of their homes. This is especially important to Santa Monicans like me who love seeing reduced dependence on the car and more biking and walking in my neighborhood. This hotel has always been and continues to be a great neighbor and asset to Santa Monica. It is well‐managed and operates quietly and responsibly. I have no doubt that they will continue this culture as they welcome more guests into their restaurant. Again, I ask you to grant the appeal and allow the Oceana to welcome its neighbors.

Thank you for your consideration.

Albin Gielicz
511 Montana
Item 6.A
11/23/21
40 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 894 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Tricia Crane <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2021 8:03 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Christine Parra; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; David White; Clerk Mailbox; Denise Anderson-Warren Subject: City Council Agenda Item 6-A, Nov. 23, 2021 - OPPOSE the approval of Oceana Hotel CUPs and text amendment

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Himmelrich and City Council,
The Board of Northeast Neighbors supports our friends in the Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Association (Wilmont) in their request to the Council (below) to NOT allow the intensification of a commercial venture in a residential neighborhood (Agenda Item 6-A). . ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS
6-
A.

Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section 9.08.020; and Appeals of Planning Commission's Denial of Two Conditional Use Permits to Allow Meal and Alcohol Service to the General Public at the Oceana Hotel’s Existing Restaurant Please protect our friends and neighbors in Wilmont.

We have read and considered the petition that has been submitted to the Council by Chair Elizabeth Van Denburgh and we urge you to consider how this change of use could impact the quality of life of the people who live near the Oceana.

You are their elected officials and they deserve your consideration and protection.

Thank you.

Tricia Crane
Chair, Northeast Neighbors
##
November 16, 2021
RE: Oppose approval of appeal of Oceana Conditional Use Permits and text amendment to intensify a nonconforming use in our residential neighborhood
____________________________________________________
Item 6.A
11/23/21
41 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 895 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 2 Mayor Himmelrich and City Council Members,
The Board of Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont) opposes the approval of the two CUPs to provide alcohol and meal services to the general public given the intensification of a nonconforming business in the Wilmont neighborhood. As well, the application for the zone text amendment should be denied because there is no need to create an exemption that guts the clear purpose of the nonconforming ordinance. The applicant's proposal is not an Interim Zoning Exemption based on the pandemic, but a permanent change to a nonconforming business in the Wilmont neighborhood. The intensification of Oceana in a residential neighborhood surrounded by multifamily housing and on an alley with multifamily housing will impact this neighborhood forever. There is no doubt that the Oceana which Hilton announced in January 2021 to be part of its LXR Hotels & Resorts will be marketing and intensifying its commercial impact on our neighborhood. This is not about a few neighbors stopping by for coffee, but the intensification of nonhotel guests' uses of the facility be it for dining, conferences, functions or other non-hotel guest activities.

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 896 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 3 to serving the general public without intensifying the use under the nonconforming use provisions of the zoning code. This zoning change starts making "swiss cheese" or a "hole" in the existing nonconforming ordinance. This kind of action serves as a precedent for other nonconforming users to pursue other types of proposals that expand the commercialism in the neighborhood. This proposal will increase the incursion of the commercial environment into our residentially zoned neighborhood. And this is previously what the zoning code worked to stop.

This proposal is so narrowly crafted as to apply to only a single business, the Oceana Hotel; if it is adopted, what is to prevent other businesses to lobby for the enactment of similar exemptions, riddling the non-conforming ordinance with loopholes. The two parking studies noted, 2006 and 2015, focused on the number of cars of hotel visitors, not the number of cars visitors who will be driving to drinks and meals at 849 Ocean Blvd. will be pushing to this destination. The announcement in January 2021, of the Hilton XLR marketing relationship, will put one of the most powerful hospitality businesses to continue grow business - hotel guests and if this proposal is approved, non-hotel guests into our residential neighborhood. We have applauded the city’s work in ensuring short-term and corporate rentals do not replace our neighborhoods and residents with tourists. Please support the same policy with respect to the expansion of a non-conforming use in our neighborhood.

Willmont members, for the past three membership meetings, have approved the following resolution:
"Wilmont supports the halt of commercial invasion and expansion into residential neighborhoods and supports parking standards that allow existing residents to park on the street near their homes." Our residents continue to be surprised by the commercial invasion into our neighborhood including the 24/7 Palihouse at 3rd and Washington. What is next? The Sovereign and Charmont apartment buildings being sold so they can evict hundreds of residents and turn them into hotels? Please Item 6.A
11/23/21
43 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 897 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 4 support Wilmont and the neighborhood residents and reject the two CUPS and proposed text amendments.

Thank-you
Board of Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont) Chair, Elizabeth Van Denburgh

Item 6.A
11/23/21
44 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 898 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 5 Vernice Hankins
From: Jordan Sholem <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2021 10:04 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 6-A: please grant appeal

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Himmelrich and Councilmembers,
I reside a block away from the Oceana Hotel. I have supported the hotel's application for Conditional Use Permits and the Text Amendment that would make the hotel restaurant -- a small dining space which is currently available only to hotel guests -- accessible to the public.

I understand that the Planning Commission denied the hotel's application in June, and that you are considering the hotel's appeal of that decision. I urge you to grant the appeal.

The north end of Ocean Avenue would benefit greatly from having a small, quiet neighborhood-friendly restaurant. We are a community of walkers and cyclists, and having a three-meal dining option a few blocks from our homes would be amazing.

The hotel's proposal will have virtually no public-facing impact. The hotel is merely looking to fill existing interior tables so they can run the restaurant efficiently and create bonds with their neighbors and community members.

I appreciate your consideration, and hope that you will vote to grant the appeal.

Many thanks and Happy Thanksgiving,
Jordan Sholem
Jordan Sholem
(310) 721 5678
Item 6.A
11/23/21
45 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 899 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Robert Meepos <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2021 6:28 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Council Item 6-A

EXTERNAL
Item 6-A
Mayor Himmelrich and Council Members:

As a resident of Santa Monica and a fan of neighborhood-serving restaurants, I want to express my support City Staff's recommendation to grant the Oceana Hotel's appeal of the Planning Commission decision.

The Oceana is a low-profile, boutique hotel facing the quiet end of Ocean Avenue. It is the perfect fit for the area. The guests at the hotel are fortunate to have access to the hotel's great little restaurant.

For several years passersby have expressed interest in stopping by and having a meal there. It's unfortunate that at the present time they must be politely turned away in the hotel lobby. To remedy this situation, the hotel applied for the appropriate approvals to allow members of the public to enjoy the food and a wonderful view of Santa Monica Bay.

The Planning Commission's denial was a disappointment to me and my friends, so I was pleased that the Oceana persisted and filed an appeal.

The restaurant could be the quiet, low‐key dining spot that is conspicuously missing from the neighborhood. I hope you consider the simplicity of the hotel's Conditional Use Permit and Text Amendment applications, and I urge you to arrive at a positive vote on the appeal.

Thank you for your time.

Bobby Meepos
Robert Meepos, CPA
Managing Partner
Meepos & Company, CPA's
409 Washington Blvd.

Marina del Rey, CA 90292
B: 310-827-2525 x101
F: 310-827-4958
www.meeposcpa.com
Item 6.A
11/23/21
46 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 900 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Marni Zapakin <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2021 7:37 AM
To: Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Oscar de la Torre; Christine Parra; [email protected]; Phil Brock; Gleam Davis
Cc: David White; councilmtgitems
Subject: Stopping the Oceana Hotel Opening their Restaurant and Bar to the General Public

EXTERNAL
Hello ‐ I'm a resident of 850 2nd Street. My apartment faces the alley that is shared with Oceana Hotel. I urge you to NOT amend Oceana's CUP to open their restaurant to the general public for food/alcohol service.

The hotel's garage already wakes me up as they receive deliveries early AM. If they open the restaurant/bar to the general public, the noise level will be extremely disturbing and not right for a residential area.

Please consider this when voting today.

Thank you,
Marni Zapakin
850 2nd Street Resident
Item 6.A
11/23/21
47 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 901 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: Kaci Courtright <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2021 9:30 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Nov 23rd, Agenda Item #6A for Oceana Hotel

EXTERNAL
I live on 3rd and Montana Ave, and I am strongly in favor of Oceana Hotel extending its use permits so that neighbors of the hotel can eat and drink in its restaurant.

I'd like to bring to attention that R3 zoning permits "community facilities that may be appropriate in a residential environment." Well, this hotel and its restaurant are certainly appropriate and fit all qualifications.

At the present, the nearest restaurant and bar is over a half a mile away. We residents need a place to walk to for a nice meal. We deserve the right to enjoy Oceana's offerings just as much as any visitor of the hotel. I disagree that it would bring undesirable traffic. This area already suffers from added pedestrians due to the sandy walking path and its proximity to the pier, and reckless driving has always been an issue which is a matter to be monitored by the police, not Oceana Hotel, which has a valet.

If older, pre‐existing residents of Santa Monica are encouraging a "no", then I can assure City Council that it would be a mistake to listen to them ‐ young and old, new and long‐time residents can all benefit from this adaptation of use permit. It's people who say no to change that stunt Santa Monica's progress and prevent fellow neighbors from enjoying a nice meal at a nearby facility. Just because it is open to the public doesn't mean that you have to go, it only means that you have the option; and it wouldn't be fair to remove someone else's option.

Let's support local businesses. Let's share a meal together. Please vote "Yes" to approve the opening of this restaurant to local residents.

Thank you.
‐‐
Kaci Courtright
Item 6.A
11/23/21
48 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 902 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) David Rindlaub
[email protected]
November 23rd, 2021

VIA E-MAIL
Santa Monica City Council
1685 Main Street
Santa Monica, Ca 90401
[email protected]
Re: November 23 5:30 PM Agenda Item 6 - 849 Ocean Avenue Dear Councilmembers:

I urge you to not override judgement of planning commission and not approve the proposed ordinance (agenda item referenced above)
Adopting this ordinance would result in the following impacts, incompatible with the current residential and recreational character of the neighborhood. I reside on the opposite side of the same block as the Oceana Hotel on 2nd St.:
- Increased street parking demand, impacting opportunity for recreational use of Palisades Park and the beach. The hotel already permanently occupies what would otherwise be street parking area for valet use.
- Increased demand and cueing of vehicles for valet parking ingress egress with increased blocking of traffic including the bicycle traffic lane. - Increased vehicle traffic by valet service circling block to access the hotel garage using Montana Ave, 2nd St or 1st Court, and Idaho Ave. Each valet use drives around the block either through the residential alley (1st Court) or residential street (2nd St) to access the hotel’s parking garage. - Increased impact of services (deliveries and trash removal) Sincerely,
David Rindlaub
Item 6.A
11/23/21
49 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 903 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Ellis Raskin <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2021 10:21 AM
To: Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Phil Brock; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra
Cc: David White; Joseph Lawrence; Jing Yeo; Rachel Kwok; Heidi von Tongeln; councilmtgitems; Clerk Mailbox
Subject: Agenda Item 6A - Oceana Hotel Appeal

EXTERNAL
Dear Hon. Mayor Himmelrich and Hon. Councilmembers,
Tonight, you are being asked to approve a CEQA exemption for this project (Class 1 Exemption; CEQA Guidelines section 15301). According to the staff report, the project will not cause environmental impacts because "the project would not result in any proposed or future expansion of the restaurant's existing kitchen, dining room, and seating capacity" (staff report at p. 32).

This is incorrect. The whole point of the requested entitlements is to allow more customers to dine at the restaurant, which means that more people will be traveling to the hotel relative to baseline conditions. The impacts of this increased vehicular travel have not been studied.

Accordingly, common sense tells us that the new vehicle trips will have the potential to cause conflicts with LUCE Policies, including (but not limited to) LU2.5 ("Achieve vehicle trip reduction through comprehensive strategies") and T15.1 ("Reduce automobile trips starting or ending in Santa Monica, especially during congested periods, with the goal of keeping peak trips at or below 2009 levels").

At the very least, we have a duty to study these potential impacts so that we can make informed decisions about traffic impacts in our community (and air quality, GHG, and parking impacts). There is no need to rush through this process without completing the due diligence that our community deserves.

Best,
Ellis Raskin
Item 6.A
11/23/21
50 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 904 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Elizabeth Van Denburgh <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2021 10:10 AM
To: Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Lana Negrete; Gleam Davis; councilmtgitems
Cc: David White
Subject: City Council Meeting, 11/23/21, Item 6A -- Appeal by Ocean Hotel, a nonconforming use in Wilmont since 1990 of two CUPs and text amendment to allow food and beverage service to the public which were denied by Planning Commission – DENY APPEAL

EXTERNAL
November 21, 2021
Mayor Himmelrich and Council Members,
The appeal of the Oceana Hotel should be denied for the following reasons:
 This is a classic example of spot zoning as described by three Planning Commissioners. It is a noncormforming 24/7 hotel in a residential R3 zone that is trying to intensify and further commercialize a residential area.  As recently as 2015, the Council determined that existing nonconforming operations should not be intensified. These CUPs and text amendment do exactly that. The staff report focuses on the restaurants staying at the same number of seats but the issue is the increase in occupancy and turnover of those seats. This increase in occupancy and turnover in the restaurant intensifies the commercialism in the neighborhood through more deliveries, more staff, more employee and customer parking in neighborhood (preferred parking only at night on Idaho with no preferred parking on Montana, Ocean (with Oceana taking half the block of Ocean with its valet parking zone) and 2nd Street. and increased use of the garage squeaky gates. The staff report continues to state the impact on the neighborhood will be insignificant with no data, no comparison to similar public restaurants and no admitting this 4‐5 star hotel (room rates from $600 ‐$1,000) will price out most neighbors. Once the damage is done, there is no mitigation or return for the residents of the Wilmont neighborhood,  Let’s remember the 1996 CUP specifically based its conclusions on granting a license on findings such as “the license type ensure alcohol service will be limited to hotel guests and their visitors thereby minimizing any potential impact on surrounding uses” Item 6.A
11/23/21
51 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 905 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 3  Neighbors and many residents have provided their feedback that the intensification of the Oceana Hotel will impact parking, noise and traffic. The residents of 850 2nd Street, the apartment building across the alley have outlined that deliveries start occurring at 6:30 am and late into the night, parking garage gates are noisy during 24/7, staff are talking and smoking in alley and there is no current process/recourse for these issues to be resolved or addressed. How would you like to live across the alley from this? There is currently no city process nor is there a planned process that helps these residents “manage potential impacts to the surrounding neighborhood” outlined in this staff report. Once again, the promise of enforcement of STOAs and CUPs are made but cannot be delivered on by the city. Code enforcement is understaffed, redeployed to help at the pier, is not staffed for nights or weekends and often cannot respond quickly enough when many of the issues occur.
 Finally, this kind of action serves as a precedent to other nonconforming users. If adopted what is to prevent other businesses to lobby for the enactment of similar exemptions, riddling the non‐conforming ordinance with loopholes. The nonconforming ordinance as it exists is simple and clear. The application for the zone text amendment should be denied because there is no need to create an exemption that guts the clear purpose of the ordinance.

The LUCE’s first principle is “Preserve the Neighborhoods. Many ran on supporting and protecting residents’ neighborhoods. The Oceana Hotel has exceeded its right as a non‐conforming hotel to ask for any intensification in the Wilmont neighborhood and this appeal should be denied.

Thank‐you
Board of Directors
Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont)

Item 6.A
11/23/21
52 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 906 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Valerie Griffin <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2021 10:42 AM
To: councilmtgitems; David Martin; Roxanne Tanemori
Subject: City Council 2021-11-23, Item 6-A Oceana

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:

I have been a Wilmont resident for more than 20 years.

One of the things I like most about living in Wilmont is being able to walk to neighborhood dining. Opening the restaurant in the Oceana Hotel to include patrons who are not hotel guests would expand dining opportunities for Wilmont residents without making any other impact on the neighborhood! It would allow the neighbors who have wanted to dine at that restaurant for years to finally enjoy this quiet and casual dining experience close to their homes.

This is a unique opportunity to enhance the neighborhood. Right now, it's especially important to give us new places, like this, to go as we approach a more normal existence.

Please grant the applicant's appeals of the Planning Commission’s denial of the two CUPS and approve the full application as your Staff has recommended.

Thank you.

Valerie Griffin
Item 6.A
11/23/21
53 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 907 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Rosemary Sostarich <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2021 1:28 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 6A City Council Mtg 11/23/21

EXTERNAL
Mayor Himmelrich and Council Members,
I am asking you to deny the appeal of the Oceana Hotel restaurant and bar expansion. Please deny this intensification of a non‐conforming 24/7 hotel in an R3 neighborhood.

I have lived in Santa Monica since the 1970s. I have seen a lot of changes in this city I love. Some of the changes were excellent and some had me wondering what the heck they were thinking. Then there were those decisions made that turned out not in the best interest of the city and the residents. This appeal by the Oceana is one of them.

We have so many restaurants that we lost during the pandemic. Some have come back and others couldn’t do it. We need to support the restaurants that are struggling to survive. Those are the ones we can support. The Oceana is an expensive boutique hotel asking us to support them when they have never been supportive of the neighborhood since they opened.

Please deny their appeal. Thank you.

Rosemary Sostarich
900 Black Ocean Ave.

Item 6.A
11/23/21
54 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 908 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: George Garlock <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2021 4:43 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 6-A 849 Ocean Avenue applicant & property owner OCBSM Owner LLC

EXTERNAL
November 23, 2021
Mayor Himmelrich and City Councilmembers,
As a local resident for the past seventeen years and retired Architect residing at 701 Ocean Avenue in Santa Monica, I respectfully request you grant this applicant's appeal for this very worthy improvement to our community. Keeping in the spirit of Santa Monica to be a walking city not a driving city this restaurant offers neighbors like myself and my wife an alternative to getting in our cars and driving to dinner when such a lovely amenity exists a block away. The small number of local users of this restaurant would have minimal or no measurable impact on the parking at the Oceana Hotel.

In keeping with our city's walkable goals please grant approval of the applicant's appeal.

George F Garlock
701 Ocean Avenue #107
Santa Monic, Ca 90402
Cell: 702 278‐6229
Item 6.A
11/23/21
55 of 55 Item 6.A
11/23/21

6.A.i
Packet Pg. 909 Attachment: Written Comments (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Constance Chesnut <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2022 3:51 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Oceana Hotel Appeal

EXTERNAL

Dear Council members,
Please do not grant the appeal of Oceana Hotel to open the hotel restaurant to the public.

This is a mostly residential area and current zoning is residential. Do not further degrade the residential character of our neighborhood. The hotel is already one of several commercial and non conforming commercial enterprises in the area which should be contained not expanded. If an exemption is granted it will make it easier for others to expand their commercial activities further degrading the neighborhood. .

The very argument used by Oceana is that another hotel on Ocean Ave received permission for a similar exemption, a hotel which is located in a commercially zoned tourist part of downtown Santa Monica and not a neighborhood similar to North of Wilshire residential. That neighborhood and its activities are what we do not want to have in the area of the Oceana.

The argument that it would provide a restaurant in walking distance is also specious. This area does not need another expensive restaurant and would undoubtedly attract more cars, traffic and parking problems in an already parking challenged area.

If this appeal is granted it is only a matter of time before the other non conforming commercial enterprises in this otherwise quiet residential area will also apply for further zoning use exemptions. Do not let this happen.

Thank you,
Constance Chesnut
124 Idaho Ave # 202
Santa Monica, CA 90403
310‐394‐4384
Item 6.A
04/26/22
1 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 910 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: jaime francis <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2022 1:24 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: oceana hotel appeal.

EXTERNAL
you know i find it amazing the way you are giving the oceana hotel such a hard time just to allow the public to use their restaurant and yet any tom, dick or harry with a permit can sell sandwiches, juices and coffee from a food truck across the street on ocean ave and his only rent is the money he puts in the meter. you guys are so unfair and biased against real business that pay taxes, insurance and workers comp etc and you give them hell. !!!
shame on you all!!!
Sent from my iPhone
Item 6.A
04/26/22
2 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 911 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: David White
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2022 6:03 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: FW: Oceana Rezoning
For written comment for the April 26, 2022 City Council meeting.

David White
City Manager
santamonica.gov
Facebook | Twitter | Instagram
Subscribe to City of Santa Monica Email Updates
From: Steven Wettenstein <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2022 4:32 PM
To: David White <[email protected]>
Subject: Oceana Rezoning

EXTERNAL

Dear Mr. White,

I am writing out of concern for revised zoning, which would allow the Oceana restaurant to open for non‐hotel users.

My wife and I moved to The Sundial apartments in February of last year. We originally expressed concern about living next to a busy establishment and we're assured by the building manager it was a quiet block. We were specifically told that the hotel, which our apartment directly faces, was not a destination for anyone except people staying here, it is not a public restaurant, and therefore there would be less worry of additional noise, crime, foot traffic. Almost immediately, we've had issues, tenants of the hotel throwing garbage on our patio, loud music up until 4am, and we've also recently had a break in at our building. I brought concerns about the rezoning to our building manager, who refused to even notify tenants of the hearing, leading me to believe she was already convinced by those representing the hotel to their interests.

As my wife and I are now starting a family, we are incredibly concerned that the place we call our home will now face increased foot traffic, noise, lack of parking for those coming to visit our baby, drunk people getting out of dinner late and waking us and our baby up. Not to mention an increase in deliveries in the alleyway will increase disturbances. There are plenty of places in our area on Montana Item 6.A
04/26/22
3 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 912 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 2 and Wilshire for commercial use and restaurants, with tenants who knew the situation when they moved in. For us to be baited to a residential neighborhood and switched right when we are about to have a baby is unfortunate. I believe in helping those in the community over the needs of corporations, and hope you will consider this when voting for the provision.

Best,
Steven
Item 6.A
04/26/22
4 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 913 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Robert Kaplan <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2022 5:45 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: FW: OPPOSITION TO OCEANA HOTEL -- STOP THE OCEANA HOTEL RESTAURANT AND BAR

EXPANSION

EXTERNAL
From: Robert Kaplan <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2022 5:06 PM
To: 'Gleam Davis' <[email protected]>; 'Phil Brock' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; 'Sue Himmelrich' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; 'David White' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]> Subject: OPPOSITION TO OCEANA HOTEL ‐‐ STOP THE OCEANA HOTEL RESTAURANT AND BAR EXPANSION

STOP THE OCEANA HOTEL RESTAURANT AND BAR EXPANSION

STOP THE EXPANSION OF THE COMMERCIAL ZONE NORTH OF CALIFORNIA AND INTO

OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD
I have been a resident of the 900 block of Ocean Avenue since 1985.

From the get-go the Oceana Hotel has proven to be terrible neighbors, playing fast and loose with the rules to the detriment of local residents.

Item 6.A
04/26/22
5 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 914 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 2  Originally the Oceana had the equivalent of three or four spots for valets. Depending on the size of the car, there was one or two public spots immediately north of the valet section and, depending on the size of the car three or four public spots immediately south of the valet section. The public spots referenced above were almost always by their valet parked cars. I know this because I not only witnessed this, but because the valets put a sticker on the window or hanging from the rear-view mirror. Parking on Ocean Avenue is very limited and when no other public spots were available and hotel valets were asked to move their valet car(s) parking on public spots they always refused. They were prohibited from parking guest cars on the public street – but they did it anyway because it was easier than using their garage. When complaints were made to hotel management, they said valets were contractors and they had no control over them. Talk about shirking responsibility and being bad neighbors…Oceana management and owners are the worst neighbors.
 With the Fairmont the Huntley Hotel and other local hotels increasing their nighttime activities, the nighttime noise levels around the neighborhood have skyrocketed – especially after midnight when the hotel bars and clubs close down.
 The Oceana Hotel is a legal nonconforming use. The requests to allow both food and alcohol service to the general public constitutes an impermissible intensification of use under the zoning conde’s provisions for nonconforming uses. This is not a request for a variance but an intensification of a use in Wilmont.
 Valets often speed off with cars of visitors
 Valets often don’t look before leaving from the curb with visitor cars  Valets often double park visitors’ cars
 Valets often leave vehicles daily and overnight parked in valet spots instead of moving them to their parking lot
 When delivering cars to guests, valets often roll through the stop sign at Idaho/Ocean, almost causing accidents. I myself have narrowly avoided being hit by them numerous times.

Add to that the staff that goes in the alley on their breaks – smoking cigarettes or weed and talking and laughing loudly among themselves an on their phones.

Item 6.A
04/26/22
6 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 915 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 3 According to the pink notice we received asking for comment, it says, the Oceana is non-conforming…and that it “requests to provide meal service to the general public provided that certain criterial are met.” I can assure you that if past is prologue, they will ignore that criteria repeatedly…just as they did years ago when, despite their permits, they served non-guests in their restaurant.

I’ve heard that some councilmembers are supportive of the Oceana permit. Well…to all those members of the council that are supportive of the Oceana’s permit…, how would you like it if me and my neighbors parked on your street taking up all the parking and blocking driveways…and then played loud music and created more traffic and noise? I doubt you would like it…so why then would you subject the residents of this neighborhood to the same?
The increasing commercialization of Palisades Park North of Washington is distressing. Food vendors, people selling their wares, musicians playing for five hours on Sunday under the “gazebo” in the 900 block and others…who when you politely ask them to face their speakers towards the ocean or lower their volume they curse you out and threaten you. And if you call the Police, we’re lucky if they even show up….and if they do rarely get out of their car and use their loud speaker to ask the people to quiet down, then leave and five minutes later we’re back to where we started.

When are you going to protect what used to be a quite residential street and neighborhood? Allowing the billionaire owner of the Oceana – Jim Lippman and his high paid lawyers to keep applying for the same permit over and over again …forcing the city to spend tax dollars and forcing citizens to take the time to fight this, is just not right. Enough has to be enough. How about representing residents instead of a billionaire bully’s boutique hotel toy?
You’ve fought district elections forever…so we have no one who represents our neighborhood – no one councilmember who we can hold accountable for all of this nonsense you keep putting on us…so that means, as last time, some of you, maybe a majority, will vote to let the billionaire bully get his way and further destroy what should be a quiet neighborhood because you know our votes against you if you allow this permit won’t matter since we’ll be diluted by the votes across the city.

I know there is a lot to unpack in this letter…forgive it’s length and at times the rant, but I’m angry…as are my neighbors….about how the city council – our elected “representatives”… have let our neighborhood slip.

Bottom line is – The Oceana Hotel is a bad neighbor and there is no reason to expect that their behavior or the impact on our neighborhood will improve. Please vote to oppose the Oceana’s permit application, and please do whatever you can to discourage them from doing it again. Please truly consider the impact of Oceana on its neighbors.

We are hoping all members of the City Council will not disappoint us and will take the sides of residents and not business, developers and a billionaire bully.

Thank you.

Item 6.A
04/26/22
7 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 916 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Jim Berchtold <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2022 4:28 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 849 Ocean Avenue

EXTERNAL
I live at 701 Ocean Avenue, PH F and have supported the expanded restaurant service for the oceana hotel ‐ I and a number of other residents feel it would be wonderful to have that service so convenient ‐ thank you for considering and approving this expanded service ‐ truely, James J Berchtold Before she passed away, my wife also supported the request ┭┮┯┰
Sent from my iPhone
Jim Berchtold
701 Ocean Avenue PH F
SANTA MONICA CA 90402
Cell 503.310.0805
[email protected] ‐ effective now
[email protected] ‐ discontinuing the Comcast email 9/25/2021 Item 6.A
04/26/22
8 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 917 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Juan Robles <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2022 10:31 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Block the Oceana Hotel Appeal

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
As a property owner and resident of less than a block away, I strongly oppose the expansion/change of the current designation of 849 Ocean Avenue. My concern is that such change will alter the residential character of our neighborhood which is not meant to be a business zone. The Oceana Santa Monica hotel was granted a restricted permit that should remain the same in order to protect our neighborhood which is in a residential zone. Please stop this hotel's second attempt to amend the text of the SMCC Section 9.08. As homeowners, we purchased our properties in this location because the zoning is residential and we want to keep it that way. Santa Monica City Council Members please block any text amendments that will compromise the appeal of the residential nature of our neighborhood.

Please feel free to contact me:

Juan Robles
917 2nd Street 201
Santa Monica, CA 90403
Regards,
Juan Robles
Item 6.A
04/26/22
9 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 918 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Grafton Harper <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2022 12:43 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Phil Brock
Subject: City Council Meeting - Oceania revote on Tues. 4/26 - Item 6A

EXTERNAL
Hello‐
At the bottom of my note is the original note I sent to the planning commission in May 2021. Please also read this earlier note as well as my updated comments as part of the proceedings.

Note for April 26, 2022 ‐ Item 6A
I understand that due to communication technicality the matter of the Oceana restaurant service to non‐guests will come up for a re‐vote with the City Council this week. This matter was voted down last November by a 6‐member quorum of the City Council.

In this Trumpian era of constant litigation, the non‐resident owner (internet search indicates a Delaware Corporation) of the Oceana has engaged land‐use attorneys to invalidate the November vote and allow the owners a second chance at obtaining a non‐conforming use for their property at Santa Monica residents' expense.

I seriously doubt that I, a lowly resident and local property owner, could get the City Council to approve a Cigar Shop in my condo building, especially get a second hearing and a second vote. I doubt any resident could get away with such shenanigans. Yet, this is exactly what has been allowed to happen. Wealthy people who don't live here are spending money to make money at the expense of the good people of Santa Monica who just want to walk their dogs, push their baby‐strollers and exercise their legs in relative safety. These residents will pay the price for an ever more dangerous and noisy intersection.

If the city council considers adding this non‐conforming commercial operation in our residential space, they must at the very least send it back to the planning commission to evalutate the traffic impact on residential pedestrians. For the record, the planning commission rejected this proposal in May of 2021 so a yes vote this week from the Council will override the planning commission. Voting yes sends the message that the safety of voters has not been discussed at any planning level.

Should this pass, the message to Santa Monica voters is clear. "Spend enough money here, and we'll rubber stamp whatever non‐conforming use you want." Staff seem to put Economic Recovery over all other concerns. In this case:

Public Safety.

Sincerely,
Grafton Harper, 837 Lincoln Blvd.

Original Note to the Planning commission from May, 2021.

Planning Commission Members ‐
I understand that once again The Oceana is petitioning to allow for non‐residents to take meals and potentially alcoholic beverages at their location at 701 Ocean.

Item 6.A
04/26/22
10 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 919 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 2 I live at 837 Lincoln Blvd. and frequently walk past the building on my way to the Palisade.

Frankly I am already alarmed at the amount of reckless driving activity already taking place at that address. There seem to be fast‐moving valets or residents pulling from the passenger spaces in front of the building all the time. The pedestrian crossing has become nothing short of hazardous as north‐ bound drivers have little choice but to swing around the traffic there and then come to a screeching halt before hitting crossing pedestrians.

I understand the arguments. Who wouldn't want to get a cup of coffee or snack at a lovely location? That's not the point. The point: This is a residential neighborhood that has no traffic infrastructure to handle a restaurant space with outside visitors.

Wouldn't it be nice if I could have a cigar shop in the lobby of my building and a little coffee shop on my roof too. I'm sure my neighbors would love that.

People invest in neighborhoods believing that their government will look out for their safety and welfare by sticking to existing code and holding back the incursions of commercial activity on the very streets that their tax dollars support. There is always someone wanting to sell something where people live. It is human nature. If a food truck pulled up there, you'd cite it.

Reject this coffee non‐sense and see it for what it is. Commercial incursion into residential spaces.

Thank you,
Grafton
____________________________
Grafton S. Harper
[email protected] (My new inbox as of 12/2018)
Lost track of me?
Permanent Forwarding available at [email protected] On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 2:18 AM Grafton Harper <[email protected]> wrote:

Hello‐
I reside near the corner of Lincoln and Montana in the Wilmont district. I have lived in Santa Monica for about a decade and in Southern California for 35 years. I am a finance professional and a UCLA MBA.

I agree with the comments sent out by my Wilmont neighborhood association in advance of tomorrow's City Council meeting. The project is too large, ignores the surrounding neighborhood, offers scant financial benefits for the city and allows very wealthy out‐of‐state investors to bypass long‐established norms to make outsized profits. At the same time, established residents and businesses are asked to accept a degraded cityscape and neighborhood experience with little benefit returned for their sacrifice.

Basic economic analysis shows that the Miramar project offers greater than 14% returns on the hotel operations and most likely much higher returns for the condominium portion of the project as proposed. While it is likely to cost the investors some $200M to improve the hotel, their return on investment will be tremendous and swift. The parcel sits on one of the most beautiful vistas on the Pacific coast. A vista made wonderful by the very absence of gigantic structures which this Project will spoil for everyone else.

The investors purchased the property with the clear intention of achieving relief from density and height restriction long imposed on the Wilmont area. These are restrictions that have been adhered to by other developers, builders, Item 6.A
04/26/22
11 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 920 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 3 residents and tenants. This project allows a great exception and high profits but at great degradation of our Santa Monica sunshine and ocean‐adjacent way of life.

I understand that it is hard to turn down money being invested in a city. But remember that the city did not choose these investors or this opportunity. The investors entered this market with the intent of scoring exceptional treatment for great profit in an area where others have been rightly restricted and mediated for decades. I did not hear the cries of these prior investors that their returns were insufficient for their needs.

I look as a finance professional at this project with more than a little jadedness. Why would the next investor wish to come to our city when they might imagine the ground‐rules can be skirted by a future competitor? Will not all developers seek exceptional terms with little benefit to the city and community? I believe this project will be such an invitation to the most base levels of development to push the height, density and footprint higher, denser and bigger. Is this a Pandora's box we wish to cast open for our city with so little given back? Respectfully submitted,
Grafton Harper, 837 Lincoln Blvd, (818) 516‐2363
____________________________
Grafton S. Harper
[email protected] (My new inbox as of 12/2018)
Lost track of me?
Permanent Forwarding available at [email protected] Item 6.A
04/26/22
12 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 921 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) April 24, 2022
Santa Monica Mayor and City Council
Item 6-A - Oceana Hotel Restaurant
Please accept this letter as my continued support of Staff’s recommendation regarding the Oceana Hotel's application considered at Council in November. I’m glad you are hearing this item again.

Staff has recommended certain conditions that take the needs of people walking and biking into consideration. The Hotel listened and has incorporated these items (I previously encouraged) into their application: incentives extended to pedestrian and bicycle customers and provision of a bike valet for restaurant patrons, for convenience and bicycle security.

Again, I support the Ocean Hotel’s proposal, I hope you vote to grant it.

I appreciate your consideration.

Thank you,
Cynthia Rose
[email protected]
Mid-City Neighborhood
Santa Monica, CA
90404

CYNTHIA ROSE
Item 6.A
04/26/22
13 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 922 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Alissa Finerman <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2022 8:57 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Phil Brock
Cc: David White
Subject: Re Oceana Hotel - deny Appeal

EXTERNAL
Hello Mayor Himmelrich and Council Members,
I've been a Santa Monica resident since 2009 and want to share my input to deny the appeal of the Ocean Hotel for several reasons:
‐ As recently as 2015, the Council already determined that existing nonconforming operations should not be intensified.

These CUPs and text amendment do exactly that. The Oceana Hotel has exceeded its right as a non‐conforming hotel to ask for any intensification in the Wilmont neighborhood and this appeal should be denied. ‐ Current feedback from neighbors (850 2nd st) is that there is already excessive noise with the garage. If the restaurant has even higher occupancy rates which could lead to more cars and deliveries, common sense tells us that noise levels will be even worse as will traffic and potentially parking. ‐ The community does not need one more expensive restaurant. The Ocean Hotel is a luxury and boutique hotel. I checked room rates for the weekend of 5/20‐22 and the least expensive room was $1,146 + $45 resort charge plus tax.

Room rates went up to $1,632 plus the resort charge and tax. Typically, expensive hotels have expensive restaurants so the hotel will likely be too expensive for locals. Let's be very clear, this is not about a few new neighbors stopping by for coffee but rather the intensification of non‐hotel guests’ uses of the facility for dining, conferences, functions or other non‐hotel guest activities (which leads to increased noise levels and traffic). ‐ The city does not have the resources or a process in place to help residents “manage potential impacts to the surrounding neighborhood” outlined in this staff report. Once again, the promise of enforcement of STOAs and CUPs are made but cannot be delivered on by the city. Code enforcement is understaffed, redeployed to help at the pier, and is not staffed for nights or weekends and often cannot respond quickly enough when many of the issues occur.

I appreciate your time on this matter and hope you will vote to preserve our residential community and deny the appeal.

Many thanks,
Alissa Finerman
Item 6.A
04/26/22
14 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 923 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Neal Payton <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2022 8:56 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Sue Himmelrich; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Kristin McCowan; Lana Negrete
Subject: Public Restaurant use in Oceana Hotel - Item 6A at Council Meeting on April 26

EXTERNAL
Dear Members of the Santa Monica City Council.

I am writing to support the opening of the existing restaurant in the Oceana Hotel for public use. Due to other commitments, I am unable to be at the meeting in person, but with this letter wish to express my point of view.

I live at 1211 Grant Street, Santa Monica 90405 in the Sunset Park neighborhood. Even though I do not live in the immediate vicinity of this restaurant I am quite familiar with the site and the area, not only because I frequent the park across the street for recreation, but also, because as a professional architect and urbanist, I led the principal consulting team that worked with City Staff on the Downtown Community Plan. While this site was not within the boundaries of that Plan it was certainly visible within the lens with which we viewed the area.

I believe that allowing non‐hotel guests to dine at this restaurant will enhance the quality of life in the neighborhood significantly. I predict it will become a go to place for residents of the immediate area and enhance their overall sense of place within the neighborhood. And to the inevitable question, “what if such a restaurant were proposed across the alley or at the end of the block on which I live”? I’d answer, “I can’t wait.” I would embrace the concept immediately, and if the food and drink were good, I would become a regular patron. In fact, I look forward to the City of Santa Monica continuing to expand the opportunity for residents to walk to the services they want by allowing an ever finer mix of uses.

Some folks have argued that allowing this restaurant to serve non‐hotel guests is an example of “spot zoning”. I disagree. If the applicant were proposing a sheet‐metal factory or logistics center—well that would indeed be an example of spot zoning. However, allowing a restaurant that already exists to be open to the general public in a hotel that already exists across the street from a public park with ocean views within the context of a residential neighborhood is more aptly an example of mixing uses. Such land‐use diversity allows more people to walk to their favorite restaurant and generally facilitates a more sociable neighborhood. I am aware that the leadership of the local neighborhood association for that area has voiced opposition to this item, but such opinions do not always reflect their constituents as I know from my own experience.

The fact that allowing the existing restaurant to be patronized by the general public needs some sort of legislative action to be permitted should not be seen as a negative. It simply reflects a change in values from the time this original zoning was enacted and the present day. We now understand that Euclidean Zoning (in which uses segregated from one another) is anathema to sustainability and that a finely grained mix of uses is one of the most important elements of combating air pollution and climate change, by getting folks out of their vehicles and onto their feet.

Thank you for your consideration of my opinion in this matter.

Best,
Neal Payton
Item 6.A
04/26/22
15 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 924 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 2 Neal I. Payton, FAIA, FCNU
Senior Principal
Torti Gallas + Partners
Architects of a Better World
240.417.9560 mobile
Item 6.A
04/26/22
16 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 925 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: A Glennon <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2022 8:19 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Phil Brock
Cc: David White
Subject: City Council Vote Tomorrow -

EXTERNAL
To Whom It May Concern,
I have been residing in Santa Monica since 2003. I do not like the commercial expansion and I know tomorow there will be a revote on the Oceana Hotel by the City Council. I am very concerned about the noise, the pollution and everything else this is generating. The consequences on residents will be forever. Please think about us when you vote.

Thank you.

Respectfully,
Angélique Glennon
Santa Monica Resident and Business Owner
Item 6.A
04/26/22
17 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 926 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 4 Vernice Hankins
From: santa monica <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2022 8:04 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Opposition to expansion of Oceana HotelEXTERNAL We residents oppose this project request.

Our city is turning into the crime capital/party capital ! we do not need any more c commercialization and inviting the general public here anymore than we do.

Residents have the priority right to peace & enjoyment in their residences. We want peace and quiet restored not more construction and more people.

I represent hundreds of resident opinions on the stop of this request.

From :

Lifetime residents 90403
Jill
Sent from my iPhone
Item 6.A
04/26/22
18 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 927 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Elena Christopoulos <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, April 25, 2022 12:08 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: David Martin
Subject: Subject - Item 6-A

EXTERNAL
City Councilmembers,
I strongly support Staff’s recommendation to grant Hotel Oceana’s appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial, and approve the CUP and text amendment.

The north end of Ocean Avenue is sadly lacking in small, neighborhood‐friendly restaurants that could serve the local community, especially the pedestrians and bicyclists who love being near the ocean, and who would enjoy a relaxing, hassle‐free meal out.

Approving the Oceana’s modest applications will provide a much‐needed, low‐key amenity and enhance the public experience. Thank you for your consideration.

Elena Christopoulos
Santa Monica
Item 6.A
04/26/22
19 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 928 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2022 11:47 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Kristin McCowan; Sue Himmelrich; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; David Martin
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: FOSP: City Council 4/26/22 item 6-A -- OPPOSE Oceana Hotel appeal

EXTERNAL
Once again:

To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Sent: 11/21/2021 11:04:39 PM Pacific Standard Time
Subject: FOSP: Council 11/23/21 item 6-A -- Oceana Hotel appeal -- OPPOSE November 21, 2021
To: Mayor Himmelrich and City Council members
From: Board of Directors, Friends of Sunset Park
RE: 11/23/21 agenda item 6-A – Oceana Hotel appeal – OPPOSE Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section 9.08.020; and Appeals of Planning Commission's Denial of Two Conditional Use Permits to Allow Meal and Alcohol Service to the General Public at the Oceana Hotel’s Existing Restaurant

Item 6.A
04/26/22
20 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 929 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 3 2) In 1958, it became a hotel, which was allowed because it was zoned R4.

3) In 1990, the property was rezoned R3, which then made the hotel a “legal nonconforming commercial use” which was required to be discontinued and removed, or altered to conform to R3, within 20 years (i.e., by 2010).

4) In 1995, the Oceana got approval to allow hotels in existence as of 1/1/1995 to remain, but to not allow expansion of such establishments. The text amendment allowed up to 5% increase within an existing building envelope, but the staff report indicated that staff would not recommend for expansion of the hotel, but only allow improvements and repairs to be made.

5) In 1996, the Oceana's CUP approval specifically based its conclusions on granting a liquor license on findings such as, "the license type ensures alcohol service will be limited to hotel guests and their visitors, thereby minimizing any potential impact on surrounding uses;" and "will not increase the demand for parking on-site."
6) Sometime after 2005, a restaurant was added to serve hotel guests. Before then, food was only allowed to be delivered to hotel.

7) In 2015, the City Council determined that existing nonconforming operations should not be intensified.
8) In 2021, the Oceana Hotel has been added to Hilton’s LXR Hotels & Resorts marketing, and the owners want to open the bar and restaurants to the general public – a further intensification of a nonconforming commercial use in a residential neighborhood. “LXR Hotels & Resorts Celebrates U.S. Debut with Oceana Santa Monica” Exclusive retreat known for unparalleled, personalized service and immersive, local experiences to join LXR’s collection of independent, luxury properties.
https://newsroom.hilton.com/lxr/news/lxr-hotels-resorts-opens-oceana-santa-monica

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 930 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 4 intimate property will connect each guest with a curated lens into Santa Monica design, wellness and lifestyle, creating memories that linger long after guests depart…. “Oceana joins the growing collection of more than 10 open or soon-to-be-open LXR properties in the world’s most sought-after destinations….Oceana provides a rare opportunity to experience Santa Monica like a local resident of the coveted beach district. Driving along Ocean Avenue, the first vision of Oceana is the hotel’s stately, ivy-clad facade, quietly at home among the neighborhood’s other beautiful residences….
"Following a nearly $30 million transformation of the former Oceana Beach Club Hotel, the stunning beachside home-away-from-home delivers a rare private residential experience in Santa Monica’s most coveted neighborhood north of Wilshire Boulevard…. “Meals are always prepared to guest specifications and can be served in any of the dining venues. Oceana’s dining experiences include:
 Sandpiper: Oceana’s main restaurant sets the scene for an intimate experience reminiscent of a private beach home with a picturesque seaside backdrop, but with the added comforts of fivestar service and elegant cuisine.  The Veranda: There is no better venue for al fresco dining at Oceana. Here, guests can enjoy full access to Oceana’s breakfast, lunch and dinner menus with the benefit of enjoying your meal poolside. Whether reclining in James Perse chaise lounges or cozying up by the fire pit, The Veranda is the perfect space to exercise your refined palette while taking advantage of always sunny Santa Monica.
 Sunset Terrace: With panoramic views of the Pacific Ocean, the Sunset Terrace is the perfect rooftop lounge location to relax, imbibe and enjoy the majesty of the sun sinking into the horizon. And for sushi lovers, we are excited to announce our exclusive Nobu Pop-Up Experience featuring some of the famed delicacies only Nobu chefs can provide.  Oceana’s authentic expression of Southern California cuisine also includes rare tequila tasting flights in the spring in partnership with Casamigos.”
This is not about a few nearby neighbors, all living within walking distance, stopping by the Oceana Hotel for coffee.

The proposed CUPs and text amendment are about non-hotel guests using this high-end facility for dining, conferences, and other functions.

As one of the Planning Commissioners noted, before the Commission turned down the owner’s request for the CUPs, this request amounts to spot zoning.

Approval of the appeal and the text amendment could also serve as a precedent for other commercial interests that may want to expand into residential neighborhoods in Santa Monica.

The 2010 LUCE (Land Use & Circulation Element) said on page 2, “The LUCE conserves the City’s neighborhoods.” It continues on page 3, “The community identified the following core values:

Preserve Existing Neighborhoods. The highest priority of the community was the preservation of the existing character and scale of Santa Monica’s neighborhoods.” Again, the FOSP Board supports residents in the Wilmont neighborhood and the Board of the WilshireMontana Neighborhood Coalition in Item 6.A
04/26/22
22 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 931 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 5 a) - opposing the proposed text amendment to the Municipal Code, and b) - opposing the appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial of Conditional Use Permits in order to intensify a nonconforming commercial use in a residential neighborhood. =
Item 6.A
04/26/22
23 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 932 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Elizabeth Van Denburgh <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2022 1:29 PM
To: Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Gleam Davis; councilmtgitems
Cc: David White
Subject: City Cnl. Mtg. 4/26/22 - Item 6A - Wilmont Board OPPOSES two CUPS/text amendment appeal to increase commercial intensification of a non-conforming use on Ocean Ave. and a residential neighborhood

EXTERNAL
April 25, 2022
Mayor Himmelrich and Council Members,
The appeal of the Oceana Hotel should be denied for the following reasons:
 This is a classic example of spot zoning as described by three Planning Commissioners.  As recently as 2015, the Council determined that existing nonconforming operations should not be intensified. These CUPs and text amendment do exactly that. The staff report focuses on the restaurants staying at the same number of seats but the issue is the increase in occupancy and turnover of those seats including additional cars and parking. The city traffic study focused on existing parking and did not forecast additional parking or increased traffic due to nonguests This increase in occupancy and turnover in the restaurant intensifies the commercialism in the neighborhood through more deliveries, more staff, more employee and customer parking and traffic in neighborhood (preferred parking only at night on Idaho with no preferred parking on Montana, Ocean (with Oceana taking half the block of Ocean with its valet parking zone) and 2nd Street. and increased use of the garage squeaky gates. The staff report Item 6.A
04/26/22
24 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 933 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 2 continues to state the impact on the neighborhood will be insignificant with no data, no comparison to similar public restaurants and no admitting this 4–5-star hotel (room rates from $600 -$1,000) will price out most neighbors. Once the damage is done, there is no mitigation or return for the residents of the Wilmont neighborhood,  Let’s remember the 1996 CUP specifically based its conclusions on granting a license on findings such as “the license type ensure alcohol service will be limited to hotel guests and their visitors thereby minimizing any potential impact on surrounding uses”. Is it just old fashioned to ensure that residents are protected from commercial impact?  Neighbors and many residents have provided their feedback that the intensification of the Oceana Hotel will impact parking, noise and traffic. The residents of 850 2nd Street, the apartment building across the alley have outlined that deliveries start occurring at 6:30 am and late into the night, parking garage gates are noisy during 24/7, staff are talking and smoking in alley and there is no current process/recourse for these issues to be resolved or addressed. How would you like to live across the alley from this? There is currently no city process nor is there a planned process that helps these residents “manage potential impacts to the surrounding neighborhood” outlined in this staff report. Once again, the promise of enforcement of STOAs and CUPs are made but cannot be delivered on by the city. Code enforcement is understaffed, redeployed to help at the pier, is not staffed for nights or weekends and often cannot respond quickly enough when many of the issues occur.
 The applicant is OCBSM Owner LLC, which is owned by JRK Residential Group Inc, which is subsequently owned by JRK Property Holdings, Inc. a privately owned real estate investment company. This company owns and operates a portfolio totaling more than $15 billion of assets spanning thirty states. This is not a mom-and-pop small business. With its signing of a franchise agreement with Hilton LXR Hotels & Resorts the Oceana will be marketing and intensifying its commercial impact on the neighborhood. This is not about a few new neighbors stopping by for coffee but the intensification of non-hotel guests’ uses of the facility be it for dining, conferences, functions or other non-hotel guest activities.
 Finally, this kind of action serves as a precedent to other nonconforming users. If adopted what is to prevent other businesses to lobby for the enactment of similar exemptions, riddling the nonconforming ordinance with loopholes. The nonconforming ordinance as it exists is simple and clear.

The application for the zone text amendment should be denied because there is no need to create an exemption that guts the clear purpose of the ordinance.

The LUCE’s first principle is “Preserve the Neighborhoods. Many ran on supporting and protecting residents’ neighborhoods. The Oceana Hotel has exceeded its right as a non-conforming hotel to ask for any intensification in the Wilmont neighborhood and this appeal should be denied.

Thank-you
Item 6.A
04/26/22
25 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 934 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 3 Board of Directors
Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont)

Item 6.A
04/26/22
26 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 935 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: John Cyrus Smith <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2022 1:56 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Phil Brock
Cc: David White; [email protected]; Wilmont Board Subject: Oceana - Item 6A
Attachments: OCEANA HOTEL.jpg

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and Council,
I don't write too often, and the letter the Wilmont Board sent you pretty much lays out this issue clearly.

HOWEVER, there are bigger issues at play with regards to the Oceana proposal., Item‐6A.

I don't care if the multi‐billion dollar owners threaten to sue. Seems every huge hotel hedge fund enterprise now sues to defy established, common‐sense zoning laws and seek an exemption when they want.

The rules and laws this very Council and city have studied and approved and made law, should not be cast aside just because deep pockets try to force the issue.

Why make laws and have codes if we don't follow them?
Hotels should not be in neighborhoods. Just ask the people who live near the PaliHouse. The owners of the Oceana don't just want to have a few quiet get‐togethers. The conglomerate wants to become the next Fig.

Please look at the "Argonaut" cover I've attached. Front page news. LXR with big plans for the Oceana, their new "destination" hotel.

Item 6.A
04/26/22
27 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 936 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 2 It won't be Downtown. It will be in our neighborhood. One can just imagine how many "Temporary neighborhood parking passes" they'll be requesting, printing out and using to "valet" park cars in the neighborhood every day.

You did the right thing the first time around. Stand by that decision. Wilmont residents like me want local businesses to thrive, but you folks are the ones who make the rules, and made these rules and for good reason.

It's time to play by them or admit they mean nothing, look the other way and say "next time", which never seems to come.

Thank you for all you do for the city.

John Cyrus Smith,
Santa Monica Recreation and Parks Commissioner and former Chair [email protected]

Item 6.A
04/26/22
28 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 937 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: Bethany Longest <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2022 1:46 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Mtg 4/26/22 - Item 6A - Opposition to Oceana Hotel two CUPs/text amendment to increase commercial intrusion through allowing non-guests to use Hotel Oceana restaurant/lounge

My fears are this:

1. More congestion on Ocean Ave near the Hotel. We already have to be super careful on the pedestrian crosswalk due to cars not stopping for us.

2. Increase noise in the alley which backs up to our apartment building

3. More trucks making deliveries, possibly violating the 0700 am code.

Sincerely,
Bethany Longest, BSN, RN &
Derek Longest
Item 6.A
04/26/22
29 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 938 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) April 25, 2022
Mayor Himmelrich and Council Members,
The appeal of the Oceana Hotel should be denied for the following reasons:
• This is a classic example of spot zoning as described by three Planning Commissioners.
• As recently as 2015, the Council determined that existing nonconforming operations should not be intensified. These CUPs and text amendment do exactly that. The staff report focuses on the restaurants staying at the same number of seats but the issue is the increase in occupancy and turnover of those seats including additional cars and parking. The city traffic study focused on existing parking and did not forecast additional parking or increased traffic due to non-guests This increase in occupancy and turnover in the restaurant intensifies the commercialism in the neighborhood through more deliveries, more staff, more employee and customer parking and traffic in neighborhood (preferred parking only at night on Idaho with no preferred parking on Montana, Ocean (with Oceana taking half the block of Ocean with its valet parking zone) and 2nd Street. and increased use of the garage squeaky gates. The staff report continues to state the impact on the neighborhood will be insignificant with no data, no comparison to similar public restaurants and no admitting this 4–5-star hotel (room rates from $600 -$1,000) will price out most neighbors. Once the damage is done, there is no mitigation or return for the residents of the Wilmont neighborhood,
 Let’s remember the 1996 CUP specifically based its conclusions on granting a license on findings such as “the license type ensure alcohol service will be limited to hotel guests and their visitors thereby minimizing any potential impact on surrounding uses”. Is it just old fashioned to ensure that residents are protected from commercial impact?
• Neighbors and many residents have provided their feedback that the intensification of the Oceana Hotel will impact parking, noise and traffic. The residents of 850 2nd Street, the apartment building across the alley have outlined that deliveries start Item 6.A
04/26/22
30 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 939 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) occurring at 6:30 am and late into the night, parking garage gates are noisy during 24/7, staff are talking and smoking in alley and there is no current process/recourse for these issues to be resolved or addressed. How would you like to live across the alley from this? There is currently no city process nor is there a planned process that helps these residents “manage potential impacts to the surrounding neighborhood” outlined in this staff report. Once again, the promise of enforcement of STOAs and CUPs are made but cannot be delivered on by the city. Code enforcement is understaffed, redeployed to help at the pier, is not staffed for nights or weekends and often cannot respond quickly enough when many of the issues occur. • The applicant is OCBSM Owner LLC, which is owned by JRK Residential Group Inc, which is subsequently owned by JRK Property Holdings, Inc. a privately owned real estate investment company. This company owns and operates a portfolio totaling more than $15 billion of assets spanning thirty states. This is not a mom-and-pop small business. With its signing of a franchise agreement with Hilton LXR Hotels & Resorts the Oceana will be marketing and intensifying its commercial impact on the neighborhood. This is not about a few new neighbors stopping by for coffee but the intensification of non-hotel guests’ uses of the facility be it for dining, conferences, functions or other non-hotel guest activities.
• Finally, this kind of action serves as a precedent to other nonconforming users. If adopted what is to prevent other businesses to lobby for the enactment of similar exemptions, riddling the non-conforming ordinance with loopholes. The nonconforming ordinance as it exists is simple and clear. The application for the zone text amendment should be denied because there is no need to create an exemption that guts the clear purpose of the ordinance.

The LUCE’s first principle is “Preserve the Neighborhoods. Many ran on supporting and protecting residents’ neighborhoods. The Oceana Hotel has exceeded its right as a nonconforming hotel to ask for any intensification in the Wilmont neighborhood and this appeal should be denied.

Thank-you
Board of Directors
Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont)
Item 6.A
04/26/22
31 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 940 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) Item 6.A
04/26/22
32 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 941 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Caroline C. Vincent, Esq. <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, April 25, 2022 3:59 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Phil Brock
Cc: David White
Subject: Oceana Hotel Commercial Expansion - Opposition

EXTERNAL
I have lived at 860 Third Street, two short blocks from the Oceana Hotel. I oppose the planned commercialization of this mostly apartment building neighborhood for several reasons:

1. I have lived in this neighborhood for over 40 years. At some point I obtained a license to practice law in my home, for which I agreed that I could not have any clients or staff present in my apartment at any time (this was a time when presumably the city understood that people with cars still use them, still need a place to park, and that parking is difficult). The rules that apply to me should apply to all permitted business in the neighborhood.

2. Turning an apartment building into a commercial hotel has not impacted me or traffic in my neighborhood personally, as there is a permitted valet zone on Ocean Ave for the guests to arrive and for Ubers to pick them up. I am impacted when trucks park in the alley to service Brookdale, leave their vehicles and don’t allow us ingress or egress. The promise that this would not happen went unfulfilled from day one.

3. Permitting a public restaurant in the apartment‐turned‐hotel facility is a major increase in traffic and commercial activity. Already it is impossible for anyone to visit that does not take an Uber, (including during the pandemic) because of prior city ill‐conceived policies that did not permit parking for workers in the city parking lots (now being torn down). And so city workers have been parking in our neighborhoods, reducing any possibility for parking for residents, let alone guests. As well, because of the higher prices, there is more density per apartment. It’s LA, lots of folks have cars. That the city is allowing increased building now while cars are still used is bad planning.

4. Unless the city were to guarantee a new parking garage, for the guests to the hotel, right nearby, we are going to have more parking issues for the residents who live there. This creates more congestion. Instead, having violated their promises to businesses in the commercial district who paid for the city lots for customers (like Beverly Hills which still does this), the city is tearing down parking lots, apparently hungry to attract new dollars from developer monies, thinking in a fantasy world, that in Item 6.A
04/26/22
33 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 942 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 2 the sprawled out city of Los Angeles, people will stop using cars. Forget about income in Santa Monica, businesses. Residential voters, take note of who votes to increase density and reduce parking.

5. Pedestrians and drivers of automobiles are already at increased risks of accidents in our increased density neighborhood (to afford current rents many folks need roommates, or many families with children now occupy apartments). Oh, and people still own and drive cars. The city has promoted scooters and bicycles for transportation, but has neglected to enforce any laws to prohibit the use of skateboarders, cyclists and scooters on sidewalks. Anyone trying to take their baby for a stroll on a carriage, or anyone living at the Brookdale facility at 2nd and Idaho (behind my building), knows full well the danger imposed by these creative and ill‐conceived ideas – a resident who wishes to use their walker for a stroll on a sidewalk is risking their life. And scooters and bicyclists have forgotten they must comply with the rules of the road, and seem oblivious and angry, as they fly out of nowhere in front of your car because the rules do not apply to them and you should have x‐ray vision, or insist you have exray eyes and will move out of the way when they are right behind you on the sidewalk with a bicycle.

6. Until these increased impacts and reduction of available parking is addressed, commercializing a highly dense residential neighborhood and guaranteeing increased noise and accidents is a bad idea. There is also no compelling need to do this other than grabbing some dollars to pay city staff. I am all for making sure we pay city staff but there are many other ways to do so (let’s get creative!). How about enforcing the traffic and safety laws that do exist, posting signs to “stop, look and listen” at street corners, posting signs reminding scooters and bicyclists to stop at intersections because cars have the right of way if there is no stop sign, and because pedestrians at the corner have the right of way when entering a crosswalk.

7. A smart idea would be to require provision of an additional adjacent or nearby parking structure to handle the increased automobile traffic and prohibit using the residential streets for the valet to park their cars, whenever a developer decides to turn an apartment building into a hotel, then years later turn the restaurant into a public one where that use is not permitted. I hope that the city leaders are able to focus on the fact that folks still drive cars in Los Angeles and need places to park them. And that folks in residentially zoned areas expected and still expect it to be relatively quiet (as in we sleep there).

8. Our alleyways are for egress and ingress into parking for apartment dwellers – they are not designed for commercial vehicles that block our access.

Item 6.A
04/26/22
34 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 943 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 3 9. Already access to our parking is limited from time to time because folks think they can just park in the alleyway to drop something off to a friend, because it is so difficult to find available parking.

10.In short, the infrastructure is not in place to turn this residential neighborhood into a commercial neighborhood.

There is no compelling reason to turn this apartment building turned hotel into a public restaurant in a residentially zoned neighborhood.

Caroline Vincent
Attorney at Law
860 Third Street #2
Santa Monica, CA 90403
310.395.2194 Office
310.617.2042 Cell
[email protected]
Item 6.A
04/26/22
35 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 944 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 4 Vernice Hankins
From: Jason Mastbaum <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2022 2:46 PM
To: councilmtgitems; councilmtgitems
Subject: 4/26/2022 Agenda item 6A

EXTERNAL
As a resident of Wilmont who lives just a couple of blocks from Oceana, I strongly support allowing the Oceana to open its hotel to the public. Why should I have to spend $600 a night to stay in a hotel just a couple of blocks from where I live in order to enjoy a local restaurant? I cannot possibly imagine how opening the restaurant to the general public will harm my quality of life, but I can very easily imagine how having a new restaurant available a short walk from my apartment will improve it.

The small minority of vocal malcontents who have written in to object—including the Wilmont neighborhood association, which does not speak for me on anything—are the same usual suspects who love to claim that development doesn't do anything for residents. Yet here we have a local business trying to serve the residents, only for those same people to now insist that serving the residents is a bad thing! Please do the right thing and allow the Oceana to open their door to residents as another neighborhood amenity.

Thank you,
Jason Mastbaum
Item 6.A
04/26/22
36 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 945 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) April 25, 2022
Via electronic mail
Santa Monica City Council
City of Santa Monica
1685 Main Street
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Via email to [email protected]
Re: Opposition to April 26 Agenda Item 6-A: “Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section

Item 6.A
04/26/22
37 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 946 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) Santa Monica City Council
April 25, 2022

Page 2 ends

the exemption is written to apply only to one property in the City, giving it greater freedom than any other nonconforming hotel operation to alter its restaurant operations. Although written as if it is generally applicable, the law applies to class of one, and only one, business, and could never apply to any other given the operational dates included in the ordinance. Such legislation has the appearance of an arbitrary act, particularly given the specificity of the qualifying conditions. The Council should reject this spot-zoning and hold the Oceana Hotel to the same standards as other hotels that are operating in residential zones in the City.

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 947 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) Santa Monica City Council
April 25, 2022

Page 3 ends

demand for parking on-site.” (See Exhibit A, pp. 2-3.) The 1996 findings also note that “[t]he proposed use will not adversely effect the welfare of neighborhood residents in a significant manner in that the use will be allow[ed] for a Type 70 restricted license, allowing alcohol service to registered guests of the hotel and their visitors only, thereby not significantly increasing hotel related impacts.” (Id. pp. 3-4.) Staff’s conclusion that the change to allow for outside use is an impermissible intensification is well-supported.

Item 6.A
04/26/22
39 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 948 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) Santa Monica City Council
April 25, 2022

Page 4 ends

June 9, 2021 Planning Commission Hearing Recognizes Spot Zoning Nature of Request At the June 9, 2021 Planning Commission meeting, several Commissioners noted with great concern the spot zoning nature of the text amendment. Commissioner Raskin noted that the zone text amendment was “so narrowly tailored,” and that it appeared to have “no rational basis” why this hotel could open to public dining but other hotels in R2 or R3 zones could not open a restaurant. Commissioner Raskin also noted that it would be difficult to justify the substantial public benefit of opening this non-conforming hotel to public dining. Commissioner FondaBonardi also commented that the proposal appeared to be spot zoning and that the purpose of non-conforming uses was to gradually phase-out non-authorized uses. This use would actually increase the operations of the hotel, in a neighborhood that is impacted by other commercial uses. Commissioner Fresco also found that the zoning ordinance was spot zoning and that any expansion of restaurant use in this area should be done in a more comprehensive manner.

Policy Implications
These proposals make a hole in the existing nonconforming ordinance. As recently as 2015, the Council determined that existing nonconforming operations should not be intensified.

Item 6.A
04/26/22
40 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 949 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) “A. The proposed use is conditionally allowed within the applicable Zoning District and complies with all other applicable provisions of this Ordinance and all other titles of the Municipal Code.

B. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan.

C. The subject parcel is physically suitable for the type of land use being proposed.

D. The proposed use is compatible with any of the land uses presently on the subject parcel if the land uses are to remain.

F. The physical location or placement of the use on the site is compatible with and relates harmoniously to the surrounding neighborhood.

H. The proposed use and related project features would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare.” (SMMC, §

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 950 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) Santa Monica City Council
April 25, 2022

Page 6 ends

parking, there is no evidence that traffic generation from similarly sized restaurants was studied in connection with this application.

Yours very truly,

STRUMWASSER & WOOCHER LLP
Beverly Grossman Palmer
Cc: Mayor Sue Himmelrich ([email protected])
Mayor Pro Tem Kristin McCowan ([email protected]) Councilmember Phil Brock ([email protected])
Councilmember Gleam Davis ([email protected])
Councilmember Oscar de la Torre ([email protected]) Councilmember Lana Negrete ([email protected])
Councilmember Christine Parra ([email protected]) Item 6.A
04/26/22
42 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 951 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins))

EXHIBIT A
Item 6.A
04/26/22
43 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 952 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) Item 6.A
04/26/22
44 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 953 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) �- .,,_ • •
EDECTIVE DATE(Sl OF ACTION(S) IF NOT APPEALED:

August 21, 1996
EXPIRATION DATE(S) OF ANY PERMITS GRANTED:

Fighteeo (J 8� Months Conditional Use Permit (CUP 96-009) LENGTH QF ANY POSSIBLE EXTENSION QF EXPIRATION DATE<.S.):

Any request for an extension of the expiration date m�t be re�ived in the Planning and Zoning Division prior to expiration of this permit.

One six (6) rnonfb extensioo Conditional Use Permit (CUP 96-009)

CONDITJONALUSEPERMIIFJNDINGS

3. The subject parcel is physically suitable for the type of land use being proposed, in that the . ·parcel is a standard lot witl>, no unusual characteristics.

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 954 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) -� • •

ALCQHQL OUTLET FINDINGS

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 955 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) "'· • •
considered to contribute to objectionable problems associated with alcohol outlets. furthermore, this type of outlet has not contributed significantly to alcohol related problems in the city.

7. The public health, safety, and general welfare are protected in that conditions of approval to require responsible dispensation of alcohol are included herein.

8. No harm to adjacent properties will result in that the conditions of approval will ensure that the establishment operates as a hotel with ancillary alcohol service.

CONDITIONS QF APPROVAL

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 956 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) Item 6.A
04/26/22
48 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 957 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) Item 6.A
04/26/22
49 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 958 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) Item 6.A
04/26/22
50 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 959 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Martyn Burke <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2022 10:28 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Phil Brock
Cc: David White
Subject: Oceana Hotel request-please vote NO
Please do not allow the Oceana Hotel to open as a commercial restaurant and bar.

This proposal is completely out of context with this neighborhood.

Martyn Burke
Laura Morton
Santa Monica
Item 6.A
04/26/22
51 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 960 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Kent Strumpell <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2022 12:00 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Sue Himmelrich; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Kristin McCowan; Lana Negrete; David Martin
Subject: Item 6-A, Oceana Hotel
Dear City Councilmembers,

This letter reiterates the points I made in my letter to you in November 2021.

I believe the request by the applicant to serve the general public in its restaurant is reasonable, beneficial and should be considered for the following reason.

Restaurants, cafes, coffee shops, etc can be valuable neighborhood resources accessible by walking, biking and short car trips. (I wish there more such places within walking distance of where we live in the Pico Neighborhood). Far from being a burden on the surrounding community, I think this low‐key restaurant at the Oceana could prove to be a local gem, an amenity that nearby residents will come to value highly.

Please consider these community benefits when you discuss the hotel's application and Staff's well‐reasoned recommendation to grant it.

Thank you,
Kent Strumpell
1211 B Michigan Ave.

Santa Monica
Item 6.A
04/26/22
52 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 961 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) April 25, 2022
Via electronic mail
Santa Monica City Council
City of Santa Monica
1685 Main Street
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Via email to [email protected]
Re: Opposition to April 26 Agenda Item 6-A: “Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section

Item 6.A
04/26/22
53 of 94 Item 6.A
04/26/22

6.A.j
Packet Pg. 962 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5005 : (REHEARING) 849 Ocean Ave – Oceana Hotel Text Amendment, CUP and Appeal (60 mins)) Santa Monica City Council
April 25, 2022

Page 2 ends

Santa Monica City CouncilApril 26, 2022

Santa Monica City Council
April 26, 2022