Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 — Santa Monica City Council, April 26, 2022

Attachment C – Correspondence provided to the Planning Commission, June 9, 2021 5/13/2021 Mail - Planning Commission Comments - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/[email protected]/deeplink?popoutv2=1&version=20210510006.03 1/1 20ENT-0236 ( Text Amendment ) 20ENT-0237 ( Conditional Use Permit to amend existing 96CUP-009 ) 21ENT-0090 ( Conditional Use Permit t0 open existing hotel restaurant to the general public )
George Garlock <[email protected]>
Fri 5/7/2021 9:13 AM
To: Planning Commission Comments <[email protected]>

EXTERNAL
849 Ocean Avenue
Applicant & property owner OCBSM Owner LLC
Planning Commission,
As a local resident at 701 Ocean Avenue we see a great community service in having restaurants that are in walking distance from where we live. The majority of the local users of this restaurant that are not hotel guests would walk not drive to the Oceana Hotel.

Please approve this very worthy improvement to our community.

George Garlock
701 Ocean Avenue #107
Santa Monica, Ca 90402
702 278-6229
5/17/2021 Mail - Planning Commission Comments - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/[email protected]/deeplink?popoutv2=1&version=20210510006.08 1/1 Wednesday May 19th 2021 @5:30 PM HEARING - 849 ocean Avenue - 20ENT-0236, 20ENT-0237, 21ENT-0090
Jim Berchtold <[email protected]>
Fri 5/14/2021 7:24 AM
To: Planning Commission Comments <[email protected]>

EXTERNAL
Planning Commission Members - I and my recently deceased wife have lived at 701 Ocean Avenue since 2012. During neighborhood strolls we would often comment that it would be very handy to be able to grap coffee or a meal at the Oceana Hotel. We have a number of elderly owners who would be ecstatic with that venue so close and within walking distance.

Please approve this application and make us all happy! I don’t think the service would increase traffic significantly over current usage and there is valet service already available for guests.

Thank you, James J Berchtold
Sent from my iPhone
Jim Berchtold
701 Ocean Avenue PH F
SANTA MONICA CA 90402
Cell 503.310.0805
[email protected]
From: Doug Sparr
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: Oceana Hotel proposed restaurant expansion
Date: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 9:08:15 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 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
5/19/2021 Mail - Planning Commission Comments - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/[email protected]/deeplink?popoutv2=1&version=20210510006.08 1/1 OCEANA RESTAURANT TEXT AMENDMENT and CUP APPLICATION - ITEM 9-A Nancy Cetner <[email protected]>
Tue 5/18/2021 9:09 PM
To: Planning Commission Comments <[email protected]> 1 attachments (652 KB)
OCEANA HOTEL.pages;

EXTERNAL
I am sending an email in support of the OCEANA to open a restaurant to members of the public. I am a strong supporter of Santa Monica Businesses.

Thank you,
Nancy Cetner
--
Nancy Cetner
[email protected]
310-998-7988

From: Juan Robles
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: 849 Ocean Avenue - Oceana
Date: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 10:23:28 PM

Please feel free to contact me:

Juan Robles
917 2nd Street 201
Santa Monica, CA 90403
(972) 740-8976
Thank you!
5/19/2021 Mail - Planning Commission Comments - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/[email protected]/deeplink?popoutv2=1&version=20210510006.08 1/1 planning comments - 5/19/2021 Oceana 849 Ocean
David Rindlaub <[email protected]>
Wed 5/19/2021 9:49 AM
To: Planning Commission Comments <[email protected]> 1 attachments (33 KB)
20210519 Santa Monica Planning Commission Letter - Oceana.pdf;

EXTERNAL
Please find attached planning commission comments and confirm receipt. thank you,
David Rindlaub
David Rindlaub
[email protected]
May 19th, 2021

VIA E-MAIL
Santa Monica Planning Commission
1685 Main Street, Room 212
Santa Monica, Ca 90401
Re: 849 Ocean Ave
20ENT-0236
20ENT-0237
21ENT-0090
Hearing Date: May 19th, 2021
Dear Chairperson Landres, Vice-Chairperson Paster and Honorable Commissioners:

I urge you to not approve all of the proposals referenced above.

Granting these approvals 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.
- 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.

Sincerely,
David Rindlaub
5/19/2021 Mail - Planning Commission Comments - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/[email protected]/deeplink?popoutv2=1&version=20210510006.08 1/1 Item 19-A - Oceana restaurant
Cynthia Rose <[email protected]>
Wed 5/19/2021 10:25 AM
To: Planning Commission Comments <[email protected]> 1 attachments (33 KB)
2021-05 Oceana Sandpiper PC .pdf;

EXTERNAL
Dear Planning Commissioners
I am unable to speak tonight because of a prior commitment with CalBike.

Please accept this attached letter as my emphatic support Staff’s recommendation on this item. --
Cynthia Rose
Director
Santa Monica Spoke
SMSpoke.org
May 19, 2021
Planning Commissioners
Item 19-A - Oceana restaurant
I am unable to speak tonight because of a prior commitment with CalBike. Please accept this letter as my support of Staff’s recommendation on this item.

My comments below are 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 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. I strongly urge the Hotel to incorporate these 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 this proposal. I hope you will send it along to the City Council for final approval.

I appreciate your consideration.

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

CYNTHIA ROSE
From: Grafton Harper
To: Planning Commission Comments; Shawn Landres
Subject: Wednesday May 19th 2021 @5:30 PM HEARING - 849 ocean Avenue - 20ENT-0236, 20ENT-0237, 21ENT-0090 Date: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 10:50:58 AM

EXTERNAL
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.

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] From: Beverly Grossman Palmer
To: Planning Commission Comments
Cc: Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Phil Brock; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Councilmember Kevin McKeown; Christine Parra
Subject: Oceana Hotel: May 19 Planning agenda item 9-A
Date: Wednesday, May 19, 2021 11:11:30 AM
Attachments: 210519 Planning Commission Item 9-A.pdf

EXTERNAL
Please see the attached letter on behalf of Wilmont resident Elizabeth Van Denburgh regarding Item 9-A on the May 19, 2021 Planning Commission agenda. The item concerns a zone text amendment and two CUPs to permit expanded food and alcohol service at the Oceana Hotel.

Beverly Grossman Palmer
Strumwasser & Woocher LLP
10940 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, CA 90024
T: 310-576-1233
F: 310-319-0156
Dir: 310-933-5930
IMPORTANT NOTICE: At this time, Strumwasser & Woocher LLP is CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC.

Packages requiring signatures will be returned undelivered – do not serve papers by this method. While our office is closed, Strumwasser & Woocher LLP consents to electronic service in all of its matters. Please serve by electronic mail to [email protected] AND to our Senior Legal Assistant, LaKeitha Oliver, at [email protected]. We reserve the right to object to any notice or delivery of any kind if not actually received by counsel before all statutory deadlines.

Disclaimer
The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast, a leader in email security and cyber resilience. Mimecast integrates email defenses with brand protection, security awareness training, web security, compliance and other essential capabilities. Mimecast helps protect large and small organizations from malicious activity, human error and technology failure; and to lead the movement toward building a more resilient world. To find out more, visit our website.

STRUMWASSER & WOOCHER LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW
MICHAEL J. STRUMWASSER 10940 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, SUITE 2000 TELEPHONE: (310) 576-1233 BRYCE A. GEE LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90024 FACSIMILE: (310) 319-0156 BEVERLY GROSSMAN PALMER WWW.STRUMWOOCH.COM
DALE K. LARSON
CAROLINE C. CHIAPPETTI FREDRIC D. WOOCHER
JULIA G. MICHEL † ANDREA SHERIDAN ORDIN
SALVADOR E. PÉREZ SENIOR COUNSEL
† Also admitted to practice in Washington
May 19, 2021
Via electronic mail
City of Santa Monica
Planning Commission
Via email to [email protected]
Re: May 19 Agenda Item 9-A: Oceana Hotel Zone Text Amendment, Alcohol and Food Expansion of Service
Dear Members of the Planning Commission:

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 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 Santa Monica Planning Commission
May 19, 2021

Page 2 ends

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.

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 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.

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.

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:

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 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]) 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,
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. (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]
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 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
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
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 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
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
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.

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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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!
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.

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
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
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)
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
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
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.

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
From: Doug Sparr
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: Oceana Restaurant expansion
Date: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 8:52:39 PM
Attachments: IMG_4992.MOV

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
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
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? I oppose the two CUPS and proposed text amendments.

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

Thank-you
Board of Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont) Chair, Elizabeth Van Denburgh
2 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
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
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.

Page Two

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.

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.

Santa Monica City CouncilApril 26, 2022

Santa Monica City Council
April 26, 2022