Written Comments — Santa Monica City Council, May 13, 2025

1 David Yakobson
From: Jason Mastbaum <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2025 9:07 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: Support Items 10.A and 16.E

EXTERNAL
Councilmembers,
I am writing to join Santa Monica Forward in supporting adoption of item 10.A bringing a permanent entertainment zone on the Promenade, and item 16.E, on the creation of an additional entertainment zone at the Pier as part of bringing back large-scale concerts at the Pier. Thank you for your work on these items and to Councilmembers Hall and Zwick and Mayor Negrete for bringing forward item 16.E.

Thank you,
Jason
90403
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
2 David Yakobson
From: Dustin Shahan <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2025 10:04 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: Support Items 10.A and 16.E

Thank you,
Dustin Shahan
90401
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
1 David Yakobson
From: Jesus <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2025 1:54 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: Support Items 10.A and 16.E

Thank you,
Jesus, 90405
Sent with Proton Mail secure email.

Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
2 David Yakobson
From: John Lin <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2025 12:11 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: Support Items 10.A and 16.E

Thank you,
90401
John Lin
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
3 David Yakobson
From: Kyle Rebar <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2025 6:45 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: Support Items 10.A and 16.E

Thank you,
Kyle Rebar
90405
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
1 David Yakobson
From: Jim Harris <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2025 4:27 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Misti Kerns; Carter Rubin; Nicholas Rolston; Julieta Giner; David Newberg; Peter Trinh; Randi Parent
Subject: Regarding May 13, 2025 City Council Agenda Itam 16.E., from Santa Monica Pier Corporation Board of Directors
Attachments: Santa Monica Pier Corporation Resolution Re Economic Recovery (1).pdf Dear Santa Monica City Council Members;
On behalf of the Santa Monica Pier Corporation Board of Directors, I am resending to you a Resolution that the Board passed at their April 28, 2025 Santa Monica Pier Corporation Board Meeting, much of which is relevant to City Council Agenda Item 16.E. at the May 13, 2025 Council Meeting.

Thanks, and all best regards,
To help
protect your
privacy,
Micro so ft
Office
prevented
auto matic
download of
this picture
from the
Internet.

Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
200 Santa Monica Pier, Suite A, Santa Monica, CA 90401

A RESOLUTION OF THE SANTA MONICA PIER CORPORATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS,

REGARDING EFFORTS TO SUPPORT ECONOMIC RECOVERY IN THE SANTA MONICA COMMUNITY.

The Board of Directors of the Santa Monica Pier Corporation (SMPC) resolves as follows:

WHEREAS the SMPC can help the City of Santa Monica (the City) support economic opportunity and growth through increasing local visitors and tourists, and; WHEREAS SMPC and the City benefit from increasing local visitors and tourism activity at the Pier through events, rentals and retail activity that contributes to the City’s Pier Fund and the SMPC’s revenue, and;
WHEREAS the Pier draws approximately 10 million visitors per year and supports a local economic impact of a $714.2 million in Santa Monica, generating nearly $20 million per year in tax revenue for local government operations in Santa Monica according to a 2019 Beacon Economics study, and;
WHEREAS the demolition and replacement of the Pier Bridge will create additional short-term challenges that require creative solutions in order to sustain high levels of visitation to the Pier, and;
WHEREAS SMPC convenes monthly public meetings attended by Pier stakeholders, including tenants, permitted vendors and performers, visitors and other members of the public to receive public input and convene conversations about the needs and priorities of the Pier community, and;
WHEREAS SMPC agrees to assist the City with public review and discussion of planning and policy matters related to the Pier objectives,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the SMPC expresses its support for the following and its desire to work with the City of Santa Monica on the following:
● Creating a Pier/Beach Zone in which the Pier Corporation leads the management of events and event prospects not only on the Pier (as is currently its responsibility), but also to the beach areas immediately next to the Pier extending between Lifeguard Towers #14 (to the north of the Pier) and #17 (to the south of the Pier) ● Updating the City of Santa Monica Administrative Instruction specific to Events and the Event Site Guidelines to make the City’s public spaces more attractive to large-scale events, including an increase to the current attendance cap for outside-produced concert events on the Pier Parking Deck from the current cap of 500 persons, thereby increasing interest in the Pier as a unique concert venue.

Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
200 Santa Monica Pier, Suite A, Santa Monica, CA 90401
● Working closely with City public safety departments in advance of events to outline security and safety needs and requirements, so that the Pier Corporation can provide as much cost certainty as possible to event partners in order for the Pier to maintain a competitive edge as a venue.
● Designating the Santa Monica Pier as an Entertainment Zone, pursuant to SB 969 (Wiener, 2024), with the geographic extent, hours of operation and other parameters to be determined in consultation with Pier tenants, stakeholders and the City. ● Seeking ideas from Community Partners to fully utilize the allowed development envelope on the Pier up to the cap established by Proposition S. ● Seeking ideas from Community Partners to invest in capital infrastructure projects such as sound, lighting and performance amenities.
● Continuing “clean and safe” investments, including the City’s DART team, to ensure that visitors and tenants can operate in a healthy and safe manner. ● Doing all of the above with consistent input and consultation from Pier stakeholders.

AND FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED that the SMPC directs the Executive Director to take necessary steps to undertake these actions.

Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
1 David Yakobson
From: Carter Rubin <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2025 2:59 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: Support Items 10.A and 16.E

Thank you,
Carter Rubin
Pico Neighborhood Resident
Best,
Carter
310-200-1088
(Sent while mobile)
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
2 David Yakobson
From: Ryan Olson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2025 2:08 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: Support Items 10.A and 16.E

EXTERNAL
I am writing to join Santa Monica Forward in supporting adoption of item 10.A bringing a permanent entertainment zone on the Promenade, and item 16.E, on the creation of an additional entertainment zone at the Pier as part of bringing back large-scale concerts at the Pier. Thank you for your work on these items and to Councilmembers Hall and Zwick and Mayor Negrete for bringing forward item 16.E.

Thank you, Ryan Olson, 90405
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
3 David Yakobson
From: Naveen Hovemann <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2025 2:09 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: Support Items 10.A and 16.E

Thank you,
Naveen Hovemann
90401
Sent from my iPhone
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
1 David Yakobson
From: Chasen Daniels <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2025 9:21 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: Support Items 10.A and 16.E

Thank you,
Chasen Daniels
90401
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
1 David Yakobson
From: Tracey Alexander <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2025 1:07 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: Support Items 10.A and 16.E

EXTERNAL
Hello Councilmembers,
I am writing to join Santa Monica Forward in supporting adoption of item 10.A bringing a permanent entertainment zone on the Promenade, and item 16.E, on the creation of an additional entertainment zone at the Pier as part of bringing back large-scale concerts at the Pier. Thank you for your dedicated work on these items and to Councilmembers Hall and Zwick and Mayor Negrete for bringing forward item 16.E.

Thank you,
Tracey Alexander
90272
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
1 David Yakobson
From: Santa Monica Forward <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2025 8:02 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Natalya Zernitskaya; Barry Snell; councilmtgitems
Subject: SM Forward Letter -- Support City Council Items 12.A, 4.J, 10.A, and 16.E Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed

EXTERNAL
To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.

May 11, 2025
Subject: Support City Council Items 12.A, 4.J, 10.A, and 16.E Dear Mayor Negrete and City Councilmembers,
Santa Monica Forward strongly supports Item 12.A updating zoning ordinance and city code, item 4.J, authorizing the city to write in support of SB79, 10.A, establishing an Entertainment Zone ordinance, and 16.E on Pier concerts on the 5.13.25 agenda. Further, we have specific recommendations for enhancing the proposal under 12.A below.

12.A
Enhancing the production of housing across Santa Monica is an urgent priority, and the city should move to facilitate administrative approvals for all sites, greater production of ADUs, and the creation of duplexes and quad-plexes via lot splits. Further, council should direct adjustments to staff proposals on ADUs, zoning density alignment, and ARB procedure as described in the following paragraphs.

Administrative Approval: Current timelines to approve new developments are taking too long, and blocking the creation of housing which the city desperately needs. Council should approve the change in ordinance to allow parcels over 1 acre in size to use administrative approval. Further, council should seek ways to streamline and reduce the time to permitting.

ADUs: Council should support changes to ADU minimum and maximum size limits, as well as the increase in number of permitted ADUs & JADUs on existing multifamily parcels. Further, council should eliminate the limitation that no more ADUs are created than existing units on a parcel, which inhibits the improvement of existing duplexes and triplexes in a way that encourages their preservation as rent controlled housing. Council should also eliminate owner-occupancy requirements for JADUs in order to enable their creation.

Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
2 Lot Splits & Duplexes: The elimination of owner-occupancy requirements and limitations on redevelopment of vacant parcels will help to increase housing in high opportunity neighborhoods, and council must vote to pass it. Council should also support increases to FAR and reductions in constraints to facilitate new projects, as recommended by Staff.

LUCE and Zoning Density Alignment: The implementation of density limits is an antiquated approach to zoning which reinforces segregation by encouraging fewer, larger units that are not affordable to middle and lower income residents. Santa Monica should use this opportunity to improve the way it zones by moving to formbased zoning centering on FAR, height, and setbacks. Form-based zoning focuses on making sure that new buildings are compatible with their surroundings, rather than restricting the number of residents who can make Santa Monica their home. As staff notes, the proposed density requirements will continue to lock our residential neighborhoods in amber, entirely blocking new housing production.

Adjustment to Section 9.55.120 on the Architectural Review Board: Council should reject this adjustment to ordinance, and clarify instead that the scheduling of a review by the ARB counts towards the meeting limit, and reduce the meeting limit to 2 from 3. As Staff demonstrates in the Administrative Approval Timelines analysis, ARB approval is a significant drag on the permitting of new housing. Council should aim to reduce timelines for ARB approval, not extend them by allowing the ARB to delay timelines by not discussing items.

Item 4.J:

SB79 is crucial to addressing California’s housing crisis and improving the lives of Santa Monica’s residents, workers, and community members. This bill would direct new housing to exactly where it should be located - within walking distance of high quality transit, like the E Line. As a smaller city within LA County which is aiming to do its part, Santa Monica cannot solve its housing crisis on its own. That’s why supporting statewide upzoning bills is crucial.

Please note that City Staff’s analysis of the locations affected by SB79 appears to incorrectly include bus stops along Wilshire, Santa Monica, Pico, and Main Street that do not meet SB79’s requirements for bus rapid transit according to Public Resources Code section 21064.3 and section 21060.2. Far less of Santa Monica would be subject to SB79 than staff’s analysis indicates as a result.

SB79 effectively walks a fine line to do right on several issues:
 Location of New Housing: SB79 is limited to within ½ mile of BRT and rail transit stops, which includes locations that are very well served. These are not merely streets with a bus, but locations where that bus line has full time dedicated lanes and 15 minute peak service.  Displacement: Tenants have rights as dictated by the Housing Accountability Act of 2019 (SB330) and thus the Tenant Protection Act of 2019, as noted by the Senate Local Government Bill Analysis. These protections are considered sufficiently robust for upzoning programs undertaken by cities themselves, and include Santa Monica’s required relocation payments to tenants for no-fault evictions.  Below Market Rate Housing: Developments are subject to Santa Monica’s inclusionary zoning ordinance, and are required to provide below market rate housing in order to qualify for benefits of the State Density Bonus program or streamlining under SB35/SB423.  Height & Density: SB79 is straightforward in defining the height and density which projects can achieve when city zoning is less permissive. Projects are not subject to increases in height under State Density Bonus.

Some Californians are opposed to SB79 and have lobbied their cities to also oppose. They believe the scale of their cities was perfect when it made room to accommodate them, but they don’t want changes that would allow the next generation similar opportunities. We should prioritize people over buildings. The housing crisis has grown out of control, and tens of thousands of Californians are living on our streets. It’s time for Santa Monica to take a stance in favor of ending our housing crisis.

Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
3 Thank you,
Santa Monica Forward
Brad Ewing and Carl Hansen, Co-Chairs
--
We are working for a diverse, progressive, sustainable and equitable Santa Monica.

SantaMonicaForward.org
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025
Item 16-E
May 13, 2025

Santa Monica City CouncilMay 13, 2025

Santa Monica City Council
May 13, 2025