SR 04-18-2017 6A
Ci ty Council
Report
City Council Meeting : April 18, 2017
Agenda Item: 6.A
1 of 17
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director , City Planning
Subject: Appeal (17ENT -0016) of the Planning Commission's Approval of a
Conditional Use Permit (16ENT -0128) to Allow a Type 47 alcohol license in
conjunction with a new full -service, 3,306 square foot 102 seat restaurant
(Avery) comprised of 92 indoor dining seats (12 bar seats) and 10 outdoor
seats located within a ground floor space of the Shore Hotel located at 1530
2nd Street.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Cou ncil deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the
Planning Commission to approve a Conditional Use Permit to allow a Type 47 alcohol
use in conjunction with a full service restaurant on a property located at 1530 2 nd Street ,
based on the findings and sub ject to the conditions of approval attached to the report.
Executive Summary
On August 16, 2016 the applicant, Full of Flavor LLC, filed a Conditional Use Permit
application to establish a full service restaurant with alcohol service on the property at
1 530 2 nd Street . On February 1, 2017, the Planning Commission approved a
Conditional Use Permit (16ENT -0128) to allow a Type -47 alcohol license in conjunction
with the full service restaurant , subject to conditions of approval in the Statement of
Official Action . The appellant, UNITE HERE Local 11, filed a timely appeal on February
14, 2017 (17ENT -0016) of the Planning Commission’s approval of Conditional Use
Permit 16ENT -0128.
The appellant requests that City Council overturn the Planning Commission’s app roval
of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP), stating that the findings cannot be made or
justified, the conditions of approval are not adequate and that the use is inconsistent
with the CUP conditions of approval placed upon the Shore Hotel (property owner) as a
limited amenity hotel. Lastly, the appellant noted that since the Shore Hotel is currently
in litigation with the Coastal Commission regarding their Coastal Development Permit, it
is not appropriate to approve a restaurant use with alcohol service bec ause it benefits
the property owner.
Pursuant to the City’s Downtown Interim Ordinance (IZO) No. 2522 (CCS), which
established interim procedures and regulations for Downtown pending completion of the
Downtown Community Plan, this project is being reviewe d for compliance with the 1988
2 of 17
zoning ordinance. The site is located in the C3 zoning district.
This report summarizes the Planning Commission’s action, the points of each appeal
provided by the appellant, the applicant rebuttal and staff’s analysis. Thi s report
concludes with a recommendation from staff to uphold the Planning Commission’s
approval of the Conditional Use Permit based upon the findings and subject to the
conditions adopted by the Planning Commission on February 1, 2017.
Background
The fo llowing is a summary of prior permits that have been issued for the subject
property:
DR 05 -007, CUP 05 -009, GPA 06 -001 and VAR 06 -018 (approved March 19, 2008)
Development Review Permit, Conditional Use Permit, General Plan Amendment and
Variance was app roved by the Planning Commission for the new Shore Hotel.
APP08 -006; APP08 -007 (approved September 23, 2008)
The Planning Commission’s approval of the Development Review Permit, Conditional
Use Permit, and Variance for the Shore Hotel was appealed. O n September 23, 2008,
the City Council denied the appeal and approved the DR, CUP, and Variance for the
Shore Hotel with modified conditions. Conditions of approval for the project limited
proposed amenities to a 370 square foot exercise room, a 750 square foot meeting
room/breakfast room, swimming pool and spa pools and prohibited a restaurant, bar,
conferencing facilities, spa, florist, lounge or similar amenities typically found in more
upscale or luxury hotels. T he separate commercial spaces along Ocean Avenue and 2 nd
Street are exempt and not subject to these restrictions.
11CUP003; 11CUP004; 11CUP005 (approved August 10, 2011)
The owner of the Shore Hotel requested and received three separate Conditional Use
Permits for alcohol service within the pr oject site. 11CUP003 was approved in
anticipation of a proposed restaurant at 1530 2 nd Street Space B (the subject space);
11CUP004 was approved for alcohol sales within the hotel’s guest rooms (mini -bars)
and on -site hotel bar; and 11CUP005 was approved f or the restaurant on Ocean
Avenue currently operated by Blue Plate Taco (Space A) with specific operational
conditions, which were complementary to the hotel’s conditions to be a limited -amenity
3 of 17
hotel. Specific operational conditions associated with the S pace A and B alcohol
conditional use permits were included to more clearly define the separation of the Hotel
from the two independently owned on -site restaurants . These conditions o f approval
included the following :
No restaurant delivery to the hotel g uestrooms shall occur unless delivery is
offered as part of the restaurant’s typical operations.
No food orders to the restaurant shall be processed through the hotel.
No restaurant charges shall be included on the hotel bill.
The operation of the restaura nt must be separate and distinct from the operation
of the hotel.
Further, t he Planning Commission approval of 11CUP003 (the subject space)
authorized seating arrangements for 74 sit -down patrons plus two (2) waiting area seats
and hours of alcohol servic e :
Sunday through Wednesday - 10:00 AM to 1:00 AM (interior dining area) and
10:00 AM to 12:00 Midnight (outdoor dining area);
Thursday through Saturday - 10:00 AM to 2:00 AM (interior dining area) and
10:00 AM to 1:00 AM (outdoor dining area).
However, C onditional Use Permit 11CUP003 expired because operations did not
commence.
14PSP008 (approved February 2, 2015)
A Performance Standards Permit granting a small, satellite automobile rental agency
was approved within the Shore Hotel. The use continues to operate at two small
counters totaling 280 square feet within the hotel.
Planning Commission Action
The Planning Commission initially heard the application request on January 18, 2017
and voted to continue the item to February 1, 2017 to enable the applicant time to meet
with Downtown Santa Monica, Inc. and the Downtown Neighborhood Association. On
4 of 17
February 1, 2017, the Planning Commission voted 4 -2 (one absent) to approve
Conditional Use Permit 16ENT -0128. The approval included conditions and
modif ications to the applicant’s request and staff’s recommended conditions. In the
Commission’s deliberations, t here was a significant amount of discussion regarding the
restaurant’s independent ownership and use from the Hotel, the need for a vibrant
pedestri an oriented use within the unfinished space, and discussion of potential impacts
related to the Shore Hotel’s conditions of approval as a limited amenity hotel. In addition
to conditions that ensured the separation of the restaurant from the hotel, typical
operational conditions, and limitations on hours of alcohol service, the Commission
added that if the restaurant were to go out of business, the Conditional Use Permit
(CUP) would only transfer to a new restaurant if the successor operator demonstrated
th at it is legally separate and distinct from the hotel operator and that the operation will
be separate and distinct from the hotel. The Commission also required that there be a
report summarizing the restaurant’s compliance with conditions of approval aft er one
year and again after seven years of operation if residential development occurred within
500 feet of the site.
Project Analysis
Proposed Project Operation / Hours of Alcohol Service
The applicant, Full of Flavor LLC., is requesting a CUP to allow alcohol service in
conjunction with a Type -47 (On -Sale General, Bona Fide Eating Place) alcohol license
at a proposed full -service restaurant , the Avery . This independently owned and
operated restaurant would occupy the vacant the 2nd Street fronting gro und floor space
(Space B) of approximately 3,306 square feet . An additional outdoor dining area of 306
square feet is also requested. The proposed dining area totals 102 seats including 92
indoor seats, a private dining area, 12 bar seats (counted with in door seats), and 10
outdoor seats, as depicted in the floor plan shown in Figure 1.
5 of 17
Figure 1: Proposed Floor Plan
The outdoor dining area extends approximately 6’ from the building façade within the
subject site, adjacent to a 10’ public sidewalk alon g 2nd Street.
Area Square Footage Seats
Dining Area/ Private
Dining 1,958 sf 80 seats
Kitchen/Service Area 887sf N/A
Bar Area 155 sf 12
Outdoor Patio 306 sf
as conditioned
10 seats
Total 3,306 sf 102 seats
6 of 17
The restaurant would function as a full -s ervice restaurant for sit -down breakfast, lunch
and dinner meal service and provide patrons the opportunity to purchase and consume
alcoholic beverages Sun day through Saturday - 7 A .M . to 2 A.M . The applicant’s
rational e for the extended hours request is t heir wish to have consistent hours of alcohol
and food service.
Vehicular Parking & Circulation
Vehicular and pedestrian access to the restaurant is via 2 nd Street. However, p arking at
the Shore Hotel is accessed from Ocean Avenue, a block west of the site, for which
there is valet parking 24 hours/7 days a week. The Shore Hotel currently provides 210
standard and compact parking spaces and 70 additional non -required tandem spaces
on -site within 4 subterranean parking levels. All of the parking on -site is valet -operated
24 -hours daily.
With the addition of the proposed restaurant, the required parking for all uses on the site
is 223 spaces, resulting in a short fall of 13 spaces. However, with the valet operation in
place, the tandem spaces may be utili ze d to support the restaurant’s off -street parking
requirement. As provided in Condition #10 of the proposed Statement of Official Action,
valet parking shall be provided to restaurant patrons during all hours of restaurant
operations.
Hotel Entitlement s and Limited Amenity Condition s of Approval
The City Council’s approval of the Shore Hotel development requires the hotel to
operate as a limited amenity facility per Condition #10 of DR 05 -007, CUP 05 -009 and
VAR 06 -018. As specified in the project con ditions of approval, the hotel operator may
provide an exercise room, breakfast/meeting room, swimming and spa pools.
Additionally, a hotel restaurant/bar, conference facilities, spa, florist, lounge or similar
amenities typically found in more luxury hot els may be determined by the Director of
Planning to constitute hotel amenit ies resulting in a change in character that would be
subject to Planning Commission approval. However, this condition does not apply to
the two restaurant spaces (Spaces A and B) that were planned with the hotel’s property
7 of 17
fronting on 2nd Street and Ocean Avenue if these venues are operated as separate
and distinct entities from the hotel and the hotel operations. Space A is currently
occupied by Blue Plate Taco and has an approv ed alcohol CUP with conditions that it
be operated separate and distinct from hotel operations.
As stated in Condition #3 of the proposed Statement of Official Action, t he hours of
operation for the full -service restaurant in Space B would be 7:00 a.m. – 2:00 a.m.
seven days a week with complete closure by 3 a.m. As detailed in the Planning
Commission staff report, a number of restaurants have recently been approved with
similar hours D owntown and therefore, the hours are appropriate due to lack of nearby
residents living within the area.
Conditions # 1 -10 in the proposed Statement of Official Action are intended to reduce
the potential adverse impacts on the surrounding area and ensure that the restaurant
operate s independently of the hotel and include t he following:
102 seats (92 indoor 12 of which may be located along a bar counter) and 10
outdoor seats.
Alcoholic beverages orders shall cease 30 minutes prior to restaurant closure, or
no later than the closing of the associated food service of the estab lishment,
whichever is first.
No restaurant delivery to the hotel guestrooms shall occur unless delivery is
offered as part of the restaurant’s typical operations.
No service orders to the restaurant shall be processed through the hotel.
No restaurant ch arges shall be included on the hotel bill.
The operation of the restaurant shall be separate and distinct from the operation
of the Shore Hotel. The approval of Conditional Use Permit 16ENT -0218 (“CUP”)
is applicable solely to Full of Flavor, LLC, and is n ot applicable to the owners of
the Shore Hotel or any of their successors in interest. Therefore, the CUP shall
terminate automatically upon the termination of the operation of the restaurant by
Full of Flavor, LLC, unless a proposed successor operator a nd/or tenant is
approved in writing by the Planning Director prior to the commencement of any
8 of 17
new operation or tenancy at 1530 2 nd Street that requires a Type 47 alcohol
license. In furtherance of achieving the objectives of this condition, the Planning
D irector may withhold approval until such time as the successor operator and/or
tenant provides documentation to substantiate (i) that it is legally separate and
distinct from the owners of the Shore Hotel and (ii) that its operation at 1530 2 nd
Street will be separate and distinct from the Shore Hotel.
Pursuant to SMMC Section 9.41.080(B), after the proposed restaurant has been
operational for one (1) year, and then again after seven (7) years of operation if
there has been residential development within 5 00 feet of the site, the applicant
shall provide to the City a report summarizing the restaurant’s compliance with
these conditions of approval. After submittal of the compliance report, if staff
determines that there have violations of these conditions o f approval, staff shall
submit the compliance report to the Planning Commission as an information item
to enable the Planning Commission to determine whether a public hearing is
necessary. Upon review of the compliant report at this public hearing, the
Pl anning Commission may add or revise terms and conditions to the extent
necessary to ensure effective conditions of approval.
Valet parking shall be provided to restaurant patrons during all hours of
restaurant operations.
Neighborhood Compatibility
Santa Monica’s Downtown functions as the City’s greatest concentration of commerce,
retail, dining, transit, and entertainment. The C3 District is within the downtown and is
intended to maintain and enhance the downtown area. The neighborhood provides a
variety of commercial, residential, cultural, and recreational opportunities and
complementary uses that generate activity during both daytime and evening hours. The
surrounding developments on 2nd Street include a variety of use s , in cl uding Santa
Monica Place, a new ly renovated P arking S tructure #6 with expanded ground floor
pedestrian uses, Hotel Carmel, retail, and dining. The proposed ground floor restaurant
of the Shore Hotel fronts 2nd Street, and since the hotel’s opening, the space has
remained a shell spa ce that has occasionally been used for seminars and events . The
9 of 17
proposed restaurant use will enliven 2nd Street by offering a full -service dining option
with alcohol service.
The impacts associated with this type of use are generally associated with no ise and
circulation issues. The proposed valet condition will address the patron’s ability to park
near the site and the outdoor dining area is minimal with only a small area outside the
building on private property available for outdoor dining. It is no t anticipated that the
alcohol service will be inconsistent with other alcohol service establishments within the
downtown, or that the use would negatively impact residential uses that may be near
the proposed restaurant.
General Plan Consistency
The pr oposed use is consistent with Goal and Policies established in the Land Use and
Circulation Element (LUCE). The subject site is located within the Downtown Core Land
Use District, which serves as the City’s center of transportation, commerce, and
entertain ment. LUCE Goal D1 envisions the Downtown Core as a premier shopping,
dining and entertainment destination for local and regional visitors. Policy D1.1 supports
the creation of diverse local and regional serving retail and dining opportunities in the
distr ict. The subject CUP, as conditioned, would allow a new dining establishment an
opportunity to function in a manner that is consistent with other dining facilities and
alcohol outlets in the Downtown. LUCE Goal D7 supports the district’s balanced mix of
us es that reinforce the greatest concentration of activity in the City and Policy D7.1
encourages a broad mix of uses that create dynamic activity in both the daytime and
evening hours. The full -service restaurant with incidental alcohol service will provide
meal service to residents and visitors during day and evening hours.
Appeal Summary
On February 14, 2017, the appellant, UNITE HERE Local 11, filed an appeal of the
Planning Commission’s approval of Conditional Use Permit 16ENT -0128 . The full text of
the appeal is presented in Attachment C of this report. The appellant’s appeal statement
is summarized below.
10 of 17
1. The restaurant could impact price and accessibility of the hotel to working people
and is not consistent with a limited amenity hotel.
2. There a re unresolved accusations against the hotel owner regarding violation of
existing Conditional Use Permits.
3. There is pending litigation between the Shore Hotel and the Coastal Commission
which should be resolved prior to approving a CUP for Space B.
4. CUP F inding #3 cannot assert that “the proposed restaurant tenancy and alcohol
service will operate as a standalone operation separate and distinct from the
hotel”.
5. CUP Finding #4, that the proposed use is compatible with any of the land uses
presently on th e subject parcel if the present land uses are to remain cannot be
made because the pending Shore Hotel and Coastal Commission litigation puts
doubt on the continued operation of the hotel.
6. CUP C onditions of Approval #2 -4, #5, #8 and #9 specifying exte nded hours of
operation, additional seats, delivery service by the restaurant if such service is
included in their operations, termination of successor operators under certain
conditions and subsequent compliance hearings are moot due to the pending
litiga tion and the inconsistency of the Shore Hotel to operate under the current
hotel conditions of approval.
Appeal Analysis
Ordinance No. 2522 (CCS) requires that the provisions of the 1988 Zoning Ordinance,
as amended, apply to the properties located in t he Downtown Community Plan area
until such time as the Plan is adopted and becomes effective . The Council, in its de
novo review of this appeal, must determine whether the proposed project meets the
11 of 17
following findings for a Conditional Use Permit pursuant to SMMC Section
9.04.20.12.040 :
(a) The proposed use is one conditionally permitted within the subject district and
complies with all of the applicable provisions of the "City of Santa Monica
Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Ordinance".
(b) The proposed use woul d not impair the integrity and character of the district in
which it is to be established or located.
(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 t he
subject parcel if the present land uses are to remain.
(e) The proposed use would be compatible with existing and permissible land uses
within the district and the general area in which the proposed use is to be
located.
(f) There are adequate provisions for wa ter, sanitation, and public utilities and
services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public
health and safety .
(g) Public access to the proposed use shall be adequate .
(h) The physical location or placement of the use on the site is compa tible with and
relates harmoniously to the surrounding neighborhood.
(i) The proposed use is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the
General Plan .
(j) The proposed use would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety,
convenience, or general welfare.
(k) The proposed use conforms precisely to the applicable performance standards
contained in Subchapter 9.04.12 , Section 9.04.12.010 and special conditions
outlined in Subchapter 9.04.14 , Section 9.04.14.010.
(l) The proposed use will not resu lt in an over concentration of such uses in the
immediate vicinity,
Council must also make the following a dditional Alcohol Outlet findings for the
dispensing of alcoholic beverages pursuant to SMMC Section 9.04.10.18.030 :
12 of 17
(a) The proposed use will not adver sely affect the welfare of neighborhood residents
in a significant manner.
(b) The proposed use will not contribute to an undue concentration of alcohol outlets
in the area.
(c) The proposed use will not detrimentally affect nearby neighborhoods considering
the di stance of the alcohol outlet to residential buildings, churches, schools,
hospitals, playgrounds, park, and other existing alcohol outlets.
(d) The proposed use is compatible with existing and potential uses within the
general area.
(e) Traffic and parking congest ion will not result.
(f) The public health, safety, and general welfare are protected.
(g) No harm to adjacent properties will result.
(h) The objectives of the General Plan are secured.
The Council may uphold the decision of the Planning Commission or grant the appe al,
in whole or in part, based upon these findings.
1. The appellant’s first point is to assert that the restaurant could impact the price
and accessibility of the hotel to working people as a limited amenity to the hotel.
The restaurant is being operated b y a separate and distinct entity from the hotel
and is not permitted to be a hotel amenity. Further, the CUP is only being
request ed for alcohol service in conjunction with restaurant operations. Condition
#8 requires the separation of hotel and restauran t operations and therefore , the
proposed restaurant is no more an amenity of the hotel than any other nearby
restaurant.
2. The appellant ’s second point states that the Shore Hotel has outstanding
violations with respect to their existing Conditional Use Pe rmits. N otwithstanding
that the Shore Hotel and the applicant’s request for an alcohol CUP in Space B
are unrelated, t he Code Compliance Division has previously investigated the
Shore Hotel’s possible violations of existing CUPs and determined that the hot el
is in compliance. The applicant making the request for the proposed alcohol CUP
13 of 17
for Space B is not associated with the ownership of the Shore Hotel. Further the
restaurant is being operated separate and distinct from hotel operations.
3. The appellant ’s third point states that pending litigation between the Shore Hotel
and the Coastal Commission should be resolved prior to approving a CUP for
Space B. City staff contacted Coastal Commission representatives staff
regarding the pending litigation and was informed that the pending litigation
should not impact the CUP for alcohol service by a third party applicant in Space
B . Staff was also informed that the trail trial is currently scheduled for June,
2017. As previously mentioned, the applicant request ing the alcohol CUP for
Space B is not an affiliate to the Shore Hotel ownership. The restaurant in Space
B is being operated separately from the hotel and would be required to obtain
separate approvals from the Coastal Commission prior to commencing
oper ations.
4. The appellant ’s fourth point contends that CUP Finding #3 (parcel is physically
suitable for the proposed use) cannot be met because the hotel and restaurant
will not operate as separate entities. This particular finding addresses the
physical sui tability of the parcel for the proposed use. The tenant space where
the restaurant with alcohol service is proposed is on the ground floor of the hotel
building with frontage on 2 nd Street. The tenant space has a pedestrian entrance
on 2 nd Street and is suitable for accommodating the proposed restaurant use with
alcohol service. The appellant’s contention that the hotel and restaurant will not
operate as separate entities cannot be substantiated. The City has received no
evidence that the restaurant will operate as anything but a separate tenant of the
hotel. In addition, as noted above, conditions of approval have been included to
ensure that the hotel and restaurant operate as separate entities.
5. The appellant ’s fifth point contends that CUP Finding #4 (compatibility with on -
site uses) cannot be met because the hotel is in litigation with the Coastal
Commission over its Coastal Development Permit and is unsure if the hotel will
continue to operate. As noted in the response to the appellant’s third point of
14 of 17
appeal, City staff contacted Coastal Commission representatives regarding the
subject application for a CUP for alcohol service in Space B and was informed
that the pending litigation would not preclude the approval of a CUP for the
proposed restaurant in Space B by a third party applicant . As previously
mentioned, the applicant requesting the alcohol CUP for Space B is unrelated to
the operation or ownership of the Shore Hotel. Furthermore , the issuance of the
CUP would not alter the respective positi ons of the Coastal Commission or the
Shore Hotel in the pending litigation. Even if the litigation were to result in a
termination of hotel operations, such termination would remain a private matter
as between the Shore Hotel (as landlord ) and the CUP app licant (as tenant).
Furthermore, t he restaurant in Space B is being operated separately from the
hotel and would be required to obtain separate approvals from the Coastal
Commission prior to commencing operations.
6. The appellant ’s sixth point states that Conditions #2 and #3 allow for more seats
and extended hours of alcohol service than the previously approved CUP for the
subject space (Space B) and those hours for Blue Plate Taco (Space A). The
request for a CUP for alcohol service in Space B is a new ap plication that does
not rely on previous approvals. In recommending the hours of alcohol service,
staff reviewed the approved alcohol service hours for other Downtown
restaurants in addition to assessing proximity of residential land uses that could
be im pacted by alcohol service at the restaurant. Based on the primarily
commercial land uses in the immediate surroundings and recently approved
alcohol service hours, the 7AM -2AM limitation was approved by the Planning
Commission.
7. The appellant ’s seventh po int states that Condition #5 provides a loophole for
room service by the hotel. This condition permits the restaurant to deliver food “to
go” to the rooms as they may to any other off -site location and is not related to
amenities offered by the hotel.
15 of 17
8. Th e appellant ’s eighth point states that Condition #8 does little to prevent the
restaurant as a hotel amenity. This condition requires that the hotel and
restaurant must operate separately by expressly stating that the CUP terminates
with termination of the restaurant’s operations by the applicant or any approved
successors. A ny successor operator of the restaurant must provide the Director
of Planning evidence to substantiate (i) that it is legally separate and distinct from
the owners of the Shore Hotel a nd (ii) that its operation at 1530 2 nd Street will be
separate and distinct from the Shore Hotel.
9. The appellant ’s ninth point states that Condition #9, which requires a compliance
report on the restaurant’s conformance with the CUP conditions, will not le ad to
successful enforcement given the prior allegations of CUP violations by the hotel.
Condition #9 only addresses the restaurant’s compliance with the alcohol CUP
conditions of approval and does not involve the hotel operator at all. Compliance
with the alcohol CUP conditions of approval is the responsibility of the restaurant
operator.
Applicant’s Statement
The applicant has provided, as requested by the City Attorney, legal documentation to
demonstrate their operation as a separate and distinct entity from the Shore Hotel
ownership. Additionally, Full of Flavor LLC asserts the dispute between UNITE HERE
Local 11 and the Shore Hotel is unfairly impacting their proposed business. They cite
the following incidents to demonstrate their findings:
Member s of the public acknowledged the proposed restaurant operator is a third
party entity during the public testimony.
The proposed CUP conditions are consistent with Blue Plate Taco (restaurant
Space A) that require the restaurant serving alcohol operate inde pendently from
Shore Hotel ownership;
Unite Here Local 11 makes references to the Shore Hotel (ownership) as being
in litigation. The applicant is not part of the litigation and appellant is seeking to
16 of 17
combine the validity of the Hotel’s coastal permit wi th the pending CUP
application.
The applicant is in agreement with the proposed conditions of approval including
number of seats, hours of operation, delivery service, potential cessation of the CUP
upon a change of ownership and possible compliance heari ngs before the Planning
Commission if residential development occurs within 500 feet of the site.
Community Outreach
The applicant supplied two letters of project support via the DTSM Downtown Santa
Monica Inc. and the Downtown Neighborhood Associatio n prior to the February 1, 2017
hearing. Correspondence was received from the public between the Planning
Commission’s January 18, 2017 public hearing and the February 1, 2017 meeting
supporting UNITE HERE Local 11’s arguments for denying the alcohol CUP . The
correspondence also alleged bad faith operations of the Shore Hotel with respect to
their organization, consistency of the Hotel’s approved operational conditions and the
relationship with UNITE HERE Local 11 and the hotel’s employees.
Environment al Analysis
This request is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), pursuant to Section 15301 (Class 13 – Existing Facilities), of the State
Implementation Guidelines as the project involves interior improvements to a n existing
building to establish a new restaurant with on -site sale of beer, wine and distilled spirits.
Alternatives
As an alternative to the staff recommendation, the Council may consider the following
with respect to the pending appeal if supported by the full evidentiary record:
1. Approve the appeal (17ENT -0016) submitted by the appellant and deny
Conditional Use Permit (16ENT -0128).
2. Articulate revised findings and/or conditions to Approve OR Deny the subject
appeal.
17 of 17
Financial Impacts and Bud get Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the
recommended action.
Prepared By: Regina Szilak, Associate Planner
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. PC STOA 1530 2nd alcohol cup
B. Applicant's statement 1530 2nd St alcohol cup
C. 1530 2nd Street appeal statement
D. Planning Commission January 18, 2017
E. Planning Commission February 1, 2017
F. 17ENT -0016 CC Appeal (1530 2nd Street 16ENT -0128) alcohol cup CC STOA
G. 16ENT0128 1530 2nd Street plan
H. 1530 2nd St. LCD screens
I. Written Comments
J. Powerpoint
1
City of Santa Monica
City Planning Division
CITY COUNCIL
STATEMENT OF OFFICIAL ACTION
PROJECT INFORMATION
CASE NUMBER: Appeal (16ENT -0016) of Conditional Use Permit (16ENT -
00128)
LOCATION: 1530 Second Street
APPLICANT: Full of Flavor, LLC
PROPERTY OWNER : Sunshine Enterprises, LP
CASE PLANNER: Gina Szilak, Associate Planner
REQUEST: The appeal of the Planning Commission’s approval of f a
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow a Type -47 alcohol
license in conjunction with a new full -service, 3,306
square -foot , 102 seat restaurant (Avery ) comprised of 9 2
indoor dining room seats (1 2 bar seats ) and 10 outdoor
seats located within a ground floor space of the Shore
Hotel.
CEQA STATUS: The request is exempt from the provisions of the California
E nvironmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to Section
15301 (Class 1), Existing Facilities, of the State
Implementation Guidelines in that the project involves
interior improvements to an existing building to establish a
new restaurant with on -site sale of beer, wine, and distilled
spirits.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION
April 18 , 2017 D etermination Date
X
Approved based on the following findings and subject to the
conditions below.
Denied.
2
Other:
EFFECTIVE DATES OF ACTIONS IF
NOT APPEALED:
April 1 8 , 2017
EXPIRATION DATE OF ANY PERMITS
GRANTED:
A pril 1 8 , 201 9
LENGTH OF ANY POSSIBLE
EXTENSION OF EXPIRATION DATES*:
6 months
* Any request for an extension of the expiration date must be received in the City
Planning Division prior to expiration of this permit.
Each and all of the findings and determinations are based on the competent and
substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the
Project. All summaries of information contained herein or in the findings are based on
the substantial evidence in the record. The absence of any particular fact from any such
summary is not an indication that a particular finding is not based in part on that fact.
FINDINGS :
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS
1. The proposed use is one conditionally permitted within the subject district and
complies with all of the applicable provisions of the "City of Santa Monica
Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Ordinance", in that alcohol licenses in
conjunction with eating and dr inking establishments are conditionally permitted in
the C3 (Downtown Commercial ) district of the Zoning Ordinance. More
specifically, requests for new alcohol licenses or substantial changes in the mode
or character of the existing licenses require Condi tional Use Permit approval
consistent with SMMC Section 9.04.10.18.020.
2. The proposed use would not impair the integrity and character of the district in
which it is to be established or located, in that the proposed alcohol sales will be
incidental to t he primary use of the business as a bona fide restaurant.
Additionally, the Downtown district encourages this type of use to create an urban
neighborhood setting and to provide neighborhood serving uses for the
employees, regional visitors, tourists, and residents in the area. Although alcohol -
related impacts are not generally associated with this type of use with alcohol
service, conditions of approval have been included to mitigate any potential
alcohol -related impacts such as restricting the hours of a lcohol sales and limiting
the hours that alcohol sales shall be permitted in the outdoor seating areas.
Furthermore, to ensure that the proposed primary use remains a s a restaurant,
Condition No. 40 requires that no more than 35% of total gross revenues p er year
shall be from alcohol sales. As conditioned, it is anticipated that the proposed
alcohol service will not impair the integrity and character of the district.
3
3. The subject parcel is physically suitable for the type of land use being proposed,
in t hat the parcel was developed as a hotel with a ground floor designed for a
pedestrian use such as a restaurant. The proposed restaurant tenancy and
alcohol service will operate as a standalone operation separate and distinct from
the hotel and will requir e building permits for standard tenant improvements to
ensure the space is appropriate for restaurant use.
4. The proposed use is compatible with any of the land uses presently on the subject
parcel if the present land uses are to remain, in that the site se rves as a hotel with
a standalone restaurant on the ground floor. The issuance of an alcohol license
and service area within the restaurant is consistent and compatible with typical
restaurant operations existing in the immediate area.
5. The proposed use would be compatible with existing and permissible land uses
within the district and the general area in which the proposed use is to be located,
in that the alcohol service is conditionally permitted by the Zoning Ordinance and
is proposed in a restaurant located in an existing pedestrian designated use of the
Shore Hotel that fronts 2 nd Street . The restaurant’s alcohol conditions of approval
will ensure that the use operates in a harmonious manner with the adjacent land
uses , provide an environment conduct ive to dining and will not create any alcohol -
related problems in the downtown area in that supports a number of full service
restaurants .
6. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and
services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public health
and safety, in that the alcohol service is conditionally permitted by the Zoning
Ordinance and is proposed within a pedestrian oriented restaurant tenant space
located within the Shore Hotel along 2 nd Street.
7. Public access to the proposed use will be adequate, in that vehicular access to the
Shore Hotel is available from Ocean Avenue . The pedestrian access to the
restaurant is provided directly from public sidewalk along Second Street.
8. The physical locat ion or placement of the use on the site is compatible with and
relates harmoniously to the surrounding neighborhood, in that the restaurant will
occupy a ground floor tenant space along 2 nd Street within a site developed as the
Shore Hotel. The proposed a lcohol licensing will be in conjunction with a full -
service, sit -down restaurant with outdoor dining in an area developed with similar
lodging, dining and retail establishments . Lastly, the Land Use Element of the
General Plan specifically supports the gre atest concentration of activity within the
Downtown such restaurant services and outdoor dining.
9. The proposed use is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the
General Plan, in that restaurant is proposed in the Downtown designation of th e
City of Santa Monica’s Land Use and Circulation (LUCE). Goal D1 of the LUCE
4
says to, “Maintain Downtown’s competitive advantage as a premier local and
regional shopping, dining, and entertainment destination, and support its evolution
in order to respond to changing market conditions.” Furthermore, Land Use
Element Goal D7 and Policy D 7 .1 supports creating a balanced mix of uses in the
downtown that reinforces its role as the greatest concentration of activity in the City
and encouraging a broad mix of uses that create dynamic activity in both the
daytime and evening hours. The proposed al cohol licensing provides the
restaurant operator the ability to offer beverages that are similar to other food
serving establishments within the downtown.
10. The proposed use would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety,
convenience, or general welfare, in that the proposed use is consistent with the
Zoning Ordinance and the Land Use Element of the General Plan, and conditions
to mitigate any potential adverse impacts such as limiting the operator to 35% of
total gross revenues on the pe rcentage of alcohol sales per year and ensuring that
the primary business operations involve a full -service restaurant with sit -down
meal service.
11. The proposed use conforms precisely to the applicable performance standards
contained in Subchapter 9.04.12 and special conditions outlined in Subchapter
9.04.14 of the City of Santa Monica Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning
Ordinance, in that in that no pe rformance standard permit is required
12. The proposed use will not result in an over concentration of such uses in the
immediate vicinity, in that the proposed restaurant alcohol license will be within a
pedestrian designed ground floor space of the Shore Ho tel serving local residents
and visitors. The general vicinity is frequented by large numbers of local residents,
shoppers, visitors, and tourists. This type of outlet has not contributed significantly
to alcohol related problems in the area, and it is an ticipated that the incorporation
of various conditions of approval will minimize impacts and intrusions into any
adjacent residential neighborhoods and not result in an overconcentration .
ALCOHOL OUTLET FINDINGS
1. The proposed use will not adversely af fect the welfare of neighborhood residents
in a significant manner in that the use will be located in a commercial area, away
from any major residential uses. The conditions of approval contain specific
conditions that have been added to mitigate any poten tial adverse impacts, such
as limiting hours, limiting gross percentage of alcohol sales and other alcohol -
related operational conditions.
2. The proposed use will not contribute to an undue concentration of alcohol outlets
in the area in that a restauran t with no separate bar area or entertainment or other
use is not typically considered to contribute to objectionable problems associated
with alcohol outlets, and in that the area is in the downtown portion of Santa Monica
which is frequented by large numb ers of local residents as well as office workers,
5
shoppers, and visitors from outside the area. Furthermore, this type of outlet has
not contributed significantly to alcohol related problems in the area.
3. The proposed use will not detrimentally affect nea rby neighborhoods considering
the distance of the alcohol outlet to residential buildings, churches, schools,
hospitals, playgrounds, parks, and other existing alcohol outlets in that the
conditions for approval, such as the requirement that the establishm ent operate
with no separate bar area or entertainment beyond the uses permitted in the
restaurant definition , will minimize the potential e ffect on the residential uses in the
vicinity. The Police Department reviewed the project and contacted staff on Au gust
30, 2016 to indicate that they did not anticipate any issues with the proposed
project.
4. The proposed use is compatible with existing and potential uses within the general
area in that the restaurant is in a commercial district, and a restaurant with an
alcohol license is compatible with permitted uses.
5. Traffic and parking congestion will not result from the proposed use in that parking
is located in the subterranean parking area which is accessed from Ocean Avenue
and exited on to First Court (alley).
6. The public health, safety, and general welfare are protected in that the project is
consistent with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and the Land Use Element
of the General Plan, and alcohol specific conditions have been added to miti gate
any potential adverse impacts. A restaurant with limited alcohol sales is compatible
with the surrounding regional shopping center and Downtown development.
7. No harm to adjacent properties will result in that the conditions of approval will
ensure that the establishment operates as a restaurant with no separate bar area
or entertainment that extends beyond the uses permitted in the restaurant
definition .
8. The objectives of the General Plan are secured in that the Land Use Element of
the General Plan designates the area as City’s Downtown. Goal D1 of the LUCE
says to, “Maintain Downtown’s competitive advantage as a premier local and
regional shopping, dining, and entertainment destination, and support its evolution
in order to respond to changing market conditions. Furthermore, Policy D1.1 says
to, “Create a diversity of retail opportunities including local - and regional -serving
retail and dining in the Downtown. The proposed restaurant with alcohol service
located within the Shore Hotel is consist ent with the zoning and LUCE designation.
6
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL :
PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Project Specific Conditions
1. This approval is for a Type 47 (On Sale General Eating Place) alcohol license only.
Any request to modify the license type shall require approval from the Planning
Commission.
2. Seating arrangements for sit -down patrons shall not exceed 102 seats (92 indoor
seats 12 of which may be located along a bar counter and 10 outdoor seats).
3. The permitted hours of alcohol consump tion shall be from:
a. 7:00 AM to 2:00 AM, seven days a week, with complete closure and all
employees vacated from the tenant space by 3:00 AM.
b. No “after hours" operations shall be permitted.
4. Alcoholic beverages orders shall cease 30 minutes prior to restaurant closure, or
no later than the closing of the associated food service of the establishment,
whichever is first.
5. No restaurant delivery to the hotel guestrooms shall occur unless delive ry is
offered as part of the restaurant’s typical operations.
6. No service orders to the restaurant shall be processed through the hotel.
7. No restaurant charges shall be included on the hotel bill.
8. The operation of the restaurant shall be separate and dist inct from the operation
of the Shore Hotel. The approval of Conditional Use Permit 16ENT -0218 (“CUP”)
is applicable solely to Full of Flavor, LLC, and is not applicable to the owners of
the Shore Hotel or any of their successors in interest. Therefore, t he CUP shall
terminate automatically upon the termination of the operation of the restaurant by
Full of Flavor, LLC, unless a proposed successor operator and/or tenant is
approved in writing by the Planning Director prior to the commencement of any
new ope ration or tenancy at 1530 2 nd Street that requires a Type 47 alcohol
license. In furtherance of achieving the objectives of this condition, the Planning
Director may withhold approval until such time as the successor operator and/or
tenant provides docume ntation to substantiate (i) that it is legally separate and
distinct from the owners of the Shore Hotel and (ii) that its operation at 1530 2 nd
Street will be separate and distinct from the Shore Hotel.
7
9. Pursuant to SMMC Section 9.41.080(B), a fter the pro posed restaurant has been
operational for one (1) year, the applicant shall provide to the City a report
summarizing the restaurant’s compliance with these conditions of approval. After
submittal of the compliance report, if staff determines that there ha ve violations of
these conditions of approval, staff shall submit the compliance report to the
Planning Commission as an information item to enable the Planning Commission
to determine whether a public hearing is necessary. Upon review of the compliant
re port at this public hearing, the Planning Commission may add or revise terms
and conditions to the extent necessary to ensure effective conditions of approval.
10. Valet parking shall be provided to restaurant patrons during all hours of restaurant
operations .
Administrative
11. The approval of this permit shall expire if the rights granted are not ex ercised 18
months (for projects in the Coastal Zone) from the permit’s effective date. Exercise
of rights shall mean issuance of a building permit to commence construction or
actual commencement of the use granted by this Conditional Use Permit if a
building permit is not required.
12. Within ten days of City Planning Division transmitt al of the Statement of Official
Action, project applicant shall sign and return a copy of the Statement of Official
Action prepared by the City Planning Division, agreeing to the conditions of
approval and acknowledging that failure to comply with such con ditions shall
constitute grounds for potential revocation of the permit approval. By signing
same, applicant shall not thereby waive any legal rights applicant may possess
regarding said conditions. The signed Statement shall be returned to the City
Plan ning Division. Failure to comply with this condition shall constitute grounds
for potential permit revocation.
13. Prior to issuance of alcohol service , the applicant shall post a notice at the building
entry stating that the site is regulated by a Condition al Use Permit and the
Statement of Official Action, which includes the establishment’s conditions of
approval, is available upon request. This notice shall remain posted at all time s
the establishment is in operation.
14. Within thirty (30) days from date of the approval of the Statement of Official Action,
the applicant shall provide a copy of the approved Statement of Official Action for
this project to the local office of the State Alcoholic Beverage Control department.
15. Within thirty (30) days after final approval of the project, a sign shall be posted on
site stating the date and nature of the approval. The sign shall be posted in
accordance with the Zoning Administrator guidelines and shall remain in place until
a building permit is issued for the proje ct. The sign shall be removed promptly
8
when a building permit is issued for the project or upon expiration of the Conditional
Use Permit.
16. The rights associated with this approval shall expire if the establishment ceases
alcohol service for more than one year.
17. Prior to commencement of alcohol service, the applicant shall post a notice at the
building entry stating that the site is regulated by a Conditional Use Permit and the
Statement of Official Action, which includes the establishment’s conditions of
appro val, is available upon request. This notice shall remain posted at all time s the
establishment is in operation.
18. Prior to commencement of alcohol service, the operator shall submit a plan for
approval by the Director of Planning regarding employee al cohol awareness
training programs and policies. The plan shall outline a mandatory alcohol
awareness training program for all employees having contact with the public and
shall state management's policies addressing alcohol consumption and
inebriation. Th e program shall require all employees having contact with the public
to complete a California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC)
sponsored alcohol awareness training program within 90 days of the effective date
of this approval. In the case of new employees, the employee shall attend the
alcohol awareness training within 90 days of hiring. In the event the ABC no longer
sponsors an alcohol awareness training program, all employees having contact
with the public shall complete an alternative prog ram approved by the Director of
Planning and Community Development. The operator shall provide the City with
an annual report regarding compliance with this condition. This project shall be
subject to any future City -wide alcohol awareness training progr am condition
affecting similar establishments.
19. Prior to commencement of alcohol service, the operator shall also submit a plan
describing the establishment's designated driver program, which shall be offered
by the operator to the establishment's patrons. The plan shall specify how the
operator will inform patrons of the progra m, such as offering a free non -alcoholic
drink for every party of two or more ordering alcoholic beverages.
20. In the event permittee violates or fails to comply with any conditions of approval of
this permit, no further permits, licenses, approvals or certificates of occupancy
shall be issued until such violation has been fully remedied
21. Applicant is advised that projects in the California Coastal Zone may need approval
of the Califo rnia Coastal Commission prior to issuance of any building permits by
the City of Santa Monica. Applicant is responsible for obtaining any such permits.
22. Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its boards,
commissions, agents, off icers, and employees (collectively, "City") from any
claims, actions, or proceedings (individually referenced as "Claim" and collectively
9
referenced as "Claims") against the City to attack, set aside, void, or annul, the
approval of 16ENT -0128 or any Claim s brought against the City due to the acts or
omissions in any way connected to the Applicant's project. City shall promptly
notify the applicant of any Claim and shall cooperate fully in the defense. Nothing
contained in this paragraph prohibits the City from participating in the defense of
any Claims, if both of the following occur:
i. The City bears its own attorney's fees and costs.
ii. The City defends the action in good faith.
iii. Applicant shall not be required to pay or perform any settlement
unless the set tlement is approved by the Applicant.
iv. In the event any such action is commenced to attack, set aside, void
or annul all, or any, provisions of any approvals granted for the
Project, or is commenced for any other reason against the City for
the act or omis sions relating to the Applicant's project, within fourteen
(14) days following notice of such action from the City, the Applicant
shall file with the City a performance bond or irrevocable letter of
credit, or other form of security satisfactory to the Cit y ("the Security")
in a form satisfactory to the City, and in the amount of $100,000 to
ensure applicant's performance of its defense, indemnity and hold
harmless obligations to City. The Security amount shall not limit the
Applicant's obligations to the C ity hereunder. The failure of the
Applicant to provide the Security shall be deemed an express
acknowledgment and agreement by the Applicant that the City shall
have the authority and right, without consent of the Applicant, to
revoke the approvals grante d hereunder.
Conformance with Approved P lans
23. This approval is for those plans dated September 29 , 2016, a copy of which shall
be maintained in the files of the City Planning Division. Project development shall
be consistent with such plans, except as otherwise specified in these conditions of
approval.
24. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director of
Planning. An increase of more than 5 % of the square footage, and increase of
seating, or a significant change in the approv ed concept shall be subject to
Planning Commission Review. Construction shall be in substantial conformance
with the plans submitted or as modified by the Planning Commission, Architectural
Review Board, or Director of Planning. No expansion in number of seats, intensity
of operation, or outdoor areas shall occur without prior approval from the City of
Santa Monica and State ABC .
10
25. Project plans shall be subject to complete Code Compliance review when the
building plans are submitted for plan check and shall comply with all applicable
provisions of Article IX of the Municipal Code and all other pertinent ordinances
and General Plan policies of the City of Santa Monica prior to building permit
issuance.
Fees
26. As required by California Government Code Sec tion 66020, the project applicant
is hereby notified that the 90 -day period has begun as of the date of the approval
of this application, in which the applicant may protest any fees, dedications,
reservations, or other exactions imposed by the City as part of the approval or as
a condition of approval of this development. The fees, dedications, reservations,
or other exactions are described in the approved plans, conditions of approval,
and/or adopted city fee schedule.
Project Operations
27. No exterior ac tivity such as trash disposal, disposal of bottles or noise generating
trash, deliveries, or other maintenance activity generating noise audible from the
exterior of the building shall occur during the hours of 11:00 pm to 7:00 am daily.
In addition, ther e shall be no outdoor cleaning of the property with pressurized or
mechanical equipment during the hours of 9:00 pm to 7:00 am, daily. Trash
containers shall be secured with locks.
28. The primary use of the premises shall be for sit -down meal service to pat rons.
29. If a counter service area is provided, food service shall be available at all hours the
counter is open for patrons, and the counter area shall not function as a separate
bar area.
30. Window or other signage visible from the public right -of -way that advertises beer
or alcohol shall not be permitted.
31. Customers shall be permitted to order meals at all times and at all locations where
alcohol is being served. The establishment shall serve food to patrons during all
hours the establishment is open for customers.
32. The establishment shall maintain a kitchen or food -serving area in which a variety
of food is prepared or cooked on the premises.
33. Take out service shall be only incidental to the primary sit -down use.
34. No alcoholic beverage shall be sold for consumption beyond the premises.
11
35. Except for special events, alcohol shall not be served in any disposable container
such as disposable plastic or paper cups.
36. No more than three television screen areas, including video projectors or similar
audio/visual d evices, shall be on the premises. The screen areas may be
comprised of a cluster of television screens that do not exceed 10 total screens
and the individual maximum screen size for each television image/screen shall not
exceed 60 inches.
37. No dancing or live entertainment beyond that allowed in restaurant definition
contained in Section 9.04.02.030.730. Specifically, “a restaurant may provide
music or other entertainment if: 1) there is sit down meal service provided at all
times while the entertainment is taking place; 2) there is no dancing or dance floor;
3) there is no cover charge or minimum drink purchase requirement; and 4) the
entertainment is provided only in the dining areas.”
38. No video or other amusement games shall be permitted on the premi ses.
39. The primary use of any outdoor dining area shall be for seated meal service.
Patrons who are standing in the outdoor seating area shall not be served.
40. The operation shall at all times be conducted in a manner not detrimental to
surrounding properti es or residents by reason of lights, noise, activities, parking or
other actions. The owner shall prohibit loitering in the parking area and shall control
noisy patrons leaving the establishment.
41. No more than 35% of total gross revenues per year shall be from alcohol sales.
The operator shall maintain records of gross revenue sources which shall be
submitted annually to the City of Santa Monica City Planning Division at the
beginning of the calendar year and also available to the City of Santa Monica an d
the State ABC upon request.
42. Liquor bottle service shall be prohibited. Wine and beer bottle service shall not be
available to patrons unless full meal service is provided concurrent with the Bottle
service. Bottle service shall mean the service of any full bottle of liquor, wine, or
beer of more than 375 ml, along with glass ware, mixers, garnishes, etc., in which
patrons are able to then make their own drinks or pour their own wine or beer. All
food items shall be available from the full service menu.
43. No organized queuing of patrons at the entry or checking of identification to control
entry into and within the establishment shall be permitted. There shall not be any
age limitation imposed restricting access to any portion of the restaurant.
44. There shall be no cover charge or minimum drink purchase requirement.
12
45. Any minimum purchase requirement may be satisfied by the purchase of
beverages or food.
46. The restaurant shall not organize or participate in organized “pub -crawl” events
where participants or customers pre -purchase tickets or tokens to be exchanged
for alcoholic beverages at the establishment.
47. Notices shall be prominently displayed urging patrons to leave the premises and
neighborhood in a quiet, peaceful, and orderly fashion and to please no t litter or
block driveways in the neighborhood.
48. Employees of the establishment shall walk a 100 -foot radius from the facility at
some point prior to 30 minutes after closing and shall pick up and dispose of any
discarded beverage containers and other tra sh left by patrons.
49. Applicant is on notice that all signage, both permanent and temporary, is subject
to the restrictions of the City sign ordinance.
50. The project shall at all times comply with the provisions of the Noise Ordinance
(SMMC Chapter 4.12).
51. P ursuant to SMMC Section 4.12 (Noise), establishments with amplified music may
be required to provide entrances and exits, except exits which are solely
emergency exits, designed as two -door vestibules, so that only one set of doors is
open at a time. Doors shall be of solid core design. Windows shall be constructed
with double -paned glass.
Construction Plan Requirements
52. Any new restaurant at the site with fewer than 50 seats capacity shall install a
grease interceptor with minimum 750 gallons static hold ing capacity in order to
pretreat sewered grease. Facilities with greater than 50 seats are required to
install an interceptor with 1000 gallons minimum holding capacity. The Public
Works Department may modify the above requirements only for good cause.
Specifically, the facility must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Industrial Waste
Section and Building and Safety Division that interceptor installation is not feasible
at the site in question. In such cases where modifications are granted, grease
traps will be required in the place of an interceptor. Building permit plans shall
show the required installation.
Stand ard Conditions
53. The property owner shall insure any graffiti on the site is promptly removed through
compliance with the City’s graffiti removal program.
13
Police
54. Prior to the commencement of alcohol service, a security plan shall be submitted
to the Chief of Police for review and approval. The plan shall address both physical
and operational security issues.
55. Prior to the commencement of alcohol service, the applicant shall participate in the
Santa Monica Alcohol Awareness for Retailers Training (S.M.A.A.R.T) program
conducted by the Santa Monica Police Department .
Compliance
56. The applicant authorizes reasonable City inspe ction of the property to ensure
compliance with the conditions of approval imposed by the City in approving this
project and will bear the reasonable cost of these inspections as established by
Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 2.72.010 and Resolution No . 9905 (CCS)
or any successor legislation thereto. These inspections shall be no more intrusive
than necessary to ensure compliance with conditions of approval.
VOTE
Ayes:
Nays:
Abstain:
Absent:
NOTICE
If this is a final decision not subject to further appeal under the City of Santa Monica
Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Ordinance, the time within which judicial review of
this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6,
which provision has been adopted by the City pursuant to Municipal Code Section
1.16.010.
I hereby certify that this Statement of Official Action accurately reflects the final
determination of the City Council of the City of Santa Monica.
_____________________________ _____________________________
Denise Anderson -Warren Date
City Clerk
14
Acknowledgement by Permit Holder
I hereby agree to the above conditions of approval and acknowledge that failure to comply
with such conditions shall constitute grounds for potential revocation of the permit
approval.
Print Name and Title Date
Applicant’s Signature