Common Sense Wins Out, And It Tastes Good

Last week my coworker and I had the opportunity to attend a Santa Monica City Council meeting.  We had met with staff members the day before to review the agenda and saw that there were going to be a couple of hot button topics.  Just as we anticipated, a decent size crowd showed up for what turned into a 6 hour meeting, ending around 12:30 AM.  3 of the 6 hours were spend on one item of the agenda.  This was an appeal to the council to impose strict limits on a new restaurant that is planning to open in Santa Monica.  In other words, it is the people vs Chef Greenwood.  The three hour back and forth shook my confidence in city management to exercise basic common sense.

It all started years ago with a restaurant at the same location.  That restaurant started as a bar, progressed to a sports bar, and eventually transformed into what some described as a club.  As there are apartments in the direct vicinity, as well as a neighborhood about a hundred yards away, many residents were unhappy with the disturbances this place created.  They complained of beer bottles being left in front yards as well as being woken by noisy patrons leaving at early morning hours.  Enough complaints led to investigations that determined that the establishment was operating in ways that were not legally afforded to them by their CUP.  The establishment was eventually shut down, and the property has been vacant for nearly three years.  Enter Chef Greenwood.

Chef Greenwood is a culinary expert that for the past few years has been the executive chef at one of LA's most prestigious establishments.  He now wants to start his own establishment in the same location as the previous sports bar.  The difference being, Mr Greenwood plans on opening up a high end steak house (in his presentation, he indicated that the tab for a party of four could easily be $500).  Knowing that residents would be apprehensive about the property opening up again, Mr Greenwood agreed to abide by a stricter code than would otherwise be required.  This included things such as not serving alcohol to patrons in containers, and allowing no more than three TV's to be placed in the restaurant.  After having agreed to all of the restrictions that council staff proposed, residents appealed to change the previously approved hours of operation.

Council staff recommended that the restaurant be opened Sunday through Thursday, 11 am - 11 pm, and 11am - 12 am on Friday and Saturday.  However, they included a provision that everyone, including the chef, had to vacate the premises a half hour after closing time each night.  If any of you know anything about the restaurant industry, you know that that is pretty ridiculous, as often times, clean up takes at least a half hour, not to mention time to do books etc.  The residents were appealing for the restaurant to be closed by 10pm on weeknights, and 11pm on Friday and Saturday.  My co-worker and I looked at each other and could not believe how crazy this request was.  Since when does the want of neighbors, who knowingly live next to a busy street that is zoned for commerce, trump the worthy life long dreams of an entrepreneur?

To his credit, Mr. Greenwood asked for a compromise, asking if he could close his front doors a half hour earlier than the staff recommendation, but be allowed to stay on the premises an hour later each night to allow for clean up and book work.  The city council seemed to have two people who had common sense and were ok with it right away.  However, a couple of the people on the council must have been either trying to look good for the citizens, or they are not playing with a full deck.  They argued back and forth about closing times, valet parking, and the probability of the guests leaving the bar and being rowdy.  Of course, the people with common sense pointed out that they cannot take alcohol off the premises, he is operating under stricter guidelines than any business int the area, and crazy partying frat boys are not likely to go to a high end place with alcohol restrictions to party.

I understand that the citizens have loved the past three years of a vacant building, but some of their arguments were pretty weak.  But they made them with passion, often yelling from the audience after the public comments were heard and having to be quieted by the council.  The worst argument I heard was the argument by a mother who claimed that she has to put her kids to bed each night at 8:30, and she didn't want the noisy patrons leaving at midnight to wake them.  Of course, she failed to realize that the few wealthy patrons leaving a nice dinner at midnight are not as noisy as the constant traffic and hustle/bustle of even more patrons leaving the restaurant at 8:30-10pm.  (Disclaimer, that was the worst argument that should be dignified with a response, there was an elderly gentleman who said he was there for his daughter who lived in the apartment building behind the place, and he asked the council "would any of you want your child or grandchild to grow up near an establishment like that?  That is all I am going to say".)

In the end, the council passed the resolution allowing the restaurant to operate 11am-10:30 pm on weeknights, allowing staff to clean and do books until midnight, and 11am-11:30 pm on Friday and Saturday, allowing till 1:30 for cleanup and book keeping.  But it was like pulling teeth.  I was so frustrated with how ridiculous the arguments were that once the motion passed, I went into the hall way to personally congratulate Chef Greenwood, and let him know that I will patron his place (well, at least once before I am done next year as I don't have endless amounts of cash).  So in the end, common sense prevailed, yet I have a feeling that it may be some time before the neighbors fully trust, or even like, this new restaurant.