Three of Hyatt’s most aspirational properties in the United States have quietly changed their policy to no longer be adults-only. While kids are now allowed, I wouldn’t say that they’re really welcome…
In this post:
Alila resorts in United States no longer have age restrictions
Alila is Hyatt’s luxury nature-focused brand, with a portfolio that (in part) includes three resorts in California — Alila Marea Encinitas, Alila Napa Valley, and Alila Ventana Big Sur. Historically, the Napa Valley and Ventana Big Sur properties have been adults-only, while the Marea Encinitas property became adults-only earlier this year.
However, all three properties have quietly walked back these policies. As you’ll see, the websites of all three hotels no longer make mention of the hotels being adults-only, and it’s possible to book a room while selecting a child as one of the guests.
However, all three properties maintain a strict policy of restricting rooms to two guests. It doesn’t matter how big the room is or how young the child is, you’re only allowed two guests per room.
For example, if you go to the FAQs of the Alila Ventana Big Sur, you’ll see the following:
Is the resort adults-only? Ventana is a resort tailored to adults and is best suited for couples. To preserve the guest experience, each room can accommodate a maximum two individuals. This includes infants and children.
Similarly, if you go to the Alila Napa Valley website, you’ll see the property referred to as being “tailored to adults,” a change to past phrasing:
Enjoy experiences that are tailored to adults while being immersed in the region, and restore your mind and body at our spa, with its extensive wellness experiences and rejuvenating treatments.
What has driven this adults-only policy change?
As you can see, this policy change doesn’t seem to be driven by any commercial decision, in the sense that these resorts still appear to be heavily targeted at adults, and seem to discourage families. After all, having a cap of two people per room (including infants), even for large suites, sends a pretty clear message.
Instead, it sure seems like these properties have just updated their adults-only policy to avoid any potential legal issues. Section 51 of California’s Civil Code, known as the Unruh Act, prevents discrimination based on a variety of protected characteristics. Here’s what it says, specifically:
All persons within the jurisdiction of this state are free and equal, and no matter what their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments of every kind whatsoever.
So while age isn’t explicitly stated as one of those characteristics, attorneys have argued that banning children from hotels in California is illegal. Now, this isn’t necessarily so cut-and-dry.
For example, the Unruh Act has been used to prohibit landlords from refusing to rent to families with children. At the same time, California also has senior communities which “discriminate” against younger people, so there are exceptions that are allowed.
What’s interesting here is that the two Northern California Alila properties had the adults-only policies for quite some time. Then earlier this year when the Southern California property decided to change its policy, it got a bit of scrutiny and bad publicity, based on the Unruh Act.
So I suspect that Hyatt pushed the properties to update their policies, to avoid legal issues. With the updated policies, I imagine it still squashes virtually any family demand for stays at these properties, given the limit of two guests per room.
Bottom line
Hyatt’s Alila properties in California are no longer adults-only. That being said, they don’t actually seem to be particularly welcoming of families, given that the strict limit of two guests per room, even if some of the people in the room are small children.
Instead, I imagine these policy updates are just intended to avoid a possible age discrimination lawsuit, given California’s Unruh Act.
What do you make of California’s Alila properties no longer being adults-only?
Nobody wants screaming crotch goblins.
Oh, the people that can handle the fact that some people don’t wanna be in a resort with families and screaming children running up and down hallways, restaurants and pools. The vast majority of all hotels and resorts are family friendly, yet people still have to complain about the few that want to provide a relaxing, adult only environment. Get over it, not all of us like kids or wanna be around them when we...
Oh, the people that can handle the fact that some people don’t wanna be in a resort with families and screaming children running up and down hallways, restaurants and pools. The vast majority of all hotels and resorts are family friendly, yet people still have to complain about the few that want to provide a relaxing, adult only environment. Get over it, not all of us like kids or wanna be around them when we spend our hard earned money on a vacation. I applaud any hotel trying to provide a more sophisticated and relaxing environment, away from entitled parents and their “perfect” offspring.
I don't have an issue with it. I also don't really get annoyed with kids. I'm not sure if we're staying at different places, but screaming children have been pretty rare for me. They mostly seem to just be hanging out.
I could do with a resort that doesn't allow seniors, though.
Sometimes it's just the cost of (wonderfully) being a parent.
Oh, California. The most liberal and inclusive state in the union. And yet, they still openly discriminate against children. Weird.
Good. Take your noisy kids elsewhere. There are very few accommodations that cater to adults. Get over it.
Adult-only hotels are common in Europe and even have that in their name.
Depends on jurisdiction. There are some member states where it's illegal.
I've been wondering for years how these properties have gotten away with being adults only. The comparison to landlords isn't really the best, as the law expressly prohibits age discrimination in the sale or rental of housing in Civ. Code Sec. 51.2, and "familial status" (i.e., having kids) discrimination is illegal under both the California Fair Employment and Housing Act and the federal Fair Housing Act (these latter two laws prohibit both intentional discrimination and...
I've been wondering for years how these properties have gotten away with being adults only. The comparison to landlords isn't really the best, as the law expressly prohibits age discrimination in the sale or rental of housing in Civ. Code Sec. 51.2, and "familial status" (i.e., having kids) discrimination is illegal under both the California Fair Employment and Housing Act and the federal Fair Housing Act (these latter two laws prohibit both intentional discrimination and disparate impact, so the protections for housing are much more robust). That said, the Unruh Act has been pretty broadly interpreted to include various forms of not-expressly-listed "arbitrary" discrimination, including age discrimination. While having reasonable restrictions on age (or other bases) is permitted under the Unruh Act, exclusionary policies are looked at more skeptically than inclusionary policies (e.g., a senior discount program is considered less skeptically than a no-kids policy) and you do need to have some sort of legitimate reason backing the policy. The court will also typically weigh whether the policy fits the purpose.
In 2018, the Court of Appeal allowed an age discrimination case against Tinder to proceed based on the company's policy of charging users over 30 more than younger users. In finding that the plaintiffs had stated a viable claim, the court said the following: "Unlike children's and senior's discounts, which are justified by compelling societal interests that can be gleaned from statutory enactments, whatever interest society may have—if any—in increasing patronage among those under the age of 30 who may be interested in the premium features of an online dating app, that interest is not sufficiently compelling to justify discriminatory age-based pricing that may well exclude less economically advantaged individuals over the age of 30 from enjoying the same premium features." [internal citations omitted]. So yeah, basically the court decides if your reason is good enough, and there's not really a great way to know in advance if your reason is going to be good enough -- so it's better to just avoid the discriminatory policy altogether unless you want to get sued.
If I had to guess, the properties probably got a compliance warning from the state's Civil Rights Department. They are pretty active in searching out discriminatory policies (and anyone can submit a complaint, also).
Wah, wah…get over it. There are very few accommodations that cater to adults. Everyone doesn’t care to be subjected to your kids.
Huh? I didn’t make a statement of preference re the adults only policy one way or the other, I was simply providing information on how California law works.
Not that it matters, but I’m happily child-free by choice.
so technically a family of four can buy two rooms with one adult registered to each room with a kid, and still enjoy the property together as a family.
Sure, if the parents are complete a-holes…
Illegal my ass. What next? Family friendly brothels?
Servicing adults only is not discrimination
A great solution. It is ridiculous that we can't have nice things, so an apartment complex must allow kids. There will always be those who rent to families to kids. They want to make money. And, forcing them to take kids is stealing the surplus from the rest of us. Why should I have to live in an old folks community (I hit the minimum age 15 years ago) to not have this headache?
There are many luxurious and beautiful hotels and resorts that make children feel very welcome. Is it really that much of an ask for a few properties to have an adults-only policy?
It is in California…
That’s like saying there’s thousands of bars in California. So why can’t I open even one bar for men only? Or god forbid, whites only?
I've stayed at the properties. Encinitas w our little one when they 1st opened and they were amazingly accommodating and it's a perfect place for kids, I could see why people would be upset they changed the policy, it's a very kid friendly property. As for the other in NorCal I would support those staying adults only there is very little for kids to do at the properties or in those destinations and I could...
I've stayed at the properties. Encinitas w our little one when they 1st opened and they were amazingly accommodating and it's a perfect place for kids, I could see why people would be upset they changed the policy, it's a very kid friendly property. As for the other in NorCal I would support those staying adults only there is very little for kids to do at the properties or in those destinations and I could see kids being very annoying at both of those properties. Napa and Big Sur are really more adult locations. San Diego, however is so kid/family focused it seems absurd and bad business to make it adult only. I think they had it right in the beginning and messed it up trying to change things.
Airlines on routes that have 3+ daily frequencies should designate some flights adults only. I bet many would happily pay a premium for that flight, and parents could breathe a little easier knowing others could have taken an adult only option if they so desired
As a father of an adult child, I can say that I applaud hotels/resorts that cater to adults-only. 99% of hotels/resorts welcome families with children; what is wrong with a very select few properties designating themselves as adults-only?
We traveled extensively with our daughter in her younger years, and enjoyed many wonderful trips across the US, and in Europe and South America. We never felt like we had a limited selection of great properties...
As a father of an adult child, I can say that I applaud hotels/resorts that cater to adults-only. 99% of hotels/resorts welcome families with children; what is wrong with a very select few properties designating themselves as adults-only?
We traveled extensively with our daughter in her younger years, and enjoyed many wonderful trips across the US, and in Europe and South America. We never felt like we had a limited selection of great properties to choose from because we had a child.
I think it is unreasonable to expect that all travelers are okay being in an environment where children are a factor. Yes, we all know, adults can behave badly. But when a child has a meltdown (which is far more common) it can easily ruin a lovely poolside oasis, or a special dinner at a hotel restaurant... and there is little recourse other than to just turn away and try to pretend it isn't a big deal. When you are spending hundreds or even thousands of dollars per night, accepting the sometimes disruptive behavior and noise of young ones should be something that can be avoided by selecting an adult-only property.
Interesting that you bring up the poolside and dinner scenarios. I was recently at the Alila Ventana Big Sur and had my breakfast experience disturbed by a family who felt everyone should love their giant dogs as much as they did (one of the dogs was shaking its slobber all over next to tables that were already set for the next guests...kind of gross), and a poolside experience disturbed by a small dog that barked...
Interesting that you bring up the poolside and dinner scenarios. I was recently at the Alila Ventana Big Sur and had my breakfast experience disturbed by a family who felt everyone should love their giant dogs as much as they did (one of the dogs was shaking its slobber all over next to tables that were already set for the next guests...kind of gross), and a poolside experience disturbed by a small dog that barked every couple of minutes, courtesy of one of the guests had poolside. Admittedly I'm not a dog lover, but I find it a bit curious that kids are restricted, but dogs are not and can be as distracting as the owner allows.
We stayed at the Alila Napa in a room with two queens as two couples on a trip to Bottle Rock (adult music festival) with no issues or questions. Everyone had breakfast and used the spa too. YMMV i guess,
I've stayed at the Encinitas property with my 2 pre-teens and wife for a night, they understood it was a quiet adult-focused property and they actually enjoyed it as a quiet getaway.
I'm all for it. We need more places that are children free.
Back in May of this year I was at the Alila Napa Valley and noticed a family of four at breakfast with kids. I was wondering about the policy change, so I appreciate this article.
It's possible the family of 4 was staying at the property, although maybe even more likely they weren't hotel guests and just decided to have breakfast at a restaurant open to the public.
I think you are underestimating the power of money. These hotels are nice enough that wealthy couples with small kids and nannies won't think twice about booking a nice room for them and one or two rooms for each kid with a nanny to be with them. There is enough money in LA and SF that a couple would love to get a weekend out of the city. I have stayed at many nice hotels...
I think you are underestimating the power of money. These hotels are nice enough that wealthy couples with small kids and nannies won't think twice about booking a nice room for them and one or two rooms for each kid with a nanny to be with them. There is enough money in LA and SF that a couple would love to get a weekend out of the city. I have stayed at many nice hotels in Europe which usually only allow 2 people in a room and I have seen many families with up to 3 nannies taking care of their kids while the parents sip wine and drinks by the pool without been bothered.
I was unfamiliar with this law. So are retirement communities in CA being challenged, too? Can adults become cub/brownie scouts? This seems like it could have a lot of unfortunate consequences.
There's a specific law that authorizes senior housing. There are specific requirements that have to be met.
In terms of cub/brownie scouts, these are likely not "business establishments" regulated under the Unruh Act, if I had to guess, but even if they were, you can overcome an Unruh claim by having a sufficiently compelling interest -- and having an age-appropriate environment in which children can develop news skills, confidence, and social connections would likely...
There's a specific law that authorizes senior housing. There are specific requirements that have to be met.
In terms of cub/brownie scouts, these are likely not "business establishments" regulated under the Unruh Act, if I had to guess, but even if they were, you can overcome an Unruh claim by having a sufficiently compelling interest -- and having an age-appropriate environment in which children can develop news skills, confidence, and social connections would likely pass the sniff test if challenged.
Bougie throuples are going to get hosed by this policy as well