SR-506-003-01 (34)
GS:SS:RD:db ...
Co u n C 11M e et 1 n 9 , """'a n u a r y 25, 1983
Santa Ilca, Callfornla
To:
Mayor and Clty CounCll
5t?~- "03--0/ ,'-C"
I
JAN 2' ~
From:
Cl ty Staff
Subject:
Fourth Street Modlficatlons between Plca
Boulevard and Hlll Street
INTRODUCTION
ThlS report recommends Clty Councll approve the attached
Negatlve Declaratlon and approprlate $30,000 from the Capltal
Improvement Fund
for the Fourth Street modlflcatlons between
Plea Boulevard and Hlll Street.
BACKGROUND
At the September 24, 1982 Clty Council meetlng, Clty Staff
presented
three plans for lmprovlng 4th Street from P1CO
Boulevard to Hill Street. Councll lnstructed Staff to proceed
wlth the Envlronmental Review of two of the proposed 4th Street
plans WhlCh provlded for elther a ralsed or a palnted medlan wlth
landscaped lslands. Councll further instructed Staff to report
back regardlng posslble sources of fundlng for the abbreviated
landscaped lsland palnted median project ($30,000) and the fully
landscaped ralsed medlan plan (an additlonal $120,000).
City Staff completed the Envlronmental Assessment and the
Negatlve Declaratlon was signed by the Plannlng Dlrector and Clty
Englneer on November 11, 1982. The analysls of the project
lndlcated no signlflcant lmpacts wlll occur due to the proJect.
Staff advertlsed the project for the 30 day publlC reVlew period
on November 23. 1982 Coples of the Envlronmental Assessment were
on flle at the library. Clty Clerk's offlce. and the Plannlng
1
11- c..
,
JAN Z 5 ~3
GS:SS.RD:db ...
Councll Meetlng,~anuary 25, 1983
Santa ~ica, Callfornia
Department.
The reVlew perlod ended December 23. 1982. No
wrltten or oral comments have been recelved by Staff.
Staff
revlewed Communlty Block Grant Funds, Ocean Park
Redevelopment Funds. Gas Tax Funds. property assessments and
Capital Improvement Funds as possible fundlng sources for the 4th
Street modiflcatlons. The most appropriate funding source to
accomplish the proJect ln the near future is the Capltal
Improvement Fund.
RECOMMENDATION
It
1 S
recommended
Clty
CounCll approve the Negative
Declaratlon and approprlate $30.000 from the Capltal Improvement
Fund Reserves for the Fourth Street modiflcatlons between Plea
Boulevard and Hlll Street.
Prepa red by:
Stan Scholl, Dlrector of General Servlces
Mark Tlgan. Dlrector of CEO
Ray Oavls. Parklng and Traffic Englneer
Kenyon Webster, Assistant Planner
Attachment: Schematlc Plan
Environmental Assessment
2
.
.
o
[1
~
~
l.) ~
co
~ '"
~ Ct)
~
~ ~
l.) ~ D ~
~
Ii\ ~
~ ~ ~
lJ) ~
l.)
~D <t)
.... D~ ~
.... ~
~ 0 T Ii\
.....
D
o
o
.
.
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
EIA NO. 728
DATE FILED
11/12/82
J. 00d..'P 0U1d
I. Name of Prcpooent CITY OF SANTA MONICA
2. Address o."Id Phone Number of Proponent Ray Davis, Parking & Traffic
Engineer., City of Santa Monica, Ca. 90401 - (213) 393~9975,
extension 227.
}. Project Addrass Fourth Street in Santa Monica between Pico
Boulevard and Hill Street.
Nome of Prcp~~!. if awliccble Fou;rth Stree~ Parkin~ and Traffic T"T'roverr.ents
II. Environmental l~t3
(E.xpICr"1ations of all "yes" end "maybe" answers are reqUired on attached sheets.)
Y@s Movbe No
I. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Uostable earth conditions or In ch<Inges
in geologic substruct1Jres?
x
b. Disruptions, displccem~nt3, corr:poction
or over<:oversrg of 'i~e soil?
x
c. Chcnge in ~cpogrcphy or ground surfcce
relief features'?
x
d. The destru:tion, C1)vering or modification
of any unique geologic: or physical features?
x
e. Any ircreose in wind or water erosion of
soils, either on or off the site?
f. Oanges in deposition or erosion of beoch
sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or
erosion which may modify the channel of 0
river or stream or the bed of the ocean or
my bay, inlet or leke?
x
-x
~1~
e
e
g. &;losure of people or property to geolo-
gic hazards such as eorthqvokes, landslides,
trnJdslidcs, ground failure, or similar hazads?
Z. Air. 'Hill the proposal result in:
a. Slbstcntial air emi~ions or deterioration
of arrbient air quality?
b. T.":l!! creaticn of objectioncble cdo~?
c. Altertltic., of air movement, moistu~ or
t~mpercture. or CITf chonge in climate,
either locally or regIonally?
3. Wcrter. 'Hill the proposal result in:
4. O.anges in currents, or the COU~ of di-
rectl<:n of water rr.oveme\ts, in either
marine or fresh waten?
b. Chcnges in cbscrptien rates, droinage pet.
terns, Of' the rate end amount of suricce
runoff?
c. Altercticns to the- course or now of flood
waters?
d. Change in the cmOlJnt of surfcce wafer Ln
cny water bcdy?
e. Discharge into SlJrfcce watel"3, or in ctry
alteration of surfo::e water quality, in-
cluding but not limited to temperature,
dissQlv~ oxygen or turb idity?
f. Alteration of the din~ctio" or rate of flow
of ground waters?
g. Change in the quantity of ground waters,
either throogh direct additicns or with-
drawols, 01' through interception of en
aquifer by cub or excavations?
h. Substantial reduction in the amount of
water otherwise OII'oiloble for P'Jblic water
:supplies?
;. E)(!)OSl.Ire of people or property to W<Jter reo-
!~ted ~ards :uc;h QS fJoodir'9 (1C' tidal waves?
-2-
Yes Moyt~ No
,x
x
-1L
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
.
4. PiUl'" Life. Will the propOSClI result in:
Q. Change in tne divenity of ~ecies. or
RJmber of crrf species of plonts (includir.g
trees, shrubs, grass, crops, ald oquatic
plants)'?
b. Reduction of th~ nurr.be~ of crIy unique,
rare or endcngered species of plants'?
c. Introduction of new sPecies of plants into
m area, or in a CarTIer :~ the normal
replenishment of existing 4)I!!Cle:s?
d. Reduction in ccrecge of cny o;riculttJrol
crop'?
s. Animal Life. 'Hill the proposal result in:
~
a. Change in the diversity of !jJecie:s, or
numbers of any !:p~:es of on:mols (birds,
lcnd ommals Ir.<:!uding reptiles. fish end
shellfish, benthiC orgcnlsms or insects)?
b. Reduction of the nUn"bers of cny unique,
rore or endangered species of el1lmols?
c. Introdl.Ctiai of new species of a1imals into
en crea, or result in a barriar to the
migratlCl1 or movement of allmals?
d. Deterioration to eXIsting fish or Wildlife
l-cll.tat?
o. Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
b. E~osure of people to severe raise levels?
7.
light and Glare.. Will the proposal produce
new light or glare?
Land Use. Will the proposal result in a sob-
stontlal alteration of the present or planned
land use of an area?
8.
1. Naturol ResCIUTl:eS. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increase in the rate of use of cny natural
re$OUrces?
-3-
.
,Yes
,~
x
No
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
.
.
b. Slbstc:ntial depletion of any nonrenewable
naturel resource?
10. RIsk of Upset. Will the prcposol il'lYOlve:
0. A ri~ of m explasion or the rdemlt
of rn:tzor~_~ subst~ (including, but ......
limIted ~ oil, ~iclc!=s, chemlCO/S or
radiaticn) in the eva'lt oi en .-~id~t or
IJI)~ ccnditions?
b.. ?C=Slble interl~ ..,Ith en cmert;enc:y
r~ plcn or Q1 emergency evccuation
pial?
II. PC'i'Ulctitn. Will the proposal alter th~ Iccation,
d:strlbuticn, denSity, or o;rowth rote of the
rumen populatim of en area? :-
12. Hcusing. Will the proposal affect existing hous-
ing, or creote a cemcnd fer addltlenal hOUSing?
I J. Trcrnpcrtatfon/Cin:u!ation. Will the propose I
result in:
o. Generation of 5tJbstcr.tial additional
vehlCt.l/ar movement?
b. Effe!:ts on existing par!.ing faCilities, or
demand rar new par,ur.q?
C. Substantial irrooct upon existing trC'lspor-
tat ion systerr.s?
d. Alterations to present patterns of cirCt.llo-
tion or movement of people andlor goods?
e. A/teroriOl'U to waterborne, rail or air
traffic?
f. II'lCTecse in t1"Clffic: hazal"cb to-motcr
vehicles, bicyclists cr pedestrians?
14. PWlic Services, Will tho! prcpoSClI have an
effect upon, or result in Q need for new or
altered governmental services in any of the
following crea::
a. Fire protecticn?
b.. Police protection?
.
c. Schools?
-4-
Yes
Htrt:be
x
x
NIl
x
x
-L
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
X
x
.
d. Perks or other recreational IQciliti~?
e. Maintenal"lC'e of plb lic fOC:ilities, including
roods?
f. Other governmental services?
15. Er.egy. Will the proposal result in:
a.. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
b. Substcntial increase in ~mand ..:pen eXIst-
ing SO\Jrces of energy, or require the
development of new sources of energy?
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need
for new systems, or stIbstanttol alterations to
the following UtI Iities: =-
a.. Power or nattJrol gas?
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sew~ or septic tanks?
e. Stcrm water drainoge?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
17. Human Health. 'Ni!I the oroposal result in:
a. Creation of any ,",ealth hazard or potentitJl
heolth hazard (excluding mental health)?
b. Exposure of people to potential health
hazc:rc!s?
IS. A~thefja. Will the prcposal result in the
obstruction of cny scenic vista or View open to
the public, or will the proposal result in the
creation of en aesthetically offefUlve site open
to public view?
19. Rl!CTeation. Will the proposal result in an
ilTl?oct upon the quality or quantity of existing
recreational opporttmities?
20. Cultural Resources.
a. Will t!'e prcposal result in the alteration
af or the destruction of a prehistoric: or
historic archoeclogical site?
-5-
.
'res
~
No
x
x
X
x
X
x
-L
X
,x
--l
X
x
x
x
x
x
e
e
b. Will the pf~1 result in adverse physlCOl
or aesthetic: effects to Q prehistcric: or
hi.1torlC: buildil19', sfru::1\Jre. or ooject?
Co Does the p~1 have the potential to
COlJ.Sl!t Q physical chonge wflld1 would affect
unique etmic: culrural values?
do Will the prcoosal restrict e:usting religiCllta
C'l' ~ed uses within the potential i~i
area?
2!. Mcndatory Firv.iings of Sisnificcnc:e.
a. Does the pro!e1:t rove the potential to
~rade the quality of the environment,
substantially ~Cuce the hcbitat of Q fish
or wIldlife specll~S. CQJ5e Q fish or wild-
life pcpulotico to drop below self sus-
tainIng levels, thre<lten to eliminate a
plant or animal community. reduce the
rolT'ber or resrrict tbe r~e of a rare or
enccrlC;ered plcnt or cnlmol or eliminate
irrpcrtcnt eXQrT'Ples of the mojor periods
of California history cr ~rehl.Story?
b. Dces t!-e project have the potential t~
achieve short-Ierm, to the disodvarltcge of
Icng-term. ef'Ivir~mental gools? (A shor1'~
tefTTI impact en the enVlrOnme.,t is one
whIch OCC'.Jt3 in Q relatively brier, cefinltive
period of time whde long-tefTTI impccts
will endure- well into the futureJ
c. Dees the project have ifTlJocts which ore
indIvidually limited, but cumulatIVely con-
sidercble? (A project may if'T'Poct on two
or more separate resources where the impact
on each resource is relatively small, but
where the effect of the total of those
i""acts on the environment IS signlficcnt.)
d. Does the project have environm~tQI effects
whic!1 will c::vse substantial adverse effects
on human ~ings, eilher directly or indirectly?
III. Oiscussicn of Environmental Evaluation
IV. Determination..
(To be oomplefed by the Lead Agency)
-6-
Yes
Mayt:.e
No
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
)
\
e.
e
.
APPLICANT'S AFFIDAVIT
Kenyon Webster 4~ t/ .d-YI~
(Prl nt Name 1 n,;f'Fu 11) "
hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in
I.
the
attached exhibits present the data and information required
for this initial environmental assessment to the best of my
ability. and that the facts. statements and information pre-
sented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and
belief.
Program and Policy Development Depzrtment
City Hall, 1685 Main Street
Santa Monica, Ca. 90401
Address
(213) 393-9975, ext. 266
Phone
Date: 11/9/82
p'
.
.
.
SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRON~ENTAL
IMPACT ASSESSMENT INFORMATION
FOR FOURTH STREET PARKING AND
TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
INTRODUCTION
This report supplements the attached City of Santa Monica
"Environmental Impact Assessment" form which exam~nes potentlal
impacts related to var~ous parking and traffic improvements to
Fourth Street in Santa Mon1ca between Pico Boulevard and Hll1
Street in Santa Monica. A map of the area in question 1S
attached.
BACKGROUND
Residents along Fourth Street in Santa Monlca have requested
that the City take action on problems associated wlth park1ng
and traffic on Fourth Street between Pica Boulevard and Hill
Street. The residants' specific concerns were to improve
safety, reduce traffic speeds and volumes and increase on-
street parking in the subject area.
Fourth Street between Pica and Ocean Park Boulevards has two
lanes in each direction with a total of 155 on-street park~ng
spcaes on both sides of the street. According to City surveys,
the average daily traffic on Fourth Street is 12,600 per weekday
and 18,300 vehicles per weekend day. The critical speed is
35 miles per hour with 63 percent of the traffic exceeding the
posted speed limit of 35 miles per hour. Analysis of traffic
.
. '. .... -. f6.'~'~~'l-'-~ "'ii"\~"i-~'l-;"':t~
, ::;\........ -.17_ ,:~lSr,~-.'"'1-
~:--~~1z:. L'~~ I~~I ~\f'f;;~ :..
i .~ -,,, ! 1- ~ "";. ~ -. ~ I)fi' \ .:-; 'l.:~ "l~"
I . V 0( : :, .l;l::::; ~~~~' i...", ';~".t~~ \\.~lT.~~{.v-I\
I ; ~.,.,. 4 ,. (:j "I.'!.,a, g..;l.'~ ~ "~"\f'oA- -:;.
c. .,. pi" ~: .."' ;'_~~~~:Y~!.I -\. ,it.... ;I.~~~~~. ___
~ : ?' z ~ j;.j~~~~';~e~l~~:~ - ~~'1 ~~\,~~.~
i e.> ~_::;:! ~~;~I~t~~li~:~~~' ~~~"'U~~~ ':
i;; ,~." (". ~~ts;~.~.~~'~ ...~'.>>~1!:~~ ~i.
~ ~ ; ~o \~~ft!f,*~~t;lir~~1.~~;~:.~ ~~~~~; ;!
J;;:::r.. -.. ......... ~,~..-:.~ "-, r!C ~. ":t~, .. ~ ~ ~. .
% ~ Z ~...,...~ ~ ...,.... ""'x . ' :I 0..;::, . . ';
lEi..... ' "" .'t'~1-11~"''L.b.~.(~~ ~ .:.;.~.. '.
p ~ -- 1f~~-r.<..i.'-lf:l~if:~~~~F'C~"'f'~~).~"\
" _0::;._ ~~ '" \Wl\- ~~_,...i!o' ...........,."..~B ~.~ri.\o; ..
<> r.. l 1:>........ _', '-~ ,~';!".....:...~-,,-,~, ,,_...t~~~....: "" -
f_ ,!! ~,...;:J:;E', ;&re-;:'i~.:f.f'~~' ~ ~-"~~u~..:-m ~
~ '" V> ,.' ':/E~~ -::1 '~- ;~f"~ ~f;-7~.r.r::,~'; : ~
: ... = ~ '" ' ..~~ ~ ..__""ii~: ~~'""'tli~ =~' .,~ w~":f.:!-, . -
o ..,.,. p.. i:' );lj" _~ ",:1.-.... 'J~~~p..!' ~...- .....-.~ "
J. '":- 0 :::: I:r;;f~~ ...tC-';"'1.~ ':t~l~'6?~~~~:ls;.;1 ~
; r<i (Q, 0 l"~'~ ..;.t.T1~~;J:....s~~';-;;:i~~''1~~.~'~i" 'I~
~ = \~~ ~ ~u ~~ !..__ ~ '" .. .$.r.1~Z~-.~~t' "'.~I' .,.;;I
~ ~~. I~~~?)i :l~~~~:;j',~t~'~:s13 ~,~I~:- ~~
~ ~ ~ ~ .:. tJ -~~9"f~~~~1i~n::. ~l't - -1.E.1
... . c;.r;~~~ - 1'''~~?'ff;' .....~p.:F.~.~'iH: - ~~~ -~,
-'*~ ~N "... s!(.~'..' ~c.:;;' _,~ '>;':~~\7tt~: :''i~[ -'J
.~.:::."';:x~ t\c[ ~~ c'~~':;~' ""j"""'){~..e" I "'"~~
.:l"1~~V-",__~- -~ ~' \~I -: ~{tS ~ 1'\ ~~j!;\~fi~-~[~~'" 1 ,,_ItS?;!~~
,~~'1'--:';'~ t:' !..I r . -z. ~. ~-:"'~~"l?::-..l~'~ - .~
,i7"':<.~"":'(;:'1 'In .....'q..~ii 'I~ I ~)> . /....!~~::tl~ t....'1';"!"fi' ~,~\~\~J:".~;;..i'Y. - I 'l ~
fi'.tX.I;!" ,,~~. /J, .......,.' ~ I ~I...... ~ ' .; ~~..-.~"-~.-'" .~-ti
i'",,-~.~.~~~ 'l), ~,i:;! ~...,~,\"':'..~~;...:'U:;:':"_-- ~
,!~~~i';;)~/ i \.-.~. ;-~~':' ~~ 'tr~~~o \' ~'... -.~~~~#~t:S -~ J j~~
iJ'P't,. .........f""Yf "}I ... ~ ~. I!tp ~~,.. 41ri ~ ... ~ ~.. J."'-::'" f\ _I ..J.Ia~
","'~f"'-:il,_--.J. ~ ~_B,. U"." _ ':~ It'" -,,' -,. -'J:i'<I?~"~~' -_~
,~-::;..:~' .n -::;; ..;;..> - . '... ~ .. '. ".~ ~~T..I ;".. ~ _.-~
",,,,,,,.r~, ..l..fLI -,:;-. -, ;1 ~~ '.: ,.m':~l.rT ..- - 't :J1o "";..:-'
. jl~" ~""".- ~~J'1 ~G~'--'- '1 ~.~ i .', ~~,,;':'}.f....... - .. I 0I~'1
I~"}lf~~~~' ~ J --c'"'"',j'\,.c:... -!. ifP~''7, i~~i\~~~~""~~'f~''(~ : ;1 ~..~
,.......,~.- .......1 =---" ~ 'fi ,~~. .~,,-. I'. '~(p'-'
~-- . r ,..... " ~=";--- - -~ ~~~~~-.."" .,.;,"Iit."". -' .~ ,...""
~ ,.... ~ - - ~ ~..r~ ~ ...:,,, -::; ri~~. F? I ,r .~:r...-.~
,j ...._~ ,I: I .!-' _' ,2"~.=; ~~-,~, ~ '.. """'~
';~ '-~ .;l; ~; u.-: .~ I' _: ~~....~" '~;\t::::- I ~ .~-;
;.t. \~ )..,.J tt-'"f.'~""',~ ~ '~ (~~~,,~' -- -~~v:,-.~ /' l: -""'. .. ~~
~ ~~1, ~ i"'l;::~ !I"~' r; r', h: 1 )~;;F.>fA~ -'"J."iI'>~~_ "'/1 &
..'~\ I 1~-iM' "" I ~.." r al ;'/fl!~' ,'~' t-r":'---. 'r"' i Ic~"'7.,o.,..,-a... /: l' . ~~
"'~I t 'li ~ ~ ... ~ _~~.....r .Jt-~~ l.' 0( t~
. ~;r ~~ lor. Ii ",=" ~ : J,;...:: ~-W'!~;:" ~~..~,,~": ,l- .. ~~
v':; -:.~ -./ i'~:t,---:..,; 'f, 11. "-:'~","~.!:I.-.~" -. ,j -'. I A
" ~ .-i ~ -;.. .[. !.....?f:.......!i~1 t !U 7'.1 ..:.~~-;;;...~ r::/ , ""'~-~
'" \ Il ..; I r.E . '-- .:,~:;s..~t"...." 1 ,.o:.~'
. . \~J ~ -~ ! ,- t 1 - I ~ ~ ~ !.A.:t;~;. ~ ~ ~.....~~ .. k:~~
'~ '~\" '~f'---"':....-''f'';'-'' . \." "l.......~~~ ,'~ /~ - ~",=,l~
Of l':l i!~ \. ..-: I · ~> ~ ri'': 9';'~!~"""'~': .J::t'i~ "f ' :--1 ~""~
- 1.11 ~I,,-. ......:.: , I~;" · -ct.... I.... ~ "", ---- '~~.;." ..- . J -_...,,!S
- , 'I' .!t.'"'-' . ! 'C I .. ....". ~... l -.---::':'\.~... .1- ~ ".. 'II .. .t.::
~I JI~ :t.~. j I, tFt,..-C! -~ p3'~""-:l'" r "'..., ~- i-., -__"'_..:!-
I.., ~'! ~..t .........i"'.. "!I'" t c.:~ r !"1t"~.r~~~,;:~ /.- ....fl ~ ::~~1
I . '/I '.: ._ i ,i~ <..x r-. V';.1! ~ L>l~t.:::~~~~~ ~'<;t . r', J} -'~';:j
. ~ a;....' ".. ~~-f - """ I ~~?"'" -~~ / -;;; ~l;">"
'"'-, ,<;.. ! ' . If"" ~ ~:: "-fl~" .~ I .,;~ @-""iU! "'~-T" _ .. .' '0 '::"t-,i
e~f,1'i/- I ,.,..,...,.t:!,.:J1 '~I"::T:I"'~r -->>o!,~.... ,. ~";
,~>,!~,.,. j... r ;~ -;~ .1/>- ,; i ~. ,- 03'''' ,;~t;1 ~~~~".~ ~~~\If.-~ ,-. " ' .:;:
o~ -, - , ,- . .'" ""'1, ,>-:,.,-~..' ;;11>".:' I
if .....' ......, "'.-" ~~...-: : ...~..;:r.'j;,!j ,,- ....~'''Il. "\...r'~ .~ ,/, "-.!
.. ....~... -... 'I: w;:.".:..~ "". " ~ ....
'I~ !~ ....,..: r J1lh....rj't..W ...:~.-: ,.;: _to. - ~ \" . ...~.....,. ..\:jt /. . ^- -..1 I :.-~
~ ~..'I.(" i '!":~ :~,.;;;, ;.,.~: #~..;;..~~~~,~~ ../ ..r~.. ,..,,'
:W~ ~ - ~ .;~~..-., ['P -! n;:x-' ~~-..... ~....."'~." Jt! ~ ~ ~
" .. .-:;:;----t.,..-?-,.(L "'\~' ,<- .J,<...~~~.,.. 'V~ / '~. ..,-~.
,.. -... ...... l.~,*""~i:t........:;:-v ~;.~ ::.JIC~"~~ r~V.." .._' . .." _---!
f c .., "L.'OI L:~.-:..~~~~....--.:r~ "'..\, ~..,..'r" / .. to -r- _ ~
l -'. 1- "-~'....~ h-' ~-:...- . ' ".' I/r - -r'
,: , ..;::., .~~.. ~~\.:r J:~ I' _ _~~..~/., .., =I '-: 0,;-
rh\. .If.:J' '1>', \ ~ .\\. y.:::r'-.;; -,1.~.......... r ' '. ' {'1-:..
. .1t;:\ b~j~ i!.~, "ff!~-.I" ~ ""~, ~~K " ~-
Hr;1' ~~ ,~i~r",jl .fr~~~~t :", ";
fJ. ~ lJ~-,~,,",'; I J..f ~''''''~~''' .... ",,-<
to .. 4,..; _ ;;...:,,; ."'J~{t"' a;, .-;-::.:r~. ....... -"=
t !;j&L "* ~.'-'~"", .- ~wk' "
; r ,fl o.:::x,l~).'ljr",~.-.......... ~ t.,.u::.J,-/ .
n{I,1 ~~I ~~..'V 'l"~~~~ "l , "
· ~:::'-,~r ...... \~~':I.~
. ,~.?tt..'lr(-;"'~;: '. '\~~~~~'
: ~~"'.' .~ ~~~~t~{:'
~~~ I 1": '.~t;.).,.$~~.c.:aj.:
l,~~~~: 1 F :->>~e~~'~~,;-'''+'r ,
.......~...~ _, ~=. ~_} rJoj.,.i Cl.
.
----
-.
----
F1 .. ,-
I
~
I . 1
'f ~
.
I. ..
'lit
~
:/ ~
.\
/. t ,. ~
lo
:j , "4
I, I')
:h lD
.
:j, . . ~
. , ..
;/
n'
10;
. .
. :
..--.
.
~t ;: I ~
!~ ~
l ! L-~~
o:! l.
,I. ,,--,....-- .
:II
~
n
.
.
-2-
.
accidents over the last five years indicates the most frequent
types of accidents are rear end, sideswipe and parked vehicle
accidents. These types of acc1dents are related to vehicles
traveling at excessive speeds. None of these accidents analyzed
would have been prevented if stop signs had been installed along
Fourth Street.
Staff f1rst met with residents to discuss ways to m1tigate noise,
traff1C, safety and parking on Fourth Street in the subJect area
on April 18, 1982.
Staff developed a series of alternative plans to analyze how to
best resolve the residents' concerns and not create an unsafe
condition for pedestr1ans, bicyc11sts and motor vehicles.
The first plan developed was to provide on traffic lane and a
bike lane in each direction separated by a two-way left turn lane.
The plan provided for an additional 15 spaces on the southern
end of the subJect area. The estimated cost was $5,000. Some
residents liked this plan but most preferred a plan with more
on-street parking.
The second plan included diagonal parking on the west side of
Fourth Street with one lane of traffic in each direct10n.
On-street parking would be increased by 16 spaces. The small
increase in parking is due to the number of driveways. Staff
had serious concerns regarding vehicles backing out of a
diagonal space crossing both traffic lanes and creating a
potentially dangerous situation to north and southbound motor
vehicles.
.
-3-
.
Because of the relative dangers of this plan and the small
number of on-street parking spaces which would be gained, both
staff and the residents ruled out this plan.
The third plan provided one traffic lane in each direct~on
separated by a raised median with intermittent trees and
with parallel parking on one side. The plan would provide an
additional 103 park~ng spaces. The est~mated cost for th~s
plan 1S $150,000. Staff believes this plan would address three
of the maJor residential concerns: increased safety, decreased
vehicle speeds, decreased noise levels. In addition, it would
add a green str1p down Fourth Street. The effects on traffic
volumes are not certaln. It should be noted that traff~c
volumes are usually perceived as problems when motor vehicles
travel at a higher rate of speed and make more noise. The
reduct~on of vehicle speeds reduces the nOlse levels and make
traffic volumes more tolerable.
The proposed plan is Slml1ar to the prevlous plan except that no
continuous median is provided. There will only be stripes
delineating parking areas between planters located at inter-
sections (see Attachment ). The estimated cost is $30,000 and
it will provide an additional 103 parking spaces. Monies for
the project are expected to be provlded by the General Fund.
A decrease in traffic speeds and volume on Fourth Street is
expected as a consequence of the proposed project. The City
Parking and Traffic Engineer estimates that the critical speed
of traffic will probably be reduced to approximately 30 miles
.
-4-
.
per hour, and that typical weekday traffic volume will be
reduced from 12,600 to approximately 9,000. The Pa~k~ng and
Traffic Eng~neer anticipates that some traffic volume will
be sh~fted to Lincoln Boulevard, Neilson Way, and Main Street
(other nearby north-south streets) as a result of the project.
According to the Parking and Traffic Engineer, these streets
have adequate capac~ty to absorb the additional traffic w~th
no significant impact on traffic flow.
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Implementation of the Fourth Street Parking and Traffic
Improvement project may cause insignificant shifts in parking
and traffic patterns.
The project w~ll result in an increase of 103 on-street parking
spaces wh~ch is expected to allev~ate an existing shortfall of
parking resources ~n the area. The increase in parking spaces
may also result in a decrease in vehicle miles traveled ~ecause
residents and visitors to the area w~ll probably spend less
time searching for a parking space. This project is expected
to reduce air pollution, no~se, and traffic problems associated
with persons searching for parking spaces.
The proJect is expected to reduce typical vehicle speeds on
Fourth Street between pico Boulevard and Hill Street. Reduced
speeds are expected to result in fewer accidents, reduced noise
levels, and reduced air pollution. Reduced speeds may also
result in some actual or perceived inconvenience to drivers
. -5- . ,~
..
because of additional perceived or actual travel time necessary.
Since critical speeds are expected to be reduced by.only 5 miles
per hour, these effects will not be significant.
The proposed project may also result in the voluntary transfer
\.
of some traffic to other streets, primarily other nearby nort~-
south streets includ~ng Lincoln Boulevard, Neison Way and MaIn
Street. Slight increases may also occur on east-west streets,
including Pica Boulevard and Ocean Park Boulevard. All of
these streets have adequate capacity to absorb the antic~pated
shift in traffic volume.
EXPLANATION OF RESPONSES
In compliance with the instructions of the "Environmental Impact
i
Assessment" form, this section provides an explanation cf all
"yes" and "maybe" answers.
lA. Will the proposed result in substantial air emissions or
deterioration of ambient air quality?
Response:
The project will not
This item is checked "maybe",
~3ol
.t.
;f!
..
,
- ,
,.
.~
.... .
--
-,.
-~
result in substantial air emissions, but
..,.. .
there is a possibility - (~.
.....
""':..
that there may be insignificant deterioration of ambient air
zZ
.. ~
This insignificant _~~
..,,;.
.
quality because of project implementation,
deterioration could occur because of a one-time re-striping
o~erations and a potential increase in vehicle miles traveled :
by persons who choose to use other. perhaps less direct routes
r
.
;'s
:-1.
. -!"
..
--
..
."a,-
". .
- ;r
4.,.
....
.1 4
~
'. .
.
-6-
.
than Fourth Street. However, because the volume of .traffic
diverted is not expected to be large and because of the
potential alternative routes are quite near Fourth Street.
these effects will be minimal. Any potential insignificant
deterioration of air quality is expected to be balanced by
a decrease in vehicle miles traveled by neighborhood residents
and visitors searching for a parking space.
4A. Will the proposal result in chan~e in the diversity of
of species, or number of any plants.,.
Response: This item is checked "yes." The project includes the
installation of thirteen curb planters containing shrubs and trees
into a street area that has no plants at present. This is regarded
as a positive aesthetic impact.
6A, Will the proposal result in increases in existing noise
levels?
Response: This item is checked "maybe." Traffic which may be
voluntarily shifted from Fourth Street to Lincoln Boulevard,
Neilson Way, Main Street. Pico Boulevard. or Ocean Park Boulevard,
may cause insignificant increases in noise levels on those streets,
with corresponding decreases in noise levels on Fourth Street.
Because of existing traffic volumes on the streets mentioned and
,because o~ anticipated dispersal of voluntarily diverted traffic.
noise impacts will not be significant. Noise levels may also
e
-7-
e
decrease because of reduced typical speeds on Fourth Street.
9A, Will the proposal result in increase in the rate of use of
any natural resources?
Response: This item is checked "maybe". Due to the potential
insignificant increase in vehicle miles traveled discussed
above, there may be slight increases in automotive fuel
consumption, However, any such increases may be balanced by
decreases in fuel consumption because of the increase in
neighborhood parking resources as discussed above,
l3B. Will the proposal result in effects on existing parkin~
facilities, or demand for new parking?
Response; This item is checked "yes." The proj e(.t will increase
Rarking resources in the area by 103 spaces.
l3D. Will the proposal result in alterations to present patterns
of circulation or movement of people and/or goods?
Response: This item is checked "yes." As discussed above.
the project will reduce a four-lane roadway to two lanes, and
will probably result in a decrease in traffic volumes on Fourth
Street and increases on certain other streets due to voluntary
shifts in routes traveled. For the reason discussed above,
these effects will not be significant.
Prepared by: Kenyon Webster
Assistant Planner
Community and Economic Development Department
City of Santa Monica, Ca. 90401
(213) 393-9975, Ext. 266
KW:ps
......
EIA No. 728
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
~EGATIVE DECLARATION
An application for a NEGATIVE DECLARATION to carry out th~~followin~
project: Perfo~ various parking and traffic improvements to 4~h Street
between Pico Boulevard and Hill Street in Santa Monica including reducin
on property cOn~only known as
the current 4-lane roadway to 2 lanes and installation of median parking
and landscapin
(see above)
in the City of Santa Monica, California, having been filed by
City of Santa Monica
.". I.
.... mb Q 19_" 8~,1
, _,. ...0. Nove er ~I
and the application having been reviewed by the Environmental Review
Committee in accordance with the procedures established by Resolution
4351(CCS), therefore the Environmental Impact Review Committee hereby
finds that:
1. The proposed activity does constitute a project within
the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act
of 1970.