SR-506-003-04 (2)
. . ~. '5'06- &CJ3-ol/
.. ~
Santa Monica, Cal1fornia, February 8, 1978
/ / J1
TO: Mayor and City Councll FEB 2 8 1978
FROM: Clty Staff
SUBJECT: Proposed One-~?l Street System
Introductlon
ThlS report recommends a proposed one-way street system to serve the Central
Buslness D1strict.
Bacl<.around
-I
In March. 1973 the Traff1c Eng1neer prepared a traffic analysls of the down-
town redevelopment project regarding traffic circulation withln and to and
from the Central Business District. One of the recommendations made in that
report was the adoption and installatlon of a one-way street system on certa1n
streets 1n the downtown area.
The report was distributed to members of the C1ty Council and Clty Staff.
Subsequently, public presentations were made by the Traffic Engineer to several
groups with1n the commun1ty, for example, Chamber of Commerce Transportatlon
Committee and Industrlal Committee. In 1975 the Santa Monica Chamber of
Commerce Transportatlon Commlttee prepared a report endorsing a llmlted one-
way street system for Santa Monica (see attached). ThlS report was presented
to the Chamberls Board of D1rectors who adopted a resolut10n also endorsing
the limited one-way street system (see attached).
Due to delays in the progress of Santa Monica Place caused in part by the
Coastal Commiss1on and the recently settled lawsuit, no formal action by the
II A
FEB 2 8 t978
- . .
, ,
To: Mayor and Council -2- February 8, 1978
Council has been taken on the establ1shment of a one-way system.
Theoretical Advantages/Oisadvantages of One-way Streets
1. Advantages:
a. Increased capac1ty
1) Usually decreases the need for expenslve street widenlng
2) In most cases curb parking ~eed not be removed
b. Increased safety
c. Reduced CBO travel times
d. Ease of left turns
e. I~creased pedestrian safety
f. Simplifled slg~al phasing and improved signal progression
2. D1sadvantages:
a. Increased travel dlstances
b. Some loss of travel flexibility
Purpose of One-way Street Proposal
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc., the traffic engineer1ng consultant flrm for
Santa Mo~ica Place, in their traffic analysls endorsed the one-way street
system (see attached Recomme~ded Improvements Figure No.7). They estimate
that Santa Monica Place will generate 12,000 to 18,000 vehicles per day of
additional traffic into the CBO wlth approx1mately 40 percent util1zing the
new 5th St. freeway off-ramp. This means that 4,800 to 7,200 vehicles will
be added to the estimated 12,000 that Caltrans anticlpates will be uS1ng the
~ew off-ramp after it opens. ThlS volume of traffic will tax the existlng
CBO two-way street system and could result In congest1on at the intersectlons
in the CBO. Such congestion would affect the success not only of Santa
Monica Place but the future development of the Central BUSlness Dlstrict.
----- -
, . e
To: Mayor and Council -3- rebruary 8, 1978
The Fifth-Slxth Street ~orth-south pair will serve not only Santa Mon1ca Place
but the entire CED better from the new Fifth Street off-ramp Slnce it will
provide a more direct way to spread th1S trafflc volume out along tne east-
west streets. The existing SlX parking structures on Second and Fourth Street
are spaced from Broadway to Wilshlre, and it is important that convenient
access to them is provided in order to spread the parklng demand over the
existlng capacity.
Barton-Aschman believes, and City Staff concurs, that the one-way street system
proposed lS essential to realizing acceptable traffic flow 1n the vicinity of
Santa Monica Place. whereas the one-way pairs would, of course, benefit trafflc
flow for all trips generated through the downtown, slmply ln terms of the
reta1l center, Barton-Aschman1s rat10nale for the two conversions 1S baslc.
1. Fifth Street must be one way northbound to allow the heavy north to west-
bound left turn movement traveling to the retall center to occur wlthout direct
oppositlon at Colorado and at Broadway They believe the mere provislon of
separate left turn lanes wlth separate turn phases is inadequate. The el1mi-
nation of opposing southbound flow on Flfth Street is the only viable alternatlve.
2. Barton-Aschman believes, and City Staff concurs. that the parking garage
to be located at the southwest corner of Fourth Street and Broadway will
require that Broadway operate one way westbound. Failure to convert to one
way will result in congestion at the key lntersect10n of Fourth and Broadway,
since traff1c waiting to turn left into the Broadway entrance to the garage
would of necess1ty have to share the road with opposing eastbound traffic.
I . e
To: Mayor and Council -4- February 8, 1978
Recormnendation
The Staff recommends, and Barton-Aschman concurs, that a one-way street system be
approved by Councll as shown below:
1. Fifth Street one way northbound from the new Freeway off-ramp to
Wilshire Blvd.
2. Slxth Street one way southbound from Wilshlre Blvd. to Colorado Ave.
3. Broadway one way westbound from L1ncoln Blvd. to Ocean Ave.
4. Arlzona Ave. one way eastbound from Ocean Ave. to Lincoln Blvd.
It lS recommended that this be 1mplemented in the followlng manner:
l. Upon completlon of the new Fifth Street Freeway off-ramp in January, 1979,
install the Fifth-Sixth Street one-way north-southbound palr from the
off-ramp to Wilshire
2. Upon complet10n of the Santa Monica Place. install the Broadway-Arizona
west-eastbound one-way pair from Lincoln Blvd. to Ocean Ave.
Staff believes this procedure wlll permit the motorist to alter his drlvlng
hab1ts ln a more orderly fash1on.
Prepared by: S. E. Scholl
E. D. McAteer
J. J. Wrenn
Att. - 3
JJ\~: gw
. . '\" 1\1 0 I\t
. e
f;~0
'r- ~,
'" -.:,..--, .. --;:- S
() .~ - ,-. > ,--, '. - . . . :.- ~
::r. t.:~:~~;"' ~ :"~?-~'~k"~ t.J
:_ -:-~~~-::.=<: ~~:::..~~-"O.~ C:::
. ";Y 'i.."~ ~~-;::::"'"-..,..,= -r-'I4J
~ ~-- ~.- =----~ -
~;'~L-~-- ~-- -=7~
e ":"': -~- - - - .--<;
~~-f.. -~~_=-'~
.~- 0
OF C
-
July 30, 1975
to: City }~nager James Williams
Mayor Nat Trives
Mayor Pro Tem. Donna Swink
Councilman Seymour Cohen
Counci lroan Fred Judson
Councilman John HcCloakey
Councilman Pieter Van Den Steermoven
Councilwoman Christine Reed
As you may be aware~ the Chamber's Transportation-Parking & Traffic
Co~ttee. headed by ChairwAn Dave Lederer) has for some time been
studying a proposed preliminary "one-way street patternU suggested by
Mr. Ja'Ilee. Wrenn, Santa Monica's Parking & Traffic Engineer.
The accompanying resolution was adopted by the Board of Directors of
the Santa }~nica Chamber of Commerce at their June 10th meeting, after
being recommended by its Transportat!on Cor-~ittee.
It is the hope of the Transportation Committee and the Board that the
proposal as outlined could he implemented at the earliest possible time.
Cordially,
Sam Porter, CCE
Executive Vice President
SP : a 1
enclosures
cc: Mr. James wrennV
Parking & Traffic Engineer
.: r;-~..
.."', 'I'fll$
e ~~ -... I -
. ..."..J;"'~' --
ACC~ECITED
~_........ --..~~
Ser-.'1ng the Sa'lta Momca'Bay Area. 200 San/a Mafllca Boulevard, Santa Monica, Ca(lfcrn:a 90401 . (2t3} 393-9B25
.
.
, . .
SANTA MONICA CHh'1BER OF COM}1ERCE
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
----------
f
WHEREAS, the subject of one-way streets has been under consideration
by the City of Santa Monica for many years, and
WHEREAS, Santa Honlcs has experienced continuous growth In popula..
tion and business activity over the past several years and this trend 18
expected to continue, and
h~EREAS, Santa Monica residents are concerned about traffic conges-
tion and increased accidents from greater activity in the community, as the
residents overwhelmingly wish to retain a pleasant "home town" character in
the city with easy and safe driving, parking and transportation, and
WHEREAS, a study by the Chamber of Commerce Transportation Commit-
tee clearly shows that one-way street systems are a proven long run method of
improving the safety and efficiency of urban streets;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Santa Monica Chamber of
Cocmerce, representing over 900 members, endorses the principle of a limited
one-way street system serving the downtown area of Santa Monica and urges the
City ~o study and implement such a system considering the establishment of an
east-west couplet *uch as Arizona and Broadway now, and a north-south couplet
in the downtown area, such as Fifth & Sixth Streets, in the near future.
SIGNED: .;;-P~"R~~'IJf-
Isa Feinstein, President
SIGNED: ..~_~~__.c
Sam Porter, Exec. V.~ Secy.
ADOPTED this 10th day of June, 1975, by
the Board of Directors of the Santa
Monica Chamber of Commerce
RECOl-:XENDED BY:
Transportation Committee
Dave Lederer, Chairman
.,
.
.
. . .
f
REPORT
The Advisability of P~viding
a Limited One-way Street System for
Santa Monica
--
.
.
Prepared by the Transportation Committee,
Santa Honiea Chamber of Corr:merce
Dave Lederer, Chairman
.
April, 1975
-,
.
. --
- -
. . e
The A~v~sability of ~!o~id~nga Li~ite~ ~e~way Street Sys~em for
T --
f ,~anta ~l<.?nica
I. ~ackground
Santa Monica has experienced continued growth in population and retail
sales over the last several years and this trend is expected to continue.
The construction of new large office buildings and future anticipated
changes, such as the Rouse Project and new freeway off ramps, are likely
to accelerate the business actLvity and traffic in Santa Monica
Greater concern with traffic flow and safety is a natural consequence of
the increased activity in the co~~unity. Santa Monica residents enjoy,
and overwhelmingly wish to retain, the relaxed, friendly,pleasant "home
town" character ot the city. Plans to provide safe easy driving, parking
and transportation must be made and implemented now if increased commer-
cial activity is to be acceptable to residents. Greater traffic effi-
ciency will also help Santa Monica business compete more succes~fully
with neighboring shopping areas, such as Century City and Fox H11ls.
II. Purpose a~d Lim~tati~~s of This Study
This study is intended to deal with policy questions to enable the
Chamber of Commerce to make a reasonable recommendation to the Santa
Monica City Council regarding a limited one-way street system. It is not
intended to discuss or recommend specific traffic details. It will
consider the broad questions of traffic flow, safety and economic factors
as experienced in other communities and applicable to the situation in
Santa Monica.
III. Santa Monica Trends
A. Population
Santa Monica population information is available from the national
census for 1970 and is estimated by the Chamber of Commerce there-
after:
Year ~opulatiorl:. % Increas~
1970 8B,841
1971 89,196 + .4%
1972 89,800 + 7',>1
. ,/0
1973 92,435 + 2.9%
1974 92,978 + .6%
It is our opinion that modest growth will continue.
.,
.
.
, . e
- 2 -
B. Safety and Traffic Flow
..
Offic1al police department accident data for Santa Monica follows:
Year hccidents % Increase
1970 2, 726
1971 2,818 + 3.4%
1972 2,842 -to .9%
1973 2,863 + .7%
1974 3,143 + 9.8%
Ko explanation has been found for the unusual increase in accidents in
1974, but it does glve concern and incentive to improve the safety of
Santa Monica streets.
Consistent detailed traffic flow information over time is not available for
al"lalys is. That data which is recorded indicates a contlnued high level of
activity in the downtown area. According to counts made in the 1973-1975
period, it appears that trafflc runs about 28.000 cars per 24-hours in the
central downtown area and up to over 38,000 cars per 24-hours around
L1ncoln Boulevard and Broadway.
c. Economic Matters
. ,
A summar~ of retail sales in Santa Mon1ca indicates a pattern of continued
growth ~1nce 1971:
Retail 3ales
Year (in ODD's) % Increase
1971 $272,'632
1972 293.935 + 7.8%
1973 320..335 + 9.8%
1974 365,000* +13.9%*
*Estimated
It is our opinion that the growth trend will continue and probably
accelerate infue coming years.
~other comrn~nity economic lndicator is the assessed value of property
10 Santa Monlca as reported by the L.A. County Assessor1s Office:
.,
- .
.
. .
.' e
- 3 -
. Assessed Value
Land & Improvements
Year (~n OOO's) % Increase
~
1970 $ 283,593
1971 290,346 + 2%
1972 299,003 T 3%
1973 311,666 + 4%
1974 341,005 + 9%
He believe property values in the Santa Monica area will cont~nue to rise
based on the City's favorable living and working conditions and outstanding
locatJ.on.
IV. The Experience of Other Co~un~!~es
~ vast number of ubeforelJ and Uafter" studies of one-way street systems
have been made by governQental units, profess~onal and academic researchers.
Only a few have been selected as 11lustrative here, but the attached
bibliography lists additional material available.
A. ~raffic Flow and Sa~~ty
Quoting from the Highway Users Federation for Safety and Mob11ity
Conference paper dated 1971:
-- DEvery major s~udy that has been completed... (since early 1900's)
... has shown that one-way streets improve transportation
efficiency. Several early studies...attr~buted large accident
reductions to one-way streets. In addition to the safety
improvement, most studies found there were substantial improve-
ments in travel time, street capacity and vehicle delay.1t
A few meaningful examples follow:
-
L.os .h.nqeles. -- J~ 1973 study by the Department of Traffic, City of
Los Angeles, on Spring and Main Streets shows the one-way couplet
resulted in more vehicles with less delay per vehicle and less
accidents. The traffic volume increased 18-20% in peak hours, the
average speed increased 25% during the afternoon peak hour period.
while average traffic time was reduced 20% accidents decreased by
23% to 25%. The record for other L.A. surface streets showed a
10.8% accident increase for the same period.
Modesto -- A late 1950's study on certain streets that were made
one-way indicates by the end of the first year of operation,
although total accidents reduced 356 to 322, the number of lnjury
accidents increase 60%. hfter an extensive campaign of informing
..
.
.
. .
, e
- 4 -
.
Motorlsts through newspapers, police at site, driver's license bureau,
etc. . all accidents were reduced. By the second year, traffic mileage
....as up 24% I tr a ve 1 time down 50%, and accidents down 28% from the two-
~ay system the year before conversion.
.
HaQllton, Ontario -- The pattern of slight accident increase during the
flrst year of operation was noted In H~~ilton due to dr~ver unfamil~arity.
Greatest problem was driver turning left from center lane of one-way
street. Three years later there was a 17% accident reduction on one-way
streets (particularly pedestrlan accidents) compared to substantial
increase on other two-way city streets. This 1mprovement was attributed
to platooning of veh1cles and creat10n of safety gaps in traffic for
pedestrians.
Twelve s~aller Oregon clties -- hn Oregon Hlghway Department study in
1959 shows a substantial lncrease in traff1c flow with an average 27%
decrease in accidents, especially rear-end, Mid-intersection, such as
sideswipe ~~etings, turning, parking, pedestrian and back~ng. These
results were confirmed in studies in New York and Mlch~gan. Night safety
by eliminating oncoming headllghts was vastly inproved.
3an Franc~sco -- A Department of Public Norks study indicates a substantial
lncrease 10 average speed and traffic volume per lane with an over 50%
decrease in accident rate. The study ~so quotes similar data reported
from Sa.frarnento, Portland and Denver.
B. Econo~ic Eff~~ts
The reported results again favor one-way streets.
A study conducted 1n Denver, Colorado ~n 1964 summarizes much of the
information reported to that date. Business on one-way 16th Street in
Sacramento 1ncreased nearly 50% more than business on other streets in the
city. h Chamber of Commerce study is quoted as saying that 103 out of
134 cities were 1n favor of one-way operatlon after a fa~r trial. The
Fresno Merchants ASSOc1ation 1nd1cates 90% felt the one-way streets were
not harmful to business and 85% would recowmend them.
~ study of R1chmond, Virginia compared retail sales and property values
of exactly comparable one-way and two-way streets. Property values on
one-way rose 46.5%, while those on two-way rose only 33.6%. Retail
gains during the first year on one-way rose 10% wh11e the city as a whole
rose only 3%.
Other cities. including Roseburg, Oregon; Buffalo, New York; Sacramento,
California; and two groups. one of 50 cities and one of 134 communities,
indicated favorable econom1C results from one-way streets.
.
.,
.
- - - .
- -- ~--
- -
. .
. e
. .
- 5 -
,.
7ne D~rector of Traffic Engineering of Denver stated, IlBusinessmen often
reslst one-way operation because they fear the effect of having only one-
half of the traffic passing their doors. Yet, it is easy to demonstrate
that, if motorists are properly directed through public and private
announcements, and when motorists have developed experience with a ene-way
;:;.rterlal system, businessRen will receive the benefits of better and safer
=,ob~lity and access developed by a pair of one-way streets."
A conference held in Washington, D.C. , in 1967 pointed out "...certainly
Saine types of businesses may be harmed although probably only temporarily.
~1ese are primarily drive-in facilities which previously catered only to
the direction of traffic that was eliminated."
A study made in Helena, Montana in 1961 shows:
o the assessed valuation of abutting propertles to the one-way couplet
increased over eight times compared with an increase of approximately
four times for non-abutting propert~es in the same area during the
sarne period.
o only 8 of 58 businessmen who were interviewed indlcated they preferred
two-way over one-way operation in the couplet area.
o traffic lncreased 87% versus 39% in the nearby area over the same period~
o the one-way couplet was favored by most residents in the area.
In an Olympia Washington study in 1952, the flndlngs indicated substantial
~nprov~~ent in safety and traffic flow. IIBeforell and ltafterU flgures
shewed that over a three year period sales on one-way streets increased
by 8% while those on two-way streets decreased by 13% under comparable
conditions. ~fuile th& retalI sales picture is complex, the study
positlvely states, tlOne-way streets were certainly not detrimental to
general business trends in the Ci ty of OlYITlpia. u L~e reports go on to
say:
111. Tne economic development of a business dlstrlct is dependent
upon the commodities and services available, the manner in
which they are offered, and the1r accessibility-to the customer.
One-way streets were installed for the purpose of increasing- -
the accessibility to the central business district, and to
add to the safety and convenience of those motorists traveling
to and through the-downtown area.
at 2. The economic structure of the modern Amerlcan City is
indlspensably built around the transportat1on of persons and
commodities by motor vehicles. Any 1mprovernent in street and
highway trafflc conditions will, in the long run, benefit
all persons and interests dependent upon the passenger car,
truck or bus for buslness, social or recreational activities."
-,
.
.
~ -
I . .
. .
~ - 6 -
v. Conclusions
~e various reports from other C1ties that stud~ed one-way operation
clearly ~ndicate that such syste~s are a slgn~ficant method of improving
t~e safety and efficiency of the urban street system. The disadvantages
of o~e-way operation are minor Ln comparison to the important benefits
~hlCh can be achieved.
Generally, cnu could expect ~mproved capacity, smoother trafflC flow,
eli~~natlon of left-turn problems, fewer pedestrian/vehicle conflicts and
signlficantly less accidents.
?nere is nothlng apparent in the situation 1n Santa Monica which would
~end to negate these anticipated results.
VI. Recommendations
7he Transportatlon Committee of the Santa Monica Chamber of Commerce
recommends that the Chamber approve a resolution to the banta Monica
Clty Council endorsing the princlple of limlted one-way streets for
Santa Monlca and implementation of such a system now, based on study and
review of the details of city traffic.
~
.
.
.
. . ~ .
'. .
T
. ~
- 7 -
VII. Bibl!ography and Reference
:II-
1:ayer, Peter h. Taylor, s. s.
?:=-aft,lc Control & R~adwc!y ,,~lem.ent~. --: L.A. Clty Traffic Eng~neer
T;""1t'nr Relatlonshl'p to Hi9hway Safety - u~~fore" and uA.f1;:,~rn Study_of th,e
Revlsed 1971 Converslon of Maln Street and
Spi- ing . s,t,reet _to" one,-.~a:y "
Trafflc Engineering, State of ~ash~ngton Cperation
;~ Study of ye!ticle ._Tra~,fic _cmd, Busl.ness October 1973
Trends uBefore I' and Uhfter" . One-way,
St~ee~s in Olymplar Was~in9ton Marconi, William
January 1952 San Francisco Traffic Engineer
One-~ayAr~erial Systems
Rybak-off, George AprJ.l 1968
Carroll College
Economic Analysis of The One-W~ Carmody, Dougl as J.
Couplet, Helena, Montana Mo4esto's On~-~ay Streets (~s~.
1967 --and 2nd Year Reports)
ThoILa$ Richard C. Street Engineerlng
~~e Eff~ct of Cn~-way Tr~~fic .operation Dece~ber 1958 and March 1960
on Retail Busine~s . ..
~rafflc Englneeri~- Unknown Author
July 1968 Supplementary One-:-way Street:
Report
Kennedy, John, and Hill, Denn~s Fresno
Econo~i~ and Environmental Effects of 1957
.. .~e-Way Streets ~n ~.esi~en!-;::i;a1 Areas
Tne,hpp~aisal Journal Data Search Printout
Cctober 1971 Battelle Institute's'
Bruce, John A. Transportation Information
Service
Cne-~iay. .Naj<;>r ~rter:lal, ,Streets Apr~l 1975
Conference-National Academy of SClences,
Uashington, D.C.
1967 Data Search Printout
Cl?e Hay StreE;~s
Department- of Publ ic "lorks I Fresno SDC's Internat10nal Search
Su~plenental Report on.Gne-way St.reets Service
January 1957
.
Reference List
Univers1ty of California,
r.erkeley,. Institute of
Transportation and Traffic
Engineering Library
April 1975
..
.
- - ~--- - .
. .
.. .....
:>:D r.----:-----.~- I I '~.' 1, 1.' 'I ~ I 'I i
. I, 'I' I " I I
:: r;a I, :, i , ' ,\ I ] J! I I~, I ,I .
;; () I, -- -. - 1 -~.~ ~_J '_ __ _--' 1 ____ ~____==J ,'--_= 'L------.-l' ~~- ~-
::; .- Vv,'s! , 'e g!yd
~ ~ i;U I ~ :- -- -- ~---- N i-- 1 :---1- 1 ~-:~: p'li -- - -, ~I_---C; r=-Ol'mr --- - - ----I ~
~ ? \~; ,'; i i : to. Ii! 1~,g> i 11 r ~,I" ! 10i ;i j'~l ')~)
....'. IO'i lb, Iii , 51l D t ~'~ ~.1,.. [
, m g j.. /' (5 ! l j :1 ~ i I I '-?"," ','r',' M : 'r
J ....~ ,U" ii' , ?:i J' 1'''= .
- .<.. :i;," , ~ T ~, !' 'I :,' I
o :E!~;' I : jQ:_" :' I , 'I, '
:: : ' ;-<, , ii, , i, : ~ ! ,1, I ~\: i: ! I
./" rl1 , ;'! ; I, ,',' l=~i ,I,')' :! ~l ')' 'I II I' ,
OJ !/ I . > j", j J , I' , " ~ lA'
"? ' I' , 'r ,"! I j', " ': , II " ,
- t, - ~- ~ L_ _ __ _--.1. -- L__ --- -~ .---' ,L_~ .~ ~-----r
_ . , . . - --' -- -. - --- - - ~ --- -' -A'nl;~a7-\;;e- ~ -- --r ~ . -
~ : ~ i " ",-. ,,--:0...__] !-~:'- ~--r------O~-I ('-'!~l- 1,-- i,i- -; :-,i~~~,' -=r ~
~ I \ ! ,: ' '~I -'- J, ., Jl ' Ii 'I) , J I
EO j' ,rl ! I ; I ~~~ '[[], ! I,' Ii I I' : I' ')
=n ? I' " ~- J I L' 'I t I
.A.I i ' I 1 - ',' . 'j I ' , , ,
o : I I' . ! I -~~ ' " j I ; J j ': " \;
or.:: !! I" 1:!' '. if ~=i-~ I: I ij' ; ! i"1 II ;, i .
J"j;1 ' I ,I I ~ ' " i I I II " '
II I ~ I ~> I ::~;. 1 q I - !. I " ~
.... J , 1;9, , ,,_::- , I! If' ,
~ t I'JI i_~~LJ, lULJL- I~. !, LJ. j : . L J ij_ !, J!
Z I? ~ ;-1-- -I!~ 1,- ~,'----=--::-= --=-=,r-=-- rr-=-= ,--- Ii r~~~~I~001Br i -- "
(J)-i 1 J j "I 101 'I /1 ~ q l ii !! : II inll 1 I II: II' if
j; f! 1 If - I( ! 11 ~ I 'tl 'I I" ' \
I l I ' I ;; . r 11 .- - \; :1 11 il j',1 ii'," If ;'1
' <. :j I' 'Oi :. Jail' t; ! i! : i ' , I I
I : I ; =~_ I '!; J i I 'I " ,
f I :L' : l~. I ~ : ' 'I 'l'i I ,I ,., ! I!! 1) JI: I
I" : I I " I'"
,i " I I" ~ I ; : I I .
, ,', r, I . , ' .
. ; Jr 1 r~_.~_~_ ! 11 il _ -= i, _ i I -...-i LJU J~__ }. ___I j
jl! ( @ . -~ * Broadv.JCl'L.... <:1
~ ; I,' '- -- -- '" . - - ~- ' - -- - -~ ,-- -- r ~ ~ -- \ '=-- -
; i 1 :'l~--- , ~ ':0 r-- - -lJ ill l'! r-~-'" l :
I I, "Jl ~ ' [ , :! ' , I
{,~. l' ~ t:! - ~ 3- __ !. II,' l!j ! ; i I I, ' I
i" ,1,,~ll"r, I
~, "~' )': ~- - ~
1 :! ,.; ~ r' I: '..-~ ,I ~" j,
~. '! !!&'--u - ; - ~i I-~ ~ ~ I
r~ ~./! /' r' "J ' , It ,',! 1,' I j I ,I
1,1,\ j' t , II ' " I '
a1'lei':::::' , ", '....... COO;ado Ave.-_
Jr\~t-c- -~'2~7.'__("r/' - - ~j J ~ i[---- ulU I j
L\ l I I ~ II ~' ! I
~ r-----\ "-J I ~< ;
, 1 ' .'
I ',= i 's;l I; ,
-=~1Ii ~~I Ii"" i .
If ,\ I l--~'~' J~j :I: j
; , ~ =;i}--Z' Mi::=-~~..::. ~ I', I ~", ' ~ I i"..----> l'
,1.,;p.C:!lGl , " .l. Z
J t- z 3: -t Z i }, ., Z
~ Uf ~ ~ ~ d "!?:. r !' 1 " -,,~ I'
m ~ ;;Q z m il 0 r' I ----- ---------:::. -- ~~ ,
,---z:~--o I G) :,;:: \ s~=~~-- ~ '
1 --I :r: ""Il -d m I (; i ;uslta-N
=-)~ ~ ~~ z . il g> ~~~~:
r T...:::~-21.", C I' 'j ~ I nD ~i
~ U>l -J I r ~,
, )> ~i 'I' L_ -
, -<;g ! ;, '" I I
--' r u> !I, I; ,
'~';ci I ~ I" )i '~~ I! ;
,. ~, ~ \ I ! I JI
~ ~ I ~ I., ! 1 r , :
- , : I '! I 1 I
r- I ~ I I . I
_I 'J" 1/ il~l..J-~ -.:;1,1'-.
~ , __ I I / I r. .
,.
. ~ \~\)\ ~l =:j t=,1-~, ~, l l=--=;dli,' '1!:=:~~' j:==-1~
. ==.J t--: .--, I ~ ~ r-- ~ ----'\ I ---. ~
. . " r--' I -'" --I 0-
'. A. I : ~ ; /-----........-./, ; 1----1 0-
....---< I -' ---i ~ ----l l-
I' C~~. -.J J-:i ~AJJ~:~O~ ~ :--i t= i t:
l I '==i r;;r ---, r--~ ITT~ ~'~ ~ ! r-:-. F
, ' j--L-L I ~ 1 I-- --I p--
~ \ ~ ! ~:-' :=1 ~r---, ~U1r -;0) - i r--:~ ~
?1kG/ . I ~' ~ -t~ \-1- --; J =1-
I t-- - I iI ---1 1 r ,
. t=:. - ---; I lr- ~
/ ' , , . \ I ,', " " ' ';l -rr1 r;-~ -,,-J ~
I ,I ~U kTt fIT "m=~,<vp,;~11 j" :"': ~"I ~
" ,,~,: ') I I PI, lOll EJI1 f1Tl Tn ,I < ~,' i 1 111 P-
: I . t-- !! I "9 -1 --I I' - I r-- i t:
-I ' ~"! I -1 : ~ 1 I . '
'I ',' I I ~ "'---'. ~
I . ~ I - "-----J ---': I:L 1 r--J :!---
;\ -=- ;! i J--,~ ---; '.. I I--- ~ r-
i __ ! " I t :~, =:::J ~ ~ ~ r-
i ~ : i~ 1rrJr1 tIT: ill ,JIj LJ FfT:ni IT
- ] .r '^"~St-'IRE
~~ I;'~~t=~ 1... ~lTl:rr:m ~:j~ f~! .;il e
; II'JOf./ .=: tE~ "~ ,I! ~q F~! t= ! ~
] i '["... ,; I, I ~t---1 J--, j.......
; " ~" 'I - I r---1S' 1---" ~
I \ fl ,: : ~ ," H. ---, ;----..,--1 ~-
, I I" . - I >-- ., i ~H ~
I , 'I" , ' " " I J, .
H' ," ~\ ~ ; 1,1 i:---1.. I - . t..-
, !S@ ,ld -- T;'", z ~~"' ;,-------::~-...... 8= ~
~ it=::j , . r---' '-'---,;-, II"; l I ~, .~, ( .--,...-
_ --. 1--" i -~~! I 1 ,.'----0, ' ">----1 ,I , I-
~ ; ~ I I'. '--j i ' j t==n r-, "~---, 1 ',,-----I~' 1 r--: i L-
.... ~, tw----- -"lI ~ -i ;; ~ I : I - I i; ~ -----i f=----- 1 p--
>. '----"; I ' --J I !I:" , , ! I ~ ' , . ~
~ t"_~ ~ I r , r r---"' l.~. i! ., I -----.J ~ _. t
.::=::::;] , _I 1 ' ,0, ,f (.....--- 1__---.. ~-, - '------I -
.t ~ ~ 1 i ~ ,~ i---1 L--~ . t------ ~! - ~ . i-- ~ 1---. i--
<, :'~ rA' ,In R ,----1' ,.-;, '!', I 1----, ,----
:t i ;. S }... L >-- I - ~ ~----..-.....--- r:;: . 1---...... i ~ ..---
OJ' = ' '---I" >-----< r---- -- I ---
~: ,.. r---I l I . I J I" ~ ; :: ~ - ~ t--. of-- I_
t..' l;::::::1' I , . .., , ~. ~ I. 1 " : ~_. . ~ ----:. 1-
, ;1 !~ --0 ~: : ~~,~ gS^,\Tho~< ,,--~ ~-':::--,:"'~: ::
~, .~ __ I-~', ,q r-~' .11--;-----,I"r--'---< +---: .' " .'-
'\ Is -::;- :t- .~ ~tj) I----"'j ------, if " . 'U !----~ ~ 0 ------/ (;,'lJ..-- ! c: : 'rl" " {:-
",I f -.< -I ----, . l~!----!-tr-, ~I-----:-l!---' "r' 1 -~
J...)~ i-t::=:f :=: I." : r-- 't. ~ -.-t--- ii"!' I I~t------. I-r-- "_i I'" --
...o-~ r--1 I ~ jT E' i:t r------:' ,It ~ -'. r-, ' ..... r---~' f";- ,...,r----, ! C >------1' 'l: '-
t'--, t I Z ~'T:j 1; I. __ '; Irr.----j' , 1r>1~' '==1f":r~Mi'll-----~,--" Hrr~,-
.... '\ l - II-I' ,r" ~"d'" ~.- ,.,.,~. ,-, !----?~
~ --------l , "'~' I ' ,'" "" ,,!,'~, ,', ' , -
.... I ........1. r:~' - . ." _.-~:r)-------o , :.--
~,,---;, I ,1 ~~ ,-- -...., I f=:'i j'-r " -,'1---,------<,~~,I~>-I-li--- '<:,',' 10<-
'-~'~' ." t ' , ' 'H . , . I rj
;-i--.....tl.~ .~~ r---!-----.J --..1 . . ~ -~ .----:-----1 r-- r;'---:~ - r-
-: ': 1 j--', -I ,! -; . r---,"----! t--->----, ~ '-r ..,'!-
~ ,-----4, I _ ~___ __~. ,___. E. I, .~I._---, _ --.J.... ,1, ~ _
O ~B, --d,' I . ~ 111 I 'I" ,*,J f.M. AlU! .,"~ ~~ - -- ~ R- 0 A. ~ A. v Sl'ti!I!!III I""'~ _ C ..
~.' , f" r . ~ r-'9" -----,:---"" " , ,--- ,~
, -- - , r---:' . --;.----..----. ~-____l ~ ; ,-
Z., ~; \ . - -'~ ""'C)~ "Tl/l' ~ !::=:j; i~ ;:--.-..:: ; ~~ i-
1T1" r---f \ ~ . [Tl 0 C l:=j !--"'" I !----1:::::::{ t-- 1;-. -. I {......
t-i" ' Z"O -f i" ~! ,~~ r--! r--' 1..
l--i," , '~-.J 1---_. ~ i ---I ~ !---,~, t-
=e Hr-lr, ,J ..... fTI- C I ~- ------1 ,I--, I' ~a t--, ! I--- · i--
)> , JL--l, ' -- z:;o . I---- " ~ -----..J --, t, I l-
, .. I '." ,\ '::0 G) fTI " ---i ,--, I ,~ ......
r""" J' jl 't,;J ~ I . ~ r--~ ~
-< -r'I I~c 181nti-" t:=: I / ~ \~ c::- '::=:t bG ~~ ~
M U "r~1" _ -..i.1 ..." ,~ l...--.,I ;.,_~ ...~;-... - ~I J t..---l j '"'-
::0 --r - -~, ---, ~ COUJ-f.."'.... ~'
-- CJ) -~_u.__.,---.~(Jl-' ~---" -.-, ~,IIm ~ nIIIIill, " ,
l~ \ J .. '.../ I', '", I I ., . . "
-.. I . ! ' : .jllt t~ . ~:
'olE --f 0 It: R ' . \---l " _I. il J . ... ~~Jl7-"" __""'S
"'T'II .." """~I;':-~..... ~ ~ .. ~ I (":::-c_ .::-.:r.q--.J t~',r'1f1Tp I __.
-- #V V - " l:-~ ..J _ - r----; --l \ - "!Ul" ... --:::.----~
>--; .,. . t:3 ' ( , "T. ,. ____...1...1. I III ~ 1-- -- <-
o 1------,:........ -I ~ . ~ I ~. -, <"'
rn 0 _ =t-...J' \ oJ "'! I, __<-1' ..----~ --- 1, s --
.-. ~ ~ ' ""1 '- ' , 1'.=:J< . ~
... -..,...- ; -; ~ i! I ; . --"" _ ".....-.... ......")..... r.. t ...---: i
..... _..: -J' f< -- - --1 r . - J..-
fTI (J) ~,..'\.,.,~" .; zl ", k._ ,--l- ~,.. P., ~~~ ...C ',- -,
' ---, '--rrTT1' v r fOl .,. _.-t' -1 ,- --..-
-I fT1 ; 1!~~rt~11~llli-~ ,--;.1 ~ ~ ~ --7 I' i:: D:!' ; [" -.:-, ...., ; "f -~~~- -I' ~~ ':'-':8~, '.~ =
,...... ~ L ~_ . j ! 1----...... ; :J - -.p ".c -... ;..--. I.J.--- ..- ~ - -
,..., ;/Io.II""l.~'- ..t~_. -~t'a.:L- ! t r- ----- ' . 1 "..
,^ ,- 1...--.", 'I 1 ;, .-- " ' <<- - '. --, : \ '. ,r--"- - ,]:-
Vf ~j fU....L_._.... 1.J:""7r--~ . 2('" -- ~~ ..J.~~ l.. . i - !-
-< !i....~; 1 i . i ["'- L- _ } f'o.... - - -: .. ..;. ~ IIQ..,._' -,.A~. !-: ~~ L
,,""'..-'( lL..",i, t ,1 I ~.. - - i """...-.... ; ,----
,^ /8' I' J E' - I rb ~.~- ::--C::-:~o.",-~ SAN,' !,"CN'" '_0 , '
VI " l-'- I ~- " ' ..... ,A, ,
-I : r----- !f ! . r-- - --- .. ~ ~-----
~ ij . I.; i ~L ~ ....-- ~~ J ~
..... , ',' l~' , - ~-7,...p, .,..' ~"- ..<, ,--. 1.1<
I.' ...Aii.....H ~ : ~.. ..... r- i.- l :---", J: -----
'::JIll' ' !~, '1' j:" . -' <..~.
:lilt ~H t+-'" ~ I -......... L-,... I' II .! -: t..... i
-~ J ~ i r-- - : ;: I '-' >--"
--------. ; Ii! Ie' I : n_ - ------1 ;-
o--..--t-----: " . : { ; IX i ~- ~- ! 1-
J I ri' I . : ~'''- J .; ,- r-----I -
)0. -..--J..-- ----,. J "-
. I It. _ l - -c.,...'1 -:..~
jj--J ,.1 ".i.JJ",,!! ~ - 1 r--~ ...---- <j.!
. ,~--J ,TITIT'n !"' ---<..~ - / < p t - ----< 0---" - I-
~s::S-;+~;- l'~:7 ~-; j : t ~== ~;.: 1.:=
~~' I ~I <.. I _ -6' .- _, .............
L---, : 11,1 j I'll rt I it L r' ~ "= I I - I, ,----.-!Ino,_
-, - - /
. -,
< .
/
b
BARTON~ASCHMAN ASSOCIATES, ,NC.
180 So...rth L..aI<E A,enx Sute 260 P-as.:o:r,} Caliana 91101 : 213: 449 Ir
Februa~y 27, 1978
Honorable Mayor Donna O. Swink
and Members of the City Councll
City of Santa Monica
1685 Main Street
Santa Monica~ Callfornia 90401
SubJ ect : Llmlted One-Way Street System in Downtown Santa Monica
Madam Mayor and Council Members:
We understand that the Santa Monica City Council is about to formally
conslder the implementation of one-way st~eets ln Downtown Santa Monica.
The purpose of this letter is to again explain our findings on the need for
the one-way street system and to offer our asslstance, if necessary~ in
respond1ng to any questions or concerns that may be raised by the City
Counei 1 .
Over the past five (5) years, Barton-Aschman Associates has served
The Rouse Company as traffic and parking consultants for Santa Monica Place.
At present~ we are under contract solely with Frank O. Gehry and Associates
(project architects) to prepare the functional designs of the two parking
garages serving Santa Monica Place. Further~ we have had the prlvilege of
serving the City of Santa Monica in the Central Area Circulation Feasibility
Analysis which will soon be presented to fhe Planning Commission and the
City Council. Our perspective therefore is not one of a traffic engineer
who only wants to move cars to/from Santa Monica Place; rather, our CBD
experience allows us to look at the function of lnd1vidual streets as each
relates to all the land uses and transportation modes 1n the downtown area.
~lstory of Proposals
In early 1973, the City Traffic Engineer completed an analysis of future
capacity requirements for downtown streets. He concluded that the most
effectlve way to accommodate future CBD trafflc was the lmplementation of two
one-way couplets -- Broadway/Arlzona and Fifth/Sixth Streets. In the 1973
report~ boundaries for these one-way couplets were suggested that would take
advantage of planned freeway interchange improvements.
When BAA began working on Santa Monica Place~ we reviewed and analyzed the
City Trafflc Englneer's report and we strongly concurred with his one-way
couplet findings. In fact, all of our plannlng and design work has been based
on the one-way system.
- ~--- ~-
4 4 --
. Honorab 1 e Mayor Donna. Swi n k .
-
a
and Members of the City Council
February 27, 1978
Page Three
The parking garage at Broadway/Fourth would have to be completely redesigned
if Broadway remained a two-way operation. Most of the traffic will approach
this garage from the east, and if left-turning traffic must face opposing east-
bound trafflc (which would be eliminated under the one-way plan), entering
traffic on westbound Broadway will "back Upll through the Fourth Street inter-
section. Under two-way operation, the garage entrance on Fourth Street would
have to be emphasized by allowing left turns into the garage from northbound
Fourth Street. Even with this change, however, it is doubtful that satlsfactory
garage and street traffic operation could be attained because of the location
of garage access points. (NOTE: The Colorado/Second garage has been deslgned
to be served by two two-way streets, and Council may wonder why this garage
will function satisfactorily but the Broadway garage would not under the two-way
operation. The essential difference is that the enterin~ traffic from Colorado
makes a right turn into the structure while at Broadway ,t would be a left
turn inbound. If opposing eastbound traffic faces the inbound (westbound)
Broadway left turns, serious II backups II will occur. Left turns out of the
Colorado garage will be handled by dual turn lanes within the garage under
traffic signal control. In essence, the Broadway garage could work on a two-
way system if the maJority of the traffic were approaching from the west
instead of the east.)
SUlTITIary
Barton-Aschman Associates strongly supports and endorses the proposed one-
way operation on Broadway/Arizona and Fifth/Sixth Streets. We believe that
these changes will serve traffic to/from the existing downtown businesses and
that it will also accommodate the increases in traffic associated with the
completion of Santa Monica Place.
If there are any questions on the contents of this letter or if there is any
other informatlon that might be of help to the Council in your deliberatlons,
please do not hesitate to ask.
S; ncere ly ,
BARTON-ASCHMAN ASSOCIATES, INC.
--~u r-' ~~f)-
'-- . ~-~---:--.
Thomas E. Mitchell
se"J AssocIate
.'~7f~
Patrick A. Gibson
Vice President
TEM:PAG:ITIll ./""
cc: Mr. James Wllliams~
Mr. Frank Gehry
b
BARTON-ASCHMAN ASSOCIATES,INC ;'::.::tr'''IC;' I.n:.,s 'i.,:j~h;;-.;;'~'1 :x:: i/n,ed;::-cls S, P"aLl M''":r,e3{)I2: Sa' J:JS2 CaJi'ocn.a ~V;:YK) Crtar.o