Loading...
SR-802-006 (2) RP : DTA : S't1:'UC -I . Councll Meetlng: A~l 2. 982 Santa Monlca~l~rnla &' tJ ::z. - 0 tO~ '-c APR ~ 7 1982 TO: ~ayor and Clty Cauncll FROM: Cl ty staff SUBJECT: Increase In Beach and Pier Parklng Rates July 4 Introductlon ThlS report requests CounCll approval to lncrease both the beach and pier parklng fee from $3 to $4 on July 4, 1982 only. Eackground July 4th produces a large number of beach goers assoClated wlth the f~reworks dlsplay from Santa Monlca Fler~ lllegal flre~~rks are used on the beach. A portion of the costs assoclated wlth the entertalnment should be borne by the beach user as well as the pler attendee. Economlc Impact Staff research of parklng records lndlcates that an lncrease In the beach parklng and pler parklng fee should produce an addltlona1 $10,000 In revenue. ThlS would cover the cost of the flreworks. Recommendatlon Staff recommends Councll approve the attached reso1utlon whlch authorlzes the Clty t1anager to lncrease both the Pler and Beach parklng fees to $4 for July 4, and to approprlate S10,000 from the Beach Fund reserve, account 11-939-000-000 to account 11-521-000-401 for the purchase of flreworks. Prepared by: Donald T. Arnett. Dlrector Recreatlon and Parks Susan l-iu1l1n P~er Manager 6-, DTA-dc APf< 6 7 19d2 " RP:DTA~dc .. . counc~l Meet~ng 4~7-8 Santa ~ica, Call=orn~a RE50LUTIO~ NO. 6475(C(5) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COu'NCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA, AMENDING SECTION 2.1i. OF RESOLUTION NUMBER 1786 (eCS) PERTAINING TO THE RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE OPERATION OF PARKING LOTS ON THE BEACH AND AMENDING SECTION 2A OF RESOLu~ION 5421 (CCS) PERTAINI~G TO THE OPERATIONS OF THE PARKING LOT ON THE S~~TA MONICA PIER. The C~ty Counc~l of the C~ty of Santa Mon~ca does hereby ~esolve as follows: SECTION 1. Subsect~on A of Sect~on 2 of Resolution 1785 (CeS) is amended to read as follows: A. The rates to be charged shall be fixed by L~e C~ty Manager from t~me to t~me, but i~ no event shall exceed three dollars per day, except July 4th when the rate shall not exceed four dollars per day. SECTION 2. Subsect~on A of Sect~on 2 of Resolut~on 5421 (eeS) ~s amended to read as follows: A. The rates to be charged shall be fixed by the C~ty Manager from t~me to time, but in no event shall exceed three dollars per day except July 4th when the rate shall ~ot exceed four dollars per day_ SECTION 3. The Clty Clerk shall cert1fy to the adopt~on of th1s resolutLon and thencefor~h and thereafter L~e same shall be In full ferce and effect. APPROVED AS TO FOR"!: f'l ~ ..-'jr "/--~ Robert 1>!. Myers Clty Attorney I j 'l.; ...... . . . ~ . ADOPTED AND APPROVED THIS 27th DAY OF April , 1982. - /J . ( MAYOR I ~ I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION NO. 6475(CCS)._WAS DULY ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ~T A MEETING THEREOF HELD ON April 27 , 1982 BY THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL VOTE: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Conn, Edwards, Jennings, Reed and Mayor Yannatta Goldway NOES: COUNCIlMEMBERS; Press and Zane ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Xone ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ATTEST: IJ / U~nyl c 6r!1 ' l ,nL~m I = UdeL, 1 CITY tLERK \ 1 - ~.. . DISTRIBUTION OF 6iSoLUTI.QW #' rt V1~ * ORDI~Al~CE tt Cauncll Meeting Date V-,;L 7-;: ;L Introduced: Agenda Item # 6-6 Adopted: * ALWAYS Pl'BLISH )OOPTED ORDlNAr'lCES Was it amended? VOTE: AffirmatIve: C!. e.( 9i 12 :-Jega t 1 ve: P " 'lsas 7----':: Abstain: ,--- - Absent. ((6'-- DISTRIBUTION: ORIGINAL to be signed, sealed and filed in Vault. ~EWSPAPER PUBLICATIO~ (Date: ) -i ' , Department originatIng staff report (:}(((,..y- ,j/~{L~ ) 1 - 1- - Clty Attorney (thDse with their codes) Agency mentloned ln document or staff report j :;JJjvy ~I I j fi\;JJ~)- Subject file (agenda packet) 1 Counter file 1 Others: Airport ParkIng Auth. Auditoium Personnel BU11ding Dept. Planning Environ. Servo Police (en- forcement?) Finance Purchasing . Fire Recr/Parks General Servo Transportation Library Treasurer Manager SE~D FOU~ COPIES OF ALL ORDIKANCES TO: CODED SYSTEMS, AtrD Peter Maclearie PROFESSIONAL CENTER, ROUTE 71 BRIELLE1 XEW JERSEY 08730 SEND FOUR COPIES OF AT~ ORDTN~Nr~s TO: PRESIDDIG JUDGE SANTA ;--!O);I CA. ~lU:\I CIPAL COURT 1725 ~AlN STREET SANTA ~ONICA, CA 90401 9 TOTAL COPIES 1 ~ . .~ ." ? cz1 tJ ;2-00,6 13-8: PIER PARKING AND TRAFFIC: Presented for consideration was the request of touncllmember Rhoden for discu'ssion regarding Santa Monica PIer parking and traffic problems. Councilmember Rhoden introduced dlscu~slon regarding parking problems related to the forthcoming summer crowds and referred to a staff report dated May ~2-.8, ~- 1980. to the City Manager from the Parking and Traffic Engineer sitIng some short te~ro solutions DISCUssion was held. Mayor Pro Tempore Vannatta Goldway mov~d that the ," Council affirm the ftrst three recommendations in the staff report of May 28, 1980. providing effective signing at the Pier entrance, collection of parkIng fees as vehicles exit from Pier parkIng, temporarily stopping pedestrian traffiC at the parking lot entrance to permit vehicle exit or entry to the parking lot, and an added fourth item to move the kiosk to the center of the Pier; further, to direct staff to meet with the Pier Merchants AssocIation to facilitate those four recommendations as quickly as possible. Second by Councllmember Reed, The motion was approved by the follO\..,lng vote: 1 ~~ ! I , i Council Vote. Unanimously approved 6-0 ], . i I ,--'j.' , -...; \ .. -. ~i' ~ ---------- -- - - - - - - -- ~ -~J /- MINUTES QF CITY COUNC IL MEETING .. March 11, 1981 "f - ... .< -\ -t " ,0, .~__ . . }38 MAR 1 0 1981 DATE: ;\farch 4, 1981 TO: ;.lavor and Council Ilembers FROB: Cheryl Rhoden SUBJECT: (ouncll Agenda Item for ~arch 10, 1981 Request for dlScuss10n regarding Santa :10n1ca P1er, parking and traffic proble~s. (Caurrell ~ember Rhoden) 1.3..8 NAK ! 0 198t .. ~ '.- -- 4~{cm -1-0 /3-6 MAR 1 0 1981 f , CITY OF SANTA MONICA IN T E R - D E PAR T Pi E H 1 i~ EM 0 DATE: May 28" 1980 # TO: Charles K. McClain" City ~anager FRO:"1 : Ray Davis" Parking & Traffic Engtneer " a"BJECT: SANTA to!ONlCA PIER p';RKHm MiD TRAFFIC CIRCULATION On April 17" I met wi:h Jerry Jackso;l of the Santa I+Jnica Chambe.- of~ Commerce" Peter Kipp" and various mem~ers of the Santa Monica Pt~r -< Organization to discuss traffic circulation and parking on the pier~ It was understood t~at ~~ input was only advisory and that any act10n to improve the existlng condltlons \'ias the responslblllty of the -t::... EntertaInment Fac11ities Dapar~ent. ~ -0 Their ~ajor concern was vehicles travel1ng down the causeway and t~ deciding that they do not \/lsh to pay for parking. They must turr~ aro~nd and then eXlt Vla the causeway. The prcble~ 1S cowpounded by the heavy pedestrian trafflc on the pier. n -" ....- -<-I .::1;--< ~~ >- -."l C') '>- !:J== -:: ;;: c.-. o~ :;!::r -n ~:.:. I suggestea severa; shon: and long term sol utiors to thel r probl ems. The pOSSible short term solutlons are as follOWS: ~.~ Effective Signing at the Pler Entrance ~ The signs now are too busy and confusing~ Tne signs should just state" "PIER PARKING - $1.00" or "FULL - USE SEASIDE TER.RACEII. This should be used in conjunction w1th pler per- sonnel controlling traffic at the top of the pier and the .b01:tcm of the causeway~ Col1~ct t.ie Par'<,1119 ~ee as Ve{licles Exit from P1er Parking ?resen~ly fees are collected as vehlcles enter. This creates a queue and ?rovides the opportunity for people to change the; minds and not park. If they were required to pay on the way 1 out they would no longer have the opportunity to change thelr ll1inds thus e1imlnating a m:mber of vehicles turning around at,/} the par~ing lot entrance. In addition~ any queue that may build up waiting to pay the par~ing fee will be ins1de the / parking area and no~ on the causeway. ~ ! , r 3) Tewoorarily StO? Pedestrain Traffic at Parking Lot ~ntrance \jhlS would prov1de a short per10d or tlme to clear vehicles out or allow venlcles to enter the parklng lot. This may b~ dor.e by pier personnel with the ald of a crossing gate of some sorts (sim11ar to early Amerlcan toll road gates). --- f)cJci~ to {3-B MAN 1 0 1981 , , / . fit tit So~~ of the long term solutions that may be considered are as follows: 1) Upgrade Traffic Sisnal at Ocean A.v,~nue and Cq.l,orado ~venue A traffic signal ;,~y be deslgned to prohlblt access to the pier but facilitate all other movements through the inter- section during the pier1s peak timeso At all other times it would fur.ctlon as a stancard traffic signal. This signal needs to be upgreG2d any~ay. The costs would be in the S80~OOO to $lCO,CJO r~r,ge; I also recomwended closing . . Colorado Avent;e ~(est of Ocean Avenue (the narrow road that . dips dmm to Pal isadas Road). 2) An Additicn?l CauS2n~Y The ideal loca~lon wouid be from the pier parklng lot to Appian 'day, 1:'11$ ~';ould provide one-way traffic ontG and off of the pier. TraTilc exiting the ~ier would use Aopian Way ~ Pica 3o~le~ard. I have no estimnte for the cost of this option. 3) : Separate Pe~es:ri~n and Vehicular Movements Presenr.ly tr.e Doart,la 1 K from the .Promena-de is on the 1 eft sice of traffic e~~ering the parking lot. ThlS creates a~ major conflict ~he~ there is a large number of pedestria?s. One way of se~rc~~on would be to provide an access frC~he Promenade en the north side of the pier and prohibit pe trlan acceS5 on ~he south side of the causeway. I have _- cost eS~l~:C far thls option. raffie Engineer RD:sc cc: Stan ScnG11 r- -, l ~ \ /\Ai~~ ~ ~..J.. - .. v k-' / . REtE,1t OFFiCf {'IF THE c~r~" ~~_~-R'''. Clarence Har-"'cn ; ~c1:.'-" I 3 I:cc~:;. ~2:- Sa~ta i':.~n~ca l:"=l-E-r S 2..:1 t a :.. _ C71l. C a, Cj.-;' . S G':': (; 1 MAR 1 2 23 PM '81 SAW- "illiih...~~ilAF;n I l-~--;l . ~. -\lllJ.am Cer:::2:1g.3, CC'J;-!cll'T'''''''~er Cl ty CI ~a~ta [~cnlca Clt~: L-~all. lEG5 LalD stree;: can~a ECDlca, C~. 90401 Dear Mr. Jennings: Pursuant to cur telephone conversat2on ~lth reference to the park- 2ng problems on the Pler, here is a summary of conditions at present and a reco~~endation for solutions. The enclosed memo from Ray Davls. dated May 28. 1980. has never developed. I have encircled three items that should be g2ven attention at present. As follows: 1. Dr2vers should be warned that payment for parking is re- qUlred. thus avolding a great deal of congestlon at the payment booth, as well as blocklng trafflc when people refuse to paYi as often happens. eight of nine cars are forced to back up. An ac.di t20n to the sign at the head of the Pier i.'ould help solve thls problem. 2. Collect1ng parking fees as veh1cles exit has been prcmlsed repeatedly. This would elim2nate delays whlle arlvers flli~ble for money. and would speed-up the flo~. Also, it ~oulc eliminate the constant raislng or 10',erlng cne gate for each auto as long as spaces are avallable. The present striping and traff2C pattern in the park1ng lot is the reverse of what it shoulc be, lmpeolng traffic flol,.; on busy days. C,~e understand this surface can not be pa2ntea untll the construct1on lS completec, ana the bumper cars are moved. Eowever, thlS 18 of great lm~ortance. we can see no eVlcence at present of any attempt to co~plete the surface re- ccnstructl0n. '?he r:;arking lot nc'" loses 100 spaces, ',hlcn coule: ~e fillec on -eek-encs, and this results In a ccnB2ceracl0 loss of :revenue. 3. D~tll recently there ~a3 trafflc centrol at the Farklng lot entrance. ;ut no~ cars are backe~ up to tne top of the nl1l ~ecause of peC~EstraJ.n f"Ycblems on \,1eek-enc.s. ;-; t:rafflC central pe:rSC:1 1S ""03t urc;ently neecec". -:::'1-.e most recentnerrc froT: the Clty C:eno\:ec that a City reFresentatlve '.oul~ 1:-e or. the Fler \,'eek-encs, in an 1centlfiable GUtflt. ~hlS bas never been eVlcencec.. In accitlon, ~ost signlflcant sEcurity ane Pler centrol Frcblems cculd be arnellorated by th~s sugqestion: A parking booth, the - .., ;........ . . :'~r . ~lllal~ Jennlnqs, Cour-:C:L 1 ;->e"l:e:r Face y' ,0 - ?eoruary 27, 19E1 a~::rC~.~lTi'ate size CI a ~hcne ccctil, ccul.5 t:e 1=081 tlcnec. ~n tr:e cen 1:er of L:..e Pler roae .ay aCJe.cent tc the lot €ntrance. ';.ras bcctn s:-:oulc J::,€ Gar.ned fron m1c.-:-ugn-c l.;.n-;:ll 52.- a.:n., af::crc.u:..<; a clear 'l/1.2',{ of tne Ent~~e length of the P1€r. 2.ny vancallsr.1 or evenr.s of SUSC2ClCUS nature could De 3een anc repartee lrrneolately Vla teleFh;ne. (T~lS' QuId aS5lst our under-mannec ~olJ.ce cepartment). nIl that oule be re~u1rec are telepnone and a~xlllary controls fCT 'Lr:e par1~lng gates. Every lessee cn the Pler 13 unhappy wlth the fee str~cture of the parklng lot, anc, ~ost im~ortantly, the lnability to valldate for customers. In connectlon with thlSt Pier lessees were promised a posted, reserved space for their buslness. Lessees often must leave the Pier for short peircds of time on week-ends, only to find no place to park upon the~r return. It occurs that th~s CQulc be put into effect easlly, especlally considering that each lessee pays a monthly fee for park1ng. Aga1nt let me emphasize the necesslty for ccmpletlon of the tcrn- u~ surface area. This creates an obstacle course for traff~c at present. . . ?hank you for your kind attention to these matters. 5~ncerely, Clar9nce B. Harmon C BE: am ;y ~~ -<L~ cd:J-L -~I-c'\ ~ /'\{\~~ ~ -:rl.u {,j c\J~~ ~-dLt f v~~\..,~~ ~~