SR-9-A (50)
tt-A
~I""'l '., '993
LUTM:PPD:SF:PF
f:\ppd\share\ccreport\ccspsr2
COUNCIL MEETING: November 23, 1993
Santa Monica, California
TO: Mayor and city Council
FROM: city staff
SUBJECT: Recommendation to Adopt a Resolution to Certify the Flnal
Environmental Impact Report for the civic Center Specific
Plan; Adopt a Resolution Adopting the Civic Center
specific Plan with the Statement of Overriding
considerations; Adopt a Resolution Amending the Land
Use Element of the General Plan; and Adopt a Resolution
of Intention to Amend the zoning Ordinance to Implement
the Civic Center specific Plan.
INTRODUCTION
This staff report forwards the Civic Center Specific Plan, the
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and necessary resolutions to
adopt and implement the Civic Center Specific Plan. The Specific
Plan presents pOlicies, guidelines and development standards for
the area bounded by pico Boulevard, Ocean Avenue, the 1-10 freeway
and Fourth Street.
The staff report includes a history of the
project, a review of the policies, guidelines and development
standards of the Specific Plan, a review of the implementation and
phasing strategy with budgeting implications and concludes with
staff recommendations. staff is recommending that the City Council
hold a public hearing, review the documents, certify the EIR, adopt
the Specific Plan
including the
Statement of overriding
Considerations, amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan, and
initiate a Resolution of Intention to amend the Zoning ordinance
for implementation of the Plan.
1
1\1 "\' " · 1993
!.'"'~ . ,)
t/-A
BACKGROUND
In August 1988, the City council adopted the present zoning
ordinance. During the adoption process, one of the final areas of
deliberation was the Civic Center District. The City Council
postponed any decisions with respect to heights and development
standards in this area and directed staff to prepare a specific
plan establishing development standards and the future scale and
character for the Civic Center area.
The City Council appointed a civic Center specific plan Communlty
Advisory Committee to insure public participation throughout the
process of formulating the Plan. Representatives from the city
neighborhood organizations, the Bayside District, Planning
Commission, pier Restoration Corp., Civic Center property owners,
the Convention and visitors Bureau as well as groups and
individuals representing citywide interests were asked to serve on
the Advisory Committee. The original Advisory Committee, comprised
of twenty individuals, began meeting in April, 1989 to examine the
complex and controversial issues of the district. They began by
compiling a list of issues, opportunities and constralnts for the
area, (which they divided into six planning areas), from which would
emerge the goals, objectives and policies of the specific Plan.
The Advisory committee produced a Draft Specific Plan which was
circulated for public comment and forwarded to the Planning
Commission for review.
2
PLANNING COMMISSION PROCESS
The Draft civic Center Specific Plan prepared by the Advisory
Committee and Final EIR (FEIR) were the subject of one study
session before the Planning commission in July 1992 and six
informational public workshops during July, October and November,
1992. Five of the workshops provided information on the Draft
Specific Plan and one workshop concentrated on the Final EIR. These
workshops were conducted throughout the community and on one
occasion with bi-lingual (Spanish) translation. The format of the
workshops consisted of a staff presentation with questions and
answers from the public. After the staff presentation, members of
the Advisory Committee representing the minority posltlon and had
the opportunity to present their issues to the public.
The Planning commission conducted public hearings and reviewed the
Advisory Commlttee's Draft Civic Center Specific Plan and the Final
ErR on February 17, February 24, March 24, and April 14, 1993. The
Planning Commission recommended certification of the FEIR, and
adoption of the specific Plan. As a condition of the Specific Plan
approval, the Planning commission recommended that an urban design
plan be prepared to conceptualize the Specific Plan and identify
any changes that may be necessary to the Specific Plan as a result
for the Urban Design Plan.
3
URBAN DESIGN PLAN
On May 25, 1993, the city council authorized staff to select an
urban deslgn consultant and establlshed an urban design working
group to help in the preparation of an urban design plan. The
Design working Group (DWG), comprised of two City councilmembers
and three Planning Commissioners, began meeting on June 2, 1993.
The DWG met ten times between June and September, 1993 to discuss
the urban design plan. The meetings of the DWG were noticed, open
to the pUblic, and provided the pUblic the opportunity to give
comments to the DWG members. Although only one public workshop was
planned, in order to facilitate more public review and input, three
public workshops were held during the months of June, July and
August, 1993. These public workshops included design sketches and
models, hands-on design work, focus group discussions and open
public forums to provide input to the DWG members.
After reviewing issues related to circulation patterns (pedestrian,
bicycle, automobile), numbers of parking spaces, open space
qualities, building massing and potential traffic impacts, the DWG
on September 23, 1993 agreed to forward the preliminary design plan
to the city Council for conceptual review.
On October 12, 1993, the City Council reviewed the preliminary
urban design plan and authorized staff to amend the Specific Plan
to incorporate the Urban Design Plan. Since the meeting of October
4
12, 1993, the Design Working Group (DWG) has met weekly to review
the draft elements of the Specific Plan,
financing and
implementation. The format of the Specific Plan as recommended by
the DWG is significantly different from that of the Planning
commission's version.
Although the format is different, the
general policies and development standards are very similar. The
policies of the Planning Commission version in comparison to the
revised Specific Plan are contained in the Specific Plan as
recommended by the Planning commission (Attachment G).
REVISED CIVIC CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN
The Specific Plan contains the overall goals, general objectives
and policy recommendations that serve as the framework for future
development within the Civic Center district. The Specific Plan
presents detailed objectives and policies in five sections: 1)
Land Use and community Design; 2) Circulation; 3) Public utilities;
4) Conservation; and 5) Implementation. It also includes a section
which examines the Specific Plan's consistency with the elements of
the city's General Plan. The Specific Plan objectlves and policies
are intended to be consistent with and supplement the General Plan
by providing greater specificity and detail for the Civic Center
district.
The major land use goals of the Civic Center specific Plan are to:
1) Establish a pattern and mix of public and private uses
that integrates this large plan area into the remainder
the City and creates a vibrant civic gathering place; and
5
2) Create a cohesive public framework of streets, parks and
other open spaces necessary to support land uses,
organize private and public buildings, enhance views and
actlvity 11nkages, and create an attractive pedestrian
environment.
The following discussion outlines the specific elements contained
in the civic Center Specific Plan.
LAND USE AND COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT
The Land Use and community Design Element of the civic Center
Specific Plan describes the location, character, amount, and
intensity for open space and recreational opportunitles, public
buildings and cultural uses, private development, public parking
and new circulation patterns. It further describes development
standards and design guidellnes for buildlngs to be developed in
the area.
The following provides more detail on the specific
policies of the Land Use and Community Design section of the Plan.
Open Space
The open space section lS comprised of public open space areas and
visual easements that establish and maintain major view corridors.
The public open space system consists of the following seven major
components:
Main street square The objectives and policies for this area
are intended to create a 1.6 acre public gathering place and
transit shuttle location in front of City Hall with small-
scale commercial and public oriented uses to foster and
enhance activity.
Main street Circle ThlS component is intended to become a
focal point in the area and slow traffic on Main street while
6
providing approximately 0.6 acre public space.
The Arroyo This area is lntended to provide an extension of
the landscape quality of palisades Park into the CiV1C Center
area, provide a view corridor to the Pier, and provide
pedestrian and bike paths linking the civic Center with the
oceanfront and downtown areas.
The Courthouse Lawn The objectives and policies for this
component are intended to provide pathways and maintain the
landscaping in front of the Courthouse in order to reinforce
the linkages between the Main street Circle and Square and to
improve the visual quality of the Courthouse building.
civic and Cultural Park The objectives and pOlicies for this
component are intended to create a six acre open space which
provides a strong visual and open space link to the adjacent
neighborhoods while complementing and extending the role of
the civic Auditorium as a venue for special events. This park
area ~ill provide bicycle and pedestrian access to the entire
area. The specific design and programming of this area will
be the subject of a process to include input from residents
and the Recreation and Parks Commission.
Main street trianqle This component located at the corner of
Main street and Colorado Avenue would serve as a gateway to
the Civic Center area and to the Downtown WhlCh would consist
of a 0.6 acre landscaped area.
Neiqhborhood Green This component would consist of a 0.7
acre, 80 foot wide village green compatible with the mixed use
development surrounding the area. This space would emphasize
the neighborhood character of the area and could include a
small children's play area to complement the adjacent family
housing and potential day care center uses.
pUblic Uses
This section of the Land Use Element descrlbes the areas of the
civic Center designated for public use. These areas consist of the
city Hall area, County Courthouse area, Civic Auditorium area and
the public parking facilities. The objectives and policies of the
Specific Plan allow for the improvement and expansion of city and
County government functions and provide for the replacement of the
existing surface parking with centrally located public parking
7
structures. Specifically the Plan allows for the following public
development.
City Hall area The policies and objectives for this area
provide for the construction of a 120,000 square foot, four to
six story police facility with below-grade parking directly
east of city Hall and for a potential community building and
public viewing tower directly to the North of City Hall.
County Courthouse area The policies would allow for a 140,000
square foot expansion to the Courthouse building for related
functions and improve the overall appearance of the building
and grounds. The Courthouse would be limited to 65' in height.
civic Auditorium area The policies in this area allow for the
preservation and expansion of existing public assembly,
recreational and cultural uses in keeping with the open space
objectives of the Plan. A parking structure below-grade or 2
levels of above grade parking would be allowed in this area.
The roof of the structure could accommodate a maximum of
40,000 square feet of recreational, cultural or pUblic-
oriented uses and adjacent to the structure a facility to
accommodate daycare, cultural or recreational purposes could
be constructed. Finally, the policies call for a subsequent
process to determine the future use or redevelopment of the
Civic Auditorium. This process would be a community process
to determine the appropriate use for the site.
Public Parking Two pUblic parking structures are allowed in
the area. As described above, one structure would be allowed
in the Civic Auditorium site. The other structure directly
behind the courthouse would be limited to 55' in height in
order to replace the surface parking. Public-oriented ground
floor uses along Fourth street would be required to the extent
that such uses could be accommodated. In addition, the
policies require that the design of the structure include an
attractive front on Fourth street and be compatible with the
other buildings in the Civic Center.
Institutional Uses
The purpose of the Institutional land use category is to provide
for the expansion of RAND Corporation facilities within the Civic
Center. As a longtime property owner within the area and as the
City's third largest non-governmental employer, RAND plays a
8
significant role within the Clvic Center and the community. The
primary policies for the area include the following.
o The consolidation and expansion of the RAND facilities
with a maximum of 500,000 square feet of RAND
development and 5,000 square feet of neighborhood uses
with no more than 750 on-site, below-grade parking spaces
(no surface parking permitted).
o New construction would be limited to six stories, 85',
stepping down to 3 stories or 45' adjacent to the Main
street Square in order to complement City Hall. All
development would be setback a minimum of 20' from Ocean
Avenue with appropriate additional building stepbacks to
extend the landscape and open space qualities of
Palisades Park.
o Policies that require publlc-oriented functions on the
RAND site be situated adjacent to the Main Street Square
and that retail, restaurant or serv~ce related uses be
encouraged at the Main Street/Olympic Boulevard corner to
help activate the area.
Mixed Use Development
The purpose of the Mixed Use designation is to enhance the
diversity of uses within the Civic Center and to help integrate the
area with the remainder of the city. Therefore, the Plan calls for
the introduction of office, residential and retail uses that will
contribute to the vitality of the Civic Center area. Specifically
the primary policies provide for the following:
o Up to 350 residential units; 250,000 square feet of
office space; 35,000 square feet of live/work space;
15,000 square feet of retal1 neighborhood and visitor
serving commercial uses.
o Residential uses concentrated east of the neighborhood
green adjacent to Main street with the commercial uses
concentrated west of the neighborhood green along Ocean
Avenue.
9
o The substitution of residential uses in lieu of
commercial development.
o Childcare facilities that provide for family daycare,
childcare, and infant care with priority given to
residents and employees of the civic Center area.
o The predominant building height would be 4 stories, 56'
but with allowable building heights of 70' for a maximum
of 8,000 square feet within 80 feet of Olympic Boulevard
and vicente Terrace. These standards would allow for a
diverse building profile and an appropriate transition
from the Pacific Shores Hotel and the RAND Corporation
buildings.
o The same building setbacks and stepbacks policies that
apply to the RAND Corporation buildings along Ocean
Avenue would be required for this area. Building setbacks
along Olympic Boulevard, vicente Terrace extension and
Main Street would be 10' to allow for landscaping and
walkways.
o Two 40' wide pedestrian pathways along the north and
south side of the Maguire Thomas parcel connecting Ocean
Avenue with Main street through the neighborhood green.
Hotel Uses
Two lodging facilities exist within the Civic Center area, the
Pacific Shores Hotel and the Ocean Lodge. The policies of the
Specific Plan provide for their continued use. Any modifications,
expansions or redevelopment of the properties shall be subject to
a discretionary review to ensure their compatibility with the
surrounding uses.
CIRCULATION AND PARKING ELEMENT
The overall circulation objectlves and pollcles of the Specific
Plan address the need for improved accessibility for all modes of
travel to and through the CiV1C Center.
The Circulation Element
10
organizes the land uses, creates an attractive pedestrian and
bicycle environment, places priority on non-automobile modes of
transportation, and protects the character of adjacent
neighborhoods by discouraging project-oriented auto trips and
parking from utilizing the neighborhood streets. The Circulation
Element of the Specific Plan is divided into four areas: streets
and pathways, transit, parking and transportation management. The
following outlines the significant policies for these issues.
streets and pathways
Main street
The Specific Plan calls for the re-design of Main Street from Pico
Boulevard to City Hall to include a one-way travel lane and bicycle
lane in each direction. A circle would be constructed at the bend
in Main street near the Civic Auditorium to accommodate a three-way
intersection. In front of City Hall, Main street would branch into
a one lane street in each direction around the public plaza. At
Colorado Avenue, Main street would realign westward for dlrect
vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian access to Second street. Finally,
the Plan recommends that design improvements made to Main street
continue south outside of the Specific Plan area so that a
continuous identity and image would be created for the entire Main
street corridor.
Olympic Boulevard
The Specific plan calls for the extension of Olympic Boulevard from
11
Fourth street at the 1-10 eastbound on-ramp to Ocean Avenue in
order to relieve traffic congestion on perimeter streets and
provide access to on-site destinations. This new street would carry
two vehicular lanes in each direction as well as on street parking
and drop-off areas. wi thin the right-of-way, a well-landscaped
pedestrian promenade and view corridor would be created to the
beach and oceanfront and provisions would be made to accommodate
potential mass transit into the area.
Civic Center Drive
A new, well-landscaped Civic Center Drive is planned between Fourth
street and Main street which would provide two-way vehicular and
pedestrian movement, a drop-off area for the civic Auditorium and
access to parking facilities.
Village Streets
Two new streets are planned within the mixed use, urban village
development on the RAND property. An extension to Vicente Terrace
would provide a short east/west access route between Ocean Avenue
and Main street north of the Pacific Shores Hotel. This street
would access a new north/south roadway connecting the Vicente
Terrace extension with the new Olympic Boulevard. This roadway
would be located around the planned neighborhood green and would
provide access to parking for the residential units.
12
Pedestrian and Bike Pathways
The Specific Plan policies create continuous pedestrian and bicycle
paths which link the Ocean Park neighborhood, the Civic center,
Santa Monica Pier, Palisades Park and Downtown. Exclusive
pedestrian and bicycle paths are called for within and through the
civic Park at Fourth and pico to Main Street. Another exclusive
bicycle path is planned from Colorado at Ocean Avenue along the I-
10 Freeway to Main Street.
Parking Alley
The Plan calls for the creation of a public alley linking the
planned public parking garages and providing service access to City
Hall, the Police building, and the County Courthouse.
Perimeter Streets
Improvements to the perimeter streets and intersections are a
necessary part of the Specific Plan. Ocean Avenue is planned to
have a landscaped median and parkway on the west side between Pico
and Colorado as well as the existing travel and bicycle lanes.
Fourth Street is planned to be widened from the I-I0 freeway off-
ramp to Pica Boulevard to accommodate a landscaped median from
Olympic Drive to pico Boulevard and a right hand turn lane between
the freeway and Olympic Drive. FinallY, P1CO Boulevard between
Fourth Street and Ocean Avenue would be improved with a landscaped
median and a well-landscaped parkway strip adjacent to the civic
Auditorlum.
13
Transit
The policies of the Specific Plan work toward reducing dependency
on the automobile. One of the ways that the specific Plan tries to
accomplish this is by providing viable options including citywide
and regional bus service locations, a shuttle service, a transit
transfer location, and accommodations for future mass transit
options. The Specific Plan calls for bus access along the new
Olympic Boulevard, and further, the policies provide for a
localized shuttle service connecting the Main street Commercial
District and the Downtown with the civic Center. The Main Street
Square would be developed as a major transit transfer location with
appropriate shelters and other transit-related improvements.
Parkinq
The Specific Plan calls for the elimination of the surface parking
in order to enhance the environmental, pedestrian and aesthetic
quality of the Civic Center. The Plan also allows for reduct~ons in
the required number of on-site parklng spaces ln order to
facilitate the implementation of parking management and shuttle
programs, carpooling, vanpooling, off-site parking and other
alternative means of transportation.
The Plan allows both above-grade and below-grade parking
structures. The location of these parking facilities and their
entrances and exits are located so as to complement land uses and
open space areas. They are situated to reduce the adverse effects
14
on the pedestrian or visual character of the area and not interfere
with transit operations. Freestanding above-grade parking
structures are limited to the perimeter of the planning area along
Fourth street to reduce their impact on activities with the area.
These buildings would include street-level uses along Fourth street
to enhance the pedestrian environment.
Transportation Hanaqement
A Transportation Management Association for uses and businesses
within the civic Center area is encouraged by the Specific Plan.
This program would work toward reducing overall travel demand and
peak-hour trips through transit and carpooling incentives and
modification to the hours of operation for business and government
activities. A synchronized signalization system which integrates
wi th other regional and municipal systems is required by the
Specific Plan to manage traffic flow more efficiently. Finally,
neighborhood protection programs and traffic-calming measures for
adjacent neighborhoods would be implemented as appropriate,
particularly along Fourth street as It enters the Ocean Park
neighborhood.
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
The Conservation Element of the Specific Plan sets forth policies
relating to the proper management and conservation of natural
resources. As recommended by the City's Environmental Task Force,
a new policy has been added requiring development to be in
15
compliance with the final adopted Santa Monlca Sustainable City
Program.
New development within the Civic Center Specific Plan area will
promote the use of state of the art conservation technologies and
practices, reduce the use of non-renewable resources, look to
develop local, less polluting, renewable energy, water and material
resources and expand recycling technologies and programs.
PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES ELEMENT
This element of the Specific plan examines existlng conditions and
identifies potentlal constraints with respect to public services
and utilities. Specifically the policies related to public services
(police and fire), utilities, water and wastewater, solid waste
disposal and energy.
IMPLEMENTATION SECTION
This section of the Specific Plan sets forth the objectives and
policies for the implementation of the Plan. It addresses a broad
range of regulatory, financing, phasing, and maintenance
considerations necessary to carry out the Plan. specifically, this
section requires approval of a subdlvision map for the private
development to facilitate development in conformance wlth the
Specific Plan and establishes a phased implementation linking
pUblic and private improvements. In order to ensure that the
public improvements are completed, the private development
16
entitlements have been tied to specific public improvements such as
the Civic Park and public parking structure. This linkage may be
modified with the approval of a development agreement.
GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
A statement of the relationship between the specific Plan and the
General Plan of the City is required by state planning and zoning
law to be part of the Specific Plan. The policies of the Civic
Center Specific Plan are generally consistent with the elements of
the City'S General Plan. The "Consistency with the General Plan"
section of the Specific Plan outlines, in detail, those areas of
the Specific Plan that relate most directly with the polices and
objectives contained in the Land Use and Circulation Elements, the
Housing Element, the Conservation Element, the Open Space Element,
and the Scenic Corridors Element of the General Plan. This section
of the Specific Plan conforms to the state requirement.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
The Civic Center Speclfic Plan is subject to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for which the City is the
designated lead agency. In accordance with CEQA procedures, the
City prepared an Initial Study for the proposed Specific Plan in
september 1988. Based upon this Initial study, it was determined
that the proposed project could have a significant adverse impact
on the environment and that an EIR should be prepared.
17
The purpose of the EIR is to provide an objective analysis of the
environmental implicatlons of the proposed policies of the civic
Center Specific plan through the evaluation of potentially
significant environmental issues. In addition, the EIR recommends
feasible mitigation measures, where applicable, that reduce adverse
impacts to insignificant levels.
The Final ErR examines six different alternative development
scenarios in order to provide an analysis of the range. of potential
impacts. Alternative 3 in the ErR most closely approximates the
development scenario represented in the proposed specific Plan (see
Attachment B) .
Significant Impacts
Under Alternative Development Scenario 3, the EIR ldentifies
significant impacts in the areas of air quality, jObs/housing,
transportation and circulation, water, wastewater, fire and
paleontological resources. The. EIR sets forth mitigation measures
to reduce the potential adverse impacts. However, the Final EIR
concludes that signlficant adverse impacts will remaln even after
mitlgation in the areas of air quality, jObs/housing, and
transportation and circulation. More specifically, air emissions
from the proposed project will cause further deterioration in
conditions which already violate air quality standards. Secondly,
although housing units would be developed under thlS scenarlo, the
project will create more Jobs than housing units, thus contributing
18
to the further deterioration of the jobs/housing balance in the
subregion. Finally, traffic conditions at eight intersections will
remain significantly impacted even after mitlgation under
Alternative 3.
To address the potential environmental effects of the policy
changes in the specific Plan from those represented under
Alternative 3 of the Final EIR, an Addendum to the Final EIR was
prepared. The Addendum concludes that the policies of the proposed
Specif1c Plan will have fewer adverse impacts after mitigation than
those associated with Alternative Development scenario 3.
As compared with Alternative Development scenario 3, the policies
of the modified Specific Plan call for reductions in the amount of
allowable development in the Civic Auditorium area and create a new
traffic circulation network with an east/west connector street
located between Ocean Avenue and 4th Street at the 1-10 eastbound
on-ramp. These modified features allow the adverse traffic impacts
to be mitigated to levels of insignificance. However, the adverse
1mpacts to air quality and the Jobs/housing balance, although
improved under the proposed Specific Plan, would remain unavoldably
significant after mitigation.
Because this is a Specific Plan and not a specific development
project, the ability to mitigate the impacts in the EIR is llmited.
The adoption of the Plan will not create significant impacts. CEQA
19
requires an evaluation of full-buildout under theoretical
conditions I which in this case identified several potential
impacts. Since this is a Specific Plan, mitigatlon is not
appropriate at this time. Rather I mitigation should occur as
individual projects are proposed. This approach will allow for
more accurate analysis of the impacts and identification of
mitigation measures specific to a given project. At this time, the
Specific Plan is based on theoretical development and mitigation is
difficult to achieve. Therefore, since the mitigation measures for
the Plan are being deferred until individual projects are
developed, it is necessary for the council to adopt a Statement of
Overriding considerations in order to approve the Plan.
REVISED TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
Additional analysis was performed by the City I S traffic consultant,
Kaku Associates, to examine the traffic-related impacts associated
with the revlsed Specific Plan within the study area bounded by
California Avenue, Lincoln Boulevard, Ocean Park Boulevard, and
Appian Way. Thirty intersections were analyzed in the traffic
study conducted for the original FEIRI where seventeen were found
to have significant impacts associated with development allowed by
the specific Plan under Alternative Development ScenarlO 2 and
eighteen under Alternative Development Scenario 3. A total of
twenty-three intersections were studied in this revised analysis,
including the seventeen significantly impacted intersections
analyzed under Scenario 2 in the original FEIR plus four additional
20
intersections located on the perimeter streets to the Specific Plan
area (including the one additional intersection impacted under
Alternative 3). In addition, two new intersections associated with
the new street network as proposed in the Specific Plan, which were
not analyzed in the original study, were also studied.
Seven of the original thirty intersections were not studied because
they did not originally have significant impacts and are located
away from the project site. Plus, the modified Specific Plan
includes reduced development potential for the Civic Auditorium
site, and a new circulation network in the area, so it is unlikely
that significant impacts would be found at these seven
intersections.
The revised analysis projected significant project-related impacts
at fourteen of the twenty-three analyzed intersections. The revised
traffic analysis then assumed that a centralized signal control
system would be put in place at the fourteen impacted intersections
as a mitigation measure. At eleven of the impacted intersections,
a centralized slgnal control system alone would mitlgate the
impacts to levels of insignificance. Two remalning intersections,
4th street and Civic Center Drlve and 4th Street and I-I0 eastbound
on-ramp/new Olympic Boulevard, require restriping and a 121
widening of the wests ide of 4th Street in addition to the
centralized control system. Finally, the intersection of Lincoln
Boulevard and pico Boulevard would require restriping in addition
21
to the centralized control system. With these mitigation measures
in place, the adverse lmpacts at the fourteen intersections can be
reduced to insignificant levels. The rtTraffic study for the
Revised Santa Monica civic center Specific Plan" is contained with
the FEIR Addendum in Attachment B.
AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING ORDINANCE
The Land Use Element of the General Plan must be amended to
accommodate the adoption of the civic Center specific Plan.
Policies #1.5.6 and #1.12.2 of the Land Use section of the Land Use
and Circulation Elements document will be amended with the policy
language as shown ln Attachment E.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT
Project Impacts
The adoption of the Plan will not have a financlal impact, however,
implementation of the Plan will have a budget impact to the City.
The financing program for the Plan establishes a two phased
implementation approach. Some improvements such as the police
facility and associated parking, the County Courthouse parking and
redevelopment of the Civic Auditorium are identified as independent
projects. The financlal analysis assumes that each of these
independent projects will provide their own source of funding and
therefore costs associated with these improvements have not been
included as part of the Plan. This summary will focus only on the
financial impact to the city as a result of implementing the public
22
improvements identified in the two phased implementation program.
Phase One
The first phase of the publicly financed improvements consist of
the parking structure behind the Courthouse and an alley to provide
access to the structure. wi th construction of the parking
structure, the surface parking located at the Civic Auditorium site
can be reduced to allow for the future park. The new parking
structure would be designed to supply approximately 1,000 spaces
for the existing City, county, and Auditorium demand. until the
second parking structure is completed! approximately 300 surface
parking spaces would remain on the Civic Auditorium site.
Financing of the parking structure and alley would be through
parking revenue bonds. As outlined in the financial analysis,
parking revenues from the structure would not be sufficient to
support the bondlng costs for construction and maintenance.
However, revenues generated by the project will be sufficient to
off-set the projected deficit. Parking rates would be consistent
with rates for the downtown parking structures.
To minimize impact of maintenance costs on the General Fund, a
maintenance district, such as a landscaping and lighting district,
will be created. The scope of the maintenance district will be
determined based on an evaluation of the total maintenance costs
and an assessment of the financial capabllity of private
23
development to carry ongoing costs. At this time it appears
sufficient annual revenues can be derived from private development
in the area to fully finance annual maintenance costs.
Phase Two
Phase Two public improvements consist of the construction of
Olympic Drive, improvements to the perimeter streets (medians along
Ocean Avenue, pico, Fourth street) and the widening of Fourth
street to provlde for a median and right turn lane. The identified
funding for these improvements consist Proposition A and C local
return funds. The use of these funds will not impact the General
Fund since these funds have not been received or programmed for
future transportation improvements.
The remaining improvements accessible to the public such as the
civic park, the city Hall square and Main street modifications will
be funded from the private development. The phasing and
implementation of those improvements are outlined in the
Implementation Element of the Specific Plan.
Traffic Mitigation Costs
Two significant mitigations are identified in order to mitigate the
impact from the Plan, synchronization of approximately 30 signals
and neighborhood protection devices for the surrounding residential
neighborhoods. The total cost of synchronization is approximately
2.4 million dollars while the cost of the neighborhood protection
24
devices cannot be quantified since speclfic measures have not been
identified.
Funds to implement both mitigations would come from
project traffic mitigation fees and discretionary funds from
Proposition A and C. Therefore, no impact to the general fund is
anticipated as a result of these improvements.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
It is the recommendation of staff that the City Council:
1) Certify the Santa Monica civic Center Specific Plan Final
Environmental Impact Report and Addedendum through
adoption of the proposed Resolution (Attachment C)i
2) Approve the civic Center Speclfic Plan as recommended and
adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations through
adoption of the proposed Resolution (Attachment D) i
3) Amend the Land Use and Circulation Element of the General
Plan through adoption of the proposed Resolution
(Attachment E).
4) Direct the Planning commission to initiate the necessary
text amendments to the Zoning Ordinance to implement the
specific Plan through adoption of the proposed Resolution
(Attachment F).
Prepared by:
Suzanne Frick, Acting Director of Land Use and
Transportation Management
Paul Foley, Associate Planner
Land Use and Transportation Management Department
25
ATTACHMENTS
A: November 18, 1993 Draft civic Center Specific Plan
B: civic Center specific Plan Final ErR and Addendum
C: Resolution certifying the Final ErR and Addendum
0: Resolution approving the adoption of the Civic
Center Specific Plan and adopting a statement of
Overriding Considerations
E: Resolution amending the Land Use and Circulation
Element of the General Plan
F: Resolution of Intention directing the Planning
commission to initiate a zoning text amendment to
implement the specific Plan.
G: April, 1993 Draft Civic Center Specific Plan as
recommended by the Planning commission
26