Loading...
SR-9-A (90) LUTM:RF:FB:neitra3:WORD council Meeting, May 12, 1992 9'--A MAY i .. ,r;1i Santa Monica, California - --- To: Mayor and City Council From: City staff Subject: Neighborhood Traffic Plans INTRODUCTION This report provides information to the City Council regarding the status of the development and implementation of the Neighborhood Traffic Plans in various parts of the City, and a request for the Council to provide comments on the concept of closing 23rd Street at the Santa Monica/Los Angeles city limit. DISCUSSION At the April 14th meeting, the Council directed staff to return with information and recommendations about the Neighborhood Traffic Plans being developed for various parts of the city. This is an interim report to update the Council on the current status of the program. For several years, staff has been working with groups of nelghbors in various parts of the City to develop and implement neighborhood traffic plans. A Neighborhood Traffic Plan is the comprehensi ve and coordinated implementation of traffic control measures to address neighborhood traffic concerns. The primary 9-4 MLlY "' -q objective of these plans is to mitigate the volume of "through" or "bypass" traffic which is traveling or "cutting" through residential areas. Currently, staff is actively working on three neighborhood traffic plans. These are the Mid City area, bounded by Wilshire Boulevard, Colorado Avenue, 26th street and Centinela Avenuej the pico Neighborhood area, bounded by Exposition Boulevard, pico Boulevard, stewart street and centinela Avenuej and the Sunset Park area, bounded by Pica Boulevard, the south city limit, Lincoln Boulevard and Centinela Avenue. The goal of moving "through" or "bypass" traffic out of residential areas is being addressed with two different approaches. One is to install traffic control measures on the residential streets to discourage or divert traffic out of the neighborhood. The other is to improve the adj acent arter ial highway system to facilitate traffic flow so traffic is not encouraged to divert through a residential area. The traffic control measures which are being proposed to meet this goal include the use of typical types of controls such as stop signs. parking restrictions, signal improvements, modified roadway striping and turn restrictions. However, these neighborhood traffic plans are also considering the use of extraordinary types of controls such as road closures, traffic circles and traffic diverters. As these plans have developed through a community process, it has 2 been staff's responsibility to monitor the progress of the plans and to ensure that traffic control measures on one street or area do not adversely impact residents on another street or in another area. It is important that the traffic concerns are not simply shifted to other residents. It is also important to evaluate the impact of neighborhood traffic plans on a citywide basis, since it would not be appropriate to provide benefit for one group of residents at a cost to another group of residents. Mid City Neiqhborhood Traffic Plan As indicated, the Mid City study area is bounded by Wilshire Boulevard on the north, Colorado Avenue on the south, 26th street on the west and centinela Avenue on the east. The primary concerns included traffic along Arizona Avenue, Broadway and Yale street. A plan has been developed in conjunction with a neighborhood working group. This group is comprised of members of Mid city Neighbors and other residents. This plan currently includes the use of stop signs, traffic diverters, turn restrictions, traffic circles and roadway restriping. Staff has prepared a report explaining the plan and sent a copy to every residential unit and business in the affected area. The council has also received a copy. Following the distribution of the report, staff held pUblic informational meetings for interested parties to discuss the plan and ask questions. This process took place on April 16th and 20th, 1992. These meetings were attended by about 80 residents and 3 businesspersons from the area. Staff will next conduct an opinion poll to evaluate the sentiment of the residents and businesspersons about the plan. After the poll is conducted, staff will bring the Mid city area plan to the Council for its review and consideration. This presentation is anticipated to occur in late June. Finally, if the Council approves the plan, staff will conduct an environmental review of the final plan. then implement the traffic control measures on a temporary basis, and monitor their effectiveness. Pico Neiqhborhood Traffic Plan The pica Neighborhood study area is bounded by Olympic Boulevard on the north, Pico Boulevard on the south, Cloverfield Avenue on the west and centinela Avenue on the east. The proposed plan for this area is about 90% complete. The same neighborhood process will be followed. Once the plan is complete, a report will be prepared and distributed, informational meetings will be held. a poll will be taken and the plan will be brought to the Council. The anticipated timeline for the Pi co Neighborhood is approximately four to eight weeks behind the Mid City schedule. Sunset Park Neiqhborhood Traffic Plan The Sunset Park Study area is bounded by pica Boulevard on the north, the south city limit, Lincoln Boulevard on the west and centinela Avenue on the east. Some of the problem areas in Sunset Park include the Pearl street corridor and the north-south collector street corridors including 11th, 14th, 17th, 20th and 4 28th streets. One of the major areas of concern is the Cloverfield/23rd/Walgrove corridor. In April 1991, staff formed a working group to help develop a neJ.ghborhood traffic plan. The group was comprised of five members each from the Boards of Directors of Sunset Park Associated Neighbors (SPAN) and Friends of Sunset Park (FOSP). Also in the group are representatives of the City staff and the Neighborhood Support Center (NSC). Since April 1991, the group has conducted bi-weekly meetings to develop a neighborhood traffic plan. The group has discussed several different alternatives during this process. Although it is difficult to judge, at this time it seems the plan is almost complete. There have been several areas of agreement for the plan. The plan includes the installation of stop signs, traffic circles, cul-de- sacs, peak hour parking restrictions, road design modifications, chokers and the implementation of improved signal timing on the arterial highways. Over the past six months, the group has been trying to develop a proposal to address the Cloverfield/23rdjWalgrove corridor. There have been several discussions about the closing of 23rd street at south city limit and diverting traffic on a newly constructed roadway through the airport. Both SPAN and FOSP support the closure 23rd street and the diversion of traffic through the airport. SPAN, however, also supports a "parallell1 plan which installs 5 other traffic measures along the corridor while the planning and design of a closure is pursued. Their plan includes cul-de- sacing some side streets entering the corridor, but basically leaving the corridor open to traffic. If this "parallel" plan reduces the traffic volume on 23rd street to 7,500 vehicles per day, then the closure process should be discontinued. However, if they do not, then the closure should be implemented. FOSP does not support a parallel program. They are concerned that if other measures are implemented, the City will never pursue closing 23rd street. However, they have provided an interim plan which they call an "enclave" plan. Briefly, their enclave concept divides the Sunset Park area into smaller areas and each area has its own set of traff ic measures. In the Cloverfield/23rd/Walgrove corridor, the "enclave" plan proposes cUl-de-sacing the north/south streets of 2lst, 22nd, 23rd, Cloverfield and 25th north of Ocean Park Boulevard and diverting traffic to adjacent arterial highways. The "enclave" elements in the Cloverfieldj23rd/Walgrove corridor would be removed when 23rd Street is closed. It 1S staff's position that the Closing of 23rd street is unrealistic. The Sunset Park working group is aware of th1S position. south of pica Boulevard, Cloverfield Boulevard and 23rd street are designated as "collector" streets in the city's Land Use and circulation Element (LUCE). The average daily traffic volume goal listed in the LUCE for a collector street is no more than 15,000 vehicles per day. The current traffic volume 6 on Cloverfield Boulevard between Pica and Ocean Park is about 7,300 vehicles per day. On 23rd street between Pico and Ocean Park the current traffic volumes are about 10,800 vehicles per day, and between Ocean Park and the south city limit there is about 21,400 vehicles per day. The working group I s goal is to reduce these traffic volumes to "feeder" street traffic volume levels, no more than 7,500 vehicles per day. For 23rd street south of Ocean Park Boulevard this means about a 67% reduction in traffic. Staff does not believe this goal is reasonable or attainable, but believes a 20 to 30% reduction is reasonable and attainable using more conventional traffic control measures. In order to achieve the working group's reduction goal of 67%, the closure of 23rd street and the diversion of traffic through the airport is the only measure that could be successful. However, as indicated, staff does not support the closure of 23rd street. Potential problems about the closure and diversion of traffic on 23rd street include cost, impact on airport land and operations, impacts on other streets both in Santa Monica and Los Angeles i and impacts on other Santa Monica residents outside of the Sunset Park area that would be affected by the closure. A more detailed discussion of the concept of closing 23rd street and constructing a new street through the airport follows this section. When a Sunset Park plan is completed , it will follow the same process to inform and involve the residents as will be done in 7 the Mid city and Pico Neighborhood areas. staff recommends following this process since it is imperative that the plan be distributed to all of the residents of Sunset Park. A tentative schedule for implementation of a plan for Sunset Park is in the late fall of 1992, assuming the outstanding issues are resolved by the end of Mayor June. This includes the months of July and August to distribute and inform the residents about the plan, the month of September to conduct a poll of the residents, the month of october to refine the plan, and Council consideration in November or December. Closina of 23rd Street and the Diversion of Traffic Throuah the AirDort on a Newlv Constructed Public Street The Closing of 23rd Street to through traffic at the south city limits and the diversion of Walgrove Avenue traffic onto Airport Avenue through Santa Monica Airport has a number of serious implications for the city. The closing of 23rd Street at the C1ty boundary would result in the diversion of northbound and southbound through traffic to both Bundy Drive and Lincoln Boulevard. Staff is concerned about the ability of these streets to accommodate this additional traffic. The environmental impact of traffic diversion to these and other streets resulting from the closure of 23rd Street could be significant. The cost of construction of a roadway through the airport is significant. The implications and impact on the airport residual land could be significant since the city has yet to determine the future uses of this site. And, the diversion of traffic through other B STRE9192; street Resurfacing 1991-92 PRINT ASSESSMENT-NO 103 NAME MICHAEL KOSS NAME-2 MAIL-STREET 12410 SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD MAIL-CITY-STATE LOS ANGELES, CA 90025 SITE-STREET 3002 MAIN STREET PARCEL-NO 4288-007-009 STR-RESURFACED GUTTER-INSTALLED TOTAL-ASSESSMENT IMPROVEMENT-NOl IMPROVEMENT-N02 PRINT ASSESSMENT-NO 104 NAME NORMAN T. OLLESTAD III NAME-2 ALAN L. FREEDMAN MAIL-STREET 185 PIER AVENUE MAIL-CITY-STATE SANTA MONICA, CA 90405 SITE-STREET 2942 MAIN STREET PARCEL-NO 4288-008-007 ~ STR-RESURFACED GUTTER-INSTALLED TOTAL-ASSESSMENT IMPROVEMENT-NO 1 IMPROVEMENT-N02 PRINT ASSESSMENT-NO 105 NAME BARRETT DEVELOPMENT LTD NAME-2 MAIL-STREET 2219 MAIN STREET MAIL-CITY-STATE SANTA MONICA, CA 90405 SITE-STREET 2934 MAIN STREET PARCEL-NO 4288-008-005 STR-RESURFACED GUTTER-INSTALLED TOTAL-ASSESSMENT IMPROVEMENT-NO 1 IMPROVEMENT-NO 2 the Aircraft Hangar/Tiedown Area, would cost approximately $5,000,000. Thus, the total amount for upgrading Airport Avenue to minimum safe and acceptable standards for a public street, and for constructing a new airport perimeter road is estimated to be $12,000,000. This does not include any right-of-way costs. Finally, there is the potential of prolonged conflict and disagreement over the use of Airport Avenue as a public street. Such a project is almost certain to be challenged by at least two identified groups, the airport user interests and the nearby residents in Los Angeles who live south of the airport. In addition, it is possible that other Santa Monica residents would challenge the closing of 23rd street. Staff has requested comments from Los Angeles City councilmember Ruth Galanter and the Cityls Department of Transportation. They will be forwarded to the Council when their comments are received. BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT At this time there is no budget or fiscal impact to report. Specific cost estimates will be developed when each individual neighborhood traffic plan is presented to Council for its consideration. All of the neighborhood traffic plans are currently funded by Traffic Mitigation fees received from the Colorado Place and the Water Gardens developments. The proposal to close 23rd street at the Los Angeles boundary has serious cost implications which will require additional work and funding. 10 1991-92 Street Resurfac1ng Program NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Page 2 of 2 FOR STREET RESURFACING AND GUTTER CONSTRUCTION: Commerc1al and 1ndustrial property owners will be assessed approx1mately $11.50 per llnear foot for gutter constructlon and $9.00 per llnear foot for street resurfaclng. RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES WILL NOT BE ASSESSED. FOR SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS AND CURBS AND PARKWAY PAVEMENTS: Commerc1al, 1ndustrial and res1dentlal property owners w1ll be assess the full cost of $6.00 per square foot for sldewalks, $7.50 per square foot for dr1veways and $10.50 per llnear foot for curbs. However, for the portion of the areas damaged by roots from a parkway tree, the res1dent1al property owner 1S assessed only 50% of the costs. The C1ty w11l pay the balance. You may do the work yourself or hue a private contractor. The C1ty Wlll provlde the concrete to do the work 1 f the damage was caused by parkway tree roots. Replacing pr1vate survey markers located 1n the sldewalk where the repair is made 1 s the sole respons 1 bi 11 ty of the property owner. Repa 1 rs must meet Santa Mon1ca Standard Specificat10n No. 24 for Construction of Curbs, Sidewalks and Dr1veways and Plan No. 1122. Cop1es are ava1lable at the Santa Mon1ca C1ty Hall, Department of General Services. Call 458-8737 for permit and spec1f1cat1on 1nformat1on F1nanc1al ass1stance 1S provided by the C1ty for low-to-moderate 1ncome property owners who must pay for these repa1rs. Call 458-8701 for f1nanclal aS51stance 1nformat10n. A publ1C hearing regarding the proposed improvement w1ll be held at 7:30 p.m., Tuesday, May 12, 1992, 1n the Counc1l Chambers, City Hall, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monlca, Cal1fornia 90401. All protests regard1ng th1S matter must be f1led in Wrlt1ng In the Office of the C1ty Clerk before said time, and all protests so filed w1ll be considered by the City Councll at that t1me. Each protest must cootaln a descr1ptlon of the property 1nvolved 10 the protest. The total proJect cost 1S estimated to be approx1mately $600,000.00. The amount to be assessed upon the d1str1ct for th1S 1mprovement 1S approx1mately $60,000. Records avallable 1nd1cate you own property 1n the above distnct, 1 f you do not own the property 11 sted on top of page 1, or if you are request1ng copies of the Resolutlon of Intention Wh1Ch contaln further particulars on th1S assessment and all quest10ns regarding the proposed improvement may be directed to Lauren Ramezan i in the Ofh ce of the City Englneer at 458-8721. Date: Apr1l 24, 1992 NPH130Btech.cJ THE ABOVE NOTICE WAS MAILED TO PROPERTY OWNERS ON APRIL ~992.C h l ~~, ~ LAUREN RAMEZANI {