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 {