SR-417-003-01 (96)F:\PCD\Share\CouncilReports2004\prefparkMM#2.doc
Council Meeting: February 10, 2004
To. Mayor and City Council
From City Staff
~ ~t
~~
Santa Monica, California
~AR 2 3 2004
Subject: Resolution Amending Preferential Parking Zone MM (9th Street between
Pico Boulevard and the Santa Monica Freeway, and Michigan Avenue,
Bay Street, Grant Street, and Pacific Street between Lincoln Boulevard
and 10~h Street) on currently regulated blocks and Amending City Council
Resolution 9344 CCS
Introduction
This report recommends the extension of the hours of restrictions in parts of the existing
Preferential Parking Zone MM, which includes 9th Street between Pico Boulevard and
the Santa Monica Freeway, and Michigan Avenue, Bay, Grant, and Pacific Streets
between Lincoln Boulevard and 10t" Street
Background
On March 5, 2002, the City Council approved Preferential Parking Zone MM (see
Attachment B: Vicinity Map). Residents requested the regulations because of difficulty
finding parking due to use of spaces by high school students, employees and patrons of
commercial establishments along Lincoln Boulevard and visitors to ~he Clare
Foundation, as well as because of noise, trash, and driving anc~ parking patterns
attributed to those parkers The regulations adopted by Council were not as restrictive
as many residents wanted them to be, because more restrictive regulations were
expected to result in significant shifts in parking from some local residential streets to
others and also because more restrictive regulations could withdraw parking spaces
.. ~
' `~ ` ""~k 2 3 2004
from use in an area where they are in high demand and few alternatives are available
for visitors and employees. When it enacted the regulations, Council asked staff to
conduct a review six months after implementation to determine the effectiveness of the
regulations and to evaluate the impact of "one-side-of-the-block" preferential parking on
9th Street between Pico and Michigan. A follow-up study was completed and
distributed to affected residents. As a result of that study, a subsequent survey, and
neighbor comments staff is recommending that regulations be extended to
evening/overnight and weekend time periods in the four block 9th and Michigan
neighborhood A copy of an information item to the Council on the follow-up study and
neighbor comments on it is included as an attachment to this report (Attachment C).
Discussion
The staff recommendations for parking regulations in this area reflect an attempt to
provide parking relief for residents without creating additional parking problems or
shifting them from one street to another. In this area, one-side-of-the-street regulations
were implemented in an effort to minimize the need for parkers to move from one
location to another, especially from regulated streets to Bay, Grant or Pacific Streets
west of Lincoln Boulevard where preferential restrictions are impractical, due to the
location of these blocks in the Coastal Zone.
Following are the policy options considered in response to the follow-up data and
residents' comments:
2
Daytime Requlations on East Side of the 1800 block of 9th Street
Many residents of 9th Street between Pico and Michigan would like the east side of their
street to have preferential parking restrictions. The east side of this block does not have
any preferential parking regulations. However, the study results show that daytime
occupancies in their neighborhood overall (71 percent) are similar to the other
neighborhoods studied Furthermore, when compared to the original study, daytime
occupancies have decreased over the four-block area Thus, the preferential parking
zone has made it easier for residents to find parking near their homes during the
daytime hours. At the same time, daytime parking occupancies have increased in the
neighborhood west of Lincoln Boulevard, where the City has not implemented daytime
parking restrictions Additional daytime restrictions in the 9th and Michigan
neighborhood (i.e. on 51 spaces on the east side of the 1800 block of 9th Street) are not
recommended because they would likely further spillover impact on the residents in the
Coastal Zone.
Niqhttime and Weekend Requlations
Some residents want restrictions to extend later than 9pm. It appears that
evening/nighttime parking occupancies are high, and higher than they were two years
ago. Since the residents west of Lincoln Boulevard do not experience high enough
parking occupancies (59%) to warrant nighttime restrictions, and parking would be
available in about 11 of the 62 spaces on the east side of 9th Street, as well as on 10tn
Street and streets further east, it is unlikely that nighttime visitors would shift as a group
to one of these locations. Therefore, it would be possible to regulate both sides of the
3
1800 block of 9th Street adjacent to residential uses after 6pm. It is unclear exactly how
much of the late night parking is actually due to residents and their guests parking their
own cars; if caused by residential parking, permit parking would not ease parking
congestion on this block. Restrictions can also be placed on both sides of this block
during the weekend days and nights, for the same reasons that they could be extended
in the weekday evenings.
Survey Results
In September 2003, Transportation Management staff sent a new survey to residents of
the four block 9th and Michigan neighborhood asking if they would like extended
restrictions weekday on evenings/nights (and until what hour), and if they want more
stringent restrictions on the weekends. It also specifically asked if residents want
weekday evening/nighttime and weekend restrictions on the east side of the 1800 block
of 9th Street. This survey yielded a 29 percent return.
The results of the survey show that a majority of residents do want enhanced
restrictions. Eighty-two percent of respondents want restrictions extended during the
weekdays on blocks that already have restrictions, and 75 percent want these
restrictions extended overnight. Likewise, 78 percent want restrictions extended on
weekends, with 79 percent requesting "no parking" restrictions on both Saturdays and
Sundays. A majority of these people want 24-hour restrictions on the weekends. As far
as the east side of the 1800 block of 9th Street, 80 percent want weekday
evening/nighttime restrictions, with 74 percent requesting overnight restrictions.
4
Seventy-six percent want weekend restrictions, with 86 percent of those requesting "no
parking" restrictions on both days of the weekend. Again, a majority want 24-hour
restrictions on the weekends. Both the survey and the survey results are included with
Attachments D and E, respectively.
Zone MM South of Pico Boulevard
The residents south of Pico Boulevard have not objected to the current regulations. In
only one of the three streets has chosen to petition and implement regulations.
The regulations (currently implemented on Bay Street only) are: "Two-hour parking
7am-9pm Monday-Friday, and two-hour parking 9am-6pm Saturday, except by permit"
(north side of block only). The 800 blocks of Bay, Grant and Pacific Streets were pre-
approved for only one side of the block for the same reason as was the 1800 block of
9th Street. Spot checks of parking occupancies in this neighborhood show that Bay and
Streets have occupancies in the mid-80 percent range during the weekday
evening hours, while Pacific Street has a lower average occupancy, at 64 percent.
During the weekend midday hours, Bay and Pacific Streets have occupancies in the
upper 60 percent range, while Grant Street averages 86 percent full
Communitv Input
A neighborhood meeting was held on January 15, 2004. All residents from Zone MM
were invited, as well as residents of the 600/700 blocks of Bay and Grant Streets west
of Lincoln Boulevard Businesses and property owners were also notified and invited,
as were officials, parents, and students from Santa Monica High School. The vast
5
majority of attendees were residents from the 9th and Michigan neighborhood (who are
unhappy about the current restrictions), and parents and students from Santa Monica
High School, who stress their need for some parking accommodation. A few residents
from the Coastal Zone attended the meeting, and stressed the lack of parking in their
neighborhood. There were no representatives from Zone MM south of Pico. Discussion
revolved mostly around the lack of parking availability for students. Comments from this
meeting are summarized in Attachment F.
New Recommendations for Zone MM
The objective of these amended regulations is to alleviate the parking pressure on
residential streets during the weekday evenings/nights and on weekends. These new
restrictions on weekday evenings/nights and weekends on both sides of the 1800 block
of 9th Street may displace only a small number of employees from surrounding
businesses to the larger area. Maintaining and extending two-hour restrictions during
weekend days will allow for continued customer parking and will also ease the weekend
burden of dealing with permit parking for short-term visitors and guests to residents on
the blocks. The following amended regulations are proposed
1) No parking between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. Monday-Friday; Two-hour parking between 7
a.m. and 6 p.m. Saturday and Sunday; No parking between 6 p.m. and 7 a.m. Daily,
except by permit on: i
• Michigan Avenue between Lincoln Boulevard and 10th Street,
• 9tn Street between the Santa Monica Freeway and Michigan Avenue, and
• 9tn Street between Michigan Avenue and Pico Boulevard (west side only).
2) No parking between 6 p.m. and 7 a.m. Daily; Two-hour parking between 7 a.m. and
6 p.m. Saturday and Sunday, except by permit on:
`:141 ; I
• 9tn Street between Michigan Avenue and Pico Boulevard (east side only).
s
3) Two-hour parking between 7 a.m. and 9 p.m. Monday through Friday; Two-hour
parking between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. Saturday, except by permit on:
• Bay Street, Grant Street, and Pacific Street between Lincoln Boulevard and 10tn
Street (north sides only). [unchanged] ,
Budqet/Fiscal Impact
The recommendation presented in this report does not have any budget or financial
impact.
CEQA Analvsis
The proposed project has been determined to be categorically exempt from the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to Article 19,
Section 15301 ( c) which was recently amended to define Class 1 exempt projects in
the following way: "Class 1 consists of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting,
leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities,
mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving little or no expansion of use
beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency's determination. ." This exemption
lists as an example of "existing facilities:" "( c j Existing highways and streets,
sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities." Preferential
parking zones involve only the issuance of permits for the use of an existing public
street and include negligible or no expansion of this existing use.
Recommendations
It is recommended that the City Council
~
Approve the attached resolution amending Preferential Parking Zone MM (9th Street
between Pico Boulevard and the Santa Monica Freeway, and Michigan Avenue, Bay
Street, Grant Street, and Pacific Street between Lincoln Boulevard and 10th Street)
and amending Resolution 9344 CCS (Resolution of the City Council of the City of
Santa Monica Re-Establishing Various Preferential Parking Zones) by replacing
Exhibit A.
Attachments: A
B
C
D
E
F
Resolution Establishing Preferential Parking, Exhibit A-
Preferential Parking Zones ~~ ~~d ~, N~ ~3 ~C~S\1
Vicinity Map ~~
August 29, 2003 Information Item
September 2003 Survey
September 2003 Survey Results
Summary of Comments from January 15, 20(
Neighborhood Meeting
Prepared By: Suzanne Frick, Director of Planning and Community Development
Lucy Dyke, Transportation Planning Manager ek, ,_,~,:
Beth Rolandson, Senior Transportation Planner ~ ~~~
~x ,,
Ruth Harper, Transportation Planning Associate ~°' ~~~.~~
~ ~~~2
~ ~_~
8
~~~~ ~
m
~
z
w
~
_
~
F--
Q
~
~II ,3~ ~ 3 ~~ ~
unco~n r~~o
ulTCOLNHLVD
~ ~
~
~
~
0•2 0 0.2 0.4 Miles
ATTACHMENT C
F:\PCD\Share\Info Items\prefparkMMfollowup.doc
August 29, 2003 Santa Monica, CA
AIID #316
INFORMATION ITEM
Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Results of Follow-up Parking Occupancy Study of Preferential Parking
Zone MM
Introduction
This information item addresses the results of follow-up parking occupancy studies for
Preferential Parking Zone MM, which includes 9th Street between Pico Boulevard and
the Santa Monica Freeway, and Michigan Avenue, Bay, Grant, and Pacific Streets
between Lincoln Boulevard and 10th Street, Staff has prepared this report in response
to Council's request for a follow-up study after implementation of this zone.
Backqround
On March 5, 2002, Preferential Parking Zone MM (see attached map) was approved by
Council. Many of the non-residential parkers involved were Santa Monica High School
students, though customer parking from nearby businesses also created difficulties for
the residents. The preferential parking regulations approved by the Council affect
approximately 94 previously unregulated on-street parking spaces. They prohibit
parking between 7am and 9pm Monday-Friday, and allow two-hour parking on
Saturdays from 9am to 6pm, except by permit, on 9th Street between Pico Boulevard
and the Santa Monica Freeway and on Michigan Avenue between Lincoln Boulevard
10th Street. On 9th Street between Pico and Michigan, only the west side has
permit regulations, leaving approximately 51 residential-adjacent parking spaces and 10
commercial-adjacent spaces on the east side unregulated and available to all. This
was done to contain possible spillover into the Coastal Zone (Bay/Grant Streets west of
Lincoln) by Santa Monica High School student parkers. The streets in the "southeast
area", Bay/Grant/Pacific between Lincoln and 10th Street, are pre-approved for two-
hour restrictions Monday-Friday 7am to 9pm, and 9am to 6pm Saturdays on the north
side of the block. To date, one qualifying petition has been received from a block south
of Pico, specifically from the 800 block of Bay Street between Lincoln Boulevard and
10th Street. This block was implemented in July 2003.
At the Council meeting on March 5, 2002, Council asked staff to conduct a review six
months after implementation to determine the effectiveness of the regulations and to
evaluate the impact of "one-side-of-the-block" preferential parking on 9th Street
between Pico and Michigan. This information item presents the results of that review,
which included collection of follow-up parking occupancies by an outside consultant,
analysis of that data by City staff, presentation of data results to residents of the 9th
and Michigan neighborhood for comment, and review of data and conclusions in light of
residents' comments.
Discussion
Preferential parking restrictions were initially implemented in the 9th and Michigan area
north of Pico in April 2002. The follow-up occupancy study was completed on
Wednesday, October 23, 2002, six months after preferential parking was implemented,
2
on a school day. Vehicle counts were conducted throughout the day, hourly between
the hours of 7am and midnight. As shown on the attached map, three areas were
studied: 1) the 9th and Michigan area, 2) the Coastal area (Bay/Grant west of Lincoln),
and 3) the area to the southeast of the Lincoln and Pico intersection (Bay/Grant east of
Lincoln). Staff reviewed the consultant's data, corrected some apparent errors,
conducted some "spot checks" to determine whether these errors significantly affected
the occupancies observed in particular locations, and summarized the data, In April
2003, staff compiled the results into a report and mailed this report to 175 residents of
the Pico and Michigan neighborhood to solicit their feedback.
Staff received 18 comments (10% return), as follows:
1 One resident felt the parking situation was fine and that preferential parking
restrictions on the east side of 9th Street were unnecessary,
2 One resident felt that there should either be restrictions on both sides of the
street or on neither;
3, 14 residents mailed in a form letter stating that parking was still very difficult, that
noisy conditions existed, that drivers were rude and often practiced unsafe
driving behavior, and that trash was often left on the street, and
4, Two residents wrote long letters expressing their displeasure with the City's
follow-up parking study-they felt that the study did not adequately describe the
conditions in their neighborhood One of these residents performed his own
survey of the neighborhood on Wednesday, April 30, 2003, and presented these
3
results to the City. This resident surveyed parking occupancies in all three areas
shown on the map,
City staff has analyzed the consultant's follow-up study and information provided by the
residents. A number of errors in the consultant's data set included apparent
misrecording of vehicle license plate numbers, inconsistent recording of the number of
parking spaces on several blocks, and possible miscounts on two blocks with street
sweeping restrictions. Staff identified and corrected some but not all of these errors
prior to release of the report to residents (see Appendix A) The corrected consultant
data and the data collected by the resident surveyor are substantially similar during the
daytime hours (before 5pm), and appear to be within the range of occupancies that
could occur in this area on a day-to-day basis throughout the year. For the purpose of
this information item, and to be responsive to the concerns of people who reviewed the
original report, staff uses solely the data collected by the resident as the basis for all the
statements about occupancy levels contained herein. As noted, analysis of both the
resident survey data and the consultant's data verified by staff are similar.
Although a few residents commented on the data, most resident comments addressed
the parking policy. Residents of the 9th and Michigan neighborhood, who were
surveyed, continue to express the view that preferential parking should do more than
make spaces on their block available to them; it should be used to limit negatives that
go along with visitor parking, specifically, noise, trash and traffic violations. Other
interested groups, including residents of the Coastal area and some high school
4
students and parents, have contacted the City about the negative impact the current
parking regulations have on them
Parkinq Occupancv Results
The entire four-block 9th and Michigan area has an average occupancy of 75 percent,
with occupancies ranging from a high of 88 percent after 10pm, to a low of 56 percent
at 4pm. The 1800 block of 9th Street between Pico and Michigan averages 85 percent
full (82 percent daytime/91 percent nighttime). The west side of this block, which has
preferential parking, has an overall average of 66 percent occupancy (daytime average
56 percent, nighttime average 83 percent), while the east side which is unregulated,
averages 95 percent. Clearly, the east side is used very heavily, however, this study
shows that residents can still find parking on the west side of this block or within the
remainder of the whole 9th and Michigan area The overall average weekday
occupancy of the entire study area is 72 percent. The table on the following page
summarizes the percentage occupancy results based on the survey data collected by
the resident.
5
_ --
,
_
~
N+e' h ,.,
h
;
1 9th and Mich ' ~ 156 71°~ i 8196
a ~ ~ ~19~
,:
- ,~' 32 .
~ g3~6
,
.
~ 62 gg
b ~
.+ ' 21 6"l~i t~396 ;
c 8
~ ~ 16 4? S5%
d , ~
?'
~5 _
5~
:;~ ~
800 /Gra ' ,$2 ~ •j{,
,, ,
600/700 / . , ~, : ~ 01 ~yb
~
~atire Stu , ,: ~; ~$39 7~ ~ _ 7596
This table shows that overall, the three neighborhoods experience about the same
daytime parking occupancies. Evening/nighttime occupancies are similar and fairly
high in areas `1' and `2' east of Lincoln Boulevard. The evening occupancy in the
Coastal area is much lower, at 59 percent.
These conditions represent a slight improvement, in the four-block area taken as a
whole, compared to survey data collected by the consultant before implementation of
~I ~arking in t~e. ~~' ~ Mich~an area~ The following graph represents
parking occupancy hour by hour throughout a weekday in Area `1',
6
Specifically, daytime on-street parking occupancies have decreased by about 15
percentage points in the 9th and Michigan area, indicating that residents are now able to
find parking in the area during the daytime. The original study did not count past 9pm.
Occupancies are now higher in the evening hours (5pm to 9pm) than they were two
years ago.
In the adjacent coastal area, conditions are worse for resident parkers. The following
graph compares the parking occupancies hour by hour on the 600/700 block of Bay
Street. This block also petitioned two years ago for preferential parking, but the City did
not implement restrictions due to its location in the Coastal Zone.
7
Parking occupancies have increased significantly on the 600/700 block of Bay Street in
these two years, presumably due to the shift of student parkers to this area since
Preferential Parking Zone MM was implemented in March 2002.
Interestir~~~t, there is no~ a de~r conn~n befiiveen parkir~~ ~k~ilii~~~rr~
Michigan area and parking occupancy on 600/700 Bay Street. As residents of gtn
Street point out, on Fridays between 9am and 11 am when street sweeping regulations
are in effect on their block, there is no significant increase in parking occupancies on
600/700 Bay Street. However, the occupancies on 600/700 Bay Street have increased
to 95% at 10am, so there is not much room on this street for more parked vehicles.
Policv Options
Da.ytin~e Rsgula~ions o~t Ess~ Side of 9'~' ~-treet
Mar~t~idents of 9~' Str~et be~n Pico and Michigan w~~~~'th~ e~~ c-f:~
8
street to have preferential parking restrictions. However, the study results show that
daytime occupancies in their neighborhood (71 percent) are similar to the other
neighborhoods studied. Furthermore, when compared to the original study, daytime
occupancies have decreased over the four-block area. Thus, the preferential parking
zone has made it easier for residents to find parking near their homes during the
daytime hours. At the same time, daytime parking occupancies have increased in the
Coastal Zone, where the City has not implemented daytime parking restrictions
Additional daytime restrictions in the 9th and Michigan neighborhood (i.e. on the east
side of the 1800 block of 9th Street) would likely further spillover impact on the residents
in the Coastal Zone,
Nighttime Regulations
Some residents want restrictions to extend later than 9pm. It appears that evening/
nighttime parking occupancies are high, and higher than they were two years ago
Since the residents of the Coastal Zone do not experience high enough parking
occupancies (59%) to warrant nighttime restrictions, it would be possible to regulate
both sides of the 1800 block of 9th Street adjacent to residential uses after 5pm without
inducing spillover effects on adjacent neighbors. Restrictions coutd extend to midnight,
or overnight (to approximately 6am the following morning) It is unclear exactly how
much of the late night parking is actually due to residents and their guests parking their
own cars; if caused by residential parking, permit parking would not ease parking
congestion on this block. Restrictions could also be placed on both sides of this block
during the weekend days. Restrictions in the evenings or on weekends would not
9
negatively affect the residents in the Coastai Zone as they are generally affected by
daytime, weekday student parkers only.
Two years ago, the Transportation Management Division sent surveys to the Zone MM
residents asking how late in the evening they wanted restrictions. At that time,
respondents were split between wanting restrictions to extend to either 6pm or 9pm.
Residents were not asked if they wanted restrictions to extend even later in the
evening Transportation Management Staff will send a new survey to residents asking
if they would like restrictions in the evening/night (and until what hour), and if they want
more stringent restrictions on the weekends. If the response to the survey indicates
that a majority of residents would like some combination of later restrictions on both
sides of the street and on the weekends, staff would then schedule a neighborhood
meeting to solicit further feedback, and finally, would return to Council recommending a
modification in the hours of the regulations.
High School Parking
Parking availability continues to be problematic for some high school students.
Although only a small percentage of high school students drive to school, parking
spaces are at a premium for them The school makes some spaces available to
students by lottery, and encourages students to carpool and use public transit service
provided by Big Blue Bus. The City, in conjunction with the high school, has modified
parking and loading regulations adjacent to the high school to facilitate drop-off. Given
10
resource and space constraints at the high school, there are no current plans to invest
in additional parking resources for high school students.
Other Parking-Related Problems
In general, residents from the 9th and Michigan area have continued to contact the
Transportation Management Division about their neighborhood. The majority of
comments center on continued rude and unsafe parking behavior exhibited by the
Santa Monica High School students, as well as some illegal permit abuse, and illegal
parking of U-Haul trucks by customers. Staff has worked with residents on all of these
issues. Parking enforcement has increased the ticketing of students who are misusing
permits Staff is in contact with U-Haul to prevent their customers from parking
commercial vehicles of a certain height or width on residential streets. The Police
Department is enforcing regulations prohibiting such parking.
Summarv
Preferential parking is a tool the City can provide to help residents find parking near
their homes when non-residential parking regularly interFeres. This tool has helped the
residents in Zone MM, They can generally find parking on their block or within a two-
block radius of their homes, Parking occupancies are lower overall in their
neighborhood during the daytime hours than they were two years ago, but they have
increased on the (unregulated) east side of 9th Street and in the 600/700 Block of Bay
Street. If permit restrictions were enacted on both sides of the 1800 block of 9t" Street
in the evenings and on weekends, this could make parking easier for residents during
11
these hours. It could also help with the U-Haul parking issues. Staff is surveying
residents to determine their level of support for night and/or weekend regulations and
will recommend these regulations to the City Council if there is resident support for
them
Attachments A Analysis of Data Errors
Prepared by: Suzanne Frick, Director of Planning and Community Development
Lucy Dyke, Transportation Planning Manager
Beth Rolandson, Senior Transportation Planner
Ruth Harper, Transportation Planning Associate
12
Appendix A: Analysis of Data Errors
Number of spaces on various streets
Because many of the parking spaces on these streets are unmarked, estimates of the
number of spaces on each street can vary. Indeed the number of cars that can be
parked can vary, depending on the size of each vechicle and the skill and courtesy of its
operator. Staff identified potential problems in the consultant's data on the number of
spaces on some blocks and corrected these numbers prior to issuing the preliminary
follow-up report for the area. On all but one block, staff used the number of cars
reported by the consultant and the actual base number of spaces on the street. Staff
assumed that the consultant did in fact count all the parked cars on an entire block;
spot checks on one block and data collected by the resident surveyor show that the
consultant's numbers were reasonable for daytime hours.
On one block, 900 Michigan, the number of spaces identified by staff was significantly
different from the number given by the consultant (40% too few spaces), staff not only
modified the base number of spaces to correct it, but also conducted "spot" checks for
seven hours during the day to determine whether there was likely a problem with the
car counts on this block or just with the base number of spaces. The "spot" checks
produced data points substantially similar to the consultant's occupancy data together
with the corrected space numbers. However, staff decided to use its own spot-check
data in the follow-up report, along with interpolated numbers for the hours which staff
did not count. The resident's data for this block is also very similar, as follows:
Average number of cars-consultant: 13.2, staff: 10.6, resident: 13.8.
Incorrect license plate numbers
The purpose of recording license plates is to determine how many cars are on the block
and to provide some insight into how many of the cars that are parked stay parked for a
particular period of time. Staff did not review or verify individual license plate numbers,
as these are not material to the conclusions of the study. The resident's observation
that some plates may have been poorly and incorrectly recorded is valid, however, it
does not affect the results of the study.
Cars shown on Bav and Grant Streets During Street Sweepinq
Cars are recorded on Bay and Grant Streets during the hours when parking is restricted
for the purpose of street sweeping. The resident implies that this data, and other data
provided by the consultant is fabricated. There are many locations in the City where
motorists park up to and after the street sweeping occurs. Staff cannot determine what
actually happenned on the days of the counts. However, the similarities befinreen the
resident's data, the staff "spot checks" and random observations of the neighborhood
suggest that the data as a whole, as corrected by staff during its review, provides a
reasonable description of the parking occupancies in the neighborhood.
13
14
ATTACHMENT D
~~
~ ~~~Y o,
Santa Monica'"
Transportation Management Division
1685 Main Street - Room 115, PO Box 2200
Santa Monica, California 90407-2200
310/458-8291 • fax: 310/576-9170
September 16, 2003 Preferential Parking Survey-Residents of 9th and Michigan Neighborhood
The City of Santa Monica would once again appreciate your help in obtaining information about
parking in your neighborhood and what types of regulations you feel would best meet your area's
needs. Residents in your neighborhood have expressed interest in restrictions which extend later in
the night on weekdays, and are more extensive on weekends. Restrictions could also exist on both
sides of the 1800 block of 9th Street between Pico Boulevard and Michigan Avenue (adjacent to
residences) after 5pm and on weekends. As always, residents with permits are allowed to park on
blocks within a two-block radius of their homes that are also designated for permit parking.
Please complete and return this survey by Wednesday, October 8 to:
City of Santa Monica, Transportation Management Division
By mail: Room 115, PO Box 2200, Santa Monica, CA 90407-2200 or by fax: 310/576-9170
(You can re-use this form--simply re-fold and mail: see reverse)
Name Phone
Address Unit #
1. Would you like weekdav restrictions to be extended on all blocks that currently have restrictions?
^ Yes
^ No
If ves, how late would you like these weekday restrictions to extend? (mark one)
^ Until midnight
^ Overnight, until 6am the following morning
2. Would you like weekend restrictions to be extended on all blocks that currently have restrictions?
^ Yes
^ No
If ves, how late would you like these weekend restrictions to extend? (mark one)
^ 2 hr parking, including Sunday (except by permit)
^ No parking on Saturday (except by permit). How late? (hour)
^ No parking on Saturday and Sunday (except by permit). How late? (hour)
3. Would you be in favor of restrictions on both sides of the 1800 block of 9th Street between Pico
Boulevard and Michigan Avenue after 5pm on weekdays?
^ Yes
^ No
If ves, how late would you like these weekday restrictions to extend? (mark one)
^ Until midnight
^ Overnight, until 6am the following morning
4. Would you be in favor of restrictions on both sides of the 1800 block of 9th Street between Pico
Boulevard and Michigan Avenue on weekends?
^ Yes
^ No
If ves, how extensive would you like these weekend restrictions to become? (mark one)
^ 2 hr parking, including Sunday (except by permit)
^ No parking on Saturday (except by permit). How late? (hour)
^ No parking on Saturday and Sunday (except by permit). How late? (hour)
Additional Comments:
Espanol: Su opinion es importante para nosotros. Para una encuesta sobre el estacionamiento
en espano/, favor de llamar a Elsa Gonza/ez al numero 310-458-2275.
ATTACHMENT F
Comments from Neiqhborhood Meeting~ Januarv 15 2004
• Could meters be installed in Coastal Zone on residential streets west of Lincoln?
• What options exist for the Coastal Zone in general?
• Why can preferential parking passes not be used in all preferential parking zones in Santa
Monica?
• Need to think of all consequences of decisions.
• Could permits be granted to businesses in the area?
• Santa Monica HS does not provide as much parking as they should.
• Coastal Zone: has a lot of student parking, students speeding, and other bad behavior,
and they sometimes park illegally.
• Why can't students park at the Civic?
• Students should be allowed to park at the Civic.
• Students could park at beach lots and take a shuttle.
• Some students need to drive because they are involved in after hours activities at the
school.
• There are only 40 student parking spots at SAMOHI.
• Students can't afford to pay a lot for parking.
• Why was parking lot replaced with a playing field at SAMOHI?
• Difficult to maintain consistent policies and goals with student turnover and some
residential turnover.
• Priorities for the SAMOHI PTSA are very low on the City of Santa Monica list.
• Need parking on SAMOHI campus.
• We live in an urban environment but need to make it easier for people to walk and cycle.
• Nobody is happy with the current zone restrictions.
• Allowing student parking at the Civic has to be made a priority.
• Make the new parking structure at the Civic larger to allow student parking.