SR-906-000 (16)
CCS: ADMIN:BS:F:\CCSADMN\SHARE\STFRPT\415 PCH
City Council Meeting: December 14, 2004 Santa Monica, California
To: Mayor and City Council
From: City Staff
Subject: Update on Funding Proposal Submitted to the Annenberg Foundation
to Support the Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse of 415 Pacific Coast
Highway, Santa Monica State Beach; Approval of Amendment to
Professional Services Agreement with Rincon Associates in the
Amount of $72,522 for Environmental Review Services; and,
Contingent upon Foundation Funding, Authorization to Proceed
INTRODUCTION
This report provides an update on planning activities related to the rehabilitation and
adaptive reuse of public property located at 415 Pacific Coast Highway (?415 PCH?),
Santa Monica State Beach (the ?Reuse Project?); and requests City Council approval
of a range of actions necessary for the purposes of securing a commitment for
funding from the Annenberg Foundation (?the Foundation?) for the Reuse Project.
BACKGROUND
The Site.
The City of Santa Monica is charged by the State of California with managing Santa
Monica State Beach, including the site at 415 PCH. This highly visible and
historically significant site began its contemporary history in the 1920?s as the Marion
Davies Estate - built by William Randolph Hearst with several important elements
designed by renowned California architect Julia Morgan.
1
415 Pacific Coast Highway, Santa Monica State Beach (circa1980).
Over time, the estate?s original 100-room mansion was demolished and other
structures added as the property experienced life as a privately owned hotel and,
when sold to the State in 1959, as a private beach club that operated for three
decades under lease. A proposal for a new beach hotel was abandoned in 1990
after Santa Monica voters passed Proposition S, creating a Beach Overlay District
that prohibited hotel and large restaurant development. For a short time in the early
1990?s, it was operated by the City as a seasonal public beach facility and a filming
and event venue. In 1994, the site experienced significant damage as a result of the
Northridge Earthquake.
2
The site includes three elements from the original estate: the Guest House and
Swimming Pool designed by Julia Morgan and a bulkhead running along the site?s
western edge. A three-story locker building, paddle tennis and volleyball courts,
parking areas and a beach café subsequently added to the site remain. The site
and the original structures have received a range of State and local historical
designations.
The 415 PCH Reuse Plan.
Recognizing the site?s potential as a pre-eminent public gathering place, the City
convened a Working Group and embarked on a community planning process that
considered various use options and site configurations. In 1999 the City Council
approved the 415 PCH Reuse Plan that envisions beach amenities that:
Preserve the history of the site
?
Encourage a ?light touch? on the site
?
Create a community-oriented destination
?
Provide public recreational activities
?
Increase public access to the beach
?
Create a range of uses
?
Encourage diverse users
?
Provide for year-round use; and
?
Link to the regional open space network
?
3
This conceptual plan illustrates a renewed site with sand and green recreation areas
anchored by the renovated historic Guest House and Swimming Pool, and a banquet
center with ocean views for public and private events. Pathways and a promenade
encourage visitors to stroll throughout the site, participating in its history and in a
range of opportunities for recreation and relaxation. Concession stands, a beach café
and recreational play areas extend into the sand, inviting visitors to enjoy the expanse
of beach to the west.
After Council approval of the Reuse Plan, preliminary environmental work was
completed, a Historic Resources Report and preservation guidelines were developed
and additional engineering studies were performed. The City and the State Parks and
Recreation Department have initiated discussions to extend the terms of the operating
agreement for Santa Monica State Beach and 415 PCH. Approximately $1.4 million in
State and Federal grant funds have been awarded to date ? a fraction of the funds
needed to realize the Reuse Plan. The selective demolition of non-contributing
structures and the stabilization of historic elements on the site have been completed.
The Proposed Partnership
The financial limitations of available governmental grant funding as well as the
magnitude of the anticipated capital investment have constrained the City in achieving
the adaptive reuse of the site. As a result, in December of 2003 the City Council
authorized the issuance of a Request for Proposals (?RFP?) to assess interest from
private developers in a partnership to further the project.
4
In January of 2004, the Annenberg Foundation contacted City staff after a member of
the Foundation?s Board of Trustees became aware of the City?s need for significant
funding to realize the site?s full community use potential. The City refrained from
issuing the RFP and began discussions with the Foundation to determine whether a
collaboration was feasible.
To inform its decision-making, the Foundation retained the services of a consultant to
review the Reuse Plan, existing technical studies and cost estimates. Concurrently,
City staff began discussions with the State Parks and Recreation Department. It soon
became evident that the Foundation?s interests were closely aligned with City and
State policy frameworks and that a partnership would yield a unique project that could
exceed original expectations and fulfill State and City policy goals. Foundation input
served as a catalyst for deeper thinking about the site?s potential and assisted the City
.
in refining the project cost estimateIn September 2004, the City submitted a formal
proposal that is currently under active consideration by the Foundation?s Board of
Trustees.
DISCUSSION
Grant Conditions.
Since receiving the City?s formal funding proposal, the Foundation has expressed a
strong interest in partnering with the City of Santa Monica for the Reuse Project and
has expressed various conditions that would have to be satisfied as a pre-requisite to
a funding commitment, as further described below. Because City staff believes that
5
discussions with the Foundation have been productive and will lead to a viable project,
the recommendations described inthis report are proposed to Council in order to
advance the projected planning process if a funding commitment is made. Once the
City agrees to the funding conditions, a definitive grant commitment letter agreement
would be prepared by the Foundation setting forth the formal commitment for such
funding.
Grant conditions discussed to date include requirements regarding the use of grant
funds, funding procedures, the term of the project, the role of the Foundation in project
design, budgeting and review process, contracting and reporting and other standard
grant requirements. The conditions are outlined in Attachment 1 to this Report. City
staff would return to Council for further discussion and authorization if additional major
funding conditions were proposed during the anticipated commitment process.
State Approvals.
The current Santa Monica State Beach Operating Agreement is in effect until
December 31, 2006, and provides adequate authority for the City to proceed with
planning and design activities for 415 PCH as outlined in this report.State officials
have drafted an agreement for 415 PCH that considers a 50-year term and a 50-year
extension based on satisfactory performance by the City. The primary elements for
performance are: satisfying the terms and conditions defined by the Annenberg
Foundation, continued funding for facility operations, proper care of the historic
structures and State-owned property, and continued public access to the facilities.
6
Project Implementation.
If Foundation funding is awarded, the following key implementation steps would be
initiated, recognizing the unique and significant opportunity made possible by
Foundation support and the corresponding obligation of the City to achieve the
project?s goals within a realistic timeframe:
Issuance of Request for Bids from Design/Build Teams
?
Negotiation and Execution of Necessary Partnership Agreements with the
?
Annenberg Foundation and State Parks and Recreation Department
EIR Scoping Meeting
?
City Council approval of Design/Build Team and Approval of Phase 1, Pre-
?
construction Services, of the Design/Build Contract
Community Design Charrette and Commission Reviews
?
Design and Art Approvals
?
Formal Environmental Review/Development Approvals
?
City Council Approval of Phase 2, Construction Services, of the
?
Design/Build Contract and Guaranteed Maximum Construction Price
Construction
?
Opening and Community Celebration!
?
An estimated timeline is included as Attachment 2 to this report.
. City staff recommends a design/build process that
The Design/Build Process
includes a focused, multi-day community design charrette in order to produce a
visionary, state-of-the art design. A multi-disciplinary design/build team would be
selected to implement the project from design through construction. The selected
team would exhibit a high level of design innovation, a deep understanding of what
makes successful public gathering places, strong financial capacity of the contractor
7
and documented experience in executing projects of this size and complexity. A
commitment to universal accessibility, sustainable practices and the integration of
public art would be essential to ensure the uniqueness of the project. A public artist
would be selected from a juried list consistent with guidelines established by the City?s
Arts Commission.
. Extensive community input received during the earlier
The Community Charrette
City planning process provides a solid basis for future decision-making. The City
proposes the use of an intensive and highly interactive process to take the design to
the next level. This process involves the project design team in setting up a special
?Design Studio? which is open to the public over the course of multiple, consecutive
days. Community members of all ages are invited to visit the team at work and lend
their voices during open house hours and at scheduled work sessions. Review by
stakeholder groups, the Foundation, City Commissions, the City Council and State
officials are integrated into the charrette timeline to focus public input. City staff
would work with the various City Commissions to make sure that special meetings are
scheduled during the charrette process in keeping with the need to meet the project
timeline.
.
Because of the historic
Landmarks and Planning Commission Reviews
significance of the site, the Landmarks Commission or a subcommittee thereof would
be asked to review technical materials related to historical issues to provide
preliminary feedback. Once the design/build team is selected and the design process
8
has commenced, the project may return to the Landmarks Commission to obtain
preliminary feedback on landmarks-related issues that emerge from the design/build
team?s work. Formal regulatory reviews by the Planning Commission and the
Landmarks Commission would follow Council approval of the project?s schematic
design.
In February 2001, the City Council awarded
The Environmental Review Process.
a professional services contract in the amount of $110,576 plus a contingency of
$16,586to Rincon Associates after the completion of a Request for Proposal process.
In December 2003, a modification was approved increasing the budget by $2,450 to
cover costs associated with a Phase I environmental assessment of the site. Baseline
environmental work has been completed and upon award of Foundation grant funds,
the next phases of consultant work should commence.
Staff recommends the preparation ofan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and an
Environmental Assessment in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) and in accordance with the Federal HUD guidelines for implementing NEPA.
The environmental analysis would analyze the proposed project as well as various
project alternatives. The project description would be based upon the elements
identified in the Reuse Plan except for the inclusion of a free-standing visitors center.
Subsequent to Council adoption of the Plan, the National Park Service has indicated
that they would not be able to fund or staff a full visitor center although there is
9
continued interest in participating in interpretative, informational and gateway
elements. Therefore, the analysis would examine the incorporation of outdoor
interpretive elements and visitor services in other structures on the site. The EIR
would include analyses of project alternatives at the same level of detail as the
proposed project, and among other alternatives, address possible project refinements
during the schematic design process -- specifically the location and size of the
banquet and meeting facilities, the rehabilitation or reconstruction of the Swimming
Pool, site grading and circulation. An amendment to the contract with Rincon
Associates in the amount of $72,522 will be required to complete the environmental
review process ? for a total contract amount of $202,134 including a contingency of
$16,586.
FISCAL/BUDGETARY IMPACT
Sufficient expenditure appropriation authority is available in expenditure account
numbers C220520.589000 ($49,390) and C110520.589000 ($23,132) for the
amendment to the professional services contract with Rincon Associates. If awarded,
Foundation grant funds would cover the cost of the capital improvements. Specific
appropriations would be requested at the time contracts are awarded or with the Mid-
Term Budget Review. The City would assume the responsibility and cost of facility
operation upon project completion.
10
RECOMMENDATION
City staff recommends that the City Council approve the following actions: (1)
Contingent upon receipt of a funding commitment from the Annenberg Foundation,
authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute all necessary agreements and
documents with the Foundation and the State of California related to this project, (2)
approve the amendment to the contract with Rincon Associates, (3) approve
budgetary actions as specified in this report, and (4)authorize the staff to proceed as
outlined in this report.
Prepared by: Barbara Stinchfield, Director
Karen Ginsberg, Assistant Director
Department of Community and Cultural Services
Attachments: 1) Grant Conditions
2) Estimated Project Timeline
Reference Contract No. 8432 (CCS) (Annenberg), Contract No. 8433 (CCS)
(State), and Amendment to Contract No. 7882 (CCS) (Rincon).
11
Attachment 1.
GRANT CONDITIONS
Grant funds would be used only to improve the site consistent with the goals of
?
an approved 415 Pacific Coast Highway Reuse Plan and budget and any
subsequent refinements resulting from the proposed design process.
The City and Foundation would each designate a project representative in
?
order to ensure clear lines of communication and an ongoing working
relationship throughout the course of the Reuse Project. The City?s designated
staff person will serve as the single point of contact with the Foundation,
consistent with standard Foundation practices. The City?s project
representative will be substantially involved in the administration, operation,
management and construction of the Project and would otherwise be
acceptable to the Foundation.
Consistent with applicable law, contracts for any aspects of design and/or
?
construction would only be awarded after the development of Request for Bid
packages and implementation of a bidding process ? both of which are mutually
approved by the City and the Foundation. In addition, minimum standards for
bidders participating in the bidding process would be established by the City
and mutually approved by the Foundation and the City. The City will only select
qualifying bidders.
The City would provide program management for the overall project (including
?
the redevelopment and operations) and assume full responsibility for project
implementation, providing opportunities for Foundation participation and review
at key junctures including design/build team selection, programming, schematic
design and design development ? to ensure that ultimately the public will have
the best possible visitor experience.
The City would develop and implement a comprehensive operations plan for
?
the improved site that provides for the highest standards of ongoing and long-
term maintenance to ensure that the Foundation?s investment is protected.
Any third-party agreements entered into by the City regarding any aspect of site
?
operations would be consistent with the project?s goal, and the City?s
responsibility, to provide the highest level of service and responsiveness to the
public.
12
Prior to release of any grant funds, the City would negotiate the necessary
?
agreements with the State of California to provide for City control and operation
of the site for a minimum period of 50 years, and preferably with an option for
the City to extend for an additional 50 years, to ensure that the site will continue
to be used, maintained and operated consistent with the Reuse Plan and will
not be included on State surplus property inventories during the term of the
Agreement, subject to general default provisions.
In the event unforeseen site conditions are encountered during the Reuse
?
Project that would require mitigations that exceed available Foundation funding
or that would disproportionately allocate Foundation funds to the exclusion of
significant visitor serving improvements, the City would provide the necessary
additional funding from other sources or determine alternative courses of action
to be mutually agreed upon by the City and the Foundation that would not
unduly delay the implementation of other components of the Reuse Project.
Distributions of grant funds to the City would be made pursuant to approved
?
project plans, specifications and budgets, in accordance with an agreed
schedule and achievement of certain milestones and contingent upon the City?s
submission of required reports and backup.
In conjunction with the development of a site branding and marketing program,
?
The City would provide the Foundation with a proposed donor recognition plan
for the site in recognition of the Foundation?s gift including but not limited to
public signage at the site and identification on all marketing materials and
correspondence letterhead) and would allow the Foundation to review any
public announcements relating to the grant or the proposed project.
The City would comply with various standard grant conditions intended to
?
satisfy legal limitations on Foundation grants, insulate the Foundation against
third party claims and protect the grant investment (including, for instance,
compliance with the Foundation?s insurance requirements).
13
Attachment 2.
Estimated Project Timeline
415 PCH
2004 December
City Council Approval of Partnership
Request for Bids ? Design/Build Team
Call for Artists
EIR Notice of Preparation
2005 January
EIR Scoping Meeting
April
City Council Approval of Design/Build Team and
Phase 1, Pre-Construction Services
May
Pre-construction Services Begin
August/Sept
Schematic Design Community Charrette
Commission and City Council Reviews
Project Partners Approval of Schematic Design
November
Planning Commission Certification of EIR and
Review of Development Review Permit
Landmarks Commission Review of Certificate of
Appropriateness
2006 January
Coastal Commission Approval
March
City Council Approval of Guaranteed Maximum
Price and Phase 2, Construction Services
November
Construction
2008 November
Opening Celebration!
14