SR-10BPCD:PPA:SF:KG:PF
f:\ppd~share~ccreport\safetel
COUNCIL MEETING: February 14, 1995
TO: Mayor and City Counc~l
FROM: City Staff
.r'"'~ y _
~ ~a
~ ~ ~, ~- :.
_r~ ~ t~.
~~ ~ '
Santa Monica, California
FE B f ~+ t395
FEB 2 1 1995
SUBJECT: Recammendation ~.o ~dapt a ResoZu~ion Certifying the Final
Environmental Impact Report; Adapt a Resolution
Approving the Adoption af the Safety Element
and Amending the Fublic Safety and Seismic Safety
Elements of the General Plan; Adopt a Resolution
Making Findings Necessary to Approve the Safety Element
and Adopt a Resolution Adapting a Mitigation Monitoring
Program for the Safety Element.
INTRODUCTION
This repart transmits ta ~he City Council the Draft Safety Element
and Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The recommended Safety
Element, a component of the General Plan, updates the City's 1975
Safety Element and 1975 Seismic Safety Elem~nt and conforms to
State Gav~rnment Section 65302 (gj which requires that the Safety
Ele~nent and the Seismic Safety EZement be combined into one
document. The EIR analyzes the environmental effects af the
policies contained in the Safety ~lement.
The Draf~ Safety Element and Draft EIR were forwarded to the
Planning Cammission and discussed at gublic hearings an April 20
and July 20, 1994. This staff report presents a summary of the
maaor issues conta~.ned in the 5afety Element. FE~ ~ t~
FEB1~+1995
It is the recommendation of staff that the City Council hoZd a
public hearing to consider the Safety Element and EIR, adopt a
1
~t~ - ~
~
.~
Resolution certifying the Final Environmenta2 Impact Repart, adapt
a Resalutian approving the adoption of the Safety Element ~nd
amending the Public Safety and Seismic Safety Elements of the
General Plan, adopt a Resolution making the findings necessary to
approve the Safety Element and adopt a R~solution approving a
mitigation monitoring program for the Safety Elemen~,
$ACRGROIIND
In 1986, the State of California adopted Section 65302(g) which
requires that each local gavernment maintain a comprehensive safety
Element that addresses a variety of natural and man~made ha2ards
and contains goals and palic~s aimed at reducing the risks
associated with these hazards. The fundamental objective of the -
Safety Element is to "reduce death, in~uries, property damage and
economic and social imbalance fram hazards"; however, other sacial,
economic, political and aesthetic factors must be considered and
balanced with these safety needs. Add~tional guidelines and
standards can be introduced through the City's Municipal Code.
The Safety Element serves the following ~unctions in working to
achieve its objectives:
o Provides an accurate and up-to-date assessment af natural
and human-related hazards in the City, including (but not limited
to) earthquakes, Zandslides, subsidence/settlement, inundation,
fire, and release of hazardous materials;
o Provides a framework by which safety considerations are
].ntroduced into the land use p~anning process;
2
o Recommends project review and permitting processes for
~dentification and mitigation of hazards for new development;
o Provides policies directed at identifying and reducing
hazards in existing development; and
a Strengthens earthquak2, inundatian, fire and hazard~us
materials preparedness planning and post-disaster reconstruction
policies particular to the City.
The Safety Element document i5 divided into two documents: the
Technica~ Background Report and the Safety Element. The Technical
Backqround Report examines the different natural and human-related
hazards that may affect the health and safety of the people in
Santa Monica -- 1} Seismic hazards; 2) Geologic hazards; 3)
Tsunami, Dam Inundation and Shoreline Erosion hazards; 4} Fire
hazards; and 5) Hazardous materials. The Safety Element conta~ns
the safety planning issues, goals and objectives which respond to
the findings as identified in the Technical Background Report.
ANALYSIS
xechniaal Backqround Report
The findings af the Technical Background Report, upan which the
Safety Element bases its policy and actian recommendations, can be
summarized as follows:
o The City is at risk from strong ground motion fram a
number af nearby seismical~y acti~e faults. Potential damage to
new and most existing develapment will be slight to moderate;
however, localized severe damage to vulnerable buildings may occur.
Given the risk, critical facilities must be designed and maintained
with a greater safety margan than that of conventional development.
o A ma~ or earthquake on the Newport-Inglewood, Santa Monica
3
or Malibu Coast fau~ts has the potentzaZ for setting into motion
multiple events, including injuries, crowd contrvl problems,
blocked roads, hazardous materials releases, isolated damage, and
~ires. A major ea~thquake on the Newport-Inglewood fault is a
probable worst-case scenario for the City ar~d must be considered in
~he ongoing development of the ~mergency Response Plan.
o A truly worse case scenaria would be a major ground
rupturing earthquake on the Santa Monica fault. A~1 utility lines
crossing the fault would be ruptured and hundreds of structures
destroyed. Fire suppression access north of the fault wouid be
severely restricted, as would water f~ow to the main portians of
the City since most reservoirs are ~ocated within the elevated
areas north of the fault.
o Shallow ground water within 50 feet of the ground surface
reportedly occurs alang the beach and near the northern industrial
corridor and Marine Park area of Santa Monica. This ground water
condition, coupl~d with uneonsolidated yauthful sediment, makes
these areas susceptibie to liquefaction during moderate to strong
earthquakes.
o Surficial instability will continue to pose constraint5
to new development and enlarqement of existing development in
praximity to the bluff areas beneath or ad~acent to Palisades Park.
o Failure of the Ri~iera and Stone Canyon reservairs may
fload portions of the City.
o Due to the extensive storm drain system, flooding due to
heavy periods of rainfall is not expect~d to impact the City.
However, s~orm-induced beach erosion will continue to impact the
coastal areas of the City.
o Wild fYre hazards are considered non-existent, hawever,
structural fires will continu~ to be a danger in the City.
o Hazardous materials releases in or n~ar the City may
xesult in widespread impact to the papulation and envzronment.
However, respons~ plans and evacuation procedures required under
California law are currently in place at facilities within the C~ty
that handle extremely hazardous and hazardous materials.
o Rupture of the crude oil pipeline extending through the
City as a result of seismic ac~ivity could resul~ in a Zarge
hazardous material release effecting Iocal populations or the
environment.
o Abandoned landfills within the City pose additional
hazardous waste concerns as well as settlem~nt/subsistence hazards.
o Tsunami ~nundat~.on poses a hazard to low iya.ng, coastal
4
environments within the City.
The January 17, 1994 Northridge Earthquake is referenced in the
Safety Element. Field investigations indicated an unexpected
da~age pattern in the narthern portian of the City which follawed
the east-west trend of the Santa Monica fault. The goals and
policies of the Safety Element are still very appropriate qiven the
infarmation obtained from the Northridge Earthquake. As new
information becomes available and is reviewed by the City, and as
an interna~l analysis of response and recovery experiences
continues, the City will continue to enhanc~ the emergency response
p~an and hazard mitigation programs throughou~. the C~ty.
Safety Element
Safety planning issues are addressed in the Safety Element section.
These issues arise from the findings of the Technical Background
Report within the areas identified above. Given the expected
growth patterns and environmental setting of the City, safety and
planning issues center on hazard mitigation, reduction and
management which can be effectively dep~oyed in connection with
upgrading existing development and encouraging safe development
practices. As a result, safety planning issues are framed in terms
of building code standards ~or new development projects and
retrofitting existing vulnerable buildings.
The Safety Element divides the natural and human-related hazards
into five categories far study purposes: 1) Seismic hazards; 2}
Geologic hazards; 3) Inundation hazards; 4} Fire hazards; and 5)
5
Haaardous materials. The EZement a~so incZudes a discussion on
Disaster preparedness. A summary of the significant actions of the
Element are outlined in Exhibit 1.
Seismic Hazards
Hazard management goals and policies are implemen~ed primarily
through code campl~ance and special development regulations. The
building and fire codes, hazard reduction regulations and specia~
development regulati~ns may apply on a city-wide and/or on a site-
specific b~515 if potential hazard impacts are more ~ocalized and
the scope of risk is more cancentrated.
Hazard reduction pragrams are already in place in Santa Mon~ca
which require the seismic upgrading of unr~inforced masonry and
other patentially hazardous structures. It is known that certain
types of building types, in addition to unreinforced masonry
buildings, are ~ulnerable during earthquak~s. These building types
include soft/weak story struc~ures~ pre-1976 tilt-up concrete
buildings, steel-frame buildings and pre-cast/reinforced poured in
pZace concrete/non-ductile buildings. In response to this, the City
Council adopted Ordinance #1748 which requires the seismic
retrofitting of these types af structur~s. The Safety Element
further recommends that the City promote the strengthening of
planned utility Zines and life~ine utilities to minimize damage and
injury from seismic and geologic hazards. In areas of potential
seismic or geoloqical hazards, the document recommends that the
6
City requ~re geological and geotechnical investigations as part af
the environmentaZ and deveZopment revzew process.
The Safety Element also includes policies that strengthen the
project permit and review process in arder to ensure that proper
actions are taken to mitigate the impact of seismic hazards,
encourage struetural and nonstructural seismic design and
construction practices that minimize earthquake damage ~n critical
facilities and prevent the total coZlaps~ of any structure designed
for human occupancy. The City would conszder the ~stablishment of
a Hazard Management Zone(s) that identifies areas susceptible to
faulting, liquefaction, settlement and slope instability. The Zone
or Zones that would be estabiished would be based upan the
Technical Background Report of the Safety Element and be updated as
new information becomes available.
The final aspect of the Safety Element which discusses seismic
hazards suggests educational and training programs for me~bers of
the community on matters of earthquake preparedness and response as
weil as seismic hazard identification.
Geoloqic Hazards
The geologic hazards of greatest concern to the City include
coastal slope instability and erosion, differential settlement
related to uncertain fills, and subsidence re~ated to graund water
withdrawal. Large coastal bluff failures along Palisades Park have
7
occurred. Clay mining operations since the early 1900's in the
central portion of the City resulted in excavations which were
backfilled with uncompacted fills (in some cases utilized as
landfill} which may result ~n differential settlement and hazardous
waste and explos~ve gas hazards. Final~.y, Santa Monica currently
receives approximately 50 percent of its water fram ground water
sources beneath the City. Subsidence and salt water intrusion
prablems resulting from similar ground water withdrawal have
occurred alang caastal areas south of the City. No such problems
exist in Santa Mon~ca to date although the potential obviously
exists.
The policies of the Safety Element which address these potential
probl~ms cancentrate on the environmental and development review
process. It is recommended that geologic and geatechnicai
investigations and design cansiderations for grading and building
permi~s be required in areas of potential siope instability and
differential settlement.
Inundation Hazards
Inundation hazards are assaciated with reservairs within or in
close proximity ta the City, tsunami or storm-generated waves and
storm-related fZoading. Two reservoirs, the Stone Canyon and
Riviera Reservoirs located narth of the City, pose potential dam
fai~ure and subsequent inundation resulting from earthquakes and
extremely heavy rainfall. In ac~dition, the City owns three 5-
S
milZion gai~Qn reservoirs -- Arcadia, ~ount OZive~te and San
Vicente reservoirs -- which pose localized inundatian hazards due
ta seiching (shaking and overtapping) during an earthquake. The
law-lying coastal areas of the City are susceptible to tsun~mi
inundation resulting from large distant earthquakes ar an
earthquake or landslide within Santa Monica Bay. Finally, the
Safety Element must assess the impact of a 100-year and 500-year
flood; however, due to the extensive s~orm drain system within the
City, the Nationa~ Flood Insurance Program has classified the flaod
hazard potential in the City as non-existent.
The Safety Element recommends that the City apply a minimum level
of acceptable risk duzing the project review phase for development
and new construction, and for proposals for substantiai
improvements and redevelopment in dam or tsunami inundation areas.
Yt recammends that the City disappro~e projects that cannot
mitigate the hazard to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety
Division ar other responsible agency. The document suggests
guidelines for mitiga~ing these hazards, such as requiring that the
ground flaor of any building praposed ~or human occupancy be
canstruc~ed one faot above the projected inundation depth,
requxring specia~ precautions in bui~dings storing and utilizing
hazardous materiaZs, and proposing possib~e flood proofing
measures.
9
Fire Hazards
In Santa Monzca, ~rban fir~ hazards pose a considerab~y greater
impact than brush fire hazards. The urban environment is develaped
with a range af structures fram wood-frame residential to high-rise
commercial buildings with an industrial corridor in the central
portion of the City. The vast ma~ority of all structure fires
involve residential and commercial buildings, however, the
potential for fires in industrial districts produces the threat of
hazardous materials incidences.
In general, the policies of the Safety Element involve
strengthening review and code enforcement programs that already
exist in the City. The policies recommend enforcement af the
Uniform Building Code and Un~farm Fire Code and the Santa Monica
Municipal Code which requires installation of sprinkler systems in
any existing lauilding found to provide inadequate accESS far fire
fighting equipment or apparatus. It is als~ recammended that all
City departments work together to improve fire fighting
infrastructure through the replacement and/or relacation of o~d
cast-iron pipelines and inadequate water mains and the installation
of redundant emergency pipeZines where necessary. Fina~ly, the
Safety Element recommends the strengthening of interjurisdictional
fire response agreements.
Hazardous Materials
Over 60Q businesses use, store or manufacture hazardous ar
10
extremely hazardous materia~s in so~e amount in the City. The Fire
Department has identified those businesses that pose ~ significant
risk to the community due to the volume or type of hazardaus
material involved. Pre-fire plans have been developed for these
bus~nesses and are maintained in the Fire Department Communications
Center and on each fire fighting apparatus.
The Safety Element suggests that th~ threats to public health and
safety from hazardous materials, especially the patential ~or
multiple releases caused by earthquakes, is minimiaed best through
the strengthening of local code enforcement actions. These actions
would include strict adherence to the Uniform Fire Code. Further,
the document encourages the continuatian and strengthe~ing of the
City's Hazardous Materials Disclosure Program (HMQP).
The Safety Element recommends that the City amend the Municipal
Cade by defining permitted an-site quantities of hazardous
materials, uses and storage requirements in each of the City's
commercial and industrial zones to address risk to adjacent
residential areas, the immobile populations, and constraints posed
by seismic, geologic ar inundation hazards. Finally, the document
suggests inter~urisdictianal coordinatian and cooperation in
dealing with hazardous materia~s tran~portation 155ll~S.
Disaster Preparedness
In additian to the policzes that deaZ with the risks associated
11
with the hazards as discussed above, the document makes
recommendations on disaster preparedness. These palicy
recommendations augment those cantained in the City's Multi-Hazard
Functional Plan {MHFP). Many of the actions recommended are ongoang
within the City such as the installation af a geographic
information system (GIS) and the training af City empioyees. As a
result of the City's response to the Northridge Earthquake, the
Element recommends that the City consider on-going training and
education for City employees, the business coi[tmunity and the
resident commtinity for disaster awareness and preparation and the
establishment of a safe ~ocat~on for canducting past-disaster
emergency operatians, rescue and communication.
Safety Element Environmental Impact Repart
The Safety Element EIR analyzes the environmental impacts of
adopting a new Safety Elemer~t for the Santa Monica General Plan.
The EIR focuses an the long-range benefits to City residents from
i~proved safety versus the shart-term impacts of implementing
Element programs such as utility relacation and tha upgrading and
reconstructian of unsafe structures. The EIR concludes that the
implementation of Safety Element programs will consume negligible
amounts of natural resources far construction. The short-t~rm
impacts as identified in the EIR can be mitigated to a level of
~nsignificance. Long term changes will be beneficial due to the
increased l.evel of saf~ty and protectian provided to the public.
12
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATTONS AND STAFF UPDATES AND CHANGES
The Planning Com~ission he].d its first pub].ic hearing on the Safety
Element and Draft EIR on April 20, 1994 where the Commissioners had
a number of comments regarding the document. Staff addressed those
comments in the document and discussed the issues at the second
public hearing before the Commission on Ju1y 20, 1994. The PlannYng
Commission recammended that an Implemen~ation Schedule be included
in the document in order to propose a timeline for the
~mplementation of the policies. An Implementation Schedule has been
incorporated intfl the Safety Element.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS
The adoption of the Safety Element will not have a financial
impact; however, implementation of the policies will have costs
associated with them. The Safety Element includes a proposed
Implementation Schedule for the policies of the document. Many of
the recommended policies of the Safety Element are on-going within
the City and will not require additional funding for
implementation. The remainder of the policies are recommended to be
implemented over the next five year period. Each City department
responsible for the implementation of a particular policy wiil
prapose necessary funding during the appropriate annual budget
process.
RECOMMENDATION
It is the recommendation of staff that the City Council take the
13
~ollowing actions:
o conduct a public hearing to review the Safety Element and
EIR;
o Adopt a Resolution certifying the Final Env~ronmental
Impact Report (Attachment D);
o Adopt a Resolution approving the adoption of the Safety
Element and amending the Public Safety and Seismic
Safety Elements of the General Plan (Attachment E};
o Adopt a Resoluti.on making the findings necessary to
approve the Safety Element (Attachment F); and
o Adopt a Resolution adoptinq a mitigation monitoring
program for the Safety Element (Attachment G).
Prepared By: Suzanne Frick, Dzrector of PCD
Karen Ginsbe~g, Planning Manager
Paul Foley, Associate Planner
Planning and Community Develapment Department
Policy and Planning Analysis Division
Exhibits:
1-- Summary of Significant Safety Element Actions
Attachments:
A -- Proposed Safety Element
B-- Proposed Safety Elem~nt Technical Backgraund Report
C-- Final Environmental Impact Report
D-- Resalutian Certifying the FEIR
E-- Resolution approving Adoption af the Safety Element
and Amending the Public Safe~y and Seismic Safety
Elements af the General Plan
F-- Resolution Making Findings Necessary to Approve the
Safety Element
G-- Resalutian Adopting a Mitigation Monitoring Program
f:~ppd~share\ccreport\safetel
14
EXHIBIT 1
Si]MMARY OF SIGNIFICANT SAFETY ELEMENT ACTIONS
Seismie Hazards
a Continue to encouxage the structural and non-struc~ural
assessment and mitigation of potentially hazardous buildings
including unreinforced masonry buildings, soft/weak story
structures, and tilt-up concrete buildings (Ordinance #1748 adopted
June 1994).
o Identify and mitigate nonstructura~ and structural
hazards in City owned buildings, especially critical facilities
(O~dinance ~1737 adapted April ~994).
o Review and enforce seismic design provisions and identify
and prevent structura~ and nonstructura~ seismic design fZaws ~n
projects involving dependent, essential, high-risk, high-occupancy
or major cammercial projects requiring City approval. Methods to
accomplish this include establishing training programs far plan
checkers and building inspectors or retaining a State-certified
structural enqineer {~rdinance #1748).
o Planned lifeline utilities should be designed, located
and upgraded where necessary to ensure operation during an
emergancy. (water and sewer utilities have back-up power to
critical faciZities and the water system has proper shut-o~f
valves).
o Consider the Establishment of a Hazard Management Zone or
Zones that identify areas susceptib~e to faulting, liquefaction,
settlement and slope instability.
0 5upport future stud~ on the Santa Monica fault system to
further define its location and recurrence interval and provide
public access to current information.
o Make available pamphlets, brochures, and in-house
expertise to educate homeowners and occupants on earthquake
preparedness.
Inundation Hazards
a Study risks and possible protectian measures, in
association with the Los Angeles Caunty Depaztment of Public Works,
in the areas of dam, tsunami, and shoreiine in~ndation.
15
ATTACHMFNT D
RESOLUTION NO. ~862
{City Council Series)
A RESOL~7TION QF THE C~TY COIINCIL
OF THE CITi~ OF 3AN'PA MONICA
CERTIFYING THE ENVIROIQMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
ON THE SAFETY ELEMEN~ OF THE GENERAL PLAN
WHEREAS, a Notice of Prepa~ation o~ an Environmental Impact
Repdrt was issued in March, 1992; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion af a Draft En~ironmental
Impact R~port was publa.shed in Aprzl, 1994 and
WHEREAS, the Draft Envxronmenta]. ~mpact Report was circulated
for a 45-day public comment per~od and sent tv the state
clearinghouse ~or review; and
WHEREAS, in July, L994 th~ Fina~ Environmental impact Report
was pubI.ished; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Impact Report and a~l notices were
prepared in compla.ance .raith the Californ~a Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA}, and the City of Santa Monica CEQA Guidelines; and
WH~REAS, the Planning Cammission has reviewed and consi.dered
the contents of the Fina~ ~~R in its decisian-making process; and
WHEREAS, the P1ann~ng Commission recommended certi~ication of
the EIR on July ~0, ~994; and
1
.
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the
contents o~' the Finai EYR in sts decisian-mak~ng process;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCTL OF THE CITY OF SANTA
M~NICA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLaWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council finds that the Final
Environtnental Impact Report adequately reviews and analyzes
potentiaJ,environmental effects af the propased proje~t and pr4ject
alternatives.
SECTION 2. The City Council certifies that the
environmental review for the project was conducted in fu1Z
compl~ance with 5tate and City CEQA Guid~lines, and that the City
CounciJ. has reviewed and considered the contents of the Final
Environmental Impact Report in its decision-making process.
SECTION 3. The city Counci2 finds that the FinaZ EIR
reflects the independent judgement of the City of Santa Monica.
2
r
SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the
adoption of this Resolution, and therefore and thereafter the same
shall he in full force and e~fect.
APPROVED AS T~ FORM:
~~
MARSHA JONES MOUTRIE
City Attorney
f:\ppd\share~reso\safecert
3
v
Ado~ted and appro~-ed this 41 st of February, 199~
~
Vlayor
I hereby certify that the fore~oina Resalution 8862 (CCS) was duiy~ adopted a~ a
rneetmg of the City Counc~l held on the 21st of February-, 1995 by the followmg vo~e
Ayes Councilmembers Abdo, O'Coz~zor, Ebner. Greenber~, Holbrook,
Rosenstetn, Genser
Noes Councilmembers None
Abstain Councilme~nbers None
~bsent Councilmembers None
ATTEST
~
C~ty Clerk
AT~ACHIVCFNT E
RESOLUTION NO. 8$63
(City Council Series)
A RESOLUTION ~F THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CxTY OF SANTA MDNICA
ADOPTTNG THE SAFETY ELEMENT AND
AMENDING THE PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT AND SEISMIC SAFETY ELEMENT O~
THE G~NERAL P~,AN OF THE C~TY OF SANTA MONICA
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Monica adopted its existing
Public Safety Element in July, 1975; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Manica adopted its ex~.sting
Seismic Safety Element in December, 1975; and
WHEREAS, in 1986, the State of CaZifornia adopted Government
Code Section 55342(g) which requires that each local government
maintain a comprehensive Safety Element, combining the formerly
requa.red Public Safety and Seismic Safety Elements, that
addresses a variety of natura]. and human-x'elated hazards and
contains goals and polices aimed at reducing the risks assaciated
with these hazards; and _
WHEREAS, a~raft Safety £lement was produced that satisfied
the requirements of Government Code Section 65302(g); and
WHEREAS~ the Draf~ Safety Elemen~. was farwarded for rev~.ew
and comment to the California Department of Canservation,
Division of Mines and G~ology in accordance w~th Government Code
Section 65302(g); and
WHEREAS, the P~anning Cammission conducted duly ~oticed
public hearzngs on the Draft Safety Element on april 20, 1994,
Ju~y 20, 1994 and November 15, 1994 and forwarded a
recommendation for appxoval wi~h mod~ficat~on to the City
Counci~; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has fully considEred the Final
Environmen~al Impact Report on the propased Safety Element,
NOW~ THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ~ANTA M~NICA
bOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTTON 1. The City Council f~nds that the amended Safety
Elemen~ promotes the public heath, safety and welfare through its
pollcies which work to reduce the impacts from natural and human-
related hazards.
SECTION 2. The City Council finds that the 5afety Element
complies with the requirements of Government Code Section
65302 (g) . ~
SECTION 3. The dacument a~tached hereto marked Exhibit A is
hereby approved and adopted as the Safety Elament of the General
P~an of the City of Santa Monica.
SECTrON 4. Pursuant ta the Santa Monica Municipal Cade,
Alrticle IX. Chaptex 1., Subchapter 9.D4.20, Part 9.04.20.18, the
City Coun~il does hereby amend the Public Safety Element and
Seismic Safety Element of the C~ty of Santa Monica General Plan
by replacing thase Elements with the Safety Element.
SECTION 5. The Ci~y Clerk shall certify to the adopt~an of
this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be
in full force and effect.
APPROVED A5 TO FORM:
~Il.~.{~ f ~~~(~.~
Marsha Jor~e Moutxie
City Attorney
r-ldopted and approved this 21s~ of Febritary, ~99~
~~
~Ia}~or
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution 8863 {CCS) wa5 duly adopted at a
meetin~ of the Ctty Council held fln the 21st of Febr~ary, 149~ by the follow~ng vote
Ayes Counciln~embers Abda, O'Connor, Ebner. Greenberg, Holbroak.
Rosenstein, Genser
~`oes Councilmembers ~1one
Abstain Councilmem~ers None
Absent Counc~imembers None
ATTEST
~
City Clerk
ExxzszT A
SAFETY ELEMENT AND TECHNICAL BACKGROUND REPORT
CiTY OF SANTA MONICA
1995
ATTACHMENT F
s - ~
RESOLUTION NUMB~R $$b`~
(City council Series)
A RESpI,UTION OF THE CITY CaUNCIL
DF T~IE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
MAKING FINDINGS NECESSARY TO APPROVE
THE SAFETY ELEMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Monica adopted its existing
Public 5afety Element in July, ~975; and
WHEREAS, ~.he City of San~a Monica adopted its exist~ng
Se~sm~.c Safe~y Eiemen~ ln December, 1975; and
WHEREAS, in 1986, the S~ate of California adopted Governmen~
Code Section 65302(g) which requires that each ~aca1 governm~nt
maintain a comprehensive Safe~y Ele~nent, c~mbining the forrnerly
required Public Safety and Se~smic Safety Elements, that
addresses a variety of natural and human-related hazards and
cantains goals and palicies aimed at reducing the r~sks
associated with th~se hazards; and
WHEREAS, in 1991 ~.he C1ty of Santa Man~ca began preparation
of a Safety Element of the Gen~ral Plan in accordance witY~ the
requirements of Government Section 55302(g); and
WHEREAS, a Draft Safety EJ.ement was produced that satisf~ed
the requ~rements of Gavernment Code Section 653o2(g); and
- 1. -
t - r
WHEREAS, the pub~ic health, safety and welfare is promoted
through the polic~es of the Safety ~lement which aim ta reduce
the risks assaciated with natural and human-related hazards; and
WHEREAS, an EnvironmentaZ Impact Report {EIR) was prepared
in Ju~y, 1994 in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA}, and the C~ty of Santa Monica CEQA Guidel~nes;
and
WHEREAS, the Final EIR determined there are no siqn~£zcant
impacts from adopting the Safety Element after m~tigation; and
WHEREAS, the Final EIR determined there are beneficial ~ong-
term safety-related i~pacts from adop~ing ~he Safety Element in
the areas of Earth Resaurces, ~laoding/Inundation, Risk of Upset,
Land Use, Housing, Population, Transportation, Utili~~es, Public
Services, and Cu~~uza1 Resouzces; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the
contents of the Final EIR in its decision-making process; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Comm~ss~on zecommended adoption of the
Safety Element on November 16, 1994;
- 2 -
r - -~
NOW~ THEREFORE, THE CITY COUPdCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
DOES HEREBY R£SOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Counczl finds that the Fina~ ETR
for the Safety Element identifies potential short-term adver~e
enviranmental impacts that are offset by beneficial long-term
environmental impacts in the areas of Earth Resaurces,
Flooding/Inundatian, Risk of Upset, Land Use, Hausing, Population,
Transportation, Utilities, Public Services, and Cultural Resources.
SECTION 2. The City Counc~l finds that the proaect ~s
consistent w~th the othEr elements of the Czty's General Plan.
SECTION 3. The Final EIR deter~ined that without
~~tigation the praposed pro~ect could result in potential short-
term significant adverse impacts on Earth Resources. Consistent
with Article v1, 5ect~on 12 af the City CEQA Guidelines and Sect~on
15091 of the Stat~ CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that the
fo~lowing mitigation measures have been requ~xed in the pro~ect
which will avo~d or substantially lessen the potential short-~erm
sign~ficant environmental effects identified wi~h respect to Earth
Resources:
(1) The City will requ3re compliance with applicable
City and ather regu~ations for pra~ects on and around unstable
and/ar steep hillsides to ensure that canstruct~on activities are
- 3 -
~- .
performed in a safe manner.
These measures will mitigate ar avoid potent~al shart-term
significant environmental impacts on Earth Resouzces and thus
m~tigate or avoid the patentza~ signz~icant envizonmental effec~s
identified in the Final EIR~ Section 5.1.
5ECT70N 4. The Final EIR determined that without
mitigation the proposed project could result in paten~ial
significant adverse impacts on Flooding/Tnundation. Consistent with
Article VI, Section 12 af the City CEQA Guadelines and Section
15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City ~inds that the
following mitigation measures have been required in the pro3ect
which will avoid or substantially lessen the patential significant
enviranmental ef~ECts identzfied with respect to
Flooding/Inundation:
(1) The Czty wi~l contact and encourage ~he appropriate
5eismological agencies or institutions ta conduct studies to assess
the potential impacts from undersea earthquake activities within
Santa Monica Bay.
(2} The City w~ll consult and cooperate with appropriate
state agencies to work to allev~ate any unusual or extensive
erosion of b~ach sand.
- 4 -
, - t
These measures will mitigate or avoid potent~al significant
envlronmental impacts on Flooding/z~~ndation and thus mit~gate or
avozd the potential sign~fican~ environmental effects identlfied in
the Final EIR, SQCtion 5.2.
SECTZoN 5. The Final EIR identified potential
signlficant adverse impacts in the discussion of Risks of
Upset/Human Health. However, all impacts with respec~ to Risk of
Upset/Hu~an Hea~th are beneficial or are mitigated by
lmplementation of the prograr~s in the Safety Element that address
disaster response and long-range planning related to hazardous
materials. Therefore, the City finds that no changes or addit~.onal
mitigation measures are required in the pro~ect to avoid or
substantially lessen significant environmental effects identYfied
with respect ta Risk of Upset/Human Health, S~ction 5.3 of the
Final E~R.
SECTI~N 6. The Final EIR determined that without
mit~gatzon the pzo~osed pro~ec~ could result in potential short-
term s~.gnaf~cant adverse impacts on Land Use. Consistent with
Article VI, Section 12 af the City CEQA Guidelines and Section
15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, ~.he City finds that the
following mitigation measures have been required in the pro~ect
which w~.].]. avoa.d or substant~.a~ly lessen the patential short-~erm
signa.:E~cant envzranmental effects iden~~f~.ed wi~h x'espect ta Land
Use:
- 5 -
~ ~ }
(].) The Ca.ty wall minimiz~ bo~h shart-term and long-term
impacts to existing land uses from Safety Element programs by
assessing, in an annua~ report to C~~.y Council, thase existing land
uses at risk from 5afety El~ment programs and those effarts
necessary to minimize significant environmental impacts.
These measures wi~l m~tigate or avoi.d potential significant
environmental impacts on Land Uses and thus mi~igate or avaid the
potenta.a]. significant environmental effects identifa~d in the Final
ETR, Section 5.4.
SECTI~N 7. Th~ Final EIR determined that withaut
mitigation the propased pro7~ct could result in potential short-
term significant adverse impacts on Housing. Consistent with
AzticJ.e VI, Section 12 of the City CEQA Guidel3.nes and Section
15091 of the State CEQA Guide~.ines, the City f~nds that the
follawing mitigation measures have been required in the project
which will avoid or s~abstantially lessen the potentzal short-term
significant environmenta~ effects identa.fied with respect to
Housing: ~
(].} The C~ty will preserve existing housing units ta the
greatest degree passible during the implementation o;~ Safety
Element programs. City staff wil~ assess, in an annual report to
City Cauncil, those exist~.ng hausing units not already covered by
relocation programs and thus at risk fram Safety E].ement progra~s.
- 6 -
.
The report wi.ll also address those efforts necessary to mi,nimiza
significant environmentaZ ~~pacts thraugh the preservation of
housing units or through assistance in providing replacement
housing for occupants.
These measures will riitigat~ or avoid potential significant
environmental impacts on Houszng and thus mitigate or av~id the
potential significant environmental effects identified in the Final
EIR, Section 5.5.
SECTION 8. The Fa.na1. EIR determ~ned that without
mitigatian the proposed praject cauld result ln potential short-
term signa.fa.cant adverse ~.mpacts on Popu].at~on. Consistent with
Article VI, Sectio~ 12 of the City CEQA Guidelines and Sec~ion
15091 0~ the State C~QA Gu~dalines, the City finds that the
follawing mitigatian measures have been required in the project
which will avoid or substantially lessen the potentiai short-term
significant env~ronmental effects identa.fied with respec~ ta
Population:
(1) Th~ City sta~f will ass5.st local residents and
business awners that wou:ld be impacted by programs of the Safety
Elem~nt in finding sui~able repiac~ment hausing or warkplaces
within the Ca.ty zn order to minimize potential shox~t-term adverse
impacts. City staff should assess, in an annual report to C~ty
Cauncil, those requests ~or assistance and the results af
- 7 -
. -
reZocation ox other assistance provided.
These measures will mitigate or avoid paten~ial shart-term
significant environmental impacts on Population and thus m~~igate
ar avoid the poten~ial significant environmenta~ effects identified
in the Final EIR, Section 5.5.
SECTION 9. The Final ~rR detezrnznEd that without
mitigation the proposed pro~ect could result xn potential short-
~erm significant adverse zmpacts an Rights-of-Way. Cansistent wath
Article VI, Section 12 of the City CEQA Guidelines and Section
15091 of the State CEQA Gu~deiines, the C~ty finds that the
fol~aw~ng mitigation measures have been required in the project
which will avoid or substantially Iessen the potent~al short-term
s~gn~ficant environmental effects identified wzth respect to
Rights-of-Way:
(1) The Environmental and Public Works Management
Department staff wi11 develop a master plan for
zemediat~on/improvements to City-owned utili~y lines which traverse
iden~ified hazard zones.
(2} Remediat~on/improvement activities will be scheduled
to cozncide with planned street and other right-of-way improvement
projects so as to mi~imize construc~xon-related impacts on rzghts~
of--way_
_ g _
(3) The impacts bf acquis~~ion of additional rights-af-
way (where necessary} wil~ be appropr~a~ely assessed and m~t~gated
during praject review by the city.
These m~asures will mitigat~ ar avoid potential short~term
significan~ environmental impacts on R~ghts-of-Way and thus
m~tigate ar avoid the potentia~ signif~cant environmental effects
identified in the Final EIR, Section 5.7.
SECTION 1D. The Final EIR determined that w~thout
mitigation the proposed pro~ect could result in potential short-
term significant adverse ~mpacts on Transportat~an. Cons~stent with
Article VI, 5ection 12 of the City CEQA Guidelines and Section
15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that the
~ollowing m~t~gat~an measures have been required in the pro~ect
which will avoid ar substant~ally lessen the potential short-term
significant environmental effects identYfied w~th respect to
Transportation:
(1) The Caty w~ll minimize traffic-re~ated zmpacts from
the implementation of Safety Element programs by scheduling
construction activities durin~ aff-peak hours or weekends and by
proper~y posting traffic signage.
(2} All construction projects w~ll be sub~ect ta City
development rev~ew and cons~ruction perm~t processes.
- 9 -
These measures will mitigate or avoid potential short-term
s~gnificant environmental impacts on Transportation and thus
mitigate ar avoid the potentia~ significant environmental effects
identified zn the Final EIR, Section 5.8.
SECTIdN 11. The Final EIR determined that withou~
mitigation the proposed pro~ect could result in potential short-
term significant adverse impacts on Ut~lities. Consistent with
Article VI, Section 12 of the City CEQA Gu~de~ines and Section
15Q91 af the Stat~ CEQA Guidelines, the City ~~nds that the
following mitigat~on measures have been required in the pro]ect
which will avoid or substantially lessen the potential short-term
significant en~ironmental effects identified with respect to
Ut~~~t~es:
(1) The C~ty w~~l schedulE major utility relocation or
reconstruction pro~ects to minimize disturbances to local residents
and businesses and to preclude the curta~lment of mu~tzple majar
services concurrently unless there are safety, ~ogzstic or ecanomic
considerations.
These measures wili mitigate ar avaid potent~al short-term
significant environmental impacts an Utilities and thus mitigate or
avoid the potential significant environmental e~fects ident~~~ed in '
the F~nal EIR, Section 5.9.
- 10 -
SECTION i2. The Final EIR ~dentified potential
significant adverse i~pacts ln the discuss~on of PubZic Services.
However, al~ impacts with respect to Public Sex-vices are benefici.al
or ars mitigated by implementati.on of the pzograms in the Safety
Element which address public safety concezns regarding fzre
protection and disaster preparedness. Therefore, the City t~nds
that no changes or additianal mitiqation measures are required in
the project to avoid or substantially lessen signifa.cant
environmental effects identified with respect to Public Services,
Section 5.10 of the Final EIR.
SECTION 13. The Final ~~R determYned that wzthout
mit~gation the proposed pro~ect could xesult in potential
significant adverse impacts on Fiscal Resouzces. Consistent with
Art~cle VI, Section 12 af the City CEQA Guidelines and Section
15091 of the State CEQA Gu~c3el~nes, the C~ty finds that the
following mitigat~on measures have been required in the project
which wzll avoid or substantially lessen the potential significant
environmental effects identified with respect to F~scal Resaurces:
(1} City staff will prepare a].a.st of Safety Element
projects for review by the City Council during each fiscal year
~ncluding capital and on-going maintenance pro~ects. The City wi].l
utllize alternati~e funda.ng sources as availab].e to finance Safety
Element projects to minimize impacts an City financial respuzces.
- 11 -
These measures wi~l mitigat~ ar avoid potential significant
envzronmental impacts on Fiscal Resources and thus mitigate or
avoid the potential significant environmental effects identified in
the Final EIR, Sectian 5.11.
SECTION 14. The Final E~R ~dent~fied potential
signif~cant adverse impacts in tha discussion of Cultural
Resources. However, all impacts with respect to CuZtural Resources
are beneficial or are mitigated by imp~ementatian of the programs
in the Safety Elem~nt which address the mitigation of hazards of
unreinfarced masonry bui~dings, including historic structures.
There~ore, the City finds that na changes or additional mitigatian
measures are required in the project to avoid or substantially
lessen significant envzronmental effects zdentif~ed with respect to
Pub~ic Services, Sect~on 5.12 of the FinaZ EIR.
SECTION 15. The F~nal EIR detexmined that withaut
mitigation the proposed pro7ecti could result in potential
signiticant adverse impacts on Aesth~tics. Consistent with Artic~e
VI, Section 12 of the City CEQA Guidelines and Sect~on 1509~ of the
State CEQA G~idelines, the City finds that th~ following mi~igation
measures have been required in the project which will avoid or
substantially iessen the potential sign~ficant env~ranmentax
effects identl~~~d wi~h respect to Aesthetics:
{1) The City wiil maintain the overa~l visual integrity
- ~2 -
and characterist~cs ot the Palzsades bluffs area to the extent
feasible during implementation of 5afety Element pxograms should
major changes to cliff faces or promin~nt visual features be
proposed. City staff shall undertake a public process prior ~o the
start of any sueh work autl~n~ng the nature Qf proposed changes.
(2) The City will consider, during development review,
any aESthetic changes or impacts that result from Safety Element
programs that accur within des~gnated scenic corridars.
These measures will mitigate or avoid potential s~gn~ficant
env~ronmental impacts on Aesthetics and thus mitigate ar a~oid the
po~ential significant environmental effects id~ntified in the Final
ExR, Section 5.13.
SECTION 16. The Final EIR determaned that without
mitigation the proposed pro~ec~ could result in potent~al shart-
term significant adverse impacts on Neiqhborhood Effects.
Co~szstent with Article VI, Section 12 of the City CEQA Gu~delines
and Section 15091 of the StatE CEQA Guidelines, the Ci~y finds that
the following m~tigatian measuxes ha~e been requ~red zn the project
which w~~l avoid or substantially lessen the patential short-term
signif~cant environmental effects identif~ed w~th respect to
Neighborhood Effects:
(X} The C~ty wi~I ho~d a hearing before the Clty Council
- 13 -
to take testimony prior to initiating wark on any City-wide pragram
that has the potential to remove or disturb any significant
neighborhood landmarks or other reso~rces. For actions or programs
which could have a direct negative effect on neighbox-hoads or
portions o~ neXghborhaods, City staff wil~ prepare a staff report
detailing potential impacts. A Neiqhborhood Advisory CommYttee may
be convened by the City Council to work with City staf~ on the
implemerz~ation of Safety Element programs shoeild significant
impacts occur.
These measures will mitigate or avoid potentia]. si.gnificant
enviranmental impacts on Neighborhood Effects and thus m~tigate or
avaid the patential significant environmentai effects identified in
the Fir-al EIR, Section 5.14.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Sect~.on 21081.6, ~.he mitiqation
zneasures requYred by this Reso~ution shal~ be manitared by the City
to ensure their comp~iance during project imp].emen~ation in
accordance with the requirements af the Pro~ect's mitigation
monitar~ng program.
- 14 -
SECTION 17. The City Clerk shall certify ta the adoption of
this Resolution, and therefore and thereafter the same shall be in
full force and effect.
APPROVEa AS TO FORM:
~~.~}~' '~~,e~.~..~~.~ rl.~c-C.~u
Marsha J`gynes Moutrie
City Attorney
f:~ppd~share~reso~safeeir
- 15 -
Adopted and approved th~s 21st of Februars~, 199~
~
Mayor
I hereb}~ certify that the fflreao~ng Resolutian $864 (CCS) was duly adopted at a
meet~ng of the Crty Council held on the 21st of February, 199~ bv the following vote
Ay~es Councilmembers Abdo, O'Connor, Ebner, Greenberg. Holbrook,
Rosenstein, Gznser
Noes Counc~lmembers None
Absta~n Councilmembers I~Tone
Absent Councilmernbers None
ATTEST
~
Cit~r Clerk
ATTAC~IlVIENT G
~
RESOLUTION NO. $865
(City Council Series}
A RESOLUTI~N OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
ADOPTING THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
FDR THE SAFETY ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN
WHEREAS, a Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact
Report for the Safety Element of the General Plan was issued ~n
March, 1992; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion of a Draft Enviranmental
Impact Report was published in April, 1994; and
WHEREAS, the Draft EnvYronmental Impact Report was circulated
for a 45 day public reva.ew period; and
WHEREAS, in July, 1994, the Finai Environmenta~ Impact Report
was pubZa.shed; and
WHEREAS, the Envizonmental Impact Repart and all natices were
prepared a,n compliance with the CaZifornia Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA), and the City of Santa Monica CEQA Gu~delines; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has rev~ewed and considered
the cantents of the Final EIR in its deci.sion-making pracess; and
1
!
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held public hearings on April
20 ar~d Jul~ 20, 1994 to hear public testimony priar to recommending
that the City Cauncil adopt the Safety Element and certify the
Environntental Impact Report; and
WHEREAS, the City Counc~l has reviewed and considered ~he
contents of the Fina~ EIR in its decision-making process; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has certzfied the ~ina1. EIR for the
Safety Element on January 17, 1995; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Santa Monica adopted
~he Safety Element at its meeting on January 17, 1995; and
WHEREAS, Section 21081.6 of the California Environmental
Quality Act requires that a miti.gation monitor~ng program be
adopted by the City to ensure that ma.tigation measures intended to
reduce ar avoid the project's adverse environmental zmpacts are
lmplem~nted;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CzTY OF SANTA
MONICA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS ~'OLL~WS:
SECTION 1. Pursuant to Section 21081.6 of the California
Environmental Quality Act the City Counci~ does hereby adopt the
Mitiqation Monitoring Program for the Safety El~ment as set forth
2
~
~n Exhibit A attached to this Resolution.
SECTION 2. The City Clerk shal~ certify ta the adoption of
tha.s Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be
in full force and effect.
APPROVEb AS T~ FORM:
J ~-e~ ~~-[~
MARSHA JOJIiES MOUTRIE
Ca.ty Attorney
3
~
EXHIBIT A
MITZGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE
SAFETY ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN
Seetion 21081.6 of the Public Resources Cade requires adoption af
a reporting or manitoring program far projects which result in
significant environmental effects. The tnonitoring is required to
ensure implementation of the measures included in the pro~ect whzch
mitigate ar avoid those significant effects.
As indica~.ed in the EIR, long-term implementation of the goals and
policies contained in the Safety Element will avoid sxgnificant
zmpacts on the environment and, in fact, will produce beneficial
effec~s. Thus, all 5afety Element goals and pa~icies serve as
mitlgation measures.
As required by Section 65400(b) of the Government Code, City staff
will provid~ an annual report to the City CQUncil outlining the
progress toward General Plan implementatian, incl.uding the Safety
Element. This existing r~porting procedure will serve as
mitigation monitoring far the Safety Element pursuant to CEQA.
In addition ta the Safety Element goals and policies, the EIR lists
16 ather anitigation measures requared to avoid significant impac~.s
on the environment. These measuzes are l~.sted in the fo].lawing
table. The table also id~ntifies the Ci~y agency and/or mechani~m
whicY~ will actually a.mplement each measure.
MITiGAT14N MONITOR[NG PROGRAM
SANTA MONICA SAFETY ELEMENT EIR
MdNITORING Ef~FORC~MEII~T
MITtGA71~N MEASURES AGENCY AGENCYI STA~l1S
MECHANISM
Additional Measure 5 1-1 The City w~li assure that construction act~wSios an and Buildinp and Safety Poliao popariment,
around unstable sndlor steep hillsidas will bo constructed m a s~fe manner, Division, Tra(fic Division
according to applacable City end other re4ulations Tamporery and permanont C~vd Enginoenng
access to areas with sleep slopes will be controlled as needod to protect public b~vision
safety Dunng construction in the Pahsades aroa, traffic shoulc! be protecled frorn
falling debns Accoss along the top of the Palisades shou~d ba constructed to
min~mize safety hazards
Additional Meaeure 5 2-1 Tsunnmr Data In addiUon to ~IlO6O AC~IDfIS proposed Pohcy end Plannmg Plannmg And
~n the Safety Element, iho Gty w~ll conir~ct nnd onrpur~4~e the appropna~e Analysis Divis~on Zonin~ Division
soismoloqical a~ona~~ .,r institut~ons to conduct "run up" studios for undarepH
earthquake activit,,,,, ,,.ithin tho Santa Monica Bay to ~dequately quantity tho
potenlial impacts from this phenomenon Fio.,,....,, ovan without this additional
measure, tsunami effects should be less than signrf~cant tor Santa Monica dua to
tlte se+tbar,k ar widtli of the local beaches and distanca to potentially threatonod
homc~s or 6usinosscss
Additional Measure 5 2-2 Shorelrne Erosron In eddition to thos.. ~,,,,,,,,a Civ~l EnQineenng Environmental
proposad in tfie~ Safr~ty Elemenl, the City wil! work to alleviate any ident~fied Div~sion Proerems and
problotns wtth unusual ur extens~vg erocion of s~nd from tha Iocal bpaches, Public Works
~ncludmg consultiryg ,~nd coordinating with the appropriato stato aponcios N{.7nadement
Additional Measure 5 4-1 The City wd) str+ve to minimixe both tomporary end Planning and .~„~~~~I reporis to
perm~nent ~mpects to existinfl land uses durin~ ~~~~ylernontation of 5afaty Elen~ent Zoninp D~vision C~ty Council from
propr~rr7s ZFus dqes not apply to luture u~o~ (a q pro~er,ts ih~! enter tha roviQw Policy snd Planning
pror.oss after adontion of She u~cEated Satety Element~ Analys~s Drvision
~ach year city staff will prepare a report for the City Councd indicating tha
amount and type ot land uses at risk from Safety ~lement pro~rams, and efforts
made to date or plannad to preserve them, or ef(orls needed to provida
replacement buildmgs, land, etc for its ownars and/or occupants Each year the
C~ty Council wilE set aside a contin~ency amount 6ased on staff recommandations
for replar.ament proprams related to Safety Ele~~~o~~~ Nroqrarns
SanEa Mo~~ca S~fety F'lemeiit EIR - Mitigation Mcfn~tc7ring Program D-2
SANTA MONICA SAFETY ELEMEN`C EIR
MITIGATIQN MONITORING PROGRAM
(CONT~NUEDJ
MONITORIN(3 ENFORCEMENT
MITIGATIOF! MEASL3FiE5 AGENCY AGENCY! Sl'ATUS
MECHANISM
Addit~onal Measure 5,5-1~ 1'he Gty will o~~~~o ~o proservp exist~np housing unus Palicy ~~nd Planning Planning and
1o ihe groatest deflree ~ractical dunng implamentauon of Sa(ety Element Anaiysis Oroisron C~~w••~~'•;
proyrams, emphasizin~ conservation of nan-cantrailed un~ts 7h~s act~on only bevo9o~~ment
applies to units ex~sNnq {COnstructodl pnar to the adoption of tha Sofety Elemant
Et does not apply to fuh~re unrts or thosa er~tennp tho City's de~elopment raview
pro~ess
AdditioneE Measure 5 6-7 City staf~ will assist local residents ihat are impacted Redoveloprnoitit Redaveloprriont
by Safety El~ment octions (i e forced to reEocato thev residence or businoss} in A~ency Agency, Mousine
(rndiny suita6ae h,,..~,.,~, or workpla~o, ~~ithin the City, within the limits ot iirne Authority
and rosour___ o! lhe a(fectod Departrnent Housing and wprkplace cssas wdl 6e
add~aS,GU by the Rodavalopment Agency, nr housinq cases inay rslso be reforred
to the Housiny Authority, as apprQpriato Low And moderatfl mcome residonts, or
residents in assisted housing prvgrams, will be givon pnorrty in locating suiiablo
replacement housmg of 1~ke kind or manner, withm the constraints of the affectod
agenciQs
City stAff w~ll make a good faith oftort to contact hoth owners and residents that
mieht be rolocr~t~:d by prn~ects undertakan as part o( thQ S~iaty Element Staff
will rTiako an annual roport to the City Councd documentmg raquests for
assistance and the rasults of ralpcat~on or othor assistance provided The ~pal of
ikus program ts to ,,,~,,,~,,,~a potentti~4 ~mpact~ to ax~atrnB 6usmossos ar~d rositiants
from relocatinn duo to Safoty Element programs
Additional Meesure 5 7-1 Tho City will dovelop a master plan for Envirar~rnentaf In CIPs
remediationlimpravemants to City•owned utility line~ which traversa ~denti(ied Programs and
ftiazard zonas Timing ~f the remediationlimprovements can be spocitied in tha Public Works
City's Capita! Improvement Program Nfanaflefnent
Additiona! Measure 5 7-2• Remediationlimprovorr~ent activ~tias will be scheduled ~.....,,,........;.,I Fnvironmont~l
.~ ~.,~ncide w~th pl~nned street and othoi rielit-nf-way ~mprovemont pra~ects so as Programs and Programs and
to in~,,,,,,,~o consiruction-related impacts on rights-of-way All utility fine Publ~c Works Public Works
unpravements wdl be coordmated to the greatest degree possiblo ManagQment Management
Santa Monica Safety Elernent EIR - M~tigahan Monitoring Program p-3
SANTA MONICA SAFETY ELEMENT ~IR
MITIGATION MDNIT4RING PROGRAM
(CONTINUED}
MONETORIN(i ENF~RCEMENT
MITIGATION MEASl1RES qGENCY AGENCY/ STqTUS
MECHANISM
Addit~ona~ Measure 5 7-3 At locations where additianal nflht-of-way must be Civil £ngineerrng Performed at
acquirad lo eccommodate planned impra~omants, the impacts of acquisition w~H Division profect le~el
ba appropriatsly assessed and mitigated during the dnvala{~ment and/or pro~ect
-eviow stapa
Additiona! Measure 5 1-8 7he City wil[ seek to minimizQ traff~c-reEated impacts Civil Engineenng Parkmg and Traf(ic
from implameniation of Safety Elemant programs Actrvitias that alfect surtace Oivision Dwisian
tra(!ic wili be plannod fo~ o(f-pea~c hours ar weakends It work must be
schQduled dunn4 peak hours, or during tho summar months in the beac~~ ~~~ ,
prudent steps will be taken so as not to pliminate parking or unnecessarily restrict
~,.~oss of vehicles or buses to the boach The Gty Enprneer will inform the City
......,,...I o( ~.., ..,..,vr u~corriin4 construction pro~QCts tFiat could affect local treff~c
each quartar, and }~rinr to tha s_....,.,.r beach season If pro~ecis will Impect local
tra(fic, signs will 6e posted to inform drivers of thQ ruason for dalay end the end
date of the pro~ect Irnpacts to truck routes, hazardous mat~ria! lransport roules,
ar emergency evacuation routes should be rrtrnimized as much es possible
AdditionaE Meesure 5 S-2 AA construction pro~ocis will t~e su6~ect to City Buildin0 and 5afaty Plannm~ and
development review and canstruct~on perrriit procassos Potential construction DiVision Cornmunity
eftects will be address~d on a pro~ect-by-pro~ect basis, ss currently occurs Dovaloprnent
Additional Measure 5 9-1 The City will schedula ma~ar utility relocetion or Civd Engineeruiq Civ~E Enpinaennp
rpconstruction pro~ecis to minrmize disturbanco to loc.+l residents, end to precludo Divis~on Div~sion
the curtailm~nt ^f rnult~ple ma~or servicas at ifio sarne i~mo ~o ~ concurrenlly
relocatin4 ma~or electnc ~and pAS IinQS at the same timpl, unless there are
ovarriding safoty, lo~istic, or economic considaretions
Add~tional MeeeurQ 5 11 Tho City will preparo e iist of Safety Element pro~octs Pls~nn~ng and Polrcy Annupl reporis to
tor reviaw by City Councii dunno each liscal year ondlar 6udpetmg cycla The lisi Analysis Division, City Council
will includa capitsl and ongoing mainlenance pro~pcts This IFSt may be prepared Civif Enginear~ng
in con~unctron with oiher City budpet reporis, but should spocitically icfenti(y pivis~on
Safely Element pro~ects by benef~t as well as by cost As much es possible, tho
Cily will ut~lizs altarnatwe iund~ng if ava~la6le to finance ~lement pro~ects so as to
mmimize impacts on City resources
Santa Monica Safety ~lement EIR - Mitigation Munitor~r~g Program D-4
SANTA MONICA SAFETY EL~MENT E!R
M~TIGATi~N MONITORING PROGRAM
{CONTINUED}
MITIGATION M~ASURES MONITORING
AGENCY ENFOFiCEMENT
AGENCY!
M~CHANISM
STq7U5
Additional Messure 6 13•1 The City will attQmpt ia maintam the ovorell ~isual Plannrng arid Plann~ng and
intagrity and charactonstics af the P~lisades sroa dunng impfementation of Safoty Zaninp D~vision, ZaninA Oroision,
Element ptograms If ma~or cfianges to alitf taoes or prominent visual feetures arQ Civd En~meermg Civi1 Enpineennp
praposad, tha City wiI[ plan and eccomphsh such ahanqes to match existin{~ Division Division
cu~~~~,.~s as much as possible, or ta ~~~o~~~.~,n natural looking suriQCes and
cont..,..s wheraver pos...:.:Q Staff wlll provide elevations ond visual analysos to
City Counc~E and th~ '___' newspapers bafore any ma~or reconstruction pro~ects
on ihe bluffs aro begun so She alAcked off~cials and pubhc will ba awara of
proposod chdnfles pnor to ihe start of work
Aclditianal Measuro 5 13-2 Fnr work wUh~n ettiy dusipr~a+ted scemc corridor, the Plnnriinp and Pr~rformed at
C~ty will corisiclur tempor~iry as well ~s permanant aosthetic chc+nges or impacts 2oninq O~viswn psnSect 4eveE
that would result irom Safoty ~~~~~~o~~t programs Buildina desipn and
archi#ectural styles will bo evalustod dur~ne development rovrew procass.
Santa Monica Safety Element EiR - Miti~ation Monitorin~ Program D-5
~
r~dopted and approved this 21st of Februan~, 1995
~~
Mayor
I hereby certify that the forego~ng Resolution 886~ {CCS) was duly adopted at a
meetin~ of the City~ Council held on the 21st af Febnzary, 1995 b~ the follow~ng vote
Ayes Councilmembers Abdo, 4'Connor, Ebner, Gree~berg, Ho~brook,
Rosenstein, Genser
Voes Counc~tmembers None
Absta~n Cauncilmembers Nane
Absent CounciIinembers None
ATTEST
.(C 1~i~~LC'.~L~~
,_ ~ ~
City Clerk