SR-11-B (23)
1/-rB
MAR 24\937
C/ED:CPD:DKW:klc
COUNCIL MEETING: March 24, 1987
Santa Monlca, Callfornla
TO:
Mayor and Clty Councll
FROM:
Clty Staff
SUBJECT:
Recommendatlon
ReVlew Pollcy
General Plan
to Authorlze Plannlng Commlssion to
4.3.1 of Circulatlon Element of the
INTRODUCTION
This report recommends that the Clty Council authorize the
Plannlng Commlsslon to rev lew POIlCY 4.3.1 of the Clrcu1at 10n
Element of the General Plan.
POllCY 4.3.1 desc r lbes level of
serVlce obJectlves for varlOUS classes of streets 1n the Clty.
BACKGROUND
On March 2, 19B7 the Plann1ng Commlsslon, by a 5 to 0 vote,
passed a motlon to request Clty Council author1zat1on for the
CommlSSlon to review and posslbly revise POIlCY 4.3.1 of the
Clrculatlon Element of the General Plan to address amblgu1t1es 1n
Its language. ThlS POllCY reads as follows:
DSafe or acceptable levels of serVlce on C1ty streets shall
be a crlter~on for evaluatIon of new development proposals.
Level of SerVIce shall be "C" for collector, feeder, and
local streets and "D" for arterlals (see Glossary) or better
where poss~ble.n
I/--B
MAR 2 4 1987
- 1 -
The Land Use and C~rculat~on Elements' Glossary def~nes Level of
Serv~ce (LOS) as ~ndicated below:
"An ~nd~cat~on of a
evaluatlon of driv~ng
ranges as follows:
road's performance based on an
condltlons, w~th SlX performance
A. Free Flow
B. Stable Flow
C. Restrlcted Flow, Tolerable Delays
D. ApproachIng Unstable Flow, SubstantIal Delays
E. Capacity Condlt~ons, Long Delays
F. Forced Flow"
Clearly, POllCY 4.3.1 was developed ~n response to concerns about
traff~c congestlon on the part of the Plannlng Commlsslon and
Clty Councll who approved the Land Use and Clrculatlon Elements.
TheIr goal 1n approv1ng thls pollcy was to establ~sh obJectlve
measures of
traffIC
condltlons
agalnst Whlch
to evaluate
development proJects.
However, the pollcy was not well-worded,
so par-t of its lntent 1S unclear-.
For example, 1t states that
the LOS snaIl be a "crIterlon for evaluatlon" and at the same
tlme states that the LOS "shall" be at cer taIn levels "where
possIble."
Staff has Interpreted POllCY 4.3.1 as establ~sh~ng standards
agalnst WhlCh proposed development projects should be evaluated,
as well as descr1bIng LOS goals WhlCh the Clty should strIve to
meet.
Others have Interpreted the pol~cy as requ~ring a certaIn
LOS for the var10US street categorles and requ~r1ng the automat~c
den~al of pro] ects WhICh e~ ther alone or 1n comb1na tlon W1 th
background trafflc growth, cause the LOS to dec11ne below the
standards of polley 4.3.1, or WhlCh are proposed 1n areas 1n
wh~ch the LOS already 1S below those standards.
Such an lnter-
-.
- 2 -
pretat10n would have a ser10US 1mpact on growth and development
1n Santa Mon1ca, and would neceSS1 tate a re-evaluat10n of the
fundamental goals of the Land Use Element.
The LOS at some IntersectIons 15 already below the goals set by
POlICY 4.3.1 (due to a slgnlflcant extent to growth outslde of
Santa MonIca), and any new development prOJect may reduce the LOS
at those Intersect10ns, especIally when conSIdered In the context
of other proJects 1n the CIty and In Los Angeles. Staff belIeves
that the LOS standards descr 1bed by POlICY 4.3.1 should be a
c r 1 ter 10n for eval uat10n of proposed development proJ ects and
that the POllCY should be modIfIed to reflect thIS clar1f1cat10n.
Further, when the LOS goals may not be achleved or may not
currently eX1st even WIthout the proJect, the Clty should
carefully cons1der thlS InformatIon In actIng on the proJect.
CONCLUSION
Staff agrees WIth the PlannIng Commlsslon that the POllCY 1.5
ambIguous. The POllCY'S ambIgUIty 15 best resolved by reVISIon
of the po11cy to clar1fy that 1ts LOS standards represent goals
agalnst WhICh to carefully evaluate development proJects rather
than absolute standards which dIctate decisions on such proJects.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT
The recommendatIons of thIS report have no budgetary or f1nanclal
Impacts.
- 3 -
, .
RECOMMENDATION
It ~s respectfully recommended that the C~ty CounCIl:
1. DIrect staff to prepare amendments to POlICY 4.3.1 of the
Clrculatlon Element of the General plan WhICh clarIfy that
the lntent of the POlICY 1S to descr1be Level of SerVlce
goals WhlCh are to be cons1dered in reVlew of development
proJects; and
2. Authorlze the PlannIng Comrn~SSIon to reVlew and make recom-
mendatIons on such amendments to the CounCIl followlng the
requlred publlC hearIng process.
Prepared by: D. Kenyon Webster, Senlor Planner
Plannlng D1V~Slon
CommunIty and EconomIC Development Department
Clrca
03/18/87
- 4 -
PPD :JT CSP..lv
.counell ~ieet lng. 10/26/82
San"ta ~lonlca, Callfornla J l-l3
.
OCT 2 0 :sa2
TO.
The ~ayor and C1t3 Councll
FROM: Clty Staff
SUBJECT. Land Use and Circulatlon Elements to the Clty'S
General Plan
Introduction
ThlS report updates the Clty Councll on "the status of ~he reV1Slon
tc the Lard Use and Circulatlon Elements of the Clty'S General
Plan.
ThlS report also recommends teat addltlonal funding be allocated
for th1S proJect due to a signiflcant expans10n of -ehe proJect's
scope. The origlnal bUdget approved by the Clty Councll was based
on very prellIDlnary estlmates by staff for only a tYPlcal land use
~ eleme~L. Slilee ~hat tlme, It has oecame eVldent L~at a re\lSJOn
to the Clty'S Clrculat10n Element and an effort to make all nlne
Elements -co the General Plan cons1stent are III order. ~.lore
lmportantly, the analys1s of the relatJonsh1p between econom1c/
fiscal effects and land use has become a pr1nc1pal focus of the
prOJect.
In a ~ypical land use element, econOffilC consJderat1ons
are cons1dered ln the context of land use parameters and eCOrOQ1C
alternatlves flow from physical land use. Glven both the City's
and prlvate sectors' concerns over the economlc/flscal health of
tte City, the staff lS proposlng that econoffi1c/f1scal analY81s
form the maJor component of the Clty'S revlsed Land Use Element.
~.:OYS lmportantlsr, 1;; 18 recormr.=Lded that the cno1ce of econom1C
.
and I1scal alternatives occur pr10r to maklng physlcal land use
deC1sions. ThlS ensures that the City w1ll receive the most
comprehensive, nEed sens1t1ve Land Use Element posslble.
II-B
OCT 2 6 1982
.
.
.
~ayor and CIty Councll
OC1:ober 26, 1982
-2-
Finally, thls report recomIT.ends that the elty Manager oe
authorlzed to enter lnto a contract wlth the consultants
selected by staff to reVlse the two Elements.
Background
The Land Use Element, one of nlne elements, lS a maJor component
of the City's General Plan. The Element forms the basls from
Wh1Ch the C1-ry wlll proceed to make future decls:.ons on zon1ng
and dev~lopment standards.
The Cal1fornla Offlce of Planning and Research In 1t8 General
Plan GUldel1nes states trat a C1ty's general plan should be
revlewed at least every flve years and should be revlsed as
necessary to reflect new communlty condltIons, needs. and local
attltudes, Santa Monica's Land Vse Element was adopted ln 1958
and has not been updated or revlsed 52nCB tnat t~me.
In adoptlng Ordlnance 1251 (CCS) on June 1, 1982, the C1ty
Councl1 authorized the Plann1ng CommlS810n to begln the process
of updat1ng and rev1s1ng the Land Use Element of the Clty'S
General Plan. Based on very pre11IDlnary est~mates by s~aff for
a standard land use element, the Council allocated ~lOO,OOO ln
the City's 1982-83 budget to complete tbe proJect.
Request for ProposaJ
Clty staff requested flve maJor plannlng firms 1n the Los
Angeles and San Francisco areas tc submlt proposals for
reV1s1ug the Land Use Element. The proposals were rece1ved
on July 19, 1982, and reviewed by Clty staff in cons~ltatlon
w:th members of the Plannlng Commlsslon who chose to partlcipate
1n the reVlew.
.
.
.
~ayor ana Clty Councl1
October 26 J 1982
-3-
Consultant Resp~nses
~nile all proposals had mer1t, two proposals contained un1que
features that address~d some of the major plannlng concerns of
the City. The Hall, Goodhue, Haisley and Barker (HGHB)
proposal contalned an emphasis on urban des1gn and the Haml1ton,
Rabinovitz, and Szanton, Inc. (HRS) proposal included exterslve
economic and fiscal analysis of the various land use policy
options available to the City. (HRS is co-owned and operated
by a woman, Francine Rabinovitz, who will be the project
director for HRS's component:)
Both fir~s' references proved excellent. HGHB has had ample
experience in prepar2ng general and specific plans for cities
throughout Callfornia. The firm has prepared general plans
for twelve communitles in the State and has prepared downtown
and urban renewal plans for eleven cltles~ An illustrative
listing of former and current cllents ~nclude: the c2tles of
Monterey. Napa, Carmel, Mart1.nez: 1'fonterey County; orgml1za1: ions
such as CalTrans, the California State Un1versity system, the
California Coastal Commission, the Irvlne Company Mult1.ple
Agency Program; and otberso Some of HGHB~plans have recelved
awards for urban design. HGHB was one of the flrst firms to
develop the concept of Development Rlghts Transfer where growth
is shifted trom sensitive areas to other areas that can better
accommodate that growth. In addition, th1S firm was one of the
few proposers that had read and was farn21iar with the recommend-
ations of the Citizens Task Forces and eXlsting Land Use Element.
HRS has extenslve exper~ence in economlC and flscal analysls and
1S very famll1.ar wlth Santa Monlca and lts econOffilC and 11scal
Mayor and Clty COUDCll
-4-
October 26, 1982
~ condit~on. HRS is a natlonally known flrm whose clients lnclude:
Governor Brown, the Unlted States Air Force, the Ford Foundat~on,
the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the Urban Instl~utej the Callforn~a
Superior Court, the Agency for Internat10nal Development, and the
World Bank, among otherso
Expal!_sion of the ~cope of ----.!!1e _Proj,ect
'lfuile reviewing the var>ou~ prcposals, lt became eV1dent tc.
City staff thf"t a simultaneous revision tc the Cj. ty! s
Circulation Element was in order. The City's C1rculatlon
Element was adopted 10 1958 alon~ with the Land Use Element
and has also not been updated and revised. Circalat10n related
~ issues such as parklng and traffic intrusions into res1dential
neighborhoods will bE' addressed 1n this Element.
It also became evident that the remainlng seven Elements of
the General Plan (Housingj Conservation, Open Space, Seismlc
Safet), N01se~ Scen1c Highways, and Safety) need to be examined
for 1nternal consistenc~ with the ent1re General Plan, includ1ng
the new Land Use and Circulat10n Elements.
In addlt1on, given both the City's and private sector's concerns
over the economic/flscal health of the City, the staff is
pre posing that economic/flscal analysis for~ the major
component of the C1ty'S revlsed Land Use Element. This ensures
that the City will reC€lVe the most comprehensive, need
~ sensltive Land Use Element possLble.
Ther€fore, the City staff requested HGHB and HRS to combine
the1r lndlvldual proposals retalnlng bo~h the urban deslgn
~!;iyor and Cl. ty Council
-v-
October 26, 1982
4It emphas~s (TIGHE) and economlc/fiscal analysls cD~ponents (HRS),
to incorporate the revlsIon to the Clty1S Circulatlon Element,
and to make the General Plan lnternallv conslstent.
"
Consultant Team
The consultant team that was selected will be led by a steerlD(
commlttee of principals of HGHB and HRS. For HGHB, WhlCh is
serving as the prime contractor~ Bryan Grunwald. PrincJpal in
Charge, will be. responslble for all HGHB 'CVork wl:icb wlll J.llclude
the land plannlng; urban des1gn analysis. and environmental
impact reporting. For HRS, Dr. Franc1ne F. Rabinovitz,
Corporatl.on Vice-Presldent, will be proJect manager and wlll
be responsible for all of the economic, fiscal, and lssues
~ analysis work. Dick Kaku and Michael Meyers of PRC-VoorhEes,
whl.ch wlll be working under HGHB supervision, will provlde the
~ectnical analysis needed for the Circulation Element component
0: thf> proj ect .
Work Program and Schedule
- . - -
With the expanded scope of the project in m~nd. HGHB and HRS
submitted a prellminary scope of services to thf: Plannlng
Commission .for 1 ts and the publlc' S cemmen ts on Augu~.t 16, 1982.
To refine this preliminary scope of serVlces and to develop a
work program and schedule, the Planning Commisslon, consultant
team, and City staff developed a list of key land use and
~ circulation lssues that should be addressed 1n the Land Use ard
Circulation Elements. Many of the issues related to spec~fic
geographic areas such as the neighborhood corrlJnercia] zones and
.
.
.
~ayor and Clty Councll
-6-
October 26, 1982
the industrlal corridor. More general issues related to ffilxed
use development, open space, publlC lands, and vacated school
sites to list a few. MaJor assumptions were alsG propozed where
it was anticipated that an issue and/or geographlc area would
be excluded frem the prlmary attention in the scope of services
(such as the airport and pier). These key issues and assumptions
were ldentified from past City planning efforts, Clty staff
\ .
experience> and respons?s to a questlonnalre sent to 5] grGups
and individuals requesting tbelr ideas. A public hearing on
the issues and assumptions was held before the Planning Commission
on September 20, 1982.
On September 20, the Planning Commission conceptually agreed
on the key lssues and assumptlons. The COrnilllSSl0n also approved
a framework for the consultants to use in developing their work
program. The framework cons~sted of an overall City objective,
six major City goals~ six areas of the City for spec1al study,
three scenarios to study for each area, and flve factors that
can be effected in each scenario. With this framework, the
consultant team developed a work program and schedule which was
presented to the Plannlng Comm1ssion at a publlC hearing on
October 4, 1982. (See Attachment 1 -- Work Program and Schedule
for the Land Use and Circulation Elements. Task 4 incorporates
the CommiSSlon's framework.)
At its October 4th meeting, the ~lanning CO~~isslon reco~~ended
some modiflcatlons to the work program. These changes were
lntended to help clarify some of the features of the work program
.
.
.
~ayor and City Counc~l
-7-
October 26, 1982
and to respond to some of the co~~ents made by members of the
pub11C. (See Addendum 1 to Attacl~~ent 1).
Some of the changes w~ll have no effect on the cost of the
proJect as budgeted by the consultants. However, adding a s~xth
separaTe POllCY working paper in Task 4 on the Plea nelghborhood
could add an addltional $27,000 to the cost of the proJect because
of the added research an~ plann~ng efforts anticlpated by the
consultants.
At this time, staff recommends that the issues to be addressed
for the Pico neighborhood not be addressed ~n a separate working
paper. The issues for the neighborhood can be adequately addressed
in other worklng papers such as the Industrlal Corrldor paper
which could focus spec~al attent10n to the need for Jobs for Plca
nelghborhood res1dents and the ~elghborhood Co~~erclal paper
Wh1Ch could address the lssue of possible commercial dislnvestment
along Pice Boulevard. In addition, the P1CO Neighborhood
Association is in the process of selecting i consultant to aid
the area's residents in developing a neighborhood plan. Appropriate
parts of this plan could be incorporated into the City's revlsed
Land Use and Circulat10n Elements.
If at a later time it becomes evident that a special study of the
Pico neighborhood 15 needed, the scope of the Elements could be
expanded to include a separate study and the projectfs contingency
fund can be used.
liayor and City Council
-8-
October 26, 1982
.
Proposed Budget of ProJect and Contract
As the proposed work program ind1cates, the or1g1nal scope of
merely revislng the City's Land Use Element has been slgnificantly
expanded to lnclude more extensive economlC and fiscal analysis
of varlOUS land use policy options, a more thorough review of
consistency among the nine elements of the C1ty'S General Plan,
and a revision to the City's outdated Circulatlon Element. To
accomplish this expanded project(wlthout a sl~th lssue paper),
an additional $105,000 is needed beyond the $100,000 cur~~ntly
budgeted for the project. The table below shows the approximate
costs of each component of the proJect:
.
Land Use Element and Draft EIR
Clrculation Element and Draft EIR
Consistency Statement
$130,000
$ 20,000
$ 5,000
$205,000
TOTAL PROJECT COST
It 18 recommended that the $105,000 needed for th~s proJec~ come
from unapproprlated General Fund Reserves. An add1t1onal $15,000
should be allocated for cont~ngency purposes.
A contract for consultant services has been included for your
review (See Attachment 2 -- Contract).
.
Recommendation
Both the Land Use and Circulation Elements to the City's General
Plan will affect the future of Santa Mon~ca for many years to
come. After revl€wing all proposals and carefully scrutlnlz~ng
.
.
.
Mayor and Clty Councll
-9-
Oc~ober 26, 1982
the proposed scope of serVlces and the work program, staff has
not been able to ldentify tasks of the proposed proJect that
could be cut or reduced in scope WhlCh would in turn reduce the
proJect cost wlthout reducing the quallty of the Elements.
Therefore, staff respectfully requests that the Clty Councll
1) approve the work program and schedule as proposed by the
consultant team, 2) apprpve the modifications recommended by
the Planning CommieSl0n except Ior the sixth worklng paper on
the P1CO neighborhood whose issues can be speclfically addressed
elsewhere in the Elements, 3) allocate an addltional $105,000
for the project from unapproprlated General Fund ~eserves>
4) allocate $15,000 for contlngencies, and 5) authorlze the Clty
Hanager to enter into a contract with the selected consultants
for their services 1n a comprehensive reVlew and revis~cn of the
Land Use and Circulation Elements to Santa Mon~ca's General Plan.
Prepared by;
Mark Tlgan
Chr~stopher Rudd
Work Program and Schedule
P1annlng Commlssion reco~~ended changes to Work Program
Contract
Attachment 1:
Addendum 1
Attachment 2.
ATTACfu"1ENT 1
9/30/82
SA.JI1I'A MONICA LAND OSE AND C1RCULATION B1:.~"'TS
AND DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTS
.
SCOPE OF t...'OR..r{
The Consultants shall, with the assistance of city staff (see p.6),
perform and carry out in a good and professional manner the
preparation of a reyised Land Use and Circulation Elementsof
the General Plan, as well as a Draft Environmental Impact
Repor~ The Elements shall meet the requirements of
Government Code Section 65302 and w111 ~nclude at least
the following:
10 Identification of principal land use and ci~culation is-
sues.
2.. A S ta tement of basic: municipal land use and circula tion
policies.
3~ A description of per.mitted land use location~ densitiesr
and 1ntensit~es and attendant circulation facilitiesr
includ~ng the relation of land use and c1rculation to
social, environmental, and economic goals.
.
4. Standards and criteria for physical development including
circulation facilities within the area that are consistent
with land'capacity.
s. A description of the resulting overall land use and circu-
lation plan including textual and graphic representations.
Consistent with their charge from the city, the consulting
team wil~ also prepare policy analyses which the city deems
necessary in order to make the basic policy decisions that are
then to be incorporated into the revised Land Use and Circula-
tion Elements.
All work will be prepared in accordance with goals and guide-
lines adopted by the Planning Commission on September 20,
1982. Planned residential land us~s will be consistent
with the Housing Element.
The respons1bilities as detailed below in each work task
shall not relieve HGHB from prime contractor responsibi11ties
for quality control and timing nor shall it be intended
to llmit the review and COIDIDent obligations by HRS on all work.
.
This Scope of Work, described below and in the attached work
flow chart, will require the consultants to complete the
following activities:
1
.
9/30/82
WORK TASKS
.
Task 1
Review ?xistins Data
Task 2 Inventory Key Land Use Issues and Participate in City
Selection of Issues for Intensive Analysis
Responsibilities:
HGHB/PRC 0 Interview city officials and elicit their views
on issues..
HR5 c Inventory issues from documents.
Joint
o Participate in discussions with the Planning Com-
mssion, the public and City Council on which is-
sues should be selected for intensi~e analysis~
The Planning Commission has resolved that the Scope should be
prepared with the understanding that the primary sub-areas for
policy review should be:
e-
1. The downtown area including Santa Monica 11all.
2. The ocean front.
3. Major commercial corr idors, particulfirly Wilshirer Lin-
coln, and Santa Monlca Boulevards.
4. The industrial corridor.
S. Nelghborhood commercial areas (such as Ocean Park
Boulevard), in particular pica Boulevard.
Task 3 - Develop Baseline Plan
-
This task involves producing a projection of what the ci ty
will be like in-the year 200Q-if its established land use
policies are continued without change. Included as current
local policy for this scenario (Scenario 1) are the existing
airport use; the Main Street Zoning Code; the Ocean Park
Redevelopment area plan and offsite improvements as amended:
the Local Coastal Plan: and the existing zoning and develop-
ment standards as amended through 1979 in the commercial and
industrial zones.
Responsibilities:
.
H~ 0 .Describe the existing land use patterns and project
the outcome of continuation of the current pattern
in the long term to the year 2000.
o Describe the capacity of public infrastructure and
project future demand on these facilities and their
2
9/30/82
.
adequacy to meet projected needs in the
long term b~sed on existing data.
o Produce a map and appended documentation based on ex-
isting data showing the basic physical configuration
of the City in the long term
assuming that no policy changes occur.
fiRS 0 Project c1ty population at 5-year intervals through
the year 2000.
o Analysis of residential land use with HGHB.
o Describe the current projected gross and average per-
sonal income of city residents.
o Describe the current and projected volume, revenuef
and type of. business activity (commercial, retail,
industr ial, and hotel) .
o Describe and project the labor force size and compo-
si tion (by type of emploYment and by residential
"
locat~on of employees)..
o Project city government gross revenue and expendi-
tures.
o Prepare Baseline Plan Memorandum..
PRe 0 Describe existing circulation patterns and project
the outcome of continuation of current policies in
the short. middle, and long term to the year 2000 on
majo~ arterials in the city including any signif~cant
impact on collector and local streets.
Task 4 - Analysis of Selected ~ssues ar.d Gen2r~1 Issues
.
This task involves p~oducin9 five Working Papers on policy
issues in the five sub-areas selected by the city. The areas
are listed in Task 2 aboveQ
Each working paper will examine the probable development of
each geographic area through the year 2000 in terms of three
scenarios:
1. Baseline land use policies.
2. A scenario based on th~ provisions of City Resolut~on 6385.
to the year 2000. (The Commerc1.al Task Force' s March 1982
recommendations should be used for the downtown area.)
3. The area as it would look under an alternative array of
land use policies which are designed to achieve balanced
growth.
.
The primary goals which animate these policies
shall be (a) to insure adequate general fund revenue to
support basic municipal services, (b) to provide employ-
ment opportunities for Santa Monica residents, (c) to
support existing Santa Monica businesses, particularly
small businesses and neighborhood commercial activities
and those that residents wish to start, (d) to maintain
3
9/30/8;;
.
and increase the growth of the ci tyJs housing stock, (e)
to preserve and improve Santa Monica's unique and attrac-
tive natural and developed environment, with particular
attention to traffic~ parking, and utilities, and (f) to
combat problems of unemployment and underemployment.
Each working paper will examine the impact of these three
scenarios in these five geographic areas in terms of their
effect on the natural and manmade environment, jobs, business
development, and city revenue and expenditure patterns. Work-
ing Papers will include sketches of the urban design implica-
tions of each sub-area for the three scenarios, but they will
not produce specific and/or detailed sub-area plans.
In addition, the more general issues such as those rel~ting
to mixed use development, ope~ space, vacated school 5~tesretc
w~ll be addr~ssed but outside of the working paper format.
Responsibilities:
.
BC..;HB. 0 Map of assumed boundaries in each sub-area.
o Planned Land Use by sub-area for each scenario.
o Sketch of the prototypical urban design impljcations
for each sub-area.
HRS 0 Presentation of Scenarios 1 and 2~
o Economic and Fiscal Analys15 for sub-areas and final
assembly of five papers.
PRe 0 Circulation and parking impact of scenarios in sub-
areas and the surrounding residential areas.
Task 5 - PreEaration of Two Alternative Land U~e and Circula-
tion Plans
The consultants will prepare, pursuant to city instructions,
two citywide alternative land use plans discussed in Task 4
(unless experience proves that consensus on one policy package
analyzed in Task 4 is sufficient to make preparation of an
alternative approach superfluous). Each alternative will
include amended projections forecasting the effects of each on
the baseline economic, physical, and demographic character of
the ci ty though the end of the century.
Responsibilities:
.
HGHB 0 Prepare of conceptual alternative land use and
circulation plans and evaluation of environmental and
public facility impacts.
HRS 0 ~ Estimate of fiscal and economic impacts of proposed
alternative.
PRe 0 Prepare circulation inp~ to land use and circula~ion
alternatives and impacts of proposed alterna tive.
4
9/30/82
.
Task 6 - Preparation of Draft Land Use and Circulation Elements
' - ..
Following subsequent city guidance, this task involves trans-
lating one or the other of the above alternatives, suitably
amended, if necessary, into ~ Draft and Final Land Use and
Circulation Elements of the Santa Monica General Plan. This
will be accompan~ed by recornmendatlons to achieve cons~stency
~n the other seven Elements cf the General Plan. The
implementation program w~ll propose general policy dlrectlon
and will detal1 implementation techniques. The- program will
not provide fully developed ordinances, statutes, or programs.
The implementation program will include discussion of the
comparable implementation technlquesused by other jurisdictions
and their results.
Responsibilities:
Bl~HK
.
o Prepare Draft Land Use and Circulation Elements.
o Prepare input to Circulation portion of Element.
o Prepare Implementation Program, with HGHB..
PRC
HRS
.
Task 7 - preparatioq of Draft ErR
T"ne task involves preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact
Report on the. revised Circulation and Land Use Elementsand
participation in public hearings on the Draft.
Responsibilities:
B~ 0 Prepare environmental analysis based on existing
data, assembly of Draft ErR, and hearing attendance.
HRS 0 Economic and fiscal input and participation in hear-
ings.
PRe 0 Circulation and parking input and participation in
hearings.
Task 8 - Preparation of Final. Land Use and Circulation Elements
Task involves final preparation of General Plan Elements and
attendance at hearings by the Planning Commission and Ci ty
Council.
Responsibilities:
.
H(;"clB
PRe and HRS
o Prepare final General Plan Elements.
o Provide input as necessary and participate in
hearings.
5
.
.
-
.
9/30/82
WORK PRODUCTS
All work products will he in the form of black and white maps,
diagrams, and text, which will be an 8-1/2 x II-inch format,
except maps, which may be folded into the aforementioned
format. All work products will be delivered to the city as
camera-ready copy, except for the Final Land Use and Circula-
tion Elemen't5, where fifty (50) copies will be delivered with a
camera-ready copy. Listed below are the following deliverable
pr~ucts:
1.
2..
3..
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9..
Draft Issues Memorandum.
Work Program.
Summary of Planning Analysi~ and Technical Working Reports
Description of Baseline Land Use and Circulation scenario
Policy Papers (5).
\
Description of Land Use and Circulation Scenarios 2 and 3.
Draft Land Use and Circulation Elements.
Dr aft Environmental Impact Report.
Final Land Use and Circulation Elements.
MEETINGS
The consultant team will attend up to fourteen (14) public
meetingsjhearings as directed by city staff. These meetings
are preliminarily identified on the attached work flow char~
It is intended that there will be staff meetings immediately
prior to and on t.lte same day as public meetings..
crTY STAFF
The City staff's responsibilities will be to:
a) ass~st in collecting existing data,
b) assist in reproduc~ng and distributing work
products (50 copies of the final Land Use and
Circulation Elements will be delivered by HGHB},and
c) provide direction to consultants.
6
,\
"
.!.1I
:i
)~
'01
r
ij
n .
-}
}
)
-~
~
I
J
I
I
)
J
]I
"
-
-
'lI
I
...
:1
ry
]I
~
~
1
~ .
I
L
J
~
.
'-
u
-=
II
OJ
~
)
.-
J
-
~
<';
:::
iiI
~
1
C/)
:>-00
rc 0>-
~ ::> .-J
'- r-~
". en z
- 00: <(
:; 20 C)
) c(u.. Z
J C/) (J) -
L ~w Z
<(::> Z
o (J) :5
c:J U) (L
rt!.
:c
:>
::
2:
o
t=
a...
o
o
<(
(j)
en
w
o
o
a:
0-
cr:
LU
o
Z
<(
r-
z
w
~
w
z
U-
w
a:
z
<(
..J
c..
(j)
W
>
l-
<(
Z
a:
LU
to-
-1
<(
LL
o
Z
o
r-
<(
::>
-l
<(
>
W
-
en
U)
>-
-l
<(
Z
<(
'" ..!J
Q!:t
It"':!
.... c <)
~ ;.t
(J<
..,
ci ,. n
Q ~..
a:...~
~.>I~
w: · ..
g~lI.
;.: .;
o~~
a:,:!'"
.0( Cl ..
ffi :: ~
uS.ii
<I) Iii
~
o
z ~
o ~
i= 0
0. (J
o >-
Q>C
<coo
-r
..J Z
<( 0
;;:'Uli:...
u.UJ<Cz
t-:J-Jw
u.o::::J:e
cCZOllJ
a:o:eS..J
c..J(.)w
T
a:
W
..J
0;(
Z
u:
10- : >>o-
LIo. '0..
- :''0.
.... a: - 1-
a: UiO '"
QUid"':
... 0 :!
Zz > 10::(
<2 Ot- CCo:
Zz !;eo
Wt- UlW
(/h( ~ m:E LLlO
;:),.J% :itC
l- ::>>fU -Ill wOo
UoC ::iii en....
cCzoUJ Z<c ..JZ
g:0::($..,J 01- 11.0
Q..J(JUl oct) :!:-
-1-
9/30/82
Q81d IQ uondOP~
HI3 leut=: IQ UOfI8::1UIur,) 0 IH !l'lV
l:IIi II'I'.IQ - ~..ti I ~ ,(j1Jl"
-ItlA.W 0lKI'tl JQ5< liI~ uon."'~
~13 ~ 1fIMtI1IS' INI- Ul!W u-ua gl: Jcl'l'
""I'.
---..------.....-
z C>
c 7ii ! s;; -
0 ., c: ~ Ci?;-
j:: ;n '" :] :a
<l;I cD <II (; <} E;
4'( E il. E
0 Ll 2 ...
;:) e ~ 0 ,..-
.:: ;;; .H 0; 0-
..J 0 C _0
< III '" ~ ~ (,) 0 do.
.a ~ !!l eo.
> :; <:I ]; 0
w UJ a: I- ~ W wO
UOr:l-oaIFP
uo~ss-rl11ro bt.rp..IUE'T d
~.lIOM A~Y llll-"
~... DVlllJOM {Iawr
"J
:$ en
0 <
c:: OuJ
z , I- ~, WVJ , 00::
~ Z I ::E a: 0<
O' 20 J:"J
0 a: a:<
l- Ll. 00 ~ 0-
z :z (,)~ ~(,)
3 c( >-a: :t:a:
0 w "<0' w
(,) --2~
0 0 ,. :::0 11.U:i: III & ~.~a II ~o
:t: 2:0
0 0
:.
",.iteuylSlIIWvr4 .A6N
'0 Aa~
z
o
;=
~~
""0
a:CJ
Qu..
LLO
z
Q
I-CIJ
<w
~;:)
-(I)
,- (I)
z-
Wu.
Qo
ti>
(j)
>-
..I
-<
Z
<:
l~
~
<D
:: >-
<0 '"
Co ~~
"E CoD
Q) ~o
K u5
o .2:0
~ ~~
<l) ~ <I)
o '15<1)
01 a. ::>
~ 8'0
in ~..J C
;( ~~
uJ tn..l
ii
8-
cQ
o
III
~
g
Vl
~
:s
...
g
u
<g
.....
'U
C
<II
III
III
o
~
UJ
(,')
o
~
8'
~
'0
C
III
2
;:
ca
~
on
c
g
u
o
o
~
C
9
;;
'5
a.
o
a..
...
\l)
.;z
~
;;..
;;
~-E
~~
>"0
C c:::
Ul<o
~
o
5il.
o
Q:
II)
c:
2
g S
(; I
ir.
'0
C
'" >-
E Cl E
& 2 g
<:II <II g
., > W
;:) :
~ ~ ~
.5 0 .3
""UulIt
>>Oll~}J
w.JlIo.td It'OM. li-t' l:!
81"0 pu.
..n.., UalQ. 01: .-::~
&
'" _ t
(a.5d:~
~i.:;u
e E ~ -:~
~'iit:ct:
. = ~;~
<.! ~ lit '" ~
A.U!r::t1O
o....~
z:
c:
cD
E
>-
.Q
a.
E
uJ
-IMI1W 8180
ADDE~DUM TO ATTriCE~ENT 1
.
~fter ltS October 4, 1982, publlC hearlng on tne consultants' worx
program, ~he Plannlng CO~~lSSlon approved ~he work pros~am wl~h the
followlng ffilnor amen~~ents and cow~en~s:
1) p.l,~3. ,I lncludlng the relatlon of land use and clrculatlon
to social, envlrolli~ental, a~!~u~2:~ a~d economlC goals."
2) p.2,Task 2. The Plca p-elghborhood shoulc be a slxth sub-area
for polley reVlew In a separate wor~lng paper (Task 4). The PlCO
nelghborhood plan, WhlCh lS to be completed by PNA consultants
1n January 1983, should be consldered by the Land Use Element
consultants and lncorporated lnto the Elements where approprlate.
The consultants should work closely wlth the P1CO nelghborhood
plannlng consultants over the course of the reV1Slon process.
The relatlonshlp between the Pleo nelghborhood and the lndustr1al
corrldor and the commerclal area along a portlon of Santa ~on1ca
4It Boulevard should be conSldered in the worklng paper produced on
the P1CO neighborhood.
3) p.2, Task 3. The year 2000 sr.ou1d be used as one checkpolnt
throughout the revision process but a longer tlme frame should be
used when 1t lS approprlate (such as for sewer llnes which have an
opera~lonal life span that could be 30 to 40 years).
4) p.2, Task 3. The basellne proJectlon (scenario I) should De based
on the eXlst~ng zon~ng pr~or to the adoptlon of the Clty'S 1nter1m
development guidellnes in Resolution 6385.
.
5j p.3, Task 4. The last paragraph should read as follows: liThe overall
objectlve of the Clty 15 for balanced growth as opposed to no growth
or uncontrolled growth. In order to reach this obJectlve, the six
maJor goals of the City shall include a)adequate general revenue to
the City, 2) employment opportunities lncludlng especlally
opportunitles for all residents, 3} support for a broad and balanced
range of bUSlnesses and for all eXlstlng businesses particularly
for small businesses , for nelghborhood servlng busi~esses, and for
Santa Monica residents who want to start bUSlnesses in the City.
.
.
.
4) protect, maintaln, and expand ~he Clty'S supply of hOUS1~g =or
both tenants and homeowners that 15 af=ordable to all lDcome g~oups,
5) preserve andlmprove Santa ~onlca's phys1cal (~at~ral) and bUllt
enV1ronment wlth speclal attentlon to trafflc aLG utill~Y syste~s, ane
6} conslder the problems of unemployed and underemployed resldents."
The Planning Cornmlssion noted that the goals are not llsted In
an hlerarchlcal order but are ~eant to be lnteractlve. Also,
the goals and assumptlons included In the work program are for
prellmlnary dlrectlon for the consultants and should not prohlDlt
the consultants from uS1ng their professlonal judgement In looklng
at other goals and assumptlon that they deem necessary over the
course of the reV1Slon process.
.
.
.
TO:
FROM;
SUBJECT:
Santa Monlca, Call=or~la, October 22, 1932
~ayor and Clty Councll
Clty Manager
Contract for Consultl~g Servlces
Attachment 2, the Contract for Consultlng Servlces,
wl11 be forwarded to CaunCll upon flnal rev~ew and
approval by the Clty Attorney.