SR-400-001 (7)PCD:AA:AS:JL:F:\CityPlanning\Share\COUNCIL\STRPT~2006\LUCE Alternatives Discussion Supplemental.doc
Council Mtg: January 24, 2006 Santa Monica, California
TO: Mayor and Council members
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Supplemental Report to the Land Use and Circulation Elements Draft
Alternatives, Common Elements, Performance Indicators and Measures,
and Proposed Public Outreach Program
INTRODUCTION
This report transmits the Planning Commission's considerations and recommendations
regarding the Land Use and Circulation Elements draft alternatives.
BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission was scheduled to discuss the subject concept alternatives at
its December 7, 2005 meeting. However, due to the lateness of the evening and other
items on the agenda, the discussion was continued to January 4. At the time the City
Council report was prepared and delivered, the Planning Commission had not
discussed the subject matter; therefore, its recommendations were to be delivered orally
to the Council on January 10. In light of the Alternatives discussion being continued to
January 24, the Commissions' recommendations are being presented in this
supplemental report.
1
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
The Commission heard testimony from seven community members regarding a variety
of issues including growth, density, building heights, traffic, pedestrian safety, and
historic preservation.
Draft Alternatives
The Commission's deliberation that evening focused largely on the draft alternatives.
There was concern that the conceptual alternatives lacked sufficient information in
terms of building height, density and traffic generation as well as uncertainty about the
future light rail line along the MTA right of way. Recognizing that an ultimate plan might
represent concepts from more than one alternative, the Commission considered hybrid
ideas, but none were fully explored. Another approach discussed was to use growth as
a means to assess one alternative. For instance, there might be two Neighborhood
Center alternatives, one with minimal growth and the other with slightly more growth.
While the Commission ultimately achieved consensus in its recommendation, there was
discussion about which alternative to eliminate; either the Grand Boulevard alternative
or the Status Quo alternative. Most Commissioners questioned whether the Grand
Boulevard would really achieve its transit oriented objective, suggesting individuals
living at these locations would likely use their own vehicles rather than the bus. Also,
given the shallow lot depth, this alternative was not seen as compatible with nearby
residential neighborhoods. Some also concluded that the Status Quo in some respects
2
illustrated the Grand Boulevard alternative if the existing land use plan were fully
realized. The Planning Commission recommended eliminating the Grand Boulevard
from further consideration.
There was concern with the Uptown / Downtown concept in terms of the ability to
achieve more pedestrian-oriented street blocks because of the unlikely change to
existing buildings such as Watergarden and surrounding entertainment related
developments. Also, uncertainty about the future light rail entered the discussion.
However, the Commission believed this an appropriate alternative to explore and
understand the benefits of this model.
The Neighborhood Centers concept generated unanimous support. Aspects of
walkability, serving existing neighborhoods, sustainable benefits and improved quality of
life for residents were mentioned as important elements. The Commission noted that
the location of the centers should be studied further and that any center must include
elements of good urban design principles and open space.
The Status Quo alternative was also selected for further study, although the
Commission supported using a different title that better distinguished this alternative
from the No Growth Scenario that will be studied. The Commission further expressed
concern that the Status Quo alternative, although heights and densities are already
known, should be evaluated at the same policy level as the other alternatives. The
3
Commission encouraged equal evaluation of this alternative relative to the other
concepts and to remain at the broader policy level rather than specific details.
Common Elements & Options
The Planning Commission previously reviewed the list of common elements at its
November policy meeting; the list was updated to reflect earlier remarks.
Recommendations were also provided in January. These additions related to the desire
for special housing alternatives to address needs for the homeless, seniors and
individuals with AIDS; improvements to Lincoln Boulevard streetscape; housing
preservation; safe routes to schools; increased open space and parks; beach
protection; greening the beach parking lots; expanding the concepts under historic
preservation; and fixing traffic.
In its evaluation of the Options list, the Commission favored moving these ideas to the
Common Elements, with the exception of second dwelling units in the single family
district and changes to the type of housing in multi family districts. This action would
ensure that all of those concepts, except the two not included, would be factored into
each alternative and ultimately the preferred plan.
The Commission provided no specific comments regarding the public outreach effort,
but previously stated the need to use the project website as another mechanism to
involve the public.
4
Prepared by: Andy Agle, Interim Director
Ellen Gelbard, Assistant Director
Gay Forbes, Development Services Officer
Amanda Schachter, Planning Manager
Lucy Dyke, Transportation Planning Manager
Jonathan Lait, AICP, Principal Planner
Beth Rolandson, AICP, Senior Transportation Planner
Liz Bar-EI, AICP, Senior Planner
Michelle Glickert, Transportation Planning Associate
Tony Kim, Associate Planner
Betsy Wheeler Kollgaard, Administrative Analyst
Planning and Community Development Department
5
PCD:AA:AS:JL:F:\CityPlanning\Share\COUNCIL\STRPT~2006\LUCE Alternatives Discussion.doc
Council Mtg: January 10, 2006 Santa Monica, California
TO: Mayor and Council members
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Draft Alternatives, Common Elements, Performance Indicators and
Measures to be Studied and Analyzed as part of the Land Use and
Circulation Element Project, and Proposed Public Outreach Program
INTRODUCTION
This report recommends that the City Council review proposed draft alternatives related
to the Land Use and Circulation Element project and choose three for further study.
Having completed initial public outreach and developed emerging themes and
opportunities and challenges analyses, the next step in the Land Use and Circulation
Element project is to conduct an analysis of land use alternatives that will assist the
community in deciding upon a preferred land use and circulation plan. Presented for
City Council review are: 1) proposed draft alternatives; 2) a set of common elements
that will hold for all alternatives; 3) performance indicators and measures that will be
used to assess the alternatives; and, 4) a proposed approach to public outreach during
this phase.
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this phase of the Land Use and Circulation Element process is to
consider possible land use outcomes and the relationships and tradeoffs between the
possibilities. Four alternative land use distributions are the means to develop
community understanding and are presented for purposes of study only - not as
6
proposed policy. Through analysis of the alternatives, the community will select the
combination of land uses that is the preferred plan.
Draft Alternative Conce
The project calls for an analysis of up to three alternatives that can be used to help
identify a preferred plan. Four alternatives are being presented to the City Council with
the idea that at least one of the Alternatives will be eliminated and, therefore, not
studied. The four alternatives are further detailed in Attachment A. The draft
alternatives should not be regarded as fully refined. The descriptions represent a
starting point to stimulate a focused discussion that will help identify a path to further
develop the concepts that will ultimately be reviewed by the community. The
Alternatives build upon the Emerging Themes and address the Policy Questions
identified in the two milestone work products, the Emerging Themes and Opportunities
and Challenges Reports. The Themes and Questions are provided as Attachments E
and F, respectively, in this report for convenient reference.
Following the Council's discussion, staff and the consultant will direct efforts toward the
preparation of an Alternatives Workbook. This workbook will more clearly detail and
analyze each of the alternatives. It will also include an analysis of a"no growth"
scenario and explain how that policy position might affect the community, legally and
culturally. This scenario is presented in response to comments expressed during the
public outreach effort and the Planning Commission's request to better understand the
7
implications of this policy perspective. A snapshot of the draft alternatives are
presented below:
"Neighborhood Centers". This alternative focuses small scale growth at strategic
locations along the commercial boulevards that will serve existing residential and
commercial neighborhoods; it also establishes a new mixed use neighborhood near
Bergamot Station. Non-motorized transportation alternatives are explored as are
parking strategies that support surrounding land uses and walkability. Light rail with
stops Downtown and at Bergamot Station are planned for and incorporated within this
alternative.
"Uptown / Downtown". This alternative creates a new Uptown District centered around
Bergamot Station. The mixed use district will provide live-work studios, support cultural
resources in the area and support opportunities to encourage medical-related uses in
the area. While this district will be a high activity area, Downtown will remain the City's
primary activity center. Light rail connections between these districts and the region are
a key circulation priority under this alternative, as is expanding parking districts
Downtown.
"Grand Boulevards". This alternative focuses development along the commercial
boulevards to create a consistent scale and distinctive character that is unique to Santa
Monica. Additional housing resources are planned around transit stops. Commercial
8
corridor transit, improved pedestrian orientation, walkability and bicycle use will be the
circulation focus; light rail opportunities will also be explored.
"Status Quo". This alternative has been included in order to understand the likely
consequences of continuing with existing policy, land uses, regulations and programs
for the community over the next twenty years based on past trends and expected reuse
of land. The purpose of studying this alternative is to enable a clear comparison
between the extension of current practice and development and new policy decisions
and plans. This comparison will help determine how to best serve the community's
vision as articulated in the Emerging Themes.
While the "Status Quo" retains existing development thresholds, it is not likely to result
in a full realization or build out of the current Land Use Element or even development
that maximizes height or floor area allowed by existing standards. Neither the Status
Quo nor other alternatives will be evaluated based on full build out potential, but rather
some percentage thereof that represents a likely development under each alternative.
Nevertheless, it is anticipated with this alternative that there will continue to be an
unlimited demand for housing, including affordable housing, little demand for office, and
little to no demand for industrial uses. Pressure to develop in the industrial zone will
persist as available land resources diminish elsewhere in the City. Concerns regarding
circulation, traffic and parking will remain largely the same and addressed with existing
policies serving as a mechanism to help mitigate stated concerns. Land uses and
9
patterns as well as development pace will continue as they have for the last 10 to 20
years, with newer housing concentrated downtown and five to ten unit condominiums
developed in existing residential neighborhoods. The commercial corridors will not
generate a significant amount of housing, but will continue to support local and regional
serving retail and office needs.
"No Growth": Pursuant to a Planning Commission request, staff will evaluate the
implications of a No Growth Scenario in addition to the three alternatives that are
ultimately selected for further study. The information to be compiled will explain the
physical, cultural, economic, and legal implications associated with this policy, including
an assessment of impacts to population diversity, property values and housing
affordability, impacts to the local economy and possible litigation challenges.
The workbook will include an analysis of this approach that is less comprehensive than
the more detailed Alternatives discussions but which will be sufficient to enable the
community to evaluate no growth policies in relationship to other alternatives and to
weigh the pros and cons of each.
Common Elements and Options
Throughout the project certain ideas or concepts have consistently been raised and
supported by the community. These ideas are presented as "Common Elements" in
Attachment B and will be a part of the development of each Alternative and ultimately
the preferred plan. For this reason, common elements are not specifically referred to in
10
the discussion of Alternatives (Attachment A). However, it is recommended that the City
Council review this list and suggest modifications as appropriate to incorporate in the
next iteration of the alternatives.
In Attachment B, another list represents concepts that have been mentioned during the
project, but without the same level of consistency as the Common Elements. This list,
called "Options", identifies topics that may require further study and may or may not be
incorporated into every alternative or the preferred plan; relevant options will be
addressed in the workbook. Additional concepts of this nature may be raised as the
project progresses. The list is presented to the Council to highlight an awareness of
these issues, but no further action is required at this time.
Indicators and Performance Measures
While there is no comprehensive or definitive standard or criteria that can be used to
predict the appropriateness or future impact of the alternatives, staff and consultant
have explored the idea of identifying indicators and performance measures that could
lead to further understanding of the alternatives. Using the Sustainable City Plan as a
model, several indicators have been identified and appear at Attachment C. The
availability of certain data and the subjectivity of the criteria present challenges to the
use of indicators. Some are quantitative and can be mapped, while others rely on a
qualitative analysis. Some of these other indicators may prove unusable if reasonable
thresholds for evaluation cannot be established. Some may become the performance
measures used over time to assess the adopted plan's performance as compared to the
11
final goals of the Land Use and Circulation Elements. Examples of performance
measures are presented in Attachment D. These measures relate primarily to possible
Circulation Element goals and are presented to the Council for comment.
Proposed Public Outreach Effort
The initial public outreach effort informed the community of the City's effort to update
the Land Use and Circulation Elements and received a significant amount of information
from a broad cross section of the community as to the issues that will be important to
carry forward over the next twenty years. This part of the process was documented in
the Emerging Themes Report. Staff and consultant then used this information and
compiled other technical data that will be useful in the Alternatives phase of the project.
The purpose of this next outreach effort is to focus input on specific issues, policies, and
geographic areas, to understand trade-offs among policy choices, and to arrive at a
consensus-based preferred alternative.
To this end, the Planning and Community Development Department will host a series of
approximately five citywide study sessions or workshops focused on particular issues.
Rather than staff attending the meetings of community groups and organizations,
members of the community will be invited to attend these citywide meetings in order to
generate understanding and dialogue about citywide issues among and between
various community sectors and neighborhoods.
12
Community meetings will be structured to present various policy options at a program
level and to create dialogue about the implications or trade-offs of certain decisions.
This dialogue will lead to the formation of practical land use and circulation goals to be
the basis of a preferred plan. The first meeting, to be scheduled in late February or
March, will focus on orienting participants to the workbook, explaining the significance of
this phase of the project and discussing the Common Elements and Options.
Subsequent forums will occur approximately every two to three weeks and will focus on
particular topics - such as housing diversity, sustainable economy - or geographical
focuses, such as the industrial area or certain commercial corridors.
The public outreach for the Alternatives phase will end in April or May, culminating in a
city-wide workshop to discuss the alternatives, review public input, and work towards
the selection of a preferred plan. Separate hearings before the Planning Commission
and City Council will then be held to review the public input and discuss
recommendations for the preferred plan. After the City Council has decided upon a
preferred plan, policy documents will be drafted, along with the new zoning ordinance,
which will be developed with its own public process.
To inform the community of these opportunities, a city-wide mailing will be distributed
and information will be posted at community centers, public libraries, City and project
websites and cable television. Information will be printed in the local papers and City
Boards, Commissions, and Task Forces will receive notice.
13
Planninq Commission Action
The Planning Commission reviewed and commented upon the approach used to
develop the four draft alternatives at its November policy meeting. In December, the
Commission deferred consideration of the draft alternatives to their January 4t" meeting
due to other items on their agenda and a desire to have a longer period of time to
discuss the matter. Since the Commission's review will occur after this report is
distributed, a summary of their comments will be provided at the Council meeting.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
A notice of the City Council meeting was mailed to persons on the project mailing list,
interested WIN subscribers, and published in the California Section of The Los Anqeles
Times. A copy of the hearing notice is contained in Attachment G.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT
The recommendation presented in this report does not have any direct budget or fiscal
impact.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council review and comment upon the direction of the
draft Alternatives, common themes, performance indicators and measures, and public
outreach effort.
14
Prepared by: Andy Agle, Interim Director
Ellen Gelbard, Assistant Director
Gay Forbes, Development Services Officer
Amanda Schachter, Planning Manager
Lucy Dyke, Transportation Planning Manager
Jonathan Lait, AICP, Principal Planner
Beth Rolandson, AICP, Senior Transportation Planner
Liz Bar-EI, AICP, Senior Planner
Michelle Glickert, Transportation Planning Associate
Tony Kim, Associate Planner
Betsy Wheeler Kollgaard, Administrative Analyst
Planning and Community Development Department
Attachments:
A. Draft Alternatives w/Conceptual Distribution Maps
B. Common Elements and Options
C. Land Use and Circulation Element Draft Indicators
D. Circulation Element Working Goals and On-Going Performance Measures
E. Emerging Themes (Excerpted from the Emerging Themes Report)
F. Policy Questions (Excerpted from the Opportunities & Challenges Report)
G. Public Notice
15
ATTACHMENT A
Draft Alternatives w/Conceptual Distribution Maps
16
Alternative A - Neighborhood Centers
Overall Concept
This alternative reinforces town-scaled neighborhood centers and enhances community
members' ability to access local services through non-motorized forms of transportation. The
Neighborhood Centers are relatively small: supporting housing at upper levels and local serving,
pedestrian-oriented commercial spaces at the first floor. Activity centers are spread throughout
the city at specific nodes along some commercial boulevards, downtown and near Bergamot
Station. Residential neighborhoods are preserved while opportunities for affordable housing,
small grocery stores and improved linkages between neighborhoods are explored.
Obiectives
Development activity is concentrated at strategic locations along commercial corridors to create
mixed use Neighborhood Centers. Locations will be determined based on existing and
surrounding land uses, previously identified opportunity sites, and the likelihood of success
given the proximity to residential and commercial areas.
The Neighborhood Centers will primarily serve and support surrounding land uses and
encourage walkability through pedestrian-oriented design and parking strategies that support
this objective. Each center will reflect the character of the area in which it is located, for
example, allowing centers on Ocean Park and Wilshire Boulevards to reflect unique differences.
Mixed use buildings will be encouraged allowing for small neighborhood-serving and locally
owned businesses to occupy the first floor with housing opportunities above. The remainder of
the commercial land area along the boulevards, outside of the centers, will continue to support
local and regional serving uses with little change to the scale or intensity that exists today.
The eastern portion of the City's light manufacturing and studio district will transition into a new
mixed use neighborhood centered around the planned light rail stop at Bergamot Station. Parcel
sizes in this area will be reduced and multi-modal streets created that reflect Santa Monica's
existing circulation grid. Proximity to a light rail station supports new housing resources and
reduces the demand for traditional parking, which will serve to reduce construction costs and
improve housing affordability. This neighborhood will also support recreational opportunities.
Linkages between area parks and the Exposition bikeway planned along the MTA right of way
will be established. Industrial uses will likely remain in the area east of the new mixed use
neighborhood. The remainder of the industrial conservation district, west of 20th Street and east
of Lincoln Boulevard will continue to support industrial uses and housing opportunities similar to
today's mix of land uses, except that around 17th Street and Olympic Boulevard a light rail
platform will be planned for, allowing for increased transit access to Santa Monica College and
the surrounding residential area.
Downtown will similarly be connected by the planned light rail station and will continue to serve
as the community's most vibrant and dense activity hub. The combination of the light rail, transit
mall, excellent bus network, and parking districts supports existing and future housing
opportunities comparable to existing densities. A complementary mixture of commercial retail,
food serving uses, entertainment, hospitality, and office uses will continue to support local
residents, regional and international visitors. Connections to the Civic Center will also be
reinforced.
Specialty commercial areas such as Main and 26th Streets, and Montana Avenue will continue
to support local needs, but also serve regional visitors much in the same way these areas
function today. However, building heights and the intensity of land uses will be evaluated to
17
ensure new development is consistent with the existing profile and pedestrian oriented
character of these streets.
The Oceanfront district will be evaluated to ensure a continued mix of housing opportunities and
land uses that support local residents, businesses and visitors.
The single and multi-family neighborhoods will remain largely unchanged except for possible
design or development modifications that seek to preserve neighborhood character, promote
good urban design and pedestrian orientation and preserve affordable housing.
18
ALTERNATIVE A
Neighb+orhood Centers
~•••• Enhanced Bus Line ~Ptanned or Actuat~
• Proposed Transit Station
O Enhanced Bus Stop (Planned or AccualJ
~ Transit Matl
~ Park/Greenway
PubliCYCu lturaU IniYituti0nal
Focused Change
~ t, -:.
Cower Higher
Act~vity Concentration
;
~~~-~
,
~ .` _
~ 2bth Street and
~ Mantana Avenwe to
~ retain predominant
1 scale and tharacter
1 /4 Mde
Rdd~u9 ~
~ ~~ `
~i ~~~ : ~~
' ~'~~ ~ti~ P§ f . ,C .,t~
~ ~
; ~
' ~ w .. ~~':. , a k~
November 30, 2005
New neighborhood at
Bergamot Station with mixed
F¢rure Expa Line use center and medium to hi~h
_ ~ ` ~ density ~residentia~l
~ ~ .
. ~
~ ~
~~
s -^ \
~
~~,
~~~`'~` ~ ~ ~'\
~
\
~
m !
~ ~~
j.~
~Y~
~ ~ ~ k
', _
i
, ~ :
,
~
^
~ "`
~
~~~j ~
~
~
; ~ ~~
~ r, ,~ ,
~ti~' ~
-~ '
~~ _,
~ `~° ~
~
,~ ~ Some industrial uses to remain
_ ;
~
'~ '~ ~
~~ ,
~ ~
within the LMSD
~ I ~ ~ 1
~
~
1 V
~ ~ i
~
~ 1
1
/ I ti `=~:>~ ~~ ~, Growth is ctustered in
r ~~ ~`~
~
~ p ~' ~~
~ neighborhood centers with
~ ~ ° ~
~u d
~ s, resCauranCS,
SCOre
~ ~i ~~- '~ ~~~ ~ comrmunity amenities and
1 "~,~~ I i'
1 ~
~ hrgher density housing
~`pP`
.~J'l~ `~
~
.
'~'~~, /
,µ
~ y~ ~~~. t
> ...~ \~:. ~
~ l
r ~
~ . _. `
~ ~ ~ m
.
~
~' .
: ~
~~ Study feasibiliEy of lig~ht rail
~'' ~
l statian at 17th Street, serving
~
:' "~"
/ , surrounding nei~hborhoods
~ :
( . ~ ~,
,..• and Santa Monica College
~ " :
'- - ... ~.. ... ..».'.
~ ~ j
~ ~
: ~
i ' ~ ~.~~ , ~~ LOWef 1f1C2C1SiYy a~4f1'~
~ ~
. , ~~
~ :
~ ~~~~ tiy ~
~`~ ~
. J
~,
~ ,
~ w,v ~ _ _ -
corndors outside the centers
T~_
. I ,
..
~ ~~ :~
....... ~ .
~ ~ `N .
m ci
Downtown w~th eo mer al,
{~~~,~.,_.....„...._a
~ ~ ~
~
~ '
~ ~i ; ~dl F
1 : ~
`"=" retail, hospitaEity, and some
. .
~ , ~
~ ~ : restdent~al
_....~ .~ w.sb v ~~ ~,
~~ ,
i
~ t
~ ~ ~ ~~_ ~ ~
,~f - =-
~-
~
--9
~
~ - -~,
~
~ - ~ ...
i
- ~
~ ~
.
~
a
~
~ -
~ --~-- - - - -~
-
~,.,
-- ~,
~~~ ~`" `~ ~ s~~-~ ~=~,
i ~ ~ Main Street to retain
~
-~"`--- ~
_
~''-- --
~ J
~ =~ ~ ~=
-~ ~ - ' "~
~~ -~ ~
~
predarminantscaleand
character
~
~
Alternative B-Uptown/Downtown (Bergamot Station and Downtown District Plan)
Overall Concept
This alternative focuses future growth and activity within two primary districts; Downtown, and a
newly created Uptown district at Bergamot Station. Uptown will serve as a vibrant mixed use
center with an eclectic mix of cultural and industrial land uses, local serving commercial uses
and a variety of housing opportunities. Light rail connections between this activity center, the
more intense downtown district and the regional transit system will be provided. Development
on other commercial corridors and residential districts remain relatively unchanged except for
the limited evolution and redevelopment of existing structures and land uses.
Obiectives
A new mixed use neighborhood is established around the planned Bergamot Station light rail
stop to support and balance galleries, offices, retailers, including grocery and discount retail
stores, as well as other commercial uses, with artist live/work studios, affordable and market
rate housing. The amount of activity and intensity of this area would be second only to
Downtown. Building heights would taper down toward the edges of the district and be greatest
near the rail station. The street grid in this area is extended reducing block size and creating a
more pedestrian oriented environment with easy access to local goods and services and
linkages to area parks, employment centers, existing residential areas, schools and the
Exposition bike path. The addition of this new center will necessitate a reconsideration of the
bus transit to this location including traditional fixed-route service and community transit. The
proximity of housing to existing and future job opportunities will reduce some vehicle trips; ways
to encourage work force housing will also be explored.
This new district will extend northwest toward St. John's Hospital providing increased
opportunities to support medical-related uses. Lower scale development will occur west of this
district toward Memorial Park, where the feasibility of a 17th Street rail station will be studied
along with supporting housing and commercial opportunities and connections to Santa Monica
College. The remainder of the industrial core will permit light industry with limited residential
development.
Downtown will continue to serve as the City's focal point for housing, local and regional goods
and services, visitor accommodations, recreation, entertainment and nightlife. Opportunities to
expand the Downtown parking district will be explored to encourage more pedestrian orientation
and better architectural design. This alternative will reinforce the linkages set forth in the Civic
Center Specific Plan to establish greater connections and access to parks, institutional
buildings, commercial uses and housing in this area. Downtown will continue to be served by
the region-serving bus network, a planned light rail station and community transit. The
Oceanfront district will be evaluated to ensure a continued mix of housing opportunities and land
uses that support local residents, businesses and visitors.
Activity on commercial corridors, including those supported by enhanced bus lines, will remain
largely unchanged from today. Along Main Street and Montana Avenue building heights and the
intensity of land uses will be evaluated to ensure new development is consistent with the
existing profile and pedestrian oriented character of these streets.
The single and multi-family neighborhoods will remain largely unchanged except for possible
design or development modifications that seek to preserve neighborhood character, promote
good urban design and pedestrian orientation, and preservation of affordable housing.
20
ALTERNATIV~ B
Uptown/'Dc~wnto~nrn
•••^ EnhancedBusLine(PlannedorActuap
~i Propos~ed Transit S[atian
t) Enhanced Bus S[op (Planned or Actuap
~ Transit Mall
`.=- ParklGreenway
Publ ic/Cu Itura!/Instt[uziona!
Poc
~ - used Change
~ ,-,
LowPr !-Ifgher
Activ~ty Cnncenfrat3an
I ~
26th Street amd
Montana Avenue to
retain predominant
seale and cnaracter
November 30, 2005
High intensity, mixed-use
~i2 n~~ie Fucure Expo Line distriet centered araund light
ead~us raiftransit, with beth
o ~~
~ ~~ t : commer~~ial and resldential
~/.
~ uses
~ ~
~ I ~~a~ ~ ~ :~ l0
- y : y ~- I „` y ~ .~
,~ ~ - - - -E~ens~~on of exi~ing stre~t
, ; : ..! r~ ~~~ ~ ti , . .' ' ~ ? _ . '
L ` ~ grad ta improve
'' . ~ ~I ___..' ~ _._ 1 surrounivitywith
,, ding neighbarhoods
°" ~,a~'-^ s~ '~ ~1
~ ~ ; ~ , t~ t i~ h~,;sa
}
: ~~thk~ ~T~~;~I ....
? -~ 1:, ?
; : ~'°_~"~ i
: ; -' ~ ti : „~ _
h f ~ ~ .... .....
~~ , ~ ,.... ... . . .
~ ~
r ~ ~
~ ~ ~~ : -r w ~, ,. Y c ~ ' ~ *
t ~ ~ ~ ~ `~~ ! ~
_.
~ -~--~` i ~"-~~_'_
~ ,
~ z~ _ ..... ~. _
~- ~ ~~ - .
- ~ ~ ~"~ _ . ; _ ~~,
. ~
< F ~,~ ~ . :
~,.~ T.~, ~ • ,
~_= = ~ ~~~~ t~ '
~ ~~,~/~-,~~ ~~ ' : .' ~
~ ~
~~ ~-> ~~~ ~ ~' ~i~ ~' ~ ~ ~~~~
.~-----~''~~__- --.-~..,~~,~ ~ _ ~. ~ ~-,
_~~..- -i_ ~ ~~
~-- "" ---_.~
- - Expanded opportur~ity for
medical-re'lated uses
__ Study feasibility af light rail
station at 77th SLr~et, serving
~ surround8rrg neignborhoods
~ and Santa Monica College
~~
- ---
--~ Mid-industrisl area zo remairr
- ~
~ " as p~rimarily light industrial
with limited residential
development
_. , ,... -
~ Less development and ~ower
intensity along carridprs
Downtown as mixed use with
c~ommercial and re~idential
u5e5
Main Streez'to retain
predominant scale and
charaeter
N
Alternative C - Grand Boulevards
Overall Concept
This alternative builds upon Santa Monica's existing commercial boulevards focusing future
activity in these areas while protecting adjacent residential neighborhoods. Boulevards that
support enhanced bus lines will have greater intensity allowing for a variety of land uses that
support local residents and businesses and promote housing near transit. To encourage a
pedestrian environment along the corridors, some travel lanes may be altered to accommodate
transit and broader sidewalks and other pedestrian facilities. The remainder of the community
will reflect existing conditions.
Obiectives
Using design standards and capital improvements, the well traveled commercial boulevards will
serve as distinct entries into the City to further reinforce Santa Monica's uniqueness. The
boulevards will continue to provide for local residents and businesses while supporting housing
needs. Unlike Alternative A, development will be concentrated along the entire corridor rather
than clustered at strategic locations. Improving pedestrian safety will be a priority along the
boulevards. Allowing better, more functional use of the public right-of-way with integrated design
and useable outdoor land area will further enhance the pedestrian environment along these
streets. Parking strategies will be explored to accommodate workers and visitors with emphases
toward transit, bicycling and walking.
Protecting residential neighborhoods near the corridors is a necessary component of this
alternative. Transitions that connect and do not isolate adjacent neighborhoods will be explored.
To achieve this protection landscape buffers, building design solutions, noise mitigation, and
loading activities will be examined. Parking will be evaluated to respect adjacent neighborhoods
with consideration of establishing parking districts.
Wilshire, Santa Monica, Pico, and Lincoln Boulevards will see the greatest degree of activity
and support transit use. Bicycles will be a transportation priority on streets parallel to the
boulevards and better north / south cross town bicycle routes will be considered.
Main and Twenty Sixth Streets, Ocean Park Boulevard, and Montana Avenue will continue to
support local needs, but also serve regional visitors much in the same way these areas function
today. However, building heights and the intensity of land uses will be evaluated to ensure new
development is consistent with the existing profile and pedestrian oriented character of these
streets.
The industrial area east of Twentieth Street will continue to serve light industrial, production and
artist studios; residential housing will not be established as a permitted use. However, housing
will continue to be allowed in the Industrial Conservation area west of Twentieth Street as well
as light industrial uses.
Downtown will continue to serve as the City's focal point for housing, local and regional goods
and services, visitor accommodations, recreation, entertainment and nightlife. Opportunities to
expand the Downtown parking district will be explored to encourage more pedestrian orientation
and better architectural design. This alternative will respect the linkages set forth in the Civic
Center Specific Plan to establish greater connections and access to parks, institutional
buildings, commercial uses and housing in this area. Downtown will continue to be served by
the excellent bus network, a planned light rail station and shuttles. The Oceanfront district will
22
be evaluated to ensure a continued mix of housing opportunities and land uses that support
local residents, businesses and visitors.
Alternative D- Status Quo (no map illustration)
This alternative is explained in the Council Staff Report, page 2.
23
ALTERNI4TlVE C
Grand Boulevards
November 3Q 2005
••••• Enhan4ed Bus Line (Plannetl orActual}
! Proposed Transi[ Station
p Enhanced Bus Stop (Planned or Ac[ual)
~ rransit Ma~~
~ Perk/6reenway
Pub[iclCultural/Institutional
Focuseci Change
~ .,~;
Lower Nlgher
Activity Concer~iration
/ ~, .~
lf
1
pff i ce
~ expansion
/ -~
' - 26th Street and
Ntontana Auenue to
retain predominant
sc~le and character ----.
~~
~~
1!
i~''
P
i
~,~ ~ ~~~
~.,;
~~i.. x.
Future Expo Line
~
~
Growth focused along city's
carridors, particularly along
Enhanced Bus lines
--1+ --- Mixed-use nodesalong
1 boulevards provide
1
neigh6arhood shopping
.,.. .._.. ,..i~.
and services
~
r _ ____._,
` , Preserve L,MSD as mostly
low-intensity mix
industrial and commereial
- L€ght industrial and some
residential in Mid-Industrial
area
~ ~
f_ Corridors to have uniform
~ r~ intensity
~
~:
° Study feasibility of light rail
staUian at 17th Street, serving
surrounding neighborhoods
and Santa Monica CoPlege
~
~~ - Mixed-use Qowntown with
l spme residential development
~l ~YJ-~ ~ ~°.~ `=- ~'~ ~ ~' ~ ~ " 1
~~~ _ ~ ° ~~ ~~~~°` ~' ~ ~ --~4 ~~ Main Street to retain
°'"`_v~_~_~ ~ -
---"'"- ~ \~~_~~`-`~~` --~---~ ~~ ~ predominantsca9eand
~ ~
i~~ „`"---_. ` ~ charaeter
~
N
ATTACHMENT B
Common Elements and Options
25
Common Elements: Elements that will be included in the preferred alternative regardless of
elements chosen from alternative choices
• Integrated Land Use and Transportation: including connections between existing
activities
• Historic Preservation: integrate the community's historic qualities to maintain its scale
and character; seek to preserve structures and neighborhoods that contribute and honor
Santa Monica past, and structures that have significant architectural, historic and cultural
significance
• Sustainability: incorporate land use and transportation policy that promotes
environmental and economic sustainability
• Building Reuse: maximize opportunities to reuse existing structures
• Housing: preserve existing housing while pursuing objectives for diversity
• Neighborhoods: Preserve the scale and character of existing residential neighborhoods
• Education: support educational opportunities for all Santa Monicans including the needs
of schools and students
• Open Space: support goals of the Open Space element, including the concept of all
public property as open space opportunities
• Public Safety: reinforce sense of community through neighborhood safety
• Childcare: continue to prioritize quality early education for children and their families
• Active Living: promote healthy communities through design and programs
• Arts and Culture: including support for a growing creative community
• Economic Vitality: including opportunities for local and community retail
• Partnerships: meet community goals through strong relationships with organizations,
including medical and educational institutions
• Existing Plans: accommodate Santa Monica plans for a provision of city services, such
as fire stations, libraries, solid waste, etc.
• Regional Context: acknowledge influence on housing market, economy and travel
demand and participate in greater regional solutions
• Quality Design: enhance streetscapes, commercial and residential areas through quality
urban design, including private property design standards
26
Options: Options that must be resolved regardless of Common Elements or Plan Alternative
• Incentives for sustainable business practices
• Incentives for preservation of residential neighborhoods
• Incentives for preservation of rent-controlled housing
• Incentives to support preservation of historic resources
• Incentives to support preservation and expansion of open space
• Incentives for preservation and expansion of childhood education facilities
• Incentives for preservation and expansion of local and local-serving businesses
• Incubator districts for sustainable industry and/or small business
• Incentives for adaptive reuse of existing buildings
• Degree of integration to strengthen other General Plan policies and city goals / objectives
• Annual growth caps
• Local shuttle system
• Shared parking districts
• Feasibility of an additional Exposition light rail stop near 14th or 17th Streets
• Transition of areas around proposed light stops/stations prior to the construction of light rail
• Conversion of existing rights-of-way to bike lanes, widened sidewalks, transit lanes
• "Woonerf" style mixed-use streets
• Parking pricing strategies to maximize parking efficiency and encourage alternatives
• Parking requirement modifications to reflect use and encourage alternatives
• Second dwelling units in R1 zones
• Transfer of Development Rights to preserve historic or existing buildings
• Rate and type of change of units in multifamily districts
• Diversity of housing
• Accommodations for single-occupancy vehicles
• Small neighborhood markets in multi-family residential districts
• Transportation impact fee
27
ATTACHMENT C
Land Use and Circulation Element Draft Indicators
28
Alternatives Indicators:
The alternatives workbook will analyze both how the different locations and intensity of
proposed land uses will meet sustainability, economic and quality of life goals and affect travel
demand, and how effectively travel demand might be met by different travel modes.
Issue Area Analytic Approach
Diversity of Jobs Consider whether the anticipated mix of land
uses will provide the type of jobs residents
will want and qualify for
• Compare the estimated number of jobs
to the estimated number of households
• Estimate the categories of jobs and
compare their typical pay rates to
housing costs
• Estimate how well the jobs may
complement the skills of the existing and
anticipated population
Housing Adequacy Consider whether there is an appropriate
number of housing units, and whether they
are well-placed to meet needs
• Estimate the number of housing units
• Compare the number of housing units to
regional housing needs, housing element
production goals and state production
requirements
• Estimate how many units would be in
locations and types suitable to provide
units for groups with the greatest needs,
such as seniors, people with low and
moderate incomes, workers, families
Economic Vitality Consider the extent to which each alternative
could allow for the continued vitality of key
employers or industries
• Estimate whether employee pool within
reasonable commuting range is
enhanced orreduced
• Estimate whether proposed commercial
centers have increased or reduced
customer pool within walking distance
• Consider whether there will be spaces
suitable for providing goods and services
residents and businesses need
• Consider whether there will be space for
the full range of activities and uses
needed to support the people who live,
work or visit
29
Consider location and types of enhanced
visitor services
• Consider whether the use mix and
intensity proposed will either balance or
transition, in scale and character, so that
commercial and residential activities can
co-exist
Education & Child Care Consider how well each alternative might
support local schools
• Estimate housing units in walking
distance to schools
• Estimate whether school age population
is expected to be stable, and balance
school capacity
• Estimate capacity for regional transit
access to SMC relative to student
population
• Estimate the potential for serving
residents and employees with well
placed and scaled child care facilities
Historic Preservation Estimate the redevelopment pressure on
historic and cultural resource properties
• Compare difference between
development intensity of existing
resources and development potential
generally proposed on the resource
properties
Preservation of Existing Affordable Housing Estimate the redevelopment pressure on
existing affordable rental units
• Compare difference between
development intensity of existing
affordable housing properties and
development potential proposed
Community Amenities: Consider the extent to which new
Arts and Culture, Recreation, Open Space development will be able to provide support
for arts and culture, open space and other
community amenities
• Estimate opportunities to attract projects
that can provide on-site amenities
Sustainability Consider aspects of sustainability such as:
• Reducing fossil fuels
• Efficient use of community resources
• Efficient reuse of existing buildings
• Mixed use development
30
• Redevelopment with improved energy
efficiency
Overall Peak Hour Travel Demand Compare overall intensity of travel demand
by estimating trips using Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) data
Mode Split Overall & By Focus Area Anticipate mode share in the City overall and
by subarea by reviewing actual travel
behavior by people in comparable areas
• City Census data
• City Census data by subarea
• Census data for comparable areas
• City employer trip reduction plans
• Big Blue Bus Ridership
• MTA Ridership
• Other travel surveys
Peak Period Auto Congestion For each alternative, estimate extent of peak-
period auto congestion by projecting added
volumes and identifying future bottlenecks
• Estimate which intersections are to be
expected to operate poorly (Level of
Services LOS E or F) during peak
periods
• Estimate increase in arterial and freeway
trips if auto demand is proportional to
development
Transit Effectiveness For each alternative, estimate effectiveness
of transit in meeting anticipated travel
demand by identifying whether location and
density of development can be well served by
existing and proposed transit systems
• Identify percentage of Santa Monica jobs
in areas with high transit ridership
• Identify percentage of Santa Monica
housing units in areas with high transit
ridership
• Project transit share for Santa Monica
workers/residents
• Estimate population or housing units
within a 30 minute transit trip to
downtown Santa Monica and other
proposed activity centers
• Identify percentage of Santa Monica
housing units within 2 blocks of a transit
stop
• Estimate percentage of jobs in areas with
high transit ridership
31
• Estimate improvement in transit share if
system improvements are made by
comparing level of transit ridership in
areas with comparable development and
transit system quality
Walking Effectiveness For each alternative, estimate the
effectiveness of walking in meeting
anticipated travel demand by looking at how
many people are in walking distance of jobs,
services and amenities
• Identify number of housing units within
walking distance of activity centers
• Estimate increase in walking share if
system improvements are made by
identifying level of walking in areas with
comparable development and walkability
Bicycling Effectiveness For each alternative, estimate the
effectiveness of bicycling in meeting
anticipated travel demand by looking at how
many people live close to high-quality bicycle
facilities that lead to activity centers
• Identify percentage of jobs in areas with
high bicycle mode split
• Estimate number of Santa Monica
housing units within one block of bike
lane or path
• Estimate percentage of jobs within one
block of bike lane or path
• Estimate increase in bicycling share if
system improvements are made by
identifying bicycling share in areas with
comparable development and bicycle
system quality
Parking Adequacy Estimate whether parking facilities will be
adequate to meet future needs
• Estimate number of new parking spaces
that would be required under current
code
• Identify areas that would have shared
parking potential and estimate the
number of parking spaces that could be
required with shared parking
• Identify local streets that might need
regulation to avoid over parking
• Estimate share of commercial activity in
areas with potential for shared parking
districts
32
Neighborhood Traffic Intrusion Identify local streets that will experience
increased use by peak-hour autos and
consider impacts of protecting them
• Map local blocks with increased spillover
pressure
• Identify number or percentage of local
blocks adjacent to areas with targeted
g rowth
• Estimate auto trips volumes diverted to
arterials if local streets are protected
Recreational Opportunities on Streets Consider value of developing some streets as
corridors suitable for recreation and fitness
• Identify number of miles potential of
fitness/recreational corridors
• Estimate percentage of housing units
within 2 blocks of a fitness/recreational
corridor
• Estimate percentage of jobs within 2
blocks of a fitness/recreational corridor
33
ATTACHMENT D
Circulation Element Working Goals and On-Going PerFormance Measures
34
This is also an appropriate time to consider indicators that may be evaluated across time after
the circulation element is adopted. These type of ineasures can help focus the energy of the
community on the goals adopted in the Circulation Element. Many of these measures would
include new data gathering processes.
Possible New Circulation Element Goal Possible On-Going PerFormance Measure
Provide transit access that is superior to • Peak period travel time by bus and auto
freeway access to and from most of the from regional centers (downtown LA,
region, during peak travel periods UCLA, LAX, Van Nuys Civic Center,
Warner Center) to downtown Santa
Monica, office district, Santa Monica
College and Beach
• Quality of transit service from regional
centers
• Cost of transit service compared to private
auto trips from regional centers to Santa
Monica
• Average-vehicle-ridereship (AVR)/mode
split for large employers
Provide local transit service to allow • Percentage of housing units close to a
residents, visitors, workers and students to transit stop
move about the City without driving . Percentage of residents who use transit
regularly
• Ridership on community transit and Big
Blue Bus
Manage travel speeds on local streets so that . Percentage of local blocks with average
they are not time-saving cut through routes speeds lower than 25 mph
and people can play in the yards adjacent to
them
Develop a system of streets where cyclists . Quality of service on bike network
are safe and comfortable, and can cross the . Number of cyclists at peak hours
City as quickly as motorists during peak travel . Mode share for cycling for employees,
periods students and residents
• Travel time to cross town on bicycle versus
auto
Allow development of neighborhood clusters . Number of people walking in mixed use
that have enough people within walking and commercial areas
distance to support quality neighborhood . Economic vitality and parking demand in
serving uses mixed use and commercial areas
Minimize delay and congestion associated • Number and location of intersections with
with auto use poor peak period level of service (LOS)
• LOS at intersection with poor peak period
level of service
• Number of hours of `peak' periods with
poor service
Develop street design standards that result in . Average or 85th percentile speeds on
low auto speeds and recreational quality streets
walking experiences • Number of people walking
35
• Percentage of streets with quality walking
experiences
Develop some corridors active cyclists and • Number of people using
joggers can use for fitness as well as regional fitness/recreational corridors
bike access (San Vicente, Olympic, beach . Number of miles of fitness/recreational
bike path) corridors
• Percentage of residents living close to
fitness/recreational corridors
Develop mechanisms to allow use of market . Number of unbundled parking spaces
incentives (pricing, regulations) to balance . Price and occupancy of on and off-street
transportation system use when capacity is parking
constrained • Relative cost of travel/parking by modes
36
ATTACHMENT E
Emerging Themes (Excerpted from the Emerging Themes Report)
37
A unique city with a strong sense of community. Santa Monica of the future should build
on characteristics that endow its uniqueness and a sense of place: a small, beach town
ambience, walkability, diversity, and innovation. Santa Monica of the future should be an
interconnected town where people can get to know their neighbors, with citizen involvement
and ownership in the future of the city. The city's neighborhoods should be vital, with tree-
lined streets, and common places where people come together to share in cultural pursuit,
celebration, and leisure.
2. A city rich in amenities, within walking distance to shops and services from
neighborhoods. While in its outlook and character Santa Monica should be a small town, it
should offer a sophisticated array of amenities, including stores, restaurants, transit, arts,
and culture. Most critically, Santa Monica should be a walkable town, with neighborhood
shopping, cafes, local and public services, and parks and open spaces, within easy reach of
every neighborhood.
3. A diverse and inclusive city. Santa Monica should be a diverse place, both socially and
physically, and with opportunity for all. Santa Monica should be affordable to households of
diverse incomes, and home to a variety of small and large businesses. The city should
provide workforce, middle income, and senior housing, artist and live/work residences, as
well as places for families and children. In terms of its physical character, Santa Monica
should support a mix of design styles and creative architecture while remaining cognizant of
its history through conservation and preservation of historic buildings and neighborhoods.
This will also help foster an experientially rich setting.
4. A community built at an appropriate town-scale. Reinforcing the theme of a small and
unique town, the height and scale of new buildings should complement the existing fabric of
neighborhoods and commercial areas. Existing height limits should be maintained, and high
rise buildings are not appropriate in any part of Santa Monica. Smaller-scale, locally owned
stores will further the city's character and Santa Monica's pursuit of its vision as a small and
unique town.
5. A city of strong neighborhoods, protected from commercial and industrial uses.
Neighborhoods should be protected from encroachment of commercial and industrial uses,
and have slow and safe traffic. New development should be in keeping with the existing
scale of neighborhoods.
6. A pedestrian and bicycle-friendly place. Streets and connections between various activity
areas shall be improved to create comfortable and safe environments for pedestrians.
Development should be friendly and engaging to pedestrians. Santa Monica should have a
comprehensive bikeway network connecting neighborhoods, schools, shopping areas, and
the beach. Popular bike routes should be redesigned to offer more safety and convenience
for cyclists, including supporting facilities such as additional bike parking/storage and transit
connections.
38
7. A city rich in its array of transit offerings. The need to support transit enjoys
overwhelming community support. Santa Monicans want to see high-quality regional transit
services, such as light-rail and rapid bus, at a level that offers advantages over private autos
for regional trips, as well as local services that are safe and fast and convenient enough to
compete with autos for local trips. Santa Monicans especially support environmentally-
friendly transit vehicles and continue to express specific support for light rail (with a terminus
in downtown and a route along Exposition).
8. A city where traffic and parking work. Automobile traffic should flow smoothly, without
disrupting neighborhood living. Park and ride lots, shuttles, and free or permitted parking by
residents should be explored to facilitate easy movement. Transportation and land use
patterns should be designed to work synergistically.
9. A city of balanced growth. Santa Monica's growth should be modest, with new
development keeping with existing scale and character, and moderate increases in intensity
in selected appropriate locations where reuse opportunities are present, where infrastructure
can serve growth, and in places where transit is present or planned to foster transit-oriented
development patterns. Many opposed growth that would lead to, expand, or worsen auto
congestion in the City, particularly in residential neighborhoods.
10. A city with attractive boulevards. The city's major boulevards should be improved with
increased landscaping, enhanced sidewalks, and additional parking. Mixed-use centers
combining shopping and new housing replacing aging uses along the city's major corridors
may help meet multiple objectives, including promoting neighborhood accessibility to shops
and services, housing affordability, aesthetic renewal, and jobs and homes in proximity to
transit. Residents would like to see the boulevards in walking distance from their homes
developed with the kinds of shops and restaurants they like to frequent.
11. A safe and secure community. The city's neighborhoods should be secure; people,
including children, should be safe walking or bicycling to schools or work. The City should
address homeless issues so that public areas, including, parks, streets, and transit vehicles
can be pleasantly enjoyed.
12. An environmentally sustainable place. Santa Monica should continue to emphasize
"green" development, recycling, development patterns that encourage walking and cycling,
clean air and water, and reuse of older buildings.
39
ATTACHMENT F
Policy Questions (Excerpted from the Opportunities & Challenges Report)
40
1. How can Santa Monica plan for the regional aspects of its economy, medical and education
institutions, and locational draw to create balanced growth and enhance the quality of life for
residents?
2. What role can visitor-servers play in Santa Monica's future?
3. How much new housing should Santa Monica plan for to maintain inclusive and
opportunities for affordable housing and yet retain an "appropriate town scale"?
4. What types of new development could fulfill the City's diversity and quality of life objectives?
5. How best can the existing industrial areas meet Santa Monica's needs?
6. How best can the character and quality of Santa Monica's residential neighborhoods be
preserved while promoting neighborhood-serving amenities on adjacent commercial
streets?
7. What is the appropriate scale and mix of uses for boulevard commercial corridors?
8. What is the appropriate scale and character of specialty commercial corridors?
9. How can the City maintain its economic vitality and protect economic advantages?
10. How can the City foster small businesses and establishments to maintain its uniqueness?
11. How can facilities that support a properly balanced transportation system be created?
12. How much parking is the appropriate amount for the community and what is the City's role in
facilitating its availability?
13. How best can transit-oriented development be promoted?
14. What is the appropriate scale, intensity and character of new development, particularly in
areas that are likely to experience change over the coming 20 years, such as the industrial
areas, along corridors, and public spaces?
15. Other than policies directing new development, what resources are available to the City to
implement the Community's vision? Which strategies are the most important? Are there
resources that might be overlooked by a traditional land use and circulation plan?
16. How best can Santa Monica promote greater connections between different parts of the
city? How could the priorities of the Circulation Element integrate and support the city's land
use and how can urban design be best used as a tool in this integration?
41
ATTACHMENT G
Public Notice
42
UPCOMING PLANNING COMMISSION AND
CITY COUNCIL HEARINGS:
DEFINING ALTERNATIVES FOR THE
SHAPE THE FUTURE 2025 AND MOTION
BY THE OCEAN PROJECTS (LAND USE c;ty of
AND CIRCULATION ELEMENTS) Santa Monica°
Based on community input received in the Emerging Themes Report, research compiled for the
Opportunities and Challenges Report and other information provided by community members
and City decision-makers, the Planning and Community Development Department is preparing
Alternative scenarios for the community's consideration in formulating draft Land Use and
Circulation Elements. You are invited to attend the following meetings to hear and comment on
the formation of these alternatives.
x~
DATES/ PLANNING COMMISSION: WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 7, 2005 i~~ ~`~
TIMES: AT 7:00 PM ~" °~~m',~~ ~-~'~
~~~~
s~~,~~~ z~~~ ,~~,~m~~~z~_
CITY COUNCIL: TUESDAY, DECEMBER 13, 2005, AT 6:45 PM ~~ --~--
LOCATION: City Council Chambers, Second Floor, Santa Monica City Hall
1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, California 90401 bY ~he ~,~~~„
MORE INFORMATION
An agenda and staff report will be available 72 hours prior to each meeting at City Hall, 1685
Main Street, or on-line at www.santa-monica.orq. Current information on the City's effort to
update the Land Use Element is available online at www.shapethefuture2025.net and, for the
Circulation Element, http://motion.santa-monica.orq. If you want more information about this
meeting, please contact Jonathan Lait, AICP, Principal Planner at (310) 458-8341, or by e-mail
at jon.lait smqov.net.
The meeting facility is wheelchair accessible. For disability-related accommodations, please
contact Carmen Gutierrez at (310) 458-8341 or (310) 458-8696 TTY at least 72 hours in
advance. All written materials are available in alternate format upon request. Santa Monica Big
Blue Bus Lines numbered 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10 serve City Hall.
ESPAIVOL
Esto es una notificacion al publico solicitando sus comentarios sobre los proyectos Shape the
Future 2025 y Motion by the Ocean, los cuales crearan polizas para guiar futuros edificios y
actividades de transportacion durante los proximos 20 anos en la Ciudad de Santa Monica.
Para mas informacion, visite nuestro sitio de Internet: www.shapethefuture2025.net y
http://motion.santa-monica.orq o Ilame a Carmen Gutierrez en el departamento de planificacion
al numero (310) 458-8341.
43