Loading...
SR-820727-City Counci: Meeting 7/27/82 Santa Monica, California TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: City Staff SUBJECT: Off-Site Improvement Plan-Ocean Park Redevelopment Project. Introduction This report transmits additional revisions to the proposed Beach Improvement Plan, discusses the traffic and financial components of the plan, and recommends that the Agency/Council approve the plan and authorize the Staff to file for an amended Coastal development permit. Background At the July 6, 1982 meeting the City Council reviewed the proposed Beach Improvement Plan and requested information on the traffic impacts and the .proposed method of financing the improvements. The plan has been modified slightly since the July 6th meeting in response to additional public comments. The modifications consist of: 1. Widening of Barnard Way greenbelt from Wadsworth Avenue to Ocean Park Boulevard by approximately 10 feet. 2. Expansion of children's play facilities to the northern portion of the project in order to achieve 1 A a more equitable distribution of play facilities in the area. The revisions have been incorporated into the plan. The State Department of Recreation and Parks has reviewed the plan and has determined that it conforms to the approved General plan. Traffic Impacts The traffic analysis component of the Beach Improvement Plan included an extensive data collection program to formulate a base for quantifying the traffic conditions and evaluating the various alternatives. This program included hourly machine counts and peak hour intersection counts to determine traffic volumes; a survey of parking lots users to find out their origin and route choice to the beach; and a parking utilization survey to determine the hourly usage of the parking lot. As a result of the data collection program, field observations, discussions with City staff, and meetings with the public, the consultant team has identified various issues regarding the traffic and parking system. These issues are presented below. Streets and traffic The major concern regarding transportation is the general issue of providing access to the beach for local residents as well as regional visitors. The transportation network serving the 2 coastal area and specifically the beach parking lot should be capable of accommodating the flows of people into, out of and through the area with an acceptable level of service and minimal inconvenience. An acceptable balance must be provided between the various and often conflicting needs of travelers. Travel by automobile must be considered but need not overshadow the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists and transit users. Pedestrian access to the beach (east-west) must be accommodated as well as pedestrian flow along the beach (north-south). Conflicts between pedestrians and automobile traffic create inconvenience for the pedestrian and a high potential for serious accidents. This is especially true for pedestrians .crossing Barnard Way. The use of public transit as a travel mode to the beach must continue to be a viable and attractive alternative to the automobile. Residents of the neighborhoods adjoining the beach area are subject to inconvenience and nuisance as a result of the high volumes of traffic associated with weekend recreational activities. Vehicles waiting to enter the parking lot form queues which back up onto Ocean Park Boulevard and Barnard Way creating a disruption to traffic flow and emitting exhaust fumes into the air. 3 The high traffic volumes and speeds on Neilson Way create a barrier and an inconvenience to residents, pedestrians and bicyclists. Barnard Way is perceived as a local residential street by some residents of the area but functions as a collector facility and a major access route to the beach parking lot. Parking Lot An issue which relates to the parking lot as well as traffic circulation on the streets is the location and operation of the entrances and exits. The locations affect travel patterns on the streets as drivers select routes which will most easily provide access to the entrance. Traffic circulation within the parking lot is likewise dependent upon the location of the entrances and exits. For pedestrian circulation through the parking lot, it is important to avoid unnecessary inconvenience and to minimize accident potential. At night, the parking lot is sometimes used for drag racing resulting in tire' screeching and other activities which are a nuisance to nearby residents. Provision must be made for the immediate exit of vehicles which reach the attendant without enough money to pay the parking fee. 4 The storage lanes at the entrance do not adequately accommodate the queues which form on peak days in the summer, spilling over into the street. The parking lot is generally underutilized throughout the year, so a portion of the space may better serve the public if it were converted to an alternative land use, such as a park. There is an absence of parking spaces for handicapped drivers. General standards for parking lot design must be applied, such as efficiency of space, geometrics, traffic circulation within the lot, pedestrian movements, operation and maintenance. Traffic Recommendations The primary objective of the overall plan is to create an area which is beneficial, useful and pleasing to people who use the area, including local residents as well as the regional populace. Specifically, the plan promotes the shortest and most direct route from the freeway to the beach parking lots, reducing traffic on local streets. Transportation needs have been only one of several types of criteria which were used in formulating the recommended plan. Additionally, it must be recognized that a transportation needs' analysis and coastal access requirements as stated in the Santa Monica Coastal Program, should place the greatest emphasis on the 5 use of public transit, followed by bicycles, pedestrians and, finally the automobile in terms of planning future development. Streets The primary change to be recommended regarding the street network is to reduce the width of Barnard Way from four lanes to two lanes along the entire segment from Bicknell Avenue to Neilson Way. The pavement should be a minimum of 42 feet in width, which would allow for two travel lanes, two bike lanes and parallel parking along one side if desired. Bus stops should be provided for beach access at key locations. The intersections at Hollister Avenue should be equipped with a left-turn lane for southbound to eastbound vehicles and the intersection at Ocean Park Boulevard should have left-turn lanes for both northbound and southbound traffic. The intersection of Barnard Way and Neilson Way should have two eastbound lanes on Barnard Way, a right-turn-only lane and a left/through lane. There are several advantages to this proposal. One is that Barnard Way would acquire the characteristics of a local street because of the decreased traffic volumes and the reduced pavement width. This would create a more pedestrian oriented facility as crossing the street would be easier and safer. The street would similarly be more amenable to bicycle usage. The strip of land gained by narrowing Barnard Way could be converted to park land or parking spaces. In general the reduction of Barnard Way to two lanes 6 would create a street which is more livable for the residents of the area and for the non-automobile users of the beach. Ocean Park Boulevard should be reduced to two lanes between Barnard Way and Neilson Way and equipped with a raised median. The bike lanes should be preserved on both sides of the street. Left turn lanes should be provided at the Neilson Way and the Barnard Way intersections. The sidewalks along both sides of Ocean Park Boulevard should be widened. These changes provide a much needed buffer for local residents subject to pedestrian and vehicular beach traffic It is recommended that all existing traffic signals remain in place and that a new pedestrian actuated signal be installed across Barnard Way at the end of the pedestrian walkway through the Sea Colony development. It is also recommended that a traffic signal be installed at the intersection of Barnard Way and Bicknell Avenue with left-turn lanes provided on both approaches of Barnard Way. This new signal as well as additional pedestrian crosswalks along Barnard Way would reduce speed of traffic and increase pedestrian safety. In addition, pedestrian actuated signals should be provided on Neilson Way. These proposed modifications will also reduce existing traffic volumes on fourth Street between Pico and Ocean Park Boulevard. 7 Concurrent with street and parking lot improvements, a signing program should be developed replacing existing signs and routing traffic along the most direct routes to beach parking lots. This will further ensure that traffic is directed away from neighborhoods. Parking Lot It is recommended that the main entrance to the parking lot be located at Bicknell Avenue and that an auxiliary entrance be operated at Ocean Park Boulevard. The queuing lanes for the main entrance should be extended in length. The entrance should be equipped with three lanes at the attendant area to speed up the service rate of entering vehicles. The entrance must also be designed with a turn-around area and an exit to allow vehicles to leave if the driver has no money or does not want to enter the lot. The two lane exit will be retained at Hollister Avenue. A secondary entrance will be developed at Ocean Park Boulevard with exit retained south o£ Ocean Park Boulevard southbound onto Barnard Way. An exit at the south end of the parking lot southbound onto Barnard Way will be provided. The lot should be designed with aisles running north-south. Cross aisles should be placed at several locations within the lot to eliminate unnecessarily long rows and give the drivers the 8 option of turning and seeking another row. These cross aisles will also serve as east-west pedestrian corridors through the lot. If Bicknell Avenue is the main entrance, traffic circulation on the street network should be minimized because the majority of the beach related traffic is from the north. Traffic volumes on Barnard Way, Ocean Park Boulevard and the nearby residential streets should decrease. Maintenance Costs of the Proposed Beach Improvement Plan The proposed plan will result in an increase in the maintenance costs by approximately $62,500. The increase is largely attributed to approximately 8.5 acres of additonal landscaped space. It should be noted that the proposed beach restaurant and other food services provided for in the plan will generate sufficient income to defray the added maintenance costs. Proposed Financing The total Capital cost of the off-site as well as on-site improvements are estimated at $8,500,000 as follows: Affordable Housing On-Site Park Beach Improvement $3,500,000 350,000 4,500,000 Total $8,500,000 9 In addition the redevelopment project currently carries a debit of $1,864,449, $1,040,000 to HUD and $824,449 to the City. The Agency can fund the proposed capital improvements and repay its debt through a variety of sources including tax increment revenues generated by the redevelopment project, proceeds from the sale of land and the $7,000,000 payment from settlement with Lincoln Property Company. The redevelopment project currently generates $715,000 in tax increrent revenues annually. Assuming a $60,000,000 market value for phase II, upon completion, the project will generate an additional $600,000 or a total of $1,315,000 in tax increment revenues annually. The projected tax increment revenues can support a tax allocation bond issue of $6-7 million depending on timing of issuance and market conditions. The attached schedule of performance illustrates one example of financing the proposed improvements. It should be noted that the dates listed are mere estimates. Depending upon Coastal Commission's conditions and the terms of the final settlement agreement with Lincoln Property Company, this schedule and therefore the revenue estimates could vary substantially. The proposed financing plan provides for termination of Federal involvement in the project through a $500,000 loan from the City in March 1983. It recommends that the Agency repay the City from the $2.1 million in land sale proceeds. The capital improvements are primarily funded from the tax increment revenues. Upon 10 completion the redevelopment project the fund balance of $5,955,129 can be utilized for the off-site improvements that are not included in the Beach Improvement Plan. Should the Agency choose to fund the proposed capital improvements from the $7 million developer payment rather than tax increment revenues, the tax increments will revert back to the taxing jurisdictions such as the County, the City, and the School District. The City will receive approximately 17%, the County 40% and the balance will flow to other taxing jurisdictions. Recommendation It is recommended that the Agency/Council approve the proposed Beach Improvement Plan and authorize the staff to file for an amended Coastal development permit. Prepared by: John Alschuler City Manager John Jalili Assistant City Manager Attachment 11 Estimated Schedule of Performance and Financial Analysis 1983 - 1986 Ocean Park Redevelopment Project Revenues Expenditures Fund Balance 1/1/83 Coastal Permit Obtained $(1,864,449)a 3/30/83 HUD Project Close-out (1,324,449)b 12/1/83 Redeveloper Completing Final Working drawings 5/1/84 City Issues Building Permit 5/2/84 Redeveloper pays first installment of `$7 million $2,250,000 payment per settlement agreement 5/5/84 Agency Conveys land, receives sales proceeds and repays loan to the City 2,100,000 $1,509,871 2,840,129 5/6/84 Redeveloper Commences Construction 5/6/84 Agency accumulates prior 12 month's tax increments 715,000 3,555,129 5/6/84 Agency funds affordable housing 3,500,000 55,129 9/1/84 Agency issues $6 million in tax allocation bonds 6,000,000 6,055,129 9/30/84 Agency funds on-site park 350,000 5,705,129 9/30/84 Agency funds beach improvement plan 4,500,000. 1,205,129 5/6/86 Redeveloper completes construction and pays agency 4,750,000 5_,955.,129 final installment of $4,750,000 Estimated Schedule of Performance and Financial Analysis 1983 - 1986 Ocean Park Redevelopment Project a. Negative fund balance of $1,864,44Q resulting from agency's indebtedness to HUD and the City. The Agency currently owes HUD $1,040,000 and the City'$824,449. ; b. In order to terminate federal .involvement in the. project the agency repays HUO with a $500,000 loan from the City and $540,000 in accumulated tax increments reducing the total project debt to $1,324,449.. ITEM 2 Mayor: I'd like to say as a resident of Ocean Park, and a person who worked for two years on the Council in the minority to stall the second phase of this development i•~hich was about to proceed, • to ensure that we had an adequate access way on Ashland Avenue, to make sure that the City held fast with its obligations to - proceed with the 61 units o£ senior citizen housing on Barnard Way, and to rehabilitate the 26 units on Neilson and Ocean Park .Boulevard, and to proceed with additional off-site housing in Ocean Park,. As the Councilmember who's really tried to build upon the original negotiated settlement that the community built in the mid 1970's and to go beyond that. This particular settle- ment goes beyond what I had anticipated we would be able to get. I had hoped, and it .would still be my hope, that would we wouldn't have to have anything. .That we could still have that nice green space there.. But,. in looking at .the choices we had of 158 con- dominiums and a private six acre park completely surrounded by wealthy development, 158 units that were 20 feet higher than the current proposal, that were set exactly on Neilson to provide a huge wall and a freeway atmosphere in the middle of the_Ocean Park neighborhood, bad traffic in and ovt of Ocean Park Boule- vard,that provided traffic on Oceann.Park into .the beach, a . contract the required the City to do landscaping of the parking lots and park. only in front of the rich areas - the two condo- minium areas. and not the rest of the neighborhood. And instead to see a program that provides for 150 units - fewer units - of lower height, lower bulk, better set-back, additional area so .that we can provide up to 75 units of housing for low and moder- ..'ate income people in .the community, a narrowed Ocean Park Boule- vard to provide a buffer for the people on the north. side of Ocean Park Boulevard, a park that-is far more accessible to the `.community on the beach side and stretches the whole length of the south part of our City that will enhance the City for everyone 2. configuration that will help the senior citizens who now live in the Neilson Villa and will .live in Barnard Way. And perhaps the people who want to cross Neilson. That we have solved an enormous numher of problems that existed in this community with this project. And I think we ought to proud of ourselves. Particularly proud of the Staff for negotiating under very difficult circumstances with. very different interests repre- sented in the community, most of which. have been me,t. That's why there were only five or six people here testifying here tonight, instead of the 300 who came to the first meeting. Most of the issues have been met and we ought to thank our, Staff and we ought to thank the outside consultants who don't have the political grounding in our City to come in here and deal with us in our political ataareness and the controvery we have and the committment we have to community and come up with. such a beautiful plan. I think we should all.be proud, we should vote on it tonight, and look forward to the kinds of refinements and additional programs for activities on that beachfront and in the community that'..this project will provide. i 2.' Mayor indicated something for the record - her entire comment 2/2 ZANE: I would be proud to make a motion- laughter - I would like to move agency-council approval of the proposed beach. improvement plan, noting the remarks of councilmembers earlier in the evening regarding those clarifications. And authorize affix the Staff to file for an amended coastal development permit. YG: Second. MANAGER: If I could just suggest a --- if we could approve the off-site plan and direct the staff to prepare a coastal application and direct the city attorney to prepare appropriate legal documents that shall be brought back to the council for final approval. ZANE: I will include that in my motion. YG: I'll agree to that. That's the motion and I'm the seconder of that motion. Ok? The city manager's wording of it is more appropriate. May we have aroll call on this. YES: CONN., EDWARDS, ~ESS~'r ~~'~~, yGt . N0: JENNINGS*, R1>~~ JENNINGS*: Without any pride, I vote no : :. and the reason.. is because - and I'd like the record to reflectlthis - I do not believe we should be spending such a large sum on beautifying the beach when people are starving to death and going without housing in Santa Monica as item 11G on our agenda tonight. And secondly, I don't believe that adequate attention has been given to the needs and desires of a large number of low and moderate income persons who come from outside of Santa ~4onica to use our beach. (continued) (continued). 4/14 **REED: No. And I would like the record to reflect that my no vote is cast because I believe proceeding in this manner is against the intent of redevelopment agency motion of April 6, 1.9.82 in which. we committed ourselves to proceed with off-site improvements and housing in a parallel program.. *** ZANE: I vote yes noting that the expenditures here I believe necessary in order ao secure the appropriate coastal commission approval of our amended permit. And it's for that reason that I support those expenditures. Yes. The motion carries.. .That concludes the business of the joint meeting..... CONN MOVE S ADJOURNMENT EDWARDS SECONDS. ALL IN FAVOR ADJOURNED.