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.