SR-111467-8F~., • ~~
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
~~ INTER E T E T
` DATE: November 3, 1967
TO: Perry Scott, City Manager
~~
FROM: Bartlett L. Kennedy, City Engineer
MEMO g ~~
SUBJECT: Second and Third Courts Adjacent to Mall
~ `~
Cy0~11 ~ 1967
THIS MUST B~
gETUKNFU a0 THE
CIT FOR FILIP Gt=FICE
As you know, the City Council, at its meeting of October 24, 1967
(Item 7E) requested recommendations and cost estimates for various
proposals of the Chamber of Commerce relative to the subject courts.
The following is furnished in compliance with this request.
RENAMING.
The present names are Second Court and Third Court. The Chamber
proposes to rename them Mall Court West and Mall Court East,.
respectively, and requests that appropriate street name signs be
installed.
If the Gity Council approves the proposed renaming, this office would
recommend against the installation of street name signs as setting an
unnecessary precedent.
~I`j
The estimated cost of furnishing and installing the twelve signs ,~il~Luz`~
required would be : ~ e (b-~}~~w~~,l
Materials and Fabrication ---- $ 155 fJ~ ~~
--------
Installation Labor ------------------- 120
Total Estimated Cost -------- $ 275
If the same pattern were followed throughout the commercial areas of
the City, approximately 115 signs would be required, at an estimated
total cost to the City of $3,500.
NO PARKING SIGNS.
The Chamber requests that the present "No Parking in Alleys°i signs
be removed from both 2nd and 3rd Courts and replaced with signs
deleting the word "alleys".
The most satisfactory substitute sign would be one reading "No Parking
Either Side". A total of 40 signs would be involved, costing an
estimated $600 to fabricate and install.
November 3, 1867 Page 2
Subject: Second and Third Courts Adjacent to Mall
STREET LIGHTING.
The problem of adequate lighting in Second and Third Courts is
complicated by the irregular alignment of the various stores,
creating isolated pockets of darkness requiring special illumina-
tion. -The Chamber has recommended that the City make a study of
the problem and develop a proposed lighting program.
A "normal" street light installation in these courts would not be
practical due to space limitations; would be quite costly; and
would not solve the "spot" lighting problem.
When the six parking garages are completed, with their exterior
lights along the rear faces of the structures, the overall light-
ing will be greatly improved, To complete the program I would
suggest the installation, at property owner expense, of the same
type of lighting fixtures on properly located stores to complete
the overall illumination and illuminate the "dark spots". A
survey to determine these locations could be undertaken by a
consultant engaged by the Chamber or by the merchants involved.
The following fixture and energy costs are furnished:
Holophane Fixture #480 - list price -------- $ 88.80
300 watt incandescent bulb - list price ---- 0.71
89.61
Sales Tax ---____ 3,~g
Total ----------- $ 93.19
Energy cost per year; light burning
all night every nights
@ $0.03/Kw hr. ------------------------- $ 36.72
Q .0.02/KW hr. ------------------------- 24.48
Installation costs will of course vary with each installation.
PAVING.
The Chamber suggests that both 2nd and 3rd Courts be repaved.
Both of these courts were repaved less than five years ago. Con-
struction damage caused by the contractor's operations at Parking
Structures 1 and 2 was completely reppaired; similar repairing will
be accomplished at Structures 3 and 4 (and 5 and 6, when built).
No further expenditure of funds for paving is justified.
November 3, 1967 Page 3
Subject: Second and Third Courts Adjacent to Mall
PAVING (continued)
The signs of utility patching can be hidden and a uniformity of
pavement color can be obtained by the application of an asphalt
emulsion sealer (such as SS1H emulsion) at an estimated total cost
of $700.
PIDESTRIAN WALK6+lAY .
The Chamber has suggested that a
one side of the alley, either by
or by a painted line.
pedestrian walk be established on
the construction of a concrete walk
If such a walkway is to be provided, I would recommend that it be on
the Mall side of the court and that it be a painted line, not con-
crete, since it could not in any case, due to width limitations, be
a raised sidewalk.
However, I would recommend against this installation, since it would
in my opinion, by instilling a false sense of security in the pedes-
trian, create more of a problem than it would solve. Due to the
narrow width, the necessity for trucks to park in the alley while
making deliveries, and the necessity in many cases for refuse con-
tainers to be stored in the alley, vehicles would be forced to drive
in the walkway area and pedestrians often would be required to leave
the wa kway. This wou d increase, not reduce, the accident potentia
SPEED LIMIT AND BOULEVARD STOPS.
The present speed limit is 15 mph. The suggestion was made to reduce it.
A lower speed limit would not be obeyed, nor in my opinion is it
necessary. More rigid enforcement of the existing limit might help
whatever problem appears to exist.
A boulevard stop at each parking structure lobby entrance was sug-
gested. Since there is adequate sight distance in both directions
from the lobby exit, this would only unduly delay traffic without
providing any additional security to the pedestrian, and it should
not, in my opinion, be installed.
As outlined in previous memos on this subject, the major problem
facing the merchants abutting these courts continues to be the
appearance of the rear of the store buildings.
BARTLETT L. KENNEDY
City. Engineer