Loading...
sr-030811-8bc7® City Council Report City of Santa Monica City Council Meeting: March 8, 2011 Agenda Item: ~-°J To: Mayor and City Council From:. Eileen Fogarty, Director of Planning and Community Development Subject: Civic Center/Downtown Parking Assessment Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council: 1) Authorize development of a parking demand reduction program designed to address event parking needs, 2) Approve siting for a potential subterranean Civic Center Parking facility beneath the existing Civic Center surface parking lot with the smallest feasible footprint, and determihe number of spaces using analysis of actual demand, based on operations of the new event venue, TDM measures, the Light Rail and transit enhancements, and the parking shuttle program, 3) Defer construction of a potential new Civic Center Parking facility until after the completion of the major parking structure projects in the downtown and dependent on increase in demand or reduction in supply. Executive Summary This report summarizes the rationale and findings for the Nelson\Nygaard Civic Center/Downtown Parking Assessment and makes recommendations for the Civic Center shared parking strategy. In March 2009 Council gave direction to address the long term integration of the Civic Center and the Downtown. As part of the integration planning,. Council authorized Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates to conduct a comprehensive Civic Center Parking Area Assessment to address Civic Center parking demand per the evolving Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) polices for shared parking as a sustainable development tool. The study assessed parking needs for the existing and potential future Civic Center -uses based on a shared parking model including temporary Downtown parking replacement requirements. The study incorporates projected demand from: City Hall and the County Courts • Palisades Garden Walk (PGW) • Civic Auditorium Santa Monica High School (2009 Master Plan, including Barnum Hall and renovated Greek Amphitheater) • Early Childhood Education Center (ECEC) 1 • Occasional large events at the Pier or adjacent beach lot • A potential new cultural arts facility • Support for the downtown parking program The Nelson\Nygaard approach recognizes that parking is an important resource which is expensive to build and should be considered in the context of additional or alternative cost effective means of addressing parking demand. While traditional approaches build for peak cumulative demand which occurs on limited days of the year, leaving underutilized parking during remaining periods, a shared parking approach seeks to optimize the use of land and parking resources. The study determined: • The combined existing Civic Center surface lot and parking structure provide sufficient parking for current usage patterns in the Civic Center area, .and can continue to do so while providing spaces for the re-purposed Auditorium and development of the Early Childhood Education Center. • The greatest future demand for parking will be generated by the combined projected cultural events at the Civic Auditorium and the High School theater facilities, Barnum Hall and the Greek Amphitheater. ® As the "full spectrum" multi-venue event scenario is based on assumptions for future projects, rather than actual current demand, the number of spaces should be informed by a utilization demand analysis conducted when the re-purposed Auditorium event venue, parking shuttle program and. other parking demand strategies, and Light Rail are operational. The study identified a flexible phasing approach to shared parking based on two scenarios. The scenarios could be implemented sequentially if necessary, or as alternates depending on the demand data collected under actual operating conditions: Scenario One -More Efficiently Utilize Existing Resources: This scenario provides an approach to meet projected demand without a new parking facility. It recommends implementing an aggressive parking demand reduction and shared parking strategies while accommodating required proximate Nederlander parking per business terms, and address "full spectrum" event days through coordinated event management, enhanced parking demand reduction strategies, temporary relocation of contractual parkers, and improved pedestrian, bike linkages and transit augmentatioh to allow for improved access between the City's shared parking facilities. Increased demand and /or loss of surface parking spaces due to additional build-out which displaces significant surface parking would trigger consideration of Scenario Two. Scenario Two -Shared Parking with New Facility: This scenario provides options for building a new facility if there is a change in either supply or demand. The analysis concluded that the optimal site for potential additional parking is under the current Civic Center surface parking lot. The site was selected because of its proximity to the greatest demand generators, support for overall circulation, and the cost-effectiveness of construction relative to other sites. The potential new facility would address projected demand, including addressing business terms for Nederlander operations, with new parking facility with one of the following options: Option A: Based on the current expectations of multi-venue events, the cumulative peak demand for a replacement subterranean structure which maintains all current contractual 2 8e agreements and maintains Civic Center spaces for contractual packers during events would need maximum capacity of approximately 950 parking spaces. Option 8: If the City temporarily relocates monthly pass contractual and non-contractual pass holders on .the estimated 30-46 full spectrum event days, and provide shuttles between off-site parking structures while implementing a TDM strategy for all users of the Civic Center, the City would need to .build a subterranean structure with approximately 540 spaces. Construction Timing: If an additional parking facility is constructed, the timing of construction will be a critical factor. Based on the Downtown Interim Parking Plan, while Parking Structure 6 is under construction and replacement spaces for Parking Structure 3 are being built, -Civic Center parking facilities are being utilized for temporary replacement spaces for the downtown. Based on current construction schedules, it is anticipated that the Civic Center garage and surface lot parking facilities will need to accommodate temporary parking from the downtown through Summer 2014. The renovated and re-programmed Civic Auditorium will be starting operations at that time, and will be the major contributing factor in identifying both the ultimate demand and optimal timing for the construction of new spaces. A recommended strategy would be to analyze one year of operating data to assess actual demand and optimal timing for construction. Parking Reduction Strategies: Managing event schedules and parking demand is an important component of both scenarios. Nelson\Nygaard recommends that once the repurposed Civic Auditorium and the Light Rail station are fully operational that a data gathering period commence to provide the most accurate analysis of the exact number of new spaces needed for an additional facility to augment the existing 705-space Civic Center Parking Structure. Data should include comprehensive TDM measures, parking contract requirements, transit pass programs, pricing strategies and the effects of the operating Downtown parking shuttle. This analysis shall include meeting the parking obligations with the Nederlahder Organization for the Civic Auditorium. Staff recommends that final decisions on exact number of spaces and timing of construction be considered using. occupancy and demand data based on actual operations. If the demand data determines the need for additional parking, it is recommended the facility be constructed with the smallest optimal footprint so as to preserve as much existing surface parking spaces as possible to minimize the loss of surface spaces during construction and the need for temporary shuttling to off-site parking while the new facility is under construction. The Executive Summary for the Civic Center Parking Assessment is included as Exhibit A. 3 Background The City Council approved the updated Civic Center Specific Plan (CCSP) in 2005. The Civic Center Specific Plan identifies projects serving cultural, civic and residential uses. Acknowledging that full build-out of the 2005 Civic Center Specific Plan would take place over an extended period of time, the plan assumed that additional Civic Center parking may be provided. as specific projects were constructed and demand increased. The Public Safety building and the Civic .Center Parking Structure have been constructed, and the additional projects identified below now have anticipated construction completion dates as follows: • The Village residential project - 2014 • Palisades Garden Walk and Town - 2014 • The Civic Auditorium renovation - 2014 • The Light Rail terminus station - 2015 • Early Childhood Education Center - 2015 In response to the approved 2006 Downtown Parking Program, the Council recognized the connection between the downtown and the Civic Center and the value of providing shared parking for the Civic Center uses which would also serve as support for parking in the downtown. In keeping with this concept, the 705-space Civic Center Parking Structure was completed in 2007 to complement the fully operational 1,010-space surface parking lot in order to address the anticipated need for interim replacement parking during the re-construction of parking structures in the downtown. The structure would also be the permanent replacement parking for the existing surface lot when additional Civic facilities were built, and serve the Civic Auditorium, City Hall facilities and the County Court House. On March 24. 2009, the City Council authorized staff to proceed with integrated circulation. and parking analyses for the Civic Center and the downtown and a contract was subsequently authorized for Nelson\Nygaard to conduct a parking assessment. On May 12, 2009 a community meeting on the Integration of the Civic Center and the downtown was held during which community members noted that in most cases they would be willing to walk 10 minutes, approximately '/z mile, from parking to their destination. On 4 June 9. 2009 the Redevelopment Authority identified priorities for redevelopment funded projects, inoludirig an allocation of $25 million for shared parking in the Civic Center. On March 8, 2011, as part of implementing the Interim Parking Plan, staff will recommend authorization of a price incentive to current downtown monthly parking pass holders to temporarily relocate to Civic Center. Also on March 8, 2011 Council will review the proposed business terms with the Nederlander organization for the repurposing of the Civic Auditorium. As of the writing of this report, the School District is still in process of refining the Santa Monica High School Master Plan to address phasing of improvements based upon funding availability. The Nelson\Nygaard analysis builds on the community process and evolution of the City's successful shared parking policies. Key efforts .which informed the analysis were the relationship of the Civic Center Specific Plan, approved in 2005, and the Downtown Parking Program approved in 2006, .the 2008 Joint Use Study for potential shared uses between the Civic Center and the High School, and the LUCE policies for shared parking as a tool for sustainable development and achieving the goal of No Net New Evening Peak Period .Vehicle Trips over the next 20 years. CCSP and the Downtown Parking Program. In 2006, the Downtown Parking Program was adopted provide a flexible plan for future development, and includes use of the Civic Center facilities on a temporary basis. The plan included several phases, beginning with a seismic retrofit program and progressinq~ to reconstruction of existing facilities and construction of new facilities in the vicinity of 5t and Arizona, including periodic evaluation. The 2009 Walker Parking Study evaluated the existing conditions and found that the planned full build-out of new parking facilities was not immediately necessary at that time. In addition, the study supported the 2010 LUCE planning policies that identify shared parking facilities that facilitate the "Park Once" philosophy as an important economic strategy and public benefit. In November 2009 Council recommended the commencement of a design-build process for Parking Structure 6 at 1431 2"d Street as the first project under the re-construction phase. As part of an overall strategic parking program for the downtown, the Council recommended maximizing the parking supply to serve existing and future development. One advantage to the increased number of spaces at this location is additional parking close to the Pier and the Civic Center to accommodate the complementary peak need for downtown usage and occasional event programming. The rebuild of Parking Structure 6 with a total of up to 750 spaces, approximately 50°/" more than the current structure, is proposed to begin in 2012 with an 18-21 month construction period. 5 As part of the comprehensive Interim Parking Plan, the City is responding to the temporary loss of 340 spaces by relocating approximately 500 monthly parkers to the Civic Center and the Library public lots, freeing up over 340 spaces of prime retail- serving, short term spaces in the downtown. As additional construction continues with the proposed demolition of Parking Structure 3 for. a new cinema project, the Civic Center will continue to serve as a key temporary replacement parking receptor until permanent replacement parking is built. Based on the proposed constructioh schedule for Parking Structure #6 and the proposed demolition of Parking Structure #3, the Civic Center garage and surface lot parking facilities would have the capacity to accommodate temporary parking for the downtown through Summer 2014 (Attachment B). Joint Use Study In light of the concurrent planning for Civic Center projects and the Santa Monica High School Campus Master Plan, the City hired Koning Eizenberg Architecture to analyze the potential for possible joint use in the areas of cultural linkages (Civic Auditorium, Samohi's Barnum Hall & Greek Theatre), open space & recreation (fields, gymnasiums, courts), education (childcare, cultural classes), mobility & access (for vehicles, buses, pedestrians & bicycles) and the character of the surrounding streets. In relation to shared parking, the Joint Use study concluded: 1) Shared parking between the Civic Center and the high school needs to be framed by the LUCE transportation demand and connectivity policies; 2) Parking and Circulation analysis should evaluate: • Capacity for concurrent use by the high school and Civic Auditorium • Early Childhood Education Center (ECEC) parking needs • Trip reduction potential through identifying possibilities for locating after-school programs within the Civic Campus The Nelson\Nygaard analysis incorporated these recommendations into their approach. LUCE and Shared Parking Policy The goals and policies of the LUCE are largely structured to match parking supply and parking demand through better management of the existing parking system. In addition to pricing strategies, the LUCE seeks to consolidate parking resources .into centralized facilities within the Civic Center (Goal D17, policies D17.1, T26.1) that are served by clear and comfortable pedestrian, bike and transit connections to adjacent districts and neighborhoods in order to accommodate business, institutional, and visitors needs (policy D11.3).The LUCE identified the benefit of shared parking for multi-uses and recognized the ongoing balance between the downtown and the Civic Center parking facilities. Proximity preference was evaluated in part based on the May 11, 2009 Downtown/Civic Center Integration workshop in which residents and .stakeholders indicated that they are willing to walkup to a half mile to events, particularly if the walk is pleasant. The community also noted a desire to have some adjacent parking for night time Auditorium uses. 6 Civic Center Parking Assessment Study The Civic Center Parking Assessment Study, initiated in 2009; and conducted by Nelson\Nygaard Associates, approached determining the demand for additional spaces and the most appropriate location as a comprehensive analysis of: • Siting conditions • Proximity to highest demand and type of use • Cost effectiveness for construction • Optimal circulation The intent of the analysis was to create an ongoing working document that supported the long term integrated planning efforts for the Civic Center/Downtown areas during the design phases of the Exposition Light Rail, Palisades Garden Walk, Civic Auditorium and the necessary linkage projects that improve the circulation and connectivity in the areas. The Nelson\Nygaard approach recognizes that parking is an important resource which is expensive to build and should be considered in the context of additional or alternative cost effective means of addressing parking demand. While traditional approaches build for peak cumulative. demand which occurs on limited days of the year, leaving underutilized parking during remaining periods, a shared parking approach seeks to optimize the use of land and parking resources. The report findings are described below in the following sections: A. Existing Utilization and Projected Demand B. Parking Demand Reduction Strategies C. Scenarios to Address Demand o Scenario 1 -Efficiently Use Existing Resources o Scenario 2 -Shared Parking with a New Facility D. Sites Considered E. Additional Analysis on the Palisades Garden Walk Site Due to differences in peak demand and use characteristics, the analysis concluded that current and immediate future demand can be met by the current supply in most cases. On limited occasions, additional parking may be needed for large scale events such as Cirque du Soleil or when multiple large events are scheduled simultaneously. In those cases, Nelson\Nygaard identified flexible phasing scenarios that include application of proactive event management, demand management, TDM and .other strategies to address demand, and opportunities for building additional shared parking if future demand data based on actual need supports construction. 7 A. Existing Utilization and Projected Demand The analysis summarized demand characteristics and. peak demand for purposes of comparison, including weekdays, and weekends as summarized below. The table provides a summary of occupancy levels observed among study area facilities at key demand time periods, expressed in terms of both the share of the inventory currently occupied (utilization) and the number of empty spaces remaining available, based primarily on observations during May and June of 2009 and September and October of 2010. These data reveal a high level of overall availability within the public off-street inventory serving the study area. Closer analysis, however, reveals that utilization within individual facilities varies significantly, with some downtown garages, experiencing modest occupancy levels even when the downtown inventory as a whole nears 90% occupancy. The large beach lots and nearby facilities have a strong seasonal variation, particularly on weekends. During hot summer weekend days, several of the beach lots are completely full. However, by late afternoon, parking in these lots becomes available again. Table 1: Existing Off-street Parking Inventory and Utilization Civic Center 705 52.7% 334 35.4% 456 23.1% 542 Civic Auditorium Surface Lot 1,010 33.0% 677 42.0% 586 17.1 % 837 CivicGenterArea 1,715 41:1%° 1,011 39.3% '1,042 19.6% 1,379 Downtown S1/1234 4th St. 338 97.0% 10 98.8%° 4 95.3% 16 Downtown S2/1235 2nd St. 647 92.4% 49 81.9% 117 58.3% 270 Downtown S3/1320 4th St. 336 98.5% 5 104.3% -15 97.8% 8 Downtown S4/1321 2nd St. 652 65.7% 224 92.3% 51 85.4% 95 Downtown S5/1440 4th St. 665 91.1 % 60 91.4% 58 62.5% 250 Downtown S6/1431 2nd St. 338 97.5% 9 98.5% 5 95.9% 14 Downtown S7/ SM Place 820 54.2% 376 86.0% 115 76.5% 193 Downtown S8/ SM Place 1,040 61.9% 396 93.3% 70 80.4% 204 Downtown S9/1136 4th St. 292 99.0% 3 95.9% 12 78.9% 62 Library Lot/601 SM Blvd. 532 59.0% 218 47.7% 278 17.0% 442 Downtown Structures 5,Ei60 76.2% 1,348 87.7%° 694 72.6% 1,551 SM Beach 1'1550 PCH 1,173 43.6% 662 90.5% 112 40.6% 697 SM Beach 4'2030 Ocean 1,319 5.8% 1,243 14.6% 1,127 0.9% 1,307 Pier Deck' /End of Colorado 271 65.7% 93 55.7% 120 33.8% 180 Larae Beach Lots'. 2.763 :27.7%° 1.998 50.8% 1.359 21.0% 2.184 Source: Capacity and utilization counts are derived from automated parking counts in September and October, 2010 for all facilities except Downtown S2, Civic Lot and the beach lots, for which counts were collected in May, 2009. 8 The projected levels of supply and demand indicate that there is a sufficient supply of parking in the Civic Center and Downtown at all times through 2015. Based on projection data, the greatest future demand will be generated when cultural events at the Civic Auditorium and the High School theater facilities, Barnum Hall and the Greek Theater occur at the same time. Peak demand is likely to be generated around 4:00 PM on Saturdays, assuming Civic Auditorium events start early in the everiing, while beach parking occupancy is still fairly high: If the private parking supply could be used by the public to a larger extent, the parking supply would be more than sufficient even during these peak events. The study estimates that starting in 2015 there would be about 30 days per year when weekday evening or weekend events (i.e., trade shows) could require additional measures to address parking demand. By 2020 or full build-out, this. has the potential to increase to 46 days per year. The study incorporates the proposed business terms for the re-purposing of the Civic Center which requires 1,000 weekend and weeknight parking spaces (and 630 weekday daytime spaces) in either the existing structure, surface lot, or a new structure, be provided in proximity to the Auditorium. B. Parking Demand Reduction Strategies The most effective long term strategy for efficient parking is to manage demand, including pro-active event coordination management to distribute events to minimize multi-venue event dates when possible, and providing-other strategies when events must be scheduled simultaneously.. Implementing parking demand reduction measures is an important factor in comprehensively managing shared parking resources, as well as implementing LUCE shared parking policy and contributing to achieving No Net New Evening Peak Period Vehicle Trips. Nelson\Nygaard identified parking management and Transportation Demand Management approaches specific to Civic Center parking and applicable to managing event parking demand including: o Coordinated event scheduling to .facilitate centralized event parking management o Transit augmentation and transit incentives (passes) o Parking shuttle to Beach lots, private lots or other public parking facilities for peak demand o Bicycle valet parking o Parking pricing to incentivize satellite lots during peak demand o Reduced parking rates at off-site lots with ticket purchase 9 These approaches are important components of all scenarios and shared parking strategies. Critical to the long term success of managing shared parking between the Pier; the downtown and the Civic Center will be the improved pedestrian linkages that create the more attractive and pleasant ten-minute walk that residents requested. The completion of the Palisades Garden Walk will provide a direct and enjoyable walk from the Civic Center to the Pier. In support of the. park and the Civic Center becoming more frequented destinations, planning staff will be bringing to Council consideration of additional suggestions for improving linkages and connections between parking sites in the Downtown and the Civic Center, such as improving the bridge connections across the I-10 freeway. C. Flexible Scenarios to Address Demand Given the assumptions and parking site analyses the study identifies two scenarios, one scenario which outlines options for not building a facility, and a second scenario which looks at options for building a facility. In response to the demand findings, these scenarios focus on relieving potential parking deficits during special events at the Civic Auditorium. The results of these scenarios are: Scenario One: More Efficiently Utilize Existing Resources Ih this scenario the City retains surface parking at the Civic Auditorium site. Existing parking supply is sufficient to accommodate ECEC. Parking reduction demand scenarios must be implemented to address multi-venue events. This scenario takes all of the TDM programs of the LUCE and recommends their full implementation. These programs could include but not be limited to: • Transit enhancements between the Civic Center and downtown, including bus stop and wayfinding improvements, real-time information, new shuttles, and rebranding of existing lines so potential passengers understand the current connections between downtown and the Civic Center (Lines 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, and 10 all make this connection, but there is little information available in the Civic area and on the sidewalks about this high level of service). • If fundable, a transit pass program for downtown employees, providing employees with free or deeply discounted EZ passes or Big Blue Bus 30-day passes. Such a program could be modeled after the successful system in downtown Boulder, CO. Bicycle enhancements, including improved bike routes to and through the study area (Michigan Ave, 2"d Street, etc.), valet bike parking at key destinations, a Bike Station downtown. 10 • Pedestrian enhancements including sidewalk and landscape improvements in key linkage areas such as bridges overthe freeway.. • A downtown mobility center, helping employees and .visitors find their way to Santa Monica without a car. The mobility center would also help arrange carpools, vanpools and employer shuttles. • Special event mobility coordination, allowing visitors to purchase reserved event parking and transit passes, along with detailed shuttle/walk directions from parking to the event. • More real-time information about parking availability, including wayfinding signage to direct motorists to nearest available spaces. • Parking fee adjustments to maintain availability in all garages and on-street spaces and synchronize incentives based on peak demand balance, i.e incentivizing downtown parking for peak Civic area utilization dates, and incentiving the City area when there are key downtown peaks. This scenario uses the Cirque du Soleil as a model, where the City was able to more efficiently utilize existing, off-peak parking downtown and in the beach lots. Public Structures 7 and 8, the Library Lot and private off-street parking can also serve as overflow for occasional event parking. During the estimated 30-46 days when there may be peak event scheduling, the City could also relocate employees to satellite facilities. In addition, closing the Civic Center structure and Civic Auditorium lot .to the general public during events would free up an additional 94 spaces. This could increase the parking availability at the Civic Auditorium by 426 spaces during critical weekdays and 212 spaces on weekends. Potentially, the shuttle that is implemented with the Interim Parking Plan would transport people from the Downtown to the Civic Center. A significant ancillary benefit to these strategies involves is that attracting people to parking downtown has positive economic and social externalities, as event-goers may shop. and dine downtown on their way to or from performances. Opportunities for retail and restaurant spending as pedestrians walk between destinations (events, parking,. transit, home, etc.) will add to the interrelated economic strength of the downtown and the Civic areas. Nelson\Nygaard recommends that the City employ a pilot utilization study once on the re- programmed Auditorium and Light Rail station open to provide the most accurate analysis of the demand for future parking. Data should include the utilization of as many of the comprehensive TDM measures listed .above as can be implemented by that time.. This 11 analysis shall include meeting the parking obligations with the Nederlander Organization for the Civic Auditorium. Final decisions on exact number of spaces and timing of construction should be made based oh this occupancy and demand data based on actual operations including the implementation of the parking demand reduction strategies.. If the demand data determines the need for additional parking, it is recommended the facility be constructed with the smallest optimal footprint as described in the recommended Scenario Two Option B below, so as to preserve as much existing surface parking spaces as possible to minimize the loss of surface spaces while the new facility is under construction. Nelson Nygaard analyzed potential parking revenue scenarios based on maintaining the surface parking lot in relation to the potential timing of constructing a new facility showing opportunities for cost benefits to delaying construction of a new facility. Scenario Two: Shared Parking with New Facility Scenario Two would be considered in the case of an increase in demand, such as the development of the cultural facility, or a significant reduction in demand that would be caused by removal of over 300 surface parking spaces due to development of a park or other Civic Center project on the site of the existing surface parking lot. The analysis looked at two options for constructing new parking at a future date, evaluating options that assumes no chahge to current Civic center contractual parking polices, and an option that considers applying parking demand reduction strategies at all times as opposed to just multi-venue event dates. Option A: Based on the current expectations of full event potential, a replacement subterranean structure which maintains all current contractual agreements and maintains Civic Center spaces for contractual parkers during occasional events, would need maximum capacity for approximately 950 parking spaces, and would displace most of the existing surface parking lot. Option 8: If the City decides to temporarily relocate monthly pass contractual and non- contractual pass holders on the estimated 30-46 full spectrum event days, and provide shuttles between off-site parking structures .while implementing a TDM strategy to all users of the Civic Center, the City would need to build a subterranean structure with space for approximately-540 spaces. Te facility could be constructed below the portion of the surface parking lot between the potential site for the New ECEC facility 12 ~~ i~ (immediately. south of Civic Center drive) and the corner of 4th Street and Pico Boulevard. On alternate option A was considered ,but rejected as infeasible, in which the City builds a 950-space subterranean parking facility under the existing Civic Auditorium lot immediately to be operable by 2014:This is not possible due to the commitment to accommodate overflow parking from the downtown as part of the Interim Parking Plan while Structure Six is under construction Construction Impacts: Assuming that the structure will be built in conjunction with the museum/cultural facility and there is no additional demand during construction, the City would need to shuttle parkers during construction. The City could utilize all 1,000 event spaces during construction for special events and shuttle all existing parking permit-holders off-site. An alternate plan would shuttle approximately 195 event-goers would need to be shuttled to the Civic Center on the weekends and 47 event-goers would need to be shuttled to the Civic Center on weekdays The smaller footprint Option B structure would allow for greater preservation of surface parking spaces while under construction and reduce disruption of Auditorium operations. Staff recommends a smaller footprint structure if a new facility is constructed. Siting: The Scenario Two study includes a siting analysis which researches potential parking layouts, efficiency and cost effectiveness at a number of sites in the Civic Center and 13 Downtown area. The siting analysis focused on identifying a preferred location which serves all of the above-mentioned uses and achieves the City's congestion. management and urban design goals. The findings of the analysis are described below in Section D, Construction Timing-Build Parking Facility After 2015 As the City has committed Civic Center parking facilities to address overflow from the Downtown through 2104 as well as 1,000 adjacent weekend and weeknight spaces for Civic Auditorium use starting in 2014, any new construction of area parking should be deferred until. after 2015 to allow the re-programmed Auditorium to be established prior to construction of new parking. From today to 2015, the existing surface lot and parking structure combine to provide over 1,700 spaces, accommodating the successful implementation of the Interim Parking Plan, providing a minimum of 1,000 adjacent weekend and weeknight spaces and 630 weekday adjacent spaces for the re-programmed Civic Auditorium, and construction of the ECEC. However, this does not address the full build-out of the Civic Center vision which includes the addition of a cultural facility or museum, a park, an open field, and demolition of part or all of the existing 1,010 surface parking supply. In addition, as identified by the Joint Use Study, additional parking may be considered as one of the potential shared uses with the High School. By 2015, the City should have determined how redevelopment of the Civic Auditorium surface lot will proceed. At that time, if the planned approximate 60,000 square foot museum and/or open space moves forward, even a slight increase in demand may tip the balance in favor of building more parking. The cultural facility may decrease the supply of parking by 220 spaces. Not only would a new cultural facility decrease supply permanently, it could increase parking demand by roughly 80 spaces on weekdays and 115 spaces on weekends. Green space is slated to occupy a minimum of approximately 600 spaces of the surface parking at the Civic Auditorium. Subterranean parking, off-site shuttles, or a combination of the two would be necessary to accommodate the event and cultural facility parking demand. In order to simplify potential variables, this scenario assumes the potential subterranean parking structure and cultural facility could be constructed simultaneously at some point after 2015. 14 D. Sites Considered The location analysis looked at a number of potential sites which are both publicly and privately owned in the Downtown and the Civic Center area to compare maximum potential, efficiency, construction cost per space, and proximity to demand. The following is a list of the sites studied, including the maximum capacity based on layout and site features. The analysis only evaluated technical parameters of layout, and consideration of urban design or pedestrian-orientation requirements could reduce the maximum number of spaces feasible at each site. • Site 1 -Civic Auditorium Campus: Subterranean parking facility at the south east corner of 4'h Street and Pico Boulevard. Maximum potential: three levels of parking with a total of 1,650 spaces. • Site 2 -Palisades Garden Walk: Subterranean parking facility between Ocean Avenue and Main Street under the future park, bounded to the south by the futre Olympic Drive and to the north by Interstate-10. Maximum potential two levels of subterranean parking with a total of 400 spaces. • Site 3 -Expo LIGHT RAIL Station: Subterranean parking facility at the southeast corner of 4th Street and Colorado Avenue, bounded to the east by 5th Street and to the south by Interstate 10. Maximum potential two levels of parking with a total of 195 spaces (3A) or 124 spaces (36). • Site 4 -Sears: Above-ground parking facility at the southwest corner of Colorado Avenue and 4th Street, bounded to the south by Interstate 10 and to the west by Main Street. Maximum potential four levels above-ground and one level below ground with a total of 639 parking spaces. • Site 5 - 5th & Arizona: (Please note that since the siting analysis in 2009, the City has acquired an adjacent parcel to increase the footprint for this site. Ongoing analysis of this site is proceeding with the 5fh and Arizona Visioning process and will include analyses of parking.) Above-ground parking facility at the southwest corner of Arizona Avenue and 5th Street. Maximum five levels above ground with a total of 557 spaces (5A, no retail) or 378 spaces (56, with retail facing. onto 5th Street). • Sites 6 & 7 -Samohi In order to better understand the potential for shared parking facilities with the Santa Monica High School, the following two sites were analyzed based on the High School Master Plan approved by the School board in 2010. The school District is currently refining the Master plan to address current funding availability. - Site 6 -Samohi Football Stadium: Subterranean parking facility underneath the proposed football stadium, likely one level with 490 parking spaces. - Site 7 -Samohi Softball Field: Subterranean parking facility underneath the proposed softball field, likely one level with 450 parking spaces. Combining the capacity, access, construction feasibility, proximity to the projected peak demand area which is the Civic Auditorium and Santa Monica High School, and cost per 15 space, the consultants considered the following factors and determined the Civic Auditorium site to be the preferred site. • Proximity to frequent peak identified demand • Parcel size and the resulting impact on efficiency, circulation delay, and construction cost per space • Flexibility in site and driveway access • Depth of subterranean structure and resulting construction cost • Capacity • Cost effectiveness • Feasibility based oh ongoing site analysis and project parameters • City control of site E. Additional Analysis on the Palisades Garden Walk Site Community input at Council meetings on December 14, 2011 and February 1, 2011 suggested interest in adding a subterranean parking garage to the Palisades Garden Walk project(PG1l~. On February 22, 2011 City staff attended the Pier Operations Committee meeting and a number of issues were raised about potential benefits to Pier operations by providing subterranean parking at the PGW site. City staff has completed additional analysis on the costs, efficiency drawbacks and benefits for providing subterranean parking under the future Palisades Garden Walk rather than providing subterranean parking at the recommended site under the Civic Center surface parking lot as described below. 16 Site Constraints -The siting analysis shows that due to the significant underground utilities, including a recently constructed sewer line, the usable area for subterranean parking is approximately 2.5 acres, compared to approximately 6.5 acres at the Civic Center surface parking lot. The smaller site results in less efficient ramping, and fewer spaces. Furthermore construction of a facility under the park would need to extend deeper to clear the tree roots and necessary soil depth to accommodate the park planting above would allow only two levels of parking before reaching the water table. Building a parking structure below the water table would significantly increase the cost per space because of de-watering requirements, raising the per space base cost by $10,000 per space; and likely becoming cost-prohibitive. Therefore, a structure on this site can viably accommodate a maximum of 400 spaces. Number of Spaces -The Nelson/Nygaard Study recommends two capacity options for the new facility scenario, 980 spaces or 540 spaces: Due to the site constraints which limit the capacity to 400 spaces, this site cannot accommodate either scenario. Access -The ongoing Civic Center and Downtown circulation analysis identifies the critical value of using existing access points for parking in order to maintain optimum traffic flow. To build parking at the PGW site, new access ramps would need to be located on Main Street, altering the current park design to include vehicle access points between. City Hall and Palisades Garden Walk. Redesigning the .park to add parking access to the design would result in major redesign and re-conceptualizing of the relationship between the two sites. In addition, the introduction of sub-grade parking at this site alters the pedestrian character and interferes with the efficiency of Main Street as a major bike route. Community comment suggests that the PGW site would provide optimal parking for Pier patrons and would be easily accessible by underground exit and egress from the Ocean and Colorado intersection closest to the Pier. However, due to the underground utilities and site constraints, the suggested access scenario would require a 450 foot pedestrian tunnel, which would cost approximately $15 million, and due to the existing freeway tunnel would not surface directly at Ocean and Colorado. This concept raises concerns about maintaining the safety of a pedestrian tunnel over such a considerable length. Proximity -The Nelson Nygaard analyses clearly notes the greatest potential demand for additional parking in the area will be generated by new frequent event programming at the Civic Auditorium and at Santa Monica High School. As Pier events occur with less frequency, and most evening Pier events have access to a large reservoir of adjacent spaces at the 1550 Beach Lot, the parking balance is better served by providing new .spaces in closer proximity to more frequent night time events at the Civic Center and Samohi. There are no current plans to permanently remove the approximate 220 parking spaces from the Pier deck. The re-built Parking Structure 6 is providing a total of up to 750 spaces, representing an increase of 350 new spaces. The rebuilt Parking Structure Six is within '/< mile of the Pier entrance, providing parking to serve events on the Pier when deck parking is displaced.. Design - In order to meet structural load requirements, the PGW design would need to be altered to either eliminate the undulating grading design or substitute the earthworks 17 with a more expensive lightweight structure for the bluff and hill grading. Community members have discussed how Chicago's Millenium Park is constructed over parking, but that park design is quite different from the community-led design for Palisades Garden Walk which focuses on creating an arroyo-type space with bluffs and hills to view the ocean. The costs associated the re-design and altered construction are estimated to be a minimum of $12.5 million: Delay- The CCSP and CCSP Final EIR assumed additional parking to address demand as projects were built out on the campus site. It is likely that locating parking under PGW and the related circulation and access changes would require additional CEQA analysis. Significant redesign and additional CEQA analysis would likely result in a delay of up to 2 years, subjecting project cost to an inflation factor of 4% per year for an additional increase of approximately $4 million. Additionally, per the current schedule, the City has the opportunity to save $3 million by utilizing the fill from the Village residential project excavation for the earthworks on the PGW site. This environmentally responsible cost saving opportunity would need to be abandoned, resulting in a total delay cost of $7 million. Total Cost Increase -The combination of cost increases for construction of a two story parking structure beneath the PGW site with a tunnel for pedestrian access is estimated to be $63.5 million total cost (Structure Cost: $29M, Tunnel Cost: $15M, Park Re-Design Cost: $12.5M, Delay/Inflation Cost: $7M),for a project with a $25 million dollar allocation. This suggested PGW alternative could not achieve the recommended new facility option estimate of 540 spaces, nor the stated desire to have additional parking adjacent to the Pier, and would generate significant unfunded expenses. Although community input suggests the increased cost might be addressed though Development Agreement contributions, there are no pending pipeline Development Agreement projects in the immediate vicinity. The City's practice has been to negotiate Development Agreements based on providing an array of public benefits which support the neighboring community. If there were an applicable development project in the future, the cost burden is too high to recoup through the negotiation process, and would preclude any other public benefit. Therefore staff does not recommend construction of parking under the Palisades Garden Walk park. Financial Impacts & Budget Actions Maintaining the existing surface parking has the potential to provide parking revenue without the costs of constructing a new facility. If a structure is to be constructed the recommended 18 site location for additional parking would be approximately $38.5 million less expensive than the PGW site. Conclusion The Civic Center/Downtown Parking Assessment study identified a flexible phasing approach to shared parking based on the two scenarios, which could be implemented sequentially if necessary, or as alternates depending on the demand data collected under actual operating conditions. Staff recommends approving site location on the eastern portion of the current Civic Auditorium surface lot subject to future data analysis and a program of parking demand reduction strategies to more effective utilize existing resources. Prepared by: Sarah Lejeune, Principal Planner, Strategic and Transportation Planning Division Approved: d 'e n Fogarty Director of Planning d Co munity Development Forwarded to Council: Rod Gould City Manager Attachments A. Civic Center Parking Assessment B. Civic Center and Downtown Parking Usage & Availability 2011-2015 19 Attach 8_B City of Santa Monica Civic Center/Downtown arin ssess en Executive Summa March 2011 NelsOn~Nygaard c!a ns u t ri`rcg a sa o c i a ces Civic Center/Downtown Parking Assessment City of Santa Monica Introduction In recent years, several major efforts have been initiated to improve public access to the Civic Center areain Santa Monica and to strengthen the link between the area and downtown. The Civic Center/Downtown Parking Assessment study was initiated in spring 2009 to collate the findings of all recent studies related to events and parking in downtown, the Civic Center and Santa Monica High School (Samohi) area, and at the beach. The purpose of the study is to analyze whether new parking should be constructed to meet the demand of future event programming and other parking needs while taking Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) policies for shared parking and demand management measures as sustainable development tools into consideration. The study assesses the existing and potential future Civic Center uses based on time-of-day, week and year, including temporary Downtown replacement requirements. The study incorporates projected demand from: • City Hall and County Courts • Palisades Garden Walk (PGW) • Civic Auditorium events • Samohi events • Early Childhood Education Center (ECEC) • A potential cultural arts facility • Occasional large events at the Pier or adjacent beach lots • Accommodation of temporary replacement parking during reconstruction of Parking Structure 6 In the long term, the existing Civic Auditorium parking lot, which currently holds 1,010 parking spaces, is envisioned to be replaced by an Early Childhood Education Center, amuseum/cultural facility, and public open space, or similar uses per the 2005 Civic Center Specific Plan (CCSP). In the near term, only the Early Childhood Education Center is slated for construction on the Civic Auditorium parking lot. Furthermore, the City is in final negotiations with an event organizer to establish apublic/private partnership for the future programming of the landmark Civic Auditorium. These factors have been key components in developing the scenarios in this study. This report details the projected supply and demand for Civic Center and Downtown for the years up to 2015, including descriptions of all relevant assumptions that have been made as part of the analysis. Potential parking sites in the study area are also identified to determine the optimal site in case new parking is needed. The report concludes with an analysis of potential scenarios to address the projected parking demand in the Santa Monica Civic Center area in the years beyond 2015. The following summarizes the assumptions and scenarios. Policy Framework Several policy documents that have been adopted in Santa Monica in recent years relate to parking management in downtown and the Civic Center area. The 2009 Walker Parking Study evaluated the parking conditions in downtown and found that the planned full build-out of the Page ES-7 • Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Civic Center/Downtown Parkins Assessment City of Santa Ntonica 2005 Downtown Parking Program was not immediately necessary. The Study also supported the LUCE by identifying additional shared parking opportunities as an important public benefit. It should be noted that the Bayside District attributes a large portion of its success to the dispersed shared parking facilities in downtown. Another key finding that was realized through the public process of the LUCE update is that residents and stakeholders indicate that they are willing to walk up to a half mile to events, particularly if the walk is pleasant. The community also noted a desire to have some adjacent parking for night time Auditorium uses. Another important planning document is the 2009 Joint Use Study for the Civic Center and Samohi, which analyzes the potential for possible shared use in the areas of cultural linkages (Civic Auditorium, Samohi's Barnum Hall, and Greek Amphitheatre), open space and recreation (fields, gymnasiums, and courts), education (childcare and cultural classes), mobility and access (for vehicles, buses, pedestrians, and bicycles), and the character of the surrounding streets. In relation to parking, the Joint Use Study identified that shared parking between the Civic Center and Samohi also needs to be framed by the LUCE policies. Furthermore, the December 2008 adoption of the modified evaluation guidelines for commercial events revised the policy regarding extended commercial use of the beach parking lot at 1550 Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) to provide more flexibility in event selection, and approved extended commercial event selection guidelines which require addressing traffic and parking impacts through the provision of parking shuttles, public transportation or similar mitigations. Existing Conditions Figure ES-1 below provides a summary of occupancy levels observed among study area facilities at key demand time periods, expressed in terms of both the share of the inventory currently occupied (utilization) and the number of empty spaces remaining available. The table and maps are based primarily on observations during May and June of 2009 and September and October of 2010. These data reveal a high level of overall availability within the public off-street inventory serving the study area. Closer analysis, however, reveals that utilization within individual facilities varies significantly, with some downtown garages, experiencing modest occupancy levels even when the downtown inventory as a whole nears 90% occupancy. The large beach lots and nearby facilities have a strong seasonal variation, particularly on weekends. During hot summer weekend days, several of the beach lots are completely full. However, by late afternoon, parking in these Tots becomes available again. Page ES-2 • Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Ine. Civic Center/Downtown Parking Assessment City of Santa Monica Figure ES-1 Existing Off-street Parking Inventory and Utilization Civic Center (CCPS) 333 Civic Center Drive 11•• 1 1 705 - ~ 52.7% • . ~• 334 ~I :I 35.4% - • •• 456 23.1% - • 542 Civic Auditorium Lot (Civic Lot) 1855 Main Street 1,010 33.0% 677 42.0% 586 17.1% 837 Chic Cen~er=Area , p=~" '' 1:,715 4~u19f j,s~ ~~rw ,`1;011 ~1:f3~;3% 1,04 r ~ 19 6% _ i`y -;';1;379 Downtown S1 1234 4th St. 338 97.0% 10 98.8% 4 95.3% 16 Downtown S2 1235 2nd St. 647 92.4% 49 81.9% 117 58.3% 270 Downtown S3 1320 4th St. 336 98:5% 5 104.3% -15 97.8% 8 Downtown S4 1321 2nd St. 652 65.7% 224 92.3% 51 85.4% 95 Downtown S5 1440 4th St. 665 91.1 % 60 91.4% 58 62.5% 250 Downtown S6 1431 2nd St. 338 97.5% 9 98.5% 5 95.9% 14 Downtown S7 Santa Monica Place 820 54:2% 376 86.0% 115 76.5% 193 Downtown S8 Santa Monica Place 1,040 61.9% 396 93.3% 70 80.4% 204 Downtown S9 1136 4th St. 292 99.0% 3 95.9% 12 78.9% 62 Library Lot 601 SM Blvd. 532 59.0% 218 47.7% 278 17.0% 442 Downtown Structures '~ r.,,, ,;~;,, ~ . ~ ~.~5;~6A~" ~ ; 76.2% ' 1;348 ' 87 7% ` ~~'" ~~~~'694 72.6% 1,651 SM Beach 1i 1550 PCH 1,173 43.6% 662 90.5% 112 40.6% 697 SM Beach 4~ 2030 Ocean Ave 1,319 5.8% 1,243 14.6% 1,127 0.9% 1,307 Pier Deck ~ End of Colorado Ave. 271 65.7% 93 55:7% 120 33.8% 180 Large Be~~(1, L9ks; rs`,~G~~., . 2 763, `~,~ .. ", 27=.7% ~ ~~~9$~,, ., ~ `, 50.8% 1,35 ~~`~ ~f~x~ 21:9% 2,184 ~:; Source: Capacity and utilization counts are derived from automated parking counts in September and October, 2010, for all facilities except SM Downtown 2, Civic Lot and the beach lots, for which counts was collected in May, 2009. Page ES-3 • Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Civic Center/Downtown Parking Assessment City of Santa Monica Short-Term Parking Condetions (Pre-2®15) In November 2009, Council authorized the commencement of a design-build process for Parking Structure 6 at 1431 2"' Street as the first project under the re-build and re-construction phase of the Downtown Parking Program, recommending maximizing the parking supply at this location to serve existing and future development as part of an overall strategic parking program for the downtown. One of the advantages to the increased number of spaces at this location was providing additional parking close to the Pier and the Civic Center which would accommodate the complementary peak need for downtown usage and occasional event programming. The reconstructed Parking Structure 6 with a total of 750 spaces, which is approximately 400 spaces more than the current structure, is scheduled to begin in 2012 with an 18-21 month construction period, requiring temporary replacement parking for the 342 existing spaces during construction. The City is responding to this temporary loss of 342 spaces by re-locating monthly parkers to the Civic Center and the Library. As additional construction continues with the demolition of Parking Structure 3 for a new cinema project, another 339 monthly parkers will be relocated to the Civic Center, Main Library structure and the 5`h and Arizona lot, freeing up more prime retail-serving, short term spaces in the downtown. The Civic Center will continue to serve as a key temporary replacement parking receptor until Parking Structure 6 is reopened, which is anticipated in summer 2014. For the purposes of projecting future parking supply and demand, this analysis assumes the following: Walker Parking assumptions: • The following Walker Parking recommendations are scheduled to be implemented by 2015 subject to Council approval - On-street meter rate adjustments to $2 for the first hour, $2 for the second hour, and $4 for the third hour - Extended hours of metered parking operation in the Bayside District - Maintain the Civic Center monthly parking rate of $82.50 and provide a shuttle from the downtown to the Civic Center - Continued discussion with parking owners to try and incentivize parking in private parking downtown vis-a-vis agreements - Analysis of parking in-lieu fees levied in a way that generates enough revenue to pay for new parking ($14-$17/square foot/year) • Walker Parking's projection of an additional demand of 211 spaces for new development in Downtown, including AMC, will be realized by 2015 in downtown municipal structures. Assumptions developed as part of this analysis: • The City projects a 6-9 month lag from when Structure 3 goes off-line and Structure 6 becomes available for public parking. Thus, during Fiscal Years 2012 and 2013, monthly pass holders in Structures 3 and 6 will park in the Civic facilities, the Library lot, or the surface lot at 5th and Arizona, with a shuttle between Civic and Downtown. • Construction staging as part of the Civic Auditorium remodeling decreases the parking supply at the Civic Center by 100 spaces during Fiscal Years 2012 and 2013. Page ES-4 • Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Civic Center/Downtown Parking Assessment City of Santa Monica • Once the remodeling is complete, increased demand at the Civic Auditorium will result in a peak demand of 630 spaces on weekdays and 1,000 spaces during weekend and weeknight events. • The ECEC footprint will permanently reduce.the available supply in the Civic Auditorium lot by 107 spaces. • While ECEC is under construction in Fiscal Year 2013, a loss of 50 spaces is anticipated for construction staging. Twenty-five spaces will be needed for the Early Childhood Education Center (ECEC) during weekdays once it becomes operational. • As there has been discussion about more frequent utilization of the Pier deck for event space, this anlysis takes the conservative approach and studies the option of accommodating the approximately 270 Pier deck spaces elsewhere. • The City will continue to offer use of beachfront lots for large, on-going events of similar scope and nature to the Cirque du Soleil during fall to spring months, and the beach lots will operate at capacity during summer weekends into the early evening. Large beach lots will have 100% occupancy at 2PM, reduced to 70% occupancy by 4PM, on a summer weekend day. • There is a desire to have 10% of the parking supply available as a cushion at each facility, which results in a 90% effective supply for each facility: • The Civic Center Parking Structure and the Civic Center surface lot currently provide parking for County Court employees, jurors, and visitors during weekdays as well as for Santa Monica Place employees on weekends. There is also an agreement with Santa Monica Place for valet service parking in the Civic Center parking facilities. The total contractual parking commitment between FY 2010-12 is 376 spaces on weekdays and 312 spaces on weekends. After FY 2012, the valet service commitment will cease with a resulting parking commitment of 276 spaces on weekdays and 212 spaces on weekends; however, the City has an option to extend the valet service commitment based on availability. • The Civic Center parking facilities provide parking for City employees and the general public for a total of 513 spaces on weekdays and 157 spaces on weekends. • As plans for the Santa Monica High School campus master plan have yet to be finalized, for the sake of these projections, it is assumed that the existing parking supply and demand at Santa Monica High School will remain. The projected levels of supply and demand based on the assumptions above indicate that there is a sufficient supply of parking in the Civic Center and Downtown at all times through 2015, when including the private parking facilities. Peak demand is likely to be generated around 4:00 PM on Saturdays, assuming Civic Auditorium events start early in the evening, while beach parking occupancy is still fairly high. If the private parking supply could be used by the public to a larger extent, the parking supply would be more than sufficient even during these peak events. It should be noted that it would take significant modifications to the way that private parking facilities are managed to further open up-the private supply. Parking Site Analysis This study includes an identification of potential parking sites in the study area, selected in coordination with City staff, although it may be determined that no additional parking should be Page ES-5 • Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Civic Center/Downtown Parking Assessment City of Santa Monica built. This exercise allows a comparison of the number of spaces that can be built at each site and associated construction costs at these facilities. In addition, this study evaluates the access each site provides to the Civic Center, Samohi, and the rest of the study area. Choate Parking Consultants has developed concept plans for sites 1 through 5 below and has also calculated construction costs for these facilities. Sites 6 and 7 are located at Samohi, with potential number of parking spaces and construction cost estimates originating from the 2009 Joint Use Study. It should be noted that the number of entrances and exits at each of the first five sites have been selected to allow for acceptable times to fill and vacate. The potential sites are listed below and in Figure ES-2: • Site 1 -Civic Auditorium: Subterranean parking facility at the south east corner of 4th Street and Pico Boulevard. Maximum three levels of parking with a total of 1,650 spaces • Sits 2 -Palisades Garden Walk: Subterranean parking facility between Ocean Avenue and Main Street under the future park, bounded to the south by the RAND building and to the north by Interstate-10. Maximum two levels of parking with a total of 400 spaces. • Site 3 -Expo LRT Station: Subterranean parking facility at the southeast corner of 4th Street and Colorado Avenue, bounded to the east by 5th Street and to the south by Interstate 10. Maximum two levels of parking with a total of 195 spaces (3A) or 124 spaces (3B). • Site 4 -Sears: Above-ground parking facility at the southwest corner of Colorado Avenue and 4th Street, bounded to the south by Interstate 10 and to the west by Main Street. Maximum four levels above-ground and one level below ground with a total of 639 parking spaces. • Site 5 - 5th & Arizona: (Please note that since the siting analysis in 2009, the City has acquired an adjacent parcel to increase the footprint for this site. Ongoing analysis of this site is proceeding with the 5th and Arizona Visioning process and will include analyses of subterranean parking.) Above-ground parking facility at the southwest corner of Arizona Avenue and 5th Street. Maximum five levels above ground with a total of 557 spaces (5A, no retail) or 378 spaces (5B, with retail facing onto 5th Street). In order to better understand the potential for shared parking facilities with the Santa Monica High School, the following two sites were analyzed in the High School Master Plan approved by the School Board in 2090. The School District is currently revising their Master Plan to address current funding availability. • Sife 6 -Samohi Football Stadium: Subterranean parking facility underneath the proposed football stadium, likely one level with 490 parking spaces. • Site 7 -Samohi Softball Field: Subterranean parking facility underneath the proposed softball field, likely one level with 450 parking spaces. Combining the capacity, access, construction feasibility, proximity to the projected peak demand area (Civic Auditorium and Samohi), and cost per space, the analyzed sites were ranked. Ranking considerations included the following factors: • Capacity • Proximity to frequent peak identified demand • Parcel size and the resulting impact on efficiency, circulation delay, and construction cost per space Page ES-6 • Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Civic Center/Downtown Parking Assessment City of Santa Monica • Flexibility in site and driveway access • Depth of subterranean structure and resulting. construction cost • Cost effectiveness • Feasibility based on ongoing site analysis and new project parameters Page ES-7 • Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Figure ES-2 Potential Parking Site Locations Civic Center/Dowptown Parking Assessment City of Santa Monica The above-ground structures are more cost-effective than underground structures: In addition, small footprints often result in very inefficient parking structures. This is the primary reason for the very high cost of building parking at Site 3. The high cost at Site 2 can be attributed to the complexities of constructing the Palisades Garden Walk park on top of the structure and similar site constraints as Site 3. Access is not only about the distance from one place to another, but also the ease and enjoyableness of the journey. As such, the two far right columns are a subjective interpretation of the access between the potential parking facilities and the key destinations investigated in this analysis. In summary, depending on the number of spaces needed and taking into account that there is currently parking available in downtown Santa Monica, Site 1 is the most favorable location as it is located within easy walking distance of the Auditorium and, due to its large footprint, has a comparatively low cost per space. Long-Terre Conditions (Post-2015) Before identifying potential solutions to event parking demand, it is important to discuss the impacts of current and proposed parking dynamics on the existing Civic Center site. While City staff and Nelson\Nygaard are reasonably certain of the conditions between today and 2015, beyond 2015, circumstances may change. In the long term, the entire Civic Auditorium lot will likely be devoted to open space and new buildings. In addition to the Early Childhood Education Center, which will occupy 107 spaces in the Civic Auditorium surface lot, amuseum/cultural facility may be built on the site, which may claim about 220 spaces in its footprint, depending on its siting. Additionally, the museum/cultural facility is projected to stimulate a peak demand of 80 parking spaces on weekdays and 115 parking spaces on weekends. For the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that ECEC would be located in the northeast corner of the existing Civic Page ES-8 • NelsonlNygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Figure ES-3 Site Ranking Civic Center/Downtown Parking Assessment City of Santa Monica Auditorium lot, and the museum in the southeast corner (fronting 4th Street), with potential event parking either provided in the southern portion of the existing surface lot or in a subterranean . facility in that same location. The number of levels will be determined by site constraints and parking demand, as illustrated in Figure ES-4. The location of each facility has yet to be finalized: The eventual redevelopment of the entire Civic Auditorium lot would necessarily signify the displacement of all surface parking. With this redevelopment, the existing Civic Center Structure. alone would not be sufficient to accommodate future parking demand. The issue then becomes how to accommodate peak parking demand during special events if and when the site is redeveloped with amuseum/cultural facility or if and when the entire site is redeveloped. Figure ES-4 Conceptual Layout of the Redeveloped Civic Auditorium Site Future Civic Center Parking Scenarios Given the assumptions and parking site analyses summarized above, the following is an analysis of two scenarios of the future Civic Center parking and various sub-options. Previous analysis has shown that Downtown Santa Monica has excess parking supply when it is needed for evening events, particularly off-street in private facilities, while the Civic Center area and Samohi face more constrained parking supplies during events. Therefore, these scenarios focus on relieving potential parking deficits during special events. The results of these scenarios are: • Scenario 1, the City retains surface parking at the Civic Auditorium site. Existing parking supply is sufficient to accommodate ECEC, but when a potential future museum is built, it increases the demand for parking at the same time as supply decreases. The existing surface may then become insufficient to accommodate the full parking demand depending on siting and design of new facilities. • Scenario 2: - In Option A, the City builds a 950-space subterranean parking facility under the existing Civic Auditorium lot. Page ES-9 • NelsonlNygaard Consulting Associates Ine. Civic Center/Downtown Parking Assessment City of Santa Monica • An Alternate Option A was also studied to build a facility immediately, to be operable by 2014. This was determined to be infeasible due to commitment for overflow parking per the Interim Parking Plan. • Option B includes increased event parking fees, implementation of a robust TDM program, and reassignment of monthly pass-holders on peak special event days, which could conservatively reduce the size of a subterranean parking facility to 540 spaces with construction in FY 2017-19. Scenario 1: More Effectively Utilize Existing Resources The City has committed through the foreseeable future to provide parking spaces for State, County, and City employees, monthly public parking and general public parking. On weekdays, these dedicated spaces amount to 789, and on weekends, the City utilizes a maximum of 369 spaces for such uses. The City also estimates a future peak concert and tradeshow parking demand of 1,000 spaces on weekends and week nights and 630 spaces on weekdays, based on historic maximum event parking demand and conversations with the event programmer with whom the City is negotiating. If no other redevelopment occurs on the site, the City has enough parking to accommodate functions at the Civic Auditorium, once it opens in 2015, as illustrated in Figure ES-5. If the site is redeveloped with a museum and/or open space, there would be a significant parking deficit, particularly if the entire surface lot is displaced by open space, thus leading to the investigation of Scenarios 2A and 2B below. Page ES-10 • Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Civic Center/Downtown Parking Assessment City of Santa Monica Figure ES-5 Option 1: More Effectively Utilize Existing Resources • ~~ t i i i t ~ i~ i Civic Auditorium Lot ~ 909 909 909 813 s 813 813 Civic Center Structure + 635 635 635 635 635 635 Total 15 44 15 44 15 44 1448 1448 1448 Contractual Parking Commitments3 376 312 376 312 276 212 276 212 276 212 276 212 Non-contractual Parkin Commitments ^ 461 157 513 157 613 257 513 157 513 157 . 513 157 Construction Phasin 0 0 0 0 567 5 567 617 e 617 0 0 0 0 Museum/Cultural Facilit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Nederlander/Civic Auditorium Events 530 800 530 800 0 0 0 0 630 1000 630 1000 Total Parkin Demand 1367 1269 1419 1269 1456 1036 1406 986 1419 1369 1419 1369 Net S aces Available 177 275 125 275 88 508 42 462 29 79 29 79 ~ A supply cushion of 10% allows drivers to find an available space in a reasonable amount oftime inoff-street parking facilities. The effective supply is hence 90% of the available inventory. zAnalysis assumes 107 surface spaces will be claimed indefinitely by the ECEC footprint in FY 2013-14. a The City currently has allocated 276 weekday spots for State and County workers,100 spaces for Macerich Valet until 2013, and 212 weekend spaces for Macerich employees. The City projects non-contractual parking far monthly City employee passes, paid public monthly passes, general public parking and the Macerich Valet. a Construction phasing al the Civic Auditorium lot in 2012-13 includes an additional demand of 342 spaces during the construction of Structure #6 downtown,125 spaces after Structure #3 is demolished, antl 100 spaces for Civic Auditorium construction staging. c Construction phasing al the Civic Auditorium lot in 2013-14 includes an additional demand of 342 spaces during the construction of Structure #6 downtown,125 spaces after Structure #3 is demolished,100 spaces for Civic Auditorium construction staging, and 50 spaces for the construction of ECEC. Page ES-11 • Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Civic Center/Downtown Parking Assessment City of Santa Monica Scenario 2: Build a Structure Option 2A: Build a Larger Structure at a Later Time OptlOn A investigates the construction of a subterranean facility at 4`" Street and Pico Boulevard. If the City were to build a structure post 2014 to accommodate all of the reasonably foreseeable parking demand (museum, ECEC, non-/contractual commitments, special events, etc), a structure with approximately 950 spaces' would be necessary to accommodate demand after 2015. Each subterranean spot is estimated to cost $40,000, including inflation. Therefore, a 950- space facility at $38 million would exceed the $25 million that is potentially available for shared parking construction in the Civic/Downtown area. This scenario would not require re-evaluation of the City's various contractual arrangements. However, during the two-year construction of this facility, there would be a significant parking deficit due to loss of surface spaces, in which satellite parking for event-goers and/or monthly pass-holders would be required. Alternate Option 2A (Deemed Infeasible): Build a Larger Structure Immediately Alternate Option 2a investigates the construction of a subterranean facility at 4\h Street and Pico Boulevard simultaneously with the Civic Auditorium remodeling effort between FYs 2012 and 2013. In this scenario, it is assumed that the parking facility can be designed, constructed, and operational by 2014 to accommodate the parking demand from future programming of the Civic Auditorium, see Figure ES-5. If the City were to build a structure by 2014 to accommodate all of the reasonably foreseeable parking demand (museum, ECEC, non-/contractual commitments, special events, etc), a structure with approximately 950 spaces2 would be necessary to accommodate demand after 2015. Each subterranean spot is estimated to cost $40,000, including inflation. Therefore, a 950- space facility at $38 million would exceed the $25 million that is potentially available for shared parking construction in the Civic/Downtown area. The additional cost of constructing a subterranean parking garage, for which the exact design of the above ground facility is unknown, could add up to 20% to these base costs. In addition to cost, this scenario suffers from a major drawback. Currently, the Civic Auditorium lots are committed to be available to temporarily accommodate downtown parkers while Parking Structure 6 is rebuilt and Parking Structure 3 is demolished as part of the Interim Parking Plan. Having all three facilities under construction at the same time would result in a major parking deficit for the downtown fora 2-year period, even if the library lot and surface parking lot at 5`h Street and Arizona Street were fully utilized. Therefore, this scenario is not feasible. Option 28: Implement TDM, Shift Users & Build a Smaller Structure With the greatest impact on parking demand at the Civic Auditorium., Scenario 2 Option B explores various demand management mechanisms. It assumes the City shuttles parking pass- holders during 30 to 46 full-spectrum special events, implements TDM, and builds a subterranean Peak parking demand in Scenario 2a amounts to 865 spaces after 2015; however, to account fora 10% buffer, the total effective parking supply weuld have to be 950 spaces. z Peak parking demand in Scenario 2a amounts to 865 spaces after 2015; however, to account far a 10% buffer, the total effective parking supply would have to be 950 spaces. Page ES-12 • Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Civic Center/Downtown Parking Assessment City of Santa Monica structure small enough to maintain some surface parking spaces during the construction of the subterranean lot. Shifting pass-holders from the Civic Auditorium to underutilized capacity downtown and at the library mitigates the parking problem at the Civic Auditorium during the 30-46 peak demand special events. Some 212 spaces at the Civic Auditorium lot are reserved for Santa Monica Mall employees on the weekends. Since these employees work downtown; it is proposed that these parking spaces are assigned in downtown parking structures or private parking downtown during special events. Additionally, during weekday special events, 332 City workers who hold monthly passes and 94 general public parking monthly pass-holders are reassigned to another structure and shuttled to the Civic Center. More importantly, this requires implementation of the TDM programs of the LUCE in order to help reduce overall rates of driving in the study area while maintaining shopping and visitation levels, in addition to assuming implementation of key bicycle and pedestrian improvements. These programs could include but not be limited to: • Transit enhancements between the Civic Center and downtown, including bus stop and wayfinding improvements, real-time information, new shuttles, and rebranding of existing lines so potential passengers understand the current connections between downtown and the Civic Center (Lines 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, and 10 all make this connection, but there is little information available in the Civic area and on the sidewalks about this high level of service). • If fundable, a transit pass program for downtown employees, providing employees with free or deeply discounted EZ passes or Big Blue Bus 30-day passes. Such a program could be modeled after the successful system in downtown Boulder, CO. • Bicycle enhancements, including improved bike routes to and through the study area (Michigan Ave, 2"d Street, etc.); valet bike parking at key destinations, a Bike Station downtown. • Pedestrian enhancements, including sidewalk and landscape improvements in key linkage areas such as bridges over the freeway. • A downtown mobility center, helping employees and visitors find their way to Santa Monica without a car. The mobility center would also help arrange carpools, vanpools and employer shuttles. • Special event mobility coordination, allowing visitors to purchase reserved event parking and transit passes, along with detailed shuttle/walk directions from parking to the event. • More real-time information about parking availability, including wayfinding signage to direct motorists to nearest available spaces. • Parking fee adjustments to maintain availability in all garages and on-street spaces and synchronize incentives based on peak demand balance. This includes incentivizing downtown parking during peak Civic events, and incentivizing the Civic parking facilities when there is a parking shortage in downtown. Many of these programs are modeled after the highly successful system in Boulder, CO, which has managed to reduce vehicle trips to their downtown, even as it has grown significantly. Figure ES-6 shows how downtown Boulder mode split has changed as they have invested in TDM. Page ES-13 • Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Civic Center/Downtown Parking Assessment City of Santa Monica Figure ES-6 Downtown Boulder Mode Split with TDM 70% 60% _ __ 50% -- -Drive Alone 40% -- -Carpool -Bus 30% ®Walked & Biked -Multi-Mode & Other 20% - 10% 0% 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 In this scenario, when the Civic Auditorium lot is redeveloped, a structure of no more than 540 spaces3 would be required. A 540-space subterranean facility would cost approximately $21,600,000. Figure ES-7 details the assumptions and outcomes of this scenario. It should be mentioned that attracting more people to park Downtown during off-peak downtown hours could have positive economic and social externalities downtown, as more people may shop and dine downtown in conjunction with special events. Nevertheless, this scenario requires coordination with monthly pass-holders and the operation of a shuttle between Downtown and the Civic Auditorium. Here again, as iri Scenario 1, the existing surface parking supply is sufficient to cover all projected parking commitments, unless the site is redeveloped, because when construction phasing requirements subside, the performance space at the Civic Auditorium reclaims these parking spaces: Temporary Construction Impacts Building a 540-space subterranean parking garage would allow part of the existing surface parking lot to remain during its construction. We assume that 300 spaces of the 1,010 space lot could be preserved: This, in addition to the 710 spaces in the existing Civic Center Structure 'Peak parking demand in Scenario 2b amounts to 495 spaces; however, to account fora 10% buffer, the total effective parking supply is 540 spaces. Page ES-14 • Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Civic Center/Downtown Parking Assessment City of Santa Monica amounts to over 1,000 spaces at the site. This supply meets special event peak demand, as long as there are no other demands for parking. However, the City has 789 weekday parking commitments and 369 weekend parking commitments. To meet special event demand, existing contractual and non-contractual parking pass holders would need to be shifted to another off-site location. Implementing. a shuttle service for 332 City workers who hold monthly passes and 94 general public parking monthly pass-holders on weekdays and 212 Santa Monica Mall employees on the weekends alleviates part of this crunch. The City could utilize all 1,000 event spaces during construction for special events and shuttle all existing parking permit-holders. Because peak event demand and non-/contractual parking commitments are staggered, an alternate plan would shuttle approximately 195 event-goers to the Civic Center on the weekends and 47 event-goers on weekdays. Recommendation Because of the scope and potential implications of the supply and demand assumptions, particularly post FY 2014-15, Nelson\Nygaard recommends that the City delay construction of a subterranean parking facility until at least 2017. At that point, the City can revisit this analysis in order to make a determination as to the appropriate size of the facility, taking into consideration the impacts of downtown parking management, opening of the Expo Light Rail, partial implementation of LUCE, enhanced connectivity to downtown; bicycle and pedestrian access and safety improvements, on-site parking pricing management, online ticket booking coordination that encourages transit, ride-sharing, walking, and bicycling, shuttle service from downtown parking facilities to the Civic Auditorium (and incentives for event-goers to utilize parking downtown during off-peak for downtown.), bike valet program at the Civic Auditorium, and whether there will be a museum/cultural facility on the site. Managing event schedules and evaluating the performance of the programs and actual Civic Center parking demand is a critical component of the success of Scenarios Land 2b. It is recommended that final decisions on exact number of spaces and timing of construction be considered using regularly updated parking demand data once the new event venue, the parking shuttle and the LRT are operating. Data collected during actual-operations may show that implementing a successful comprehensive program of parking demand strategies may allow the City to forego building a new parking facility, even with some additional development of Civic Center projects. This assumes multi-venue events would be addressed through event calendar management, utilization of existing parking facilities, further enhanced parking demand reduction strategies, and improved pedestrian, bike linkages and transit augmentation to allow for improved access between the City's shared parking facilities. Page ES•15 • Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. Civic Center/Downtown Parking Assessment City of Santa Monica ~ A supply cushion of 10% allows drivers to find an available space in a reasonable amount. oftime inoff-street parking facilities. The effective supply is hence 90% of the available inventory. zAnalysis includes increased parking demand and decreased parking supply due to a potential museum on the Civic Auditorium surface parking site. 3The City currently has allocated 276 weekday spots for State and County workers,100 spaces for Macerich Valet until 2073, and 212 weekend spaces for Macerich employees. ^The City projects non-contractual parking for monthly City employee passes, paid public monthly passes; general public parking and the Macerich Valet s Construction phasing at the Civic Auditorium lot in 2012-13 includes an additional demand of 342 spaces during the construction of Structure #6 downtown, 125 spaces after Structure #3 is demolished, and 100 spaces for Civic Auditorium construction staging. s Construction phasing at the Civic Auditorium lot in 2013-14 includes an additional demand of 342 spaces during the construction of Structure #6 downtown,125 spaces after Structure #3 is demolished,100 spaces for Civic Auditorium construction staging, and 50 spaces for the constmction of ECEC. 'Analysis assumes 107 surface spaces will be claimed indef nicely by the ECEC footprint in FY 2013-14. gAssumes increasing the price of parking will reduce demand by 10% (Price elasticity of demand is -.3). Assumes TDM strategy (Expo LRT, bike valet, other bcycle/pedestrian connectivity and safety improvements, online ticket booking and parking coordination, market ornear-market parking pricing) decreases parking space demand for special events by 5%. Page ES-t6 • NelsonlNygaard Consulting Associates Ine. Figure ES-7 Option 2B: Implement TDM, Shift Contractual Users & Build a Smaller Structure 8-B Civic Center Parking Lot and Structure: Parking Usage and Availability from 2011-2015 FY 2010/11 FY 2011/12 FY 2012/13 FY 2013/14 FY 2014+ TOTAL SPACES AVAILABLE Civic Center 1715 t 1715- 1715 1715 1715! 1715 1715 1735:1'. 1715 1608 1508:. 1608 1608 ' 1608: 1608 5th and Arizona 130 130? 130 130 130: 130 130 130° 130 130 :1301 130 130 P. 130-. 130 Main Library structure 200/300 200- 300 200/300 200:' 300 200/300 200: 300 200/300 .'200:? 300 200/300 ' 2001:. 300 TOTAL 204$;. 2145 2045 I. 2145 2045:: 2145 193$: 2038 1936-. 2038 Parkine Commitments Actual High est Use Actual Highest Use Actual Highest Use Actual Highest Use Actual Highest Use ContraN l Ci l t p Nllo[ated r p gllo[atetl p AIOW[etl p gp ocaletl for p g locaSetl for Ua - v n r or use Weekday Weekend ror use Weekday Weekend ror u:e Weekday Weekend u:e Weekday Weekend uae Weekday Weekend State/County 325 2761. 0 325 276 0 325 2761 0 325 276 0 325 -': 276: 0 Macerich employees (w/end only) 400 0 < 212 400 0: 212 400 0 F 212 400 !: O h 212 400 0 ' 212 Macerich Valet 100 100; 100. 100 100 100 0 0; 0 0 ` 0- 0 0 '. 0! 0 SUBTOTAL 376 312 376: 312 276' 212 276 : 211 2765 212 Non-contractual - Clv'c Center City Employee monthly 699 280: 70 699 332. 70 699 332:. 70 699 B32 70 699 [ 332': 70 Paid Public Monthly 164 87 87 164 ST. 87 164 8T- 87 164 87 ` 87 164 ' : STr 87 General Public Parking 94 0 94- 0 94' 0 94' 0 94 0 Macerich Valet Option 100 Oi 0 0 0' 0 100 100 100 0 0:: 0 0 : 0- 0 SUBTOTAL 461 % 157 513 : - 157 613.: 257 '$13 ': 157 513 157 New Projects PS#6: 146 monthlies+general 342 0 0 0 0: 0 342 342, 342 342 342 '. 342 0 - 0: 0 ECEC-see note 50/25 0- 0 0 0:` 0 0 01 0 50 -: 50! 50 25 25 0 Civic Event Parking/Nederlander 800/1000 530f 800 800 $30' 800 0 0' 0 0 0' 0 1000 : 630` 1000 Construction Staging-Civic AUd 100 0: 0 0 0: 0 ~ 100 100:: 100 100 `100'. 100 O t 0< 0 AMC During PS #6 Construction 339 0' 0 0 0 0 339 339; 339 339 :339'. 339 0 '' 0 0 SUBTOTAL I 530 800 5301 800 781:' 781 x831 F 837 655:: 1000 TOTAL PARKING REQUESTED '; 13675 1269 1419'; 1269 3670.' 1250 f1620i 1200 1444::: 1369 Net Available w/projects 678 876 626`. 876 375':. 895 :316:1 838 4945 669 Total Available in Civic Center 34B: 446 296i' 446 2593 679 302: 622 164:. 239 Total Available in 5th/Arizona & Library 330 430 330 430 116: 276 :'136 ' 216 330 430 rvu i ea un r.nan i TOTAL SPACES AVAILABLE: Civic includes lot & structure, minus Police spaces in structure and 6 spaces occupied by an emergency storage bin; 5th & Arizona includes existing surface lot only eekd :Assumes: 85%of State/County passesused at peak, includesjurors; 280 City employees based on recorded peak in Oct/NOV 2010 (From 2011 also includes 52 relocated employees, (29 individuals and 23 carpool spaces), from RAND temporary lot); 100%valet which is closed off; 53%of public paid monthly based on documented highest peak hour use recorded in structure (Oct/Nov 2010) and estimated peak at lot based on daily totals; and 94 general paid daily porkers based on peak hour use during week of 1/3-1/7 (now/e data) . e en :Assumes 10%of City employees, no State/County employees, Macerich and paid public card holders at same rate as weekday; events as described below; no general parking req'd. Events; Assumes current peak in 10/11 and Civic dark in 12/13-13/14; for Nederlander, assumes 63%use of spaces on event weekdays & full use on weekends (although use will be inconsistent). # Allocated for Use: Number of spaces allocated for specific use, based on number of passes distributed; for reference. Actual Highest Use: Assumed to remain stable for period covered based on City's ability to control pass distribution. For Parking Structure #6: Assumes 100%need for CEQA evaluation; this Is a very conservative scenario. AMC- Construction may start as early as Jan. 2013; Projected 12-18 month overlap w/PS#6 construction; 125 relocated monthly passholders to use Civic lot, the balance of 339 monthlies to use available spaces at Main Library and 5th & Arizona; all may be able to use new PS#6 from 2014. Macerich Valet Ootion: Assumes that City does not extend option after 2012/13 because ECEC construction begins ECEC: Project will permanently remove 107 spaces from total. ECEC also needs 50 for staging during construction and 25 employee parking when open City-issued oarkine cards: Total number includes employees not regularly assigned to City Hall vicinity; Use # reflects highest daily use by City employees per Parking Office data. Paid Public Monthly City controls and may reduce in future as needed to balance other parking needs or loss of spaces due to development. Samohi construction oarkine accommodatio • F faculty o k'ne durin P BB facil'ty tr coon o eeme t 'th Cit NOTE: Museum project projected to break ground after the period covered; further analysis will be required. AvJ ~ ~ ~ MAR _ 2011 I ~iEt~E!'~ED . ?FF1CE ~?F TkE C!T`r' C! s;p~ Honorable Council members: 2Q! i BAR -8 P~ 3~ 19 Regarding 88: I own a business on the Santa Monica (The Candy Carousel) and I chai~t,~i~ga~t HONEC l+. CALIF. Operator's Association. Please note: Business on the Pier is directly related to the parking available. The limitation of available parking is a direct limitation to all pier businesses. The Downtown Parking and Circulation Assessment report is ridiculously wrong.. It claims that the 1550 lot functions at 40% capacity. I'm laughing at that one! The pier lot reaches capacity every warm weekend, and is rarely at 40% capacity on any afternoon. People are turned away regularly as the lot fills. Underground parking under the new park is the obvious place for additional parking.. The report's analysis of that lot seems intentionally wrong. It is my understanding from good sources that that lot can support 3 levels of parking and definitely qualifies for development. To suggest that a lot a mile away from the pier is reasonable parking for the pier is completely lacking in understanding of human Southern California behavior. The Pier is important to the city's tourist industry, drawing people from all over Southern California who come to the pier, then spend money in the rest of downtown. Paying attention to our needs is also paying attention to yours. Kindly postpone action on this report until an accurate study can be obtained. Your listeners and readers are not stupid. With All Due Respect, Andy Harkins, Candy Carousel on the Pier MAR ~ 2011