The URL can be used to link to this page

SR 03-06-2018 3A City Council Report City Council Meeting: March 6, 2018 Agenda Item: 3.A 1 of 8 To: Mayor and City Council From: Susan Cline, Director, Public Works, Civil Engineering Subject: Award RFP for the Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study, Pier West End Retrofit and Pier Area 2 Upgrades at the Santa Monica Pier Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Award RFP# SP2473 to Moffatt & Nichol, a California-based company, to provide structural engineering consulting and design services to develop a new Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study and prepare construction documents for the Pier West End Retrofit and Pier Area 2 Upgrades at the Santa Monica Pier; 2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with Moffatt & Nichol, in an amount not to exceed $328,000 (including a 10% contingency) over a two-year period. Executive Summary The last Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study was completed in 2008 (Attachment A). The study evaluated the Santa Monica Pier structures and provided recommendations and cost estimates for upgrades over a 10-year period. A new assessment is required to reevaluate the present-day condition of the Pier’s structural components (above and below water) and to provide recommendations and cost estimates for future improvements. Staff recommends Moffatt & Nichol to provide engineering design services including the preparation of a new infrastructure assessment study, and the development of construction plans and documents. Staff also recommends that Moffatt & Nichol provide engineering support during the construction phases of the Municipal and Newcomb Pier upgrade projects recommended by the 2008 Study. The total contract award would be for an amount not to exceed $328,000 (including a 10% contingency). Background The Santa Monica Pier (Pier) is over 100 years old and is an iconic destination where 2 of 8 community and educational events are programmed throughout the year. It is an internationally recognized destination that draws over 6 million visitors each year. Over the years, the Pier has been subjected to harsh environmental and user impacts due to its coastal location and heavy usage. In an effort to plan for and address the maintenance requirements of the Pier, in 2008 the City completed a Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (2008 Study) that: (1) focused on the evaluation of the existing condition of the Pier’s various structural components; (2) conducted upgrade studies for the various structural systems, which included accommodations for 15-ton (H-15) and 20-ton (H-20) truck loading that the Pier is currently incapable of handling and; (3) developed a maintenance program in conjunction with a proposed 10-year improvement plan (Attachment A). Many recommendations of the 2008 Study have been implemented, and numerous areas have been upgraded at the Pier. Discussion The Santa Monica Pier is composed of two separate structures, the Municipal Pier and the Newcomb Pier, as shown in Figure 1. Municipal Pier The Municipal Pier begins at the concrete approach of the Pier Bridge and extends approximately 1,480 feet west over the ocean. The Municipal Pier is the main thoroughfare for pedestrian and vehicular access to commercial and recreational destinations. While the Municipal Pier is decked entirely with timber boards fastened to timber stringers (similar to joists), three different structural substructures are currently in place. The term substructure refers to structural elements below the decking including piles, caps, beams, and stringers. The westernmost 440 feet is composed of concrete piles supporting a concrete waffle system. The easternmo st 675 feet is entirely timber, and the middle 365 feet was upgraded in 2014 to concrete piles, concrete caps, and concrete tie-beams. 3 of 8 Newcomb Pier The Newcomb Pier is approximately 1,050 feet long by 265 feet wide and supports the majority of the commercial tenants, including an amusement park, the historic carousel, and on-deck parking for passenger cars. The majority of this pier is also made of timber, except for a 350-foot by 135-foot section in the southwest corner that supports the amusement park rides. This section has a substructure consisting of concrete piles and beams with timber stringers and decking. The sections with concrete substructures in both piers are relatively new compared with the timber sections and are generally in good condition . The condition of the timber sections varies from good in the recently upgraded portions to poor in some areas of the Newcomb Pier deck system. Figure 1 New Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (New Study) The new Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study will provide inspection of elements both above and below the water’s surface, GIS database documentation, assessment of the existing condition of all structural elements including the decking, and recommendations for a new 10-year improvement plan based on the findings. 2008 Study Upgrade Recommendations – Remaining Work There are limited locations identified in the 2008 Study that still require upgrades to 4 of 8 increase structural capacity, including: (1) the easterly portion of the Newcomb Pier referred to as Pier Area 2 (Fig. 2); and (2) the west end of the Municipal Pier referred to as West End (Fig. 2). These proposed upgrades would allow access for larger vehicles including, but not limited to, emergency and delivery vehicles. Part of the new study would reassess and/or revalidate the previous recommendations made in the 2008 Study, which may require new or additional recommendations for these areas. If deemed necessary, these recommendations would be vetted prior to proceeding with the upgrades. Area 2 Upgrade (Newcomb Pier) Recommended upgrades to the Newcomb Pier include improving the structure to an H- 15 rating (15-ton vehicle). Current structural capacities in different portions of the Newcomb Pier range from 3 to 15 tons. A priority area for struct ural upgrade is Area 2, as shown in Figure 2. Area 2 is approximately 25,000 square feet. The limits of this area are bounded by approximately 70 feet of the Hippodrome to the east, edge of the parking lot to the west, the Hippodrome to the north and the edge of the parking lot to the south. In this zone, 2-inch-thick wood decking is supported by 3-inch-thick by 12-inch-deep stringers that are spaced 22 inches apart. The current calculated capacity for this area is 3 tons. To upgrade this section to an H-15 rating (15-ton vehicle), the stringers must be removed and replaced with larger stringers spaced closer together. Pier West End Upgrade (Municipal Pier) The existing concrete waffle structure portion of the Municipal Pier at the west end is not capable of supporting a 20-ton vehicle, such as a fire engine. Strengthening the existing members is necessary to safely accommodate the additional loading requirements of a 20-ton vehicle. Moffat & Nichol would be tasked with developing alternatives for upgrading the waffle slab. The West End is approximately 10,400 square feet. Figure 2 5 of 8 Environmental Analysis The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301(c) and Section 15302 of the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15301(c) exempts Class 1 projects consisting of the "operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topo graphical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency’s determination." This exemption includes “existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar fac ilities." Section 15302 exempts Class 2 projects consisting of the “replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities.” The project's West End and Area 2 improvements at the Santa Monica Pier qualify as Class 1 and 2 projects exempt from CEQA. In addition, none of the exceptions specified in Section 15300.2 of CEQA Guidelines would apply that would preclude the use of this CEQA exemption: The project site is not located in a sensitive environment; the project would not have a significant effect on the environment; the project would not damage scenic resources; the project would not be located on a hazardous waste site; and the project would not cause a change to a historical resource 6 of 8 including the Santa Monica Pier as all materials would be replaced with the same material type and would look exactly the same. Therefore, this project is categorically exempt from CEQA. Consultant Selection On September 28, 2017, the City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the design of the Pier West End Retrofit and Pier Area 2 Upgrades and structural engineering services for preparation of a new Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study. The RFP was posted on the City’s online bidding site, and notices were advertised in the Santa Monica Daily Press in accordance with City Charter and Municipal Code provisions. Fifty-three vendors downloaded the RFP, and seven firms responded. The following firms submitted proposals:  AECOM  COWI North America, Inc.  Holmes Structures  Moffat & Nichol  Walker Consultants  Walter P. Moore  WJE Associates, Inc. A selection committee consisting of staff from the Civil Engineering Division reviewed the proposals. Evaluation was based on the following selection criteria: experience, references, proposed project work plan and timelines, proposed project team, quality work products, creativity, demonstrated technical competence and understanding of the project scope, and value added services and cost. Based on these criteria and criteria in SMMC 2.24.073, staff recommends Moffat & Nichol as the best qualified firm to provide structural engineering design services in an amount not to exceed $328,000 (including a 10% contingency). Moffat & Nichol demonstrated extensive knowledge and experience with similar projects in the cities of Seal Beach, Redondo Beach, Manhattan Beach, Newport Beach, Goleta, Los Angeles (San Pedro), Los Angeles (Wilmington), Malibu 7 of 8 and Santa Monica. Moffat & Nichol also demonstrated through past projects their ability to offer experienced design teams that can complete high quality project designs and reports in an expeditious manner and at competitive hourly rates. Next Steps The anticipated timeline for the infrastructure assessment and design phase of the project is approximately 8-12 months. After completion of the design work, the project team would prepare the bidding documents, advertise the project on the City’s on-line bidding site, select a contractor, and return to the City Council for award of the construction contract. Financial Impacts and Budget Actions The agreement to be awarded to Moffat & Nichol is for an amount not to exceed $328,000. Funds are available in the FY 2017-18 Capital Improvement Program budget in the following accounts: Account No. Description FY 17-18 C309187.589000 Structural Engineering Inspection / Assessment $ 191,000 C309186.589000 Pier Substructure Retrofit – West End $ 74,000 C309185.589200 Pier Deck Upgrade – Area 2 $ 63,000 Total Funds Available $ 328,000 Prepared By: Joshua Carvalho, Civil Engineer Approved Forwarded to Council Attachments: A. 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (PIAS) 8 of 8 B. MN_OAKS_INITIATIVE_2_7_18 Santa Monica Pier Architectural Conditions Assessment submitted by Wallace Roberts & Todd, LLC February 8, 20088 URBAN FURNISHINGS – TABLE OF CONTENTS Subsection Page Number Assessment and Methodology………………………………………………………………………………….10 Railings………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………11 Benches…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….14 Tables………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..16 Trash Receptacles……………………………………………………………………………………………………..18 Curbs…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………21 Decking ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….….22 Lighting……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..24 Features……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………27 Quantitative Assessment Chart………………………………………………………………………………..34 Pier Sector Graphic……………………………………………………………………………………………………35 Existing Site Features…………………………………………………………………………………………………36 9 Assessment and Methodology The Santa Monica Pier has been an iconic element of the city since the early 1900’s. It was and still is today a space where tourists and locals congregate to enjoy sunsets, entertainment, and activities featured on the pier. Despite the step grade, narrow sidewalks and high curb, thousands of people visit the Pier, by either walking, bicycling or driving on the Pier Bridge. They are welcomed by iconic signage that displays the Santa Monica name and logo and by informational Kiosks explaining elements on the pier to enjoy; such as the historic carousel, fi shing piers, entertaining performers and Pacifi c Park. The idea of the pier and the history that surrounds it sets a whimsical background for those who visit it. However, over many years of harsh coastal weather, unforeseen vandalism problems, a mish mash of replacement furniture, and a lost sense of style standards, the elements on the pier no longer present a cohesive atmosphere that tie all of the pier’s characteristic icons together. Pier Assessment and Methodology Development on the Pier has been guided by Santa Monica Pier Design Guidelines, adopted in 1987. These Guidelines address many features found on the Pier, but give only general guidance. WRT referred to these Guidelines during its assessment of current conditions, and noted where future recommendations about specifi c features would be warranted. It is WRT’s intent in the Architectural Conditions Assessment Report to assess the public amenities for their functional- ity, appearance, durability, comfort, sustainability and maintenance condition. Information and observations about these amenities will be the basis for more detailed recommendations to be formulated in coordination with the City and with input from the Santa Monica Pier Restoration Corporation and the public. The issues raised in this Report and the results of community input, will be further expanded upon and incorporated into the Sustainability Plan, the Maintenance Plan, the Lighting Plan and the Urban Design Plan. This section looks not only at urban furnishings, but opportunities to improve specifi c areas of the Pier to enhance the public’s enjoyment of this nationally recognized community, environ- mental and cultural resource. This assessment report provides the team’s analysis of the various site elements as they ap- peared during these site visits. The following elements were addressed: 1. Railings 2. Benches 3. Picnic Tables 4. Trash Receptacles 5. Curbs 6. Decking 7. Lighting Fixtures 8. Special Features The letter designations in the text refer to the Pier Sector Graphic. 4.10 Railings Rail Type 1: Blue Metal Rail Location: Primary railing, used on pier perimeter Sector Graphic: (A, B, D, E, F, G) Number: Approximately 4,500 Linear Feet Quality assessment: Materials: The railing is constructed of 3 (sometimes 4) horizontal 2” diameter steel pipe rails, with 2” diameter steel tube posts and fi ttings. All metal tubing is painted blue and appears to have been painted multiple times. Stainless steel cables have been added in the horizontal direction, centered between metal rails to create the 4” minimum clearance required by code. However, code has been updated and vertical barriers at minimum 4” O.C. have not been added. Joints vary in diff erent sections of the railing; some are welded, while others are assembled with metal tees. Maintenance: Paint has been chipped and repainted multiple times. Rust appears where paint is missing, most typically in areas of concentrated fi shing activity. Metal rails require constant repainting to prevent rust, as rust can form wherever metal is exposed.* Functionality/Placement: The railing provides a safety barrier at the edge of the pier. However, the railing no longer meets current safety requirements as there are more than 4” square openings in the rail. Durability: Painted metal is a durable option for railing if rust is prevented. Sustainability: There is no evidence that this railing uses low VOC paint or a renewable material. Recycled content material should be considered for this application in the event of replacement. Comfort: While the rail provides a fairly transparent barrier to the ocean, the steel rail is not very comfortable to lean against. * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 Rail Type 1: Socket Rail Type: Steel cables The entire pedestrian area of the Pier is surrounded by a barrier rail with a minimum height of 42 inches. The predominant railing type is a painted blue metal post and railing. There is a section of this railing that is similar but with a wooden top rail. At the west end of the Pier there is also a painted wood and metal railing that separates the upper and lower decks and forms the stair railing. These varied railings do not create a cohesive design for the Pier. The 1987 Pier Design Guidelines recommends that the railings should be compatible with overall build- ing design and are corrosion, graffi ti and vandal resistant. No specifi c type of rail is prescribed. 5.11 Rail Type 2: Blue Metal with Wooden Top Rail Location: Southeast corner of pier Sector Graphic: (G) Number: approximately 1,200 Linear Feet Quality assessment: Materials: The railing is similar to Type 1 with the addition of a 2x8 wooden top rail. The railing is made of 3 (sometimes 4) 2” diameter horizontal metal tubes, with 2” diameter tubular metal posts. The top rail is a stained and coated wooden 2x8 plank, heavily worn, and supported by a bracket underneath. All metal tubing is painted blue and appears to have been painted multiple times. Stainless steel cables run horizontally only, centered between metal tubes to reduce the opening size to 4” in one direction. Joints vary in diff erent sections of railing; some are welded while others are assembled with tees and sockets. Maintenance: In general, the paint covers the metal railing consistently. Paint is worn and chipped in limited areas of high use especially along ramps, with rust observed where metal has been exposed. Metal tubing must be painted to prevent rust as wear requires. Wood is teak and requires pressure washing and re oiling annually in the spring. * Functionality/Placement: The railing provides a safety barrier at the edge of the ramp and at the deck above the volleyball court. The railing does not meet current safety requirements as there are more than 4” square openings between members. Durability: Metal and wood are solid, durable, and appropriate materials for this railing if the metal remains painted to prevent rust and the wood is regularly refi nished. Sustainability: There is no evidence that this railing uses low VOC paint or a renewable material. Recycled content material should be considered for this application as well as a recycled composite in the event of replacement. Comfort: The rail is more comfortable to lean against because of the wide, wooden top rail. * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 Rail Type 2: Wooden Railing 6.12 Rail Type 3: White Rail with Green Top Rail Location: West end of pier, on deck and staircases Sector Graphic: (E) Number: approximately 400 Linear Feet Quality assessment: Materials: This metal rail is quite diff erent than the other two rails and occurs only in a limited area at the Observation Deck at the west end of pier. The rail is made of 2” diameter painted steel posts and bottom rail, with a painted green wooden top rail. Horizontal stainless steel cables and turnbuckles have been added in the horizon- tal direction to limit size of openings. Maintenance: In general, the paint covers the metal rail- ing consistently. The paint is worn and chipped in limited areas of high use but rust was not observed. The painted wood top rail is worn and raw wood is exposed in some areas. Functionality/Placement: The railing does not meet cur- rent safety requirements as there are more than 4” openings between members. Durability: Metal and wood are solid, durable, and appropriate materials for this railing if the metal remains painted to prevent rust and the wood is regularly refi nished. Sustainability: There is no evidence that this railing uses low VOC paint or any renewable materials. Recycled composite should be considered for wood substitute as well as recycled content metal. Comfort: The rail is more comfortable to lean against because of the wide, wooden top rail. Rail Type 3: Green Top Rail 7. General Observations about Railings: It was observed and confi rmed by maintenance that these railings are not holding up to the standards of the pier and require too much maintenance.* There are missing pieces, rust and failing sections that need constant upkeep and are unappeal- ing to pier users. A material/railing that does not rust and requires no painting will be considered and researched further by WRT. * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 13 Bench Type 1: Blue Seat with White Logo Base Location: Along promenade Sector Graphic: (A, B, D) Number: 29 Quality assessment: Materials: This bench is the “standard” Santa Monica park bench found throughout the City. The base and supports for this bench are white painted pre-cast concrete with the words “Santa Monica” stamped into the base. Seat and seatbacks are 2x4 wood slats which are been painted blue. Benches are approximately 7 feet long and accommodate 4 people. There appears to be two slightly diff erent bench types, assumed to be of diff erent eras. Maintenance: Concrete supports require painting to maintain a clean fi nish, wood slats require regular painting and sanding or replacement if damaged. Functionality/Placement: Benches are located in such a way that adjacent railings block ocean view when seated. All benches face the ocean. An option should be considered that allows benches to be oriented in other directions to take advantage of sun and people watching. These benches do not have any arm rests which makes them targets for bench sleepers. Durability: The base is heavy, not easily moved, and very durable. The wood components may be easily defaced. Sustainability: Recycled content material should be con- sidered in the event of replacement. Comfort: This bench has a straight, tall back making it more comfortable for taller users. The seat and seatback surfaces are made of wood which is more comfortable than the metal benches on the pier. However, this bench could have been more comfortable if it had more lumbar support and curve on the seating surface. The wood surface dries quickly in the marine environment. Benches Bench Type 1 Bench Type 2 There are currently three diff erent styles of benches on the Pier. The blue Seat/white base benches are custom made and most predominant bench on the Pier. The other benches are prefabricated and appear to have been added at diff erent dates than the original. The 1987 Pier Design Guidelines recommends that the benches should be compatible with overall building design and are corrosion, graffi ti and vandal resistant. No particular type of bench is prescribed. 8 . Bench Type 2: Blue Metal Hatch Location: West side of entrance to Pacifi c Park Sector Graphic: (C) Number: 1 Quality assessment: Materials: This bench is a modern design and approxi- mately 6 feet long and seats 3 adults. It is fabricated of blue painted or powder coated open grid metal, with one piece seat and back. Metal tubes on sides act as legs and armrests. It is bolted to the deck.14 Bench Type 2: Blue Metal Hatch Continued. Maintenance: Routine repainting is required to prevent rust; removal from site is required if powder coating needs to be reap- plied, per manufacturer’s directions. The open metal seat prevents water from ponding on the surface. Functionality/Placement: This bench is less likely to attract bench sleepers as it is shorter and has arm rests. This bench was ob- served to be very well used at all times, with high demand for seating in this area. Durability: Rust was observed at base and near welds where the metal has been exposed. Sustainability: Consider recycled content and sustainable materials in the event of replacement. Comfort: Curved seat and seatback provides lumbar sup- port, however the grid open metal pattern is uncomfortable to sit on, especially in shorts. The curved shape of the seat and seatback is not conducive to sitting at any angle other than straight-ahead. Bench Type 3: Victorian Bench Location: West end of pier; Sector Graphic: (E) Number: 2 Quality assessment: Materials: Victorian style six foot bench that seats four adults. Bench is made of 3 ornate cast iron supports/arm rests with a composite slat board. Bench is bolted to wood deck. Maintenance: The benches are inside the Observation Deck and are in excellent shape. Composite boards are easily replaced if they were to become damaged. Functionality/Placement: This bench design captures the “Victorian” character of the carousel, but does not blend well with the more rustic pier aesthetics at the western end. No other benches or site furnishings found on the Pier match this style. The bench appears lighter and less solid than the exterior benches. Durability: Composite boards may be subject to scratch- ing and carving. The lightweight construction of this bench appears to be much less durable than other site furnishings. Sustainability: Composite slats could have been made of recycled content but are not identifi ed as such. Comfort: Shape, materials, and armrests make this the most comfortable bench on the pier. Bench Type 3 9 . General Observations about Benches: It was found that not only was seat- ing insuffi cient on the pier but those which were provided did not meet aesthetic, functionality or comfort expectations. Maintenance expressed a need for at least a dozen more.* In the Urban Design Plan, WRT, in consulta- tion with the City and SMPRC, will identify additional locations for public seating and will give guidance about how seating should be arranged. * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 15 Tables Table Type 1: 4-foot Square Orange Powder Coated Table (seats 8) Location: Entrance to the Pacifi c Park Sector Graphic: (C) Number: 10 Note: Privately owned Quality assessment: Materials: Prefabricated outdoor picnic table, with top and seats made of vinyl coated metal mesh. The seats are attached to table top with painted tubular metal legs. An umbrella opening is provided, but none of the tables have umbrellas. Maintenance: The vinyl coating on the tables allows the table to be easily wiped or hosed off for cleaning. However, it looked as if daily maintenance had not been performed; many tables were coated with a layer of dust and/or dirt. Functionality/Placement: The vinyl coating defl ects sunlight, keeping this table cooler when placed in the direct sunlight. All of the outdoor tables are located at the entrance to the amusement park. Although this arrangement is convenient for patrons who pur- chase food at adjacent stands, there are no quiet places to sit at a table. Handicap accessible tables should be made available; tables provided have permanent benches on all four sides, leaving no roll up access for persons in wheelchairs. A table with one open side or alternative table design with easy accessibility is strongly suggested. Durability: The tables all seemed to be withstanding the ocean/salty conditions. There was no observed rust and the tables ap- peared to be fairly new. Sustainability: There are no apparent sustainable aspects to these furnishings. In the event of replacement, low VOC paint, recy- cled content, and local materials should be utilized wherever possible. Comfort: This is a relatively comfortable outdoor cafete- ria table. The seats are wide enough to comfortably seat two adults on each bench. The edges are rounded and have a plastic coating which provides a level of safety and comfort. They generally experience rapid customer turnover. The Pier currently has one main outdoor eating area adjacent to the main food vendors and Pacifi c Park. There are two styles of tables and they are intermingled on either side of the amusement park entrance walkway. Table Type 1 10 .16 Table Type 2: Round Metal Table Location: Entrance to Pacifi c Park Sector Graphic: (C) Number: 9 Note: Privately owned Quality assessment: Materials: Three-Foot diameter metal table with three attached bench seats. Tables seat six adults very tightly and are more appropriate for three persons. They are colorful, with bright pink and yellow seats with white tables. Fabric umbrellas are provided at each table. Maintenance: The metal fi nish is chipped and limited rust was observed. Functionality/Placement: These tables are heavily utilized because they serve all the food vendors at the Pacifi c Park entrance. It would be desirable to have more tables in this area, and designate another area on the pier where people could eat as well. Durability: The round metal tables have some rust. Sustainability: There are no apparent sustainable aspects to this piece of furniture. In the event of replacement, low VOC paint, recycled content, and local materials should be used where possible. Comfort: The seat and table top are made of painted metal. The leg room under this table is small to accommodate a group of adult users. Table Type 2 11 . General Observations about Tables: The existing tables provide insuf- fi cient seating and lack basic ADA standards. Table 1 is maintenance friendly and easy to clean, however table 2 has signifi cant imperfec- tions mainly rust, due to inappropriate material choices. Any additional tables to be maintained by Pier Maintenance would have to be easy to clean, ADA accessible, adaptable for diff erent types of users, and aes- thetically cohesive throughout the pier. New tables could possibly be an opportunity to get private owners to update their tables. Setting a standard for furniture should be enforced. 17 Receptacle Type 1: “Barrel” Receptacle Location: Around Pacifi c Park Sector Graphic: (C, F) Number: 4 Note: Privately owned Quality assessment: Materials: Barrel with wood staves wrapped with metal bands and a plastic funnel lid. Wood is unfi nished. Receptacles look old. Maintenance: The wood is unfi nished and would require sealant to increase longevity. The plastic funnel lid (white) shows dirt eas- ily. Functionality/Placement: The plastic funnel lid helps to keep trash in the barrel and hidden from view; however, it is not very aes- thetically pleasing. Visually, this receptacle does not match any other site furnishings found on the pier. Durability: The metal straps around the outside of the bar- rel have small amounts of rust, and the screws holding these straps are rusted. Sustainability: No sustainable elements are obvious in this furniture. Use of renewable wood could be implemented in the event of replacement. Trash Receptacles Trash Receptacle 1: Barrel Trash Receptacle 2: Santa Monica logo Trash receptacles are a necessary and important site furnishing. They should be viewed as another opportunity to strengthen the design concept and cohesion. More recycling receptacles should be provided throughout the pier to encour- age recycling. The 1987 Pier Design Guidelines recommends that the trash re- ceptacles are compatible with overall building design and are corrosion, graffi ti and vandal resistant. No particular type of receptacle is prescribed. The Design Guidelines do require that dumpsters for the various concessions are screened. 12 . Receptacle Type 2: Concrete Cylinder with Santa Monica Logo Location: Present in all zones on the pier. Sector Graphic: (A-G) Number: 45, most predominant trash receptacle on the pier Quality assessment: Materials: Custom pre-cast light colored concrete cylinder with metal collar around center hole, as well as bronze City of Santa Monica Logo. These pre-cast receptacles are new. Maintenance: Requires little maintenance, weight makes it diffi cult to move or take, which is why Maintenance expressed their prefer- ence for this receptacle.* There is no rust and weathering, but on-going cleaning is necessary. Functionality/Placement: The pre-cast concrete is a good choice for marine environments since they contain no metal and painting is not necessary. * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 18 Receptacle Type 2: Concrete Cylinder with Santa Monica Logo Continued. Durability: The receptacle appears to be very durable concrete construction, with few signs of wear or need of for replacement. Sustainability: No sustainable factors appear to be consid- ered for development of this product in regard to materials. However, the long life span of the receptacle reduces need for replacement and thus reduces waste. Receptacle Type 3: Blue Metal Trash Receptacle Location: West end of pier (E), South edge Sector Graphic: (F, G) Number: 21, second most predominant trash receptacle on pier. Quality assessment: Materials: Fabricated blue powder coated painted metal with vertical slats and horizontal bands. A metal liner holds the trash. Maintenance: The receptacle is very rusted, faded and appears dirty. Functionality/Placement: This trash receptacle has no lid, exposing trash to seagulls and wind. Durability: Rust is forming where the paint has failed. Metal looks unsubstantial for the use and marine environment. Sustainability: No sustainable elements are associated with this product. A recycled metal alternative should be considered in the event of replacing such furnishings. Trash Receptacle 3: Blue Metal 13 . Receptacle Type 4: Blue Metal Recycling Receptacle Location: West end of pier; Sector Graphic: (E), South edge (G) Number: 4 Quality assessment: Materials: Fabricated blue powder coated painted metal with vertical slats and horizontal bands with a standard tapered formed lid, similar in style to trash can. A liner holds the recycled material. A blue and white “recycle” sign designates this bin for recycling. Maintenance: The container was worn and not clean. Regular repainting is required. Functionality/Placement: Site recycle bins do not sepa- rate any recyclable materials and are not clearly labeled as to which recyclables they accept. The Pier should include more recycling stations and they should be placed along side trash receptacles. Containers that accommodate multiple recyclable materials should also be imple- mented. Recycled materials include, but are not limited to, newspaper, plastics, glass, food, compost, etc. Durability: Rust is forming where the paint has failed, but with routine repainting this is a durable option. Sustainability: No sustainable elements are associated with this product. A recycled metal alternative should be considered in the event of a replacement. Trash Receptacle 3: Blue Metal Recycling 19 14 . General Observations of Trash Receptacles: The most functional recep- tacle was the Santa Monica custom concrete designed bin. The rest are made of corrosive materials that don’t match, are hard to maintain and are easily vandalized or stolen. WRT will look into receptacles similar to the Santa Monica concrete variety and suggest additional opportuni- ties for placement. Additional recyclable bins are also suggested that match the current receptacles. Providing adequate and appropriate receptacles will help to keep the pier clean. Receptacle Type 5: Recycled Content Receptacle Location: In enclosed observation deck (E) Number: 1 Quality assessment: Materials: Made of 100% recycled content plastic boards that match the adjacent bench with cast iron details. Maintenance: The receptacle is inside the enclosed ob- servation deck and is in excellent shape. Composite boards can easily be replaced if they were to become damaged. Functionality/Placement: This receptacle design cap- tures the “Victorian” character of the carousel, but does not blend well with the more rustic pier aesthetics at the western end. The receptacle appears lighter and less solid than the exterior receptacles. Durability: Composite boards may be subject to scratching and carving. The lightweight construction of this recep- tacle appears to be much less durable than other site furnishings located outside. Sustainability: Receptacle is made of 100% recycled content plastic boards. Trash Receptacle 5: Recycled Content Receptacle 20 Curb Type 1: 6x6 Wood Timber Curb – Painted Yellow Location: Central Walkway; Sector Graphic: (A, B); South Parking area (G) and used for wheel stops in parking area. Number: approximate 200 Linear Feet Quality assessment: Materials: Painted wood timber. Maintenance: Repainting required on a regular basis. Functionality/Placement: This curb defi nes the mainte- nance/fi re lane. This curb off ers no aesthetic benefi t to the pier experi- ence and could pose a tripping hazard. Durability: The timber appears durable enough to satisfy function though edges of wood are becoming worn and repainting is necessary to maintain color. Sustainability: Any wood used should comply with sus- tainable forestry practices. Alternative renewable materials should be considered, such as a high recycled content composite. Curb Type 2: 8x10 Wood Timber Curb – Painted Red Location: Central Walkway; Sector Graphic: (A, B) Number: approximate 200 Linear Feet Quality assessment: Comfort: N/A Materials: Painted Wood timber. Maintenance: Repainting required on a regular basis Functionality/Placement: Curb required for traffi c manage- ment and directs vehicular traffi c into parking lot. These curbs off er no aesthetic interest to pier experience and pose a tripping hazard for pedes- trians. Durability: The timber appears durable enough to satisfy function though edges of wood are becoming worn and repainting is necessary in places. Sustainability: Any wood used should comply with sustain- able forestry practices. Otherwise alternative renewable materials should be considered, such as a high recycled content composite. Curbs The curbs found on The Pier are made of heavy timbers which have been bolted to the decking. These timbers serve to guide traffi c and defi ne the fi re lane. Curbs are not defi ned in the 1987 Design Guide- lines but the Guidelines do require timber wheel stops. Curb Type 1: Yellow Curb Type 2: Red 15 . General Observations about Curbs: It was concluded that the curbs’ biggest weakness was its upkeep of repainting and replacement.* They function properly, however WRT will look into opportunities to cut down on maintenance on this element of the pier.** * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 21 Decking The pier’s top decking material is made up primarily of 2x12 pieces of lumber. In most places the decking runs perpendicular to the edge of the pier, however, there are areas where the planks are mounted di- agonally at a 45 degree angle to the sides of the pier. The 1987 Design Guidelines require exposed wood decking for all pier walkways, access and service drives and parking areas. Decking Type 1: Pedestrian Areas Location: All wood areas for pedestrian use; Sector Graphic: (A-G) Area: approximately 180,000 Square Feet Quality assessment: Materials: Exposed 12” wide pressure-treated wooden decking planks, unfi nished. Maintenance: The wood planks were generally in good condition. There were no signifi cant gaps identifi ed, and it appears that where gaps had occurred, they had been corrected. Wood decking requires routine washing, sealing (except for pressure treated wood), and replacement as necessary due to wear and exposure. Functionality/Placement: When well cared for wood decking makes for an enjoyable and marine oriented walking surface. Durability: The decking shows limited wear in the pe- destrian areas. Challenges for wood decking include the variability of wood products, twisting, warping, splitting, etc. Also, wear of deck can leave hazardous exposed nails. Deck boards should be replaced when nails are exposed. Sustainability: Any wood used should comply with sus- tainable forestry practices. Otherwise alternative renewable materials should be considered, such as a high recycled content composite. Comfort: The wood decking is comfortable to walk on provided it has been adequately maintained. Decking Type 1: Pedestrian Decking Type 2: Asphalt 16 . Decking Type 2: Asphalt covered decking Location: Central Walkway; Sector Graphic: (B) Area: approximately 5,400 Square Feet Quality assessment: Materials: Asphalt coated wood deck with corrugated metal panels Maintenance: Occasional cleaning is required, along with routine repainting of the stripes. Functionality/Placement: The metal sheets appear to cover a mechanical chase. An alternative to this design is desired as this option is inconsistent with the requirement of the Design Guide- lines. 22 Decking Type 2: Asphalt covered decking continued. Durability: The asphalt was cracking and showing signs of wear. Sustainability: Materials more sustainable than asphalt and steel should be used where available. Comfort: The asphalt rises above the level of the wooden deck and creates an uneven surface. The corrugated metal sheets are uncomfortable to walk on due to their uneven surface. Pedestrians did not appear to prefer to walk on this surface unless necessary. Note: Asphalt covered decking and corrugated metal panels are scheduled to be removed and replaced with wood decking.* General Observations about Decking: We have identifi ed that there are/were signifi cant gaps in the decking. Large areas of repair have been corrected by maintenance by replacing said areas with “patches” of decking. However, over- all decking was in good shape on the main walk. And it was noted that there are plans to replace decking with 3” thick boards, instead the 2” boards that are currently used. ** Therefore, gaps and general repairs will be reduced. Sealing of decking is not necessary due to the fact that the boards are pressure washed.*** The painted parking lines wear and fl ake and need to be repainted several times each year. WRT will make recommendations to be included in the Maintenance Plan about alternative approaches to striping parking lots with more durable materials * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 ** Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 *** Todd: Gemni Forest Products Decking Type 3: Parking lot and vehicular traveled decking Location: Parking Deck; Sector Graphic: (G) Area: approximately 83,000 Square Feet Quality assessment: Materials: Pressure treated wooden decking planks, 12” wide, painted with parking lot striping. Maintenance: These areas appear to have been replaced at diff er- ent times. Decking should be replaced where cracks and gaps pose a hazard. Re-striping should also occur on a regular basis to ensure a cohesive fl ow within the lot. Functionality/Placement: The parking deck planks appear uneven and worn when compared to “pedestrian only” areas. The boards are spaced further apart and in many cases greatly exceed ¼” between fl oor boards. Durability: The vehicular decking is signifi cantly more worn than pedestrian decking due to heavy and constant use. Raised knots and nails were observed. Typical challenges of wood decking include dealing with variability of wood products, twisting, warping, splitting, etc. . Sustainability: Any wood used should comply with sustainable forestry practices. Otherwise alternative renewable materials should be consid- ered, such as a high recycled content composite. Comfort: The uneven surface is bumpy while driving in a car. Decking Type 3: Parking Lot 17 .23 Lighting There are fi ve diff erent lighting fi xtures existing on the Pier. They are of assorted designs and styles and various heights. Lighting is predominant on the perimeter of the pier, and less prevalent in the parking lot or central areas. The majority of the lighting fi xtures appear to be of diff erent vintages and some are in questionable or non-working condition. (Observed at nighttime, about 20% of the lights were not lit). The Pier lacks a coherent theme in lighting and a consistency in fi xtures. The Design Guidelines dictate that there is a minimum of 4 footcandles and a maximum of 8 footcandles in lighting levels. Style and fi xture type is not prescribed but recommends that the fi xtures are compatible with overall building design and are corrosion, graffi ti and vandal resistant. Lighting Type 1: Cobra Head Light Fixture Location: First 100 feet of Central Walkway Sector Graphic: (A) Number: 12 Quality assessment: Materials: Standard cobra head fi xture made of metal with glass lamp cover on a painted white metal pole, 18 feet high. Maintenance: Routine replacement is required for ex- pired bulbs. Painted white metal poles need annual painting and occasional cleaning, and maintenance has confi rmed that painting the tall lights is not a problem with the use of a crane.* According to Bill Bollinger, the Pier Maintenance supervisor, there was a previous desire to replace the 26” Cobra Head” lights with the other ornamental lights along the rest of the deck. Functionality/Placement: Tall overhead lighting serves to illuminate the main path; however they provide no pedestrian ambi- ance on the pier at night. Lights of this style are generally associated with vehicular traffi c and parking. This lighting arrangement is not ap- pealing for a pedestrian oriented walking space. Durability: Many of the Cobra head light poles are se- verely rusted and the bases are weakened by the corrosive environ- ment. Sustainability: Fixture should use an effi cient, low watt- age lamp where possible. Also poles should be made of renewable, high recycled content materials. * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 Lighting Type 1: Cobra Head 18 .24 Lighting Type 2: Grey Arched Light Fixture Location: Succeeds the cobra head fi xture down the second half of the pier, wraps around the observation deck, and continues down the east side of the deck. Sector Graphic: (A, B, D, E, F) Number: 40 Quality assessment: Materials: Ornate metal light pole, 15 feet, is painted grey with a tear drop shaped glass lamp cover, in a “historic” style. Hanging banner or pot hooks are provided, however there were no banners or fl ower pots observed. Maintenance: The fi xtures appear relatively new and in good condition. They require routine replacement for expired bulbs. Grey poles may need occasional cleaning and repainting. Functionality/Placement: The poles are spaced at approximately 40 feet on center. Light levels felt safe and comfortable for the pedestrian, when operating. The shorter fi xture has a more human scale and seems to fi t in with the character of the Pier better. This pole is more ornate than the other fi xtures on the Pier, with curvilinear appendages and unique globes. The dark color hides dirt and blemishes better than the white poles. Durability: These light poles are durable and showed few signs of rust. Provided adequate attention is given to regular painting these poles should remain durable. Sustainability: The fi xture should use an effi cient, low wattage lamp where possible. Also poles should be made of renewable, high recycled content materials. Lighting Type 3: Wooden Light Fixture Location: Observation/fi shing decks. Located around the observation deck and the lower fi shing decks; Sector Graphic: (E) Number: 7 Quality assessment: Materials: 8x8 wooden pole, 15 foot tall, with wood cross arms supporting two metal light fi xtures. Fixtures appear to be sodium vapor (orange glow) at night. Maintenance: The wood is weathered and pressure treated. Maintenance is necessary to prevent the wood from becoming weathered looking. Functionality/Placement: The design of this fi xture has horizontal arms which provide bird roosts. Bird repellent measures (“bird spikes”) appear to be an after market addition. The fi xture is a box “spotlight” style that provides little aesthetic character. Durability: The wooden pole is very weathered looking. It also has a shorter lifespan than its metal counterparts and more susceptible to vandalism; concrete or fi berglass may be more desirable for durability. Sustainability: The fi xture should use an effi cient, low wattage lamp wherever possible. Also poles should be made of renewable and high recycled content materials. Lighting Type 2: Arched Fixture Lighting Type 3: Wooden Fixture 19 .25 Lighting Type 4: Box Light Fixture Location: Illuminates the perimeter of the southern parking deck; Sector Graphic: (G) Number: 7 Quality assessment: Materials: 8x8 painted wooden pole (teal green), 20-25 feet tall with a dual, box light fi xtures mounted at top. An additional light fi xture is provided shining onto beach. Conduit runs outside the pole with exposed junction boxes. Bird spikes are provided to prevent roosting. Maintenance: The wooden pole is in need of new paint, as it is noticeably peeling. Because it is wood, regular maintenance and upkeep will require the light to function at its best. Functionality/Placement: The lights illuminate the perimeter of the parking lot, but there is a lack of lighting in the middle of the deck. Durability: The wood is worn and requires regular painting to maintain fi nish. Sustainability: The fi xture should use an effi cient, low wattage lamp where possible. Also poles should be made of renewable and high recycled content materials. Lighting Type 5: Bell Shaped Light Fixture Location: Eastern edge of pier near Carousel; Sector Graphic: (G) Number: 8 Quality assessment: Materials: Gray/green painted round metal pole with 2 bell-shaped fi xtures on arched posts mounted at top of pole. Poles are approximately 15 feet high. Maintenance: The painted poles are well worn and scratched. The inside of fi xture is very rusted. Functionality/Placement: When observed at night, these lights provided a comfortable level of light for pedestrians. There did not appear to be “hot” bright areas or deep dark areas in this area by the carousel. The light poles are appropriately scaled to function in a human scale/promenade experience. However, these lighting fi xtures are not consistent in style with any other fi xture on Pier. They are located in only one corner of the deck instead of being integrated into the rest of the design. Durability: The metal seems to be very durable for this situation if painted surface is maintained to prevent rust. Sustainability: The fi xture should use an effi cient, low wattage lamp where possible. Also poles should be made of renewable and high recycled content materials. Lighting Type 4: Box Light Fixture Lighting Type 5: Bell Fixture 20 . General Observations of Lighting: Some of the lighting featured on the pier have the festive char- acter the pier desires, where others are more utilitarian in nature. Because of the many diff erent lighting styles, no overall lighting feature contributes substantially to the pier’s character. The Type 2 Arched Fixture is the most in keeping with the desired historical compatibility and pier character but its limited use does not promote a consistent image. Currently the varied fi xtures create a variety of maintenance concerns, including corrosion in the ocean environment, bird perches, and the need for repainting. WRT has noted that a comprehensive and cohesive lighting fi xture will substantially contribute to the urban design character of the pier as well as create uniform maintenance require- ments and uniform light levels. 26 While these items were not identifi ed in the scope of the Urban Design assessment and therefore not investigated to the same level as the previous items, they were observed as critical to the pier’s char- acter and environment. These items are included here to further address the additional features that make up the urban context. Features Feature Type 1: Telescopes Location: Along the northern edge of the Central Walkway; Sector Graphic: (B, D) Number: 11 Quality assessment: Materials: Grey painted prefabricated metal pedestals mounted to pier decking, with a step for child’s use. Maintenance: Moderate rust was observed. Routine cleaning and occasional repainting is required for upkeep. Functionality/Placement: We noticed many of the telescopes were in use every time we visited the pier. Telescopes look out towards the beach, water, City of Santa Monica, and Santa Monica Mountains in the distance. Durability: The telescopes appear to be high grade and appropriate for this application. Sustainability: No particular sustainable elements apparent in this feature. Feature Type 2: Designated Smoking Areas Location: Four locations throughout the pier, two on the observation deck, one on the western edge and southern edge of amusement park adjacent to railing. Sector Graphic: (D, E, F, G) Number: 8 Quality assessment: Comfort: The platforms allow for a designated place to smoke. Smoking is prohibited on other parts of the pier. Materials: The grey painted plywood sheet with smoking urn sits directly on pier decking. Maintenance: The platform requires regular painting and clean up of garbage around smoking area. Functionality/Placement: Smoking will be banned from beach in the future which would eliminate the need for this element. Durability: Smoking stations appear to address a designated need but are not integrally designed as part of the pier. They appear to be a temporary solution. Sustainability: No sustainable elements in existing feature. General Observations of Smoking Areas: Recommendations for more compatible smoking receptacles and smoking areas will be identifi ed in the Urban Design Recommendations. Feature 1: Telescope Feature 2: Smoking Areas 21.27 Feature Type 3: Fishing Utilities Location: Lower level fi shing decks at east end of pier Sector Graphic: (E, D) Number: 3 Sinks Quality assessment: The Design Guidelines identifi es that cutting boards, cleaning sinks and railings shall be consistent and compatible with the rest of the pier. It also suggests that “new construction at fi shing pier shall also evoke whimsy and fantasy.” There is no whimsy or fantasy in these utilitarian services. Materials: Wooden 12x24 fi sh cutting boards are located at various random intervals along the metal rail. The wood is untreated and heavily carved. Three free-standing pre-fabricated stainless steel sinks with fi sh cleaning stations. Maintenance: The wooden cutting boards are easy to detach and replace when necessary. The metal sink design is simple and easily cleaned using a hose. Functionality/Placement: Sinks and water source are easily accessible at all lower fi shing decks. Currently sinks are provided as well as wooden cutting boards attached to existing railings. There are also movable aluminum garbage bins for use by fi shermen. Durability: Perhaps more permanent trash receptacles could be designed for use by fi shermen specifi cally. Stainless steel sinks seem to be very high quality and used heavily. Amenities need to be durable due to heavy use of the pier by fi shermen. Sustainability: No sustainable elements noted in existing features. Feature Type 4: Planters (belong to restaurant-private property) Location: Near entrance to Pacifi c Park (C) and near restaurant at end of pier (E); Sector Graphic: Number: 4 Quality assessment: Design Guidelines: The Design Guidelines include a statement that landscape features shall be minimized and not compete with the architecture. Species shall be compatible with the beach environment. Materials: One wood and three plastic pots Maintenance: Maintained adequately by concession. Functionality/Placement: Planters can be a very pleasing site amenity; however this has not been executed successfully due to a lack of coherency. Durability: Wood or heavy plastic planters are appropriate and durable materials for this application. Existing planters were not in need of replacement or refurbishing. Sustainability: Wood, especially harvested using responsible forestry techniques, is a preferred alternative over plastic unless it is a recycled plastic product. Feature 3: Fishing Utilities Feature 4: Planters 22 .28 Feature Type 5: Bike Racks Location: Four locations with three diff erent styles of bike racks: A row of two standard metal racks on the west side of Pacifi c Park, one metal “low profi le” rack next to the restaurant at end of pier, one “wave” rack just east of the Carousel, and one “wave” rack at beginning of the pedestrian walk; Sector Graphic: (D, E, F, G) Number: 5 racks total Quality assessment: Materials: Metal, Blue Paint Maintenance: Some rust on bike racks where not painted. Functionality/Placement: The bike rack at the entrance of the pedestrian walk has room for eight bikes and was full upon one observation; consideration should be given to adding more parking spaces at this location. The rack at the west end of the Pier has room for eight bikes; two bikes were parked at this rack. “Low profi le” racks are less desirable because they do not support the bike on its frame; bikes to fall over more easily in this style of rack. There were no bikes parked at the other three rack sites. Effi cient rack system would help encourage fi sherman and pier visitors to use bicycle transportation. Durability: With proper paint, bike racks should be able to survive the pier climate with little rust damage. Painted bike racks are easily scraped by bikes and locks. Stainless steel is more durable and will not rust but is more expensive. Sustainability: Bike racks encourage non-motorized transportation. Recycled content metals should be used wherever possible. General Observations: Bike valet stations were introduced to the Pier in 2007 during the Twilight Dance Series and were very popular. The Urban Design Study will address possible locations for bicycle valet stations. Feature 5: Bike Racks 23 . Feature Type 6: Security Barriers Location: The City installed approximately 3’x3’x3.5 boxes around the Pier. Quality assessment: Materials: Wood, and fi lled with sand Maintenance: Originally, Pier Maintenance planted plants in the boxes, but the water damaged the deck boards, so the plants were removed and plywood was placed on the tops. Functionality/Placement: Sited to create a traffi c barrier. General Observations: These security barriers are large, and block pedestrian fl ow. Bollards that require little maintenance could serve the pier better and are recommended in the pier guidelines. If planters are to be used, we suggest that they follow the design guidelines. Feature Type 6: Security Barriers 29 Feature Type 7: Parking Kiosk and Pedestrian Access Location: The kiosk to the parking lot is located at the entrance to the Newcomb Deck. A pedestrian walkway, designated by chain link and raised curbs, leads pedestrians to and from the Newcomb Deck to the Municipal Pier. Quality assessment: Functionality/Placement: The pedestrian path, designated by a chain link fence, is not in character with the pier and appears temporary, but the function is appropriate for protection from vehicular activity. Options such as bollards and diff erential fl ooring material can serve the same purpose and create a safe walking space for pedestrians. The Design Guidelines state that the pier is to develop a unique, pedestrian oriented environment with ease of access and user friendliness as a prime design consideration. Improvements to the pedestrian circulation will create a better pedestrian environment. General Observations: The pedestrian walkway presents an opportunity to improve the ambiance of the Pier and create a walkway that adheres to the goals of the Design Guidelines. These goals encourage improvements that relate to the Pier and create a safe, functional and appealing circulation path and entrance to the Pier for both vehicles and pedestrians. Feature Type 7: Parking Kiosk Feature Type 8: Observation Deck Location: At the west end of the Pier Number: l General Observations: The Observation Deck at the west end of the Pier is a rarely used resource. It is an enclosed area and access is from a staircase or by an elevator. The Observation Deck is furnished with benches and a trash can and is painted red and green, which is complementary to the adjacent Mexican Restaurant, but not to the public nature of the Pier. The Santa Monica Pier Restoration Corporation Staff has indicated that they will install historic displays in this area as part of the Pier’s 100th Anniversary. Selection of paint colors, repair of windows, replacement of light fi xtures, and installation of seating and tables would add to the ambiance. Guidance about how to treat this area will be included in the Urban Design Study. Feature Type 8: Observation Deck 24 .30 Feature Type 9: Display Cases Location: Display cases are located near the Police Sub-station and the elevators at the west end. Quality assessment: Maintenance: Unless display cases are cleaned regularly and the material updated, they give an appearance of neglect. Functionality/Placement: Their current location is not an ideal spot for visitors to congregate and read. The displays are right outside of the bathrooms, they are up a level of stairs and not easily accessible to everyone, and they are tucked away out of view. General Observations: Display cases create an opportunity to share important information about the Pier, businesses and current activities. When part of a regular program, they create interest and educate Pier visitors. Feature Type 9: Historic Display Cases Feature Type 10: Pier Skirting Location: Around the pilings of the pier where pedestrian accessibility is an issue Quality assessment: Materials: wood fencing General Observations: The skirting was constructed to prevent unauthorized access under the pier and security, while the existing Design Guidelines suggest whimsical treatment. Our observation is that the skirting/fencing should not compete with the festive activity on the pier and should remain ‘background’. Feature type 10: Pier Skirting 25 .31 Feature Type11: Outdoor Dining Barriers Location: Outside Pacifi c Park dining areas and restaurant located on the west end of the pier. These structures are privately maintained. Quality assessment: Functionality/Placement: Serve their purpose of sectioning off and privatizing the eating spaces. General Observations: Each restaurant on the Pier provides barriers for its outdoor dining. The Design Guidelines state that development of exterior dining, lounge and vending areas is strongly encouraged. However to match the architectural standards of the guidelines they should still retain the whimsical character that matches the rest of the architecture, which the current barriers do not. Although these are privately constructed barriers around the tenants’ leasehold areas, they are highly visible feature of the Pier. The Urban Design Study will provide guidance about alternative designs for barriers that enhance the ambiance of the Pier. Feature Type 11: Restaurant barrier Feature Type 12: Gazebos Location: Newcomb Deck, at the southeast corner of the Pier. Number: 2 Quality assessment: Materials: Steel, same as railing system Maintenance: Same maintenance and material as the railings. Yearly painting and touch-ups. Functionality/Placement: Main seating for the volleyball courts is provided by the bleachers to the south of the parking lot. While the gazebos fi t in with the character of the pier, they are architectural “follies”. General Observations: The Gazebos were intended to be rest areas for visitors, but lack seating, cover and functionality. In consultation with the City the Urban Design Study, will make recommendations as to how these amenities can be enhanced. Feature Type 12: Gazebo 26 .32 Feature Type 13: Signage Location: Along deck. More concentrated at west end. Quality assessment: Functionality/Placement: WRT noticed a lack of signage for bathroom locations and overall directional signs. Regulation signs were noticeable and suffi cient. The main Kiosk is large but placed off the main path. It provides visitors with useful information but seems to go unnoticed by many visitors. General Observations: Signs advising the public about acceptable rules of conduct on the Pier (e.g. no diving, no alcohol, etc.) are placed throughout the Pier. These signs are of metal, about and were installed in 2007. Consolidation of information on these signs has reduced clutter. A diff erent location for the pier’s informations kiosk should be considered as well as a more inviting display around it to attract visitors. The Urban Design Study will recommend an expansion of the signage program and kiosk display. Feature Type 13: Pier Visitor Conduct Signs Feature Type 13: Visitor Kiosk 27 .33 SA N T A M O N I C A P I E R A S S E S S M E N T - Q u a n t i t a t i v e A s s e s s m e n t C h a r t SE C T O R O F P I E R A S S E S S E D ( B a s e d o n G r a p h i c ) SI T E F E A T U R E AB C D E F G To t a l N O T E S Ra i l i n g Bl u e M e t a l 51 4 6 4 29 Me t a l t u b i n g , p a i n t e d b l u e , s t a i n l e s s s t e e l c a b l e , m e t a l s o c k e t j o i n t s Bl u e M e t a l w i t h W o o d e n T o p R a i l 51 4 6 4 29 Me t a l t u b i n g , p a i n t e d b l u e , s t a i n l e s s s t e e l c a b l e , w o o d e n 2 x 6 r a i l i n g Wh i t e w i t h G r e e n T o p R a i l 51 4 6 4 29 Pa i n t e d w o o d s e a t b o a r d s , p a i n t e d w h i t e c o n c r e t e b a s e Be n c h e s Bl u e s e a t / W h i t e b a s e 51 4 6 4 29 Pa i n t e d w o o d s e a t b o a r d s , p a i n t e d w h i t e c o n c r e t e b a s e Bl u e m e t a l 1 1 Pr e f a b r i c a t e d , p o w d e r c o a t e d , b l u e m e t a l Wo o d e n / b l a c k m e t a l 2 2 Co m p o s i t e b o a r d s e a t , p a i n t e d b l a c k m e t a l f r a m e to t a l 32 Ta b l e s Or a n g e / m e t a l 10 10 Pl a s t i c c o a t e d m e t a l m e s h Ro u n d / C o l o r e d s e a t s 9 9 Pr e f a b r i c a t e d , p a i n t e d m e t a l to t a l 19 Tr a s h R e c e p t a c l e s Im i t a t i o n " B a r r e l " 31 4 Wo o d s t a v e s , m e t a l b a n d s Co n c r e t e C y l i n d e r w i t h S M L o g o 5 1 4 1 3 6 5 2 45 Cu s t o m m a d e , b a r e c a s t c o n c r e t e , m e t a l l o g o , " S a n t a M o n i c a " l e t t e r i n g Bl u e M e t a l R e c y c l i n g 11 1 1 4 Me t a l v e r t i c a l s l a t s , h o r i z o n t a l m e t a l b a n d s , p a i n t e d b l u e , " R e c y c l e " s i g n Bl u e M e t a l 46 1 1 21 Me t a l v e r t i c a l s l a t s , h o r i z o n t a l m e t a l b a n d s , p a i n t e d b l u e to t a l 74 Cu r b Wo o d T i m b e r C u r b - P a i n t e d Y e l l o w Bo l t e d d o w n t i m b e r 4 x 4 ' s , p a i n t e d y e l l o w Wo o d T i m b e r C u r b - P a i n t e d R e d Bo l t e d d o w n t i m b e r 4 x 4 ' s , p a i n t e d r e d to t a l De c k i n g Pe d e s t r a i n A r e a s Un t r e a t e d w o o d e n d e c k i n g b o a r d s As p h a l t C o v e r e d D e c k i n g As p h a l t a n d c o r r u g a t e d m e t a l p a n e l s Pa r k i n g L o t a n d V e h i c u l a r D e c k i n g Wo o d e n d e c k i n g b o a r d s , p a i n t e d p a r k i n g l o t s t r i p i n g to t a l Li g h t i n g Wh i t e / C o b r a H e a d 27 2 11 St a n d a r d c o b r a , m e t a l p o l e , p a i n t e d w h i t e , g l a s s l a m p , 1 8 ' h i g h Gr e y / S i n g l e C u r v e d 91 7 1 4 40 Me t a l p o l e , g r a y , t e a r d r o p g l a s s l a m p c o v e r , 1 5 ' h i g h Wo o d / D o u b l e H e a d 3 3 Wo o d e n p o l e , m e t a l f i x t u r e Sh o e B o x / d e c k p a r k i n g 52 7 Wo o d e n p o l e , b o x l i g h t Gr e e n / C u r v e d / B e l l 8 8 Me t a l p o l e , g r a y / g r e e n p a i n t to t a l 69 Fe a t u r e s Te l e s c o p e s 11 Gr e y p a i n t e d p r e f a b r i c a t e d m e t a l p e d e s t a l s Sm o k i n g A r e a s 22 2 2 8 Gr e y p a i n t e d p l y w o o d s h e e t w i t h s m o k i n g u r n Fi s h i n g A m e n i t i e s ( s i n k s ) 21 3 Wo o d e n f i s h c l e a n i n g p l a t f o r m s , s t a i n l e s s s t e e l s i n k s Pl a n t e r s 21 3 An a s s o r t m e n t o f w o o d a n d p l a s t i c p o t s Bi k e r a c k s 12 1 4 Me t a l , b l u e p a i n t 34 SA N T A M O N I C A P I E R A S S E S S M E N T *A-Pier Entrance -Extends from Bridge entrance to parking lot entrance *B-Pier (First Half) -Section of Asphalt topped pier *C-Amusement Park Entrance *D-Pier(Second Half) -End of ﬁ rst half of pier to the observation deck *E-Observation Deck -Bo *F-West and South deck -Deck behind and to the west of the amusement park *G-Parking DeckLegend Pi e r S e c t o r s 35 Tr a s h R e c e p t a c l e Bl u e M e t a l - r e c y c l a b l e Lo c a t e d f u l l l e n g t h of P i e r -4 T o t a l Ra i l i n g s Ra i l i n g t o p Lo c a t e d f u l l l e n g t h of P i e r Li g h t i n g Wo o d e n p o l e ﬁ x t u r e Lo c a t e d a r o u n d pe r i m e t e r o f d e c k a t e n d of p i e r o n l y -3 T o t a l Be n c h Wo o d e n B e n c h ( t r e x ) Lo c a t e d i n s i d e s i t e d e c k -2 T o t a l Trash Receptacle Santa Monica Pier Custom Located full length of Pier -4 5 T o t a l Li g h t i n g Wh i t e o v e r h e a d ﬁ x t u r e Lo c a t e d a l o n g ﬁ r s t h a l f o f p i e r -1 2 T o t a l Cu r b Wo o d e n C u r b ( p a i n t e d r e d ) al o n g P i e r a n d D e c k . B y Am u s e m e n t p a r k . Cu r b Wo o d e n C u r b (p a i n t e d y e l l o w ) al o n g P i e r an d D e c k . B y am u s e m e n t pa r k . Be n c h Wo o d e n B e n c h - S a n t a Mo n i c a C u s t o m Lo c a t e d a l o n g en t i r e st r e t c h o f pi e r -2 9 T o t a l Ta b l e Ro u n d t a b l e w i t h U m b r e l l a Lo c a t e d b y a m u s e m e n t pa r k o n l y -9 T o t a l Ta b l e Co a t e d M e t a l T a b l e Lo c a t e d b y a m u s e m e n t pa r k o n l y -1 0 T o t a l Li g h t i n g Gr e y a r c h e d ﬁ x t u r e Lo c a t e d al o n g se c o n d h a l f of p i e r a n d we s t d e c k -4 0 T o t a l SA N T A M O N I C A P I E R A S S E S S M E N T Curb Wooden Curb (painted yellow) along parking deck onlyLightingGrey Deck Fixture Located on east deck only -8 Total Railings Wooden Railing top Located on east deck onlyRailingsWooden Railing top for ramp Located on east deck onlyDeckingDecking at transition across bridge*A-Pier Entrance -Extends from Bridge entrance to parking lot entrance *B-Pier (First Half) -Section of Asphalt topped pie r *C-Amusement Park Entrance *D-Pier(Second Half) -End of ﬁ rst half of pier to the observation deck *E-Observation Deck *F-West and South deck -Deck behind and to the west of the amusement park *G-Parking DeckFact and Figures (Approx... Quantities) Tr a s h R e c e p t a c l e s Wo o d e n B a r r e l - 4 T o t a l Lo c a t e d a l l w i t h i n th e a m u s e m e n t p a r k en t r a n c e -4 T o t a l Be n c h Me t a l c o a t e d b e n c h Lo c a t e d a l o n g t h e we s t s i d e o f t h e de c k 1 T o t a l Tr a s h R e c e p t a c l e Bl u e M e t a l Lo c a t e d s o u t h d e c k an d p a r k i n g l o t -2 1 T o t a l Sm o k i n g P a d De s i g n a t e d sm o k i n g a r e a s th r o u g h o u t p i e r an d d e c k -4 T o t a l Li g h t i n g Gr e y P a r k i n g D e c k F i x t u r e Lo c a t e d i n d e c k p a r k i n g l o t o n l y -7 T o t a l G F B Am u s e m e n t Pa r k Ra i l i n g s Bo a r d s de s i g n a t e ﬁ s h i n g l o c a t i o n s . Ra i l i n g s St a i r r a i l i n g s Lo c a t e d a t e n d of p i e r o n l y D E Decking Worn and separated boards on the parking deck. Si g n a g e Fi s h i n g i s al l o w e d o n l y at d e s i g n a t e d ar e a s o n t h e pi e r . A C Metal Pier Access to underside of pier.Extends length of pier. P a r k i n g L o t E n t r a n c e Ob s e r v a t i o n To w e r Benches TablesDESCRIPTION QUANTITY STYLES Trash Receptacles Lighting321974 69324 5Legend Pl a n t e r s As s o r t e d p o t s -3 T o t a l Si n k s Si n k s a n d c l e a n i n g st a t i o n s a r e pr o v i d e d i n ﬁ s h i n g de s i g n a t e d a r e a s - 3 T o t a l Bike Racks Two styles, many unused -4 Total Ex i s t i n g S i t e F e a t u r e s 36 Santa Monica Pier Infrasturcture Assessment Phase 2 – Upgrade Studies Table of Contents Subject Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY………………………………………………………………… ii NEWCOMB PIER STRUCTURAL UPGRADE………………………………………….. ..1 AQUARIUM ROOF ASSESSMENT……………………………………………………... 12 MUNICIPAL PIER PHASE 4 UPGRADE………………………………………………... 14 MUNICIPAL PIER CONCRETE UPGRADE (Seaward of Bent 59) ……………………. 16 EMERGENCY GANGWAY……………………………………………………………… 18 CAROUSEL CUPOLA ONION DOME………………………………………………….. 25 FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM…………………………………………………………… 29 UTILITY SYSTEMS……………………………………………………………………… 45 LIGHTING STUDY……………………………………………………………………….. 49 TEN-YEAR PLAN………………………………………………………………………… 66 URBAN DESIGN STUDY (WRT)…………………………………………...APPENDIX A i 67 APPENDIX A URBAN DESIGN STUDY (WRT) This document is a part of the Santa Monica Pier Infrastructure Assess- ment Study to assist in the develop- ment of the City of Santa Monica’s multi-year Capital Improvement and Maintenance Program, led by Moffat & Nichol. Wallace Roberts & Todd, LLC Planning and Design 1133 Columbia St., #205 San Diego, CA 92101 November 17, 2008 Santa Monica Pier Assessment Recommendations Report for Urban Design Elements 1 Introduction 2 Methodology 3 Reccomendations 4 Site Furnishings contents 21 Carousel Building Roof Elizabeth R. Sedat Collection 1 The Santa Monica Pier has been an iconic element of the City and region since the early 1900’s. Unique among California piers, the Santa Monica Pier, its history and activities, are a clas- sic yet – whimsical stage welcoming tourists and locals alike. How- ever, over many years of harsh coastal weather, active urban use and the addition of an eclectic mix of site furnishings (benches, lighting, trash receptacles, etc) the Pier no longer presents a cohe- sive atmosphere worthy of Santa Monica. This set of recommen- dations, based on an assessment of current conditions, is intended to guide the choices for the selection of new and replacement furnishings. Introduction 2 The ﬁ rst step in the process was to review the Santa Monica Pier Design Guidelines (Guidelines), adopted in 1987. The Guidelines provide a general vision for the character of the buildings and furnishings and allow ﬂ exibility in accomplishing its goals. methodology WRT then interviewed City staff from maintenance, public safety and operations. The Assessment of Ex- isting Conditions was conducted in late 2007 and presented to the Santa Monica Pier Restoration Corpora- tion (SMPRC) March 5, 2008, and is included as Attachment No. 1. WRT was then directed to prepare recom- mendations for improving the charac- ter and function of the public spaces of the Pier. Design alternatives were presented to the SMPRC Operations Committee on May 28, 2008. The alternatives in- cluded three ‘families’ of site furnish- ings representing a range from those of Palisades Park and South Beach to contemporary styles and materials. Based on this input, WRT is making the following recommendations. 3 The Santa Monica Pier was built for the pleasure of the public in 1909. Ever since, citizens and visitors have enjoyed the amuse- ments and relaxation of the Pier. The very nature of a pier – apart from the land, above the sea and into the sky – is a place for en- joying a remarkable set of experiences. Santa Monica’s traditions of spinning around the carousel, soaring in the Ferris wheel, gath- ering for picnics, entertainment, fishing, strolling, and enjoying the view remain strongly held. The nationally recognized historic structure of the Hippodrome Building and contributing elements on the Pier, combined with the purpose – for fun, sets the founda- tional character and style of the public realm of the Pier deck. This character has been best described as ‘whimsical.’ Two fundamental opportunities were identiﬁ ed in the Assessment of Exist- ing Conditions: 1. Visual clarity, user comfort and maintenance could be improved with the selection of a complementary ‘family’ of site furnishings. 2. The placement of site furnishings could assist in directing circulation and deﬁ ning spaces for speciﬁ c use, i.e. performance. recommendations The following recommendations are organized to guide the selection of speciﬁ c items, i.e. benches, lights, etc., – Site Furnishings; and how to arrange them on the Pier. 4 The historic Byzantine-Moorish styled Hippodrome at the base of the bridge graciously marks the entrance to the Pier. More recently constructed buildings line the eastern portion of Pier and are characterized by the bold signage for the dining and amusement attractions within. The architecture of the distant west end might be characterized as an eclectic craftsman style. The site furnishings are a mix of styles and materials and the wood decking is compromised by numerous anomalies of asphalt and metal plates. The style and character of the Pier’s site furnishings need to be simpliﬁ ed to become an integrated family of elements that is complementary of the architecture styles and contributes to a sophisticated sense of whimsy. This will reduce the visual clutter that distracts from the quality of the Pier experience and reduce efforts in maintenance and operation. site furnishings Each of the items meets basic criteria for high quality materials that will reasonably withstand the corrosive coastal environment and require minimal maintenance which con- tribute to a level of ‘sustainability.’ The manufacturers and model infor- mation illustrate the design intent. Equivalent elements may be identi- ﬁ ed through the City’s public bid process. Quantities are approximate, provided for planning purposes. Fig- ure 1 diagrammatically locates each of the site furnishing elements. 5 Figure 1, Location Diagram for Site Furnishings 2 6 7 The 6,100 linear feet of rail on the Pier is constructed of three to four horizontal two inch steel pipe rails, with two inch diameter steel tube posts and ﬁ ttings, ﬁ gure 2. Some sections have a wood top rail. Stain- less steel cables have been added in the horizontal direction, centered between metal rails to create a four inch minimum clearance. However, current code requires vertical barriers at minimum four inches on center. In addition, joints vary in different sections of the railing. There are various materials that could replace the railing that would require less maintenance and present a different aesthetic image. However, the cost to replace the railings is estimated at $2.75 million. A more economical alternative is to retroﬁ t the railing to meet current code for opening size. To achieve the require- ment, stainless steel cable at four inch on-center spacing should be added in a vertical pattern. The color of the railing should be painted Mediterranean Blue, RAL color system 5002 to match new benches, tables and lighting. railings Figure 2 Railing 8 Figure 4 Benches by artists Figure 3 Bench 9 The Assessment of Existing Condi- tions concluded that there were not enough seating and resting opportu- nities on the Pier. In addition, there are three types of benches on the Pier, some of which are more comfortable than others. The Condition Assess- ment Report noted that the benches on the Pier have backs and are in a ﬁ xed position, most facing the ocean. These types of benches limit the visi- tors view. A backless bench provides more ﬂ exibility for the visitor. WRT recommends a new bench standard to replace variety of existing benches. The new benches should be of a style that provides options for backless benches and benches with backs, inviting the visitor to look out to the ocean or onto the spectacle of performances and people on the Pier. This report recommends the removal of all thirty two existing benches and the addition of forty one new backed benches and twenty seven backless. They should be surface mounted to the deck and carefully located in the locations shown in ﬁ gure 1 to provide a range of seating opportunities. The recommended style of bench, ﬁ gure 3, is 48” Scarborough – hori- zontal metal strap as manufactured by Landscapeforms, ﬁ gure 3. These benches should all be powdercoated by the manufacturer in ‘Ocean Blue’ to match the railing, tables and lights. The estimated cost for each bench is $990 for backless and $1,080 for backed. benches The bench is also an opportunity to engage public art on the Pier. Intro- ducing public art into the seating is encouraged to build on the legacy of ‘whimsy’ of the Pier. Santa Monica, renowned for its programs for public art, may consider numerous options, such as: a. replace all existing benches with a ‘off-the-shelf’ benches and add a few artist-designed/ custom made benches each year, ﬁ gure 4; b. locate artist-designed/custom made benches in speciﬁ c locations, such as on the deck east of the Hippodrome; or c. engage an artist to enhance a new set of ‘off-the-shelf’ benches. WRT recommends establishing a public art program to invite qualiﬁ ed artists to create one-of-a-kind seating for speciﬁ c sites along the pier. Figure 1 illustrates the eight locations where the off-the-shelf bench might be replaced, over time, with an art- ist bench. The estimated budget for the artist benches is $12,000 each, including artist fee, materials and fabrication, installation, one year’s maintenance. 10 The Assessment of Existing Condi- tions found that all the nineteen tables are owned and maintained by merchants and shop owners. Their locations serve the tenant’s use. How- ever, there is a need for public picnic tables. Ten of the nineteen existing tables are the square, as shown in ﬁ gure 5, with red seating and table surface. The other ten are small round tables. The style and character of the square metal tables, now used by tenants, with attached bench seating is recom- mended above other options consid- ered, ﬁ gure 5. The existing nineteen should be replaced by merchants to match the recommended blue color and nine- teen new tables should be added (to be owned and maintained by the City) in the locations, ﬁ gure 1. picnic tables Figure 5 Picnic table Six to ten of the new tables should have two or three benches to invite wheel chair users to the table. The color of the perforated metal table tops should be powder coated ‘Slate Blue’, as manufactured by Wabash Valley, for movable tables: Models SG140P - 46” Sq. Table - Perforated and SG155P - 46” 3 - Seat ADA Accessible Table; and for surface mounted tables: SG229P - 46” Sq. Table - 4 Seats - Surf. Mt - Basic Frame - Perforated, and SG234P - 46” Sq. Table - 3 Seats - Surf. Mt - Basic Frame – Perforated. 11 Five types of trash receptacles were identiﬁ ed by the Assessment of Exist- ing Conditions. Of the seventy four existing receptacles forty ﬁ ve are the recommended concrete unit, ﬁ gure 6. They were found to require minimal maintenance and most durable of the options available. Approximately thirty new trash receptacles and twenty new receptacles for recycled materials should be placed as shown, ﬁ gure 1, for ease of use and collec- tion. The trash receptacle model QR-CAL2832W, anodized aluminum lid A-24 as manufactured by Quick- crete or approved equal, with the city name embossed and bronze logo inset to match the existing units. Mate- rial to be Ecocast, made from 70% post consumer and industrial waste, color – Erosion. The top eight inches, including the rim, should be sealed to minimize staining. Receptacles for recyclable materials need to be added to the Pier (twenty total). They should be set next to the trash receptacles. It is recommended that the twenty new receptacles for recyclable materials match the trash receptacles with the addition of sig- nage. Signage or other designations on the trash receptacle, is recom- mended to designate the speciﬁ c use of the receptacle and educate the public on the importance of recy- cling. The signage program is to be coordinated with other City agencies. trash receptacles Figure 6 Receptacle The City of Santa Monica uses the following receptacle for recyclable materials: Recycled Recycler Excel Series Model 900-X50-F 50 gal. front access 25”x 22”x 49’” 115 lbs., ‘Designer’ series, as manufactured by Midpoint International. For the Pier, brown recycled plastic lumber, is recommended. It includes a rubber bafﬂ e to discour- age inappropriate removal of materi- als. Figure 7 Recyclable Materials Receptacle 12 decking The tradition of the wood deck is important to the distinct character of the Pier. The top decking is primar- ily two inch by twelve inch by twenty foot long lumber. Portions of the pier are covered with asphalt and metal plates. The Design Guidelines require wood decking for the whole pier. The ongoing program for repairing the wood deck is encouraged to con- tinue so that all the metal plates and asphalted areas will be removed and replaced with wood decking. 13 Seat walls should be introduced along the curb line, at the change in surface elevation between the two decks. The seat wall should be sixteen inches tall by sixteen inches wide in various lengths with two foot wide gaps at approximately twenty foot intervals to allow pedestrians to walk between, see ﬁ gure 1. The curb seating should be constructed in recycled plastic lumber/wood composite, in a me- dium dark brown color, ﬁ gure 8. curbs The Assessment of Existing Condi- tions noted the use of heavy timbers bolted to the pier deck to guide traf- ﬁ c, deﬁ ne the ﬁ re lane and cover the transition between the different eleva- tions between the Municipal Pier from the pedestrian walkway. While the curbs could be a tripping hazard for pedestrians and visually unappeal- ing they also are used for seating. The ﬁ re lane and pedestrian areas should be deﬁ ned by other means, i.e. bol- lards – see section B. Spatial Com- position and Circulation. A wooden ramp should replace the asphalt inﬁ ll along the seam between the two piers at the amusement facility entrances. Figure 8, Seat wall 14 Figure 9, Decorative arched pole Figure 10, Task lights to be added to the decorative poles 15 The Assessment of Existing Condi- tions revealed that there were six styles of lights on Santa Monica Pier. The existing decorative arched poles with the acorn light ﬁ xtures are not identiﬁ ed as historic elements, but contribute to the classic character of the Pier. To create a cohesive im- age, remove clutter and improve this important visual element of the Pier, three types of lights are recom- mended. All lights must provide the Pier staff the ability to control each independently. a. Decorative arched poles with an acorn light ﬁ xture, ﬁ gure 9, are the primary character deﬁ n- ing light element of the Pier. Figure 1 illustrates the locations for ninety seven new lights on the twelve foot tall poles at thirty eight foot spacing around the entire pier perimeter. This light serves pedestrians and the light ﬁ xtures, see the Infrastructure Upgrades volume of the Santa Monica Pier Assessment. The original manu- facturer of the existing lights has not been determined. Replacement of a matching pole and ﬁ xture is feasible and should be conducted carefully to achieve the desired character. The rec- ommended manufacturer is Sitelink by Holophane. b. Task lights, ﬁ gure 10, should be placed on the decorative arched poles with three to ﬁ ve spot lights adjustable to illuminate speciﬁ c fea- tures, i.e. ﬁ shing areas, boat launch, performance areas, etc. Figure 1 recommends twenty nine locations. c. Parking lot lights should be replaced on the Newcomb Pier. The lighting study of the Infrastructure Upgrades recommends a twenty ﬁ ve foot tall pole, spaced eighty feet on center along the pier perimeter to provide maximum ﬂ exibility to program events on the Newcomb deck. It is estimated that ﬁ fteen poles , located on ﬁ gure 1, will provide suf- ﬁ cient illumination. d. Necklace Lights currently trim the edge of the pier. It was recommended that the existing lights be replaced with 750 energy efﬁ cient LED ﬁ xtures, at ﬁ ve feet on center, vandal resistant marine grade with cast housing, high impact lens and gasketed cast lens guard as manufac- tured by Cole Lighting. The esti- mated cost exceeded the budget. See the “Lighting Study” for alternatives considered. lights 16 a. Bicycle racks are currently on the Pier, but underutilized because of their inconvenient locations. While bicycle riding is not encouraged on the Pier due to potential conﬂ icts with pedestrians, bikes are recognized as a popular and sustainable mode of transportation for locals. To encour- age bicycle access to the Pier new racks are recommended to replace the existing ﬁ ve with additional locations for new bike racks are illustrated on ﬁ gure 1. The galvanized steel ‘Wave’ rack is recommended, ﬁ gure 11, each securing up to eight bikes, as manu- factured by Bike Security Racks Co. b. Security barriers, currently sited, are large three foot by thee foot wooden boxes now serve as bollards to designate pedestrian areas and vehicle areas. It is recommended that the wooden boxes be removed and replaced with 127 ﬁ xed and 14 removable bollards. Model “San Fran- cisco”, as manufactured by Urban Accessories, ﬁ gure 12, spaced eight feet on-center and located as shown on ﬁ gure 1. These cast aluminum furnishings should be powder coated by the manufacturer in RAL color system 5002 to match other furnish- ings. special features Figure 11, Bicycle rack Figure 12, Bollard 17 c. Gazebos have been part of the Pier for over 15 years. The two decorative gazebos are located on the south rail of the Pier. They were de- signed as performance areas, but are currently underutilized. To encour- age use, it is recommended a picnic table is installed in each with a trash receptacle nearby, and a system of colorful fabric to animate the space and discourage bird resting/dropping. d. Smoking areas are currently designated and maintained on the Pier, ﬁ gure 1. The existing eight ash urns should be replaced with eight surface mounted, powdercoated (RAL color system 5002) aluminum ash urns, model Grenadier as manufactured by Land- scapeforms, ﬁ gure 13. The deck of the smoking areas should be a solid surface to keep burning items away from the wood Pier. In- stead of the existing painted plywood, it is recommended that a four foot by eight foot deck of tightly set recycled plastic lumber, one inch thick (or less) by six inches wide, tongue and groove, a medium dark brown color, is installed directly on the wood Pier. It is recommended that the envi- ronmental graphics program direct smokers to the designated areas. Figure 13, Ash Urn 18 e. Signage is an important interface between the public and the facilities of the Pier, as well as key to the identity of the public places, the merchants and shop owners. Signage for individual tenants and merchants are required to follow the Archi- tectural Design Guidelines. These recommendations are for the public signs. The Assessment of Existing Condi- tions found recently installed signs that provide consolidated informa- tion about rules and regulations that apply to the Pier. However other signage on the Pier is inconsistent in its character, quality, message and placement. A comprehensive environmental graphics program should be devel- oped to direct the replacement and addition of signage on the Santa Monica Pier. The graphics program should be based on what and how information is delivered. It should include an interpretive program ad- dressing cultural resources, natural history, and functions of the pier. The graphics program should coordinate the character of interpretive signage with that needed for directional and regulatory information. The solution should serve the Pier for ﬁ fteen to twenty years allowing an amount of ﬂ exibility with high quality materials located to minimize clutter and focus the message to the public. Figure 14, Interpretive Panel, by Mortar & Ink 19 The historic information displayed near the police sub-station at the west end of the Pier may be more effectively displayed in a series of panels along the railing, see ﬁ gure 14. Porcelain enamel is recommended for interpretive signs. This technique and use of materials is proven to hold up well in the ocean climate and deliver hi-quality graphic detail. The size could vary within the system. Figure 1 identiﬁ es up to eight potential loca- tions for interpretive information. Regulatory and directional compo- nents may be aluminum to ﬁ t within the city’s signage program. The existing information kiosk is a helpful and attractive element, ﬁ gure 15. Two additional kiosks are recom- mended as located on ﬁ gure 1. Figure 15, Kiosk Centennial anniversary signage should be considered temporary, un- less it can be included in the com- prehensive environmental graphics program. To assist in the efﬁ cient and effectiveness of a temporary program the PRC should consider: Deﬁ ning the identity of the year long event; Building on the City’s envi- ronmental signage program and production capabilities; Utilizing materials that can be recycled appropriately; and Engaging local sponsors. 20 f. Performance areas are man- aged by the SMPRC, ﬁ gure 1. These open spaces along the edge of the Pier, between the emergency vehicle access path and the railing. These sites should be marked with a painted white star on the wood deck as de- ﬁ ned by the environmental graphics program. g. Vendor carts are managed by the City of Santa Monica in locations shown on ﬁ gure 1. They are marked on the deck with a painted white “T”. 21 The Santa Monica Looff Hippodrome building is listed National Historic Landmark, National Register Number: 87000766. Statement of Signiﬁ cance (as of designation - February 27, 1987): The principal historic element of the formerly extensive collection of amusement facilities at the Santa Monica (Looff) Amusement Pier, this is a rare, intact example of an early shelter structure built (1916) to house a carousel in an amusement park and the better preserved of the two such structures that remain on the West Coast. http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=1979&ResourceType=Building carousel building roof Historic photos of the Santa Monica Looff Hippodrome (Carousel Build- ing) show the elegant curved funnel shaped roof rising to the central ‘onion dome’ on a cupola. The perimeter of the building has octagonal shaped turrets at the corners of the building. The northeast corner is wider and taller than the other three. Each of the turrets may have had a viewing deck on the ﬂ at roofs with a railing. Three dome shaped features were equally spaced along the rooﬂ ine of each façade. 22 Currently the metal funnel roof rises out of a ﬂ at roof with the wood cupola sitting on top. Missing is the ‘onion dome’ cupola roof, the railing around the perimeter of the turret roofs and the twelve dome shaped features. The 1987 Design guidelines note that the Carousel Building was “already restored”, page 56. The graphics of the design guidelines to not indicate the reconstruction of the ‘onion dome’ or the dome shaped features around the building perimeter. Construction plans and speciﬁ cations for Rooﬁ ng and Cupola Replacement were prepared in 1997 by Pugh Scarpa Kodama. They call for the removal of the existing ﬂ at roof portion to the underlying curved sheathing. They do not address the dome shaped features around the building perimeter. The City of Santa Monica’s Land- marks Commission adheres to the National Park Service—Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treat- ment of Historic Properties. Decisions and agreement concerning the Carou- sel Building roof should be conﬁ rmed prior to further action. Recommendations: 1. Conﬁ rm speciﬁ c elements to be reconstructed to meet the Santa Monica Landmark Commission’s requirements and agreements to maintain the National Historic Landmark status of the building. 2. Update the Rooﬁ ng and Cupola Replacement Plans to meet current building and safety codes and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards (including, but not limited to, the restoration of the turrets, addition of perimeter dome shaped features if necessary). CITY OF SANTA MONICA OAKS INITIATIVE DISCLOSURE FORM In order to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Oaks Initiative, the City compiles and maintains certain information. That information includes the name of any person or persons who is seeking a “public benefit.” If the “public benefit” is sought by an entity, rather than an individual person, the information includes the name of every person who is: (a) trustee, (b) director, (c) partner, (d) officer, or has (e) more than a ten percent interest in the entity. Public benefits include: 1.Personal services contracts in excess of $25,000 over any 12-month period; 2.Sale of material, equipment or supplies to the City in excess of $25,000 over a 12- month period; 3.Purchase, sale or lease of real property to or from the City in excess of $25,000 over a 12- month period; 4.Non-competitive franchise awards with gross revenue of $50,000 or more in any 12-month period; 5.Land use variance, special use permit, or other exception to an established land use plan, where the decision has a value in excess of $25,000; 6.Tax “abatement, exception, or benefit” of a value in excess of $5,000 in any 12- month period; or 7.Payment of “cash or specie” of a net value to the recipient of $10,000 in any 12- month period. Name(s) of persons or entities receiving public benefit: Name(s) of trustees, directors, partners, and officers: Name(s) of persons with more than a 10% equity, participation, or revenue interest: Prepared by: ____________________________Title: __________________________ Signature: ______________________________________ Date: ________________ Email: ____________________________________ Phone: ____________________ FOR CITY USE ONLY: Bid/PO/Contract # ____________________________ Permit # ___________________________ REFERENCE: Agreement No. 10633 (CCS)