SR 04-24-2018 7A
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: April 24, 2018
Agenda Item: 7.A
1 of 7
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director, Parking Operations (PCD)
Subject: Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Modifying Sections of the
Santa Monica Municipal Code Related to the Management of Parking and
Adoption of a Resolution Revising Public Parking Rates
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Introduce for first reading an ordinance (Attachment A) modifying the Santa
Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section 3.16 related to on-street parking
management and 3.04 related to off-street parking management; and
2. Adopt the attached resolution (Attachment B) establishing new transient parking
rates and permit parking fees for various City parking facilities.
Executive Summary
This report presents information and requests actions necessary to adopt the revised
Downtown transient parking rates and permit fees following the public hearing held last
month.
On March 6, 2018, staff proposed various demand-responsive parking pricing strategies
options for Council consideration to further manage congestion, improve public parking
services, address Santa Monica residents’ parking desires, and encourage shifts
towards more sustainable modes of transportation. Council heard from the public and
various stakeholders within the City, and directed staff to return to Council with
modifications to the recommended pricing strategy that, in the short term, take into
account input from Council and the community, and in the long-term, strategically
address the reduction of subsidized parking by providing increased investments in
diverse mobility options.
Background
2 of 7
On May 11, 2010, Council adopted a resolution (Attachment C) establishing new
parking rates for off-street parking as a first phase in implementing the 2009 Walker
Parking Study recommendations. The Walker Parking Study found that there was an
imbalance in pricing between the different parking facilities within Downtown resulting in
the unintended consequence of putting visitors, employees, and transient and monthly
parkers in competition for the most convenient and often least expensive spaces while
other spaces in the City remained largely unoccupied. Walker Parking consultants
provided recommendations consistent with the LUCE to better manage parking demand
and maximize efficiency of the public parking supply in Downtown Santa Monica.
On July 10, 2012, Council adopted a resolution (Attachment D) establishing new
parking fees at citywide on-street parking meters, off-street parking facilities, and beach
parking lots, including a reduction in the Downtown free parking “grace” period from two
hours to 90 minutes. These changes were informed by a parking rate study conducted
by Walker Parking Consultants in 2012, consistent with the LUCE and the 2009 Walker
Parking Study.
On May 10, 2016, Council adopted a resolution (Attachment E) establishing revised
parking rates for the Civic Center and Downtown parking facilities to address increased
high weekday occupancies and discourage potential “park and ride” activity due to the
arrival of the Expo Light Rail.
Discussion
On March 6, 2018, staff conducted a study session (Attachment F) with City Council
that included various demand-responsive parking pricing strategy options for Council
consideration. Staff sought Council direction on the concept of implementing a demand -
responsive parking pricing strategy that sets different parking rate structures on
weekdays and weekends based on their different demand patterns. The proposed
parking strategies were based on a detailed analysis of parking transactions and
occupancies in each Downtown parking facility, and were designed to:
Facilitate at least 15% parking availability in all facilities at all times
3 of 7
Redirect long-term parking sessions to less expensive parking facilities outside of
the Downtown core
Maximize the use of existing public parking inventory
Address occupancy, traffic, access and circulation challenges
Encourage consideration of travel mode shift
Reduce subsidized parking for monthly permit holders
Prior to developing the parking pricing strategies for Council consideration, s taff
conducted study sessions with various stakeholde rs throughout the City to ensure that
the needs of the communities represented by the respective stakeholders were
considered and included in the overall proposal to Council. During this thorough six
month outreach process, staff received verbal and written comments from residents and
stakeholders in the City that supported staff’s overall proposal to address traffic
congestion and excessively high parking facility peak occupancies. However, the
feedback on how to address these challenges varied amongst stakeholders. For
example, there was unequivocal support from Santa Monica Travel and Tourism, which
promotes the City of Santa Monica as a travel destination as well as local employment
opportunities in the City, on all of the staff proposed pricing strategies (Attachment G).
There were other stakeholders in the City who also supported the overall goals, but
recommended addressing the current challenges with varied pricing alternatives,
primarily being the preservation of the free parking for the first 90 minutes in the
Downtown core parking facilities. Attachment H includes formal written comments from
these stakeholders, community members and residents.
In light of the comprehensive discussion and feedback, Council directed staff to return
to Council promptly with the necessary ordinance and resolution to adopt the proposed
parking rate increases with the following modifications:
Immediate Parking Pricing Strategies
Maintain first 90 minutes free parking period in PS 1 -9 and KEC
4 of 7
Increase parking rates; however maintain a uniform parking rate structure across
Downtown core facilities, PS 1-8 and KEC, to avoid customer confusion
Eliminate monthly parking in PS 1 and PS 3, providing alternative parking
options, if necessary, in PS 9 and PS 10 based on availability
Draft an ordinance that streamlines the process and modernizes the municipal
code to reflect the current practice of setting on-street and off-street parking rates
based on goals outlined in the LUCE and DCP
Continue subsidizing parking for Ken Edwards Center and Santa Monica
Emeritus College program users
Develop new subsidized parking options for Main Library program users
Continue to invest incremental parking revenues over the FY 2009-10 base year
into parking traffic, access, and circulation programs, including transit subsidy
options
Staff recommends that Council adopt the attached resolution that includes the
immediate parking pricing strategies as submitted for implementation by July 1, 2018.
This proposal addresses the immediate implementation of the necessary ordinance and
resolution to establish rates in a timely manner.
5 of 7
Long-term Parking Management Strategies
Staff will work with city stakeholders and other City Departments to develop a long-term
comprehensive strategy that is aligned with the City’s larger focus on supporting a more
livable community, and return to Council on or before June 30, 2019 with specific long
term strategy proposals for Council approval and adoption. Among the steps staff will
take going forward are the following:
Partner with City Departments, stakeholders, and TNC businesses to create
mobility options that support the use of more sustainable travel modes
Evaluate the effectiveness of a SM Resident Downtown Access Parking Program
and a Downtown Merchant Validation Program
Work with stakeholders to analyze the feasibility of pursuing a universal valet
parking program
Return to Council with a comprehensive strategy that addresses the reduction of
free or subsidized parking with investments in tangible mobility options
Return to Council annually to report on the State of Citywide Parking
Judicial Council Parking
The fee resolution also extends the bulk parking fee for the California Judicial Council
for twelve months from July 2018 to June 2019 in anticipation of the multipurpose sports
field, with a possible request for a six month extension if construction demands allow.
The Council has made progress in promoting alternative options for its employees,
customers, and jurors; however, the Council requires additional time to address budget
impacts and to develop programs to address its minimum parking needs, particularly for
members of the public who utilize the court’s services.
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
6 of 7
Due to the ever-changing conditions surrounding current and emerging transportation
options and parking alternatives, revenue projections in establishing budgets are as
much an art as a science, and predictive models developed by staff to gauge parking
revenues fall into this category. The model used to develop the proposed pricing
strategy is based on the concept of demand elasticity and recognizes that both
occupancy and elasticity changes throughout the day, including research that suggests
that elasticities tend to be higher when there are more alternative transportation options.
The proposed parking rate and permit fee adjustments account for parkers shifting
amongst the Citywide parking facilities, and takes a proactive approach to managing
demand across the remaining parking facilities, slightly increasing the Downtown core
parking rates to encourage parkers to shift to less expensive facilities without
oversaturating any given facility due to significant rate differential between structures.
Lessons learned from the FY 2016-17 parking rate change suggest that not making the
secondary rate increase to other peripheral parking facilities within the Downtown
portfolio would result in potential overcrowding in those facilities.
Staff believes that the following range between $3 million and $5 million of increased
revenues is sound, prudent, and based on an elasticity model that has included several
years of data from Santa Monica parking facilities as well as benchmarking against
industry standards of practice and in comparison with other parking operation s with
similar characteristics. While no model will exactly predict total revenues, staff is
confident that it has established a fairly strong case for these predicted increases, if the
recommendation is approved as submitted for implementation by July 1, 2018. The
anticipated revenues would primarily recover the revenues lost over the last 1-2 years
due downward trend of parking transactions related to the changing mobility patterns.
Staff will include the revenue projections as part of the FY 2018 -19 Exception Based
Budget, and will continue to actively monitor parking activity in the various facilities and
adjust revenue estimates, if necessary, during the FY 2018 -19 midyear budget.
7 of 7
Prepared By: Michael Towler, Principal Administrative Analyst
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. Ordinance
B. Resolution
C. 05-11-10 staff report
D. 07-10-12 staff report
E. 05-10-16 staff report
F. 03-06-18 staff report
G. SMTT Board Letter
H. Other Boards and Commissions
I. Written Comments
J. Powerpoint presentation
City Council Report
City Council Meeting: May 11, 2010
Agenda Item: 8-C
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Carol Swindell, Director of Finance
Eileen Fogarty, Director of Planning and Community Development
Subject: Resolution establishing new parking rates for Downtown Structures 1-9, Main
Library, Civic Center Parking Structure, and Civic Auditorium Lot.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that City Council adopt attached resolution (Attachment A) establishing
new parking rates for Downtown Structures 1-9, Main Library Structure, Civic Center Parking
Structure, and the Civic Auditorium Lot, as a first phase in implementing the Walker Parking
Study recommendations.
Executive Summary
Pursuant to the direction of City Council at the September 8, 2009 Council meeting, staff
proposes changes to parking rates in Downtown City-owned parking structures, consistent
with recommendations of the Walker Parking Study. The proposed rate changes included in
this report were developed through additional study of rates in comparable areas and
ongoing consultation with the Bayside District Corporation. The Bayside District generally
supports the Walker Study recommendations. After lengthy discussions with the Bayside
District Parking Committee and members of the public, staff recommends that the decision
to reduce “two hours free” parking in the Downtown be deferred until a later time. This report
details the proposed rate changes. The proposed rate changes for this first phase are as
follows:
1) Increase the maximum daily rate in Downtown Structures 1 through 9 from $7.00/day
to $9.00/day and the Civic Center maximum from $8.00/day to $9.00/day.
2) Increase the monthly rate for Structures 1 through 9 from $82.50/month to
$121.00/month.
3) Increase the evening flat rates in Downtown Structures 1 through 9 from $3.00 to
$5.00 and implement new evening maximum rates for the Main Library Structure,
Civic Center Parking Structure, and Civic Auditorium lot at a lower rate of $3.00.
The recommended changes provide lower cost parking options during evenings and
weekends in peripheral locations. Furthermore, the recommended changes provide lower
cost monthly parking rates outside of the Downtown core. These recommended changes
are also consistent with the policy objectives of the LUCE in terms of improving the
management of parking resources as a part of the City’s overall transportation system. The
implementation of the rate changes proposed herein will provide additional revenue, a
Page 1 of 6New Parking Rates for Downtown Structures, Main Library, Civic Center Parking Structu...
3/22/2018https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20100511/s2010051108-C.htm
portion of which can be used to finance the reconstruction of Parking Structure #6. Full
implementation of the Walker Parking Study recommendations will provide additional
revenue.
Background
The Walker Parking Study, endorsed by Council on September 8, 2009, was a follow-up to
the Downtown Parking Program, adopted by Council on May 9, 2006. The Walker Parking
Study evaluated parking operations and market conditions in Downtown Santa Monica and
analyzed revenue opportunities from parking rates, in-lieu fees, property-based
assessments and other sources as a means to fund recommended improvements. Walker’s
overall recommendation was that other than the additional 576 parking spaces planned in
the reconstruction of Parking Structure Nos. 1 and 6, Downtown Santa Monica does not
need additional public parking at this time. Rather, in coordination with the citywide
Transportation Management Strategy identified for implementation in the Circulation
Element of the LUCE, Walker recommended implementation of several actions to support
access to Downtown. These actions included:
x Strategically increase on-street and off-street public parking rates in the Downtown core
to more efficiently and effectively utilize existing public and private parking resources to
meet parking needs, thereby creating greater availability of parking for visitors to
Downtown;
x Use increased parking revenues to fund additional programs to support employee
access to Downtown by transit, bicycle and carpooling;
x Use increased parking revenues to support shuttle service to outlying parking resources,
including the Civic Center Parking Structure during parking structure reconstruction;
x Use parking revenues to enhance parking operations, parking technology, wayfinding,
parking occupancy assessment and capital replacement and repair;
x Implement a centralized valet operation to access private parking spaces during off-peak
periods, supplemented by agreements with office building owners to make empty spaces
available to the public on evenings and weekends; and
x Regularly review parking occupancies and adjust parking rates to encourage optimal
use of public parking resources.
At its September 8, 2009 meeting, City Council directed staff to return with actions
necessary to implement the recommendations of the Walker Parking Study. On February
23, 2010 staff presented an implementation plan for the recommendations of the Walker
Parking Study. At that meeting, staff noted that that in order to implement the pricing
recommendations of the Walker Study, a phased approach would need to be developed.
Certain recommendations, such as changes to parking structure rates, are relatively easy to
Page 2 of 6New Parking Rates for Downtown Structures, Main Library, Civic Center Parking Structu...
3/22/2018https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20100511/s2010051108-C.htm
implement and require little or no capital costs. Other recommendations, such as changes in
parking meter technologies, require more time and substantial capital investment.
Therefore, actions proposed by staff related to the Walker Study recommendations will occur
in a phased manner. The first phase is recommended to be proposed rate adjustments for
Downtown parking structures.
Discussion
At the February 23, 2010 Council meeting, staff stated that a rate study would be completed
prior to implementing any of the rate changes proposed by the Walker Parking Study. In
addition to conducting the rate study, staff worked directly with the Bayside District
Corporation through regular monthly Parking Implementation Committee meetings to refine
the proposed rate changes. The following sections describe the rate study, the development
of the proposed parking rate changes in coordination with the Bayside District Corporation,
public outreach, and the proposed rate changes.
Rate Study
A summary of the rate study completed by staff is attached to this staff report (Attachment
B).
Bayside District Corporation Input
The proposed Implementation Plan was endorsed by the Bayside District Corporation’s
Parking Implementation Committee on January 12, 2010 and the Bayside Board on January
28, 2010. Following support of the Implementation Plan, staff met with the Bayside District
Corporation’s Parking Implementation Committee on February 8, 2010 and March 9, 2010 to
refine the proposed parking rate changes. On March 25, 2010 the proposed rate changes
were supported by the Bayside District Corporation Board.
The Bayside District Corporation did not endorse the initial recommendation in the Walker
Parking Study to reduce the existing “two hours free” parking for Downtown Structures 1-9 to
“one hour free.” As noted in the rate study, the majority of destination retail areas in the
greater Los Angeles area provide some form of “free” parking for patrons; therefore, staff
recommends maintaining the existing “two hours free” parking until a viable and effective
alternative system, such as validations, can be identified.
The Bayside District Corporation also advocated for reduced-cost monthly parking at
selected City-owned facilities for employees who work in the Downtown area. For this
reason, staff recommends maintaining the existing monthly parking rates at the Main Library
Page 3 of 6New Parking Rates for Downtown Structures, Main Library, Civic Center Parking Structu...
3/22/2018https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20100511/s2010051108-C.htm
Structure, Civic Center Parking Structure, and Civic Auditorium lot, while also recommending
an increase in the monthly parking rate for Downtown Structures 1-9. In these cases, the
Walker Study recommended an increase in monthly parking rates for all City-owned
facilities.
Public Outreach
During the development of these proposed rate changes, staff heard input from the public
through public comment at Bayside District Corporation meetings. Additionally, staff met with
the Chamber of Commerce shortly after the Council’s September action to gather input on
the Walker Study and potential implementation plans.
Proposed Rate Changes
The proposed rate changes are as follows:
Downtown Structures (PS1 - 9):
x Maintain existing “2 hours free” parking in Downtown Structures (PS 1-9)
x Maintain existing rates (8:00 AM to 6:00 PM) at $1.00 per 30 minutes
x Increase evening flat rates (after 6:00 PM) from $3.00 to $5.00
x Increase daily maximum rates from $7.00 to $9.00
x Increase monthly parking rates from $82.50 to $121.00
Main Library Structure:
x Maintain hourly rates at $0.50 per 30 minutes, or $1.00 per hour
x Maintain daily maximum rates at $10.00
x Maintain weekend (Saturday and Sunday) and holiday daily flat rate at $3.00
x Implement new evening maximum rate (after 4:00 PM until 11:00 PM) at $3.00
x Maintain monthly parking rate at $82.50
Civic Center Parking Structure and Civic Lot:
x Reduce hourly rates from $1.60 per 20 minutes, or $4.80 per hour, to $1.50 per 20
minutes, or $4.50 per hour
x Increase daily maximum rates from $8.00 to $9.00
x Implement new evening flat rate(after 6:00 PM until 6:00 AM) at $3.00
x Maintain weekend (Saturday and Sunday) and holiday daily flat rate at $3.00
x Maintain monthly parking rate at $82.50
Page 4 of 6New Parking Rates for Downtown Structures, Main Library, Civic Center Parking Structu...
3/22/2018https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20100511/s2010051108-C.htm
x Implement daily flat rate up to $15.00 for event days, with approval of the City
Manager.
Financial Impacts & Budget Actions
The Walker Parking Study recommends using the changes in parking rates as a means to
manage traffic and parking and also as a funding mechanism to implement parking
programs. The Parking Structure 6 staff report, agenda item 8-D, also identifies funds
generated from this recommendation as one of the sources to fund that project. Finance
staff is scheduled to bring forward a financing strategy for the Walker Study
recommendations in early fall, following completion of a comprehensive organizational
review currently underway. The recommendations in this report would generate
approximately an addition $175,000 per month or $2,100,000 annually in revenue. The
financing of the reconstruction of Parking Structure 6 is consistent with the Walker
recommendations and would leave approximately $1,500,000 annually to fund other study
recommendations.
Since the rate changes at the Civic Center Parking Structure and Civic Auditorium Lot would
only be effective on non-event days, no change in event-related parking revenues is
anticipated. Community and Cultural Services Department staff estimate $32,587 in
additional event-related parking revenues for FY2010-2011
Community and Cultural Services Department staff estimates a loss in revenue of
$10,918.80 (based on 2009 parking sales data for the Civic Auditorium lot) due to the
proposed reduction in hourly rates. Due to the proposed new rates, a net increase in
parking revenue of $54,959 is estimated for FY2010-2011.
Prepared by: Sam Morrissey, P.E., Principal Transportation Engineer
Approved: Forwarded to Council:
Carol Swindell
Director of Finance
________________________________
________________________________
Eileen Fogarty
Rod Gould
City Manager
Page 5 of 6New Parking Rates for Downtown Structures, Main Library, Civic Center Parking Structu...
3/22/2018https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20100511/s2010051108-C.htm
Director, Planning and Community
Development
Attachments:
A.Resolution
B.Summary of Rate Study
Page 6 of 6New Parking Rates for Downtown Structures, Main Library, Civic Center Parking Structu...
3/22/2018https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2010/20100511/s2010051108-C.htm
City Council Meeting: July 10, 2012
Agenda Item: 7-A
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Gigi Decavalles-Hughes, Director of Finance
David Martin, Director of Planning and Community Development
Subject: Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Modifying Sections of Santa
Monica Municipal Code Article 3 Related to the Management of Parking and
Adoption of a Resolution Setting Public Parking Rates
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that City Council:
1) Introduce for first reading an ordinance modifying Santa Monica Municipal Code
Article 3 related to parking regulations;
2) Approve off-street parking policies for vehicles displaying disabled placards, including
charging vehicles displaying disabled placards in the Downtown parking structures
and in the Civic Center during capacity events;
3) Approve the attached resolution establishing new parking effective October 1, 2012 at
all locations except beach lots where rates would be effective November 1, 2012 with
the change to winter rates, subject to Coastal Commission approval where required;
4) Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with Santa
Monica College to provide validated parking for students attending classes at
Emeritus College; and
5) Direct staff to continue to use any incremental increase in General Fund parking
revenue over the FY 2009-10 base year to address traffic, parking, access and
circulation; and
6) Direct staff to study the development of a Parking Enterprise Fund during FY 2012-13
and present recommendations as part of the FY 2013-15 budget.
Executive Summary
Parking in Santa Monica is a limited resource, in high demand, and has been the subject of
numerous studies and reports over the past decade. These studies have resulted in
numerous changes to parking operations, including the transfer of parking operations and
permit issuance to the Finance Department. Additionally, Council has taken various actions
to provide greater flexibility in the setting of rates, including granting the City Manager the
ability to set event rates up to $25 per entry and to adjust rates in the Downtown and Civic
Center areas to ensure the success of the Interim Parking Plan in place during the
reconstruction of Parking Structure 6. These actions have made numerous sections of
Page 1 of 12City of Santa Monica - Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Modifying Sectio...
3/22/2018https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2012/20120710/s201207107-A.htm
Santa Monica Municipal Code Article 3 outdated. The proposed ordinance modifying various
chapters of Article 3 updates the ordinance to reflect the current organizational structure and
codifies various actions Council has taken to better manage traffic over the past two years
through the Interim Parking Plan, Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE), and actions
taken in response to the previous 2010 Walker Parking Consultant study. Staff is also
proposing to codify a provision to provide some flexibility in adjusting rates not more than
quarterly if occupancy and other factors are not met, which would allow staff to better
manage parking demand throughout the City.
The proposed Parking Rate Resolution reflects the results of the most comprehensive study
of rates Citywide in more than a decade and adjusts every parking rate in the City except
the Main Street parking lots, which were adjusted last year. The proposed rates were
developed using an empirical model that takes into account occupancy, current rates,
parking rates in comparable areas and other factors. The Resolution looks at parking as a
Citywide system and proposes rates reflecting the overall parking management strategy,
which includes higher pricing in the congested core areas and lower pricing in areas of
greater availability. This management strategy optimizes the use of the City’s existing public
parking resources, and implements General Plan policies, including Land Use and
Circulation Element (LUCE) Policies T21.2, T21.5, T21.6 and 26.6, that encourage the use
of pricing strategies to improve access to parking in impacted areas and reduce congestion
associated with parking. The ordinance and resolution also propose new monthly parking
permits to better meet demand, including a permit in the South Beach lot that would allow
for parking past sunset, and additional evening and week-day daytime-only permits in the
Downtown area.
Council is also being asked to set policy related to the use of disabled placards for off street
public parking. Currently, by resolution, free parking for disabled placards is only provided
in the beach lots. To best manage access to parking spaces and ensure that they are more
likely to be available in the congested Downtown structures, staff recommends that Council
support a policy to provide free parking for those with disabled placards in all City-owned
parking facilities except the Downtown parking structures.
The proposed changes would result in:
x Reduced evening parking rates in the Downtown.
x Reduced parking rates in the Civic Center and Library.
x Increases at the beach lots that reflect demand.
x A 25 cent increase to parking meters citywide, except the Downtown.
x A significant increase in Downtown on street parking meter rates to reflect demand.
x An increase to Downtown Parking Structure rates during the peak daytime period by
reducing the free period to 90 minutes and increasing the hourly rate after 2.5 hours
and the daily rate to reflect market rates.
The rate changes are expected to result in a revenue increase of approximately $3.5 million
for each full fiscal year following implementation.
Background
Page 2 of 12City of Santa Monica - Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Modifying Sectio...
3/22/2018https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2012/20120710/s201207107-A.htm
Public parking in Santa Monica is a limited resource that is in high demand, and presents
many challenges to both users and City administrators. During peak periods, the average
occupancy rate for some Downtown parking structures can exceed 95%, while others are
under-utilized. Similarly, the Central Beach zone and Pier parking areas may exceed
capacity during peak hours, while other parking resources are underutilized. Parking
management strategies, including parking pricing, are critical tools for providing more
balanced utilization and improving access to destinations throughout Santa Monica.
To date, most of the City’s parking efforts have been focused on the Downtown area. In
2006, Council approved the Downtown Parking Program, which included three components:
x Seismic retrofit of two nine-story parking structures (Numbers 2 and 4);
x Tearing down and rebuilding three five-story parking structures (Numbers 1, 3 and
6), with up to 712 additional spaces; and
x Adding up to two new parking structures, containing a maximum of 1,000 additional
spaces, to accommodate parking for new development, in the area generally
bounded between 4th Court, Wilshire Boulevard, 6th Court and Colorado Avenue.
In 2009, the City contracted with Walker Parking Consultants to update the 2006 Downtown
Parking Program and in 2010, Council approved an Implementation Plan that included the
following actions:
1) Complete a study of overall pricing and hours of operation changes for both the
parking structures and on-street parking meters.
a. Adjust meter and structure prices throughout the Downtown and adjacent
areas as identified through the study and by City staff.
b. Adjust meter and structure hours of operation, as identified through the study
and by City staff.
2) Develop agreements and new signage for public use of private parking facilities.
3) Identify and secure employee parking options.
a. Re-negotiate 100 Wilshire parking agreement in Structure 2 (Completed and
approved by Council on January 19, 2010.)
b. Identify locations (including private lots and peripheral locations) and short-
headway transportation options to/from the identified location(s).
4) Expand transportation demand management programs.
5) Identify and expand alternative payment mechanisms.
a. Replace meters with ones that accept credit cards.
b. Expand or develop new smart card system.
6) Review parking operations staffing, policies and procedures.
Page 3 of 12City of Santa Monica - Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Modifying Sectio...
3/22/2018https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2012/20120710/s201207107-A.htm
a. Review parking operations staffing.
b. Review revenue control, cashiering and close out procedures.
7) Review/formalize maintenance program.
8) Review Walker in-lieu fee recommendations.
9) Research and develop centralized valet program.
10)Establish mechanism for ongoing review of pricing, parking supply and demand, and
operations.
11)Develop pro-active program to disseminate parking information.
Most recently, Council approved an Interim Parking Plan for parking during the construction
of Parking Structure 6 that has relocated 153 monthly parkers from Parking Structure 6 to
the Civic Center and Library. The City’s parking policy was incorporated into the updated
LUCE adopted in July 2010 and included a range of strategies to improve parking access
and availability, as well as manage congestion through parking pricing, expansion of the
“park once” approach, and alternative transportation. Specific LUCE policies addressed by
the Interim Parking Plan include:
x 21.2: Consider eliminating direct and hidden subsidies of motor vehicle parking and
driving, making the true costs of parking and driving visible to motorists.
x 21.5: Strive to implement measures to minimize the time motorists spend searching
for parking through way-finding and pricing parking to create availability.
x 21.6: Consider parking pricing and commuter parking limits as tools for managing
congestion.
x 26.6: Use parking pricing as a tool to manage congestion.
An Information Item was issued on June 25, 2012, updating Council on progress made on
these initiatives.
Discussion
Ordinance
The implementation of the strategies outlined above has caused current parking regulations,
especially those related to department and staff responsibilities, in Santa Monica Municipal
Code Article 3 to be outdated and also to no longer reflect best practices. Staff from
Finance, Police, Planning and Community Development, and Community and Cultural
Services reviewed the entirety of the Article with the City Attorney’s Office and are proposing
changes that streamline and modernize the code to reflect recent Council actions and
current practices. The most significant proposed changes to the Article, which reflect new
policies not previously considered by Council but are consistent with previous policy actions
Page 4 of 12City of Santa Monica - Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Modifying Sectio...
3/22/2018https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2012/20120710/s201207107-A.htm
Council has taken with the adoption of the previous Walker Parking Consultants study,
Interim Parking Plan and LUCE, are as follows:
x Modification of Chapter 3.04.030 to provide for the issuance of permits that allow for
parking past sunset in the South Beach Lots to facilitate use of the lots by employees
of Main St. merchants.
x Addition of Chapter 3.06, Car Share Parking, specifically to allow for the parking of
car share vehicles in designated on-street public parking spaces.
x Addition of 3.08.090 to codify current holidays when preferential parking restrictions
are not enforced as January 1, July 4, Thanksgiving Day, and December 25.
x Modification of Section 3.16.170 to allow for regular adjustments to on-street parking
meter rates at regular intervals based on a survey and report of occupancy rates.
The chapter provides for adjustments at $0.25 increments not more than quarterly
and not to exceed $4.00 per hour or lower than $1.00 per hour for on-street meters.
Adjustments for off-street facilities are addressed in the attached parking rate
resolution.
x Modification of various sections related to payment and permits to provide for
implementation of license plate reader technology.
x Elimination of various sections that are duplicative of California Vehicle Code
regulations.
x Addition of provision to allow for administrative adjustments of parking rates,
including parking structures and lots, based on factors that are included as part of the
model, such as occupancy, rates of comparable areas, and distribution of parking
between facilities. The provision provides for adjustments to rates not more than
quarterly and only after 30 days’ notice has been provided.
Policy for use of Disabled Placards in Off Street Parking Facilities
Currently, Council-adopted policies provide free off-street parking to vehicles displaying
disabled placards in the Beach Lots via Section 9 of Resolution 10595 (CCS) adopted on
July 26, 2011. There are no Council resolutions, policies or laws providing free off-street
parking in any other City-owned lot or structure. Current and historical practice is to let
those with disabled placards leave without paying if they request it at the point of payment
and if they park in ADA spaces located off the alley in some Downtown parking structures.
Recent usage surveys showed that at peak times, 97% of ADA accessible spaces in
Downtown were occupied, 92% of those spaces were occupied by the same vehicle for
more than four hours, and 84% were occupied by the same vehicle for more than six hours.
This data suggests that the spaces are being used by Downtown employees and/or nearby
residents who desire long-term parking. The long-term parking of any vehicles within the
public parking structures reduces the amount of public parking available for shorter-term
visitors and makes it more challenging for those who wish to patronize Downtown
businesses.
Page 5 of 12City of Santa Monica - Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Modifying Sectio...
3/22/2018https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2012/20120710/s201207107-A.htm
A review of applicable law, including the California Vehicle Code, confirms that there is no
local or State statute that requires the City to provide free off-street parking for those
displaying disabled placards or license plates. A majority of local city-owned off-street gated
parking facilities charge drivers who display a placard/license plate:
x Redondo Beach, Culver City and County Museums charge.
x Los Angeles and Pasadena charge in their gated facilities only.
x Beverly Hills, Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, and County Beaches offer free
parking.
Staff recommends that Council, via the attached rate resolution, confirm a policy to provide
free off-street parking for vehicles displaying disabled placards in City owned parking lots
outside the Downtown area, at the Civic Center, except during capacity events, and Library
parking structures. Staff also recommends that Council approve charging vehicles displaying
disabled placards in the heavily used Downtown parking structures to better manage the
parking resources and create greater access to accessible parking spaces by discouraging
the long term use of those limited spaces. Additionally, vehicles displaying disabled
placards will continue to be able to park for free at marked on-street parking spaces (with the
exception of valet parking zones or areas designated with white curb paint) in conformance
with State law. By charging for parking in the most congested City-owned parking facilities,
the ADA accessible spaces will become more available to visitors throughout the day by
discouraging long-term storage of vehicles displaying disabled placards inside the City-
owned Downtown parking structures.
On April 2, 2012, the Disabilities Commission reviewed a proposal to charge disabled
placards in all City-owned off street facilities. The Commission voted to oppose this
recommendation by a vote of 5-2. In their vote, as reflected in its letter submitted to Council,
the Commission found the technical data good but felt that the analysis failed to address the
social impacts of charging those with disabilities. Since the Disabilities Commission
meeting, staff has modified its proposal to only charge disabled placards for off street
parking facilities in the heavily utilized Downtown parking structures and in the Civic Center
during capacity events and to approve free parking for those with disabled placards in all
other off street parking facilities. The Disabilities Commission voted to oppose the revised
proposal at its June 4, 2012 meeting. The Commission for the Senior Community voted
down a motion to support the modified proposal by 4-3.
Parking Rate Resolution
Page 6 of 12City of Santa Monica - Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Modifying Sectio...
3/22/2018https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2012/20120710/s201207107-A.htm
In February 2012, staff contracted with Walker Parking Consultants to conduct a Citywide
parking rate study and to develop a model by which future rate adjustments could be made.
The parking rate study examined various factors including:
x Current occupancy and usage of City-owned facilities.
x Current rates.
x Rates at private Santa Monica facilities.
x Rates at various comparable and competitive areas.
x The relationship between on-street and off-street parking locations.
x Monthly rates.
x Event Rates.
Walker Parking Consultants was asked to provide a report that showed the exact rate that
the model produced for various areas. Staff reviewed the model recommendations and
developed proposed rates that were presented to various stakeholders, including
representatives from the Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Santa Monica, Inc., Main Street
Merchants, Neighborhood Councils, Pier Corporation, and the Pier Tenants Association. In
developing the proposed rates, staff sought to balance change from current rates and
compliance with previous Council actions that seek to lower rates in less used facilities and
charge more in congested facilities. The rate recommendations in the attached resolution
represent the most comprehensive change to parking rates Citywide in more than a decade
and closely tie rates to the City’s broader transportation policies adopted in the LUCE. This
flexibility is proposed to be the same as that set forth in the proposed ordinance for on street
meters whereby any rate adjustments would meet defined criteria, including:
x The rates would not be adjusted more than quarterly, more than 25% lower or
higher, and will not exceed or lower beyond limits established in the attached
resolution.
x Rates will only be changed to support goals adopted in the LUCE, occupancy
targets and as reflected in the new rate model that takes into account the factors
outlined above.
x As proposed,
o parking rates are significantly decreased in the Civic Center and Library and
decreased for the average evening downtown parker from Sunday through
Thursday, who averages less than 3 hours per stay;
o parking rates are increased in the high demand areas of the Pier deck and
Beach Lot 1N and in Downtown during the day.
x Any rate changes will require the approval of the City Manager and will require at
a minimum:
Page 7 of 12City of Santa Monica - Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Modifying Sectio...
3/22/2018https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2012/20120710/s201207107-A.htm
o 30 day notice.
o Posting notice of rate adjustments at affected locations.
o Written notice to stakeholders.
o Notices placed in a local paper and the City website.
Highlights of the proposed rates include (a full comparison of proposed vs. current rates is
included in Attachment D):
On Street Meters
x Increase rates from $1.00 per hour to $2.00 per hour Downtown.
x Increase rates elsewhere from $0.75 to $1.00 per hour.
Downtown
x Modification of parking facility rates to:
o 90 minutes free;
o $1 per hour for next 1 hour;
o $3 per hour thereafter with $14 daily maximum.
x Creates new types of monthly permits:
o Weekday, valid Monday through Friday from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
o Nights and weekends, valid from 4:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. and all day
Saturday and Sunday.
o Anytime, anywhere, valid in any Downtown structure, Library and Civic
Center all day, every day. Validity in Parking Structure 7 & 8 is subject
to agreement with Macerich.
Main Street
x No change to parking lot rates.
Civic and Main Library
x Elimination of evening and weekend flat rate.
x Significant reduction and simplification of rates to first 30 minutes free; $1.00
per hour for next three hours; $5 daily max.
x Addition of a nights and weekends monthly pass valid from 3:30 p.m. to 8:30
a.m. and all day Saturday and Sunday.
Beach
x Elimination of shoulder (spring and fall) season.
x Addition of free parking from 4:00 to sunset in the South Beach Lots 4S and
5S, located at 2030 Ocean Ave. and 2600 Barnard Way, and North Beach Lot
3N, located at 1150 Palisades Beach Road.
x Recognition of the popularity of the Central Zone year round through
increased parking rates in that zone.
Page 8 of 12City of Santa Monica - Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Modifying Sectio...
3/22/2018https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2012/20120710/s201207107-A.htm
x Continued use of rate structure where parking rates decrease as one moves
north and south of the Pier.
x Rates remain in the range of $6.00 to $12.00, however, more locations and
times would utilize the higher rates. As an example, the $6.00 rate is only
available in the south and north beach lots midweek during the winter, and
central beach rates increase from $6.00 to $10.00 during winter weekdays.
x Simplification of Beach House rates to $3 per hour with an $8.00 daily
maximum in winter and $3 per hour with a $12 maximum during summer.
x Consideration for potential addition of short-term parking spaces at Beach Lot
3N, to be priced at $1.00 per hour.
Pier
x Elimination of shoulder (spring and fall) season rates.
x Simplification of rates to $3.00 per hour with a $12.00 daily maximum in winter
and $3.00 per hour with a $15.00 daily maximum during summer.
Events
x Staff does not propose any changes to the existing event rate policy which
allows for charging up to $25.00 per entry with approval of the City Manager.
Establishment of Parking Enterprise Fund
At its meeting on May 11, 2010, Council increased some parking rates in the Downtown
area as a result of the 2010 Walker Parking Consultants study. That study included a
recommendation that increased rates in General Fund facilities be used to benefit parking,
traffic and circulation. The incremental revenue increase from the 2010 parking rate
adjustment is being used to finance the debt related to the reconstruction of Parking
Structure 6. Parking and traffic continue to be the top issue in community surveys and have
numerous unfunded needs, including routine maintenance and resurfacing of parking lots,
new elevators in the Downtown structures, and resurfacing of the Main St. lots.
Additionally, parking is currently operated as an enterprise and stakeholders have expressed
a desire for transparency in the uses of parking revenue and the desire to designate any
increased revenue to benefit traffic, parking, access, and circulation. The establishment of a
Parking Enterprise Fund, as originally proposed in Walker Parking Consultants’ 2010 study,
would accomplish these goals. Staff recommends that Council direct staff to study and bring
forward recommendations related to the establishment of a Parking Enterprise Fund as part
of the FY 2013-15 Biennial Budget. Staff also recommends that, during the interim period,
staff continue to use any incremental increase in parking revenue over the FY 2009-10
Page 9 of 12City of Santa Monica - Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Modifying Sectio...
3/22/2018https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2012/20120710/s201207107-A.htm
baseline first to address traffic, parking, access and circulation. This recommendation
supports the following LUCE Policies:
x 21.8: Seek methods to use parking revenue to support travel by transit, bicycle,
walking and other modes.
x 26.3: Use a portion of revenues raised from parking charges to achieve more
sustainable transportation choices including transit, walking and biking.
Parking revenues generated at the beach and Pier will still be directed to support these
enterprises.
Agreement with Santa Monica College
Santa Monica College operates the Emeritus College at 1227 Second Street, immediately
next to Downtown Parking Structure 2. The Emeritus College provides a wide range of
classes for seniors in promotion of the City’s Life Long Learning campaign and the City’s
efforts to promote a wide range of activities to engage the senior community and to promote
an active lifestyle. The College provides these classes free of charge and the majority of
classes last just under 2 hours. Staff recommends that, to continue to promote the Life Long
Learning campaign and an active lifestyle for seniors, Council authorize the City Manager to
negotiate and execute an agreement with Santa Monica College to provide validated parking
for seniors taking part in classes at the Emeritus College. The validation would increase the
free parking period to two hours for the students of the Emeritus College. This
recommendation is consistent with previous Council action taken to support involvement in
Santa Monica Malibu Unified School District activities through a provision for a limited
number of days of free parking for events at public school campuses throughout the City.
Stakeholder Input
Over the past three months, staff and Walker Parking Consultants have met with numerous
stakeholders, boards and commissions to discuss the proposed rate and ordinance
changes. As parking availability and access is consistently one of the top concerns for the
community, each presentation has had a robust discussion of the advantages and
disadvantages of the proposed rate structures. Generally discussions concluded with either
no official action or votes that were not unanimous. Specifically, staff presented aspects of
the recommended actions to Chamber of Commerce representatives, numerous interested
individual businesses and stakeholders, the Pier Tenants Association and the following
Boards and Commissions:
x Commission for the Senior Community – Voted 4-3 against a motion supporting
staff’s recommendation to charge disabled placards. The commission also expressed
concern for seniors taking classes at the Emeritus College.
Page 10 of 12City of Santa Monica - Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Modifying Sect...
3/22/2018https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2012/20120710/s201207107-A.htm
x Disabilities Commission – Voted 5-2 against staff’s original proposal to charge
vehicles with disabled placards in all off-street lots and structures. The Commission’s
vote included feedback that the technical analysis didn’t include an analysis of the
social impacts on persons with disabilities; requested the City explore alternative
methods to creating the desired turn-over rather than charging placard holders; and
that anything done be on a pilot basis and only where necessary. On June 4, the
Commission voted 6-1 to not support staff’s revised proposal.
x Downtown Santa Monica, Inc. (DTSM) Board – At its June 28 meeting, the DTSM
Board voted in support of the rate recommendation, including the 90 minutes free and
$14 daily maximum. The Board expressed support for incremental revenue benefiting
access, circulation and parking. The Board also expressed support for creating an
Enterprise Fund to ensure adequate funding for maintenance. DTSM requested
implementation be delayed until January 2013 and for the creation of the $3 pre-paid
parking rate in the Civic Center.
x Main St. Merchants – Voted to support staff’s proposed rates in the Main St. area as
long as two hours free is eliminated in the Downtown. The merchants also voted to
support lowering the South Beach mid-week summer rates and monthly pass fee.
x Pier Board – Considered the proposal and recommended a modification to provide
for a lower winter weekday rate.
Based on the feedback received, staff modified its proposal as follows and as described in
Attachment B:
x Limited recommendation to charge persons with Disability Placards to only the most
impacted Downtown automated structures and at the Civic during events that are
expected to reach capacity.
x Modified recommendation to eliminate the 2 hours free in Downtown and replace with
90 minutes free.
x Modified beach rates to have weekday and weekend rates.
Alternatives
As much discussion in Downtown and with Main St. merchants focused on the current
practice of providing the two hours of free parking in Downtown structures, Council may wish
to consider alternatives to staff’s recommendation.
1) DTSM’s initial recommendation to implement the rate adjustments without eliminating
the two hours free. This recommendation would devalue the incentive for employees
or other long term parkers to use the lower-cost peripheral locations, eliminate the
anticipated increase in General Fund revenue in the Financial Impact and Budget
Section, and would result in an additional revenue loss of approximately $1.8 million
compared with Fiscal Year 2011-12 estimated actuals.
2) Provide either no free time or a different amount of free time in Downtown structures.
This alternative would best move the City towards meeting the transportation and
parking management goals of the City, as adopted in the LUCE and Interim Parking
Plan. Under this alternative, Council could consider three strategies:
Page 11 of 12City of Santa Monica - Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Modifying Sect...
3/22/2018https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2012/20120710/s201207107-A.htm
a) Implement the proposed rates, as originally recommended (Attachment D),
eliminating the two hours free and eliminate weekday and weekend beach lot
rates. This recommendation would result in a $1.5 million increase to the
General Fund and a $2 million increase to the Beach Fund.
b) Implement the proposed rates, as originally recommended, except in Parking
Structures 2, 4, and 7. Although these structures do frequently reach capacity,
they do so slightly less frequently than other Downtown structures.
Implementing 1 hour free in these three structures would reduce the
incremental revenue increase to approximately $750,000.
Financial Impact and Budget Actions
As recommended, the proposed rate adjustments would increase revenue by the following
estimated amounts for each full fiscal year:
General Fund - $1.5 million
Beach Fund - $1.1 million
Beach House Fund - $100,000
Pier Fund - $800,000
There should only be marginal increase in the Civic Auditorium Fund that currently receives
the incremental revenue on event days.
Prepared by: Donald Patterson, Assistant Director - Finance
Approved:
Forwarded to Council:
Gigi Decavalles-Hughes
Director of Finance
Rod Gould
City Manager
David Martin
Director of Planning and Community
Development
Attachments:
A.Ordinance
B.Walker Parking Consultants Study
C.Resolution
D.Parking rate comparison of new vs. current rates
Page 12 of 12City of Santa Monica - Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Modifying Sect...
3/22/2018https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/agendas/2012/20120710/s201207107-A.htm
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: May 10, 2016
Agenda Item: 11.A
1 of 11
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director, Planning and Community Development, Planning &
Community Development, Transportation Engineering & Management
Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Setting Public Parking Rates
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1) Adopt the attached resolution establishing new parking rates for the Civic Center
parking facilities, restricting permit eligibility to discourage park and ride, and
make minor changes to address operational needs, and
2) Provide input on the proposed administrative fee increase.
Executive Summary
With Expo operations commencing on May 20, 2016, minor operational measures are
recommended to prevent daily park and ride activity. In addition, rates at the Civic
Center are recommended to be increased to address high weekday occupancies, which
are typically above 90% by noon on weekdays. Staff is also requesting input from the
Council on a potential administrative increase of parking rates in the Downtown.
While the full impact of Expo operations on public parking in the Downtown and Civic
Center areas remains to be seen, these measures will address current conditions and
forestall daily park and ride activity. Staff plans to monitor parking occupancies over the
course of the first year of service to inform a study and broader policy discussion at that
time.
Background
Parking in Santa Monica is a limited resource, in high demand, and has been the
subject of multiple studies and reports over the past decade, which have resulted in a
number of changes to parking policies. The Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE)
provides policy guidance for parking management, including Policy T26.6: “Use parking
pricing as a tool to manage congestion.” The LUCE suggests managing parking in
Santa Monica as the limited resource it is and ensuring that adequate parking is
available for residents, employees, and visitors. It sets a target threshold of 15% parking
availability at all times and provides various strategies to employ in achieving this target.
2 of 11
On and off-street public parking rates were last amended by Council on July 10, 2012
concurrent with the demolition and reconstruction of Parking Structure 6, which
included:
• Decreasing parking rates at the Civic Center and the Main Library due to the low
occupancy and peripheral location to the downtown core
• Eliminating the Downtown evening flat rate
• Increasing on-street parking meter rates Citywide
• Reducing the free period in Downtown structures from 120 to 90 minutes
These modifications were informed by a parking rate study conducted by Walker
Parking Consultants in 2012 (Attachment A). The study recommended “making rate
changes at least once per year, if not more frequently” (8).
The February 2016 Draft Downtown Community Plan contains goals and policies to
further the Council’s strategic initiative of establishing a new model for mobility,
including Policy AM3.6: “Use parking pricing, concentration, and location as tools to
manage vehicle congestion in Downtown.” The Plan emphasizes sustainability, safety,
and a focus on moving as many people as possible given the space constraints of an
urban environment. A key component of this strategy is managing parking through
pricing.
Staff conducted a study session with the Downtown Santa Monica, Inc. (DTSM) Board
of Directors on January 27, 2016 and the Planning Commission on April 6, 2016.
Feedback from each body is incorporated herein.
Discussion
Parking in the Downtown and Civic Center areas is utilized by many various users,
including residents, employees, beachgoers, Santa Monica High School (Samohi) staff
and students, and short term visitors who come to Santa Monica for City and Court
services, dining, shopping, entertainment, business meetings, special events, and the
Farmers Market. The full impact of Expo on parking demand will evolve over time as
these diverse users have time to incorporate light rail into their travel choices. Some
current drivers will switch to Expo, while others may desire to park in the Downtown or
Civic Center areas and then ride Expo to other locations in the region, also known as
park and ride. Daily park and ride activity is not preferred because it has the potential to
add new vehicle trips to Santa Monica streets (assuming that the driver’s commute
would otherwise not travel through Santa Monica) while also using a parking space for
several hours by someone not working at or patronizing destinations in Santa Monica.
3 of 11
Staff will evaluate impacts and continuously monitor parking occupancies closely once
Expo opens. Staff is submitting a request with the FY 2017-19 biennial budget to fund a
comprehensive parking study. Staff is also beginning this process in coordination with
DTSM to conduct intercept surveys in the downtown and Civic Center area before Expo
operations begin, and will begin utilizing existing monitoring tools. However, in light of
the May 20, 2016 inauguration of Expo light rail service, and the increased usage of the
Civic Center structure and surface lot, minor operational modifications are necessary to
further Council’s strategic initiative to establish a new model for mobility in Santa
Monica, and to leverage the significant opportunity that Expo represents. Staff is
attempting to balance a “wait and see” approach with a proactive approach by
recommending a set of narrow actions to address more immediate operational issues
already identified or which are in keeping with Council objectives.
Downtown Parking Rates
As supported by adopted City policy, parking price is one of the most effective ways to
motivate motorists to consider other transportation modes. Stagnant parking rates,
coupled with inflation and historically low gas prices, do little to encourage the
consideration—and ultimately the use—of active modes of transportation. The
transportation options in Santa Monica have improved greatly since 2012, including the
launch of Breeze Bike Share, Big Blue Bus - The Evolution of Blue, the continued build-
out of the City’s bike network, the launch of the City’s car share pilot program, and the
forthcoming launch of Expo. Maintaining current prices will not leverage the City’s
substantial investments in this arena. To maximize the accessibility of the City’s
Downtown, reduce auto trips, and leverage the strong investment and commitment the
City has made to transit and active modes of transportation, staff is inclined to pursue
the administrative rate increases afforded by Section 17 of Resolution 10889. This
section authorizes the City Manager to increase or decrease transient (daily) and
monthly parking rates based on occupancy, comparable location surveys, and
relationship to adjacent parking facilities.
Downtown public parking rates have remained constant since 2012, while weekday
daily maximums at a sampling of privately owned public parking facilities in the
neighborhood have increased by an average of 12%. Attachment B contains a map of
weekday daily maximum rates in Downtown Santa Monica at publically available
parking facilities. If this trend continues, increasing numbers of users could elect to p ark
in City facilities, overburdening them while privately-operated locations become
underutilized. This could have the effect of creating the perception that there is a lack of
parking inventory, while private facilities go underutilized.
While this increase can be made administratively, because of the lapse in time since the
last increase and the recent turnover of parking staff, staff seeks input from Council to
determine whether the increase is appropriate at this time. The proposed fee schedule,
which incorporates feedback from DTSM and the Planning Commission is proposed to
be adjusted as follows:
4 of 11
Parking Structures 1 through 9 and Ken Edwards Center
Transient (25% increase allowed)
Duration Current Proposed
First 90 minutes Free No change1
Next 60 minutes $1 +$.25 = $1.25
Each additional 30 minutes $1.50 +$.352 = $1.85
Daily maximum $14 +$3.5 = $17.50
Monthly (10% increase allowed)
Type Current Proposed
All access $160 +$16 = $176
Weekday only $120 +$12 = $132
Weeknights/weekends only $75 +$7.50 = $82.50
Affordable housing $65 No change3
Parking Structure 10 and Downtown Lots 27-30
Transient (25% increase allowed)
Duration Current Proposed
Each 30 minutes $1 +$.25 = $1.25
1 DTSM requested that the free period be maintained until a larger study could be completed. Although
the Planning Commission has specifically advocated for the elimination of all free periods, staff is
proposing to defer this decision until a broader review and more outreach can be conducted.
2 Maximum increase allowed is $0.375, rounded down to $0.35 for simplification.
3 The Planning Commission requested to maintain the current rate for the Affordable Housing monthly
keycard.
5 of 11
Daily maximum $14 +$3.50 = $17.50
Monthly (10% increase allowed)
Type Current Proposed
Weekday only $120 +$12 = $132
Weeknights/weekends only $75 +$7.50 = $82.50
Parking rates at the Main Library parking structure and lot are not proposed to be
changed at this time as occupancies at this facility are lower than the rest of the
Downtown structures and lots. Further, as this facility is located on the eastern edge of
downtown, the Draft Downtown Community Plan suggests that rates should be lower in
comparison to incentivize patrons to park on the edge of the Downtown n eighborhood
and walk to their destination. The proposed rate changes might result in increased
occupancies at the Library, so staff will monitor the situation closely and make
adjustments administratively as conditions require.
Civic Center Parking Rates
The first 30 minutes of parking at the Civic Center parking structure and surface lot are
free, and each additional hour is $1. The daily maximum is $5, with a $3 daily maximum
rate available to those purchasing pre-paid debit cards. When rates were last changed
by Council in July 2012, the Civic Center area was perceived by many as disconnected
from the rest of Downtown and thus seen as a peripheral parking option to the
Downtown core. Now, in addition to preexisting offices, hotels, government offices, a nd
Samohi, the area has a more diverse set of land uses including Tongva Park,
restaurants, and multi-family housing. As a result, and combined with inexpensive
parking rates, weekday occupancies in the lot and structure are much higher than in the
past. W hile average hourly occupancies in the Civic parking structure in July 2012 were
rarely higher than 60%, they were frequently above 80% in July 2015, and currently
reach 100% most weekdays. Patterns in the surface lot are similar. It was this low
occupancy that resulted in the reduction of the daily maximum to be reduced by 50%
from $10 to $5.
In addition to the parking demand generated by the new land uses in the Civic Center
area, the parking facilities are further impacted by the prices charged by nearb y
privately-owned public parking facilities. Daily maximum parking rates within a short
walk of these facilities range from $15 at the Le Méridien Delfina to as high as $42 at
6 of 11
the Viceroy Hotel. Attachment C includes daily maximum parking rates in the Civic
Center area.
Demand will likely be further impacted by the opening of the Expo station at 4 th Street
and Colorado Avenue. While prices in the Downtown should discourage park -and-ride
activity, $3 to $5 weekday daily maximums in the Civic Center might ac tively encourage
this behavior. As a result, staff recommends aligning rates at the Civic with the current
Downtown structures fee schedule, without increasing the free period from the current
30 minutes.
Civic Center Parking Structure and Surface Lot
Transient—Weekdays
Current Recommended
Free period 30 minutes No change
Payment increments Each additional hour is $1 Next hour is $1, each
additional 30 minutes
is $1.50
Daily maximum $5 (or $3 for debit card
holders)
$14
Staff originally considered increasing the free period to 90 minutes so that the fee
schedule would be consistent with the Downtown structures. In response to Planning
Commission feedback however, staff recommends maintaining the current 30 minute s
free period. The following chart provides a comparison of rates a parker would pay for
each 30 minute increment Monday through Friday.
Length
of Stay
Current
Rate
90 minutes free
(Original proposal)
30 minutes free
(Recommendation)
0:30 Free Free Free
1:00 $1 Free $1
7 of 11
1:30 $1 Free $1
2:00 $2 $1 $2.50
2:30 $2 $1 $4
3:00 $3 $2.50 $5.50
3:30 $3 $4 $7
4:00 $4 $5.50 $8.50
4:30 $4 $7 $10
5:00 $5 $8.50 $11.50
5:30 - $10 $13
6:00 - $11.50 $14
6:30 - $13 -
7:00 - $14 -
Under the current fee schedule, the daily maximum is reached after five hours of
parking, compared to seven hours under the original proposal which would have
extended the free period to 90 minutes. The staff recommendation is to maintain the
current 30 minutes free, which results in the daily maximum being reached at hour six.
Contrary to weekdays, the Civic Center parking facilities are underused on weekends
when the Courthouse, Samohi, and most City offices are closed. To better use the Civic
parking resources and further the peripheral parking strategy outlined in the Draft
Downtown Community Plan, staff recommends maintaining t he $5 daily maximum on
weekends. A parker would reach the $5 daily maximum on Saturday or Sunday after
four hours under the original proposal with 90 minutes free, with the $5 daily maximum
being reached after three hours under the staff recommendation which would maintain
the 30 minutes free period.
Staff recommends raising monthly keycard rates to be consistent with the current
Downtown rates (prior to the proposed administrative increase). Based on feedback
from the Planning Commission and various stakeholders who expressed that a 146%
increase was too high all at once, staff recommends staggering the increase to provide
8 of 11
ample notice to customers. If adopted, the first increase of 50% would occur on January
1, 2017. A second increase of 64% would occur on July 1, 2017 to coincide with the
new fiscal year. Any new keycard accounts established during this transition would be
charged $160 per month.
Type Current Original
Suggestion
Recommendation
All access $65 $160 effective
Oct 1, 2016
$97.50 effective Jan 1, 2017,
$160 effective July 1, 2017
Weeknights and
weekends only
$50 $75 effective
Oct 1, 2016
$75 effective Jan 1, 2017
While the overall increase is substantial, it is necessary to ensure parking availability in
the Civic, in light of the fact that the Civic parking facility is already at capacity during
weekdays. Furthermore, continuing to offer a monthly keycard for only $65, while a
monthly Metro EZ Transit Pass costs $110, is inconsistent with adopted policy and will
not further Council’s strategic initiative to establish a new model for mobility in Santa
Monica.
Monthly Keycards
Ninety-six percent of the 4,517 keycards issued to the Downtown Stru ctures, Civic, and
Library are associated with a business account. The remaining 4% are either area
residents or employees purchasing their own keycards. Upon the opening of Expo, even
with the recommended rate increases herein, monthly keycards could be a ppealing to
park and ride users. To prevent the use of keycards for park and ride, staff recommends
limiting Downtown, Library, and Civic keycard sales to Downtown and Civic Center
employers, employees and residents of buildings without on -site parking. Existing
keycard holders would be provided with a three month grace period to submit the
required proof of current employment or residency before their account would be
suspended.
Staff also recommends assigning downtown keycards to one or two parking struc tures.
Currently, Downtown keycards grant access to Parking Structures 1-6 and 9. However,
few users take advantage of the flexibility afforded by this option. For example, in
January 2016, 92% of keycards were used in only one location, while another 7% were
used in only two locations. By assigning keycards to locations which are underutilized,
staff will be able to free up space for transient parkers in parking structures that often
have high occupancies, such as Parking Structures 1 and 3. Every effort will be made to
9 of 11
assign keycard holders to the structure they are currently utilizing most frequently.
Additionally, the attached resolution includes a provision authorizing staff to offer a
monthly volume discount of up to 20% for up to one year to accounts of 50 or more
keycards to facilitate the distribution of parkers to facilities that are underutilized.
Parking Rates Resolution
Additional minor changes have been made to the resolution to address operational
needs: to establish clear eligibility boundaries for Main Street Employee permits, to limit
parking fee refunds at the Sunday morning Main Street Farmers Market to one per
person per day, to clarify that Beach Zone residents with a valid disabled placard are
eligible for one free resident permit, and to grant authority to the City Manager or the
Assistant Director of the Planning and Community Development Department to authorize
the issuance of parking permits to other governmental agencies to use in the course of
business as a courtesy.
Public Outreach
Staff conducted a study session with the DTSM Board of Directors on January 27, 2016.
The Board stressed that they want to maintain the 90 minutes free period, agreed with
discouraging park and ride activity by limiting monthly parking sales to those living and
working Downtown, and expressed that they would like to see additional dynamic
wayfinding signage to direct drivers to available spaces. Additionally, staff participated
in a discussion with the Parking, Access and Circulation Committee of the DTSM Board
on February 23, 2016. At this meeting, there was a general consensus to increase the
daily maximum rate, slightly increase the price of monthlies, and to explore keeping the
Main Library parking structure open later, as it currently closes at 11 p.m.
The Planning Commission held a study session on the proposed changes on April 6,
2016. At that meeting, the Commission expressed agreement with the proposed rate
increases, assigning keycards to one or two locations, and keycard eligibility
requirements; recommended maintaining the affordable housing keycard rate and not
increasing the free parking period at the Civic from 30 to 90 minutes; and suggested
phasing in the rate increase for Civic keycards. The Commission also made additional
suggestions such as eliminating the free period in all locations, and exploring both
congestion pricing and dynamic pricing. Staff will return to the Commission with
additional study sessions to discuss topics such as these to inform the broader parking
policy and rate study to occur the year after Expo service begins.
Alternatives
Aside from the shorter free period, the rate structure recommended for the Civic Center
parking facilities is identical to the one currently in place in the Downtown Structures,
and thus familiar to users. Alternatively, Council could choose to adopt a disparate rate
10 of 11
structure or maintain current rates, the latter of which would not address current
overcrowding at the Civic nor further Council’s strategic initiative to establish a new
model for mobility.
Council could choose to implement the Planning Commission’s suggestion to eliminate
all free parking periods, however this would be at odds with the desires of the DTSM
Board of Directors.
Council could decide not to implement eligibility requirements for monthly key cards.
However, as current holders give up their existing key cards, these cards would be
available to individuals on the waiting list who may choose to use them for park and
ride.
Environmental Analysis
The proposed parking regulations are not subject to environmental review under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section
15378(b)(4), a “project” for the purposes of CEQA does not include “the creation of
government funding mechanisms or other government fiscal activities, which do not
involve any commitment to any specific project which may result in a potentially
significant impact on the environment” or “organization or administrative activities of
governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the
environment.” The proposed actions are considered fiscal and operational activities of
the City that will not result in physical changes in the environment. Therefore, no CEQA
review is required.
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
Council approval of the recommended changes to the Civic Center parking rates is
anticipated to increase parking fee and parking facility tax revenues by $786,500
annually based on current usage patterns adjusted to reflect some attrition resulting
from the rate increases. The revised transient rates will be effective June 11, 2016 and
the first phase of the revised monthly rates will be effective January 1, 2017.
The Downtown administrative fee increases are expected to increase parking fee and
parking facility tax revenue by approximate ly $3.4 million annually also based on current
usage patterns adjusted to reflect some attrition in transient revenue resulting from the
higher rates. It is assumed that any attrition in monthly parkin g permits will be offset due
to high demand. If recommended, these rates would be implemented July 1, 2016.
The revenue impacts of these changes will be included in the FY 2016 -17 Proposed
Budget. As noted above, the revenue assumptions are based on curr ent usage patterns
adjusted for some attrition. However, with the arrival of Expo as well as other potential
11 of 11
changes in mobility patterns, it is possible usage patterns could change significantly
from the present. Staff will monitor usage patterns and adjust revenue estimates as
necessary as part of the Midyear Budget process.
Prepared By: Jason Kligier, Parking Administrator
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. 2012 Parking Rate Study
B. Downtown Weekday Daily Maximums
C. Civic Daily Maximums
D. Parking Rates Resolution
E. Written comments
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: March 6, 2018
Agenda Item: 4.A
1 of 23
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director, Parking Operations (PCD)
Subject: Downtown Parking Management Pricing Strategies Study Session
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Direct staff to draft an ordinance modifying the Santa Monica Municipal Code
(“SMMC”) Section 3.16 related to on-street parking management and Section
3.04 related to the establishment of off-street public parking fees;
2. Review and provide direction to staff on the proposed parking management
strategies consistent with the policies in the Land Use and Circulation Element
(“LUCE”) to further manage congestion, improve public parking services, address
downtown residents’ parking desires, and encourage shifts toward more
sustainable modes of transportation;
3. Direct staff to report annually on the State of Citywide Parking, including a
financial and operational analysis as well as recommendations for future year
parking rate adjustments.
Executive Summary
Parking policy and parking facilities have been integral to the evolution of Santa Monica,
particularly our vibrant Downtown and three miles of beachfront. The City owns and/or
operates 43 parking facilities with approximately 14,000 available public parking spaces.
These parking facilities help support the diverse local economy by providing convenient
access to housing, retail centers, hotels and restaurants, employment, a public beach
and community parks, education and recreation centers, special events, and municipal
services and social service agencies alike.
Both policy and the market for parking are changing, however. There is increasing
recognition of the high economic and environmental cost of subsidized parking, and
growing recognition that in a region where there are seven parking spaces for every car
that greater attention must be paid to the efficient utilization of parking.
2 of 23
Council adopted policies outlined in the Land Use and Circulation Element (“LUCE”)
and Downtown Community Plan (“DCP”) suggest that parking pricing is one of the most
effective strategies to reduce traffic congestion, encourage the shift towards alternative
modes of transportation, and facilitate a more efficient use of existing parking supply.
Based on a comprehensive analysis of the aggregated parking transaction and
occupancy data, staff seeks Council direction on employing a demand-responsive
parking pricing strategy in the Downtown core and peripheral parking facilities to
proactively manage the various weekday and weekend demands, including traffic ,
congestion and circulation challenges. These policy shifts are part of the City’s larger
focus on the Strategic Goal of creating a new model of mobility, one that Council
reaffirmed during its wide-ranging February 27, 2018 study session, emphasizing the
importance of aligning our policies and investments to support a more livable
community. In addition, these concepts reflect changing mobility patterns as alternate
travel modes including ride share companies, bike share, electric scooters, and the
advent of autonomous vehicles reshape how people travel, with the apparent net impact
of reducing and/or redistributing locational parking demand.
Staff believes that creating a weekday versus weekend pricing structure throughout the
Downtown and peripheral facilities would better align pricing with demand to ensure that
there is at least 15% availability at all times in all facilities, and allow the City to maintain
sufficient ongoing revenues to fund parking, traffic and circulation programs, and other
essential public services. Staff recommends that Council review and provide comment
on the proposed parking management strategy options, and direct staff to return to
Council in the future with the necessary resolutions to adopt revised transient parking
rates and permit fees.
Additionally, staff recommends that Council direct staff to draft an ordinance for first
reading modifying the SMMC Section 3.16.170 and Section 3.04.035 to streamline the
process and modernize the municipal code to reflect the current practice of setting on-
street and off-street parking rates based on the policies and goals outlined in the LUCE
and DCP.
3 of 23
Over the previous five months, Staff conducted study sessions with various
stakeholders throughout the City to ensure that the needs of the communities
represented by the respective stakeholders were considered in the overall proposed
parking management strategies. Feedback from each body is incorporated in the
strategies outlined in the Discussion Section of the staff report.
Background
On May 11, 2010, Council adopted a resolution establishing new parking rates for off -
street parking as a first phase in implementing the 2009 Walker Parking Study
recommendations. The Walker Parking Study found that there was an imbalance in
pricing between the different parking facilities within Downtown resulting in the
unintended consequence of putting visitors, employees, and transient and monthly
parkers in competition for the most convenient and often least expensive spaces while
other spaces in the City remained unoccupied. Walker Parking consultants provided
recommendations consistent with the LUCE to better manage parking demand and
maximize efficiency of the public parking supply in Downtown Santa Monica. The
Walker Parking Study recommended that the City:
Increase on-street and off-street public parking rates in the Downtown to more
efficiently and effectively utilize existing public and private parking resources to
meet parking needs, thereby creating greater availability of parking for visitors in
the Downtown
Use increased parking revenues to enhance parking operations, parking
technology, wayfinding, parking occupancy assessments, and capital repairs and
replacements
Review parking occupancies regularly and adjust parking rates to encourage
optimal use of public parking resources
On July 10, 2012, Council adopted a resolution establishing new parking fees at
citywide on-street parking meters, off -street parking facilities, and beach parking lots,
including a reduction in the Downtown grace period from two hours to 90 minutes.
These changes were informed by a parking rate study conducted by Walker Parking
4 of 23
Consultants in 2012, consistent with the LUCE and the 2009 Walker Parking Study with
the continued goal of:
Managing parking demand to ensure availability in all locations and better use of
underutilized parking resources
Identifying the relationship between the pricing of public parking, private parking,
adjacent land uses and parking demand
Reviewing parking occupancies and adjust parking rates to encourage optimal
use of public parking resources
Developing an objective, technical and transparent process by which to set public
parking rates
On May 10, 2016, Council adopted a resolution establishing revised parking rates for
the Civic Center and Downtown parking facilities to address increased high weekday
occupancies and discourage potential “park and ride” activity due to the arrival of the
Expo Light Rail. Staff anticipated that the rate increase would result in an a dditional $4.2
million in ongoing revenues beginning in FY 2016-17 based on utilization rates at that
time and some attrition in transient transactions because of the higher rates. Staff
monitored parking occupancies over the course of the first year of Expo Light Rail
service. Attachment A includes a detailed year over year analysis of transactions,
utilization, parking duration and peak occupancies for each parking facility.
Discussion
Parking policy is ultimately driven by the City’s larger policy goals, including supporting
the Mobility Strategic Goal and contributing to the City’s Framework of Economic
Opportunity and fiscal sustainability. This report seeks direction for staff to undertake a
transition in parking policy that involves a range of inte rrelated changes. Accordingly,
this report breaks down the concepts via the following sections:
1. Analysis of Parking Occupancies, Transactions, and Durations
2. Proposed Downtown and Peripheral Parking Facility Pricing Strategies
3. Other Items for Council Consideration
5 of 23
4. Alternative Pricing Strategies for Future Consideration
5. Annual State of the Citywide Parking Report
6. Public Outreach and Communication with Boards and Commissions
Section 1 – Analysis of Parking Occupancies, Transactions, and Durations
(Sessions)
In FY 2015-16, there were 7.6 million total (transient and permit) parking transactions in
the Downtown core and peripheral facilities discussed in this staff report. In FY 2016-17,
there were 7.1 million total parking transactions, resulting in a 0.5 million, or 7%,
reduction when compared to the prior year. The data included in Attachment A shows
that the parking rate increase in FY 2016-17, in conjunction with increased popularity of
Transportation Network Companies (“TNC”) and the increased demand in Expo Light
Rail ridership (Attachment B) had a direct impact on parking behavior in the City,
particularly successful in achieving the following goals:
Reducing total parking sessions in these Downtown core facilities
Discouraging park and ride activity in the Downtown core facilities
Reducing high weekday peak occupancies in most of the Downtown parking
facilities
Freeing up parking for short-term parking for residents and Downtown visitors
Encouraging parkers to utilize less expensive parking facilities on the periphery
of the Downtown core, or consider shifting to alternative modes of transportation
The reduction in total parking transactions continued into the first half of FY 2017-18. In
light of this, on February 13, 2018, staff included a $3.9 million, or 7%, reduction in
projected General Fund parking revenues as part of the Midyear Financial Status
Update to Council. The midyear budget adjustment corrects the previous ongoing
revenue projection related to the FY 2016-17 parking rate increase and accounts for the
current shift in how staff believes people travel into the Downtown, including the
following:
Expo Light Rail ridership realized a significant increase when it began six-minute
headway service in March 2017. The City’s Traffic Management Division also
6 of 23
implemented a signal priority protocol for Expo trains around this time, giving the
rail “the green light” versus surrounding traffic. Expo now has a significant time
and frequency advantage it did not have prior to March 2017. Additional
information related to Expo Light Rail Ridership Statist ics are included in
Attachment B.
The Police Department worked out “geo-fenced” customer pick up solutions with
Lyft and with Uber. As such, these TNC operators have streamlined their
operations making them even more attractive for use in our downtown, and along
Main Street. The significance is that TNC customers are able to get greater
access to downtown and Main Street venues than ever before. This provides a
competitive time and money advantage over the pricing and location of our
parking structures and lots.
The nature of downtown shopping is changing significantly. As mentioned in the
Midyear Financial Status Update, many customers are switching from visiting
brick and mortar stores and making bulk purchases to on-line shopping.
While there were also slight decreases in the average peak occupancy for weekdays
and weekends in some of the Downtown and peripheral facilities during the first half of
FY 2017-18, other parking facilities either maintained existing peak occupancies or
realized increases primarily due to their proximity and accessibility to the Downtown.
Section 2 – Proposed Downtown and Peripheral Parking Facility Pricing
Strategies
The LUCE and the DCP include specific language about how to better manage the
parking resource and achieve greater mode shift to other more sustainable
transportation options. The LUCE suggests managing parking in Santa Monica as a
limited resource, ensuring that adequate parking is available for residents, employees,
and visitors by establishing an availability target of at least 15% of spaces in every lot
and garage at all times. It also suggests that the City should adjust parking prices and
the hours of enforcement to meet this target, varying by time of day, season, and
location. Moreover, the LUCE recognizes that parking provides a substantial positive
7 of 23
revenue stream to the City that should continue well into the future. The DCP echoes
many of the core parking management principles of the LUCE, including maximizing the
use of the Citywide parking inventory of available spaces and actively reviewing parking
data to address occupancy, traffic, access and circulation challenges. The DCP goes a
step further and recommends an integration of public and private spaces into a shared
network with real-time information to further inform policy decisions.
Setting sensible parking pricing is one of the most effective strategies to manage
demand, ensure parking availability at all times, maximize the use of underutilized
facilities, reduce traffic congestion, and encourage the use of more sustainable modes
of transportation. Staff included three strategy options for Council consideration, r eview,
and discussion. Based on the Council adopted policies mentioned above, staff seeks
Council direction on the concept of implementing a demand-responsive parking pricing
strategy that sets different rate structures on weekdays and weekends based on th eir
different demand patterns.
The proposed pricing adjustments included in this staff report would continue the
multipronged strategy of:
Balancing the needs of the community, including residents, businesses,
employees, and visitors alike, with a focus on establishing a new rate structure
that welcomes and favors residents as our priority users into the Downtown area,
Facilitating desired turnover and incentivizing longer term parking sessions
outside of the Downtown core,
Encouraging the mode shift towards sustainable transportation options, and
Maintaining sufficient revenues to reinvest in traffic, parking, and other essential
public services programs.
To achieve the aforementioned objectives, staff asks that Council consider and provide
feedback on the following range of choices included in Options A, B, and C:
1. Extend the pilot Downtown employee discount validation parking program for one
additional year, through June 30, 2019
8 of 23
2. Use shorter pricing periods, ensuring minimal impact on short-term parking
sessions and progressively increasing the incremental parking rates for
successive time periods. This is designed to encourage long-term parking
sessions in the less expensive parking facilities outside of the Downtown core, or
to encourage consideration of mode shift
3. Set monthly parking permit fees to 11 times the transient weekday daily
maximum rate, limiting monthly permit parking holders’ access to one or two
facilities
4. Reduce the free “grace period” in the Downtown core facilities, Parking
Structures 1-8 and Ken Edwards Center, from 90 minutes to 60 minutes
5. Reduce the free “grace period” in Parking Structure 9, a non-Downtown core
facility located north of Wilshire Blvd., from 90 minutes to 30 minutes
Option A
Downtown Core Parking Structures 1 and 3 – Current and Proposed
Facility Current Proposed Current Proposed
PS 1 17.50$ 25.00$ 17.50$ 30.00$
PS 3 17.50$ 25.00$ 17.50$ 30.00$
Weekday Daily Max. Weekend Daily Max.
The proposed incremental parking rate tables and graphs are included in Attachment C.
Parking Structures 1 and 3 are both located on 4 th Street between Wilshire Blvd. and
Santa Monica Blvd. with a combined inventory of 674 total parking spaces. Below is a
table outlining the average peak occupancies for Parking Structures 1 and 3 for
weekdays and weekends:
Facility FY 15/16
Weekday
FY 16/17
Weekday
FY 17/18
Weekday
FY 15/16
Weekend
FY 16/17
Weekend
FY 17/18
Weekend
PS 1 91% 85% 82% 99% 96% 88%
PS 3 100% 99% 95% 100% 100% 95%
9 of 23
Both facilities regularly reach weekday and weekend peak occupancies between 11
a.m. and noon, maintain peak occupancies through 8 p.m., and do not begin to
significantly taper off until after 9 p.m. Staff believes that the excessively high weekday
and weekend peak occupancies are due to the limited capacities and proximity of these
two facilities to the Third Street Promenade and surrounding businesses. Additionally,
these are the first two parking facilities introduced to travelers along the Wilshire
corridor when headed south on 4th street.
Historical City pricing strategies suggest these facilities be priced similarly to the other
facilities within the Downtown core to avoid customer confusion an d reduce circulation
and congestion problems related to simply shifting travel from one location to another.
However, based on the data and price sensitivity, staff seeks Council direction on
setting parking rates for these facilities slightly higher than the rest of the parking
portfolio to respond to the specific demand in these facilities with a goal of ensuring at
least 15% availability at all times. Staff anticipates that this pricing strategy will shift
parkers to other less expensive facilities within the Downtown core or periphery, thereby
facilitating a more efficient use of the overall Downtown parking availability.
Downtown Core Parking Structures 2, and 4 through 8 – Current and Proposed
Facility Current Proposed Current Proposed
PS 2 17.50$ 20.00$ 17.50$ 25.00$
PS 4 17.50$ 20.00$ 17.50$ 25.00$
PS 5 17.50$ 20.00$ 17.50$ 25.00$
PS 6 17.50$ 20.00$ 17.50$ 25.00$
PS 7 17.50$ 20.00$ 17.50$ 25.00$
PS 8 17.50$ 20.00$ 17.50$ 25.00$
Weekday Daily Max. Weekend Daily Max.
The proposed incremental parking rate tables and graph s are included in Attachment C.
Parking Structures 2, and 4 through 8 are located within the Downtown core between
Wilshire to the north, Colorado to the south, 4th Street to the east, and 2nd Street to the
10 of 23
west. Below is a table outlining the average peak occupancies for the aforementioned
facilities:
Location FY 15/16
Weekday
FY 16/17
Weekday
FY 17/18
Weekday
FY 15/16
Weekend
FY 16/17
Weekend
FY 17/18
Weekend
PS 2 73% 62% 58% 69% 56% 48%
PS 4 83% 76% 71% 81% 73% 71%
PS 5 70% 61% 62% 70% 70% 67%
PS 6 79% 70% 76% 84% 77% 77%
PS 7 70% 68% 62% 84% 82% 75%
PS 8 50% 55% 56% 76% 77% 80%
Most of these Downtown parking facilities regularly reached weekday peak occupancies
around noon and maintained peak occupancy through 8 p.m. before sharply tapering off
after 8 p.m. On the weekends, most of these facilities regularly reached peak
occupancies by noon and maintain peak occupancy to as late as 9 p.m. before sharply
tapering off in the late night.
Staff believes that setting the parking rates for th ese facilities slightly lower than the
proposed rates for Parking Structures 1 and 3 will:
Account for anticipated increase in parkers shifting from parking in Parking
Structures 1 and 3 due to the rate differential
Improve traffic circulation within the Downtown core
Take a proactive approach in better managing congestion while ensuring 15%
availability within all of the Downtown core facilities at all times
11 of 23
Ken Edwards Center Parking Structure – Current and Proposed
Facility Current Proposed Current Proposed
KEC 17.50$ 20.00$ 17.50$ 10.00$
Weekday Daily Max. Weekend Daily Max.
The proposed incremental parking rate tables and graphs are included in Attachment C.
The Ken Edwards Center Public Parking Structure is located on 4th Street between
Broadway and Colorado Avenue with 98 available parking spaces. These parking
spaces are available to all on a first come first served basis. Below is a table outlining
the average peak occupancies for this facility:
Location FY 15/16
Weekday
FY 16/17
Weekday
FY 17/18
Weekday
FY 15/16
Weekend
FY 16/17
Weekend
FY 17/18
Weekend
KEC 79% 78% 76% 15% 15% 17%
The Ken Edwards Center Parking Facility regularly reached weekday peak occupancy
around 11 a.m., slowly tapering off through 3 p.m., and then experienced a sharp
decline after 4 p.m. Staff believes that this is due to the various programs offered at the
Ken Edwards Community Center during the week. Parking in this facility is subsidized
by the General Fund through free parking validations provided to Ken Edwards
Community Center program users. On the weekends, the facility is significantly
underutilized, reaching peak occupancy around 17% at noon, and gradually emptying
throughout the afternoon. Staff believes that the low weekend usage is due to limited
weekend programs offered at the Ken Edwards Community Center as well as a lack of
permanent signage indicating this is a public parking facility. Staff recently installed
temporary signage on the weekends to direct traffic into the facility to temporarily
address this issue. As a result, there has been a slight uptick in transactions and
occupancy in this facility.
12 of 23
Based on the occupancy and transaction data, staff recommends increasing the
weekday daily maximum rate from $17.50 to $20.00, and reducing the weekend daily
maximum rate from $17.50 to $10.00. Staff believes that the proposed rate structure
aligns with the demand for this facility, ensuring that there will not be any weekday
parking spillover from other Downtown core parking facilities due to price differential.
Staff anticipates that the proposed weekday rate would ensure 15% availability at all
times for Ken Edwards Center program users. The proposed reduction in the weekend
rate is to maximize the use of this underutilized facility on the weekend.
Downtown Peripheral Parking Structures 9 and 10 – Current and Proposed
Facility Current Proposed Current Proposed
PS 9 17.50$ 17.00$ 17.50$ 20.00$
PS 10 17.50$ 17.00$ 17.50$ 20.00$
Weekday Daily Max. Weekend Daily Max.
The proposed incremental parking rate tables and graphs are included in Attachment C.
Parking Structure 9 is located outside of the Downtown core on 4th Street just north of
Wilshire Blvd. and shares an alley on Third Court with Parking Structure 10, for a
combined inventory of 381 total spaces between the two facilities. Below is a table
outlining the average peak occupancies for these two facilities:
Location FY 15/16
Weekday
FY 16/17
Weekday
FY 17/18
Weekday
FY 15/16
Weekend
FY 16/17
Weekend
FY 17/18
Weekend
PS 9 81% 64% 69% 66% 60% 56%
PS 10 55% 48% 44% 80% 70% 62%
Staff believes that pricing these two facilities similarly will help balance the demand
between them and reduce on-street traffic in the Downtown core as part of the overall
peripheral parking pricing strategy. Staff anticipates that the proposed rate structure will
ensure at least 15% availability as these are the two most northern parking facilities in
13 of 23
the entire portfolio and are likely to attract new parkers shifting from Parking Structures
1 and 3, and parkers shifting from the Downtown core due to the rate differential and
easier accessibility from Wilshire Blvd.
Downtown Peripheral Parking - Civic Center Lot and Structure – Current and Proposed
Facility Current Proposed Current Proposed
Civic Lot 14.00$ 14.00$ 5.00$ 5.00$
Civic Structure 14.00$ 14.00$ 5.00$ 5.00$
The proposed incremental parking rate tables and graphs are included in Attachment C.
Below is a table outlining the average peak occupancies for the two facilities:
Location FY 15/16
Weekday
FY 16/17
Weekday
FY 17/18
Weekday
FY 15/16
Weekend
FY 16/17
Weekend
FY 17/18
Weekend
Civic Lot 70% 50% 43% 43% 34% 28%
Civic
Structure
84% 60% 54% 60% 43% 37%
The proposed changes reflect adjustments to the weekday and weekend incremental
rate at the Civic Center parking facilities without adjusting the grace period, and without
adjusting the weekday or weekend daily maximum rate. The proposed incremental rate
adjustments are simply correcting the imbalance in the Downtown core incremental
parking rates versus non-Downtown core facilities. It currently costs more to park in the
weekday at the Civic Center for three hours ($5.50) than it does in the Downtown core
facilities ($3.10). The proposed changes keeps long-term parking sessions in these
facilities less expensive than the Downtown core, thus continuing to support the holistic
parking strategy that ensures maximum use of all parking facilities in the citywide
parking portfolio. Staff will return to Council with the results of the recently begun Walker
Parking Consultants Civic Center parking impact study and a broader Civic Center
parking policy discussion in the future.
14 of 23
Downtown Periphery Parking - Main Library Structure – Current and Proposed
Facility Current Proposed Current Proposed
Main Library 10.00$ 14.00$ 5.00$ 5.00$
Weekday Daily Max. Weekend Daily Max.
The proposed incremental parking rate tables and graphs are included in Attachment C.
The Main Library Parking Structure is located on Santa Monica Blvd. between 6th Street
and 7th Street with 529 available parking spaces. Below is a table outlining the average
peak occupancies for the Main Library Parking Structure:
Location FY 15/16
Weekday
FY 16/17
Weekday
FY 17/18
Weekday
FY 15/16
Weekend
FY 16/17
Weekend
FY 17/18
Weekend
Main
Library PS
77% 83% 71% 52% 51% 45%
The Main Library Parking Structure regularly reached peak occupancy around 11 a.m.,
maintained peak occupancy through 6 p.m. before sharply tapering off in the evening.
The high weekday peak occupancy can be attributed to long-term weekday parkers
taking advantage of the cheaper all day parking rate ($10 .00), when compared to the
Downtown all day parking rate ($17.50) and Civic Center all day parking rate ($14.00).
Staff anticipates parkers will shift from the Downtown core to the Library due to the price
differential; therefore, the proposed rate structure would allow the Main Library Parking
Structure to service these parkers and ensure 15% availability at all times.
15 of 23
Monthly Parking Permits for Downtown and Peripheral Parking Facilities
Parking Facility
Current
Monthly
Rate
Proposed
Monthly
Rate
Difference
($)
Difference
(%)
Parking Structures 1 and 3 $176.00 $275.00 $99.00 56%
Parking Structures 2, 4 through 8 $176.00 $220.00 $44.00 25%
Ken Edwards Center $176.00 $220.00 $44.00 25%
Parking Structure 9 $176.00 $187.00 $11.00 6%
Parking Structure 10 $132.00 $187.00 $55.00 42%
Civic Center Parking Lot and Structure 1 $160.00 $160.00 $0.00 0%
Main Library $82.50 $154.00 $71.50 87%
Affordable Housing 2 $65.00 $65.00 $0.00 0%
Currently, the “anytime access” Downtown monthly parking permits for Parking
Structures 1-9 and Ken Edwards Center are $176 per month, which is equivalent to
about 10 times the weekday daily maximum transient parking rate of $17.50. As most
full-time employees work an average of 22 days per month, this effectively represents
12 days of discounted or subsidized parking for monthly permit holders.
Staff recommends increasing the monthly parking permit rate to 11 times the weekday
daily maximum rate of the respective facilities, in an effort to balance the demand of
regular long-term Downtown employees with the need to ensure parking availability for
transient, Santa Monica residents, and visitors who frequent Downtown. The proposed
monthly permit rates would also create a rate structure that is in alignment with LUCE,
DCP goals, and Council policy. This action allows complete transparency of the hidden
subsidy provided with monthly parking. Setting the monthly parking permit rates to 11
times the weekday daily maximum rate effectively represents a 50% discount or subsidy
for monthly parking permit holders. As stated in the LUCE, “unrealized revenues related
1 Staff does not recommend any changes to the monthly parking permit in the Civic Center Parking Lot and
Structure at this time due to the recently begun parking impact study being conducted by Walker Parking
Consultants.
2 Staff does not recommend any changes to the Affordable Housing monthly parking permits at th is time.
16 of 23
to subsidized parking is money that could otherwise be used for capital repairs and
operating cost of providing parking and incentives for alternative modes of
transportation.”
Staff recommends a gradual and well broadcasted phasing in of the monthly parking
permit increases over the course of next fiscal year for Parking Structures 1 and 3,
Parking Structure 10, and the Main Library Parking Structure. This would allow staff
time to conduct outreach to the impacted customers and provide alternative parking
options, if necessary, in other facilities based on a review of transactions and durations
in the other facilities.
Option B
Option B reflects a more moderate increase to the parking rates in the parking facilities,
as outlined below:
Facility Current Proposed Current Proposed
PS 1 17.50$ 20.00$ 17.50$ 25.00$
PS 3 17.50$ 20.00$ 17.50$ 25.00$
Weekday Daily Max. Weekend Daily Max.
Facility Current Proposed Current Proposed
PS 2 17.50$ 17.00$ 17.50$ 20.00$
PS 4 17.50$ 17.00$ 17.50$ 20.00$
PS 5 17.50$ 17.00$ 17.50$ 20.00$
PS 6 17.50$ 17.00$ 17.50$ 20.00$
PS 7 17.50$ 17.00$ 17.50$ 20.00$
PS 8 17.50$ 17.00$ 17.50$ 20.00$
Weekday Daily Max. Weekend Daily Max.
Facility Current Proposed Current Proposed
KEC 17.50$ 17.00$ 17.50$ 10.00$
Weekday Daily Max. Weekend Daily Max.
17 of 23
Facility Current Proposed Current Proposed
PS 9 17.50$ 17.00$ 17.50$ 17.00$
PS 10 17.50$ 17.00$ 17.50$ 17.00$
Facility Current Proposed Current Proposed
Civic Lot 14.00$ 14.00$ 5.00$ 5.00$
Civic Structure 14.00$ 14.00$ 5.00$ 5.00$
Weekday Daily Max. Weekend Daily Max.
Facility Current Proposed Current Proposed
Main Library 10.00$ 12.00$ 5.00$ 5.00$
Weekday Daily Max. Weekend Daily Max.
Parking Facility
Current
Monthly
Rate
Proposed
Monthly
Rate
Difference
($)
Difference
(%)
Parking Structures 1 and 3 $176.00 $220.00 $44.00 25%
Parking Structures 2, 4 through 8 $176.00 $187.00 $11.00 6%
Ken Edwards Center $176.00 $187.00 $11.00 6%
Parking Structure 9 $176.00 $187.00 $11.00 6%
Parking Structure 10 $132.00 $187.00 $55.00 42%
Civic Center Parking Lot and
Structure
$160.00 $160.00 $0.00 0%
Main Library $82.50 $132.00 $49.50 60%
Affordable Housing $65.00 $65.00 $0.00 0%
The detailed rate tables and graphs are included in Attachment D.
Option C
Council could consider implementing some of the proposed rate changes in Option A or
Option B in phases, including adopting some of the proposed rate changes without any
adjustments to the grace periods at this time. Depending on the guidance provided by
18 of 23
Council at this study session, staff will return to Council with any necessary ordinance
and/or resolutions in the future.
Rate Survey of Privately-owned Parking Facilities in the City of Santa Monica
Staff conducted a survey of parking rates for privately owned parking facilities within the
City of Santa Monica, as these facilities directly affect parking demand and traffic
circulation in the City. Attachment E includes a rate graph of six privately owned parking
facilities and their respective weekday parking rates. Most of these private parking
facilities reach a weekday daily maximum parking rate between $20.00 and $22.50 at
three hours of parking, and none of them provides free grace periods without validation
to their customers. These same private parking facilities have a flat weekend rate
ranging from $6 to 12 upon entry.
Staff believes that the proposed parking rate adjustments to the City facilities included in
this staff report take into account the market conditions, are aligned with Council
adopted policies and parking management strategies, and are appropriately priced to
ensure that there is not an unintended consequence of parking spillover to City facilities
due to pricing imbalances between public and private parking facilities.
Section 3 – Other Items for Council Consideration
3A – Ordinance
Section 3.16.170 of the SMMC governs the process in which on -street parking meter
rates can be adjusted, including specific target occupancy rates, the amount and
frequency of rate changes, the amount in which and the minimum and maximum range
in which on-street meter rates can be adjusted. This policy and process is outdated and
does not align with other provisions in the municipal code, particularly Section 3.04.035
that allows off-street parking rates to be established and changed from time to time via
resolution. Staff recommends streamlining the process and modernizing the municipal
code to reflect the current practice of setting on-street and off-street parking rates based
on policies and goals outlined in the LUCE and DCP. As part of a holistic parking
management strategy, on-street parking rates should be set in tandem with off-street
parking rates to facilitate the turnover of on-street parking spaces more frequently and
19 of 23
making them available for short-term use, directing traffic off the streets into the parking
facilities, and ensuring at least 15% availability at all times.
3B – Adjust Free Disabled Placard Parking Policy in Off-Street Parking Facilities
Council adopted a policy via resolution to provide free parking for vehicles displaying
ADA placards for the following on-street parking meters and off-street City parking
facilities:
On-street parking meters (in conformance with State law)
Preferential parking zones 1-5 (in conformance with State law)
Main Library Parking Structure
Main Library Parking Surface Lot
Civic Center Parking Structure and Parking Lot (except during capacity events)
Beach Parking Lots (South, Central, and North)
Pier Deck Parking Lot
Parking Structure 10
Main Street Parking Lots (Lots 9, 10, 11, and 26)
Mid-City Parking Lots (Lots 7, 8, and 12)
Downtown Parking Lots (Lots 27, 28, 29, and 30)
Staff recommends adjusting this policy to eliminate free ADA parking for the Main
Library Parking Structure and Parking Structure 10 as these facilities have higher
average peak occupancies than some of the other parking facilities in the overall City
parking portfolio. Additionally, Parking Structure 10 has a total of 81 parking spaces, two
of which are reserved for ADA parking. By charging for ADA parking in these specific
facilities, ADA parking spaces will become more available to residents and visitors by
discouraging long-term transient parking and “storage parking” in these spaces.
This proposed adjustment was discussed with stakeholder representatives of the
Commission for the Senior Community and the Disabilities Commission.
3C – Adjust Rate for Annual Senior Beach Parking Permit
20 of 23
The annual Senior Beach parking permit allows California residents, ages 62 and over,
to park at all Beach parking lots (excluding Pier Deck) during posted time limits of
sunrise to sunset. The annual permit fee is $2.20 and is valid from April 1 to March 31.
There are currently 3,000 permits made available to eligible California residents, with
42% of which are purchased by Santa Monica residents while the remaining 58%
purchased by non-Santa Monica residents.
Below are the current rates for an annual Senior Beach parking permit in the following
neighboring beach cities:
Los Angeles County Beaches and Harbor Senior Parking Permit - $25
Orange County Beach Parking Pass for Seniors and Disabled - $35
Long Beach Day Parking Pass for Seniors - $75
Huntington Beach Senior Parking Pass - $75
Staff recommends adjusting the rates to $25 to align with Los Angeles County Beaches
and Harbor rates (lowest rate amongst the neighboring beach cities). This proposed
pricing change was discussed with stakeholder representatives of the Commission for
the Senior Community and the Disabilities Commission.
Section 4 – Alternative Pricing Strategies for Future Consideration
By way of background, below are some of the commonly used demand-responsive
parking pricing strategies employed by various agencies to ensure availability at all
times in their facilities:
Congestion Pricing – is a demand-side solution of setting prices to reduce parking,
traffic and congestion during high peak occupancy or rush hours. This pricing method is
supposed to encourage users who can be flexible in their usage times to shift their use
away from peak periods to times when it is less expensive. Below are some of the
congestion pricing options:
Time of Day Pricing (“Time Bands”) – set parking rates based on peak parking
demand patterns (i.e. cheaper parking during low-demand morning hours,
21 of 23
increased parking rates during high-demand afternoon hours, and reduce parking
rates for low-demand evening hours)
Day of Week Pricing – sets parking rates based on the different demand patterns
during weekday and weekends
Progressive (“Length of Stay”) Parking Pricing – sets parking rates to facilitate a
desired rate of turnover, maintain rates for desired short-term parking at a lower
rate and then escalate rates with time
Dynamic Pricing – is another demand-side solution that sets pricing based on real-time
changes in the market. This pricing strategy would allow the City to increase rates when
demand is high and lower rates when demand is lower based on real-time occupancies
in each of the facilities. This would require a significant investment in new parking
technologies and systems and each of the various parking and traffic systems would
need to interface with each other in real-time to supply the necessary data to facilitate
this pricing strategy. This strategy is not proposed for Santa Monica parking facilities at
this time.
Section 5 – Annual State of the Citywide Parking Report
Staff recommends that Council direct staff to report annually on the State of Citywide
parking. This report would including the following:
Analysis of parking revenues, including utilization and availability data by
location, day of week, and parking type
Analysis of parking operating and capital expenditures, including progress
reports on capital improvement projects
Operational assessment and services update
Parking asset management update including planned equipment replacement
Emerging parking trends and technologies
Key accomplishments
Various challenges of Citywide parking operations and proposed opportunities for
improvement
22 of 23
Future year parking rate recommendations based on data analytics and Council
adopted parking policies
Progress towards meeting Council strategic goals
Section 6 – Public Outreach and Communication with Boards and Commissions
Staff conducted study sessions with the following Boards and Commissions to ensure
that the needs of the communities represented by the respective commissions were
considered with the proposals included in this staff report:
Commission for the Senior Community – October 2017
Santa Monica Library Board – October 2017
Chamber of Commerce – November 2017
Disabilities Commission – November 2017
Downtown Santa Monica, Inc. – November 2017
Santa Monica Travel and Tourism – January 2018
Official feedback from each body was thoroughly considered and incorporated herein.
Attachment F includes formal responses from the respective bodies. Staff will return to
the Boards and Commissions with additional study sessions to further discuss these
topics and inform these stakeholders of broader parking management strategies.
Recommended Next Steps
Staff recommends the adoption of specific rate changes consistent with Option A to
address Council concerns of traffic congestion, Downtown circulation, parking
availability, and reductions in free parking. However, based on comments, feedback,
and discussion at this study session, staff will return to Council at the March 27, 2018
Council meeting with specific rate proposals and enabling ordinances and resolutions.
23 of 23
Prepared By: Michael Towler, Principal Administrative Analyst
Approved
Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. Parking Analytics
B. Expo Light Rail Info, Tables and Graphs
C. Option A Pricing
D. Option B Pricing
E. Private Parking Facility Rate Comparison
F. Boards and Commissions Letters
G. Written Comments
H. Powerpoint Presentation
2427 Main St, Santa Monica, CA 90405
santamonica.com
310.319.6263
- $
*%/4*0) %'
. */$-!.% !)/*" )/ *)% - 1!'*0-%.( ) )/ *)%
-!.% !)/ (+'! .! /*2-%/!/$%.'!//!-/*!3+-!..(4 *)"% !) !%)!)-4!-16)
) /$!%/4*" )/ *)% - ""% ) -&%)#/! (
/ )/ *)% - 1!'*0-%.(%/%.*0-(%..%*)/*%) -! .!1%.%/*-!3+!) %/0-!.
/*0-%.(-!1!)0!. ) '* '!(+'*4(!)/*++*-/0)%/%!./$-*0#$/$!+-*(*/%*)*"
)/ *)% . /- 1!' !./%) /%*) %/%*) ''4 )/ *)% - 1!'*0-%.(
'.*+-*1% !."%1!1%.%/*- !)/!-'* /%*).%) '0 !.
(* %'!1!$% '!2%/$"-%!) '4
/- %)! ) &)*2'! #! '! /- 1!' *0).!'*-. 2$* -! /- %)! /*$!'+ 1%.%/*-.
!3+!-%!) !/$! !./*0- !./%) /%*)$ ./**""!- 4+-*1% %)#.!-1% !..0 $ .
%.%/*-. 0% !. ) +. "-!! -% ! .$0//'! "*-!%#) ' )#0 #! '%)! )
%)"*-( /%*)*) //- /%*).$*/!'. %)%)#(0.!0(.# ''!-%!. ) !)/!-/ %)(!)/
/$-*0#$*0//$!!)/%-! %/4
. ) !!3+! /! + -&%)#+' 4. )%)/!#- '-*'!%)/$!. /%." /*-4!3+!-%!) !
*"1%.%/*-./**0- !./%) /%*)*/$%.!) 2!-!'4$! 1%'4*)/$! %/4+ -&%)#/! (
/*(!!/*0-1%.%/*-9.)!! .$-*0#$*0//$!4! -.%/$ . !!)#-! //*$ 1! /! (
%)/$! %/42$*%. '!/* ) '45!' -#! / %..!(%) /!%//*/$!./ &!$*' !-.
) #!)0%)!'4 *).% !- /$!%- "!! & !"*-! ( &%)# $ )#!. /*+-% %)# )
*+!- /%*) '+-* ! 0-!.8" /*-./$ /$ 1! ' -#!%(+ /"*-*0-1%.%/*-.$!
+ -&%)#*+!- /%*)./! ($ . !!)-!.+*).%1!/**0-)!! . ) /$! 0--!)/./ ""
-!+*-/+-*1% ! %. *).%./!)/2%/$*0--!,0!./.
91! !!)2%/$ )/ *)% - 1!'*0-%.("*-/$!+ ./
4! -. ) $ 1!
* .!-1! "%-./$ ) /$! *+!- /%*) ' %(+-*1!(!)/. /$ / $ 1! * 0--! %)
+ -/)!-.$%+2%/$/$! %/49.+ -&%)#/! ( ) (!- $ )/.*) %)/-!!/2$!-!*0-
*""% !%.'* /! #** !3 (+'!*"/$%.%./$!%)%/% /%1!"*-"-!!*1!-)%#$/+ -&%)#
*) %)/-!!//$ /2! *''! /%1!'42*-&! *)
$-*0#$(4 *)1!-. /%*).2%/$1 -%*0. 0.%)!..!. -*0) /$! %/4$ 1! *(!
/* !'%!1!/$ /+-% %)# $ )#!. .! *)$%./*-% ' / ) +-!1%*0.- /! $ )#!.
$ 1! +*.%/%1!%(+ /*)/*0-%.( !.0++*-//$! $ )#!.+-*+*.! 4/$! %/4
+ -&%)# /! ( %) '0 %)# /$! #- 0 ' -! 0 /%*) *" "-!! #- ! +!-%* + -&%)#
/$-*0#$*0/ /$! %/4 ! 0.! /$! /! ( $ . !(*)./- /! $*2 %/ 2%'' %) -! .!
2427 Main St, Santa Monica, CA 90405
santamonica.com
310.319.6263
+ -&%)# 1 %' %'%/4 ) !).0-!/$ //$!-!%. '2 4. + -&%)#.+ ! 1 %' '!"*-
-!.% !)/ ) 1%.%/*-. )/ *)% - 1!'*0-%.(.0++*-/./$!+-*+*. '"*-/$!
%/4/*0.! )4)!/%) -!(!)/ '-!1!)0!./*-!%)1!./%) %/%*) '/- ""% ) + -&%)#
+-*#- (./$ /2%'' !)!"%//$! *((0)%/4 . 2$*'!
'**&"*-2 - /* *)/%)0%)#/*2*-&2%/$/$! %/4+ -&%)#/! ( ) -!( %) /4*0-
%.+*. '.$*0' 4*0)!! (*-!%)"*-( /%*)*)$*2/$!/! ($ . !)!"%/! )/
*)% - 1!'*0-%.(9.(%..%*)
++-! % /!4*0- *).% !- /%*)
$ )&4*0
%./%!-).
-!.% !)/
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, April 23, 2018 6:05 PM
To:Ted Winterer; Gleam Davis; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Terry O’Day;
Councilmember Kevin McKeown; Tony Vazquez
Cc:councilmtgitems; Rick Cole; Katie E. Lichtig; David Martin
Subject:FW: Tuesday.parking rates
Council‐
Please see the email below regarding the parking pricing ordinance on tomorrow’s agenda.
Thanks,
Stephanie
From: Mathew Millen [mailto:matmillen@msn.com]
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2018 10:48 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Tuesday.parking rates
If you want to encourage more people to visit downtown Santa Monica then provide an incentive...increase
free parking to 2 hours and DO NOT raise parking rates.
Your strategy of forcing people out of their cars to use a bike, bus or metro just means they will go to Century
City or Westwood
mathew millen
Item 7-A
4/24/18
1 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Alan Levenson <alan@alanlevenson.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:25 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 7A
Dear Council‐
Please do not allow parking rate increases without a public process.
Thank you.
Item 7-A
4/24/18
2 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:nicole perkins <nwidperk@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:59 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmuds.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov;
Rick Cole
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is
approved and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long-promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since
2005. We understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field
fits and I am requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you,
Nicole Perkins,
Santa Monica Resident
Item 7-A
4/24/18
3 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Susan Sheu <susan_sheu@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:03 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmuds.org;
amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov; Rick Cole; Clerk Mailbox
Cc:Brian
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
April 24, 2018
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is approved and
built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long‐promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since 2005. We
understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits and I am
requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you,
Susan Sheu and Brian Colker
Residents, homeowners, and business owners, in the city of Santa Monica
614 26th St.
Santa Monica, California
90402
(310) 393‐4069
Item 7-A
4/24/18
4 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Nikki Kolhoff <nhkolhoff@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:18 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmuds.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov;
Rick Cole
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field
is approved and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first! He
should NOT have that authority, and you need to hear from residents before making such sweeping
policy changes.
We want the long-promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been
since 2005. City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits and I
am requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now, instead of
implementing pricing changes that sabotage the data that is favorable to the Sports Field.
In addition, I want to call to your attention the one-sided nature of the Staff Report and the purposeful
selective treatment of public input. The Staff Report claims there was a "thorough six month outreach
process" but we know that staff never reached out to any neighborhood organizations, schools or field
groups during this process. Furthermore, we know that many negative comments were received for
the Planning Commission study session from the community (once the community became aware of
this issue), yet the Staff Report conveniently excludes any public feedback, including all of the
negative feedback, given after the March 6 City Council meeting. Shame on Staff for
mischaracterizing the support for these rate changes and for not including negative comments in the
attachments to the Staff Report.
And I would also like to call out Ted Winterer for his email responses to the community that continue
to suggest that commenting about the Sports Field is inappropriate when the Sports Field has not
been specifically agendized. We all know that Staff has purposefully avoided placing the Sports Field
on Council's agenda since last July as anything but a consent item (for the bogus parking study that is
not required by Coastal Commission because there are enough spaces in the Civic Center lot based
on the data presented March 6) until after they finalize the Local Coastal Program. Why? Because the
City doesn’t want any item on the agenda that would pressure the City Council to take an action on
the Sports Field until the Local Coastal Program, with the NEW PARKING POLICY is finalized.
Stop playing games with the Sports Field and submit it to Coastal while it still fits. Do not make these
parking rate changes until the Sports Field is approved and built, and never delegate the authority to
make changes to the City Manager.
Thank you,
Nikki Kolhoff
SM Resident and SMMUSD Parent
Item 7-A
4/24/18
5 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:37 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A.
From: Ann Maggio [mailto:annmaggio@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:08 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Sam Thanawalla <samthanawalla@gmail.com>
Subject: Agenda Item 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for
Civic Center Uses.
Thank you,
Ann
& Sam
Thanawalla
"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth." - Albert Einstein
Item 7-A
4/24/18
6 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:37 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A
From: Nick Mortillaro [mailto:nickmortillaro@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:17 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: RE: Agenda Item 7.A
Dear City Council,
Please do NOT allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Please do NOT approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot.
The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center Uses.
Many of our Santa Monica residents are very much in disagreement with these plans.
We will remember in November.
Thank you,
Nick Mortillaro
Item 7-A
4/24/18
7 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:38 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A.
From: Evans, James [mailto:James.Evans@umusic.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:17 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Agenda Item 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for
Civic Center Uses.
Thank you,
James Evans
1012 7th Street #10
Santa Monica, CA, 90403
Item 7-A
4/24/18
8 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:38 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A.
From: Biersmith, Kurt [mailto:Kurt.Biersmith@umusic.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:26 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Agenda Item 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Please not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for
Civic Center Uses.
Thank you,
Kurt Biersmith
1513 Harvard St
Santa Monica, CA
Item 7-A
4/24/18
9 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:38 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A.
From: Gabrielle Cohen [mailto:gabrielle7@mindspring.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:26 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Agenda Item 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for
Civic Center Uses.
It is becoming increasingly difficult for us residents to utilize our own city. This will only make it more difficult and
unappealing.
Thank you,
Gabrielle Cohen
Item 7-A
4/24/18
10 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:39 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: John's Yahoo [mailto:johnwkeefer@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:29 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: RE: Agenda Item 7.A
Dear City Council,
Please stop the City Manager's authority to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
The Civic Center is not a viable option.
You are killing the businesses already. Why would anyone go to a movie and have dinner there? For those of us who
cannot walk or ride bikes you eliminate it as a viable option for families.
We are the residents who frequent these establishments
Thank you,
John Keefer
Item 7-A
4/24/18
11 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:39 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: City Parking Rates
From: Thane Roberts [mailto:robertsthane@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:29 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: City Parking Rates
TO: City Council and City Clerk
RE: Agenda Item 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for
Civic Center Uses.
Thank you,
Thane Roberts AIA
member SM a.r.t.
Item 7-A
4/24/18
12 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:39 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
From: nicole perkins [mailto:nwidperk@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:59 AM
To: councilmtgitems <councilmtgitems@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmuds.org;
amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov; Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Agenda Item 7.A. ‐ Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is
approved and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long-promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since
2005. We understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field
fits and I am requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you,
Nicole Perkins,
Santa Monica Resident
Item 7-A
4/24/18
13 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:40 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Susan Sheu [mailto:susan_sheu@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:03 AM
To: councilmtgitems <councilmtgitems@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>;
brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmuds.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov; Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>; Clerk
Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Brian <bcolker@lineasolutions.com>
Subject: Agenda Item 7.A. ‐ Parking Rates and Management
April 24, 2018
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is approved and
built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long‐promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since 2005. We
understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits and I am
requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you,
Susan Sheu and Brian Colker
Residents, homeowners, and business owners, in the city of Santa Monica
614 26th St.
Santa Monica, California
90402
(310) 393‐4069
Item 7-A
4/24/18
14 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:40 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A.
From: Thomas Nagle [mailto:thomasmnagle@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:08 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; brd@smmusd.org
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: RE: Agenda Item 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for
Civic Center Uses.
Sincerely,
Thomas Nagle
Item 7-A
4/24/18
15 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:40 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A.
From: Thomas Nagle [mailto:thomasmnagle@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:08 AM
To: Council Mailbox ; brd@smmusd.org
Cc: Clerk Mailbox
Subject: RE: Agenda Item 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for
Civic Center Uses.
Sincerely,
Thomas Nagle
Item 7-A
4/24/18
16 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:40 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
From: Nikki Kolhoff [mailto:nhkolhoff@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:18 AM
To: councilmtgitems <councilmtgitems@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmuds.org;
amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov; Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Agenda Item 7.A. ‐ Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field
is approved and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first! He
should NOT have that authority, and you need to hear from residents before making such sweeping
policy changes.
We want the long-promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been
since 2005. City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits and I
am requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now, instead of
implementing pricing changes that sabotage the data that is favorable to the Sports Field.
In addition, I want to call to your attention the one-sided nature of the Staff Report and the purposeful
selective treatment of public input. The Staff Report claims there was a "thorough six month outreach
process" but we know that staff never reached out to any neighborhood organizations, schools or field
groups during this process. Furthermore, we know that many negative comments were received for
the Planning Commission study session from the community (once the community became aware of
this issue), yet the Staff Report conveniently excludes any public feedback, including all of the
negative feedback, given after the March 6 City Council meeting. Shame on Staff for
mischaracterizing the support for these rate changes and for not including negative comments in the
attachments to the Staff Report.
And I would also like to call out Ted Winterer for his email responses to the community that continue
to suggest that commenting about the Sports Field is inappropriate when the Sports Field has not
been specifically agendized. We all know that Staff has purposefully avoided placing the Sports Field
on Council's agenda since last July as anything but a consent item (for the bogus parking study that is
not required by Coastal Commission because there are enough spaces in the Civic Center lot based
on the data presented March 6) until after they finalize the Local Coastal Program. Why? Because the
City doesn’t want any item on the agenda that would pressure the City Council to take an action on
the Sports Field until the Local Coastal Program, with the NEW PARKING POLICY is finalized.
Item 7-A
4/24/18
17 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
2
Stop playing games with the Sports Field and submit it to Coastal while it still fits. Do not make these
parking rate changes until the Sports Field is approved and built, and never delegate the authority to
make changes to the City Manager.
Thank you,
Nikki Kolhoff
SM Resident and SMMUSD Parent
Item 7-A
4/24/18
18 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:amy korndorffer <korndawg1103@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:41 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmusd.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov;
Rick Cole
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field
is approved and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long-promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been
since 2005. We understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows
the Sports Field fits and I am requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal
Commission now.
Thank you,
Amy Daly
938 17th St. #1
Santa Monica, CA 90403
Item 7-A
4/24/18
19 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
Item 7-A
4/24/18
20 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
Item 7-A
4/24/18
21 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Mitch Dorf <dorf@earthlink.net>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:45 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmusd.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov;
Rick Cole
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Below is an email I did not personally compose but stand behind.
The only thing I would like to convey in addition is:
STOP SCREWING AROUND WITH ANYTHING THAT WILL DISTRACT, DELAY OR COMPROMISE YOUR PROMISED FIELD AT
THE CIVIC CENTER. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!! PLEASE, JUST GET IT DONE!
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is approved and
built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long‐promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since 2005. We
understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits and I am
requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you,
Mitch Dorf
Item 7-A
4/24/18
22 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:47 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
From: amy korndorffer [mailto:korndawg1103@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:41 AM
To: councilmtgitems <councilmtgitems@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmusd.org;
amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov; Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Agenda Item 7.A. ‐ Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field
is approved and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long-promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been
since 2005. We understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows
the Sports Field fits and I am requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal
Commission now.
Thank you,
Amy Daly
938 17th St. #1
Santa Monica, CA 90403
Item 7-A
4/24/18
23 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:47 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Mitch Dorf [mailto:dorf@earthlink.net]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:45 AM
To: councilmtgitems <councilmtgitems@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmusd.org;
amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov; Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Agenda Item 7.A. ‐ Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Below is an email I did not personally compose but stand behind.
The only thing I would like to convey in addition is:
STOP SCREWING AROUND WITH ANYTHING THAT WILL DISTRACT, DELAY OR COMPROMISE YOUR PROMISED FIELD AT
THE CIVIC CENTER. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!! PLEASE, JUST GET IT DONE!
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is approved and
built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long‐promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since 2005. We
understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits and I am
requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you,
Mitch Dorf
Item 7-A
4/24/18
24 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Christy Hagen <christy.hagen@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:48 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmusd.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov;
Rick Cole
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is approved
and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long-promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since 2005. We
understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits and I am
requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you,
Christina Hagen
Santa Monica Resident
21st St, 90403
Christy Hagen, APR
Doctoral Candidate and Annenberg Fellow
Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism
University of Southern California
chagen@usc.edu
703-261-9710
Item 7-A
4/24/18
25 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Rob Levin <rob@arocd.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:51 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmusd.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov;
Rick Cole
Subject:RE: Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is
approved and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long‐promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since 2005.
We understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits
and I am requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you
Robert Levin
Item 7-A
4/24/18
26 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Ann Maggio <annmaggio@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:55 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for
Civic Center Uses.
Thank you,
Ann
& Sam
Thanawalla
"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth." - Albert Einstein
Item 7-A
4/24/18
27 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Christy Hagen <christy.hagen@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:48 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmusd.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov;
Rick Cole
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is approved
and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long-promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since 2005. We
understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits and I am
requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you,
Christina Hagen
Santa Monica Resident
21st St, 90403
Christy Hagen, APR
Doctoral Candidate and Annenberg Fellow
Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism
University of Southern California
chagen@usc.edu
703-261-9710
Item 7-A
4/24/18
28 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Rob Levin <rob@arocd.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:51 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmusd.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov;
Rick Cole
Subject:RE: Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is
approved and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long‐promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since 2005.
We understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits
and I am requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you
Robert Levin
Item 7-A
4/24/18
29 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Jones, Penn <phjones@tronc.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:53 AM
To:Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A.
Importance:High
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center
Lot should only be used for Civic Center Uses.
Thank you,
Penn & Erin JOnes
Penn H Jones | phjones@tronc.com
VP ADV; Nat’l Sales West, Auto & Central Regions| tronc, Inc.
(formerly Tribune Publishing Company)
o 213‐237‐4460
m 310‐999‐5609
Media Kit: http://www.troncmediakit.com/portfolio/
Nat’l News: http://www.tronc.com
LAT News Site: Los Angeles Times
LAT Media Kit: http://mediakit.latimes.com
Item 7-A
4/24/18
30 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:valstreit@roadrunner.com
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 12:00 PM
To:Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox
Subject:RE: Agenda Item 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center Lot should only be used
for Civic Center Uses.
Thank you,
Val Streit
Item 7-A
4/24/18
31 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:deeonn la <deeonn@hotmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 12:04 PM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmusd.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov;
Rick Cole
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
I am writing to ask that you NOT approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center
Lot until the Sports Field is approved and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic
Center uses.
Please do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long-promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been
since 2005. We understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows
the Sports Field fits and I am requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal
Commission now.
Thank you,
DeAnne Ozaki (Santa Monica resident and parent of two SMMUSD students)
Item 7-A
4/24/18
32 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Hank Antosz <hank@simpartners.net>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 12:17 PM
To:Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox
Subject:Fwd: Agenda item 7.A.
To: Council@smgov.net
Cc: clerk@smgov.net
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first.
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center lot should
only be used for Civic Center Uses.
Thank you,
Henry Antosz
Fran Ginsberg
Julie Holcenberg
Brad Holcenberg
Max Holcenberg
Ben Holcenberg
Item 7-A
4/24/18
33 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Monday, April 23, 2018 6:05 PM
To:Ted Winterer; Gleam Davis; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Terry O’Day;
Councilmember Kevin McKeown; Tony Vazquez
Cc:councilmtgitems; Rick Cole; Katie E. Lichtig; David Martin
Subject:FW: Tuesday.parking rates
Council‐
Please see the email below regarding the parking pricing ordinance on tomorrow’s agenda.
Thanks,
Stephanie
From: Mathew Millen [mailto:matmillen@msn.com]
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2018 10:48 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Tuesday.parking rates
If you want to encourage more people to visit downtown Santa Monica then provide an incentive...increase
free parking to 2 hours and DO NOT raise parking rates.
Your strategy of forcing people out of their cars to use a bike, bus or metro just means they will go to Century
City or Westwood
mathew millen
Item 7-A
4/24/18
34 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Alan Levenson <alan@alanlevenson.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:25 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Item 7A
Dear Council‐
Please do not allow parking rate increases without a public process.
Thank you.
Item 7-A
4/24/18
35 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:nicole perkins <nwidperk@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:59 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmuds.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov;
Rick Cole
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is
approved and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long-promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since
2005. We understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field
fits and I am requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you,
Nicole Perkins,
Santa Monica Resident
Item 7-A
4/24/18
36 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Susan Sheu <susan_sheu@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:03 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmuds.org;
amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov; Rick Cole; Clerk Mailbox
Cc:Brian
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
April 24, 2018
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is approved and
built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long‐promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since 2005. We
understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits and I am
requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you,
Susan Sheu and Brian Colker
Residents, homeowners, and business owners, in the city of Santa Monica
614 26th St.
Santa Monica, California
90402
(310) 393‐4069
Item 7-A
4/24/18
37 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Nikki Kolhoff <nhkolhoff@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:18 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmuds.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov;
Rick Cole
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field
is approved and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first! He
should NOT have that authority, and you need to hear from residents before making such sweeping
policy changes.
We want the long-promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been
since 2005. City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits and I
am requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now, instead of
implementing pricing changes that sabotage the data that is favorable to the Sports Field.
In addition, I want to call to your attention the one-sided nature of the Staff Report and the purposeful
selective treatment of public input. The Staff Report claims there was a "thorough six month outreach
process" but we know that staff never reached out to any neighborhood organizations, schools or field
groups during this process. Furthermore, we know that many negative comments were received for
the Planning Commission study session from the community (once the community became aware of
this issue), yet the Staff Report conveniently excludes any public feedback, including all of the
negative feedback, given after the March 6 City Council meeting. Shame on Staff for
mischaracterizing the support for these rate changes and for not including negative comments in the
attachments to the Staff Report.
And I would also like to call out Ted Winterer for his email responses to the community that continue
to suggest that commenting about the Sports Field is inappropriate when the Sports Field has not
been specifically agendized. We all know that Staff has purposefully avoided placing the Sports Field
on Council's agenda since last July as anything but a consent item (for the bogus parking study that is
not required by Coastal Commission because there are enough spaces in the Civic Center lot based
on the data presented March 6) until after they finalize the Local Coastal Program. Why? Because the
City doesn’t want any item on the agenda that would pressure the City Council to take an action on
the Sports Field until the Local Coastal Program, with the NEW PARKING POLICY is finalized.
Stop playing games with the Sports Field and submit it to Coastal while it still fits. Do not make these
parking rate changes until the Sports Field is approved and built, and never delegate the authority to
make changes to the City Manager.
Thank you,
Nikki Kolhoff
SM Resident and SMMUSD Parent
Item 7-A
4/24/18
38 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:37 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A.
From: Ann Maggio [mailto:annmaggio@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:08 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Sam Thanawalla <samthanawalla@gmail.com>
Subject: Agenda Item 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for
Civic Center Uses.
Thank you,
Ann
& Sam
Thanawalla
"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth." - Albert Einstein
Item 7-A
4/24/18
39 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:37 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A
From: Nick Mortillaro [mailto:nickmortillaro@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:17 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: RE: Agenda Item 7.A
Dear City Council,
Please do NOT allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Please do NOT approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot.
The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center Uses.
Many of our Santa Monica residents are very much in disagreement with these plans.
We will remember in November.
Thank you,
Nick Mortillaro
Item 7-A
4/24/18
40 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:38 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A.
From: Evans, James [mailto:James.Evans@umusic.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:17 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Agenda Item 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for
Civic Center Uses.
Thank you,
James Evans
1012 7th Street #10
Santa Monica, CA, 90403
Item 7-A
4/24/18
41 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:38 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A.
From: Biersmith, Kurt [mailto:Kurt.Biersmith@umusic.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:26 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Agenda Item 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Please not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for
Civic Center Uses.
Thank you,
Kurt Biersmith
1513 Harvard St
Santa Monica, CA
Item 7-A
4/24/18
42 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:38 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A.
From: Gabrielle Cohen [mailto:gabrielle7@mindspring.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:26 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Agenda Item 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for
Civic Center Uses.
It is becoming increasingly difficult for us residents to utilize our own city. This will only make it more difficult and
unappealing.
Thank you,
Gabrielle Cohen
Item 7-A
4/24/18
43 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:39 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: John's Yahoo [mailto:johnwkeefer@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:29 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: RE: Agenda Item 7.A
Dear City Council,
Please stop the City Manager's authority to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
The Civic Center is not a viable option.
You are killing the businesses already. Why would anyone go to a movie and have dinner there? For those of us who
cannot walk or ride bikes you eliminate it as a viable option for families.
We are the residents who frequent these establishments
Thank you,
John Keefer
Item 7-A
4/24/18
44 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:39 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: City Parking Rates
From: Thane Roberts [mailto:robertsthane@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:29 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: City Parking Rates
TO: City Council and City Clerk
RE: Agenda Item 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for
Civic Center Uses.
Thank you,
Thane Roberts AIA
member SM a.r.t.
Item 7-A
4/24/18
45 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:39 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
From: nicole perkins [mailto:nwidperk@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:59 AM
To: councilmtgitems <councilmtgitems@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmuds.org;
amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov; Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Agenda Item 7.A. ‐ Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is
approved and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long-promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since
2005. We understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field
fits and I am requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you,
Nicole Perkins,
Santa Monica Resident
Item 7-A
4/24/18
46 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:40 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Susan Sheu [mailto:susan_sheu@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:03 AM
To: councilmtgitems <councilmtgitems@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>;
brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmuds.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov; Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>; Clerk
Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Brian <bcolker@lineasolutions.com>
Subject: Agenda Item 7.A. ‐ Parking Rates and Management
April 24, 2018
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is approved and
built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long‐promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since 2005. We
understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits and I am
requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you,
Susan Sheu and Brian Colker
Residents, homeowners, and business owners, in the city of Santa Monica
614 26th St.
Santa Monica, California
90402
(310) 393‐4069
Item 7-A
4/24/18
47 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:40 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A.
From: Thomas Nagle [mailto:thomasmnagle@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:08 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; brd@smmusd.org
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: RE: Agenda Item 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for
Civic Center Uses.
Sincerely,
Thomas Nagle
Item 7-A
4/24/18
48 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:40 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A.
From: Thomas Nagle [mailto:thomasmnagle@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:08 AM
To: Council Mailbox ; brd@smmusd.org
Cc: Clerk Mailbox
Subject: RE: Agenda Item 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for
Civic Center Uses.
Sincerely,
Thomas Nagle
Item 7-A
4/24/18
49 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:40 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
From: Nikki Kolhoff [mailto:nhkolhoff@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:18 AM
To: councilmtgitems <councilmtgitems@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmuds.org;
amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov; Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Agenda Item 7.A. ‐ Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field
is approved and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first! He
should NOT have that authority, and you need to hear from residents before making such sweeping
policy changes.
We want the long-promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been
since 2005. City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits and I
am requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now, instead of
implementing pricing changes that sabotage the data that is favorable to the Sports Field.
In addition, I want to call to your attention the one-sided nature of the Staff Report and the purposeful
selective treatment of public input. The Staff Report claims there was a "thorough six month outreach
process" but we know that staff never reached out to any neighborhood organizations, schools or field
groups during this process. Furthermore, we know that many negative comments were received for
the Planning Commission study session from the community (once the community became aware of
this issue), yet the Staff Report conveniently excludes any public feedback, including all of the
negative feedback, given after the March 6 City Council meeting. Shame on Staff for
mischaracterizing the support for these rate changes and for not including negative comments in the
attachments to the Staff Report.
And I would also like to call out Ted Winterer for his email responses to the community that continue
to suggest that commenting about the Sports Field is inappropriate when the Sports Field has not
been specifically agendized. We all know that Staff has purposefully avoided placing the Sports Field
on Council's agenda since last July as anything but a consent item (for the bogus parking study that is
not required by Coastal Commission because there are enough spaces in the Civic Center lot based
on the data presented March 6) until after they finalize the Local Coastal Program. Why? Because the
City doesn’t want any item on the agenda that would pressure the City Council to take an action on
the Sports Field until the Local Coastal Program, with the NEW PARKING POLICY is finalized.
Item 7-A
4/24/18
50 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
2
Stop playing games with the Sports Field and submit it to Coastal while it still fits. Do not make these
parking rate changes until the Sports Field is approved and built, and never delegate the authority to
make changes to the City Manager.
Thank you,
Nikki Kolhoff
SM Resident and SMMUSD Parent
Item 7-A
4/24/18
51 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:amy korndorffer <korndawg1103@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:41 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmusd.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov;
Rick Cole
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field
is approved and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long-promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been
since 2005. We understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows
the Sports Field fits and I am requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal
Commission now.
Thank you,
Amy Daly
938 17th St. #1
Santa Monica, CA 90403
Item 7-A
4/24/18
52 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
Item 7-A
4/24/18
53 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
Item 7-A
4/24/18
54 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Mitch Dorf <dorf@earthlink.net>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:45 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmusd.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov;
Rick Cole
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Below is an email I did not personally compose but stand behind.
The only thing I would like to convey in addition is:
STOP SCREWING AROUND WITH ANYTHING THAT WILL DISTRACT, DELAY OR COMPROMISE YOUR PROMISED FIELD AT
THE CIVIC CENTER. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!! PLEASE, JUST GET IT DONE!
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is approved and
built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long‐promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since 2005. We
understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits and I am
requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you,
Mitch Dorf
Item 7-A
4/24/18
55 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:47 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
From: amy korndorffer [mailto:korndawg1103@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:41 AM
To: councilmtgitems <councilmtgitems@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmusd.org;
amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov; Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Agenda Item 7.A. ‐ Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field
is approved and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long-promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been
since 2005. We understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows
the Sports Field fits and I am requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal
Commission now.
Thank you,
Amy Daly
938 17th St. #1
Santa Monica, CA 90403
Item 7-A
4/24/18
56 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Clerk Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:47 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Mitch Dorf [mailto:dorf@earthlink.net]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:45 AM
To: councilmtgitems <councilmtgitems@SMGOV.NET>; Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmusd.org;
amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov; Rick Cole <Rick.Cole@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Agenda Item 7.A. ‐ Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Below is an email I did not personally compose but stand behind.
The only thing I would like to convey in addition is:
STOP SCREWING AROUND WITH ANYTHING THAT WILL DISTRACT, DELAY OR COMPROMISE YOUR PROMISED FIELD AT
THE CIVIC CENTER. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!! PLEASE, JUST GET IT DONE!
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is approved and
built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long‐promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since 2005. We
understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits and I am
requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you,
Mitch Dorf
Item 7-A
4/24/18
57 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Christy Hagen <christy.hagen@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:48 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmusd.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov;
Rick Cole
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is approved
and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long-promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since 2005. We
understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits and I am
requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you,
Christina Hagen
Santa Monica Resident
21st St, 90403
Christy Hagen, APR
Doctoral Candidate and Annenberg Fellow
Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism
University of Southern California
chagen@usc.edu
703-261-9710
Item 7-A
4/24/18
58 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Rob Levin <rob@arocd.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:51 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmusd.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov;
Rick Cole
Subject:RE: Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is
approved and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long‐promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since 2005.
We understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits
and I am requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you
Robert Levin
Item 7-A
4/24/18
59 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Ann Maggio <annmaggio@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:55 AM
To:councilmtgitems
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for
Civic Center Uses.
Thank you,
Ann
& Sam
Thanawalla
"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth." - Albert Einstein
Item 7-A
4/24/18
60 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Christy Hagen <christy.hagen@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:48 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmusd.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov;
Rick Cole
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is approved
and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long-promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since 2005. We
understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits and I am
requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you,
Christina Hagen
Santa Monica Resident
21st St, 90403
Christy Hagen, APR
Doctoral Candidate and Annenberg Fellow
Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism
University of Southern California
chagen@usc.edu
703-261-9710
Item 7-A
4/24/18
61 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Rob Levin <rob@arocd.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:51 AM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmusd.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov;
Rick Cole
Subject:RE: Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is
approved and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long‐promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since 2005.
We understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits
and I am requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you
Robert Levin
Item 7-A
4/24/18
62 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Jones, Penn <phjones@tronc.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 11:53 AM
To:Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A.
Importance:High
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center
Lot should only be used for Civic Center Uses.
Thank you,
Penn & Erin JOnes
Penn H Jones | phjones@tronc.com
VP ADV; Nat’l Sales West, Auto & Central Regions| tronc, Inc.
(formerly Tribune Publishing Company)
o 213‐237‐4460
m 310‐999‐5609
Media Kit: http://www.troncmediakit.com/portfolio/
Nat’l News: http://www.tronc.com
LAT News Site: Los Angeles Times
LAT Media Kit: http://mediakit.latimes.com
Item 7-A
4/24/18
63 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:valstreit@roadrunner.com
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 12:00 PM
To:Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox
Subject:RE: Agenda Item 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center Lot should only be used
for Civic Center Uses.
Thank you,
Val Streit
Item 7-A
4/24/18
64 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:deeonn la <deeonn@hotmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 12:04 PM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmusd.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov;
Rick Cole
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
I am writing to ask that you NOT approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center
Lot until the Sports Field is approved and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic
Center uses.
Please do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long-promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been
since 2005. We understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows
the Sports Field fits and I am requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal
Commission now.
Thank you,
DeAnne Ozaki (Santa Monica resident and parent of two SMMUSD students)
Item 7-A
4/24/18
65 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Hank Antosz <hank@simpartners.net>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 12:17 PM
To:Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox
Subject:Fwd: Agenda item 7.A.
To: Council@smgov.net
Cc: clerk@smgov.net
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first.
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center lot should
only be used for Civic Center Uses.
Thank you,
Henry Antosz
Fran Ginsberg
Julie Holcenberg
Brad Holcenberg
Max Holcenberg
Ben Holcenberg
Item 7-A
4/24/18
66 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Wendy Dembo <wendydembo@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 12:32 PM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov; Rick Cole; Clerk Mailbox; bdrati@smmusd.org;
brd@smmusd.org
Subject:RE: Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Recently, I was at Whole Foods 365 and overheard some young people, who had come to Santa Monica to go to
the beach. After they had to pay $27 for parking, they said that they wouldn't be back soon.
Please do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is
approved and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Please do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want and need the long-promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since
2005. We understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits
and I am requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you,
Wendy Dembo
Mother to a SMMUSD student, Santa Monica Resident and voter
Item 7-A
4/24/18
67 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:John Redfield <jredfield@smcm.org>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 12:42 PM
To:Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox
Subject:URGENT! STOP City from avoiding hearings on Parking Rate Increases
TO: council@smgov.net
CC:clerk@smgov.net
RE: Agenda Item 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for
Civic Center Uses.
Thank you,
John & Sigal Redfield
201 21st Place
Santa Monica CA 90402
Item 7-A
4/24/18
68 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Fran Ginsberg <frangins06@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 1:14 PM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmusd.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov;
Rick Cole
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
RE: Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Please do NOT approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot
until the Sports Field is approved and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for
Civic Center uses.
Please do NOT allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public
hearings first!
We want the long-promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan
and has been since 2005. We understand that the City Staff has presented parking data
to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits and I am requesting that you to submit
the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
I want my grandchildren to have a local sports field. The loyal, tax paying residents of
Santa Monica deserve this!
Thank you,
Fran Ginsberg - resident of Santa Monica for 37 years.
Item 7-A
4/24/18
69 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Alisa Bunting <desmondb@verizon.net>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 1:47 PM
To:Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox
Subject:URGENT! AGENDA ITEM 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center
Lot should only be used for Civic Center Uses.
Thank you,
Alisa Bunting
desmondb@verizon.net
310-569-5499
Item 7-A
4/24/18
70 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Donald Brand <dbofsantamonica@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 2:02 PM
To:Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox
Subject:Parking Fees
RE: Agenda Item 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public
hearings and input first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The
Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center Uses.
Thank you,
Donald Brand
735 17th St
Santa Monica, Ca 90402
Item 7-A
4/24/18
71 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Ann Hoover <annkbowman@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 2:33 PM
To:Council Mailbox; Ted Winterer; Gleam Davis; Tony Vazquez; Sue Himmelrich; Pam
OConnor; Terry O’Day; Councilmember Kevin McKeown
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; councilmtgitems; Rick Cole; Katie E. Lichtig; David Martin; Jing Yeo; Liz
Bar-El; Cary Fukui; Jaleh MIRHASHEMI; Zina Josephs; Maryanne LaGuardia; John Cyrus
Smith; Ruth Fragoso; Joan Krenik
Subject:04-24-18 City Council Meeting Item 7.A. -- Global Parking Strategy / Revising Public
Parking Rates
Dear Mayor Winterer, Mayor Pro Tempore Davis, and Esteemed Council Members -
Increase Downtown parking rates tonight if you must, but what is up with the strategy to
shift parkers to places like the Civic Center, per yesterday's SMDP article,
below? Written, perhaps, by the City's very own P.R. Team? Quote from the article:
"Staff wrote the proposed changes will likely shift commuters to less expensive structures outside of the
Downtown core. The Civic Center structures and Civic Auditorium lots are just $14 maximum during the week
and $5 on weekends, as opposed to $20 and $25 downtown." Whaaaatttt?!!!??!!!
This global parking management strategy is in head-on conflict with the increased parking demand at
the Civic Center to be generated by the CSB and ECLS, both built with no parking, and also with the
construction of the Civic Center Multipurpose Sports Field. While yes, there appears to be some
room at the Civic Center lot and garage right now (most likely due to the increase in week day pricing
there in 2016 to discourage "park and ride" after the EXPO line opened), but there won't be that same
availability once CSB and ELCS usage kicks in and field construction starts. It seems extremely
short-sighted and inconsiderate to actively manipulate parking habits now and direct parkers
to this area, only to pull the rug out from under people in less than 24 months. Particularly if in
the interim you've made plans to get or have gotten rid of any parking facilities in Downtown that
those parkers could shift back to when parking availability ultimately decreases at the Civic Center.
Looking 2-3 years out instead of just in the moment, what will be the global parking strategy once the
ECLS, CSB and field are finished? And can you give Team Field some assurances from the dais
tonight that pushing parkers over to the Civic Center facilities will not delay or harm the sports field
project?
Please do not take any action tonight that could negatively impact the sports field, please.
Thank you, as always, for your time and for listening.
Best, Ann Hoover
Co-Chair, SAMOHI PTSA Civic Center Task Force
310-560-9902
Council looking to increase the price to park Downtown
Item 7-A
4/24/18
72 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
2
Council looking to increase the price to
park Downtown
The City Council will consider upping the cost to park in downtown’s
aging parking structures while maintaining ...
Item 7-A
4/24/18
73 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Matt Edelman <matt.e.edelman@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 2:34 PM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmusd.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov;
Rick Cole
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council,
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot until the Sports Field is approved and
built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
We want the long‐promised Sports Field built ASAP. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since 2005. We
understand that the City Staff has presented parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits and I am
requesting that you to submit the Sports Field to the Coastal Commission now.
Thank you,
Best,
Matt
_________________
Matt Edelman
(310) 770‐7194
Item 7-A
4/24/18
74 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 2:51 PM
To:Ted Winterer; Gleam Davis; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Terry O’Day;
Councilmember Kevin McKeown; Tony Vazquez
Cc:councilmtgitems; Rick Cole; Katie E. Lichtig; Anuj Gupta; David Martin
Subject:FW: Downtown Parking Rates
Council‐
Please see the email below regarding the parking pricing ordinance.
Thanks,
Stephanie
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Alan Mont [mailto:mont@downtownsm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 2:16 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Downtown Parking Rates
City Council Members,
Thank you for your decision to maintain 90 minute free parking and the uniform rates in the downtown parking
structures.
These are challenging times and although making rate adjustments is reasonable, reducing free parking would have hurt
business and kept locals away.
Again, thank you.
Alan Mont/ Resident and Property Owner
818‐261‐8172
Item 7-A
4/24/18
75 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 2:53 PM
To:Ted Winterer; Gleam Davis; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Terry O’Day;
Councilmember Kevin McKeown; Tony Vazquez
Cc:councilmtgitems; Rick Cole; Katie E. Lichtig; Anuj Gupta; David Martin
Subject:FW: Thank you for continuing 90 minute parking rates
Council‐
Please see the email below regarding the parking pricing ordinance.
Thanks,
Stephanie
From: Jerryfle@roadrunner.com [mailto:jerryfle@roadrunner.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 1:45 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Thank you for continuing 90 minute parking rates
To the Staff,
Thank you for continuing to make short‐term parking affordable, with 90 minute free parking to continue.
J. Fleischman
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication and any documents, files or previous e‐mail messages
attached to it, constitute an electronic communication within the scope of the Electronic Communication
Privacy Act, 18 USC 2510‐2521. This communication may contain non‐public, confidential, or legally privileged
information intended for the sole use of the designated recipient(s). The unlawful interception, use or
disclosure of such information is strictly prohibited under 18 USC 2511 and other applicable laws. Please reply
to the sender that you have received the message in error, and then delete it. Thank you.
Item 7-A
4/24/18
76 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 2:58 PM
To:Ted Winterer; Gleam Davis; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Terry O’Day;
Councilmember Kevin McKeown; Tony Vazquez
Cc:councilmtgitems; Rick Cole; Katie E. Lichtig; Anuj Gupta; David Martin
Subject:FW: Preserve 90 minute free parking
Council‐
Please see the email below regarding the parking pricing ordinance.
Thanks,
Stephanie
From: Laurie Sasson [mailto:lsasson@me.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 1:06 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Laurie Sasson <lsasson@me.com>
Subject: Preserve 90 minute free parking
Dear Council,
As a property owner in Downtown Santa Monica I know that preserving 90 minutes free is an essential element
as we compete with other shopping areas to draw customers who spend money in our stores.
I urge you to remember that sales tax, property tax and the special assessments are what funds city initiatives in
our downtown.
Don’t bite the hands that feed: PRESERVE 90 MINUTE FREE PARKING !!!!
Laurie R. Sasson
Romano 1338 Third Street Promenade, LLC
PO Box 5723
Beverly Hills, CA 90209
O: 310-858-1248
F: 310-274-2908
C: 310-488-3588
E: Laurie@rftventures.com
Item 7-A
4/24/18
77 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Julie Millett <jmillett@rwaplanning.com>
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 3:03 PM
To:councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc:Clerk Mailbox; brd@smmusd.org; bdrati@smmusd.org; amber.dobson@coastal.ca.gov;
Rick Cole
Subject:Agenda Item 7.A. - Parking Rates and Management
Dear City Council Members,
I am writing to request that Council not approve parking rate increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot
until the long planned Sports Field is approved and built. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for Civic Center uses.
It is inappropriate to allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing properly noticed public hearings.
I am in strong support of the long promised Sports Field and request that its development and construction become a
top priority. It is part of our Civic Center Plan and has been since 2005. We understand that the City Staff has presented
parking data to City Council that shows the Sports Field fits, and I am requesting that you to submit the Sports Field
plans to the Coastal Commission to move the project forward as quickly as possible. It is long overdue.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Julie Millett
Item 7-A
4/24/18
78 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 3:05 PM
To:Ted Winterer; Gleam Davis; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Terry O’Day;
Councilmember Kevin McKeown; Tony Vazquez
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Preserve 90 minute free parking!
Council‐
Please see the email below regarding the parking pricing ordinance.
Thanks,
Stephanie
From: Laurie Sasson [mailto:lsasson@me.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 1:06 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Laurie Sasson <lsasson@me.com>
Subject: Preserve 90 minute free parking!
Dear Council,
As a property owner in Downtown Santa Monica I know that preserving 90 minutes free is an essential element
as we compete with other shopping areas to draw customers who spend money in our stores.
I urge you to remember that sales tax, property tax and the special assessments are what funds city initiatives in
our downtown.
Don’t bite the hands that feed: PRESERVE 90 MINUTE FREE PARKING !!!!
Laurie R. Sasson
Romano 1215-1221 Third Street Promenade, LLC
PO Box 5723
Beverly Hills, CA 90209
O: 310-858-1248
F: 310-274-2908
C: 310-488-3588
E: Laurie@rftventures.com
Item 7-A
4/24/18
79 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 3:05 PM
To:Ted Winterer; Gleam Davis; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Terry O’Day;
Councilmember Kevin McKeown; Tony Vazquez
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: URGENT! STOP City from avoiding hearings on Parking Rate Increases
Council‐
Please see the email below regarding the parking pricing ordinance.
Thanks,
Stephanie
From: John Redfield [mailto:jredfield@smcm.org]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 12:42 PM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Cc: Clerk Mailbox <Clerk.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: URGENT! STOP City from avoiding hearings on Parking Rate Increases
TO: council@smgov.net
CC:clerk@smgov.net
RE: Agenda Item 7.A.
Dear City Council,
Do not allow the City Manager to change parking rates without providing public hearings first!
Do not approve parking increases that will drive parking to the Civic Center Lot. The Civic Center Lot should only be used for
Civic Center Uses.
Thank you,
John & Sigal Redfield
201 21st Place
Santa Monica CA 90402
Item 7-A
4/24/18
80 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
1
Vernice Hankins
From:Council Mailbox
Sent:Tuesday, April 24, 2018 3:15 PM
To:Ted Winterer; Gleam Davis; Pam OConnor; Sue Himmelrich; Terry O’Day;
Councilmember Kevin McKeown; Tony Vazquez
Cc:councilmtgitems
Subject:FW: Item 7A.
Council‐
Please see the email below regarding the parking pricing ordinance.
Thanks,
Stephanie
From: lmarreola [mailto:lmarreola@roadrunner.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2018 10:24 AM
To: Council Mailbox <Council.Mailbox@SMGOV.NET>
Subject: Item 7A.
Dear City Council,
Do not allow City Mgr. to change parking rates without providing public hearings first.
Do not approve parking increases that might drive parking to the Civic Center lot.The Civic Ctr.. lot shCry. only
be used for Civic Ctr. uses..
Try to keep rates low downtown so working class people won't have to spend an extra 8, 10 or more dollars to
see a 2 hour movie and have a bite or drink before or after .
Thank You,
Larry Arreola
SM Resident
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S® 6, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
Item 7-A
4/24/18
81 of 81 Item 7-A
4/24/18
CITY OF SANTA M ONICA
DOWNTOWN PA RKING MANAGEMENT
PRICING STRATEGY
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL
APRIL 24, 2018 Agenda Item 7-A
Planning & Community Development
Tr affic and Parking Management
Proposed Parking Strategies –Immediate
•Introduce an ordinance for first reading streamlining municipal code
•Maintain first 90 minutes free parking period in PS 1-9 and KEC
•Increase parking rates, keeping uniform rates across DT core facilities
•Harmonize parking rates for non DT core facilities
•Increase monthly parking fees to 11 x transient daily maximum rate
•Redirect monthly parkers from PS 1 and PS 3 to other facilities
2
Proposed Parking Strategies –Immediate (cont.)
•Continue subsidy for KEC and SMC Emeritus College
•Develop subsidized parking options for Main Library program users
•Extend pilot DT employee discounted validation parking program
•Extend California Judicial Council bulk parking agreement for one year
•Reinvest incremental revenues into Traffic, Parking, Access & Circulation
3
Proposed Parking Strategies –Long Term
•Partner with City Departments, stakeholders, and TNC companies to
create mobility programs that support the use of more sustainable travel
modes
•Evaluate the effectiveness of a SM Resident Downtown Access Program
and Downtown Merchant Validation Program
•Work with stakeholders to analyze the feasibility of a universal valet
program
4
Proposed Parking Strategies –Long Term (cont.)
•Return to Council with a comprehensive strategy to address the
reduction of subsidized parking, offset with investments in tangible
mobility options
•Return to Council annually to report on the State of Citywide Parking
5
CITY OF SANTA M ONICA -DOWNTOWN PARKING
MANAGEMENT PRICING STRATEGIES
Q & A
Item 7-A April 24, 2018
Tr affic and Parking Management
23
REFERENCE:
Resolution No. 11110
(CCS)