Santa Monica City Council
September 26, 2023

City of Santa Monica
City Council Meeting
AGENDA

GLEAM DAVIS
MAYOR

PHIL BROCK LANA NEGRETE

COUNCILMEMBER MAYOR PRO TEM

CHRISTINE PARRA CAROLINE TOROSIS

COUNCILMEMBER COUNCILMEMBER

JESSE ZWICK OSCAR DE LA TORRE

COUNCILMEMBER COUNCILMEMBER

DAVID WHITE

CITY MANAGER

DOUGLAS SLOAN

CITY ATTORNEY

DENISE ANDERSON-WARREN

CITY CLERK

STANDARDS OF BEHAVIOR THAT PROMOTE CIVILITY AT ALL PUBLIC MEETINGS:
• Treat everyone courteously; • Give open-minded consideration to all viewpoints; • Listen to others respectfully • Focus on the issues and avoid personalizing debate; • Exercise self-control • Embrace respectful disagreement and dissent as democratic rights, inherent components of an inclusive public process, and tools for forging sound decisions
Regular meetings are broadcast live on CityTV cable channel 16 and on the internet at santamonica.gov. Cable television re-broadcasts air on Thursday and Saturday at 11:30 AM. The agenda will air on CityTV on Saturday and Sunday at 11:00 AM and 6:00 PM, and on Monday and Tuesday at 12:30 PM and 6:00 PM.

City of Santa Monica Generated: 9/26/2023 5:53 PM Page 2

RULES OF ORDER FOR THE CONDUCT OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS (Resolution No.11494(CCS))

WAYS TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT
If you are interested in providing public comment at a City Council meeting, there are several ways to participate:
(1) Written public comment. In lieu of oral public comment, the public is strongly encouraged to submit written public comment on agenda items via email to [email protected]. Written public comment submitted before 12:00 pm on the day of the meeting will be available for online viewing. Please note the agenda item number in the subject line of your written comments. (2) Oral public comment. Persons wishing to address the City Council regarding items on the agenda must be present and submit their name and address (optional) to the City Clerk before the public comment section is opened for that item or before the public hearing is opened where one is required by law. Register to speak at the Speaker Kiosk prior to the meeting. Remarks from the public are limited to a total of 6 minutes per City Council meeting, with a maximum of 2 minutes and a minimum of one minute per item. Except for the author of the request, public comment on 15-items are limited to 1 minute. Except on Public Input, speakers appearing at the meeting in person, may donate 2 minutes to another person present in-person at the meeting, who may speak for a total of 4 minutes on that item.

Both the donor of time and the designated speaker must register at the Speaker Kiosk in person together.

Oral public comment from any one individual is limited to a total of 6 minutes per City Council meeting, with a maximum of 2 minutes per agenda item; under some circumstances, Council may change the maximum to 1 minute per agenda item.

ORDER OF BUSINESS (may not be changed except by majority vote of the City Council.)

1. General Public Input
(members of the public may address the City Council
only on items not on the agenda, but within the
subject matter jurisdiction of the City).

2. Public Comment for Closed Session, Special
Agenda, and Consent Calendar Items Only
(Commendations and Proclamations presented).

3. Closed Session.

4. Special Agenda Items (City Manager’s Report,
Presentations, etc.).

5. Consent Calendar (All items considered in one
motion unless removed by a City Councilmember for
discussion. Public comment shall be heard prior
to City Council discussion).

6. Public Comment on remaining Agenda Items

7. Study Session.

8. Continued Items.

9. Administrative Proceedings.

10. Ordinances:
• 1
st Reading
• 2
nd Reading

11. Staff Administrative Item.

12. Public Hearings.

13. Reports of Boards and Commissions.

14. Resolutions.

15. Written Communications (other than
Reports of Commission and Officers).

16. Councilmember Discussion Items.

Agendas and reports are accessible on the City's webpage at smgov.net/council/agendas. They are also available at the City Clerk's Office and in alternate formats upon request. For a free email subscription to the City Council Agendas, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (310) 458-8211 or [email protected].

Si desea comunicarse con alguien en español, llame a nuestra oficina al (310) 458-8211 y pida hablar con Esterlina Lugo.

City of Santa Monica Generated: 9/26/2023 5:53 PM Page 3

AGENDAS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

REGULAR MEETING

CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1685 MAIN STREET, ROOM 250,
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2023
MEETING BEGINS AT 5:30 PM
HOW TO PROVIDE WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENT:

Written public comment can be submitted via email to [email protected].

Written comments received prior to 12:00 pm on the day of the meeting will be available online. Please note the agenda item number in the subject line of your written comments.

CALL TO ORDER

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

ROLL CALL

1. PUBLIC INPUT
(Public comment is permitted only on items not on the agenda that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City. State law prohibits the City Council from taking any action on items not listed on the agenda, including issues raised under this agenda item.)

1.A. Written Comments

2. PUBLIC INPUT (AGENDA ITEMS UNDER CLOSED SESSION, SPECIAL AGENDA

ITEMS, CONSENT CALENDAR ONLY)

3. CLOSED SESSIONS

3.A. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Gov. Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): Christina Choi, et al. v. City of Santa Monica, et al.; LASC Case No. 22STCV21608 - New Item Received. 9/21/2023

3.B. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1):

Supervisory Team Associates v. City of Santa Monica, Public Employment Relations Board, Case No. LA-CE-1608-M - New Item Received. 9/21/2023 City of Santa Monica Generated: 9/26/2023 5:53 PM Page 4

3.C. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): Gayle Makasian v. City of Santa Monica; LASC Case No. 22SMCV01921. [report out only] - New Item Received. 9/21/2023

3.D. Conference with Real Estate Negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8: Property: 2828 Donald Douglas Loop North, Santa Monica, California Offices and Pilot Lounge Premises (~5,300 sq. ft.), Corporate Hangar and Maintenance Shop (~6,450 sq. ft.), Aircraft Main Ramp (~145,000 sq. ft.), Aircraft Overflow Ramp (~32,000 sq. ft.); and 3100 Donald Douglas Loop North, Santa Monica, California “Fuel Farm” (~3,800 sq. ft.) consisting of three 12,000 gallon and one 500 gallon underground storage tanks and associated systems and equipment; City Negotiators: Stelios Makrides, Chief Operations Officer/Airport Director; Owner of Record: City of Santa Monica; Persons to be negotiated with: Atlantic SMO Holdings; Under negotiation: terms for modified and extended lease with the City - New Item Received. 9/21/2023

4. SPECIAL AGENDA ITEMS

4.A. Proclamation: Banned Books Week
The following is the order of business for items to be heard no earlier than 7:00 p.m.

4.B. City Manager's Report

5. CONSENT CALENDAR
(All items will be considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a Councilmember for discussion. In accordance with Charter section 615, the adoption of all ordinances and resolutions shall be by reading of title only unless a Councilmember present dissents.)

5.A. Approval of Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software, LLC for business license software
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a second modification to agreement #9756 (CCS) with HdL Software, LLC to extend the term three additional years and increase the contract amount by $90,797 for business license software services and software development services for the Finance Department. This will result in a 13-year amended agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $469,072, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

5.B. Award Purchase Order to Toyota Material Handling Solutions for the Purchase and Delivery of Six Forklifts
City of Santa Monica Generated: 9/26/2023 5:53 PM Page 5 Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines.

2. Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue a purchase order with Toyota Material Handling Solutions for the purchase of six electric Toyota Forklifts for the Public Works Department. This recommended award is made as an exception to the competitive bidding process pursuant to Section 2.24.250(b) and is for a total amount not to exceed $527,248.

5.C. Authorization to accept Grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety for the Selective Enforcement Program.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15321 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines

2. Authorize the City Manager to accept a grant awarded in the amount of $306,000 from the California Office of Traffic Safety for the Police Department’s Selective Traffic Enforcement Program.

3. Authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents to accept the grant and all subsequent grant renewals.

4. Authorize budget changes as outlined in the Financial Impacts & Budget Actions section of this report.

5.D. Adoption of a Resolution accepting a report on the status of all statemandated annual fire inspections in the City of Santa Monica in conjunction with SB1205 and California Health and Safety Code Section 13146.4.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a Resolution acknowledging receipt of a report on the status of state mandated annual fire inspections in the City of Santa Monica pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 13146.4

2. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

5.E. Award RFP to Moffatt & Nichol for the Pier Capital Plan, Inspections, Condition Assessment, and Design Services for the Necessary Repairs Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Sections 15301 and 15302 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and a finding of Statutory Exemption pursuant to Section 15252 of CEQA

2. Award RFP #SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol to provide structural engineering consulting and design services to develop a capital plan for necessary City of Santa Monica Generated: 9/26/2023 5:53 PM Page 6 structural repairs and maintenance to the Pier and to prepare construction and bidding documents for projects identified in the plan.

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with Moffatt & Nichol in an amount not to exceed $1,498,819 (including a $120,000 contingency).

5.F. Approval of Agreements with Zones and Hewlett Packard for City Computer Equipment
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15061(d)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

2. Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue a change order to purchase order #22400546 in the amount of $100,588 with the Hewlett Packard Corporation for computer equipment for the Information Services Department.

This would result in a revised purchase order total not to exceed $350,588.

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with Zones Corporation for computer equipment and installation services for the Information Services Department. This recommended award is made as an exception to the competitive bidding process pursuant to Section 2.24.250 (c) and is for a five-year total amount not to exceed $7,864,000 with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

4. Authorize budget changes as outlined in the Financial Impacts & Budget Actions section of this report.

5.G. Approval of Contract with SHI International Corp. for purchase of software from Granicus, LLC. for short term rental address verification, compliance monitoring, permitting, and tax collection services for the City of Santa Monica Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines; and

2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a professional services agreement with SHI International for purchase of software services from Granicus, LLC for short term rental address verification, compliance monitoring, permitting and tax collection services for the Community Development and Finance Departments. This recommended award is made as an exception to the competitive bidding process pursuant to Section

2.24.250(c) and is for a total amount not to exceed $455,560 over a five-year period with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

5.H. Award Purchase Order with Badger Meter, Inc. to Furnish and Deliver Water Meters
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that City Council:

City of Santa Monica Generated: 9/26/2023 5:53 PM Page 7

1. Adopt a finding of categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

2. Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue a purchase order with Badger Meter, Inc. for the purchase of positive-displacement water meters for the Water Resources Division of the Public Works Department. This recommended award is made as an exception to the competitive bidding process pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section

2.24.250(b) and is for a total amount not to exceed $1,658,000 over a fiveyear period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

5.I. Award Bid and enter into Agreement with General Pump Company, Inc. for Water Well and Booster Pump Repairs and Maintenance
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

2. Award Bid #4448 to General Pump Company, Inc. for water well and booster pump repair and maintenance for the Public Works Department.

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with General Pump Company, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $3,200,000 over a five-year period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

5.J. Award Bid 4458 to Bound Tree Medical LLC., Life-Assist Inc. and Henry Schein Inc. for Fire Department Medical Supplies
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Award Bid #4458 to Bound Tree Medical, LLC. as the primary vendor and to Life-Assist Inc., and Henry Schein Inc. as secondary vendors, for the purchase of medical supplies for the Fire Department.

2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with Bound Tree, Medical LLC., as the primary vendor for the purchase and delivery of Fire Department medical supplies in an amount not to exceed $663,076 over a five-year period, with future funding contingent on Council budget approval; and

3. Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue Purchase Orders over a fiveyear period to Life-Assist Inc. in an amount not to exceed $55,256 and to Henry Schein Inc. in an amount not to exceed $27,628, as secondary vendors for the purchase and delivery of Fire Department medical supplies, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

4. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

5.K. Adoption of a Resolution Amending and Restating the Civility at Public Meetings Policy set forth in Resolution No. 10642 (CCS) City of Santa Monica Generated: 9/26/2023 5:53 PM Page 8 Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1.  Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines; and

2. Adopt the attached resolution to amend and restate the Civility at Public Meetings set forth in resolution No. 10642 (CCS) (the Civility Policy).

5.L. City Council - Regular Meeting - Sep 12, 2023 5:30 PM - New Item Received. 9/21/2023

6. PUBLIC INPUT ON REMAINING AGENDA ITEMS
No public comment on Continued Items. Public input was heard and closed at the 9/12 meeting.

7. STUDY SESSION
No items

8. CONTINUED ITEMS

8.A. Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 3.24 to Regulate Retail Firearm Sales, Establish Additional Firearm Owner Responsibilities, Restrict Weapon Usage on CityOwned Property and Other Locations, Establish a Voluntary Commitment Program, and Ban Non-Serialized Firearms in the City
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.

8.B. Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 3.29 to Prohibit the Open Carry of Knives, Daggers, and Swords in Public Areas
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.

8.C. Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance Amending the Text of the Santa Monica Municipal Code Creating Article 13, Neighborhood Preservation, and Chapter 13.02, Property Maintenance, and Chapter 13.04, Vacant Properties and Moving Language Found in Chapter 8.96, Abatement of Nuisances, to New Chapter 13.06, Abatement of Nuisances, and Retitling Chapter 8.96 to Reserved
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.

City of Santa Monica Generated: 9/26/2023 5:53 PM Page 9

8.D. Introduction and Adoption of an Urgency Ordinance Amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 3.22.090 to Extend the Second Shared Mobility Device Pilot Program
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15301 and Section 15308 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines

2. Introduce and adopt an urgency ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section 3.22.090 to extend the term of the Second Shared Mobility Device Pilot Program from September 30, 2023, to a date thirty calendar days after execution of the contract(s) under SMMC Section

3.23 for permanent shared mobility services.

8.E. Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 6.49 on Taxicabs to Transition from Taxicab Franchises to Taxicab Permits
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) and a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

2. Introduce for first reading changes to the attached ordinance, SMMC 6.49, Taxicabs, that transition the City from a taxicab franchise program to a permitbased program.

8.F. Adoption of a Resolution Amending Council Rules of Order and Procedure Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

2. Permanently adopt the public input pilot, previously extended to December 31, 2023, in order to efficiently implement hybrid public input model approved by Council in the 2023-25 biennial budget; and,

3. Adopt the attached proposed resolution amending the City Council’s Rules of Order and Procedure and repealing Resolution No. 11517 (CCS).

8.G. Approval of Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with AMCAL Multi-Housing, Inc. and Gen-Land, LLC
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with AMCAL Multi-Housing, Inc. and Gen-Land, LLC, for the development of affordable and market housing on the assemblage site City of Santa Monica Generated: 9/26/2023 5:53 PM Page 10 which includes City-owned parcels located adjacent to Expo Terminus Station.

2. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

8.H. Appointment to two seats on the Human Services Commission for terms both ending on 6/30/2026. (Continued from 9/12/2023.)

8.I. Appointment to one L.A. West Vector Control District seat for a term ending on 6/30/2026. (Continued from 9/12/2023.)

8.J. Request of Councilmember Brock to give direction to the City Attorney and City Manager to: (1) request that the City’s state lobbyist continue to advocate and pursue state legislation to enable the City to use sound-activated devices to enforce vehicle noise limits; (2) evaluate the ability to enforce California Vehicle Code 27150 and 27151 and (3) evaluate the costs and ability to deploy sound-activated devices to enforce noise limits on the Promenade.

8.K. Request of Councilmember Zwick, Councilmember Torosis, and Mayor Davis that the City Manager study and prioritize timely and effective solutions to prevent dangerous motor vehicle incursions into Santa Monica’s protected and unprotected bike lanes. Specifically, the City Manager should consider enhanced enforcement by parking and traffic officers, photo enforcement to the extent allowable by law, a targeted curb management evaluation and space reallocation to reduce double parking in bike lanes, and the deployment of quick-build infrastructure to protect bike lanes and reorient parking on streets in the City’s existing and planned protected bikeway network whenever feasible.

9. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS
No items

10. ORDINANCES
(Public comment is permitted on ordinances for introduction and first reading. No public discussion is permitted on ordinances for second reading and adoption. In accordance with Charter section 615, the adoption of all ordinances and resolutions shall be by reading of title only unless a Councilmember present dissents.)

10.A. Introduction and First Reading of an Interim Zoning Ordinance Extending Interim Zoning Ordinance Number 2754 (CCS) Promoting Economic Recovery in the City’s Downtown Area, including the Third Street Promenade Area and Santa Monica Place, and Providing Other Minor and Clerical Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance Related to Economic Recovery.

City of Santa Monica Generated: 9/26/2023 5:53 PM Page 11 Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Sections 15301 (Existing Facilities) and 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

2. Introduction and first reading of an Interim Zoning Ordinance extending Interim Zoning Ordinance Number 2754 (CCS) promoting economic recovery in the City’s Downtown area, including the Third Street Promenade Area and Santa Monica Place, and providing other minor and clerical amendments to the Zoning Ordinance related to economic recovery.

11. STAFF ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS
No items

12. PUBLIC HEARINGS
No items

13. REPORTS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS

13.A. Santa Monica Housing Commission Report : Creating Equity - Affordable Homeownership in Santa Monica

14. RESOLUTIONS

14.A. Adoption of a Resolution Amending Preferential Parking Zones QQ and YY Recommended Action
Staff recommends that City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) and a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

2. Amend Preferential Parking Zone QQ for the following block:

Harvard Street between Washington Avenue and Wilshire Boulevard by changing the regulations from 2-hour parking 9AM-6PM Monday-Friday, except by permit to 2-hour parking 9AM-10PM daily, except by permit.

3. Amend Preferential Parking Zone YY for the following three blocks:

Princeton, Harvard, and Yale streets between Arizona Avenue and Wilshire Boulevard by changing the regulations from 2-hour parking 9AM-10PM daily, except by permit to 2-hour parking 9AM-6PM, No parking 6PM-9AM daily, except by permit.

4. Approve the Resolution amending Preferential Parking Regulations (Attachment A).

15. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS OTHER THAN REPORTS OF COMMISSION AND

OFFICERS
No items
City of Santa Monica Generated: 9/26/2023 5:53 PM Page 12

16. COUNCILMEMBER DISCUSSION ITEMS

16.A. Recommendation to accept Jonathan Kaplan's resignation from the Landmarks Commission and authorize the City Clerk to publish the vacancy. - Item Pulled at the Request of Staff. 9/21/2023

ADJOURNMENT
Agendas and reports are accessible on the City's webpage at www.smgov.net/council/agendas. They are also available at the City Clerk's Office and in alternate formats upon request. For a free email subscription to the City Council Agendas, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (310) 458-8211 or [email protected].

Members of the public unable to attend a meeting but wishing to comment on an item(s) listed on the agenda may submit written comments prior to the meeting by meeting by mailing them to: City Clerk, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401 or to [email protected]. Written comments received from the public by 2 PM on the day of the City Council meeting will be distributed to the City Council prior to the meeting and posted online.

City Hall and the Council Chamber are wheelchair accessible. If you require any special disability related accommodations to either attend or provide public testimony at a Council meeting (i.e. sign language interpreting, access to an amplified sound system, remote option, etc.), please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (310) 458-8211 or TDD: (310) 917- 6626 or via email at [email protected] at least 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting. Best efforts shall be made to accommodate requests received after the 72-hour deadline. In the case of special meetings, requests should be submitted as early as possible, but no later than noon the day of the special Council meeting.

Si desea comunicarse con alguien en español, llame a nuestra oficina al (310) 458-8211 y pida hablar con Esterlina Lugo.

Santa Monica Blue Bus Lines #2, #3, #5, #9 and the EXPO Line serve City Hall. Parking is available on Main Street, on Olympic Drive, and in the Civic Center Parking Structure (validation free).

City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: September 26, 2023
Agenda Item: 1.A
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Denise Anderson Warren, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department
Subject: Written Comments
Prepared By: Esterlina Lugo, Deputy City Clerk
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Written Comments

1.A
Packet Pg. 13
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Peter DiChellis <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 3:17 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre
Subject: Agenda Item 1 - Public Input - Crime

EXTERNAL
In the September 12 Council meeƟng, SMPD Chief BaƟsta informed the Council and the public that crime in Santa Monica conƟnues to increase, now eclipsing pre‐pandemic levels.

Yet tonight’s agenda includes zero discussion of taking further acƟon to deter criminals here.

Since Chief BaƟsta’s presentaƟon, public records show SMPD has made mulƟple arrests for violent crimes in Santa Monica. (These are arrests, mind you, not total crimes commiƩed.) In just the 12 days from September 12 to September 23, for example, arrests in Santa Monica included:

Five (5) for assault with a deadly weapon;
Four (4) for robbery;
Three (3) for baƩery, including an aggravated baƩery causing serious bodily injury; Three (3) for using unlawful force against a police officer, including an assault with a deadly weapon against a police officer;
Two (2) for assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury; Plus arrests for Brandishing a Deadly Weapon, Carjacking, DomesƟc BaƩery, Elder Abuse, and Statutory Rape.

And these were in addiƟon to arrests for a tacky assortment of crimes such as Failing to Register as a Sex Offender, Providing False ID to a Police Officer, Public IntoxicaƟon, Receiving Stolen Property, ShopliŌing, Defrauding an Innkeeper, Vandalism, and various Warrant and Parole ViolaƟons.

Ignoring the problem is not a soluƟon.

Sincerely,
Peter DiChellis
Santa Monica 90403
Item 1
09/26/23
1 of 4 Item 1
09/26/23

1.A.a
Packet Pg. 14
Attachment: Written Comments (6037 : Written Comments)
1 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 7:37 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Christine Parra; Phil Brock; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Oscar de la Torre; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Covered 6 is dishonest and affiliated with extremism, anti-Immigrants, and Transphobia

EXTERNAL
Please do not allow public funds to be used on a contract with Covered6. Chris Dunn has been lying about his co‐ founder, Bryce Eddy for some time now. Bryce Eddy is a far right extremist who refers to the LGBTQI community as “satanic” and “mentally ill.” When Dunn was asked about this by a community member in the Las Virgenes School District area of the Conejo Valley, he lied. There are receipts. This company is run by extremists. It is not safe to allow them to “police” our communities and it is unethical to use public funds on a company with obvious ties to far right political extremists.

See this twitter thread for receipts:
https://x.com/cantifascists/status/1644487629994610688?s=46&t=SMVZYMBE5fIaZBiG1O2aPg Thank you.

Sent from Proton Mail for iOS
Item 1
09/26/23
2 of 4 Item 1
09/26/23

1.A.a
Packet Pg. 15
Attachment: Written Comments (6037 : Written Comments)
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Jason Mastbaum <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2023 11:09 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 9/26/23 meeting item 2 public comment: Phil, Oscar, Christine, and Lana owe residents and staff an apology

EXTERNAL
During the July 25 council meeting discussion on Phil and Oscar's travel budget overruns, Phil repeatedly blamed staff for not warning him he would be going over until he was already over in March. Oscar claimed “nobody was given a report to say hey you’re going over.” Christine claimed "nobody was letting us know, hey by the way, heads up, you’re a thousand dollars away" and further blamed staff for not onboarding her properly. Lana claimed "this is just a circumstance where there was poorer systems in place before that weren’t alerting councilmembers to what was left".

But emails received via a Public Records Act request clearly show that staff first warned Phil in JANUARY that he would be going over. And another PRA request shows that ALL councilmembers receive the travel policy as part of their onboarding materials; and Phil moved, and Oscar and Christine voted yes on, a motion during one of their very first council meetings to pass the travel policy they now blame staff for not telling them about.

Phil, Oscar, Christine, and Lana owe an apology not just to the residents, but to our hardworking staff for callously throwing them under the bus to cover up Phil and Oscar's unwillingness to adhere to their travel budgets.

Item 1
09/26/23
3 of 4 Item 1
09/26/23

1.A.a
Packet Pg. 16
Attachment: Written Comments (6037 : Written Comments)
2 Item 1
09/26/23
4 of 4 Item 1
09/26/23

1.A.a
Packet Pg. 17
Attachment: Written Comments (6037 : Written Comments)
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: September 26, 2023
Agenda Item: 3.D
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Douglas Sloan, City Attorney, City Attorney's Office Subject: Conference with Real Estate Negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8: Property: 2828 Donald Douglas Loop North, Santa Monica, California Offices and Pilot Lounge Premises (~5,300 sq. ft.), Corporate Hangar and Maintenance Shop (~6,450 sq. ft.), Aircraft Main Ramp (~145,000 sq. ft.), Aircraft Overflow Ramp (~32,000 sq. ft.); and 3100 Donald Douglas Loop North, Santa Monica, California “Fuel Farm” (~3,800 sq. ft.) consisting of three 12,000 gallon and one 500 gallon underground storage tanks and associated systems and equipment; City Negotiators: Stelios Makrides, Chief Operations Officer/Airport Director; Owner of Record: City of Santa Monica; Persons to be negotiated with: Atlantic SMO Holdings; Under negotiation: terms for modified and extended lease with the City Prepared By: Esterlina Lugo, Deputy City Clerk
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Written Comments

3.D
Packet Pg. 18
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Ann Lewis <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 9:00 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3D

EXTERNAL
Please do not to renew the Atlantic lease and not to lease the fuel tanks.

Ann Lewis
T: +1.310.433.8586 | [email protected]
Item 3.D
09/26/23
1 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 19
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Lutz, Joseph <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 8:51 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Lutz, Joseph
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
To whom it may concern:

We implore you to please not renew the Atlantic lease and do not lease the fuel tanks.

Best regards,
Joe Lutz
Joseph Lutz | Senior Counsel | Seyfarth Shaw LLP
2029 Century Park East | Suite 3500 | Los Angeles, California 90067‐3021 Direct: +1‐310‐201‐1545 | Mobile: +1‐310‐717‐3692 | Fax: +1‐310‐551‐8345 [email protected] | www.seyfarth.com
To help protect your privacy,
Micro so ft Office prevented
auto matic downlo ad o f this
picture from the Internet.

Seyfarth_Logo_Signature.png
CONFIDENTIALITY WARNING: This email may contain privileged or confidential information and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized use or disclosure of this communication is prohibited. If you believe that you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete it from your system.

Item 3.D
09/26/23
2 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 20
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: Erika Soja-Combs <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 8:35 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Do not least to Atlantic Aviation.

EXTERNAL
Do t not renew the lease with AtlanƟc AviaƟon. The tanks are too dangerous and the lease is not required.

Sent from my iPhone
Item 3.D
09/26/23
3 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 4 Vernice Hankins
From: Robb Curtis Brown <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 8:30 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D - REJECT ATLANTIC'S LEASE AND THEIR DANGEROUS FUEL TANKS!

EXTERNAL
I am urging the Council to reject the renewal of the AtlanƟc AviaƟon lease and to TERMINATE the fuel tank lease.

Do not risk the poisoning of our aquifer.  NO MORE TANKS! And it's Ɵme for AtlanƟc AviaƟon to GO!  Their lease is not Ɵed, in any way, to the consent decree or to any FAA agreement.

We, the residents of Santa Monica, who OVERWHELMINGLY passed measure LC and rejected the decepƟve measure D, urge you to reject these renewals!
Robert Brown
[email protected]
310‐795‐5353
Sent from my iPhone
Item 3.D
09/26/23
4 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 5 Vernice Hankins
From: Margi Cheske <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 9:02 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3D

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
I urge you to end the lease with Atlantic Aviation, including their toxic LEADED FUEL TANKS at the Santa Monica Airport.

These (potentially leaking?) tanks sit on our water supply.

Thank you.

Margaret Cheske
Item 3.D
09/26/23
5 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 6 Vernice Hankins
From: Alex Novakovich <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 9:16 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda item 3D

EXTERNAL
Council members,
Please do NOT lease property to Atlantic Aviation. As a Sunset Park resident and 50 year resident of Santa Monica I strongly oppose any agreement that would use city land for airport purposes especially leasing property with underground fuel tanks that store leaded and toxic fuels sitting over our aquifer.

Sincerely,
Alex Novakovich
2607 26th St.

Item 3.D
09/26/23
6 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: KENT ALVES <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 10:00 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
SM Council,
Please do not renew the AtlanƟc lease or fuel tanks. It does not make sense and the people don’t want it.

Thank you for keeping your commitment to the park plan.

Kent Alves
Sent from KHA iPhone
Item 3.D
09/26/23
7 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Alan Levenson <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 9:45 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3d Atlantic lease

EXTERNAL
Dear Council,
Rather than entering close door discussion over a lease you might ask what specific contractual or legal documents require us to lease any fuel tanks at all, especially old ones that sit above our precious and irreplaceable aquifer. We have never goƩen a straight answer other than in the vaguest references to documents that DO NOT MENTION THE LEASE OF FUEL TANKS.

Don’t lease the tanks. Do not sign a lease with tanks. There are safe tank opƟons available. They cost money. If it is not worth it to AtlanƟc to invest in environmentally safe tanks to sell fuel then they should not be doing business here.

Rather uncool to slip this item in the agenda without prior noƟficaƟon to the Airport Commission or neighborhood groups or voƟng public especially considering the ramificaƟons.

Thank you.

Alan Levenson
Item 3.D
09/26/23
8 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: Caroline Denyer <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 9:40 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3D

EXTERNAL
Dear Council members,
Please do not renew the AtlanƟc lease and do not lease the fuel tanks in the future.

These fuel tanks sit over an aqua fir and can leach toxins into our water supply.

Aren’t we supposed to pride ourselves on being a “ green city”? Caroline Denyer
Santa Monica Resident
Sent from my iPhone
Item 3.D
09/26/23
9 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 4 Vernice Hankins
From: Gregg Chadwick <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 9:38 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3D

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council Members,
As a Santa Monica homeowner, small business owner, and as an environmentally concerned individual, I ask that you not renew the Atlantic lease and not to lease the leak prone fuel tank at the Santa Monica Airport.

We need to make active moves across the board to provide a healthier environment for all residents of Santa Monica.

Thank you,
Gregg Chadwick
www.greggchadwick.com

Item 3.D
09/26/23
10 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 5 Vernice Hankins
From: Tracy Orloff <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 9:34 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3D

EXTERNAL
City Council Members,
Please do NOT renew the Atlantic lease/lease of the oil tanks at the airport.  Taxpayers in the City want all fuel/aircraft services at the airport dismantled.  When you have closed door sessions it deepens people’s beliefs that at least some of you are “on the take.”
Please be honorable and do the right thing.  Closed door meetings are not transparent and suggest you have something to hide.  Making SM a repository of fossil fuels is not what the majority of people here want ‐ we voted for you to represent our interests ‐ please do that.

Thank you,
Tracy Orloff
Item 3.D
09/26/23
11 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Marta Vago <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 10:21 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
DO NOT RENEW THE ATLANTIC LEASE AND DO NOT LEASE THE FUEL TANKS! REMINDER: WE VOTED DOWN MEASURE D, AND PASSED MEASURE LC TO CLOSE THE AIRPORT AND DEVELOP A PARK WITH THE LAND RESIDENTS PURCHASED WITH A VOTE IN 1926 TO BE USED FOR A PARK. RESIDENTS DID NOT PURCHASE THE LAND FOR AN AIRPORT OR A HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.

Marta Vago, Ph.D.

Advisor, coach and consultant to entrepreneurs, executives, creative professionals, and families in business. 2929 16th Street, Santa Monica, CA 90405
Phone: (310)396‐5034
Item 3.D
09/26/23
12 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Andrew Denyer <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 10:15 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3D

EXTERNAL
Drear Council Members,
In 2014 the residents and those able to vote in the elecƟons for Santa Monica were given a clear choice on the future for SMO beteeen Measure D and Measure LC commiƫng to closing the airport and turning it into a park.

This was a very well publicized campaign feom both parƟes with serious money spent. The decision the voters decided was for LC and the park.

Every vote by the council from then, now and going forward regarding the airport should reflect that choice of the residents and you should be commiƩed to honoring those wishes.

Please do not extend the lease on fuel tanks beyond the closing date commiƩed to be by previous councils and the voters choice in 2014.

Andrew
+1 310‐795‐3084
[email protected]
Item 3.D
09/26/23
13 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: JOHN VENTURA <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 10:11 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
In your consideration to renew leasing city property to Atlantic Aviation, including 40yr. old underground fuel tanks that store leaded and toxic fuels that sit over our aquifer, I would like to voice my opposition to a lease renewal. Please do not renew the Atlantic lease and do not lease the fuel tanks.

It has been reported that Atlantic Aviation is operating without a lease since 2015. Residents and the Airport Commission have lobbied the city and the city council for years to not lease the tanks that have leaked in the past. We are not required to lease these tanks under any agreement with the FAA or the consent decree and have never received a clear answer regarding why the city would put our aquifer at risk if providing tanks to Atlantic is not required.

We, the people, voted down measure D, and passed measure LC to close the airport and develop a park with the land residents purchased with a vote in 1926 to be used for a park; residents did not purchase the land for an airport or a housing development.  Maybe some in politics would like to ignore the vote of the people and re‐open the discussion regarding the airport as if the votes in 1926 and 2014 never happened. Consider the fact that since LC has passed the city has not applied for any state or federal grant money for the park or done much of anything to plan it in the last nine years. Please do not ignore the votes of the people.

Thank you,
John Ventura
City Resident
Item 3.D
09/26/23
14 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 4 Vernice Hankins
From: Hal Bogotch <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 10:04 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: S.M. Airport updates
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
To Whom It May Concern ‐
As a Santa Monica resident, who looks forward to the permanent closure of SMO on Dec. 31, 2028, and to the creation of a Great Park — I hereby urge the Council NOT to renew the Atlantic lease and NOT to lease the fuel tanks.

The storage and use of leaded fuels at SMO is one of the most dangerous aspects of having an airport in our neighborhood.

Please heed the expressed will of Santa Monica voters, who have doubled down on the airport closure & set their sights on a Great Park.
‐‐ Hal
⭼⭽⭾⭿⮀⮁⮂
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
<<  Hal Bogotch >>
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
http://www.amazon.com/author/halbogotch
https://hal123pov.wordpress.com/
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Item 3.D
09/26/23
15 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 5 Vernice Hankins
From: sdp1996 <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 10:02 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
I am a Santa Monica resident and I am asking you to not renew the Atlantic Aviation lease at the Santa Monica Airport. I also ask that you do not lease the fuel tanks at the Santa Monica Airport. I am in favor of a park at the site of the Airport.

Thank you --
Denise Gerber
1120 Pine Street
Santa Monica 90405
Item 3.D
09/26/23
16 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 34
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Helane Weingarten <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 10:50 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
I am against the renewal of the Atlantic Lease and do NOT want fuel tanks leased!  Please vote against it.

Although I am not a Santa Monica residence, my back property line butts up to the Santa Monica Airport.  You have no idea what a nightmare it is to have no peace with those jets taking off every couple minutes let alone the toxicity of being so close to this dangerous airport.

Helane Weingarten
13209 Dewey St.

Los Angeles, CA 90066
Item 3.D
09/26/23
17 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 35
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Paulette Rochelle-Levy <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 10:38 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
DO NOT RENEW THE ATLANTIC LEASE AND THSE DANGEROUS FUEL TANKS ATTHE AIRPORT!! Regards,
Paulette
Paulette Rochelle-Levy, MFT
2215 Oak st. #201
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Item 3.D
09/26/23
18 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: V N Davich <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 10:33 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Airport2Park
Subject: No more airport!

EXTERNAL
Do the right thing: Close that polluter down!
Thanks
V. Davich
A voter‐‐‐maybe even for you
Item 3.D
09/26/23
19 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 4 Vernice Hankins
From: Robin OConnell <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 10:31 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
Council members,
I urge you not to renew the Atlantic lease and not to lease the fuel tanks. I voted a few years back in favor of LC, and with that measure passed, the city should proceed with creating a park at the airport. This is what the people of Santa Monica voted for. Please uphold measure LC and proceed in the right direction for our city.

Thank you,
Robin O’Connell
3044 Paula Drive
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Item 3.D
09/26/23
20 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 5 Vernice Hankins
From: Ben <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 10:31 AM
To: Christine Parra; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Kristin McCowan; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Sue Himmelrich; Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems; David White Subject: Re: SMO: SMCC Agenda Item 3D September 26, 2023 = April 12, 2022 -- City Council Meeting Agenda Item 1.G -- Petition to Santa Monica City Council

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council, please see the email below related to SMCC Agenda Item 3 on September 26, 2023.

On Tuesday, April 12, 2022, 10:05 AM, Ben <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Santa Monica City Council:

The attached Petition from over 220+ community members is respectfully submitted for your consideration for the April 12, 2022 City Council Meeting Agenda Item 1.G. “We, the undersigned, urge the City Council to decommission the 37-year-old City-owned underground storage tanks at Santa Monica Airport and to stop leasing them to store leaded and other toxic fuels.”
SMO will close in 80 months, per both the 2017 Consent Decree and the 2017 City Council SMO Closure Resolution No. 11026 which states, “The City Council directs the City Manager, City Attorney and their staffs to take all actions necessary and proper to ensure that SMO will cease to operate as an airport and shall be closed to all aeronautical use forever effective as of midnight on December 31, 2028.” The SMO fuel farm and underground storage tanks are a huge present danger and risk. They are far past their life expectancy and should be decommissioned now.

You may receive the petition from others as well. For your convenience, I have also pasted it below in the text of this email
Thank you,
Ben Wang
===============
Petition to Santa Monica City Council
April 12, 2022
City Council Meeting
Agenda Item 1.G
Item 3.D
09/26/23
21 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 6 “We, the undersigned, urge the City Council to decommission the 37-year-old Cityowned underground storage tanks at Santa Monica Airport and to stop leasing them to store leaded and other toxic fuels.”
Below are the names, timestamp, and additional comments submitted by over 220+ petition signers:

Alan Levenson -- 4/9/2022 11:20
Billy Nistico -- 4/9/2022 13:44
Theo Swerissen -- 4/9/2022 13:45
John Campisi -- 4/9/2022 13:46
Asa Greenberg -- 4/9/2022 13:46
Katherine Newmark -- 4/9/2022 13:48
Ellen Mark -- 4/9/2022 13:48
Gregg Cahdwick -- 4/9/2022 13:49
Simona Garon -- 4/9/2022 13:50
Gavin Scott -- 4/9/2022 13:50
James Murakami -- 4/9/2022 13:52
Jonny Pray -- 4/9/2022 13:53
Yvonne Guy -- 4/9/2022 13:54
Will Guston -- 4/9/2022 13:56
Sejon Ding -- 4/9/2022 13:57
Sulinh Lafontaine -- 4/9/2022 13:57
Guy Cass -- 4/9/2022 13:58
Kent Alves -- 4/9/2022 13:58
Ross Berryman -- 4/9/2022 14:00
Patricia Braun -- 4/9/2022 14:00
Gary Glickman -- 4/9/2022 14:03
Jan Simonovic -- 4/9/2022 14:03
Jill Rosen -- 4/9/2022 14:03
Katherine Inglis -- 4/9/2022 14:05
Benjamin Shore -- 4/9/2022 14:08
John Greenwood -- 4/9/2022 14:08
tom krumpak -- 4/9/2022 14:10
William N. Fordes -- 4/9/2022 14:10
Darcy Lubbers -- 4/9/2022 14:12
David Abramis -- 4/9/2022 14:15
Chuck Mason -- 4/9/2022 14:18
Zina Josephs -- 4/9/2022 14:20
Robb Brown -- 4/9/2022 14:20
Jan-Peter Flack -- 4/9/2022 14:24
Nicola Scott -- 4/9/2022 14:29
Edward Luci -- 4/9/2022 14:33
David Konell -- 4/9/2022 14:33
Jeff Treves -- 4/9/2022 14:37
Jennifer Field -- 4/9/2022 14:38
Doug Wolf -- 4/9/2022 14:38
Alvin Crown -- 4/9/2022 14:39
Maureen Bradford -- 4/9/2022 14:45
Marion Klein -- 4/9/2022 14:48
Jesse Kramer -- 4/9/2022 14:59
Item 3.D
09/26/23
22 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 7 Lori Nafshun -- 4/9/2022 15:02
Nan Waldman -- 4/9/2022 15:08
Joseph Lutz -- 4/9/2022 15:15
Zuzana Landres -- 4/9/2022 15:29
Dorothy Chapman -- 4/9/2022 15:30
Ose Dalldorf -- 4/9/2022 15:34
Stephan Hewitt -- 4/9/2022 15:38
Chris Lee -- 4/9/2022 15:42
Jamie Dunham -- 4/9/2022 15:46
Lauren wallenstein -- 4/9/2022 15:48
LOU SSUTU -- 4/9/2022 15:57
David Ginsburg -- 4/9/2022 16:00
Erika Soja -- 4/9/2022 16:18
Marsha Nakashima -- 4/9/2022 16:21
David Sirh -- 4/9/2022 16:26
Andrea Lieberman -- 4/9/2022 16:45
Laurie Rocha -- 4/9/2022 16:57
Andrea Maitra -- 4/9/2022 17:04
Deborah Rothman -- 4/9/2022 17:06
Brian Kelly -- 4/9/2022 17:09
Betsy Katz -- 4/9/2022 17:25
Deborah Travis -- 4/9/2022 17:34
Ann Lewis -- 4/9/2022 17:39
Socorro Gallegos -- 4/9/2022 18:02
Mia Levenson -- 4/9/2022 18:03
Charles Bloomquist -- 4/9/2022 18:07
Jo Winston -- 4/9/2022 18:27
Joseph Schmitz -- 4/9/2022 18:34
Elin Katz -- 4/9/2022 18:36
Joan Schmitz -- 4/9/2022 18:42
Caroline Denyer -- 4/9/2022 18:55
Michael Brodsky -- 4/9/2022 18:55
Peter Spelman -- 4/9/2022 19:26
John Humble -- 4/9/2022 19:28
John Machtinger -- 4/9/2022 19:46
Michael Osment -- 4/9/2022 19:54
Mindy Taylor-Ross -- 4/9/2022 20:14
Carol Dickinson -- 4/9/2022 20:25
Patrick Seeholzer -- 4/9/2022 21:01
Lisa Sandbank -- 4/9/2022 21:07
Patty -- 4/9/2022 21:15
Davidegoddard -- 4/9/2022 21:29
Roy Rico -- 4/9/2022 22:48
Linda Wilson -- 4/9/2022 23:05
Julia Quinn -- 4/9/2022 23:12
Dennis Wilder -- 4/10/2022 0:46
Michael Katz -- 4/10/2022 1:04
Bill Sundblad -- 4/10/2022 1:39
Matt Hendrickson -- 4/10/2022 1:47
Charles Blum -- 4/10/2022 2:54
Dirk Beving -- 4/10/2022 4:08
Item 3.D
09/26/23
23 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 41
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 8 Eric Weingarten -- 4/10/2022 4:38
Helane Weingarten -- 4/10/2022 4:39
Cheryl Jones -- 4/10/2022 4:55
Dee Forrest -- 4/10/2022 4:57
David McCoy -- 4/10/2022 7:28
Rebecca Villegas -- 4/10/2022 8:49
Gizelle Strohkendl -- 4/10/2022 9:19
Paola Levenson -- 4/10/2022 9:22
Gary Keller -- 4/10/2022 10:28
Joyce Foster -- 4/10/2022 10:36
Brett Schafer -- 4/10/2022 11:05
Alice Ellis -- 4/10/2022 11:05
Ammar lughod -- 4/10/2022 11:14
Flynn Isment -- 4/10/2022 11:44
Ava Osment -- 4/10/2022 11:45
Sandra Casillas -- 4/10/2022 12:02
Lara Osment -- 4/10/2022 12:12
Annie Sabroux -- 4/10/2022 12:23
Will Pirkey -- 4/10/2022 12:24
Susan Grossman -- 4/10/2022 12:26
Richard M Levine -- 4/10/2022 12:45
John Ventura -- 4/10/2022 13:00
Patrick De Feo -- 4/10/2022 13:15
Elizabeth Oakes -- 4/10/2022 13:15
Olivia Kelly -- 4/10/2022 13:28
Leslie Bogart -- 4/10/2022 13:34
Shannon Eakman -- 4/10/2022 13:34
Kirsten Campisi -- 4/10/2022 13:37
Schafer -- 4/10/2022 13:38
David Abramis -- 4/10/2022 13:43
Cathy tieri -- 4/10/2022 14:03
Stephen Manes -- 4/10/2022 14:19
Stacey Abrams-Sherick -- 4/10/2022 14:31
Tina Sumner -- 4/10/2022 14:39
ADRIAN HAREWOOD -- 4/10/2022 14:42
Laura Zerr -- 4/10/2022 14:55
Jordan Ellis -- 4/10/2022 15:28
susan reid -- 4/10/2022 15:29
H Milder -- 4/10/2022 16:57
William Schoene -- 4/10/2022 16:58
Natalie pittman -- 4/10/2022 16:59
William Schoene -- 4/10/2022 17:01
Joey Reynolds -- 4/10/2022 17:18
Nina Ellis -- 4/10/2022 17:22
Robert Street -- 4/10/2022 17:34
Christina Tayag -- 4/10/2022 18:02
Cris Armstrong -- 4/10/2022 18:18
David Greene -- 4/10/2022 18:33
Tasha Giuda -- 4/10/2022 18:44
Sydney Lovelace -- 4/10/2022 18:44
Astrid Calderas -- 4/10/2022 18:52
Item 3.D
09/26/23
24 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 42
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 9 Astrid Calderas -- 4/10/2022 18:53
IrmaVargas -- 4/10/2022 18:58
Andrea ferrer -- 4/10/2022 19:36
Leo and Rachel Marcus -- 4/10/2022 19:47
Santiago Ferrer -- 4/10/2022 19:48
Lorri Benson -- 4/10/2022 19:49
Joseph Hardin -- 4/10/2022 19:51
Barbara Kaplan -- 4/10/2022 19:54
Karen Stern -- 4/10/2022 20:06
Stephen Mark -- 4/10/2022 20:14
Mario Peixoto -- 4/10/2022 20:38
Vivien Flitton -- 4/10/2022 20:44
Kim Grossman -- 4/10/2022 20:59
victor davich -- 4/10/2022 21:40
Deanna Ssutu -- 4/10/2022 22:49
Dale Strumpell -- 4/10/2022 23:00
Patricia Rulo -- 4/10/2022 23:24
Diana Tran -- 4/10/2022 23:30
Anne Yee -- 4/10/2022 23:31
Russell Yee -- 4/10/2022 23:32
Nancy Owens -- 4/10/2022 23:37
Jilla Sardashti -- 4/10/2022 23:49
Megan FitzGerald -- 4/11/2022 0:09
Paula Mazur -- 4/11/2022 0:56
Pam Bottaro -- 4/11/2022 1:19
HAL GOLDEN -- 4/11/2022 1:29
Joan Blum -- 4/11/2022 2:10
Steven Benson -- 4/11/2022 2:10
Gregory Blum -- 4/11/2022 2:10
Christine Hardin -- 4/11/2022 8:38
Lisa Detamore -- 4/11/2022 10:33
stephen wilkins -- 4/11/2022 11:50
Kathy Cass -- 4/11/2022 11:58
Allison Greene -- 4/11/2022 12:21
John Greene -- 4/11/2022 12:28
saku ee -- 4/11/2022 13:03
hal lindes -- 4/11/2022 13:28
Joy Abbott -- 4/11/2022 14:44
Philip Cass -- 4/11/2022 15:08
Nicola Goode -- 4/11/2022 19:06
Sean Meehan -- 4/11/2022 19:08
Dylan McFarland -- 4/11/2022 19:09
Ruby Meehan -- 4/11/2022 19:38
Sara Daleiden -- 4/11/2022 20:01
ruth shari -- 4/11/2022 20:06
Tina Grossman -- 4/11/2022 20:59
Max Hunt -- 4/11/2022 21:12
Tracy Orloff -- 4/11/2022 22:31
Stephen Naftali -- 4/11/2022 23:24
Catherine Lerer -- 4/11/2022 23:46
Antonio Lysy -- 4/12/2022 1:12
Item 3.D
09/26/23
25 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 43
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 10 Ted Braun -- 4/12/2022 1:25
Syd Lovelace -- 4/12/2022 2:27
Ken Abbott -- 4/12/2022 2:52
Randolph Holland -- 4/12/2022 3:29
Colin Maduzia -- 4/12/2022 9:35
Michele Perrone -- 4/12/2022 9:44
Pamela Gavras -- 4/12/2022 11:19
Margaret Griffin -- 4/12/2022 11:21
Kim Andres -- 4/12/2022 11:24
Susan grant -- 4/12/2022 11:27
tamra raven -- 4/12/2022 11:29
Jeffrey Rosenfeld -- 4/12/2022 11:30
Janet Tunick -- 4/12/2022 11:34
Laura Thixton -- 4/12/2022 11:36
Dorothy Cramer -- 4/12/2022 11:36
Cinzia Paganuzzi -- 4/12/2022 11:41
Alison Megliola -- 4/12/2022 11:41
John Murdock -- 4/12/2022 11:52
Patty Antin -- 4/12/2022 11:55
Heather Gould -- 4/12/2022 11:59
Mary Hubbell -- 4/12/2022 12:02
Ben Wang -- 4/12/2022 12:05
Leah -- 4/12/2022 12:06
Kathy Seal -- 4/12/2022 12:15
Robert Street – 4/12/2022 12:24:28
Paulette Rochelle-Levy – 4/12/2022 12:25:32
Geraldine Kennedy – 4/12/2022 12:27:21
Tregg Rustad – 4/12/2022 12:40:56
Additional comments:
 Don’t lease tanks. Thanks.
 Please I live near this place. These tanks and lead are not compatible with living things.
 These jets are not flying out over the shoreline before banking north upon take off, which I believe is a violation of departures.
 Airport should be closed and all services suspended ASAP  Take the leaded gas out of our city!
 Please end the storage of leaded fuel in Santa Monica.  Please stop providing leaded fuel at Santa Monica airport. Thanks  "Protect the long term health of our environment get rid of these fuel storage tanks, now!
 Choke the airport not the lives around it!
 Newer studies show the dangers. Please act now.
 These tank are a danger to the health and safety of all!!  Toxic! Dangerous! Life threatening! Protect us. Just say no.  PLEASE do the right thing. For once....
 It's time.
 Practice what you PREACH!! Stop the sale of TOXINS!
Item 3.D
09/26/23
26 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 44
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 11  In our effort to shut down the airport permanently, we should keep establishing facts wherever possible. Shutting down AVGAS storage and distribution is a key action that needs to be taken. Dear City Council: please act accordingly and do not renew the tank leases. Ideally the tanks get dismantled and removed. That sends a clear message to the Aviation Industry and will be hard to reverse.  Stop storing toxic fuels in these old storage tanks!
 It’s time to get rid of these under ground storage tanks.  If there is any fuel offered it should be UNLEADED!!!! Other small airports such as Torrance have done this for years. PLEASE contribute to the climate change solution as well as cleaning the air in our back yards. I will be SO grateful.  Lead causes learning disabilities in children and impacts health. We must eradicate lead from our environment!
 Please cease and desist the sale of leaded fuel.
 Every little piece of the puzzle is essential.Every missed link weakens us. Please remain strong in your actions !
 Decommission the toxic tanks and stop leasing them now!  Please get rid of the fuel storage and stop the jets from endangering our neighborhoods.
 While SM cannot restrict the sale of leaded fuel, the Consent Decree does not require SM to sell leaded AvGas or provide tanks for lease to sell this toxic fuel. I do believe that individual Council Members could be personally liable for gross dereliction of duty if the sale of toxic fuel is authorized. And, why WOULD a sane person go out of their way to facilitate the spewing of toxic, disease-causing fumes over our own neighbors??
 For the good of Santa Monica please discontinue use of all city owned tanks that store toxic fuel. Do the right thing.
 Please do the right thing to make our community as safe as possible for its residents. Thank you.
 Please be kind to mother earth!
 "Stopping the City from enabling Atlantic Aviation's ongoing lead poisoning of our children should be an easy decision given your professed commitment to environmental justice.
 Acts, not words, reveal values.
 As our elected representatives, are you stalwart protectors of our children! Please act on our behalf."
 Please discourage leaded fuel wherever you can!
 Please, please do not allow the city to be complicit in poisoning our children with lead.
 "Please stop the poisoning of my two children, we live in Sunset Park, we smell leaded gas fumes all the time!!
 You pride yourself on being an environmental city. Santa Monica has a history of developing environmental and sustainability strategies, with the most recent focus on community-wide carbon neutrality by 2050 or sooner. PLEASE, get rid of the fuel storage tanks! Please protect the many, over the few.  Let’s begin to close down the airport so that we’re ready in 2028.  There can be NO GOOD REASON to lease underground storage tanks at SMO to store leaded fuel for use over our town. PLEASE STOP and think of the PEOPLE.
 There will be long term repercussions to your decisions which will leave your legacy of service to Santa Monica Citizens who entrust the health of the children in your hands. There is more than enough research by the EPA, CDC, and even Item 3.D
09/26/23
27 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 12 the FAA about the dangers of lead pollution. It is time to stop playing politics and stand up for what you know in your heart is right.
 Get this toxic stuff out of our neighborhood!
 Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this common sense measure.  Please stop poisoning the residents of Santa Monica.
 Fuel tanks at gas stations have often been repaired due to leakage. There are ways to avoid future litigation. Perhaps you should take them.  Please don’t allow them to store toxic fuels on the airport!!!!  Do not stand by while our children are being poisoned. Do not extend the Atlantic Aviation lease of city-owned fuel tanks. GET THE LEAD OUT!  I would like to voice my support to stop leasing of the underground storage tanks at the Santa Monica Airport for all types of fuels and toxic chemicals.  We know how harmful these fuels are to the public and the environment, and yet we do little to stop them. Do not enable this any longer! Please end the lease and decommission the tanks to prevent further harm to us all. Thank you.  Stop the fuel farm lease!
 Stop poisoning our neighborhood and children! It’s absurd.  My house is constantly covered in sut from fuel.. toxic and loud  Don't be fools! Water is gold
 We are not required to provide tanks or sell fuel and we should not if we are serious about closing the airport. Right now we need to focus on the fuel farm lease. Time to do as you say, now!
 Water is so precious that it must be protected above all and no matter the cost.  I want this decommission of the 37-year-old City-owned underground storage tanks to happen immediately.
 There is no case for the continued use of leaded fuels, aviation or otherwise.  No more jets!!!! Enough.
 Hasten the discontinuation of leaded aviation fuel by refusing to store it in cityowned facilities.  Please help convert airport to a park. No new construction.  Please do not delay any longer than necessary.
 Since we are not supposed to have jets at the SM Airport - we don't need to have the fuel there either. Begs the question, are you serious about providing safety to the neighborhood by removing the jets and fuel? that's what we have all been promised for years
 I strongly oppose the renewal of the fuel tank lease at the airport property  The health risks are simply not worth any potential commercial benefits that may derive from maintaining the lease. Thank you for doing the right thing!  Please please please vote to get rid of these dangerous toxins in our neighborhood. We know too much to let these leaded and other toxic fuels continue to harm us all. Thank you!
 No more Aviation fuel at SMO
 This is urgent to address and take action to protect our environment and the future of our aquifer, our most valuable asset. Please take action to decommission the 37 year old City owned storage tanks at Santa Monica Airport and stop leasing them to store leaded and other toxic fuels.  Walk the talk and protect our environment. And no deals with "property developers."
 An accident--and class action--waiting to happen.
 Decommission Now!!
Item 3.D
09/26/23
28 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 13  Removing the underground storage tanks would contribute to better health, especially for those of us who live in the airport neighborhood.  Stop allowing toxic fuels in our city!
 Fuel tanks don't belong here if we're serious about closing the airport.  For a city that prides itself on clean living, Santa Monica can be mighty hypocritical when it comes to selling out.
 Let’s get this transition started.
 Please help clean up our city!
 Santa Monica should do everything in it's power to protect the health of its citizens!
 You absolutely have a health obligation to stop the storage & sale of AV leaded fuel….
 Having been a victim of leaded fuel particles over our house for 38 years, we strongly encourage going forward the City stop leasing underground storage used for leaded fuels.
 Let's do the common sense, right thing. Thank you.
 Thank you for continuing to seek ways to heal the land at the Santa Monica Airport so it is available for a new life.
 How many years will it take to clean up the toxic leaks on airport land?  Let's get the lead out of Santa Monica. Thank you.
 Please get the lead out! I live at the end of the runway (Navy and Walgreens). I worry about long term known health risks. I’m shocked to learn that lead fuel exists.
 Do not extending this
 Let's clean up these tanks to avoid a much more expensive cleanup when the chemicals leach into our land due to age-related failure.  The vast health problems that stem from leaded fuel were first discovered in the 70's (fifty years ago). Lead was introduced into fuel to make engines go faster.

Allowing airplanes at SMO access to leaded fuel from City owned storage tanks, means you the City Council (our representatives) would be prioritizing airplane efficiency over the lives of the City's citizens. Decommissioning these tanks is 50 years past due.
 I believe my father’s Parkinson’s Disease could have been caused by his living under the runway of the airport.
 Release the underground storage
 Don't be hypocritical. Stop supplying storage for lead avgas.  SMO will close in 80 months, per both the 2017 Consent Decree and the 2017 City Council SMO Closure Resolution No. 11026 which states, “The City Council directs the City Manager, City Attorney and their staffs to take all actions necessary and proper to ensure that SMO will cease to operate as an airport and shall be closed to all aeronautical use forever effective as of midnight on December 31, 2028.” The SMO fuel farm and underground storage tanks are far past their life expectancy and should be decommissioned now.  Please act quickly on this hazard to our community's health!  We have known for over ten years the damage that leaded gas from the Small planes is causing our children> THIS MUST STOP NOW!!
 I wholeheartedly agree that these storage tanks be decommissioned. And let’s have public notice that Santa Monica is a leader in reducing access to leaded gas. Public health and the climate thank you!
Item 3.D
09/26/23
29 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 14 Item 3.D
09/26/23
30 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 48
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Asa Greenberg <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 11:19 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
Hello!
As a Santa Monica resident, homeowner, and business owner, I write regarding the fuel tank lease for AtlanƟc AviaƟon. It is Ɵme to stop. We live in a residenƟal area and the airport has long overstayed its welcome. This is no recreaƟonal airport per its original mandate. And the toxins in the air and noise are palpable.

Dust accumulates on our windows and doors. Why are we storing fuels and other chemicals here? Please do not allow this company to renew its lease.

Please hear us, it's Ɵme for the airport to end all commercial acƟvity and close its doors. Accordingly, the fuel tanks must go. All of my neighbors feel the same.

I hope the authoriƟes in Santa Monica will recognize that none of us want the airport here. Let's come up with a plan that is economically viable ‐‐ e.g., a plan to replace any jobs that may be in flux when the airport goes. But let's make sure the closure happens on schedule and all tanks and equipment are removed safely and ASAP.

Sincerely,
Asa Greenberg
2315 Pier Ave.

Santa Monica, CA 90405
‐‐
‐
Asa Greenberg
Kilogram Entertainment
Item 3.D
09/26/23
31 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 49
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Will Guston <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 11:09 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3D

EXTERNAL
Dear City council,
We the ciƟzens are aware of
An effort to conƟnue the operaƟon of
AtlanƟc AviaƟon and the leasing of fuel tanks Which will supply Leaded fuel to be spewed over our Community.

Do not provide a lease for fuel tanks and do not provide a lease for AtlanƟc AviaƟon.

Honor the terms of ProposiƟon LC voted for by the people! Begin doing the work of preparing to create a great park on the airport land.

Honor the votes on 1926 and 2014, do it now.

Respecƞully,
Will Guston
Sent from my iPhone
Item 3.D
09/26/23
32 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 50
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: Laurie Rocha <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 11:07 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3D

EXTERNAL
Do not renew lease to AtlanƟc or lease these tanks to anyone.

Laurie Rocha
Sent from my iPad
Item 3.D
09/26/23
33 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 51
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 4 Vernice Hankins
From: jay jay <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 11:02 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3D

EXTERNAL
Please do not renew the AtlanƟc lease and please do not lease the fuel tanks.

Thanks,
Alison Lopez
Item 3.D
09/26/23
34 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 52
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 5 Vernice Hankins
From: Jamie Lloyd-Smith <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 10:51 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3D: do not lease city-owned tanks at SMO

EXTERNAL
To the city council,
As a longtime Santa Monica resident I urge you not to authorize the lease of city‐owned fuel tanks at SMO. There is no rationale for the city to lend its support and its assets to activities that put its own residents’ health at risk (through toxic lead emissions and noise pollution) and put its own water supply at risk (through possible leakage into the aquifer).

The airport is slated to close in five years, as overwhelmingly supported by Santa Monica voters, and there is no rationale to take any discretionary action to extend aviation activities.  In the meantime, airport operations continue to put our residents’ health at risk every day through pollution and noise. So I also urge you not to extend any new lease to Atlantic Aviation.

The city’s management of the airport and its pending closure is a core voting issue in my household, and we speak frequently about it with our friends and neighbors. Please know that your votes on this matter are being closely observed by the residents of Santa Monica, your constituents.

Thanks for your attention,
Jamie Lloyd‐Smith
Item 3.D
09/26/23
35 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 53
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Kirsten Campisi <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 11:33 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
Do Not renew the AtlanƟc AviaƟon lease and Do Not lease the fuel tanks. Do not potenƟally put residents drinking water and health at risk. You work for and represent the residents of Santa Monica, and we Do Not want this.

Kirsten Campisi
1352 Hill St.

Item 3.D
09/26/23
36 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 54
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Jilla Sardashti <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 11:22 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3D

EXTERNAL
Ladies/Gentlemen:

I’m asking as I’ve in the last many many years to turn SMO into a park.

I’m pleasing, asking and demanding that you do NOT renew lease with Atlantic Aviation nor lease the fuel tanks to them.

You’re public servants there to promote the health and well being of your constituency not protect private enterprises.

It’s absolutely mind boggling to me that you’d refuse to uphold the will of the residents voted through measures across many years and yet behind closed doors make such decisions with possible catastrophic consequences! DO NOT RENEW THE LEASE OR ALLOW ATLANTIC AVIATION TO RUN THE AIRPORT!! Jilla Sardashti, concerned resident
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
Item 3.D
09/26/23
37 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 55
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: John Reynolds <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 12:31 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: John Fairweather
Subject: Item 3-D

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
Do not under any circumstances renew the lease for Atlantic! They have not been compliant nor will they ever be! John Reynolds
3217 ‐7th street
SM, CA 90405
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
Item 3.D
09/26/23
38 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 56
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Lauren Wallenstein <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 12:25 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 3D

EXTERNAL
Please do not renew the AtlanƟc lease or the fuel tanks. This airport is supposed to close in a few years and that is the will of the voters. Period.

Item 3.D
09/26/23
39 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 57
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: Laura P <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 12:05 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3D

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
Please DO NOT RENEW the lease for the underground tanks at the airport.  This city is in enough trouble, we do not need to take the chance of a leak and find out later that our water has been compromised.  I hope you will listen to what the residents of this city really want.  Sadly, not enough reach out to you, but I guarantee you they do not want the tanks.

Thank you,
Laura Park
Santa Monica Resident
Ashland Ave.

Sent from Mail for Windows
Item 3.D
09/26/23
40 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 58
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 4 Vernice Hankins
From: John Campisi <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 11:57 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
Do Not renew the Atlantic Aviation lease and Do Not lease the fuel tanks. Do not potentially put residents drinking water and health at risk. You work for and represent the residents of Santa Monica, and we Do Not want this.

John Campisi
133 Hart Avenue
SM, 90405
CAA and former ICM agents are operating under CAA's New York City (1359415‐DCA) and California (TA000225666) talent agency licenses. This e‐mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If the reader of this e‐mail is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e‐mail is strictly prohibited. CAA is committed to ensuring that clients are free to do their best work without experiencing harassment and want to ensure they have the relevant resources they need.

Clients can go to https://www.caa.com/legal/sexual‐harassment‐guidelines‐caa‐clients to learn more about their rights, and how to report violations.

In performing services for you, we regularly receive, process and maintain certain personal information about you. For information about how Creative Artists Agency, LLC and its subsidiaries process such personal data, please see our Privacy Notice https://www.caa.com/legal/client‐privacy‐notice.

Item 3.D
09/26/23
41 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 59
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 5 Vernice Hankins
From: Lauren de la Fuente <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 12:48 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
Please don’t lease the fuel tanks. I vote.

Do the right thing, history has its eyes on you.

Sincerely,
Lauren de la Fuente
2110 Pearl Street
Santa Monica, CA 90405
310.283.8488
Item 3.D
09/26/23
42 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 60
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Gary Glickman <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 2:17 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
Hey y'all fellow Santa Monica residents.

Please, you have power over the future generations, and you are ignoring the mandates of 1926 and 2014 and all of our voter choices since.

This is supposed to be a democracy! If you care about sustaining the earth for our young people, do not  secretly allow renting the airport fuel tanks above our aquifer!
thank you,
Gary Glickman
Stephan Hewitt
3106 17th st
Santa Monica
Item 3.D
09/26/23
43 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 61
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: A. Harewood <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 1:48 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
To the SM City Council,
I respecƞully ask that you adhere to ALL the terms of Measure LC that I, and the majority of my co‐residents, had voted for and do OUR (the resident’s/electorate’s) business in a open public and transparent fashion. Specifically, do not issue or renew the lease to AtlanƟc AviaƟon without a *well in‐advance public noƟficaƟon discussion, feedback (including a Q&A session with the full City Council*), and economic & environmental analysis report, if one has not already been issued. I have not seen or am aware of one.

I have been very discouraged for some Ɵme with all of the “back room” dealings outside of the public eye and various other disingenuous poliƟcal behavior on all sides of the poliƟcal splectrum. And, I am going to use whatever liƩle civic power I have (nothing illegal, of course) to promote reasonable and common‐sense change and/or conservaƟon in the city that I love and have lived in for most of my life.

A. Harewood – VoƟng resident
AtlanƟc AviaƟon has been operaƟng without a lease since 2015. Residents and the Airport Commission have lobbied the city and the city council for years to not lease the tanks that have leaked in the past. We are not required to lease these tanks under any agreement with the FAA or the consent decree and have never received a clear answer regarding why the city would put our aquifer at risk if providing tanks to AtlanƟc is not required. The Airport Commission was never given a recent heads up regarding this lease renewal even though the airport staff had promised to keep them informed. This behind closed door discussion will take place on Tuesday, September 26th.

The following night, Wednesday Sept 27th, the Santa Monica DemocraƟc Club will be holding a discussion regarding the "Future of the Santa Monica Airport" with a pilot at the table. AddiƟonally. the DemocraƟc Club has heavily weighted their panel with speakers who would like to see housing on the airport land. We, the people, voted down measure D, and passed measure LC to close the airport and develop a park with the land residents purchased with a vote in 1926 to be used for a park; residents did not purchase the land for an airport or a housing development.  Maybe, like some others in poliƟcs, the DemocraƟc Club prefers to ignore the vote of the people and re‐open the discussion regarding the airport as if the votes in 1926 and 2014 never happened.

Considering these two back to back moves and the fact that since LC has passed the city has not applied for any state or federal grant money for the park or done much of anything to plan it in the last nine years, it does not bode well for a park or an airport closure.

Item 3.D
09/26/23
44 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 62
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: Gary Keller <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 1:16 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3D

EXTERNAL
The unrest that you are seeing in people who have worked on negaƟve airport issues for many years will be magnified when the Endangerment Finding comes out very soon. What is also in play is the recent class acƟon lawsuit against the aviaƟon industry for the ultra fine parƟcles that have been linked to thousands of cancer cases around Sea‐Tac airport.

To push the envelope even further, noise groups across the enƟre US, Australia and Europe are making tremendous strides in their efforts to stop the decisions of lawmakers to endanger the health of people.

Whatever you do, all of you will be remembered.

Gary Keller
619‐933‐3377
Item 3.D
09/26/23
45 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 63
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 4 Vernice Hankins
From: Gary Keller <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 1:14 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Something to think about

EXTERNAL
The unrest that you are seeing in people who have worked on negaƟve airport issues for many years will be magnified when the Endangerment Finding comes out very soon. What is also in play is the recent class acƟon lawsuit against the aviaƟon industry for the ultra fine parƟcles that have been linked to thousands of cancer cases around Sea‐Tac airport.

To push the envelope even further, noise groups across the enƟre US, Australia and Europe are making tremendous strides in their efforts to stop the decisions of lawmakers to endanger the health of people.

Whatever you do, all of you will be remembered.

Gary Keller
619‐933‐3377
Item 3.D
09/26/23
46 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 64
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 5 Vernice Hankins
From: Alan Kerner <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 12:51 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fuel tanks at SM airport

EXTERNAL
City Council,
I urge you to make the health of our neighborhood a top priority and do not allow the fuel tanks to be used.  This is an urgent maƩer and impacts our health directly.

Alan Kerner
1761 Sunset Ave
Santa Monica CA 90405
Sent from my iPad
Item 3.D
09/26/23
47 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 65
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Katharine Dreyfuss <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 3:09 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Re: Item 3D

EXTERNAL
P.S. Correction: Sorry, I mis‐spelled Measure LC. We voted to replace the airport with a park.

Thank you.

Katharine Dreyfuss
On Sun, Sep 24, 2023 at 3:05 PM Katharine Dreyfuss <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Santa Monica City Council Members:

I understand that you will be discussing the possibility of renewing Santa Monica's  lease with Atlantic Aviation.

Please do not renew any such lease.

Please do not lease the 40‐years‐old fuel tanks to anyone.

Santa Monica voters have voted against Measure D and passed Measure C.

Please work toward closing the airport and replacing it with a community park.

Thank you.

Best,
Katharine Dreyfuss
Item 3.D
09/26/23
48 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 66
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Katharine Dreyfuss <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 3:06 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Re: Item 3D

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council Members:

I understand that you will be discussing the possibility of renewing Santa Monica's  lease with Atlantic Aviation.

Please do not renew any such lease.

Please do not lease the 40‐years‐old fuel tanks to anyone.

Santa Monica voters have voted against Measure D and passed Measure C.

Please work toward closing the airport and replacing it with a community park.

Thank you.

Best,
Katharine Dreyfuss
Item 3.D
09/26/23
49 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 67
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: Deborah Rothman <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 2:57 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
Please do not renew the Atlantic lease and do everything you can to keep those underground fuel tanks from infiltrating our aquifer. Thank you.

Deborah Rothman, PC, Esq. (she/her)
Mediator, Arbitrator & Arbitration Consultant
Past President, College of Commercial Arbitrators
Distinguished Fellow, International Academy of Mediators * Tier 1 “Best Law Firms” Best Lawyers in America® (Mediation, Arbitration) * Who's Who Legal (Commercial Mediation)
*  SuperLawyers (Arbitration, Mediation)
*  Chambers USA (Top 35 Mediators)
* Member of AAA Master Mediator Panel
Item 3.D
09/26/23
50 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 4 Vernice Hankins
From: Lisa Sandbank <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 2:49 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3D September 26, 2023

EXTERNAL
Councilmembers,
I am wriƟng to express my opposiƟon to providing a lease to AtlanƟc AviaƟon including the anƟquated fuel storage tanks, due to environmental and health hazards, and because it is supporƟng the aviaƟon industry, which damages all neighboring communiƟes with it’s unnecessary noise, polluƟon, and safety risks.

Lisa Sandbank
Sunset park resident.

Item 3.D
09/26/23
51 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 69
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 5 Vernice Hankins
From: Jerrett, Michael <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 2:38 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Don't Renew the Atlantic Lease

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
You know it’s wrong to renew the lease for Atlantic Aviation, so do the right thing and deny the renewal.

Sincerely,
Michael Jerrett, PhD
Professor, Department of Environmental Health Sciences
Director, Center for Occupational and Environmental Health Co‐Director, Center for Healthy Climate Solutions
Fielding School of Public Health
University of California, Los Angeles and
650 Charles E. Young Drive S
Rm. 56‐070 CHS, Mail Code: 177220
Los Angeles, CA 90095
Fax: 1‐310‐794‐2106
Phone: 1‐310‐825‐9037
Email: [email protected]
Item 3.D
09/26/23
52 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 70
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 6 Vernice Hankins
From: Jeff Treves <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 2:34 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3D

EXTERNAL
I thinks it’s time not to renew the lease for Atlantic Aviation and consider those of us that live near the airport, our families, our children. Thank you
Sincerely,
Jeff Treves
The positive thinker sees the invisible, feels the intangible, and  achieves the impossible.

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail may contain confidential, proprietary and/or privileged information and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient, please contact the sender at (323) 581-3663 immediately and destroy any and all copies of the original email and any and all attachments. Reproduction, retransmission, or other use of this communication or any attachment thereto is prohibited without the permission of the original sender.

Item 3.D
09/26/23
53 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 71
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Ose Dalldorf <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 1:31 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
PLEASE DO NOT RENEW THE ATLANTIC AVIATION LEASE !
ALSO, PLEASE DO NOT LEASE THE FUEL TANKS ......it's
dangerous for our health to do so !
Thank you,
your concerned resident.

Item 3.D
09/26/23
54 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 72
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 8:11 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
Please do not support any efforts to lease city property to Atlantic Aviation, including 40 year old underground fuel tanks that sit over our aquifer.

I am a concerned resident of the area impacted by the airport that has been a major detriment to the quality of life of those of us who live near the airport.
-Roy Rico
Item 3.D
09/26/23
55 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 73
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: Jan Simonovic <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 5:53 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Regarding Closed Door Session on Item 3D

EXTERNAL
Dear Council,
My husband and I have a house on Lawler Street in Mar Vista, near the Santa Monica Airport.

The Santa Monica Airport is a menace to the health and safety of those who live near it. We ask you not to renew the Atlantic lease and not to lease the dangerous existing fuel tanks.

The Santa Monica Airport land should be made a park that all can enjoy and be enriched by.

Sincerely,
Jan Simonovic
Tom Krumpak
12106 Lawler Street
Los Angeles, CA 90066
Item 3.D
09/26/23
56 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 74
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 4 Vernice Hankins
From: Natalie Fastmail <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 5:48 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3D

EXTERNAL
> As a Santa Monica resident and homeowner I write regarding the fuel > tank lease for AtlanƟc AviaƟon. It is Ɵme to stop. We live in a > residenƟal area and the airport has long overstayed its welcome. This > is no recreaƟonal airport per its original mandate.
> And the toxins in the air and noise are palpable.
>
> Dust accumulates on our windows and doors. Why are we storing fuels > and other chemicals here? Please do not allow this company to renew > its lease.
>
> Please hear us, it's Ɵme for the airport to end all commercial > acƟvity and close its doors. Accordingly, the fuel tanks must go. All > of my neighbors feel the same.
>
> I hope the authoriƟes in Santa Monica will recognize that none of us > want the airport here. Let's come up with a plan that is economically > viable ‐‐ e.g., a plan to replace any jobs that may be in flux when > the airport goes. But let's make sure the closure happens on schedule > and all tanks and equipment are removed safely and ASAP. >
>
> Sincerely,
Natalie Greenberg
Sent from my iPhone
Item 3.D
09/26/23
57 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 75
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 5 Vernice Hankins
From: Alison Buell <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 4:19 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
I understand there is an item 3D, on the 26th of September, of which it is suggested by the City Attorney that the City renews The Atlantic lease at the airport.  We should no longer lease these fuel tanks.

We all know the housing problems as well as the water problems in our area and California as a whole:

 Housing can, and is, be made more dense, but open park space becomes more important with the rise in population. We already have heavy use of our parks.
 Water is too scarce a resource to risk further underground leaks and contamination.

Why did this matter not go to the airport commission first? Why are people eying the airport for housing when voters want a “great” park? The voters of Santa Monica have voted to close the airport and to construct a park. So far I haven’t seen much work on that voter‐mandated vision.

As always, it is better to be open when conducting city business.

Alison Buell
1302 Marine St
Item 3.D
09/26/23
58 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 76
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 6 Vernice Hankins
From: Jeanne Heller <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2023 3:38 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
PLEASE do NOT renew the Atlantic Aviation lease or lease the fuel tanks.

VERY important.

Thank you.

Jeanne D. Heller
Item 3.D
09/26/23
59 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 77
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: D F <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 5:15 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
We do not want an airport that serves the few wealthy travelers.

Do not  continue to allow Atlantic to use or lease fuel tanks.

Respect what the city has requested by popular vote.

Item 3.D
09/26/23
60 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 78
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: JORDAN ELLIS <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 7:58 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Do not renew the Atlantic Aviation lease!

EXTERNAL
Dear Counsel,
As a resident of Santa Monica, I do not want the Atlantic Aviation lease renewed, including 40 year old underground fuel tanks that store leaded and toxic fuels that sit over our aquifer.

Thank you,
Jordan Ellis
Item 3.D
09/26/23
61 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 79
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Jamie Dunham <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 8:46 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: John Gereau
Subject: Item 3D

EXTERNAL
Please do NOT renew the Atlantic lease and do NOT lease fuel tanks.

We have voted on this measure before to turn the Santa Monica Airport into a PARK.

We live on the north east corner of the airport and have been patiently waiting its closure.   To hear of closed door considerations to renew a lease from 8 years ago is disturbing ‐ as is any talk of creating housing instead of a park.

Thank you,
Jamie Dunham & John Gereau
2314 Pier Ave
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
Item 3.D
09/26/23
62 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 80
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: ALICE ELLIS <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 9:25 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D
Importance: High

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council members,
I can not believe the City of Santa Monica is even considering renewing the leases for Atlantic Aviation and the fuel tanks.

We are not required to lease these tanks under any agreement with the FAA or the consent decree. Do not put our aquifer at risk by providing tanks to Atlantic when it is not required.

We, the people, voted down measure D, and passed measure LC to close the airport and develop a park with the land residents purchased with a vote in 1926 to be used for a park. You need to start the process of transforming the Santa Monica Airport into a Great Park ‐ NOT renew these leases!
Thank you,
Alice Ellis
Item 3.D
09/26/23
63 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 81
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Michael Katz <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 9:01 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
WTF?  Please do not renew the $%#^& Atlantic lease on  potentially calamitous leaking fuel tanks at SM0.  Santa Monica voters have spoken on Airport matters many times, overwhelming in favor of CLOSING THE AIRPORT and stopping airport operations ASAP.  The Council needs to listen to the voters, not the special interests.

Michael Katz
3016 Ruskin Street
SM 90405
Item 3.D
09/26/23
64 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 82
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Sejon Ding <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 12:04 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Please do not renew lease on leaded fuel tank at SM Airport

EXTERNAL
Dear SM City Council,
I am confused as to why no actions have been taken to make the SM Airport into a park. Does the voter approval in 2014 mean nothing or you'll just find another way to finagle out of it? Is this the elected elites playing their games again?
Best regards,

Sejon Ding
Pristine Windows, Inc
Tel: 310-446-8180
www.pristinewindows.com
Item 3.D
09/26/23
65 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 83
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Betsy Katz <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 11:19 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 3D 9/27, 2023

EXTERNAL
Dear Member of the Santa Monica City Council,
Please do not renew AtlanƟc AviaƟon’s lease at SMO.  And for god’s sake DO NOT  lease the aged fuel tanks that sit over our aquifer.  The City is under no obligaƟon to lease these tanks that will hold leaded gas and threaten our precious water supply should they leak.  They have leaked in the past. We are already suffering from toxic parƟcles in the air from the planes sƟll using leaded gas.

The City should be limiƟng, not increasing,  operaƟons at SMO as 2028 approaches.  The ciƟzens of Santa Monica passed measure LC that would close the airport and develop a Park.

The Council needs to listen to the voters, not the special interests.

Thank you.

Betsy Katz
3016 Ruskin Street
Santa Monica, CA
90405
Item 3.D
09/26/23
66 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: Simona Garon <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 10:54 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
Atlantic Aviation has been operating without a lease since 2015. Residents and the Airport Commission have lobbied the city and the city council for years to not lease the tanks that have leaked in the past. We are not required to lease these tanks under any agreement with the FAA or the consent decree and have never received a clear answer regarding why the city would put our aquifer at risk if providing tanks to Atlantic is not required.

Please do not renew the Atlantic lease and not to lease the fuel tanks.

Regards,
Simona Garon, PhD
2127 Navy St
90405 SM
Item 3.D
09/26/23
67 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 85
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 4 Vernice Hankins
From: Minda Johnstone <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 10:10 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
PLEASE!  Do NOT renew the AtlanƟc lease and do NOT lease the fuel tanks! Minda Johnstone
2812 Barry Avenue
Item 3.D
09/26/23
68 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 86
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Jane Dempsey <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 3:43 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: RE: Item 3D Atlantic Aviation lease

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and Councilmembers,
I urge you to not renew the lease for Atlantic Aviation.  Residents have waited years for the airport to become parkland and any active lease has always been an impediment in the process.

Thank you,
Jane Dempsey
Item 3.D
09/26/23
69 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 87
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Joseph Hardin <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 3:25 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
Council members,
First of all, thank you for your hard work.

Please stop leasing aviaƟon fuel tanks at SMO, especially any containing leaded fuel. Also please stop wasƟng any Santa Monica Taxpayers money on aviaƟon acƟvity at SMO. We have been polluƟng the air, land and water of thousands of people surrounding SMO for too many years. Most of the people experiencing the worst polluƟon from SMO are Los Angeles residents so they don't get to vote on these issues. We sƟll have a responsibility for their health and safety. The Santa Monica Taxpayers, who have a right to vote, passed measure LC so we could do the best thing for us and our neighbors. It's Ɵme, actually past the Ɵme, to start taking steps to close SMO to commercial aviaƟon at the very least and starƟng the environmental cleanup at SMO.
2028 is not that far away and the aviaƟon interests that have been buying votes and trying to hide the truth for at least 30 years are sƟll in business, most of them headquartered in other ciƟes, doing business that does not benefit the Taxpayers and neighbors of Santa Monica.

Thank you,
Joseph Hardin
Resident of Santa Monica
Item 3.D
09/26/23
70 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 88
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: joey brighton reynolds <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 2:09 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
Do Not renew the Atlantic Aviation lease and Do Not lease the fuel tanks. Do not potentially put residents drinking water and health at risk. You work for and represent the residents of Santa Monica, and we Do Not want this.

Joey Brighton Reynolds
1321 Ocean Park Blvd.

Item 3.D
09/26/23
71 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 89
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 4 Vernice Hankins
From: Jill Boberg <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 12:55 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
Hi!
I am a long term resident and homeowner in Santa Monica. I urge you to reject the proposal of leasing city property to Atlantic Aviation. It is unclear to me how this lease would serve the interests of Santa Monica residents, and there is a decent chance that it would diminish quality of life instead.

Please represent the citizens of Santa Monica by rejecting Item3D or, at worst, deferring it to an open session at a later date.
thank you,
Jill Boberg
Santa Monica
‐‐
jill
Item 3.D
09/26/23
72 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 90
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 5 Vernice Hankins
From: David Abramis <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 12:42 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council Members:

I am a long‐time resident and home‐owner of the City of Santa Monica.  I'm writing you today to ask you, please do not renew the Atlantic lease and do not lease the fuel tanks.

I thought this was already settled, but apparently not.

Again, please.

Thank you,
David Abramis
2642 33rd St.

Santa Monica, CA 90405
Item 3.D
09/26/23
73 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 6 Vernice Hankins
From: Maureen Jerrett <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 12:35 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D - Do not lease the fuel tanks

EXTERNAL
Dear Counsel members,
Please represent the residents of Santa Monica by saying 'no' to any further lease of the fuel tanks. We, the people you were elected to represent, want you to vote 'no' to the lease. Please respect our wishes.

Best regards,
Maureen Jerrett
Item 3.D
09/26/23
74 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 4:30 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 3D: Do not renew the Atlantic lease or lease an SMO fuel tanks! Attachments: SMO Gas Leaks.pdf

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
Regarding Item 3D, please do not renew the Atlantic lease or continue to lease any SMO fuel tanks.

This is an opportunity to wind down things at SMO and honor the voice of the people as viewed by the passing of measure LC. But regardless the reality is that the fuel tanks are antiquated and located over our aquifers. See the following article which is also attached with references.

How could anyone in the right mind consider this as an option? See:Charles Blum. Preparing for the Best Case Scenario: The City of Santa Monica’s Involvement in the Storage and Sale of Leaded AvGas. Santa Monica Daily Press. November 15, 2021. [https://smdp.com/2021/11/15/preparing-for-the-best-case-scenario-the-city-of-santa-monicasinvolvement-in-the-storage-and-sale-of-leaded-avgas/] All the Best!
Charles
Dr. Charles L. Blum
[email protected]
1752 Ocean Park Boulevard
Santa Monica, CA 90405
310-392-9795
www.drcharlesblum.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This E-Mail communication (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act 18, U.S.C 2510-2521, is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have received this message in error, and then delete it. Thank You.

Ferpa Notice: Additionally, these records are protected by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act and are provided to the intended recipient under an exception to the Act found in Section 99.32. These records must be maintained confidentially and may not be re-disclosed. They must be destroyed when your legitimate educational interest no longer exists.

Item 3.D
09/26/23
75 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) Preparing for the Best Case Scenario: The City of Santa Monica’s Involvement in the Storage and Sale of Leaded AvGas
Charles Blum
As discussed in a prior article entitled, “Santa Monica Airport (SMO), Leaded Avgas, and Childhood Blood Lead Levels: Profound Pediatric Health Consequences1,” what is clear is that:
“1. Avgas is the largest source of lead in air in the United States.

2. SMO sells leaded avgas and allows aircraft using leaded avgas into its airport.

3. Blood lead levels in our children near the airport has profound and drastic short and long-term health consequences.”
1 What is not commonly known is that the City of Santa Monica is facilitating and promoting the sale of leaded AvGas at SMO. The common façade the city has hid behind is something called the Consent Decree, which represents an agreement between the City of Santa Monica and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) made in 2017.2 Part of this agreement states that. “Nothing in this agreement shall allow the City to restrict the sale of leaded aviation fuel for as long as the FAA authorizes use of such fuels within the United States.”2
However, Alan Levenson (Founder of No Jets and Environmental Activist) and other Activists who have researched our agreements note that while the city cannot restrict the sale of leaded fuel nothing in the agreement states that the City of Santa Monica must sell leaded AvGas or provide tanks for lease to sell this toxic fuel. Though the City of Santa Monica should do everything possible to stop the sale of leaded AvGas at SMO the consent decree still permits other private agencies such as Atlantic Aviation to sell leaded AvGas at SMO. Therefore the fuel storage tanks owned by the City of Santa Monica can • It is irrefutable that leaded aviation fuel (avgas) is an extremely toxic vehicle for transmission of lead in the air, representing over 70% of the toxic lead in the air and causing profound health consequences for our developing children.
• 80% of Santa Monica Airport’s fleet can run on unleaded avgas but the City of Santa Monica and the Airport only sell leaded avgas. • Earthquakes have a history of causing leaks with underground fuel storage, so the fuel underground storage at the Santa Monica Airport is problematic since there is a well on the airport premises, which connects to the main Silverado Aquifer used by the City of Santa Monica.

Item 3.D
09/26/23
76 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 94
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) be restricted to only the sale of unleaded AvGas and 80% of the SMO fleet can use this unleaded fuel.
3 Seldom is it an issue to prepare for the “Best Case Scenario,” so it is crucial to consider how to best consider the risks associated with the storage of fuel underground at SMO.

We really don’t get any advance warning when an earthquake might take place and Environmental Protection Agencies note that “following a substantial earthquake it is important to examine all underground storage tank (UST) systems for damage. A damaged or improperly operating UST system can pose a significant risk to human health, safety, and the environment.”
4 In fact the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cautions that “natural disasters – such as tornadoes, hurricanes, tsunamis, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and fires – are often unpredictable, cause significant damage, and can be costly to mitigate.

Underground storage tank (UST) systems can be vulnerable to damage during natural disasters and can even release regulated substances into the environment.” 5 California is particularly susceptible to earthquakes and fuel storage accidents as witnessed in San Francisco in 20196 and Los Angeles in 20157. Given the problems at underground gas storage facilities, a 2014 United States study by the National Agricultural and Rural Development Policy Centre determined that “… underground natural gas storage activities bear risks that are substantial enough to affect nearby residents, and that these impacts are more severe in proximity, concentration, and for properties without access to public water.”
7 One aspect of earthquakes and fuel storage is the possible leaks and adverse affects to our aquifers, which are our main sources of water. Contaminated aquifers can affect water availability and subsequent health issues for decades or even centuries. A study by the EPA investigating lead emissions from piston-engine aircraft using leaded aviation gasoline8 noted that ethylene dibromide may “enter underground aquifers via leaking underground storage tanks or fuel spills. Studies demonstrate that ethylene dibromide may persist for long periods of time in certain groundwater environments.9 Due to the seriousness of this possible environmental emergency the EPA Office of Underground Storage Tanks (OUST) and Office of Research and Development’s National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL) in association with the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials (ATSWMO) have formed a team to evaluate the potential for public health and welfare effects attributable to ethylene dibromide from past or present fuel leaks and spills.10 These agencies found that “water samples for this study were provided by State agencies to EPA between October 2005 and July 2007. Of the 802 groundwater samples provided from 102 sites, ethylene dibromide was detected in 54 samples, 43 of which had ethylene dibromide concentrations above the Maximum Concentration Level.” 11 It is important to
note that could have been much worse since these sites did not include the analysis of groundwater at airports.8
Item 3.D
09/26/23
77 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 95
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) But the City of Santa Monica, might ask are we immune from issues of fuel storage leaks? A review of the recent past, suggests otherwise. For instance, a spill in the Charnock Sub-Basin led the EPA to investigate the cleanup of methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), a gasoline additive, from a groundwater basin formerly used for drinking water by the City of Santa Monica, California.12
Another illustration is the extensive clean up of drinking water contamination needed at Santa Monica’s Olympic Well field, where an aquifer is located that underlies Olympic Boulevard and surrounding areas in the eastern part of the City, and represents the City’s second largest groundwater supply.13
A study by Hall found that “Contamination in Santa Monica has come from several sources. Locations of suspected and known soil and water contamination are tracked and cataloged by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), a department of the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), and by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). Leaking underground storage tanks of petroleum and other chemicals have allowed pollutants to seep into the soil and water in some parts of the Santa Monica Basin. Some sites are actively leaking or are in the process of being tested.”14
The primary groundwater producing areas for the Silverado aquifer are the City of Santa Monica’s Olympic and Charnock Wellfields. At the west, the Santa Monica Airport also has a well, that feeds into the aquifer and the yields are approximately 300 gallons per minute.
15 So safety is an important concern with leaded or even unleaded AvGas fuel underground storage and sale in and around SMO since there is a well at SMO that feeds into the Silverado aquifer.

Since lead in AvGas is one of the largest air and soil contaminant source in our environment the City of Santa Monica should immediately stop their sale of this toxic fuel. However it should also consider stopping their involvement with the storage of fuel underground at SMO. When we consider the health of our citizens and environment the risk of storing fuel that could lead to health risks affecting our aquifers warrants our serious attention.

As SMO and the City of Santa Monica are preparing to close the airport by 2029, according to the consent decree2
, it only makes sense that the city should stop the sale of leaded AvGas and eliminate the City’s storage of underground AvGas Fuel. The consent decree allows other private agencies, other than the city, within SMO to store and sell AvGas fuel. This solution insulates the city from liability due to conceivable class action suits against the city for the sale of leaded AvGas and its social health consequences and eliminates the risk associated with underground fuel storage leaks.

Item 3.D
09/26/23
78 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) References

1. Blum CL. Santa Monica Airport (SMO), Leaded Avgas, and Childhood Blood Lead Levels: Profound Pediatric Health Consequences. Santa Monica Daily Press.

September 7, 2021. [https://www.smdp.com/santa-monica-airport-smo-leadedavgas-and-childhood-blood-lead-levels-profound-pediatric-healthconsequences/208212] Last accessed November 7, 2021.

2. United States District Court for the Central District of California. Civil Action No. 13-CV.8046-JFW (VBKx). Stipulation and Order/Consent Decree. City of Santa Monica Settlement Agreement. 2017. 7.
[https://www.faa.gov/airports/airport_compliance/santa_monica_settlement/media /Santa-Monica-settlement-stipulation-and-order-consent-decree-2017.pdf] Last accessed November 7, 2021.

3. Jorge Casuso. Santa Monica Could Join in Call for Ban on Leaded Aviation Fuel.

Santa Monica Lookout. November 5, 2021.
[https://www.surfsantamonica.com/ssm_site/the_lookout/news/News2021/November2021/11_05_2021_Santa_Monica_Could_Join_in_Call_for_Ban_on_Leaded_Avi ation_Fuel.html] Last accessed November 7, 2021.

4. Assessing Underground Storage Tanks. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality and U.S. EPA. August 25, 2014.
[http://fremont.gov/DocumentCenter/View/24621] Last accessed November 7, 2021.

5. Natural Disasters and Underground Storage Tanks
[https://www.epa.gov/ust/natural-disasters-and-underground-storage-tanks] Last accessed November 7, 2021.

6. Officials Study Fire at California Storage Site after Quake. Pipeline and Gas Journal. 10/17/2019 [https://pgjonline.com/news/2019/10-oct/officials-study-fireat-california-storage-site-after-quake] Last accessed November 7, 2021.

7. Nikiforuk A. California’s Massive Gas Leak: Hazards of Industry Long Known .

Jan 2016.
[https://thetyee.ca/News/2016/01/11/California-Gas-Leak/] Last accessed November 7, 2021.

8. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 40 CFR Part 87, Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Lead Emissions From Piston-Engine Aircraft Using Leaded Aviation Gasoline, Proposed Rules: 22464-22465. Federal Register;75(81). April 28, 2010.
[https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-04-28/pdf/2010-9603.pdf] Last accessed November 7, 2021.

Item 3.D
09/26/23
79 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 97
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.)

9. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development (2008) Natural Attenuation of the Lead Scavengers 1,2– Dibromoethan (EDB) and 1,2–Dichloroethane (1,2– DCA) at Motor Fuel Release Sites and Implications for Risk Management, Chapter 2. EPA 600/R–08/ 107. Available online at:
[http://www.epa.gov/ada]. Last accessed November 7, 2021.

10. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development (2008) Natural Attenuation of the Lead Scavengers 1,2– Dibromoethan (EDB) and 1,2–Dichloroethane (1,2– DCA) at Motor Fuel Release Sites and Implications for Risk Management. p.3. EPA 600/R–08/107. Available online at:
[http://www.epa.gov/ada]. Last accessed November 7, 2021.

11. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development (2008) Natural Attenuation of the Lead Scavengers 1,2– Dibromoethan (EDB) and 1,2–Dichloroethane (1,2– DCA) at Motor Fuel Release Sites and Implications for Risk Management. p.4. EPA 600/R–08/107. Available online at:
[http://www.epa.gov/ada]. Last accessed November 7, 2021.

12. United States Department of Justice. For Immediate Release Wednesday, February 16, 2005. WWW.USDOJ.COM.
[https://www.justice.gov/archive/opa/pr/2005/February/05_enrd_067.htm] Last accessed November 7, 2021.

13. City of Santa Monica, City Attorney’s Office Gillette To Pay City $68 Million Over Water Cleanup.
[https://www.smgov.net/Departments/CAO/content.aspx?id=9543] Last accessed November 7, 2021.

14. Hall M. The Water Issue, Santa Monica, California: Santa Monica’s Guide to Water Conservation and Sustainability. City of Santa Monica and the Santa Monica Daily Press. Santa Monica Daily Press. 2015: 11.

15. Santa Monica Basin Groundwater Sustainability Agency. Groundwater Sustainability Plan for the Santa Monica Groundwater Subbasin. July 2021. 12169:2-61.
[https://www.santamonica.gov/Media/Users/smgov_5Calfredo_2Egonzalez/SMB GSA/2_Santa_Monica_Subbasin_DRAFT_GSP_Chapter2_Basin%20Setting.pdf] Last accessed November 7, 2021.

Item 3.D
09/26/23
80 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 98
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 6:57 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3D

EXTERNAL
Mayor Davis, Councilmembers,
Please do not renew the lease on the fuel tanks at the airport.

They do nothing to contribute to the wellbeing of Santa Monicans.

Thank you,
Andrew Gledhill
Ocena Park
Item 3.D
09/26/23
81 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 99
Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Alexis Koren <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 6:50 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3D

EXTERNAL
Do not renew!!
Item 3.D
09/26/23
82 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: Lara Osment <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 6:40 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3D

EXTERNAL
Do not renew the lease to Atlantic and do not lease the Fuel Tanks.

The fact we have to even ask is nonsense.

I am a Santa Monica Resident of 11 years.

Lara Osment
Wife, Mother, Wonder Woman
Item 3.D
09/26/23
83 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Lois Bostwick <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2023 6:17 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Airport tanks 3D

EXTERNAL
Please do not lease the tanks at the airport! We voted to close the airport, and create a park, to enhance the health of the city. Especially with all the development and higher density buildings (without requiring developers to include enough areas with trees), we need more trees and green space and the airport is the only large space that is left (part of which could serve as a potential back up emergency landing strip in the future). Underground tanks defeat the purpose of increasing the health of Santa Monicans!
Lois
Item 3.D
09/26/23
84 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Allison Greene <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2023 7:34 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3D

EXTERNAL
Please do NOT renew the AtlanƟc lease and do not lease the fuel tanks.  Thank you,  Allison Greene Item 3.D
09/26/23
85 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Hunt, Max <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2023 9:02 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Resident statement about fuel tanks

EXTERNAL
Good morning,
I am a resident who lives near the Santa Monica Airport.  My address is 1776 Bryn Mawr Ave, 90405.  This email is my statement that the Atlantic lease should not be renewed and the fuel tanks in question should not be leased. `               Sincerely, Max Hunt (310)963‐8300.

Item 3.D
09/26/23
86 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Jay Abramowitz <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2023 10:55 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item #D

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
I understand there is an item 3D, on the 26th of September, of which it is suggested by the City Attorney that the City renews The Atlantic lease at the airport.  We should no longer lease these fuel tanks.

We all know the housing problems as well as the water problems in our area and California as a whole:
 Housing can, and is, be made more dense, but open park space becomes more important with the rise in population. We already have heavy use of our parks.  Water is too scarce a resource to risk further underground leaks and contamination.

Why did this matter not go to the airport commission first? Why are people eying the airport for housing when voters want a “great” park? The voters of Santa Monica have voted to close the airport and to construct a park. So far I haven’t seen much work on that voter‐mandated vision.

As always, it is better to be open when conducting city business.

Jay Abramowitz
1302 Marine St
Item 3.D
09/26/23
87 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2023 10:55 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Christine Parra; Gleam Davis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; David White; Stelios Makrides
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: FOSP: City Council 9/26/23 item 3-D -- Atlantic Aviation lease -- OPPOSE!

EXTERNAL
September 24, 2023

To: Mayor Davis and City Council members
From: Board of Directors, Friends of Sunset Park
RE: 9/26/23 agenda item 3-D: Lease agreement with Atlantic Aviation Agenda: https://santamonicacityca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1379

The FOSP Board opposes this lease agreement.

The lease of city property to Atlantic Aviation would include 40-year-old underground fuel tanks, sitting above our aquifer, which are used to store leaded and toxic aviation fuels.

(California “Fuel Farm” (~3,800 sq. ft.) consisting of three 12,000 gallon and one 500 gallon underground storage tanks and associated systems and equipment)

Atlantic Aviation has been operating without a lease since 2015.

For years, residents and the Airport Commission have lobbied the city and the City Council to not continue leasing these old underground tanks, which have leaked in the past.

Have you forgotten the leaks from underground tanks at gas stations which contaminated the city's Charnock wells some years
ago? https://www.epa.gov/archive/epapages/newsroom_archive/newsreleases/5a790d8bf1a74361852570d8005e 16fc.html

The city is not required to lease these tanks by the consent decree or by any agreement with the FAA.

We have never received a clear answer from staff as to why the city would put our aquifer at risk in this way, when providing tanks to Atlantic is not required.

Furthermore, the Airport Commission was not given a "heads up" regarding this lease renewal, even though the Airport staff had promised to keep them informed.

Again, the FOSP Board opposes this lease agreement with Atlantic Aviation.

Item 3.D
09/26/23
88 of 88 Item 3.D
09/26/23

3.D.a
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Written Comments (6038 : Closed Session 3.D.) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: September 26, 2023
Agenda Item: 4.A
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Denise Anderson Warren, City Clerk, Special Agenda Items Subject: Proclamation: Banned Books Week
Prepared By: Gilbert Portillo, Administrative Staff Assistant Approved Forwarded to Council

4.A
Packet Pg. 107
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: September 26, 2023
Agenda Item: 4.B
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David White, City Manager, City Manager's Office
Subject: City Manager's Report
Prepared By: Sergio Ramirez, Acting Chief of Staff
Approved Forwarded to Council

4.B
Packet Pg. 108
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: September 26, 2023
Agenda Item: 5.A
1 of 4
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Gigi Decavalles-Hughes, Director, Finance Department, Revenue Subject: Approval of Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software, LLC for business license software
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a second modification to agreement #9756 (CCS) with HdL Software, LLC to extend the term three additional years and increase the contract amount by $90,797 for business license software services and software development services for the Finance Department. This will result in a 13-year amended agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $469,072, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

Summary
Currently, HdL Software (HdL) provides business license software services to administer the billing and collection of business license taxes as well as certain assessments, fees, and regulatory permits. The City is in the process of conducting a comprehensive review of the City’s Business License Tax program. Staff plans to bring an updated ordinance to City voters in 2024. A second modification to the agreement would ensure continued software maintenance that is used to support the administration of business licensing, including billing and payment processing requirements. Staff recommends a second modification to agreement #9756 to increase the contract amount by an additional $90,797 with a total not to exceed $469,072 and extend the term for an additional three years for a total term of 13 years.

5.A
Packet Pg. 109
2 of 4
Discussion
The City’s Municipal Code allows the Finance Department to levy and collect business license tax. The business license tax program supports the overall well-being of Santa Monica by funding essential services, such as public safety, community recreation and economic development. The management of the business license tax collections requires specialized software.

The City has been utilizing HdL’s business license software since 1998. The City oversees approximately 23,000 business license accounts and collects approximately $34.5 million in tax, assessment, and fee revenue annually. Staff is currently conducting a strategic, comprehensive review and modernization of the City’s Business License Tax program to align with the Council’s FY 2023-25 priority to Cultivate Economic Recovery & Expand Community & Cultural Offerings. The results of this study would likely result in a restructuring of the current Business License Tax code, which would require voter approval. Staff will complete an analysis and determine whether it will recommend that the Council bring the updated ordinance to City voters in November 2024. The outcome could have a significant impact on the City's requirements for a business license system. While staff analyzes and works on strategies to modernize the Business License Tax program, ensuring that there is no interruption in the existing business license system services is critical. Since the results of this effort would likely impact technology needs, staff believes that it is best to delay the procurement process for a new Business License Tax software until after the election when the Business License Tax Modernization measures, if approved, would be implemented. The City’s current agreement for business license software with HdL expires November 12, 2023.

Therefore, the extension of the current contract until after the election is the most prudent course of action. In addition, staff would proceed with the issuance of an RFP for these services during the extension period and return to Council to request approval of award for a new agreement.

Environmental Review

5.A
Packet Pg. 110
3 of 4
The award agreement is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. The award agreement is covered by the common sense exemption which states that CEQA does not apply, “where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.” The modification will allow the City to continue to utilize its business license software. Therefore, it can be seen with certainty that the agreement would not result in adverse physical impacts on the environment, and as such, is categorically exempt from CEQA.

Past Council Actions
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
Staff seeks authority to approve available funding from the General Fund to increase the amount of agreement #9756 with HdL to provide business license software services and software development services.

Agreement Modification Request
Agreement
#
Current
Authorize
Amount
FY 2023-24
Modified Request
Amount
Future Year
Modified Request
Amount
Department
Account #
Total Contract
Amount
9756 $378,275 $16,689 $74,108 01300005.529230 $469,072
Future year funding is contingent on Council budget approval.

Meeting Date Description
6/25/2013
(Attachment A)
Authorize agreement with HdL for business license
software maintenance and support services.
10/23/2018
(Attachment B)
Approval of First Modification to Agreement No. 9756
(CCS) for Business License Software Maintenance and
Support Services and Software Development Services.

5.A
Packet Pg. 111
4 of 4
Prepared By: David Carr, Assistant City Treasurer
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS
B. Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed C. Executed HdL Renewal Letter for Business
D. HdL Software OAKS FY 23-24

5.A
Packet Pg. 112

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: Attachment A - HdL Prime Software Agg #9756 CCS (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software,

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 200 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 201 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 202 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 203 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 207 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 209 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 216 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 217 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 218 Attachment: Attachment B - HdL Modification to Contract 9756_fully executed (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401 • (310) 458-8411 • [email protected] santamonica.gov • @cityofsantamonica • @santamonicacity Finance Department
Date:

Robert Gray
Chief Information Officer
HdL Companies
120 S. State College Blvd., Suite 200
Brea, CA 92821
Re: Contract No. 9756 (CCS) Renewal Option for Business License Software Maintenance and Support Services
Dear Mr. Gray:

Please accept this letter as the City’s notification of its intent to extend the term of the above-referenced Software Maintenance and Support Agreement (the “Agreement”) for a period of two (2) years. As noted in Section 1 of the Term and Conditions of the Agreement dated November 12, 2018, the City may extend the term for one (1) additional two (2) year term. The renewal will extend the term of the Agreement beginning on November 12, 2021 through November 12, 2023. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain the same and in full force and effect.

If you have any questions, please contact David Carr, Assistant City Treasurer, at (310) 458-8775 or [email protected].

Sincerely,
David White
City Manager
cc: David Carr, Assistant City Treasurer
Procurement Division
DocuSign Envelope ID: 018CC8BB-984C-44D3-8A3B-7086C15B3DA4 11/8/2021
11/8/2021

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 219 Attachment: Executed HdL Renewal Letter for Business (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software, LLC for

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

OAKS INITIATIVE NOTICE

NOTICE TO APPLICANTS, BIDDERS, PROPOSERS

AND OTHERS SEEKING DISCRETIONARY PERMITS, CONTRACTS,

OR OTHER BENEFITS FROM THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
Santa Monica’s voters adopted a City Charter amendment commonly known as the Oaks Initiative. The Oaks Initiative requires the City to provide this notice and information about the Initiative’s requirements. You may obtain a full copy of the Initiative’s text from the City Clerk.

This information is required by City Charter Article XXII—Taxpayer Protection.

It prohibits a public official from receiving, and a person or entity from conferring, specified personal benefits or campaign advantages from a person or entity after theofficial votes, or otherwise takes official action, to award a “public benefit” to that person or entity. The prohibition applies within and outside of the geographical boundaries of SantaMonica.

All persons or entities applying or receiving public benefits from the City of Santa Monica shall provide the names of trustees, directors, partners, and officers, and names of persons with more than a 10% equity, participation or revenue interest. An exception exists for persons serving in those capacities as volunteers, without compensation, for organizations exempt from income taxes under Section 501(c)(3), (4), or (6), of the Internal Revenue Code. However, this exception does not apply if the organization is a political committee or controls political committees.

Examples of a “public benefit” include public contracts to provide goods or services worth more than $25,000 or a land use approval worth more than $25,000 over a 12- month period.

In order to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Oaks Initiative, theCity compiles and maintains certain information. That information includes the name of any personorpersons whois seeking a “publicbenefit.” If the“public benefit” is sought by an entity, ratherthan an individual person, the information includes the nameof everyperson who is: (a) trustee, (b) director, (c) partner, (d) officer, or has (e) more than a ten percent interest in the entity. Therefore, if you are seeking a “public benefit” covered by the Oaks Initiative, you must supply that information on the Oaks Initiative Disclosure Form. This information must be updated and supplied every 12 months.

DocuSign Envelope ID: B9FAE758-BEE4-4437-A56E-B40A45DFEAFC

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 220 Attachment: HdL Software OAKS FY 23-24 (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software, LLC for business

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

OAKS INITIATIVE DISCLOSURE FORM
In order to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Oaks Initiative, the City compiles and maintains certain information. That information includes the name of any person or persons who is seeking a “public benefit.” If the “public benefit” is sought by an entity, rather than an individual person, the information includes the name of every person who is: (a) trustee, (b) director, (c) partner, (d) officer, or has (e) more than a ten percent interest in the entity.

Public benefits include:

1. Personal services contracts in excess of $25,000 over any 12-monthperiod;

2. Sale of material, equipment or supplies to the City in excess of $25,000 over a 12- month period;

3. Purchase, sale or lease of real property to or from the City in excess of $25,000 over a 12- month period;

4. Non-competitive franchise awards with gross revenue of $50,000 or more inany 12-month period;

5. Land use variance, special use permit, or other exception to an established land use plan, where the decision has a value in excess of $25,000;

6. Tax “abatement, exception, or benefit” of a value in excess of $5,000 in any 12- month period; or

7. Payment of “cash or specie” of a net value to the recipient of $10,000 in any 12- month period.

Name(s) of persons or entities receiving public benefit:

Name(s) of trustees, directors, partners, and officers:

Name(s) of persons with more than a 10% equity, participation, or revenue interest:

Prepared by: Title:

Signature: Date:

Email: Phone:

Permit #
FOR CITY USE ONLY:

Bid/PO/Contract #
Robert Gray CIO [email protected] 714-879-5000
HdL Software LLC N/A. 100% ESOP owned company, with shares owned by an ESOP trust. Robert Gray, CIO DocuSign Envelope ID: B9FAE758-BEE4-4437-A56E-B40A45DFEAFC 6/6/2023 | 4:20:08 PM PDT

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 221 Attachment: HdL Software OAKS FY 23-24 (5793 : Second Modification to Agreement No. 9756 (CCS) with HdL Software, LLC for business City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: September 26, 2023
Agenda Item: 5.B
1 of 7
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Rick Valte, Public Works Director, Public Works, Fleet Services Subject: Award Purchase Order to Toyota Material Handling Solutions for the Purchase and Delivery of Six Forklifts
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines.

2. Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue a purchase order with Toyota Material Handling Solutions for the purchase of six electric Toyota Forklifts for the Public Works Department. This recommended award is made as an exception to the competitive bidding process pursuant to Section 2.24.250(b) and is for a total amount not to exceed $527,248.

Summary
The City of Santa Monica’s Public Works Department provides essential services that maintain clean and safe neighborhoods and open spaces for Santa Monica’s residents, visitors, and City staff. These operations rely on vehicles and equipment managed and maintained by the City’s Fleet Management Division. Many of these vehicles are aging past their cost-effective useful lives. To ensure reliable operations, provide uninterrupted service to the community, and reduce downtime, maintenance costs, and emissions, staff recommends purchasing six forklifts for the Public Works Department, which can only be sourced directly from Toyota Material Handling Solutions, as an exception to the competitive bidding process.

5.B
Packet Pg. 222
2 of 7
Discussion
The Fleet Management Division is responsible for ensuring the City’s diverse fleet of over 800 vehicles and equipment are available, dependable, meet the highest environmental standards for a sustainable fleet, and are safe to operate from acquisition through disposal. The division routinely replaces vehicles that have reached the end of their cost-effective useful lives through the Vehicle Replacement Fund.

In response to the budgetary impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, contributions to the Vehicle Replacement Fund were suspended for the General and Beach Funds, and vehicle replacements were temporarily suspended unless they were necessary for public safety or for the operation of essential City services. The Fleet Management Division has worked together with various City divisions to extend the useful lives of their vehicles as much as possible.

Six forklifts have been identified for replacement. These vehicles are vital to essential operations but have reached or exceeded their cost-effective useful life, incurring maintenance costs of approximately 50% of the original purchase cost over the last two years. Due to their age and use, these vehicles require significant ongoing maintenance and repair costs to remain reliable, safe, and operational.

In Spring of 2024, The California Air Resources Board (CARB) will vote to revise its Mobile Source Strategy, State Implementation Plan, and Sustainable Freight Action Plans to facilitate further zero-emission equipment penetration in the off-road sector.

This means, beginning 2026, that applicable forklifts that are bought or leased will need to be zero-emission, and older, non-compliant models will need to be phased out. Staff anticipates a high demand and limited availability as the effective date of this new requirement approaches. Purchasing these electric forklifts ahead of the CARB changes will allow the City to avoid availability issues and provide higher auction revenue of the current forklifts prior to the auction houses receiving an influx of forklifts as other organizations begin to comply with the new legislation.

5.B
Packet Pg. 223
3 of 7
With all these factors in mind, staff is recommending the purchase of six electric forklifts for a total amount not to exceed $527,248 as itemized in Table 1. Funding for the replacement of these vehicles is available and was collected over each asset’s useful life.

Table 1. Vehicle Replacement Program: Equipment Purchases Unit # Fund Dept/Division Vendor Description Qty. Extended Price
15678 General PW – Facilities
Maintenance
Toyota Material
Handling Solutions
Toyota Electric Lift
Truck Package 3 1 $109,055
15703 General PW – Fleet
Management
Toyota Material
Handling Solutions
Toyota Electric Lift
Truck Package 1 1 $100,647
16196 General PW – Public Landscape Toyota Material
Handling Solutions
Toyota Electric Lift
Truck Package 2 1 $53,922
General Fund Total 3 $263,624
20212 RRR PW – Resource
Recovery & Recycling
Toyota Material
Handling Solutions
Toyota Electric Lift
Truck Package 3 1 $109,055
RRR Fund Total 1 $109,055
15685 Water PW – Water Resources
– Arcadia
Toyota Material
Handling Solutions
Toyota Electric Lift
Truck Package 1 1 $100,647
16197 Water PW – Water Resources Toyota Material
Handling Solutions
Toyota Electric Lift
Truck Package 2 1 $53,922
Water Fund Total 2 $154,569
Grand Total 6 $527,248
Public Works Department
Facilities Maintenance Division – Custodial Services
The Facilities Maintenance Division relies on their forklift to carry out day-to-day operations that directly support the City’s priority of a Clean and Safe Santa Monica, including:
• To accept and off-load custodial supplies for City Hall and other City locations. • To move pallets of supplies onto trucks to be delivered to other City facilities. • To move pallets of tables and chairs for City events. • To assist custodial staff in moving trash bin locations.

Fleet Management Division
The Fleet Management Division is responsible for procuring and maintaining over 800 of the City’s vehicles and equipment. The forklift assigned to Fleet is used to:
• To lift and move pallets of parts delivered by vendors to their storage location. • To dispose of metal waste from its welder’s shop.

5.B
Packet Pg. 224
4 of 7
• To move nonfunctioning equipment and/or vehicles to properly dispose of them. • To move parts from the part room to the vehicle that is being worked on. • To lift and install overweight parts such as cylinders for repairs on heavy duty vehicles.

Public Landscape
The Public Landscape Division maintains the City’s parks urban forest, and oceanfront.

Park Maintenance staff provide landscaping and irrigation in 28 parks and nearly 300 medians and open spaces. This division relies heavily on their forklift to:
• To move large parts, including playground equipment, benches, picnic tables, concrete barriers, wood, and other park parts.
• To move pallets of fertilizer, seed, ballfield conditioners, field cork, and palletized parts.
• To occasionally assist the Aquatics, Pier Maintenance, and/or Beach sections with their deliveries.

Resource Recovery and Recycling (RRR)
The RRR Division relies on their forklifts to carry out day-to-day operations that directly support the City’s priority of a Clean and Safe Santa Monica, including:
• To unload and unstack containers from tractor trailers. • To lift recyclable metals over 10 feet into a roll off container. • To load and unload stake bed trucks.
• To lift and rotate bins so they can be assembled.
• To move pallets and items in stock around the yard.
• To prepare Household Hazardous Waste to be picked up for disposal.

Water Resources Division
The City’s Water Resources Division operates and maintains three water treatment facilities and four water storage reservoirs as well as over 200 miles of water distribution mains, 150 miles of sewers, and 60 miles of storm drains throughout the city. Various

5.B
Packet Pg. 225
5 of 7
service trucks and construction vehicles are used by Water Resources staff to operate and maintain this water and wastewater infrastructure.

These vehicles are also used to carry out day-to-day operations to provide water and wastewater services to the community, which include the following:
• To lift and move pallets of parts delivered by vendors to their storage locations. • To unload totes of chemicals and locate them within the facility. • To load and unload large meters, pipes, valves, and fittings onto utility and stake bed vehicles for work in the field.

Vendor Selection
Exception to Competitive Bidding
Staff recommends Toyota Material Handling Solutions to furnish and deliver six electric forklifts as an exception to competitive bidding per Muni Code 2.24.250(b). Toyota Material Handling Solutions is the sole source authorized dealership of Toyota forklifts, machines, repair, and maintenance parts.

The reliability and durability of these electric forklifts ensure the delivery of a clean and safe City to Santa Monica’s residents and visitors. Toyota Material Handling Solutions provides these electric forklifts with full-service maintenance agreements (Toyota 360 Support Plus 5). This provides the additional advantage of predictable costs with fewer unforeseen out-of-pocket repair bills or expenses and a cost-effective way to maintain the units at optimum functionality.

In an effort to lower future parts, repair, and maintenance costs, Fleet Management aims to standardize its fleet, including these forklifts. Decreasing the variety of vehicle and equipment makes/models also allows Fleet to standardize parts inventory and increase supply availability.
b. When a good or service is copyrighted, patented or only available from one license holder, including, proprietary goods, original equipment manufacturers and/or exclusive distributors.

5.B
Packet Pg. 226
6 of 7
Environmental Review
The purchase orders for replacement vehicles are categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction) of the CEQA Guidelines.

Section 15302 exempts Class 2 projects which “consists of replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the structure replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced”. The replacement vehicles would replace existing City fleet vehicles, with essentially the same purpose and capacity.

Therefore, the purchase orders qualify for a Class 2 exemption.

Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
Staff seeks authority to approve available funding from the Vehicle Replacement Fund and the SCAQMD Subvention Fund to award a purchase order with Toyota Material Handling Solutions for the purchase and delivery of six electric forklifts in the amount of $527,248.

Purchase Order Request
Vendor FY2023-24
Amount CIP Account # Fund Total Purchase Order Amount
Toyota
Material
Handling
Solutions
$113,653 C7000010.689000.90532 General $113,653
$109,055 C7000010.689000.90535 RRR $109,055
$154,569 C7000010.689000.90534 Water $154,569
$149,971 *C1806910.689000 SCAQMD $149,971
Total $527,248 Total $527,248
*SCAQMD Subvention Fund amount of $149,971 will offset the General Fund total of $263,624 for a new General Fund amount of $113,653

5.B
Packet Pg. 227
7 of 7
Prepared By: Doris Mejia, Senior Administrative Analyst Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Oaks Initiative Form - Toyota Material Handling Solutions

5.B
Packet Pg. 228

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 229 Attachment: Oaks Initiative Form - Toyota Material Handling Solutions (5829 : Purchase and Deliver Forklifts) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: September 26, 2023
Agenda Item: 5.C
1 of 3
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Ramon Batista, Police Chief, Police Department
Subject: Authorization to accept Grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety for the Selective Enforcement Program.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15321 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines

2. Authorize the City Manager to accept a grant awarded in the amount of $306,000 from the California Office of Traffic Safety for the Police Department’s Selective Traffic Enforcement Program.

3. Authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents to accept the grant and all subsequent grant renewals.

4. Authorize budget changes as outlined in the Financial Impacts & Budget Actions section of this report.

Summary
The Santa Monica Police Department (SMPD) has been awarded a $306,000 Selective Traffic Enforcement Program (2023 STEP) grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) for a year-long program of education and special enforcement efforts to help prevent traffic-related deaths and injuries. The 2023 STEP grant would provide funding for an array of strategies to impact roadway safety, as well as funds for training and outreach. SMPD continues to work with community partners and mobility groups to ensure the safety of the roadways. These annual grant activities support Santa Monica in striving to attain the goals of Vision Zero and to ensure our commitment to providing safe travel for all transportation modes.

5.C
Packet Pg. 230
2 of 3
Discussion
For over ten years, SMPD has been awarded OTS STEP grant funding that is specifically directed toward improving roadway safety in Santa Monica. SMPD uses these funds to conduct a variety of focused traffic enforcement operations, attend annual trainings, and purchase equipment to support traffic enforcement operations.

Similar to previous OTS STEP grants, the 2023 STEP grant would fund the following enforcement activities, mainly with overtime funds:
• DUI Checkpoint Operations
• DUI Saturation Patrol Operations
• Traffic Enforcement Operations focused on unsafe practices such as speeding and unsafe turning
• Distracted Driving Enforcement Operations
• Motorcycle Safety Enforcement Operations
• Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Enforcement Operations
Additionally, the 2023 STEP grant program would include six traffic safety educational presentations to the community, “Know Your Limit” campaigns, and participation in National Distracted Driving Awareness month in April. These strategies combined aim to help the community safely share the road and are proven strategies for reducing the number of injury traffic collisions. Safe movement throughout the city is an ongoing high priority at both the state and local level.

Environmental Review
Acceptance of grant funding for enforcement activities is categorically exempt from CEQA under Section 15321. Section 15321 of the CEQA State Guidelines provides Class 21 (enforcement actions by regulatory agencies) exemption for enforcement of a law or law enforcement activities by peace officers acting under any law that provides a criminal sanction.

5.C
Packet Pg. 231
3 of 3
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
Staff seeks authority to accept a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety Selective Traffic Enforcement Program. Staff also recommends the following budget changes.

FY 2023-24 Grant Budget Changes
Establish Revenue Budget Appropriate Funds
Account Number Amount Account Numbers Amount
20180002.40469H $306,000 20180002.511400.89017 $284,123 20180002.55522D $21,877
Total $306,000 Total $306,000
Prepared By: Jose Arroyo, Senior Administrative Analyst Approved Forwarded to Council

5.C
Packet Pg. 232
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: September 26, 2023
Agenda Item: 5.D
1 of 4
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Wolfgang Knabe, Interim Fire Chief, Fire Department Subject: Adoption of a Resolution accepting a report on the status of all statemandated annual fire inspections in the City of Santa Monica in conjunction with SB1205 and California Health and Safety Code Section 13146.4.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a Resolution acknowledging receipt of a report on the status of state mandated annual fire inspections in the City of Santa Monica pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 13146.4

2. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

Summary
With the signing of SB 1205 (Hill) on September 27, 2018 by the Governor, the California Health and Safety Code was amended by adding Section 13146.4 which requires that all fire departments perform annual inspections pursuant to Sections 13146.2 and 13146.3 and report annually to its administrating authority on its compliance. These sections mandate that annual inspections of all public and private schools, hotels, motels, lodging houses, and all apartment and condominium buildings be performed by the Fire Department. The purpose of annual fire inspections is to mitigate known hazards, reduce risk to the community and ensure reasonable compliance with the California Fire Code. The Fire Department completed annual fire inspections of these facilities for Fiscal Year 2022-2023. A resolution to accept the City’s FY 2022-2023 annual fire inspections report is included as Attachment A.

5.D
Packet Pg. 233
2 of 4
Discussion
SB 1205 requires that every city or county fire department or district to perform the above-described inspections and to report annually to its administering authority on the department or district’s compliance with the above-described inspection requirements. The bill also requires the administering authority to acknowledge receipt of the report in a resolution or a similar formal document. Further, the acceptance of this compliance report and the recommended Resolution fulfills the statutory requirements contained in California Health and Safety Code Sections 13146.2, 13146.3 and 13146.4, as amended by SB 1205.

The California Building Code also specifies that condominiums should be considered apartments for building code application. An apartment shall consist of three or more attached units and excludes all duplex style buildings. Last fiscal year, the Fire Department inspected 3,828 apartment/condominium buildings with three or more units.

5.D
Packet Pg. 234
3 of 4
The following is the mandated reporting of the inspections from the Santa Monica Fire Department for the Fiscal Year 2022-2023.

Occupancy
Type
Inspections
Completed Total Number
Percentage
Completed
Schools Public 40 40 100%
Schools Private 18 18 100%
Jails SMPD PSF 1 1 100%
Multi-Family
Residential
Three Units + 3,828 3,828 100%
Total Inspections Completed 3,887
During Fiscal Year 2022-2023 the Fire Department conducted 3,887 state-mandated annual inspections under California Health and Safety Code Sections 13146.2, 13146.3 and 13146.4 and 3,055 other types of annual inspections shown in the table below.

In addition to the mandated reporting of the specific occupancies above, the following are the remaining inspections conducted by the Santa Monica Fire Department on an annual basis, reported for Fiscal Year 2022-2023.

Occupancy Type
Inspections
Completed
Total
Number
Percentage
Completed
Assemblies, Institutions,
Hospitals
309 309 100%
Highrise 80 80 100%
Underground Storage Tanks 34 34 100%
New Construction Plan Review
and Inspections
2,118 2,118 100%
Business and Mercantile*
Staffing priority was given to
completing mandated
inspections
514 4139 12%
Environmental Review
The reporting of Fire and Life Safety annual inspections is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense

5.D
Packet Pg. 235
4 of 4
Exemption) of the CEQA Guidelines, which states that CEQA does not apply, where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.

Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the recommended action.

Prepared By: Terese Toomey, Principal Administrative Analyst Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. SB 1205 23-24 Resolution (2023) Fire Inspection

5.D
Packet Pg. 236
Attachment A
City Council Meeting: September 26, 2023 Santa Monica, California RESOLUTION NUMBER ________ (CCS)
(City Council Series)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA,

ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT OF A REPORT ON THE STATUS OF STATE

MANDATED ANNUAL FIRE INSPECTIONS IN THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 13146.4 WHEREAS, California Health & Safety Code Section 13146.4 was added in 2018, and became effective on September 27, 2018; and,
WHEREAS, California Health & Safety Code Sections 13146.2 and 13146.3 requires that all fire departments, including the Santa Monica Fire Department, provide fire protection services to perform annual inspections in every building used as a public or private school, hotel, motel, lodging house, apartment house, and certain residential care facilities for compliance with building standards, as provided and, WHEREAS, California Health & Safety Code Section 13146.2 requires that all fire departments, including the Santa Monica Fire Department, provide fire protection services to report annually to its administering authority on its compliance with Sections 13146.2 and 13146.3 and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Santa Monica intends this Resolution to fulfill the requirements of the California Health & Safety Code regarding acknowledgment of the Santa Monica Fire Department’s compliance with California Health and Sections 13146.2 and 13146.3.

5.D.a
Packet Pg. 237 Attachment: SB 1205 23-24 Resolution (2023) Fire Inspection [Revision 1] (5843 : Accept Report on Annual Fire Inspections Per SB1205) Attachment A

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Monica expressly acknowledges the measure of compliance of the Santa Monica Fire Department with California Health and Safety Code Sections 13146.2 and 13146.3 in the area encompassed by the City of Santa Monica as follows:

A. EDUCATIONAL GROUP E OCCUPANCIES:

Educational Group E occupancies are generally those public and private schools, used by more than six persons at any one time for educational purposes through the 12th grade. Within the City of Santa Monica, there are 58 Group E occupancies, buildings, structures and/or facilities.

During the fiscal year 2022-2023, the Santa Monica Fire Department completed the annual inspection of 58 Group E occupancies, buildings, structures and/or facilities. This is a compliance rate of 100% for this reporting period.

B. RESIDENTIAL GROUP R OCCUPANCIES:

Residential Group R occupancies, for the purposes of this resolution, are generally those occupancies containing sleeping units, and include hotels, motels, apartments (three units or more), etc. as well as other residential occupancies (including a number of residential care facilities). These residential care facilities have a number of different subclassifications, and they may contain residents or clients that have a range of needs, including those related to custodial care, mobility impairments, cognitive disabilities, etc.

The residents may also be non-ambulatory or bedridden. Within the City of Santa Monica,

5.D.a
Packet Pg. 238 Attachment: SB 1205 23-24 Resolution (2023) Fire Inspection [Revision 1] (5843 : Accept Report on Annual Fire Inspections Per SB1205) Attachment A
there lie 3,861 Group R (and their associated sub-categories) occupancies of this nature.

During the fiscal year 2022-2023, the Santa Monica Fire Department completed the annual inspection of 3,828 Group R occupancies, buildings, structures and/or facilities.

This is a compliance rate of 100% for this reporting period.

SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

BY:

DOUGLAS SLOAN, City Attorney

5.D.a
Packet Pg. 239 Attachment: SB 1205 23-24 Resolution (2023) Fire Inspection [Revision 1] (5843 : Accept Report on Annual Fire Inspections Per SB1205) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: September 26, 2023
Agenda Item: 5.E
1 of 6
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Rick Valte, Public Works Director, Public Works, Engineering and Street Services
Subject: Award RFP to Moffatt & Nichol for the Pier Capital Plan, Inspections, Condition Assessment, and Design Services for the Necessary Repairs Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Sections 15301 and 15302 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and a finding of Statutory Exemption pursuant to Section 15252 of CEQA

2. Award RFP #SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol to provide structural engineering consulting and design services to develop a capital plan for necessary structural repairs and maintenance to the Pier and to prepare construction and bidding documents for projects identified in the plan.

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with Moffatt & Nichol in an amount not to exceed $1,498,819 (including a $120,000 contingency).

Summary
The City of Santa Monica previously completed a Pier Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study in 2018 and subsequent studies are recommended to be conducted every five to ten years. These studies are used to identify elements of the Santa Monica Pier (Pier) in need of repair or replacement, and they help staff develop capital projects and maintenance plans. Staff recommends Moffatt & Nichol to provide structural engineering consulting and design services to conduct an inspection and assessment of the Pier, develop a Pier Capital Plan, including the design of up to seven projects for an amount not to exceed $1,498,819.

5.E
Packet Pg. 240
2 of 6
Discussion
The Santa Monica Pier attracts an estimated nine million visitors annually and accommodates pedestrians and vehicles along with a multitude of different businesses.

These diverse and constant uses combined with the harsh marine environment make the Pier susceptible to wear and tear that is more aggressive compared to other city infrastructure. The City has proactively managed the condition of the Pier by conducting studies and assessments that have led to ongoing capital improvement and maintenance projects.

In both 2008 and 2018, the City completed assessments of the Pier which included reports that catalogued each structural component of the Pier and assigned them condition ratings (Attachments A & B). City staff used the reports to prioritize upgrades and developed several projects including the Santa Monica Municipal Pier Phase 4 Improvements, Pier Railing and Lighting Improvements, Pier Deck Upgrades Areas 2 & 10 (parking lot), and other smaller-scale projects, then hired consultants to design the projects, and subsequently contracted out the construction. While enabling the City to maintain the Pier, this multi-step process is lengthy and could be improved to realize efficiencies in capital improvement budget planning.

The proposed Pier Capital Plan Project would improve the capital budget planning process. The consultant would perform a complete inspection of the Pier including underwater structural elements and would prepare a report documenting all findings.

The consultant would then collaborate with City staff to develop final plans, specifications, and estimates for up to seven future projects. The future projects would group repairs based on a combination of urgency and location on the Pier. Staff would seek construction funding in upcoming Capital Improvement Program funding cycles.

The consultant’s scope of work is comprised of four major tasks. The first task includes conducting above-water and underwater inspections of the Pier’s structural members, decking, and other components. Divers would be utilized to inspect underwater elements. Inspectors and engineers would assess above-water features. Results of the inspections would be documented, logged, and the information would be transcribed

5.E
Packet Pg. 241
3 of 6
onto a GIS map layer. Upon completion of the field work and GIS map, a condition assessment report would be prepared.

Under the second task, a capital improvement plan for the Pier would be developed.

This plan would categorize the repairs based on priority ranges, including short term (1- 5 years) for more urgent repairs, long-term (5-10 years) for less severe issues, and deferred improvements (10-15 years) for non-critical work. The capital plan would serve as guidance when preparing the design packages of future capital improvement projects. The capital plan would determine the sequencing, phasing, and funding required to make the repairs identified in the first task.

The consultant would prepare final plans, specifications, and estimates for up to seven projects as part of the third task. This includes geotechnical investigations, topographic surveys, structural capacity modeling and calculations, and support during construction bidding.

Task four focuses on the preparation of a maintenance plan for the Pier. The maintenance plan would provide recommendations and instructions regarding preventive maintenance that can be handled by City staff.

Vendor Selection
Bidder Recommendation
Best and Only
Qualified Firm
Moffatt & Nichol
Evaluation
Criteria
Credentials/experience, competence/skill, capacity/ability to perform services promptly, work plans and approach, character/reputation, ability to provide services as needed and price.

Municipal Code SMMC 2.24.190
Proposals Received
Moffatt & Nichol
RFP Data
Posted On Posted On Advertised in (City
Charter & SMMC)
Vendors
Downloaded
Date Publicly
Opened

5.E
Packet Pg. 242
4 of 6
04/27/2023 City’s Online
Bidding Site
Santa Monica Daily
Press
55 05/24/2023
Additional Vendor Outreach & Justification to Award
The proposal was reviewed by a selection panel consisting of staff from the Engineering & Street Services and Public Landscape Divisions. The proposal evaluation was based on experience with structural and marine engineering projects, understanding/workplan and project approach, ability to deliver, quality of product, cost, and compliance with City requirements. Staff interviewed the only proposer.

In addition, staff conducted outreach to other vendors who downloaded the RFP to understand why proposals were not submitted. Responses included: 1) the scope is too specific, and expertise is not available in marine and timber engineering, 2) too busy and no capacity to perform the work 3) no expertise with inspections of marine structures and 4) other work in the market was more rewarding. Staff also conducted an estimate for this work during the CIP process, the staff estimate lines up with the proposed costs by the vendor.

Based on the evaluation criteria, staff recommends Moffatt & Nichol, as the best and only qualified firm to provide engineering services for the Project based on their extensive and prior experience in developing similar projects for other California agencies, including the cities of Manhattan Beach, Redondo Beach, Oceanside, Seal Beach, Newport Beach, and the City of Santa Monica.

Past Council Actions
Meeting Date Description
03/06/2018 (Attachment C) Staff Report – Award RFP for the Pier Infrastructure Assessment
Environmental Review
The award for engineering consulting and design services for the Pier is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301Section 15302 of the CEQA Guidelines and is also statutorily exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies) of the

5.E
Packet Pg. 243
5 of 6
CEQA Guidelines. Section 15301exempts Class 1 projects consisting of the "operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency’s determination." This exemption includes “existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities." Section 15302 exempts Class 2 projects consisting of the “replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities.” In addition, none of the exceptions specified in Section 15300.2 of CEQA Guidelines would apply that would preclude the use of this CEQA exemption: The Pier is not located in a sensitive environment; the award contract would not have a significant effect on the environment; would not damage scenic resources; would not be located on a hazardous waste site; and would not cause a change to a historical resource including the Santa Monica Pier as all materials would be replaced with the same material type and would look exactly the same. Section 15252 exempts feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions. The award agreement would provide a capital improvement plan, geotechnical investigations, and a maintenance plan for the Pier. Therefore, the award contract is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15301 and Section 15302 and statutorily exempt pursuant to Section 15262.

Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
Staff seeks authority to approve available funding from the Pier Fund to award a contract with Moffatt & Nichol for structural engineering and inspection services of the Pier. Funds are available in the FY 2023-24 Capital Improvement Program Budget for this project. Future year funding is contingent on Council budget approval.

Agreement Request
FY 2023-24 Request
Amount
CIP Account # Total Contract Amount
$1,498,819 C5306750.689000 $1,498,819
Total $1,498,819

5.E
Packet Pg. 244
6 of 6
Prepared By: Curtis Castle, Principal Civil Engineer
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study
B. 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study C. March 6, 2018 Staff Report (Web Link)
D. Oaks Initiative Form - Moffatt & Nichol
E. OaksInitiative-wEx-Completed-081723

5.E
Packet Pg. 245

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 246
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 247 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 248
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 249
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 250
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 251
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 252
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 253
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 254
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 255
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 256
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Santa Monica Pier
Architectural Conditions Assessment
submitted by
Wallace Roberts & Todd, LLC
February 8, 2008
8 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 257 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) URBAN FURNISHINGS –

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Subsection               Page Number
Assessment and Methodology………………………………………………………………………………….10 Railings………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………11 Benches…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….14
Tables………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..16 Trash Receptacles……………………………………………………………………………………………………..18 Curbs…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………21
Decking………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….….22 Lighting……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..24 Features……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………27
Quantitative Assessment Chart………………………………………………………………………………..34 Pier Sector Graphic……………………………………………………………………………………………………35 Existing Site Features…………………………………………………………………………………………………36 9 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 258 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Assessment and Methodology
The Santa Monica Pier has been an iconic element of the city since the early 1900’s. It was and still is today a space where tourists and locals congregate to enjoy sunsets, entertainment, and activities featured on the pier.

Despite the step grade, narrow sidewalks and high curb, thousands of people visit the Pier, by either walking, bicycling or driving on the Pier Bridge. They are welcomed by iconic signage that displays the Santa Monica name and logo and by informational Kiosks explaining elements on the pier to enjoy; such as the historic carousel, fi shing piers, entertaining performers and Pacifi c Park.

The idea of the pier and the history that surrounds it sets a whimsical background for those who visit it. However, over many years of harsh coastal weather, unforeseen vandalism problems, a mish mash of replacement furniture, and a lost sense of style standards, the elements on the pier no longer present a cohesive atmosphere that tie all of the pier’s characteristic icons together.

Pier Assessment and Methodology
Development on the Pier has been guided by Santa Monica Pier Design Guidelines, adopted in 1987. These Guidelines address many features found on the Pier, but give only general guidance.

WRT referred to these Guidelines during its assessment of current conditions, and noted where future recommendations about specifi c features would be warranted. It is WRT’s intent in the Architectural Conditions Assessment Report to assess the public amenities for their functionality, appearance, durability, comfort, sustainability and maintenance condition. Information and observations about these amenities will be the basis for more detailed recommendations to be formulated in coordination with the City and with input from the Santa Monica Pier Restoration Corporation and the public. The issues raised in this Report and the results of community input, will be further expanded upon and incorporated into the Sustainability Plan, the Maintenance Plan, the Lighting Plan and the Urban Design Plan.

This section looks not only at urban furnishings, but opportunities to improve specifi c areas of the Pier to enhance the public’s enjoyment of this nationally recognized community, environmental and cultural resource.

This assessment report provides the team’s analysis of the various site elements as they appeared during these site visits.

The following elements were addressed:

1. Railings

2. Benches

3. Picnic Tables

4. Trash Receptacles

5. Curbs

6. Decking

7. Lighting Fixtures

8. Special Features
The letter designations in the text refer to the Pier Sector Graphic.

4. 10

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 259 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Railings
Rail Type 1: Blue Metal Rail
Location: Primary railing, used on pier perimeter
Sector Graphic: (A, B, D, E, F, G)
Number: Approximately 4,500 Linear Feet
Quality assessment:

Materials: The railing is constructed of 3 (sometimes
4) horizontal 2” diameter steel pipe rails, with 2” diameter steel tube posts and fi ttings. All metal tubing is painted blue and appears to have been painted multiple times. Stainless steel cables have been added in the horizontal direction, centered between metal rails to create the 4” minimum clearance required by code. However, code has been updated and vertical barriers at minimum 4” O.C. have not been added.

Joints vary in diff erent sections of the railing; some are welded, while others are assembled with metal tees.

Maintenance: Paint has been chipped and repainted
multiple times. Rust appears where paint is missing, most typically in areas of concentrated fi shing activity. Metal rails require constant repainting to prevent rust, as rust can form wherever metal is exposed.* Functionality/Placement: The railing provides a safety
barrier at the edge of the pier. However, the railing no longer meets current safety requirements as there are more than 4” square openings in the rail.

Durability: Painted metal is a durable option for railing if rust is prevented.

Sustainability: There is no evidence that this railing uses low VOC paint or a renewable material. Recycled content material should be considered for this application in the event of replacement.

Comfort: While the rail provides a fairly transparent
barrier to the ocean, the steel rail is not very comfortable to lean against.
* Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated

11.28.2007
Rail Type 1: Socket
Rail Type: Steel cables
The entire pedestrian area of the Pier is surrounded by a barrier rail with a minimum height of 42 inches. The predominant railing type is a painted blue metal post and railing. There is a section of this railing that is similar but with a wooden top rail. At the west end of the Pier there is also a painted wood and metal railing that separates the upper and lower decks and forms the stair railing. These varied railings do not create a cohesive design for the Pier. The 1987 Pier Design Guidelines recommends that the railings should be compatible with overall building design and are corrosion, graffi ti and vandal resistant. No specifi c type of rail is prescribed.

5. 11

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 260 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Rail Type 2: Blue Metal with Wooden Top Rail
Location: Southeast corner of pier
Sector Graphic: (G)
Number: approximately 1,200 Linear Feet
Quality assessment:

Materials: The railing is similar to Type 1 with the
addition of a 2x8 wooden top rail. The railing is made of 3 (sometimes 4) 2” diameter horizontal metal tubes, with 2” diameter tubular metal posts. The top rail is a stained and coated wooden 2x8 plank, heavily worn, and supported by a bracket underneath. All metal tubing is painted blue and appears to have been painted multiple times.

Stainless steel cables run horizontally only, centered between metal tubes to reduce the opening size to 4” in one direction. Joints vary in diff erent sections of railing; some are welded while others are assembled with tees and sockets.

Maintenance: In general, the paint covers the metal
railing consistently. Paint is worn and chipped in limited areas of high use especially along ramps, with rust observed where metal has been exposed. Metal tubing must be painted to prevent rust as wear requires. Wood is teak and requires pressure washing and re oiling annually in the spring. *

Functionality/Placement: The railing provides a safety
barrier at the edge of the ramp and at the deck above the volleyball court. The railing does not meet current safety requirements as there are more than 4” square openings between members.

Durability: Metal and wood are solid, durable, and
appropriate materials for this railing if the metal remains painted to prevent rust and the wood is regularly refi nished.

Sustainability: There is no evidence that this railing
uses low VOC paint or a renewable material. Recycled content material should be considered for this application as well as a recycled composite in the event of replacement.

Comfort: The rail is more comfortable to lean against
because of the wide, wooden top rail.
* Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated

11.28.2007
Rail Type 2: Wooden Railing

6. 12

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 261 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Rail Type 3: White Rail with Green Top Rail
Location: West end of pier, on deck and staircases
Sector Graphic: (E)
Number: approximately 400 Linear Feet
Quality assessment:

Materials: This metal rail is quite diff erent than the other two rails and occurs only in a limited area at the Observation Deck at the west end of pier. The rail is made of 2” diameter painted steel posts and bottom rail, with a painted green wooden top rail. Horizontal stainless steel cables and turnbuckles have been added in the horizontal direction to limit size of openings.

Maintenance: In general, the paint covers the metal railing consistently. The paint is worn and chipped in limited areas of high use but rust was not observed. The painted wood top rail is worn and raw wood is exposed in some areas.

Functionality/Placement: The railing does not meet current safety requirements as there are more than 4” openings between members.

Durability: Metal and wood are solid, durable, and
appropriate materials for this railing if the metal remains painted to prevent rust and the wood is regularly refi nished.

Sustainability: There is no evidence that this railing uses low VOC paint or any renewable materials. Recycled composite should be considered for wood substitute as well as recycled content metal.

Comfort: The rail is more comfortable to lean against because of the wide, wooden top rail.

Rail Type 3: Green Top Rail

7. General Observations about Railings: It was observed and confi rmed by maintenance that these railings are not holding up to the standards of the pier and require too much maintenance.*
There are missing pieces,
rust and failing sections that need constant upkeep and are unappealing to pier users. A material/railing that does not rust and requires no painting will be considered and researched further by WRT. * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated

11.28.2007
13 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 262 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Bench Type 1: Blue Seat with White Logo Base
Location: Along promenade
Sector Graphic: (A, B, D)
Number: 29
Quality assessment:

Materials: This bench is the “standard” Santa Monica
park bench found throughout the City. The base and supports for this bench are white painted pre-cast concrete with the words “Santa Monica” stamped into the base. Seat and seatbacks are 2x4 wood slats which are been painted blue. Benches are approximately 7 feet long and accommodate 4 people. There appears to be two slightly diff erent bench types, assumed to be of diff erent eras.

Maintenance: Concrete supports require painting to
maintain a clean fi nish, wood slats require regular painting and sanding or replacement if damaged.

Functionality/Placement: Benches are located in such a
way that adjacent railings block ocean view when seated. All benches face the ocean. An option should be considered that allows benches to be oriented in other directions to take advantage of sun and people watching. These benches do not have any arm rests which makes them targets for bench sleepers.

Durability: The base is heavy, not easily moved, and very durable. The wood components may be easily defaced.

Sustainability: Recycled content material should be considered in the event of replacement.

Comfort: This bench has a straight, tall back making it more comfortable for taller users. The seat and seatback surfaces are made of wood which is more comfortable than the metal benches on the pier. However, this bench could have been more comfortable if it had more lumbar support and curve on the seating surface. The wood surface dries quickly in the marine environment.

Benches
Bench Type 1
Bench Type 2
There are currently three diff erent styles of benches on the Pier.

The blue Seat/white base benches are custom made and most predominant bench on the Pier. The other benches are prefabricated and appear to have been added at diff erent dates than the original.

The 1987 Pier Design Guidelines recommends that the benches should be compatible with overall building design and are corrosion, graffi ti and vandal resistant. No particular type of bench is prescribed. 8 .

Bench Type 2: Blue Metal Hatch
Location: West side of entrance to Pacifi c Park Sector Graphic: (C) Number: 1
Quality assessment:

Materials: This bench is a modern design and approximately 6 feet long and seats 3 adults. It is fabricated of blue painted or powder coated open grid metal, with one piece seat and back. Metal tubes on sides act as legs and armrests. It is bolted to the deck. 14 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 263 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Bench Type 2: Blue Metal Hatch Continued.

Maintenance: Routine repainting is required to prevent
rust; removal from site is required if powder coating needs to be reapplied, per manufacturer’s directions. The open metal seat prevents water from ponding on the surface.

Functionality/Placement: This bench is less likely to attract bench sleepers as it is shorter and has arm rests. This bench was observed to be very well used at all times, with high demand for seating in this area.

Durability: Rust was observed at base and near welds
where the metal has been exposed.

Sustainability: Consider recycled content and sustainable materials in the event of replacement.

Comfort: Curved seat and seatback provides lumbar support, however the grid open metal pattern is uncomfortable to sit on, especially in shorts. The curved shape of the seat and seatback is not conducive to sitting at any angle other than straight-ahead.

Bench Type 3: Victorian Bench
Location: West end of pier; Sector Graphic: (E)
Number: 2
Quality assessment:

Materials: Victorian style six foot bench that seats four adults. Bench is made of 3 ornate cast iron supports/arm rests with a composite slat board. Bench is bolted to wood deck.

Maintenance: The benches are inside the Observation
Deck and are in excellent shape. Composite boards are easily replaced if they were to become damaged.

Functionality/Placement: This bench design captures the “Victorian” character of the carousel, but does not blend well with the more rustic pier aesthetics at the western end. No other benches or site furnishings found on the Pier match this style. The bench appears lighter and less solid than the exterior benches.

Durability: Composite boards may be subject to scratching and carving. The lightweight construction of this bench appears to be much less durable than other site furnishings.

Sustainability: Composite slats could have been made of recycled content but are not identifi ed as such.

Comfort: Shape, materials, and armrests make this the
most comfortable bench on the pier.

Bench Type 3
9 .

General Observations about Benches: It was found that not only was seating insuffi cient on the pier but those which were provided did not meet aesthetic, functionality or comfort expectations. Maintenance expressed a need for at least a dozen more.*
In the Urban Design Plan, WRT, in consultation with the City and SMPRC, will identify additional locations for public seating and will give guidance about how seating should be arranged. * Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated

11.28.2007
15 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 264 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Tables
Table Type 1: 4-foot Square Orange Powder Coated Table (seats 8) Location: Entrance to the Pacifi c Park
Sector Graphic: (C)
Number: 10
Note: Privately owned
Quality assessment:

Materials: Prefabricated outdoor picnic table, with top and seats made of vinyl coated metal mesh. The seats are attached to table top with painted tubular metal legs. An umbrella opening is provided, but none of the tables have umbrellas.

Maintenance: The vinyl coating on the tables allows the table to be easily wiped or hosed off for cleaning. However, it looked as if daily maintenance had not been performed; many tables were coated with a layer of dust and/or dirt.

Functionality/Placement: The vinyl coating defl ects
sunlight, keeping this table cooler when placed in the direct sunlight.

All of the outdoor tables are located at the entrance to the amusement park. Although this arrangement is convenient for patrons who purchase food at adjacent stands, there are no quiet places to sit at a table.

Handicap accessible tables should be made available; tables provided have permanent benches on all four sides, leaving no roll up access for persons in wheelchairs. A table with one open side or alternative table design with easy accessibility is strongly suggested.

Durability: The tables all seemed to be withstanding the ocean/salty conditions. There was no observed rust and the tables appeared to be fairly new.

Sustainability: There are no apparent sustainable aspects to these furnishings. In the event of replacement, low VOC paint, recycled content, and local materials should be utilized wherever possible.

Comfort: This is a relatively comfortable outdoor cafeteria table. The seats are wide enough to comfortably seat two adults on each bench. The edges are rounded and have a plastic coating which provides a level of safety and comfort. They generally experience rapid customer turnover.

The Pier currently has one main outdoor eating area adjacent to the main food vendors and Pacifi c Park. There are two styles of tables and they are intermingled on either side of the amusement park entrance walkway.

Table Type 1
10 .
16 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 265 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Table Type 2: Round Metal Table
Location: Entrance to Pacifi c Park
Sector Graphic: (C)
Number: 9
Note: Privately owned
Quality assessment:

Materials: Three-Foot diameter metal table with three
attached bench seats. Tables seat six adults very tightly and are more appropriate for three persons. They are colorful, with bright pink and yellow seats with white tables. Fabric umbrellas are provided at each table.

Maintenance: The metal fi nish is chipped and limited rust was observed.

Functionality/Placement: These tables are heavily utilized because they serve all the food vendors at the Pacifi c Park entrance.

It would be desirable to have more tables in this area, and designate another area on the pier where people could eat as well.

Durability: The round metal tables have some rust.

Sustainability: There are no apparent sustainable aspects to this piece of furniture. In the event of replacement, low VOC paint, recycled content, and local materials should be used where possible.

Comfort: The seat and table top are made of painted
metal. The leg room under this table is small to accommodate a group of adult users.

Table Type 2
11 .

General Observations about Tables: The existing tables provide insuffi cient seating and lack basic ADA standards. Table 1 is maintenance friendly and easy to clean, however table 2 has signifi cant imperfections mainly rust, due to inappropriate material choices. Any additional tables to be maintained by Pier Maintenance would have to be easy to clean, ADA accessible, adaptable for diff erent types of users, and aesthetically cohesive throughout the pier. New tables could possibly be an opportunity to get private owners to update their tables. Setting a standard for furniture should be enforced.
17 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 266 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Receptacle Type 1: “Barrel” Receptacle
Location: Around Pacifi c Park
Sector Graphic: (C, F)
Number: 4
Note: Privately owned
Quality assessment:

Materials: Barrel with wood staves wrapped with metal
bands and a plastic funnel lid. Wood is unfi nished. Receptacles look old.

Maintenance: The wood is unfi nished and would require
sealant to increase longevity. The plastic funnel lid (white) shows dirt easily.

Functionality/Placement: The plastic funnel lid helps to keep trash in the barrel and hidden from view; however, it is not very aesthetically pleasing. Visually, this receptacle does not match any other site furnishings found on the pier.

Durability: The metal straps around the outside of the barrel have small amounts of rust, and the screws holding these straps are rusted.

Sustainability: No sustainable elements are obvious in this furniture. Use of renewable wood could be implemented in the event of replacement.

Trash Receptacles
Trash Receptacle 1: Barrel
Trash Receptacle 2: Santa Monica logo
Trash receptacles are a necessary and important site furnishing. They should be viewed as another opportunity to strengthen the design concept and cohesion.

More recycling receptacles should be provided throughout the pier to encourage recycling. The 1987 Pier Design Guidelines recommends that the trash receptacles are compatible with overall building design and are corrosion, graffi ti and vandal resistant. No particular type of receptacle is prescribed. The Design Guidelines do require that dumpsters for the various concessions are screened. 12 .

Receptacle Type 2: Concrete Cylinder with Santa Monica Logo Location: Present in all zones on the pier.

Sector Graphic: (A-G)
Number: 45, most predominant trash receptacle on the pier Quality assessment:

Materials: Custom pre-cast light colored concrete cylinder with metal collar around center hole, as well as bronze City of Santa Monica Logo. These pre-cast receptacles are new.

Maintenance: Requires little maintenance, weight makes it diffi cult to move or take, which is why Maintenance expressed their preference for this receptacle.* There is no rust and weathering, but on-going
cleaning is necessary.

Functionality/Placement: The pre-cast concrete is a good choice for marine environments since they contain no metal and painting is not necessary.
* Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated

11.28.2007
18 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 267 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Receptacle Type 2: Concrete Cylinder with Santa Monica Logo Continued.

Durability: The receptacle appears to be very durable concrete construction, with few signs of wear or need of for replacement.

Sustainability: No sustainable factors appear to be considered for development of this product in regard to materials. However, the long life span of the receptacle reduces need for replacement and thus reduces waste.

Receptacle Type 3: Blue Metal Trash Receptacle
Location: West end of pier (E), South edge
Sector Graphic: (F, G)
Number: 21, second most predominant trash receptacle on pier.

Quality assessment:

Materials: Fabricated blue powder coated painted metal
with vertical slats and horizontal bands. A metal liner holds the trash.

Maintenance: The receptacle is very rusted, faded and
appears dirty.

Functionality/Placement: This trash receptacle has no
lid, exposing trash to seagulls and wind.

Durability: Rust is forming where the paint has failed.

Metal looks unsubstantial for the use and marine environment.

Sustainability: No sustainable elements are associated
with this product. A recycled metal alternative should be considered in the event of replacing such furnishings.

Trash Receptacle 3: Blue Metal
13 .

Receptacle Type 4: Blue Metal Recycling Receptacle
Location: West end of pier; Sector Graphic: (E),
South edge (G)
Number: 4
Quality assessment:

Materials: Fabricated blue powder coated painted metal
with vertical slats and horizontal bands with a standard tapered formed lid, similar in style to trash can. A liner holds the recycled material. A blue and white “recycle” sign designates this bin for recycling.

Maintenance: The container was worn and not clean.

Regular repainting is required.

Functionality/Placement: Site recycle bins do not separate any recyclable materials and are not clearly labeled as to which recyclables they accept. The Pier should include more recycling stations and they should be placed along side trash receptacles. Containers that accommodate multiple recyclable materials should also be implemented. Recycled materials include, but are not limited to, newspaper, plastics, glass, food, compost, etc.

Durability: Rust is forming where the paint has failed, but with routine repainting this is a durable option.

Sustainability: No sustainable elements are associated
with this product. A recycled metal alternative should be considered in the event of a replacement.

Trash Receptacle 3: Blue Metal Recycling
19 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 268 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 14 .

General Observations of Trash Receptacles: The most functional receptacle was the Santa Monica custom concrete designed bin. The rest are made of corrosive materials that don’t match, are hard to maintain and are easily vandalized or stolen. WRT will look into receptacles similar to the Santa Monica concrete variety and suggest additional opportunities for placement. Additional recyclable bins are also suggested that match the current receptacles. Providing adequate and appropriate receptacles will help to keep the pier clean.

Receptacle Type 5: Recycled Content Receptacle
Location: In enclosed observation deck (E)
Number: 1
Quality assessment:

Materials: Made of 100% recycled content plastic
boards that match the adjacent bench with cast iron details.

Maintenance: The receptacle is inside the enclosed observation deck and is in excellent shape. Composite boards can easily be replaced if they were to become damaged.

Functionality/Placement: This receptacle design captures the “Victorian” character of the carousel, but does not blend well with the more rustic pier aesthetics at the western end. The receptacle appears lighter and less solid than the exterior receptacles.

Durability: Composite boards may be subject to
scratching and carving. The lightweight construction of this receptacle appears to be much less durable than other site furnishings located outside.

Sustainability: Receptacle is made of 100% recycled
content plastic boards.

Trash Receptacle 5: Recycled Content Receptacle
20 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 269 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Curb Type 1: 6x6 Wood Timber Curb – Painted Yellow
Location: Central Walkway; Sector Graphic: (A, B); South Parking area (G) and used for wheel stops in parking area.

Number: approximate 200 Linear Feet
Quality assessment:

Materials: Painted wood timber.

Maintenance: Repainting required on a regular basis.

Functionality/Placement: This curb defi nes the maintenance/fi re lane. This curb off ers no aesthetic benefi t to the pier experience and could pose a tripping hazard.

Durability: The timber appears durable enough to satisfy function though edges of wood are becoming worn and repainting is necessary to maintain color.

Sustainability: Any wood used should comply with sustainable forestry practices. Alternative renewable materials should be considered, such as a high recycled content composite.

Curb Type 2: 8x10 Wood Timber Curb – Painted Red
Location: Central Walkway; Sector Graphic: (A, B)
Number: approximate 200 Linear Feet
Quality assessment:

Comfort: N/A
Materials: Painted Wood timber.

Maintenance: Repainting required on a regular basis
Functionality/Placement: Curb required for traffi c management and directs vehicular traffi c into parking lot. These curbs off er no aesthetic interest to pier experience and pose a tripping hazard for pedestrians.

Durability: The timber appears durable enough to satisfy function though edges of wood are becoming worn and repainting is necessary in places.

Sustainability: Any wood used should comply with sustainable forestry practices. Otherwise alternative renewable materials should be considered, such as a high recycled content composite.

Curbs
The curbs found on The Pier are made of heavy timbers which have been bolted to the decking. These timbers serve to guide traffi c and defi ne the fi re lane. Curbs are not defi ned in the 1987 Design Guidelines but the Guidelines do require timber wheel stops.

Curb Type 1: Yellow
Curb Type 2: Red
15 .

General Observations about Curbs: It was concluded that the curbs’ biggest weakness was its upkeep of repainting and replacement.* They function properly, however WRT will look into opportunities to cut down on maintenance on this element of the pier.**
* Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated

11.28.2007
21 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 270 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Decking
The pier’s top decking material is made up primarily of 2x12 pieces of lumber. In most places the decking runs perpendicular to the edge of the pier, however, there are areas where the planks are mounted diagonally at a 45 degree angle to the sides of the pier. The 1987 Design Guidelines require exposed wood decking for all pier walkways, access and service drives and parking areas.

Decking Type 1: Pedestrian Areas
Location: All wood areas for pedestrian use; Sector Graphic: (A-G) Area: approximately 180,000 Square Feet
Quality assessment:

Materials: Exposed 12” wide pressure-treated wooden
decking planks, unfi nished.

Maintenance: The wood planks were generally in good
condition. There were no signifi cant gaps identifi ed, and it appears that where gaps had occurred, they had been corrected. Wood decking requires routine washing, sealing (except for pressure treated wood), and replacement as necessary due to wear and exposure.

Functionality/Placement: When well cared for wood
decking makes for an enjoyable and marine oriented walking surface.

Durability: The decking shows limited wear in the pedestrian areas. Challenges for wood decking include the variability of wood products, twisting, warping, splitting, etc. Also, wear of deck can leave hazardous exposed nails. Deck boards should be replaced when nails are exposed.

Sustainability: Any wood used should comply with sustainable forestry practices. Otherwise alternative renewable materials should be considered, such as a high recycled content composite.

Comfort: The wood decking is comfortable to walk on
provided it has been adequately maintained.

Decking Type 1: Pedestrian
Decking Type 2: Asphalt 16 .

Decking Type 2: Asphalt covered decking
Location: Central Walkway; Sector Graphic: (B)
Area: approximately 5,400 Square Feet
Quality assessment:

Materials: Asphalt coated wood deck with corrugated
metal panels
Maintenance: Occasional cleaning is required, along with routine repainting of the stripes.

Functionality/Placement: The metal sheets appear to
cover a mechanical chase. An alternative to this design is desired as this option is inconsistent with the requirement of the Design Guidelines. 22 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 271 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Decking Type 2: Asphalt covered decking continued.

Durability: The asphalt was cracking and showing signs of wear.

Sustainability: Materials more sustainable than asphalt and steel should be used where available.

Comfort: The asphalt rises above the level of the wooden deck and creates an uneven surface. The corrugated metal sheets are uncomfortable to walk on due to their uneven surface. Pedestrians did not appear to prefer to walk on this surface unless necessary.

Note: Asphalt covered decking and corrugated metal panels are scheduled to be removed and replaced with wood decking.* General Observations about Decking: We have identifi ed that there are/were signifi cant gaps in the decking. Large areas of repair have been corrected by maintenance by replacing said areas with “patches” of decking. However, overall decking was in good shape on the main walk. And it was noted that there are plans to replace decking with 3” thick boards, instead the 2” boards that are currently used. ** Therefore, gaps and general repairs will be reduced. Sealing of decking is not necessary due to the fact that the boards are pressure washed.*** The painted parking lines wear and fl ake and need to be repainted several times each year. WRT will make recommendations to be included in the Maintenance Plan about alternative approaches to striping parking lots with more durable materials
* Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 ** Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated 11.28.2007 *** Todd: Gemni Forest Products
Decking Type 3: Parking lot and vehicular traveled decking Location: Parking Deck; Sector Graphic: (G)
Area: approximately 83,000 Square Feet
Quality assessment:

Materials: Pressure treated wooden decking planks, 12” wide, painted with parking lot striping.

Maintenance: These areas appear to have been replaced at diff erent times. Decking should be replaced where cracks and gaps pose a hazard.

Re-striping should also occur on a regular basis to ensure a cohesive fl ow within the lot.

Functionality/Placement: The parking deck planks appear uneven and worn when compared to “pedestrian only” areas. The boards are spaced further apart and in many cases greatly exceed ¼” between fl oor boards.

Durability: The vehicular decking is signifi cantly more worn than pedestrian decking due to heavy and constant use. Raised knots and nails were observed. Typical challenges of wood decking include dealing with variability of wood products, twisting, warping, splitting, etc. .

Sustainability: Any wood used should comply with sustainable forestry practices. Otherwise alternative renewable materials should be considered, such as a high recycled content composite.

Comfort: The uneven surface is bumpy while driving in a car.

Decking Type 3: Parking Lot
17 .
23 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 272 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Lighting
There are fi ve diff erent lighting fi xtures existing on the Pier. They are of assorted designs and styles and various heights. Lighting is predominant on the perimeter of the pier, and less prevalent in the parking lot or central areas. The majority of the lighting fi xtures appear to be of diff erent vintages and some are in questionable or non-working condition. (Observed at nighttime, about 20% of the lights were not lit). The Pier lacks a coherent theme in lighting and a consistency in fi xtures. The Design Guidelines dictate that there is a minimum of 4 footcandles and a maximum of 8 footcandles in lighting levels. Style and fi xture type is not prescribed but recommends that the fi xtures are compatible with overall building design and are corrosion, graffi ti and vandal resistant.

Lighting Type 1: Cobra Head Light Fixture
Location: First 100 feet of Central Walkway
Sector Graphic: (A)
Number: 12
Quality assessment:

Materials: Standard cobra head fi xture made of metal
with glass lamp cover on a painted white metal pole, 18 feet high.

Maintenance: Routine replacement is required for expired bulbs. Painted white metal poles need annual painting and occasional cleaning, and maintenance has confi rmed that painting the tall lights is not a problem with the use of a crane.*
According to Bill
Bollinger, the Pier Maintenance supervisor, there was a previous desire to replace the 26” Cobra Head” lights with the other ornamental lights along the rest of the deck.

Functionality/Placement: Tall overhead lighting serves to illuminate the main path; however they provide no pedestrian ambiance on the pier at night. Lights of this style are generally associated with vehicular traffi c and parking. This lighting arrangement is not appealing for a pedestrian oriented walking space.

Durability: Many of the Cobra head light poles are severely rusted and the bases are weakened by the corrosive environment.

Sustainability: Fixture should use an effi cient, low wattage lamp where possible. Also poles should be made of renewable, high recycled content materials.
* Bill Bollinger: Pier Maintenance Supervisor. Per email dated

11.28.2007
Lighting Type 1: Cobra Head
18 .
24 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Lighting Type 2: Grey Arched Light Fixture
Location: Succeeds the cobra head fi xture down the second half of the pier, wraps around the observation deck,
and continues down the east side of the deck. Sector Graphic: (A, B, D, E, F) Number: 40
Quality assessment:

Materials: Ornate metal light pole, 15 feet, is painted grey with a tear drop shaped glass lamp cover, in a “historic” style. Hanging banner or pot hooks are provided, however there were no banners or fl ower pots observed.

Maintenance: The fi xtures appear relatively new and in good condition. They require routine replacement for expired bulbs. Grey poles may need occasional cleaning and repainting.

Functionality/Placement: The poles are spaced at
approximately 40 feet on center. Light levels felt safe and comfortable for the pedestrian, when operating. The shorter fi xture has a more human scale and seems to fi t in with the character of the Pier better. This pole is more ornate than the other fi xtures on the Pier, with curvilinear appendages and unique globes. The dark color hides dirt and blemishes better than the white poles.

Durability: These light poles are durable and showed few signs of rust. Provided adequate attention is given to regular painting these poles should remain durable.

Sustainability: The fi xture should use an effi cient, low wattage lamp where possible. Also poles should be made of renewable, high recycled content materials.

Lighting Type 3: Wooden Light Fixture
Location: Observation/fi shing decks. Located around the observation deck and the lower fi shing decks; Sector
Graphic: (E)
Number: 7
Quality assessment:

Materials: 8x8 wooden pole, 15 foot tall, with wood cross arms supporting two metal light fi xtures. Fixtures appear to be sodium vapor (orange glow) at night.

Maintenance: The wood is weathered and pressure treated.

Maintenance is necessary to prevent the wood from becoming weathered looking.

Functionality/Placement: The design of this fi xture has horizontal arms which provide bird roosts. Bird repellent measures (“bird spikes”) appear to be an after market addition. The fi xture is a box “spotlight” style that provides little aesthetic character.

Durability: The wooden pole is very weathered looking.

It also has a shorter lifespan than its metal counterparts and more susceptible to vandalism; concrete or fi berglass may be more desirable for durability.

Sustainability: The fi xture should use an effi cient, low wattage lamp wherever possible. Also poles should be made of renewable and high recycled content materials.

Lighting Type 2: Arched Fixture
Lighting Type 3: Wooden Fixture
19 .
25 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Lighting Type 4: Box Light Fixture
Location: Illuminates the perimeter of the southern parking deck; Sector Graphic: (G) Number: 7
Quality assessment:

Materials: 8x8 painted wooden pole (teal green), 20-25 feet tall with a dual, box light fi xtures mounted at top. An additional light fi xture is provided shining onto beach.

Conduit runs outside the pole with exposed junction boxes. Bird spikes are provided to prevent roosting.

Maintenance: The wooden pole is in need of new paint, as it is noticeably peeling. Because it is wood, regular maintenance and upkeep will require the light to function at its best.

Functionality/Placement: The lights illuminate the perimeter of the parking lot, but there is a lack of lighting in the middle of the deck.

Durability: The wood is worn and requires regular painting to maintain fi nish.

Sustainability: The fi xture should use an effi cient, low wattage lamp where possible. Also poles should be made of renewable and high recycled content materials.

Lighting Type 5: Bell Shaped Light Fixture
Location: Eastern edge of pier near Carousel; Sector Graphic: (G) Number: 8
Quality assessment:

Materials: Gray/green painted round metal pole with 2 bell-shaped fi xtures on arched posts mounted at top of pole. Poles are approximately 15 feet high.

Maintenance: The painted poles are well worn and scratched. The inside of fi xture is very rusted.

Functionality/Placement: When observed at night, these lights provided a comfortable level of light for pedestrians. There did not appear to be “hot” bright areas or deep dark areas in this area by the carousel. The light poles are appropriately scaled to function in a human scale/promenade experience. However, these lighting fi xtures are not consistent in style with any other fi xture on Pier. They are located in only one corner of the deck instead of being integrated into the rest of the design.

Durability: The metal seems to be very durable for this situation if painted surface is maintained to prevent rust.

Sustainability: The fi xture should use an effi cient, low wattage lamp where possible. Also poles should be made of renewable and high recycled content materials.

Lighting Type 4:

Box Light Fixture
Lighting Type 5:

Bell Fixture
20 .

General Observations of Lighting: Some of the lighting featured on the pier have the festive character the pier desires, where others are more utilitarian in nature. Because of the many diff erent lighting styles, no overall lighting feature contributes substantially to the pier’s character. The Type 2 Arched Fixture is the most in keeping with the desired historical compatibility and pier character but its limited use does not promote a consistent image. Currently the varied fi xtures create a variety of maintenance concerns, including corrosion in the ocean environment, bird perches, and the need for repainting. WRT has noted that a comprehensive and cohesive lighting fi xture will substantially contribute to the urban design character of the pier as well as create uniform maintenance requirements and uniform light levels. 26 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) While these items were not identifi ed in the scope of the Urban Design assessment and therefore not investigated to the same level as the previous items, they were observed as critical to the pier’s character and environment. These items are included here to further address the additional features that make up the urban context.

Features
Feature Type 1: Telescopes
Location: Along the northern edge of the Central Walkway; Sector Graphic: (B, D)
Number: 11
Quality assessment:

Materials: Grey painted prefabricated metal pedestals
mounted to pier decking, with a step for child’s use.

Maintenance: Moderate rust was observed. Routine
cleaning and occasional repainting is required for upkeep.

Functionality/Placement: We noticed many of the
telescopes were in use every time we visited the pier. Telescopes look out towards the beach, water, City of Santa Monica, and Santa Monica Mountains in the distance.

Durability: The telescopes appear to be high grade and
appropriate for this application.

Sustainability: No particular sustainable elements
apparent in this feature.

Feature Type 2: Designated Smoking Areas
Location: Four locations throughout the pier, two on the observation deck, one on the western edge and
southern edge of amusement park adjacent to railing.

Sector Graphic: (D, E, F, G)
Number: 8
Quality assessment:

Comfort: The platforms allow for a designated place to
smoke. Smoking is prohibited on other parts of the pier.

Materials: The grey painted plywood sheet with smoking
urn sits directly on pier decking.

Maintenance: The platform requires regular painting and clean up of garbage around smoking area.

Functionality/Placement: Smoking will be banned from
beach in the future which would eliminate the need for this element.

Durability: Smoking stations appear to address a
designated need but are not integrally designed as part of the pier.

They appear to be a temporary solution.

Sustainability: No sustainable elements in existing
feature.

General Observations of Smoking Areas: Recommendations for more compatible smoking receptacles and smoking areas will be identifi ed in the Urban Design Recommendations.

Feature 1: Telescope
Feature 2: Smoking Areas

21. 27

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Feature Type 3: Fishing Utilities
Location: Lower level fi shing decks at east end of pier Sector Graphic: (E, D)
Number: 3 Sinks
Quality assessment:

The Design Guidelines identifi es that cutting boards,
cleaning sinks and railings shall be consistent and compatible with the rest of the pier. It also suggests that “new construction at fi shing pier shall also evoke whimsy and fantasy.” There is no whimsy or fantasy in these utilitarian services.

Materials: Wooden 12x24 fi sh cutting boards are located at various random intervals along the metal rail. The wood is untreated and heavily carved. Three free-standing pre-fabricated stainless steel sinks with fi sh cleaning stations.

Maintenance: The wooden cutting boards are easy to
detach and replace when necessary. The metal sink design is simple and easily cleaned using a hose.

Functionality/Placement: Sinks and water source are
easily accessible at all lower fi shing decks. Currently sinks are provided as well as wooden cutting boards attached to existing railings. There are also movable aluminum garbage bins for use by fi shermen.

Durability: Perhaps more permanent trash receptacles
could be designed for use by fi shermen specifi cally. Stainless steel sinks seem to be very high quality and used heavily. Amenities need to be durable due to heavy use of the pier by fi shermen.

Sustainability: No sustainable elements noted in existing features.

Feature Type 4: Planters (belong to restaurant-private property) Location: Near entrance to Pacifi c Park (C) and near restaurant at end of pier (E); Sector Graphic:

Number: 4
Quality assessment:

Design Guidelines: The Design Guidelines include a
statement that landscape features shall be minimized and not compete with the architecture. Species shall be compatible with the beach environment.

Materials: One wood and three plastic pots
Maintenance: Maintained adequately by concession.

Functionality/Placement: Planters can be a very pleasing site amenity; however this has not been executed successfully due to a lack of coherency.

Durability: Wood or heavy plastic planters are
appropriate and durable materials for this application. Existing planters were not in need of replacement or refurbishing.

Sustainability: Wood, especially harvested using
responsible forestry techniques, is a preferred alternative over plastic unless it is a recycled plastic product.

Feature 3: Fishing Utilities
Feature 4: Planters
22 .
28 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Feature Type 5: Bike Racks
Location: Four locations with three diff erent styles of bike racks:

A row of two standard metal racks on the west side of
Pacifi c Park, one metal “low profi le” rack next to the restaurant at end of pier, one “wave” rack just east of the Carousel, and one “wave” rack at beginning of the
pedestrian walk; Sector Graphic: (D, E, F, G)
Number: 5 racks total
Quality assessment:

Materials: Metal, Blue Paint
Maintenance: Some rust on bike racks where not
painted.

Functionality/Placement: The bike rack at the entrance
of the pedestrian walk has room for eight bikes and was full upon one observation; consideration should be given to adding more parking spaces at this location. The rack at the west end of the Pier has room for eight bikes; two bikes were parked at this rack. “Low profi le” racks are less desirable because they do not support the bike on its frame; bikes to fall over more easily in this style of rack. There were no bikes parked at the other three rack sites. Effi cient rack system would help encourage fi sherman and pier visitors to use bicycle transportation.

Durability: With proper paint, bike racks should be able to survive the pier climate with little rust damage. Painted bike racks are easily scraped by bikes and locks. Stainless steel is more durable and will not rust but is more expensive.

Sustainability: Bike racks encourage non-motorized
transportation. Recycled content metals should be used wherever possible.

General Observations: Bike valet stations were introduced to the Pier in 2007 during the Twilight Dance Series and were very popular. The Urban Design Study will address possible locations for bicycle valet stations.

Feature 5: Bike Racks
23 .

Feature Type 6: Security Barriers
Location: The City installed approximately 3’x3’x3.5 boxes around the Pier.

Quality assessment:

Materials: Wood, and fi lled with sand
Maintenance: Originally, Pier Maintenance planted plants in the boxes, but the water damaged the deck boards, so the plants were removed and plywood was placed on the tops.

Functionality/Placement: Sited to create a traffi c barrier.

General Observations: These security barriers are large, and block pedestrian fl ow. Bollards that require little maintenance could serve the pier better and are recommended in the pier guidelines. If planters are to be used, we suggest that they follow the design guidelines.

Feature Type 6: Security Barriers
29 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Feature Type 7: Parking Kiosk and Pedestrian Access
Location: The kiosk to the parking lot is located at the entrance to the Newcomb Deck. A pedestrian walkway, designated by chain link and raised curbs, leads pedestrians to and from the Newcomb Deck to the Municipal Pier.

Quality assessment:

Functionality/Placement: The pedestrian path,
designated by a chain link fence, is not in character with the pier and appears temporary, but the function is appropriate for protection from vehicular activity. Options such as bollards and diff erential fl ooring material can serve the same purpose and create a safe walking space for pedestrians. The Design Guidelines state that the pier is to develop a unique, pedestrian oriented environment with ease of access and user friendliness as a prime design consideration. Improvements to the pedestrian circulation will create a better pedestrian environment.

General Observations: The pedestrian walkway presents an opportunity to improve the ambiance of the Pier and create a walkway that adheres to the goals of the Design Guidelines. These goals encourage improvements that relate to the Pier and create a safe, functional and appealing circulation path and entrance to the Pier for both vehicles and pedestrians.

Feature Type 7: Parking Kiosk
Feature Type 8: Observation Deck
Location: At the west end of the Pier
Number: l
General Observations: The Observation Deck at the west end of the Pier is a rarely used resource. It is an enclosed area and access is from a staircase or by an elevator. The Observation Deck is furnished with benches and a trash can and is painted red and green, which is complementary to the adjacent Mexican Restaurant, but not to the public nature of the Pier. The Santa Monica Pier Restoration Corporation Staff has indicated that they will install historic displays in this area as part of the Pier’s 100th Anniversary. Selection of paint colors, repair of windows, replacement of light fi xtures, and installation of seating and tables would add to the ambiance. Guidance about how to treat this area will be included in the Urban Design Study.

Feature Type 8: Observation Deck
24 .
30 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Feature Type 9: Display Cases
Location: Display cases are located near the Police Sub-station and the elevators at the west end.

Quality assessment:

Maintenance: Unless display cases are cleaned regularly and the material updated, they give an appearance of neglect.

Functionality/Placement: Their current location is not
an ideal spot for visitors to congregate and read. The displays are right outside of the bathrooms, they are up a level of stairs and not easily accessible to everyone, and they are tucked away out of view.

General Observations: Display cases create an opportunity to share important information about the Pier, businesses and current activities.

When part of a regular program, they create interest and educate Pier visitors.

Feature Type 9: Historic Display Cases
Feature Type 10: Pier Skirting
Location: Around the pilings of the pier where pedestrian accessibility is an issue
Quality assessment:

Materials: wood fencing

General Observations: The skirting was constructed to prevent unauthorized access under the pier and security, while the existing Design Guidelines suggest whimsical treatment. Our observation is that the skirting/fencing should not compete with the festive activity on the pier and should remain ‘background’.

Feature type 10: Pier Skirting
25 .
31 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Feature Type11: Outdoor Dining Barriers
Location: Outside Pacifi c Park dining areas and restaurant located on the west end of the pier. These structures are privately maintained.

Quality assessment:

Functionality/Placement: Serve their purpose of
sectioning off and privatizing the eating spaces.

General Observations: Each restaurant on the Pier provides barriers for its outdoor dining. The Design Guidelines state that development of exterior dining, lounge and vending areas is strongly encouraged.

However to match the architectural standards of the guidelines they should still retain the whimsical character that matches the rest of the architecture, which the current barriers do not. Although these are privately constructed barriers around the tenants’ leasehold areas, they are highly visible feature of the Pier. The Urban Design Study will provide guidance about alternative designs for barriers that enhance the ambiance of the Pier.

Feature Type 11: Restaurant barrier
Feature Type 12: Gazebos
Location: Newcomb Deck, at the southeast corner of the Pier.

Number: 2
Quality assessment:

Materials: Steel, same as railing system
Maintenance: Same maintenance and material as the
railings. Yearly painting and touch-ups.

Functionality/Placement: Main seating for the volleyball courts is provided by the bleachers to the south of the parking lot. While the gazebos fi t in with the character of the pier, they are architectural “follies”.

General Observations: The Gazebos were intended to be rest areas for visitors, but lack seating, cover and functionality. In consultation with the City the Urban Design Study, will make recommendations as to how these amenities can be enhanced.

Feature Type 12: Gazebo
26 .
32 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Feature Type 13: Signage
Location: Along deck. More concentrated at west end.

Quality assessment:

Functionality/Placement: WRT noticed a lack of signage
for bathroom locations and overall directional signs. Regulation signs were noticeable and suffi cient. The main Kiosk is large but placed off the main path. It provides visitors with useful information but seems to go unnoticed by many visitors.

General Observations: Signs advising the public about acceptable rules of conduct on the Pier (e.g. no diving, no alcohol, etc.) are placed throughout the Pier. These signs are of metal, about and were installed in 2007. Consolidation of information on these signs has reduced clutter. A diff erent location for the pier’s informations kiosk should be considered as well as a more inviting display around it to attract visitors. The Urban Design Study will recommend an expansion of the signage program and kiosk display.

Feature Type 13: Pier Visitor
Conduct Signs
Feature Type 13:

Visitor Kiosk
27 .
33 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) SANTA MONICA PIER ASSESSMENT- Quantitative Assessment Chart SECTOR OF PIER ASSESSED (Based on Graphic)
SITE FEATURE ABCDEFG Total NOTES
RailingBlue Metal 5 14 6 4 29 Metal tubing, painted blue, stainless steel cable, metal socket joints Blue Metal with Wooden Top Rail 5 14 6 4 29 Metal tubing, painted blue, stainless steel cable, wooden 2x6 railing White with Green Top Rail 5 14 6 4 29 Painted wood seat boards, painted white concrete base BenchesBlue seat/White base 5 14 6 4 29 Painted wood seat boards, painted white concrete base Blue metal 1 1 Prefabricated, powdercoated, blue metalWooden/black metal 2 2 Composite board seat, painted black metal frame
total 32TablesOrange/metal 10 10 Plastic coated metal meshRound/Colored seats 9 9 Prefabricated, painted metal
total 19Trash ReceptaclesImitation "Barrel" 31
4 Wood staves, metal bands
Concrete Cylinder with SM Logo 5 14 13 6 5 2 45 Custom made, bare cast concrete, metal logo, "Santa Monica" letteringBlue Metal Recycling 11 1 1 4 Metal vertical slats, horizontal metal bands, painted blue,"Recycle" sign Blue Metal 4 6 11 21 Metal vertical slats, horizontal metal bands, painted blue total 74CurbWood Timber Curb - Painted Yellow Bolted down timber 4x4's, painted yellowWood Timber Curb - Painted Red Bolted down timber 4x4's, painted redtotalDeckingPedestrain Areas Untreated wooden decking boardsAsphalt Covered Decking Asphalt and corrugated metal panelsParking Lot and Vehicular Decking Wooden decking boards, painted parking lot stripingtotalLightingWhite/Cobra Head 27 2 11 Standard cobra, metal pole, painted white, glass lamp, 18' highGrey/Single Curved 9 17 14 40 Metal pole, gray, tear drop glass lamp cover, 15' highWood/Double Head 3 3 Wooden pole, metal fixture
Shoe Box/deck parking 52
7 Wooden pole, box light
Green/Curved/ Bell 8
8 Metal pole, gray/green paint
total 69FeaturesTelescopes 11 Grey painted prefabricated metal pedestals Smoking Areas 2222
8 Grey painted plywood sheet with smoking urn
Fishing Amenities (sinks) 21
3 Wooden fish cleaning platforms, stainless steel sinks Planters 21
3 An assortment of wood and plastic pots
Bike racks 121
4 Metal, blue paint
34 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 283
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 284
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol SANTA MONICA PIER ASSESSMENT *A-Pier Entrance -Extends from Bridge entrance to parking lot entrance *B-Pier (First Half)
-Section of Asphalt topped pier
*C-Amusement Park Entrance*D-Pier(Second Half)
-End of fi rst half of pier to the observation deck
*E-Observation Deck
-Bo
*F-West and South deck
-Deck behind and to the west of the amusement park
*G-Parking DeckLegend
Pier Sectors
35 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 285
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 286
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol Trash Receptacle
Blue Metal-recyclable
Located full length
of Pier
-4 Total
RailingsRailing top Located full length of Pier Lighting Wooden pole fi xtureLocated around perimeter of deck at end of pier only-3 Total Bench
Wooden Bench (trex)Located inside site deck -2 Total
Trash ReceptacleSanta Monica Pier CustomLocated full length of Pier-45 Total LightingWhite overhead fi xtureLocated along fi rst half of pier-12 Total Curb
Wooden Curb (painted red)
along Pier and Deck. By Amusement park.

CurbWooden Curb (painted yellow) along Pier and Deck. By amusement park.

BenchWooden Bench- Santa Monica CustomLocated along entire stretch of pier-29 Total TableRound table with UmbrellaLocated by amusement park only-9 Total TableCoated Metal TableLocated by amusement park only-10 Total LightingGrey arched fi xtureLocated along second half of pier and west deck-40 Total

SANTA MONICA PIER ASSESSMENT
CurbWooden Curb (painted yellow) along parking deck only LightingGrey Deck FixtureLocated on east deck only-8 Total Railings
Wooden Railing top Located on east deck onlyRailingsWooden Railing top for ramp Located on east deck only DeckingDecking at transition across bridge
*A-Pier Entrance -Extends from Bridge entrance to parking lot entrance*B-Pier (First Half) -Section of Asphalt topped pier
*C-Amusement Park Entrance*D-Pier(Second Half) -End of fi rst half of pier to the observation deck*E-Observation Deck*F-West and South deck -Deck behind and to the west of the amusement park*G-Parking Deck Fact and Figures (Approx... Quantities)
Trash ReceptaclesWooden Barrel-4 TotalLocated all within the amusement park entrance-4 Total BenchMetal coated benchLocated along the west side of the deck1 Total Trash ReceptacleBlue Metal Located south deck and parking lot-21 Total Smoking Pad
Designated smoking areas throughout pier and deck-4 Total LightingGrey Parking Deck FixtureLocated in deck parking lot only-7 Total G
F
B
Amusement Railings Park
Boards designate fi shing locations.

RailingsStair railingsLocated at end of pier only
D
E
DeckingWorn and separated boards on the parking deck.

SignageFishing is allowed only at designated areas on the pier.

A
C
Metal PierAccess to underside of pier.Extends length of pier.

Parking Lot
Entrance
Observation
Tower
BenchesTablesDESCRIPTION QUANTITY STYLESTrash ReceptaclesLighting 32197469
3245
Legend
PlantersAssorted pots-3 Total
SinksSinks and cleaning stations are provided in fi shing designated areas- 3 Total Bike RacksTwo styles, many unused-4 Total
Existing Site Features
36 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 287
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 288
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 289
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 290
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 291
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 292
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 293
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 294
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 295
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 296
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 297
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 298
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 299
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 300
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 301
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 302
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 303
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 304
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 305
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 306
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 307
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 308
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 309
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 310
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 311
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 312
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 313
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 314
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 315
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 316
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 317
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 318
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 319
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 320
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 321
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 322
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 323
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 324
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 325
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 326
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 327
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 328
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 329
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 330
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 331
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 332
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 333 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 334
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 335
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 336 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 337
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Santa Monica Pier Infrasturcture Assessment
Phase 2 – Upgrade Studies
Table of Contents
Subject Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY………………………………………………………………… ii
NEWCOMB PIER STRUCTURAL UPGRADE………………………………………….. ..1
AQUARIUM ROOF ASSESSMENT……………………………………………………... 12
MUNICIPAL PIER PHASE 4 UPGRADE………………………………………………... 14
MUNICIPAL PIER CONCRETE UPGRADE (Seaward of Bent 59) ……………………. 16 EMERGENCY GANGWAY……………………………………………………………… 18
CAROUSEL CUPOLA ONION DOME………………………………………………….. 25
FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM…………………………………………………………… 29
UTILITY SYSTEMS……………………………………………………………………… 45
LIGHTING STUDY……………………………………………………………………….. 49
TEN-YEAR PLAN………………………………………………………………………… 66
URBAN DESIGN STUDY (WRT)…………………………………………...APPENDIX A
i

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 338 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 339
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 340
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 341
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 342
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 343
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 344
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 345
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 346
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 347
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 348
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 349 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 350 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 351 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 352
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 353
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 354
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 355
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 356
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 357 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 358
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 359
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 360
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 361
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 362
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 363
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 364
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 365
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 366
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 367
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 368
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 369
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 370
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 371
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 372
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 373
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 374
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 375
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 376
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 377
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 378
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 379
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 380
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 381
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 382
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 383
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 384
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 385
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 386
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 387
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 388
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 389
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 390
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 391
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 392
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 393
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 394
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 395
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 396
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 397
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 398
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 399
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 400
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 401
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 402
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 403
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 404
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 405
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 406
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 67 5.E.a
Packet Pg. 407 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol

APPENDIX A

URBAN DESIGN STUDY (WRT)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 408 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) This document is a part of the Santa
Monica Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study to assist in the development of the City of Santa Monica’s multi-year Capital Improvement and
Maintenance Program, led by Moffat
& Nichol.

Wallace Roberts & Todd, LLC
Planning and Design
1133 Columbia St., #205
San Diego, CA 92101
November 17, 2008
Santa Monica Pier Assessment
Recommendations Report
for Urban Design Elements

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 409 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 410 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 1 Introduction 2 Methodology 3 Reccomendations 4 Site Furnishings contents
21 Carousel Building Roof

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 411 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Elizabeth R. Sedat Collection

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 412 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 1 The Santa Monica Pier has been an iconic element of the City and region since the early 1900’s. Unique among California piers, the Santa Monica Pier, its
history and activities, are a classic yet – whimsical stage welcoming tourists and locals alike. However, over many years of harsh coastal weather, active urban use and the addition of an eclectic mix of site furnishings (benches, lighting, trash receptacles, etc) the Pier no longer presents a cohesive atmosphere worthy of Santa Monica. This set of recommendations, based on an assessment of current conditions, is intended to guide the choices for the selection of new and replacement furnishings.

Introduction

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 413 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 2 The fi rst step in the process was to
review the Santa Monica Pier Design
Guidelines (Guidelines), adopted
in 1987. The Guidelines provide a
general vision for the character of the
buildings and furnishings and allow
fl exibility in accomplishing its goals.
methodology
WRT then interviewed City staff
from maintenance, public safety and
operations. The Assessment of Existing Conditions was conducted in late 2007 and presented to the Santa
Monica Pier Restoration Corporation (SMPRC) March 5, 2008, and is included as Attachment No. 1. WRT
was then directed to prepare recommendations for improving the character and function of the public spaces of the Pier.

Design alternatives were presented to
the SMPRC Operations Committee
on May 28, 2008. The alternatives included three ‘families’ of site furnishings representing a range from those of Palisades Park and South Beach to
contemporary styles and materials.

Based on this input, WRT is making
the following recommendations.

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 414 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 3 The Santa Monica Pier was built for the pleasure of the public in 1909. Ever since, citizens and visitors have enjoyed the amusements and relaxation of the Pier. The very nature of a pier – apart from the land, above the sea and into the sky – is a place for enjoying a remarkable set of experiences. Santa Monica’s traditions of spinning around the carousel, soaring in the Ferris wheel, gathering for picnics, entertainment, fishing, strolling, and enjoying the view remain strongly held. The nationally recognized historic structure of the Hippodrome Building and contributing elements on the Pier, combined with the purpose – for fun, sets the foundational character and style of the public realm of the Pier deck. This character has been best described as ‘whimsical.’

Two fundamental opportunities were
identifi ed in the Assessment of Existing Conditions:

1. Visual clarity, user comfort and
maintenance could be improved with
the selection of a complementary
‘family’ of site furnishings.

2. The placement of site furnishings
could assist in directing circulation
and defi ning spaces for specifi c use,
i.e. performance.
recommendations
The following recommendations are organized to guide the selection of specifi c items, i.e. benches, lights, etc., – Site Furnishings; and how to arrange them on the Pier.

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 415 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 4 The historic Byzantine-Moorish
styled Hippodrome at the base of the
bridge graciously marks the entrance
to the Pier. More recently constructed
buildings line the eastern portion
of Pier and are characterized by
the bold signage for the dining and
amusement attractions within. The
architecture of the distant west end
might be characterized as an eclectic
craftsman style. The site furnishings
are a mix of styles and materials and
the wood decking is compromised by
numerous anomalies of asphalt and
metal plates.

The style and character of the Pier’s
site furnishings need to be simplifi ed
to become an integrated family of
elements that is complementary of
the architecture styles and contributes
to a sophisticated sense of whimsy.

This will reduce the visual clutter
that distracts from the quality of the
Pier experience and reduce efforts in
maintenance and operation.
site furnishings
Each of the items meets basic criteria
for high quality materials that will
reasonably withstand the corrosive
coastal environment and require
minimal maintenance which contribute to a level of ‘sustainability.’ The manufacturers and model information illustrate the design intent.

Equivalent elements may be identifi ed through the City’s public bid process. Quantities are approximate,
provided for planning purposes. Figure 1 diagrammatically locates each of the site furnishing elements.

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 416 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 5 Figure 1, Location Diagram for Site Furnishings

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 417
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 6 2

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 418
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 7 The 6,100 linear feet of rail on the
Pier is constructed of three to four
horizontal two inch steel pipe rails,
with two inch diameter steel tube
posts and fi ttings, fi gure 2. Some
sections have a wood top rail. Stainless steel cables have been added in the horizontal direction, centered
between metal rails to create a four
inch minimum clearance. However,
current code requires vertical barriers
at minimum four inches on center.

In addition, joints vary in different
sections of the railing.

There are various materials that
could replace the railing that would
require less maintenance and present
a different aesthetic image. However,
the cost to replace the railings is
estimated at $2.75 million. A more
economical alternative is to retrofi t
the railing to meet current code for
opening size. To achieve the requirement, stainless steel cable at four inch on-center spacing should be added in
a vertical pattern.

The color of the railing should be
painted Mediterranean Blue, RAL
color system 5002 to match new
benches, tables and lighting.
railings
Figure 2 Railing

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 419 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 8 Figure 4 Benches by artists
Figure 3 Bench

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 420 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 9 The Assessment of Existing Conditions concluded that there were not enough seating and resting opportunities on the Pier. In addition, there are three types of benches on the Pier,
some of which are more comfortable
than others. The Condition Assessment Report noted that the benches on the Pier have backs and are in a
fi xed position, most facing the ocean.

These types of benches limit the visitors view. A backless bench provides more fl exibility for the visitor.

WRT recommends a new bench
standard to replace variety of existing
benches. The new benches should be
of a style that provides options for
backless benches and benches with
backs, inviting the visitor to look out
to the ocean or onto the spectacle of
performances and people on the Pier.

This report recommends the removal
of all thirty two existing benches and
the addition of forty one new backed
benches and twenty seven backless.

They should be surface mounted to
the deck and carefully located in the
locations shown in fi gure 1 to provide
a range of seating opportunities.

The recommended style of bench,
fi gure 3, is 48” Scarborough – horizontal metal strap as manufactured by Landscapeforms, fi gure 3. These
benches should all be powdercoated
by the manufacturer in ‘Ocean Blue’
to match the railing, tables and lights.

The estimated cost for each bench
is $990 for backless and $1,080 for
backed.
benches
The bench is also an opportunity to
engage public art on the Pier. Introducing public art into the seating is encouraged to build on the legacy of
‘whimsy’ of the Pier. Santa Monica,
renowned for its programs for public
art, may consider numerous options,
such as:
a. replace all existing benches
with a ‘off-the-shelf’ benches
and add a few artist-designed/
custom made benches each year,
fi gure 4;
b. locate artist-designed/custom
made benches in specifi c locations,
such as on the deck east of the
Hippodrome; or
c. engage an artist to enhance a
new set of ‘off-the-shelf’ benches.

WRT recommends establishing a
public art program to invite qualifi ed
artists to create one-of-a-kind seating
for specifi c sites along the pier.

Figure 1 illustrates the eight locations
where the off-the-shelf bench might
be replaced, over time, with an artist bench. The estimated budget for the artist benches is $12,000 each,
including artist fee, materials and
fabrication, installation, one year’s
maintenance.

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 421 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 10 The Assessment of Existing Conditions found that all the nineteen tables are owned and maintained by
merchants and shop owners. Their
locations serve the tenant’s use. However, there is a need for public picnic tables.

Ten of the nineteen existing tables
are the square, as shown in fi gure 5,
with red seating and table surface.

The other ten are small round tables.

The style and character of the square
metal tables, now used by tenants,
with attached bench seating is recommended above other options considered, fi gure 5.

The existing nineteen should be
replaced by merchants to match the
recommended blue color and nineteen new tables should be added (to be owned and maintained by the
City) in the locations, fi gure 1.
picnic tables
Figure 5 Picnic table
Six to ten of the new tables should
have two or three benches to invite
wheel chair users to the table.

The color of the perforated metal
table tops should be powder coated
‘Slate Blue’, as manufactured by
Wabash Valley, for movable tables:

Models SG140P - 46” Sq. Table -
Perforated and SG155P - 46” 3 - Seat
ADA Accessible Table; and for surface
mounted tables: SG229P - 46” Sq.

Table - 4 Seats - Surf. Mt - Basic
Frame - Perforated, and SG234P
- 46” Sq. Table - 3 Seats - Surf. Mt
- Basic Frame – Perforated.

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 422 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 11 Five types of trash receptacles were
identifi ed by the Assessment of Existing Conditions. Of the seventy four existing receptacles forty fi ve are the
recommended concrete unit, fi gure 6.

They were found to require minimal
maintenance and most durable of
the options available. Approximately
thirty new trash receptacles and
twenty new receptacles for recycled
materials should be placed as shown,
fi gure 1, for ease of use and collection. The trash receptacle model QR-CAL2832W, anodized aluminum
lid A-24 as manufactured by Quickcrete or approved equal, with the city name embossed and bronze logo inset
to match the existing units. Material to be Ecocast, made from 70% post consumer and industrial waste,
color – Erosion. The top eight inches,
including the rim, should be sealed to
minimize staining.

Receptacles for recyclable materials
need to be added to the Pier (twenty
total). They should be set next to the
trash receptacles. It is recommended
that the twenty new receptacles for
recyclable materials match the trash
receptacles with the addition of signage. Signage or other designations on the trash receptacle, is recommended to designate the specifi c use of the receptacle and educate the
public on the importance of recycling. The signage program is to be coordinated with other City agencies.
trash receptacles
Figure 6 Receptacle
The City of Santa Monica uses the
following receptacle for recyclable
materials: Recycled Recycler Excel
Series Model 900-X50-F 50 gal.
front access 25”x 22”x 49’” 115 lbs.,
‘Designer’ series, as manufactured
by Midpoint International. For the
Pier, brown recycled plastic lumber, is
recommended.

It includes a rubber baffl e to discourage inappropriate removal of materials. Figure 7 Recyclable Materials Receptacle

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 423 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 12 decking
The tradition of the wood deck is
important to the distinct character of
the Pier. The top decking is primarily two inch by twelve inch by twenty foot long lumber. Portions of the pier
are covered with asphalt and metal
plates. The Design Guidelines require
wood decking for the whole pier. The
ongoing program for repairing the
wood deck is encouraged to continue so that all the metal plates and asphalted areas will be removed and
replaced with wood decking.

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 424 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 13 Seat walls should be introduced along
the curb line, at the change in surface
elevation between the two decks. The
seat wall should be sixteen inches
tall by sixteen inches wide in various
lengths with two foot wide gaps at
approximately twenty foot intervals
to allow pedestrians to walk between,
see fi gure 1. The curb seating should
be constructed in recycled plastic
lumber/wood composite, in a medium dark brown color, fi gure 8. curbs
The Assessment of Existing Conditions noted the use of heavy timbers bolted to the pier deck to guide traffi c, defi ne the fi re lane and cover the transition between the different elevations between the Municipal Pier from the pedestrian walkway. While
the curbs could be a tripping hazard
for pedestrians and visually unappealing they also are used for seating. The fi re lane and pedestrian areas should
be defi ned by other means, i.e. bollards – see section B. Spatial Composition and Circulation. A wooden ramp should replace the asphalt infi ll
along the seam between the two piers
at the amusement facility entrances.

Figure 8, Seat wall

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 425 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 14 Figure 9, Decorative arched pole
Figure 10, Task lights to be added to the decorative poles

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 426 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 15 The Assessment of Existing Conditions revealed that there were six styles of lights on Santa Monica Pier.

The existing decorative arched poles
with the acorn light fi xtures are not
identifi ed as historic elements, but
contribute to the classic character of
the Pier. To create a cohesive image, remove clutter and improve this important visual element of the
Pier, three types of lights are recommended. All lights must provide the Pier staff the ability to control each
independently.
a. Decorative arched poles
with an acorn light fi xture, fi gure
9, are the primary character defi ning light element of the Pier. Figure 1 illustrates the locations for ninety
seven new lights on the twelve foot
tall poles at thirty eight foot spacing
around the entire pier perimeter.

This light serves pedestrians and the
light fi xtures, see the Infrastructure
Upgrades volume of the Santa Monica
Pier Assessment. The original manufacturer of the existing lights has not been determined. Replacement of a
matching pole and fi xture is feasible
and should be conducted carefully to
achieve the desired character. The recommended manufacturer is Sitelink by Holophane.
b. Task lights, fi gure 10, should
be placed on the decorative arched
poles with three to fi ve spot lights
adjustable to illuminate specifi c features, i.e. fi shing areas, boat launch, performance areas, etc. Figure 1
recommends twenty nine locations.
c. Parking lot lights should be
replaced on the Newcomb Pier. The
lighting study of the Infrastructure
Upgrades recommends a twenty fi ve
foot tall pole, spaced eighty feet
on center along the pier perimeter
to provide maximum fl exibility to
program events on the Newcomb
deck. It is estimated that fi fteen poles
, located on fi gure 1, will provide suffi cient illumination. d. Necklace Lights currently
trim the edge of the pier. It was
recommended that the existing lights
be replaced with 750 energy effi cient
LED fi xtures, at fi ve feet on center,
vandal resistant marine grade with
cast housing, high impact lens and
gasketed cast lens guard as manufactured by Cole Lighting. The estimated cost exceeded the budget. See the “Lighting Study” for alternatives
considered.
lights

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 427 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 16 a. Bicycle racks are currently on
the Pier, but underutilized because of
their inconvenient locations. While
bicycle riding is not encouraged on
the Pier due to potential confl icts
with pedestrians, bikes are recognized
as a popular and sustainable mode of
transportation for locals. To encourage bicycle access to the Pier new racks are recommended to replace the
existing fi ve with additional locations
for new bike racks are illustrated on
fi gure 1. The galvanized steel ‘Wave’
rack is recommended, fi gure 11, each
securing up to eight bikes, as manufactured by Bike Security Racks Co. b. Security barriers, currently
sited, are large three foot by thee foot
wooden boxes now serve as bollards
to designate pedestrian areas and
vehicle areas. It is recommended
that the wooden boxes be removed
and replaced with 127 fi xed and 14
removable bollards. Model “San Francisco”, as manufactured by Urban Accessories, fi gure 12, spaced eight
feet on-center and located as shown
on fi gure 1. These cast aluminum
furnishings should be powder coated
by the manufacturer in RAL color
system 5002 to match other furnishings.
special features
Figure 11, Bicycle rack
Figure 12, Bollard

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 428 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 17 c. Gazebos have been part of
the Pier for over 15 years. The two
decorative gazebos are located on the
south rail of the Pier. They were designed as performance areas, but are currently underutilized. To encourage use, it is recommended a picnic table is installed in each with a trash
receptacle nearby, and a system of
colorful fabric to animate the space
and discourage bird resting/dropping.
d. Smoking areas are currently
designated and maintained on the
Pier, fi gure 1.

The existing eight ash urns should be
replaced with eight surface mounted,
powdercoated (RAL color system
5002) aluminum ash urns, model
Grenadier as manufactured by Landscapeforms, fi gure 13.

The deck of the smoking areas should
be a solid surface to keep burning
items away from the wood Pier. Instead of the existing painted plywood, it is recommended that a four foot by
eight foot deck of tightly set recycled
plastic lumber, one inch thick (or
less) by six inches wide, tongue and
groove, a medium dark brown color,
is installed directly on the wood Pier.

It is recommended that the environmental graphics program direct smokers to the designated areas.

Figure 13, Ash Urn

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 429 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 18 e. Signage is an important
interface between the public and the
facilities of the Pier, as well as key to
the identity of the public places, the
merchants and shop owners. Signage
for individual tenants and merchants
are required to follow the Architectural Design Guidelines. These recommendations are for the public
signs.

The Assessment of Existing Conditions found recently installed signs that provide consolidated information about rules and regulations that apply to the Pier. However other
signage on the Pier is inconsistent
in its character, quality, message and
placement.

A comprehensive environmental
graphics program should be developed to direct the replacement and addition of signage on the Santa
Monica Pier. The graphics program
should be based on what and how
information is delivered. It should
include an interpretive program addressing cultural resources, natural history, and functions of the pier. The
graphics program should coordinate
the character of interpretive signage
with that needed for directional and
regulatory information. The solution
should serve the Pier for fi fteen to
twenty years allowing an amount of fl exibility with high quality materials located to minimize clutter and focus
the message to the public.

Figure 14, Interpretive Panel, by Mortar & Ink

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 430 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 19 The historic information displayed
near the police sub-station at the
west end of the Pier may be more
effectively displayed in a series of
panels along the railing, see fi gure 14.

Porcelain enamel is recommended for
interpretive signs. This technique and
use of materials is proven to hold up
well in the ocean climate and deliver
hi-quality graphic detail. The size
could vary within the system. Figure
1 identifi es up to eight potential locations for interpretive information.

Regulatory and directional components may be aluminum to fi t within the city’s signage program.

The existing information kiosk is a
helpful and attractive element, fi gure

15. Two additional kiosks are recommended as located on fi gure 1.

Figure 15, Kiosk
Centennial anniversary signage
should be considered temporary, unless it can be included in the comprehensive environmental graphics program. To assist in the effi cient and
effectiveness of a temporary program
the PRC should consider:
• Defi ning the identity of the
year long event;
• Building on the City’s environmental signage program and production capabilities;
• Utilizing materials that can be
recycled appropriately; and
• Engaging local sponsors.

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 431 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 20 f. Performance areas are managed by the SMPRC, fi gure 1. These open spaces along the edge of the
Pier, between the emergency vehicle
access path and the railing. These
sites should be marked with a painted
white star on the wood deck as de- fi ned by the environmental graphics program.
g. Vendor carts are managed by
the City of Santa Monica in locations
shown on fi gure 1. They are marked
on the deck with a painted white
“T”.

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 432 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 21 The Santa Monica Looff Hippodrome building is listed National Historic Landmark, National Register Number: 87000766.

Statement of Signifi cance (as of designation - February 27, 1987):

The principal historic element of the formerly extensive collection of amusement facilities at the Santa Monica (Looff) Amusement Pier, this is a rare, intact example of an early shelter structure built (1916) to house a carousel in an amusement park and the better preserved of the two such structures that remain on the West Coast.
http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=1979&ResourceType=Building carousel building roof
Historic photos of the Santa Monica
Looff Hippodrome (Carousel Building) show the elegant curved funnel shaped roof rising to the central ‘onion
dome’ on a cupola. The perimeter
of the building has octagonal shaped
turrets at the corners of the building.

The northeast corner is wider and
taller than the other three. Each of the
turrets may have had a viewing deck
on the fl at roofs with a railing. Three
dome shaped features were equally
spaced along the roofl ine of each
façade.

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 433 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) 22 Currently the metal funnel roof rises
out of a fl at roof with the wood cupola
sitting on top. Missing is the ‘onion
dome’ cupola roof, the railing around
the perimeter of the turret roofs and
the twelve dome shaped features.

The 1987 Design guidelines note that
the Carousel Building was “already
restored”, page 56. The graphics of
the design guidelines to not indicate
the reconstruction of the ‘onion dome’
or the dome shaped features around
the building perimeter.

Construction plans and specifi cations
for Roofi ng and Cupola Replacement
were prepared in 1997 by Pugh Scarpa
Kodama. They call for the removal of
the existing fl at roof portion to the
underlying curved sheathing. They do
not address the dome shaped features
around the building perimeter.

The City of Santa Monica’s Landmarks Commission adheres to the National Park Service—Secretary of
the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. Decisions and agreement concerning the Carousel Building roof should be confi rmed prior to further action.

Recommendations:

1. Confi rm specifi c elements to
be reconstructed to meet the Santa
Monica Landmark Commission’s
requirements and agreements to
maintain the National Historic
Landmark status of the building.

2. Update the Roofi ng and
Cupola Replacement Plans to
meet current building and safety
codes and the Secretary of the
Interior’s Standards (including, but
not limited to, the restoration of
the turrets, addition of perimeter
dome shaped features if necessary).

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 434 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 435 Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 436
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 437
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 438
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 439
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 440
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 441
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 442
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 443
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 444
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 445
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 446
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 447
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 448
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 449
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 450
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 451
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 452
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 453
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 454
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 455
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 456
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 457
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 458
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 459
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 460
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 461
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 462
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 463
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 464
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 465
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 466
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 467
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 468
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 469
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 470
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 471
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 472
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 473
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 474
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 475
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 476
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 477
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 478
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 479
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 480
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 481
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 482
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 483
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 484
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 485
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 486
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 487
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 488
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 489
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 490
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 491
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 492
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 493
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 494
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 495
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 496
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 497
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 498
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 499
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 500
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 501
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 502
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 503
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 504
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 505
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 506
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 507
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 508
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 509
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 510
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 511
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 512
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 513
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 514
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 515
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan)

5.E.a
Packet Pg. 516
Attachment: 2008 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Capital Plan) Prepared by:

Moffatt & Nichol
Waterfront Inspection & Engineering
4225 E. Conant Street
Long Beach, CA 90808
(562) 590-6500

FINAL - SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER
Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study - 2018 Update Submittal Date: M&N Project No.: City of Santa Monica Project No.:

December 12, 2018 10225-00 SP2473
Revised: February 11, 2020
Prepared for:

The City of Santa Monica
Public Works Department, Civil
Engineering Division
1437 4th Street, Room 300
Santa Monica, CA 90401
(310) 458-2201
Santa Monica Municipal Pier, Santa Monica, CA

5.E.b
Packet Pg. 517 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Page i

SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL PIER

INFRASTRUCTURE INSPECTION & ASSESSMENT
STUDY (2018 UPDATE)
Field investigations for the Santa Monica Pier inspection and condition assessment were led by Jeremiah Holcomb, PE, between July 24th and September 7th, 2018 to assess the condition of the existing pier structural components. The inspection was conducted in accordance with the American Society of Civil EngineersManual 130 “Waterfront Facilities Inspection and Assessment” (ASCE Manual 130) standard practices. Repair and upgrade recommendations are intended for planning purposes only, and do not constitute engineering designs necessary to construct these necessary improvements.

Jeremiah Holcomb, PE 80027
Senior Staff Engineer

5.E.b
Packet Pg. 518 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225
Page i
Revision Date Reason for
Issue
M&N Job
Number Prepared by Reviewed by Approved by
01 12-01-18 Draft
Submittal 10225
02 09-24-19 Final
Submittal 10225
03 02-11-2020 Final
Submittal 10225

5.E.b
Packet Pg. 519 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225
Page ii
Contents
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................vi Phase 1 – Observations Summary and Repair Cost Estimate.............................................................. vi Phase 2 – Pier Upgrades Summary and Cost Estimate.......................................................................xiii

1. Introduction .........................................................................................................................1 Inspection Scope of Work ............................................................................................................. 1 Exclusions...................................................................................................................................... 2 Documentation Review................................................................................................................. 2

2. Background and Description of Facilities ...............................................................................3 Existing Facilities Description........................................................................................................ 3 Pier ZONE Identification................................................................................................................ 4 ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier (Bent 0 – Bent 53)........................................................................ 6 ZONE 2 - Concrete Amusement Structure Pier (Bent 35 – Bent 53)............................................. 6 ZONE 3 - Concrete West-End Approach Pier (Bent 42 – Bent 59.8) ............................................. 7 ZONE 4 - Concrete West-End Platform Pier (Bent 60 – Bent 103)................................................ 8

3. Repair Recommendation Criteria ........................................................................................10 Element Damage and Overall System Condition Assessment Ratings .......................................10 General Phasing of Repair Recommendations ...........................................................................10

4. Municipal Pier Inspection Observations ..............................................................................11 General Observations .................................................................................................................11 ZONE 1 - Timber East-End Pier Segment (Bent 0 – Bent 53) ......................................................15 ZONE 2 - Concrete Amusement Structure Pier Segment (Bent 35 – Bent 53)............................26 ZONE 3 - Concrete West-End Approach Pier Segment (Bent 42 – Bent 59.8)............................32 ZONE 4 - Concrete West-End Platform Pier Segment (Bent 60 – Bent 103) ..............................35 Additional Defects Observed ......................................................................................................39

5. Repair Observations Summary and Cost Estimate................................................................43 Geographic Information System (GIS) Database ........................................................................43 Priority Repairs (Immediate Repair/Replacement).....................................................................44 Short-Term Repairs (Within 1-5 Years) .......................................................................................45 Long-Term Repairs (Within 5-10 Years)......................................................................................46 Additional Defect Repairs (Hardware and Appurtenances) .......................................................47 Repair Cost Estimates .................................................................................................................47

6. Repair Recommendations ...................................................................................................50 Timber Substructure Repair Recommendations.........................................................................50 Concrete Substructure Repair Recommendations .....................................................................53

7. Upgrades Assessment and Related Studies..........................................................................58 Pier Load Rating and Upgrades Assessment...............................................................................58 Pier Load Ratings and Upgrades Summary .................................................................................65 Pier Upgrades Cost Estimate.......................................................................................................67 Sea Level Rise..............................................................................................................................70

5.E.b
Packet Pg. 520 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225
Page iii
Appendices:

Appendix A: Material Element & Overall System Condition Assessment Ratings Appendix B: GIS Database Inspection Summary Figures
Appendix C: Detailed Pier Repair Cost Summary
Appendix D: Pier Load Rating Figures
Appendix E: Pier Condition Element Ratings and Identified Defects Appendix F: Reference Documents
List of Tables
Table E-1: Priority Repair Summary ........................................................................................................ viii Table E-2: Short-term Repair Summary .................................................................................................... ix Table E-3: Long-term Repair Summary ...................................................................................................... x Table E-4: Priority Repair Cost Estimate ................................................................................................... xi Table E-5: Short-term Repair Cost Estimate .............................................................................................. xi Table E-6: Long-term Repair Cost Estimate .............................................................................................. xii Table E-7: Deck Area Life Cycle Repair Cost Estimate .............................................................................. xiv Table E-8: Deck Area Upgrades Cost Estimate ......................................................................................... xv Table E-9: Area 14 Concrete Substructure Upgrades Cost Estimate ....................................................... xv Table E-10: Area 17 Concrete Substructure Upgrades Cost Estimate ....................................................... xv Table 5-1: Priority Repair Summary ......................................................................................................... 44 Table 5-2: Short-term Repair Summary ................................................................................................... 45 Table 5-3: Long-term Repair Summary .................................................................................................... 46 Table 5-4: Priority Repair Cost Estimate .................................................................................................. 48 Table 5-5: Short-term Repair Cost Estimate ............................................................................................. 49 Table 5-6: Long-term Repair Cost Estimate .............................................................................................. 49 Table 7-1: Deck Area Upgrades Cost Estimate ......................................................................................... 68 Table 7-2: Area 14 Concrete Substructure Upgrades Cost Estimate ....................................................... 69 Table 7-3: Area 17 Concrete Substructure Upgrades Cost Estimate ....................................................... 69 List of Figures
Figure E-1: Pier Identification System / GIS Database ............................................................................... vii Figure E-2: Site Plan – Pier Load Assessment ............................................................................................xiii Figure 2-1: Project Location ......................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2-2: Aerial View of Project Site ......................................................................................................... 4 Figure 2-3: Pier ZONE Identification System................................................................................................ 5 Figure 2-4: Typical Pier Cross Section (ZONE 1: Municipal Pier & Newcomb Pier) ..................................... 6 Figure 2-5: Typical Pier Cross Section (ZONE 2: Amusement Structure) ..................................................... 7 Figure 2-6: Typical Pier Cross Section (ZONE 3: West-End Approach) ........................................................ 8 Figure 2-7: Typical Pier Cross Section (ZONE 4: West-End Platform) .......................................................... 9

5.E.b
Packet Pg. 521 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225
Page iv
Figure 4-1: Pier Area Identification System ............................................................................................... 11 Figure 4-2: ZONE 1 Site Plan - Timber East-End Portion of Pier ................................................................ 15 Figure 4-3: Site Plan – Concrete Amusement Structure Portion of Pier ................................................... 26 Figure 4-4: Site Plan – Concrete West-End Approach Portion of Pier ....................................................... 32 Figure 4-5: Site Plan – Concrete West-End Platform Portion of Pier ........................................................ 35 Figure 5-1: Site Plan – GIS Map Used for Field Investigations ................................................................... 43 Figure 6-1: Timber Pile FRP Jacket Repair Method (Five Star Marine, Inc.) .............................................. 51 Figure 6-2: Concrete Corrosion and Spalling Progression ......................................................................... 54 Figure 6-3: Rebar Corrosion Without and With Sacrificial Anodes (Vector Corrosion) ............................. 54 Figure 6-4: Repair of Concrete Corrosion and Spalling ............................................................................. 56 Figure 7-1: Site Plan – Pier Load Rating Map ............................................................................................. 58 Figure 7-2: H7.5 Truck Loading .................................................................................................................. 65 Figure 7-3: California Ocean Protection Council SLR Projections and Associated Risk Recommendations ................................................................................................................................................. 70 List of Photos
Photo 4-1: Overall view of the Pier as seen from Palisades Park looking to the southwest. ................... 12 Photo 4-2: Pier entrance as seen from entrance bridge structure looking west. ..................................... 12 Photo 4-3: ZONE 2 Amusement Structure transition from ZONE 1 East-End Structure as seen from the West-End Approach looking southeast. .................................................................................. 13 Photo 4-4: Transition between ZONE 3 West-End Approach, ZONE 1 East-End Structure, and ZONE 2 Amusement Structure from boat looking to the east. ............................................................ 13 Photo 4-5: ZONE 3 West-End Approach transition from ZONE 4 West-End Platform Structure .............. 14 Photo 4-6: West-End Platform portion of the Pier with concrete waffle slab. ......................................... 14 Photo 4-7: Typical timber pile condition under water (Level II inspection effort). .................................. 15 Photo 4-8: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Severe Defect, Pile 11.5q ..................................................................... 17 Photo 4-9: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Severe Defect, Pile 47i.7 ....................................................................... 17 Photo 4-10: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Major Defect, Pile 46f ........................................................................... 17 Photo 4-11: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Moderate Defect, Pile 47c .................................................................... 17 Photo 4-12: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Caps Severe Defect, ............................................................................... 19 Photo 4-13: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Caps Severe Defect, Caps 41K-41O ...................................................... 19 Photo 4-14: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Caps Major Defect, Caps 41a-41c......................................................... 19 Photo 4-15: ZONE 1 - Timber Pile Caps Moderate Defect, Caps 39M-39O................................................. 19 Photo 4-16: ZONE 1 - Timber Bracing Severe Defect, Pile 42n-43n ........................................................... 21 Photo 4-17: ZONE 1 - Timber Bracing Severe Defect, Pile 41K-41M ........................................................... 21 Photo 4-18: ZONE 1 - Steel Bracing Major Defect, Pile 47c-47d ................................................................ 21 Photo 4-19: ZONE 1 - Timber Bracing Moderate Defect, Pile 43a-44a ....................................................... 21 Photo 4-20: ZONE 1 - Stringer Area Severe Defect, Pile 37k-37n-38k-38n ................................................ 23 Photo 4-21: ZONE 1 - Stringer Area Severe Defect, Pile 36l-36m-37l-37m ................................................ 23 Photo 4-22: ZONE 1 - Stringer Area Major Defect, Pile 6q-6p-7p-7o ......................................................... 23 Photo 4-23: ZONE 1 - Stringer Area Moderate Defect, Pile 23p-23r-24r-24p ............................................ 23 Photo 4-24: ZONE 1 - Decking Area Major Defect, Defect Area 2.............................................................. 25 Photo 4-25: ZONE 1 - Decking Area Major Defect, Defect Area 7 .............................................................. 25

5.E.b
Packet Pg. 522 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225
Page v
Photo 4-26: ZONE 1 - Decking Area Major Defect, Defect Area 6.............................................................. 25 Photo 4-27: ZONE 1 - Decking Area Moderate Defect, Defect Area 4 ........................................................ 25 Photo 4-28: Typical Previous Concrete Pile Jacket Repair .......................................................................... 26 Photo 4-29: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Major Defect, Pile AS_24G ................................................................ 27 Photo 4-30: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Major Defect, Pile AS_24G ................................................................. 27 Photo 4-31: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Moderate Defect, Pile AS_32B .......................................................... 27 Photo 4-32: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Moderate Defect, Pile 53q_W ........................................................... 27 Photo 4-33: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Capital Moderate Defect, Pile 41s ..................................................... 28 Photo 4-34: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Capital Moderate Defect, Pile 42s..................................................... 28 Photo 4-35: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Capital Moderate Defect, Pile 43o .................................................... 28 Photo 4-36: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Cap Severe Defect, Pile AS_19 ........................................................... 29 Photo 4-37: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Cap Severe Defect, Pile AS_23 .......................................................... 30 Photo 4-38: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Cap Severe Defect, Pile AS_19 .......................................................... 30 Photo 4-39: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Cap Severe Defect, Pile AS_19 ........................................................... 30 Photo 4-40: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Cap Major Defect, Pile AS_21 ........................................................... 31 Photo 4-41: ZONE 2 - Concrete Pile Cap Moderate Defect, Pile 41w-41y ................................................. 31 Photo 4-42: ZONE 3 – Typical Concrete Pile, Pile 49K ................................................................................ 33 Photo 4-43: ZONE 3 - Typical Concrete Pile, Pile 49N ............................................................................... 33 Photo 4-44: ZONE 3 – Typical Concrete Pile Caps Moderate Defect, Pile 51K-51L..................................... 34 Photo 4-45: ZONE 3 - Typical Concrete Pile Cap, Pile 49K ......................................................................... 34 Photo 4-46: ZONE 4 – Concrete Pile Moderate Defect, Pile 93E_E ............................................................ 36 Photo 4-47: ZONE 4 - Concrete Pile Moderate Defect, Pile 95C ................................................................ 36 Photo 4-48: ZONE 4 – Concrete Waffle Slab Moderate Defect, Defect Area 13 ........................................ 37 Photo 4-49: ZONE 4 - Concrete Waffle Slab Moderate Defect, Defect Area 13 ........................................ 37 Photo 4-50: ZONE 4 – Deck Area Moderate Defect, Defect Area 14 .......................................................... 38 Photo 4-51: ZONE 4 - Deck Area Moderate Defect, Defect Area 13 .......................................................... 38 Photo 4-52: Additional Defects - Utility Supports, Corroded Hangers near Pile 89H ................................. 39 Photo 4-53: Additional Defects - Utility Supports, Corroded Hangers near Pile 29M ................................ 39 Photo 4-54: Additional Defects - Leaking Wet Utility Pipes, Leaking PVC Line near Pile 34y ..................... 40 Photo 4-55: Additional Defects - Leaking Wet Utility Pipes, Leaking Fire Line near Pile 29M .................... 40 Photo 4-56: Additional Defects - Handrail Corrosion near Pile 76P ............................................................ 41 Photo 4-57: Additional Defects - Handrail Corrosion near Pile 97A ........................................................... 41 Photo 4-58: Additional Defects - ADA Compliance near Pile 86P ............................................................... 42 Photo 4-59: Additional Defects - ADA Compliance near Pile 26c ............................................................... 42

5.E.b
Packet Pg. 523 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225
Page vi
Executive Summary
Moffatt & Nichol (M&N) was retained by the City of Santa Monica (City) to perform inspection, assessment, and rehabilitation engineering services for the Santa Monica Municipal Pier (Pier) facilities, in the City of Santa Monica, California. This waterfront inspection report is part of a design repair project that will identify potential Pier defects and associated rehabilitation options.

This report is intended to provide updates to the previous Santa Monica Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study performed in 2008 (PIAS-2008), by M&N and associate subconsultants. Efforts for this updated 2018 Pier Infrastructure Assessment Study (PIAS-2018) are focused on providing condition assessment and rehabilitation concepts for the Pier to correct defects identified in existing structural elements. This scope of work included: existing Pier piles, pile caps, stringers, lateral and transverse bracing, and deck elements.

In addition, studies were performed to evaluate the need for future recommended upgrades for a variety of reasons including: providing an allowable load rating for emergency vehicles, minimizing on-going maintenance within the offshore splash zone, and to maintain existing operations.

The scope of services for this PIAS-2018 excluded some items previously considered as part of the PIAS2008 and/or are not included in the scope of work at the request of the City. Excluded items include existing electrical and wet utilities not limited to: Pier lighting, shore power, tie-ins to existing buildings, potable water, sewage, fire water, storm drains, and other existing landside utilities. The scope of work also excluded landside and above-deck Pier facilities (Topside Buildings and Amusement Structures, Topside Architectural Furnishings (benches, light poles, etc.), Landside Concrete Abutments and/or Bulkhead Walls, and Waterside Shore Protection & Rock Revetments.

This report consists of two study phases. Phase 1 provides observations and assesses the existing condition of the various structural infrastructure systems of the Pier. Rehabilitation studies are then provided for the various deficiencies noted and construction cost estimates developed for those proposed repairs. Phase 2 presents potential upgrades and maintenance programs to be implemented into the future 10-year improvement plan. Evaluations are given on the existing load rating of the Pier, and cost estimates developed to outline construction costs for the proposed upgrades.

Phase 1 – Observations Summary and Repair Cost Estimate The inspection and assessment were performed to support the development of repair recommendations for the Pier. The repair recommendations are presented below in a prioritized manner considering severity of damage, location, and impact of damage to the overall Pier structural integrity, and operational use of the facilities. An attempt has also been made to categorize the deficiencies that will allow the City to choose a maintenance or replacement program that best suits their needs and budget.

The inspection report focuses on identification of deficiencies as part of a future design repair project.

Providing engineering bid documents (repair plans, details, and specifications) for the recommended repairs are outside the scope of this inspection report. Due to the nature and configuration of repairs necessary, required repairs will likely entail water-based construction operations. Various techniques may be employed to conduct these repairs; however, it is recommended construction plans and details be developed prior to construction.

5.E.b
Packet Pg. 524 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225
Page vii
GIS Database
A GIS database was created for structural components of the pier that were inspected. Figure E-1 shows a map of inspection ‘ZONES’ used to define the assessment. The inspection observations have been uploaded to the City’s GIS database system, and additional information can also be found in Appendix B.

Figure E-1: Pier Identification System / GIS Database
Pier Identification System
To facilitate the inspection effort and to have a common location reference, a pile numbering system was established, and reference numbers painted on piles as part of the 2008 study. To eliminate confusion with prior numbering schemes, old markings on the piles were painted out using black paint. The new numbers were painted in white. In this numbering system the pile bents are numbered consecutively starting at "1" for the first pile bent at the east or onshore end of the Pier and ending in “103” at the west or offshore end of the Pier. The piles in each bent are assigned a letter designation, starting with “a” for the first pile bent at the north end of the Pier, then continuing on to “z” and ending in “AB” at the south end of the Pier. See Figure E-1 for the numbering system.

Condition Assessment Summary
The following is a summary of structural defects/damages identified during the inspections, with repair directives as follows:
x Priority – for “Severe” damages – Repair as soon as feasible x Short-Term – for “Major” damages – Repair within 1-5 years x Long-Term – for “Moderate” damages – Repair within 5-10 years Based upon the structural element deficiencies identified in the observation portion of this report, it is our recommendation that reparative or further extensive replacement options are necessary to prevent future potential worsening of present Pier defects. Refer to Appendix E for a full itemized list of deficiencies and damage ratings.

5.E.b
Packet Pg. 525 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225
Page viii
It is recommended future Pier inspections be conducted at regular intervals according to normal industry standard, every five (5) to ten (10) years or following a significant storm wave or other significant event.

Priority Repairs Summary (Immediate Repair / Replacement) Consistent with the “priority-repair” recommendations, the repairs defined in this section are recommended to be accomplished as soon as feasible. Defects included were categorized with “Severe” damage. Refer to Table E-1 below.

Table E-1: Priority Repair Summary

5.E.b
Packet Pg. 526 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225
Page ix
Short-term Repairs Summary (Within 1-5 Years)
Consistent with the “short-term repair” recommendations, the repairs defined in this section are recommended to be accomplished as soon as feasible but may be delayed for the first 1-5 years while the City appropriates funds. Defects included were categorized with “Major” damage. Refer to Table E-2 below.

Table E-2: Short-term Repair Summary

5.E.b
Packet Pg. 527 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225
Page x
Long-term Repairs Summary (Within 5-10 Years)
Consistent with the “long-term repair” recommendations, the repairs defined in this section are to be accomplished as soon as feasible but may be delayed until the City’s next maintenance cycle (5 to 10 years). Defects included were categorized with “Moderate” damage. Refer to Table E-3 below.

Table E-3: Long-term Repair Summary

5.E.b
Packet Pg. 528 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225
Page xi
Repair Cost Estimate Summary
Estimates of probable construction costs have been produced for the three repair conditions “priority,” “short-term,” and “long-term.” Cost estimates assume each of these repair phases will be done under a separate contractor mobilization effort. There may be an opportunity to save costs by conducting all repairs under a single contract, by having an on-call agreement with a local marine construction contractor, or by having the City maintenance staff conduct the repairs. Refer to Table E-4, Table E-5, and Table E-6 below, also refer to Appendix C for a full itemized cost estimate for recommended repairs.

Table E-4: Priority Repair Cost Estimate
Table E-5: Short-term Repair Cost Estimate

5.E.b
Packet Pg. 529 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225
Page xii
Table E-6: Long-term Repair Cost Estimate
On-Going Life Cycle Maintenance Repairs Summary (As-Needed) At the request of the City, estimates of probable construction costs have also been provided for future life cycle replacement costs for deck members, based on various loading scenarios. This estimate is meant to provide the City with an estimate for future planning of deck replacement cycles based on a squarefoot basis and includes only deck boards (excluding stringers and pile caps). It is assumed deck board members will be replaced with 3-inch x 12-inch nominal size timber members at regular intervals once they deteriorate beyond their useful life. The estimates do not consider necessary future maintenance or upgrades to meet load requirements. Cost estimates assume each of these upgrade phases will be done under a separate contractor mobilization effort. The expected useful life of deck boards under pedestrian foot traffic is 10-15 years and under vehicle traffic is 5-10 years. The opinion of probable construction cost is shown in Table E-7 below.

Table E-7: Deck Area Life Cycle Repair Cost Estimate

5.E.b
Packet Pg. 530 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225
Page xiii
Phase 2 – Pier Upgrades Summary and Cost Estimate
Pier Load Rating Summary
The results of the Pier load assessment are broken into localized ‘Areas’ corresponding to the type of construction, anticipated loading, and age of construction. Recommendations from the previous PIAS2008 study have been incorporated into this PIAS-2018, and recommended upgrades updated to reflect actual Pier conditions at the time of inspections. Consideration was also given to upgrades that have been completed to the Pier since the last inspection in 2008. Figure E-2 below depicts the different pier areas, and a complete map of the pier load rating can be found in Appendix D.

Figure E-2: Site Plan – Pier Load Assessment
Pier Upgrades Summary
This assessment focuses on identification of upgrades necessary to achieve load requirements or future maintenance goals as part of the overall Pier capital improvements program. In particular, the City desires to provide upgrades to the Pier to allow occasional H-20 vehicle access for emergency response and regular H-15 access for delivery truck vehicles. Providing engineering bid documents (upgrade plans, details, and specifications) for the recommended upgrades are outside the scope of this report. Due to the nature and configuration of necessary upgrades, they will likely require water-based construction operations. Various techniques may be employed to conduct these upgrades; it is recommended construction plans and details be developed prior to construction.

Estimates of probable construction costs have been produced for the recommended upgrades for the Pier deck areas to achieve necessary load requirements or future maintenance goals. Cost estimates assume each of these upgrade phases will be done under a separate contractor mobilization effort. There may be an opportunity to save costs by conducting all upgrades under a single contract, by having an on-call

5.E.b
Packet Pg. 531 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225
Page xiv
agreement with a local marine construction contractor, or by having the City maintenance staff conduct the upgrades. Refer to Appendix D for a full itemized cost estimate for recommended upgrades. The opinion of probable construction cost is shown in Table E-8 through Table E-10.

Table E-8: Deck Area Upgrades Cost Estimate

5.E.b
Packet Pg. 532 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225
Page xv
Table E-9: Area 14 Concrete Substructure Upgrades Cost Estimate Table E-10: Area 17 Concrete Substructure Upgrades Cost Estimate

5.E.b
Packet Pg. 533 Attachment: 2018 Pier Infrastructure Inspection & Assessment Study [Revision 4] (5853 : Award RFP# SP2689 to Moffatt & Nichol for Pier Santa Monica Pier–Infrastructure Inspection and Assessment Study February 11, 2020 The City of Santa Monica, CA M&N Project No. 10225