Santa Monica City Council
May 12, 2026

SANTA M

SAFETY STUDY
April 2026

NICA B ULEVARD
DRAFT
[ THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ]
DRAFT
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page i

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

STAFF TEAM

INTERDEPARTMENTAL TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE PREPARED BY Carlos Hernandez Santa Monica Department of Transportation, Mobility Division Kyle Kozar Santa Monica Department of Transportation, Mobility Division Colleen Stoll - Santa Monica Department of Transportation, Mobility Division Jason Kligier, AICP - Santa Monica Department of Transportation, Mobility Division Jacqui Swartz - Santa Monica Department of Transportation, Mobility Division Mia Silver - Santa Monica Department of Transportation, Mobility Division Joe Conroy - Santa Monica Department of Transportation, Mobility Division Shayne Smith - Santa Monica Department of Transportation, Mobility Division Trevor Thomas - Santa Monica Department of Transportation, Mobility Division Edward Escarcega - Santa Monica Department of Transportation, Mobility Division Sergeant Jason Olson - Santa Monica Police Department
Officer Koby Arnold - Santa Monica Police Department
Sergeant Evan Raleigh - Santa Monica Police Department
Captain Roberto Villegas - Santa Monica Police Department Lieutenant Roberto Lucio - Santa Monica Police Department Alfredo Torales - Santa Monica Department of Transportation, Big Blue Bus Abdallah Daboussi - Santa Monica Department of Transportation, Big Blue Bus Joseph Santiago - Santa Monica Department of Transportation, Big Blue Bus Jason Hoang - Santa Monica Public Works Department
Alisha Flores - Santa Monica Public Works Department
Senior Inspector Ryan Demirdjian - Santa Monica Fire Department Fire Marshal Joe Cavin - Santa Monica Fire Department
Deputy Chief Dan Caldwell - Santa Monica Fire Department Michael Baker International

WITH SUPPORT FROM
Nelson Nygaard & HereLA
DRAFT
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................................1 Take the Friendly Road.......................................................................................................................................................................2 Study Funding ................................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Study Area ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 POLICY & PLANNING CONTEXT.................................................................................................................................................. 5 Supporting Plans & Initiatives ........................................................................................................................................................... 6 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT....................................................................................................................................................... 9 Approach .......................................................................................................................................................................................10 Strategies......................................................................................................................................................................................10 SAFETY AUDIT & ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................................................................... 17 Roadway Characteristics ................................................................................................................................................................19 Crash Analysis ...............................................................................................................................................................................20 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS............................................................................................................................................................... 27 Transit Operations ..........................................................................................................................................................................28 Vehicular Operations.......................................................................................................................................................................29 RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................................................................................................. 31 Safety Treatment Options ................................................................................................................................................................33 Corridor-Wide Safety Recommendations...........................................................................................................................................39 Focus Intersections Recommendations ............................................................................................................................................42 NEXT STEPS ...............................................................................................................................................................................58 Cost Estimate ................................................................................................................................................................................60 Potential Phasing............................................................................................................................................................................ 61 Grant Funding ................................................................................................................................................................................68 SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
DRAFT
Figure 1 2022 Local Roadway Safety Plan Priority Streets and Intersections ....................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 2 Light Up the Night Sticker Installation Results .....................................................................................................................................................11 Figure 3 Walk Audit Route ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 12 Figure 4 Total Crashes by Injury Level.............................................................................................................................................................................20 Figure 5 Annual Crashes by Injury Level..........................................................................................................................................................................20 Figure 6 Age distribution of People Involved in Injury Crashes ........................................................................................................................................... 21 Figure 7 Crashes by Mode and Severity .......................................................................................................................................................................... 21 Figure 8 Intersection and Midblock Crashes by Severity ...................................................................................................................................................22 Figure 9 Crash Concentration on Santa Monica Boulevard ................................................................................................................................................22 Figure 10 Intersection and Midblock Injury Crashes by Crash Mode .....................................................................................................................................23 Figure 11 Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Scooter Injury Crashes by Location Type .........................................................................................................................23 Figure 12 Crash Injury Level by Location Type....................................................................................................................................................................23 Figure 13 Crashes by Time of Day by Severity ...................................................................................................................................................................24 Figure 14 Crashes by Injury Level and Lighting Conditions..................................................................................................................................................24 Figure 15 Primary Collision Factors in Injury Crashes.........................................................................................................................................................25 Figure 16 Speed-Related Crashes by Injury Level ..............................................................................................................................................................25 Figure 17 Impairment-Related Crashes by Injury Level.......................................................................................................................................................25 Figure 18 Focus Intersections Locations..........................................................................................................................................................................42 SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page iii

LIST OF FIGURES
DRAFT
Table 1 Speed Limits vs. 85th Percentile Speeds............................................................................................................................................................19 Table 2 Potential Phasing ............................................................................................................................................................................................62 Table 3 Regional and Local Funding ..............................................................................................................................................................................68 Table 4 State Funding .................................................................................................................................................................................................69 Appendix A - Community Engagement Summaries
Appendix B - Safety Analysis Memorandum
Appendix C - Operations Analysis
Appendix D - Cost Estimates
Appendix E - Concept Plans
Appendix F - Vertical Traffic Calming Elements Memorandum SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page iv

LIST OF TABLES

APPENDIX
DRAFT
[ THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ]
DRAFT

1. INTRODUCTION
DRAFT
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 2

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD,

THEN AND NOW
Known as “America’s Main Street,” Route
66 spans more than 2,400 miles throughout
eight states, connecting Chicago to Santa
Monica. It was one of the United States’
first continuous stretches of paved highway
and served as a major path for those who
migrated west. Route 66 was commissioned
on November 11, 1926, and on January 1,
1936, Santa Monica Boulevard became a part
of Route 66, which currently terminates
at the intersection of Lincoln and Olympic
boulevards. It was decommissioned as
a federal highway in 1985 following the
creation of the Interstate Highway System.

Route 66 celebrates its centennial in 2026.

Today, Santa Monica Boulevard is one of the
City’s principal east-west arterial roads with
many connections to transit, jobs, housing,
services, and other destinations along this
active and developed corridor.

The City of Santa Monica is committed to ensuring
its streets and neighborhoods are clean and safe.

To that end, the City has made a commitment to
eliminate fatalities and severe injuries caused
by traffic collisions. This Santa Monica Boulevard
Safety Study has been created in support of these
goals.

Santa Monica Boulevard is a critical street that
provides multimodal access to community and
regional destinations such as:
• Santa Monica Public Library
• Santa Monica College Performing Arts Center
• McKinley Elementary School
• Nearby public parks including Memorial Park,
Reed Park, and Douglas Park
• High density residential neighborhoods
• Large job centers including Downtown Santa
Monica, Santa Monica UCLA Medical Center, and
Providence Saint John’s Health Center
The Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Study identifies
improvements that address crash patterns on
Santa Monica Boulevard, as well as observations
and experiences shared by community members
through a robust community engagement process.

The recommendations aim to improve conditions
for people walking, driving, and taking transit,
and serve to strengthen connectivity to major
destinations and job centers. Ultimately, this study
approach included:

1. Gathering existing conditions

2. Seeking community feedback, and

3. Identifying targeted safety enhancements

1.1 TAKE THE

FRIENDLY ROAD
Take the Friendly Road is Santa Monica’s Vision
Zero-based traffic safety initiative focused
on connecting the community to educational
resources and infrastructure projects that improve
street safety and help reach the goal of eliminating
all fatal and severe injury crashes from our streets
by 2026. This action was adopted by the City Council
in the 2016 Pedestrian Action Plan.

In 2022, the City completed the Local Roadway
Safety Plan (LRSP), which builds on the previous
Vision Zero work launched in 2017 to eliminate
fatal and severe crashes on city streets. Both of
these studies identified Santa Monica Boulevard
as a top priority due to the number and severity of
crashes that occurred during the analysis period.

According to the LRSP, between 2015 and 2019, the

2.4 mile stretch of Santa Monica Boulevard from
Ocean Avenue to Centinela Avenue experienced nine
severe injuries and one fatality. This Safety Study
analyzes 10 years of crash data up to December
2024. In July 2024, after receiving a grant from the
State of California, the City launched the Santa
Monica Boulevard Safety Study under the Take the
Friendly Road banner.

DRAFT
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 3

1.2 STUDY FUNDING
The Study is funded through a grant from the
California Department of Transportation (“Caltrans”)
Sustainable Communities Transportation Planning
Grant Program, along with a local match.

The City’s vision and the Study Team’s approach
included building on goals and recommendations
identified in prior planning efforts, targeted data
collection and analysis to assess issues along
Santa Monica Boulevard, and a robust community
engagement process to further identify issues
and potential recommendations. With the reliance
on data, analysis findings, and community input
and support, the Study Team has clearly identified
targeted short-term and long-term improvements.

The Study Team has also identified longer-term
improvements that will require subsequent design
and construction as additional funding becomes
available. This report includes a high-level cost
estimate for design and implementation, which will
assist the City in prioritizing improvements and
securing necessary future funding.

DRAFT
May 2025
Santa Monica Blvd
S Broadway
Arizona Ave
Wilshire Blvd
Olympic Blvd
Colorado Ave
Exhibit 2
Focus Area
Legend
City Boundary
Focus Area (0.125mile Buffer)
LRSP Priority Streets
LRSP Priority Intersections
Source:
2022 Local Road Safety Plan
1 SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 4

1.3 STUDY AREA
The study area includes the entirety of Santa
Monica Boulevard from Ocean Avenue to Centinela
Avenue, approximately 2.4 miles. As an arterial
roadway, Santa Monica Boulevard is one of the
major east-west corridors that carries vehicular
Figure 1. 2022 Local Roadway Safety Plan Priority Streets and Intersections and transit traffic through the city. The corridor
is home to many types of commercial and
neighborhood services including libraries, medical
centers, schools, and many of the city’s auto
dealerships.

DRAFT

2. POLICY & PLANNING CONTEXT
DRAFT
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 6
Existing City-adopted plans, policies, regulations,
standards, and best practices relating to mobility
and active transportation were reviewed to align
this Safety Study within the existing framework.

The following provides an overview of these efforts
as they relate to prioritizing investments in Santa
Monica. The recommended improvements in this
Safety Study complement, and/or are consistent
with these policies, plans, and standards.

PEDESTRIAN ACTION PLAN (2016)
The City adopted the Pedestrian Action Plan in 2016
which recognizes and celebrates walking as a core
part of Santa Monica’s identity and character, while
laying out a specific vision, standards, and priority
projects and programs to guide improvements
through 2031.

Proposed projects along Santa Monica Boulevard
were recommended and included improvements like
curb extensions, crosswalks, advanced stop lines,
direction ramps, and pedestrian oriented lights.

VISION ZERO PLAN (2017)
In 2017, the City of Santa Monica adopted Vision
Zero, aiming to eliminate fatal and severe injury
crashes on our streets by 2026, and establishing an
initiative to focus on three primary efforts:

1. Infrastructure Improvements: redesign streets
to increase safety, encourage multimodal
mobility, and reduce conflict points that lead to
traffic deaths and serious injuries.

2. Data: use data to prioritize locations in the
City where these types of incidents are more
common.

3. Community Engagement: promote campaigns
and events that bring communities together to
learn about Vision Zero, safe driving behavior,
and interventions that increase safety on our
streets.

Santa Monica Boulevard was identified as a priority
street with priority intersections at Ocean Avenue,
Lincoln Boulevard, Princeton Street and Cloverfield
Boulevard.

2.1 SUPPORTING PLANS & INITIATIVES
Vision Zero Plan (2017)
WILSHIRE SAFETY STUDY (2020)
Wilshire Boulevard was identified as a priority of the
City’s Vision Zero initiative to eliminate fatal and
severe injury crashes. In 2020, the City adopted the
Wilshire Boulevard Safety Study which took a deep
dive into safety concerns and enhancements along
the corridor.

The Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Study follows
a similar project planning approach to the Wilshire
Safety Study project.

In 2023, the City began implementing Phase 1 of
the planned safety improvements, which include
installing flashing beacons at five intersections,
adding painted curb extensions with bollards
at fourteen intersections, introducing trafficcalming measures such as right-turn-only from unsignalized side streets, updating pavement
markings for bus zones, expanding loading zones,
and constructing a new traffic signal at Wilshire
Boulevard and 16th Street. In Phase 2, the City will
convert interim materials at seven intersections
into permanent capital improvements.

DRAFT
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 7
BIKE ACTION PLAN (2011, AMENDED 2020)
In 2011, the City adopted the Bike Action Plan to
serve as a guide for Santa Monica to implement a
citywide bike network. In 2020, the City developed
an amendment for the Bike Action Plan which
introduces a citywide network of protected bike
lanes.

SANTA MONICA LOCAL ROADWAY SAFETY PLAN
(2022)
Building on the Vision Zero approach, the City
refreshed the 2017 Plan with new data spanning
from 2015-2019. The refreshed Local Roadway
Safety Plan was released in 2022 and identifies the
highest priority intersections and corridors for
improvement, as well as recommended focus areas
to address some the primary causes of crashes.

The results of the 2022 Local Roadway Safety Plan
(LRSP) identify segments of Santa Monica Boulevard
as a priority street, with key intersections 6th
Street, 15th Street, 16th Street, 18th Street, and
20th Street as priority intersections.

LAND USE & CIRCULATION ELEMENT (2010,
AMENDED 2023)
Originally adopted in 2010, and amended in 2023,
the City’s Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE)
outlines the vision for Santa Monica’s character,
neighborhoods, transportation systems, and
housing.

PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS AT SIX SCHOOLS
PROJECT (2024)
The City implemented pedestrian safety
improvements near six public schools throughout
the City. One of the schools included as part of this
project is McKinley Elementary School located on
Santa Monica Boulevard near Cloverfield Boulevard.

The project focused on critical infrastructure
improvements to address pedestrian safety
concerns and ensure compliance with the American
with Disabilities (ADA) standards. During the
analysis phase of the Santa Monica Boulevard
Safety Study in the Spring of 2025, roadway
improvements were constructed near McKinley
Elementary School on Santa Monica Boulevard to
emphasize the city’s ongoing commitment to Vision
Zero and Safety.

Two of the focus intersections analyzed in more
detail as part of this safety study (Chelsea
Avenue and 26th Street) are located near
McKinley Elementary School. The recommended
improvements further build upon these traffic
calming and pedestrian enhancements.

TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT INITIATIVES ON SANTA
MONICA BOULEVARD (2025-2028)
In Fall 2025, two coordinated initiatives launched
to enhance transit along Santa Monica Boulevard.

Caltrans began construction on the rehabilitation
of the road and the implementation of 1.4 miles of
designated bus priority lanes between Centinela
Avenue and I-405 in West LA. At the same time,
the Westside Cities Council of Governments
(WSCCOG) launched the Westside Quick-Build Bus
Infrastructure Program to gather community input
and conduct feasibility analyses for installing quickbuild bus infrastructure—specifically bus-only lanes—along three major corridors in the Westside
sub-region, including Santa Monica Boulevard from
Ocean Avenue to Moreno Drive in Los Angeles. The
project analysis began in late 2025 with the goal
of developing shovel-ready designs for corridor
segments that prove both feasible and supported
by the community. Many of the recommendations in
this study align with these initiatives and would not
prevent the addition of future transit improvements
from advancing if ultimately deemed feasible and
necessary.

DRAFT
[ THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ]
DRAFT

3. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
DRAFT
The Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Study Team
applied a robust community engagement process
and key tactics to reach a broad audience
of stakeholders and community members.

This included presentations to neighborhood
associations and commissions, a Pop-Up
Event (Touchpoint #1), a community walk audit
(Touchpoint #2), a community open-house
workshop (Touchpoint #3), branded banners,
meetings with key city stakeholder groups, and
a robust online presence with study updates. In
addition to the public outreach, the project team
also established a Technical Advisory Committee
(TAC) consisting of representatives from SaMoDOT
Mobility Division, Traffic Management, Public Works,
Santa Monica Police Department, Santa Monica Fire
Department, and Big Blue Bus.

To help inform data collection and evaluation,
the Study Team conducted multiple rounds of
outreach events and meetings early in the process,
prior to the initial safety recommendations. Once
preliminary recommendations were developed,
the Study Team returned to neighborhood groups,
technical advisory groups, and commissions to
present more detailed safety findings and draft
recommendations for feedback and adjustment.

In October 2024, as part of the Santa Monica
Boulevard Safety Study, a three-week installation
was set up at the Downtown Santa Monica Public
Library. The installation coincided with the library’s
Halloween Trick-or-Treat event on October 31, 2024.

The goals of the installation were to:
• engage and educate the community about road
safety
• identify specific locations along the corridor for
desired improvements
• collect measurable data on community values
and preferences when it comes to road safety.

TOUCH POINT #1 - LIGHT UP THE NIGHT

3.1 APPROACH 3.2 STRATEGIES
Participants of all ages were invited to choose an
LED safety light in the color that represents the
type of improvement that they would like to see
more of along Santa Monica Boulevard. Participants
then used a sticker to indicate on a nearby map
where they’d like to see improvements. They
could also add comments and provide contact
information to stay informed about project updates
and events.

The Results
Out of a total of 59 votes, the most popular
improvement suggested by participants was
“Safe Crossings” with 18 votes. This was followed
closely by “Safe Vehicle Movements”, with a total
of 17 votes. The least popular improvement was
“Improved Sidewalks.”
Touchpoint #1 Participant Touchpoint #1 Participants
DRAFT
Total = 208 Stickers Placed On The Map Throughout The Three Week Period Including Curb Extensions, Street Lighting, Pedestrian Refuge Islands,
Bus Lanes, And Signal Priority, Etc.

Figure 2. Light Up the Night Sticker Installation Results

SAFE CROSSINGS
56 STICKERS

SAFE VEHICLE MOVEMENTS
59 STICKERS

IMPROVED SIDEWALKS
47 STICKERS

SOMETHING ELSE
46 STICKERS
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 11
Figure 2 indicates where stickers were placed on the
map (showing the closest cross street or mid-block
location along Santa Monica Boulevard) between
October 31st and November 21st. Stickers were
placed at almost every intersection. There were
more stickers placed along the western portion of
the corridor, between Ocean Avenue and Lincoln
Boulevard. There was an even spread between the
four categories, but the most popular category
was “Safer Vehicle Movements” (59 stickers).

Recommendations for “Something Else” included
“curb extensions,” “street lighting,” “pedestrian
refuge islands,” “bus lanes,” and “signal priority,”
among others. The intersection with the most
feedback was Lincoln Boulevard, with 17 stickers,
then Ocean Avenue, with 15 stickers. Following this,
2nd Street, 3rd Street, 4th Street, 6th Street, 12th
Street, and 20th Street all had between 10 and 14
stickers.

A detailed event summary is provided in Appendix A.

DRAFT
Figure 3. Walk Audit Route

BERGAMOT STATION

ARTS CENTER
7TH ST

LINCOLN BLVD
9TH ST
10TH ST11TH ST12TH ST

EUCLID ST
14TH ST15TH ST17TH ST19TH ST
21ST ST

CLOVERFIELD BLVD

PARK DRIVE
25TH ST
26TH ST

PRINCETON ST

HARVARD ST

YALE ST

STANFORD ST

BERKELEY ST

FRANKLIN ST

CENTINELA AVE

CROSSROADS

ELEMENTARY
16TH ST
18TH ST
20TH ST
23RD ST
26TH ST

CLOVERFIELD BLVD

START/FINISH

WEST GROUP EAST GROUP

SANTA MONICA BLVD

SELECTED WALK AUDIT STOP (WEST GROUP)

SELECTED WALK AUDIT STOP (EAST GROUP)
chELSEA AVE

WALK AUDIT STOP (EAST GROUP)

WALK AUDIT STOP (WEST GROUP)
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 12
A community walk audit was held on February
22, 2025 starting from Providence Saint John’s
Medical Center. The walk audit was a communitybased assessment of the conditions along the street and allowed individuals to provide realtime feedback and observations of Santa Monica Boulevard. Seventeen members of the public
and key stakeholders walked a portion of Santa
Monica Boulevard to discuss safety concerns and
opportunities. The walk audit included residents,
students at McKinley Elementary, hospital
employees, and City staff.

The walk audit was facilitated in two
groups focusing on locations within ½
mile of the starting location (Providence
St. John’s Health Center) to make the
walk accessible to all ages:
• West Group stopped at 20th Street,
18th Street and 16th Street
• East Group stopped at Cloverfield
Boulevard, Chelsea Avenue, and 26th
Street
The goals of the walk audit were to:
• Gather feedback from the community about
the overall experience and “issue areas” along
Santa Monica Boulevard.
• Identify potential enhancements to improve the
experience for people walking, rolling, driving,
and taking transit.

Participants were assigned to an East or West
group and provided an associated “workbook.”
The front of the workbook provided space for
general reflections at each intersection along with
discussion questions. The back provided a checklist
of priorities for each intersection and a map for
sketching.

TOUCH POINT #2 - COMMUNITY WALK AUDIT A detailed event summary is provided in Appendix A.

DRAFT
The Results
Based on the auditors’ discussion and notes from
the workbooks, several overall concerns and
safety priorities were identified for Santa Monica
Boulevard. Recommendations are summarized
below, organized by key themes:

Walk auditors highlighted crossing concerns for
pedestrians at many of the intersections visited.

Visibility challenges also result in cars pulling into
crosswalks to see oncoming traffic.

Consider:
• Scramble crosswalks
• Pedestrian refuge islands
There were many concerns regarding high vehicle
speeds that create uncomfortable conditions
for pedestrians. Fast moving traffic also makes
waiting for the bus uncomfortable.

Consider:
• Posted speeds and speed feedback signs
• Curb extensions
• Narrow vehicle lanes

DESIGN FOR SLOWER VEHICLE
SPEEDS

FURTHER SEPARATE CARS AND

PEDESTRIANS

IMPROVE SIGNAL TIMING

FOR PEDESTRIANS
The walk audit revealed that long wait times
at signalized intersections can lead to risky
pedestrian behavior, such as crossing without
a walk signal. Drivers also frequently attempt
right turns in front of pedestrians.

Consider:
• Leading pedestrian intervals
• Pedestrian walk signals
A need for greater separation between
pedestrians and vehicle traffic was identified to
enhance safety and comfort while walking.

Consider:
• Wider sidewalks
• Buffers between the street and the sidewalk

SAFE CROSSINGS
Touchpoint #2 Participants
DRAFT
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 14
An open house was held at the Santa Monica
Family YMCA on September 6th, 2025, where
staff showcased draft conceptual designs for
14 intersections as well as draft corridor-wide
improvements. A total of 62 members of the public
attended the open house to discuss the designs
and provide feedback about the overall selected
treatments. We heard from a wide array of residents
including families, students, and City Council
members.

The goals of the event were to: • Gather feedback from the community about proposed designs and corridor-wide
improvements.
• Share information about the study and next
steps.

Participants were provided a “Route Map” for a
self-guided tour through 14 intersections. The map
provided space for reflections at each intersection,
with an option to mark whether they “liked the
design” or “had comments.” The back of the map
provided additional space to comment on corridorwide improvements.

The Results
The feedback received during the open house
provided strong support to the proposed location
specific improvements as well as the corridor-wide
enhancements.

TOUCH POINT #3 - OPEN HOUSE
DRAFT
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 15

ONLINE OUTREACH & MAPPING TOOL
For digital communication and outreach, the Study
Team set up a dedicated webpage on the City’s
website that was available for the duration of the
project. On the site, community members were
able to sign up for the Take the Friendly Road email
newsletter to receive notifications, project updates,
and provide location-specific comments on an
interactive city-wide map.

In addition to the project website, a map-based
tool allowed community members to drop a pin at
any location along the corridor to share thoughts
and provide feedback. The online mapping tool
launched in October 2024 during the “Light Up the
Night” event (Touchpoint #1) and was live through
April 2025 to provide a virtual component to the
in-person engagement activities. Participants
submitted comments and concerns about specific
locations along Santa Monica Boulevard categorized
by specific issues. In total, the Study Team gathered
and analyzed 349 comments that were submitted
through the project website. The full summary of
the comments received on the interactive-map is
available in Appendix A.

NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION PRESENTATIONS
The Study Team, led by the City, worked with
neighborhood associations within the study area,
including Mid-City Neighbors, Pico Neighborhood
Association, and the Downtown Santa Monica
business improvement district to identify the
community’s concerns, discuss preliminary crash
data, collect feedback, outline the timeline for the
study, and explain how to provide additional input.

TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
In addition to community stakeholders, staff met
with several City departments to discuss the initial
collision analysis and held a series of meetings to
identify operational and safety improvements. This
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) consisted of
representatives from the Mobility Division, Public
Works, Santa Monica Police Department, Santa
Monica Fire Department, and Big Blue Bus.

One of the workshops held with the TAC included
a technical Safety Walk Audit of Santa Monica
Boulevard on November 21st, 2024. The walk
audit examined corridor-wide safety, design,
and operational concerns. During the Walk Audit,
members of the TAC discussed those concerns and
conducted field observations at key intersections.

The full safety audit report is included as Appendix
B.

ADDITIONAL CORRIDOR OUTREACH
Throughout the life of this study, the project team
conducted additional outreach throughout the
community including:
• Door knocking at businesses along Santa
Monica Boulevard
• Mailing 10,000 post cards within 0.5 miles from
the corridor
• Pop-up tabling at DTSM farmer’s market,
Douglas Park, and McKinley Elementary School
for world heritage day and family literacy night
DRAFT
[ THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ]
DRAFT

4. SAFETY AUDIT & ANALYSIS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BLVD
LINCOLNBLVD14TH ST16TH ST

HIGHEST CRASH SEVERITY

PRIMARY COLLISION FACTORS
(46%)
(32%)
(22%)
(55%) 22%
(20%)
Top 3 locations with the on Santa Monica Blvd
83% of all crashes occur at intersections
17% (56%) (59%)
of all crashes occur at midblock
Bicycles & scooters account for
of all collisions and more than half
of all serious crash injuries

1. Auto Right of Way Violation

2. Speeding
For injury crashes involving pedestrians & bicyclists,
pedestrian & bicyclist
crashes occured at signalized intersections
Proceding movement for injury crashes
where pedestrians were in a crosswalk:
• vehicle turning left
• vehicle proceeding straight
• vehicle turning right
Pedestrian-involved injury crashes
occurring at night (including those under
street lighting) account for 22% of all
pedestrian-related injury crashes
that results in injury crashes at intersections

KEY CORRIDOR SAFETY STATISTICS
Safety Analysis Summary
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 18
In 2022, the City developed a Local Roadway Safety
Plan (LRSP), which serves as an update to the 2017
Vision Zero Plan and analyzed citywide crash data
between 2015-2019. Through the crash analysis
under the LRSP, Santa Monica Boulevard accounted
for four of the top ten crash intersections. Building
on the citywide crash analysis conducted under the
LRSP, this Safety Study analyzes collisions along
Santa Monica Boulevard during the ten-year
period from 2015-2024.

This chapter provides a detailed assessment
along the corridor to see exactly where
crashes occurred and better understand
crash circumstances that can be addressed
through improvements. The full Safety Analysis
Memorandum is available in Appendix B.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Blvd Segments Speed Limits 85th Percentile Speeds Ocean Ave to Lincoln Blvd 25 mph 25 mph - 29 mph
Lincoln Blvd to Cloverfield Blvd 30 mph 30 mph - 34 mph Cloverfield Blvd to Centinela Ave 30 mph 35 mph - 49 mph SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 19
Table 1. Speed Limits vs. 85th Percentile Speeds
Santa Monica Boulevard is classified as a principal
arterial roadway that runs in the general east-west
direction between Ocean Avenue in Santa Monica
and Sunset Boulevard in Hollywood. The study area,
from Ocean Avenue to Centinela Avenue, is 2.4
miles long and has 20 signalized intersections (19
signalized intersections in City of Santa Monica and
one signalized intersection in City of Los Angeles),
13 two-way stop control intersections, and 21
alleys.

Santa Monica Boulevard has four travel lanes, two in
each direction, with intermittent turn lanes and onstreet metered parking. Lane widths are narrower near Ocean Avenue and downtown Santa Monica
and gradually widen toward Centinela Avenue. Block
spacing along the corridor averages about 320 feet
between intersections. Concrete sidewalks are
provided on both sides of the street throughout the
study area. The speed limit between Ocean Avenue
and Lincoln Boulevard is 25 mph and between
Lincoln Boulevard and Centinela Avenue it is 30 mph.

However, many drivers do not abide by speed limits
and travel at higher speeds as shown in Table 1.

Land uses along the corridor primarily consist of
commercial and office spaces and public facilities
such as libraries, hospitals, and schools. The
corridor is served by the Big Blue Bus and LA Metro
(Refer to Section 5.1 for additional discussion on
transit). While there are no bicycle facilities on
Santa Monica Boulevard, the following bicycle
routes intersect the corridor:
• Ocean Avenue – Bi-directional parking protected
bike lane on west side and northbound Class II
bike lane on east side
• 2nd Street – Northbound and southbound Class
II bike lanes
• 6th Street - Northbound and southbound Class
II bike lanes
• 7th Street - Northbound and southbound
Class II bike lanes, no bike lane approaching
intersection
• Lincoln Boulevard – Northbound and
southbound bike route
• 11th Street - Northbound and southbound Class
II bike lanes
• 14th Street - Northbound and southbound Class
II bike lanes
• 17th Street - Northbound and southbound Class
IV buffered bike lanes with green bike crossing
pavement markings across the intersection
• Yale Street – Northbound and southbound bike
route

4.1 ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS
Source: 2024 Citywide Speed Survey
DRAFT
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 20

4.2 CRASH ANALYSIS
This section presents the results of the crash
analysis along Santa Monica Boulevard from
Ocean Avenue to Centinela Avenue. The goal of
this analysis is to identify where, when, and why
crashes occur, with a specific focus on patterns
related to fatal and serious injury crashes.

The analysis is based on data from CrossRoads
(an online collision database used by police
departments and public works agencies) provided
by the City of Santa Monica, and include crashes
that took place between Jan 1, 2015 and Dec 31,
2024.

CRASH TRENDS
During 2015-2024, 435 injury crashes and 401
Property Damage Only crashes were recorded
along the study corridor. Figure 4 illustrates the
number of crashes and their distribution by injury
severity. Notably, about half of the crashes were
reported as property damage only. Visible injuries
and complaints of pain account for 48% of the total,
while severe injuries and fatalities account for the
remaining 3%.

In the analysis, “Property Damage Only” crashes
are included in the crash trends and intersection
maps but are excluded from the analysis, aiming
at identifying specific patterns of injury crashes
because there is a significant difference between
PDO and injury crash attributes.

Total crashes per year reached a high point in 2018.

Crashes significantly decreased during the COVID-19
pandemic beginning in early 2020 but gradually
increased again after 2022. The increase has been
more pronounced for severe crashes, with 17 severe
crashes from 2022- 2024. During the 10-year period
one fatal crash was observed in 2017.
120
Property Damage Only
Severe Injury
Fatal
Other Visible Injury
Complaint of Pain

48.0%

27.9%

20.5%

3.6%0.1%
Figure 4. Total crashes by injury level
Figure 4. Total Crashes by Injury Level
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
Property Damage Only Complaint of Pain Other Visible Injury Severe Injury Fatal 2015 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2016
Number of Crashes
Property Damage Only
Severe Injury
Fatal
Other Visible Injury
Complaint of Pain

48.0%

27.9%

20.5%

3.6%0.1%
Crash Year
Figure 4. Total crashes by injury lev
Figure 5.

DRAFT
Annual Crashes by Injury Level
Figure 6. Age distribution of People Involved in Injury Crashes Figure 7. Crashes by Mode and Severity
0 5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
12%
8%
18%
15%
13%
14%
10%
9%
1%
16%
24%
17%
16%
13%
7%
6%
Population in Santa Monica City (n=
People involved in crashes (n-625)
0-15 16-25 26-35 36-45 46-55 56-65 66-75 76+
%00
%00
People involved in crashes (n=625) Population in Santa Monica City (n=91,500) 0 20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Scooter
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Motor Vehicle
All Crashes Property Damage Only Minor Injury Fatal/Severe Injury ALL CRASHES PROPERTY DAMGE ONLY MINOR INJURY FATAL/SEVERE INJURY Motor Vehicle Bicycle
Pedestrian Scooter
Percentage of people/population
Age Category
Figure 6Age Distribution of People Involved in Injury Crashes Figure 7. crashes by mode and severity
Note: “Minor Injury” category includes Other
Visible Injury and Complaint of Pain
0 5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
12%
8%
18%
15%
1%
16%
24%
17%
16 0-15 16-25 26-35 36-45 4
People involved in crashes (n=625) Popula
0 20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Sc
Ped
Bic
Mo
All Crashes Property Damage Only Minor Injury Fatal/Severe Injury ALL CRASHES PROPERTY DAMGE ONLY MINOR INJURY FATAL/SEVERE INJURY Motor Vehicle Bicycle
Pedestrian Scooter
Percentage of people/population
Age Category
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 21
WHO IS INVOLVED IN CRASHES?
Figure 6 highlights that the two most common age
groups for people involved in crashes are between
26–35 and 36–45, accounting for 24% and 17%
of those involved, respectively. The teal bars in
Figure 6 compare the age distribution of Santa
Monica residents. Notably, the 16–25 age group is
significantly overrepresented in crashes, making
up 16% of those involved, despite only comprising
8% of the city’s population. Similarly, the 26–35
age group is overrepresented by 6 percentage
points. Children aged 0–15 years represent only 4
individuals (0.6%) of those involved. As explained in
the following section, most (822) crashes involve
at least one person who is driving a vehicle or
motorcycle.

WHAT TYPES OF CRASHES ARE OCCURRING?
The crash mode is categorized based on the
non-motor vehicle party involved. For example, a
motor vehicle crash involves only automobiles, a
pedestrian crash involves a pedestrian and a motor
vehicle, and a bicycle crash involves a bicyclist
and a motor vehicle. The data also includes two
crashes involving only a bicyclist and a pedestrian;
these were categorized under the pedestrian
mode to streamline the analysis. Figure 7 shows
the distribution of crash modes by injury level
(Fatal/Serious Injury include one fatality during
the period of analysis). Nearly 81% of all crashes
involve only motor vehicles. However, when
examining fatal and serious injury crashes, motor
vehicle crashes account for 45%, nearly half their
share in all crashes. Conversely, pedestrians are
overrepresented in serious injury crashes, making
up 29% of such incidents compared to 11% in all
crashes. Bicycle and scooter crashes are also
overrepresented in serious injury crashes (55%)
compared to all crashes (20%).

Injury severity and crash type can also vary
depending on whether the crash occurred at
an intersection or a midblock location. Figure 8
compares the proportion of crashes at intersections
and midblock, by injury severity. Most crashes along
Santa Monica Boulevard occur at intersections
with other streets (77%), while only 6% take place
at intersections with alleys. In addition, no fatal
or severe injury crashes were recorded at alley
intersections.

Since alley crashes make up a small proportion
of total crashes and do not contribute to fatal
or serious injuries, the remainder of this report
consolidates alley and street intersection crashes
into a single intersection category.

DRAFT
Figure 8. Intersection and Midblock Crashes by
Severity
Figure 9. Crash Concentration on Santa Monica Boulevard 0 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Servere Injury
Minor Injury
Damage Only
All Crashes ALL CRASHES

PROPERTY DAMAGE ONLY

MINOR INJURY

FATAL/SEVERE INJURY
Midblock
Intersection - Street
Intersection - Alley
Figure 8. Intersection and midblock crashes by injury level SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 22
WHERE ARE CRASHES OCCURRING?
Figure 9 illustrates the concentration of crashes
(PDO and Injury) along the study corridor using a
heatmap that clusters the 797 crashes based on
proximity. This number is slightly lower than the
836 total crashes presented in previous sections,
as some crashes lacked sufficient data for locating
and were therefore excluded from the map. The
hotspots highlight areas with a higher density
of crashes near each other. This visualization is
intended to provide an overview and identify areas
with high crash history for further investigation.

The heatmap above identifies the following
locations with high crash history frequency:
• At the intersection with 4th Street.
• At the intersection with Lincoln Boulevard.
• Between 14th and 16th Streets.
• At the intersection with 20th Street.
• At the intersection with 26th Street.

All Crashes, 2015-2024
DRAFT
Figure 10. Intersection and Midblock Injury Crashes
by Crash Mode
Figure 11. Crash Injury Level by Location Type
Figure 12. Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Scooter Injury Crashes by Location Type Motor Vehicle Bicycle
Pedestrian
Fatal/Severe Injury
Property Damage Only
Scooter Minor Injury
0 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120
Scooter
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Motor Vehicle
Midblock
Intersection
0 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Midblock
Signalized
Unsignalized
Unsignalized Signalized Midblock
34% 56%
10%
37% 59%
4%
36%
18%
45%
Figure 12. Pedestrian and bicyclists injury crashes by location type Figure 10. Intersection and midblock injury crashes by crash mode Figure 11. Crash Injury level by location type Motor Vehicle Bicycle
Pedestrian
Fatal/Severe Injury
Property Damage Only
Scooter Minor Injury
0 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120
Scooter
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Motor Vehicle
Midblock
Intersection
0 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Midblock
Signalized
Unsignalized
Unsignalized Signalized Midblock
34% 56%
10%
37% 59%
4%
36%
18%
45%
Figure 12. Pedestrian and bicyclists injury crashes by location type Figure 10. Intersection and midblock injury crashes by crash mode Figure 11. Crash Injury level by location type Motor Vehicle Bicycle
Pedestrian
Fatal/Severe Injury
Property Damage Only
Scooter Minor Injury
0 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120
Scooter
Pedestrian
Bicycle
Motor Vehicle
Midblock
Intersection
0 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Midblock
Signalized
Unsignalized
Unsignalized Signalized Midblock
34% 56%
10%
37% 59%
4%
36%
18%
45%
Figure 12. Pedestrian and bicyclists injury crashes by location type Figure 10. Intersection and midblock injury crashes by crash mode Figure 11. Crash Injury level by location type SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 23
Figure 10 shows the distribution of injury crash
modes at intersections and midblock. Motor vehicle
crashes make up the majority at both location
types, nonetheless the share of motor vehicle
crashes at intersections (65%) is less than at
midblock (72%).

Figure 11 shows the distribution of crash types
across different location types. Crashes occur most
frequently at signalized intersections, and injury
severity is highest at unsignalized intersections.

Figure 12 shows the distribution of injury crashes
that involve pedestrians and bicyclists at different
location types. Many of these crashes (56-59%)
occur at signalized intersections. Bicyclist crashes
(37%) and pedestrian crashes (34%) occur at
about the same rate at unsignalized intersections.

Conversely, pedestrian crashes (10%) are more
common at midblock than bicyclist crashes (4%).

DRAFT
Figure 13. Crashes by Time of Day by Severity
Figure 14. Crashes by Injury Level and Lighting Conditions 0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 Minor Injury
Fatal/Serious Injury
12:00 AM
1:00 AM
2:00 AM
3:00 AM
4:00 AM
5:00 AM
6:00 AM
7:00 AM
8:00 AM
9:00 AM
10:00AM
11:00 AM
12:00 PM
1:00 PM
2:00 PM
3:00 PM
4:00 PM
5:00 PM
6:00 PM
7:00 PM
8:00 PM
9:00 PM
10:00 PM
11:00 PM
0 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Fatal/Severe Injury
Minor Injury
Property Damage Only
Daylight Dusk-Dawn
Minor Injury Fatal/Severe Injury
Dark-Streetlights Dark-No Streetlights
Number of Crashes
Time of Day
Figure 13. Crashes by Time of Day by Severity, 2015-2024 Figure 14. Crash Injury level by location type SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 24 WHEN ARE CRASHES OCCURRING?
This section examines seasonality of crashes and
lighting. Figure 13 illustrates how the number of
crashes increases throughout the day, peaking
between 5 pm and 6 pm.

Seasonal changes affect lighting conditions, with
daylight hours being shorter in the winter. Lighting
availability is especially important for pedestrian
and bicycle visibility, when streetlights may be their
only source of lighting.

Figure 14 shows the distribution of lighting
conditions in crashes across different injury levels.

Most property damage only (PDO) and minor injury
crashes occur during daylight, with only a small
proportion happening at dusk or dawn. However,
nearly one-quarter of PDO crashes and one-fifth
of minor injury crashes occur in the dark, under
the presence of street lighting. The proportion of
fatal and serious injury crashes occurring in the
dark with street lighting is significantly higher,
accounting for 45% of these crashes under such
lighting conditions. The share of crashes occurring
at dusk or dawn is also higher for fatal and serious
injuries compared to the other two categories. This
suggests that the lack of natural daylight may be
an underlying cause of fatal and severe injuries
crashes.
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 Minor Injury
Fatal/Serious Injury
12:00 AM
1:00 AM
2:00 AM
3:00 AM
4:00 AM
5:00 AM
6:00 AM
7:00 AM
8:00 AM
9:00 AM
10:00AM
11:00 AM
12:00 PM
1:00 PM
2:00 PM
3:00 PM
4:00 PM
5:00 PM
6:00 PM
7:00 PM
8:00 PM
9:00 PM
10:00 PM
11:00 PM
0 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Fatal/Severe Injury
Minor Injury
Property Damage Only
Daylight Dusk-Dawn
Minor Injury Fatal/Severe Injury
Dark-Streetlights Dark-No Streetlights
Number of Crashes
Time of Day
Figure 13. Crashes by Time of Day by Severity, 2015-2024 Figure 14. Crash Injury level by location type
DRAFT
Figure 16. Speed-Related Crashes by Injury Level
Figure 17. Impairment-Related Crashes by Injury Level
Figure 15. Primary Collision Factors in Injury Crashes
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Midb
Inter
Other Hazardous Movement
Improper Turning
Traic Signals and Signs
Unsafe Speed
Auto Right of Way Violation
0 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Speed
Othe
Fatal/Serious Injury
Minor Injury
Property Damage Only
Other Factors Speeding
Other Factors Impairment
0 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Impa
Othe
Fatal/Serious Injury
Minor Injury
Property Damage Only
Intersection Midblock
Fi
In
Fi
in
Fi
by
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Midb
Inters
Other Hazardous Movement
Improper Turning
Traic Signals and Signs
Unsafe Speed
Auto Right of Way Violation
0 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Speed
Other
Fatal/Serious Injury
Minor Injury
Property Damage Only
Other Factors Speeding
Other Factors Impairment
0 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Impa
Othe
Fatal/Serious Injury
Minor Injury
Property Damage Only
Intersection Midblock
Fi
In
Fi
in
Fi
by
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Midblo
Interse
Other Hazardous Movement
Improper Turning
Traic Signals and Signs
Unsafe Speed
Auto Right of Way Violation
0 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Speed
Other
Fatal/Serious Injury
Minor Injury
Property Damage Only
Other Factors Speeding
Other Factors Impairment
0 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Impai
Other
Fatal/Serious Injury
Minor Injury
Property Damage Only
Intersection Midblock
Fig
Inj
Fig
inj
Fig
by
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 25
WHY ARE CRASHES OCCURRING?
Police Crash reports provide details about the
primary and contributing factors that caused a
crash, and the sobriety of each party involved.

This analysis examines the proportion of crashes
where speed, impairment, and/or inattention was
identified either as the primary collision factor or
contributing factor when applicable.

Failure to yield and speeding are the top two
primary collision factors that result in injury
crashes at intersections. Speeding and improper
turning are top collision factors at midblock
locations. Improvements shall address these crash
factors. (see Figure 15)
Figure 16 presents speed-related crashes by injury
level. A crash was categorized as speed-related
if the primary collision factor was identified as
“unsafe speed.” Among the 31 serious injury
crashes, 3% were associated with speeding, a lower
proportion compared to minor injury crashes and
property damage only. This trend is atypical, as
most crash analyses show a positive correlation
between speed and injury severity.

Figure 17 shows impairment-related crashes by
injury level. A crash was considered impairmentrelated if any party “Had Been Drinking (HBD) - Under Influence” or “Under Drug Influence”; or if
the crash primary collision factor was recorded as
“Driving Under Influence.” Out of the 836 crashes
analyzed, 48 (5%) were related to impairment.

The proportion of crashes involving impairment is
highest in property damage (7%) and fatal/serious
injury crashes (6%).

DRAFT

COLLISIONS INVOLVING PEOPLE WALKING IN THE CROSSWALK
Pedestrian crashes are overrepresented in serious injury crashes. Appropriate safety measures should be explored during the recommendation phase to increase driver awareness of pedestrians and compliance with yielding laws.

EXCESSIVE SPEED
Excessive speed has been identified as one of the top three collision factors in reported crashes. Speeding is more prevalent in the areas between Cloverfield Boulevard and Centinela Avenue where many drivers were reported traveling 5 to 15 mph over the posted speed limit. Safety walk audit participants also shared concerns about higher vehicle speeds in the eastern portion of Santa Monica Boulevard due to wider lanes and larger block spacing, which can encourage speeding. Evaluate appropriate traffic calming measures approaching intersections to reduce injury collisions of all types.

EXCESSIVE DISTANCE BETWEEN MARKED CROSSWALKS
Large block spacing causes many pedestrians to walk long distances to access crosswalks, causing some people to opt for a shorter route and potentially crossing at unexpected locations.

SIDE STREET CONFLICTS
A significant number of crashes involve vehicles making left turns while pedestrians are crossing in crosswalks.

During the safety walk audit, numerous drivers were observed completing their left turns when the traffic signal turned yellow or red. The lack of dedicated turning phases and limited opportunities to turn during permissive phases causes drivers to focus on completing their turns and failing to notice pedestrians crossing the street. For signalized intersections, consider eliminating permissive phases at high pedestrian volumes areas. At unsignalized intersections with side streets, a similar threat is posed by drivers turning off the boulevard where left turn prohibitions can be considered.

Additionally, it is difficult for drivers traveling straight across the boulevard from side streets to find acceptable gaps, resulting in the threat of broadside collisions. Consider implementing right turn only restrictions where the predominant crash type is broadside and/or the resulting out of direction travel impacts are low.

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 26
01 02
03 04

KEY SAFETY CONCERNS
DRAFT

5. TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
DRAFT
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 28
As part of the Safety Study, an analysis was
conducted of transit operations along Santa Monica
Boulevard between Ocean Avenue and Centinela
Avenue. Santa Monica Boulevard is served by Big
Blue Bus Routes 1 and Rapid Route 10, as well as L.A.

Metro Route 4 with numerous other intersecting
routes.

A detailed transit analysis can be found in Appendix
B.

TRANSIT DELAY
Bus operations and transit rider connections help
us understand where street safety improvements
might overlap for the benefit of more reliable transit
travel times. As part of this study, transit delay was
calculated based on stop-to-stop average speed for
Big Blue Bus Route 1 along the study corridor, using
weekday trips collected in October 2024.

Morning Peak – For the eastbound direction, the
segment between 22nd Street and Cloverfield
Boulevard experienced slower travel speeds due to
congestion pinch points, and the segment between
4th Street and 6th Street experienced slower travel
speeds due to the location of the transit map where
many busses stop queue or change drivers. In
the westbound direction, the segments between
Cloverfield and 20th Street as well as between Yale
Street and 26th Street experience the slowest travel
speeds.

Evening Peak – For the eastbound direction, the segments from 22nd Street to Cloverfield Boulevard and 4th Street to 6th Street are the slowest, with travel speeds dropping below 7 mph and reaching as low as 4 mph. The segments from 20th Street to 22nd Street and 6th Street to Lincoln Boulevard also experienced slow travel speeds in the evening. For the westbound direction, buses traveling into Santa Monica during the afternoon peak period maintain steady speeds.

Ocean Avenue
• Big Blue Route 9
• LA Metro Route 134
2nd Street
• Big Blue Bus Route 8
• LA Metro Route 33
4th Street
• Big Blue Bus Route 1
• Big Blue Bus Route 2
• Big Blue Bus Route 3
• Big Blue Bus Route 8
• Big Blue Bus Route 9
• Big Blue Bus Rapid 10
• Big Blue Bus Route 18
• Big Blue Bus Route 43
• LA Metro Route 4
• LA Metro Route 20
• LA Metro Route 134
• LA Metro Route 720
6th Street
• Big Blue Bus Route 1
• Big Blue Bus Route 3
• Big Blue Bus Route 5
• Big Blue Bus Route 7
• Big Blue Bus Route 8
• Big Blue Bus Rapid 10
• Big Blue Bus Route 18
• LA Metro Route 4
7th Street
• Big Blue Bus Route 7
• Big Blue Bus Route 8
Lincoln Boulevard
• Big Blue Bus Route 18
• LA Metro Route 4
14th Street
• Big Blue Bus Route 41
• LA Metro Route 4
20th Street
• Big Blue Bus Route 41
• LA Metro Route 4
26th Street
• Big Blue Bus Route 43
• LA Metro Route 4
Centinela Avenue
• Big Blue Bus Route 16

TRANSIT ROUTES CROSSING SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD

5.1 TRANSIT OPERATIONS
DRAFT
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 29

TRANSIT RIDERSHIP
Transit activity (boardings and alightings) by stop
for the eastbound and westbound directions were
analyzed for Big Blue Bus routes. In the eastbound
direction the highest activity of average daily
boardings/alightings, from west to east, occurred
at 4th Street (366), 6th Street (174) 20th Street (99)
and 26th Street (120). In the westbound direction
the highest activity, from east to west, 26th Street
(106), 20th Street (90) and 6th Street (255).

For the Metro Route 4, which has wider stop
spacing and fewer stops along Santa Monica
Boulevard, the highest activity occurs at 4th Street
with approximately 638 average daily boardings
and alightings for both eastbound and westbound
directions. The stops at 4th and 6th Streets are
located within the Downtown Transit Mall and
expected to have more boardings and alightings.

In addition to the community feedback and
the detailed crash analysis, the recommended
improvements for Santa Monica Boulevard were
also informed by a detailed level of service (LOS)
operations analysis that evaluated each of the
signalized and unsignalized intersections along
the corridor. While this safety study focuses on
improvements that address documented crash
patterns, vehicular operations should also be
considered in conjunction with the crash data to
ensure the proposed safety measures do not create
excessive congestion or operational deficiencies,
which could potentially introduce new challenges or
negatively impact overall roadway performance.

The traffic operations analysis evaluated current
intersection performance using recent traffic
counts and projected traffic volumes for the year
2050. This established a baseline for existing
conditions, including the current design and signal
timing. The results provide the level of service
(LOS), a measure of traffic flow, which is used to
compare the intersection’s current performance
with its expected performance under the proposed
improvements.

Level of Service (LOS) is commonly used as a
measure of the operational performance of an
intersection based on average vehicular delay. The
intersection analysis conforms to Highway Capacity
Manual operational analysis methodology, which is
a widely accepted methodology and consistent with
methodology used by the City of Santa Monica.

Provided in Appendix C are the intersection
performance tables that compare baseline
operations to the “with improvement” scenario
for 2025 existing condition and the Future Year
2050 forecast conditions. As shown in the tables
in Appendix C, with the implementation of the
proposed improvements, operations along the
corridor are projected to improve compared to
the existing condition. In addition to the location
specific improvements at the focus intersections,
the operations analysis also incorporates
corridor-wide traffic signal enhancements and
synchronization between adjacent intersections.

Refer to Section 6.2 for more discussion on this
type of treatment.

5.2 VEHICULAR OPERATIONS
DRAFT
[ THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ]
DRAFT

6. RECOMMENDATIONS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY
This chapter outlines the potential treatments that
could be implemented on Santa Monica Boulevard
to reduce crashes and improve the multimodal
environment for all users. These recommended
improvements have been developed throughout
the outreach process based on meaningful input
and feedback received from the community and
the technical advisory committee. They have also
been informed and influenced by the data driven
technical analysis including the detailed safety
audit, crash analysis, and the traffic operations
analysis.

These improvements have been categorized into
short-term (phase 1) and long-term (phase 2)
improvements depending on how complicated
the projects are, ease of implementation, and
estimated costs. Some project elements may even
be completed immediately after plan adoption,
including signal timing adjustments, Leading
Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs), pedestrian recall, turn
restrictions, and farside bus stop relocations.

As further explored in Chapter 7: Next Steps,
implementation of these potential improvements
will depend on available funding, coordination with
other stakeholders, feasibility and engineering
complexity. This plan is intended to provide
guidance and flexibility based on project-specific
conditions and will serve as a foundational
reference to guide future coordination, funding
requests, and infrastructure planning efforts.

Short Term
Includes minor infrastructure upgrades that could be implemented within the next two years. Some elements that could be advanced during the next 6-12 months include signal timing adjustments, Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs), pedestrian recall, turn restrictions, and farside bus stop relocations, which are indicated with an asterisk in section 7.2 Potential Phasing.

Long Term
Includes projects with moderate investments requiring additional funding, planning, design, or potential policy modifications. These improvements could be implemented within the next 3 to 10 years.

DRAFT
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 33
In response to numerous public comments and
observed safety conditions at multiple two-way
stop intersections, implementation of right-turn
only treatments are recommended at all 2-way,
stop-controlled side streets along Santa Monica
Boulevard. This treatment is a low cost option
utilizing striping, signing, and direction delineators
to prohibit left-turns and force vehicles to turn
right from the side streets onto Santa Monica
Boulevard. Limiting the side streets to right-turn
only at these unsignalized intersections will
allow traffic on Santa Monica Boulevard to flow
better as well as reduce conflicts and motorist
confusion. These treatments have been previously
implemented throughout the City, including multiple
locations on Wilshire Boulevard, and have reduced
conflicts at intersections
Right-Turn Only from Side Street
One of the most resounding comments received
throughout the community engagement process
was the desire to easily cross Santa Monica
Boulevard on foot. Installing new Rectangular
Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) is recommended
at six unsignalized intersections, in addition to
upgrading the existing six RRFB intersections along
Santa Monica Boulevard. The RRFB is a pedestrian
activated flashing light system used at crosswalks
to alert drivers that they must yield to people who
are crossing (or about to cross) the street. An
RRFB is a crossing treatment that greatly improves
pedestrian safety and driver yielding rates at
crosswalks.

The Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA’s) Guide
to Improving Pedestrian Safety at Uncontrolled
Crossing Locations endorses RRFBs as a proven
safety countermeasure and recommends combining
RRFBs with high visibility crosswalks, medians and/
or curb extensions where feasible for additional
enhancements to the crossing environment. The
FHWA notes that RRFBs can reduce crashes up
to 47% for pedestrian crashes, and can increase
motorist yielding rates up to 98%. To further
improve RRFB visibility at the 12 intersections, mast
arms are recommended to place flashing beacons
above travel lanes.

6.1 SAFETY TREATMENT OPTIONS

RIGHT-TURN ONLY ON SIDE STREETS

RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING

BEACONS (RRFB)
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB)
with Mast Arms
The safety treatment recommendations listed
below have been applied to other areas of Santa
Monica and have varying crash reduction factors,
an indication of how many crashes a treatment is
expected to reduce if installed.

DRAFT
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 34
Leading pedestrian intervals (LPIs) give pedestrians
a “head start” to cross a signalized intersection
several seconds before motorists can legally
proceed through the intersection. LPIs typically last
at least three seconds but can range depending
on intersection context. A LPI treatment allows
pedestrians to establish themselves in the
crosswalk and reinforces their right-of-way, thus
improving crossing visibility and reducing crashes.

Based on feedback from the community and
other stakeholders, LPI’s are recommended at all
signalized intersections where there is not an
existing or recommended pedestrian scramble.

A pedestrian scramble crossing, also known as
an all-pedestrian crossing is a dedicated signal
phase where all vehicular movements receive a
red light and pedestrians are allowed to cross in
every direction, including diagonally across the
intersection. This treatment improves pedestrian
safety by eliminating conflicts with turning vehicles
and reduces the need for multiple crossings by
allowing pedestrians to navigate directly from
one corner to another. To further enhance this
treatment, it would be combined with “No Right On
Red” restrictions to prevent vehicles from turning
right during the pedestrian phase.

Pedestrian scrambles already exist at 2nd Street
and 4th Street and are recommended to be installed
at 5th Street, 6th Street, and 7th Street.

LEADING PEDESTRIAN INTERVALS EXCLUSIVE PEDESTRIAN PHASE (SCRAMBLE) Leading Pedestrian Intervals
Pedestrian Scramble
DRAFT
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 35
Many of the signalized intersections along the
Santa Monica Boulevard corridor utilize permissive
left-turn phasing in the east-west direction from
Santa Monica Boulevard to the minor streets. This
means that drivers attempting to make a left-turn
movement must yield to oncoming traffic from the
opposing direction and attempt to complete their
maneuver between gaps in traffic. Often times
this movement is also made concurrently with the
conflicting pedestrian crossings. The analysis of
crash data indicates this left-turn operations at
signalized intersections are likely to contribute to
left-turn crashes.

During the Safety Walk Audit with the Technical
Advisory Committee as well as the Community
Walk Audit with members of the public, there were
several observations that vehicles were stuck
in the middle of a signalized intersection during
the permissive left-turn phase without adequate
gaps in opposing traffic complete their turn. In
addition, vehicles would attempt unsafe left-turn
movements during the yellow and all-red phase in
order to avoid sitting through another whole cycle.

The conversion from permissive phasing to a
protected left-turn phasing operations would
provided a separate dedicated portion of the traffic
signal cycle for left-turning vehicles only without
conflicting movements from other directions. By
Protected Left-Turn Phasing
It improves comfort by providing a buffer between
pedestrians and vehicles and can slow speeds due
to narrowing of lanes, especially near crosswalks.

Pedestrian refuge islands are recommended at the
following locations:
• Chelsea Avenue
• Princeton Street
• Harvard Street
• Stanford Street
• Franklin Street

RAISED LANDSCAPED MEDIANS
Landscaped medians enhance operations by
separating opposing traffic, reducing vehicular
speeds and reducing pedestrian crossing distance
by creating a pedestrian refuge island. Landscaped
medians will physically constrain left turns
onto Santa Monica Boulevard from side streets.

Native plantings may be used to minimize water
consumption and maintenance needs and enhance
the corridor’s sense of place.
removing the conflicts between other movements
as well as pedestrian crossings, protected leftturn phasing operations enhances safety for all roadway users by reducing the likelihood of leftturn crashes, improving predictability at signalized intersections, and providing clearer separation
between vehicle and pedestrian movements.

Protected left-turn phasing is recommended at the
following locations:
• Lincoln Boulevard
• 11th Street
• 20th Street

PEDESTRIAN REFUGE ISLAND
Pedestrian refuge islands are provided at crossing
locations and are intended to reduce a pedestrian’s
exposure to traffic. This is even more important
on multilane roadways such as Santa Monica
Boulevard.

PROTECTED LEFT-TURN PHASING
Landscaped Median with Pedestrian Refuge
Island
DRAFT
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 36
Hardened centerlines are raised vertical elements
within the roadway along the centerline of an
intersection approach that extends partially
past the limit line to narrow the path of travel for
left turning vehicles. By physically constraining
the left turns, drivers are forced to make
slower, tighter turns. When combined with
right-turn only treatments on the side-streets,
these also discourage wrong-way movements
further enforcing the left-turn restrictions onto
Santa Monica Boulevard. These treatments are
recommended at:
• 9th Street
• 10th Street
• 12th Street
• 15th Street
• 16th Street
• 18th Street
• 19th Street
• Euclid Street
A curb extension, also known as a bulb-out,
is a traffic calming measure that widens the
sidewalk for a short distance and extends the
curb space at the corner of an intersection. This
treatment enhances visibility between drivers and
pedestrians, slows vehicle speeds, and shortens
the overall crossing distance for pedestrians. They
may be implemented on the major street, the
minor street, or both. Additional considerations
need to be given to curb extensions as they may
affect drainage, catch basins, and the flow of
stormwater. Curb extensions can also impact truck
turning maneuvers, especially large vehicles such
as delivery trucks, emergency vehicles, and buses
trying to navigate through the intersection. As curb
extensions physically narrow the roadway, they
are generally incompatible with bus queue jump
lanes, however they can be extended to include
nearby transit stops and provide wider sidewalks for
boarding/alighting.

Curb extensions are recommended at:
• 6th Street (with extended bus boarding)
• Lincoln Boulevard (with extended bus boarding)
• 9th Street
• 10th Street
• 12th Street
• 15th Street
• 16th Street
• 18th Street
• 19th Street
• 26th Street (with extended bus boarding)
• Euclid Street

HARDENED CENTERLINES CURB EXTENSIONS / BULB-OUTS
Hardened Centerlines
Curb Extensions / Bulb-Outs

LANE WIDTH REDUCTION
Narrowing lane widths on arterials and collectors
can be an effective measure to reduce both speed
and the number of collisions. Narrowing lane widths
along Santa Monica Boulevard, where feasible, can
encourage drivers to drive slower.

The following lane widths are recommended
throughout the project area:
• All vehicle travel lanes are preferred to be 10’
wide, with a maximum width of 11’.
• All travel lanes for transit service are preferred
to be 12’ wide, with a maximum width of 13’.
• Markings near intersections and next to parking
lanes have been revised to better delineate the
new preferred travel lane widths.

DRAFT
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 37
One of the primary goals of this Study is to enhance
accessibility for all, especially pedestrians with
disabilities. With the implementation of the
recommended improvements, it is important to
ensure that all facilities are ADA compliant. This
includes meeting or exceeding the standards
outlined in the Public Right-of-Way Accessibility
Guidelines (PROWAG), such as sufficient access
routes (i.e. sidewalk widths), detectable warning
surfaces at all curb ramps (i.e truncated domes),
accommodations at signal crossings (audible
crossings and pedestrian push-buttons), etc.

Many site-specific recommendations include
modifications to the curb return and reconstruction
of curb ramps which will be designed to the
appropriate ADA requirements. To further support
crossing movements, pedestrian signals are
recommended to be on recall in all directions from
7:00 AM to 10:00 PM along Santa Monica Boulevard,
forgoing the need to press a pedestrian button to
cross the street. Still, Accessible Pedestrian Signals
with an audible function may still be recommended
for sight-impaired pedestrians.

Traffic calming treatments that use vertical
deflection (speed tables, raised crosswalks, etc.)
work to slow traffic, address safety challenges, and
improve conditions for bicyclists and pedestrians.

Industry guidance emphasizes that evaluation and
selection of vertical roadway treatments should
consider context of the location, crash types,
existing and target speeds, traffic volumes, rightof-way width and number of lanes, and emergency access. Due to this, vertical deflection treatments
are typically applied to local or collector roads with
average daily traffic of under 9,000 vehicles and a
speed limit of 35mph or less. As a principal arterial
that carries approximately 10,000 - 29,000 daily
vehicles, Santa Monica Boulevard generally falls
outside the typical context in which professional
guidance supports widespread use of vertical
deflection. However, such treatments could still
be evaluated further during the design phase of
implementation. Staff therefore recommends
that, in addition to the context-appropriate traffic
calming measures identified in this Safety Study,
vertical deflection elements on Santa Monica
Boulevard be considered at 16th Street, 21st Street,
22nd Street, Chealsea Avenue, Princeton Street, and
Franklin Street.

The Safety Study will incorporate and build upon the
recommendations identified in the West Side Cities
Council of Government’s Bus Lane Project. These
recommendations are focused on improving bus
travel time, reliability, and safety along the corridor through strategic reallocation of roadway space.

Key improvements include the implementation of
peak‑hour bus‑only lanes in both directions from
Centinela Avenue to Harvard Street, as well as
full‑time bus‑only lanes in both directions from
14th Street to Lincoln Boulevard, which would
repurpose one existing travel lane in each direction
for dedicated bus use. In addition, the project
proposes extending the existing eastbound transit
plaza and bus‑only lane from 5th Street to Lincoln
Boulevard by repurposing one eastbound vehicle
travel lane. The recommendations also include the
creation of a new westbound curbside transit plaza
along Santa Monica Boulevard between 6th Street
and 7th Street, where on‑street parking would
be impacted to support transit operations and
passenger loading.

ADA ENHANCEMENTS

VERTICAL DEFLECTION BUS-ONLY LANES
Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS)
Vertical Deflection (Raised Crosswalk)
DRAFT
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 38
While Santa Monica Boulevard is not classified
as a dedicated bicycle corridor, there are several
intersecting north-south connections to existing
facilities as well as future priority connections
as outlined in the Bike Action Plan. Feedback
received from the community identified a desire
for additional bicycle enhancements to improve
cyclist comfort as they cross Santa Monica
Boulevard. This includes conflict striping through
the intersection at 7th Street, 11th Street, 14th
Street, Chelsea Avenue, and Yale Street. In addition,
bike boxes are proposed on the minor approaches
at 6th Street to provide a designated staging area
at the traffic signal ahead of the vehicle stop
bar which allows cyclists to bypass the vehicular
queue. These treatments increase cyclist visibility,
driver awareness, and encourage bicycle activity
along these intersecting cross streets, providing
connections to parallel bicycle routes.

Relocating bus stops from the near side to the far
side of the intersection can enhance passenger
visibility at the crosswalk and improve service
reliability by reducing signal delay. As referenced in
the NACTO Urban Street Design Guide, far-side stops
allow pedestrians to cross behind the bus which
improves visibility. On multi-lane roadways, far-side
stops also make pedestrians more visible to drivers
waiting at traffic signals and can reduce conflicts
with right-turning vehicles.

Through coordination with City Staff and other
stakeholders, far-side bus stop relocations are
recommended where feasible based on roadway
geometry, curb-to-curb widths, and other
considerations. These locations include:
• 6th Street (eastbound)
• 11th Street (eastbound)
• 14th Street (eastbound)
• Berkeley Street (eastbound)
• 26th Street (eastbound)
Bus queue jump treatments allow buses to advance
through an intersection to a far-side stop from the
near-side right-turn lane, minimizing signal delay
for buses. The benefits of queue jump lanes are
that they can be implemented for short sections
ahead of the intersection rather than providing
a continuous bus lane. Queue jump lanes require
some curbside space to bypass traffic at signalized
locations so that buses can “jump” ahead of
queued vehicles.

Through coordination with City Staff and other
stakeholders, bus queue jumps are recommended
where feasible based on roadway geometry,
curb-to-curb widths, parking impacts, and
other considerations. This treatment may also
be combined with far-side bus stop relocations.

Identified locations for bus queue jump lanes
include:
• Lincoln Boulevard (westbound)
• 26th Street (westbound)

ENHANCED NORTH-SOUTH BIKE CONNECTIONS FAR-SIDE BUS STOP RELOCATION BUS QUEUE JUMP LANES Bus Queue Jump Lanes
DRAFT
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 39
As part of the traffic operations analysis, the
project team evaluated signal timing at each
signalized intersection along the corridor (Refer to
Appendix C). This assessment verified the feasibility
of recommended improvements and examined their
impact on vehicular operations. A key component
of the signal timing evaluation was signal
synchronization, aimed at pacing traffic flows while
reducing delays. This is particularly important for
the segment of Santa Monica Boulevard between
20th Street and 26th Street, which experiences
a significant level of congestion during the peak
morning and evening periods, which can cause
driver frustration and unpredictable driver behavior.

In order to optimize synchronization and maximize
the efficiency of traffic signals, upgrades to traffic
signal equipment may be necessary to implement
the most state-of-the-art technology. Since
buses operate within the general flow of traffic,
the analysis also provides insight into transit
performance along the corridor; however the
analysis does not account for bus queue jumps or
During the field observations, the project team
identified faded roadway striping along the length
of the corridor that is in need of refreshing. As
recommended improvements are implemented
at specific locations along the corridor, roadway
striping will be updated to reflect the appropriate
treatments. In addition, where feasible, travel lane
widths should be standardized along the corridor.

Reducing travel lane widths creates visual cues
for slower driving, reducing vehicle speeds, and
calming traffic.

Similarly, street signage should be consistent and
upgraded throughout the corridor.

In addition, in order to provide a more consistent
experience for drivers along the corridor, on-street
parking should be formalized with parking edge “T’s”
and updated parking regulations as appropriate.

other transit priority recommendations which would
only further improve transit operations.

The results of this analysis show that average
vehicular delays along the corridor would operate
acceptably. As improvements are implemented
along Santa Monica Boulevard, City Staff will
continue to monitor flow and congestion and make
signal timing adjustments as appropriate.

SIGNAL TIMING ENHANCEMENTS
& SYNCHRONIZATION

PAVEMENT MARKINGS AND SIGNAGE

6.2 CORRIDOR-WIDE SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS
In addition to the safety treatment options that
are applied at site specific locations (priority
intersections), other corridor-wide enhancements
should be implemented along the length of Santa
Monica Boulevard. This section discusses additional
universal improvements that would provide a safer,
more consistent user experience for all.

Improved Pavement Markings Example
(Broadway Safety Project)
DRAFT
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 40
In addition to signage and striping updates
along the corridor, red curb zones should also be
refreshed and formalized, especially in the vicinity
of marked crosswalks. Assembly Bill 413, also
known as California’s “Daylighting Law,” prohibits
vehicles from parking within 20 feet of any marked
or unmarked crosswalk regardless of red curb
markings or signage. This offset can be reduced
to 15 feet with the presence of curb extensions.

This required buffer is intended to improve visibility
sight lines by clearing obstructions, including
conflicts with parked vehicles, enabling drivers to
see pedestrians waiting to cross.

Red curbs should also be added adjacent to alleys
and driveways to provide sufficient visibility for
vehicles entering and existing Santa Monica
Boulevard. When the length of curb between
adjacent driveways is less than 16 feet, the entire
segment should be painted.

Formalizing red curb zones improves visibility
for vehicles turning out of driveways and alleys,
reduces pedestrian crashes, and provides a more
predictable environment. Some segments may
experience a reduction in on-street parking spaces
due to these requirements.

During the community walk audit, as well as
field observations with the TAC, the project team
observed multiple locations where mature trees
covered existing street lights which would impact
the overall lighting along the corridor. This was
especially evident at 20th Street and 26th Street
where the tree canopy was encompassing signal
poles, mast arms, and street lights.

The safety analysis identified that 22% of
pedestrian-involved injury crashes occur at night.

Future efforts should evaluate the overall lighting
conditions along the entire corridor and include a
detailed photometric assessment. The City should
also evaluate tree height and width to identify
where trees need pruning.

In addition to tracking crash trends and patterns,
the City will assess how these improvements
can improve safety, public health, and quality of
life, the project will apply a Counts+ evaluation
approach that is currently being applied to Caltrans
ATP projects, and other projects in Santa Monica.

Rather than simply understanding the before and
after change of transportation modes, the Counts+
examines specific performance metrics such as
yield compliance at crosswalks, change in speed,
use of designated crosswalks, and user/parent
satisfaction. This methodology will allow staff to
better understand the impacts of safety projects at
a granular level and adjust the approach for future
safety projects.

FORMALIZE RED CURB ZONES LIGHTING EVALUATION
Lighting condition impacted by tree canopy
DRAFT
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 41
DRAFT
6TH ST
LINCOLN BLVD10TH ST11TH ST14TH ST15TH ST16TH ST18TH ST19TH ST20TH STCHELSEA AVE PARK DR26TH STPRINCETON STSTANFORD STFRANKLIN ST

SANTA MONICA BLVD

OCEAN AVE

CENTINELA AVE
2ND ST3RD ST PROMENADE4TH ST5TH ST7TH ST9TH ST12TH STEUCLID ST17TH ST21ST ST22ND ST23RD STHARVARD STYALE STBERKELEY ST 25TH ST

CLOVERFIELD BLVD
Focus Intersections

RECOMMENDATIONS
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 42

6.3 FOCUS INTERSECTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS
As part of this safety analysis, specific
intersections, or “focus intersections” were
identified through close coordination with the
project team. These locations were chosen due to
their unique crash history, geometric conditions,
proximity to community resources, and/or study
team observations and community input.

According to the 2022 LRSP, two intersections on
Santa Monica Boulevard made the list of the “Top
Signalized Intersections Overall” (6th Street and
20th Street) and three additional intersections
made the list on the “Top Crash Locations at
Unsignalized Intersections Overall” (15th Street,
16th Street, and 18th Street).

Through the Safety Audit, each intersection along
the corridor was analyzed and assigned a weighted
crash severity score. Based on these scores as
well as the public interest and feedback received
from preliminary community engagement through
the Social Pinpoint online survey a total of 14 focus
intersections were identified. For these focus
intersections, detailed recommendations and
concept designs have been developed to directly
address the unique conditions at each location
as well as respond to and address community
concerns.

Figure 18. Focus Intersections Locations
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BLVD
6TH ST
Goodwill
Tar & Roses
Santa Monica Public
Library
Union
Existing Parklet
6TH ST SANTA MONICA BLVD

OCEAN AVE

CENTINELA AVE
Southland Credit
1 2
2 2
3 4
4 2
3 6
6 6
5 Between 2015 and 2024, a total of 20 crashes occurred at the intersection of Santa Monica Boulevard and 6th Street, including three that resulted in serious injuries. The community also identified this intersection as a priority location during the Social Pinpoint mapping exercise. Located in the heart of the downtown area and immediately adjacent to the Public Library, 6th Street experiences high traffic volumes, high pedestrian crossings with multiple transit routes traversing through the intersection. Community members highlighted that Santa Monica Boulevard and 6th Street is difficult to cross and has multiple sight line issues. During the Safety Walk Audit, drivers were observed traveling in the opposing lanes, blocking intersections and crosswalks. It was also observed that drivers turning left to and from Santa Monica Boulevard had difficulty executing their movements during the permissive phases due to insufficient gaps in the opposing through movements. A north/south Class II bike lane on 6th Street intersects Santa Monica Boulevard and the community expressed interest in enhancing that facility.

RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations for 6th Street include
implementing pedestrian enhancements such
as a scramble phase with diagonal crossings and
“No Right On Red” restrictions as well as new
activated push buttons. The pedestrian scramble
will safely control movements at this intersection,
since it sees a high amount of pedestrian activity
due to the Public Library at the intersection.

Curb extensions at all corners would enhance
pedestrian visibility, reduce pedestrian crossing
distance, and reduce vehicle turn speeds of
right-turn vehicles approaching the intersection.

The curb extensions on the southwest side of
the intersection would be continued to the west
to include the near-side bus stop and allow
expanded sidewalks for boarding and alighting.

Bicycle enhancements include new striping on the
approaches as well as bike boxes to allow cyclists
to bypass vehicle queues. The transit stop on the
southwest side of 6th Street would be relocated
to the near-side of Santa Monica Boulevard on the
westbound approach.

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD & 6TH STREET

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

PEDESTRIAN SCRAMBLE

NO RIGHT-TURN ON RED

CURB EXTENSIONS

BIKE LANE MODIFICATIONS

NEAR-SIDE BUS STOP RELOCATION

BUS-ONLY LANE
5 1
4 2
3 6
6TH STREET
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BLVD

LINCOLN BLVD
Hyundai Santa
Monica
Mobil
Burton Hearing Aid
Center
Jack in the Box
Santa Monica Tailor
by Bello

LINCOLN BLVD SANTA MONICA BLVD

OCEAN AVE

CENTINELA AVE
1 2
3 5
4 6
6 7 6
7 7
7 Lincoln Boulevard was identified as a focus intersection based on comments throughout the engagement process and crash history. Between 2015-2024, 38 crashes were reported with two serious injuries. In addition, Lincoln Boulevard serves as a truck route with large vehicle traffic in the north-south directions.

Members of the community shared that Lincoln Boulevard is difficult to cross and has issues with vehicles speeding. It was also noted that the bus stop is located in a difficult place and that there is congestion on all approaches.

RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations for Lincoln Boulevard
include modifying the existing traffic signal
at the intersection. This includes adding
leading pedestrian interval signal phasing
to enhance pedestrian visibility in the
crosswalks and new activated push buttons.

Since the eastbound left-turn movement
currently operates with a permissive
movement, it’s recommended this be
converted to a protected left-turns to reduce
vehicular and pedestrian conflicts. A modified
curb extension on the southwest corner
of the intersection would be continued
west to include the near-side bus stop and
allow expanded sidewalks for boarding and
alighting. On the other side of the street
in the westbound direction, traffic signals
modifications with signage enhancements
would allow a transit signal priority to allow
buses to bypass vehicle queues. With the
construction of new curb extensions,
the existing bi-directional curb ramps would
be reconstructed as unidirectional ramps,
providing clearer, more direct crossings.

This design reduces pedestrian exposure to
turning vehicles and improves accessibility.

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD & LINCOLN BOULEVARD

LINCOLN BOULEVARD

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

PROTECTED LEFT TURN

LEADING PEDESTRIAN INTERVALS
1 2

DAYLIGHTING AT INTERSECTIONS

BUS-ONLY LANE
5 7 DIRECTIONAL CURB RAMPS
6 TRANSIT SIGNAL PRIORITY

BUS STOP BULBOUT
3 4
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BLVD
10TH ST
Santa Monica College
of Performing Arts
Santa Monica MEIS Architects
Classic Tile and Flooring Inc.
2 2
3 3
5 STOP
STOP
7 10TH ST

SANTA MONICA BLVD

OCEAN AVE

CENTINELA AVE
4 6
8 8
7 1
6 5 4
The intersection of Santa Monica Boulevard and 10th Street saw a total of 18 crashes between 2015-2024.

Three of those crashes involved a serious injury and five involved a pedestrian. Community members noted that they would like to see improved crossings at this intersection. The Santa Monica College Performing Arts Center is located on the north side of Santa Monica Boulevard between 10th Street and 11th Street.

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations at this intersection
include installing curb extensions into
Santa Monica Boulevard on the southwest
and northwest corners as well as curb
extensions into 10th Street on the northeast
corner only. The curb extensions reduce the
crossing distances while new high-visibility
crosswalks enhance pedestrian visibility. With
the construction of new curb extensions,
the existing bi-directional curb ramps would
be reconstructed as unidirectional ramps,
providing clearer, more direct crossings.

This design reduces pedestrian exposure to
turning vehicles and improves accessibility.

Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) are
recommended across Santa Monica Boulevard
to improve pedestrian crossing conditions and
vehicle yielding rates.

The right-turn only restriction on 10th
Street onto Santa Monica Boulevard will be
reinforced with pavement markings and flex
posts as well as hardened centerlines to
prevent left-turn movements from the minor
street. The centerline hardening also helps to
reduce left-turn turning speeds from Santa
Monica Boulevard onto the minor street.

The combination of these treatments will
reduce crashes and create more predictable
movements at this intersection. Additional
painted red curbs and buffered striping are
recommended on the westbound approach and
eastbound departure.

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD & 10TH STREET

NEW CROSSWALK

CURB EXTENSIONS & DIRECTIONAL CURB RAMPS

RIGHT-TURN ONLY

DAYLIGHTING AT INTERSECTIONS
1 4
2 3

HARDENED CENTERLINES

FLASHING BEACONS (RRFB)

ADVANCE YIELD LINE

BUS-ONLY LANE
5 6
7 8
10TH STREET
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BLVD
11TH ST
Stokes Tire Service
Kia Santa Monica
Santa Monica Audi
Parts Department
SMC Performing Arts
Center Parking
4 3
11TH ST

SANTA MONICA BLVD

OCEAN AVE

CENTINELA AVE
3 1
2 2
2 6
6 3
2 3
5 The intersection of Santa Monica Boulevard and 11th Street saw 17 total crashes between 2015-2024. Two of those crashes involved serious injury, four crashes involved a pedestrian, and three crashes involved a bicyclist. 11th Street also has a Class II bike lane that crosses Santa Monica Boulevard and the community expressed interest in enhancing this facility. Comments from the community also highlight 11th Street as a difficult intersection to navigate. The Santa Monica Performing Arts Center is located on the north side of Santa Monica Boulevard between 10th Street and 11th Street.

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations for 11th Street
include signal modifications, adding leading
pedestrian interval signal phasing as well
as new activated push buttons. Since the
left-turn movements currently operate as
permissive movements, it’s recommended
that all approaches be converted to
protected left-turns to reduce vehicular and
pedestrian conflicts.

Enhanced bicycle accommodations are
also recommended at the intersection
approaches as well as conflict striping
across Santa Monica Boulevard to enhance
visibility and improve driver awareness,
encourage bicycle activity across Santa
Monica Boulevard, and improve connectivity
to parallel bicycle routes.

The existing bi-directional curb ramps would
be reconstructed as unidirectional ramps,
providing clearer, more direct crossings.

This design reduces pedestrian exposure to
turning vehicles and improves accessibility.

In addition, the existing transit stop on
the west side of 11th Street would be
relocated to the far-side to improve transit
operations, decrease delays and improve
pedestrian visibility.

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD & 11TH STREET

LEADING PEDESTRIAN INTERVALS
bIKE LANE MODIFICATIONS

DIRECTIONAL CURB RAMPS

PROTECTED LEFT-TURN

BUS STOP RELOCATION

BUS-ONLY LANE
1 4
2 5
3 6
11TH STREET
DRAFT
Tesla Superchargers
Santa Monica Ford
Chevron
Bludso’s BBQ
The Room
Santa Monica
Miller’s Lock Shop

SANTA MONICA BLVD
14TH ST
1 4
14TH ST

SANTA MONICA BLVD

OCEAN AVE

CENTINELA AVE
4 2
4 4
3 3
2 5
6 5
Between 2015-2024, 34 crashes were reported at Santa Monica Boulevard and 14th Street. Two of those crashes caused a serious injury, four crashes involved a pedestrian and four involved a bicyclist. 14th was identified as a focus intersection because of the multiple bicycle and pedestrian involved crashes and volume of comments received by the community. 14th Street also has a Class II bike lane that intersects Santa Monica Boulevard and the community expressed interest in enhancing this facility.

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations for 14th Street
include signal modifications, adding leading
pedestrian interval signal phasing as well as
new activated push buttons. Enhanced bicycle
accommodations are also recommended
at the intersection approaches as well
as conflict striping across Santa Monica
Boulevard. Enhanced visibility will improve
driver awareness, encourage bicycle activity
across Santa Monica Boulevard, and improve
connectivity to parallel bicycle routes. The
existing bi-directional curb ramps would
be reconstructed as unidirectional ramps,
providing clearer, more direct crossings. This
design reduces pedestrian exposure to turning
vehicles and improves accessibility. In addition,
the existing transit stops on either side of 14th
Street would be relocated to the far-side to
improve transit operations, decrease delays and
improve pedestrian visibility.

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD & 14TH STREET
14TH STREET

LEADING PEDESTRIAN INTERVALS

BUS STOP RELOCATION
bIKE LANE MODIFICATIONS

DIRECTIONAL CURB RAMPS
bUS-ONLY LANE

BUS STOP BULBOUT
1 4
2 3
5 6
DRAFT
15TH ST

SANTA MONICA BLVD

OCEAN AVE

CENTINELA AVE
Lexus Santa Monica
Tesla Supercharger
Santa Monica iPhone
Screen Repair
15th St Liquor
Thrifty Car Rental

SANTA MONICA BLVD
15TH ST
Lexus Santa Monica
2 2
6 3
4 3
1 1
1 3
6 5
4 5
The intersection of 15th Street and Santa Monica Boulevard is the western-most pedestrian crossing connecting the 17th Street/ SMC Metro station to the UCLA Medical Campus located one block to the north.

This intersection experienced 24 crashes between 2015-2024 with two crashes involving a pedestrian, and two crashes causing severe injury. There is an existing RRFB across Santa Monica Boulevard on the west side of the intersection, and the recommended improvements seek to further enhance the existing pedestrian crossings at this location.

RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations at this intersection include
installing curb extensions into Santa Monica
Boulevard on the southwest and northwest
corners as well as curb extensions into 15th
Street on the northeast corner only. The curb
extensions reduce the crossing distances
while new high-visibility crosswalks enhance
pedestrian visibility. With the construction of new
curb extensions, the existing bi-directional curb
ramps would be reconstructed as unidirectional
ramps, providing clearer, more direct crossings.

This design reduces pedestrian exposure to
turning vehicles and improves accessibility,
thereby enhancing overall pedestrian safety. The
existing RRFB would be relocated to accommodate
the proposed curb extensions. Travel lanes will
be narrowed to help reduce vehicle speeds and
additional painted red curbs and buffered striping
are recommended on the westbound approach
and eastbound departure.

The right-turn only restriction on 15th Street
onto Santa Monica Boulevard will be reinforced
with pavement markings and flex posts as
well as hardened centerlines prevent leftturn movements from the minor street. The centerline hardening also helps to reduce leftturn turning speeds from Santa Monica Boulevard onto the minor street. The combination of
these treatments will create more predictable
movements at this intersection. Additional
painted red curbs and buffered striping are
recommended on the westbound approach and
eastbound departure.

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD & 15TH STREET
15TH STREET

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

CURB EXTENSIONS

FLASHING BEACONS (RRFB)

DIRECTIONAL CURB RAMPS
1 3
2 RIGHT-TURN ONLY FROM SIDE STREETS

HARDENED CENTERLINES

DAYLIGHTING AT INTERSECTIONS
4 5
6 DRAFT
16TH ST

SANTA MONICA BLVD

OCEAN AVE

CENTINELA AVE

SANTA MONICA BLVD
16TH ST
Lexus Santa Monica
DK’s Donuts and
Bakery
Vacant
Building
STOP
STOP
1 1
1 2
4 4
3 5
2 6
6 5
Between 2015-2024, 37 crashes were reported at Santa Monica Boulevard and 16th Street. Five of those crashes involved a pedestrian and four involved a bicyclist. Community engagement efforts highlighted that this intersection has experienced corner sight issues and difficulties crossing the street. There is an existing RRFB across Santa Monica Boulevard on the east side of the intersection, and the recommended improvements seek to further enhance the pedestrian crossings at this location. 16th Street and Santa Monica Boulevard is the primary pedestrian crossing connecting 17th Street/ SMC Metro station to the UCLA Medical Campus located one block to the north.

RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations at this intersection include
removing the existing pedestrian refuge island and
installing curb extensions into Santa Monica Boulevard
on the southeast and northeast corners as well as curb
extensions into 16th Street on the southwest corner
only. The curb extensions reduce the crossing distances while new high-visibility crosswalks enhance pedestrian visibility while providing more consistency along the
corridor. The new curb extensions would replace the
existing bi-directional curb ramps with unidirectional
ramps, providing clearer, more direct crossings. This
design reduces pedestrian exposure to turning vehicles
and improves accessibility. The existing RRFB would
be relocated to accommodate the proposed curb
extensions. Travel lanes will be narrowed to help reduce vehicle speeds and additional painted red curbs and
buffered striping are recommended on the westbound
approach and eastbound departure. Construction of
vertical deflection, such as speed humps in advance
of the intersection, may be considered to further
encourage drivers to reduce speeds as they approach
the intersection.

The right-turn only restriction on 16th Street onto Santa Monica Boulevard will be reinforced with pavement
markings and flex posts as well as hardened centerlines to prevent left-turn movements from the minor street.

The centerline hardening also helps to reduce left-turn turning speeds from Santa Monica Boulevard onto the
minor street. The combination of these treatments
will create more predictable movements at this
intersection. Additional painted red curbs and buffered striping are recommended on the westbound approach
and eastbound departure.

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD & 16TH STREET
16TH STREET

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

CURB EXTENSIONS

FLASHING BEACONS (RRFB)

DIRECTIONAL CURB RAMPS

RIGHT-TURN ONLY
1 3
2 4

HARDENED CENTERLINES (REPLACE

PEDESTRIAN REFUGE)
VERTICAL DEFLECTION cONSIDERED
5 6
DRAFT
18TH ST

SANTA MONICA BLVD

OCEAN AVE

CENTINELA AVE
STOP
STOP
Midway Car Rental
Brentwood

SANTA MONICA BLVD
18TH ST
Honda Dealer
Vacant Lot
Honda Pre-Owned
Vehicles
2 2
2 1
1 5
5 5
5 4
6 6 4
3 3
Between 2019 and 2023 seven crashes occurred at the intersection with two of those crashes being severe.

Wilshire Boulevard and 18th Street was identified as a hot-spot safety intersection in the Wilshire Safety Plan in 2020. During the Safety Audit, drivers at 18th Street were observed obstructing pedestrian access by failing to yield to pedestrians and blocking the crosswalk. There is an existing RRFB across Santa Monica Boulevard on the west side of the intersection, and the recommended improvements seek to further enhance the existing pedestrian crossings at this location.

RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations at this intersection
include installing curb extensions into
Santa Monica Boulevard on the southeast
and northeast corners as well as curb
extensions into 18th Street on the southwest
corner only. The curb extensions reduce the
crossing distances while new high-visibility
crosswalks enhance pedestrian visibility.

The new curb extensions would replace
the existing bi-directional curb ramps with
unidirectional ramps, providing clearer,
more direct crossings. This design reduces
pedestrian exposure to turning vehicles and
improves accessibility, thereby enhancing
overall pedestrian safety. Travel lanes will
be narrowed to help reduce vehicle speeds
and the existing RRFB would be relocated to
accommodate the proposed curb extensions.

The right-turn only restriction on 18th
Street onto Santa Monica Boulevard will be
reinforced with pavement markings and
flex posts as well as hardened centerlines
prevent left-turn movements from the minor
street. The centerline hardening also helps to
reduce left-turn turning speeds from Santa
Monica Boulevard onto the minor street.

The combination of these treatments will
create more predictable movements at this
intersection. Additional painted red curbs
and buffered striping are recommended on
the westbound approach and eastbound
departure.

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD & 18TH STREET
18TH STREET

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

RIGHT-TURN ONLY

CURB EXTENSIONS

DAYLIGHTING AT INTERSECTIONS
1 3
2 HARDENED CENTERLINES

DIRECTIONAL CURB RAMPS

FLASHING BEACONS (RRFB)
4 5
6 DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BLVD
19TH ST
Santa Monica
Music Center
Honda Pre-Owned
Vehicles
Maserati of Santa
Monica
SMC Pharmacy STOP
STOP
SANTA MONICA BLVD 19TH ST

OCEAN AVE

CENTINELA AVE
1 2
2 2
3 3
5 5
6 6
4 4
Similar to 18th Street, 19th Street at Santa Monica Boulevard is a two-way stop-controlled intersection. The Crash Analysis identified 19th Street as an intersection with a high number of injury-related crashes.

RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations at this intersection
include installing curb extensions into Santa
Monica Boulevard on the southeast and
northeast corners as well as curb extensions
into 19th Street on the southwest corner
only. The curb extensions reduce the crossing
distances while new high-visibility crosswalks
enhance pedestrian visibility. The new curb
extensions would replace the existing bidirectional curb ramps with unidirectional ramps, providing clearer, more direct crossings.

This design reduces pedestrian exposure to
turning vehicles and improves accessibility.

Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) are
recommended across Santa Monica Boulevard
to improve pedestrian crossing conditions
and vehicle yielding rates. Travel lanes will be
narrowed to help reduce vehicle speeds.

The right-turn only restriction on 19th
Street onto Santa Monica Boulevard will be
reinforced with pavement markings and
flex posts as well as hardened centerlines
prevent left-turn movements from the minor
street. The centerline hardening also helps to
reduce left-turn turning speeds from Santa
Monica Boulevard onto the minor street.

The combination of these treatments will
create more predictable movements at this
intersection. Additional painted red curbs and
buffered striping are recommended on the
westbound approach and eastbound departure.

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD & 19TH STREET
19TH STREET

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

NEW CROSSWALK

CURB EXTENSIONS

FLASHING BEACONS (RRFB)
1 3
2 RIGHT-TURN ONLY

HARDENED CENTERLINES

DAYLIGHTING AT INTERSECTIONS
4 5
6 DRAFT
STOP

SANTA MONICA BLVD

CHELSEA AVE
UCLA Medical
Group
Volkswagen
Santa Monica
Big Waves
Laundromat
McKinley School

CHELSEA AVE

SANTA MONICA BLVD

OCEAN AVE

CENTINELA AVE
1 2
2 2
3 3
5 6
6 6
4 Chelsea Avenue is an important location due to immediate vicinity to McKinley Elementary School and the high volume of school age children walking to and from school. During the Community Walk Audit (Touchpoint #2), community members noted the high vehicular speeds along Santa Monica Boulevard in front of the school as well as the long distances between crosswalks. Through discussions with the school, teachers, the Parent Teacher Association (PTA) and community members, there was a strong desire for a protected crosswalk at this location.

In the Spring of 2025, after the Walk Audit and Social Pinpoint survey, the City of Santa Monica implemented Safe Routes to Schools (SRTS) Pedestrian Improvements at Six Schools, which included McKinley Elementary. These improvements included traffic signal modifications as well as new curb extensions, curb ramp improvements and crosswalk renewals at Cloverfield Boulevard. The project also included crosswalk renewals across Chelsea Avenue, and addition of a center two-way left turn lane at Chelsea Avenue.

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

RECOMMENDATIONS
The improvements that are recommended as part of
this Study include installing a new pedestrian traffic
signal, a raised median, and a high visibility crosswalk with directional curb ramps. The pedestrian signal would be synchronized with the nearby signal at Cloverfield
Boulevard and stop traffic on Santa Monica Boulevard
to allow school children and pedestrian crossings. The
raised median would create a right-turn only restriction similar to other locations along the corridor and would also eliminate the left-turn conflicts from Santa Monica Boulevard onto the sides streets. Traffic lanes will be narrowed to help reduce vehicle speeds.

The City’s Bicycle Action Plan also identifies Chelsea
Avenue and Park Drive as a future priority connection.

The recommended improvements include bicycle conflict
striping through the intersection as well as bicycle
detection for the pedestrian signal. The new raised
median would include an opening to connect the Class III sharrow on Chelsea Avenue to the Class II receiving bike lane segment on Park Drive.

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD & CHELSEA AVENUE

NEW CROSSWALK
bIKE LANE MODIFICATION

PEDESTRIAN REFUGES AND MEDIANS

RIGHT-TURN ONLY

PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC SIGNAL

DIRECTIONAL CURB RAMPS
1 4
2 5
3 6 CHELSEA AVENUE
DRAFT
26th ST

SANTA MONICA BLVD

OCEAN AVE

CENTINELA AVE

SANTA MONICA BLVD
26TH ST
Apartment
Complex
Namita’s Eyebrow
Threading Salon
Allan Jeries
Framing
Vacant Building
CVS Pharmacy 1
2 3
4 3
5 Community members mentioned during multiple outreach activities that 26th Street and Santa Monica Boulevard is a challenging intersection. During the Safety Audit the project team observed drivers who were attempting left turns from Santa Monica Boulevard onto 26th Street during the permissive phases could not find an adequate gap in oncoming traffic to completed their turns and would have to wait to execute their maneuver when the traffic signal turned yellow or red, after waiting in the middle of the intersection.

Vehicles were also seen blocking the crosswalks due to the upstream queueing.

RECOMMENDATIONS
Since the left-turn movements currently
operate as permissive movements, it’s
recommended these be converted to
protected left-turns to reduce vehicular
and pedestrian conflicts. Additional traffic
signal modifications would allow for a transit
signal priority (queue jump) in the westbound
direction. The recommendations at this
intersection include installing curb extensions
into Santa Monica Boulevard on the southwest
and northeast corners as well as curb
extensions into 26th Street on the southeast
corner only. The curb extensions reduce the
crossing distances while new high-visibility
crosswalks enhance pedestrian visibility.

The curb extensions on the southwest and
northeast corners of the intersection would
be continued along Santa Monica Boulevard
to include the near-side bus stops and
allow expanded sidewalks for boarding and
alighting. In addition, the existing transit stop
on the southwest side of the street would be
relocated to the far-side to improve transit
operations, decrease delays and improve
pedestrian visibility.

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD & 26TH STREET
26TH STREET

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

LEADING PEDESTRIAN INTERVALS

BUS BULBOUT

CURB EXTENSIONS & DIRECTIONAL CURB RAMPS
1 3
2 ADDED PARKING STALLS

FAR-SIDE BUS STOP RELOCATION
4 5
DRAFT

PRINCETON ST

SANTA MONICA BLVD

OCEAN AVE

CENTINELA AVE
STOP
STOP

SANTA MONICA BLVD

PRINCETON ST
Sir Speedy
McDonald’s
Rip City
Skates
AE German
Car Service
Coee
Shop
The Rich
Spa Now
Sedler’s
Shoe Repair
Lucky’s Pet
Grooming
2 2
4 4
3 3
5 5
6 6
1 1
The Princeton Street intersection has an irregular geometry where the streets are not directly aligned, which results in some unpredictable maneuvers from drivers. The Safety Audit showed there have been 18 crashes at this intersection over the last decade. While there is an existing crosswalk with RRFBs on the west side of the intersection, pedestrians must cross five lanes of traffic at once with no enhanced safety countermeasures. The recommended improvements seek to further enhance the pedestrian crossings at this location. Community members also expressed desire for safer vehicle movements at Princeton Street.

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

RECOMMENDATIONS
Improvements at Princeton Street include a right-turn
only restriction from Princton Street onto Santa Monica Boulevard, reinforced with pavement markings and
flex posts. In addition, a new landscape median
restricts left turn movements from Santa Monica
Boulevard onto Princeton Street from the eastbound
direction, but still allows them in the westbound
direction. The new median would also allow a
pedestrian refuge so that pedestrians would only
need to cross one direction of traffic at a time. The
combination of these treatments will create more
predictable movements at this intersection.

With the improvements to the RRFB, including
advanced yield signs and striping, the existing bidirectional curb ramps would be reconstructed as unidirectional ramps, providing clearer, more direct
crossings. This design reduces pedestrian exposure to
turning vehicles and improves accessibility, and travel lanes will be narrowed to help reduce vehicle speeds.

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD & PRINCETON STREET

DIRECTIONAL CURB RAMPS

PEDESTRIAN REFUGE AND

LANDSCAPED MEDIANS

RIGHT-TURN ONLY

FLASHING BEACONS (RRFB)

ADVANCE YIELD LINE

VERTICAL DEFLECTION CONSIDERED
1 4
2 5
6 PRINCETON STREET 3
DRAFT
STOP

SANTA MONICA BLVD

STANFORD ST
Days Inn
Wine Expo
Major Motor Cars
Little Lunch/
Ohand Coee
Bunda Fitness
Center
Santa Monica School
of Dance and Music STOP

STANFORD ST

SANTA MONICA BLVD

OCEAN AVE

CENTINELA AVE
2 2
4 4
4 3
3 5
5 6
7 7
7 7
6 1
1 The Stanford Steet intersection was highlighted during the Safety Audit which noted this location has experienced an increase in pedestrian demand due to the recent development at the southwest corner of the intersection. There have been 15 collisions at this intersection over the last decade.

RECOMMENDATIONS
Improvements at Stanford Street include a right-turn only restriction from Stanford Street onto Santa Monica Boulevard which will be reinforced with pavement markings and flex posts. In addition, a new landscape median restricts left turn movements from Santa Monica Boulevard onto Stanford Street from the westbound direction, but still allow them in the eastbound direction. The new median would also allow a pedestrian refuge so that pedestrians would only need to cross one direction of traffic at a time. This design reduces pedestrian exposure to turning vehicles and improves
accessibility. The existing bi-directional curb ramps would also be reconstructed as unidirectional ramps providing clearer, more direct crossings. The combination of these treatments will create more predictable movements at this intersection.

Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) are recommended across Santa Monica Boulevard to improve pedestrian crossing conditions and vehicle yielding rates. With the improvements to the RRFB, including advanced yield signs and striping, the existing bi-directional curb ramps would be reconstructed as unidirectional ramps, providing clearer, more direct crossings.

This design reduces pedestrian exposure to turning vehicles and improves accessibility.

The available width of Santa Monica Boulevard in the vicinity of Stanford Street provides sufficient space to accommodate a dedicated peak-hour bus lane without significantly
impacting general traffic operations. This could be achieved by reallocating the existing parking lane during the morning and evening commute periods, using clear pavement markings and signage to indicate the bus-only restriction. The lane would operate exclusively for buses during designated peak hours, improving transit reliability and reducing travel times for riders, while reverting to general parking use during off-peak periods.

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD & STANFORD STREET

STANFORD STREET

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

NEW CROSSWALK

PEDESTRIAN REFUGE AND
LandSCAPED MEDIAN

RIGHT-TURN ONLY
1 3
2 FLASHING BEACON (RRFB)

ADVANCE YIELD LINE

PEAK HOUR BUS LANE

DIRECTIONAL CURB RAMPS
4 5
6 7
DRAFT

FRANKLIN ST

SANTA MONICA BLVD

OCEAN AVE

CENTINELA AVE
STOP

SANTA MONICA BLVD

FRANKLIN ST
Willow Spa
Soneca
Martial Arts
Ptak Family
Chiropractic
Awesome
Dental
Super
Lash Spa
Super
Dental Care
Box ‘N Burn Santa Monica
Boxing Fitness Gym
Soul Massage
Hearing Aid
STOP
5 2
4 4
4 3
3 5
6 6
7 7
1 1
8 8
Community feedback throughout the engagement process, including the Social Pinpoint mapping exercise identified Franklin Street as a priority intersection where community members noted absence of crossing opportunities across Santa Monica Boulevard. According to the Safety Audit, between 2015-2024, Franklin Street saw a total of 14 crashes at the intersection with one crash causing serious injury and 3 total crashes involved pedestrian, bicyclists, and/or scooters.

RECOMMENDATIONS
Improvements at Franklin Street include a right-turn only restriction from Franklin Street onto Santa Monica Boulevard which will be reinforced with pavement markings and flex posts. In addition, a new landscape median restricts left turn movements from Santa Monica Boulevard onto Franklin Street from the westbound direction, but still allow them in the eastbound direction. The new median would also allow a pedestrian refuge so that pedestrians would only need to cross one direction of traffic at a time. The combination of these treatments will create more predictable movements at this intersection. Construction of vertical deflection, such as speed humps in advance of the intersection, may be considered to further encourage drivers to reduce speeds as they approach the intersection.

Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) are recommended across Santa Monica Boulevard to improve pedestrian crossing conditions and vehicle yielding rates. With the improvements to the RRFB, including advanced yield signs and striping, the existing bi-directional curb ramps would be reconstructed as unidirectional ramps, providing clearer, more direct crossings.

This design reduces pedestrian exposure to turning vehicles and improves accessibility.

The available width of Santa Monica Boulevard in the vicinity of Franklin Street provides sufficient space to accommodate a dedicated peak-hour bus lane without significantly impacting general traffic operations. This could be achieved by reallocating the existing parking lane during the morning and evening commute periods, using clear pavement markings and dynamic signage to indicate the bus-only restriction. The lane would operate exclusively for buses during designated peak hours, improving transit reliability and reducing travel times for riders, while reverting to general parking use during off-peak periods.

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD & FRANKLIN STREET

FRANKLIN STREET

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

PEDESTRIAN REFUGE AND
LaNDSCAPED MEDIAN

NEW CROSSWALK

RIGHT-TURN ONLY

FLASHING BEACON (RRFB)
1 3
2 4

ADVANCE YIELD LINE

PEAK HOUR BUS LANE

DIRECTIONAL CURB RAMPS

VERTICAL DEFLECTION CONSIDERED
5 6
7 8
DRAFT
[ THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ]
DRAFT

7. NEXT STEPS
DRAFT
One of the goals of the Santa Monica Boulevard
Safety Study is to identify the lowest cost, highest
impact approach to rethinking transportation
safety through design and operations. The Safety
Study has touched on the intensive community
engagement process and detailed data analysis
that has led to the identification of the safety
countermeasures on Santa Monica Boulevard
discussed in Chapter 6. This Study is recommending
a phased approach to implementing the proposed
project identified so that enhancements can be
deployed quickly, tested, and evaluated.

Prior to implementation, each of the recommended
improvements would need further evaluation
and considerations as there are various factors
influencing the feasibility of a project as well as
the ease of initiating, completing, and putting
a project into action. While a project may
align with community interests and priorities,
engineering complexity, funding considerations,
and coordination with other stakeholders also
contribute to the actual implementation of a
project.

The following sections detail the recommended
phasing strategy, steps, and actions to carry out
the overall vision of the Santa Monica Boulevard
Safety Study. The recommended phasing
strategy categorizes improvements into shortterm and long-term improvements depending on how complicated the projects are, ease of
implementation, and availability of funding. Lowcost measures that can be constructed in the near term to provide immediate benefits should
be prioritized while the City works to advance
designs and seek additional funding for more
complex project elements. This phasing strategy
is also intended to provide guidance and flexibility
based on project-specific conditions and will
serve as a foundational reference to guide future
coordination, funding requests, and infrastructure
planning efforts.

DRAFT
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 60
A set of high-level unit costs were established
to develop a rough order magnitude (ROM) cost
estimate for improvements recommended at each
intersection. The cost estimates are based on highlevel recommendations and quantities and should be used for planning purposes only. Costs were
broken down into:
• General overhead related items (mobilization,
traffic control, etc)
• General construction costs (demolition,
construction) including 25% contingency
As discussed previously, actual implementation of
a project may be based on engineering complexity,
coordination with other stakeholders, available
funding, and other factors. The timing of delivery
of various components of this Safety Study is
intended to be flexible to maximize implementation
opportunities and resources as they become
available.

High-level cost estimates for each phase of the safety study project include:

Appendix D includes the full list of projects by intersection and their cost estimate. pHASE 1

TOTAL COST
pHASE 2

SHORT-TERM LONG-TERM
$5.0 million
~ $12.7 million
$7.7 million

7.1 COST ESTIMATE
DRAFT
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 61
Each of the recommended improvements is
assigned a potential phasing based on the
cost of the project as well as the likely ease of
constructibility, it will determine if that project will be considered short- or long-term. The intent of
this phasing approach is to prioritize achievable
safety improvements for early action, while larger
projects are strategically scheduled for future
investments. These potential phases are intended
to be flexible based on project-specific conditions
and projects may move forward or back based on
any of the factors mentioned previously.

Table 4 summarizes the recommended
improvements, the ROM cost estimates, and the
potential phase it could be implemented. The table
is organized to list intersections in geographic order
on the corridor starting from the west and moving
east.

Short-term measures include low-cost corridor-wide improvements that can be implemented in short order and likely utilize local funds. These improvements can include projects like paint, signage which can take up to 24 months but elements like signal timing changes, lead pedestrian intervals, pedestrian recall, turn restrictions, and far-side bus stop relocations, could be advanced within 6-12 months. Phase 1 projects could be implemented in the next six months to two years and would likely utilize local funds.

Long-term projects will require additional design and funding and should be prioritized when funding becomes available. These projects can include major signal infrastructure improvements, major signal phasing changes, and improvements at the focus intersections identified. Phase 2 projects could be implemented in three to ten years and can be prioritized as funding becomes available.
pHASE 1
pHASE 2

SHORT-TERM

LONG-TERM

7.2 POTENTIAL PHASING
DRAFT

LOCATION
(West to East) RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS PHASING ROM COST ESTIMATES Ocean Avenue Traffic Signal Modifications - Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs) Phase 1 $22,500 2nd Street No-Right-On-Red* Phase 1 $22,500
4th Street No-Right-On-Red* Phase 1 $22,500
5th Street No-Right-On-Red* Phase 1 $138,125 Installation of Pedestrian Scramble Phase with Diagonal Crossing and Accessible Pedestrian Signals 6th Street
Installation of Pedestrian Scramble Phase with Diagonal Crossing and Accessible Pedestrian Signals Phase 1 $545,625
No-Right-On-Red*
Westbound Bus Stop Relocation*
Install Bike Boxes on Side-Street
Bus-Only Lane
Proposed Extension for Near-Side Transit Stop Phase 2 $243,250 Curb Extensions on Side-Streets (pending truck-turn templates) 7th Street Installation of Pedestrian Scramble Phase with Diagonal Crossing and Accessible Pedestrian Signals Phase 1 $279,375 Bike Lane Conflict Striping Across Santa Monica Boulevard Lincoln Boulevard
Traffic Signal Modifications - Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI's)* Phase 1 $363,750
Installation of Painted Curb Striping
Traffic Signal Modification - Protected Left-Turn Phasing Installation of Accessible Pedestrian Signals*
Bus-Only Lane
Proposed Sidewalk Extension for Near-Side Transit Stop
Phase 2 $451,575 Traffic Signal Modifications - Transit Signal Priority Travelling Westbound (Queue Jump) Bus Pad
Directional Curb Ramps
9th Street
Proposed “Yield to Pedestrians” Signage
Phase 1 $120,750 Installation of Centerline Hardening
Right-Turn Only Treatment (Side Street)
Installation of Painted Curb Striping
Curb Extensions on Santa Monica Boulevard (pending truck-turn templates) Reconstruct Curb Ramps (Uni-Directional) Phase 2 $262,125 Fire Hydrant/ Light pole relocations
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 62
Table 2. Potential Phasing
* May be completed within 6-12 months
DRAFT

LOCATION
(West to East) RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS PHASING ROM COST ESTIMATES 10th Street
Proposed “Yield to Pedestrians” Signage
Phase 1 $244,500
Proposed High-Visibility Crosswalk
Right-Turn Only Treatment (Side Street)
Installation of Centerline Hardening
Proposed RRFB
Installation of Painted Curb Striping
Bus-Only Lane
Curb Extensions on Santa Monica Boulevard (pending truck-turn templates) Phase 2 $343,950 Curb Extensions on Side-Streets (pending truck-turn templates) Reconstruct Curb Ramps (Uni-Directional)
Catch basin Relocation
11th Street
Traffic Signal Modifications - Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI's)* Phase 1 $390,000
Installation of Accessible Pedestrian Signals*
Bike Lane Conflict Striping Across Santa Monica Boulevard Bike Lane Modifications on Minor Street Approaches
Relocate Bus Stop to Farside*
Traffic Signal Modifications - Protected Left-Turn Phasing Bus-Only Lane
Reconstruct Curb Ramps (Uni-Directional) Phase 2 $240,625 Bus Pad 12th Street
Proposed “Yield to Pedestrians” Signage
Phase 1 $188,250
Proposed High-Visibility Crosswalk
Right-Turn Only Treatment (Side Street)
Installation of Centerline Hardening
Proposed RRFB
Installation of Painted Curb Striping
Curb Extensions on Santa Monica Boulevard (pending truck-turn templates) Reconstruct Curb Ramps (Uni-directional) Phase 2 $305,125 Catch basin Relocation
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 63
* May be completed within 6-12 months
DRAFT

LOCATION
(West to East) RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS PHASING ROM COST ESTIMATES Euclid Street
Proposed “Yield to Pedestrians” Signage
Phase 1 $108,250 Right-Turn Only Treatment (Side Street) Installation of Centerline Hardening
Installation of Painted Curb Striping
Curb Extensions on Santa Monica Boulevard (pending truck-turn templates) Reconstruct Curb Ramps (Uni-directional) Phase 2 $408,375 Catch basin Relocation
14th Street
Traffic Signal Modifications - Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs)* Phase 1 $321,500
Relocate Bus Stop to Far-Side*
Bike Lane Conflict Striping Across Santa Monica Boulevard Bike Lane Modifications on Minor Street Approaches
Installation of Accessible Pedestrian Signals*
Bus-Only Lane
Reconstruct Curb Ramps (Uni-Directional) Phase 2 $383,750 Bus Pad 15th Street
Installation of Centerline Hardening
Phase 1 $131,500
Refresh Existing High Visibility Crosswalk
Right-Turn Only Treatment (Side Street)
Relocate Existing RRFB
Installation of Painted Curb Striping
Curb Extensions on Santa Monica Boulevard (pending truck-turn templates) Reconstruct Curb Ramps (Uni-Directional) Phase 2 $366,450 Catch Basin Relocation
16th Street
Installation of Centerline Hardening
Phase 1 $113,500
Refresh Existing High Visibility Crosswalk
Right-Turn Only Treatment (Side Street)
Relocate Existing RRFB
Installation of Painted Curb Striping
Removal of Existing Pedestrian Refuge
Phase 2 $506,250 Curb Extensions on Santa Monica Boulevard (pending truck-turn templates) Reconstruct Curb Ramps (Uni-Directional)
Catch Basin Relocation
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 64
* May be completed within 6-12 months
DRAFT

LOCATION
(West to East) RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS PHASING ROM COST ESTIMATES 17th Street Traffic Signal Modifications - Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI's)* Phase 1 $55,000 18th Street
Installation of Centerline Hardening
Phase 1 $139,000 Right-Turn Only Treatment (Side Street) Relocate Existing RRFB
Installation of Painted Curb Striping
Curb Extensions on Santa Monica Boulevard (pending truck-turn templates) Phase 2 $328,200 Curb Extensions on Side-Streets (pending truck-turn templates) Reconstruct Curb Ramps (Uni-Directional)
Catch basin Relocation
19th Street
Proposed “Yield to Pedestrians” Signage
Phase 1 $149,250
Proposed High-Visibility Crosswalk
Right-Turn Only Treatment (Side Street)
Installation of Centerline Hardening
Proposed RRFB
Installation of Painted Curb Striping
Curb Extensions on Santa Monica Boulevard (pending truck-turn templates) Phase 2 502,375 Curb Extensions on Side-Streets (pending truck-turn templates) Reconstruct Curb Ramps (Uni-Directional)
Catch basin Relocation
21st Street Traffic Signal Modifications - Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs)* Phase 1 $61,250 22nd Street Traffic Signal Modifications - Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs)* Phase 1 $51,250 23rd Street Traffic Signal Modifications - Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs)* Phase 1 $62,500 Cloverfield Blvd. Traffic Signal Modifications - Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs)* Phase 1 $50,000 Chelsea Avenue
Right-Turn Only Treatment (Side Street) with No Right on Red Phase 1 $21,250 New bike facility on Park Drive Proposed Pedestrian Traffic Signal
Phase 2 $1,150,000
New Pedestrian Refuge
New Raised Landscape Median
Reconstruct Curb Ramps (Uni-directional)
Bike Lane Median Opening
Remove Parking and Add Class II Bike Lane on Chelsea Avenue Proposed High-Visibility Crosswalk
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 65
* May be completed within 6-12 months
DRAFT

LOCATION
(West to East) RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS PHASING ROM COST ESTIMATES 25th Street Right-Turn Only Treatment (Side Street) Phase 1 $22,000 26th Street
Traffic Signal Modifications - Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI's)* Added Parking Stalls on 26th Street Phase 1 $175,000
Far-side Bus Stop Relocation*
Proposed Sidewalk Extension for Near-Side Transit Stop
Phase 2 $722,375
Curb Extensions on Side-Streets (pending truck-turn templates) Traffic Signal Modifications - Transit Signal Priority Travelling Westbound (Queue Jump) Bus Pad
Catch basin Relocation
Princeton Street
New Striped Median
Phase 1 $253,000
Refresh Existing High Visibility Crosswalk
Right-Turn Only Treatment (Side Street)
Proposed RRFB
Proposed “Yield to Pedestrians” Signage
New Raised Landscape Median
New Pedestrian Refuge Phase 2 227,125
Reconstruct Curb Ramps (Uni-directional)
Harvard Street
Proposed Peak Hour Bus/Parking Lane
Phase 1 $257,000
Proposed High-Visibility Crosswalk
Right-Turn Only Treatment (Side Street)
Proposed RRFB
Proposed “Yield to Pedestrians” Signage
New Raised Landscape Median
New Pedestrian Refuge Phase 2 $472,750
Reconstruct Curb Ramps (Uni-directional)
Yale Street Bike Lane Conflict Striping Across Santa Monica Boulevard Phase 1 $70,000 Traffic Signal Modifications - Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs)* SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 66
* May be completed within 6-12 months
DRAFT

LOCATION
(West to East) RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS PHASING ROM COST ESTIMATES Berkeley Street Relocate Bus Stop to Far-Side* Phase 1 $101,250 Traffic Signal Modifications - Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs)* Franklin Street
Proposed Peak Hour Bus/Parking Lane
Phase 1 $254,500
Proposed High-Visibility Crosswalk
Right-Turn Only Treatment (Side Street)
Proposed RRFB
Proposed “Yield to Pedestrians” Signage
New Raised Landscape Median
New Pedestrian Refuge Phase 2 $396,750
Reconstruct Curb Ramps (Uni-directional)
Centinela Avenue Traffic Signal Modifications - Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI's)* Phase 1 $60,000 Subtotal Estimated Costs
Phase 1 $5,060,000
Phase 2 $7,680,000
Total Estimated Costs $12,740,000

LOCATION
(West to East) RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS PHASING ROM COST ESTIMATES Stanford Street
Proposed Peak Hour Bus/Parking Lane
Phase 1 $263,250
Proposed High-Visibility Crosswalk
Right-Turn Only Treatment (Side Street)
Proposed RRFB
Proposed “Yield to Pedestrians” Signage
New Raised Landscape Median
Phase 2 $363,250 New Pedestrian Refuge
Reconstruct Curb Ramps (Uni-directional)
Directional Curb Ramps
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 67
* May be completed within 6-12 months
DRAFT

FUNDING PROGRAM DESCRIPTION RELEVANT ELIGIBLE

PROJECTS

GRANT CYCLE

CADENCE
Carbon Reduction Program - SCAG
The SCAG region anticipates receiving approximately $34 million annually of this federal program. SCAG selects projects within the region that support transit and passenger rail, active transportation, zero emission vehicles infrastructure.

Active Transportation and
micromobility Annual
Surface Transportation Block Grant STBG
- SCAG
Federal funding source for projects that preserve and improve conditions of highways, bridges, and public roads, pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and transit capital projects. SCAG is responsible for the project selection process in the region.

Transit signal priority,
mobility hubs, microtransit.

Active Transportation Plans,
Complete Street Plans
Comprehensive multimodal
corridor plans
Biennial
Sustainable Communities Program - SCAG Provide funding to projects that support active transportation modes, improve roadway safety, and achieve mobility goals.

Community/Areawide Plans
Quick-Build Projects
TBD
Measure M - LA Metro
The no sunset half-cent sales tax measure funds projects to ease traffic, repair local streets and sidewalks, expand public transportation, earthquake retrofit bridges and subsidize transit fares for students, seniors, and persons with disabilities. Measure M funds many Metro projects but funding is available to local jurisdictions via the Metro Subregional Program (MSP); Metro Active Transportation, Transit and First/Last Mile (MAT) Program; and Local Return Active Transportation
Public Transportation
TBD
Table 3. Regional and Local Funding
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD SAFETY STUDY Page 68
A variety of competitive grant funding sources are available to help Santa Monica fund elements of the Safety Plan. The descriptions are intended to provide an overview of available options and do not represent a comprehensive list. It should be noted that this section reflects funding available at the time of writing. The funding amounts, cycles, and even programs themselves are susceptible to change without notice.

7.3 GRANT FUNDING
DRAFT

FUNDING PROGRAM DESCRIPTION RELEVANT ELIGIBLE PROJECTS GRANT CYCLE

CADENCE
Active Transportation Program (ATP) -
Caltrans
Caltrans ATP was created to encourage increased use of active modes of transportation, increase the safety and mobility of nonmotorized users, help achieve GHG emission reduction goals, enhance public health, and ensure that projects benefit many types of active transportation users while ensuring disadvantaged communities share the benefits.

Capital projects: environmental, design,
right-of-way, and construction phases
of a capital project
Plans: community wide bicycle,
pedestrian, SRTS, or active
transportation plans.

Non-Infrastructure: education,
encouragement activities
Biennial
Solutions for Congested Corridors
Program - Caltrans
This is a statewide, competitive program that provides funding to achieve a balanced set of transportation, environmental, and community access improvements to reduce congestion throughout the state
Projects must be in an adopted plan
Project may include improvements to
local streets and roads, public transit
facilities, bicycle and pedestrian
facilities.

Biennial
Highway Safety Improvements
Program (HSIP) - Caltrans
Serves to reduce traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads.

HISP funds are eligible for any public
road or any publicly owned bicycle
or pedestrian pathway or trail that
improves the safety for its users.

Biennial
Local Streets and Roads Program -
Caltrans
Funding dedication for cities and counties to perform basic road maintenance, rehabilitation, and critical safety projects.

Safety projects
Complete streets projects
Traffic control devices
Maintenance and rehabilitation
Annual
Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) Grant
Program
Funds to prevent serious injury and death resulting from motor vehicle collisions.

Non-infrastructure programs
Safety programs
Encouragement programs
SRTS programs
Annual
Sustainable Transportation Planning
Grant - Caltrans
Funds local and regional multimodal transportation and land use planning projects that further the region’s TRP SCS/APS and contribute to the State’s GHG reduction
SRTS Plans
Active Transportation Plans
Complete Street Plans
Annual
Table 4. State Funding
DRAFT
[ THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ]
DRAFT

SANTA M

SAFETY STUDY

NICA B ULEVARD
DRAFT

TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPENDIX A. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SUMMARIES
APPENDIX B. SAFETY ANALYSIS MEMORANDUM
APPENDIX C. OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
APPENDIX D. COST ESTIMATES
APPENDIX E. CONCEPT PLANS
APPENDIX F. VERTICAL TRAFFIC CALMING ELEMENTS MEMORANDUM TOUCHPOINT #1 - LIGHT UP THE NIGHT POP UP EVENT SUMMARY TOUCHPOINT #2 - COMMUNITY WALK AUDIT SUMMARY
TOUCHPOINT #3 - OPEN HOUSE SUMMARY

COMMUNITY SURVEY SUMMARY

SAFETY AND TRANSIT ANALYSIS

SAFETY AUDIT REPORT
DRAFT
APPENDIX A.

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SUMMARIES
DRAFT

COUMMUNITY OUTREACH
TOUCHPOINT #1
DRAFT
Santa Monica Blvd Safety Study
Community Touchpoint #1
October 31 - November 21, 2024
Draft 12/12/24

LIGHT UP THE NIGHT
POP UP

EVENT SUMMARY
DRAFT

THE EVENT
As part of the Santa Monica Blvd Safety Study,
a three-week installation was set up at the
Downtown Santa Monica Public Library. The
installation coincided with the library’s Halloween
Trick-or-Treat event on October 31, 2024.

The goals of the installation were to:
• engage and educate the community
about road safety
• identify specific locations along the
corridor for improvements
• collect measurable data on community
values and preferences when it comes
to road safety
Participants of all ages were invited
to choose an LED safety light in the
color that represents the type of
improvement that they would like
to see more of along Santa Monica
Blvd. Participants then used a sticker
to indicate on a nearby map where
they’d like to see improvements.

They could also add comments and
provide contact information to stay
informed.

DRAFT

IMPROVED

SIDEWALKS

SAFER VEHICLE

MOVEMENTS

SOMETHING
ELSE
SAFER

CROSSINGS

THE RESULTS
What would you like to see more
of along Santa Monica Blvd?
OUT OF A TOTAL OF 59 VOTES*, the most
popular improvement suggested by
participants was “Safer Crossings” with 18
votes. This was followed closely by “Safer
Vehicle Movements” and “Something Else”,
with a total of 17 and 16 votes respectively.

The least popular improvement was
“Improved Sidewalks”.

THE “SOMETHING ELSE” RESPONSES that
specified a recommendation included:
• Protected Bike Lanes or Improved Bike
Safety (4)
• Street Lighting (1)
• Signal Improvements (1)
• Less Cars (1)
• Other/Not Indicated (6)
*Votes include the number of LEDs removed
at the 10/31 event.
18 LEDS REMOVED
17 LEDS REMOVED
8 LEDS REMOVED
16 LEDS REMOVED
DRAFT

THE MAP
TOTAL = 208 STICKERS pLACED ON THE MAP

BERGAMOT STATION

ARTS CENTER
3RD ST4TH ST5TH ST6TH ST7TH ST

LINCOLN BLVD
9TH ST
10TH ST11TH ST12TH ST

EUCLID ST
14TH ST15TH ST16TH ST17TH ST18TH ST
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD 19TH ST
20TH ST
21ST ST
23RD ST
chELSEA AVE PARK DRIVE
25TH ST
26TH ST

PRINCETON ST

HARVARD ST

YALE ST

STANFORD ST

BERKELEY ST

FRANKLIN ST

CENTINELA AVE

OCEAN AVE
2ND ST

PACIFIC OCEAN
SANTA MONICA STATE BEACh

CROSSROADS

ELEMENTARY
Lincoln Blvd. There was quite an even spread between the four categories, but the most popular category of sticker was “Safer Vehicle Movements” (59 stickers). Recommendations for “Something Else” included “street lighting,” “signal/turn signal,” “4 way stop,” “less cars,” and “curb extensions,” among others.

WHERE ARE IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED THE MOST ALONG
SANTA MONICA BLVD?
The map below indicates where stickers were placed on
the map (showing the closest cross street or mid-block
location along Santa Monica Blvd) between October 31st
and November 21st. Stickers were placed at almost every intersection. There were more stickers placed along the southern portion of the corridor, between Ocean Ave and SAFER

CROSSINGS
56 STICKERS PLACED ON THE MAP

SAFER VEHICLE

MOVEMENTS
59 STICKERS

IMPROVED

SIDEWALKS
47 STICKERS

SOMETHING
ELSE
46 STICKERS
DRAFT

THE MAP, CONTINUED
30 Safer Crossings
Safer Vehicle
Movements
Improved Sidewalks
Something Else
Number of Stickers Placed on Map
Ocean Ave
2nd St
3rd St
4th St
5th St
6th St
7th St
Lincoln Blvd
Reed Park
Midblock Lincoln/7th
9th St
10th St
11th St
12th St
Euclid St
14th St
15th St
16th St
17th St
18th St
19th St
20th St
21st St
Midblock 23rd/21st
Memorial Park
23rd St
Chelsea Ave
25th St
26th St
Princeton St
Harvard St
Midblock Yale/Harvard
Midblock Berkeley/Stanford
Yale St
Stanford St
Berkeley St
Midblock Franklin/Berkeley
Franklin St
Centinela Ave
3 3
6 3
6 2
1 3
1 2
3 1
3 2
1 3
5 1
1 1
1 2
1 1
6 4
2 1
1 3
3 1
8 1
1 1
4 1
2 1
1 4
1 1
3 2
1 2
1 1
1 5
1 3
5 1
1 4
4 1
2 3
2 4
1 1
1 3
1 2
1 2
3 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 1
4 1
2 4
1 1
2 2
1 2
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
2 The intersection with the most feedback was Lincoln Blvd, with 17 stickers, then Ocean Ave, with 15 stickers. Following this, 2nd St, 3rd St, 4th St, 6th St, 12th St, and 20th St all had between 10 and 14 stickers. The highest number of responses for each category are as follows:
• “Safer Crossings” at 3rd and 6th St
• “Safer Vehicle Movements” at Lincoln Ave
• “Improved Sidewalks” at Ocean Ave and 4th St
• “Something Else” at 12th and 17th St
DRAFT

SELECTED COMMENTS
• Slower cars with drivers that are attentive.

SAFER VEHICLE MOVEMENTS
SAFER CROSSINGS:
• More crosswalks on long blocks to avoid jaywalking.
• Scramble crossings.
• The wait times at pedestrian crossings are too long. Pedestrians therefore cross against the lights.
• Consistent pedestrian crossings. Some buttons don’t need to be pressed, others do. Many people don’t know which need to be pressed so there’s tons of jaywalking.
• Pedestrian refuge islands.

SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS
• Making sidewalks special-needs friendly.
• Higher visibility provided for pedestrians.
• Better bike lanes. I got injured biking on Santa Monica Blvd. • More cameras to catch people speeding.
• Left turn signals to ensure traffic flow and safe pedestrian crossing. • No turn on red.
• Bus lanes and signal priority.
• More lights at stop signs and corners because it is hard to see pedestrians at night.

SOMETHING ELSE:

Below is a selection of general comments received that are relevant to the entire corridor. A full list of location-specific comments can be found in the appendix.

DRAFT

EVENT PHOTOS
DRAFT

EVENT PHOTOS
DRAFT

APPENDICES
DRAFT
FARMER’S MARKET OUTREACH
TOTAL = 9 STICKERS pLACED ON THE MAP

BERGAMOT STATION

ARTS CENTER
3RD ST4TH ST5TH ST6TH ST7TH ST

LINCOLN BLVD
9TH ST
10TH ST11TH ST12TH ST

EUCLID ST
14TH ST15TH ST16TH ST17TH ST18TH ST
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD 19TH ST
20TH ST
21ST ST
23RD ST
chELSEA AVE PARK DRIVE
25TH ST
26TH ST

PRINCETON ST

HARVARD ST

YALE ST

STANFORD ST

BERKELEY ST

FRANKLIN ST

CENTINELA AVE

OCEAN AVE
2ND ST

PACIFIC OCEAN
SANTA MONICA STATE BEACh

CROSSROADS

ELEMENTARY
A smaller, portable version of the installation was also taken to the Downtown Farmer’s Market on Wednesday, November
6, 2024. The feedback is summarized below.

SAFER

CROSSINGS
4 STICKERS PLACED ON THE MAP

SAFER VEHICLE

MOVEMENTS
1 STICKER

IMPROVED

SIDEWALKS
0 STICKERS

SOMETHING
ELSE
4 STICKERS
• More flashing beacons at unsignalized intersections.
• Más cruces peatonales. More pedestrian crossings.
• Crosswalks take too long, so jaywalking is inherently encouraged.

COMMENTS INCLUDED:

DRAFT

LIBRARY COMMENTS
Confusing sidewalk area transition between the protected bike and on-sidewalk riding up 17th St - confusing transitions from one-way to others as well.

Around Arizona and 15/16 (near UCLA) I think there should be a crossing signal. Many pedestrians use the 4-way stop to cross continuously and cars are frantic there. I want to keep people safe and have a clear time for them to cross and for cars to cross. #SAFETYFIRST Improvements for bike security on Santa Monica Blvd are needed! Crossing and riding is not safe.

More lights at stop signs (Washington, California and Idaho Avenues) corners - hard to see pedestrians at night.

Tickets for cars that don’t fully stop at stop signs.

Establish a rapid response cleanup squad for truly awful eyesores (with signs and telephone number so people know whom to call).

Making the right and left turn from Santa Monica onto Ocean Blvd - cars turn at the same time people are crossing and it's dangerous.

HAWK Beacons at unsignalized intersections, especially Princeton. RRFB yield compliance by drivers is non-existent.

Bus lanes and signal priority from Ocean to Centinela.

Protected intersections at 6th 11th, 14th, 26th and NTOR (no turn on red).

Warnings about the sand on the boardwalk re: tourists and curbs.

More crosswalks on long blocks, to avoid jaywalking.

Walking across the CVS parking lot at 26th is like roulette daily.

More shade trees 26th to Berkeley.

Higher visibility provided for pedestrians.

Making sidewalks special needs friendly.

Better bike lane; got injured once when biking on Santa Monica Blvd.

All comments received on the towers at the Santa Monica Public Library Downtown Branch are listed below.

DRAFT
More cameras to catch people speeding.

Crosswalks without a light are DANGEROUS!
Scramble crossings.

Road diet - traffic circles at 10th, 16th, Chelsea, 26th, Princeton St like Bird Rock in La Jolla.

Get cars to stop parking in the middle of traffic (+1 to this).

More bike lanes please (like 17th St).

The wait times at pedestrian crossings are too long. Pedestrians therefore cross against the lights! Bike lanes.
14th and California four stop sign intersection is a mess. It needs a stop light.

Slower cars with drivers that are attentive. (I second that emotion).

More pedestrian protection for crossings between 20th and Lincoln on Santa Monica Blvd.

Consistent pedestrian crossings. Some buttons don't need to be pressed, others do. Many people don't know which need to be pressed so there's tons of jaywalking.

Pedestrian refuges.

Curb extensions.

LIBRARY COMMENTS, CONTINUED
DRAFT

LIBRARY COMMENTS, CONTINUED
Right to the City.

Make sure you use your blinker before you turn.

Stop texting or being on your phone when you are driving.

I love my birth town but LA in general needs to fix sidewalks! Ban cars! (No!)
Remove homeless please.

Let's have welcome thoughts.

Let's try to be resourceful and less wasteful.

Free internet and free electricity output.

More cops.

Public restrooms.

App to report drivers using equipment to stalk pedestrians.

Remove homeless from Reed Park, they're too close to the kids school. Santa Monica school and playground. Keep kids safe! A selection of out of scope and unrelated comments received on the towers at the Santa Monica Public Library Downtown Branch are listed below.

DRAFT
FARMER’S MARKET COMMENTS
Car left turns at Chelsea going eastbound is not safe.
20th / Santa Monica Blvd on 20th cars block the bus stop and double parking on 20th (NB) for St John's.

Left turn from eastbound SM Blvd does not allow easy access into Von’s parking lot.

Extend 17th St bikeway to Montana.

More flashing beacons at unsignalized [intersections].

Más cruces peatonales. More pedestrian crossings.

Crosswalks take too long. Jaywalking inherently encouraged.

Bus stops, no place to sit, no shelters, dirty, no waste bins.

Improve pedestrian crossing at 20th. Scramble?
All comments received on the boards from the Downtown Farmer’s Market Pop up on Nov 6 are lited below.

DRAFT

COUMMUNITY OUTREACH
TOUCHPOINT #2
DRAFT
Santa Monica Blvd Safety Study
Engagement Touchpoint #2
February 22, 2025

COMMUNITY WALK AUDIT

SUMMARY
DRAFT

THE EVENT
As part of the Santa Monica Blvd Safety Study, a
community walk audit was held on February 22,
2025 starting from Saint John’s Medical Center.

A walk audit is a community-based assessment
of the conditions along a street. Seventeen
members of the public and key stakeholders
walked a portion of Santa Monica Blvd to discuss
safety concerns and opportunities. The walk
audit included residents, students at McKinley
Elementary, hospital employees, and City staff.

THE GOALS OF THE EVENT WERE TO:
• Gather feedback from the community about
the overall experience and “issue areas” along
Santa Monica Blvd.
• Identify potential enhancements to improve
safety for people waking, rolling, driving, and
taking transit.

Participants were assigned to an East or West
group and provided an associated “workbook.”
The front of the workbook provided space for
general reflections at each intersection along
with discussion questions. The back provided a
checklist of priorities for each intersection and a
map for sketching.

DRAFT

THE WORKBOOK

PROVIDED ROOM FOR

GENERAL REFLECTIONS
ON THE FRONT....
.... AND SPECIFIC

RECOMMENDATIONS AND
SKETCHES ON THE FLIP SIDE.

WALK AUDITORS WERE ENCOURAGED TO TAKE
NOTES IN THE WORKBOOK ALONG THE WAY. 20TH ST 18TH ST
16TH ST

WEST EAST
oPTIONAL: SKETCH YOUR THOUGHTS oPTIONAL: SKETCH YOUR THOUGHTS oPTIONAL: SKETCH YOUR THOUGHTS Crosswalk / Visibility
Enhancements
Signal or HAWK Signal
Improved ADA Access
SELECT UP TO 3 PRIORITIES:

Street Lighting
Speed Signage
Other
Crosswalk / Visibility
Enhancements
Signal or HAWK Signal
Pedestrian Refuge Islands
Improved ADA Access
SELECT UP TO 3 PRIORITIES:

Street Lighting
Speed Signage
Other
Bus Stop Improvements
Bus Only Lane
Crosswalk / Visibility
Enhancements
Leading Pedestrian
Interval (LPI) or scramble
crosswalk
SELECT UP TO 3 PRIORITIES:

Signal Improvements
Improved ADA Access
Street Lighting
Speed Signage
Other

CORRIDOR-WIDE

COMMENTS

WHAT FEATURES WOULD MAKE TRAVELING ALONG
THE CORRIDOR SAFER AND MORE COMFORTABLE?

SANTA MONICA BLVD

SANTA MONICA BLVD SAFETY STUDY
FEBRUARY 22, 2024
NAME:

COMMUNITY

WALK AUDIT

WORKBOOK
WEST

WHAT WOULD MAKE THE EXPERIENCE BETTER FOR
YOU?
IMAGINE CATChING THE BUS FROM THIS
INTERSECTION. WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE BUS
STOP, ROUTES, aND TIMELINESS?
N
N
N
18TH ST 2

FLIP OVER FOR THE MAP
& RECOMMENDATIONS!
20TH ST 1 WHAT IS YOUR EXPERIENCE CROSSING THE STREET
AT THIS INTERSECTION?
WHAT WOULD MAKE YOU FEEL SAFER HERE?
16TH ST 3
WHAT WOULD MAKE YOU FEEL SAFER HERE?

WHAT IS YOUR EXPERIENCE AS A PEDESTRIAN
HERE, ALONG THE SIDEWALK?

FLIP OVER FOR THE MAP
& RECOMMENDATIONS!

FLIP OVER FOR THE MAP
& RECOMMENDATIONS!
20TH ST

SANTA MONICA BLVD
18TH ST

SANTA MONICA BLVD
16TH ST

SANTA MONICA
BLVD
20TH ST
18TH ST
16TH ST

WEST EAST
oPTIONAL: SKETCH YOUR THOUGHTS oPTIONAL: SKETCH YOUR THOUGHTS oPTIONAL: SKETCH YOUR THOUGHTS Crosswalk / Visibility
Enhancements
Signal or HAWK Signal
Improved ADA Access
SELECT UP TO 3 PRIORITIES:

Street Lighting
Speed Signage
Other
Crosswalk / Visibility
Enhancements
Signal or HAWK Signal
Pedestrian Refuge Islands
Improved ADA Access
SELECT UP TO 3 PRIORITIES:

Street Lighting
Speed Signage
Other
Bus Stop Improvements
Bus Only Lane
Crosswalk / Visibility
Enhancements
Leading Pedestrian
Interval (LPI) or scramble
crosswalk
SELECT UP TO 3 PRIORITIES:

Signal Improvements
Improved ADA Access
Street Lighting
Speed Signage
Other

CORRIDOR-WIDE

COMMENTS

WHAT FEATURES WOULD MAKE TRAVELING ALONG
THE CORRIDOR SAFER AND MORE COMFORTABLE?

SANTA MONICA BLVD

SANTA MONICA BLVD SAFETY STUDY
FEBRUARY 22, 2024
NAME:

COMMUNITY

WALK AUDIT

WORKBOOK
WEST

WHAT WOULD MAKE THE EXPERIENCE BETTER FOR
YOU?
IMAGINE CATChING THE BUS FROM THIS
INTERSECTION. WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE BUS
STOP, ROUTES, aND TIMELINESS?
N
N
N
18TH ST 2

FLIP OVER FOR THE MAP
& RECOMMENDATIONS!
20TH ST 1 WHAT IS YOUR EXPERIENCE CROSSING THE STREET
AT THIS INTERSECTION?
WHAT WOULD MAKE YOU FEEL SAFER HERE?
16TH ST 3
WHAT WOULD MAKE YOU FEEL SAFER HERE?

WHAT IS YOUR EXPERIENCE AS A PEDESTRIAN
HERE, ALONG THE SIDEWALK?

FLIP OVER FOR THE MAP
& RECOMMENDATIONS!

FLIP OVER FOR THE MAP
& RECOMMENDATIONS!
20TH ST

SANTA MONICA BLVD
18TH ST

SANTA MONICA BLVD
16TH ST

SANTA MONICA
BLVD

THE WORKBOOK
DRAFT

BERGAMOT STATION

ARTS CENTER
10TH ST11TH ST12TH ST

EUCLID ST
14TH ST15TH ST17TH ST19TH ST
21ST ST

CLOVERFIELD BLVD

PARK DRIVE
25TH ST
26TH ST

PRINCETON ST

HARVARD ST

YALE ST

STANFORD ST

BERKELEY ST

FRANKLIN ST

CENTINELA AVE

CROSSROADS

ELEMENTARY
16TH ST
18TH ST
20TH ST
23RD ST
26TH ST

CLOVERFIELD BLVD

START/FINISH

WEST GROUP EAST GROUP

SANTA MONICA BLVD

SELECTED WALK AUDIT STOP (WEST GROUP)

SELECTED WALK AUDIT STOP (EAST GROUP)
chELSEA AVE

THE ROUTE
THE WEST GROUP STOPPED AT 20TH ST, 18TH ST, AND 16TH ST.

THE EAST GROUP STOPPED AT CLOVERFIELD BLVD, CHELSEA AVE, AND 26TH ST.

CHOOSING STOP LOCATIONS
All stop locations were within 1/2 mile of the starting location (St. John’s Health Center) to make the walk accessible to all ages. Stop locations also needed to be identified as a priority through significant feedback from Touchpoint #1 or identified as a safety priority in the Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) or Technical Walk Audit, or as a Vision Zero Priority Intersection.

DRAFT
Sketches noted lack of shade, loud noise, high
speeds, and desire for scramble crosswalks.

Sketches indicated desire for turn restrictions
for vehicles.

Sketches showed bulbouts and additional
crosswalks.

RESULTS WEST GROUP(7 PARTICIPANTS) 18TH ST 20TH ST 16TH ST

TOP THREE PRIORITIES
KEY THEMES At 16th St, walk auditors commented
about unsafe driver behaviors (e.g. how cars
creep into the street to try and see oncoming
traffic or cars often do not stop). The lack of
visibility for cars on 16th St was also noted. One
walk auditor mentioned that they were a victim
of a hit-and-run at this intersection in 1971.

Recommendations for this location included
landscaping, lighting, curb extensions, better stop
controls, and a wider refuge island, among others.

TOP THREE PRIORITIES

TOP THREE PRIORITIES
Other*** (4), Crosswalk/Visibility Enhancements (4)
Bus Stop Improvements (2), Leading Pedestrian
Interval (LPI) or scramble crosswalks (2), Speed
Signage (2)
Bus Only Lane (1)
Signal or HAWK Signal (4)
Pedestrian Refuge Island (3)
Crosswalk/Visibility Enhancements (2).

Street Lighting (2), and Other (2)**
* “Other” at 16th St: turn restriction, curb extensions, no left turn, bus only lane. ** “Other” at 18th St: curb extensions, vertical elements on the center line, no left turns, median installation. *** “Other” at 20th St: Bike lanes, more shade, traffic calming, building setbacks, tree planters.

Crosswalk/Visibility Enhancements (4)
Signal or HAWK Signal (4)
Street Lighting (2), Other (2)*
KEY THEMES Walk auditors characterized this
intersection as “noisy” and “exposed” due to
speeding cars and dangerous driving behavior.

They identified this specific intersection as
“too dangerous” to cross for children. Curb
extensions, additional crosswalks, safety
signage, and more trees were requested to slow
down traffic and increase pedestrian safety and
comfort.

KEY THEMES Many notes from walk auditors
reflected on the lack of shelter at the bus stop
on 20th St, as well as a dangerous right turn
from 20th St onto Santa Monica Blvd and swiftly
moving vehicles. Walk auditors requested more
shade trees, a bus only lane, a larger shelter,
turn restrictions for cars, speed reduction, and
more consistent sidewalk maintenance.

DRAFT
Sketches noting desire for crosswalk at Chelsea
Ave.

No sketches for this intersection.

No sketches for this intersection.
* “Other” at Cloverfield Blvd: No right turn on red, red light signage, traffic speed reduction. ** “Other” at Chelsea Ave: Pedestrian signal, lighting during the day, left turn restrictions, repainting street lines, traffic calming. *** “Other” at 26th St: Leading pedestrian intervals, shorter curb, removal of on-street parking, scramble crosswalk, repainting street lines.

EAST GROUP(10 PARTICIPANTS)

CLOVERFIELD BLVD

CHELSEAAVE
26THST

TOP THREE PRIORITIES
KEY THEMES At Cloverfield Blvd, walk auditors
described the intersection as “hostile,” “scary,”
and “very inhospitable.” They noted proximity
of cars to pedestrians, and discussed potential
methods for traffic calming including narrower
streets and wider sidewalks. Walk auditors
requested a buffer between the sidewalk and
street, a new bike lane, no right turn on red
restrictions, and red light cameras for cars.

TOP THREE PRIORITIES

TOP THREE PRIORITIES
Crosswalk Enhancements/Other*** (6)
Bus Only Lane (5)
Speed Signage (4)
New Crosswalk (9)
Other** (5)
Speed Signage (4)
Crosswalk/Visibility Enhancements (8)
Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI) (5)
Signal Improvements (3), Other* (3)
KEY THEMES Walk auditors reflected on the high
vehicular speeds at Chelsea Ave as well as the
long distances between crosswalks. They noted a
desire for new crosswalks, improved landscaping
on sidewalks, a buffer between the sidewalk and
street, and better sychronization between traffic
signals. Traffic speeds continue to be a major
concern for walk auditors.

KEY THEMES While walk auditors appreciated the
timeliness of the bus, they noted that the shelter is
lacking shade, shelter, and landscaping. They also
pointed out the curbs direct users into the street
rather than the crosswalks. There were requests
for a dedicated bus lane, improved bus station
amenities, automatic walk signals, and a protected
left turn for drivers. Many unsafe driver behaviors
were noted at this location.

DRAFT
Walk auditors highlighted significant
safety concerns for pedestrians at
many of the intersections visited.

Visibility challenges also result in
cars pulling into crosswalks to see
oncoming traffic.

Consider:
• Scramble crosswalks.
• Pedestrian refuge islands.

There were many concerns regarding
high vehicle speeds that create unsafe
conditions for pedestrians. Fast
moving traffic also makes waiting for
the bus uncomfortable.

Consider:
• Slowing down cars (through design
and posted speeds).
• Narrow vehicle lanes.
• Speed signage.

Based on the auditors’ discussion and notes from the workbooks, several overall concerns and safety priorities were identified for Santa Monica Blvd.

Recommendations are summarized below, organized by key themes:

DESIGN FOR SLOWER VEHICLE
SPEEDS

FURTHER SEPARATE CARS AND

PEDESTRIANS

IMPROVE SIGNAL TIMING

FOR PEDESTRIANS
The walk audit revealed that long wait
times at signalized intersections can
lead to risky pedestrian behavior, such
as crossing without a walk signal.

Drivers also frequently attempt to
turn right in front of pedestrians,
creating unsafe crossing conditions.

Consider:
• Leading pedestrian intervals.
• Pedestrian walk signal without
having to press a button.

A need for greater separation between
pedestrians and vehicle traffic was
identified to enhance safety and
comfort while walking.

Consider:
• Wider sidewalks.
• Buffers between the street and
the sidewalk.

OVERALL RECOMMENDATIONS

MAKE CROSSING SAFER
DRAFT

EVENT PHOTOS
Walking, Crossing, Observing!
DRAFT

EVENT PHOTOS
Notetaking and Discussion!
DRAFT

COUMMUNITY OUTREACH
TOUCHPOINT #3
DRAFT
Santa Monica Blvd Safety Study
Engagement Touchpoint #3
September 6, 2025

SANTA MONICA BLVD
SAFETY STUDY:

OPEN HOUSE

SUMMARY
DRAFT

THE EVENT
As part of the Santa Monica Blvd Safety Study,
an open house was held at the Santa Monica
Family YMCA on September 6th, 2025. The open
house showcased draft conceptual designs for
14 intersections as well as draft corridor-wide
improvements. 62 members of the public attended
the open house to discuss the designs and
provide feedback, and they were free to choose
the intersections they wanted to comment on.

We heard from a wide array of residents including
families, students, and City Council members.

THE GOALS OF THE EVENT WERE TO:
• Gather feedback from the community
about proposed designs and corridor-wide
improvements.
• Share information about the study and next
steps.

Participants were provided a “Route Map” that
guided them through 14 intersections. The
map provided space for refl ections at each
intersection, with an option to mark whether they
“liked the design” or “had comments.” The back of
the map provided additional space to comment on
corridor-wide improvements.
improvements. 62 members of the public attended
provide feedback, and they were free to choose
the intersections they wanted to comment on.

We heard from a wide array of residents including
Share information about the study and next
intersection, with an option to mark whether they
“liked the design” or “had comments.” The back of
the map provided additional space to comment on
DRAFT

THE ROUTE MAP
E N d
S
T
A
R
T LINCOLN bLvd 10TH ST

PRINCETON ST
15TH ST
11TH ST
14TH ST
16TH ST 18TH ST

STANFORD ST

CHELSEA AVE
26Th ST

FRANKLIN ST
6TH ST

ENGLISH

I LIKE THIS DESIGN

I HAVE COMMENTS

I LIKE THIS DESIGN

I HAVE COMMENTS

I LIKE THIS DESIGN

I HAVE COMMENTS

I LIKE THIS DESIGN

I HAVE COMMENTS

I LIKE THIS DESIGN

I HAVE COMMENTS

I LIKE THIS DESIGN

I HAVE COMMENTS

I LIKE THIS DESIGN

I HAVE COMMENTS

I LIKE THIS DESIGN

I LIKE THIS DESIGN I HAVE COMMENTS

I HAVE COMMENTS

I LIKE THIS DESIGN

I HAVE COMMENTS

I LIKE THIS DESIGN

I HAVE COMMENTS

I LIKE THIS DESIGN

I HAVE COMMENTS

I LIKE THIS DESIGN

I HAVE COMMENTS

I LIKE THIS DESIGN

I HAVE COMMENTS
19TH ST
14TH ST WALK AND RIDE

SANTA MONICA BLVD
HOW TO
1 Find the street sign of the
intersections that interest you.

Review the draft designs and
proposed improvements.
2 If you like the proposed design,
check the “I Like This Design” circle.

I LIKE THIS DESIGN

I HAVE COMMENTS
3 If you have comments regarding
the proposed designs, write them
in the box.
4 Add your thoughts about the other
corridor-wide improvements in the
comment section to the right.

FILL IN YOUR ROUTE MAP
Hand in your route map to submit
your feedback! 5

MY ROUTE MAP

SANTA MONICA BLVD

SAFETY STUDY

OPEN HOUSE
NAME:

EMAIL (OPTIONAL):

CORRIDOR-WIDE

IMPROVEMENTS
• Would the recommended improvements
make you feel safer walking or taking
transit on Santa Monica Blvd?
• How would these improvements impact
di†erent street users?
• Are there additional improvements you
would like to see along the corridor?
Corridor-wide improvements include
low-cost street enhancements that are
recommended along the entire corridor, from
Ocean Ave to Centinela Ave. These systemic
improvements are shown at the last station.
cOMMENTS

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

THE ROUTE MAP

ALLOWED SPACE FOR

COMMENTS AT EACH
INTERSECTION.

PARTICIPANTS WERE

ENCOURAGED TO

PROVIDE FEEDBACK

ON CORRIDOR-WIDE
IMPROVEMENTS.

DRAFT

THE BOARDS

DESCRIPTION OF

PROPOSED SAFETY

ENHANCEMENTS

ADDITIONAL COLLISION

DATA AND PRIOR

COMMUNITY FEEDBACK

AXONOMETRIC VIEW

OF DRAFT DESIGNS
DRAFT

RESULTS
6TH ST - 14TH ST KEY NOTES Feedback on 6th St was largely supportive of the proposed scramble
crosswalk and curb extensions. Additional
suggestions included reducing the speed
limit to 20 mph, shortening cycle lengths,
and addressing poor sidewalk conditions.

KEY NOTES Comments on Lincoln Blvd
demonstrated strong support for No Right
Turn on Red (NRTOR) and upgrading curb
ramps to be directional. Other feedback
included requests for pedestrian buttons
and motion sensors for crosswalks, and one
concern about losing the right-turn lane
from the proposed bus bulbout. KEY NOTES On 10th St, participants suggested raised crosswalks and speed
bumps to help increase visibility of
pedestrians and slow vehicles. They also
suggested adding crosswalks in all four
directions. Participants appreciated the
hardened centerlines.

KEY NOTES There was strong support for
moving the bus stop to the far-side of the
intersection at 11th St. Many participants
suggested adding NRTOR and Leading
Pedestrian Intervals (LPI) to provide
additional protection for pedestrians, and
protected bike lanes or a dedicated bus lane.

KEY NOTES Participants made repeated
requests for NRTOR at 14th St. Comments
also included requests for raised crosswalks,
concrete bollards, pedestrian sensors, and
shade at the relocated bus stop.

FEEDBACK BREAKDOWN

FEEDBACK BREAKDOWN

FEEDBACK BREAKDOWN

FEEDBACK BREAKDOWN

FEEDBACK BREAKDOWN
I like this design (12)
I like this design (9)
I like this design (9)
I like this design (9)
I like this design (10)
I have comments (4)
I have comments (6)
I have comments (8)
I have comments (4)
I have comments (5)
I like this design and
I have comments (2)
I like this design and
I have comments (1)
I like this design and
I have comments (2)
I like this design and
I have comments (2)
6TH ST
14TH ST

LINCOLN BLVD
11TH ST
10TH ST
DRAFT
KEY NOTES Comments on 15th St included
desire for raised crosswalks, crosswalks in
all four directions, and a pedestrian refuge
to address the wide street. Additional
suggestions included restricting left turns
for vehicles and reducing parking.

KEY NOTES Feedback on 16th St
included requests for raised crosswalks
and crosswalks in all four directions.

Participants appreciated the hardened
centerlines, but suggested stronger safety
measures such as a tra
ic light and a midstreet pedestrian refuge island.

KEY NOTES On 19th St, participants
requested raised crosswalks and
crosswalks in all four directions to improve
the visibility of pedestrians. One comment
noted that the proposed curb extension
could cause vehicles to veer suddenly.

KEY NOTES Participants were very excited
about the designs proposed on Chelsea
Ave, particularly the pedestrian refuge
island, crosswalk, and bike markings.

Concerns were raised about the removal
of the center turn lane. Participants also
noted the importance of ensuring that push
buttons are accessible for people biking.

FEEDBACK BREAKDOWN

FEEDBACK BREAKDOWN

FEEDBACK BREAKDOWN

FEEDBACK BREAKDOWN
15TH 16TH
19TH

CHELSEA
I like this design (10)
I like this design (9)
I like this design (10)
I like this design (7)
I have comments (7)
I have comments (5)
KEY NOTES Participants appreciated the
directional curb ramps, curb extensions,
and fl ashing beacons. Comments
suggested adding raised crosswalks and
crosswalks in all four directions. One
participant raised concerns about the
e
ectiveness of hardened centerlines and
stated that they would be an obstacle for
bikes and motorcycles.

FEEDBACK BREAKDOWN 18TH
I have comments (3)
I have comments (4)
I like this design and
I have comments (2)
I like this design and
I have comments (1) I like this design and
I have comments (3)

RESULTS
15TH ST - CHELSEA AVE
I like this design (8)
I have comments (6)
I like this design and
I have comments (1)
15TH ST

CHELSEA AVE
16TH ST
19TH ST
18TH ST
DRAFT
KEY NOTES On 26th St, participants were
supportive of the far-side bus stops with
bulbouts. One participant noted they use
the route daily. Participants requested
raised crosswalks, NRTOR, and reduced
parking.

KEY NOTES There was strong support for
the pedestrian refuge islands and fl ashing
beacons on Princeton St. Additional
requests were made for raised crosswalks,
crosswalks in all four directions, hardened
centerlines, and speed bumps at stop signs.

KEY NOTES Participants were excited about
the proposed pedestrian refuge islands and
fl ashing beacons on Stanford St. Comments
included crosswalks in all four directions,
raised crosswalks, concrete bollards, and
elimination of a drive lane.

KEY NOTES Participants expressed support
for the proposed bus lane. Suggestions
included adding landscaped medians or
bioswales, crosswalks in all four directions,
raised crosswalks, and solid bollards. One
participant stated that they would favor
travel lanes over pedestrian refuge islands.

LOCATION-SPECIFIC COMMENTS (SELECTED)
• How to enforce NRTOR if people ignore it
at Wilshire/Broadway?
• Absence of medians as half-way point is
insu
icient for students at McKinley to
cross SM Blvd independently.

KEY THEMES

FEEDBACK BREAKDOWN

FEEDBACK BREAKDOWN

FEEDBACK BREAKDOWN
26TH FEEDBACK BREAKDOWN
I like this design (6)
I like this design (8)
I like this design (8)
I like this design (8)
I have comments (8)
I have comments (6)
I have comments (4)
I have comments (5)
I like this design and
I have comments (1)
I like this design and
I have comments (1)

RESULTS
26TH - FRANKLIN ST
& CORRIDOR-WIDE

MAKE PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS SAFER

REDUCE VEHICLE SPEEDS AND INCREASE

ENFORCEMENT

PRIORITIZE TRANSIT, BIKES, AND

PEDESTRIANS OVER CARS

ADD CROSSWALKS IN FOUR DIRECTIONS
26TH ST

CORRIDOR-WIDE

PRINCETON ST

FRANKLIN ST

STANFORD ST
DRAFT

EVENT PHOTOS
Some of the friendly faces we saw at the open house!
DRAFT

EVENT PHOTOS
DRAFT

COUMMUNITY OUTREACH

COMMUNITY SURVEY SUMMARY
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BLVD SAFETY STUDY
APRIL 2025

COMMUNITY
SURVEY

SUMMARY
DRAFT

CONTENTS
1 1. ABOUT THE SURVEY • Goals & How It Worked • Timeframe & Promotion

2. OVERALL RESULTS • Total Engagement • Trends by Location • Trends by Theme

3. KEY FINDINGS • Upvotes & Downvotes • Key Themes • Priority Intersections DRAFT
2 The map-based survey
was hosted on the city’s
website and could be accessed
from various devices (computer,
phone, tablet).

Community members were invited to
choose a category and drop a pin at any
location along the corridor to share their
thoughts. They could also peruse the map,
upvote or downvote comments, and reply to
comments posted by others.

GOALS
The survey aimed to:
• Gather place-specific feedback
about issues and opportunities
along Santa Monica Blvd.
• Complement the project’s
ongoing in-person community
engagement touchpoints with
a virtual, easy-to-use tool
for the general public.

HOW IT
WORKED
DRAFT
DRAFT
4 TOTAL ENGAGEMENT

DIFFICULT

CROSSING
(108)

BROKEN/INCOMPLETE
SIDEWALKS (5)
SPEEDING (60)

SOMETHING
ELSE (77)
Double
Parking: 10
DOUBLE
PARKING (9)

POOR BUS STOP
ZONE (17)

CORNER SIGHT
ISSUES (19)

DIFFICULT

TURNING
MOVEMENT (25)

TRAFFIC/

CONGESTION
(20)

TOTAL COMMENTS PER CATEGORY
349

MOST FREQUENT
CATEGORIES:
• “Difficult crossings” (31% of
comments).
• Something else,” including bicyclerelated improvements and bus-only lanes (22% of comments).
• “Speeding” (17% of comments).
*Some comments were removed from the analysis
because they were recommendations for streets
other than Santa Monica Blvd, or were comments
about unrelated topics.

Relevant comments were
received on the map*
700+
People visited the
survey page
DRAFT
5 TRENDS BY LOCATION

THE MAPS ON THE FOLLOWING

PAGES SHOW THE SPATIAL

DISTRIBUTION OF EACH

RELEVANT COMMENT CATEGORY

ALONG THE CORRIDOR, FROM
OCEAN AVE TO CENTINELA AVE.

THESE MAPS:
• Reveal trends in the data.
• Indicate areas of priority for each type of
issue or improvement.

In order to highlight specific categories,
“Something Else” is not shown on the maps.

Systemic (corridor-wide) comments and bus
lane comments are also not shown since they
do not pertain to specific intersections. They are
instead covered in the Key Findings sections.
11TH ST12TH ST

EUCLID ST
14TH ST15TH ST16TH ST17TH ST18TH ST
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD 19TH ST
20TH ST
21ST ST
23RD ST
chELSEA AVE PARK DRIVE
25TH ST
26TH ST

PRINCETON ST

HARVARD ST

YALE ST

STANFORD ST

BERKELEY ST
3 1 3 2 4 1

NUMBER OF

COMMENTS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BLVD
6 TRENDS BY LOCATION
There are several “hot spots” where corner sight issues came up, notably at 26th St, between 23rd and Chelsea Ave, and at 16th St. 3RD ST 4TH ST 5TH ST 6TH ST 7TH ST LINCOLN BLVD 9TH ST 10TH ST 11TH ST 12TH ST EUCLID ST 14TH ST 15TH ST 16TH ST 17TH ST 18TH ST SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD 19TH ST
20TH ST
21ST ST
23RD ST
chELSEA AVE PARK DRIVE
25TH ST
26TH ST

PRINCETON ST

HARVARD ST

YALE ST

STANFORD ST

BERKELEY ST

FRANKLIN ST

CENTINELA AVE

OCEAN AVE
2ND ST
1 2 3 1 3 2 4 1

CORNER SIGHT ISSUES

BROKEN/INCOMPLETE SIDEWALKS
Broken/incomplete sidewalks were highlighted between Ocean Ave and 2nd St, 3rd and 4th St, 23rd and Chelsea Ave, and Chelsea Ave and 25th St. 3RD ST 4TH ST 5TH ST 6TH ST 7TH ST LINCOLN BLVD 9TH ST 10TH ST 11TH ST 12TH ST EUCLID ST 14TH ST 15TH ST 16TH ST 17TH ST 18TH ST SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD 19TH ST
20TH ST
21ST ST
23RD ST
chELSEA AVE PARK DRIVE
25TH ST
26TH ST

PRINCETON ST

HARVARD ST

YALE ST

STANFORD ST

BERKELEY ST

FRANKLIN ST

CENTINELA AVE

OCEAN AVE
2ND ST
1 1 1 1
DRAFT
7 3RD ST4TH ST5TH ST6TH ST7TH ST

LINCOLN BLVD
9TH ST
10TH ST11TH ST12TH ST

EUCLID ST
14TH ST15TH ST16TH ST17TH ST18TH ST
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD 19TH ST
20TH ST
21ST ST
23RD ST
chELSEA AVE PARK DRIVE
25TH ST
26TH ST

PRINCETON ST

HARVARD ST

YALE ST

STANFORD ST

BERKELEY ST

FRANKLIN ST

CENTINELA AVE

OCEAN AVE
2ND ST
1 2 1 1 1 2 1 5 4 3 4 3 2 3 4 3 4 3 5 3 3 10 5 5 7 5 3 4 1 1 1
1 TRENDS BY LOCATION 3RD ST 4TH ST 5TH ST 6TH ST 7TH ST LINCOLN BLVD 9TH ST 10TH ST 11TH ST 12TH ST EUCLID ST 14TH ST 15TH ST 16TH ST 17TH ST 18TH ST SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD 19TH ST
20TH ST
21ST ST
23RD ST
chELSEA AVE PARK DRIVE
25TH ST
26TH ST

PRINCETON ST

HARVARD ST

YALE ST

STANFORD ST

BERKELEY ST

FRANKLIN ST

CENTINELA AVE

OCEAN AVE
2ND ST
1 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 2 2 3 2 2 1

DIFFICULT TURNING MOVEMENT
Difficult crossings was a very popular category throughout the entire corridor. The intersections with the highest number of comments were Chelsea Ave and Princeton St.

Several areas came to the forefront for the difficult turning movement category, including 26th St and 15th St.

DIFFICULT CROSSINGS
DRAFT
8 TRENDS BY LOCATION 3RD ST 4TH ST 5TH ST 6TH ST 7TH ST LINCOLN BLVD 9TH ST 10TH ST 11TH ST 12TH ST EUCLID ST 14TH ST 15TH ST 16TH ST 17TH ST 18TH ST SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD 19TH ST
20TH ST
21ST ST
23RD ST
chELSEA AVE PARK DRIVE
25TH ST
26TH ST

PRINCETON ST

HARVARD ST

YALE ST

STANFORD ST

BERKELEY ST

FRANKLIN ST

CENTINELA AVE

OCEAN AVE
2ND ST
1 1 1 3 3 3RD ST 4TH ST 5TH ST 6TH ST 7TH ST LINCOLN BLVD 9TH ST 10TH ST 11TH ST 12TH ST EUCLID ST 14TH ST 15TH ST 16TH ST 17TH ST 18TH ST SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD 19TH ST
20TH ST
21ST ST
23RD ST
chELSEA AVE PARK DRIVE
25TH ST
26TH ST

PRINCETON ST

HARVARD ST

YALE ST

STANFORD ST

BERKELEY ST

FRANKLIN ST

CENTINELA AVE

OCEAN AVE
2ND ST
1 2 2 2 2 4 4

DOUBLE PARKING

POOR BUS STOP ZONE
There were three comments about double parking at 20th St, and between 23rd and Chelsea Ave.

Poor bus stop zones were noted four times between Euclid and 14th St, 25th and 26th St, and at Centinela Ave.

DRAFT
9 3RD ST4TH ST5TH ST6TH ST7TH ST

LINCOLN BLVD
9TH ST
10TH ST11TH ST12TH ST

EUCLID ST
14TH ST15TH ST16TH ST17TH ST18TH ST
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD 19TH ST
20TH ST
21ST ST
23RD ST
chELSEA AVE PARK DRIVE
25TH ST
26TH ST

PRINCETON ST

HARVARD ST

YALE ST

STANFORD ST

BERKELEY ST

FRANKLIN ST

CENTINELA AVE

OCEAN AVE
2ND ST
1 1 3 1 2 3 1 2 1 5 2 3 5 1 1 2
3RD ST4TH ST5TH ST6TH ST7TH ST

LINCOLN BLVD
9TH ST
10TH ST11TH ST12TH ST

EUCLID ST
14TH ST15TH ST16TH ST17TH ST18TH ST
SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD 19TH ST
20TH ST
21ST ST
23RD ST
chELSEA AVE PARK DRIVE
25TH ST
26TH ST

PRINCETON ST

HARVARD ST

YALE ST

STANFORD ST

BERKELEY ST

FRANKLIN ST

CENTINELA AVE

OCEAN AVE
2ND ST
1 1 1 2 2 4 3 2

TRENDS BY LOCATION

SPEEDING

TRAFFIC/CONGESTION
There were many comments about speeding, especially on the eastern portion of the corridor, between 23rd St and Princeton St.

Traffic and congestion-related comments were noted in the downtown area, at Lincoln Blvd, and between 20th St and 25th St.

DRAFT
10 TRENDS BY LOCATION
Comments are organized by location on the bar chart, below.

The intersection with the most feedback was 26th St, with 25 comments across many categories. Many comments focused
on the eastern portion of the corridor (20th St to 26th St), as well as 17th St and Lincoln Blvd. Some comments related to specific segments of the street and these segmentrelated comments are represented by the colorful bars left of the street names. The 78 systemic (corridor-wide) comments are not shown in this intersection-specific
chart, but are summarized on page 13.
*Note that map pins were associated with the nearest intersection.

RELEVANT COMMENTS BY CATEGORY*
:
(: (
4: 4

'5%21'
1'$$%2-









 














4/
4 



4 




43
4:
(&
(
(.
(/
(

(



(4
((
(:
&




.
/




3
4 



%2,-2!'%
'$$%218)-1),1%2,-2!'%1*2"1',!9'%2#1,+ ,'"
5-1

',%
!

!
!

!
'5
'',1
'$
)
,

!

CENTINELA

FRANKLIN

BERKELEY

STANFORD
YALE

HARVARD

PRINCETON
26TH
25TH

CHELSEA
24TH

CLOVERFIELD
23RD
20TH
19TH
18TH
17TH
16TH
15TH
14TH
EUCLID
12TH
11TH
1OTH
9TH

LINCOLN
7TH
6TH
5TH
4TH
3RD
2ND
OCEAN Broken/Incomplete Sidewalks
Bus Lane
Corner Sight Issues
Difficult Crossings
Difficult Turning Movement
Double Parking
Poor Bus Stop Zone
Speeding
Traffic/Congestion
Something Else
0 5 10 15 20 25
DRAFT
11 TRENDS BY THEME
This chart shows the 15 most frequently mentioned phrases from all the relevant comments received. Common and
location-specific words (like “Santa Monica” or “SM Blvd”) were removed to focus on meaningful themes. Similar
phrases were grouped to better understand key concerns
raised by the community. Pedestrian crossings were
commonly mentioned. Safety enhancements like HAWK
signals, curb extensions, and marked crosswalks, were
all very common recommendations. Also included in
the top 15 phrases were bus lanes and bike lane-related comments.

TRENDS BY THEME
HAWK Signal
Right Turn
Traffic Signal Red Light
Add Curb
Bus Stop
Marked Crosswalk
Protected Bike Lane
Left Turn
Make Safer
Curb Extension
Bus Lane
Bike Lane
Pedestrian Crossing
DRAFT
12 UPVOTES & DOWNVOTES
Respondents could upvote or downvote existing comments. The comments with the highest number of upvotes are paraphrased below. The top comment pertained to a bus lane, followed by a comment about the intersection with Chelsea Ave.

Many other comments with a lot of upvotes mentioned difficult crossings, for example on Franklin Blvd and Lincoln Blvd, or driver behavior. 34 UPVOTES
• Whether or not we’re willing to be bold enough
to consider a bus lane, I’m going to say it: a bus
lane on Santa Monica Blvd would be a great step
forward. While there is little congestion, cars still
slow buses down.
30 UPVOTES
• Add a traffic signal at Chelsea Ave for a bikeway
between Park Dr/Broadway and 24th/Idaho that
uses Chelsea Ave.
25 UPVOTES
• The pedestrian crossing at 10th St is important
for Santa Monica College and Kaiser, but it is
unmarked and uncontrolled. It should have a HAWK
signal or comparable signal and marked crosswalk.
• Delivery drivers and others tend to ignore
crosswalks and red curbs downtown (and
everywhere else, but it’s particularly noticeable in
busy areas like downtown). Curb extensions like
the quick-build ones on Wilshire Blvd would be a
good start.

A NOTE ON DOWNVOTES:

The comment with the highest number of
downvotes (4) was:
“Please add bike signals for the separated
bike lanes on the west side of Ocean, both
northbound and southbound... [Also] yield-topedestrians signage and markings are small, hard to see, and confusing with the main traffic
light”.

Overall, there were fewer downvotes than upvotes.

Many downvotes were added to recommendations
for removing a drive lane or carrying out a road
diet, which is reflective of disagreements in the
community over the idea of reducing the number
of drive lanes on Santa Monica Blvd.

DRAFT
13 KEY THEMES
Taking into account the comments that had the highest number of upvotes and the categories that came up the most frequently, key themes are paraphrased below:

Several respondents were interested
in a bus lane. At the same time, there
were some comments that were weary
of “slowing down traffic”. Suggestions
included:
• Full-time bus lanes and transit
priority.
• Reduced travel time for buses.
• Enforcing no parking in bus lanes.

Speeding continues to be a concern
for many respondents. Suggestions
called for:
• Traffic calming.
• Narrower drive lanes
• Wider sidewalks.
• Reduced number of drive lanes.

DESIGN FOR SLOWER VEHICLE
SPEEDS

MAKE CROSSINGS MORE

PEDESTRIAN-FRIENDLY

IMPROVE BICYCLE

INFRASTRUCTURE
Even if bicycle infrastructure is not
proposed, it will be important to
ensure that bicycle connections to
and through the street are considered,
such as:
• Bicycle signals.
• Bicycle boxes.

Many respondents mentioned feeling
unsafe when crossing the street and
recommended enhancements at
intersections:
• Scramble crossings.
• Curb extensions.
• Limiting left turns or right turns on
a red signal.
• HAWK signals.
• New crosswalks.

CONSIDER A BUS LANE
DRAFT
14 PRIORITY INTERSECTIONS
The top 3 categories for each of the 15 Priority Intersections identified for the Santa Monica Blvd Safety Study are listed below and on the following page.
6TH ST
• Difficult crossings (2).
• Corner sight issues (2).
• Something else (2) including.
bicycle traffic signals, curb
extensions, and a scramble
crosswalk.

LINCOLN BLVD
• Difficult crossings (5).
• Speeding (3).
• Poor bus stop zone (2).
• Traffic congestion (2).
10TH ST
• Difficult crossings (3).
11TH ST
• Difficult crossings (4).
• Poor bus stop zone (2).
• Difficult turning movement (1).
• Something else (1) including
bicycle traffic signals.
14TH ST
• Difficult crossings (3).
• Poor bus stop zone (2).
• Speeding (1).
15TH ST
• Difficult crossings (4).
• Difficult turning movement (3).
• Speeding (1).
16TH ST
• Corner sight issues (3).
• Difficult crossings (3).
• Something else (3) including traffic
circle, and traffic signal with left
hand turn light.
18TH ST
• Difficult crossings (4).
19TH ST
• Difficult crossings (3).

DRAFT
15 PRIORITY INTERSECTIONS
20TH ST
• Something else (7) including traffic
circle, no right turn on red, curb
extensions, widened sidewalk.
• Difficult crossings (5).
• Double parking (3).
21ST ST
• No comments specific to this
intersection. However, traffic
congestion from delivery trucks/
passenger loading vehicles was
noted for the 21st - 23rd segment.
22ND ST
• No comments specific to this
intersection. However, traffic
congestion from delivery trucks/
passenger loading vehicles was
noted for the 21st - 23rd segment.

CHELSEA AVE
• Difficult crossings (10).
• Something else (4) including traffic
light, pedestrian bridge, traffic
filters or diverters, and speed
bumps.
• Traffic/congestion (3).
26TH ST
• Difficult crossings (5).
• Speeding (5).
• Corner sight issues (4).
• Poor bus stop zone (4).

PRINCETON ST
• Difficult crossings (7).
• Difficult turning movement (2).
• Something else (1) regarding
unsafe driving behavior from the
McDonald’s drive-through.

STANFORD AVE
• Difficult crossings (3).
• Difficult turning movement (1).

FRANKLIN BLVD
• Difficult crossings (4).

SYSTEMIC (CORRIDOR-WIDE)
• Something else (25) including bus
rapid transit lanes, road diet, right
turn on red restrictions, shade
trees, other amenities such as
garbage cans.
• Speeding (25).
• Difficult crossings (8).

DRAFT
APPENDIX b.

SAFETY ANALYSIS MEMORANDUM
DRAFT

SAFETY STUDY

SAFETY AND TRANSIT ANALYSIS
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 1

MEMORANDUM
To: City of Santa Monica
From: Nelson\Nygaard
Date: February 27, 2025
Subject: Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis FINAL DRAFT This memo provides an analysis of crashes and transit operations along Santa Monica Boulevard between Ocean Avenue and Centinela Avenue as part of the Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study. The corridor was identified as part of the city’s priority network to improve roadway safety due to high number of crashes, including crashes involved with active modes and crashes that occur after dark. This analysis focuses on vehicle speeds, transit operations, reported crash history and activity. It builds on the information documented in the walk audit conducted with participants from various city departments on November 21, 2024.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This section illuminates some of the notable findings of the analyses and offers some key challenges and opportunities for improvement along the Santa Monica Boulevard corridor.1 Key Findings
 Prioritize safety improvements at locations with the highest crash severity. The top three locations with the highest crash severity are listed below. Table 9 lists the top 15 intersections.
− Santa Monica Boulevard and 14th Street
− Santa Monica Boulevard and 16th Street
− Santa Monica Boulevard and Lincoln Boulevard
 83% of all crashes occur at intersections, with the remaining 17% occurring midblock.

Midblock crashes have a higher share of Property Damage Only (PDO) crashes (22%).

Safety improvements should focus on reducing crashes and crash severity at intersections.
1 For this analysis, a crash was classified as intersection-related if its recorded location (latitude and longitude) was within 50 feet of the intersection of two crossing street centerlines. Crashes occurring beyond 50 feet from any of these intersections were categorized as midblock crashes.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 2
 Bicycle and scooter crashes are overrepresented in serious injury crashes (55%) compared to all crashes (20%), and therefore safety improvements should support these users, including educational efforts to address high risk scooter and bike behaviors.
 Injury crashes occur more at unsignalized and signalized intersections compared to midblock locations. Safety improvements approaching intersections should be prioritized over midblock corridor changes.
 Failure to yield and speeding are the top two primary collision factors that result in injury crashes at intersections. Speeding and improper turning are the top collision factors at midblock locations. Improvements shall address these crash factors.  Many pedestrian crashes occur when a pedestrian is crossing at an intersection while a motor vehicle is making a left turn, at both signalized and unsignalized intersections. Consider ways to reduce conflicting movements. Examples include restricting left turns at intersections where this diversion would result in limited out of direction travel, elimination of permissive left turn signal phases at signalized intersections, or slowing turning speeds via centerline hardening or other methods.  Excessive distance between intersections with marked crosswalks can cause significant out of direction or crossings at locations without them. Consider increasing the frequency of marked crosswalks, with the appropriate supplements, along Santa Monica Boulevard.
 Seniors aged 66-75 and 76+ make up 23% of all pedestrians involved in injury crashes, a higher proportion than the 19% these two age groups represent in Santa Monica total population. Interventions can be focused where older adults live, and result in slower speeds, to reduce the severity of crashes when they do happen.  Crashes occur most frequently at signalized intersections, and injury severity is highest at unsignalized intersections; therefore, interventions at unsignalized intersections should be a priority.
 Consider increasing the frequency of tree maintenance to improve visibility of traffic control devices and efficacy of safety lighting at crosswalks.  Pedestrian-involved injury crashes occurring at night (including those under street lighting) account for 22% of all pedestrian-related injury crashes. Consider increasing pedestrian scale and street safety lighting for better night-time visibility and safety.

In addition to the safety findings, there may also be opportunities to improve the transit experience along the corridor based on the following observations:
 Buses travel at low speeds, averaging between 10 to 15 mph during morning (7 am to 10 am) and afternoon (4 pm to 7 pm) peak periods likely due to congestion during DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 3
peak commute times. Improvements to the Santa Monica Boulevard corridor could consider measures that improve bus speed and reliability.  The bus stop pairs at intersections with the highest ridership —each averaging over 200 daily boardings and alightings—are listed below. These stops are primarily served by Santa Monica Big Blue Bus Route 1 and LA Metro Route 4. Improvements should consider the pedestrian experience of riders, especially at high activity stops where transfers require crossing Santa Monica Boulevard, and ample waiting space for riders is needed.
− 3rd Street Promenade
− 4th Street
− 6th Street
− Lincoln Boulevard
− 20th Street
− 26th Street

ORGANIZATION OF THIS MEMO
This memo summarizes the following:

1. Document Review of relevant planning studies preceding this work

2. Description of the Roadway Characteristics along the corridor

3. Transit Operations – Analysis of transit speeds, service delays, and ridership for routes running along the corridor

4. Crash analysis – When, where, and why are crashes occurring

5. Synthesis of key findings from the analysis

6. Top 15 Ranked Intersections by weighted severity of reported crashes DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 4
1 DOCUMENT REVIEW
Santa Monica Boulevard is a key corridor with a demonstrated history of crashes. The City of Santa Monica is focused on improving safety, accessibility, and the overall travel experience for community members. This section provides a high-level summary of past planning efforts related to Santa Monica Boulevard.

Local Safety Roadway Plan (2022)
Overview
The Local Safety Roadway Plan (LSRP) analyzed citywide crash data from 2015 to 2019 to identify corridors and intersections with the highest number of crashes. The LSRP builds on the Vision Zero Program to eliminate serious injuries and fatalities.

Santa Monica Boulevard was identified as part of the priority network which is defined as streets that experience the top 50% of crashes. Key intersections along Santa Monica Boulevard with notable crash histories that were identified in the LRSP include:
 Intersections with the most crashes
− 6th Street
− 15th Street
− 16th Street
− 18th Street
 Intersections with the most crashes involving active modes (i.e., people walking, people on bikes, and people on scooters):
− 6th Street
− 15th Street
− 18th Street
− 20th Street
− 26th Street
 Intersections with the most crashes occurring after dark:
− 6th Street
− 16th Street
Recommendations
The LSRP recommended four emphasis areas with a set of strategies to address high crash volumes, including crashes with active modes and crashes occurring after dark. These emphasis areas are applicable to Santa Monica Boulevard.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 5
 Emphasis Area #1: Pedestrians crossing at intersections − Implement traffic calming measures in and around high pedestrian crash intersections.
− Enhance lighting in and around intersections.
 Emphasis Area #2: Crashes involving people bicycling and scootering − Complete the planned five-year protected bicycle network on Santa Monica Boulevard as defined in the City’s Bike Action Plan Amendment (2020).

Implement intersection treatments at 2nd Street, 6th Street, 11th Street, 14th Street, 20th Street, 26th Street, and Yale Street.
− Implement safety measures to address crashes that involve people who bike and scooter.
− Implement safety strategies that manage vehicular speeds in and around intersections.
− Add protected left turn signals at intersections with persistent left-turn-related bicycle and shared mobility involved crashes.
 Emphasis Area #3: Priority Network
− Accelerate ongoing traffic safety projects within the priority network. − Work with City departments, including Police and Fire, to address safety issues on the Priority Network through education and emergency response efforts. − Seek funding to conduct comprehensive safety evaluations on roadway segments identified as part of the priority network.
 Emphasis Area #4: Speed Management
− Develop a toolkit of safety countermeasures that reduce vehicular speeds. − Ensure speed limits are set appropriately and consistent with recent legislation (Assembly Bill No. 43).

Vision Zero Plan (2017)
Overview
The Vision Zero Plan identified near-term efforts to reduce fatal and severe injury crashes to zero by 2026. An analysis of the 11-year crash history from 2006 to 2016 identified high priority locations with high concentrations of crashes, including the Santa Monica Boulevard at Cloverfield Boulevard intersection.

Recommendations
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 6
The following five key areas along with a set of programs were identified as efforts to reduce fatal and serious injuries. These areas should be considered in recommending countermeasures to increase safety on Santa Monica Boulevard.  Data-driven decision-making: Develop a precise, data-drive decision-making system to identify locations of highest need and evaluate collision reports to assess the most effective safety countermeasures.
− Programs include obtaining all crash data, evaluating emergency response times, and mitigating speeds.
 Safer streets for all ages and abilities: Design and enforce street operations so that drivers travel at appropriate speeds where people are walking and biking. Build a network of neighborhood greenways, low-stress routes that parallel busier corridors, and connect to parks, schools, jobs, and services. Conduct regular enforcement operations targeting speeding and distracted driving.
− Programs include establishing a rapid deployment team, mitigating speeds, building the biking and pedestrian networks, identifying locations for street lighting, and implementing safe routes for schools, senior centers, hospitals, parks, and libraries.
 An engaged and alert community: Engage with community members to promote awareness about roadway safety.
− Programs include implementing Safe Routes for Seniors and Safe Routes for Schools and developing Vision Zero campaigns.
 Supporting policies: Ensure roadway safety is a prioritized metric in the City’s budget process, create policy to minimize construction impacts to road users, and advocate for safety.
− Programs include creating rules and procedures to minimize sidewalks and bike facility closures during construction and expanding neighborhood greenways.  Safer vehicles: Improve the safety of city fleet vehicles and their operators. Educate drivers about cyclists and the maneuvers they make to improve predictability and safety.
− Programs include implementing a bicycle friendly driver program for bus operators.

Pedestrian Action Plan (2016)
Overview
The Pedestrian Action Plan identified priority projects and programs to enhance safety and comfort for people walking. In this plan, the Santa Monica Boulevard corridor was identified DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 7
as a place that is difficult to walk across and along because of high vehicle speeds and multiple travel lanes, despite experiencing a high level of pedestrian activity due to commercial areas and schools.

Recommendations
The following projects were recommended for the Santa Monica Boulevard corridor.  Add left turn protected signal phases on Santa Monica Boulevard at Yale Street and Berkeley Street.
 Implement a streetscape project which includes curb extensions, crosswalks, advance stop bars, directional ramps, and pedestrian-oriented lighting on Santa Monica Boulevard between Lincoln Boulevard and 20th Street.
 Implement leading pedestrian intervals (LPIs) at all signalized intersection along Santa Monica Boulevard.
 Implement a streetscape project which includes seven median islands, 32 curb extensions, two crosswalks, two advance stop bars, directional ramps, and pedestrian-oriented lighting on Santa Monica Boulevard between 20th Street and Centinela Avenue.
2 ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS
Santa Monica Boulevard is classified as a principal arterial roadway that runs in the general east-west direction between Ocean Avenue in Santa Monica and Sunset Boulevard in Hollywood. The study area, from Ocean Avenue to Centinela Avenue, is 2.4 miles long and has 20 signalized intersections (19 signalized intersections in City of Santa Monica and one signalized intersection in City of Los Angeles), 13 two-way stop control intersections, and 21 alleys.

Santa Monica Boulevard has four travel lanes, two in each direction, with intermittent turn lanes and on-street metered parking. Lane widths are narrower near Ocean Avenue and downtown Santa Monica (10-11’) and gradually widen toward Centinela Avenue (12-14’).

Block spacing along the corridor averages about 320 feet between intersections. Concrete sidewalks are provided on both sides of the street throughout the study area. The speed limit between Ocean Avenue and Lincoln Boulevard is 25 mph and between Lincoln Avenue and Centinela Avenue it is 30 mph. However, many drivers do not abide by speed limits and travel at higher speeds as shown in Table 1.

Table 1 Speed Limits vs. 85th Percentile Speeds
Santa Monica Blvd Segments Speed Limits 85th Percentile Speeds Ocean Ave to Lincoln Blvd 25 mph 25 mph – 29 mph
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 8
Santa Monica Blvd Segments Speed Limits 85th Percentile Speeds Lincoln Blvd to Cloverfield Blvd 30 mph 30 mph – 34 mph Cloverfield Blvd to Centinela Ave 30 mph 35 mph – 49 mph Source: Engineering and Traffic Survey Results and Speed Limit Update, City of Santa Monica, July 29, 2024 Land uses along the corridor primarily consist of commercial and office spaces and public facilities such as libraries, hospitals, and schools. The corridor is served by the Big Blue Bus and LA Metro. While there are no bicycle facilities on Santa Monica Boulevard, the following bicycle routes intersect the corridor:
 Ocean Avenue –Protected bike lane on west side and northbound Class II bike lane on east side
 2nd Street – Northbound and southbound buffered bike lanes  6th Street - Northbound and southbound buffered bike lanes  7th Street - Northbound and southbound buffered bike lanes, no bike lane at intersection
 Lincoln Boulevard – Northbound and southbound bike route  11th Street - Northbound and southbound buffered bike lanes  14th Street - Northbound and southbound buffered bike lanes, no bike lane entering intersection
 17th Street - Northbound and southbound buffered bike lanes with green bike crossing pavement markings across the intersection
 Yale Street – Northbound and southbound bike route
3 TRANSIT OPERATIONS
Santa Monica Boulevard is served by several Big Blue Bus routes (primarily Route 1) and one LA Metro route that runs along the boulevard. Bus services run along intersecting streets as described below in Table 2.

Table 2 Bus Services that run along Intersecting Streets of Santa Monica Boulevard Street Name Bus Routes
Ocean Avenue  Big Blue Bus Route 8
 Big Blue Route 9
 LA Metro Route 134
2nd Street  Big Blue Bus Route 5
 LA Metro Route 33
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 9
Street Name Bus Routes
4th Street
(Terminus for some bus
routes)
 Big Blue Bus Route 1
 Big Blue Bus Route 2
 Big Blue Bus Route 3
 Big Blue Bus Rapid 3
 Big Blue Bus Rapid 7
 Big Blue Bus Route 8
 Big Blue Bus Route 9
 Big Blue Bus Rapid 10
 Big Blue Bus Route 18
 LA Metro Route 4
 LA Metro Route 20
 LA Metro Route 134
 LA Metro Route 720
6th Street
(Terminus for some bus
routes)
 Big Blue Bus Route 1
 Big Blue Bus Route 3
 Big Blue Bus Route 5
 Big Blue Bus Route 7
 Big Blue Bus Rapid 7
 Big Blue Bus Route 8
 Big Blue Bus Rapid 10
 Big Blue Bus Route 18
 LA Metro Route 4
7th Street  Big Blue Bus Route 5
 Big Blue Bus Route 7
 Big Blue Bus Route 8
Lincoln Boulevard  Big Blue Bus Route 18
 LA Metro Route 4
14th Street  Big Blue Bus Route 41
 LA Metro Route 4
20th Street  Big Blue Bus Route 41
 LA Metro Route 4
26th Street  Big Blue Bus Route 43
 LA Metro Route 4
Centinela Avenue  Big Blue Bus Route 16
Transit Delay
Bus operations and transit rider connections help us understand where street safety improvements might overlap for the benefit of more reliable transit travel times. Transit travel times are also a proxy for vehicle congestion, which is what often causes transit delay.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 10
The transit delay analysis calculates stop-to-stop average speed for Big Blue Bus Route 1 along the study corridor, using weekday trips collected in October 2024. To account for variations in stop distances, travel times were normalized by distance.

Morning Peak - Eastbound
Figure 1 shows the average travel speeds for eastbound trips during the morning peak period (7 a.m. to 10 a.m.). Most segments have travel speeds between 12 and 16 mph.

However, some segments experience significantly lower speeds, including the stretches between 22nd Street and Cloverfield Street, and 4th Street and 6th Street, where speeds drop below 9 mph. Other slower segments include 17th Street to 20th Street, and 6th Street to Lincoln Boulevard, with average travel speeds of 10–11 mph.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 11
Figure 1 Big Blue Bus Route 1 Eastbound Speeds Along Santa Monica Boulevard, AM Peak

Morning Peak – Westbound
In the westbound direction during the morning peak, Figure 2 shows that the slowest stretch is between Cloverfield Boulevard and 20th Street, followed by the segment between Yale Street and 26th Street. The remainder of the corridor in the morning westbound direction maintains speeds above 12 mph.

Nearside Bus Stop
Farside Bus Stop
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 12
Figure 2 Big Blue Bus Route 1 Westbound Speeds Along Santa Monica Boulevard, AM Peak Afternoon Peak - Eastbound
The afternoon peak includes all trips scheduled between 4 p.m. and 7 p.m. Figure 3 shows that Route 1 buses traveling eastbound during this time experience slow speeds across much of the corridor. The segments from 22nd Street to Cloverfield Boulevard and 4th Street to 6th Street are the slowest, with travel speeds dropping below 7 mph and reaching as low as 4 mph. The segments from 20th Street to 22nd Street and 6th Street to Lincoln Boulevard have average speeds of 8–9 mph. Additionally, the segments from Cloverfield Boulevard to Yale Street and 17th Street to 20th Street do not exceed speeds of 11 mph during this period.

Nearside Bus Stop
Farside Bus Stop
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 13
Figure 3 Big Blue Bus Route 1 Eastbound Speeds Along Santa Monica Boulevard, PM Peak Afternoon Peak – Westbound
In contrast, buses traveling into Santa Monica during the afternoon peak period maintain steady speeds, with most of the corridor averaging above 12 mph. Figure 4 shows that even the slowest segment in the westbound direction, between Cloverfield Boulevard and 20th Street, has speeds of 10–11 mph.

Nearside Bus Stop
Farside Bus Stop
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 14
Figure 4 Big Blue Bus Route 1 Westbound Speeds Along Santa Monica Boulevard, PM Peak Los Angeles Metro Bus Route 4 also travels along the study corridor. This route connects Santa Monica to Downtown Los Angeles via Santa Monica Boulevard and serves five stops within the study corridor at 4th Street, Lincoln Boulevard, 14th Street, 20th Street, and 26th Street. Notably, Route 4 has fewer stops along the study corridor than Big Blue Bus Route 1.

Travel speed data for Route 4 was available for the study corridor by time of day and direction of travel, but not at the stop level. Figure 5 presents the average travel speed during the morning peak period for Route 4 buses traveling in both directions. As observed, buses travel slightly faster in the eastbound direction (13.1 mph on average) compared to the Bus Stop
Farside Bus Stop
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 15
westbound direction (11.8 mph on average). This travel speed pattern aligns with the observed speeds for Big Blue Bus Route 1, where eastbound segments generally exhibited higher speeds, particularly in the 14-16 mph range, compared to westbound segments.

Figure 5 Los Angeles Metro Route 4 Speeds Along Santa Monica Corridor, AM Peak In the afternoon peak, Figure 6 shows that overall speeds are lower than in the morning period, especially in the eastbound direction. Specifically, in the early afternoon, eastbound speeds along Santa Monica Boulevard are slightly below 10 mph but gradually improve to around 13 mph later in the afternoon. In contrast, westbound speeds remain more consistent throughout the afternoon, ranging from 11 to 12 mph. These trends for Route 4 also align with observations from Big Blue Bus Route 1, where long stretches of the corridor in the eastbound direction recorded speeds between 8-11 mph, making it the slowest direction and time period.

0.0 2.0

4.0 6.0

8.0 10.0

12.0 14.0

16.0 18.0
7:00 AM 7:30 AM 8:00 AM 8:30 AM 9:00 AM 9:30 AM 10:00 AM Travel speed (miles per hour)
Time of day
Eastbound Westbound
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 16
Figure 6 Los Angeles Metro Route 4 Speeds Along Santa Monica Corridor, PM Peak Transit Ridership
Table 3 and Table 4 illustrate transit activity (boardings and alightings) by stop for the eastbound and westbound directions for Big Blue Bus routes, respectively, with stops averaging 100 or more daily activities highlighted.

In the eastbound direction, the stops with the highest transit activity are located at the beginning of the corridor, specifically at 4th Street and 6th Street, with activity levels of 366 and 174 boardings and alightings, respectively. Other stops with significant transit activity include those at 20th Street and 26th Street.

Table 3 BBB Transit Activity on Eastbound Stops in Corridor Stop Name (from west to east) Average daily boardings + alightings Routes included in data OCEAN NB/SANTA MONICA NS 10 8
SANTA MONICA EB/3RD FS 17 5, 8
SANTA MONICA EB/4TH FS 366 1, 5, 10, 18, 8
SANTA MONICA EB/6TH NS 174 1, 5, 10, 18, 8

SANTA MONICA EB/LINCOLN NS /

LINCOLN NB/SANTA MONICA FS
84 1, 5, 10
SANTA MONICA EB/11TH NS 62 1, 10
SANTA MONICA EB/14TH NS 83 1, 10
SANTA MONICA EB & 17TH FS 72 1, 10

0.0 2.0

4.0 6.0

8.0 10.0

12.0 14.0

16.0 18.0
4:00 PM 4:30 PM 5:00 PM 5:30 PM 6:00 PM 6:30 PM 7:00 PM Travel speed miles per hour
Time of day
Eastbound Westbound
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 17
SANTA MONICA EB/20TH FS 99 1, 10
SANTA MONICA EB/22ND FS 34 1
SANTA MONICA EB/CLOVERFIELD FS 44 1, 10
SANTA MONICA EB/26TH NS 120 1, 10
SANTA MONICA EB/YALE FS 62 1, 10
SANTA MONICA EB/BERKELEY NS 61 1
SANTA MONICA EB/CENTINELA FS 64 1, 10
Note that Route 8 only serves Santa Monica Blvd on its westbound trip (UCLA to Downtown Santa Monica) however, the route travels eastbound so the stops on Santa Monica will correspond to those on the eastbound direction.

In contrast, transit activity in the westbound direction is generally lower, particularly at the far west stops (4th Street and 3rd Street). This is because Routes 1 and 10 turn right onto 6th Street before getting to 4th Street as they do in the eastbound direction. However, the stop at 6th Street and Santa Monica has a transit activity of 255, the highest in the corridor. Similarly to the eastbound direction, the stop at 26th Street also sees high transit activity, with 126 boardings and alightings, making it the second busiest stop in the westbound direction.

Table 4 BBB Transit Activity on Westbound Stops in Corridor Stop Name (From east to west) Average daily boardings + alightings Routes included in data
SANTA MONICA WB/CENTINELA FS 58 1, 10
SANTA MONICA WB/BERKELEY NS 57 1
SANTA MONICA WB/YALE FS 59 1, 10
SANTA MONICA WB/26TH NS 106 1, 10
SANTA MONICA WB/CLOVERFIELD NS 49 1, 10
SANTA MONICA WB/22ND NS 49 1
SANTA MONICA WB/20TH FS 90 1, 10
SANTA MONICA WB/17TH FS 72 1, 10
SANTA MONICA WB/14TH NS 81 1, 10
SANTA MONICA WB/11TH FS 62 1, 10

SANTA MONICA WB/LINCOLN NS/

LINCOLN SB/SANTA MONICA NS
77 1, 10, 18
6TH SB & SANTA MONICA FS 255 1, 10, 18
LA Metro Route 4 is a frequent service line connecting Santa Monica with Downtown Los Angeles. Compared to Big Blue Bus routes, Route 4 has wider stop spacing, resulting in fewer stops along Santa Monica Boulevard. Table 5 presents the transit activity (boardings and alightings) at stops located on Santa Monica Boulevard, grouped by stop pair. The busiest stop is at Santa Monica Boulevard and 4th Street, serving over 600 passengers daily. The DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 18
remaining stops show relatively consistent activity, ranging from 186 to 253 passengers per day.

Table 5 LA Metro Route 4 Transit Activity by Stop
Stop Name Average daily boardings + alightings
SANTA MONICA / 3RD ST PROMENADE 231
SANTA MONICA / 4TH 638
6TH / SANTA MONICA 206
SANTA MONICA / LINCOLN 235
SANTA MONICA / 14TH 186
SANTA MONICA / 20TH 220
SANTA MONICA / 26TH 253
Safety improvements throughout the corridor should consider the crossing experience of inbound and outbound riders. Particular attention should be paid to high activity stops and where transfers require crossing Santa Monica Boulevard. 4 CRASH ANALYSIS
This section presents the results of the crash analysis along Santa Monica Boulevard from Ocean Avenue to Centinela Avenue. The goal of this analysis is to identify where, when, and why crashes occur, with a specific focus on patterns related to fatal and serious injury crashes.

The analysis is based on data from CrossRoads provided by the City of Santa Monica, and include crashes that took place between Jan 1, 2015 and Dec 31, 2024. Of note:
 The data includes all Injury and Property Damage Only (PDO) crashes. In the analysis PDO crashes are included in the Crash Trends and Intersection maps but are excluded from the analysis aiming at identifying specific patterns of injury crashes because a Chi-squared analysis of crash patterns and crash types demonstrated that there is a significant difference between PDO and injury crash attributes.  Crashes included in the analysis occurred within 100 feet of the Santa Monica Boulevard centerline. Additionally, CrossRoads data already assigned all crashes within 30 feet of the intersecting street centerlines as an intersection-related crash.

This analysis expanded that threshold to 50 feet to ensure an intersection-related crash footprint includes the crosswalks around the intersection.  For the purpose of assigning the preceding movements to a specific street, the analysis assumes that parties moving east or west are traveling along Santa Monica Boulevard and parties traveling north or south are approaching Santa Monica from an intersecting street.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 19
 While one or more parties can be involved in crashes as drivers, pedestrians, bicyclists, passengers, or in other roles, CrossRoads data only includes information for two parties. Therefore, it is not possible to determine if more than two parties were involved.

Crash Trends
During 2015-2024, 435 injury crashes and 401 Property Damage Only crashes were recorded along the study corridor. Figure 7 illustrates the number of crashes and their distribution by injury severity. Notably, about half of the crashes were reported as property damage only.

Visible injuries and complaints of pain account for 48% of the total, while serious injuries and fatalities account for the remaining 3%.

Figure 7 Total crashes by injury level, 2015-2024
Total crashes per year reached a high point in 2018. Crashes significantly decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic beginning in early 2020, but gradually increased again after 2022.

The increase has been more pronounced for serious crashes, with 17 serious crashes from 2022- 2024. During the 10-year period analyzed one fatal crash occurred in 2017.

Property Damage
Only
401
Complaint of Pain 48.0%
233

27.9%
Other Visible Injury
171

20.5%
Severe Injury
30 3.6%
Fatal
1 0.1%
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 20
Figure 8 Annual crashes by injury level, 2015-2024
Who is involved in crashes?
Between 2015 and 2024, there was age information for approximately 600 people involved in the 435 injury crashes.

Figure 9 highlights that the two most common age groups for people involved in crashes are between 26–35 and 36–45, accounting for 24% and 17% of those involved, respectively. The yellow bars in the chart compare the age distribution of Santa Monica residents. Notably, the 16–25 age group is significantly overrepresented in crashes, making up 16% of those involved, despite only comprising 8% of the city's population. Similarly, the 26–35 age group is overrepresented by 6 percentage points. Children aged 0–15 years represent only 4 individuals (0.6%) of those involved. As explained in the following section, most crashes involve at least one person who is driving a vehicle or motorcycle. 2 2 The age distribution analysis is divided into 10-year intervals, except for the first and last categories. The first category includes all children who are not legally permitted to drive without supervision in the State of California. For individuals aged 75 and older, the number of people involved in crashes decreases significantly. Grouping them into a single category does not risk obscuring any specific trends related to this age group.
35 35 35
57 51
33 27 37 41 50
35 30 28
29 21
10 16
28 22 14
16 16 9
29 27
15 15
18 11 15
1 2
6 1
3 6
2 1 9
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Number of Crashes
Crash Year
Property Damage Only Complaint of Pain Other Visible Injury Severe Injury Fatal DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 21
Figure 9 Age distribution of people involved in injury crashes, 2015-2024 Santa Monica population estimates according to American Community Survey 2019-2023.

Of the 625 people involved in injury crashes, 520 (83%) are driving motor vehicles (including motorcycles), 61 (10%) are pedestrians, and 40 (6%) are bicyclists. It is important to note that these figures represent the roles of individuals in a crash, not the crash mode, which is discussed later in the analysis. For example, in a crash involving a car hitting a pedestrian, the two parties involved are the driver and the pedestrian. However, this crash would be classified as a pedestrian crash.

Figure 10 shows the age distribution of individuals involved in crashes, broken down by their role in the crash. Each column color adds up to 100%. The chart highlights which age groups make up a larger proportion of individuals in each role and compares these distributions across roles. Key takeaways include:
 People between the ages of 26-35 are more likely to be involved in crashes across all modes compared to people in other age groups.
 Drivers aged 26-35 have the highest share (24%) of those involved in injury crashes, followed by the 16-25, 36-45, and 46-55 age groups. Adults between the ages of 26 and 55 account for more than half of the drivers involved in injury crashes.  Adults between the ages of 56-65 make up 18% of all pedestrians involved in injury crashes, 5% higher than drivers in this age group.
 Seniors aged 66-75 and 76+ make up 23% of all pedestrians involved in injury crashes, a significantly higher proportion than the 13% of drivers in these two age groups.
 Nearly 3% of all pedestrians involved in injury crashes are children under 16. 1%
16%
24%
17% 16%
13%
7% 6%
12%
8%
18%
15%
13% 14%
10% 9%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Percentage of people/population
0-15 16-25 26-35 36-45 46-55 56-65 66-75 76+
Age Category
People involved in crashes (n = 625) Population in Santa Monica City (n = 91,500) DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 22
 People between the ages of 26 and 45 make up for more than 50% of all bicyclists involved in injury crashes, a higher proportion compared to drivers and pedestrians.

Figure 10 Age distribution of people by their role in the injury crash, 2015-2024 What types of crashes are occurring?
The crash mode is categorized based on the non-motor vehicle party involved. For example, a motor vehicle crash involves only automobiles, a pedestrian crash involves a pedestrian and a motor vehicle, and a bicycle crash involves a bicyclist and a motor vehicle. The data also includes two crashes involving only a bicyclist and a pedestrian; these were categorized under the pedestrian mode to streamline the analysis. Figure 11 shows the distribution of crash modes by injury level (Fatal/Serious Injury include one fatality during the period of analysis). Nearly 81% of all crashes involve only motor vehicles. However, when examining fatal and serious injury crashes, motor vehicle crashes account for 45%, nearly half their share in all crashes. Conversely, pedestrians are overrepresented in serious injury crashes, making up 29% of such incidents compared to 11% in all crashes. Bicycle and scooter crashes are also overrepresented in serious injury crashes (55%) compared to all crashes (20%). 0%
17%
24%
17% 17%
13%
7% 6%
3%
7%
20%
16%
13%
18%
10%
13%
0%
13%
33%
20%
10%
18%
5%
3%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
0-15 16-25 26-35 36-45 46-55 56-65 66-75 76+
Percentage of people by role
Age Category
Driver (n = 520) Pedestrian (n = 61) Bicyclist (n = 40) DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 23
Figure 11 Share of crash mode in all crashes and serious injury crashes, 2015-2024 Note: “Minor Injury” category includes Other Visible Injury and Complaint of Pain Injury severity and crash type can also vary depending on whether the crash occurred at an intersection or a midblock location. Figure 12 compares the proportion of crashes at intersections and midblock, by injury severity. Most crashes along Santa Monica Boulevard occur at intersections with other streets (77%), while only 6% take place at intersections with alleys. In addition, no fatal or serious injury crashes were recorded at alley intersections.

Since alley crashes make up a small proportion of total crashes and do not contribute to fatal or serious injuries, the remainder of this report consolidates alley and street intersection crashes into a single intersection category.
45%
67%
97%

80.5%
16%
12%

0.7%

6.6%
29%
19%

1.7%

11.1%
10%
2%

0.5%

1.8%
(n = 31)
(n = 404)
(n = 401)
(n = 836)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Fatal/Serious Injury
Minor Injury
Property Damage Only
All Crashes
Motor Vehicle Bicycle Pedestrian Scooter
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 24
Figure 12 Intersection and midblock crashes by injury level Where are crashes occurring?
Figure 13 illustrates the concentration of crashes (PDO and Injury) along the study corridor using a heatmap that clusters the 797 geocoded crashes based on proximity. This number is slightly lower than the 836 total crashes presented in previous sections, as some crashes lacked sufficient data for geocoding and were therefore excluded from the spatial analysis.

The hotspots highlight areas with a higher density of crashes near each other. This visualization is intended to provide an overview and identify areas with high crash history for further investigation.
13%
12%
22%
17%
87%
82%
72%
77%
6%
6%
6%
(n = 31)
(n = 404)
(n = 401)
(n = 836)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Fatal/Serious Injury
Minor Injury
Property Damage
Only
All Crashes
Midblock Intersection - Street Intersection - Alley
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 25
Figure 13 Crash Concentration on Santa Monica Corridor
The heatmap above identifies the following locations with high crash history frequency:
 At the intersection with 4th Street.
 At the intersection with Lincoln Boulevard.
 Between 14th and 16th Streets.
 At the intersection with 20th Street.
 At the intersection with 26th Street.

To provide more detailed insights into crash history along the corridor, Figure 14, Figure 15, Figure 16, and Figure 17 show the number of crashes at each intersection. Since 83% of all crashes and 87% of injury crashes occur at intersections, the maps below focus on DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 26
intersection-related crashes to make it easier to identify high-crash areas and compare crash locations when weighted by severity. For better visualization, Santa Monica Boulevard is divided into four segments.

The first map on the upper half of each page for each segment show the total number of crashes, illustrated with red circles, while the lower maps display crashes weighted by severity, illustrated with blue circles. In the weighted maps, each serious injury crash (including one fatal crash) is multiplied by 20, other injury crashes (“other visible injury” and “complaint of pain” crashes) are multiplied by 5, and PDO crashes are multiplied by 1. This weighting is based on guidance from the State of California Local Roadway Safety Manual3 ,
intended to account for the social, economic, and relationship impacts of lost life and serious injury by elevating locations where the crash frequency might be lower, but the severity is higher. Note, the scale of the circles should not be compared across maps. Table 6 compares three groups of intersections: the top ten intersections with the highest number of total crashes (20 or more), the top ten with the highest number of injury crashes (14 or more), and the 17 intersections where at least one serious injury crash occurred between 2015 and 2024.

As highlighted in bold, eight intersections appear in all three categories—those with the highest total crashes, highest injury crashes, and at least one serious injury crash.. 3 https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/local-assistance/documents/hsip/2024/lrsm2024-v2.pdf DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 27
Table 6 Intersections with highest number of total crashes, intersections with highest number of injury crashes and intersections with at least one serious injury Intersections along Santa
Monica Blvd with the highest
number of total crashes
Intersections along Santa
Monica Blvd with the highest
number of injury crashes
Intersections along Santa
Monica Blvd that have at least
one serious injury
 4th Street
 Lincoln Boulevard
 16th Street
 20th Street
 14th Street
 26th Street
 5th Street
 2nd Street
 15th Street
 6th Street
 16th Street
 20th Street
 14th Street
 Lincoln Boulevard
 26th Street
 4th Street
 15th Street
 5th Street
 18th Street
 19th Street
 10th Street
 6th Street
 14th Street
 Lincoln Boulevard
 26th Street
 15th Street
 18th Street
 11th Street
 Princeton Street
 16th Street
 20th Street
 4th Street
 5th Street
 Franklin Street
 Chelsea Avenue
 Yale Street
DRAFT
 9th Street
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 28
Figure 14 Number of total crashes and weighted crashes from Ocean Avenue to 9th Court, 2015-2024 DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 29
Figure 15 Number of total crashes and weighted crashes from 10th Street to 18th Court, 2015-2024 DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 30
Figure 16 Number of total crashes and weighted crashes from 18th Street to 26th Court, 2015-2024 DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 31
Figure 17 Number of total crashes and weighted crashes from 26th Street to Centinela Avenue, 2015-2024 (Note that because the intersection with Centinela Avenue falls partially outside the City of Santa Monica boundary, crash data here may be incomplete) DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 32
Figure 18 shows the distribution of injury crash modes at intersections and midblock. Motor vehicles crashes make up the majority at both location types, nonetheless the share of motor vehicle crashes at intersections (65%) is less than at midblock (72%).

Figure 18 Intersection and midblock injury crashes by crash mode At intersections, the most significant primary collision factor for injury crashes is failure to yield to an automobile’s right of way. The next most significant primary collision factor at intersections is unsafe speed.

For injury crashes occurring at midblock, improper turning and unsafe speeds are the most common primary collision factors. The complete list of collision factors for both intersection and midblock crashes is presented in Figure 19.
72%
65%
19%
20%
5%
13%
5%
3%
(n = 43)
(n = 392)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Midblock
Intersection
Motor Vehicle Pedestrian Bicycle Scooter
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 33
Figure 19 Primary Collision Factors in Injury Crashes
Note: The above figured does not include the 54 injury crashes where contributing circumstances was coded as “Unknown”, “Not Stated” or “Missing”. Definitions for each primary collision factor are in the appendix and compiled from the California Highway Patrol Collision Investigation Manual.

Figure 20 shows the distribution of injury crashes that involve pedestrians and bicyclists at different location types. Many of these crashes (56-59%) occur at signalized intersections.

Bicyclist crashes (37%) and pedestrian crashes (34%) occur at about the same rate at unsignalized intersections. Conversely, pedestrian crashes (10%) are more common at midblock than bicyclist crashes (4%).
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Other
Other Than Driver
Other Improper Driving
Following Too Closely
Impeding Traffic
Unsafe Lane Change
Improper Passing
Wrong Side of Road
Unsafe Starting or Backing
Driving Under Influence
Pedestrian Violation
Ped R/W Violation
Other Hazardous Movement
Improper Turning
Traffic Signals and Signs
Unsafe Speed
Auto R/W Violation
Intersection Midblock
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 34
Figure 20 Pedestrian and bicyclists injury crashes by location type Unsignalized Signalized Midblock
Figure 21 shows the distribution of crash types across different location types. Crashes occur most frequently at signalized intersections, and injury severity is highest at unsignalized intersections.

Figure 21 Crash injury level by location type, 2015-2024 10%
56%
34%
Pedestrian (n = 89)
4%
59%
37%
Bicycle (n = 54)
3%
4%
4%
39%
48%
55%
58%
48%
41%
(n = 103)
(n = 380)
(n = 314)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Midblock
Signalized
Unsignalized
Fatal/Serious Injury Minor Injury Property Damage Only
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 35
When are crashes occurring?
This section examines seasonality of crashes and lighting. Figure 22 shows the total number of crashes each month over the ten-year period, by month. No discernable patterns emerge.

Figure 22 Frequency of Crashes by Month by Severity, 2015-2024 Figure 23 illustrates how the number of crashes increases throughout the day, peaking between 5 pm and 6 pm.

Figure 23 Crashes by Time of Day by Severity, 2015-2024 0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Number of Crashes
Property Damage Only Minor Injury Fatal/Serious Injury
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 12:00 AM
1:00 AM2:00 AM3:00 AM4:00 AM5:00 AM6:00 AM7:00 AM8:00 AM9:00 AM 10:00 AM11:00 AM
12:00 PM
1:00 PM2:00 PM3:00 PM4:00 PM5:00 PM6:00 PM7:00 PM8:00 PM9:00 PM 10:00 PM11:00 PM
Number of Crashes
Hour of Day
Fatal/Serious Injury Minor Injury
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 36
Figure 24 and Figure 25 illustrate the direction of travel for parties involved in injury crashes during the analysis period. For travel along Santa Monica Boulevard, the distribution between eastbound and westbound is generally similar, though the westbound direction has a slightly higher share during most hours of the day. Similarly, for northbound and southbound travel on cross streets, both directions have nearly equal shares, with no discernible trend.

Figure 24 Injury Crashes by Time of Day by Direction of Travel East-Westbound, 2015-2024 Figure 25 Injury Crashes by Time of Day by Direction of Travel North-Southbound, 2015-2024 Seasonal changes affect lighting conditions, with daylight hours being shorter in the winter.

Lighting availability is especially important for pedestrian and bicycle visibility, when streetlights may be their only source of lighting.
0 10
20 30
40 50
12:00 AM
1:00 AM2:00 AM3:00 AM4:00 AM5:00 AM6:00 AM7:00 AM8:00 AM9:00 AM 10:00 AM11:00 AM
12:00 PM
1:00 PM2:00 PM3:00 PM4:00 PM5:00 PM6:00 PM7:00 PM8:00 PM9:00 PM 10:00 PM11:00 PM
Number of Crashes
Time of Day
Eastbound Westbound
0 10
20 30
40 50
12:00 AM
1:00 AM2:00 AM3:00 AM4:00 AM5:00 AM6:00 AM7:00 AM8:00 AM9:00 AM 10:00 AM11:00 AM
12:00 PM
1:00 PM2:00 PM3:00 PM4:00 PM5:00 PM6:00 PM7:00 PM8:00 PM9:00 PM 10:00 PM11:00 PM
Number of Crashes
Time of Day
Northbound Southbound
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 37
Crashes in Figure 26 include all incidents occurring between November and March from 3 to 5 PM (winter sunset) and all crashes occurring between May and September from 5 to 7 PM (summer sunset). The direction of travel refers to the movement of drivers involved in a given crash. In this chart, westbound travel indicates that the driver was driving into the sunset.

Figure 26 Crashes at Sunset by Driver’s Direction of Travel Crashes in Figure 27 include all incidents occurring between November and March from 6 to 8 AM (winter sunrise) and all crashes occurring between May and September from 5 to 7 AM (summer sunrise). The direction of travel refers to the movement of drivers involved in a given crash. In this chart, eastbound travel indicates that the driver was driving into the sunrise.
50%
30%
38%
50%
22%
30%
24%
14%
24%
18%
(n = 2)
(n = 76)
(n = 66)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Fatal/Serious Injury
Minor Injury
Property Damage Only
Westbound
(into sunset)
Eastbound Northbound Southbound
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 38
Figure 27 Crashes at Sunrise by Driver’s Direction of Travel Sun glare is a topic of emerging study (Study on the influence of sun glare on driving safety - ScienceDirect ). While a detailed analysis of this phenomenon could only be accomplished by reviewing the narrative of the crash reports, slower speeds can reduce the risk of serious injury should a driver be temporarily unable to see because of the low hanging sun. 28%
20%
16%
27%
36%
53%
100%
20%
(n = 1)
(n = 25)
(n = 15)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Fatal/Serious Injury
Minor Injury
Property Damage Only
Westbound Eastbound
(into sunrise)
Northbound Southbound
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 39
Figure 28 shows the distribution of lighting conditions in crashes across different injury levels. Most property damage only (PDO) and minor injury crashes occur during daylight, with only a small proportion happening at dusk or dawn. However, nearly one-quarter of PDO crashes and one-fifth of minor injury crashes occur in the dark, under the presence of street lighting. The proportion of fatal and serious injury crashes occurring in the dark with street lighting is significantly higher, accounting for 45% of these crashes under such lighting conditions. The share of crashes occurring at dusk or dawn is also higher for fatal and serious injuries compared to the other two categories. This suggests that the lack of natural daylight may be an underlying cause of fatal and serious injuries crashes.

Figure 28 Crashes by Injury Level and Lighting Conditions

48.4%

78.2%

71.5%

6.5%

2.2%

2.3%

45.2%

19.3%

26.2%

0.2%
(n = 31)
(n = 404)
(n = 390)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Fatal/Serious Injury
Minor Injury
Property Damage Only
Daylight Dusk - Dawn Dark - Street Lights Dark - No Street Lights DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 40
Figure 29 examines the relationship between the number of pedestrian crashes throughout the year and the lighting conditions at the time of each injury crash. October recorded the highest number of pedestrian crashes overall in the study period. November had a comparable number of pedestrian crashes, with more occurring in darkness. May and June had the lowest number of pedestrians crashes.

This analysis suggests that lighting conditions are unlikely to be a major factor in pedestrian crashes, as most incidents occur either in daylight or areas with streetlights. However, the data does suggest that winter months do have more incidence of pedestrian crashes, likely due to precipitation and/or reduced overall visibility (cloudy days, fewer daylight hours). An important caveat to this result is that data only indicates the presence of streetlights, but it does not capture if the lightning conditions were adequate.

Figure 29 Lighting Conditions in Pedestrian Injury Crashes by Month, 2015-2024 0 2
4 6
8 10
12 14
16 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Number of pedestrian crashes
Daylight Dusk-Dawn Dark - Street Lights Dark - No Street Lights DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 41
Figure 30 highlights the distribution of lighting conditions for the 52 bicycle injury crashes.

The data shows that bicycle crashes predominantly occur during daylight. March, April, May, September, October, November, and December had bicycle crashes that occur in the dark with streetlights.

Figure 30 Lighting Conditions in Bicycle Injury Crashes by Month, 2015-2024 Figure 31 illustrates the distribution of pedestrian crashes by time of day during the analysis period. Most crashes occur between three timeframes: 7 am to 10 am, 1pm to 4 pm, and 4 pm to 7 pm. In sum, the rates are likely associated with exposure, as these times of day are expected to have more activity.

Figure 31 Pedestrian injury crashes by time of day occurrence, 2015-2024 3 2
7 3 4
1 4 4 4 3
1 4
1 2
1 1 2 3
1 1
0 2
4 6
8 10
12 14
16 18
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Number of bicyclist crashes
Daylight Dusk-Dawn Dark - Street Lights Dark - No Street Lights 0 5 10 15 20 25
Before 7a.m.
7a.m. - 10a.m.
10a.m. - 1p.m.
1p.m. - 4p.m.
4p.m. - 7p.m.
7p.m. - 10p.m.

After 10p.m.

Pedestrian Crashes
Time of Day
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 42
Why are crashes occurring?
Crash reports provide details about the primary and contributing factors that caused a crash, and the sobriety of each party involved. This analysis examines the proportion of crashes where speed, impairment, and/or inattention was identified either as primary collision factor or contributing factor when applicable.

Figure 32 presents speed-related crashes by injury level. A crash was categorized as speedrelated if the primary collision factor was identified as "unsafe speed". Among the 31 serious injury crashes, 3% were associated with speeding, a lower proportion compared to minor injury crashes and property damage only. This trend is atypical, as most crash analyses show a positive correlation between speed and injury severity.

Figure 32 Speed-Related Crashes by Injury Level, 2015-2024 97%
88%
87%
3%
12%
13%
(n = 31)
(n = 404)
(n = 401)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Fatal/Serious Injury
Minor Injury
Property Damage Only
Other Speeding
Other factors Speeding
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 43
Figure 33 shows impairment-related crashes by injury level. A crash was considered impairment-related if any party "Had Been Drinking (HBD) - Under Influence" or “Under Drug Influence”; or if the crash primary collision factor was recorded as “Driving Under Influence”.

Out of the 836 crashes analyzed, only 48 (5%) were related to impairment. The proportion of crashes involving impairment is highest in property damage only (7%) and fatal/serious injury crashes (6%).

Figure 33 Impairment-Related Crashes by Injury Level, 2015-2024 Figure 34 highlights inattention-related crashes by injury level. A crash was classified as inattention-related if the contributing factor for any party was listed as "Inattention”.

According to the crash data, inattention is a small factor in crashes on Santa Monica Boulevard.

Figure 34 Inattention-Related Crashes by Injury Level, 2015-2025 94%
96%
93%
6%
4%
7%
(n = 31)
(n = 404)
(n = 401)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Fatal/Serious Injury
Minor Injury
Property Damage Only
Other Impairment
97%
96%
99%
4%
1%
(n = 31)
(n = 404)
(n = 401)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Fatal/Serious Injury
Minor Injury
Property Damage Only
Other Inattention
Other factors Impairment
Other factors Inattention
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 44
For motor vehicle-only injury crashes, the most common crash type is a broadside crash, where the front of one vehicle strikes the side of another vehicle. Figure 35 shows that 160 out of the 284 motor vehicle injury crashes were broadside crashes, followed by rear-end crashes (66) and head-on collisions (23).

Figure 35 Motor Vehicle Injury Crash Types, 2014-2025
A deeper understanding of why crashes occur requires an evaluation of the movements made by the parties involved immediately before the crash. Table 7 illustrates the combinations of preceding movements by motor vehicles involved in motor vehicle-only injury crashes.

The most common scenario involves two vehicles proceeding straight. These movements are typical for broadside crashes. Other common scenarios include a vehicle proceeding straight colliding with a vehicle making a left turn, vehicle proceeding straight into a stopped vehicle.

Table 7 Motor Vehicles Movement Combination Preceding Motor Vehicle-Only Injury Crashes (continued on following page)
Motor Vehicle 1 Action Motor Vehicle 2 Action Number of Crashes Proceeding straight Proceeding straight 107
Making left turn Proceeding straight 59
Proceeding straight Stopped in road 45
Making right turn Proceeding straight 12
Entering traffic Proceeding straight 10
Making U-turn Proceeding straight 8
Changing lanes Proceeding straight 5
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Not Stated
Hit Object
Other
Overturned
Sideswipe
Head-On
Rear-End
Broadside
Number of Crashes
Crash Type
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 45
Motor Vehicle 1 Action Motor Vehicle 2 Action Number of Crashes Parked Proceeding straight 4
Proceeding straight NA 4
Backing Making left turn 2
Backing Proceeding straight 2
Making left turn Parked 2
Making left turn Stopped in road 2
Making right turn Stopped in road 2
Other Proceeding straight 2
Proceeding straight Slowing / stopping 2
Note: Preceding movement combinations with fewer than two crashes are not shown in the table.

Table 8 illustrates the combinations of pedestrian and motor vehicle actions leading to pedestrian injury crashes. The dominant preceding crash type is a vehicle making a left turn into a pedestrian crossing in a crosswalk at an intersection.

Table 8 Pedestrian and Vehicle Movement Combination Preceding Pedestrian Crashes Pedestrian action Motor Vehicle Action Number of Crashes Crossing in crosswalk at intersection Making left turn 23 Crossing in crosswalk at intersection Proceeding straight 16 Crossing in crosswalk at intersection Making right turn 11 In road Proceeding straight 10
Not in road Proceeding straight 5
Crossing not in crosswalk Proceeding straight 3
Not in road Making right turn 3
Crossing in crosswalk at intersection Traveling wrong way 2 Note: Preceding movement combinations with fewer than two injury crashes are not shown in the table.

Refer to California Highway Patrol Collision Investigation Manual.

Table 9 highlights the combinations of bicycle and motor vehicle movements preceding injury crashes. The most common motor vehicle movement involved in these crashes was making a right turn, making a left turn, and proceeding straight, while the bicycle was proceeding straight in all instances.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 46
Table 9 Bicycle and Vehicle Movement Combination Preceding Bicycle Injury Crashes Bicycle action Motor Vehicle Action Number of Crashes
Proceeding straight Making right turn 11
Proceeding straight Making left turn 9
Proceeding straight Proceeding straight 9
Proceeding straight Parked 4
Proceeding straight Entering traffic 3
Making left turn Proceeding straight 2
Proceeding straight Stopped in road 2
Traveling wrong way Making right turn 2
Note: Preceding movement combinations with fewer than two injury crashes are not shown in the table.

Another way to analyze crash patterns is by examining the reported violation codes. During this period, the top three cited violations in reported crashes were: unsafe lane change (n=134), excessive speed (n=102); and failure to stop at a stop sign before entering an intersection (n=51).
5 DEMAND ANALYSIS
Methodology
A travel demand analysis was conducted to identify high activity areas along Santa Monica Boulevard generating trips taken by any mode that require travel across the boulevard. This analysis utilized data from Replica, a platform that provides modeled mobility insights based on anonymized location data.

To obtain origin-destination (OD) flows, the Replica platform allows users to select predefined geographies (e.g., census tracts) or define custom geographies. Twelve (12) custom areas were used for this analysis, designed to evaluate trip flows across Santa Monica Boulevard. These areas are bounded by Wilshire Boulevard to the north and Colorado Avenue to the south, with Santa Monica Boulevard serving as the central divider. Oddnumbered zones represent areas north of Santa Monica Boulevard (bounded by Wilshire Boulevard), while even-numbered zones represent areas south of Santa Monica Boulevard (bounded by Colorado Avenue).

The crossing streets that define the boundaries of these zones are as follows:
• SM01 and SM02: Ocean Avenue to 4th Street
• SM03 and SM04: 4th Street to Lincoln Boulevard
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 47
• SM05 and SM06: Lincoln Boulevard to 14th Street
• SM07 and SM08: 14th Street to 20th Street
• SM09 and SM10: 20th Street to 26th Street
• SM11 and SM12: 26th Street to Centinela Avenue
These zones were loaded into the Replica platform to retrieve all individual trips starting or ending within any of the custom zones. The query returned approximately 25,000 daily trips within the defined zones.

An origin-destination (OD) matrix was then constructed to aggregate all trips between zones.

For instance, trips starting in zone SM01 and ending in zone SM03 were combined with trips starting in SM03 and ending in SM01. Using this matrix, the analysis consolidated unidirectional flows into bidirectional flows and identified the OD pairs with the largest trip volumes.

It is important to note that only flows involving a north zone paired with a south zone were considered, as these trips require crossing Santa Monica Blvd. The remainder of this section presents the results of the demand analysis.

Trip Origin and Destination Analysis
Figure 36 illustrates trip origin and destination pairs that have more than 400 daily trips across Santa Monica Boulevard. The top five zones with more than 400 daily trips are shown below. Analyzing travel patterns of how people cross Santa Monica Boulevard can provide insights into where potential conflicts may occur.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 48
Figure 36 Origin Destination Pairs with more than 200 Trips, 2019-2023 DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 49
SM 01 (Santa Monica Boulevard between Ocean Avenue and 4th Street) and SM 04 (Santa Monica Boulevard between 4th Street and Lincoln Boulevard)
SM 01 is located between Ocean Avenue and 4th Street and SM 04 is located between 4th Street and Lincoln Boulevard. SM 01 primarily consists of office buildings, retail and dining areas, and hotels, while SM 04 features a mix of dining and retail areas, such as 3rd Street Promenade, along with a library and residential apartment buildings.

These two zones have the most daily trips with 737 trips. Trips are divided into two flows:
 57% of trips (419 trips) originate in SM 01 and end in SM 04.  43% of trips (318 trips) originate in SM 04 and end in SM 01.

SM 01 and SM 02 (Santa Monica Boulevard between 4th Street and Lincoln Boulevard)
SM 01 and SM 02 are also located in the downtown area between 4th Street and Lincoln Boulevard. SM 01 primarily consists of office buildings at 100 Wilshire Boulevard and 1299 Ocean Avenue, retail and dining areas, and hotels. SM 02 consists of retail areas including Santa Monica Place, a shopping mall. 3rd Street Promenade intersects both zones.

These two zones have a total of 643 daily trips, and trips are divided into two flows:
 44% of trips (286 trips) originate in SM 01 and end in SM 02.  55% of trips (357 trips) originate in SM 02 and end in SM 01.

SM 01 (Santa Monica Boulevard between Ocean Avenue and 4th Street) and SM 06 (Santa Monica Boulevard between Lincoln Boulevard and 14th Street)
SM 01 is located between Ocean Avenue and 4th Street and SM 06 is located between Lincoln Boulevard and 14th Street. SM 01 SM 01 primarily consists of office buildings, retail and dining areas, and hotels, while SM 06 consists of dining and retail areas, offices, and residential apartment buildings.

These two zones have a total of 296 trips, and trips are divided into two flows:
 54% of trips (160 trips) originate in SM 01 and end in SM 06.  46% of trips (136) originate in SM 06 and end in SM 01.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 50
SM 02 (Santa Monica Boulevard between Ocean Avenue to 4th Street) and SM 03 (Santa Monica Boulevard between 4th Street and Lincoln Boulevard)
SM 02 is located between Ocean Avenue to 4th Street and SM 03 is located between 4th Street and Lincoln Boulevard. SM 02 consists of retail areas including Santa Monica Place and 3rd Street Promenade. SM 03 consists of a mix of retail spaces, offices, and residential areas.

These two zones experience a total of 201 trips and are divided into two flows:
 50% of trips (101 trips) originate in SM 02 and end in SM 03.  50% of trips (100 trips) originate in SM 03 and end in SM 02.

SM 03 and SM 04 (Santa Monica Boulevard between 4th Street and Lincoln Boulevard)
SM 03 and SM 04 are located between 4th Street and Lincoln Boulevard. Both areas feature a mix of retail spaces including car dealerships, offices, and residential areas.

These two zones experience a total of 463 daily trips and are divided into two flows:
 56% of trips (261 trips) originate in SM 03 and end in SM 04.  44% of trips (207 trips) originate in SM 04 and end in SM 03.

SM 05 and SM 06 (Santa Monica Boulevard between Lincoln Boulevard and 14th Street)
SM 05 and SM 06 are located between Lincoln Boulevard and 14th Street. SM 05 consists of retail including car dealerships, dining, offices, and residential areas.

These two zones have a total of 355 trips and are divided into two flows:
 46% of trips (165 trips) originate in SM 05 and end in SM 06.  54% of trips (190 trips) originate in SM 06 and end in SM 05.

SM 06 (Santa Monica Boulevard between Lincoln Boulevard and 14th Street) and SM 07 (Santa Monica Boulevard between 14th Street and 20th Street)
SM 06 is located between Lincoln Boulevard and 14th Street and SM 07 is located between 14th Street 20th Street. SM 06 consists of retail, dining, offices, and residential areas. SM 07 consists of retail areas including car dealerships, dining, and offices. SM 07 consists of retail areas including retail areas including car dealerships, offices, and residential areas.

These two zones have a total of 313 total trips and are divided into two flows:

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 51
 50% of trips (156 trips) originate in SM 06 and end in SM 07.  50% of trips (157 trips) originate in SM 07 and end in SM 06.

SM 07 (Santa Monica Boulevard between 14th Street and 20th Street) and SM 10 (Santa Monica Boulevard between 20th Street and 26th Street)
SM 07 is located between 14th Street and 20th Street and consists of retail areas including retail areas including car dealerships, offices, and residential areas. SM 10 is located between 20th Street and 26th Street and consists of healthcare facilities such as the UCLA Health Santa Monica Parkside Family Medicine and Providence Saint John’s Cancer Institute, office buildings including Colorado Center, retail and dining areas, and residential areas.

These zones experience 226 total trips and are divided into two trip flows:
 52% of trips (117 trips) originate in SM 07 and end in SM 10.  48% of trips (109 trips) originate in SM 10 and end in SM 07.

SM 09 and SM 10: (Santa Monica Boulevard between 20th Street and 26th Street)
SM 09 and SM 10 are located between 20th Street and 26th Street. SM 09 consists of healthcare facilities such as Providence Saint John’s Health Center, educational facilities like McKinley Elementary School, retail and dining areas, and residential areas. SM 10 consists of healthcare facilities such as the UCLA Health Santa Monica Parkside Family Medicine and Providence Saint John’s Cancer Institute, office buildings including Colorado Center, retail and dining areas, and residential areas.

These zones experience 594 daily trips and are divided into two flows:
 43% of trips (254 trips) originate in SM 09 and end in SM 10.  57% of trips (340 trips) originate in SM 10 and end in SM 09.

SM 09 (Santa Monica Boulevard between 20th Street and 26th Street) and SM 12 (Santa Monica Boulevard between 26th Street and Centinela Avenue)
SM 09 is located between 20th Street and 26th Street, and SM 12 is located between 26th Street and Centinela Avenue. SM 09 includes healthcare facilities, offices, retail, and residential areas. SM 12 features a mix of retail spaces, hotels, and residential areas.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 52
These zones have a total of 325 trips and are divided into two flows:
 57% of trips (204 trips) originate in SM 09 and end in SM 12.  43% of trips (154 trips) originate SM 12 and end in SM 09.

SM 10 (Santa Monica Boulevard between 20th Street to 26th Street) and SM 11 (Santa Monica Boulevard between 26th Street and Centinela Avenue)
SM 10 is located between 20th Street and 26th Street, and SM 11 is located between 26th Street and Centinela Avenue. SM 10 includes healthcare facilities, retail, and offices, and residential. SM 11 has a mix of retail spaces, hotels, and residential areas.

These two zones have a total of 272 trips and are divided into two flows:
 49% of trips (133 trips) originate in SM 10 and end in SM 11.  51% of trips (139 trips) originate in SM 11 and end in SM 10.

SM 11 and SM 12 (Santa Monica Boulevard between 26th Street and Centinela Avenue)
SM 11 and SM 12 are located between 26th Street and Centinela Avenue. Both areas feature a mix of retail spaces, hotels, and residential areas.

These two zones have a total of 477 daily trips and are divided into two flows:
 48% of trips (229 trips) originate in SM 11 and end in SM 12.  52% trips (248 trips) originate in SM 12 and end in SM 11.

Downtown Santa Monica Station and SM 01 (Santa Monica Boulevard between Ocean Avenue to 4th Street)
Downtown Santa Moncia E Line Metro Station is located on Colorado Avenue and 4th Street, and SM 01 is located between Ocean Avenue to 4th Street.

These two zones have a total of 297 trips and are divided into two flows:
 85% of trips (253 trips) originate in the Downtown Santa Monica Station and end in SM 01.
 15% of trips (36 trips) originate in SM 01 and end at the Downtown Santa Monica Station.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 53
6 SYNTHESIS OF SAFETY ISSUES
The following issues elevated by the technical walk audit and safety analysis should be considered when making recommendations for Santa Monica Boulevard.

1. Excessive speed
Excessive speed has been identified as one of the top three collision factors in reported crashes. Speeding is more prevalent in the areas between Cloverfield Boulevard and Centinela Avenue where many drivers were reported traveling 5 to 15 mph over the posted speed limit. Safety walk audit participants also shared concerns about higher vehicle speeds in the eastern portion of Santa Monica Boulevard due to wider lanes and larger block spacing which encourages speeding. Evaluate appropriate traffic calming measures approaching intersections to reduce injury collisions of all types.

2. Collisions involving people walking in the crosswalk Pedestrian crashes are overrepresented in serious injury crashes. Appropriate safety measures should be explored during the recommendation phase to increase driver awareness of pedestrians and compliance with yielding laws.

3. Inconsistent pavement markings and signs
Pavement markings and signs are inconsistent throughout the Santa Monica Boulevard corridor. Some crosswalks and warning and regulatory signage are faded, while crosswalks are missing on north-south running streets. While pedestrian crashes are fewer in unmarked areas compared to marked areas, standardizing crosswalks and signage throughout the corridor could help reduce overall crashes. Additionally, consistent and clear crosswalks and warning and regulatory signage would enhance visibility for both drivers and pedestrians.

4. Side street conflicts
A significant number of crashes involve vehicles making left turns while pedestrians are crossing crosswalks. During the safety walk audit, numerous drivers were observed completing their left turns during permissive phases when the traffic signal turned yellow or red. The lack of sufficient gaps in opposing through movements causes drivers to focus on completing their turns and failing to notice pedestrians crossing the street. For signalized intersections, consider eliminating permissive phases at high pedestrian volumes areas. At unsignalized intersections with side streets, a similar threat is posed by drivers turning off the boulevard where left turn prohibitions can be considered.

Additionally, it is difficult for drivers traveling straight across the boulevard from side streets to find acceptable gaps, resulting in the threat of broadside collisions. Consider implementing right turn only restrictions where the predominant crash type is broadside and/or the resulting out of direction travel impacts are low.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 54

5. Excessive distance between marked crosswalks
Large block spacing causes many pedestrians to walk long distances to access crosswalks, causing many to jaywalk as pedestrians often opt for a shorter route. This behavior is promoted due to the lack of crosswalks running north-south of Santa Monica Boulevard.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 55
7 RANKED INTERSECTION LIST
Table 10 15 Intersections Ranked by Weighted Severity of Reported Crashes Intersection Total
crashes
Total
Crashes
Weighted
(a)
Serious
Injury
Crashes
Pedestrian
Crashes
Bicycle
Crashes
Scooter
Crashes
Motor
Vehicle
Crashes
Most common turning movement
combinations
Most common injurious
collision type
Santa Monica Blvd and 14th St 34 152 2 4 4 1 25 Westbound through – Southbound through (2)
Eastbound turn left – Northbound
through (2)
Broadside (9)
Santa Monica Blvd and 16th St 37 152 1 5 4 0 28 Westbound through – Northbound through (8)
Broadside (17)
Santa Monica Blvd and Lincoln
Blvd
38 144 2 1 1 0 36 Eastbound through – Northbound
through (3)
Broadside (5)
Santa Monica Blvd and 20th St 37 140 1 5 4 0 28 No movement combination with more than 1 crash
Broadside (9)
Santa Monica Blvd and 4th St 56 139 1 3 0 3 50 Westbound through – Southbound through (4)
Broadside (6)
Santa Monica Blvd and 26th St 31 137 2 7 3 0 21 Westbound through – Northbound through (2)
Westbound through – Northbound
turn left (2)
Broadside (9)
Santa Monica Blvd and 15th St 24 122 2 2 0 0 22 Eastbound through – Southbound through (6)
Broadside (11)
Santa Monica Blvd and 18th St 18 112 2 2 2 0 14 Eastbound through – Southbound through (6)
Broadside (9)
Santa Monica Blvd and 5th St 30 109 1 4 3 1 22 Eastbound through – Northbound through (2)
Broadside (5)
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 56
Intersection Total
crashes
Total
Crashes
Weighted
(a)
Serious
Injury
Crashes
Pedestrian
Crashes
Bicycle
Crashes
Scooter
Crashes
Motor
Vehicle
Crashes
Most common turning movement
combinations
Most common injurious
collision type
Santa Monica Blvd and 10th St 18 99 3 5 0 0 13 Westbound through – Southbound through (2)
Westbound through – Northbound
through (2)
Broadside (6)
Santa Monica Blvd and 11th St 17 99 2 4 3 0 10 Westbound through – Northbound through (2)
Broadside (7)
Santa Monica Blvd and 6th 20 97 3 2 4 0 14 Eastbound turn right – Northbound through (1)
Sideswipe (3)
Santa Monica Blvd and Princeton
St
18 92 2 2 2 0 14 No movement combination with
more than 1 crash
Broadside (5)
Santa Monica Blvd and 19th St 19 75 0 3 1 0 15 Westbound through – Northbound through (5)
Broadside (10)
Santa Monica Blvd and Franklin St 14 69 1 1 1 1 11 Eastbound through – Southbound through (3
Broadside (5)
(a) Crashes are weighted by injury severity as follows: fatal and serious injury = 20, other injury = 5, and property damage only = 1.

Number in parenthesis indicates the number of crashes corresponding to that movement combination or collision type.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 57
APPENDIX –COLLISION FACTOR

DEFINITIONS
Auto R/W Violation: Situations where a driver fails to yield the right-of-way to another vehicle as mandated, causing conflicts or collisions.

Driving Under Influence: Operating a vehicle while impaired by alcohol or drugs, significantly increasing crash risk.

Following Too Closely: When a vehicle maintains an insufficient distance from the vehicle ahead, leading to rear-end collisions.

Impeding Traffic: Driving at unusually low speeds or stopping without cause, obstructing the normal flow of traffic.

Improper Passing: Overtaking another vehicle in prohibited zones or without ensuring a clear path, risking side-swipe or head-on collisions.

Improper Turning: Executing turns in a manner that violates traffic rules or endangers others, like turning from the wrong lane.

Not Stated: Cases where the specific cause or contributing factor of the crash isn't specified.

Other Hazardous Movement: Dangerous driving actions not categorized elsewhere, such as sudden swerving.

Other Improper Driving: Driver behaviors that are inappropriate but don't fall under specific infractions, like erratic driving.

Other Than Driver: Crashes attributed to factors not involving driver error, such as mechanical failures or environmental conditions.

Other: Miscellaneous crash causes that don't fit standard categories.

Ped R/W Violation: Situations where a pedestrian fails to yield the right-of-way when required, leading to potential accidents.

Pedestrian Violation: Incidents where a pedestrian's actions, like jaywalking, contribute to a collision.

Traffic Signals and Signs: Crashes resulting from disregarding or misinterpreting traffic control devices, such as running red lights.

Unknown: Instances where the cause of the crash hasn't been determined or recorded.

Unsafe Lane Change: Switching lanes without proper signaling, checking blind spots, or yielding, causing potential collisions.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety and Transit Analysis Final Draft City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 58
Unsafe Speed: Driving at speeds unsuitable for conditions, exceeding limits, or too fast for road/weather conditions.

Unsafe Starting or Backing: Initiating movement from a stationary position or reversing without ensuring the path is clear.

Wrong Side of Road: Driving against the designated direction, leading to potential head-on crashes.

DRAFT

SAFETY STUDY

SAFETY AUDIT REPORT
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 1
Santa Monica Boulevard
Safety Enhancement
Study – Roadway Safety
Audit Report FINAL
January 2025

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 2

INTRODUCTION
Project Overview
The Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study aims to enhance safety, access, and the overall transportation experience along Santa Monica Boulevard from Ocean Avenue to Centinela Avenue, a 2.4-mile corridor. Nelson\Nygaard, along with Michael Baker International, hosted a safety walk audit on November 21, 2024 with representatives from various City of Santa Monica departments, including Fire, Police, Public Works, and Transportation. This memo summarizes the preparation and facilitation of the walk audit.

Safety Walk Audit Purpose and Goals
The purpose of the safety walk audit is to:
 Examine travel behaviors by people using Santa Monica Boulevard.  While walking and taking the Big Blue Bus Route 1, document safety concerns of pedestrians, cyclists, transit users, and drivers along the Santa Monica Boulevard corridor.
 Review five years of crash data and recent community comments to identify highpriority intersections.  Gather and discuss concerns, opportunities, and limitations from key staff across city departments.

The goal of the safety walk audit is to synthesize key observations of behavior and infrastructure along the corridor and across the corridor.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 3
Figure 1 Walk Audit Participants
Figure 2 Santa Monica Police officer writing observations DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 4
Figure 3 Big Blue Bus staff writing observations

METHODOLOGY
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Study Area
The corridor has four travel lanes with left turn pockets at intersections. Curb to curb lane widths are narrower near Ocean Avenue and the downtown area, ranging from 42 feet to 63 feet, and gradually are wider toward Centinela Avenue at 76 feet. Block spacing along the corridor averages about 320 feet.

Land uses along the corridor primarily consist of commercial and office spaces, and public facilities such as libraries, hospitals, and schools. The segment from Lincoln Avenue to 19th Street is unique in that it hosts most of the city’s auto dealerships. The corridor is served by Big Blue Bus and L.A. Metro transit. Bike facilities intersect Santa Monica Boulevard at:
 Ocean Avenue (Class II)
 2nd Street (Class II)
 6th Street (Class II)
 7th Street (Class II)
 Lincoln Boulevard (Class III)
 11th Street (Class II)
 14th Street (Class II)
 17th Street (Class II)
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 5
 Yale Street (Class II)
Walk Audit Extents
Nelson\Nygaard examined data collected from community engagement events and an online survey, and reviewed the Local Safety Roadway Plan (LSRP) and the Vision Zero Plan to inform the intersections city department representatives visited during the safety walk audit. While the Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Study examines the 2.4-mile corridor from Ocean Avenue and Centinela Avenue, the safety walk audit focused on seven intersections, and the segments between them (Figure 4):
 Santa Monica Boulevard and 6th Street
 Santa Monica Boulevard and 16th Street
 Santa Monica Boulevard and 18th Street
 Santa Monica Boulevard and 20th Street
 Santa Monica Boulevard and 23rd Street
 Santa Monica Boulevard and 26th Street
 Santa Monica Boulevard and Stanford Street
Figure 4 Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Study Area
Community Feedback
Prior to facilitating the Safety Audit, the Here LA team hosted an engagement event at the Santa Monica Public Library and an online survey via Social Pinpoint to gather input from community members about safety concerns along Santa Monica Boulevard. An event summary of the “LIGHT UP THE NIGHT” pop up prepared by Here LA will be made available under a separate cover. Common concerns that community members shared included:
 High vehicular speeds
 Difficulty crossing for both pedestrians and cyclists  Lack of crosswalks on all four sides of intersections  Bus amenities in poor condition
 Congestion on various blocks
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 6
 Right-turning drivers fail to see cyclists
This initial feedback helped inform Safety Audit participants on the community’s experiences at key intersections.

Local Safety and Roadway Plan (2022)
The City’s Local Roadway Safety Plan (LSRP) analyzed crash data from 2015 to 2019 to identify corridors and intersections with the highest number of crashes. These included 6th Street, 15th Street, 16th Street, 18th Street, 20th Street, and 26th Street along Santa Monica Boulevard.

Vision Zero Plan (2017)
The Vision Zero Plan identifies near-term efforts to reduce fatal and severe injury crashes to zero by 2026. Crash data from 2006 to 2016 were analyzed to identify locations with high concentrations of crashes. The Santa Monica Boulevard and Cloverfield Boulevard intersection was identified as a high priority intersection (Figure 5).

Figure 5 Vision Zero Priority Map, 2017
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 7
Safety Walk Audit
The safety walk audit occurred on November 21, 2024, from 9 AM to 1 PM with fifteen (15) participants from various city departments in attendance, including:
 Department of Transportation
− Mobility Division
− Big Blue Bus
 Public Works Department
 Fire Department
 Police Department
Figure 6 shows the itinerary for the safety walk audit. Participants gathered at the Santa Monica Public Library for introductions and a presentation detailing the purpose of the safety walk audit with instructions on how to use worksheets for recording observations during the audit.

During the briefing before the walk audit, participants shared one word to describe Santa Monica Boulevard which included:
 Busy (5 times)  Congested
 Legendary  Dealerships
 Iconic  Traffic (2 times)
 Innovative  Dangerous
 Action  Route 1
 Buses
After observing Santa Monica Boulevard at 6th Street, participants rode the Big Blue Bus to 17th Street. After walking approximately one mile to Berkeley Street, they returned by bus to the library.

At the end of the safety walk audit, participants returned to the library to debrief at which time they shared and discussed their observations of the corridor. Responses are synthesized in the ‘Observations’ section of this memo.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 8
Figure 6 Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Walk Audit Itinerary Participants received two sets of worksheets at the beginning of the tour to help facilitate their evaluation of the conditions along Santa Monica Boulevard.  Corridor overview sheet provided data on total crashes, bus stop locations, transit ridership, and 85th percentile speeds.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 9
 Crash diagram worksheets (Figure 7) provided detailed crash types and statistics for the seven intersections included in the tour, along with preliminary community feedback collected during an engagement event at the Santa Monica Public Library hosted by Here LA.

Throughout the safety walk audit, participants documented behavioral observations (i.e., travel patterns of pedestrians, cyclists, rollers, and drivers) and infrastructure observations (i.e., infrastructure that create challenges or opportunities for pedestrians, cyclists, rollers, and drivers) on the crash diagram worksheets.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 10
Figure 7 Example of Crash Diagram Worksheet
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 11

OBSERVATIONS
This section summarizes the general observations from the data and notes collected from the cut sheets as well as the debrief discussion of the corridor and individual intersections conducted at the end of the tour.

Corridor-wide
Behavioral Observations
 Drivers seem to lack sufficient gaps to make left turns and often initiate them when the traffic signal turns yellow or red and/or while pedestrians are in the crosswalk.  While drivers trying to turn wait for pedestrians to clear or gaps in oncoming traffic, they block intersections and crosswalks.
 Pedestrians cross in unmarked and midblock locations.  Some delivery truck operators park along the red curb to unload goods.  Some people walking do not have enough time to finish crossing Santa Monica Boulevard during the pedestrian signal phase.
 Pedestrians do not activate rectangular rapid flash beacons (RRFBs) before crossing.  Some drivers did not yield to pedestrians when the RRFB was activated.  Vehicle speeds are noticeably higher along the eastern end of the corridor.

Infrastructure Observations
 Westbound right turn only signs for the curb lane approaching Lincoln Boulevard are positioned at the far side of the intersection only. Police officers noted they are not sufficiently prominent for enforcement.
 Sidewalk cross slopes are not maintained at 2% across at multiple driveways along the corridor.
 Many parcels have land uses, such as car dealerships, with long driveways.  Curb ramps require people using wheelchairs to travel out of direction to enter crosswalks.
 Some curb ramps are missing truncated domes.
 Inconsistent signage and pavement markings for crosswalks along the corridor.  Many crosswalks are faded.
 Overgrown trees obstruct street lights, traffic signals and RRFBs, limiting drivers’ ability to see them.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 12
 Sight triangles are obstructed by vehicles parked too close to intersections and driveways.
 There is no ‘School Zone’ ends westbound signage for McKinley Elementary School.

Santa Monica Boulevard and 6th Street
Santa Monica Boulevard at 6th Street is controlled by a two phase traffic signal. Santa Monica Boulevard has two lanes in each direction plus a left turn pocket, and 6th Street has one bike lane and one travel lane in each direction with a left turn pocket. Land uses adjacent to the intersection include offices, retail, and library on Santa Monica Boulevard and retail and residential on 6th Street. Loading and/or parking are permitted starting at about 80 feet from the intersection. There are high visibility crosswalks and advance stop bars at all legs. Signals include leading pedestrian intervals (LPI’s) for pedestrians crossing either street. xx Behavioral Observations
Participants observed drivers traveling in the incorrect lanes, blocking intersections and crosswalks. In addition, drivers turning left to and from Santa Monica Boulevard had difficulty executing their movements during the permissive phases due to insufficient gaps in the opposing through movement. Pedestrians also lacked sufficient time to cross the street during the flash-don’t-walk phase (Figure 8). Pedestrians worry about missing the bus due to long signal phases. DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 13
Figure 8 Pedestrians Crossing Street
Infrastructure Observations
Some infrastructure was in poor condition, such as faded pavement markings and missing truncated domes at the eastern leg of the intersection. Detailed behavioral and infrastructure observations are shown in Figure 9.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 14
Figure 9 Behavioral and Infrastructure Observations at Santa Monica Boulevard and 6th Street DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 15
Santa Monica Boulevard and 16th Street
Santa Monica Boulevard is an arterial road, while 16th Street is a neighborhood street, and they are a two-way street stop-controlled intersection with an RRFB on the eastern leg. Santa Monica Boulevard is free flowing with two lanes in each direction, while 16th street has one travel lane in each direction. Santa Monica Boulevard adjacent to this intersection has car dealerships and retail businesses and 16th Street has residential areas. Loading and/or parking are permitted starting at about 50 feet from the corner. There are three high visibility crosswalks and advance stop bars on the north, south, and eastern legs. The eastern crosswalk has a pedestrian refuge island.

Behavioral Observations
People driving fail to yield to pedestrians crossing the street. Drivers were also observed unable to complete a left turn from 16th Street due to high volumes of traffic and inadequate gaps on Santa Monica Boulevard, causing them to conduct a right turn instead. Pedestrians were also seen crossing at the unmarked area on the western leg of the intersection which caused some conflicts with vehicles. Additionally, pedestrians and individuals who use a wheelchair cross the street without activating the rectangular rapid flash beacon (RRFB) because the button is far from the curb ramp (Figure 10).

Figure 10 Individual in a Wheelchair Waiting to Cross the Street and Path of Travel Diagram Infrastructure Observations
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 16
While the crosswalk on the east side of Santa Monica Boulevard is enhanced with an RRFB, the path of travel from the pushbutton on the south side of the street to the street level via the truncated domes requires 30’ of additional travel for people using wheelchairs. The diagonal crosswalk also requires navigation in the gutter to move to the crosswalk. Detailed behavioral and infrastructure observations are shown in Figure 11.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 17
Figure 11 Behavioral and Infrastructure Observations at Santa Monica Boulevard and 16th Street DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 18
Santa Monica Boulevard and 18th Street
Santa Monica Boulevard at 18th Street is two-way street stop-controlled with an RFFB on the eastern leg. Santa Monica Boulevard is an arterial with two lanes in each direction, and 18th Street is a neighborhood street with one travel lane in each direction. Santa Monica Boulevard adjacent to this intersection primarily consists of car dealerships and retail areas, and 18th Street primarily consists of residential areas. Loading and/or parking are permitted starting at about 30 feet from the corner. It has three high visibility crosswalks, advance stop bars on the north and south legs, and advance yield lines (shark teeth) on the west and east leg.

Behavioral Observations
Drivers were observed obstructing pedestrian access by failing to yield to pedestrians and blocking crosswalks. Some vehicles parked on curb cuts, blocking sidewalk access and vehicles exiting parking lots. Additionally, parked vehicles caused visibility issues as they obstructed the views of drivers attempting left turns.

Infrastructure Observations
Truncated domes are missing on three of the four diagonal curb ramps. One of the RFFBs did not turn on when activated due to insufficient solar power caused by trees and buildings blocking sunlight (Figure 12). Detailed behavioral and infrastructure observations are shown in Figure 13.

Figure 12 RRFB not Activated
DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 19
Figure 13 Behavioral and Infrastructure Observations at Santa Monica Boulevard and 18th Street DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 20
Santa Monica Boulevard and 20th Street
Santa Monica Boulevard at 20th Street is controlled by a traffic signal. Both Santa Monica Boulevard, an arterial, and 20th Street, a secondary avenue, are two lanes in each direction with a left turn pocket on each approach. Protected / permissive left turn phasing exists for all approaches. Santa Monica Boulevard’s land uses adjacent to this intersection consist of offices and retail, and 20th Street consists of offices and residential areas. Loading and/or parking are permitted starting at about 140 feet from the southern corner after the bus stop. It has high visibility crosswalks and advance stop bars at all legs.

Behavioral Observations
Drivers stop within the crosswalk at the northern leg of the intersection, blocking pedestrian access. Drivers had difficulty conducting left turns during the permissive phases due to insufficient gaps in the opposing through movement, causing some to maneuver around other vehicles without checking for pedestrians (Figure 14). Immediately east of the intersection, one driver made an illegal midblock U-turn, while another driver dropped off a passenger in a nostopping zone. The Police Department representative in attendance commented that this is a common occurrence and often blocks traffic in the through-lanes.

Figure 14 Driver Conducting a Left Turn during a Yellow Light Infrastructure Observations
Truncated domes are only installed at the northwest curb ramp, and none are present at the other three curb ramps. Additionally, the full tree canopy under the safety lighting may prevent DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 21
a full lighting of the crosswalk at night. Detailed behavioral and infrastructure observations are shown in Figure 15.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 22
Figure 15 Behavioral and Infrastructure Observations at Santa Monica Boulevard and 20th Street DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 23
Santa Monica Boulevard and 23rd Street
Santa Monica Boulevard at 23rd Street is controlled by a traffic signal, with no protected phases for turns. Santa Monica Boulevard, an arterial has two lanes in each direction with a left turn pocket on the east and west legs. The north and south legs of 23rd Street, a neighborhood street, are offset by 30 feet. The north leg is three lanes including one northbound lane and southbound through-left and right turn only lanes. The south leg is one way southbound. Santa Moncia Boulevard’s land uses adjacent to this intersection consist of a hospital, offices, and retail, and 23rd Street has residential areas. Loading and/or parking are permitted and varies starting at about 30-100 feet from the corner. It has high visibility crosswalks and advance stop bars at north, south, and west legs.

Behavioral Observations
Drivers approach this intersection from the east at high speeds and then periodically block the intersection due to downstream queues at 21st Street, despite the presence of ‘Keep Clear’ pavement markings and enforcement signs. Eastbound drivers making left turns onto 23rd Street also block the intersection. Observers noted a delivery truck parked along the red curb to unload goods, and a driver turning right onto 23rd Street failed to yield to pedestrians.

Participants noted that high vehicular volumes occur during pick-up and drop-off times at McKinley Elementary School.

Infrastructure Observations
The high-visibility crosswalk markings on the southern side of the intersection are faded and multiple corners lack truncated domes, posing accessibility barriers for pedestrians and individuals with mobility devices or cognitive challenges (Figure 16). An overgrown tree on the northwest sidewalk obstructs the traffic signal while its roots have cracked and caused vertical uplift of the sidewalks, creating a tripping hazard.

McKinley Elementary School is located on Santa Monica Boulevard between 23rd Street and Chelsea Avenue to the east. The school zone ends sign is missing westbound and there are no school zone speed limit signs eastbound for the school. Detailed behavioral and infrastructure observations are shown in Figure 17.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 24
Figure 16 Faded Crosswalks and Missing Truncated Domes at 23rd Street DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 25
Figure 17 Behavioral and Infrastructure Observations at Santa Monica Boulevard and 23rd Street DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 26
Santa Monica Boulevard and 26th Street
Santa Monica Boulevard at 26th Street is controlled by a traffic signal which includes protected/permissive left turn phases on all approaches. Santa Monica Boulevard, an arterial, is two lanes in each direction plus a left turn pocket, and 26th Street, a neighborhood street, has Class III bicycle facilities (aka “sharrows”) and one travel lane in each direction with dedicated right-turn and left-turn pockets. Santa Monica Boulevard adjacent to this intersection has retail stores, and 26th Street has residential areas. Loading and/or parking are permitted starting at about 75 feet from the corner. It has high visibility crosswalks and advance stop bars at all legs.

Behavioral Observations
People driving who were attempting left turns on to or off of Santa Monica Boulevard during permissive phases completed their turns when the traffic signal turned yellow or red, after waiting in the intersection. Additionally, vehicles were unable to enter the intersection due to upstream queuing and stopped in the crosswalks, blocking pedestrian access (Figure 18).

Figure 18 Driver Blocking Crosswalk
Infrastructure Observations
Truncated domes are missing at the southwest corner of the intersection, and crosswalks were faded. Detailed behavioral and infrastructure observations are shown in Figure 19.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 27
Figure 19 Behavioral and Infrastructure Observations at Santa Monica Boulevard and 26th Street DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 28
Santa Monica Boulevard and Stanford Street
Santa Monica Boulevard, an artierial, is not controlled at this location. As a two-way two lane neighborhood street, Stanford Street is stop-controlled. Santa Monica Boulevard is two lanes in each direction plus a left turn pocket, Stanford Street has one travel lane in each direction.

Santa Monica Boulevard’s land uses adjacent to this intersection consist of hotels, retail, and car dealerships, and Stanford Street has residential areas. This location has higher pedestrian demand due to the recent development of the coffee shop and yoga studio located at the southwest corner of the intersection. Loading and/or parking are permitted starting at about 30 feet from the corner. It has high visibility crosswalks and advance stop bars at the north and south legs only.

Behavioral Observations
No crosswalks are provided across Santa Monica Boulevard; however pedestrians were observed crossing at unmarked areas, causing safety concerns (Figure 20).

Figure 20 Pedestrian crossing Stanford Street

Infrastructure Observations
Curb ramps are not aligned with crosswalks, and truncated domes are missing at the western leg of the intersection. Detailed behavioral and infrastructure observations are shown in Figure 21.

DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 29
Figure 21 Behavioral and Infrastructure Observations at Santa Monica Boulevard and Stanford Street DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 30

CONCLUSION
Key Safety Issues and Opportunities
Based on the observations from the walk audit, potential improvement opportunities are listed below to improve safety, accessibility, and the overall travel experience along Santa Monica Boulevard.

Address inconsistent marked crosswalk installations.

All along the corridor, faded crosswalks limit their visibility to drivers. Future crosswalk maintenance and upgrades should include a consistent application of signs and pavement markings, including high visibility crosswalks, warning and regulatory signs, and sharks-teeth advanced yield bars.

Review existing marked crosswalks to determine their sufficiency according to Caltrans and Federal Highway Administration guidance. This guidance recommends countermeasures proven to increase pedestrian safety at marked crosswalks, dependent on speed, volume, number of lanes, and presence of a median.

Explore installation of marked crosswalks across north-south running streets to increase awareness for turning drivers that people are crossing along Santa Monica Boulevard.

Finally, evaluate the possibility of removing crossing prohibitions to legalize crossings at all four corners.

Explore strategies to create safer turning movements across the boulevard.

At many locations, drivers blocked intersections and crosswalks, while awaiting a sufficient gap to make a left turn. This causes conflicts with other road users, notably pedestrians and rollers.

At signalized locations, consider removing the permissive left turn phase to reduce crosswalk blocking, and the completion of turns during the red phase. At unsignalized locations, consider eliminating left turns at congested intersections, high-volume pedestrian intersections, and transit transfer points.

Install additional enhanced marked crosswalk opportunities Using best practice crossing spacing guidance, make and enhance additional crosswalks along Santa Monica Boulevard to increase pedestrian access at significant crossing locations.

Improve pedestrian infrastructure to meet best universal design practices.

Many intersections along Santa Monica Boulevard have incomplete infrastructure such as missing truncated domes and diagonal ramps that create a misalignment with crosswalks for DRAFT
Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study – Roadway Safety Audit Report DRAFT City of Santa Monica
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 31
people using the ramps. Create a more universal design for all users by replacing uneven sidewalk patches and diagonal access ramps.

Maintain landscape and infrastructure to improve visibility.

Overgrown trees obstruct drivers’ views of traffic signals, block solar energy for RRFBs, and block safety lighting from overhead streetlights. Additionally, parked vehicles near the intersection reduce visibility issues for both turning vehicles and pedestrians. The City of Santa Monica can enforce tree maintenance schedules and implement more conservative sight triangle dimensions to improve sightlines near intersections.

Develop strategies to improve traffic and safety around McKinley Elementary School.

The project can explore strategies needed to manage traffic during peak hours and install appropriate signage to improve safety and awareness around the school during pick-up and drop-off times.

Support transit riders.

The City of Santa Monica can coordinate internally and collaborate with LA Metro to align bus schedules, allowing passengers to easily connect to their transfer bus without concern of missing the bus or experiencing unnecessary delays. Other transit supportive concepts would include moving high transfer stops to the same crosswalk, to reduce delay for riders, and increase confidence that the signal and marked crossing infrastructure is designed to assure safe and efficient connections.

Address pedestrian signal wait times.

Evaluate and adjust pedestrian signal timing at intersection to reduce long wait times that may cause riders to cross against the signal to avoid missing a bus. Additionally, consider extending the pedestrian crossing phase to allow sufficient time for pedestrians to cross the street during the pedestrian phase.

DRAFT
APPENDIX c.

OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
DRAFT
Level of Service Operations Assessment
Introduction
As part of the Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study, Michael Baker International has completed a traffic operations analysis to evaluate the baseline conditions of the corridor under the existing geometric conditions and compare the forecast vehicular operations with the proposed improvements. The overall study area covers the 2.4-mile corridor from Ocean Avenue to Centinela Avenue and includes a total of 29 study intersections consisting of 20 signalized locations and 9 unsignalized locations. This analysis considered existing count data as well as forecast future 2050 conditions.

Intersection Analysis Methodology
The HCM analysis methodology describes the operation of an intersection using a range of level of service from LOS A (free-flow conditions) to LOS F (severely congested conditions), based on the corresponding stopped delay, in terms of seconds per vehicle (sec/veh). The criteria for the LOS grade designations are provided in Table 1.

Synchro/SimTraffic version 12 analysis software was used to assess the intersection along the corridor.

Synchro reports average delays for a signalized intersection, which correspond to a particular LOS, to describe the overall operation of an intersection. Unsignalized intersection LOS for all-way stops is based on the average delay for all approaches. Delay for one-way or two-way stop controlled intersections is based on available gaps in traffic flow on the non-controlled approach and LOS is based on the approach with the worst delay.

Table 1: Level of Service Criteria for Intersections
Level of
Service
Control Delay (seconds/vehicle)
Description Signalized
Intersections
Unsignalized &
Roundabouts
LOS A < 10 < 10 Operations with very low delay and most vehicles do not stop.

LOS B >10 and ≤ 20 >10 and ≤ 15 Operations with good progression but with some restricted movements.

LOS C >20 and ≤ 35 >15 and ≤ 25 Operations where a significant number of vehicles are stopping with some backup and light congestion.

LOS D >35 and ≤55 >25 and ≤35
Operations where congestion is noticeable, longer delays occur, and many vehicles stop. The proportion of vehicles not stopping.

LOS E >55 and ≤ 80 >35 and ≤ 50 Operations where there is significant delay, extensive queuing, and poor progression.

LOS F >80 >50 Operations that are unacceptable to most drivers, when the arrival rates exceed the capacity of the intersection
Source: Highway Capacity Manual, 7th Edition.

Note: If the volume-to-capacity ratio (v/c) > 1.0, LOS = F.

DRAFT
Existing Conditions
To determine the existing operations of the study intersections, intersection turning movement counts were collected for weekdays and weekends. Weekday counts were collected on Tuesday, March 25, 2025, from 7:30 AM to 9:30 AM and from 5:00 PM to 7:00 PM. Weekend counts were collected on Saturday March 22, 2025, from 1:00 PM and 5:00 PM. The volumes utilized in this analysis were taken from the highest hour within the peak periods for weekday AM and PM conditions, as well as the Weekend Mid-Day condition.

The intersection data collection included pedestrian and bicycle counts, as well as a vehicle breakdown of passenger cars, heavy trucks, and transit vehicles. The count data was used as the basis for the Existing Year 2025 peak hour volumes.

Future Forecast 2050 Conditions
The Future Baseline Year 2050 volumes were developed by applying a linear annual growth rate of 0.33% per year to the Existing Year 2025 traffic volumes. This results in a total growth of approximately 8.25% between 2025 and 2050. The growth rate was determined based on Southern California Associate of Governments’ socio-economic data for the City of Santa Monica.

The analysis results in the following table show operations along the corridor for both conditions. As shown, under the existing baseline conditions (without the proposed improvements), poor operations are expected at various locations throughout the corridor, primarily stop-controlled intersections. With the implementation of the proposed improvements, the operations along the corridor are anticipated to generally improve.

DRAFT
Traffic Operation Analysis Results
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay3 LOS Delay3 LOS Delay3 LOS Delay3 LOS Delay 3 LOS Delay3 LOS
1 Santa Monica Blvd / Ocean Ave Signal 14.9 B 15.4 B 15.7 B 16.4 B 15.1 B 15.6 B 15.2 B 17.4 B 16.1 B 16.7 B 17.0 B 16.9 B 2 Santa Monica Blvd / 2nd St Signal 22.9 C 26.0 C 24.0 C 22.3 C 25.1 C 24.4 C 23.1 C 26.3 C 24.4 C 22.3 C 28.2 C 26.8 C 3 Santa Monica Blvd / 3rd St Promenade Signal 0.9 A 1.1 A 1.1 A 1.9 A 2.1 A 2.4 A 0.9 A 1.1 A 1.1 A 1.9 A 2.1 A 2.5 A 4 Santa Monica Blvd / 4th St Signal 30.9 C 26.6 C 26.1 C 30.8 C 28.2 C 26.9 C 30.7 C 27.4 C 26.8 C 30.9 C 30.0 C 29.7 C 5 Santa Monica Blvd / 5th St Signal 23.9 C 25.0 C 24.5 C 26.6 C 24.5 C 24.6 C 23.6 C 25.2 C 25.3 C 26.3 C 26.2 C 26.7 C 6 Santa Monica Blvd / 6th St Signal 13.0 B 15.6 B 10.4 B 16.4 B 23.9 C 14.8 B 13.0 B 15.6 B 10.4 B 16.6 B 25.1 C 15.6 B 7 Santa Monica Blvd / 7th St Signal 14.1 B 15.7 B 15.6 B 18.7 B 19.2 B 19.1 B 14.1 B 15.9 B 15.9 B 20.8 C 20.4 C 19.0 B 8 Santa Monica Blvd / Lincoln Blvd Signal 25.1 C 23.1 C 22.3 C 36.9 D 43.1 D 37.9 D 29.6 C 25.2 C 23.7 C 47.7 D 50.9 D 41.9 D 9 Santa Monica Blvd / 10th St TWSC119.7 C 22.6 C 21.3 C 12.7 B 14.2 B 13.7 B 22.1 C 26.4 D 24.8 C 13.3 B 15.0 C 14.4 B 10 Santa Monica Blvd / 11th St Signal 20.0 C 19.2 B 18.7 B 33.7 C 37.8 D 33.4 C 20.5 C 18.9 B 18.9 B 38.0 C 39.5 D 51.9 D 11 Santa Monica Blvd / 14th St Signal 16.9 B 16.2 B 9.4 A 28.6 C 27.8 C 27.9 C 17.0 B 16.5 B 10.7 B 28.4 C 30.7 C 27.9 C 12 Santa Monica Blvd / 15th St TWSC1

46.7 E 57.4 F 135.6 F 11.9 B 12.9 B 13.6 B 74.9 F 95.1 F 279.5 F 12.3 B 13.4 B 14.3 B 13 Santa Monica Blvd / 16th St TWSC137.8 E 99.3 F 84.1 F 11.8 B 12.9 B 13.2 B 51.2 F 189.1 F 157.6 F 12.1 B 13.4 B 13.9 B 14 Santa Monica Blvd / 17th St Signal 17.0 B 16.8 B 15.2 B 23.3 C 18.7 B 20.4 C 18.0 B 18.4 B 16.3 B 23.1 C 26.1 C 23.0 C 15 Santa Monica Blvd / 18th St TWSC124.1 C 39.5 E 38.5 E 11.3 B 12.8 B 13.3 B 28.8 D 50.8 F 48.0 E 11.7 B 13.3 B 14.0 B 16 Santa Monica Blvd / 19th St TWSC1

30.9 D 48.8 E 30.4 D 12.1 B 13.0 B 13.2 B 41.7 E 74.1 F 39.5 E 12.6 B 13.6 B 13.8 B 17 Santa Monica Blvd / 20th St Signal 39.0 D 27.3 C 32.1 C 36.8 D 32.6 C 27.3 C 39.3 D 29.2 C 33.9 C 39.6 D 37.3 D 31.7 C 18 Santa Monica Blvd / 21st St Signal 2.8 A 2.3 A 6.6 A 6.6 A 6.7 A 6.3 A 13.4 B 2.3 A 6.7 A 8.2 A 5.2 A 5.4 A 19 Santa Monica Blvd / 22nd St Signal 2.7 A 2.7 A 4.3 A 7.3 A 7.9 A 5.0 A 3.3 A 2.6 A 5.7 A 7.9 A 5.2 A 2.9 A 20 Santa Monica Blvd / 23rd St Signal 11.6 B 5.7 A 11.5 B 13.2 B 12.2 B 12.1 B 13.1 B 6.0 A 11.7 B 13.7 B 10.6 B 9.8 A 21 Santa Monica Blvd / Cloverfield Blvd Signal 6.3 A 9.5 A 0.4 A 32.4 C 38.5 D 41.4 D 6.7 A 10.0 B 0.5 A 36.4 D 55.9 E 51.6 D 22 Santa Monica Blvd / Chelsea Ave TWSC/Signal2

29.3 D 27.6 D 27.5 D 23.9 C 50.2 D 43.9 D 37.8 E 38.8 E 37.2 E 32.1 C 48.0 D 56.8 E 23 Santa Monica Blvd / 26th St Signal 25.8 C 23.6 C 22.8 C 25.1 C 25.8 C 24.5 C 24.7 C 23.8 C 23.8 C 27.6 C 23.7 C 24.3 C 24 Santa Monica Blvd / Princeton St TWSC133.7 D 57.7 F 34.3 D 15.9 C 14.2 B 13.1 B 40.8 E 85.8 F 42.4 E 17.0 C 15.1 C 13.7 B 25 Santa Monica Blvd / Yale St Signal 17.9 B 23.2 C 12.8 B 14.2 B 18.8 B 12.3 B 20.8 C 24.8 C 13.6 B 15.9 B 20.8 C 13.0 B 26 Santa Monica Blvd / Stanford St TWSC145.7 E 80.1 F 42.8 E 13.9 B 14.7 B 12.6 B 67.9 F 125.5 F 58.3 F 14.7 B 15.6 C 13.2 B 27 Santa Monica Blvd / Berkeley St Signal 10.9 B 12.4 B 11.5 B 15.6 B 13.1 B 15.9 B 11.2 B 13.2 B 12.0 B 16.1 B 13.4 B 16.1 B 28 Santa Monica Blvd / Franklin St TWSC138.3 E 95.1 F 48.9 E 14.1 B 14.8 B 13.1 B 46.7 E 194.4 F 67.9 F 15.0 C 15.7 C 13.7 B 29 Santa Monica Blvd / Centinela Ave Signal 21.6 C 22.0 C 16.8 B 22.2 C 23.6 C 17.4 B 20.6 C 25.3 C 17.7 B 21.2 C 28.2 C 18.5 B Note: Deficient intersection oepration indicated in red shading. 1 TWSC = Two Way Stop Control
2 The intesection of Santa Monica Blvd & Chelsea Blvd is Two Way Stop Controlled in the existing condition and singalized in the With Improvement condition. 3 Delay shown as average seconds of delay per vehicle
Intersection Weekday AM Weekday PM Weekend Midday Weekday AM Existing Year 2025
Control Weekday AM Weekday PM Weekend Midday Weekday PM Future Year 2050 With Improvements
Weekend Midday
Future Year 2050
Weekday AM Weekday PM Weekend Midday
Existing Year 2025 With Improvements
DRAFT
APPENDIX d.

COST ESTIMATES
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $1,614,500 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $794,000 TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $1,078,000 TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $560,000 RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $2,692,500 RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $1,354,000 25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $673,125 25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $338,500 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $3,365,625 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $1,692,500 $5,058,125
TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $3,005,735 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $710,700 TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $1,975,000 TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $448,000 RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $4,980,735 RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $1,158,700 25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $1,245,184 25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $289,675 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $6,225,919 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $1,448,375 $7,674,294
PHASE 1 & 2 TOTAL $12,732,419
PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL
FOCUS INTERSECTIONS (PHASE 1) ADDED INTERSECTIONS (PHASE 1) FOCUS INTERSECTIONS (PHASE 2) ADDED INTERSECTIONS (PHASE 2) DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $1,000.00 $1,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $3,000.00 $3,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $1,000.00 $1,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $1,000.00 $1,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $2,000.00 $2,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Lead Pestrian Interval's) $10,000.00 $10,000 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $10,000
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $8,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $18,000
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $4,500
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $22,500
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / Ocean Avenue (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $1,000.00 $1,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $3,000.00 $3,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $1,000.00 $1,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $1,000.00 $1,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $2,000.00 $2,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (No Right-Turn on Red) $10,000.00 $10,000 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $10,000
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $8,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $18,000
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $4,500
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $22,500
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 2nd Street (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $1,000.00 $1,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $3,000.00 $3,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $1,000.00 $1,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $1,000.00 $1,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $2,000.00 $2,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (No Right-Turn on Red) $10,000.00 $10,000 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $10,000
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $8,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $18,000
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $4,500
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $22,500
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 4th Street (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $4,000.00 $4,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $20,000.00 $20,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $4,000.00 $4,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $7,000.00 $7,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $10,000.00 $10,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $28,000.00 $28,000
7 1 LS Red Paint $5,000.00 $5,000
8 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Intersection Scramble) $22,500.00 $22,500 9 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (No Right-Turn on Red) $10,000.00 $10,000 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $65,500
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $45,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $110,500
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $27,625
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $138,125

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 5th Street (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $14,000.00 $14,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $79,000.00 $79,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $14,000.00 $14,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $27,000.00 $27,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $40,000.00 $40,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $37,000.00 $37,000
7 1 LS Green Paint $5,000.00 $5,000
8 1 LS Red Paint $23,000.00 $23,000
9 2 EA PCC Bus Pad $40,000.00 $80,000
10 1 EA Bus Stop Relocation $10,000.00 $10,000
11 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Intersection Scramble) $22,500.00 $22,500 12 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (No Right-Turn on Red) $10,000.00 $10,000 13 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Accessible Pedestrian Signal and Pedestrian Recall) $75,000.00 $75,000 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $262,500
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $174,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $436,500
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $109,125
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $545,625
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $6,000.00 $6,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $35,000.00 $35,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $6,000.00 $6,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $12,000.00 $12,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $18,000.00 $18,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 300 LF Removal of Curb & Gutter $12.00 $3,600 *Curb & gutter removal for curb extenstions. 7 100 CY Removal of AC Pavement, Base & Subgrade (14") $350.00 $35,000 *AC pavement removal for curb extenstions & bus pads. 8 4 EA ADA Compliant Curb Ramp $9,000.00 $36,000
9 1 EA Curb Extension (Full Corner Bulb-out) $18,000.00 $18,000 10 1 EA Tranist Curb Extention $25,000.00 $25,000
TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $117,600
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $77,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $194,600
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $48,650
PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $243,250
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 20% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $545,625 PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 20% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $243,250 TOTAL $788,875

GENERAL

DEMOLITION

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 6th St (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 6th St (PHASE 2) DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $7,000.00 $7,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $41,000.00 $41,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $7,000.00 $7,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $14,000.00 $14,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $21,000.00 $21,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $29,000.00 $29,000
7 1 LS Green Paint $2,000.00 $2,000
8 1 LS Red Paint $5,000.00 $5,000
9 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Intersection Scramble) $22,500.00 $22,500 10 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Accessible Pedestrian Signal and Pedestrian Recall) $75,000.00 $75,000 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $133,500
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $90,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $223,500
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $55,875
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $279,375
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 7th Street (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $9,000.00 $9,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $52,000.00 $52,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $9,000.00 $9,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $18,000.00 $18,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $27,000.00 $27,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $32,000.00 $32,000
7 1 LS Red Paint $14,000.00 $14,000
8 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Lead Pedestrian Interval's) $10,000.00 $10,000 9 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Projected Left-turns) $45,000.00 $45,000 10 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Accessible Pedestrian Signal and Pedestrian Recall) $75,000.00 $75,000 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $176,000
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $115,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $291,000
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $72,750
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $363,750
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $11,000.00 $11,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $66,000.00 $66,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $11,000.00 $11,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $22,000.00 $22,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $33,000.00 $33,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 105 LF Removal of Curb & Gutter $12.00 $1,260 *Curb & gutter removal for curb extensions. 7 50 CY Removal of AC Pavement, Base & Subgrade (14") $350.00 $17,500 *AC pavement removal for curb extenstions & bus pads. 8 8 EA ADA Compliant Curb Ramp $9,000.00 $72,000
9 1 EA Transit Curb Extension $25,000.00 $25,000
10 2 EA PCC Bus Pad $40,000.00 $80,000
11 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Queue Jump) $22,500.00 $22,500 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $218,260
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $143,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $361,260
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $90,315
PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $451,575
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $363,750 PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $451,575 TOTAL $815,325

DEMOLITION

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / Lincoln Boulevard (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / Lincoln Boulevard (PHASE 2)

GENERAL
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $3,000.00 $3,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $18,000.00 $18,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $3,000.00 $3,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $6,000.00 $6,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $9,000.00 $9,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $34,000.00 $34,000
7 1 LS Red Paint $18,000.00 $18,000
8 16 EA Bollards $200.00 $3,200
9 12 EA Hardened Centerline Treatments $200.00 $2,400
TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $57,600
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $39,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $96,600
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $24,150
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $120,750
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $7,000.00 $7,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $41,000.00 $41,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $7,000.00 $7,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $14,000.00 $14,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $3,000.00 $3,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 100 LF Removal of Curb & Gutter $12.00 $1,200 *Curb & gutter removal for curb extenstions. 7 30 CY Removal of AC Pavement, Base & Subgrade (14") $350.00 $10,500 *AC pavement removal for curb extenstions. 8 6 EA ADA Compliant Curb Ramp $9,000.00 $54,000
9 2 EA Curb Extension (Bulb-out) $11,000.00 $22,000
10 1 EA Relocate Fire Hydrant $20,000.00 $20,000
11 2 EA Relocate Light Pole $15,000.00 $30,000
TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $137,700
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $72,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $209,700
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $52,425
PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $262,125
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $120,750 PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $262,125 TOTAL $382,875

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS

GENERAL

DEMOLITION
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 9th Street (PHASE 2) Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 9th Street (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $6,000.00 $6,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $36,000.00 $36,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $6,000.00 $6,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $12,000.00 $12,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $18,000.00 $18,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $34,000.00 $34,000
7 1 LS Red Paint $18,000.00 $18,000
8 12 EA Hardened Centerline Treatments $200.00 $2,400 *Assumes use of bollards for centerline treatments. 9 16 EA Bollards $200.00 $3,200
9 2 EA Proposed Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacon (RRFB) $30,000.00 $60,000 *Price per RRFB head.

TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $117,600
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $78,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $195,600
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $48,900
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $244,500
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $9,000.00 $9,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $49,000.00 $49,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $9,000.00 $9,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $17,000.00 $17,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $25,000.00 $25,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 180 LF Removal of Curb & Gutter $12.00 $2,160 *Curb & gutter removal for curb extenstions. 7 60 CY Removal of AC Pavement, Base & Subgrade (14") $350.00 $21,000 *AC pavement removal for curb extenstions. 8 6 EA ADA Compliant Curb Ramp $9,000.00 $54,000
9 1 EA Curb Extension (Bulb-out) $11,000.00 $11,000
10 1 EA Curb Extension (Full Corner Bulb-out) $18,000.00 $18,000 11 1 EA Relocate Catch Basin $60,000.00 $60,000 *Assumes use of bollards for centerline treatments.

TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $166,160
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $109,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $275,160
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $68,790
PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $343,950
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $244,500 PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $343,950 TOTAL $588,450

DEMOLITION

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 10th St (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 10th St (PHASE 2)

GENERAL
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes

GENERAL
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $10,000.00 $10,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $56,000.00 $56,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $10,000.00 $10,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $19,000.00 $19,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $29,000.00 $29,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general.

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
6 1 LS Signing & Striping $27,000.00 $27,000
7 1 LS Green Paint $4,000.00 $4,000
8 1 LS Red Paint $17,000.00 $17,000
9 1 EA Bus Stop Relocation $10,000.00 $10,000

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
10 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Lead Pestrian Interval's) $10,000.00 $10,000 11 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Projected Left-turns) $45,000.00 $45,000 12 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Accessible Pedestrian Signal and Pedestrian Recall) $75,000.00 $75,000 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $188,000
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $124,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $312,000
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $78,000
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $390,000
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes

GENERAL
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $6,000.00 $6,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $35,000.00 $35,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $6,000.00 $6,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $12,000.00 $12,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $18,000.00 $18,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general.

DEMOLITION
6 10 CY Removal of AC Pavement, Base & Subgrade (14") $350.00 $3,500 *Full depth replacement used for bus pads.

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
7 8 EA ADA Compliant Curb Ramp $9,000.00 $72,000
8 1 EA PCC Bus Pad $40,000.00 $40,000
TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $115,500
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $77,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $192,500
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $48,125
PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $240,625
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 20% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $390,000 PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 20% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $240,625 TOTAL $630,625
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 11th St (PHASE 2) Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 11th St (PHASE 1) DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $5,000.00 $5,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $27,000.00 $27,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $5,000.00 $5,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $9,000.00 $9,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $14,000.00 $14,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $27,000.00 $27,000
7 1 LS Red Paint $18,000.00 $18,000
8 16 EA Bollards $200.00 $3,200
9 12 EA Hardened Centerline Treatments $200.00 $2,400
10 2 EA Proposed Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacon (RRFB) $20,000.00 $40,000 *Price per RRFB head.

TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $90,600
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $60,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $150,600
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $37,650
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $188,250
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $8,000.00 $8,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $44,000.00 $44,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $7,000.00 $7,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $15,000.00 $15,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $23,000.00 $23,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 100 LF Removal of Curb & Gutter $6.00 $600 *Curb & gutter removal for curb extenstions. 7 30 CY Removal of AC Pavement, Base & Subgrade (14") $350.00 $10,500 *AC pavement removal for curb extenstions. 8 6 EA ADA Compliant Curb Ramp $9,000.00 $54,000
9 2 EA Curb Extension (Bulb-out) $11,000.00 $22,000
10 1 EA Relocate Catch Basin $60,000.00 $60,000
TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $147,100
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $97,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $244,100
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $61,025
PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $305,125
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $188,250 PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $305,125 TOTAL $493,375

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 12th Street (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 12th Street (PHASE 2)

GENERAL

DEMOLITION
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $3,000.00 $3,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $16,000.00 $16,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $3,000.00 $3,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $6,000.00 $6,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $8,000.00 $8,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $27,000.00 $27,000
7 1 LS Red Paint $18,000.00 $18,000
8 16 EA Bollards $200.00 $3,200
9 12 EA Hardened Centerline Treatments $200.00 $2,400
TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $50,600
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $36,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $86,600
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $21,650
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $108,250
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $10,000.00 $10,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $59,000.00 $59,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $10,000.00 $10,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $20,000.00 $20,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $30,000.00 $30,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 100 LF Removal of Curb & Gutter $12.00 $1,200 *Curb & gutter removal for curb extenstions. 7 30 CY Removal of AC Pavement, Base & Subgrade (14") $350.00 $10,500 *AC pavement removal for curb extenstions. 8 6 EA ADA Compliant Curb Ramp $9,000.00 $54,000
9 2 EA Curb Extension (Bulb-out) $11,000.00 $22,000
10 1 EA Relocate Fire Hydrant $20,000.00 $20,000
11 2 EA Relocate Light Pole $15,000.00 $30,000
12 1 EA Relocate Catch Basin $60,000.00 $60,000
TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $197,700
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $129,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $326,700
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $81,675
PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $408,375
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $108,250 PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $408,375 TOTAL $516,625

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS

GENERAL

DEMOLITION
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / Euclid Street (PHASE 2) Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / Euclid Street (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes

GENERAL
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $8,000.00 $8,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $47,000.00 $47,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $8,000.00 $8,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $16,000.00 $16,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $24,000.00 $24,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $35,000.00 $35,000
7 1 LS Green Paint $5,200.00 $5,200
8 1 LS Red Paint $9,000.00 $9,000
9 2 EA Bus Stop Relocation $10,000.00 $20,000
10 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Lead Pestrian Interval's) $10,000.00 $10,000 11 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Accessible Pedestrian Signal and Pedestrian Recall) $75,000.00 $75,000 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $154,200
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $103,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $257,200
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $64,300
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $321,500
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes

GENERAL
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $10,000.00 $10,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $56,000.00 $56,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $10,000.00 $10,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $19,000.00 $19,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $28,000.00 $28,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general.

DEMOLITION
6 20 CY Removal of AC Pavement, Base & Subgrade (14") $350.00 $7,000 *Full depth replacement used for bus pads. 7 8 EA ADA Compliant Curb Ramp $9,000.00 $72,000
8 1 EA Transit Curb Extension $25,000.00 $25,000
9 2 EA PCC Bus Pad $40,000.00 $80,000
TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $184,000
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $123,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $307,000
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $76,750
PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $383,750
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 20% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $321,500 PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 20% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $383,750 TOTAL $705,250
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 14th St

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 14th St (PHASE 1)

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $4,000.00 $4,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $18,000.00 $18,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $4,000.00 $4,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $7,000.00 $7,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $10,000.00 $10,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $26,000.00 $26,000
7 16 EA Bollards $200.00 $3,200
8 15 EA Hardened Centerline Treatments $200.00 $3,000 *Assumes use of bollards for centerline treatments. 9 2 EA Relocate Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacon (RRFB) $15,000.00 $30,000 *Price per RRFB head.

TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $62,200
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $43,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $105,200
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $26,300
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $131,500
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $9,000.00 $9,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $53,000.00 $53,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $9,000.00 $9,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $18,000.00 $18,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $27,000.00 $27,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 180 LF Removal of Curb & Gutter $12.00 $2,160 *Curb & gutter removal for curb extenstions. 7 60 CY Removal of AC Pavement, Base & Subgrade (14") $350.00 $21,000 *AC pavement removal for curb extenstions. 8 6 EA ADA Compliant Curb Ramp $9,000.00 $54,000
9 2 EA Curb Extension (Bulb-out) $11,000.00 $22,000
10 1 EA Curb Extension (Full Corner Bulb-out) $18,000.00 $18,000 11 1 EA Relocate Catch Basin $60,000.00 $60,000
TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $177,160
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $116,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $293,160
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $73,290
PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $366,450
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $131,500 PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $366,450 TOTAL $497,950

DEMOLITION

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 15th St (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 15th St (PHASE 2)

GENERAL
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $3,000.00 $3,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $17,000.00 $17,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $3,000.00 $3,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $5,000.00 $5,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $9,000.00 $9,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $18,000.00 $18,000
7 16 EA Bollards $200.00 $3,200
8 13 EA Hardened Centerline Treatments $200.00 $2,600 *Assumes use of bollards for centerline treatments. 9 2 EA Relocate Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacon (RRFB) $15,000.00 $30,000 *Price per RRFB head.

TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $53,800
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $37,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $90,800
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $22,700
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $113,500
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $12,000.00 $12,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $74,000.00 $74,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $12,000.00 $12,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $25,000.00 $25,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $37,000.00 $37,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 360 LF Removal of Curb & Gutter $12.00 $4,320 *Curb & gutter removal for curb extenstions. 7 70 CY Removal of AC Pavement, Base & Subgrade (14") $350.00 $24,500 *Full depth replacement for curb extensions and median. 8 7 TN Construct AC Pavement $240.00 $1,680 *AC pavement used for existing median. 9 5 CY Construct Class II AB $110.00 $495 *Class II AB used for reconstruction of road. 10 6 EA ADA Compliant Curb Ramp $9,000.00 $54,000
11 2 EA Curb Extension (Bulb-out) $11,000.00 $22,000
12 1 EA Curb Extension (Full Corner Bulb-out) $18,000.00 $18,000 13 2 EA Relocate Catch Basin $60,000.00 $120,000
TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $244,995
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $160,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $404,995
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $101,249
PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $506,244
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $113,500 PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $506,244 TOTAL $619,744

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 16th St (PHASE 1)

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS

GENERAL
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 16th St (PHASE 2)

GENERAL

DEMOLITION
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $2,000.00 $2,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $8,000.00 $8,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $2,000.00 $2,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $3,000.00 $3,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $4,000.00 $4,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $15,000.00 $15,000
7 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Lead Pestrian Interval's) $10,000.00 $10,000 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $25,000
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $19,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $44,000
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $11,000
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $55,000

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 17th Street (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes

GENERAL
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $4,000.00 $4,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $20,000.00 $20,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $4,000.00 $4,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $7,000.00 $7,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $10,000.00 $10,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general.

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
6 1 LS Signing & Striping $30,000.00 $30,000
7 16 EA Bollards $200.00 $3,200
8 15 EA Hardened Centerline Treatments $200.00 $3,000 *Assumes use of bollards for centerline treatments. 9 2 EA Relocate Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacon (RRFB) $15,000.00 $30,000 *Price per RRFB head.

TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $66,200
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $45,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $111,200
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $27,800
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $139,000
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes

GENERAL
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $8,000.00 $8,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $48,000.00 $48,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $8,000.00 $8,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $16,000.00 $16,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $24,000.00 $24,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general.

DEMOLITION
6 130 LF Removal of Curb & Gutter $12.00 $1,560 *Curb & gutter removal for curb extenstions. 7 40 CY Removal of AC Pavement, Base & Subgrade (14") $350.00 $14,000 *AC pavement removal for curb extenstions.

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
8 6 EA ADA Compliant Curb Ramp $9,000.00 $54,000
9 1 EA Curb Extension (Bulb-out) $11,000.00 $11,000
10 1 EA Curb Extension (Full Corner Bulb-out) $18,000.00 $18,000 11 1 EA Relocate Catch Basin $60,000.00 $60,000
TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $158,560
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $104,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $262,560
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $65,640
PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $328,200
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $139,000 PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $328,200 TOTAL $467,200

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 18th St (PHASE 2) Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 18th St (PHASE 1) DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $4,000.00 $4,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $22,000.00 $22,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $4,000.00 $4,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $8,000.00 $8,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $11,000.00 $11,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $24,000.00 $24,000
7 16 EA Bollards $200.00 $3,200
8 16 EA Hardened Centerline Treatments $200.00 $3,200 *Assumes use of bollards for centerline treatments. 9 2 EA Proposed Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacon (RRFB) $20,000.00 $40,000 *Price per RRFB head.

TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $70,400
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $49,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $119,400
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $29,850
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $149,250
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $13,000.00 $13,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $73,000.00 $73,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $13,000.00 $13,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $25,000.00 $25,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $37,000.00 $37,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 200 LF Removal of Curb & Gutter $12.00 $2,400 *Curb & gutter removal for curb extenstions. 7 70 CY Removal of AC Pavement, Base & Subgrade (14") $350.00 $24,500 *AC pavement removal for curb extenstions. 8 6 EA ADA Compliant Curb Ramp $9,000.00 $54,000
9 2 EA Curb Extension (Bulb-out) $11,000.00 $22,000
10 1 EA Curb Extension (Full Corner Bulb-out) $18,000.00 $18,000 11 2 EA Relocate Catch Basin $60,000.00 $120,000
TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $240,900
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $161,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $401,900
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $100,475
PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $502,375
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $149,250 PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $502,375 TOTAL $651,625

DEMOLITION

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 19th St (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 19th St (PHASE 2)

GENERAL
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $2,000.00 $2,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $9,000.00 $9,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $2,000.00 $2,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $3,000.00 $3,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $5,000.00 $5,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $18,000.00 $18,000
7 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Lead Pestrian Interval's) $10,000.00 $10,000 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $28,000
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $21,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $49,000
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $12,250
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $61,250

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 21st Street (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $2,000.00 $2,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $7,000.00 $7,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $2,000.00 $2,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $3,000.00 $3,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $4,000.00 $4,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $13,000.00 $13,000
7 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Lead Pestrian Interval's) $10,000.00 $10,000 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $23,000
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $18,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $41,000
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $10,250
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $51,250

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 22nd Street (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $2,000.00 $2,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $9,000.00 $9,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $2,000.00 $2,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $3,000.00 $3,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $5,000.00 $5,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $19,000.00 $19,000
7 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Lead Pestrian Interval's) $10,000.00 $10,000 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $29,000
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $21,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $50,000
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $12,500
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $62,500

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 23rd Steet (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $2,000.00 $2,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $7,000.00 $7,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $2,000.00 $2,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $3,000.00 $3,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $4,000.00 $4,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $12,000.00 $12,000
7 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Lead Pestrian Interval's) $10,000.00 $10,000 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $22,000
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $18,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $40,000
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $10,000
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $50,000

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / Cloverfield Boulevard (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $1,000.00 $1,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $3,000.00 $3,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $1,000.00 $1,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $1,000.00 $1,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $2,000.00 $2,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $8,000.00 $8,000
7 8 EA Bollards $200.00 $1,600
TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $9,600
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $8,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $17,600
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $4,400
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $22,000
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 25th Street (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $0.00 $0 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $3,000.00 $3,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $1,000.00 $1,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $1,000.00 $1,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $2,000.00 $2,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (No Right-Turn on Red) $10,000.00 $10,000 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $10,000
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $7,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $17,000
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $4,250
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $21,250
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $27,000.00 $27,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $168,000.00 $168,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $27,000.00 $27,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $56,000.00 $56,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $84,000.00 $84,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 100 CY Removal of AC Pavement, Base & Subgrade (14") $350.00 $35,000 *Full depth replacement used for medians. 7 1 LS Signing & Striping $29,000.00 $29,000
8 1 LS Green Paint $6,000.00 $6,000
9 5 EA ADA Compliant Curb Ramp $9,000.00 $45,000
10 1 LS Landscaped & Decorative Raised Median $78,000.00 $78,000 11 1 EA Pedestrian Refuge $15,000.00 $15,000
12 1 EA HAWK Signal $350,000.00 $350,000
TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $558,000
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $362,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $920,000
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $230,000
PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $1,150,000
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $21,250 PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $1,150,000 TOTAL $1,171,250

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / Chelsea Ave (PHASE 1)

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS

GENERAL
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / Chelsea Ave (PHASE 2)

GENERAL

DEMOLITION

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $4,000.00 $4,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $26,000.00 $26,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $4,000.00 $4,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $8,000.00 $8,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $13,000.00 $13,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Lead Pestrian Interval's) $10,000.00 $10,000 7 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Accessible Pedestrian Signal and Pedestrian Recall) $75,000.00 $75,000 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $85,000
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $55,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $140,000
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $35,000
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $175,000
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $18,000.00 $18,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $104,000.00 $104,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $18,000.00 $18,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $35,000.00 $35,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $53,000.00 $53,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 200 LF Removal of Curb & Gutter $12.00 $2,400 *Curb & gutter removal for curb extenstions. 7 40 CY Removal of AC Pavement, Base & Subgrade (14") $350.00 $14,000 *Full depth replacement used for bus pads. 8 1 LS Signing & Striping $27,000.00 $27,000
9 8 EA ADA Compliant Curb Ramp $9,000.00 $72,000
10 2 EA Curb Extension (Bulb-out) $11,000.00 $22,000
11 2 EA Tranist Curb Extenstion $25,000.00 $50,000
12 2 EA PCC Bus Pad $40,000.00 $80,000
13 1 EA Relocate Catch Basin $60,000.00 $60,000
14 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Queue Jump) $22,500.00 $22,500 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $349,900
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $228,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $577,900
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $144,475
PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $722,375
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $175,000 PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $722,375 TOTAL $897,375

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 26th St (PHASE 2)

GENERAL

DEMOLITION

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / 26th St (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes

GENERAL
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $7,000.00 $7,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $36,000.00 $36,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $7,000.00 $7,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $13,000.00 $13,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $19,000.00 $19,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general.

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
6 1 LS Signing & Striping $28,000.00 $28,000
7 12 EA Bollards $200.00 $2,400

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
8 3 EA Proposed Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacon (RRFB) $30,000.00 $90,000 *Price per RRFB head.

TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $120,400
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $82,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $202,400
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $50,600
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $253,000
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes

GENERAL
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $6,000.00 $6,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $33,000.00 $33,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $6,000.00 $6,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $10,000.00 $10,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $17,000.00 $17,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general.

DEMOLITION
6 40 CY Removal of AC Pavement, Base & Subgrade (14") $350.00 $10,600 *Full depth replacement used for medians.

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
7 6 EA ADA Compliant Curb Ramp $9,000.00 $54,000
8 1 EA Landscaped Raised Median $30,100.00 $30,100
9 1 EA Pedestrian Refuge $15,000.00 $15,000 *Assumed cost of a ADA compliant curb ramp.

TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $109,700
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $72,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $181,700
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $45,425
PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $227,125
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $253,000 PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $227,125 TOTAL $480,125
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / Princeton St (PHASE 1) Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / Princeton St (PHASE 2) DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $7,000.00 $7,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $37,000.00 $37,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $7,000.00 $7,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $13,000.00 $13,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $19,000.00 $19,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $29,000.00 $29,000
7 6 EA Hardened Centerline Treatments $200.00 $1,200 *Assumes use of bollards for centerline treatments. 8 12 EA Bollards $200.00 $2,400
9 3 EA Proposed Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacon (RRFB) $30,000.00 $90,000 *Price per RRFB head.

TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $122,600
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $83,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $205,600
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $51,400
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $257,000
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $12,000.00 $12,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $69,000.00 $69,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $12,000.00 $12,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $22,000.00 $22,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $35,000.00 $35,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 110 CY Removal of AC Pavement, Base & Subgrade (14") $350.00 $38,500 *Full depth replacement used for medians. 7 6 EA ADA Compliant Curb Ramp $9,000.00 $54,000
8 1 EA Landscaped Raised Median $120,700.00 $120,700
9 1 EA Pedestrian Refuge $15,000.00 $15,000 *Assumed cost of a ADA compliant curb ramp.

TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $228,200
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $150,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $378,200
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $94,550
PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $472,750
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $257,000 PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $472,750 TOTAL $729,750

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / Harvard Street (PHASE 2)

GENERAL

DEMOLITION

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / Harvard Street (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $2,000.00 $2,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $10,000.00 $10,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $2,000.00 $2,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $4,000.00 $4,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $5,000.00 $5,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $20,000.00 $20,000
7 1 LS Green Paint $3,000.00 $3,000
8 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Lead Pestrian Interval's) $10,000.00 $10,000 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $33,000
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $23,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $56,000
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $14,000
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $70,000
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / Yale Street (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes

GENERAL
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $7,000.00 $7,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $38,000.00 $38,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $7,000.00 $7,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $13,000.00 $13,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $19,000.00 $19,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general.

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
6 1 LS Signing & Striping $33,000.00 $33,000
7 6 EA Hardened Centerline Treatments $200.00 $1,200 *Assumes use of bollards for centerline treatments. 8 12 EA Bollards $200.00 $2,400

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
9 3 EA Proposed Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacon (RRFB) $30,000.00 $90,000 *Price per RRFB head.

TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $126,600
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $84,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $210,600
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $52,650
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $263,250
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes

GENERAL
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $9,000.00 $9,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $53,000.00 $53,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $9,000.00 $9,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $18,000.00 $18,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $27,000.00 $27,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general.

DEMOLITION
6 110 CY Removal of AC Pavement, Base & Subgrade (14") $350.00 $38,500 *Full depth replacement used for medians.

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
7 4 EA ADA Compliant Curb Ramp $9,000.00 $36,000
8 1 EA Landscaped Raised Median $85,100.00 $85,100
9 1 EA Pedestrian Refuge $15,000.00 $15,000 *Assumed cost of a ADA compliant curb ramp.

TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $174,600
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $116,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $290,600
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $72,650
PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $363,250
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $263,250 PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $363,250 TOTAL $626,500
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / Stanford St (PHASE 1) Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / Stanford St (PHASE 2) DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $3,000.00 $3,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $15,000.00 $15,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $3,000.00 $3,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $5,000.00 $5,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $8,000.00 $8,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $17,000.00 $17,000
7 2 EA Bus Stop Relocation $10,000.00 $20,000
8 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Lead Pestrian Interval's) $10,000.00 $10,000 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $47,000
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $34,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $81,000
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $20,250
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $101,250
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / Berkeley Street (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes

GENERAL
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $7,000.00 $7,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $37,000.00 $37,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $7,000.00 $7,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $12,000.00 $12,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $19,000.00 $19,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general.

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
6 1 LS Signing & Striping $28,000.00 $28,000
7 6 EA Hardened Centerline Treatments $200.00 $1,200 *Assumes use of bollards for centerline treatments. 8 12 EA Bollards $200.00 $2,400

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
9 3 EA Proposed Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacon (RRFB) $30,000.00 $90,000 *Price per RRFB head.

TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $121,600
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $82,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $203,600
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $50,900
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $254,500
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes

GENERAL
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $10,000.00 $10,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $58,000.00 $58,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $10,000.00 $10,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $20,000.00 $20,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $29,000.00 $29,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general.

DEMOLITION
6 110 CY Removal of AC Pavement, Base & Subgrade (14") $350.00 $35,700 *Full depth replacement used for medians.

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
7 6 EA ADA Compliant Curb Ramp $9,000.00 $54,000
8 1 EA Landscaped Raised Median $85,700.00 $85,700
9 1 EA Pedestrian Refuge $15,000.00 $15,000 *Assumed cost of a ADA compliant curb ramp.

TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $190,400
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $127,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $317,400
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $79,350
PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $396,750
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $254,500 PHASE 2 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL WITH 25% CONTENGENCY SUBTOTAL $396,750 TOTAL $651,250
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / Franklin St (PHASE 1) Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / Franklin St (PHASE 2) DRAFT

SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD IMPROVMENTS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ROM ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Prepared April 15, 2026
Job Number: 202369
Item No. Approximate
Quantity Unit Item Unit Price Total Notes
1 1 LS Utility Relocations $2,000.00 $2,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 2 1 LS Mobilization, Demolition, Excavation, and Traffic Control $9,000.00 $9,000 *Assumes 30% of total excluding general. 3 1 LS Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan $2,000.00 $2,000 *Assumes 5% of total excluding general. 4 1 LS Field Orders $3,000.00 $3,000 *Assumes 10% of total excluding general. 5 1 LS PS&E/ROW Engineering $5,000.00 $5,000 *Assumes 15% of total excluding general. 6 1 LS Signing & Striping $17,000.00 $17,000
7 1 EA Traffic Signal Modification (Lead Pestrian Interval's) $10,000.00 $10,000 TOTAL EXCLUDING GENERAL SUBTOTAL $27,000
TOTAL GENERAL ONLY SUBTOTAL $21,000
RAW SUBTOTAL SUBTOTAL $48,000
25% CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL $12,000
PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL TOTAL $60,000

SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS
Intersection: Santa Monica Boulevard / Centinela Avenue (PHASE 1)

GENERAL

TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENTS
DRAFT
APPENDIX E.

CONCEPT PLANS
DRAFT

SOUTHLAND CREDIT UNION GOODWILL SANTA MONICA PUBLIC LIBRARY TAR & ROSES EX. PARKLET PREVIOUS BUS STOP NEW BUS STOP Study Intersection #1 Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study Concepts 6th Street LEGEND CURB BACK OF SIDEWALK LANE STRIPE BIKE LANE CONFLICT AREA PARKING SPACE STRIPE TRAFFIC SIGNAL SIDEWALK STREET CONCRETE BUS LANDING EXISTING PARKLET EXISTING BUS STOP PROPOSED BUS STOP N40 20SCALE: 1"=40' 0 40 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLATION OF PEDESTRIAN SCRAMBLE PHASE WITH DIAGONAL CROSSING NO RIGHT-TURN ON RED FIRE HYDRANT PROPOSED ADA CURB RAMP PROPOSED EXTENSION FOR NEAR-SIDE TRANSIT STOP CURB EXTENSIONS ON SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD (PENDING TRUCK TURN TEMPLATES) CURB EXTENSIONS ON SIDE-STREETS (PENDING TRUCK TURN TEMPLATES) INSTALL BIKE BOX ON SIDE-STREET THRU MOVEMENT INSTALLATION OF FOG-LINE STRIPING TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION - TRANSIT SIGNAL PRIORITY TRAVELING WESTBOUND (QUEUE JUMP) PROPOSED BUS-ONLY LANE INSTALLATION OF PAINTED CURB STRIPING INSTALLATION OF ACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL (APS) AND PEDESTRIAN RECALL IN COORDINATED HOURS DRAFT
JACK IN THE BOX SANTA MONICA TAILOR BY BELLO MOBIL BURTON HEARING AID CENTER HYUNDAI SANTA MONICA Study Intersection #2 Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study Concepts Lincoln Boulevard LEGEND CURB BACK OF SIDEWALK LANE STRIPE BIKE LANE CONFLICT AREA PARKING SPACE STRIPE TRAFFIC SIGNAL SIDEWALK STREET CONCRETE BUS LANDING EXISTING BUS STOP PROPOSED CURB RAMP N40 20SCALE: 1"=40' 0 40 IMPROVEMENTS TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION - LEAD PEDESTRIAN INTERVALS (LPI'S) TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION - TRANSIT SIGNAL PRIORITY TRAVELING WESTBOUND (QUEUE JUMP) TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION - PROTECTED LEFT-TURN TRAVELING EASTBOUND PROPOSED SIDEWALK EXTENSION FOR NEAR-SIDE TRANSIT STOP INSTALLATION OF ACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL (APS) AND PEDESTRIAN RECALL IN COORDINATED HOURS INSTALLATION OF PAINTED CURB STRIPING INSTALLATION OF FOG-LINE STRIPING PROPOSED BUS-ONLY LANE RECONSTRUCT CURB RAMPS (UNI-DIRECTIONAL) INSTALLATION OF SHARED RIGHT TURN ONLY TREATMENT ADDED PARKING STALLS DRAFT
CLASSIC TILE AND FLOORING INC. MEIS ARCHITECTS SMC OFFICES Study Intersection #3 Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study Concepts 10th Street IMPROVEMENTS LEGEND CURB BACK OF SIDEWALK LANE STRIPE BIKE LANE CONFLICT AREA PARKING SPACE STRIPE YIELD LINE SIDEWALK STREET CONCRETE BUS LANDING FIRE HYDRANT DELINEATOR POST PROPOSED ADA CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENTS N40 20SCALE: 1"=40' 0 40 IMPROVEMENTS CURB EXTENSIONS ON SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD (PENDING TRUCK TURN TEMPLATES) PROPOSED HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK RIGHT-TURN ONLY TREATMENT (SIDE STREET) RECONSTRUCT CURB RAMPS (UNI-DIRECTIONAL) CURB EXTENSIONS ON SIDE-STREETS (PENDING TRUCK TURN TEMPLATES) INSTALLATION OF CENTER-LINE HARDENING INSTALLATION OF PAINTED CURB STRIPING PROPOSED RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON (RRFB) PROPOSED YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS SIGN INSTALLATION OF FOG-LINE STRIPING PROPOSED BUS-ONLY LANE DRAFT
KIA SANTA MONICA STOKES TIRE SERVICE Study Intersection #4 Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study Concepts 11th Street IMPROVEMENTS SANTA MONICA AUDI PARTS DEPARTMENT LEGEND CURB BACK OF SIDEWALK LANE STRIPE BIKE LANE CONFLICT AREA PARKING SPACE STRIPE TRAFFIC SIGNAL SIDEWALK STREET CONCRETE BUS LANDING FIRE HYDRANT EXISTING BUS STOP PROPOSED BUS STOP RELOCATION PROPOSED ADA CURB RAMP N40 20SCALE: 1"=40' 0 40 IMPROVEMENTS TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION - LEAD PEDESTRIAN INTERVALS (LPI'S) INSTALLATION OF ACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL (APS) AND PEDESTRIAN RECALL IN COORDINATED HOURS BIKE LANE CONFLICT STRIPING ACROSS INTERSCTION BIKE LANE MODIFICATIONS (MINOR STREET) RECONSTRUCT CURB RAMPS (UNI-DIRECTIONAL) TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION - PROTECTED LEFT-TURN TRAVELING EASTBOUND. RELOCATE BUS STOP TO FARSIDE INSTALLATION OF FOG-LINE STRIPING PROPOSED BUS-ONLY LANE CLOSE EXISTING DRIVEWAY INSTALLATION OF PAINTED CURB STRIPING SMC PERFORMING ARTS CENTER PARKING DRAFT
CHEVRON MILLER'S LOCKSHOP THE ROOM SANTA MONICABLUDSO'S BBQ COFFEE COMMISSARY Study Intersection #5 Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study Concepts 14th Street LEGEND CURB BACK OF SIDEWALK LANE STRIPE BIKE LANE CONFLICT AREA PARKING SPACE STRIPE TRAFFIC SIGNAL SIDEWALK STREET CONCRETE BUS LANDING FIRE HYDRANT EXISTING BUS STOP PROPOSED BUS STOP RELOCATION PROPOSED ADA CURB RAMP TESLA SUPERCHARGER'SSANTA MONICA FORD N40 20SCALE: 1"=40' 0 40 IMPROVEMENTS TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION - LEAD PEDESTRIAN INTERVALS (LPI'S) RELOCATE BUS STOP TO FARSIDE BIKE LANE CONFLICT STRIPING ACROSS INTERSCTION BIKE LANE MODIFICATIONS (MINOR STREET) RECONSTRUCT CURB RAMPS (UNI-DIRECTIONAL) PROPOSED SIDEWALK EXTENSION FOR FAR-SIDE TRANSIT STOP INSTALLATION OF FOG-LINE STRIPING PROPOSED BUS-ONLY LANE PROPOSED RIGHT TURN ONLY TREATMENT PROPOSED RIGHT TURN ONLY SIGN ADDED PARKING STALLS INSTALLATION OF PAINTED CURB STRIPING INSTALLATION OF ACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL (APS) AND PEDESTRIAN RECALL IN COORDINATED HOURS DRAFT
15TH ST LIQUOR Study Intersection #6 Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study Concepts 15th Street LEGEND CURB BACK OF SIDEWALK LANE STRIPE BIKE LANE CONFLICT AREA PARKING SPACE STRIPE YIELD LINE SIDEWALK STREET CONCRETE BUS LANDING FIRE HYDRANT DELINEATOR POST PROPOSED ADA CURB RAMP SANTA MONICA IPHONE SCREEN REPAIR THRIFTY CAR RENTAL TESLA SUPERCHARGER LEXUS SANTA MONICA LEXUS SANTA MONICA N40 20SCALE: 1"=40' 0 40 IMPROVEMENTS CURB EXTENSIONS ON SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD (PENDING TRUCK TURN TEMPLATES) REFRESH EXISTING HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK RIGHT-TURN ONLY TREATMENT (SIDE STREET) RECONSTRUCT CURB RAMPS (UNI-DIRECTIONAL) RELOCATE EXISTING RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON (RRFB) INSTALLATION OF PAINTED CURB STRIPING INSTALLATION OF CENTER-LINE HARDENING EXISTING YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS SIGN CURB EXTENSIONS ON SIDE-STREETS (PENDING TRUCK TURN TEMPLATES) INSTALLATION OF FOG-LINE STRIPING DRAFT
Study Intersection #7 Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study Concepts 16th Street LEGEND CURB BACK OF SIDEWALK LANE STRIPE BIKE LANE CONFLICT AREA PARKING SPACE STRIPE YIELD LINE SIDEWALK STREET CONCRETE BUS LANDING FIRE HYDRANT DELINEATOR POST PROPOSED ADA CURB RAMP DK'S DONUTS AND BAKERY LEXUS SANTA MONICA LEXUS SANTA MONICA VACANT BUILDING VOLVO CARS SANTA MONICA N40 20SCALE: 1"=40' 0 40 IMPROVEMENTS CURB EXTENSIONS ON SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD (PENDING TRUCK TURN TEMPLATES) REFRESH EXISTING HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK RIGHT-TURN ONLY TREATMENT (SIDE STREET) RECONSTRUCT CURB RAMPS (UNI-DIRECTIONAL) REMOVAL OF EXISTING PEDESTRIAN REFUGE INSTALLATION OF PAINTED CURB STRIPING CURB EXTENSIONS ON SIDE-STREETS (PENDING TRUCK TURN TEMPLATES) INSTALLATION OF CENTER-LINE HARDENING RELOCATE EXISTING RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON (RRFB) YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS SIGN INSTALLATION OF FOG-LINE STRIPING EXPLORE VERTICAL DEFLECTION ELEMENTS DRAFT
Study Intersection #8 Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study Concepts 18th Street HONDA DEALER VACANT LOT LEGEND CURB BACK OF SIDEWALK LANE STRIPE BIKE LANE CONFLICT AREA PARKING SPACE STRIPE YIELD LINE SIDEWALK STREET CONCRETE BUS LANDING FIRE HYDRANT DELINEATOR POST PROPOSED ADA CURB RAMP RAPID RECTANGULAR FLASHING BEACON (RRFB) YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS SIGN N40 20SCALE: 1"=40' 0 40 HONDA PRE-OWNED VEHICLES IMPROVEMENTS CURB EXTENSIONS ON SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD (PENDING TRUCK TURN TEMPLATES) RIGHT-TURN ONLY TREATMENT (SIDE STREET) RECONSTRUCT CURB RAMPS (UNI-DIRECTIONAL) CURB EXTENSIONS ON SIDE-STREETS (PENDING TRUCK TURN TEMPLATES) INSTALLATION OF PAINTED CURB STRIPING INSTALLATION OF CENTER-LINE HARDENING INSTALLATION OF FOG-LINE STRIPING MIDWAY CAR RENTAL BRENTWOOD DRAFT
Study Intersection #9 Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study Concepts 19th Street CURB BACK OF SIDEWALK LANE STRIPE BIKE LANE CONFLICT AREA PARKING SPACE STRIPE YIELD LINE SIDEWALK STREET CONCRETE BUS LANDING FIRE HYDRANT DELINEATOR POST PROPOSED ADA CURB RAMP MASERATI OF SANTA MONICA SMC PHARMACY SANTA MONICA MUSIC CENTER HONDA PRE-OWNED VEHICLES N40 20SCALE: 1"=40' 0 40 IMPROVEMENTS LEGEND CURB EXTENSIONS ON SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD (PENDING TRUCK TURN TEMPLATES) PROPOSED HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK RIGHT-TURN ONLY TREATMENT (SIDE STREET) RECONSTRUCT CURB RAMPS (UNI-DIRECTIONAL) CURB EXTENSIONS ON SIDE-STREETS (PENDING TRUCK TURN TEMPLATES) INSTALLATION OF CENTER-LINE HARDENING INSTALLATION OF PAINTED CURB STRIPING INSTALLATION OF FOG-LINE STRIPING PROPOSED YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS SIGN PROPOSED RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON (RRFB) ADDED PARKING STALLS DRAFT

MCKINLEY SCHOOL UCLA MEDICAL GROUP VOLKSWAGEN SANTA MONICA BIG WAVES LAUNDROMAT (ONE-WAY SB) Study Intersection #10 Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study Concepts Chelsea Avenue LEGEND CURB BACK OF SIDEWALK LANE STRIPE BIKE LANE CONFLICT AREA PARKING SPACE STRIPE TRAFFIC SIGNAL SIDEWALK STREET CONCRETE BUS LANDING RAISED LANDSCAPED MEDIAN RAISED MEDIAN EXISTING CURB RAMP N40 20SCALE: 1"=40' 0 40 IMPROVEMENTS RECONSTRUCT CURB RAMPS (UNI-DIRECTIONAL) PROPOSED HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL WITH BICYCLE DETECTION NEW PEDESTRIAN REFUGE NEW RAISED LANDSCAPED MEDIAN NEW STRIPED MEDIAN RIGHT-TURN ONLY TREATMENT (SIDE STREET) WITH NO RIGHT-TURN ON RED BLANK OUT SIGN BIKE LANE MEDIAN OPENING NEW RAISED MEDIAN WITH BIKE LANE AND CHEVRON PROPOSED ADA CURB RAMP FIRE HYDRANT REMOVE PARKING AND ADD CLASS II BIKE LANE NEW CLASS III BIKE LANE INSTALLATION OF PAINTED CURB STRIPING INSTALLATION OF FOG-LINE STRIPING DRAFT
COFFEE SHOP THE RICH SPA NOW SEDLER'S SHOE REPAIR ALLAN JEFFRIES FRAMING Study Intersection #11 Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study Concepts 26th Street LEGEND CURB BACK OF SIDEWALK LANE STRIPE BIKE LANE CONFLICT AREA PARKING SPACE STRIPE TRAFFIC SIGNAL SIDEWALK STREET CONCRETE BUS LANDING EXISTING CURB RAMP EXISTING BUS STOP PROPOSED BUS STOP VACANT BUILDING CVS PHARMACY APARTMENT COMPLEX NAMITA'S EYEBROW THREADING SALON N40 20SCALE: 1"=40' 0 40 IMPROVEMENTS TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION - LEAD PEDESTRIAN INTERVALS (LPI'S) TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION - TRANSIT SIGNAL PRIORITY TRAVELING WESTBOUND (QUEUE JUMP) PROPOSED BUS BULB ON SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD CURB EXTENSIONS ON SIDE-STREETS (PENDING TRUCK TURN TEMPLATES) ADDED PARKING STALLS CURB EXTENSIONS ON SANTA MONICA BOULEVARD (PENDING TRUCK TURN TEMPLATES) RELOCATE BUS STOP TO FARSIDE RECONSTRUCT CURB RAMPS (UNI-DIRECTIONAL) INSTALLATION OF FOG-LINE STRIPING PROPOSED ADA CURB RAMP INSTALLATION OF ACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL (APS) AND PEDESTRIAN RECALL IN COORDINATED HOURS DRAFT
MCDONALD'S AE GERMAN CAR SERVICE COFFEE SHOP THE RICH SPA NOW SEDLER'S SHOE REPAIR RIP CITY SKATES LUCKY'S PET GROOMING SIR SPEEDY Study Intersection #12 Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study Concepts Princeton Street LEGEND CURB BACK OF SIDEWALK LANE STRIPE BIKE LANE CONFLICT AREA PARKING SPACE STRIPE YIELD LINE SIDEWALK STREET CONCRETE BUS LANDING RAISED LANDSCAPED MEDIAN DELINEATOR POST PROPOSED ADA CURB RAMP N40 20SCALE: 1"=40' 0 40 PROPOSED YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS SIGN IMPROVEMENTS NEW PEDESTRIAN REFUGE REFRESH EXISTING HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK RIGHT-TURN ONLY TREATMENT (SIDE STREET) NEW RAISED LANDSCAPED MEDIAN NEW STRIPED MEDIAN RECONSTRUCT CURB RAMPS (UNI-DIRECTIONAL) INSTALLATION OF FOG-LINE STRIPING IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLATION OF PAINTED CURB STRIPING PROPOSED RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON (RRFB) DRAFT
X MAJOR MOTOR CARS BUNDA FITNESS CENTER LITTLE LUNCH / OFFHAND COFFEE SANTA MONICA SCHOOL OF DANCE AND MUSIC WINE EXPO DAYS INN Study Intersection #13 Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study Concepts Stanford Street LEGEND CURB BACK OF SIDEWALK LANE STRIPE BIKE LANE CONFLICT AREA PARKING SPACE STRIPE YIELD LINE SIDEWALK STREET CONCRETE BUS LANDING EXISTING CURB RAMP DELINEATOR POST PROPOSED ADA CURB RAMP RAISED LANDSCAPED MEDIAN N40 20SCALE: 1"=40' 0 40 IMPROVEMENTS NEW PEDESTRIAN REFUGE PROPOSED HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK RIGHT-TURN ONLY TREATMENT (SIDE STREET) NEW RAISED LANDSCAPED MEDIAN RECONSTRUCT CURB RAMPS (UNI-DIRECTIONAL) PROPOSED RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON (RRFB) PROPOSED YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS SIGN PROPOSED PEAK HOUR BUS/PARKING LANE INSTALLATION OF CENTER-LINE HARDENING DRAFT
HEARING AID SONECA MATRIAL ARTSPTAK FAMILY SOUL MASSAGE CHIROPRACTIC AWESOME DENTAL SUPER DENTAL CARE SUPER LASH SPA BOX 'N BURN SANTA MONICA BOXING FITNESS GYM WILLOW SPA Study Intersection #14 Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study Concepts Franklin Street LEGEND CURB BACK OF SIDEWALK LANE STRIPE BIKE LANE CONFLICT AREA PARKING SPACE STRIPE YIELD LINE SIDEWALK STREET CONCRETE BUS LANDING FIRE HYDRANT DELINEATOR POST PROPOSED ADA CURB RAMP RAISED LANDSCAPED MEDIAN N40 20SCALE: 1"=40' 0 40 IMPROVEMENTS NEW PEDESTRIAN REFUGE PROPOSED HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK RIGHT-TURN ONLY TREATMENT (SIDE STREET) NEW RAISED LANDSCAPED MEDIAN RECONSTRUCT CURB RAMPS (UNI-DIRECTIONAL) PROPOSED YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS SIGN PROPOSED PEAK HOUR BUS/PARKING LANE INSTALLATION OF CENTER-LINE HARDENING PROPOSED RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON (RRFB) EXPLORE VERTICAL DEFLECTION ELEMENTS DRAFT
APPENDIX F.

VERTICAL TRAFFIC CALMING

ELEMENTS MEMORANDUM
DRAFT
5050 Avenida Encinas, Suite 260 |Carlsbad , CA 92008 | Office: 760-476-9193| Fax: 760-476-9198 | www.mbakerintl.com

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Carlos Hernandez, City of Santa Monica
Kyle Kozar, City of Santa Monica
DATE: April 16, 2026
FROM:

CC:

Jordan Gray PE TE, Michael Baker International
Brittany White, Michael Baker International
SUBJECT: Vertical Traffic Calming Elements on Santa Monica Boulevard Introduction
Michael Baker International has completed a review of the technical feasibility and contextual suitability for raised crosswalks and other vertical traffic calming elements as it relates to the draft Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Study (February 2026).

This opinion letter reviews the industry standard guidance on suitable contexts for vertical traffic calming treatments, an analysis of the overall technical feasibility of these treatments on Santa Monica Boulevard, and the suitability of six candidate locations for the potential installation of raised crosswalks. This review is informed by industry guidance published by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO), California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and other established reference sources.

Santa Monica Boulevard is classified as a principal arterial that runs in the general east-west direction between Ocean Avenue and Sunset Boulevard in Hollywood. The study area for the Safety Study extends from Ocean Avenue to the City limits at Centinela Avenue. The roadway has four travel lanes, two in each direction, with intermittent turn lanes and on-street metered parking. The speed limit between Ocean Avenue and Lincoln Boulevard is 25 mph carrying an average of 10,000 daily vehicle trips. Between Lincoln Boulevard and Centinela the speed limit is 30 mph. Between Lincoln Boulevard and 17th Street the average daily traffic volumes range between 16,000 and 24,000 trips. Between 17th Street and Centinela Boulevard, this range increases to approximately 26,000 to 29,000 daily trips.1
According to the City’s General Plan Circulation element, as a principal arterial, Santa Monica Boulevard is considered an auto/transit priority street (Bicycle Network map – pg 4.0-35) and a “regional transportation corridor” that is intended to “protect avenues and neighborhood streets from through traffic by providing superior travel times and service quality.” (Automobile Network Map – pg 4.0-53).

Guidance on best practices for raised crosswalks and other vertical roadway elements and considerations for their application on Santa Monica Boulevard is reviewed in more detail in the following sections. Specifically, six 1 Daily travel volume data collected in January 2024 by National Data & Surveying Services as part of the 2024 Citywide Speed Survey.

DRAFT
2 candidate locations have been evaluated for the technical feasibility and adequacy of raised crosswalks across Santa Monica Boulevard including:
• 16th Street
• 21
st Street
• 22nd Street
• Chelsea Avenue
• Princeton Street
• Franklin Street
Vertical Roadway Elements
Vertical roadway elements are a type of traffic calming treatment that use vertical deflection to slow traffic, address safety challenges, and improve conditions for bicyclists and pedestrians. Industry guidance emphasizes that evaluation and selection of vertical roadway treatments should include several considerations, such as context, crash types, existing and target speeds, traffic volumes, right-of-way width and number of lanes, emergency access, and other local context such as land use and nearby destinations.

Caltrans Guidance on Vertical Treatment Types
The Caltrans Traffic Calming Guide categorizes vertical roadway elements into six different treatment types. 2 Each
treatment type is described in the list below, and an overview of roadway context and design considerations are summarized in Table 1.
• Speed Hump: Vertical deflection that runs perpendicular to the flow of travel and discourages speeding by creating discomfort to motorists traversing the hump at speeds greater than 15 to 20 mph. When used in combination with other traffic calming treatments, speed humps reduce speeding, reinforce driver awareness, and improve yielding and stopping behavior at intersections and pedestrian crossings, particularly on roadways with visibility and speeding challenges. • Speed Cushion: Similar to a speed hump, however this treatment has gaps, or “cutouts” between the raised mounds to enable wider vehicles (trucks, emergency vehicles, some buses) to pass through without vertical deflection.
• Offset Speed Table: Similar to a speed hump or speed cushion, but the vertical deflections are offset on either side of the street, allowing emergency vehicles to pass through without slowing down over the speed tables.
• Raised Crosswalk: Also referred to as a “speed table,” is a crosswalk that is level with the sidewalk and features up to a 5% grade ramp for vehicles. The raised crosswalk increases visibility of pedestrians, encourages slower speeds, and improves stopping and yielding behavior. • Raised Intersection: A raised intersection vertically raises the entirety of an intersection by three to four inches, and may be reinforced with colored asphalt, concrete or pavers that heighten visibility and alertness of all travelers in the intersection, reduces speeding, and improves stopping and yielding behavior.
2 Access the Caltrans Traffic Calming Guide, A Compendium of Strategies here: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/safety-programs/documents/traffic-calming/final-traffic-calming-guide_v2-a11y.pdf DRAFT
3 • Transverse Rumble Strips: Raised or grooved patterns that provide an audible and tactile warning to motorists to slow down ahead of a decision point such as a crosswalk or stop-controlled intersection.

Table 1. Caltrans Vertical Roadway Element Categories
Treatment Type Functional
Classification Daily Volume Speed Limit Other considerations Speed Hump Local Roads 3,500 ADT or
less 30 MPH or less
Should not be used where
trucks account for more than 5%
of traffic and can delay
emergency vehicles by 5-10
seconds.

Speed Cushion Local Roads 3,500 ADT or
less 30 MPH or less
Reduction in speed is less than
speed humps because motorists
can still clear the vertical
deflection with one wheel off
the cushion.

Offset Speed
Table Local Roads 9,000 ADT or less 30 MPH or less
Reduction in speed is less than
speed humps because motorists
can also bypass the speed tables
if there are no vehicles on the
opposing side of the street.

Raised Crosswalk Collectors and
Local Roads
9,000 ADT or
less 30 MPH or less
Not recommended for use along
primary emergency vehicle
routes.

Raised
Intersection
Collectors and
Local Roads - 35 MPH or less
Not recommended for use along
primary emergency vehicle
routes or truck routes.

Transverse
Rumble Strips
Principal Arterials,
Minor Arterials,
Collectors, and
Local Roads
-
Guidance on
speed limit
restrictions not
provided
Generally not recommended for
urban areas where the noise
may be excessively disruptive.

Data Source: Caltrans Traffic Calming Guide, A Compendium of Strategies. See Category D. Vertical Roadway Elements for more information.

NACTO Guidance on Target Speed and Context
According to NACTO,
3 vertical roadway elements have been shown to slow traffic speeds, creating a safer and more attractive roadway environment. NACTO advises that vertical traffic calming should be installed on streets where the target speed limit is 20 mph or less and they should be considered in contexts where the target speed of the roadway cannot be achieved through the use of conventional traffic calming elements, such as medians, narrowing the roadway, curb extensions, lowering the speed limit, or enforcement measures. Vertical roadway 3 See NACTO Urban Street Design Guide on Vertical Speed Control Elements for more information:
https://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/street-design-elements/vertical-speed-control-elements/ DRAFT
4 elements are most effectively implemented at the neighborhood level, where “slow zones” are coordinated for the local network in a comprehensive way, rather than by request on a single street.

FHWA STEP Guidance on Countermeasure Selection
FHWA provides guidance on the selection of appropriate crash countermeasures based on roadway features in its publication STEP Studio: Tools for selecting and implementing countermeasures for improving pedestrian crossing safely. Considerations for countermeasure selection are summarized in the chart excerpted from the FHWA STEP Studio guidelines below.

Table 2. FHWA Guidance on Countermeasure Selection4
4 To view the FHWA STEP Studio, follow this link: https://highways.dot.gov/sites/fhwa.dot.gov/files/2022-06/step_studio.pdf DRAFT
5 As shown, “Raised Crosswalk” is icon number 2 in the chart, and it is notably absent across all columns for roadway configurations “4+ lanes with raised median” and “4+ lanes without raised median.” Accounting for speed limit and AADT, other countermeasures that “should always be considered,” (symbolized with a black circle in the FHWA chart) for four-lane roadways include the following treatments:
• High visibility crosswalk markings
• Parking restrictions on crosswalk approach
• Adequate nighttime lighting
• Crossing warning signs
• Advance yield signs and lines
• Pedestrian refuge islands
• Rectangular rapid flashing beacons
• Pedestrian hybrid beacons
The Draft Safety Study considered these context-sensitive countermeasures recommended by FHWA for four-lane roadways, and they have been vetted and selected for focus intersections and corridor-wide improvements where feasible and applicable for Santa Monica Boulevard. In addition to treatments outlined in the FHWA chart, several other countermeasures were also selected for the corridor to help slow traffic, increase visibility, remove conflict points, and improve transit performance, based on industry standard guidance from NACTO, AASHTO, Caltrans, and other FHWA resources.

In addition to those from the FHWA STEP Guide listed above, countermeasures selected for Santa Monica Boulevard in the Draft Safety Study include:
• Right-turn only restrictions from side streets
• Pedestrian scramble crosswalks
• Leading pedestrian intervals
• Raised landscaped medians
• Curb extensions
• Hardened centerlines
• Narrowed travel lanes
• ADA enhancements
• Bus queue jump lanes and stop relocation
• Signal timing enhancements
• Uni-directional curb ramps
• No right-turn on red
• Bus stop bulbouts
• Transit signal priority
• New crosswalk locations
• Bus only lanes
Recommended corridor-wide and focus intersection treatments are described in greater detail in the Draft Safety Study.

Application Assessment for Santa Monica Boulevard
Corridor Overview
Santa Monica Boulevard is an east-west principal arterial roadway with four travel lanes, two in each direction.

The 2.4-mile corridor features 20 signalized intersections, 13 two-way stop-controlled intersections, metered parking, and intermittent turn lanes. Lane widths are narrower at the western end of the corridor, generally averaging 10 to 11 feet, and gradually widen toward the eastern end of the corridor, averaging 12 to 14 feet.

The speed limit is 25 MPH between Ocean Avenue and Lincoln Boulevard, and 30 mph between Lincoln Avenue and Centinela. According to the 2024 Citywide Speed Survey, drivers travel at higher speeds than the posted limits, especially in the eastern segment of the corridor where 85th percentile speeds are 35 mph to 49 mph.

DRAFT
6 Table 3. Speed Limits vs 85th Percentile Speeds
Santa Monica Boulevard Segment Speed Limit 85th Percentile Speed Ocean Ave to Lincoln Blvd 25 mph 25 mph – 29 mph
Lincoln Blvd to Cloverfield Blvd 30 mph 30 mph – 34 mph Cloverfield Blvd to Centinela Ave 30 mph 35 mph – 49 mph Application of Vertical Elements by Roadway Features
Functional Classification
As shown in Table 1, most vertical traffic calming treatments are recommended for local roads and collectors. The only treatment that is conventionally used on principal arterials are transverse rumble strips, which are typically not recommended for urban environments due to the excessive disruption from the noise.

Functional Classification Evaluation
Functional Classification of Santa Monica Boulevard Principal Arterial Vertical Elements Typically Recommended for Collectors and Local Roads Finding Treatment not typically recommended for this
functional classification
Daily Traffic Volume
The recommended daily volume for vertical roadway treatments, as shown in Table 1, should be less than 9,000 ADT, or even less than 3,500 for speed humps and speed cushions. Each segment of Santa Monica Boulevard exceeds these thresholds. Ocean Avenue to Lincoln Boulevard has an estimated daily traffic volume of 10,000 trips. Between Lincoln Boulevard and 17th Street the estimated daily traffic volumes range between 16,000 and 24,000 trips. And between 17th Street and Centinela Boulevard, this range increases to approximately 26,000 to 29,000 daily trips.

Daily Traffic Volume Evaluation
Daily Traffic Volume of Santa Monica Boulevard 10,000 to 29,000 daily trips Vertical Elements Typically Recommended for Less than 9,000 daily trips Finding Treatment not recommended for this high level of daily traffic volume
Actual/Target Speed
While the posted speed limits along Santa Monica Boulevard (25–30 mph) fall within the range commonly cited in design guidance for vertical traffic-calming treatments (see Table 1), it is important to recognize that many of these treatments are intended for streets where the design objective is to achieve 20 mph operating speeds or lower, such as local neighborhood streets and low-volume collectors. Applying a 20 mph target on a four-lane principal arterial like Santa Monica Boulevard would represent a substantial departure from its intended mobility function. The corridor carries 16,000 to approximately 29,000 daily trips east of Lincoln Boulevard, serves numerous commercial destinations, and functions as a key transit and emergency response route. Reducing speeds to 20 mph under these conditions would lead to broader network congestion as vehicles divert to parallel DRAFT
7 residential streets. In short, while vertical elements can be effective at reducing speeds on appropriately scaled streets, creating a 20 mph operating environment on Santa Monica Boulevard would conflict with its arterial function, traffic volumes, and operational needs. Instead, other countermeasures, such as raised medians and narrower travel lanes, can help reduce vehicle speeds while maintaining the roadway’s operational role.

Actual/Target Speed Evaluation
Actual/Target Speed of Santa Monica Boulevard Actual Speeds: 25 mph to 49mph Target Speeds: 25 mph and 30 mph
Vertical Elements Typically Recommended for Design Guidance: Most treatments recommend a posted speed limit of 30 mph or less
Target Guidance: Most suitable when the goal is to
reduce speeds to 20 mph
Finding Treatment is suitable for the posted speed limits; however a target design speed of 20 mph may cause
significant delay and congestion
Emergency Vehicles, Trucks, and Transit
Traffic calming treatments, including vertical roadway elements can impact the movement of large vehicles, such as fire trucks, ambulances, heavy trucks, and transit vehicles. Santa Monical Boulevard serves many large vehicles, with an emergency room at Providence Saint John’s Health Center near the center of the corridor at 21st Street, heavy truck deliveries to the many businesses along the corridor, and multiple transit stops from Big Blue Bus and LA Metro. FHWA guidelines encourage minimal use of vertical elements on roadways serving heavy trucks, emergency vehicle routes, and transit routes.

Emergency Vehicles, Trucks, and Transit Evaluation
Large vehicles served on Santa Monica Boulevard Heavy trucks, emergency vehicles, and buses Considerations for vertical elements Generally not recommended for emergency vehicle routes or corridors with heavy truck or transit traffic Finding Treatment is not ideal for the flow of emergency vehicles, heavy trucks, and transit on the corridor
Roadway Cross-Section
Vertical roadway elements are typically recommended on two lane roadways. On multilane streets, drivers can avoid traversing a speed hump by shifting into an adjacent lane to bypass the vertical element. Where bus-only lanes are recommended, a speed hump could create conflicts in the bus lane if drivers bypass the speed hump by swerving into the bus-only lane. Vertical elements also require complex drainage design, precise ramp transitions, and tight construction tolerances that will be difficult to achieve on a wide 4-lane roadway.

Roadway Configuration
Cross-Section of Santa Monica Boulevard Four Lanes
Considerations for vertical elements Typically recommended on single-lane one-way streets, or two-lane two-way streets.

Finding Treatment is not recommended for four-lane
roadways
DRAFT
8 Candidate Locations for Raised Crosswalks
While raised crosswalks and vertical roadway elements are not typically recommended as systemic traffic calming treatments for high volume principal arterials such as Santa Monica Boulevard, some locations may be evaluated for site-specific characteristics where they may be feasible. Six candidate locations have been identified for consideration for the implementation of vertical traffic calming improvements on Santa Monica Boulevard due to their high pedestrian activity, proximity to pedestrian activity generating destinations, and existing safety challenges that were identified during the Safety Study process. These locations include:
16th Street
There were 37 crashes at this unsignalized intersection between 2015-2024, including five pedestrian and four bicycle crashes. The community cited visibility and turning conflicts at this location. This location was tied for the highest ranked intersection by weighted severity scoring as part of the safety analysis and has some of the highest pedestrian activity along the corridor.

The current configuration includes an existing RRFB on the east leg. To address the community’s concerns, the Draft Safety Study recommends curb extensions, relocating the RRFB to accompany the proposed curb extensions, directional ramps, right-turns only from the side street, and hardened centerlines.
21st Street
This signalized intersection serves as an exit from Providence Saint John’s Health Center, situated on the north side of Santa Monica Boulevard. This location was ranked as a high priority based on feedback during the public engagement process with some of the highest pedestrian activity along the corridor. The north leg, the exit driveway from the hospital, has parallel crosswalk markings, and each of the other three legs have zebra crosswalk markings. This is a high pedestrian traffic location, with many hospital staff and visitors crossing all sides of the intersection throughout the day. The Draft Safety Study recommends implementing narrowed travel lanes and a leading pedestrian interval phase to the traffic signal to calm traffic. 22nd Street
This 3-legged signalized T-intersection serves as the entrance to Providence Saint John’s Health Center, situated on the north side of Santa Monica Boulevard. This location was ranked as a high priority based on feedback during the public engagement process with some of the highest pedestrian activity along the corridor. The north leg, the entrance driveway to the hospital, has parallel crosswalk markings, and the other east leg has zebra crosswalk markings. This is a high pedestrian traffic location, with many hospital staff and visitors crossing the two legs of the intersection throughout the day. The Draft Safety Study recommends implementing narrowed travel lanes and a leading pedestrian interval phase to the traffic signal to calm traffic.

Chelsea Avenue
McKinley Elementary School is situated on the north side of the corridor at this intersection.

Community input throughout the Safety Study emphasized the desire for enhanced crossings at this location and concerns about speeding. This intersection was also analyzed as part of the City’s Safe Routes to Schools Pedestrian Improvements and Six Schools effort. Proposed improvements in the Draft Safety Study include installing a new crosswalk, pedestrian refuges and medians, rightturn only restrictions from the side street, a pedestrian traffic signal, and directional curb ramps, all of which would be designed to calm traffic and remove conflict points at this location.

DRAFT
9 Princeton Street
Princeton Street has an irregular geometry where the side streets are not aligned, which can result in unpredictable maneuvers from drivers. There were 18 crashes at this intersection during the crash analysis period (2015-2024) and was ranked within the top 15 intersections by weighted severity scoring as part of the safety analysis. The Draft Safety Study recommends implementing a pedestrian refuge and landscaped medians, right-turn only restrictions from the side street, Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons, narrowed travel lanes, and advance yield lines for crosswalks.

Franklin Street
The Franklin Street intersection, one block west of the eastern end of the project area (Centinela Avenue), functions as the eastern gateway to the corridor. This location was ranked within the top 15 intersections by weighted severity scoring as part of the safety analysis. Community input throughout the Safety Study emphasized the desire for enhanced crossings at this location.

Between 2015-2024, this intersection saw a total of 14 crashes, including one serious injury crash and three crashes involving a bicyclist, pedestrian, and/or scooter rider. Targeting these challenges at this intersection, the Draft Safety Study recommends several traffic calming treatments, including a new crosswalk with a pedestrian refuge island in the median, Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons, advanced yield signs and striping, and right-turn only restrictions.

While these six intersections exhibit high pedestrian activity, documented safety concerns, and strong community interest in enhanced crossings, they ultimately remain only a conditional candidates for vertical treatments rather than recommended locations. To complement the proposed traffic calming and advanced yield signing and striping at these intersections, speed cushions in advance of these intersections could be further evaluated to help reinforce and encourage positive yield behavior and encourage lower speeds as motorists approach these challenging intersections. Based on feedback provided by City staff, the following locations could be considered the best candidates for further evaluation:
• 16th Street
o Consider adding a speed table before the approach to the marked crosswalk in both directions. o The speed table should include advance markings consistent with established industry standards to alert drivers to the vertical deflection.
• 22nd Street
o Consider adding a raised crosswalk at the existing marked crosswalk/signal. o The raised crosswalk should include advance markings consistent with established industry standards to alert drivers to the vertical deflection.
• Franklin Street
o Consider adding a speed table before the approach to the proposed marked crosswalk in both directions.
o The speed table should include advance markings consistent with established industry standards to alert drivers to the vertical deflection.

Even at these sites, where vulnerability, visibility issues, and site-specific conflicts are established, the broader constraints of Santa Monica Boulevard’s function as a four-lane principal arterial, its role in emergency response and transit operations, and its target operating speeds do not align with the standard design guidance for vertical roadway elements. Further evaluation is needed to identify and address operational, maintenance, and mobility challenges that could arise from the implementation of vertical deflection on an arterial corridor. Accordingly, while these intersections represent the best possible candidates on the corridor, they should only be selected DRAFT
10 following further site evaluations and coordination with key stakeholders, including emergency personnel, McKinley Elementary School, Big Blue Bus, and LA Metro. Vertical elements should not be considered as a replacement to proposed traffic calming treatments in the Draft Safety Study, but rather complementary enhancements to the proposed recommendations that have been previously identified.

Conclusion
For over a decade, across multiple planning efforts and studies, Santa Monica Boulevard has been emphasized as a priority corridor with several priority segments and intersections identified as key locations for improving safety challenges and reducing collisions. Throughout the Safety Study process, speeding was flagged as a top concern for community members. We understand the City’s need to thoroughly evaluate every potential countermeasure, including raised crosswalks and vertical roadway elements. It is our recommendation that the City carry forward the proposed context-appropriate traffic calming treatments outlined in the Draft Safety Study and give further consideration to implementing vertical elements on Santa Monica Boulevard only at select locations with high crossing volumes, near key destinations, and where other proposed traffic calming treatments may be further enhanced.

DRAFT