City Preps Residents to Defend Beach Parking Zones

By Jorge Casuso

On the surface, it seemed just another meeting of city staff and their constituents.

But with seven Ocean Park preferential parking zones on the line - all of them more than 10 years old -, Saturday's meeting at the Ken Edwards Center was anything but routine.

Instead of just providing information and listening to concerns, planning department staff helped coach and organize some three dozen residents for a crucial Coastal Commission meeting Tuesday morning.

After a year's delay, the commission finally will decide the fate of 936 preferential parking spaces south of Pico Boulevard and east of Lincoln Boulevard that were created by the city without commission approval between 1983 and 1989. The commission discovered the spaces in 1998, while considering the Edgemar Development project on Main Street.

"Don't be exclusionary," Planning Director Suzanne Frick advised the residents. "What is important is to put a face on this issue. We don't want to alienate this commission."

Among the key points city staff encouraged residents to make are the dearth of street parking, the availability of parking in beach lots and the make up of the community (it is not just rich homeowners).

Residents who spoke at Saturday's meeting said they feared that if preferential parking is revoked they wouldn't be able to move their cars or entertain guests, especially on weekends, because there will often be nowhere to park near their homes.

"I can't leave during the day, but there are empty spaces on the beach," said one resident who lives in a zone near Main Street with no daytime restrictions. "As usual, the residents are going to be caught in the middle of this squabble."

While there are 2,400 spaces in Ocean Park's two beach lots, it costs $7 to park ($6 during the winter.) By comparison, unrestricted street parking is free.

Frick, however, warned against bringing up the underused lot, saying that lowering the rates - which already are cheaper than the rates at Venice Beach and Will Rogers State Park - is not on the table.

She did encourage residents who blamed the parking woes not on beach goers, but on employees and customers of Main Street businesses, to speak out on Tuesday.

"It's a major impact," said Roger Genser, a 22-year resident of Ocean Park who helped organize the first Ocean Park zone in 1983. "It was a reaction against Main Street. It had nothing to do with beach parking."

Tuesday's decision will center on whether Santa Monica's zones restrict access to the beach, which the Coastal Commission was created in 1976 to protect.

Commission staff has recommended that the seven zones be retained - with the caveat that the city must reapply for the permits in three years. The city opposes that condition, saying it would be too costly, inhibit long-range planning and leave residents in limbo. Instead city staff is proposing to conduct a parking monitoring program and file a report within five years.

Commission staff also is requiring the city to create 154 spaces to help replenish those taken up by preferential parking. Of these, 65 already have been created. The city also must keep the Tide and Pier beach shuttles running during the summer months.

While Coastal Commission staff seems sympathetic to the plight of beach area residents, it is impossible to predict what the commission will do, Frick said. One warning sign was a complaint by a commissioner who visited the beach to watch the sunset and found no place to park.

"We've been discussing this with the staff for a year and a half," Frick said. "I think this really boils down to philosophical issues with the commission."

Although the city has been negotiating with commission staff, it also has made it clear that it is prepared to file a lawsuit if the commission revokes the zones.

"We have a difference of legal opinion as to whether the Coastal Commission even has authority," Frick said. "We would prefer to go through the process and have a positive outcome."

Since the Coastal Act was passed in 1976, the Coastal Commission has required cities to apply for permits for the special parking zones.

Historically, the Coastal Commission has granted permission for preferential parking zones in coastal communities, often imposing strict conditions to ensure plenty of public parking and beach access.

Since 1982 the commission has approved three applications from Hermosa Beach, Santa Cruz and Capitola. The commission, however, has denied preferential parking permits for Santa Monica's closest neighbors - Venice to the south and Pacific Palisades to the north.

In 1998 approximately 7.5 million visitors flocked to Santa Monica beaches. Over the past 28 years beach attendance has grown by 20 percent.

City Manager Susan McCarthy, who did not attend the meeting, said it would be "unforgivable" if residents weren't prepared given what's at stake.

"The Coastal Commission has a relatively clear mission laid out in the law, and in this situation, it may not be a mission that is sympathetic," McCarthy said. "This would certainly be a profound change."

The Coastal Commission will meet Tuesday at 10 a.m. at the Four Points Sheraton, 530 Pico Blvd.

Staff writer Teresa Rochester contributed to this report.

Cell Phones Proposal Triggers Calls to Action

Cell Phone Proposal Triggers Calls to Action

By Jorge Casuso

Ever since Councilman Paul Rosenstein floated a proposal to ban drivers from using cell phones, his phone has been, well, ringing off the hook.

"The interest in the cell phone issue is amazing," said Rosentein, who proposed studying a ban at last week's City Council meeting. "The reaction I've been getting is blowing me away. Everything has been, 'Go for it. Go for it.' People have been really energized."

Shortly after the council voted 6 to 0 to study the issue, the former mayor was interviewed by five TV stations, six radio news and talk shows, the AP wire service (which is picked up by more than 1,000 newspapers nationwide), as well as trade journals. Even Swedish radio called to see why a high-tech entertainment Mecca filled with cell phone users wanted to follow the lead of Brooklyn, Ohio and Hilltown, Pennsylvania.

The media attention led to dozens of phone calls and emails from constituents, as well as from residents from far outside the area. "I've received tons of positive messages from all over," Rosenstein said.

Some of the messages were from pedestrians and cyclists, who outlined close calls with distracted drivers speaking on cell phones.

"About 11 AM on Wednesday, February l6," one email began, "I was crossing Arizona Street at the crosswalk midway between Fourth and Fifth Streets. I was in the middle of the crosswalk going north when an automobile going west would have hit me if I
had not jumped backwards. The lady driver was on her telephone; I don't think
she even saw me.

"I see no reason to spend time and money investigating the dangers of driving
while on a telephone," the writer concluded. "Just pass the ordinance."

One frequent cyclist, who estimates he has pedaled 40,000 miles during the past 10 years, denounced the used of cell phones as deadly and proposed bumper stickers that read, "Drive; Don't Talk."

"Without a doubt in my mind," the cyclist wrote, "I have come the closest to my own death on a bicycle as a result of the complete inattentiveness of dozens of drivers attempting to drive while talking on cell phones.

"These drivers appear to be oblivious to signals, other cars, and pedestrians alike. I've observed one user drive right through a red light in no particular hurry, indicating to me that they had no awareness of the traffic situation at hand."

Other calls were from drivers who supported the ban.

"Heck I can't even carry on an animated conversation whilst driving without becoming discombobulated, let alone juggle a cell phone" one Santa Monica resident wrote. "It is
astounding to me that bad driving, whatever the cause, is treated so lightly because its cost is so much greater than the sum of other criminal. (activity).... and, yes, negligent driving is criminal activity."

But what surprised Rosenetsin most were the letters and calls from cell phone users who supported his proposed ban.

"I have a cell phone and I think it is very dangerous to use them while driving," one West Los Angeles resident wrote.

Though most of the letters were from supporters, a few were from opponents who expressed outrage at the proposal.

"A full ban is ludicrous," one opponent wrote. "What's next, you can't listen to the radio or have a conversation with someone in your car? Instead of trying to get your name in lights, why not recommend something intelligent like the mandatory usage of hands-free devices? They cost $20 and make a tremendous difference. You'll never get a full ban passed so don't waste everyone's time and money. Next time propose something realistic."