Transit Mall Opponents Lobby Coastal Commission

By Jorge Casuso

Unable to derail the proposed Downtown Transit Mall at last month's City Council meeting, opponents of the $12 million project are lobbying the California Coastal Commission to stop, or at least delay, construction, which is scheduled to start next month.

In a letter this week, representatives for the newly formed Santa Monica Transportation Council asked the Coastal Commission to either deny the City a construction permit pending a full environmental impact analysis or postpone next Tuesday's scheduled vote until the next commission hearing in San Diego in March.

"We make this request because the City has completely failed to consider whether the Transit Mall project... may have significant adverse environmental impacts in the manner required by the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA")," wrote attorney Tom Larmore on behalf of the Transportation Council.

Larmore contends that the City "has erroneously advised the Commission in its Application that the Transit Mall project is exempt from CEQA." He added that "the City's actions and omissions render it impossible for the Commission to make certain findings required by its Regulations and by CEQA and any such approval would be unlawful."

At the council meeting January 23, City Planning director Suzanne Frick countered Larmore's contention that the City had never approved a preliminary design nor specifically analyzed the impacts of the transit mall, which will widen sidewalks, reduce general traffic lanes and require tearing up streets and removing some metered parking.

Frick argued that the City had analyzed the environmental impacts of the project in its downtown circulation study and Bayside District Specific Plan.

Noting that the Transit Mall had been in the works for years, the City Council dismissed Larmore's contentions and voted 6 to 0 to green light the Transit Mall, which is scheduled to begin construction in March.

But City officials say that the council's approval does not mean they are taking the Transportation Council's contentions lightly.

"We're still working at evaluating the contentions," said City Attorney Marsha Moutrie. "Now that legal questions were publicly raised, we're looking at what happened.

"We're into fulfilling our obligations in environmental law," Moutrie said. "We always carefully evaluate seriously made legal claims. We expect City staff will formulate a recommendation within the next few days."

Off the record, however, some City officials familiar with the process question whether the required environmental analysis was conducted.

"The mall was never separately analyzed," one official said. "Did we analyze the construction impacts? That hasn't been done."

Transportation Council spokesman Bill Imhoff, whose family has owned property on the Third Street Promenade since 1941, said members of the group have been writing letters to the Coastal Commission and donating money towards attorneys fees.

But he said the Transportation Council -- which includes downtown business and property owners, as well as residents -- does not have a set membership.

"This is evolving," Imhoff said. "What it was yesterday is not what it is today. It's based on a coalition of different individuals. Let's do this responsibly. That's what's bringing people out."

The City has several paths it can follow, City officials said. It can pause and conduct a full environmental review. It can await a Coastal Commission decision. Or it can await a decision in court if the Transportation Council, which is represented by the prominent land use firm of Harding Larmore Kutcher and Kozal, decides to file suit.

But no matter which path the City follows, it will be difficult for opponents to stop the Transit Mall, which has secured federal funding.

"I think the mall is coming either way," said a City official. "The question is when."