santa monica civic auditorium

Santa Monica, California

SANTA MONICA CIVIC AUDITORIUM TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PANEL (TAP) PROGRAM JULY 2013

A ULI Advisory Services Technical Assistance Panel Report

ii Santa Monica Civic Auditorium Technical Assistance Panel

Staff and Panel Members

TAP ClientCity of Santa Monica

Panel ChairJohn H. Alschuler, Jr. Chairman, HR&A Advisors, Inc.New York, New York

PanelistsMichael W. RossChief Executive Officer, Pasadena Civic Auditorium,Convention Center, Convention & Visitors BureauPasadena, California

John Fisher, AIAPresident, John Sergio Fisher & Associates, Inc.Tarzana, California

Thomas W. WulfSenior Vice President, Lowe Enterprises Real Estate Group

Melani V. Smith, AICPPrincipal, Melendrez

Dan MassielloSenior Vice President-Public Finance, Kosmont Companies

ULI Los Angeles Project StaffGail GoldbergExecutive Director, ULI Los Angeles

Christine Aure SusaDirector, ULI Los Angeles

Matthew SeversonAssociate, ULI Los Angeles

Report EditorSusan Davison, AICP, CGBPLEI, [email protected]

ULI Los Angeles Mission StatementAt the Urban Land Institute, our mission is to provide leadership in the responsible use of land and in creating and sustaining thriving communities worldwide. ULI Los Angeles, a district council of the Urban Land Institute, carries forth that mission as the preeminent regional real estate organization providing inclusive and trusted leadership influencing public policy and practice.

About the ULI Los Angeles Technical Assistance PanelsIn keeping with the Urban Land Institute mission, Technical Assistance Panels are convened to provide pro-bono planning and development assistance to public officials and local stakeholders of communities and nonprofit organizations who have requested assistance in addressing their land use challenges.

A group of diverse professionals representing the full spectrum of land use and real estate disciplines typically spend one day visiting and analyzing the built environments, identifying specific planning and development issues, and formulating realistic and actionable recommendations to move initiatives forward in a fashion consistent with the applicant’s goals and objectives.

1

ContentsExecutive Summary ..................................................................................... 2

Santa Monica Civic Auditorium Assistance Panel Report ............................... 5

Technical Assistance Panel Assignment and Process ................................... 7

Panel Observations and Recommendations .................................................. 9

Programming and Management ................................................................ 10

Set the Dream ........................................................................................... 12

Moving beyond the Civic: The Civic Center Creative District......................... 14

Opportunities............................................................................................. 16

Financing Options and Implementation ....................................................... 18

Conclusion ................................................................................................ 21

Acknowledgements ................................................................................... 22

Technical Assistance Panel Member Biographies ....................................... 23

2 Santa Monica Civic Auditorium Technical Assistance Panel

THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA, DIRECTED BY THE

Community & Cultural Service Department’s Cultural Affairs

Division (“Cultural Affairs Division”), requested ULI Los

Angeles to host a ULI Technical Assistance Panel to provide a

roadmap to address the long-term future of the Santa Monica

Civic Auditorium and provide a framework to implement the

vision. The event was part of ULI Los Angeles’s Technical

Advisory Panel (“TAP”) program which provides expert,

multidisciplinary advice on land use and real estate issues

facing communities in the Los Angeles Region. For many

years, the Civic Auditorium was one of the largest concert

venues in Southern California. International artists, such as

the Doors, the Rolling Stones, the Beach Boys, Bob Hope, and

Bob Dylan performed in the main auditorium. It was designed

to be flexible enough to allow for local community events

or large concert performances. But, with the lack of capital

investment in the facility, and years of deferred maintenance,

most concerts and events prefer to contract with newer,

state-of-the-art venues in the Los Angeles area. The majority

of event bookings at the Civic Auditorium now consist of

consumer event shows, and while it remains home to the

Santa Monica Symphony Orchestra, the building systems

have deteriorated and reached the end of their useful life. The

City of Santa Monica had plans and the funds to renovate

the Civic Auditorium, but the loss of redevelopment agencies

terminated those plans. At this time, the city closed regular

operations of the Civic Auditorium on June 30, 2013. The

panel now sees the challenge for the city is to redefine their

vision for the Civic Auditorium and make it a reality.

The Santa Monica Civic Auditorium is the Cultural Heart of the CityGiven the deep sense of civic pride and community

connection to the building, the panel recommends the

preservation and restoration of the Civic Auditorium. The

ULI Los Angeles Technical Assistance Panel recommends

the City of Santa Monica “set the dream” – to renovate the

theatre as a cultural icon for posterity. More than 43% of

Santa Monica adults make all, or a portion of their living in

arts-related fields. This factor points to a major opportunity for

a type of development that taps into the desire for something

for the community. The City of Santa Monica can establish

a cultural center – performing arts, visual arts, and more

importantly, a special place for the Westside - where the city

can demonstrate it is a leading place for culture, for all the

arts. The city should aspire for a renovated Civic Auditorium

that can qualitatively compete with downtown and other

regional venues.

The panel believes that any future for the Civic Auditorium

will require major financial commitments; harmonious,

appropriately-scaled development; improvements to the

operating model; and the generation of other sources of

revenue, through the sale of naming rights or general

obligation bonds.

Executive Summary

Santa Monica Civic Auditorium, primary (north) elevation, looking southeast.

3

Santa Monica Civic Auditorium marquee displaying upcoming events.

Programming and ManagementThe Civic Auditorium exists in a highly competitive, fluid

market environment, which will require a distinct market

position in order to succeed. Successful facility management

demands extensive knowledge, expertise and creativity.

A modern, well-managed facility can capture concerts,

Broadway shows, family shows, filming, award shows, local

events, graduations, and local performances. Additional event

opportunities for revenue are available, through the booking

of tradeshows, conventions, consumer shows, meetings,

outdoor parking lot events, and banquets and receptions.

Consideration should be given to a public non-profit

management model, to be explored for the operation and

management of the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium. This

model will allow the city to maintain budget authority and to

elect the governing board. The governing board oversees

the management and sets policy. The Facility Manager is

in charge of day-to-day operations and implements the

policy. This governing format is valuable in that it enables

the facility management to operate with greater flexibility

and effectiveness, especially in the areas of personnel

management, payroll, purchasing, contract approval,

sales and marketing, event booking, scheduling, event

management, parking, ticketing, advertising, concessions and

catering, facility maintenance, and generally being able to

negotiate competitive “deals.” This model can be successful if

there are clearly defined goals and the facility management is

entrepreneurial and market-focused.

The panel believes the future of the Civic will require a

substantial capital subsidy and annual operating support if its

programming mix includes a commitment to provide below

market pricing for community events and the arts sought

by so many citizens. The panel recommends the city set

the direction for the Civic and determine whether the Civic

needs to operate at profit; break-even from operations; cover

debt service; or operate at a loss. Currently, there is a large

city subsidy, which cannot continue in the current economic

environment. A snapshot of the Civic’s financials indicate the

cost of services are too high and out of alignment with what is

considered feasible within the market. The panel suggests the

Civic Auditorium set fees to cover costs, be priced within the

industry norm, and be managed to industry standards.

Set the DreamThe Civic Auditorium needs to be a state-of-the-art facility

that is flexible enough to be an ideal venue for drama,

musicals, ballet, popular concerts, choral, classical concerts,

film and both raked seating and flat floor special events

including exhibits. The Civic Auditorium should be renovated

to enhance acoustics; incorporate telescopic seating;

and modernize the theatre system technology. These

improvements are in addition to the excellent study already

presented to the city for the renovation and addition to the

Civic.

Move Beyond the Civic: The Civic Center Creative DistrictThe Civic Center Specific Plan, adopted by the City of

Santa Monica in 2005, has proven to be a planning vehicle

that is adaptable to the changing market conditions and

opportunities facing the city. In 2013, given the new reality

facing the city, that the funding previously available to

renovate the Civic Auditorium is no longer available, so new

solutions and opportunities must be sought. The entire 10

acres that currently encompass the Auditorium Special Use

District within the Specific Plan must now be replanned. While

the Early Childhood Center currently proposed in the District

is still a viable use, and planning for it is ongoing with Santa


Monica College, the proposal to incorporate a soccer field

within the acreage, to be shared with Samo High, is now

obsolete. The space that this use would have occupied within

the District, has therefore been reconsidered by the panel.

The Civic Auditorium has survived as an island in a sea of

surface parking for long enough, but for the Civic to succeed

in the future, it must be embedded in a larger Creative

District, flanked by compatible uses, and reconnected to the

urban fabric of the city. In the future a surface parking lot will

be considered an inappropriate use of a precious piece of

land in this location. Citizens need welcoming, well-defined

public spaces to stimulate face-to-face interaction, encourage

civic participation, admire public art and gather for public

events.

OpportunitiesThe panel suggests the following directions for the city to

support the Civic Auditorium: 1) Support the renovation &

modernization of the Civic Auditorium with significant financial

support through development opportunities of the surrounding

city controlled surface parking lots; 2) Support and encourage

the establishment of the Civic Center Creative District through

complimentary development uses to expand the arts impact;

and 3) Bring a renewed vibrancy and activity to the Civic

Center Creative District and establish the connections and

linkages to the surrounding area.

The panel recommends a healthy mix of uses to generate

activity in the Civic Center Creative District and provide a

revenue stream to support any renovation and development.

A mix of some of the following complimentary uses should be

explored: boutique hotel and conference center; residential

apartments; artist in residence; creative commercial office;

and pedestrian activated ground floor retail.

Financing OptionsRedevelopment funding is no longer a resource for the city

and the ability to raise new annual revenues from the general

fund to make debt service payments is curtailed. In order to

determine what the city can afford in the post-redevelopment

era, financing options must be explored prior to making

a decision to continue planning such a project. The panel

believes that a balanced multi-sourced approach should be

utilized and suggests the city explore the following options:

leverage the value of parking lots with development, naming

rights, voter authorization for general obligation bond; public/

private opportunities; and other financing vehicles such

as EB-5 financing, New Markets Tax Credit financing and

Historical Tax Credits.

Panel RecommendationThe challenge for the city is to redefine their vision for the

Civic Auditorium and make it a reality. In the future, the panel

imagines the Civic Auditorium and any development within

the Santa Monica Civic Center Specific Plan to be a place of

civic pride, serving citizens ranging in age from early chilhood

to mature adulthood, integrated seamlessly into its context,

and providing a range of activities drawing community

members to diverse facilities and lively public space. The city

should save the Civic Auditorium due to its cultural history,

landmark status and the unusually high level of civic pride

associated with the structure, even though it is not cost

effective to restore the building. In order to do so, the path

forward will require an affirmative approach since achieving

the vision will require a disciplined, sustained commitment

from the City of Santa Monica.

Side view of the primary entrance and its parabolic pylons.

5

Jessica Cusick and Lisa Luboff join the panel on a tour of the Civic.

Santa Monica Civic Auditorium Technical Assistance Panel Report

BackgroundThe Santa Monica Civic Auditorium was built in 1958,

designed by Welton Becket, as a public gathering place

dedicated to cultural, educational and community events.

Welton Becket studied at the famed Ecole des Beaux Arts,

and is known for his mid-twentieth century modern designs.

Beckett designed cultural Los Angeles icons, such as the

Capital Records building, the old Music Center, the Beverly

Hilton Hotel, and the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium. His

master planning work includes the Century City, and UCLA,

where he was master planner from 1948 until 1968.

The Civic Auditorium incorporates a modern style, and aside

from minor upgrades, the building is largely in its original

condition. The facility has a capacity for up to 3,000 seated

and 3,500 standing. Designed as a multi-purpose facility,

which can be used for both flat-floor events and sloped-floor

events, the facility comprises 27,000 square feet on the

main floor. The auditorium contains a unique mechanical

riser system that allows the main floor to convert from flat

exhibit space to sloped performance space for concerts. A

forerunner of adaptable space, the riser system allowed the

main floor to accommodate a variety of stage performances,

theater, concerts, and events. The auditorium includes a

stage area and proscenium opening, stage rigging, and rear

access to the facility for event loading. The East/West wing

provides an additional 4,200 square feet of exhibit/meeting

space. More than 1,000 surface parking spaces are available

and tents can be used over the main entrance to provide an

additional 17,000 square feet of covered space for larger

events. In 2002, the city designated the auditorium building

a historic landmark, citing its mid-century international style

and riser design as historic features.

For many years, the Civic Auditorium was one of the largest

concert venues in Southern California. International artists,

such as the Doors, the Rolling Stones, the Beach Boys, Bob

Hope, and Bob Dylan performed in the main auditorium.

The Civic Auditorium has hosted significant entertainment

and cultural events; from the Oscars, to conventions with

a regional draw. From 1961 to 1968, the Academy of

Motion Picture Arts and Sciences held its annual Oscar

awards ceremony there. It was designed to be flexible

enough to allow for local community events or large concert

performances. But, with the lack of capital investment in the

facility, and years of deferred maintenance, most concerts

and events located to new facilities constructed in the Los

Angeles area. The majority of event bookings at the Civic

Auditorium now consist of consumer event shows, and while

it remains home to the Santa Monica Symphony Orchestra,

the building systems have deteriorated and reached the end

of their useful life.


Santa Monica Civic Center Specific PlanThe Santa Monica Civic Center Specific Plan covers a portion

of the city that provides critical opportunity for redevelopment

and rejuvenation. Within the specific plan are a number of

significant land uses, such as the downtown, the main street

commercial area, and the civic center. The Civic Auditorium

is located in the civic center of the city, which includes the

City Hall, the city’s Public Safety Facility and the County

Courthouse. Since the plan was adopted in 1993, several

public facilities were improved or constructed in the area, as

well as the completion of the RAND headquarters on a 3.7-

acre site directly opposite of the Civic Auditorium. During the

planning process, a public open space and public/community

facilities program was approved, which included residential

and mixed-use housing with the area. The plan sought to

create an appropriate balance between open space and

housing, accommodate future light rail service, and provide

for the future of the Civic Auditorium. A key objective of the

plan was to maintain the Civic Auditorium as a prominent

landmark and program it with activities for the community.

Current development plans within the area also allow for the

construction of an Early Childhood Education Center along

the northern edge of the Special Use District, expected to

add a layer of activity to the area. (The Civic Auditorium and

Early Childhood Education Center reside within the Auditorium

Special Use District, one of five special use districts within the

Santa Monica Civic Center Specific Plan).

TOP: John S. Fisher, Mike Ross, Jessica Cusick, John Alschuler and Lisa Luboff touring the facility.BOTTOM: Tom Wulf, John Sergio Fisher, and Mike Ross interview Nederlander representatives.

7

In 2012, the City of Santa Monica made a difficult decision.

The city had expended significant time and resources to

address the future of the Civic Auditorium and the potential

opportunity for redevelopment within the Santa Monica Civic

Center Specific Plan area. Over the course of seven years,

the city examined a number of different ways to revitalize

the Civic. Several public facilities within the area were

upgraded and the city had plans and funds to renovate the

Civic Auditorium. But, the loss of Redevelopment Agencies

in the State of California, and the access to redevelopment

funds, the city terminated the $50 million renovation plans

for the Civic Auditorium. The cty indicated they are unable

to continue to subsidize and operate the Civic Auditorium,

for a variety of reasons, including: the building, along with

its systems and performance technology are antiquated;

it presents seismic safety concerns; the current business

model, which relies primarily on consumer shows, is no

longer economically viable; the Civic had lost its competitive

position in the region for attracting concerts, performances

and larger events, apart from community-subsidized

activities, and it operates with an annual deficit of up to $2

million. The City of Santa Monica, directed by the Community

& Cultural Service Department’s Cultural Affairs Division

(“Cultural Affairs Division”), requested that the Urban Land

Institute Los Angeles to host a ULI Technical Assistance Panel

to provide a roadmap to move forward.

Now that redevelopment funding is no longer a resource, the

city commissioned the TAP so as to address several major

questions and provide recommendations on guiding future

opportunities for the Civic Auditorium and the potential for

future redevelopment within the Santa Monica Civic Center

Specific Plan.

Technical Assistance Panel Assignment and Process

Technical Assistance Panel Questions1. EXAMINE THE STRATEGIES to maximize the full potential

of the Civic Auditorium as a standalone, self-supporting venue

bringing cultural events to Santa Monica. Consider the logical

partners in this endeavor, the use of the building and the full

site, including the parking lot. Specifically:

• Consider the financing options available to create a

viable venue which must include a major retrofit and

renovation.

• Once renovated can a sufficient number of events

and activities be attracted to the Civic Auditorium

considering regional competition and the venue’s

place in the community? If so, what types of events

and activities might these be?

• What are reasonable expectations for operating

profitably with sufficient income generation to pay

any debt service resulting from the renovation?

2. WHAT KIND OF OPERATOR, and operation, would appear

to create the best chance of success in the long term for this

cultural icon? What size theatre might be most efficient and

effective? The current Specific Plan allows for a 20,000 SF

addition and calls for sports fields and open space adjacent

to the Civic. Is this compatible with the strategy to renovate

the facility and make it self-sufficient or should the plan be

revised? Are there other actions the city can take to benefit

the future viability of the Civic Auditorium?

Tom Wulf and Dan Massiello meet with Francie Stefan.


3. DESCRIBE THE ISSUES related to the redevelopment of

this site, and the potential opportunities to overcome them.

• Is there a minimum area of the parking lot land

required to be redeveloped in order to provide a

feasible funding option?

• What might be the best types of development at this

site?

• Is an integrated development approach preferable or

should it be more segregated with separate uses and

a project specific approach?

• What is the role of public parking in relation to any

potential future pro-forma for the facility and the site?

Panel of ExpertsThe District Council assists the sponsor in refining the scope

of work and convenes a panel to address those specific

issues. Each panel follows a proven process that begins with

a conversation between ULI representatives and the potential

sponsor to frame the assignment. Each panel is comprised of

highly qualified professionals who volunteer their time to ULI.

They are chosen for their knowledge relative to the scope of

the topic and screened to ensure their objectivity. Members

of a TAP cannot be involved in matters pending before or be

working for the sponsor of a TAP, and cannot solicit work

from the sponsor during the panel’s assignment period. ULI

panel teams are interdisciplinary and typically include several

developers, a planner, a market analyst, a finance expert, and

others with the niche expertise needed to address a given

project. ULI teams are structured to provide a holistic look at

development problems. Each panel is chaired by a respected

ULI member with previous panel experience.

ProcessThe agenda for the two day TAP process was intensive, and

included interviews with a diverse group of stakeholders, a

site tour, a working session and an evening spent discussing

findings and formulating recommendations. Sponsor entities

are responsible for significant preparation before the panel’s

visit, including providing extensive briefing material to each

member prior to the panel’s convening. During the day

of the TAP, members tour the site, hear from public and

private stakeholders, and then deliberate on the assigned

issues. Panel members approach the assignment from many

perspectives, such as market potential, land use and design,

financing and development strategies, and organizing and

implementation. Because of the in-depth preparation prior

to the day of the TAP, panel members are able to assess

a sponsor’s issues and to provide recommendations in a

compressed amount of time. In fulfillment of the mission of

the Urban Land Institute, this report is intended to provide

objective advice that will further ULI’s mission to share best

practices and provide educational services in local land use

planning and real estate development.

The panel reviews their findings.

9

Panel Observations and Recommendations

During the two day TAP, panelists began with a list of findings

to help set the focus for the recommendations. Panelists

discussed the various observations gathered during the

review of the briefing materials, as well as the issues and

ideas that were raised during the various interviews of the

stakeholders. Panel overall recommendations included

programming and management, recommendations for

the theater, the creation of a civic center cultural district,

development opportunities, and a list of financial options.

Observations

• The Civic Auditorium has been the cultural heart of

the City of Santa Monica. It is a gathering place for

the community, one in which residents have special

memories of community events that have been held

in the building. The deep pride in the Auditorium

indicates that it is a lifestyle anchor with tremendous

value to the residents of the city.

• The city should save the Civic due to its cultural

history, landmark status and the unusually high level

of civic pride associated with the structure, even

though it is not cost-effective to restore the building

when compared to the cost of new construction.

• With the city’s special emphasis on the arts and a

high demand for the arts on the Westside, the Civic

should be saved and can fill an important niche. The

Civic Auditorium exists in a highly competitive, fluid

market environment, which will require a distinct

market position in order to succeed.

• The Civic Auditorium building is over fifty years old,

with landmark status, is functionally obsolete, has

deferred maintenance issues, and is disconnected

from the urban fabric.

• The operating model has imbedded costs that the

market cannot and will not carry. Preserving the Civic

Auditorium as an arts center requires substantial

subsidies, and will require annual operating support.

There is no economic model for a self-sustaining

cultural center.

• The arts are an important civic function, but are

not typically economically viable on their own. In

this case, the panel believes a successful future for

the Civic will require major financial commitments

and multiple sources of funding. In a very difficult

economy, the City of Santa Monica is fortunate to

have choices, but none of these choices are easy or

obvious.

• The future of the Civic will require viewing the

ten acre site as a single, holistic place. Any plan

for renovation should be oriented towards the

community, but based in reality. It should be focused

on implementation, and include a development and

operating plan that provides for long-term revenue

solutions that support civic and performing arts

programming.

• Despite clear consensus that the Civic Auditorium

should be saved, there is a distinct lack of clarity

with stakeholders as to function, economics and

management.

Panel members meet with the Santa Monica Convention and Visitors Bureau


Programming and ManagementThe current operating model is the Civic Auditorium is

managed by a municipal department. Very few cities cost

effectively manage convention centers, theaters, stadiums or

other large facilities. The public assembly facility business is

competitive, with the Los Angeles area containing a variety

of venues that serve the entertainment market. From the

2,100 seat Ahmanson Theater in downtown, to the 7,100

seat Nokia Theater, Los Angeles is home to more than

fifteen venues that compete with the Civic, none of which

are run by a city department. The Civic Auditorium cannot

compete in terms of the facility, its acoustics and ambience,

and the cost of services. Panelists consider it highly unlikely

that the Civic Auditorium can be financially successful if its

manager is constrained by city policies and procedures that

make it difficult, if not impossible, to conduct business in a

competitive, business-like manner. City leaders must free

the facility from constraints that inhibit sound and reasonable

business practices.

Currently, there is a large city subsidy, which cannot continue

in the current economic environment. The Civic Auditorium

provides free services to city departments and civic events.

The panel suggests the Civic Auditorium needs to at least

provide services at cost recovery. There should be no free

services to the city or civic organizations. In the City of

Pasadena, which is the same size, same demographic, and

contains the Pasadena Civic Auditorium, the city pays to

use the facility at a third of the normal rent. The city pays for

every service, from internet access, to union stage hands,

to audio services. In the City of Santa Monica, about 40%

of the Civic Auditorium’s usage is city departments. A lot of

Auditorium use is not paid for – and has been covered by the

city subsidy.

Services have to be priced within the industry norm. A

snapshot of the Civic’s financials indicate the cost of services

are too high. The facility has a high operating cost and aging

systems, completely out of alignment with what is considered

feasible within the market. The building needs to be managed

to industry standards.

The City of Santa Monica must consider the following

questions and define their own financial expectations of the

Civic Auditorium:

• Is the mission of the Civic to make an operating

profit – profit being defined as a surplus of operating

revenue over operating expenses?

• What level of profit is desired? Is the mission’s

objective only to generate income sufficient to break-

even from operations or should the profit be large

enough to also cover debt service?

• Are operating losses acceptable? If they are, to what

extent will the city fund the facility and programs?

• How will any shortfall be funded?

Successful facility management demands extensive

knowledge, expertise and creativity. A modern, well-managed

facility can capture additional events. Concerts are attractive,

Competing venues chart. Source: Pasadena Convention Center.

Venue Location # Seats Stage CommentsAhmanson Theater Downtown 2,100 Union Premier location. High profile/reputation

Cerritos Center Cerritos 1,800 Non-Union Self-presents, controls product through non-compete

Dorothy Chandler Auditorium Downtown 3,100 Union Premier location. High profile/reputation

Greek Theater Griffith Park 6,100 Union Location, Accommodates larger shows, Traditional reputation

Hollywood Palladium Hollywood 4,000 Open Floor Union Location, Night club setting, Livenation

Nokia Theater Downtown 7,100 Union Location, Accommodates larger shows, Competes for TV shows

Orpheum Theater Downtown 2,100 Non-Union Location, Co-promotion, higher profitability for marginal events

Pantages Theater Hollywood 2,700 Union Owned and promoted by Nederlander

Pasadena Civic Auditorium Pasadena 3,000 Union Convenient to valleys, L.A. Perceived distant from west-side

Royce Hall Westwood 1,800 Non-Union Location, Higher profitability for marginal events

Santa Monica Civic Aud. West-side 3,000 Union Premier location. Not true performing arts theater

Segerstrom Hall Orange County 2,900 Union Orange County, Regional competition for 2nd shows in market

Shrine Auditorium Downtown 6,300 Union Location, Accommodates larger shows, Competes for TV shows

Terrace Theater Long Beach 3,100 Non-Union Convenient to South L.A., North Orange Co.

The Grove Anaheim 1,700 Union Orange County, Nederlander promoted, 2nd shows in market

Thousand Oaks Civic Theater Thousand Oaks 1,800 Non-Union Niche location, Higher profitability for marginal events

Universal Amphitheater Hollywood 6,000 Union Location, Accommodates larger shows, Competes for TV shows

Wiltern Theater Downtown 2,300 Union Location, owned and promoted by Livenation

11

but in revenue terms, they are only one night. Management

should seek to capture concerts, Broadway shows, family

shows, filming, award shows, local events, graduations, and

local performances. Additional event opportunities for revenue

are tradeshows, conventions, consumer shows, meetings,

outdoor parking lot events, and banquets and receptions.

Rarely does a public assembly facility operate for a single

purpose or event type. Ancillary revenue can be captured by

internet connectivity charges, electric and equipment rentals,

food and beverage concessions, ticket service charges

(renovation fee) and retail space. All are an important part of

the balance of activities, as well as the opportunities to drive

revenue to offset any city subsidies.

Like Santa Monica, most local government agencies finance,

construct and manage the majority of public assembly

facilities and thus this form of ownership is by far the most

common, however often not the most effective and cost

efficient model. The Santa Monica Civic Auditorium has an

unusually high $2 million annual operating loss. At this point,

the city believes this level of subsidy is unacceptable and will

not continue in the future.

There is no reason a public assembly facility cannot be

successfully operated by a public body if:

• There are clearly defined goals.

• The approach is business-like, bottom-line oriented.

• The leadership knows the need for an

entrepreneurial, marketing-oriented approach.

• The facility and operation are relatively non-political

and freed of factors that cause instability, loss of

confidence, and lack of competitiveness.

• In effect, the facility’s operation is treated as a public

enterprise or as if it were a private organization and

as free as possible from bureaucratic restraints.

There are four basic forms of governance of public assembly

facilities:

• Elected public body – Santa Monica Model (city

council) While the reporting lines may be through an

appointed official, (e.g., city manager, department

head) it is the city council, etc. that makes the final

decisions

• Elected public body with an independent board –

(e.g., recreation commission, facilities district, etc.).

The board would likely be appointed by the public

body, receive its authority from the public body and

have some reporting responsibilities (and perhaps

some approvals such as budget) to that body.

• Public non-profit or not-for-profit corporation –

Pasadena Model (public authority). (Pasadena Model)

This arrangement has more independent authority yet

would have to have at an operating agreement with

the city.

• Private corporation limited liability company or

partnership.

Consideration should be given to the Public Non-profit

Management model, to be explored for the operation and

management of the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium. This

model will allow the city to maintain budget authority and to

elect the governing board. The governing board oversees the

management and sets policy. The manager implements the

policy. This governing format is valuable in that it enables

the facility management to operate with greater flexibility

and effectiveness, especially in the areas of personnel

management, payroll, purchasing, contract approval,

sales and marketing, event booking, scheduling, event

management, parking, ticketing, advertising, concessions

and catering, facility maintenance, and generally being able

to negotiate competitive “deals.” The Facility Manager is in

charge of the day-to-day operation, not the governing board.


The panel recommendation is for the city to “set the dream”

– to renovate the theatre as a cultural icon for posterity set

in the context of an engaging mixed use urban environment.

The City of Santa Monica can establish a cultural center –

performing arts, visual arts, and more importantly, a special

place for the Westside. The city can demonstrate it is a

leading place for culture, for all the arts, and qualitatively

compete with downtown venues so that the Westside

population does not need to travel downtown to enjoy the

best entertainment and special events. The city holds perhaps

the largest concentration of creative professionals in the

U.S. More than 43% of Santa Monica adults make all, or a

portion of their living in arts-related fields. This factor points

to a major opportunity for a type of development that taps

into the desire for something beyond just another office

building, residential tract, or shopping experience; a new

destination that provides a real sense of ownership for the

community. In the Creative Capital report that details a plan

for the development of the city’s arts and culture vision, the

community “envisions the arts and culture as an integral

component of civic life, incorporating into the values, policies,

and daily activities of the city.” Residents view culture as an

important component of what makes the city exceptional,

desirable and economically competitive. Part of the plan

involves the retention, development, and reuse of cultural

facilities that fit into the community’s identity. The panel

considered the Civic Auditorium as one of those facilities that

would contribute to the cultural participation in the city.

In order to do so, the Auditorium needs to be a state-of-the

art facility that is flexible enough to be an ideal venue for

drama, musicals, ballet, popular concerts, choral, classical

concerts, film, and both raked-seating and flat-floor special

events that include exhibits. Each of the above uses has an

ideal capacity that should be considered and accommodated,

in order to provide the greatest amount of capacity to the city

and to groups seeking to use the facility.

The following are needs and possibilities for setting the

dream:

GREATLY IMPROVE THE ACOUSTICS. This can be done by

removing the ceiling for a greater reverberation time coupled

with adjustable absorption panels and draperies for variable

acoustics ranging in reverberation times under one second

for film to one second for reinforced sound to 2 seconds for

classical orchestra or adjustable acoustics can be achieved

electronically.

GREATLY IMPROVE THE SEATS. Instead of plastic

removable seating, the city should consider installing

retractable permanent upholstered performing arts center

seats. With the push of a button, seats can disappear when

a flat floor is needed. Easily retractable seating equates to

cost savings in labor. There currently is one company that can

provide telescoping seating with curved rows which provide

better sightlines and heightens audience self-awareness.

A maximum of 2,000 seats is an ideal number for dramas,

musicals, ballet and classical orchestra. The request for

3,000 seats for special filming premiers and popular concerts

The Civic staged for an exhibit event. The main floor includes a unique hydraulic tilting platform to allow for flexibility in uses.

Set the Dream

13

has been expressed. With the removal of the existing seating,

there is enough height to build a balcony with 1,000 fixed

performing arts seats. Two-thousand telescoping seats

can be installed on the floor, designed to the height of the

new balcony, and closed off to accommodate a 2,000 seat

capacity event. A scrim roll drop at the balcony edge could

visually separate and allow for the space closure, while still

maintaining the acoustical volume.

PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FLOOR SPACE. The retracted

telescoping seating would yield 20,000 SF of flat floor. The

motorized sloping floor was an innovation in its time but

not as efficient today. It would be historically preserved. A

flat area of 50,000 SF has been cited for exhibits and other

special events. The stage area plus an addition from the stage

all the way to Pico Blvd. could approach the needed area and

present an iconic front in back. Other additions could include

one or two small black box theatres for small performances

and so that the cultural center can be continually active.

GREATLY IMPROVE THE TECHNOLOGY. Theatre system

technology improvements needs to be installed in order to

renovate the Civic Auditorium to astate-of-the-art facility.

Improvements should include motorized rigging and tension

grids for flexible front-of-house theatrical lighting positions,

the use of movie lights and LED fixtures, and modernized

amenities. Concessions and restrooms need to be expanded

and improved.

All recommendations should include a series of design

studies with projected costs and operating proformas. Illustrative figure of telescopic, retractable, and upholstered seating


Moving Beyond the Civic: The Civic Center Creative DistrictThe rejuvenated facility should anchor a creative cultural

district. The Civic Center Specific Plan, adopted by the

City of Santa Monica in 2005, has proven to be a planning

vehicle that is adaptable to the changing market conditions

and opportunities facing the city. In 2013, given the new

reality facing the city, that the funding previously available

to renovate the Civic Auditorium is no longer available, new

solutions and opportunities must be sought. The entire ten

acres that currently encompass the Auditorium Special Use

District within the Specific Plan must now be replanned

and repurposed. While the Early Childhood Center currently

proposed in the District is still a viable use, and planning

for it is ongoing with Santa Monica College, the proposal to

incorporate a soccer field within the acreage, to be shared

with Samo High is now obsolete. The space that this use

would have occupied within the District, has therefore been

reconsidered by the panel.

The Civic Auditorium has survived as an island in a sea of

surface parking for long enough, but for the Civic to succeed

in the future, it must be embedded in a larger Creative

District, flanked by compatible uses, and reconnected to the

urban fabric of the city. In the future a surface parking lot will

be considered an inappropriate use of a precious piece of

land in this location.

The District must reflect four essential characteristics, it must

be:

CIVIC– The uses must be compatible with and

supportive of the civic focus of the Civic Center.

CULTURAL– The hub of a diverse and dynamic

creative precinct that grows and expands events

and offerings. The Civic Center, and the Auditorium

Special Use District within in it, must support a broad

range of performing arts, film exhibition, community

activities, and special events.

CREATIVE– The city is becoming the home of the

creative class, and must showcase arts and activities

that represent the dynamism of the population of the

city, as well as the entire westside of Los Angeles.

Uses and programming should build upon the

changing and continued growth of creative industries

(in terms of digital and other technology and media)

and their populations.

ACTIVATED – A successful site, in the remarkable

coastal setting that the Civic Center enjoys, must be

a place in which life, use and programming occurs

both indoors and outdoors. It must also connect to

the surrounding urban areas.

Open SpaceThe on site open space within the District should be

complementary to Tongva Park, but serve different group

sizes and accommodate different types of cultural and arts

oriented events. In short, open space within the District

should be accessible, flexible, and programmed. Examples

of open spaces that may serve as models for this District’s

Knitting the urban fabric.

15

space are the canted lawn atop the Hypar Pavilion at Lincoln

Center, the well established and beloved lawn at Bryant Park

in New York, Federation Square in Melborne, and the plaza in

front of the New World Symphony Building in Miami Beach.

The specific development opportunities that the panel

identified for the land within the District, are described in the

Opportunities section of this report starting on page 16.

MobilityIn addition to providing facilities and amenities that

complement the Civic, it is crucial that the District is knit

together, and into the urban fabric that surrounds it, by

connective tissue that is multimodal, serving not only drivers,

but also transit riders coming from the future Metro Expo

Line station at 4th and Colorado, or from Big Blue Bus stops,

or others on foot, as well as those on private, or in the near

future, city bike share bicycles.

Specific physical connections are described below and

shown in the figure on page 14. These elements should be

considered in the replanning of the District, and either reflect

guidance already contained in the Specific Plan itself, or

introduce ideas that have already been adopted in the city’s

Bike Action Plan of 2011.

• 3rd Street should be reintroduced through the site

from the south, and connected to Main Street, at

least as a path for cycists.

• Civic Center Drive should be comfortable for all

modes of travel, as it enters the site and travels east

west.

• Multimodal connections to the site should be

enhanced from the east and west via the Michigan

Ave. Neighborhood Greenway improvements

currently being planned. Olympic will be a central

spine through the site itself, connected through

from 4th Street to Ocean Boulevard, through the

developing Village, with multimodal capability to

serve cyclists as well as pedestrians and drivers.

The western connection will facilitate flow ffrom the

Pier, through the Civic Center to the Civic. One could

imagine, for example, Santa Monica Glow festival art

exhibits extending from the beach to the Civic Center

Creative District via this path.

• Main Street’s organization should be enhanced

and clarified with the addition of colored buffered

bike lanes north and south, crossing points for

pedestrians should also be clearly marked. Though

the street has a comfortably narrow section, the

space within it for drivers, pedestrians and cyclists is

not clearly differentiated. Streetscape improvements

to this street, together with its realignment, as

proposed in the Colorado Esplanade project, will

facilitate the connection to downtown Santa Monica

and to the Metro Expo Line. The Colorado Esplanade

project also proposes improvements to the northern

sidewalk of 4th Street, which will facilitate pedestrian

connectivity to the Civic Center.

• The edges of the Creative District should also be

re-imagined as new development is planned. Both

the Pico Blvd. and 4th Street edges of the site are

presently unactivated by at grade uses, and edged

with surface parking. In the case of 4th street, at

least south of Civic Center Drive, the sidewalk zone

is isolated from the site by hedges, and devoid of the

amenities which increase pedestrian comfort. On

Pico Boulevard, the street edge is backed by either

surface parking behind hedged shrubs, or back of

house elements of the Santa Monica Civic, including

its loading dock. However, at least in the case of the

Pico Blvd. edge, an unutilized turf setback area is of

a significant depth and could be redesigned to work

with the sidewalk zone in order to provide a widened,

shaded, pleasant walking environment.

In the future, we imagine the The Civic Center Creative

District to be a place of civic pride, serving citizens ranging

in age from early chilhood to mature adulthood, integrated

seamlessly into its context, and providing a range of activities

drawing community members to diverse facilities and lively

public space.


OpportunitiesWhat does it take to create this cultural and creative district?

The panel suggested the setting of a few goals to provide the

foundation for a community direction.

GOAL 1: Bring a renewed vibrancy and activity to the

Civic Center Creative District;

GOAL 2: Support the renovation & modernization

of the Civic Auditorium with significant financial

support through development opportunities of the

surrounding city controlled surface parking lots;

GOAL 3: Support and encourage the establishment

of the Civic Center Creative District through

complementary development uses to expand the arts

impact;

GOAL 4: Establish the connections and linkages to the

surrounding area.

The city is quite fortunate to share a location and environment

which is in high demand for a variety of potential development

uses which could all be successful and achieve the

established goals. Many cities and agencies are not so

fortunate with land for development opportunities. What

this provides is a clean slate of many viable development

scenarios for the approximately five to six acre development

property. The panel recommends a healthy mix of uses to

generate activity in the Civic Center Creative District while

programming a revenue stream to support any renovation

and development. Examples of potential complementary

and viable uses are the following (note: the sites available

will likely not support all of these uses simultaneously at this

scale, however a mix of these is recommended to accomplish

the outlined goals):

BOUTIQUE HOTEL AND CONFERENCE CENTER

200-400 keys; 20,000-40,000 SF conference facility.

The addition of a full-service, low-rise hotel and

conference center adjacent to the Civic Auditorium

can be beneficial in achieving multiple goals for the

district. First is the synergy with the Civic Auditorium

for events, exhibits, conferences and even food service.

The addition of a directly adjacent hotel and expanded

conference space can further enhance the viability of

the Civic Auditorium itself and attract additional meeting

and conference business to the city. The food and

beverage services of the hotel may also have the ability

to support the Civic Auditorium needs.

RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTS/MULTI-FAMILY

400-600 residential units & amenities. The addition of

residents to the Civic Center Creative District can bring a

vibrancy and life to the district; especially in “off-hours”,

evenings and weekends where the current Civic area

is predominately vacated. The demand for additional

housing units continues to outstrip supply in the Santa

Monica market and is expected to continue to do so

for the near future. Although additional residents and

units typically translate to increased traffic concerns, the

panel recommends density precisely at these types of

locations that have significant connectivity with the city

and region as a whole.

Opportunities

Parking at the Civic.

17

ARTIST IN RESIDENCE – LIVE/WORK LOFTS OR ARTIST

HOUSING

50-100 loft units (WAV Ventura example; http://

www.wavartists.com/). The inclusion of an “artist in

residence” portion of development is essential to the

creation and success of the Civic Center Creative

District. Although this use will most certainly require

subsidy, it is important to the creation of the district

and vibrancy of the space. A residence for working

artists, whether they be visual, performance, digital

or new media will add both ongoing activity, but more

importantly, creativity to the ongoing programming of

the district and generate opportunities for additional

events.

COMMERCIAL OFFICE – CREATIVE, TECHNOLOGY,

DIGITAL AND MEDIA FOCUS

100,000-150,000 SF; Creative, low-rise general office

uses. Building the vision of the Civic Center Creative

District also includes the growth and expansion of

innovative business and the synergy that brings within

the district. The site is highly desirable from an office

standpoint and in particular from the Creative Class

within the city. Including these types of uses, and

more importantly, people within the district will further

enhance the success and vibrant nature of the site.

PEDESTRIAN ACTIVATED GROUND FLOOR RETAIL

30,000-50,000 SF – Stitching the uses together,

surrounding the created open space, the Civic

Auditorium and linking the district the fabric of the city,

the ground floor retail amenities are an essential piece

of the development. The Civic Center Creative District

will benefit from an authentic, local, and unique mix

of retail and food service amenities that continue to

activate the space during an 18-hour day. It is within

this space and adjacent to these retail establishments

that the outdoor programming will bring the vibrancy

and activity to the area.

LAND REDEVELOPMENT Potential Revenues to support Civic AuditoriumThe current modernization and renovation program for the

Civic Auditorium was reported to require approximately

$4-6 Million per year in annual revenue to support the

capital costs. A balanced mix of development can be

programmed to achieve this goal. In concept, below,

a mixture of the following program elements on the

approximately 5.1 acre site achieve this goal:

BOUTIQUE HOTEL & CONFERENCE CENTER:

o 1 acre land area

o 150,000 GSF +/-

o 300 rooms +/-

o $275 ADR, 75% occupancy, 14% TOT = $3.1

Million/year

o Ground lease of land: approx. $.5 Million/year

RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTS/MULTI-FAMILY:

o 3 acre land area; 3.5 FAR; 460,000 GSF +/-

o 400-600 residential units

o Land value approx. $48 Million

o Ground lease of land: approx. $2.8 Million/year

COMMERCIAL OFFICE – CREATIVE CLASS

o 1.5-2 acre land area; 3.5 FAR

o 250,000-300,000 GSF +/-

o Land value approx. $15 Million

o Ground lease of land: approx. $1.0 Million/year

ARTIST IN RESIDENCE - POTENTIAL:

o 1 acre land area; 2.0 FAR; 87,000 GSF +/-

o 50-75 live/work affordable units

o Likely requires subsidy/Potential for Affordable

Housing fund use


One fundamental question must be answered before the

city can move forward on planning the rehabilitation and

renovation of the Civic Auditorium: Can the city pay for it?

Other sections of this report address the areas in which the

panel discussed room for improvement in the operations

of the Auditorium and other economic considerations, but

we do not expect that the Auditorium’s operations would

ever meaningfully contribute to paying the debt service

payments required to finance the costs of such major

capital improvements. Now that redevelopment funding is

no longer a resource for the city, the ability to raise new

annual revenues to make debt service payments is severely

curtailed. In order to determine what the city can afford in the

post-redevelopment era, many financing alternatives must be

explored prior to making a decision to continue planning such

a project.

The team assembled for the TAP considered many

approaches to financing such a large project. Traditional

vehicles such as general obligation bonds, city general

fund financing (such as certificates of participation) or

alternative pledges from within the operations of the Civic

Auditorium Enterprise and/or other city Enterprises were all

contemplated. Considering the fact that one of the stated

Financing Options and Implementationgoals is to have the facility be self-sustaining, i.e. elimination

of general fund operating subsidies, the utilization of any city

funds (outside of the Auditorium’s operations) to support debt

service were deemed not to be viable options. Furthermore,

GO bonds are difficult to get approved in California due to the

requirements of Proposition 13.

Other financing vehicles that were looked at include EB-5

financing (a federal Visa/Immigration program encouraging

job-creating foreign investment in the US), New Markets Tax

Credit financing (another federal program offering tax credits

in lieu of tax exempt interest), and historical tax credits (a

similar program), but the reality is that while these programs

offer attractive effective borrowing rates, they are in fact

debt vehicles and the funding for their annual debt service

ultimately must be generated by the Civic Auditorium itself or

come from other city operations.

What is needed is a new source of external funding that can

be relied upon on an annual basis in order to repay any debt

incurred to finance improvements. Possible external funding

sources that could be available to the city may include the

selling of naming rights for an annual fee or applying for

grants or other philanthropic resources. While these and other

alternatives should be explored, they are either insufficient

in size to have a meaningful impact on the projected annual

debt service requirements and/or it is simply too premature

to ascertain the availability of any meaningful resources

of this nature. In order to finance the rehabilitation and/or

reconstruction of the Civic Auditorium, a more broad-based

solution is required.

The panel was unanimous in their assessment that in order

to finance an investment of this magnitude, the city would

need to tap into the value of its most readily available asset:

the real estate on which the Auditorium sits. The parking lots

surrounding the Auditorium are extremely valuable properties,

John Alschuler outlines the panel’s recommendations for the final presentation.

19

and, if properly structured, the value contained therein can be

unlocked, deployed to the city’s benefit, and remain under the

city’s control as well.

There are several methods that can be employed to monetize

the value of the real estate assets surrounding the Civic

Auditorium. As is the case with the entire project as a whole,

several policy issues must be addressed and choices made

that will affect the city and its residents far into the future. All

approaches envision some sort of private development taking

place next to the auditorium. This approach would ostensibly

be a “public/private partnership”, whereby private capital will

be deployed along with public funding. If the city chooses to

leverage the value of this real estate asset in order to fund

this project, the panel recommends, in general, that the city

retain ownership of the property itself and devise a structure

that would lease it to private entities to install a for-profit

development.

The types and amounts of revenues that could be generated

by any such private development depend on the nature of that

development. If some sort of hotel development is desired,

new annual revenues realized by the city would likely be in

the form of increases to “site-specific” transient occupancy,

real estate and sales taxes, as well as ground rent generated

by the footprint of the development project itself. If more of

a residential development is desired, it seems likely that the

major types of revenues produced would be ground rent and

new real estate taxes generated by this currently tax-exempt

property. There would also likely be site-specific increases to

city sales tax receipts as well in a mixed-use scenario where

retail and housing are installed within the new development.

These new site-specific tax revenues generated by the

new project could then be allocated by the city from within

the general fund to the repayment of any debt service

associated with the financing of the Civic Auditorium’s capital

improvements. When these revenues are combined with

ground rent to be received by the leasing of said property,

there will be a substantial amount of new annual revenues

that can be deployed to support the large scale financing that

would be required to pay the costs of the improvements to

the Civic Auditorium.

The current market value and best use of the parking lots,

anticipated new revenues that could be generated by a

private development and the market factors that need to

be considered when determining what to develop and/or

evaluating the likelihood of the success of any such endeavor,

are all beyond the scope of this panel’s assignment. However,

very rough “back of the envelope” calculations made by

the panel during the session, and based on the collective

expertise and experience of the panel’s members, estimated

the potential for annual new revenues could be in the $4

million range or higher. At current interest rates, $4 million

would pay the debt service to finance an approximately $50

million capital project.

The panel considered these figures simply as “food for

thought” as they are in no way intended to represent an

actual projection or estimation of the city’s ability to realize

this level of new annual revenues. The panel does believe,

however, that these “high level”, broad-based evaluations

are conservative and could be higher if the proper mix of

development opportunities can be realized. Moreover, the

panel made sweeping assumptions and generalizations

about the character and nature of what could be installed

on the parking lot; ultimately, the choice of what to install, if

anything, would be up to the city’s policy-makers and could

be something substantially different from what the panel

contemplated for use in this very limited exercise. The Cultural District.


Moving beyond the Civic means that the city will be required

to rethink the entire approach that was previously considered

back in the era of redevelopment funding. Embarking down

such a path of further study and exploration is expensive, in

and of itself. The city must first determine if the ultimate goal

of “saving the Civic” is even obtainable, before deciding how

best to do so. The answer to the question “should we save

the Civic” will not lie in a financial model because the panel

believes it is not an economically sound decision. The answer

lies within a cost/benefit analysis that must be applied to less

scientific concepts, such as quality of life priorities regarding

development and policy regarding how best to utilize city

resources, such as real estate.

Do the financial means to pay the costs of rehabilitating the

Civic Auditorium even exist? The panelists believe that the

answer is a qualified “yes”.

Creating the vision and setting the directionThe panel urges the city to consider the report suggestions,

the thoughtful work of the city staff and the comments of its

citizenry then move forward with an action plan. The Civic

has closed while an important district of the city remains

dominated by surface parking lots. Opportunities exist to re-

envision the management of the Civic, its physical form, and

its surrounding development context. While there is no easy

course of action available, the city is fortunate to have the

intellectual, cultural and financial assets that can address the

apparent challenges.

To that end, the panel urges that the city set clear direction in

regard to:

- The cultural, civic and artist function of the Civic

Auditorium considering the aspirations of the

community and the competitive market place.

- The operating mode of the Civic Auditorium

considering the need for management able to

implement community’s vision in the context of

today’s market and financial realities.

- A financial plan for the renovation of the building.

- A comprehensive development plan for the District,

including the development of the parking lots.

- A sustainable operating plan for operating financing.

The panel recommends the City “set the vision” and craft

a plan to resolve the above issues before any further

engagement with the marketplace, i.e. to solicit operators of

the facility, investors or development proposals. There are

many ways to address these questions, the panel suggests

consideration of the following two options. First, the City

staff could lead this process drawing upon their considerable

resources supplemented by constants with expertise in facility

management, real estate, design, planning and cultural

resources. Or, as the panel recommends, the City could

create establish a new board appointed by and responsible to

the City Council, a precursor to the entity that might eventually

oversee and manage the new cultural district. The board

could be led by a balanced group of citizens with experience

in cultural programming, civic requirements, public/private

development, and business management, again supported by

appropriate third party advisory resources. In both instances,

substantive community engagement would be solicited. Either

path forward can be viable, though the panel expresses its

recommendation for the near term creation of a new board.

The process could take up to a year.

Regardless, the panel urges the city and its elected leadership

take this opportunity to make the required decisions to

ensure the long term contribution of the Civic to the cultural

and community life of Santa Monica. Once these issues are

resolved, the city or the new governing board could choose

experienced, creative executive leadership to implement the

vision with the goal of opening the Civic within five to ten

years.

John Alschuler interviews Nina Fresco, Carol Lemlein and Frank Gruber from the Save the Civic community group.

21

Conclusion

Due to the loss of redevelopment funds, the city closed

regular operations of the Civic Auditorium on June 30, 2013.

The building is an important cultural resource and it is seen

by the community as the cultural heart of the downtown civic

area. The city should save the Civic Auditorium due to its

cultural history, landmark status and the unusually high level

of civic pride associated with the structure, even though it is

not cost effective to restore the building in comparison to the

costs of new construction. In order to do so, the path forward

will require an affirmative approach since achieving the vision

will require a disciplined, sustained commitment from the City

of Santa Monica.

At the heart of the recommendation is the need for the city to

clearly lay out their vision for the future of the Civic Auditorium

and the Civic Center Specific Plan. It is important that the city

establish a program that is clearly defined and detailed along

with a viable financing plan before issuing another Request

for Proposal (“RFP”). For example, the local community may

desire the renovation of the Civic Auditorium, but without

a clear path forward that includes a viable, solid operating

plan, the city will be responsible for the long term subsidy of

the Civic Auditorium and it’s programs. The panel believes

the future of the Civic will require substantial subsidies and

annual operating support. Any program for the Civic Center

should include a long term vision, a defined path, short

and long term revenue opportunities, and a cost-effective,

business-like management structure.

There is no economic model for a self-sustaining cultural

center that does not rely on substantial annual private funding

for either the building or its program components, or both.

The panel suggested various development scenarios in the

report that would provide the revenue foundation for the

renovation and long term preservation of the Civic Auditorium

through development opportunities at the site. For the Civic

Auditorium to succeed in the future, it must be embedded

in a larger Cultural Creative District, flanked by compatible

uses and reconnected to the urban fabric of the city. Any

program should be created so developers and the local

community have clarity about the vision and support for

the Civic Auditorium and the Civic Center Creative District.

Communication should be integral to the public process and

all costs, revenue, and subsidies should be transparent.

Another part of the recommendation is for the city to create

a public authority that runs the Civic Center program. This

is the time for the city to take leadership and create a new

public entity to implement its vision. This leadership would be

a dedicated board of local leaders that mobilizes resources,

builds community support, and worries about the future of

this place. The Civic Center is not a building, it should be a

place. Once you build it, you have to effectively run it. The

board should craft an imaginative, long term, economically

viable operating and management plan. The panel

recommends the city design and develop a Cultural Creative

District, that includes multiple venues and public open space,

all centered around the renovation of the Civic Auditorium.

The public board would execute the vision, oversee all

renovation and development, and sustain the C ivic message

over time. It is clear to the panelists that the City of Santa

Monica has a sense of community spirit and a passion for

the arts. In the future, the panel imagines the Civic Center

Cultural Creative District to be a place of civic pride that

provides a range of activities drawing community members to

diverse arts and cultural facilities and lively public spaces.


Acknowledgements

The Technical Assistance Panel is thankful for the

participation and commitment of city staff, stakeholders and

community members. The following is a list of individuals

who were interviewed or provided valuable information and

perspective during the TAP process.

City of Santa Monica Community and Cultural Services Department

• Karen Ginsberg, Director

• Jessica Cusick, Cultural Affairs Manager

• Lisa Luboff Varon, Senior Administrative Analyst

City Manager’s Office

• Rod Gould, City Manager

• Elaine Polachek, Assistant City Manager

Housing and Economic Development • Andy Agle, Director

• Jason Harris, Manager, Economic Development

• Jennifer Taylor, Administrator, Economic Development

Nederlander • J. Alex Hodges, Chief Operating Officer

• David K. Green, Senior Vice President / Chief Financial

Officer

Planning and Community Development• Francie Stefan, Strategic and Transportation Planning

Manager

• Sarah Lejeune, Principal Planner

Save the Civic community group• Nina Fresco

• Frank Gruber

• Carol Lemlein

Architecture • Brenda Levin, FAIA, Consultant

• Miriam Mulder, City Architect

Santa Monica Convention and Visitor’s Bureau • Misti Kerns, Executive Director

• Jeff Jarow - SMCVB Board of Director Chair, Par

Commercial Brokerage

• Ellis O’Connor - SMCVB Board of Directors Vice

Chair, MSD Hospitality Owner Representative for The

Fairmont Miramar

• Paul Leclerc - SM TMD Committee Members, Loews

Hotel General Manager

• Jonathan Wolf of IFTA and AFM

Entertainment/Event Executive• Sepp Donahower

Michael Ross, Dan Massiello and John Alschuler meet with stakeholders discussing the Civic.

23

John H. Alschuler, Jr.Chairman, HR&A Advisors, Inc.

Mr. John Alschuler’s work focuses on development finance, the revitalization of urban communities, regional economic development, waterfront redevelopment and asset planning for institutions. John’s core skills include structuring public-private partnerships, development finance, building parklands, and creating innovative development strategies.

John’s wide-ranging practice is national and international in scope ranging from New York to Cincinnati, San Antonio to London. His work focuses on large-scale urban transformations, as well as discreet real estate transactions. Since founding the New York office of HR&A in 1984, he has led to bold plans that have reshaped important waterfronts, downtown districts and neighborhoods.

John held several positions in city governments and brings his experience in public budgeting and public finance to his practice. He served as the City Manager of Santa Monica, California, where he was responsible for the planning and development of the Third Street Promenade.

Panel Members

Dan MassielloSenior Vice President-Public Finance, Kosmont Companies

Mr. Dan Massiello brings over 20 years of professional experience in the Public Finance industry to Kosmont Companies. Mr. Massiello started his career with an east coast financial advisory firm, and has been an investment banker in CA for 13 years.

Mr. Massiello has structured and brought to market over $4 billion of new money and refunding transactions to market for Cities, Redevelopment Agencies, School and Community College Districts and Special Districts. Successfully completed transactions include General Fund Financings (Certificates of Participation), Tax Increment, General Obligation, Installment Purchase, Lease Revenue, Revenue, Special Tax, and Sales Tax supported financings. A significant portion of these transactions involved unrated and challenging credits, which have garnered Mr. Massiello the ability to engineer well-structured and marketable financing vehicles that consistently meet his clients’ financing goals and objectives.

TAP Panelists (left to right): Dan Massiello, Michael Ross, John Alschuler, Melani Smith, John Fisher and Tom Wulf.


Michael W. RossChief Executive Officer, The Pasadena Center Operating Company

Mr. Michael Ross is the chief executive officer (CEO) of The Pasadena Center Operating Company (PCOC), a nonprofit organization responsible for managing the Pasadena Convention Center, Pasadena Civic Auditorium and the Pasadena Convention & Visitors Bureau. Since joining the PCOC in 2006, MIchael has been responsible for the management of the convention center expansion scheduled to open in March 2009 that will include 60,000 square feet of new exhibit space and a 25,000 square foot ballroom. In addition, he oversees the operation of the Pasadena Convention Center, the historical 3,000-seat Pasadena Civic Auditorium and the Pasadena Convention & Visitors Bureau.

Michael has more than 20 years of hospitality industry experience with extensive facility operations and destination marketing experience. Prior to joining the PCOC, he was the first CEO of Team San Jose, a nonprofit public-private partnership responsible for operating San Jose’s convention and cultural facilities, including the 400,000-square-foot San Jose Convention Center, the 2,600-seat Center for Performing Arts and the 3,000-seat Civic Auditorium. Additional executive level facility experience includes stints as general manager of the Sacramento Convention Center Complex and director of the Harborside Convention Complex in Fort Myers, FL and executive director of the Gateway Center/Collinsville Convention & Visitors Bureau in Collinsville, IL.

Melani V. Smith, AICPPresident, Principal - Planning and Urban Design, Meléndrez

Ms. Melani Smith brings to her work at Meléndrez communication, management, leadership, and facilitation skills born out of a diverse background in urban planning, marketing and public relations.

As Principal and Director of Meléndrez’s planning practice, Melani works at regional, community and site-specific scales, from engaging project stakeholders, visioning, and creating conceptual and master plans and design guidelines, through to grant writing for funding and implementation. Sensitivity to long term livability and sustainability of the urban environment is a cornerstone of Meléndrez philosophy. Key issues, including walkability and bicycle friendliness, placemaking, and resource and energy conservation are addressed as a core part of each planning assignment the firm undertakes.

Melani is President of the Downtown Breakfast Club in Los Angeles, was recently appointed to Mayor Villaraigosa’s Design Advisory Panel in the City of Los Angeles, and in 2007 she was appointed to the City of Long Beach’s Planning commission.

25

Thomas W. WulfSenior Vice President, Lowe Enterprises Real Estate Group

Mr. Thomas Wulf is Senior Vice President of Lowe Enterprises Real Estate Group, responsible for commercial property development and management in Southern California. Thomas co-manages Lowe’s New Markets Tax Credits allocation and public-private partnership activities, and currently oversees the firm’s assignment with the cities of Culver City and Compton.

His past developments include the 1.8 million square foot Exchange mixed-use development in Hawthorne, Calif., the 210,000-square-foot, three-building Calabasas Commerce Center and the 140,000-square foot Arboretum Courtyard in Santa Monica. He is a member of the Urban Land Institute, the International Council of Shopping Centers, the US Green Building Council, and serves on the Executive Board of Directors of the Southern California chapter of NAIOP. Mr. Wulf is a USGBC LEED Accredited Professional.

John Fisher, AIAPresident, John Sergio Fisher & Associates, Inc.

Mr. John Fisher is a registered architect in the states of Alaska, Arizona, California, Illinois, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia, and he is NCARB certified. John received his Bachelor and Master of Architecture degrees from Carnegie Institute of Technology and was a Fulbright scholar in Finland. He was a design instructor at Carnegie Tech. From there, he joined the faculty of the Department of Architecture at the University of California, Berkeley, where he was chairman of the Environmental Control Systems study area.

He remains committed to “green” architecture in his current work. He has been practicing in California since his time at Berkeley, with a four-year hiatus as Dean of the School of Architecture at Syracuse University. While at Syracuse University, he supervised the HUD research grant on Making Buildings and Facilities Accessible and Usable by Physically Disabled People. Upon his return to California, he opened his present architectural practice. In addition to private practice, John has taught design part time at UCLA and Woodbury University. He has also been a visiting professor at Cal Poly, Pomona, and Tsinghua University in Beijing.

John has 43 years of experience as a registered architect and as a principal of his own architectural firms with offices in California, New York and China. He has been responsible for the design of over $3.5 Billion Dollars US in construction value for cultural, hospitality, commercial, educational and housing facilities around the country and in Asia and Europe.

At the Urban Land Institute, our mission is to provide leadership in the responsible use of land and in creating and sustaining thriving communities worldwide.

601 S. Figueroa, Suite 500Los Angeles, CA 90017

213-542-4694la.uli.org

ULI Los Angeles, a district council of the Urban Land Institute, carries forth that mission as the preeminent real estate forum in Southern California, facilitating the open exchange of ideas, information and experiences among local, national and international industry leaders and policy makers.

Established in 1936, ULI is a nonprofit education and research institute with over 40,000 members across the globe –1,500 here in the Greater Los Angeles area. As a nonpartisan organization, the Institute has long been recognized as one of America’s most respected and widely quoted sources of objective information on urban planning, growth, and development.

The membership of ULI Los Angeles represents the entire spectrum of land use and real estate development disciplines. They include developers, builders, investors, architects, public officials, planners, real estate brokers, appraisers, attorneys, engineers, lenders, academics and students. Members of the Urban Land Institute in the counties of Los Angeles, Ventura, Kern, San Luis Obispo, and Santa Barbara are automatically members of ULI Los Angeles.

v1.9-20130801A Document of ULI Los Angeles

© Copyright 2013

santa monica civic auditorium

Documents