Council Green Lights RAND Headquarters

By Teresa Rochester

Capping an 11-year process, the Santa Monica City Council Tuesday night approved in concept the design and uses of RAND Corp's new headquarters assuring that the think tank will stay in the City it has called home for 55 years.

In a 7 to 0 vote the City Council acquiesced to many of RAND's requests, allowing the non-profit research and development firm to keep its proposed 308,856 square foot elliptical glass and concrete design with few changes.

The council also allowed RAND to keep its 30,000 square-foot courtyard closed to the public for security reasons. In addition, the think tank also can rent space to other tenants as long as it doesn't create additional environmental impacts.

"The City Council reaffirmed Santa Monica's commitment to RAND and we are glad to be able to reaffirm RAND's commitment to Santa Monica," RAND's Executive Vice President Michael Rich said after the hearing. "It was apparent that council members had taken the time to learn about our project. The quality of their debate was very high throughout the hearing."

Tuesday's series of votes ended a process that began in the late 1980s when RAND put forth a plan to redevelop its 15 acres of prime real estate with a new headquarters, housing and retail shops. Ultimately, the think tank sold 11.3 acres to the City last year for $53 million when it was unable to find a developer for the project. The City will likely turn the land into park space and affordable housing.

Tuesday night's seven-hour hearing brought out more than two dozen community members, including the head of the police union, former Planning Commissioners and education activists, who supported the project. Of the 32 speakers only one decried the project.

"It's been my privilege and pleasure to work with a number of people from RAND," resident Ben Bryce told the council. "I'm scared we're going to lose them if we don't accommodate them on some of those issues."

Form and Function

The twin slices of glass and concrete that will form RAND's new headquarters have been likened to everything from a deflated football to an elongated donut to a racetrack. But to Mayor Ken Genser the 6-story structure nestled on 3.86 acres of land across from the Civic Auditorium looks like the Los Angeles Coliseum.

On Tuesday night the Mayor laid out pictures of the sports stadium on an overhead projector and compared it to the RAND headquarters' 700-foot-long, 70-foot-tall façade.

"I think we all know what it feels like to stand next to the Coliseum," said Genser, who pointed out that the Coliseum is similar in length and height to RAND's new headquarters. "There's no need for RAND to have a building of this magnitude. It's inappropriate."

Genser along with City Staff and the Planning Commission found the proposed building too big and out of character for the Civic Center area, which extends from Ocean Avenue east to Fourth Street. The area is governed by a 7-year-old Civic Center Specific Plan that will likely be scrapped when the City Council decides what to put on its newly acquired 11.3 acres.

Genser supported staff's recommendation to include more step backs and punch-outs in the façade in order to break up the "monolithic" feel of the proposed building, which he contends is incompatible with the pedestrian-friendly goals of the Civic Center plan.

"The overall massing is incompatible with the rest of the Civic Center," said Genser. "Along with Councilman Rosenstein, I worked on drafting that plan. The process itself was as important as the plan. We defined a set of standards for the district that were neither arbitrary nor capricious.

"RAND not only supported that plan, but vigorously supported it when it met opposition," Genser said. "I feel a lot of loyalty to that plan.... A step-backed design is pedestrian friendly. It (the proposed structure) is incredibly out of scale for the Civic Center."

Rosenstein disagreed.

"They're trying to plan a building based on a specific plan that is irrelevant to this project," he said. "Some of it [the plan] had good reason. Some of it was old-fashioned politics."

But RAND officials argued that the building complies with the Civic Center plan and meets the needs of RAND employees, whose input was used to design the building. Several former Planning Commissioners also testified on the design's behalf, calling it the perfect example of form following function.

"This is a pure example of form following function," said former planning commissioner Eric Parlee, who sat on the Civic Center Specific Plan working group. "What you have here is rather bold and elegant in its own way."

Inside the elliptical building, continuous hallways are meant to minimize the hierarchy established by corner offices and maximize the chances of RAND employees bumping into each other, striking up conversations and generating new ideas.

The new building is designed to include two libraries (one of them "classified"), computer-modeling-simulation workrooms, a shredding room and a cafeteria - the perfect place for RAND to call home for the next 50 years.

RAND's president, Jim Thomson said the building design reflects the non-profit's "culture" and "the way in which our people work and get on with each other."

Genser floated a motion requesting that RAND redesign the project, but other Council members balked at the suggestion and the motion died without a second.

"Okay it's a big building. This is all a matter of balance," said Councilman Kevin McKeown. "I don't think it's so horribly out of scale that this council should sit here and say we can't move on."

Rosentein did question a part of the building that extended out from the façade. The pop- out, as it was dubbed, was planned to house RAND's graduate school and was an attempt to break up the façade.

"It just doesn't look right," said Rosenstein.

Councilman Richard Bloom asked the building's architect what he preferred.

"Option D," said Paul Danna of DMJM, who had revised the building's design numerous times to accommodate changes suggested by the City. "After putting it in we actually like it."

In the end the pop out was allowed to stay. The council also approved RAND's plans to have two entrances to its subterranean parking garage, a drop off point in front of the building, a smaller traffic circle and the relocation of a loading dock. The council also ordered RAND to move its electrical transformers underground or inside.

The council split its vote on the aluminum sunshades over the windows. While RAND officials said they were willing to forego the shades, the council voted 4 to 3 (Genser and Council members Pam O'Connor and Michael Feinstein dissented) to keep them.

"Photons vs. Pedestrians"

In the heart of the twin slices of glass and concrete lies a 30,000 square foot courtyard. The design drawings show lush plants and intimate benches with happy people chatting below bluish glass walls that reach skyward.

"It's deliciously inviting," said McKeown.

But a view of the courtyard is all that the general public will get. One of the more contentious points between RAND and the City was whether or not the courtyard would be open to the public and include pedestrian pathways.

Despite an 11-hour hearing, the Planning Commission last month did not deliver a recommendation on public access, but City staff wanted the courtyard open, arguing that it was part of the features called for in the specific plan. Some council members agreed.

"It's really critical to have a path to maintain that connection," said Genser. "If we don't have some pathway in the RAND building we have something with 700 feet with no break in it."

Genser said that it seemed RAND officials had no problem with the traffic and pedestrian path through its current headquarters, but Rich disagreed.

"It's a constant worry of ours," Rich responded. "I wish I could tell you in public session. We have reason to worry. We would not do that again. We have reasons as to why we would not do that again with the work that we do."

Rich argued that RAND employees not only deal with national security issues, they routinely handle private information such as test scores, medical records and proprietary data. RAND officials also have noted that heads of state routinely visit their headquarters.

McKeown worried that pedestrians would find the courtyard luring, only to find that they were prohibited access. "We're being more friendly to photons than pedestrians," McKeown said.

Rosenstein disagreed.

"People do not go wandering through these buildings," said Rosenstein, who pointed to the public park at the MGM complex, which sat unused until signs were put up noting that it was open to the public. "People don't go where they don't know."

As a compromise RAND designed a path around the building from Main Street to Ocean Avenue. In the end the council upheld RAND's wish to keep its courtyard closed to the public.

"One Special Closet"

Even if its design was approved and the courtyard closed off to the public, RAND officials still had a key concern: What would happen if for some reason it had to downsize or move out? After all, anyone financing the project would want assurances that their investment wouldn't depend on RAND always being there.

To allay those concerns, RAND officials sought to broaden the scope of what is allowed on the land. Currently the land use is limited to a single tenant and research and development use. If the land use couldn't be expanded, RAND officials hinted that they might have to pack up and start looking for a new home.

The stage seemed set for a standoff.

In June when RAND's request was made public in the project's draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR), elected officials were rankled, charging that the organization was plotting to move out of the city. Then last month, the Planning Commission recommended further restricting the land use by limiting it to subsidiaries of RAND and clarifying the definition of research and development.

"There is no other institution that's going to fit that description," Rich argued.

RAND officials and Assistant City Manager Gordon Anderson huddled over the issue. (Because City Manager Susan McCarthy's husband works for RAND, she was precluded from taking part in the negotiations and stepped down during the Tuesday's council deliberations and votes.)

Negotiations continued on the touchy point and at Tuesday night's meeting a new land use definition was introduced to the council. The definition allows for institutional office use, which would include research, analysis, educational, philanthropic or charitable uses.

The council also agreed to a proposal that any new tenant or tenants that took up less than 15,000 square feet would fall under administrative review by the city, while any new tenant taking up more than 15,000 square feet would require a more detailed discretionary review. In addition, the environmental impact of any new tenant could not be greater than the impacts outlined in the RAND EIR.

"Let me get this straight," said City Attorney Marsha Moutrie. "If you have 18 tenants and they have slightly under 15,000 square feet, they don't need discretionary approval. But if you have a 19th tenant who rents a closet that pushes it slightly over 15,000 square feet they will have to go through the whole process?"

Council members also questioned if the environmental impacts were going to be measured against the current EIR even if the issue takes place 50 years from now.

In the end the council agreed to the broadened definition and in exchange RAND pulled its request to have a year added onto the time it had to begin construction after pulling permits and receiving proper approvals.

The council also voted to recommend a statement of overriding consideration paving the way for the demolition of the existing RAND buildings, once the new headquarter is built. At least one of the Cold War era buildings is eligible for landmark status on the National, State and local levels.

The City Council will finalize its decision on the RAND project in two weeks once staff has revised the development agreement between the City and RAND to reflect the changes made Tuesday night.

"This provides us with what we need to take the next steps forward building RAND's new home in Santa Monica," Thomson said after the meeting. "We intend to create a facility in which the entire community can take pride."

"I'm thrilled this step is behind us," said Councilman Feinstein, who as a community activist opposed the specific plan. "Now it's time for the community to plan our 11.3 acres."