Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
TPO007_441 NEWPORT BLVD
TP0007 • NEGATIVE DECLARATIO`l • TO: 'Secretary for Resources FROM: Planning Department 1400 Tenth Street City of Newport Beach Sacramento, CA 95814 3300 Newport Boulevard ?tewport Beach, CA 92663 - X Clerk of the Board of Supervisors P. 0. Box• 687 NAME OF PROJECT: National-Benvenuti - UP-1957 and R-667 PROJECT. LOCATION:' 441 N. Newport Blvd., Newport Beach PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ; ,._The• proposed. construction'of an office building with associated.- . - ' landscaping and parking. -,The project approvals include Use Permft . No. 1957, a Traffic Study, Resubdivision No. 667 and issuance of 'a• Grading, Permit. _ i FINDING: . Pursuant to the provisions of City Council Policy K-3 pertaining to procedures and guidelines to implement the California Environmental Quality Act, the. Environmental Affairs Committee has evaluated the proposed 'project and determined" that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment. ; MITrGATION MEASURES: - See Attached - INITIAL STUDY PREPARED BY: City of Newport Beach INITIAL STUDY AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT: 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA DATE RECEIVED FOR FILING: 77 EnvEronceantaT Ecordinator MITIGATION MEASURES 1. , The following disclosure statement of the City of 11-ewport Beach's policy regarding the Orange County Airport should be included in all Teases or sub-leases for space in the project and shall be included in any Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions which may be recorded against the property. Disclosure Statement The Lessee•herein, his heirs, successors and assigns acknowledge that: a) The Orange County Airport may not be able to provide adequate air service for business establishments which rely on such services; %b) When an alternate air facility is available, a ceazlate phase out of jet service may-occur at the Orange County Airport_ c) The City of Newport Beach may continue to oppose additional commercial air service expansions at the Orange County Airport; d) Lessee, his heirs, successors and assigns wilt not actively oppose any.-action taken by the City of Newport Beach to phase out or limit jet air service at the Orange :County Airport. 2. The on-site parking will be provided in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code: 3. The project be designed to conform to Title 24, Paragraph 6, Division T-20, Chapter 2, Subchapter 4. 4. Should any resources be uncovered during construction, that a qualified archaeologist or paleontologist evaluate the site prior to completion of construction activities; and in accordance with City Policies K-6 & K-7. S. - Final design of the project should provide for the incorporation of water *saving devices for project lavatories and other water-using facilities. 6. The final design of 'the project 'should,provide far the sorting of recyclable material from other solid waste. 7. The applicants should provide for weekly vacuum sweeping of all paved parking areas and drives. 8. Any construction on the site should be dine in accordance with the 'height restriction regulations of- the City. The restrictions of said should apply to any landscape materials, signs, flags, etc., as well as structures. 9. A landscape and irrigation plan for the project shall be prepared by a licensed ' landscape architect. 10. The landscape plan should be subject to the review of the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Department and approval of the Planning Department. 11. The landscape plan should include a maintenance program which controls the use of fertilizers and pesticides. Page 2. - 12. The landscape plan should place heavy emphasis on the use of drought- resistant native vegetation and be irrigated via a system designed to avoid surface runoff and over-watering. 13. Development of the'site should be' subje'ct to a grading permit to be approved by the Building and Planning Departents. . 14. That a grading plan-if required should include a carplete plan for temporary and permanent drainage facilities, to minimize any potential irupacts from silt, debris, and other water pollutants. 15. The grading permit shall include, if required, a description of haul routes, access points to the site and a watering, and sweeping program designed to minimize impacts of.haui operations. w . 16. An erosion and dust control plan, if required, should be submitted and be subject tq the approval of the Building Department. 17. That an erosion and siltation control plan, if required, be approved by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - -Santa Ana Region, and the plan •be submitted to said Board ten days prior to any construction ' activities. 18. The project- should be so designed to eliminate light and glare spillage on adjacent uses. �-• 1 1 TRAFFIC STUDY 1 FOR PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING 1 AT 441 NEWPORT AVENUE 1 FOR 1 TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE IN 1 NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 1 1 . 1 September 1980 1 1 1 Prepared by ASL Consulting Engineers 1201 East Warner Avenue 1 Santa Ana, California 92705 (714) 979-1761 I� 1 1 ' September 25, 1980 City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 Attention: Mr. Fred Talarico ' Dear Fred: ' Subject: Proposed Office Building at 441 Newport Avenue ' ASL Consulting Engineers is pleased to submit our traffic study completed in compliance with the guidelines outlined in the City' s Traffic Phasing Ordinance for the proposed 11, 000 square foot office building at 441 Newport Avenue. We find the project does not increase traffic one year after completion on any approach to a critical intersection by as ' much as 1% during any 2-1/2 hour peak period and therefore qualifies for a finding of I .D. 2. We wish to express our appreciati6n for being selected to perform this study and acknowledge the cooperation and as- sistance provided by yourself and Mr. Rich Edmunston which enabled us to complete the work quickly and easily. rSincerely, 5oeE Fous ' Senior Traffic/Transportation Engineer California Reg. No. C-20258/T-854 JEF:bjb PROJECT ' National Investment Properties, Inc. in joint venture with H. D. Benvenuti Family Trust is proposing an 11,000 square foot office building at 441 Newport Avenue. Nine individual offices ' will be housed within the proposed 3-story office building and 44 parking spaces will be provided adjacent to the structure. Construction is planned to begin in January, 1981 and continue for 9 months. Full occupancy will be achieved in October, 1981 and the year of analysis for purpose of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance is 1982. ' The office building's location (see Exhibit 1) is on Newport Avenue near the northern boundary of the City of Newport Beach. ' As a consequence much of the traffic that enters/exits the fac- ility does not impact on the City' s critical intersections. ' Presently, a 16-unit motel occupies the two lots on which the proposed office building is to be constructed. • Removal of the existing motel, and the consequent removal of a traffic gener- ator, mitigates the impact of trips generated by the office building on critical intersections within the City. A site location map is "shown in Exhibit 1. ' TRAFFIC GENERATION ' Trip generation rates utilized within this study for trips generated by the proposed office building were supplied by ' Mr. Rich Edmunston, Traffic Engineer for the City of Newport Beach. A general office building produces an average of 13 GOT TYLLT Slljlpl <> PL�un ri ✓f? d Na LCAY�PLap ■ NLTOP •Cy oO—o IRO zo 4 n W a s PINE o PLILGG m S jJRA:4 300 g M7M NOS+ HA ILT ST=OAK ST <� i HAMILTON 700 > ;i':�..6B�� ` fn-0a• NDEN a PL 1- a i= >• KNOWELL PL siDNEY w e 3'd.• GROPE of w z ` rt EN F 8 n BAY ST L`i^� I - BAY P o•!N — COVE YORKSHIRE� �- --"`ST 1�fl' • ny 4-i s/ii's"�..i'.i. n r f.. Z o gg ¢ EAL Sia 5 K 'R• p 20 u R Q gg R ST Q 7, ;r7K�t,•j� '>3'.;NA- :?: u EVERGREEN PL O ROSS ST a _ NO 7 DOGWOOD 4u SURF Si ST y,�,;,„.rREG/dNAI•.•�r•�gBl�.,�Y m -� o: aRERNARD y al ?r CEDAR 0. a REACH 5T 1 qp0 lie� ,T 51=,..::+;IVAOP ;ni «•. L 1 ARBDR K $T W ¢ r MRD R zR ]► ! .T::"Kt;... W w IN An c9i.^�u_ !6- 40 p��i �/q .JI ' :?r'`;•,:.:'.?4fxT:E` 'r1 rl• 919TH " w Si w � 'far• BOG 0Pt MER ST> "0 '[Dd • 6A" h/Y� rj. ' JrQA D t a CM tq d a ST. �ARKMu• . TOWNE ST WE L DR a W COS51'I • yF y v)'�.kALKABWTOR �Q Q S - S ;MESA'¢ P q 4 O.STARFISH CT ♦ g CO ' a0 1 SAND DOLLARR p %•� m algTx � �STAid$'p Q. 'yFs ti A. SCOV DIERY DR P41 1 oz : S L BIG CIPPER SONSET 7A2' S a i, H' • ,p ].WINDSgN'CT Q S ALIM(+R o DR JQ CH g, P L SURFSIDE CT 7 K J y F JY ' 9.RIPTIDEC7 _ I W _NEWTON p, WY ! TERMINAI3 WY 4r ar.cc Qy cp q/. 10.STARBURST a 11.4DONRISE CT 12.NORTHWIND R tt$$�� TM- n Il1EABIROCT 3 E 17 � - 13 It SEMIIST alt I 900 700 60 I&SANDFLOWERR _ IG LATITUDE CT - B{ - O LAM Q �W p �f �i• q• ' 17.SUNDMCE DR • NEWHALL "�'� OF1�5 STz (`q(/�j1{■�I- � TM .. 8 �.WY a,� , 4(¢� SkyF'r n o� dab y ur;la. F! do ! I 700 3! yP.IRK ti�Ag6F 1 PRODUCTION C �.� "IAme riti F CgNAL 9T .. 1 m4Ma _ .:� ., � � e •i . i°w"."` `a _{� - I/ `{J y$',O ' /S'y ?yam Sr or`Y,� e•�o„/P�, 0499 oc e� f I asusun \ EN's Sir OASi •�' �.ssw' o- � ••1 - �,p a cR .�°5 . .g+y. � A',e ,9, '�c obi y aD�. l' EL SpI 3f' OAST i g� fib'F7af 1• v�.9 x �d> s 0 o'oAP.9a` °fi' / ' =o "�• q r;7 ��Jt a< ��rl;� ■ F- y_ �QY Qa 06 �?a� <4�3 S.{. Ic' y~x fj°/' q lkt• i. Lee � a !+ AD'L EY aOptPY' ,�a P y` J r / yP�QP hy0 0.l 4 Bq fA '• �.6A'y� •N Q 1. 4 �) P y •tP pJ P SJ. •P 4y E` t`ART!' I S1 S J' e. J NfWPoRT M SCHOOL CHOOL N/G `�h"ha moo Py azop RwY o.Aw oc,yPN vw ef'� ,Ts ° ,.p'`P' AV a �aD S p JAMFS TDD �. I I A ,yPO a 9 a 9•( .o '�' o �0 1 �, I�'o CGIFF a s Q z pR K lv��St 9 a `� A° 1- 5� p �e'" n� _ P p > co 'J•1 kx\-1 CLp•PSGD P yf• �� a BAIBOA ca SrvR•VV R SIST 6T" if �i + S r'F nA6•C`5'; n'AJ ti MKCJN:! d `� x�pgfP BAY C(DBI/ V3T4�\q Di :'! '1�p1�'S1 d' S 5� _Svv � 1\0 n�\\W�°�%(.+ �•</ "� .,P` ♦�B�q`Y segC/q o�� + 'l oC tom/ \,D.wt +y7 y+P .Ph gOflE/ j ^aV 4l5 1a r � .rol i� i•w ' SITE LOCATION MAP QM ALDEIUUX SWIFT ' 60O(n16 &LF-f"It. S EXHIBIT 1 x G G7C30(�I'C�Gig trip ends (TE) per day per 1000 gross square feet (GSF) of office area with a peak hour generation factor of 2. 3 TE/Peak Hour/1000 GSF. Given the 11, 000 square foot office structure, a total of 143 ADT and 26 TE/Peak Hour can be expected. The primary source utilized for determination of trip rates ' of the existing motel was Trip Generation - An ITE Informa- tional Report published in 1976. A motel produces an average of 9.58 TE per occupied room with a peak hour generation fac- tor of 0. 71 TE/Peak Hour/Occupied Room and the inbound to outbound ratio of travel during the peak hour is a 50-50 split. ' Motel occupation was assumed to be 50% during winter months ' and 75% during summer months. Given the 16-unit motel, a total of 77 ADT and 6 TE/Peak Hour were generated during winter with 115 ADT and 8 TE/Peak Hour generated during summer. The base year for analysis purposes (i.e. one year- after pro- ject completion) was taken as 1982. For purposes of estimat- ing future traffic growth, a growth factor of 2. 5% per year ' was utilized for Coast Highway in the vicinity of the project and a similar factor was used for the intersection of Newport ' Boulevard and Hospital Road. 1980 traffic counts were avail- able for the Coast Highway intersections whereas 1979 figures ' were available for the Newport Boulevard and Hospital Road intersection. Analysis purposes required projecting two years growth at the Coast Highway intersection and three years growth ' at the Newport Boulevard and Hospital Road intersection. ' TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION Proposed Office Building Traffic Distribution The directional distribution of the traffic approaching and departing the proposed office building was assumed to take on ' the same relationship as that of existing establishments within the vicinity of the project. To determine the existing direc- tional distribution a peak hour count was conducted, during the afternoon peak period starting at 3:30 p.m. , of traffic enter- ing and exiting two existing establishments (i.e. Newport Harbor - Costa Mesa Board of Realtors and Anglers Center) located to the ' south adjacent to the project site. The travel paths of vehicles which exited the existing establishments to the south were fol- lowed through the Newport Avenue and Hospital Road/Westminster. intersection and the Hospital Road/Newport Boulevard intersection. ' Since the parking lot will have access only onto Newport Avenue and the City limits lies immediately to the north, it is only that traffic which enters from the south and exits to the south ' which needs to be traced through the City. The parking lot turn- ing movement count reveals the following information regarding ' the existing travel patterns: ' 1. 52% of the travel is via Newport Avenue southerly of the project site (48% uses Newport Avenue to the north which is essentially out of the City) . ' 2. The inbound to outbound ratio of travel during the afternoon peak period is 29% inbound and 71% out- bound. (This split corresponds to the figures set ' forth by the City Traffic Engineer. ) ' 3. Of the vehicles which exited to the south: 15% turned left onto Westminster Avenue, 35% continued ' along Newport Avenue and 45% turned right into Hospital Road. 4. Of the exiting southbound vehicles which turned right onto Hospital Road: 45% turned left onto 1 ' Newport Boulevard, 45% continued along Hospital Road, ' and 10% turned right onto Newport Boulevard. ' •Combining the typical trip generation rate of 26 VPH during the peak one hour, which equates to 52 vehicles per 2-1/2 hour peals period, with the known directional distribution of existing ' travel results in 19 Veh./2-1/2 hour peak period leaving the project site in a southbound direction and 7 Veh./2-1/2 hour peak period approaching via- northbound Newport Avenue. This traffic was traced through the City in the following manner: 1. Outbound Vehicles ' At the Newport Avenue and Hospital Road/Westminster Avenue Intersection: - Vehicle turning left onto Westminster Avenue ' were assumed not to impact any critical inter- section. - Vehicles continuing southbound along Newport Avenue are assumed to merge with the westbound flow on Coast Highway, impacting the Balboa ' Boulevard/Superior Avenue and Coast Highway intersection and the Orange Street and Coast Highway intersection. At the Newport Boulevard and Hospital Road Inter- section: t - Vehicles turning left onto Newport Boulevard are assumed to utilize Newport Boulevard as a means I 1 of reaching the eastbound flow on Coast Highway, ' thereby impacting the Coast'Highway and Riverside . Avenue intersection. 1 - Vehicles continuing along. Hospital Road are as- sumed to 'have no further impact on critical 1 intersections. 1 - Vehicles turning right onto Newport Boulevard are leaving the City and will have no further impact 1 on critical intersections. 1 2. , Inbound Vehicles 1 - Vehicles originating from the westbound flow on Coast Highway impact the Coast Highway and River- side Avenue intersection. 1 . - Vehicles originating from the eastbound flow on Coast Highway impact the Coast Highway and Orange Street intersection, the Balboa Boulevard/Superior Avenue and- Coast Highway intersection, and the 1 Newport Boulevard and Hospital Road intersection: 1 - Vehicles originating from the eastbound on Hospital 1 Road impact the Newport Avenue and Hospital Road intersection. 1 - Vehicles originating from north of the project site are assumed to utilize Newport Avenue and will have 1 no impact on any critical intersections. 1 . 1 The results of the traffic assignment for trips generated by the ' proposed office building are shown in Exhibit 2. ' Motel Traffic Distribution i ' The directional distribution of the traffic approaching and de- parting the existing motel was assumed to be evenly split between ' the north and the south lying areas. Traffic originating from and departing to* the north once again did not effect any of the City's critical intersections. Traffic approaching from the ' south and departing to the south was assumed to utilize Coast Highway for all trips with equal distribution to both directions ' of the highway. Combining the typical generation rate of 6 VPH in winter and 8 VPH in summer, which equates to 12 (winter) and 16 (summer) vehicles per 2-1/2 hour peak period, with the assumed directional distribution of travel results in 3 (winter) and 4 ' (summer) vehicles per 2-1/2 hour peak period arriving from the south and equal volumes departing to the south. The traffic ' generated by the motel was traced through the critical inter- sections in the same manner as the traffic generated by the pro- posed office building which utilized Coast Highway. ' The results of the traffic assignment for the traffic generated ' by the existing motel are shown in Exhibit 3. ' The replacement of the existing motel with the proposed office building results in a net increase of traffic at each critical ' intersection analyzed. However, the motel removal does reduce the increase in traffic volumes at each critical iritersection due to the construction of the office building. i f DISTRIBUTION OF TRAFFIC GENERATED BY PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING . m Q - a a • 3 a° ' z w z PROJECT W K SITE NOgpITq� 2 RD. ER . w H h h w m CRITICAL INTERECTION DIRECTION OF VEHICLE FLOW LI�I Sy1fIFT &LEWIS EXHIBIT- 2 ca�aa�cr�� DISTRIBUTION OF TRAFFIC GENERATED BY EXISTING MOTEL . m X — WINTER F W— SUMMER o 3 a ro PROJECT SITE • HOSPITgL f0 3 f4 mtl'�a o - •„Q� �..J "l o� w�STNdNSSER v 3(4) T g o ter► HW y 3 (4) 3 (4 3 (4) w3� CRITICAL INTERECTION DIRECTION OF VEHICLE FLOW Lj-�_1�.nEasua��JJ suriF r EXHIBIT 3 do LEYi1S r5OGJ6Md40 tI"JC�S • LGJ�Ofn`7GCG139 - 1 Exhibit 4 shows the net increase in vehicle volumes at each critical intersection. 1 CRITICAL INTERSECTIONS ANALYZED Four critical intersections have been identified as being im- pacted by traffic generated by the proposed office building. Analysis was performed on all. of the following intersections: 1 1. Coast Highway and Orange Street. 1 2'. Coast Highway and -Balboa Boulevard/Superior 1 Avenue. 1 3. Coast Highway and Riverside Avenue. 14. Newport Boulevard and Hospital Road. 1 The analysis includes the impact on each intersection due to 1 traffic generated by the proposed office building only and the impact on each intersection due to the net traffic generated 1 by the replacement of the existing motel with the proposed office building. 1 CONCLUSION 1 Examination of the traffic assignment and distribution (Exhibit 3) of traffic generated by the proposed office building shows 1 little impact during the peak 2-1/2 hour period. Construction of the 11, 000 square foot office building generates 52 total 1 trips/2-1/2 hour peak period of which only 23 trips/2-1/2 hour peak period impact upon critical intersections. As •a result 1 1 DISTRIBUTION OF • NET TRAFFIC 'GENERATED BASE ON MOTELS OCCUPANCY DURING WINTER MONTHS m 2 PROJECT SITE . HOSP/TA� , cy ' D. o ���• I �.l �I,� w�5 1N E� ' 0 2 ' O• A 1ti.. T Hw y . d O 0 �- CRITICAL INTERECTION DIRECTION OF VEHICLE FLOW wlFlr ALDMum = S -WI La LEY[1S EXHIBIT 4 rs'OO CJ�M16540Mn� C�nM®O(nILC�C3fl i all critical intersection approaches will experience a traffic ' increase of less than 1% . The impact upon critical intersec- tions is further reduced by considering the reduction in• traf- ' fic volumes due to the removal of the existing motel as a traffic generator. The most significant increase of traffic ' occurs on westbound Hospital Road at Newport Boulevard where 9 Veh./2-1/2 hours, (6 Veh./2-1/2 hours considering the motel 's ' removal) , will be added to the approach traffic compared to the limiting 1%" factor which would allow an addition of up to 15 Veh./2-1/2 hours and still meet the 1% test. All other crit- ical intersection approaches will be substantially below the 1% value. 1 1 1 1 � - 1 APPENDIX 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � . 1 1 ' 1 - - 1 ' , 1% Traffic Volume Analysis* Intersection Coast Hwy and Orange St. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1980) ' Approach 1 Existing I Peak 2%y Hour Approved Projected li of Projected Project iDirectton ( Peak 2y Hour Regional Projects Peak 2h Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2y Hourl Volume Growth Peak 211 Hour Volume Volume Volume i Volume Volume 1Northbound ! 250 13 0 263 3 0 I 5outhbound 132 7. 0 139 1 0 2605 132 164 2901 29 3 �astbound ' esibound 4304 218 716 5238 52 7 ® Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2Z Hour Traffic Volume ' ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. ' * 'Based on traffic generated by proposed office building alone . ' Proposed Office Building at 441 Newport Avenue DATE: 9/25/80 PROJECT: FOP34 I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis ** Intersection Coast Hwy and Orange St. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1980) Approach } Existing Peak 2§ Hour Approved Projected 1S of Projected Project !. iDirection Peak 2§ Hour Regional Projects Peak 2is Hour Peak 23s Hour Peak 2y Hour' Volume Growth Peak 211 Hour Volume Volume Volume } Volume Volume i f i 250 13 0 .263 3 0 (Northbound ' isouthbound ; 132 7 0 139 1 0 2605 132 164 2901 29 0 'Eastbound ' 4estbound 4304 218 716 5238 52 4 ' ® Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ' ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2Z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. ** Net Traffic Generated - Difference between traffic generated by proposed office building and existing motel. Based on traffic generated by motel in winter months. Proposed Office Building at 441 Newport Avenue DATE: 9/25/80 PROJECT: FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume' Analysis ' Intersection Balboa Ave./Superior Ave @ Coast Hwy.' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1980) Approach i Existing Peak 2h Hour Approved Projected 1% of Projected Project iDirection Peak 2h Hour Regional Projects Peak 2h Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2h Houri Volume Growth Peak 2h Hour Volume ' Volume Volume i ' } Volume Volume t M 1221 62 4 1287 13 , 0. Northbound ' 2271 115 - 8 2394 24 0 i5outhbound ; ' astbound 2857 145 156 3158 32 3 Westbound 3335 169 .716 4220 42 7 ' D Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2Z Hour Traffic Volume ' ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected: Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. , Intersection Capacity Utilization ' (I.C.U. )' Analysis is required. * Based on traffic generated by proposed office building alone. ' _Proposed Office Building 'at 441 Newport Avenue DATE; 9/25/80 PROJECT: FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis ** ' Intersection Balboa Ave./Superior Ave @ Coast Hwy. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1980) Approach Existing Peak 2y Hour Approved Projected 1% of Projected Project iDirection Peak 2k Hour Regional Projects Peak 2k Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2h Hour i l Volume "Growth Peak 2$ Hour Volume volume volume t i Volume Volume E 1221 62 4 1287 13 , 0. Northbound j 2271 115 8 2394 24 0 l5outhbound ; Eastbound 2857 145 156 3158 32 0 estbound 3335 169 .716 4220 42 4 ' ® Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ' ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected. Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.)' Analysis is required. ** Net Traffic Generated - Difference between traffic ' generated by proposed office building and existing motel . Based on traffic generated by motel in winter months. ' Proposed Office Building at 441 Newport Avenue DATE: 9/25/80 PROJECT: FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis ' Intersection Coast Hwy/Riverside Ave. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1980) Approach Existing Peak 2§ Hour Approved Projected 1% of Projected Project + ! ' Direction , Peak 21s Hour Regional Projects Peak 2+a Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2y Houri Volume Growth • Peak 2;1 Hour Volume Volume Volume i Volume Volume __ • -- _— ' 1 Northbound ' Southbound ' 1106 56 0 1162 12 0 i � I IEastbound 4401 223 15.6 4780• 48 4 `( 4testbound 4082 207 716 5005 50 2 ' ❑s Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 212 Hour Traffic Volume ' ' ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected• Peak 2= Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization ' (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. * Based on traffic generated by proposed office building alone.. - Proposed Office Building at 441 Newport Avenue DATE: 9/25/80 ' PROJECT: FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis** ' Intersection Coast Hwy/Riverside Ave. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1980) ' Approach Existing Peak 2� Hour Approved Projected I% of Projected Project Direction i Peak 2)1 Hour Regional Projects Peak 211 Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2�1 Hour' Volume Growth Peak 29 Hour Volume Volume Volume ' Volume Volume Northbound 1 ' i5outhbound ; 1106 56 0 1162 12 0 Eastbound 4401 1 223 156 4780• 48 1 ' ilesihound 4082 207 716 5005 50 0 i ' D Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2s Hour Traffic Volume ' ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected, Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization ' (I .C.U. ) Analysis is required. ** Net Traffic Generated - Difference between traffic generated by proposed office building and existing motel: Based on traffic ' generated by motel in winter months, t ' Proposed Office Building at 441 Newport Avenue DATE• 9/25/80 _ PROJECT: ' I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis ' Intersection Newport Boulevard/Hospital Road (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _) Approach Existing Peak 2+y Hour Approved Projected 1% of Projected Project IUirection Peak 2k Hour Regional Projects Peak 2h Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2y Hour I Volume Growth Peak 211 Hour Volume Vol une Volume Volume Volume Northbound 4055 205 30 4290 43 3 ' �southbound j 3719 188 17 3924 39 0 Eastbound 1645 83 70 1:798 18 2 ' estbound 1448 1 73 20 '1541 15 9 ® Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected ' Peak 23-2 Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. * Based on traffic generated by proposed office building alone. t ' Proposed office Building at 441 Newport Avenue : DATE 9/25/80 o on.irrr. 1% Traffic Volume Analysis** ' Intersection Newport Boulevard/Hospital Road (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _) Approach Existing Peak 2$ Hour Approved Projected 1% of Projected Project 1�irection Peak 21$ Hour Regional 'Projects Peak 21S Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2h Hour Volume Growth Peak 23, Hour Volume Volume Volume ± Vol'M Volume tNorthbound 4055 20'5 30 4290 43 0 ' �Southbound j 3719 188 17 3924 39 0 Eastbound 1645 83 70 1798 18 2 estbound 1448 73 20 1541 15 6 . ' D Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected ' Peak 231 Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. ' ** Net Traffic Generated — Difference between traffic generated by proposed office building and existing motel . Based on traffic generated by motel in ' winter months. ' Proposed Office Building at 441 Newport Avenue DATE: 9/25/80 _ AGREEMENT 41 THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into on this 16.th day of September, 1980, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", and ASL CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. , hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT." W I T N E S S E T H WHEREAS, City desires to have the CONSULTANT prepare a Traffic Study for a proposed office building at 441 Newport Avenue (11 ,000 sq.ft.) in the City of Newport Beach. WHEREAS, CONSULTANT desires to prepare said Traffic Study. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1 . GENERAL CONSULTANT agrees to prepare a Traffic Study on the proposed office 1 building on Newport Avenue in the City of Newport Beach in accordance with the requirements set forth in paragraph 2 of this Agreement in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in this document. 2. SCOPE OF WORK The subject Traffic Study will be prepared in accordance with the requirements of the City Traffic Engineer for the preparation of such studies and in accordance with Chapter 15.40 of the Municipal Code of the City. 3. BILLING AND PAYMENT CONSULTANT shall be paid under this Agreement on a time and material basis. In no event shall the maximum amount of this Agreement exceed Four Hundred and Fifty Dollars ($450.00) . Partial payments shall be made by CITY to CONSULTANT upon CONSULTANT's presentation of statements verifying the time and material costs incurred by it in connection with this Agreement. 4. FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE CONSULTANT shall use diligent efforts to complete the provisions within thirty (30) days after execution of this Agreement. The subject Traffic Study must meet the approval of the Environmental Coordinator and Traffic Engineer of the City. - 1 - I� 5. TERMINATA This Agreement is subject to termination by the City at any time upon serving written notice to CONSULTANT. The CITY shall be thereafter liable to CONSULTANT only for fees and costs incurred as of the date CONSULTANT receives such notice of termination. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have entered into this Agreement as of the date and year first above written. APPRQYED AS TO FORM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH —Assistant City Attorney Di ec r PI nni g Department . CITY ASL CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. By CONSULTANT - 2 - This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp THE NEWPORT ENSIGN PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2015.5 C.C.P.) A STATE OF CALIFORNIA, as. County of Orange, Notice I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the Proof of Publication of County aforesaid;I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above-entitled Permit # 1957 matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of the Newport Harbor Ensign newspaper of general circula- tion, printed and published weekly in the city of Newport Beach, County of Orange, and which news- PUBLIC NOTICE paper has been adjudged a newspaper of general NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING i Notice la hereby given that the Plan• circulation by the Superior Court of the County of Or- .1.4 Cnmml..lon of the city of ange, State of California, under the date of May 14, Newport Beach will hold a public bear. 1951, CASE NUMBER A-20178 that the notice, of ing on the I (or anon of NATIONAL. BENVEN a for a on of N TIO No. which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not 667, Use Panvil No. 1957, Traffic study on propody located at 441 N. smaller than nonpareil) has been published in each Newport Ave., to Parrott the can, regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in a melon of a 11,000 •q• It. -Ill.- building on properly located In a any supplement thereof on the following dates to-wit: spa.UlH, plan area where a specific area plan has not been adopted. said p p application also Includes mmbdlvid.n Jo- Oct.. 8 a 19 V 0 / \,y' for thedin purpoms of estminting a one R> building d4 and allminnllaq m In- •r Ierior Tot line whin two lot.now exist •••'""••'""••••. •"'• ...... •- r �t1 end We approval of a befit.study. Iy i _ by NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that a•Negative Dednratlon has bee.prepared by the City al Newport r _1 apO�s Beech in connection with the eppllca- ....... ................... ...... ........ O DryT a 4,y J fault., noted above.City the pineal he Vv 11 9 IO lenlion of the Con to nauPl he Noccoo. Declaration and nr-.,.Q. doamevb. The Cityo.. epublic to L`i 1}�,< �•1� ,"t'tii}' mamhon of the 9onaml Pu6ilc to 4h1•}�. review and commont on this docoman. lalfon.Copley of the Negative Declers- V II.. and supporting d.....nb era available for public revlow and In• opecuan el the Plgnnivg Department, � I car ' r declare) under penalty of perjury that the City .1 Newport Beach, 3300 w. fo oing I true and correct. Dated at Newport Newport 4)64 Newport Beach, Ca g Newpo t Blvd-, New 216. Bf ach,Califo nia,this 8 day of Oct 19 80 Notion I.homby further given that said public hppa Ing will be hold on the j 23rd day oI Oblober,1980,at the hour ' of 7:30 p M.In the Council Chambers °o! the Newport Beech City Heil at which lima end ray any and all Pbe ti ,,,, j hone Inlareen- may appear and be 1 heard III Co t George Coca., Secretary,1Newport eavninq Comminl.n, t.8 d Newport Bench. Publish:Ocl.B,19801n The Newport Sn•19n NE877 Signature - — THE NEWPORT ENSIGN 2721 E.Coast Hwy.,Corona del Mar,California 92625. PROOF OF PUBLICATION 7.409 E0 TRAFFIC STUDY APPLICATION - CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICANT 4 //-/ 74 rz 9J 0/ MAILING ADDRESS G/O /�2��u00r� �P.u`�e� I\ r, # Yf(37 /%Tor`r<BeAc�c � (d/+1oiz/moo PROPERTY OWNEO�, A as .4�ao �rea. � PHONE Sowr� MAILING ADDRESS S',, m e a s / Ilia `74 ADDRESS OR LOCATION OF PROJECT yL// %/e &a4lon r`� 8 (�r� DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: 14"0 CPar Je,,, _ Lo A/E T� 3-' M' g e 0 P FZr t- npades n /v&r 44 PC, ; [ ,w DEVELOPMENT PHASING: Beginning Construction Completion Project Initial Occupancy Total- Occupancy 1�t8/ Sep4ew. berll4� SeP4a -barhPp ©d`leo ve /i �O`nuary, �D Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year MITIGATION MEASURES: Do Not Complete Application Below This Line Date Filed Fee Paid Receipt• No. City Traffic Engineer Approval Date Planning Commission Action Date City Council Action Date ' ;I .� Q (Lcs�t.�d,�o.sioN,.u, �