Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMASTER PLAN AMENDMENT # 17 'TLWeaem 3/6/68 RESOLUTION NO. 6714 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO .THE MASTER STREET AND HIGHWAY PLAN WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the City Council have heretofore adopted a Master Plan which includes as a unit thereof a Master Street and Highway Plan, with revisions; and WHEREAS, studies by the Planning Commission reveal that since the adoption of said Master Street and Highway Plan there have been changes in conditions which indicate that said Plan should 'be amended to show new alignments, additions, street name corrections and classification changes; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach, after notice as required by law, has held a public hearing on the proposed amendment and has recommended the adoption of an amendment to the Master Street and Highway Plan; and I WHEREAS, the City Council, after notice as required by law, has held a public hearing on .said proposed amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is desirable to amend said Master Street and Highway Plan as recommended; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Newport Beach does hereby adopt Amendment No. 17 to the Master Street and Highway Plan as shown on a map entitled Exhibit "A", attached hereto, by including thereon a prolongation of Ford Road as a primary road from a point intersecting with the present alignment of MacArthur Boulevard and otherwise known as proposed Corona del Mar Freeway easterly and northerly to an inter- section with Bonita Canyon Road; and further designating thereon a realignment of MacArthur Boulevard as a primary road commencing at Pacific Coast Highway continuing to a point intersecting at San Joaquin Hills Road northerly to a point intersecting with Ford Road �r e At F_ ~ as designated by this amendment and continuing northerly to a point intersecting with Bonita Canyon Road near the proposed Corona del Mar Freeway. ADOPTED this 11 thday of March , 1968. Mayor ATTEST: CityCer 2 . �..;,�-++- g• ',./!.) ` ':'•,/tij76-' 7 l�lil /•,r'\i-.f1 ,is\'e,.�,l•,, ,Y�`•.,� ` •. ` '��:: \)){{�� ,`C`,•'lv ayd' �Qa•,'f�{K/ i�'•a\.,,ry_. i•L✓�� .1�„I ( ✓�.\�oll ��•!' pp 1��• • � 'JJJ+���------ � • �/1 !—'• ri � I� / s/•, r}FF.� .j,• /�1,./, � �\=:6 o`i it , '1�i�S , ~�^y �' V3 _���`�� I i/t;3r drf / f //5' ' I�j,` �, \[' p iV, \ /'�{jf/ �^ '1I � �_"",•�.�._.`\,�� /'/'h}{l,J NN �,;\�,•.',p/;Y.Jl�} �, �I'' •4' ',,,::, r \F'C��,/�� p f�'; //il�.\11°:.����•�/ t. /V��I �...-_• 4� a� '`�� SAW . ,r•\,1 `,`\s-, \rf `� ,l/�� 'r� ' J^;t ' �� �'''�!n>`.\ V;'I/;%���fli:l'/J•, r.• 'V.�,%`�.���J `�./i- �� ..—•.�iV��:}/y �"�\ t""°.`�w, s '-� �t�l ✓w�` ,�/, --. r �../"Il�ti _�' .%�.:•.1 !���:1. �. !, ` ,•\j�p i�.7 'r`\}: ' i \:•�•\� n \ � ;•�, \sf,., „-�\,,.��, V,)�i 1{�L\ f �'• 1 J"/..n` ` q•+.. r_I• .�i 3 i } r �••itv„7 /y/ �`\. ,C'lt ' '�'�In i/ �:/.\� �" ..1�. •�� ,i�f :f.: \; 14 1;1, ' ` •J\'�)a ,,•*�1 - ' .\t�i,;Jr :i°`;+��+. / _;'1 °u•; � /�'. .J��/ �•� r L� q :.i 1,r „ 'G? � \` l\ /�•71rj� •`o I7.. � a� r'\/ -,�,v`I� ..� •1 �^�.���.f�9• 5: �.. /' l ♦ �-`�'-_.�. ' 1 t.f /%. �� ' , \ i✓/ _r :,. .0 � / "",1'r e.._\`.�,'�:t.,', a✓ t ..•.,1"h'/ �°• S / r'' !'t�`�r.�^'�:. . a '` f'��.f•'V:fID�\ T�..� V '" 1 l�Il ^� r,I llil !�J ?l''n �-x 3+w'%.'.i�Y�' r �-^ 1. i /.: =- a'' {,';�\ .. ,�^. ,i /.�� ,TM,� f•%f�t� W ma's \( /^; �//_'/ ti )\d.,r/,il/,/Z• P •;'.,,,,a•t"'�. �._.,m-�1' ,1..'�_'T , ,t; . n. S ��' _ �;` v��CSti 11 `�-,..0 � 4� o rr 1 .�/'i., ,• a "�„ ,� ` ',;,,. • o` `W'%'- ••n,. 'dYy,�.,y-.' .:G��:.h- \\:��-1, '\,' e �� ,t�.: y, •i ! !S >, '^ ,:��✓ ""�"i•�r"""+,-,. 1./. w a> 4, _ 'lii �jl`\`'�'`'' ` i� ,":,rV fJ".rY A^{ fje� U \ - �• , ` y, tiI -..�lNl ' / .3y11� " . �(r'n n Y(ISv ' ,V'`\'' I(u .t^7':,•„al /f. \�.' ���,`S , `��'^/ 'd`t' 1 7 ` //'_ �\S \., f / /°, ' 1 �1! Nh'3.�(•1"`-�� 1 u '1' �I� [ , , `;:•r. r \J \JI 5 �, 1 :a ," \ 'tiJ;: ..{. ,r_ ` rt'�"�"' \ j•V'1' '(i �'�\• . ''t\' \�` f/ ,C""i"2%•< , .�t r `,' 1\�•_'-_--•,�•�w�-�,.1.�' l� �+ r• �•OI•ll :aa�r"' `i f,{;vi` ��.�,\ rd I/f'l LI lN� J> �fq"' q...,�-••.�a ��y :' ` ' 1("�1li'd`7(7�4�„H�'�"' -`. `7�(>I1,Jib"?--.rs ,,,, 1(t'"' ti- 'w"+`. ,r .ti `- !%-'� ' � 1'1.,1„'a - 1� •\,'\•-yf.' J � ��� r `'f \(/^\`�•/ r/�' 1�M1,(!i ��y y� 1 I, /I 2-. ..a � \: C: � \ �'� •1n -'t }(y'`� '"" f}/ , ,'",{:atl� L4. �1, / (`I�.i +,1 ' `` \ /�^� �� . r �.;} f��� ,\! A1�C,•� .% �J1/�.,:--• _. 9 \ � �� t`` t•' ��i 4�:,(l� Il�� ( ,.,�., i / .�y.. of` `-:`! ,t'tv . I c?'1`/)r+" d •NO'� '''y I, �/ '„`ti\, IJ , d d \ t, v ` �`lT. �� 1 ir✓ IN g //�� \ � `��-<\��,�' .rt."�^. `'^;, '_'"''i!Srr('r/ 'it'I'y1'1f1.{ , i , V r _ ,_ � ✓.4 ��' � �,- y .,ter .a r` N`6 .., •�— ,,.� r? r � I ,. - ,.:;-••,. .Ir^' . .J.� I�� �•,�y"'� I I ,��,5 1�a�•3� I r' ;`,c7�4"�,I rJ('\\'t,.'` � ���:•,r'\1d il.�� �t.l,.t '--'.-�,��,�7r { �"_ � \"\ \ , �".•,�y� e J /! : /^ 1 I l \ IY l �\` \'• '�'� ssr is ;' \, v.�:` \x _\ ��•;J, I•n' rl i��r �;,'Y 11,,E ,- � /. � � ,,l;,tl / (`� •. , J,(\• �:�! `�,` y ��—"��- 'wM' !! ( j�` •,, 'IA-P.. Cq t�-.•ll kk ' \Ir` `y.:, \�.v��,: •' ' •• .; r / if l/YOU if \`I \� r -. .� �:- i.F.>,'� 1 ; ^• - `r''�'"•^ '\: �;;/' /�. ._. ` .:...i-D'.`'arc` I f, ,� ,3�\ � KJ• )/1\�I- 1 � r.._> r'C, r»h`'>.. `_" •7�' `'^n✓ . .•^'. +w�.` 4: 3its:k> �"`/, ' !f" ->/' f { ' rl/ /J ``-.r a •e .->'.f w •.`/ ' %t :,'�` -_,/ f1• ./�.�l'i. `i"^. r \ as � �•,_' ��'� /�._'CT4x /i i i r •.. J s!, 0�,':4";��,. ='" rl P� 3 � ,,a, ,, r=�/,'�;.•4- 1•\l..___:, "�., �;a.�-\":,s'y" • r i^ r.+'Z Z.' / f �����C�f!�w 6'"(,OT � 'm-i� -,c f ��.• •`:'=�1. ,+' `., , '^ �. -.ram✓ , flnl. ... .-� `+. "50�/� �ti: f"•l�.•'�.yi�� ./�, .r M`� f'1/%(,,i. 7 \„S:T l •� J. „/,l�• ,�. � s �r•, \. .i \N� %//1�`��•\ -.r `'.%7;. .'' �:^..a. }};;-��� •`."4: f'(,f7 //]f��f'/n7�/'/�,f�/f'/� { /��e�„� �.JJQ/F 1. .- \r / A�''Yk' S aT�:i 1J V�i"4' � C/ (/ ' a�i •il\ .,�s,, ✓ ^•,.w v\ ` /d'f' .\ , i,(•Y�('t- . ,. vim' .v�•J��'Q�� •^'�� I�'ti �.�r 1`17,t,•,C,�i!^ /'t•' �` 1/Y"/'/�''� i �'.°'^"9;;'. ''( ., {.�..,.. `'�•�. -.4- /�4 �.. 7.1 .' ^}'> ,� t:` �7, ?,t_ -"`\: , e � (.tlM1;y'\ n,i�'i ._.; p' �r.\�,/,•\`,Y �"',,�, 6 f'�'/•C.1.,•"�, '�...,,.. 1 'f(•' -'. `1 • �c /.l i • -.-. !' : a •i\'\`„(f�':-^' .t^� I IS1 !.q:<�`"�:�,:�.'v .J"• /.y, '•, air,l i , r l I f � ."n!'k. . J ��\`,� '•�' /' \)..�/\J � ;��y.,.".'^•1y.\_ �' l/ J,%�r� '�i 11 (:\\'`r y��= •�, .i a<a.k /'', '.-..+�I'\\t,(r�y }':��.'L-1' Y ' F � J!,.{•,'!.�` �j �\. � �i4y G:..`_ :�� r 3,L1 {�{:: C ! l i'/7J, i, ',�T. ���%•"\,•r \, "Yl i/i// rt,••%:�• •,f � ,\ �.l r_.. ' -i.�l� .� " d`\ '�\. '•i��� �,I-/t•j'/i� �' i" �./ 4(]i/` ".1,e.1t/,�y/ J,.��� r•�ly�`,ZS:�r a��'�'� f 'v�>��; / 1 �� ®V ©•I TLW.aem 2/19/68 RESOLUTION NO. 705 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING AND RECOMMENDING AN AMENDMENT TO THE MASTER STREET AND HIGHWAY PLAN WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the City Council have heretofore adopted a Master Plan which includes as a unit thereof a Master Street and Highway Plan, with revisions; and WHEREAS, studies by the Planning Commission reveal that since the adoption of said Master Street and Highway Plan there have been changes i �.n conditions which indicate that said Plan should be amended to show new alignments, additions, street name corrections and classification changes; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 65351 of the Government Code the Planning Commission has held a public hearing to consider the above mentioned amendment; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Com- mission of the City of Newport Beach does hereby recommend to the City Council that the Master Street and Highway Plan as shown on a map entitled Exhibit "A", attached hereto, be amended by designating thereon a prolongation of Ford Road as a primary road from a point intersecting with the present alignment of MacArthur Boulevard and otherwise known as proposed Corona del Mar Freeway easterly and northerly to an intersection with Bonita Canyon Road; and further designating thereon a realignment of MacArthur Boulevard as a primary road commencing at Pacific Coast Highway continuing to a point intersecting at San Joaquin Hills Road northerly to a point intersecting with Ford Road as designated by this amendment and continuing northerly to a point intersecting with Bonita Canyon Road near the proposed Corona del Mar Freeway. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chairman and Secretary of the Planning Commission are hereby directed to endorse said amendment and transmit same to the City Council for consider- ation and adoption. Regularly passed and adopted by the Planning Commis- sion of the City of Newport Beach, State of California, on the 15th day of February, 1968. AYES: Curtis , Clark, Jakosky, Clemence, Dosh, Watson, Copelin NOES : ABSENT: Secretary Chairman 2. 10 'A 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH March 11 , 1968 TO : City Council FROM : Planning Department SUBJECT: Master Plan Amendment No . 17 Ford Road and Mac Arthur Boulevard The Planning Department in their preliminary review of the plan submitted with the annexation request came to the following con- clusions : 1 . The area proposed for annexation is well within the boundaries traditionally agreed to as appro- priate as the City ' s ultimate boundary. 2 . Both Mac Arthur Boulevard and Ford Road , shown as the easterly and northerly boundaries of the annexa- tion area represent conceptual deviations from the City ' s Master Plan of Streets and Highways . 3 . There appear to be some very compelling reasons for the modified alignments of these two highways but at least one of them may prove to be more costly to construct because of its additional length . 4. No determination as to the appropriateness of the annexation should be made without the matter of the modified highway alignments being also decided . 5 . A public hearing by both the Planning Commission and the City Council is required to amend the Master Plan of Streets and Highways . Analysis The Planning Department in analyzing this amendment requested a de- tailed analysis of the proposed highway amendments from the Public Works Department. Such report is attached to this report. The Public Works report in essence points out : ( 1 ) That there appear to be no objections whatsoever to the proposed Ford Road realignment ; (2 ) that the proposed Mac Arthur Boulevard realignment is a more lengthy one and therefore provides "poorer service" . (3) That Mac Arthur Boulevard should be a continuous highway between San Joaquin Hills Road and the Newport Freeway . Planning staff after many meetings with the Irvine Company , the County Road Department and the Public Works Department has come essentially to the same conclusions with one minor deviation . Planning staff believes that the advantages of a more easterly alignment of Mac Arthur Boulevard by far outweight the disadvantages . This position is taken based upon Mac Arthur Boulevard continuing northerly of Ford Road as recommended by the Public Works Department and for the following reasons : TO ; City Council - 2 . 1 . A master plan of streets and highways is a generalized document which attempts in advance of precise study to define future transportational needs . 2 . Highway alignment determinations are often made well in advance of land development patterns taking shape and generally are plotted without careful study as to ter- rain or precise "desire , demand and warrant" studies . 3 . For these very reasons highway alignments shown . on master plans are intended only to serve as generalized guidelines to transportation planners and city planners . 4 . The location of Mac Arthur Boulevard was similarly plotted on the City ' s ' Master Plan of Streets and High- ways . Its location was meant to be flexible and was based on the best information available at a particu- lar point in time. 5 . More definitive study appears to reveal that there are a number of good reasons why the location requested is superior from a pure planning point of view. Most important of these is the fact that the�prroopos�ed ari nment follows the terrain more sensibly s� a arat� o f at area ',from a hill, area ;,thereby efinin an separating two natura p armin units or entities . It therefore serves t e lan • an - contemn ated land uses more more effective y. The alignment presently illustrated on the Master Plan of Streets an . i wa s creates -a -narrow band— of al nd that wou a sandwic a etween a -€reeway an a eavily travelled arterial i wayL — Suc lan because of its narrow width from a anners • oint of view , does not lend itself to we desi ne . rm ential land uses . On the other and; ,suc � a eninsu a-mi ht be f � g 1 sought after, y t e . eve o ersgof stri commercia " businesses . A hlghly un esira e-t oug t . In addition the ro osed•=loeation of Mac Arthur Boulevard creates a good sized^ anning -.unitor sector in w is 'n considerable amount ,of , design -flex, ility exists , Based on the aforementioned reasoning - the Planning Department believes that Mac Arthur Boulevard as proposed offers an acceptable level of •service to those persons seeking ,a throug arterial of er than the freeway while providing for a much more efficient and desirable land usepotential and flexibility. Re�y.'...'d ►fully submitted, Ernest Ma er, Jr Attachment : Map of existing and Planning Director proposed arterials EM : hh CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH March 11 , 1968 TO : City Council FROM : Planning Department SUBJECT: Master Plan Amendment No . 17 Ford Road and Mac Arthur Boulevard The Planning Department in their preliminary review of the plan submitted with the annexation request came to the following con- clusions : 1 . The area proposed for annexation is well within the boundaries traditionally agreed to as appro- priate as the City ' s ultimate boundary. 2 . Both Mac Arthur Boulevard and Ford Road , shown as the easterly and northerly boundaries of the annexa- tion area represent conceptual deviations from the City ' s Master Plan of Streets and Highways . 3 . There appear to be some very compelling reasons for the modified alignments of' these two highways but at least one of them may prove to be more costly to construct because of its additional length . 4. No determination as to the appropriateness of the annexation should' be made without the matter of the modified highway alignments being also decided . 5 . A public hearing by both the Planning Commission and the City Council is required to amend the Master Plan of Streets and Highways . Analysis The Planning Department in analyzing this amendment requested a de- tailed analysis of the proposed highway amendments from the Public Works Department . Such report is attached to this report . The Public Works report in essence points out : ( 1 ) That there appear to be no objections whatsoever to the proposed Ford Road realignment ; (2) that the proposed Mac Arthur Boulevard realignment is a more lengthy one and therefore provides "poorer service" . (3) That Mac Arthur Boulevard should be a continuous highway between San Joaquin Hills Road and the Newport Freeway. Planning staff after many meetings with the Irvine Company , the County Road Department and the Public Works Department has come essentially to the same conclusions with one minor deviation . Planning staff believes that the advantages of a more easterly alignment of Mac Arthur Boulevard by far outweight the disadvantages . This position is taken based upon Mac Arthur Boulevard continuing northerly of Ford Road as recommended by the Public Works Department and for the following reasons : TO : City Council - 2 . I . A master plan of streets and highways is a generalized document which attempts in advance of precise study to define future transportational needs . 2 . Highway alignment determinations are often made well in advance of land development patterns taking shape and generally are plotted without careful study as to ter- rain or precise "desire , demand and warrant" studies . 3 . For these very reasons highway alignments shown on master plans are intended only to serve as generalized guidelines to transportation planners and city planners . 4 . The location of Mac Arthur Boulevard was similarly plotted on the City ' s Master Plan of Streets and High- ways . Its location was meant to be flexible and was based on the best information available at a particu- lar point in time . 5 . More definitive study appears to reveal that there are a number of good reasons why the location requested is superior from a pure planning point of view. Most important of these is the fact that the ro osed a i nment follows the terrain more sensibly se arat1n a flat area ,from a i reara . y definin an separating twonatura tunits or entities . It therefore serve he lan • an • contem lated land uses more effectively. The ale nment resentl illustrated on the Master Plan of Streets an i wa s creates -a- narrow band— of lanT that would be sandwic e e weep -a• freeway an a eavily travelled arterial i wwa�y�:_ Sua tan because of its narrow width from a annf— ers; pint of view, does not end itself to well desi ne ,, residential land uses . On the other and , -suc ' a ' enTnsula-Might a ighl sought afjer. y t e deve o e'rs�of=_ stri commercial " businesses . h� y un esrtr• a e••t oug t. In addition the proposed,l.ocation of Mac Arthur Boulevard creates a good sized'-, anning rim t or sector in w is d considerable amount •of design flexibility exists . Based on the aforementioned reasoning the Planning Department believes that Mac Arthur Boulevard as proposed offers an acce table level of service to those persons seeking a throug •arterial other than the freeway while providing for a much more efficient and desirable land use potential and flexibility. Re�ful7y submitted , Ernest Ma er Jr Attachment : Map of existing and Planning Director proposed arterials EM : hh CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH March 11 , 1968 TO : City Council FROM: Planning Department BY : Planning Director SUBJECT: Master- Plan Amendment No . 17 Ford Road and Mac Arthur Blvd . Background The City Council at its meeting of December 11 , 1967 requested the Planning Commission to study an annexation request by the Irvine Company relating to a 212 acre parcel of land located easterly of Mac Arthur Blvd. and southerly of the proposed extension of Ford Road. The Planning Commission in reviewing this annexation request recog- nized that in order to process the annexation as submitted , amend- ments to the Master Plan of Streets and Highways would be necessary. This determination was made in recognition of the fact that the pro- posed annexation showed both Mac Arthur Blvd. and Ford Road in locations different than the locations shown on the Master Plan of Streets and Highways . The Planning Commission , after a lengthy and exhaustive review of staff reports and public hearing presentation on February 15 , 1968 , determined that the proposed locations of Mac Arthur Boulevard and Ford Road were proper and in the best interests of sound planning and the City , with one proviso ; that Mac Arthur Blvd . be shown to continue as a primary arterial street northerly of Ford Road in order to provide a continuous Mac Arthur Blvd. from San Joaquin Hills Road to the Newport Freeway. Master Plan Amendment No . 17 was., therefore , recommended to the City Council for approval by Resolution No. 705 . Reports from the Planning Department and Public Works Department are attached for City Council review along with Resolution No . 705- with Exhibit "A" map attached . E url�ly submitted ayer,c. Planning Director EM : hh Attachments : Resolution from Planning Commission No . 705 Exhibit "A" Map Report from Public Works Department CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH March 11 , 1968 TO : City Council FROM: Planning Department BY : Planning Director SUBJECT: Master Plan Amendment No . 17 Ford Road and Mac Arthur Blvd . Background The City Council at its meeting of December 11 , 1967 requested the Planning Commission to study an annexation request by the Irvine Company relating to a 212 acre parcel of land located easterly of Mac Arthur Blvd. and southerly of the proposed extension of Ford Road. The Planning Commission in reviewing this annexation request recog- nized that in order to process the annexation as submitted , amend- ments to the Master Plan of Streets and Highways would be necessary . This determination was made in recognition of the fact that the pro- posed annexation showed both Mac Arthur Blvd. and Ford Road in locations different than the locations shown on the Master Plan of Streets and Highways . The Planning Commission , after a lengthy and exhaustive review of staff reports and public hearing presentation on February 15 , 1968 , determined that the proposed locations of Mac Arthur Boulevard and Ford Road were proper andin the best interests of sound planning and the City , with one proviso ; that Mac Arthur Blvd . be shown to continue as a primary arterial street northerly of Ford Road in order to provide a continuous Mac Arthur Blvd. from San Joaquin Hills Road to the Newport Freeway. Master Plan Amendment No . 17 was., therefore , recommended to the City Council for approval by Resolution No . 705. Reports from the Planning Department and Public Works Department are attached for City Council review along with Resolution No. 705• with Exhibit "A" map attached . r ufl�ly submitted "® v Ernest Mayer, rl_�_ Planning Director EM: hh Attachments : Resolution from Planning Commission No . 705 Exhibit "A" Map Report from Public Works Department CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH March 11 , 1968 TO : City Council FROM: Planning Department BY : Planning Director SUBJECT: Master- Plan Amendment No . 17 Ford Road and Mac Arthur Blvd , Background The City Council at its meeting of December 11 , 1967 requested the Planning Commission to study an annexation request by the Irvine Company relating to a 212 acre parcel of land located easterly of Mac Arthur Blvd. and southerly of the proposed extension of Ford Road. The Planning Commission in reviewing this annexation request recog- nized that in order to process the annexation as submitted , amend- ments to the Master Plan' of Streets and Highways would be necessary. This determination was made in recognition of the fact that the pro- posed annexation showed both Mac Arthur Blvd . and Ford Road in locations different than the locations shown on the Master Plan of Streets and Highways . The Planning Commission , after a lengthy and exhaustive review of staff reports and public hearing presentation on February 15 , 1968 , determined that the proposed locations of Mac Arthur Boulevard and Ford Road were proper andj n the best interests of sound planning and the City , with one proviso ; that Mac Arthur Blvd . be shown to continue as a primary arterial street northerly of Ford Road in order to provide a continuous Mac Arthur Blvd. from San Joaquin Hills Road to the Newport Freeway. Master Plan Amendment No . 17 was , therefore , recommended to the City Council for approval by Resolution No . 705. Reports from the Planning Department and Public Works Department are attached- for City Council review along with Resolution No . 705- with Exhibit "A" map attached. Res ectfully submitted Ernest Mayer, r. Planning Director EM: hh Attachments : Resolution from Planning Commission No . 705 Exhibit "A" Map Report from Public Works Department CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH February 26 , 1968 TO : City Council FROM: Planning Commission BY: Planning Director SUBJECT: Master Plan Amendment No . 17 Background and Explanation The City Council at its meeting of December11 , 1967 requested the Planning Commission to study an annexation request by the Irvine Company relating to a 212 acre parcel of land located easterly of MacArthur Boulevard and southerly of the proposed extension of Ford Road . The Planning Commission in reviewing this annexation request rec- ognized that in order to process the annexation as submitted, amendments to the Master Plan of Streets and Highways would be necessary . This determination was made in recognition of the fact that the proposed annexation showed both MacArthur Boulevard and Ford Road in locations different than the locations shown on the Master Plan of Streets and Highways . The Planning Commission , after a lengthy and exhaustive review of Staff reports and public hearing presentation on February 15 , 1968 , determined that the proposed locations of MacArthur Boulevard and Ford Road were proper and in the best interests of sound planning and the City with one proviso ; that MacArthur Boulevard be shown to continue as a primary arterial street northerly of Ford Road in order to provide a continuous MacArthur� Boulevard from San Joaquin Hills Road to the Newport Freeway. Master Plan Amendment No . 17 was , therefore , recommended to the City Council for approval by Resolution No . 705 . A thorough report will be sent to the City Council hearing in the regular agenda packet prior to the public hearing . Respectfully submitted, PLANNING COMMISSION By '^UM:L. Ernest ayer , Jr„ Planning Director Attachments : Planning Commission Resolution Map of Proposed Alignments �,� a-� rucf�o '• •y � ' 1{S��`l it j \\���:`,. �I wG•r.,�'-� ro � 4 �lf�J ✓��+/'��/ , y+.p �> ✓• ._' l,b�M' 4, •5 •, A.i g;� ���, i,'^k.y{at , C�.r..rm,..�e.nr��.w.F'rr•.M. �J `' 7 p h , ••r^, l ''`•", ��".1.( { ` �,'�_ ` � �,"'+"�, a+ts..o. ...Izuivdi.-a.•+• N ��� •�� 1 � :• •� \.... //A/9 5'�t•' ••• ' �1{.`'�I �aa luti�;`�.+_ � t +, %r'y_.i'.,•� �i ,. "� rr i �/ .i. . )+L,°+G• yy l son JoWur;y,. c11" ` .4...t 1'h•— \�\—] �V \•\c0-' �`l � 1 �fI 'Nf�/ • +J / r� �'I, /{ ���� +yZ,,rNv -r`` i.. _•� • ,.,\� 'l, a\. "� O +C(•'r'" 1 i �'•f�, ✓+--{`,•• h+ o �•'J_�.t��%••0-'�} � 1{'1i I ' �S1 .rr^A m '� .,� / t .• 4'T`'p`• t. Yam. '��........yr�':y !IU(;��� '` i\ ^'S (��_ ;.zw�, ��//••�� yy����,y��y% /ii�' S},'.��•., rli�:.. h ' ._.,_.,•r..,•.,.,,..-,....- t� I/ 1)0^ �� .� - "•:. �'ta•i 7"'^.��"�fJ�.A wf�'�"" 4a //Nri�..G_ +�..._..y k•,.��...�h. �_,�+/' �' �/� \'j:'Y,-�f.�,. ,�..�'�(i�� .� 6, 1 1 / r ,-�,,I7 •! y;•. - / !i'`:1 li \�`� •'• BO�J 1� I I/\-`/1 IRV, sit Ponds „ " " S 1. �I,•, 1, �//� J •�1\��f�'�, :,e• f � �r.r; It r ••r- ..r` �l'ii,•/f`��P'•�.OT !. j�\�qj 16�I 11' �, +/ ��Ion , ,,( � Lfr ,J'1t� L'100 ��.��s+4 ' ��pt�:.N,"6:���• `� I1I�-'4...1�, '`��"�' t v/'"!: �";� ~ �' � 11'•, ,� \ ry \�//`.r' G/♦ \\J��j)> >S° I���r�=\�j�f^��'.i� IV "'T �%+h•1' (r. ly'��)��y~ '.�' 1�..:,T''-n ,s, ,�,.+/��' � r, n h�♦ y-V�f 'Y � \ r �y�.f.•�� • \ { 1�� /I/(:.' ' �/ ~�' fl`.'`y( `. n•..Y� �^^�'" .'„•. i�%� ! / .Y, r Dlj rnelY, �4"vv�( ��./ �:r- `.�\,•' �' li = \ / J 111�I��Sl,nr..,,, •�P..W.^^ � ./� •1'��3 � � "".'.'.g;•'`""�A �'T *;:..,•v, �•..:r.v y '�•.' � , / (.y/�J •� !. ,I lVp"-., i„ C*�\;�`\\CL's. ' � Ji4s., ��••,�„-��� ,EY' •:�' •7' � ° i- n •`*.^ '�_` is-i*"". � 'l �. Y •`';rf, •, r - i+'2Yi FlE }:ii . ->j 4 `�U �I--�• f�� I� "r"i''�O�'�;��I"�YO'�..�. ' yss"*�j'T�j\�;e '�+� II���IC frr , ,/ ��Vf;•,`,1 '' `" ��'�—�._�:�.i � \ -�R ,.•�-�I� �� �� lykrJ.r,,,,.�h`@,��. '`,r�.e` �',�1 Vie l� • �r'q a�.. I✓, `l • //} . .•>'y Ild / �j/ `Q',1.:';\,Z �y//h� ��l1C.b•'\ s "{"�� „, \ A ��, ,� \�1; •�.. � r'�Y! � �,eriN l�il ;j, ':i�a ( I��q , , 501 •�,' Y�� .� .�F " �1 I A[/ � � '� -'=�11, � � ' ('�•I� '.+ r '( u1s+ �ll� �i��t�!` .5"''r' ' 7,�� '•\ 1 '� �'.(�, �,,,, %'1, y 1 3AN„ ;? ).' �iS ! ,' \vl•',ft) {( �-' 1\ \�'•I, ;G."Nae / �'�� ` �;'�•, `, , '',,, , .y`V`c�Y` ,ir+.C Ypu tr �t� `:`i r � � ��,) f �],\,�f -,,.. RCS �RVGIJ,(� �i�i <� I ��1\` �,n�,�1` " F+•"'1•,•��Y �3ytj.+r.71�11 •'", �—•r �:. ? rr/Y �l✓ � 'J�,= �- l "Jog !/ ...7"11`\ .� '``•>4-•" '' �•`fW+'w/+' "� /i ' � /( is �,t.':. �--: �l c---•!/'/fry //�// / i• 4. �-- I � � r,. \ram..�,,, I 'd+l '.F+��'�I .'� 413y{•1�{{{"���1r„f� .. _ �//,'� 11''^t'•/4w.+.'``"`� �r\�`�• ;��''��•y eti„�_�.\�� °t1+ 'i.�1 ♦ i \: , N _. ±�_._� �r fi /tit."�,'�1�A'!�) ♦ Id" jr l)r .`�t� i `� v sk�`''4 '•,:- ?: ���T. •r"Tir�/1\\- I, .., CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH February 26 , 1968 TO: City Council FROM: Planning Commission BY : Planning Director SUBJECT: Master Plan Amendment No . 17 Background and Explanation The City Council at its meeting of December 11 , 1967 requested the Planning Commission to study an annexation request by the Irvine Company relating to a 212 acre parcel of land located easterly of MacArthur Boulevard and southerly of the proposed extension of Ford Road. The Planning Commission in reviewing this annexation request rec- ognized that in order to process the annexation as submitted , amendments to the Master Plan of Streets and Highways would be necessary . This determination was made in recognition of the fact that the proposed annexation showed both MacArthur Boulevard and Ford Road in locations different than the locations shown on the Master Plan of Streets and Highways . The Planning Commission , after a lengthy and exhaustive review of Staff reports and public hearing presentation on February 15 , 1968 , determined that the proposed locations of MacArthur Boulevard and Ford Road were proper and in the best interests of sound planning and the City with one proviso ; that MacArthur, Boulevard be shown to continue as a primary arterial street northerly of Ford Road in order to provide a continuous MacArthur Boulevard from San Joaquin Hills Road to the Newport Freeway . Master Plan Amendment No . 17 was , therefore , recommended to the City Council for approval by Resolution No . 705 . A thorough report will be sent to the City Council hearing in the regular agenda packet prior to the public hearing . Respectfully submitted , PLANNING COMMISSION By Ernest Mayer, Jr„ P arming Director Attachments : Planning Commission Resolution Map of Proposed Alignments I / ,• \\ r• + � �\M'-7`.:k . �¢ / r y� 9 J v7 / •r r,yy'`; �`L\t!1 ••} 1`,,\�R5. \ !%+, � `.� f �L. 03 �� a.•f 1 //{A�7/Q,`•a n. . yti`'. q (�/�\rto- �' rv:l' \�--�'\ •� �-�'`• V ly .3r.`'i• t``S.. ^ '✓/:, • I ^+� t�.J^ ril' ! - g"{ ;A' ♦t\♦ , .ts: ^ �.'•'�:,1.1�":. \ '\ fir" 1� r� �.J�7 ...v.1.yS• . 7 { Son Jo"UIn <; t. t7 �'�y.:: b�.'n'--. < ,\ '\ ,.1 ..`%( .•\ 'l •, ` (r��: off/ •� r1L I \>�S .�a�` :M;; j ' „Gj' '•I '.. •(' t°! /f:..Rll' \ t �, _- '• ,��•It. 1"N, ��A. � �'u..l. t... Trr....�!$!; -..«..-.,.•.,^--.•.,.,.'^ ^, !l.��Vf 1! )dam\l.�r�>i _�:.-;."r� •. f Vr . 'l,aa�7�C '�`*:"L.�� r '„!;- `�'. ,� ,•rw jY�lr,.(l ,..YiI.�...��„_!�•W(/.cY;•�,::'"':_�. JfJ J .,. II'` \V`d'/'�� , .� _ ' •�^'� .` ••�S.f' .Q, �" ,�/ . ra. i• � ` %�i��1\iyW�`��I IiF\-'•i �- " -G`.i^•-eo ���(�`�J !'.✓+\UI`��- ir • OIt Pond 3 'A•, i i, 'i,, `;7�/•l Jrv� ���• �)�L!(�+ ' �°/. �•...• .1�♦11+ ,,.MM"�T �r. `.J✓' / �V� i`(v! r'_.'+' � h\\J�(�+..�`'� `+t\..'J'". mow....Y J/'�'�� i ;:-"� _`- .. �,;¢'o:� ri ; ' 6- a /�� ) �� L�Iv/ `�, t. `;C�3�J;ri� ��,.\� ,i ✓'•�.�f'ti/ r - •f fin, YVl oAli N �• 1 �U)(' �� �� ✓f11�j 1 .� `' \�1 a��� ' r ,'��.� =�c'�', I.:,��^�. � ` (�� \ �CJ �--asp;`✓ ,�!. ,-;,�,•���' I /' /'• Y �' �-' \ Jyf Q!/\ , '/� 1 I` \ �l it� �`-1 J/: J,�' ✓'Y d \.• \ C,y�/ `1 i` �.�/J�. , ' /J'I r�,IJ(^..•;�..�; �.1. [(. • \ f,/i \.•-T,. '""�,� 1 fS `UIr S •)�// CV�J�/�- C i as�%`. taAy AY\= T \ c-•`�, { ;' • „" ,.,f'1 ,, 11r a �:1 tt '�C�S;" � � �'_"�^`'ee ,'i ^'/�G / c� //�q��`'�•+�%^'~ rs ' ' f ,�� a , '� � .• 1 '-1��\ ,j'-6`�:��.�•;,': ,tea.. ,lj �: �.' F�—/•�• , 1 `�\ •-y E. � tip` o, �% r)Iir� �>/ rr..-'%: '.>�:�'��.-.. rA7� +13.C. \`(� Fy YJ" b : \r \\ �i✓.m• �.!r`j.. L•1�� �'L �\ .J1•"..e,`wl�•� ! .v; 81����,�•%°/ a�al��yy:.�.� A7 . '"�,�•.\ V •�ICj=; ' '� I��C'V" '' �`;�;�� �5�,./�7 I( • \�—_'`�ti a "":� $14^� •�• �' w,,,�ga\� `�•. ' r i ;i fJi'rfd t V•\,WWt9Y `!",yi"�C� 't;�"." `__..R*� .` -�i r1d�'d:\:.f D. '�11 • /! _`- �,.�..\ ,� ,', +\ 1Y � ' I iJL '"'y' 3—x..,• � la , 1 u. �.%:.. //_ "+.�I •7 ,\'a lr S T\y .i"�N 7' V '4� p�s�..•�;r" ,"'4• �t .� /� 1 1 1.1(�' +'s� 1\�,, q l(/\^ r/r rl�:, �'' 1'1"�,�1 t��._. i7, .1 f ' !r�� \J� '�J �Il�ur(a .,,�,Yfp�11^�. '5��1�1A �,�/�1����l♦ -`yap (� \\ \ / ��y• l` Ilk `��,`l�^:+5y1`? 4ir - rjl\ 1 ! (�.n'lY� lt'fj�'i�r.,✓R���,r1 `I±14j �: }yt��1 �,a, -\` ! • ! `�, {�y� r � 1 1 1 AVtl ,e((l''�� !,�+•, ��t .+\\ � y:l)�J L{ ' •r'',ri�, � /V�A� "°/�//C �`�:','`� =�1 Sol (/}r�11 !ay G+s,: /.",.�+`'/,•✓ y,sY,,�'��. , A �° / �'\\�i' J�. If `J�• � o) �(�+�� •v.,,,,�^ /�.•� \ Ja•` 11� ', \ `\;1 �.Ir `����,,�P �'�f.�'�u�,b 1� ' ' V.} '7F�r.5fil� ,\�L� �, fRUOf,(��( �ll� 1!`1• �' S t �5 ,,P' '� two 1.--,^ 1 :1 I\�'.,'9�/ ���', { ♦� ', �„�'�,;tp(�,,.J�•`t „/�, ,1\ i,.,� ' � it k'.eP q�� 'ti. "''"♦ fA 2 Mil, ♦ r / �J?�_� • ' 1l Ci' �j J �r� �I'' \\J���` �+' 'v�� {So1 A • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH February 26 , 1968 TO: City Council FROM: Planning Commission . BY: Planning Director SUBJECT: Master Plan Amendment No . 17 Background and Explanation The City Council at its meeting of December11 , 1967 requested the Planning Commission to study an annexation request by the Irvine Company relating to a 212 acre parcel of land located easterly of MacArthur Boulevard and southerly of the proposed extension of Ford Road. The Planning Commission in reviewing this annexation request rec- ognized that in order to process the annexation as submitted , amendments to the Master Plan of Streets and Highways would be necessary . This determination was made in recognition of the fact that the proposed annexation showed both MacArthur Boulevard and Ford Road in locations different than the locations shown on the Master Plan of Streets and Highways . The Planning Commission , after a lengthy and exhaustive review of Staff reports and public hearing presentation on February 15 , 1968 , determined that the proposed locations of MacArthur Boulevard and Ford Road were proper and in the best interests of sound planning and the City with one proviso ; that MacArthur, Boulevard be shown to continue as a primary arterial street northerly of Ford Road in order to provide a continuous MacArthur Boulevard from San Joaquin Hills Road to the Newport Freeway . Master Plan Amendment No . 17 was , therefore , recommended to the City Council for approval by Resolution No . 705 . A thorough report will be sent to the City Council hearing in the regular agenda packet prior to the public hearing . Respectfully submitted , PLANNING COMMISSION By i& &Z2=2� Ernest Mayer, Jr. , Planning Director Attachments : Planning Commission Resolution Map of Proposed Alignments C- TLW9aem 2/19/68 RESOLUTION NO> 705 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING AND RECOMMENDING AN AMENDMENT TO THE MASTER STREET AND HIGHWAY PLAN WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the City Council have heretofore adopted a Master Plan which includes as. a unit . thereof a Master Street and Highway Plan, with revisions; and WHEREAS, studies by the Planning Commission reveal that since the adoption of said Master Street and Highway Plan there have been changes in conditions which indicate that said Flan should be amended to show new alignments, additions, street name corrections and classification changes; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 65351 of the Government Code the Planning Commission has held a public hearing to consider the above mentioned amendment; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Com- mission of the City of Newport Beach does hereby recommend to the City Council that the Master Street and Highway Plan as shown on a map entitled Exhibit "A109 attached hereto, be amended by designating thereon a prolongation of Ford Road as a primary road from a point intersecting with the present alignment of MacArthur Boulevard and otherwise known as proposed Corona del Mar Freeway easterly and northerly to an intersection with Bonita Canyon Road; and further designating thereon a realignment of MacArthur Boulevard as a primary road commencing at Pacific Coast Highway continuing to a point intersecting at San Joaquin Hills Road northerly to a point intersecting with Ford Road as designated by this amendment and continuing northerly to a point 1 intersecting with Bonita Canyon Road near the proposed Corona del Mar Freeway. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chairman and Secretary of the Planning Commission are hereby directed to endorse said amendment and transmit same to the City Council for consider- ation and adoption. Regularly passed and adopted by the Planning Commis- sion of the City of Newport Beach, State of California, on the 15th day of February, 1968. AYES: Curtis , Clark, Jakosky, Clemence, Dosh, Watson, Copelin NOES : ABSENT: Secretary C a rman 2 . •�. hF . y5 '[/ '4�'i,4 VS l��`.�\ 'rc I � ww« '.6. M � /7 M1 .�n �yy/ Q �Sr. . '�'�4"YY� •� a''li �\ ``.�r,1-.n-y:t+' � \\..[„• / a..-..r•,nw�.'.J,,..C,+nus V'•� �iP- y7. F . /�^/ !\ /� �.�� _�- - •r"-",'.x ...n.t_ve.uw.:....r... }5" F"• 'l , '`'t� \\ >-• ��_�n �r:u 11 I l .may •'r". PIS Srn Jo"wlt ..lr�v f•. tS ...4...i•' r' w � \\.\°e•� /' l '�4,�•,-1':f'V'�-rlAr�{y,,.,Y •�' ( .cu„ f'y��'d�. It �\+ <' •�`� 1,\\� �� o �4•ay.,-�, .`�• / '� I /,'V'7 �.•'�'d.:.'- p7 arc-'' 11 �. 1 A•'�'-:v:J r �, �11\� `..� lA .. VW� � ,,.�.�. ,;5, ,���/j t� rI,^ '1/�r,�� i l ` '^• . Ponds nee �-�� / '���• /�'}�,(� �� ' (�/��' �, , l�l alt v fi /-. ;'a.`~�.•IVr,��t"a'. •1- C,' � ��•-- / �' �+i' /f/ib•. '7,. ''{rll�IV%'E' �, r{1 V? o I (•\� \l 1 /^� r'��� l'•� ,�/ �r •. //may //"\ �J• � J ,r,�© ) J��!--•�.,, .�.,,/// rJT) � _I• ) ! � u t!'�/�f�S r f i' f r' '"�` ( •fll •1 ��/r ''\�/ 'u' 4�)�j �����l r/}/' i/ 1/'��\�/'./!' 19 ri Ifa , \ ..Jlf r•:a 'I j�`' / ). ' 11 1'l ��y / ..G.�.`.6� .�"f ;i%L/�, ,�t\••'«. ;•. • ,+ ,• AC�• ;!� � ,,!� •. , ,tr 1., , a1l eye •�Y �✓'' rr�`�`1\/`�.a.A';, •i:l .h15, ayh,•\` an ND•x.' �'a %' ,' �/ N �,•�rr4.1.., \ `'ry Z ''•; �:':a Y ".� i O�;,.,r,,�� yz �•�•� �t'C��,'�• �` \ ✓ •l {.;G� � � 7 "�r\�'� J\� /. !/ �'� •ta. Axe / „ r•.-✓,�� I. ��� '� ( r,\.Y -"a.• '. -fj'•• ,L..7 D. ° %r I• �/,' � " ::"•:., i� �', \ yVVT ,p •� <' :,.'n, _ ,,:'ti a�1r,11;(ul A r�.� ,1. f::.,1••.. � r f'd '<4 ); a��-S ' 'l +J�^'�� r�(r�/ � .`rt, °�;i1 I,t }} ��,1• -/�o�, �'i e'J\ [y,:icS }.+" f`A`v...4. /�-` r 1 r r /-.✓ ) A, \I/j'(��j-+,�,• `,S-'=: \A.�,. r t 1r,( !/I , r10 �"'•'.�l...i .y'�'Y • ^�., 1.�,` - i�i f•,` r % O�II, '.,I' Iflli 1" t 1t1 '1 i k `' ,:. ��> rI r „ Af .. i:., 1 fy �,y" `1'••:1 •'r' a r r/-�-.i^\f:a�i._1J .) � IS �1`t'S'�`�7+� 1�:" ��1,t,•'1yyyS+r//ry-M'��')� I 'I• ` /��...71� /t.�ff '1a�'�. �� `'-.. / \\/,f� w., I qr' •�� /?lll/`��1'f`lil �;48��� \�1, I •+ v//u^ as r� \ // ` \ram- '' .� ( a �; C � �\\1 IIII'�i��+�4�1U', �1\a `` I � ,,/}`' , S "`'�> ,�n�� �^^/,� '1(. �,• �� 1 -'' a„+IJ� r / 7��� `.:'r'}�\�\.)�r`fs'���i�l���:��'�)�``I�) lr dVn1j'� r?"Frt,.. ; /','�+ '+.. ' � : `./_• ' �'�. �. „'f. ' '1 n\\-;•`;') .'Vg1y A�`/�'(` �i' 1`\�, 111 1/Jr \\� ,J4 _ ...y A•,Z��L `� 1 , ,�`r,'!('Z� t � .��` .•�i , \��' �rdzrr ;k''t;�.\`1�k1�), "'11i']S�f', IA`r,'Ii •,•,� `.�`.� v ;\ � +`i�` �i i','i.�1` t '•�` � ?`�� -�l�Slt2�' '�%; IIY�jr'`I /ll���i�f /' •l��rv� O ` � ;U� r"F � . '4.�11/�I ��V �,. •`n A 'I t ,,1; �11 (� I7� r� /� .r , � �1 •� �y��,' i ��aa n �, S!��yi.. I� 1 1l�\':�1�•'�Cl � tf ,eyrt „•,,'�•,� Ya olP �1\ -. �� �� \ I J':,`r , ,l-•,• +p • l '",\�/ S/'/af�f'r �-:�. � y ,. '• s�au ` r �? /! (f//' , F^„ L..,�,'.r i:`.• • y,, n. 4�:;jd yL �. ;a ! A - \ °� � ��11 � /`•y3 , �:"h')�y„l'• �1 / vi, t 9 � � �1 \, \ \- /f�y) au.r•• r•�r A� �*'' y 1� )� ;fig`.` U ` r`/; • �} '� �' ' � � � , � f' %. F•• \Y✓/\_� •�/ •{ �' 1lYl �4,' I' ,���`7--v�J'I ' .��^�I`rr ,« rc �4 •fr2 n, 6' •c, lpl (I it ���( • .: l L.Jr ! f ,ry ,71 t �11•,1��' „�\\f,./t. /^ •�% \)�/i V .I F•�3 jl+ {F �/Q/y�I� O ��� \ ��•,��/�`.-t" -�(�Cp�j,�C.•+ �J�\l).1�,���+��,�//�I'`� ,J%_'L,•,••r•. ,I,i•`/SI r• It, `! I �:� a O�nI� it(r �t� /y'F . �•� :.'�'.r�n g.jl� pp('.,.' ShA:li4" ''i\, '(;� .F�-.J ,`�� i 7 � �,1 '' r4 •,� r'' f G;A,t`'Ya�� T�//• I?2/(•J�/�(y� i � je �}i. ./''0 "� �. \�`4��'..-!( ' �'��I,\\ 11f C '9e`'G,r�.�, t ? �r�.� - rj',i•I'I l � /.&r+W.r,..u.,y 1'r'`�-� �.\1\ L�1�'"��Y,`�+�'•��`•�. �. . _ ��"4..�G1_ x: ,_ _. •.:5 �.��`•i'•y. I�r.!�''1 w �J,r %.+r r. ,ti1, vskb �`�` r,: ��_='��ICC�� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH February 26 , 1968 TO: City Council FROM: Planning Commission BY : Planning Director SUBJECT: Master Plan Amendment No . 17 Background and Explanation The City Council at its meeting of December11 , 1967 requested the Planning Commission to study an annexation request by the Irvine Company relating to a 212 acre parcel -of land located easterly of MacArthur Boulevard and southerly of the proposed extension of Ford Road. The Planning Commission in reviewing this annexation request rec- ognized that in order to process the annexation as submitted, amendments to the Master Plan of Streets and Highways would be necessary . This determination was made in recognition of the fact that the proposed annexation showed both MacArthur Boulevard and Ford Road in locations different than the locations shown on the Master Plan of Streets and Highways . The Planning Commission , after a lengthy and exhaustive review of Staff reports and public hearing presentation on February 15 , 1968 , determined that the proposed locations of MacArthur Boulevard and Ford Road were proper and in the best interests of sound planning and the City with one proviso ; that MacArthur Boulevard be shown to continue as a primary arterial street northerly of Ford Road in order to provide a continuous MacArthur Boulevard from San Joaquin Hills Road to the Newport Freeway. Master Plan Amendment No . 17 was , therefore , recommended to the City Council for approval by Resolution No . 705 . A thorough report will be sent to the City Council hearing in the regular agenda packet prior to the public hearing . Respectfully submitted, PLANNING COMMISSION By Ernest Mayer, Jr. , Planning Director Attachments : Planning Commission Resolution Map of Proposed Alignments Ilk t � M ,�`^ Iti�, 1\.�) \Rt`' itr.� aC-- � Y � r -Y4:•'n .1 /,,:' ��� / �� ♦ t° a`� '\lt. ..fin ^, ��.•• y San JOaoUlll '�'•\�,`.� :�. .•...1 4 ��'+'♦'��: y\�'�' A. t. 'H� l Y 1 ' A �__ •hee't_i'1 7U',�'�Y �, �.wSY/"tu..r ,.�..�,,rau. o....,ty�4,l,.. ;..�t•"ljJf JI� ,/ ' lf,. + �w p � I, .•.�ti I a . nit PondO IF � f � ��t 3 6_ V,• Ds o((/�������(�r• IJU��� IN t 111`r j0,('=,'I ,t-' «".i �','a,`�� •+,. .-..r. �` ` Imo. _ ' U,\�`: 1v /,,t�• /1/.`- "!^ ,r. �`V., or i;f P�L�/2 /50 Yx Y �- •-^•.__ 'S I � �( tti i ,,tb ,, lam', "�\ ,J \••%I�"h�. '% i/�i'`l�`✓/'��•�1:.r., Cf 1�`..'+ ,`•, • -� tfi - - < �, �;}���i(�� ✓ram�r' r ♦ � \ •\\ `� � //�.. of P �t � p��'/' +0'�arr' •\ nt'�M'� �„ •`�J 1 N'( ' r,/�� ,.l1�lL� ° / `/`(�::;F + Y� �r11 `!`.�\..�ri-'r1:�,\('n,>.,..p, oi, a ' a� r � \ `rv^ `/ /`/l., 1 ('� v� �1� !'\••'.�-i '^'.C,`-�:-%T�...r�',r Y` ,i !•rs ,c l�♦���*�' /'JYp�• ``.iµ_.• � �' ,j..{ 1'/�•I/_(�i� %%� \r. �f/y3'•.ld,.--J t� y y\'\I,`�'a, � ,I �:��9"� �I\'a""J�Y,�� .�'"��M• ` �+w\�_.•1*�;,I _ �l.•r:�y�..nf "D, a •��P'f f_ I����%-~�`i'ti��� :�,,r�` t• r .��J.\� ,���� �Y�j,• t / I ��'°',., \. ,) / ,I / Ir,��,.. ' (l!(i ,, !'1'{,^iK�`•;\�' �'a: \V WI' �•!1 I�y X \�tl ♦•J �;`a \•l / ��, !�J /� ���j\�'I t• �ir r.,, �.1�1���\\�`f„}1 N1 {\\ ,,�/+ t ,•ri t '�WY aI ��: �� 'I�/�"..__�.\.u.11 \ .l � i•� ,�_ � J+il ` I+'�`d l„j�f^ ''J��t- .�1 \ 1,\^�'1. 1. ` '� 9 i.,J r \gip �. •.t 1' / '!`\;�``•4'4\�t�•fU� J .. "``'q� , ! 1 / 5'' ' ram,. •�y\ � !�,.- �,i �(; {r��S;r � "•'''�.�� 't���3'� �' "'�'�"�ja`' y •.;r' ``\ '~:�`��r�l ->,��� x�i.' \ t t If�. 1, \ '�.� `` T,r' '��q �1 \I,/.�\=`�'�, k' j� �� (•. �` z)+ ! � , �+ 44 �/ 74 t"F�tt(,L�4�% � i, ' cat: "• �.J t ��l, .,,air ,;r \ �fr,�_ , ,• � �;. a io, �0� , as •*i ';',''w+a.wl�,�i I ^ '�•• 'G,.•�-r f� 1 - �/G I �� ri1 D5 � .., � ��� q• j)+ll�(;; � , ,i y�� e/y�• IQ X II a• \ � �,�F/�,'�,r+�;''�t � ♦ya �` 'V t '�,� I C',e r� i�� it ` i'f(; ��� (�,.•�' (!,�``\•i p�;` ¢,.w`�".tJ�` `�°3'""•.� "' \/ tif`'p(i�,�.\ kkIV i: �/ 1`�j^ /�YYY} }��,V, j' 3 d.4d 1 'S 't'I♦ rw G``\�a�` f / Y �J III \ .��' �,f nla��,4 ' t+}/�6 �,�• ]� )f 7 / %r � r,�'C17• � %• ; . YYY �•..�. .r\• -11\ � _..;i l/ `fir/ 11��,. � �°��� "'• 1,�'''3 � /�_`Y (/�t o `�/ \ /^�°X l 1',� ' r�.'-',Y!��`\�`��1`,;l~' l��rr� .. -`,fir::;.; '�b•.tV�VI %�'. 1 ,"��i`1.% .�"�4 �� /�, �/� _ 1/\u ( /` Gcn1::`/l. " �'�"`,\\ll �' �I r t. •✓J`:��-tX CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH February 15 , 1968 TO : Planning Commission FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: Master Plan Amendment No . 17 Ford Road and MacArthur Boulevard Background On December 7 , 1967 the Irvine Company submitted a letter to the City Council advising the City that they wished to have a 212 acre parcel of land located easterly of MacArthur Boulevard and southerly of the proposed extension of Ford Road considered for annexation . The matter was subsequently referred to the staff for study and report. Preliminary Study The Planning Department and Public Works Department in their pre- liminary review of the plan submitted with the annexation request came to the following conclusions : 1 . The area proposed for annexation .is well within the' boundaries traditionally agreed to as appro- priate as the City ' s ultimate boundary. 2 . Both MacArthur Boulevard and Ford Road, shown as the easterly and northerly boundaries of the annexa- tion area represent deviations from the City ' s Master Plan of Streets and Highways . 3 . There appear to be some very compelling reasons for the modified alignments of these two highways but at least one of them may prove to be more costly to construct because of its additional length . 4. No determination as to the appropriateness of the annexation can be made without the matter of the modified highway alignments being also decided. 5 . A public hearing by both the Planning Commission and the City Council is required to amend the Master Plan of Streets and Highways . Analysis The Planning Department in analyzing this amendment requested a detailed analysis of the proposed highway amendments from the Public Works Department . Such report has been prepared and is TO : Planning Commission - 2 . attached to this report. The Public Works report in essence points out: ( 1 ) That there appear to be no objections whatsoever to the proposed Ford Road realignment ; (2) that the proposed MacArthur Boulevard realignment is a more lengthy one and therefore provides "Poorer service" ( 3 ) That MacArthur Boulevard. should be a con- tinuous highway between San Joaquin Hills Road and the Newport Freeway . Planning staff after many meetings with the Irvine Company, the County Road Department and the Public Works Department has come essentially to the same conclusions with one minor deviation . Plann- ing staff believes that the advantages of a more easterly alignment of MacArthur Boulevard by far outweigh the disadvantages . This position is taken based upon MacArthur Boulevard continuing northerly of Ford Road as recommended by the Public Works Department and for the following reasons : 1 . A master plan of streets and highways is a generalized document which attempts in advance of precise study to define future transportational needs . 2 . Highway alignment determinations are often made well in advance of land development patterns taking shape and generally are plotted without careful study as to terrain or precise "desire , demand and warrant" studies . 3 . For these very reasons highway alignments shown on master plans are intended only to serve as generalized guidelines to transportation planners and city planners . 4 . The location of MacArthur Boulevard was similarly plotted on the City ' s Master Plan of Streets and Highways . Its location was meant to be flexible and was based on the best information available at a par- ticular point in time . 5 . More definitive study appears to reveal that there are a number of good reasons why the location requested is superior from a pure planning point of view. Most important of these is the fact that the proposed ali nment fo ows the terrain more sensibly se aratin a flat area from a illy- area ,-- re y defining_,and separating two natural planning units or entities . The alignment resently illustrated on the Master Plan of Streets an � g ways creates a narrow and of and that would be sandwiched between a freeway and a heavily. travelled arterial ig way . Suc and because of its narrow width from a Tanners point of view , does not lend itself to we Jentia and uses . On the other hand , such apeninEu a mi t be i h7y sought after by the developers of 11strip commercial " businesses . fr-- �� • TO : Planning Commission - 3 . In addition the ro osed location of Mac Arthur Boulevar allows for a reasona y goo sized�lannin9 unit or sector in which a - conSiderable amount of de- sign flexibility exists . Based on the aforementioned reasoning the Planning Department believes that MacArthur Boulevard as proposed offers an acceptable level of service to those persons seeking a thF—ough arterial other than t e freeway while providing for a much more efficient and 'desirable land use potential and flexibility . The proposed Master Plan Amendment is therefore recommended for approval . Res ectfully submitted , Ernest May4, 0r. Planning Director EM : hh Attachments : Map of existing and proposed arterials Report of the Public Works Department February 15, 1968 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: Public Works Department SUBJECT: PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO MASTER PLAN OF STREETS AND HIGHWAYS DISCUSSION: In connection with the proposed Upper Harbor View Hills annexation and devel- opment, The Irvine Company has requested certain- revisions, to the' Master P}an of Streets and Highways. The changes being presented for Commission consideration- are described below and also shown on the attached drawing. 1 . Ford Road easterly of the Corona del Mar- Freeway route is extended northerly to a connection with Bonita Canyon Road. The present Master Plan shows an extension easterly and southerly to a connection with San Joaquin Hills Road. As proposed, the' revision would realign that portion of the Ford Road extension between the Corona' del Mar Freeway and future MacArthur Boulevard to a more northerly location and connect it to Bonita Canyon Road. The portion of the' Ford Road extension between future MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Road would be left as it is presently shown pending further study. A traffic study prepared for The Irvine Company by De Leuw, Cather and Company indicates that the proposed change would- provide better overall traffic service to the area by reducing the' excessive future traffic demands on Bonita Canyon Road. The Public Works Department has reviewed the traffic report and agrees with these findings. 2. Future MacArthur Boulevard between San Joaquin Hills Road and Bonita Canyon Road is moved to a new' alignment generally' located from 1 ,000 feet to 2,000 feet easterly of the-alignment' presently shown on the Master Plan. This realignment will increase the street length by approximately 2,300 feet, thus increasing accordingly the distance through traffic must travel . This change would• also' increase°the' City's' share'.of construction costs under the Capital' Improvement Policy. Although the realignment would result in poorer service to' through traffic', The' Irvine Company feels that there are important land• use, considerations' involved in the realignment; these land use concepts will be' the subject of a presentation to the Commission by The Irvine Company. Inasmuch as the entire area of the proposed changes' is presently unincorporated, the matter has been reviewed with the Orange County Road Department. The Road Department has indicated verbally that they have no objections to' the amendment. After action by the City, a corresponding amendment to the' County' Master Plan would be considered by the County. In addition to the above changes, The Irvine Company feels that their traffic study indicates that there is not sufficient through traffic demand to justify the in- clusion on the Master Plan of the MacArthur Boulevard link between Ford Road extension and Bonita Canyon Road. Neither the Public Works Department nor the County Road Depart- ment are in agreement with this conclusion,' therefore- the amendment' includes the link. A further detailed study of the need for this link will be made by the staff. The con- necting arterial link northerly of Pacific View Memorial Park extending from future MacArthur Boulevard to San Joaquin Hills Road will also be the subject of further study. t� • Page 2 February 15, 1968 - Planning Commission Proposed Amendment to Master Plan of- Streets- and Highways RECOMMENDATIONS: 1 . Approve the changes proposed ,to, the -easterly.extensi.om of Ford Road. 2. If it is felt by the Planning 'Commission-that, the, land, use benefits obtained by- the realignment, of,-MacArthur., Boulevard' outweigh the poorer level of service to• through•-trafficrcaused• by-the increase in length, approval, of, the, realignment, would be in order. c 4�ffxc Benjamin B. Nolan City Engineer BBN/ldg Att. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH February 15 , 1968 TO : Planning Commission FROM : Planning Department SUBJECT: Master Plan Amendment No . 17 Ford Road and MacArthur Boulevard Background On December 7 , 1967 the Irvine Company submitted a letter to the City Council advising the City that they wished to have a 212 acre parcel of land located easterly of MacArthur Boulevard and southerly of the proposed extension of Ford Road considered for annexation . The matter was subsequently referred to the staff for study and report. Preliminary Study The Planning Department and Public Works Department in their pre- liminary review of the plan submitted with the annexation request came to the following conclusions : 1 . The area proposed for annexation is well within the boundaries traditionally agreed to as appro- priate as the City ' s ultimate boundary. 2 . Both MacArthur Boulevard and Ford Road, shown as the easterly and northerly boundaries of the annexa- tion area represent deviations from the City ' s Master Plan of Streets and Highways . 3 . There appear to be some very compelling reasons for the modified alignments of these two highways but at least one of them may prove to be more costly to construct because of its additional length . 4 . No determination as to the appropriateness of the annexation can be made without the matter of the modified highway alignments being also decided. 5 . A public hearing by both the Planning Commission and the City Council is required to amend the Master Plan of Streets and Highways . Analysis The Planning Department in analyzing this amendment requested a detailed analysis of the proposed highway amendments from the Public Works Department . Such report has been prepared and is TO : Planning Commission - 2 . attached to this report. The Public Works report in essence points out: ( 1 ) That there appear to be no objections whatsoever to the proposed Ford Road realignment ; (2 ) that the proposed MacArthur Boulevard realignment is a more lengthy one and therefore provides " poorer service" . (3) That MacArthur Boulevard should be a con- tinuous highway between San Joaquin Hills Road and the Newport Freeway. Planning staff after many meetings with the Irvine Company, the County Road Department and the Public Works Department has come essentially to the same conclusions with one minor deviation . Plann- ing staff believes that the advantages of a more easterly alignment of MacArthur Boulevard by far outweigh the disadvantages . This position is taken based upon MacArthur Boulevard continuing northerly of Ford Road as recommended by the Public Works Department and for the following reasons : 1 . A master plan of streets and highways is a generalized document which attempts in advance of precise study to define future transportational needs . 2 . Highway alignment determinations are often made well in advance of land development patterns taking shape and generally are plotted without careful study as to terrain or precise "desire , demand and warrant" studies . 3 . For these very reasons highway alignments shown on master plans are intended only to serve as generalized guidelines to transportation planners and city planners . 4. The location of MacArthur Boulevard was similarly plotted on the City ' s Master Plan of Streets and Highways . Its location was meant to be flexible and was based on the best information available at a par- ticular point in time . 5 . More definitive study appears to reveal that there are a number of good reasons why the location requested is superior from a pure planning point of view. Most important of these is the fact that the proposed alignment foT ows the terrain more sensib y separating a flat area from a hilly` are.a ,"thereby defining and separating two natural planning units or entities . The alignment presently illustrated on the Master Plan of Streets an Highways creates' a narrow and of and that wou a sandwichedbetween a freeway an a eavily travelled arterialTiig way . Such land because of its narrow width from a planners oint of view , does not lend itself to well desi ne resi entia and uses . on t e other and , suc a peninsu a might be hi sought after by the developers of_"strip commercial " us Nsses . TO : Planning Commission - 3 . In addition the ro osed location of Mac Arthur Boulevar a lows for a r2asona y goo _ s1zed planning unit or sector in which a consideraT a amount of de- sign flexibility exists . Based on the aforementioned reasoning the Planning Department believes that MacArthur Boulevard as proposed offers an acce table level of service to those persons seeking a through a�rteria of er than the freeway while providing for a much more efficient and 'desirable land use potential and flexibility . The proposed Master Plan Amendment is therefore recommended for approval . Res ectfully submitted , Ernest May4, Jr. Planning Director EM : hh Attachments : Map of existing and proposed arterials Report of the Public Works Department • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH February 15 , 1968 TO : Planning Commission FROM : Planning Department SUBJECT : Master Plan Amendment No . 17 Ford Road and MacArthur Boulevard Background On December 7 , 1967 the Irvine Company submitted a letter to the City Council advising the City that they wished• to have a 212 acre parcel of land located easterly of MacArthur Boulevard and southerly of the proposed extension of Ford Road considered for annexation . The matter was subsequently referred to the staff for study and report. Preliminary Study The Planning Department and Public Works Department in their pre- liminary review of the plan submitted with the annexation request came to the following conclusions : 1 . The area proposed for annexation is well within the boundaries traditionally agreed to as appro- priate as the City ' s ultimate boundary . 2 . Both MacArthur Boulevard and Ford Road , shown as the easterly and northerly boundaries of the annexa- tion area represent deviations from the City ' s Master Plan of Streets and Highways . 3 . There appear to be some very compelling reasons for the modified alignments of these two highways but at least one of them may prove to be more costly to construct because of its additional length . 4 . No determination • as to the appropriateness of the annexati-on can be made without the matter of the modified highway alignments being also decided. 5 . A public hearing by both the Planning Commission and the City Council is required to amend the Master Plan of Streets and Highways . Analysis • The Planning Department in analyzing this amendment requested a detailed analysis of the proposed highway amendments from the Public Works Department. Such report has been prepared and is T0 : PlanningCommission - 2 . attached to this report. The Public Works report in essence points out: ( 1 ) That there appear to be no objections whatsoever to the proposed Ford Road realignment ; ( 2 ) that the proposed MacArthur Boulevard realignment is a more lengthy one and therefore provides "poorer service" . (3) That MacArthur Boulevard should be a con- tinuous highway between San Joaquin Hills Road and the Newport Freeway. Planning staff after many meetings with the Irvine Company , the County Road Department and the Public Works Department has come essentially to the same conclusions with one minor deviation . Plann- ing staff believes that the advantages of a more easterly alignment of MacArthur Boulevard by far outweigh the disadvantages . This position is taken based upon MacArthur Boulevard continuing northerly of Ford Road as recommended by the Public Works Department and for the following reasons : 1 . A master plan of streets and highways is a generalized document which attempts in advance of precise study to define future transportational needs . 2 . Highway alignment determinations are often made well in advance of land development patterns taking shape and generally are plotted without careful study as to terrain or precise "desire , demand and warrant" studies . 3 . For these very reasons highway alignments shown on master plans are intended only to serve as generalized guidelines to transportation planners and city planners . 4 . The location of MacArthur Boulevard was similarly plotted on the City ' s Master Plan of Streets and Highways . Its location was meant to be flexible and was based on the best information available at a par- ticular .point in time . 5 . More definitive study appears to reveal that there are a number of good reasons why the location requested is superior from a pure planning point of view. Most important of these is the fact that the proposed alignment fof ows the terrain more sensi6 y separating a flat area from ahilly-' area , thereby defining and separating two natural planning units or entities . The alignment resently illustrated on the Master Plan of Streets an ig ways creates a narrow and of and That—would a sandwiched etween a freewa and a heavily travelled arterial 71- g wa . Suc Land ecause of its narrow width from a pTanners point of view , does not lend itself to well signed residential and uses . On t e other hand , such a peninsula might be hi song t after by the developers of strip commercial " businesses . TO : Planning Commission - 3 . In addition the ro osed location of Mac Arthur Boulevard a lows for a reasona _y_goo - si_ zed planning unit or sector in which a considerable amount of de- sign flexibility exists -. Based on the aforementioned reasoning the Planning Department believes that MacArthur Boulevard as proposed offers an acceptable level of service to those persons seeking a through arterial other than t e freeway while providing for a much more efficient and 'desirable land use potential and flexibility. The proposed Master Plan Amendment is therefore recommended for approval . Res ecjtfully submitted , Ernest May4, Jr. Planning Director EM : hh Attachments : Map of existing and proposed arterials Report of the Public Works Department U a LOG ROW .. . 3 G s 7 TES Al LEGEND LOW MEDIUM DENSITY HOUSING v / 0 MEDIUM DENSITY HOUSING SCHOOL PARK \ ® METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT (Existing Facilities) THAViNE COMPANY N ,-;UPPER HARBOR VIEW HILLS ^ Jan 68 . 1" 200' oNatn Planning Opt. mvm@O°`'4�0 ` ue.,nwo•LAND USE-FIRST PHASE PHON@(IIU a.4.0190 0� �a February 15, 1968 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: Public Works Department SUBJECT: PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO MASTER PLAN OF STREETS AND HIGHWAYS DISCUSSION: In connection with the proposed Upper Harbor View Hills annexation and devel- opment, The Irvine Company has requested, certain, revisions to the, Master"Plan of Streets and Highways. The changes being presented' for Commission consideration- are described below and also shown on the attached drawing. 1 . Ford Road easterly of the Corona del Mar Freeway-route is extended northerly to a connection with Bonita Canyon Road. The present Master Plan shows an extension easterly and southerly to a connection with San Joaquin Hills Road. As proposed, the revision would realign that portion of the Ford Road extension between the Corona del Mar Freeway and future MacArthur Boulevard to a more northerly location and connect it to Bonita Canyon Road. The portion of the Ford Road extension between future MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Road would be left as it is presently shown pending further study. A traffic study prepared for The Irvine Company by De Leuw, Cather and Company indicates' that the proposed change would provide better overall traffic service to the area by reducing the' excessive future traffic demands on Bonita Canyon Road. The Public Works Department has reviewed the traffic report and agrees with these findings. 2. Future MacArthur Boulevard between San Joaquin Hills Road and Bonita Canyon Road is moved to a new' alignment generally- located from 1 ,000 feet to 2,000 feet easterly of the- alignment' presently shown on the Master Plan. This realignment will increase the street length by approximately 2,300 feet, thus increasing accordingly the' distance' through traffic must travel . This change would' also increase the' City's' share' of construction costs under the Capital' Improvement Policy. Although the realignment would result in poorer service to' through traffic', The Irvine Company feels that there are important land• use considerations' involved in the realignment; these land use concepts will be' the subject of a presentation to the Commission by The Irvine Company. Inasmuch as the entire area of the proposed changes is presently unincorporated, the matter has been reviewed with the Orange County Road Department. The Road Department has indicated verbally that they have no objections to, the amendment. After action by the City, a corresponding amendment to the' County Master Plan would be considered by the County. In addition to the above changes, The Irvine Company feels that their traffic study indicates that there is not sufficient through traffic demand to justify the in- clusion on the Master Plan of the MacArthur Boulevard link between Ford Road extension and Bonita Canyon Road. Neither the Public Works Department nor the County Road Depart- ment are in agreement with this conclusion,' therefore the amendment' includes the link. A further detailed study of the need for this link will be made' by the staff. The con- necting arterial link northerly of Pacific View Memorial Park extending from future MacArthur Boulevard to San Joaquin Hills Road will also be the subject of further study. Page 2 February. 15, .1968 - Planning Commission Proposed Amendment to Master Plan of' Streets- and Highways RECOMMENDATIONS: 1 . Approve the changes proposed;-to- the easterly° extension' of Ford Road. 2. if it is felt by the Planning Commissiorr-that, the,-land' use benefits obtained by the realignment• of,MacArthur° Boulevard outweigh the poorer level of service to, through• traffic--caused, bythe increase in length, approval, of,,the• realignment- would be in order. Benjamin B. Nolan City Engineer BBN/ldg Att. • �'%� 63 � ,.f 5��('�`�y�et � 1\\� S j;' �: -i�',r. `a' p� � r .J,/• /M1 �1�l`... ` aft Ponds ,, . �j ��/ �� �t, I�� ,�, � � •.�(, •♦ ` - G. Nv Ory _✓/ �:���gr'• � ,r� III\;�� `�/ / / I ^- c 'Ta y t �I 1.i " I ; { \ •♦ \vV/.._�./\;y'..rAn /U� �,` _rye •� '��� +����'��,�� +�.-+ ' �f �• ° U �`.n t �A\��� l -rro " r`"3-��I � ^\ �,• \\i+ t� �'\s ���� " , 1\ � \' � <� 0 ��9�� �d l( �II���(�`��) lot ski jIl jr f � O Fi .� � ' � 1 I ,t 1`Y 1p•,,,`r�n'"ti \ `� 1 ' 1 RC34Ruor�1 Co JYJL -IL yg'h1A (ice .''\\ �1 " � .'. Al Ik •(I �• . .gi �/ • ' 1,. I IiA �j.'�'/' ��°�rll/ 1` •V M5�4• L\Y A'\�nC �,�.5� .\£ � 11j February 15, 1968 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: Public Works Department SUBJECT: PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO MASTER PLAN OF STREETS AND HIGHWAYS DISCUSSION: In connection with the proposed Upper' Harbor View' Hills annexation and devel- opment, The Irvine Company has requested certain' revisions' to the' Master Plan of Streets and Highways. The changes being presented for Commission' consideration' are described below and also shown on the attached drawing. 1 . Ford Road easterly of the Corona del Mar- Freeway' route is extended northerly to a connection with Bonita Canyon Road. The present Master Plan shows an extension easterly and southerly to a connection with San Joaquin Hills Road. As proposed, the- revision would realign that portion of the Ford Road extension between the Corona del Mar Freeway and future MacArthur Boulevard to a more northerly location and connect it to Bonita Canyon Road. The portion of the Ford Road extension' between future MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Road would be left as it is presently shown pending further study. A traffic study prepared- for The Irvine Company by De Leuw, Cather and Company indicates that the proposed change would provide better overall traffic service to the area by reducing the excessive future traffic demands on Bonita Canyon Road. The Public Works Department has reviewed the traffic report and agrees with these findings. 2. Future MacArthur Boulevard between San Joaquin Hills Road and Bonita Canyon Road is moved to a new' ali'gnment generally located from 1 ,000 feet to 2,000 feet easterly -of the,-alignment' presently shown on the Master Plan. This realignment will increase the street length by approximately 2,300 feet, thus increasing accordingly the distance through traffic must travel . This change would also' increase°the' City's' share, of construction costs under the Capital• Improvement Policy. Although the realignment would, result in poorer service to' through traffic', The, Irvine Company feels that there are important land, use, considerations' involved in' the realignment; these land use concepts will be- the subject of a, presentation to the Commission by The Irvine Company. Inasmuch as the entire area of the proposed changes, is presently unincorporated, the matter has been reviewed with the Orange County Road Department. The Road Department has indicated verbally that they have no objections to, the amendment. After action by the City, a corresponding amendment to the' County' Master Plan would be considered by the County. In addition to the above changes, The Irvine Company feels that their traffic study indicates that there is not sufficient through traffic demand to justify the in- clusion on the Master Plan of the MacArthur Boulevard link between Ford Road extension and Bonita Canyon Road. Neither the Public Works Department nor the County Road Depart- ment are in agreement with this conclusion,' therefore the amendment includes the link. A further detailed study of the need for this link will be made, by the staff. The con- necting arterial link northerly of Pacific View Memorial Park extending from future MacArthur Boulevard to San Joaquin Hills Road will also be the subject of further study. Page 2 February 15, .1968 - Planning Commission Proposed Amendment to Master Plan of- Streets-'and Highways RECOMMENDATIONS: 1 , Approve the changes proposed;-to: the easterly extension,, of Ford Road. 2. If it is felt by the Pl-anning Commissiorr-that' the' land' use benefits obtained by the realignment• of,-MacArthur* Boulevardzoutweigh the poorer level of service to* through• traffic"caused* by-the increase in length, approval• of,the, realignmeht• would be in order. Benjamin B. Nolan City Engineer BBN/ldg Att. ul A IN ' ft ^•��,p*• ` 4"-, s c '�a- I ` \/ —JET------Y •\/ ``-• ~ /; 7y� Sin Joequl ,/. �'--` J'-V'•.�\\ -'�.. �:—� Q�� ,� \ O /` Bit Ponds O �` '60 \ N I � kk �Mx�" f , Bl f'a y, •fl _ w .+\ 1Cl/7, � � ° � lylZ MA II I l_ OL IM 7"+ ' /O \ �' s; St l \ �' li r 1 `yl r 3fGl ) �(�5 �� t• � x r(� \�)�(_` �(, `, 9/2,7 \ ., ry� I, I Q GSHRUOII� '�� s IV •;��'^-�i/]fy+b'e,1� ',;.*}96 �}\� � �•� f i \, ~ ^�!�' ail. "• _� 1� ( QZ /��-` It C N ♦ �` .• 'D+, ,f///(�� 1 � Q^�I�xn .('f� �� . .\���: --nl\`ice �_�. �(�.;1\f , . 4( • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH February 13 , 1968 TO : City Council FROM : Planning Commission BY : Planning Director SUBJECT: Master Plan Amendments No . 14 , 15 and 16 Background and Explanation The City Council at its meeting of September 11 , 1967 by Resolution No. 6639 requested the Planning Commission to , initiate proceedings to include Fifth Avenue in Corona del Mar on the Master Plan ,of Streets and Highways . This action was , subsequently taken at a public hearing on January 4 , 1968 and is recommended for approval to the City Council by Resolution No . 703 as Amendment No . 14 . Amendment No . 15 was staff initiated and recommends "that MacArthur Boulevard between the East Coast Highway and San Joaquin Hills Road be classified a primary (4 lanes divided) , a• change from the previous secondary road status . The revision •would provide for a single road classification for the entire length of Mac Arthur Boulevard within the City" . Amendment No . 16 was also staff initiated and recommends "that. Hospital Road and Placentia Avenue between Superior Avenue and Newport Boulevard be classified a secondary road (4 lanes undivided) connecting to Placentia Avenue , also a secondary road . Hospital. Road is a •private street but the Public Works Department is currently studying the re- quest of the hospital for dedication of the road as a public street. It is felt that this street provides a strong link in the street pattern of the West Newport Beach area and should • be classified .a secondary" . Amendments No . 15 and 16 were considered by the Planning Commission at a public hearing on •December 7 , 1967 and are recommended for approval to the City Council by, Resolution No . 702 . Maps - of the subject amendments as well as a thorough report will be sent to the -City Council prior to• the public hearing in the regular agenda packets Respectfully submitted PLANNING COMMISSION By —< � M "i:.,' - Ernest Mayer, J . , lanning Director Attachments : Planning Commission Resolutions CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH February 13 , 1968 TO : City Council . FROM : Planning Commission BY : Planning Director SUBJECT: - Master- Plan Amendments No . 14 , .15 and 16 Background and Explanation The City Council at its meeting of September 11 , 1967 by Resolution No . 6639 requested the Planning Commission to initiate proceedings to include Fifth Avenue in Corona del Mar on the Master- Plan of Streets and Highways . This action was , subsequently taken at a public hearing on January 4 , 1968 and is recommended for approval to the City Council by Resolution No . 703 as Amendment . No . 14. Amendment No . 15 was staff initiated and recommends "that MacArthur , Boulevard between the East Coast Highway and San Joaquin Hills Road be classified a primary (4 lanes divided) , a change from the previous secondary road status . The revision would provide for a single road, classification for the entire length of Mac Arthur Boulevard within the City" Amendment No . 16 was also staff initiated and recommends "that .Hospital Road and Placentia Avenue between Superior Avenue and Newport Boulevard be classified a secondary road (4 lanes undivided) connecting to Placentia Avenue , also a secondary road . Hospital Road is a private street but the Public Works Department is currently studying the re- quest of the hospital for dedication of- the road as a public street. It is felt that this street provides a .strong link in the street pattern of the West Newport Beach area and should be classified a secondary" . Amendments No . 15 and 16 were considered by the Planning Commission at a public .hearing on -December 7 , 1967 and are recommended for approval to the City Council by Resolution No . 702 . Maps - of .the subject amendments as well as a thorough report will be sent to the •City Council prior to the public hearing in the regular agenda packet. Respectfully submitted PLANNING COMMISSION By� Ernest Mayer, J . , tanning Director Attachments : Planning Commission Resolutions TLW:aem 2/l/68 RESOLUTION NO. 704 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO CONSIDER CERTAIN AMENDMENTS TO THE MASTER PLAN OF STREETS AND HIGHWAYS OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH WHEREAS, Section 707 of the Charter of the City of Newport Beach empowers the Planning Commission of the City to hold public hearings and thereafter recommend to the City Council that the Master Plan or any part thereof should be amended; and WHEREAS, the City Council has directed the Planning Commis- sion to study a proposed amendment to the Master Plan of Streets and Highways which would reflect a realignment of Ford Road and MacArthur Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach believes that certain amendments to the Master Plan of Streets and Highways of the City of Newport Beach may be desirable; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission declares its intention to consider the proposed amendments to the Master Plan of Streets and Highways of the City of Newport Beach at a public hearing to be held on the 15th day of February 19689 at the hour of 8:00 P.M., in the Council Chambers. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Secretary of the Newport Beach Planning Commission is hereby directed to publish notice of said hearing in accordance with the requirements of the City Charter and the Municipal Code. Regularly passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach, State of California, on the 1st day of February, 1968, AYES: Curtis, Jakosky, Copelin, Dosh NOES• Clark, Clemence, Watson !' ABSENT: None SIG. Secretary C airman I� TLW:aem 2/1/68 RESOLUTION NO. 704 , A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO CONSIDER CERTAIN XJENDMENTS TO THE MASTER PLAN OF STREETS AND HIGHWAYS OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH WHEREAS# Section 707 of the Charter of the City of Newport Beach empowers the Planning Commission of the City to hold public hearings and thereafter recommend to the City Council that the Master Plan or any part, thereof should be amended; and WHEREAS, the City Council has directed the Planning Commis- sion to study a proposed emendment to the Master Plan of Streets and Highways which would reflect a realignment of Ford Road and MacArthur Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Coach believes that certain amendments to the •llaster plan of Streets and Highways of the City of Newport Beach may be deli-cable; NOW, THEREFORE, BE It RESOLVED that the Planning Commission declares its intention to consider the proposed amendments to the Master Plan of' Streets, and Highways of the City of Newport Beach at a public hearing to be held •on the 15th day of February 1968# at the hour of 8:00 P.14,, in the Council Chambers. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Secretary of the Newport Beach Planning Commission is hereby directed to publish notice of said hearing in accordance with the requirements of the City Charter and the Municipal Code. Regularly •passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach, State of California# on the 1st day of February. 1968. AYES.—.,.�,._ NOES: ABSENT: ecretary a rman CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7 , 1967 TO : Planning Commission FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: Master Plan Amendment No . 15 Mac Arthur Blvd. between East Coast Highway and San Joaquin Hills Road The Planning Commission has been requested by the Public Works Department to approve the following Master Plan , Amendment . "That Mac Arthur - Boulevard between the East Coast Highway and San Joaquin Hills Road be classified a primary (4 lanes divided) , a change from the previous secondary road , status . The revision would provide for a single road classification for the entire length of Mac Arthur Boulevard within the City . " Planning staff concurs with the need for such amendment - and recommends its approval . Respectfully submitted,, Ernest Mayer; Planning Director EM : hh CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7 , 1967 TO : Planning Commission FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: Master Plan Amendment No . 15 Mac Arthur Blvd. between East Coast Highway and San Joaquin Hills Road, The Planning Commission has been requested by the Public Works Department to approve the following Master- Plan Amendment . "That Mac Arthur - Boulevard between the East Coast Highway and San Joaquin Hills Road be classified a primary (4 lanes divided) , a change from the previous secondary road status . The revision would provide for a single road classification for the entire length of Mac Arthur Boulevard within the City . " Planning staff concurs with the need for such amendment and recommends its approval . Respectfully submitted, Ernest Mayer; Jr� Planning Director EM: hh CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 7 , 1967 TO : Planning Commission FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT : Master Plan Amendment No . 15 Mac Arthur• Blvd . between East Coast Highway and San Joaquin Hills Road The Planning Commission has been requested by the Public Works Department to approve the following Master- Plan Amendment . "That Mac Arthur - Boulevard between the East Coast Highway and San Joaquin Hills Road be classified a primary (4 lanes divided) , a change from the previous secondary road status . The revision would provide for a single road classification for the entire length of Mac Arthur Boulevard within the City . " Planning staff concurs with the need for such amendment and recommends its approvals Respectfully submitted, �/' Ernest Mayer; Jr� Planning Director EM: hh AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION NEWPORT HARBOR ENSIGN STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Orange J I, .......ARVO E. HAAPA....................... being first .......I..................... duly sworn, and on oath depose and say that I am the printer and publisher of the Newport Harbor Ensign, a weekly newspaper printed and published in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California, and that the....NQ.ti Q.e....Of...F.ld1211G...IMLR 119.. ............................................................................................................ ..........................................................................................of which copy attached hereto is a true and complete copy, was printed and published in the regular issue(s) of said newspaper, and not in a supplement, .........I........ consecu- tive times: to-wit the Issue(s) of ..................Feb.t...1.s....1968............................ ...................................................................................... ..................................................................................... ...................................................................................... -L GAL NOTI- —. .. . _ 47 ...................................................................................... OS�T); LAV A.M A ii$T MA 1 \\ 41 NO, 17 (Signed).4�1 ? ..�.../. otice N-her y liven t ;Vponeing mmissiolt Subscribed and sworn to before me this.2th,,,day of Cit'q of port $eac 51 hold one p is hear�hg on February 19 68 proposed a ent to the ` ..................._.............. ...... gtaryplan teats gnd. r h n sd 31 1 n / ad an Mel�r GF `�.. the U e � •,•••.,,-,•.4 , ry Notary Pu 'c in and for th e• •r� ��.a.F+ ,7•!,�•5,�,, County of range, State of California. btiGy�' !� �, / �~_ice.'•+• ', MY COMMISSION E%Plana Sa} a i, 19.7/ otty, _r 1�. lase, sir in rite Co Wpo S (. k-•, - � y` � *,ra CAN bh P ap an W 1 'c planp' { Publish: j The New- Tip NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 17 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH WILL HOLD ONE PUBLIC ' HEARING ON A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE MASTER PLAN OF STREETS AND HIGHWAYS AS IT RELATES TO FORD ROAD AND MAC ARTHUR BOULEVARD IN THE UPPER HARBOR VIEW HILLS AREA. NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN THAT SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON THE 15 DAY OF FEBRUARY 1968 AT' THE HOUR OF 8:00 P.M. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE NEWPORT BEACH CITY HALL, AT WHICH TIME AND PLACE ANY AND ALL PERSONS INTERESTED MAY APPEAR AND BE HEARD THEREON. RAY Y. COPELIN, SECRETARY. NEWPORT BEACH CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Publication Date Received for Pub. o Date Received � . f77-P� R J f A i 1! ;t 'VI 1 i� � .K- j Lril �➢P31� O � /- �q/I U i `1 V p __�. - y 7� � ♦ Z41- AD W Lly � p+ 7.l� �, 1)t J .I ' � •F 1 C � � �. } }l ' 1 j � / . \\�C' i--��-_ �.✓ r::' f `. I �� V Y �✓ • // /! �F� . i � yr_^��11�\,,� � •1 \�� � � � � f� , � �� �,�� A = `� h.((����Z'. / 1 1 \y.:�� d ��7 �? S�C��jvr-�- l77 �. �•-�-, �J �� [/.'Y3 ,y�.�-�'f'"`, ..\ � ,�� r i ST, /l7U✓Ji✓"'C�L�\;"�� y ,I�` � _ ' � „ems.-.._ . '\l !`7 r .. ' it jl ;.•J// y < �r !(1 / �-\ a �. ' r• � �3` -1 S )� \�\- ��/ i idVi�• i( ����r � ��. 'ram �� �. �'� r� .. G � I ® ENT �•L, •�1.\ •�/) /� ��� _ ^ F 1' vc cl,�! \ \�J� BEAD Ty \� •ice.,, y!� `► f \. �\ v _ , r per/ � � i f��i ti `L//' 0lUf18lK ls' ,,., \./ �M6�.. '�.66 _ / ii. h f:-✓� �sCJf/x��9Y rvoy ��,,. ,� LK'D1 / 3 .,,• .rj,9 f. ,"Q.1�;;.•�Y; � � � �\ i., .•W, ro � Sf4�' .., £..• M• F '4 '� i, \,,'d• 1� (,.� 1 ram-' /' / �,,.+•�(� p.we.,..•.w. � fi. t`�� �• '�♦ ,-d'�,�•i '�!�•. / V� /Y�.,G�'_;� A �! , .e+"" ,\\ t..^...•..:..`Iw�iwkl'.w�io-. , avN�: 1 fff,,`,• �•ii '� '�.i;,;y.��••\i,r, " i; ,"\I I`\Qo- ^ td�,�}••:;,&" ` �V/ :.yp.l%sl.. �Y yrr .•F. !f.f�rr'J4:.�:Iq' : �A ! o S�II JONIUU,� \"-�-'v. a'v1S�,-��•'4'S ^` t"✓• ••+'+r`` ^ /)� 1 ...! 'rpm I i G,� qh� �`Sl •.`••, a. J.�" ( i'•t, i \ i �.• O �J' ' 'i`'•ix^'..: F Z,'~ �' +���.�^•,Y" .T l ,1 `'p•.+. `I ,�'\Q•.� wl^✓ \` 1 J •,�`rT� \� fF' r �"�"' ll., .p ,`.��I L,..i ,.`��7....�,�..(��e... •,»,rr`t`•, •`,.,,-�.`+',/Tf-�,1•' ((/�° �• ;'��'-� r`,'� s���\ r �•� _. ...7��7 t� F�.';�, -ra-, �t -'�,•7l•'l, '(�lr�'��l''�, �Qo� i jJJ (��l'r�•!'`3`UI(�.-.,� .'�'\ Snit Ponds y / ';"' � I" � \�;.,, ,, ,��'•��,:;7" y h. ,_.,.,Yd •w.... ,�Y'n'%^ ''Fyi Y, 6-' �p 1 )( { �'� �, .���: �',/ ��--.a. �11 \�`r\,' 100 0 •` '"•� '}`"'� /•—`__ 'r +/"`� `° ��)` 1�i�%/.%,�, � IF1 / /r �V"�.' J � \'•Il �( 1 (�'\\�' 1�'/,�41 \� " r' •j'�rC r 1,7,1t y�/1:.. � � 1�\\ r ! ( / � �,qs/���'/��G� ( `�•,('r^` i \�-P nu AL •�,ry' A.^ '.r., � ; r, \ lL�-G'�:r�f i� ,i ."-� 'ah� �'/ v�i�11�//��Y✓/��r/i.;�/'�.�", I\ 7[.;i)"f' ' r\f\ • `\'fl++il\��� u?:'��, �/$^/(,/J/YA'/�//�(`�-('��%��rod(,(((—//////• Ul�',—. �' ` h�0• �Li� o• 71 U`'.,Y ,1:0 ,•/°. I \,I`,%l.r o��'"i 6.I..,Wy: ' +. •\ �1 T � 1 V'I�i '1 ♦����Li � '•Z� �t If`-�+r.. y�.,.',r, � ' ,/• -'�y� ` �. � \ � � 1\ ✓ , /rig G �, -�,'�I') i ��� �`�.'+�=�;rf%••-•.w• i�sJ _�yy� •q 4,1�. ��•�'y�� • -'�'., rG�-.���.\ \ �/ q U .//lL� I��('`✓ 1i�I,1,v� �'�� ^•n�'ph\y//�'9{ � /J/r , ✓ ��" /: .vl BIS�Il••LL••..a�' {{`�,Ya x �''; ,� 1`�.� 1. f/1(�/ :. , ,.` \ I•�i �I / 'SNr''1 'i' ,� �r 1"� `\ l � nT, 11� (♦\ 's`s. �� '(zt`�� o �fsti^3 ��•°ry�. ,`,\�`�' 1 Y+�}' rJ`P�n\,''`b., .�� � rt--••,.�,7' G �•:. "�,"'l�. ,:�='-.11��/j ��l",=�'`'�+'ti, "II",)(�;J Y � �I •�;,�,_ ,J 'te,�' `'11° ��-`'"''t'�'m'<... ,� 1 , v_ .J,�•�_ �`) � _. `,,�=7su:�*;•:� x. 3 i �` : \ � '3'r;,. ;i=; °i •i i-S �"`� �1 ( /ff r.•:- a�'l } (f'C Y',I,, o "J '(��_� `- �VTti� ..xx'� �• ' %��\L.�K1�.J'` :l 1� ,�� ^# 1 : i 1��Ca' /fy-;,,1 ''t;/-��M I�„�f�,(���. Al /� �•�'�, , d' � �:p.1' n :`.yi' ,,(/.Y r F� r 1f'l �rl� fat r . ° ' V Oi � �.... i,y,I .[• ``_ ' '4 p J �j �,�� �I fir' 4��. "•>Y �1i>�\' :!�''/� lr• y' ,�(:, �aS l`rr�i \ i' \\��`�\•�..t'F� �—•`�—�' � � ,�^'•�`\ .�`\!r j�`I� �j:�.,�\l� '+�1��,i� % d~.I�, \r?r` . J ' A" ��' n� o���'/ ,"� �:,��I � �\��r'�-.'=��\1,l�••}f.�:1�:CJ� /�� +n' ,." ' r ',/ � �,�1;;. rf' �,, 9�G y; °rryi�i I 'Vl�r'a�� �.�• ,�(','1� !((/'rl� \�1�ri / \ , Ij ye) two 'fir �,,,�`_ +�•,aYj � (Sx' 4���V� aCs y 1. /1� �i.. /�`I � � ' ti—";�'.,..-} yr+- �� i1'1 '' � ♦1;` fRp/,� I /�,` i1 , 11\I I;a�,,,J•,r-'•,� yar+.:l' •�� wT.. ',•.� G�",„ ,,�ti'i '(LL \ " . ... �'' —.•. _ -� � , �j� ��` '``' Y o�.,.^'J �,1 4G''� ��. r 'u,4, �©�y} (�Y/ j•.'? �� .. \ ���. r1 '�' \�'N� l.! ,��' " ' ..1-„ 1 �' ,,, t``�\„a���.f�//J ,.�rr./' ,h.��' � <�. ^,+6J' �,..� ( O C 1• � : /�r_v'+/va^�� I� , ^'•,}}�4�\(\�Sfl1,,t� �%1\\� �A•'•:;,:. ,i�.,�,:(rr'•/„ T` I � � '1 %,^.;� !. I �1.:.. �":��•ram �C_ '"Y ��`,�� � !} 1 ; ��,��/��\ J -1 f/ 1, (� '�\ :'/" J' ''�,1`(J�((if^ 4,A-:w'w•„�y�-'1i�\\`\\�^'�'-'°, �j.=`.;' . I �,� �� _ _ • It- A- ' L 0 Y � �.� �- ti w G� - r Y � ,�_ '• `- ` ^ — � \ Son Jwui IV It Ponds Ell•: / i�i� �' l iti �n LV 44 • �/ ' ` \ \_..� / �i f tr-~� �y��. / I f as a ���} � .��r:, !II ����i �, (J j 131Gr ( Fi d a '�( .' ��,� - �r- \ V �Cav�6d �>•\../ , ` l�i-y tom^ .. .'�"`�. /,,.Z @ate \. . / _. r \ I -i , • . vv �' v `. - ,. - 1 1 a , _. - 1 / ., - - - - _ - - II ti I"--,i�",��",,f.'"I�,-�/,I A II''1 I1 1�:c/�;—�,.I I,1."��;I1--,I,�.-.,,,�I.i'�`,1,1,I,.11 I,��1;�,?.I-V--4-��I�,��,,I.II 1�I_III(A. I'--�-1 O 1(1�I��I�L,,�"I1I,i�,." II.I--�.II�I I�1 I,e'.'I,�I-/c,1'I,-A'�--I,�,II,i�,I I1-I�%,,.o.1'I,�I,,-,\I""',,.��,II II -�Ip II,Z,.:-A' -�,II....I-I I II_II�-..1I I I1-I I,1 L1II,�I..I�II I-I.FI1�I�I III l.r r 1,I�I—�--lI III.1./i ,I�-�1�I.I.A 1" I 1./.,I /-�-A..III,I I,�"—�.I.I:I-.-I��.,I-"",!,-,.."I".I�I.-I I-*%-II�—:�-I�I .!II:I�—-�Ij�\"""II ,,�I/��--I:I1,�..I I -�--��-�I—.I,.I I I II I.,-�.,I,"/I,.—,, 1. II � . ti' , / - A �.- _ _ , , - , - ", ..i , J _ .. r .. ,. ,r \ . \\ , `. . _ r I - I" < . .V - - y-/. I v A - - - _ , 36;. , + ' - IV \\ . _ \ \ \\ I 1 I _ \ _ _ \ J 1 Vv v vv , 1 _ vr\ �,_ \\ \ v \ S I 1 - I, ,. , \\ \, I II 1 ` V I , / f / - - . '. [/►� .. / , I _ - \ \\ / / , - \,\ - - _ \ - - \ _ _ , - - _y - Y..} �J If a, N 1 I. _: f / ._ , -.,. _ , \\ , . " _ .. \ \: - \ - ROAD \ _ LTA- N \ - 60 ANYQ I: & N F _ \` koa - C . . ! - _ \.\\ ` .. / y \ I I. Div,\ \*qt,l\\` \ i, // r. ` , _. /jJ' 1 n _ - I. : _,.. II II II I. I. 1. !' , -� 1 \ ; 1 — . ,f ',_ \\\ II iTaT,00 -..1�IET. UOq: `:.b, ';'� _:-.. . _ ', - - - - . - 6 ' __ > r\ y , --.- \;\ ,e ., `"I/ 1 :J1: tt. :\' ...}i - - s-:.1 �' s - ,. C� ".I v" - .iki ;c Al IV'. ASfu, `. ' /,j .-\-, i/,`\\t\fi t,: fi _. - e,y, .. - Ck,O _ _ \ .. - 1 ,- v..,.,., - - __ -1 - , t ' - >` _ _ 1 \ - - - - - . 6 - or) . \� t, I - - Y - 1 , , I \�\ , y rF _ q, x. �o . -- ,, - l , _.. _ - � —, _ t— - : 3 £ -- - f , ,3 _ t _ r. `.,!\ h 7. <`r a M`}rl� POSSIBLE 12" !% _ , .. � . ', , : . ER CONN. 710 - _ r WAT ', .. \ I . -., �"::` -- - ice' `a, _ - '_ ., � ! '�\ r .:, ._ 1 ,'7 / :-;: Zak,! - ,J■ _ 1 \ \ \\\ t' - WER �i \ 4 5E � \ ` '♦ �� � ' PUMP, STA, ; "- :.' \ , � `\ _ r .\ .\ \ FdgCEMAiN /" - . -- :y , d \ C \ UTR ` FOR ,AERON ONE t Y �. . , . li �Uta S(;N II = o '� ._ .,\,\ o�T 3F5S STRICT \ _ <\ - '.L .. '/ \\ \\ - \ ._''lP - -,, 104 :/ CH 'yE, cp fJl'ST EXiSTIy_ _. -- - - _. \ - _ _ - - E ,:1,41 ` .>' .\y,\ rill \ :'.�� i T�E7C Nj�', _9\ -. . - __ - , .. - � _ - - 1 1 — _ ." I i"`��.., iY ,"I \\\ ?, k1 I POSSIBLE 12" . . __ p , `/ - `T ''S`b-- a I WATER CONN. \ t� - � ---- 'fit . � `� I ` a> , _ - _ . ] t � \. \\ �\\ PROPOSED I •\n , v, vv I FWY R/W i'I _ EXISTING NEWPORT BEACh v . � _. . p k I4Y.: JOUNDARY .. i' R' ! \s', \ .. . >�O ,<s. \ �\a., \� _ - d MCa eA1.D1ST a'SO.S _ \ r , -. . , , ,. e w•n. I \ ', 1Ei7 Y \ , i. _ .-. r _ " _ '- 1�a��� >� � ._ ��{ �Z 1, I. �. V �'' !M. '/ . - tom. > _ . i• .%I \ 11 4\ - - �`:f .6C G' . - .- `+. . — VIEW , I ' Y. - - r { / 9 PROPOSED / . - A. PACr'. , , . _ . ,� - \ * ; - ` i�It a / CQNYOPf \ AREA y \'r --- � ' BIG , r - took II - ��, y uruRE 10 ' / /: r �ml. 12"SFWER�" ,I'L 'I v�� ���. - _ 1 �oti� - I1ti: ;I ♦ EMORIAL ARK M :... -- _ t \r. � I , "J , , / : "'� t. - \.:e\n/ - HIV _L ', I` .i1. _ , i r o' 5I I '\ ' ' - _ ., - x - ati G. 4,.:--r,: I. fi✓' _ - r i I 1 11.. 1 I� / ;. - . 4 ! / y I. as . of a - .,,, ' - - #; : t /u b C 1 { ' W40 -.66YCN / .,- - - , _ , . .' ,_ _ i. 1 1�.1 , r_ -_ R t _ 1 - _ _ - ` ' Tf I .. : I - - - CY, A� I - N.- . V Ml t \ . t E_ �.- - l ' , 31._ : , . ✓F , I, :I II \ `l`., \ LOTH. ,\\\ .1 .. - ,.+' ' ,> �� / / 1 ,I ;, I ` i , 1, P I -� V, - s r. w - x ii ,- . ,' 1 - r ATHQLI,C ' CHU - e m , I I Imo.,, CH IAN SCIENCE //I r ,` _ . Q III r j; li URCH - C� H RCMP \ a _ s w,_z $. I .I .11; II - l : - , _ . NIO - ' II LIN �N JU EPISCOPAL CHURCH ' .' _ I 3 ,- 1 COL R� . .. - a, it I) _21 .'s_ - - ./ �- / -... \b _ •:1 '` II: w : I .. / /': - - � • $pdI7GT1otJ DISL'IJO.5 fie.. \o \ - ; 1 f'�tl l - h 1 .W SCH I if 1 i \ �"I I HI \ AND _ GH SCHOOL _ . - I / ' SqN POpU s d I /// JOA 1 14 l HIC S 11, e 11, I Iw// N EW PO RT r - _ I i dI\ . 1 . \ i t v �. l hl a — - �� I v I - .. 1 `� - - , :: \ N' ' - 1 ENT ER �--- - C __//r r , , , / _ - I F J, A r v . i \ a .- - 1 - " -_- _ i _ - „ _ _.. _ _. - .:� { , '-.. .: 1. - - :_. .. , '\ :. , _ -- , , . 1 , _ ' _. - , ; .. , _3, t)I A . _ w 'S,II c • '1, { 4 \ t r. _ I �- - _ `1 W :1 _. - I ( -. _ .. ./. ., . i.-- - „ .. �" - - . .- ./ ' 1 a -I - ; - 'r - _ , -- _ 1 .. - -. .. -. _ - _ . . _ _ i _ F �: F ,... ..., ___ , v � x t. - 1/ ' i;'i i ." %; . _ , \ .; v. ' . - _ - _ 1. .. _ i �, - . e. ' -' f , ,- y 3 t I r --_ _ _ __ - - . . , _ - - - - r---- �5 I .3 r� �� - --'. _ _ - — _ --- f---� ^ '--' - ' : —