HomeMy WebLinkAbout18 - Adopting the General Plan Circulation Element Update (PA2017-141)Q SEW Pp�T
CITY OF
z NEWPORT BEACH
c�<,FORN'P City Council Staff Report
October 25, 2022
Agenda Item No. 18
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Seimone Jurjis, Community Development Director - 949-644-3232,
sjurjis@newportbeachca.gov
PREPARED BY: Antony Brine, City Traffic Engineer, tbrine@newportbeachca.gov
PHONE: 949-644-3329
TITLE: Resolution No. 2022-80: Adopting the General Plan Circulation
Element Update (PA2017-141)
ABSTRACT
For the City Council's consideration is a resolution to adopt an amendment to the General
Plan for the Circulation Element Update. The Circulation Element is a planning document
that looks to a roughly 20-year horizon and establishes the vision for mobility in Newport
Beach. The City of Newport Beach's (City's) Circulation Element was last updated in
2006. For over two years, City staff and the consultant team have worked together with
the Planning Commission and the community to prepare this update to the General Plan
Circulation Element. The purpose of the update is to provide new goals and policies that
comply with legal, State of California (State) mandates such as Vehicle Miles Traveled
(VMT) and "Complete Streets." The updated Goals and Policies also reflect the
community's vision on new and trending transportation matters, including electric vehicles
(EV) and climate change, rideshare services, public transportation, bicycle plans and
electric bikes, telecommuting, roadway safety, and parking management.
RECOMMENDATION:
a) Conduct a public hearing;
b) Find this action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential
to have a significant effect on the environment and further that the action is statutorily
exempt under Section 15262 of the CEQA Guidelines, which exempts projects involving
feasibility or planning studies for future actions which the City has not approved or
funded; and
c) Adopt Resolution No. 2022-80, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport
Beach, California, Adopting an Amendment to the Newport Beach General Plan
Updating the Circulation Element (PA2017-141).
18-1
Resolution No. 2022-80: Adopting the General Plan Circulation Element Update
October 25, 2022
Page 2
DISCUSSION:
The Circulation Element governs the long-term mobility system of the City. Its primary
purpose is to evaluate, improve and manage the circulation system to meet the current
and future needs of Newport Beach. It is not intended to define specific construction
projects, rather it outlines goals and policies that provide for the safe and efficient
movement of people and goods through all modes of travel. The circulation and
transportation system play a vital role in the economic development of the City. The
Circulation Element correlates directly with the Land Use Element and the Housing
Element. The Goals and Policies provide for a balanced transportation network that will
support and encourage walking, bicycling and transit ridership. Goals and policies have
been written to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, plan for future technology, and
improve safety in the circulation system.
For close to two years, City staff and the consultant team have worked together with the
Planning Commission and the community to prepare the update to the General Plan
Circulation Element. Five community workshops were held and extensive input was
received from the public. Nine meetings were held with the Planning Commission to
provide status. Current transportation topics were covered with the intent to provide new
goals and policies that address the paramount and timely issues that are important to the
community today. Staff and the consultant have prepared this Circulation Element Update
to enact policy shifts that comply with State mandates and include the fresh perspective
and visioning of the community.
Legal and Regulatory Mandates
This Circulation Element Update is intended to implement State mandates that have
come into effect since the last update in 2006. In particular, State laws are mandating
integration of land use and transportation planning and are shifting from congestion to
climate change. These laws are listed below and are discussed in greater detail in the
subsequent sections.
Assembly Bill (AB) 1358, the Complete Streets Act of 2008, requires cities to plan for a
balanced, multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of streets,
roads and highways for safe and convenient travel.
Senate Bill (SB) 743, approved in 2013, establishes Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) as the
metric for determining transportation impacts in analyses under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In Newport Beach, the City will use VMT analysis as
part of the CEQA process but will also continue to analyze development projects using
the Level -of -Service (LOS) analysis, as prescribed in the City's Traffic Phasing
Ordinance.
The Circulation Element Update is also consistent with SB 32 and SB 375, approved in
2008, by supporting the State's climate action goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
through coordinated transportation and land use planning.
18-2
Resolution No. 2022-80: Adopting the General Plan Circulation Element Update
October 25, 2022
Page 3
SIB 932, approved in 2022, requires cities to incorporate the principles of the Federal
Highway Administration's Safe System Approach. A new policy has been added to require
an annual review of traffic collision data in the City to develop a plan for safety
improvements on roadways and at intersections.
Complete Streets
AB 1358, titled the Complete Streets Act, was signed into law by Governor
Schwarzenegger in October 2008. This law requires that cities and counties plan a
circulation system that meets the needs of all users of streets including motorists,
pedestrians, bicyclists, children, persons with disabilities, seniors, movers of commercial
goods, and users of public transportation. As far back as 2011, the Governor's Office of
Planning and Research issued new general plan update guidelines which stated that
"AB 1358 places the planning, designing, and building of complete streets into the larger
planning framework of the general plan by requiring jurisdictions to amend their circulation
elements to plan for multimodal transportation networks".
In 2012, the Orange County Council of Governments (OCCOG) prepared a Complete
Streets guidance document for all Orange County agencies to consider. Many Orange
County cities have already adopted the necessary components of Complete Streets in
their general plans to maintain consistency and to comply with AB 1358. A policy has
been included to prepare a Citywide Complete Streets Master Plan. The OCCOG
Complete Streets Initiative Design Handbook will be used as a reference to ensure
consistency.
Vehicle Miles Traveled
SB 743 was approved in 2013 and established that a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
analysis shall be prepared and used to assess transportation impacts under CEQA. While
the City adopted new VMT thresholds in 2020, the practical application of this new
requirement is inconsistent with the Policy objectives of the current 2006 Circulation
Element. In fact, the current Circulation Element does not even consider issues of VMT
nor does it anticipate this type of change to environmental and general plan requirements.
This Circulation Element Update includes policies that specifically address the
requirement to evaluate development and transportation projects using VMT. It also
discusses potential methods to seek practical mitigation of any disclosed VMT impacts.
The Policies related to VMT analysis are timely given the State's (Caltrans) recent actions
to get involved in local agency land use development discretion. Caltrans, through its
Transportation Analysis Framework and Transportation Analysis under CEQA process,
will actively participate in the local agency development review process and will comment
on issues like consistency with circulation plans and policies (CEQA Checklist Question
1). With an updated Circulation Element, the City will maintain consistency between
CEQA policy and CEQA practice.
18-3
Resolution No. 2022-80: Adopting the General Plan Circulation Element Update
October 25, 2022
Page 4
Climate Change
The topic of climate change is important to Newport Beach. Goals and policies specific to
climate change and mobility have been added in the Circulation Element Update. Among
these Goals are increasing the number of electric -vehicle charging stations both in City
buildings and, where appropriate, in future new developments. As stated previously,
requirements related to climate change, such as planning for Complete Streets and
analysis of Vehicle Miles Traveled, are incorporated in the Circulation Element Update.
The City seeks to do its part while encouraging residents and business partners to
address climate change.
Safe System Approach
The Federal Highway Administration Safe System Approach takes a holistic approach to
reducing and eliminating fatal and serious accidents. Designing for safety should be
proactive, and transportation systems should be designed to accommodate for human
mistakes and to limit crash forces. The approach considers the safety for roadway users
by improving vehicles, addressing travel speeds, and improving post -crash care. AB 43
was signed into law in 2022 and will permit local agencies more flexibility when setting
speed limits.
Coordination with 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
In January 2019, the City Council acted to initiate a comprehensive update to the Newport
Beach General Plan. Public outreach meetings began in late 2019. Given the deadline of
October 2021 for completion of the Housing Element Update, a comprehensive update
to the entire General Plan was deferred. In January 2020, the City Council directed staff
to focus efforts on primarily updating the Housing Element for compliance with the State
Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) deadline, along with preparing a
simultaneous update to the Circulation Element to address legal mandates and ensure
adequate mobility for the community.
In April 2020, the City Council authorized a professional services agreement with Kimley-
Horn and Associates (Kimley-Horn) for the preparation of the more focused Housing and
Circulation Element updates. The contract with Kimley-Horn included the services of
LSA Associates for the preparation of the Circulation Element Update.
Community Outreach and Engagement
To provide ample opportunities for community participation, the City implemented an
ongoing outreach and engagement effort for the Circulation Element Update. City staff
worked closely with an outreach consultant and advertised participation opportunities
using social media, City website updates, and the Newport, Together webpage. The
public outreach process included five virtual community workshops that were held
between September 2020 and April 2021. The workshops were well attended, with
approximately 40 attendees on average.
:%
Resolution No. 2022-80: Adopting the General Plan Circulation Element Update
October 25, 2022
Page 5
A robust exchange of verbal and written comments and questions was a part of these
workshops. The public was interested in Complete Streets, bicycle infrastructure, climate
change, regional traffic impacts in neighborhoods, electric vehicles, rideshare operations
(e.g., Uber and Lyft), autonomous vehicles, and parking availability.
The initial draft of the Circulation Element Update was first released to the public on the
City website on March 12, 2021. Revisions were made to the document following the
Planning Commission Study Session held on March 18, 2021. Additional revisions were
made to reflect community input following the public workshop held on April 5, 2021.
The final draft of the revised text in the document was posted on the City website for
public review on July 12, 2022, and the final version, including all refreshed maps and
exhibits, was posted on August 16, 2022.
Upcoming Land Use Element and Zoning Code Update
As part of the upcoming Land Use Element and rezoning, a complete technical traffic
analysis will be prepared. The traffic analysis will include an evaluation of any traffic
impacts associated with the housing units incorporated in the 6t" Cycle Housing Element,
in addition to future land use planning. The traffic study will contain a traditional
intersection level of service (LOS) analysis given existing and proposed Circulation
Element policies require this type of analysis. The traffic analysis will be prepared per the
requirements of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO). The LOS analysis would not be
part of any General Plan Update CEQA document because the impacts of vehicle delay
are no longer part of the CEQA impact analysis process pursuant to State law (SB 743).
The traffic analysis will include an assessment of VMT citywide, which would be
incorporated within the CEQA document.
Master Plan of Streets and Highways
The Orange County Transportation Authority administers the County Master Plan of
Arterial Highways (MPAH). The MPAH defines the long-range highway system for Orange
County. Local jurisdictions are required to have consistency between their Circulation
Elements and the MPAH. Consistency with the MPAH ensures that each city and the
County of Orange implement the same base transportation network using similar design
and standards.
As part of this Circulation Element Update, no revisions are proposed to the existing City's
Master Plan of Streets and Highways. The technical traffic analysis that will be prepared
with the upcoming Land Use Element and Zoning Code update will review the City's
Master Plan of Streets and Highways. The traffic analysis would identify if roadway or
intersection improvements are required.
Updated Goals and Policies
New policies that are proposed to be modified and added are a direct result of the State
mandates to support Complete Streets, VMT analysis, and climate action goals.
18-5
Resolution No. 2022-80: Adopting the General Plan Circulation Element Update
October 25, 2022
Page 6
Additionally, community input received at all the workshops was essential in creating new
goals and policies to address current and noteworthy issues that are very important to the
community today. The proposed new Policies outlined below address the State law
mandates and address input from residents at the community workshops. A redline -
strikeout version of the Circulation Element is included as Attachment B to this report.
• Electric vehicles. A new policy to install additional EV charging stations in City
facilities and to develop incentives for the installation of charging stations in new
development projects.
• Parking. A policy to support the development of parking -related apps to promote
efficient parking, as well as a policy to review commercial areas for use of curbside
zones for drop-off, rideshare, valet or delivery uses.
• Rideshare vehicles. A policy to consider rideshare usage in determining any
potential for reduction in parking requirements.
• Traffic Safety. To address roadway safety for all users, a new policy has been
added to formally evaluate traffic collision data on an annual basis. Appropriate
traffic safety improvements will be planned to follow the practices of the "Safe
System Approach". This Policy aligns with the recently approved U.S. Department
of Transportation's National Roadway Safety Strategy (NRSS), which set the first
national goal of zero roadway fatalities and recognizes the Safe System Approach
as encompassing a range of roadway safety programs and stakeholders.
• Bicycle Improvements. The 2006 General Plan does not include a policy for a
comprehensive Bicycle Master Plan. This update incorporates the existing Bicycle
Master Plan and directs the City to regularly review and update the Capital
Improvement Program to include eligible bicycle improvements to the circulation
system. Adopting this Circulation Element Update prepares the City to implement
the vision of active transportation and Complete Streets. The existing Bicycle
Master Plan details the current bicycle network and offers many future
improvements which will enhance the roadway network.
• Electric Bikes. To address a regularly raised topic, new policy language is added
to review bicycle sidewalk use, review sidewalk widths, and consider separate
facilities for e-bikes and other semi -motorized modes to reduce conflicts. Increased
enforcement is also supported, with a focus on the Oceanfront Walk and around
schools.
Commission Involvement and Recommendation
On October 13, 2020, the City Council approved Resolution No. 2020-93 delegating the
duties to the Planning Commission to oversee the Circulation Element Update process
and to provide strategic guidance and a public forum for discussion of the update.
:.
Resolution No. 2022-80: Adopting the General Plan Circulation Element Update
October 25, 2022
Page 7
Nine meetings were held with the Planning Commission to present the Circulation
Element Update and to provide status. Input from the Planning Commission was
incorporated into subsequent revisions of the Circulation Element.
The final draft of the Circulation Element Update was presented and recommended for
adoption to the City Council by the Planning Commission at its September 8, 2022,
meeting by a vote of 6-0 (6 ayes, 1 absent) with adoption of Planning Commission
Resolution No. PC2022-025 (Attachment C).
FISCAL IMPACT:
While there is no direct fiscal impact related to approval of this item, there will be costs
associated with the preparation of a technical traffic study during the Land Use Element
update and rezoning process.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Staff recommends the City Council find this action is not a project under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Code
of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines), the common-sense
exemption because it involves policies, programs, and actions that would not cause a
significant effect on the environment.
The purpose of the Circulation Element Update, as presented, is to implement State law
requirements that are intended to protect the environment. For instance, SIB 743
establishes VMT as the metric for determining transportation impacts under CEQA,
SIB 32 and SIB 375 require a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions through coordinated
transportation and land use planning, and AB 1358 requires a balanced multimodal
transportation network that meets the needs of all users of streets, roads and highways
for safe and convenient travel. Since the Goals and Policies in the Circulation Element
Update implement State law requirements intended to protect the environment, no
additional environmental review is necessary.
Moreover, the Circulation Element Update is statutorily exempt under Section 15262 of
the CEQA Guidelines, which exempts projects involving feasibility or planning studies for
future actions which the City has not approved or funded. The Circulation Element Update
was coordinated with the adoption of the 6th Cycle Housing Element. The 6th Cycle
Housing Element Update was determined to be statutorily exempt under Section 15262
because it does not provide development entitlements to any specific land use projects,
nor does it make any changes to the General Plan land use map or modify land use
designations, densities, or land use intensities. Rather, comprehensive environmental
analysis will be completed with the Land Use Element and Zoning Code update, which
implement the 6th Cycle Housing Element. Similarly, the Circulation Element Update is a
policy document statutorily exempt under CEQA. A comprehensive environmental
analysis, including a traffic analysis, will be completed with the Land Use Element and
Zoning Code update.
18- 7
Resolution No. 2022-80: Adopting the General Plan Circulation Element Update
October 25, 2022
Page 8
NOTICING:
Given its citywide nature, notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot in a
one -eighth page format consistent with the provisions of the Newport Beach Municipal
Code. Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted
at City Hall and on the City website.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A — Resolution No. 2022-80, including Exhibit A: "Circulation Element Update"
Attachment B — Redline Version of Circulation Element Update
Attachment C — Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-025
Attachment D — Excerpt of the Planning Commission Minutes, Dated September 8, 2022
Attachment E — Correspondence
::
Attachment A
Resolution No. 2022-80, including Exhibit "A": "Circulation Element Update"
I
RESOLUTION NO. 2022- 80
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING AN
AMENDMENT TO THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL
PLAN UPDATING THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT
(PA2017-141)
WHEREAS, the Circulation Element is one of the mandatory elements of the City
of Newport Beach ("City") General Plan that governs the long-term mobility system within
Newport Beach;
WHEREAS, the update to the Circulation Element ("Circulation Element Update")
is required to incorporate goals and policies implementing state law that have been
approved since the last update, in 2006, which includes:
• Senate Bill 743, which establishes Vehicle Miles Traveled ("VMT") as the metric
for determining transportation impacts as part of a California Environmental
Quality Act ("CEQA") analysis;
• Senate Bill 32 and Senate Bill 375, which require a reduction in greenhouse
gas emissions through coordinated transportation and land use planning;
• Assembly Bill 1358, commonly referred to as the Complete Streets Act of 2008,
which requires a balanced multimodal transportation network that meets the
needs of all users of streets, roads, and highways for safe and convenient
travel; and
• Senate Bill 932, which incorporates the principles of the Federal Highway
Administration's Safe System Approach, by requiring bicycle, pedestrian and
traffic calming plans to improve traffic safety;
WHEREAS, the Circulation Element Update was also coordinated with the
adoption of the 6th Cycle Housing Element Update;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 65033, the City conducted an
extensive public participation process during the preparation of the Circulation Element
Update;
WHEREAS, since September 2020, the City held five community workshops and
discussed the Circulation Element Update at nine duly noticed Planning Commission
meetings;
18-10
Resolution No. 2022-
Page 2 of 5
WHEREAS, the initial draft of the Circulation Element Update was made available
for public review and comment on the City's website from March 12, 2021 to April 30,
2021;
WHEREAS, the final draft Circulation Element Update was made available for
public review and comment on the City's website from July 12, 2022 to August 1, 2022;
WHEREAS, on September 8, 2022, a public hearing was held by the Planning
Commission in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach,
California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in
accordance with California Government Code Sections 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown
Act") and 65353 ("Section 65353"), and City Council Policy K-1 (General Plan and Local
Coastal Program) ("Council Policy K-1 "). Evidence, both written and oral, was presented
to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at the meeting;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted
Resolution No. PC2022-025 recommending to the City Council approval of the Circulation
Element Update;
WHEREAS, on October 11, 2022, a study session was held by the City Council
in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A
notice of time, place and purpose of the study session was given in accordance with the
Ralph M. Brown Act, Section 65353, and Council Policy K-1. Evidence, both written and
oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at the study session; and
WHEREAS, on October 25, 2022, a public hearing was held by the City Council
in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A
notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the
Ralph M. Brown Act, Section 65353, and Council Policy K-1. Evidence, both written and
oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at the meeting.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as
follows..
Section 1: The City Council does hereby approve the Circulation Element
Update which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference.
18-11
Resolution No. 2022-
Page 3 of 5
Section 2: The Circulation Element Update does not require voter approval
under Section 423 of the Charter and Council Policy A-18 (Guidelines for Implementing
Charter Section 423) ("Council Policy A-18"). Section 423 and Council Policy A-18
require any amendment to the General Plan be reviewed to determine if a vote of the
electorate would be required. If a project includes a general plan amendment, and,
separately or cumulatively with other projects over a 10-year span, exceeds more than
100 additional peak hour trips (a.m. or p.m.), adds 40,000 square feet or more of non-
residential floor area or adds more than 100 dwelling units in a statistical area, a vote of
the electorate is required. The purpose of the Circulation Element Update, as presented,
is to incorporate state law requirements that are intended to protect the environment, and
to improve traffic safety and mobility. The Circulation Element Update would not result in
an increase in peak hour trips, square footage of non-residential floor area or dwelling
units. Amendments to the Land Use Element of the General Plan ("Land Use Element")
and Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC ("Zoning Code") that implement the 6tn
Cycle Housing Element will require voter approval. A traffic analysis will be completed
during the Land Use Element update process and any update to the Master Plan of
Streets and Highways that may be necessary, as a result of the traffic analysis, would
require voter approval.
Section 3: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are
incorporated into the operative part of this resolution.
Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not
affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City
Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each section,
subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or
more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
18-12
Resolution No. 2022-
Page 4 of 5
Section 5: The City Council finds the adoption of this resolution is not a project
under CEQA pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Code of Regulations, Title
14, Division 6, Chapter 3 ("CEQA Guidelines"), the common-sense exemption because it
involves policies, programs, and actions that would not cause a significant effect on the
environment; and categorically exempt under Sections 15307 and 15308 of the CEQA
Guidelines, which exempt projects by regulatory agencies for protection of natural
resources and the environment. The purpose of the Circulation Element Update, as
presented, is to implement state law requirements that are intended to protect the
environment. For instance, Senate Bill 743 establishes VMT as the metric for determining
transportation impacts under CEQA, Senate Bill 32 and Senate Bill 375 require a
reduction in greenhouse gas emissions through coordinated transportation and land use
planning, and Assembly Bill 1358 requires a balanced multimodal transportation network
that meets the needs of all users of streets, roads, and highways for safe and convenient
travel. Since the goals and policies in the Circulation Element Update implement state
law requirements intended to protect the environment, no additional environmental review
is necessary.
Moreover, the Circulation Element Update is statutorily exempt under Section
15262 of the CEQA Guidelines, which exempts projects involving feasibility or planning
studies for future actions which the City has not approved or funded. The purpose of the
Circulation Element Update, as presented, is to implement state law requirements that
are intended to protect the environment. In addition, the Circulation Element Update was
coordinated with the adoption of the 6th Cycle Housing Element. The 6th Cycle Housing
Element Update was determined to be statutorily exempt under Section 15262 because
it does not provide development entitlements to any specific land use projects, nor does
it make any changes to the General Plan land use map or modify land use designations,
densities, or land use intensities. Rather, comprehensive environmental analysis will be
completed with the Land Use Element and Zoning Code update, which implement the 6th
Cycle Housing Element. Similarly, the Circulation Element Update is a policy document
statutorily exempt under CEQA. A comprehensive environmental analysis, including a
traffic analysis, will be completed with the Land Use Element and Zoning Code update.
18-13
Resolution No. 2022-
Page 5 of 5
Section 6: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the
City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution.
ADOPTED this 25th day of October, 2022.
Kevin Muldoon
Mayor
ATTEST:
Leilani I. Brown
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
//. C
Xar6C. Harp
City Attorney
Attachment: Exhibit "A" — Circulation Element Update
18-14
Circulation Element
CIRCULATION ELEMENT
A Safe and Convenient Transportation System for All
Introduction
The County of Orange continues to grow as a thriving urban residential and employment region. Over
the years, Newport Beach has transformed along with the County. Once a small community and seasonal
getaway, Newport Beach is now home to 86,000 residents and is a global destination for travel. As a result,
travel in Newport Beach and the surrounding communities has evolved. Demographics and technology
are changing the demand for and delivery of different travel modes. The legacy of the pandemic may also
further change travel demand and travel habits. The trend from regional and State levels of governments
has been to provide greater regulation regarding the planning and programming of transportation. The
Circulation Element of the Newport Beach General Plan governs the long-term development of mobility
systems in the City of Newport Beach and provides the best opportunity for the City to establish its vision
of mobility. The Circulation Element acknowledges the influences of local, regional, State and federal
guidance and regulation, and expresses the ultimate vision of mobility to respond to the needs and
objectives of Newport Beach residents. The goals and policies in the Circulation Element are balanced
with the goals and policies of the Land Use and Housing Elements in order to provide a correlation
between land use and transportation planning. In so doing the General Plan provides the best possible
balance between the City's future growth, service levels for all travel modes, and community character.
The Circulation Element is consistent with the Complete Streets Act (Assembly Bill 1358), the Sustainable
Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (Senate Bill 375), the Vehicle Miles Traveled provisions
of Senate Bill 743, the Transportation Demand Management Ordinance, and the Local Coastal Program.
It also recognizes the programs and policies inherent in Senate Bill 932 (Safe Systems Approaches).
Newport Beach General Plan
18-16
Circulation Element
Context
SETTING
Newport Beach is centrally located among the six coastal cities in Orange County. The City of Newport
Beach was incorporated in 1906, only ten years after Henry Ford built his first automobile. The community
has changed along with transportation options from days of the Pacific Electric Red Car to wide adoption
and then reliance on automobiles. Even as freeways came to symbolize Southern California, no freeways
traversed Newport Beach until the Corona Del Mar Freeway opened in 1978 providing a short connection
between MacArthur Boulevard and the San Diego Freeway (I-405). Today, the Costa Mesa freeway (SR-
55) terminates just north of Newport Beach and the San Joaquin Transportation Corridor (SR-73)
traverses the city's northern edge. Newport Beach instead relies on regional roadways for connections and
transportation including Coast Highway, Newport Boulevard, Jamboree Road, and MacArthur
Boulevard). In the future, emerging technology and greater access for alternative transportation modes
are anticipated to affect and be affected by Newport Beach as it grows.
Newport Beach is a collection of villages and
neighborhoods including Balboa Peninsula, Cannery
Village, the Islands of Newport Harbor, Mariners' Mile,
Newport Heights, Dover Shores, Corona Del Mar,
Newport Coast, Newport Center/Fashion Island, Big
Canyon, Back Bay, and Eastbluff. These neighborhoods
rely on local streets for transportation and are connected
by regional roadways. Regional traffic also uses the
regional roadways, which has reduced the City's ability to
allocate space to alternative travel modes. Summertime beach traffic has been a
traffic volumes near or exceeding roadway capacity in the beach areas for a century.
predictable source of
Growth in Orange County, and especially communities neighboring Newport Beach will increase regional
through traffic and summertime beach traffic. These increases will occur whether or not Newport Beach
plans for it. This Circulation Element plans for anticipated regional growth and seeks regional cooperation
to accommodate regional traffic growth.
Roads have been the primary means of getting around Newport Beach, but Newport Harbor presents an
opportunity for community specific transportation and recreation alternatives. Water transportation
between Newport Beach and Santa Catalina Island, harbors and ports up and down Southern California,
and between Balboa Island and the Balboa Peninsula is already present. More water transportation services
(public or private) could be established between locations in Newport Beach to reduce the reliance on
roadways.
Newport Beach General Plan
18-17
Circulation Element
LOCAL ROADWAY SYSTEM
Local roadways are planned to accommodate traffic circulating the local village or neighborhood they
serve. Keeping regional traffic off of local streets preserves right-of-way for its intended use and for use
by other transportation modes. In recognition of the need to discourage non -local cut -through traffic
from using residential streets, the City Council adopted Policy L-26 (Traffic Management Policy) in 2006
(amended in 2015 and 2018). This policy provides tools and a process for managing the speed and volume
of vehicles on residential streets and implementing considered responses that do not simply shift cut -
through traffic from one residential street to another.
ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Much of the traffic traversing Newport Beach uses regional roadways, simply passing through town.
Regional serving roadways are categorized according to the type and quantity of traffic they are designed
to accommodate through the roadway classification system adopted in the City of Newport Beach Master
Plan of Streets and Highways (MPSH). The roadway classifications used by the City of Newport Beach
are required to be consistent with the County of Orange Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH), which
is administered by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). OCTA is the regional agency
responsible for overseeing the regional transportation system and local agency compliance with regional
and statewide programs such as the Congestion Management Program (CMP). The roadway classifications
and their generalized daily capacity, used for long range General Plan analysis, are presented below.
Roadways may be able to carry traffic above the typical capacity level identified in these basic classifications
if the standard section is augmented. Augmented sections could include additional through lanes,
additional turning lanes at intersections with high turning volumes, or through signal synchronization.
Principal Arterial —A Principal arterial highway is typically an eight -lane divided roadway. A Principal
arterial is designed to accommodate a daily capacity ranging from 45,000 to 60,000. Principal arterials carry
a large volume of regional through traffic not handled by the freeway system.
Major Arterial— A Major arterial highway is typically a six -lane divided roadway. A Major arterial is
designed to accommodate a daily capacity ranging from 30,000 to 45,000. Major arterials carry a large
volume of regional through traffic not handled by the freeway system. A Major Augmented is similar to a
Major arterial, but may include additional lanes, particularly at intersections, resulting in a daily capacity
ranging from 52,000 to 70,000.
Primary Arterial— A Primary arterial highway is usually a four -lane divided roadway. A Primary arterial
is designed to accommodate a daily capacity ranging from 20,000 to 30,000. A Primary arterial's function
is similar to that of a Principal or Major arterial. The chief difference is capacity. A Primary Augmented is
similar to a Primary arterial, but may include additional lanes, particularly at intersections, resulting in a
daily capacity ranging from 35,000 to 50,000.
Secondary Arterial— A Secondary arterial highway is a four -lane roadway (often undivided). A
Secondary arterial distributes traffic between local streets and Major or Primary arterials. Although some
V_ Newport Beach General Plan
18-18
Circulation Element
Secondary arterials serve as through routes, most provide more direct access to surrounding land uses
than Principal, Major, or Primary arterials. Secondary arterials carry a daily capacity ranging from 10,000
to 20,000.
Commuter Roadway —A commuter roadway is a two -to -four -lane, unrestricted access roadway with a
daily capacity ranging from 7,500 to 15,000. It differs from a local street in its ability to handle through
traffic movements between arterials.
ROADWAY OPERATIONS
The efficient operation of the circulation system is constrained by conflict and congestion at intersections.
Intersections that do not perform well can affect roadway conditions upstream and downstream, impact
access to adjacent parcels, increase vehicle collisions, present safety hazards to other travel modes, and
concentrate air pollution. Conflict and congestion are usually the result of traffic volume. The residents
of Newport Beach desire good traffic flow and the ability to get from one side of the city to the other.
However, there are impediments to this.
In Newport Beach, natural barriers (including the Pacific Ocean, the Santa Ana River, and Upper Newport
Bay) and the John Wayne Airport superblock limit roadway connections. As a result, traffic volumes are
concentrated on the roadways making regional connections (i.e., Coast Highway, Bristol Street/SR-73,
Newport Boulevard, Jamboree Road, and MacArthur Boulevard) which increases conflict and congestion
at intersections along these routes. Because other coastal communities have similar barriers, regional traffic
with no origin or destination in Newport Beach also uses these limited connections through Newport
Beach, further increasing traffic. Summertime beach traffic is not affected by Newport Beach land use
policy. For that reason, it has been and continues to be the practice of the City to analyze traffic conditions
outside of the summer season to determine the function and operation of City streets.
The Highway Capacity Manual provides methodology for measuring intersection performance in terms
of delay experienced by vehicles traversing the intersection. As detailed below, letter grades are assigned
based on the amount of delay experienced by vehicles during the peak commute hours. Unlike school
grades, however, level of service A is not necessarily a goal. An intersection performing at level of service
A could indicate that too much right-of-way is dedicated to vehicle travel lanes and not enough right-of-
way is dedicated to other travel modes such as bicycles and pedestrians.
■ LOS "A" —Minimal delay (less than 10 seconds on average) is experienced.
■ LOS `B"—Vehicles at signalized intersections experience between 10 and 20 seconds of delay on
average, while vehicles on the side street STOP controlled approaches at unsignalized intersections
experience between 10 and 15 seconds of average delay.
■ LOS "C"—Delays at signalized intersections range from 20 to 35 seconds and from 15 to 25
seconds for side street / STOP controlled traffic at unsignalized intersections.
■ LOS "D"—Delays at signalized intersections range from 35 to 55 seconds and from 25 to 35
seconds for side street / STOP controlled approaches at unsignalized intersections.
Newport Beach General Plan "a
18-19
Circulation Element
■ LOS "E"—Delays at signalized intersections range from 55 to 80 seconds on average, while delays
for side street / STOP controlled traffic at unsignalized intersections range from 35 to 50 seconds.
■ LOS "F"—All vehicles at signalized intersections can be expected to wait through more than a
single signal cycle with average delays in excess of 80 seconds, while delays to side street / STOP
controlled approaches at unsignalized intersections will exceed 50 seconds on average.
The City of Newport Beach has traditionally set LOS D as its goal for intersection performance where
possible. Establishing and maintaining a target requires a balance between goals such as accessibility for
all travel modes congestion, delay, emergency response, community character, and capital expenditure. It
is also important to recognize that some sources of traffic (such as summertime beach traffic) may expand
to use any new capacity provided. In the past, LOS E was established as the goal in the airport area and
at specific intersections in Corona del Mar to achieve the desired balance.
A traffic analysis of the General Plan update will forecast future traffic volumes, analyze intersection
performance, and identify necessary roadway and intersection improvements to maintain LOS D. Once
those needs are determined, the City of Newport Beach will consider all goals and will review the Master
Plan of Streets and Highways.
Recently, the State has made changes to the measurement of transportation impacts under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As of July 2020, all jurisdictions must analyze vehicle miles traveled
(VMT) for the purposes of CEQA. While VMT contributes to congestion, by itself it cannot be used to
measure congestion impacts or congestion relief. VMT is a good measure of effects contributing to climate
change. Newport Beach is concerned about climate change and sea level rise and adopted the Vehicle
Miles Traveled Implementation Guide in May 2020 and requires the analysis of VMT for the purposes of
CEQA. However, Newport Beach originally established the Traffic Phasing Ordinance in 1978, which
requires analysis of vehicle LOS when planning transportation improvements in coordination with land
use development. In addition, vehicle LOS analysis is still required by the Orange County CMP. Therefore,
the City of Newport Beach requires the analysis of VMT for the purposes of CEQA and also requires the
analysis of vehicle LOS for compliance with the Traffic Phasing Ordinance and the CMP.
SAFE SYSTEM APPROACH
The Safe System approach takes a holistic approach to reduce fatal and serious injuries occurring on
roadways. The Safe Systems approach was codified on Senate Bill 932. The first core principle of the Safe
System approach is to view fatal and serious injuries as unacceptable and accept the ethical imperative to
reduce and eliminate their occurrence. Human bodies, especially those using non -motorized
transportation, are vulnerable and have limited tolerance for crash forces before sustaining serious injury.
Because humans make mistakes, transportation systems should be designed to accommodate those
mistakes and limit crash forces. Designing for safety should be proactive with risks identified and mitigated
rather than reacting after crashes. The responsibility for safety is shared by roadway users, roadway
managers, and vehicle manufacturers. Designing for safety also means planning for redundancy so that
one failure does not necessitate a bad outcome. The Safe System approach adds layers of protection by
W. Newport Beach General Plan
18-20
Circulation Element
improving the safety of roadway users, vehicles, travel speeds, and roadway design while also improving
post -crash care.
In the past, roadway speeds were set by roadway users through speed surveys conducted according to the
California Vehicle Code and the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Assembly Bill
43 (Friedman) was signed into law in 2021 and will permit local agencies more flexibility starting in 2024
to consider vulnerable groups when setting lower speed limits than identified by speed surveys. The City
of Newport Beach will incorporate traffic safety improvement projects in the annual Capital Improvement
Program and will consider vulnerable groups when setting speed limits when permitted by State law,
consistent with a Safe Systems approach.
TRUCK TRAFFIC
Trucks are necessary to deliver goods, collect refuse, and service utilities throughout Newport Beach.
Truck trips can, however, result in noise and other impacts to residents, increase traffic congestion, and
shorten the lifespan of infrastructure. Commercial vehicles weighing in excess of 3 tons (6,000 pounds)
are prohibited from certain roadways, when posted. Concentrated periods of high truck traffic, such as
during construction of large development projects, have increased potential for noise, congestion, and
roadway damage impacts. The City of Newport Beach could control and limit those impacts by reviewing
and approving construction management plans for large development projects in addition to monitoring
construction traffic associated with residential projects.
REGIONAL FACILITIES
Many different agencies plan and operate regional transportation facilities that are used by residents of
Newport Beach and vehicles passing through Newport Beach. These include the State, the Southern
California Association of Governments (SCAG), OCTA, the Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA),
and neighboring cities. The County of Orange owns and operates John Wayne Airport, which is a
generator of special use traffic neighboring Newport Beach. The City of Newport Beach coordinates with
outside agencies on matters relevant to the mobility of Newport Beach residents.
' The State, through the California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans), is the owner/operator of major regional routes used
by Newport Beach residents including I-405, SR-55, Newport
Boulevard, and Coast Highway. Coast Highway is owned and
operated by Caltrans with the exception of the segment between
Jamboree Road and Newport Coast Drive. Newport Boulevard
from Finley Street to the northerly city limits at Industrial Way is
also under Caltrans jurisdiction. Caltrans controls the signal timing and signal coordination along these
roadways. The City of Newport Beach coordinates with Caltrans related to signal timing and seeks greater
coordination related to incorporating emerging technology and the latest transportation system
management techniques.
Newport Beach General Plan M
18-21
Circulation Element
SCAG is the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) responsible for preparing the Regional
Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) for Southern California. The
RTP/SCS is prepared every four years and outlines the region's vision for use of regional facilities and
delivery of mobility. The City of Newport Beach provides local data for the RTP/SCS process to ensure
Newport Beach is accurately represented and provides feedback on draft strategies.
As previously mentioned, OCTA is the regional agency responsible for overseeing the regional
transportation system, the County Master Plan of Arterial Highways, and local agency compliance with
regional and statewide programs such as the CMP, which is prepared every two years. The CMP roadways
within Newport Beach are Coast Highway, Newport Boulevard, MacArthur Boulevard, and Jamboree
Road. The City of Newport Beach provides local data for the CMP preparation. OCTA also prepares a
Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) every four years that establishes a vision for Orange County
mobility that is submitted to SCAG for inclusion in the RTP/SCS. The City of Newport Beach monitors
the LRTP and provides feedback related to the needs of Newport Beach residents. The TCA operates the
San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor (SR-73). The City of Newport Beach is a partner in this joint
powers' authority.
OCTA provides a forum for communication and coordination between neighboring jurisdictions for the
efficient delivery of mobility across jurisdictional borders through regional plans such as the MPAH,
Commuter Bikeways Strategic Plan, and OC Go. One example of effective cross -jurisdictional
coordination has been the Regional Traffic Signal Synchronization Program. The City of Newport Beach
coordinates with neighboring jurisdictions seeking effective planning and delivery of transportation
facilities.
JWA is a part of the regional system of airports serving air travel for Orange County residents, workers,
and visitors. The Newport Beach Aviation Committee assists the City in the implementation of Council
Policy A-17 (Newport Beach Council Airport Policy).
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
Fixed route bus service and on -demand paratransit in Newport Beach (and all of Orange County) is
operated by OCTA. One of the bus routes in Newport Beach connects the Newport Transportation
Center (located at MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Road
in Newport Center) to the �� countywide bus network. In order
to maintain State mandated revenue/cost balance, OCTA
occasionally revises their service _ schedule. During periods of
increased public transportation M use, service routes are extended and
new routes may be added. During periods of decreased public
transportation use, service areas with the lowest ridership are contracted. OCTA's
most recent review of bus service, the Bus 360 program, concentrated bus service in the central part of
Orange County and reduced bus service in South Orange County and the periphery.
Newport Beach General Plan
18-22
Circulation Element
OC Go Project V provides funding for community -based transit/circulators. The
Newport Beach summer shuttle service on the Balboa Peninsula is partially funded
by Project V. The City of Newport Beach would consider pilot programs for other
shuttle routes, potentially connecting the villages within Newport Beach.
The extensive use of rideshare services has been one of the factors leading to declining
bus ridership. As part of the Bus 360 program, OCTA even tested use of rideshare
operators to provide on -demand mobility service in lieu of reduced fixed route
service. In some markets, rideshare drivers have begun offering subscription rates for
customers with regular medical appointments. The trend is clearly toward more trips being taken with this
travel mode and the City of Newport Beach is considering ways to accommodate the demand such as
designating curbside drop-off zones in commercial areas.
TRAI LS
Trail systems provide functional alternatives to automobile travel and recreational
opportunities for the community. The trail system in Newport Beach has been
developed for commuter and recreational bicyclists, pedestrians, and equestrians.
Bicycle Trails
This Circulation Element incorporates the 2014 City of Newport Beach Bicycle
Master Plan and any future updates to that plan. The Bicycle Master Plan identifies
four types of bicycle facilities.
1. Bicycle Path (Caltrans Class I). Provides for bicycle travel on a paved
right-of-way separated from any street or highway. Includes sidewalk
adjacent to street.
2. Bicycle Lane (Caltrans Class II). Provides a striped and stenciled lane for
bicycle travel on a street or highway.
3. Bicycle Route (Caltrans Class III). Provides for a shared use with motor
vehicle traffic and may be identified by signing. Stencil markings identifying
a recommended position for bicycles may also be provided.
4. Bicycle Trail. Provides a dirt pathway designated for the use of bicycles and
pedestrians completely separated from motor vehicle traffic.
Subsequent to adoption of the Bicycle Master Plan, Caltrans has included an
additional classification of bicycle facility in the Highway Design Manual and
California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. A Class IV Bikeway (also
Bicycle Route,
known as a cycle track) is an on -road facility separated from vehicle traffic by a Caltrans Class Ill
physical barrier. The City may incorporate this type of facility into the Bicycle Master Plan in the future.
Bicycle Path,
Caltrans Class 1
Bicycle Lane,
Caltrans Class Il
Newport Beach General Plan
18-23
Circulation Element
The facility needs of bicyclists vary with the function of the trip and the speed and
skill level of the rider. Those residents who use bicycles daily for their primary
means of transportation likely prefer the most convenient and direct route
available to their destination. These bicyclists normally will select a route along a
primary or a major highway. In contrast, the recreational rider might choose a
route for its scenic interest such as a ride on a bike trail separated from vehicular
traffic. New or infrequent bicycle riders may prefer a route separated from vehicle
travel or along a route with low vehicle volume and speeds. Thus, it is necessary
to provide bikeways for bicyclists along major transportation corridors as well as
alternative routes. It is also necessary to provide bikeways which separate faster
cyclists from pedestrian travel and slower cyclists, integrating bicycle travel more
closely with vehicular traffic, and bikeways which separate slower cyclists from
motor vehicle traffic.
The City has designated additional off -road facilities in the form of sidewalk bikeways, which provide
improved bicycle safety for children within high use corridors in the vicinity of schools, beaches, and
residential neighborhoods. The City will periodically review the Bicycle Sidewalk Resolution to determine
whether areas permitting bicycle use on sidewalks are serving the intended purpose, whether additional
permitted areas are desirable, and whether restrictions on use (e.g., bicycle speed limits) are warranted.
Review of the Bicycle Sidewalk Resolution and strategies for separating faster cyclists from pedestrians
and slower cyclists will become more important due to the emergence of electric -assisted bicycles (e-
bikes).
Researchers have noted the rapid uptake of e-bikes by consumers, that
e-bikes are more likely than standard bicycles to replace car trips, and that
trips with e-bikes are longer than trips with standard bicycles. The
availability of e-bikes also expands the potential group of users of bicycle
facilities and the range of all users of those facilities. This emerging
technology may improve the mobility of Newport Beach residents, but the
City would like to ensure that the benefits to some do not come at the
expense of safety to other users and residents.
Pedestrian Corridors
Newport Beach has a variety of pedestrian and multi -use facilities. These include sidewalks through
developed areas, the oceanfront boardwalk on the Balboa Peninsula, bayfront walkways, and trails along
Upper Newport Bay and in open space areas. Coastal areas see high pedestrian activity including Balboa
Island, Balboa Peninsula, Corona del Mar, and Mariners' Mile. High volumes of pedestrians cross Coast
Highway through Mariners' Mile. Where there are opportunities, the City of Newport Beach will consider
providing more Bayfront walkways along the Balboa Peninsula and Mariners' Mile. These walkways will
help to accommodate high pedestrian volumes while also providing an alternative network separate from
high vehicle volume streets. Closing low volume minor streets and alleys and creating pedestrian
Newport Beach General Plan
18-24
Circulation Element
promenades or activity areas can also be a strategy to create a pedestrian friendly network while activating
a business district. In addition, overhead pedestrian crossings should be considered to improve pedestrian
safety.
Equestrian Trails
Equestrian trails are primarily located in the Santa Ana Heights portion of the City. These trails, and other
equestrian facilities, are highly valued by residents of this area and provide regional recreation
opportunities as well.
COMPLETE STREETS
While alternative modes such as bicycles have always been permitted to use the roadway network, the
Complete Streets Act (Assembly Bill 1358) requires that Circulation Elements "plan for a balanced
multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of streets, roads, and highways,
defined to include motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists, children, persons with disabilities, seniors, movers of
commercial goods, and users of public transportation, in a manner that is suitable to the rural, suburban,
or urban context of the general plan." Providing a balance for multiple modes is one strategy toward
reducing greenhouse gas emissions and combating climate change consistent with the City's goals of
reducing risks to residents from climate change and sea level rise. Additionally, research shows that a
multimodal transportation system, encouraging choice of bicycle walking and rolling modes, can enhance
local economic development and improve public health. The City of Newport Beach will use the Orange
County Council of Governments (OCCOG) Complete Streets Initiative Design Handbook to develop
the City's complete streets master plan.
Planning for a balanced multimodal transportation network does not mean that every street allocates equal
space to all travel modes. In fact, satisfactory service levels are difficult to provide on all streets for all
travel modes due to the competing interests between modes. Automobile friendly streets have high travel
speeds, wide lanes, and separate turn lanes all of which decrease pedestrian service levels. Rather than
trying to simultaneously serve competing needs, the City of Newport Beach favors a layered network
approach to complete streets planning. In a layered network, a street is prioritized for a particular travel
Newport Beach General Plan
18-25
Circulation Element
mode (or multiple travel modes benefiting from similar characteristics), but the network as a whole
provides for the mobility of all users of roadways.
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY
The City of Newport Beach has used and continues to use technology to improve the delivery and
performance of mobility. Transportation System Management techniques have been used to enhance
capacity without physical roadway widening while retaining the community character and limiting the
impact of the roadway system on the environment. Examples of Transportation System Management
improvements include intelligent transportation system improvements at traffic signals, traffic signal
coordination and improvements to roadway signage along busy routes (especially to tourist destinations),
and the completion of the traffic management center in City Hall allowing for traffic monitoring and
remote signal operation. The City also replaced old street lighting to more efficient LED fixtures to reduce
electricity consumption and the City's carbon footprint.
Technology is changing rapidly, and the City of Newport Beach will respond to the challenges and
opportunities presented by emerging technology. The number of electric vehicles (EV) using our roadways
will continue to grow and have fueling needs that are distinct from gasoline powered vehicles. Rideshare
services continue to grow ridership and simultaneously the need for designated places to drop-off and
pick-up are growing. Wayfinding apps help people to navigate our roadways, but the directions provided
do not always show the most direct route or respect roadway classification. Traditional engineering
techniques may not be effective in redirecting this source of traffic volume and the City of Newport Beach
is investigating potential strategies.
Vehicles with limited self -driving capability are already on our roadways. On the horizon, the City
anticipates that vehicle -to -everything (V2X) infrastructure improvements will be needed to accommodate
and realize the advantages offered by connected and autonomous vehicles. Potential advantages from
connected vehicles include feedback regarding roadway maintenance needs, uniform traffic flows, real
time signal synchronization, improved safety for drivers and other travel modes, and reduced GHG
emissions. While the City of Newport Beach is aware of what is happening now and what is anticipated
in the near future, the City must remain flexible and adapt to rapidly changing transportation options in
order to experience the benefits offered while avoiding the pitfalls of change.
TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT
The City of Newport Beach retains the Travel Demand Management (TDM) Ordinance requiring projects
to reduce the number of peak -period vehicle trips by providing facilities to support alternate modes and
encouraging the use of alternative transportation modes, such as carpools, vanpools, public transit,
bicycles, and walking. Employers can also offer flexible work schedules, including work -from -home. Some
TDM strategies will reduce VMT generated by a land use. All of these techniques are enhanced by
emerging technologies. Adopting TDM measures not only reduces peak -period vehicle trips and
associated GHG emissions but could also reduce parking demand.
V_ Newport Beach General Plan
18-26
Circulation Element
CURB SIDE MANAGEMENT
Newport Beach manages curb side space seeking the best use for the community needs. Prohibitions, fee
assessment, or time limits are used to induce turnover and ensure availability, perform maintenance such
as street sweeping, preserve sight distance, or provide right -turn lanes.
Within commercial districts, time limitations and metered parking are common. Novel parking
management may provide greater benefit to Newport Beach residents and visitors. Strategies such as valet
and loading zones could reduce vehicle loads on side streets and alleys. Designating rideshare or delivery
space could accommodate emerging trends. Curb side right of way could also be used as exchange areas
for shared non -motorized transportation. Some of these novel parking management strategies could
reduce passenger car use.
Within residential districts, parking demand can overflow from commercial districts or private residential
property onto public residential streets. Management of curb side right of way can help to provide equal
access for all of the district's residents.
CLIMATE CHANGE
Newport Beach is concerned about climate change and sea level rise. As seen in other parts of the country,
climate change can increase the frequency and intensity of natural emergencies. The City of Newport
Beach is planning for these contingencies using tsunami warning signs, evacuation planning and battery
back-up systems for traffic signals. Initiatives included in the Circulation Element such as planning for a
balanced multimodal network including support for additional transit facilities in higher density areas and
measures to reduce VMT help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and combat climate change. The City
of Newport Beach intends to do more to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and combat climate change.
On City property, the City can provide more EV charging stations, bicycle parking, and other supporting
facilities. The City can encourage or require these supporting facilities on privately owned property within
Newport Beach. The City can also encourage local businesses to establish and maintain telework programs
in addition to carpooling/vanpooling.
PARKING
Similar to other coastal communities, parking availability is limited citywide, especially in some areas during
the peak summer months. Areas of Newport Beach that were largely subdivided prior to widespread
adoption of the automobile are areas of particular concern (i.e., Balboa Peninsula, Balboa Island, and
Corona Del Mar). The Balboa Village Parking Management Overlay Plan included recommendations. The
City of Newport Beach has implemented some of the recommendations (i.e., beginning to implement
parking meter time limits, providing bus layover areas, improving intersection visibility with additional red
curbing, and monitoring lot utilization). Implementing additional recommendations is being considered
including increasing parking meter fees, consolidating public parking, and initiating a shared parking
Newport Beach General Plan
18-27
Circulation Element
program. Similar Parking Management Overlay plans could be implemented in other activity areas
including Corona del Mar, Mariners' Mile, McFadden Wharf, Cannery Village, and Balboa Island.
Technology changes make other innovative solutions possible. The City of Newport Beach uses a
smartphone app to allow remote payment of fees at parking meters, which has increased compliance. This
program could be expanded to provide the location of and directions to available parking spaces, which
could reduce circling while looking for a parking space and the congestion those movements cause.
Increased use of rideshare services may reduce parking demand for some land uses or in some areas of
Newport Beach. Future review of off-street parking requirements may allow reuse of vehicle parking
spaces for bicycle parking or could permit reallocation of curbside space. Alternatives for management of
curbside space include valet or rideshare pick-up/drop-off and deliveries, further supporting a trend
toward less private vehicle parking.
TRANSPORTATION FUNDING
Newport Beach receives funding for transportation improvements from gasoline tax apportionment
(including SB-1), OC Go (also known as Measure M) local turnback, OC Go competitive programs, the
State, federal funds, developer fees (i.e., the Traffic Phasing Ordinance and Fair Share Traffic Contribution
Ordinance), and the General Fund. The City of Newport Beach leverages City resources to improve the
chances of winning competitive funding sources (e.g., MacArthur Boulevard improvements, Superior
Avenue pedestrian bridge, and more). The effect of revisions to CEQA measuring transportation impacts
in terms of VMT on developer fees is not known at this time. A regional VMT mitigation program, if
established, may offer a new funding source for public transit or alternative transportation projects.
The City of Newport Beach will have additional expenditures in the future to adapt existing infrastructure
with emerging technology, including traffic signal improvements for compatibility with connected and
autonomous vehicles. The City of Newport Beach is considering potential sources of funding for these
expenditures.
Newport Beach General Plan
18-28
Circulation Element
Goals and Policies
CE 1.1
An overall transportation system that facilitates the movement of people and goods within and through
the City of Newport Beach and accommodates conservative growth within the City of Newport Beach
but is not expanded primarily to accommodate growth in the surrounding region.
Policies
CE 1.1.1 Comprehensive Transportation System
Provide a diverse transportation system that provides mobility options for the
community. (Imp 16.8, 16.11)
CE 1.1.2 Integrated System of Multiple Modes
Provide an integrated transportation system that supports the land use plan
set forth in the Land Use Element. (Imp 2.1)
CE 1.1.3 Levels of Service Related to Community Character
Maintain level of service standards that reflect the character of the various
unique districts and neighborhoods of Newport Beach. (Imp 16.2, 16.4, 16.6,
16.7)
Goal
CE 1.2
Reduced summertime visitor traffic impacts.
Policies
CE 1.2.1 Wayfinding
Implement way -finding signs for
vehicles and pedestrians, specifi-
cally for tourist destination areas.
(Imp 16.7)
Newport Beach General Plan
18-29
Circulation Element
CE 1.2.2 Shuttle Service
Encourage and maintain remote visitor parking and shuttle services. (Imp 14.4)
CE 1.2.3 Internal Shuttle
Study the potential of implementing a pilot program, for a shuttle system
connecting the villages of Newport Beach. (Imp 16.8)
CE 1.2.4 Traffic System Management
Continue to implement measures, such as special traffic signal timing, to
reduce the impact of high -volume summer traffic on persons living along and
around the beach and bay, as well as visitors. (Imp 16.7)
CE 1.2.5 Public Transit
Support and encourage OCTA efforts to provide/fund
summertime expanded bus service and/or local shuttle
services to reduce visitor traffic. (Imp 16.8)
Goffil
CE 2.1
A roadway system with no significant gaps that provides for the efficient movement of goods and people
in the City of Newport Beach, while maintaining the community's character and its residents' quality of
life.
Policies
CE 2.1.1 Level of Service Standards
Plan the arterial roadway system to accommodate projected traffic at the
following level of service standards:
A. Level of Service (LOS) "D" throughout the City, unless otherwise noted
B. LOS "E" at any intersection in the Airport Area shared with Irvine, and
in Corona del Mar (subject to findings of the most recent General Plan
update traffic study) (Imp 16.3)
CE 2.1.2 Street and Highway Network
Construct the circulation system described on the map entitled Newport
Beach Circulation Element -Master Plan of Streets and Highways shown in
Figure CE1 and Figure CE2 (cross-section). (Imp 14.9, 16.3)
Newport Beach General Plan
18-30
cvom mcm
A
-
NEWPORT
RfDGE
MPA
CRYSTAL COVE
STATE PA""
CITY of NEWPORT BEACH
GENERALPLAN
Figure CE1
MASTER PLAN OF
STREETS AND HIGHWAYS
Legend
[] ADOPTED INTERCHANGE
L) PROPOSED INTERCHANGE
ROUTES REQUIRING
FURTHER COORDINATION
VJ5Mi|os
COMMUTER ROADWAY
(TWO LANE UNDIVIDED)
8.24Mi|os
SECONDARY ROAD
(FOUR LANE UNDIVIDED)
1O.DDMi|os
SECONDARY
(NOT BUILT)
0.2DMi|os
PRIMARY ROAD
(FOUR LANE DIVIDED)
29.62 Miles
PRIMARY ROAD
(NOT BUILT)
3.29 K8i|os
MAJOR ROAD
(SIX LANE DIVIDED)
80.64Mi|os
EIGHT LANE ROAD
(DIVIDED)
2.81 Miles
SANJOAOU|NHILLS
TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR
5.32 Miles
ADOPTED FREEWAY
~~~~� ROUTES
4.48Mi|ao
FUTURE FREEWAY
| EXTENSION |
Miles
Source: City of Newport Beach
Date: 7/28/22
PRINCIPAL - 144'
(8 Lanes Divided)
q_
MAJOR - 128'
(6 Lanes Divided)
q
PRIMARY - 104'
(4 Lanes Divided)
SECONDARY - 84'
(4 Lanes Undivided)
91
COMMUTER - 60'
(2 Lanes Divided)
q_
CITY of NEWPORT BEACH
GENERAL PLAN
Figure CE2
GENERAL PLAN
ROADWAY
CROSS -SECTIONS
NOTE: AUGMENTED SECTIONS MAY
INCLUDE ADDITIONAL LANES AT
INTERSECTION, AS NECESSARY,
Source: LSAAssociates
PROJECT NUMBER:
Date: 07/18/22
z9 L S A
I:\CNB1702.04\G\Clrc Element\CE_Cross_Sectons.ol (8/10/2022)
18-32
Circulation Element
CE 2.1.3 Current Traffic Data
Monitor traffic conditions on an ongoing basis and update Master Plan as
necessary. (Imp 16.4)
CE 2.1.4 Roadway Improvements
Pursue construction of intersection improvements (subject to findings of the
most recent General Plan update traffic study) or alternate improvements that
achieve an acceptable level of service. (Imp 16.3)
CE 2.1.5 MacArthur Boulevard Widening
Plan the addition of lanes to MacArthur Boulevard between Harbor View
Drive and the prolongation of Crown Drive so that more than four lanes are
constructed only when the daily volume to capacity ratio equals or exceeds 1.0
in that section of MacArthur Boulevard, not counting trips generated by the
MacArthur Boulevard access drive to Corona del mar Plaza, and after public
hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council, and only by
narrowing the median. (Imp 16.3)
CE 2.1.6 Protection of Right -of -Way
Protect right-of-way for designated future streets and highways through all
practicable means. (Imp 2.1)
Goal
CE 2.2
A safe and efficient roadway system.
Poli��cies
CE 2.2.1 Safe Roadways
Provide for safe roadway conditions by adhering to nationally recognized
improvement standards and uniform construction and maintenance practices.
(Imp 16.4, 16.6)
CE 2.2.2 Safe System Approach
Evaluate traffic collision data annually and review best practices for safe
circulation systems and implement appropriate technologies/infrastructure
consistent with the industry recognized Safe System principles. Incorporate
traffic safety improvement projects in the annual Capital Improvement
Program. (Imp 16.2, 16.4)
Newport Beach General Plan M
18-33
Circulation Element
CE 2.2.3 Up -to -Date Standards
Periodically review and update street standards to current multimodal capacity
and safety practices. (Imp 16.4, 16.6)
CE 2.2.4 Traffic Control
Design traffic control measures to ensure City streets and roads function with
safety and efficiency for vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. (Imp 16.7)
CE 2.2.5 Driveway and Access Limitations
Limit driveway and local street access on arterial streets to maintain a desired
quality of traffic flow and limit hazards to active transportation modes.
Wherever possible, consolidate and/or reduce the number of driveways and
implement access controls during redevelopment of adjacent parcels. (Imp 16.1)
CE 2.2.6 Neighborhood Traffic Calming
Balance safety, quality of life, and efficiency when considering cut -through
traffic and traffic calming improvements to local neighborhood streets.
Address neighborhood traffic concerns through City Council Policy L-26. (Imp
16.6)
CE 2.2.7 Emergency Access
Provide all residential, commercial, and industrial areas with efficient and safe
access for emergency vehicles. An emergency evacuation map shall be
prepared as part of an updated Safety Element. (Imp 16.6)
CE 2.2.8 Alleys
Alleys in new developments shall be 20' wide to facilitate circulation. (Imp 8.1)
CE 2.3
Optimal roadway system operation.
Policies
CE 2.3.1 Coast Highway Ownership
Pursue ownership of Coast Highway throughout Newport Beach, as
opportunities arise, so that Coast Highway can be improved to its ultimate
width in Mariners' Mile consistent with the City's Master Plan of Streets and
Highways and the OCTA Master Plan of Arterial Highways and to provide
Newport Beach General Plan
18-34
Circulation Element
the City with more opportunities to increase operational efficiencies. (Imp 2.1,
14.9)
CE 2.3.2 Roadway Maintenance
Support roadway maintenance programs that inspect, repair, and rehabilitate
pavement surfaces and sidewalks in order to preserve the high quality of City
streets and thoroughfares. (Imp 16.4)
CE 2.3.3 New Development Maintenance Responsibility
Ensure minimization of traffic congestion impacts and parking impacts and
ensure proper roadway maintenance through review and approval of
Construction Management Plans associated with new development proposals
in residential neighborhoods. (Imp 8.1, 16.9)
CE 2.3.4 Traffic Conditions Data Base
Monitor traffic conditions and optimize traffic signal operations and
coordination on an ongoing basis. (Imp 16.2)
CE 2.3.5 Improvements to Reflect Changing Traffic Conditions
Based on the monitoring of traffic conditions, consider additional
improvements in areas with operations issues, such as intersections with heavy
turn volumes (e.g., additional turn lanes, traffic signal progression, etc.). (Imp
16.2)
CE 2.3.6 San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor
Work with the Transportation Corridor Agency (TCA) to create improvement
strategies and funding mechanisms to address regional through traffic created
by the toll road along East Coast Highway and within the area of influence of
the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor.
Goal
CE 2.4
Truck routes that support goods movement to and from land use in the City while minimizing adverse
impacts to residents or businesses.
Newport Beach General Plan
18-35
Circulation Element
Policies
CE 2.4.1 Truck Routes
Allow truck use of City streets except selected residential and arterial streets
adjacent to residential areas and school zones necessary to minimize impacts
of truck traffic on residential areas. (Imp 16.9)
CE 2.4.2 Impacts of Trucks
Provide appropriately designed and maintained roadways to safely
accommodate truck travel and minimize noise and vibration. (Imp 16.9)
CE 2.4.3 Management of Truck Activities
Actively manage trucking activities related to oversize loads such as large boats
and comparable characteristics. (Imp 16.9)
CE 2.4.4 Construction Management Plans
Develop program to require CMP for large developments to address haul
routes, hours of operation, and number of truck trips. (Imp 16.9)
Goo
CE 3.1
A network of regional facilities which ensures the safe and efficient movement of people and goods from
within the City to areas outside its boundaries and minimizes the use of City streets by regional through
traffic.
Policies
CE 3.1.1 Freeway System
Encourage ongoing regional investment in the freeway system. (Imp 14.1, 14.3,
14.9, 14.10)
CE 3.1.2 Integration of Transportation Systems with Adjoining Communities
and the Region
Interface with regional and surrounding local agencies, such as Caltrans,
OCTA, the County of Orange, John Wayne Airport, the Cities of Irvine, Costa
Mesa, and Huntington Beach, and the University of California, Irvine to
implement systems that serve the needs of regional travelers (vehicles,
Newport Beach General Plan
18-36
Circulation Element
bicycles, and pedestrians) in a way that minimizes impacts on Newport Beach
residents. (Imp 14.9, 14.10, 16.5)
CE 3.1.3 Traffic from Adjoining Communities
Continue to monitor land development applications in adjacent communities
and encourage coordination on land development projects that affect traffic
and mobility in Newport Beach. (Imp 14.1)
CE 3.1.4 Regional Consistency
Maintain consistency between the City of Newport Beach Master Plan of
Streets and Highways (shown on Figure CE1) and the Orange County Master
Plan of Arterial Highways. (Imp 16.5)
CE 3.1.5 Regional Traffic Mitigation
Continue to participate in programs (Orange County Congestion
Management Program, Southern California Association of Governments
Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, etc.) to
reduce regional traffic congestion. (Imp 14.1, 14.3, 16.5)
CE 3.1.6 Santa Ana River Future Mobility Alternatives
Advocate for the study and review of regional transportation improvements
along and/or across the Santa Ana River, which reflects current planning, that
may include active transportation or neighborhood electric vehicle
improvements that reduce passenger car use, offer mobility choice, enhance
recreation and community health and reduce vehicle miles traveled without
disproportionate impacts on Newport Beach including Coast Highway,
consistent with all environmental review requirements. (Imp 16.5)
CE 4.1
A public transportation system that provides mobility for residents and encourages use of public
transportation as an alternative to automobile travel.
V m�m Policies
CE 4.1.1 Public Transit Efficiency
Support efforts by OCTA and other agencies to increase the effectiveness of
transit services, possibly including local shuttle services. (Imp 14.4)
Newport Beach General Plan
18-37
Circulation Element
CE 4.1.2 Transit Services for Special Need Populations
Support efforts to increase accessible transit services and facilities for the
elderly, disabled, and other transportation disadvantaged persons. (Imp 16.8)
CE 4.1.3 Seasonal Public Transit
Coordinate with OCTA to provide seasonal, recreational, and special events
shuttles. (Imp 14.4, 16.8)
CE 4.1.4 John Wayne Airport Shuttles
Encourage the use of airport shuttle services to minimize the impacts of air
travelers on the local roadway system. (Imp 14.4, 16.8)
CE 4.1.5 Transit Support Facilities
Cooperate with OCTA in efforts to provide additional regional transit support
facilities, including park -and -ride lots, bus stops, and shelters in higher density
residential areas or mixed -use development areas to reduce passenger car
travel through and within Newport Beach. (Imp 16.8)
CE 4.1.6 School Transit
Monitor the demand for additional private, public, and school transportation
available to serve the needs of K-12 students and advocate for improvements
in traffic from students. (Imp 14.2, 16.11)
Goal
CE 5.1
A transportation system that supports Complete Streets policies and design.
CE 5.1.1 Circulation Complete Streets System for All Users
Develop a Complete Streets master plan and design guide based upon best
practices (e.g., Orange County Council of Governments Complete Streets
Initiative Design Handbook, 2016) that prioritizes City rights of way to allow
all users safe and efficient mobility. Pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and
transit riders of all ages and abilities are able to safely move along and across
the mobility system of Newport Beach. (Imp 16.1, 16.8, 16.11)
MNewport Beach General Plan
18-38
Circulation Element
Goal
CE 5.2
Convenient bicycle trail systems that satisfy recreational desires and transportation needs.
F
Policies
CE 5.2.2 Integration of the Bicycle Master Plan
Review projects adopted in the 2014 Bicycle Master Plan, the 20-year program
of bicycle capital improvements to facilitate safe and efficient active
transportation commute and recreational mobility, annually and integrate
bicycle projects into general mobility capital improvement programming. (Imp
16.11)
CE 5.2.3 Bicycle Master Plan Vision
Provide for a network of active transportation facilities consistent with the
vision in the current Newport Beach Bicycle Master Plan. (Imp 16. 1 1)
CE 5.2.4 Trail System
Promote construction of a comprehensive trail system as shown on Figure
CE3 to connect bicycle trails with hiking trails and transit routes. (Updated
figure in process) (Imp 16.1 1)
CE 5.2.5 Travel Mode Connectivity
Ensure all active transportation networks are linked and provide connectivity
between transit, transit centers, and other major land uses such as village areas,
commercial centers, activity nodes, recreation facilities, schools, parks, and
institutions so that residents can travel within the community without driving.
(Imp 16.8, 16.11, 20.1)
CE 5.2.6 Pedestrian Improvements in New Development Projects
Require new development projects to include safe and attractive sidewalks,
walkways, and bike lanes in accordance with the Master Plan, and, if feasible,
trails. (Imp 16.11)
CE 5.2.7 Linkages to Citywide Trail System and Neighborhoods
Require developers to construct links to the planned trail system, adjacent
areas, and communities where appropriate. (Imp 16.11)
Newport Beach General Plan
18-39
Circulation Element
CE 5.2.8 Bikeway System
Cooperate with state, federal, county, and local agencies to coordinate
bikeways and trails throughout the region. (Imp 16.11)
CE 5.2.9 Bikeway Legislation
Coordinate with local legislative delegation in Sacramento to address safety
regulation of bicycles and e-bikes, including training, education and
modification to the California Vehicle Code.
CE 5.2.10 Bicycle Supporting Facilities
Incorporate separate bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the design plans for
new streets and highways and, where feasible, in the plans for improving
existing roads. (Imp 16.11)
CE 5.2.11 Bicycle Supporting Amenities
Require bicycle facilities such as bike racks, bike stations, or lockers according
to national standards for long-term and short-term bicycle utilization on City
property and with new development and encourage the addition of such
bicycle facilities within existing development. (Imp 16.11)
CE 5.2.12 Bicycle Safety
Provide for safety of conventional bicyclists, e-bicyclists, equestrians, and
pedestrians by adhering to current national standards and uniform practices
especially where modes interact. (Imp 16.11)
CE 5.2.13 Bicycle Conflicts with Vehicles and
Pedestrians
Minimize conflict points among motorized
traffic, pedestrians, e-bikes, and conven-
tional bicycle traffic. Support increased
enforcement activity for bicycle and e-bike
travel, with a focus on The Oceanfront
Boardwalk and around school zones. (Imp
16.11)
CE 5.2.14 Integrated Bicycle Improvements
Coordinate community bicycle and pedestrian facilities in a citywide network
for continuity of travel. (Imp 16.11)
Newport Beach General Plan
18-41
Circulation Element
CE 5.2.15 Bicycle Trail Signage
Develop and implement a uniform signing program to assist the public in
locating, recognizing, and utilizing public bikeways and trails. (Imp 16.11)
Goal
CE 5.3
Safe and complete active transportation alternatives near school zones.
CE 5.3.1 School Access
Work with schools to promote walking, biking, safe drop-off, and other
improvements. (Imp 14.2, 16.11)
CE 5.3.2 School Coordination
Explore opportunities to create working group of decision makers at the City
and the school district to meet regularly to address safe school mobility, access
and parking.
CE 5.3.3 Suggested Route to School
Prepare Suggested Route to School maps for all schools in the City.
CE 5.4
Completion of pedestrian infrastructure where planned and necessary.
CE 5.4.1 Pedestrian Street Crossings
Continue to implement improved pedestrian
crossings, such as lighted crosswalk installations, in
key high -volume areas such as Corona Del Mar,
Mariners' Mile, West Newport, Airport Area,
Newport Center/Fashion Island, and the Balboa
Peninsula. (Imp 16.11)
Newport Beach General Plan
18-42
Circulation Element
CE 5.4.2 Overhead Pedestrian Street Crossings
Consider overhead pedestrian crossings in areas where pedestrian use limits
the efficiency of the roadway or signalized intersection and/or where an
overhead crossing provides for improved pedestrian safety. (Imp 16.11)
CE 5.4.3 Newport Harbor Trails and Walkways
Develop and implement a long-range plan for public trails and walkways to
access all appropriate commercial areas of the harbor, as determined to be
physically and economically feasible including the following:
A. Extension of the Lido Marina Village boardwalk across all of the
waterfront commercial properties in Lido Village
B. Provide a continuous waterfront walkway along the Rhine Channel,
connecting Cannery Village and McFadden Square waterfront
commercial areas with Las Arenas Beach at 19th Street
C. Provide a walkway connecting the Lido Village area with Mariners' Mile
D. Provide a continuous walkway along the Mariners' Mile waterfront from
the Coast Highway/Newport Boulevard Bridge to the Balboa Bay Club
(Policy HB 6.2) (Imp 16.11)
CE 5.4.4 Pedestrian Sidewalk Improvements
As part of the annual capital improvement planning, consider implementation
and construction of new sidewalks and improvements to sidewalks to result
in comfortable widths consistent with industry standards and appropriate for
the street/neighborhood. Provide for safe and ample opportunities to cross
streets and design safe crosswalk enhancements.
CE 5.4.5 Equestrian Trails
Maintain the existing equestrian trail system in Santa Ana Heights (Figure
CE4). (Imp 16.11)
CE 5.4.6 Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety
Provide for the safety of bicyclists and pedestrians through
provision of adequate facilities, including review of
locations where sidewalk use by bicyclists is appropriate,
consideration of separate facilities for e-bikes or other
semi -motorized modes, and maintenance and construction
of extra sidewalk width where feasible. (Imp 16.11)
Newport Beach General Plan
18-43
,A
COSTA MESA
UPPER
NEWPORT
BAY
£ o WEST Opp
s
iE
HA
sv�a NhF` i,,AHo� an�
i LIDO �sinry
,. oq coiiixs ante
oR
ISLE �sinrvo
BALBOA ISLAND
PACIFIC OCEAN
FASHION
ISLAND
•\O � aE•..a oiaE � NEWPORT
RIDGE
NEWPORT
CRYSTAL COVE
STATE PARK
CITY of NEWPORT BEACH
GENERALPLAN
Figure CE4
EQUESTRIAN AND HIKING
TRAILS MASTER PLAN
Legend
■ Existing Staging Area
■ Proposed Staging Area
Proposed Equestrian Trail
Existing Equestrian Trail
Existing Hiking Trail
1
0.5 1
Miles
Source: City of Newport Beach
Date: 7/28/22
Circulation Element
Goal
CE 5.5
Enhanced and maintained public water transportation services and expanded public water transportation
uses and land support facilities. (Policy HB 6.5)
PoHAR
CE 5.5.1 Marine Terminals
Coordinate the location of marine terminals with other components of the
transportation system to ensure convenient multi -modal access and adequate
parking. (Policy HB 6.6) (Imp 16.12)
CE 5.5.2 Expanded Water Transportation Modes
Promote opportunities to expand water transportation modes, such as water -
based shuttle services and other nautical services. (Policy HB 6.7) (Imp 16.12)
0
CE 6.1
An efficient circulation system through the use of transportation systems management.
Policies
CE 6.1.1 Traffic Signals
Improve traffic signal operations by optimizing signal timing, interconnecting
signalized intersections along arterial streets, and installing computerized
master traffic signal control systems in intensively utilized areas. (Imp 16.7)
CE 6.1.2 Intelligent Transportation Systems
Explore and implement intelligent transportation system and infrastructure
improvements which will improve circulation system performance from that
forecast in this Element. (Imp16.4, 16.7
CE 6.1.3 Coordination with Adjacent Jurisdictions
Coordinate operations with adjacent jurisdictions to enhance the efficiency of
inter -jurisdictional roadway system operations. (Imp 14.1, 14.3)
Newport Beach General Plan
18-45
Circulation Element
CE 6.1.4 Rideshare Vehicles
Monitor the volume and proliferation of on demand rideshare services (e.g.,
Uber and Lyft) and respond with appropriate level of design guidance and
regulation of curb side uses (including loading zone) and parking lot
utilization. (Imp 16.10)
CE 6.1.5 Autonomous, Connected, and Future Vehicle Technology
Monitor the development of new vehicle technology and associated
community -based infrastructure. For improvements demonstrated as
practical, plan for the deployment of new vehicle technology within the
existing right-of-way and infrastructure system through the annual budgeting
process and capital improvement programming process. (Imp 16.7, 30.1)
CE 6.1.6 Wayfinding Technology
Monitor and communicate with wayfinding technology providers (e.g., Waze
and Google Maps) to reduce routing of traffic through neighborhoods. (Imp
16.7)
CE 6.1.7 Parking Technology
Consider deployment of parking app technology that identifies available
parking spaces and reduces vehicle circulation and congestion related to
searching for parking spaces. (Imp 16.7)
Gow
CE 7.1
Promote strategies to reduce the use of internal combustion passenger cars and the attendant greenhouse
gas emissions.
Policies
CE 7.1.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis
Follow the analysis methodology for vehicle miles traveled according to the
Newport Beach VMT thresholds policy and as required in Senate Bill 743 and
the revised California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. (Imp
11.1)
Newport Beach General Plan
18-46
Circulation Element
CE 7.1.2 VMT Mitigation Measures
Require implementation of CEQA project related VMT mitigation measures
when warranted and monitor reductions in VMT from new development. (Imp
11.1)
CE 7.1.3 Regional VMT Mitigation Measures
Promote the development of regional VMT mitigation in order to simplify the
CEQA process and enhance the effectiveness of VMT and GHG reduction
strategies. (Imp 14.4)
CE 7.1.4 Alternative Transportation Modes and Practices
Promote and encourage the use of alternative transportation modes, such as
ridesharing, carpools, vanpools, public transit, bicycles, walking, and
telecommuting programs, through the planning and development of a
Complete Streets master plan and design guide. (Imp 16.8, 16.11)
CE 7.1.5 Support Facilities for Alternative Modes
Require new development projects to provide facilities commensurate with
development type and intensity to support alternative modes, such as
preferential parking for carpools, bike racks, bike stations, bicycle lockers,
showers, commuter information areas, rideshare vehicle loading areas, water
transportation docks, and bus stop improvements. (Imp 16.8, 16.11)
CE 7.1.6 Public Right of Way Curbside Management
Review areas with commercial uses (such as retail, restaurant, and hospitality)
to incorporate strategies to accommodate novel use of curb side right of way
to reduce passenger car use through drop-off or valet and accommodate
rideshare as well as delivery activities where appropriate. (Imp 16.10)
CE 7.1.7 Project Site Design Supporting Alternative Modes
Encourage increased use of public transportation by requiring project site
designs that facilitate the use of public transportation and walking. (Imp 16.8,
16.11)
CE 7.1.8 Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Stations
Install additional EV charging stations on City properties, support existing
private development to add new EV charging stations and develop incentives
for the installation of EV charging stations and other alternative fuels systems
as part of new development.
Newport Beach General Plan
18-47
Circulation Element
CE 8.1
An adequate supply of convenient parking throughout the City.
Policies
CE 8.1.1 Required Parking
Require that new development provide adequate, convenient parking for
residents, guests, business patrons, and visitors. (Imp 16.10)
CE 8.1.2 Parking Considerations of Rideshare Vehicles
Develop parking demand statistics that consider the efficiency of rideshare
services and the potential for reduction in parking requirements. (Imp 16.10)
CE 8.1.3 Parking In -Lieu Fees
Establish an in -lieu parking fee that the City may require to be paid when a
development is not able to provide required parking. (Imp 16.10)
CE 8.1.4 Funding of Shared Parking Facilities
Use in -lieu fees and other funds to develop public shared parking facilities in
areas with inadequate parking supply. Priority shall be given to spending fees
in areas that will benefit those who contributed the fees. (Imp 16.10)
CE 8.1.5 Expanded Parking in Corona del Mar
Permit conversion of Corona Del Mar residential lots adjacent to commercial
areas and commercial lots for parking to support commercial uses. Encourage
continued use of existing parking on residential zoned lots, as well as existing
shared parking lots. (Imp 2.1, 8.1, 8.2, 24.1)
CE 8.1.6 Parking Consolidation
Evaluate the potential to consolidate underutilized parcels to create parking
districts and to construct areawide parking hubs potentially relieving individual
parcels of some of their parking requirements. (Imp 16.10)
CE 8.1.7 Avon Street Municipal Parking Lot Relocation
Consider relocation of the Avon Street municipal lot to better serve
commercial uses in Mariners' Mile. (Imp 2.1, 16.10)
MNewport Beach General Plan
18-48
Circulation Element
CE 8.1.8 Public Use of Private Parking Facilities
Encourage the use of commercial, office, and institutional parking areas for
use as public parking to serve coastal recreational areas during weekends and
holidays, in conjunction with public transit or shuttles where appropriate. (Imp
8.1, 8.2, 16.10)
CE 8.1.9 Shared Parking Facilities
Consider allowing shared parking in mixed use and pedestrian oriented areas
throughout the City. (Imp 2.1, 8.1, 8.2, 16.10)
CE 8.1.10 Parking Configuration
Site and design new development to avoid use of parking configurations or
management programs that are difficult to maintain and enforce. (Imp 2.1, 7.1,
8.1)
CE 8.1.11 Parking Requirements for Pedestrian -Oriented and Local -Serving
Uses
Consider revised parking requirements for small scale neighborhood serving
commercial uses in areas that derive most of their trade from walk-in business,
especially where on -street or other public parking is available. (Imp 2.1, 8.1, 8.2)
CE 8.1.12 Parking for Marine Recreational Users
Provide adequate parking as necessary in the vicinity of visitor serving marine
uses, including marinas, water transportation terminals, boat ramps, as well as
parking suitable for service vehicles in commercial marinas and berthing areas.
(Imp 16.12)
CE 8.1.13 Curb Cuts
Require new development to minimize curb cuts to protect on -street parking
spaces. Close curb cuts to create on street parking spaces wherever feasible.
(Imp 2.1, 7.1, 8.1)
CE 8.1.14 Alley Access
Require alley access to parking areas for all new development in areas where
alley access exists. (Imp 2.1, 8.1)
CE 8.1.15 Up -to -Date Parking Requirements
Periodically review and update off-street parking requirements in the
Municipal Code to account for changes in technology and commuter behavior
and ensure that new development provides off-street parking sufficient to
serve approved uses. (Imp 8.1, 8.2, 16.10)
Newport Beach General Plan
18-49
Circulation Element
Goal
L -
CE 8.2
An efficiently operated parking system.
CE 8.2.1 Parking Management
Develop parking management programs for areas with inadequate parking.
(Imp 16.10)
CE 8.2.2 Parking Technology
Support the development of new technologies, including parking related apps
to promote wayfinding, parking availability, and parking fee collections in an
efficient manner. (Imp 16.10)
CE 8.2.3 Parking Pricing
Periodically review and update parking fees and rates at on -street locations
and off-street parking lots operated by the City. (Imp 16.10)
CE 8.2.4 Parking Signage
Provide improved parking information and signage. (Imp 16.10)
CE 8.2.5 Shared Valet Service
Explore the feasibility of shared valet parking programs in areas with high
parking demand and less conveniently located parking facilities, such as
Mariners' Mile and McFadden Square. (Imp 16.10)
CE 9.1
Adequate funding for needed transportation infrastructure and operations including support of measures
for outside funding of transportation improvements.
Newport Beach General Plan
18-50
Circulation Element
Policies
CE 9.1.1 Transportation User and Benefit Fees
Support legislation to increase transportation user and benefit fees, and to
index such fees to keep pace with inflation, in order to provide the additional
revenues for needed transportation facilities and services. (Imp 7.3)
CE 9.1.2 State Highway Revenues
Support legislation to increase state highway revenues as needed to maintain
and rehabilitate the existing state highway system and to match all available
federal highway funding. (Imp 14.9)
CE 9.1.3 Innovative Transportation Funding
Support the evaluation and implementation of innovative transportation
financing mechanisms such as local tax increment districts, benefit assessment
districts, and joint development and use of transportation centers. (Imp 31.1)
CE 9.1.4 Local Street and Highway Revenues
Support measures to increase local street and highway revenues as needed to
fund all road reconstruction, operation, and maintenance cost. (Imp 7.3, 20.1)
CE 9.1.5 Comprehensive Funding Program
Support measures to develop and implement a continuing funding program,
including private sector participation, to fund the construction, operation, and
maintenance of pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities and services. (Imp 7.2,
7.3, 20.1)
CE 9.1.6 Annual Budgeting for Improvements
Annually review and consider budgeting for projects contributing to
completion of the Master Plan of Streets and Highways, Bicycle Master Plan,
Complete Streets Master Plan, and intelligent transportation system plans. (Imp
7.3, 30.1)
CE 9.1.7 Fair Share Fee Ordinance
Periodically review the Fair Share Fee Ordinance, reassess the unfunded cost
of required improvements, and adjust the required Fair Share Fees as
appropriate. (Imp 7.2)
Newport Beach General Plan
18-51
Circulation Element
CE 9.1.8 Roadway Improvements Funding
Fund costs of major roadway facility and intersection improvements through
gas tax revenues, federal, state, and county grants, and City ordinances to avoid
burdening the General Fund to the extent that this is possible. (Imp 7.2, 7.3,
30.2)
CE 9.1.9 Right -of -Way Dedication
Require the dedication of needed right-of-way in conjunction with approval
of subdivision maps or other discretionary approvals. (Imp 1.1)
CE 9.1.10 Development Requirements
Require development to provide the needed roadway improvements adjacent
to a site, commensurate with project impact and in accordance with the Master
Plan of Streets and Highways. (Imp 16.3)
CE 9.1.11 Joint Funding with Adjoining Jurisdictions
Pursue joint funding of improvements in areas (such as the Airport Area)
where traffic growth and/or needed improvements are demonstrably based
upon traffic contributions or improvements that are a joint responsibility of
Newport Beach and one or more adjacent jurisdictions/agencies. (Imp 14.1)
CE 9.1.12 Measure M Restrictions
Measure M sales tax revenues shall not be used to replace private developer
funding that has been committed for any project or normal subdivision
obligations. (Imp 16.2)
CE 9.1.13 Transportation Improvement or Special Assessment District
Establish a transportation improvement or special assessment district to fund
improvements needed in the Airport Area. (Imp 31.1)
Newport Beach General Plan
18-52
Attachment B
Redline Version of the Circulation Element Update
18-53
Ci rculat ion Eleme nt
CIRCULATION ELEMENT
A Safe and Convenient Transportation System for All
Introduction
The ability County of Orange continues to move peoplegrow as a thriving urban residential and good-s
employment region. Over the years, Newport Beach has transformed along with the County. Once a
small community andseasonal getaway, Newport Beach is know home to 86,000 residents and
eleffientis a global destination for travel. As a result
travel in Newport Beach, , and the surrounding
communities has evolved. Demographics and technology are changing the demand forand delivery of
different travel modes of tfwel that eE)t,a relieve p..,...sti fe o-aad___ays The legacy of the pandemic may also
further change travel demand and travel habits. The trend from regional and State levels of governments has been
to provide greater regulation regarding the planning and programming of transportation. The Circulation Element
of the Newport Beach General Plan governs the long-term development of mobility syste i7-e€sy ms in the City
of Newport Beach.- and provides the best opportunity for the City to establish its vision of mobility. The Circulation
Element acknowledges the influences of local, regional, State and federal guidance and regulation, and expresses
the ultimate vision of mobility to respond to the needs and objectives of Newport Beach residents. The goals and
policies in thi-Fithe Circulation Element are elose'_y Barrel balanced with the goals and policies of the Land Use
Element and are ifitendedHousing Elements in order to provide a correlation between land use and transportation
planning. In so doing the General Plan provides the best possible balance between the City's future growth
land use development, faa&way si2e, , service levels for all travel modes. and community character. The
Circulation Element is alpconsistent with the Complete Streets Act (Assembly Bill 1358), the Sustainable
Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (Senate Bill 375) the Vehicle Miles Traveled provisions of Senate
Bill 743, the Transportation Demand Management Ordinance, and the Local Coastal Program. It also recognizes
the programs and policies inherent in Senate Bill 932 (Safe Systems Approaches).
Newport Beach General Plan
18-54
Circulation Element
Context
SETTING
•
-,- •---
ii���ui i -
i:. iww:.:iw:�Aiu w:�:i�e•i�:re�:�:w�ww6.•ois
• �.IM-
IRWIN
• •
•1111111
WHEr•
•
- " - - - � i:a�.iis —• ���Ewa
• - .
�:♦�iwwwi•.��_ - _ - _�� - _ -
\
Fw
•
Newport Beach General Plan
18-55
Circulation Element
��rport Area roads such as MacArthur Bottlevard, Camptis > jamboree Road,
couplet. and the Bfistol Stree
■
•
Newport Beach is centrallv located among the six coastal cities in Orange County. The Citv of Newport Beach was
incorporated in 1906, only ten years after Henry Ford built his first automobile. The community has changed along
with transportation options from days of the Pacific Electric Red Car to wide adoption and then reliance on
automobiles. Even as freeways came to symbolize Southern California, no freeways traversed Newport Beach until
the Corona Del Mar Freeway opened in 1978 providing a short connection between MacArthur Boulevard and the
San Diego Freeway (I-405). Today, the Costa Mesa freewaSR-55) terminates dust north of Newport Beach and
the San -In Transportation Corridor (SR-73) traverses the city's northern edge. Newport Beach instead relies
on regional roadways for connections and transportation including Coast Highway, Newport Boulevard} -jamboree
Road, and MacArthur Boulevard). In the future, emerging technology and greater access for alternative
transportation modes are anticipated to affect and be affected by Newport Beach as it grows.
Newport Beach is a collection of villages and neighborhoods including Balboa Peninsula. Cannery Village. the
Islands of Newport Harbor, Mariners' Mile, Newport Heights, Dover Shores, Corona Del Mar, Newport Coast,
Newport Center/Fashion Island, Big Canyon, Back Bay, and Eastbluff. These neighborhoods rely on local streets
for transportation and are connected by regional roadways. Regional traffic also uses the regional roadways- which
has reduced the City's ability to allocate space to alternative travel modes. Summertime beach traffic has been a
predictable source of traffic volumes near or exceeding roadway capacity in the beach areas for a century.
Growth in Orange County, and especially communities neighboring Newport Beach will increase regional through
traffic and summertime beach traffic. These increases will occur whether or not Newport Beach plans for it. This
Circulation Element plans for anticipated regional growth and seeks regional cooperation to accommodate regional
traffic growth.
Newport Beach General Plan
18-56
Circulation Element
Roads have been the primary means of getting around Newport Beach, but Newport Harbor presents an
opportunity for community specific transportation and recreation alternatives. Water transportation between
Newport Beach and Santa Catalina Island, harbors and ports up and down Southern California, and between Balboa
Island and the Balboa Peninsula is already present. More water transportation services (public or private) could be
established between locations in Newport Beach to reduce the reliance on roadways.
LOCAL ROADWAY SYSTEM
Local roadwaysplanned to accommodate traffic circulating the local village or neighborhood they serve. Keeping
regional traffic off of local streets preserves right-of-way for its intended use and for use by other transportation
modes. In recognition of the need to discourage non -local cut -through traffic from using residential streets, the Citv
Council adopted Policy L-26 (Traffic Management Policy) in 2006 amended in 2015 and 2018). This policyVrovides
tools and a process for managing the speed and volume of vehicles on residential streets and implementing
considered responses that do not simply shift cut -through traffic from one residential street to another.
ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
The foadway system is generally organized in tefms of a roadwfty classification system. uch of the traffic
traversing Newport Beach uses regional roadways, simply_passing through town. Regional serving roadway
categorized according to the type and quantity of traffic they are designed to accommodate through the roadway
classification system adopted in the City of Newport Beach Master Plan of Streets and Highways (MUSH). The
roadway classifications used by the City of Newport Beach are required to be consistent with the County of Orange
Master Plan of Arterial Highways,-NIPAH), which is administered by the Orange County Transportation Authority
(OCTA). OCTA is the regional agency responsible for overseeing the regional transportation system and local
agency compliance with regional and statewide programs such as the Congestion Management Program (CMP}�
Growth Alaftageffient Program (GAIP). The geffeTa4. The roadway classifications and their generalized daily
EaPae}tiescapacity, used for long range General Plan analysis, are presented below. Roadways may be able to carry
traffic above the typical capacity level identified in these basic classifications if the standard section is augmented.
Augmented sections could include additional through lanes, additional turning lanes at intersections with high
turning volumes, or through signal synchronization.
Newport Beach General Plan
18-57
Circulat ion Eleme nt
Principal Arterial —A Principal arterial highway is typically an eight -lane divided roadway. A Principal arterial is
designed to accommodate a daily capacity ranging from 60,000 to 73,000 with it typieal daily eapffeity of 68-,000
-eehieles per- day (NTD). 45,000 to 60,0 00. Principal arterials carry a large volume of regional through traffic not
handled by the freeway system.
Major Arterial— A Major arterial highway is typically a six -lane divided roadway. A Major arterial is designed to
accommodate a daily capacity ranging from 45,000 to 67,000 w4h Ft typiea4 daily eapffeky of 5i,000
dar.30,000 to 45,000. Major arterials carry a large volume of regional through traffic not handled by the freeway
system. A Major Augmented is similar to a Major arterial, but may include additional lanes, particularly at
intersections, resulting in a daily capacity ranging from 52,000 to 70,00 ,
Primary Arterial— A Primary arterial highway is usually a four -lane divided roadway. A Primary arterial is designed
to accommodate a daily capacity ranging from 20,000
to 30,000. A Primary arterial's function is similar to that of a Principal or Major arterial. The chief difference is
capacity. A Primary Augmented is similar to a Primary arterial, but may include additional lanes, particularly at
intersections, resulting in a daily capacity ranging from 35,000 to 50,000 with a fypiea4 daily eapaeky of 40,0
vehieles per day
Secondary Arterial— A Secondary arterial highway is a four -lane roadway (often undivided). A Secondary arterial
distributes traffic between local streets and Major or Primary arterials. Although some Secondary arterials serve as
through routes, most provide more direct access to surrounding land uses than Principal, Major, or Primary arterials.
Secondary arterials carry a daily capacity ranging from 20,000 to 305000 with a typical daily capacity of 23,000
3,"P8-10.000 to 20,000.
Commuter Roadway —A commuter roadway is a two -to -four -lane, unrestricted access roadway with a daily capacity ranging
from 7,W0500 to 15,000. It differs from a local street in its ability to handle
through traffic movements between arterials.
ROADWAY OPERATIONS
Newport Beach General Plan
Circulation Element
•
IN
The efficient operation of the circulation system is constrained by conflict and congestion at intersections.
Intersections that do not perform well can affect roadway conditions upstream and downstream, impact access to
adjacent parcels, increase vehicle collisions, present safety hazards to other travel modes, and concentrate air
pollution. Conflict and congestion are usually the result of traffic volume. The residents of Newport Beach desire
good traffic flow and the ability to get from one side of the citv to the other. However. there are impediments to
this.
In Newport Beach. natural barriers (including the Pacific Ocean. the Santa Ana River. and Upper Newport Ba
and the John Wayne Airport superblock limit roadway connections. As a result, traffic volumes are concentrated
on the roadways making regional connections (i.e., Coast Highway, Bristol Street/SR-73, Newport Boulevard,
-jamboree Road, and MacArthur Boulevard) which increases conflict and congestion at intersections along these
routes. Because other coastal communities have similar barriers, regional traffic with no origin or destination in
Newport Beach also uses these limited connections through Newport Beach, further increasing traffic. Summertime
beach traffic is not affected by Newport Beach land use policy. For that reason, it has been and continues to be the
practice of the Citv to analvze traffic conditions outside of the summer season to determine the function and
operation of City streets.
The Highwav Capacity Manual provides methodoloQv for measuring intersection performance in terms of dela
experienced by vehicles traversing the intersection. As detailed below, letter grades are assigned based on the amount
of delay experienced by vehicles during the peak commute hours. Unlike school grades, however, level of service A
is not necessarily a goal. An intersection performing at level of service A could indicate that too much right-of-way
is dedicated to vehicle travel lanes and not enough right-of-wav is dedicated to other travel modes such as bicvcles
and pedestrians.
■ LOS "A" —Minimal delay (less than 10 seconds on average) is experienced.
■ LOS `B"—Vehicles at signalized intersections experience between 10 and 20 seconds of delay on average,
while vehicles on the side street STOP controlled approaches at unsignalized intersections experience
between 10 and 15 seconds of average delay.
■ LOS "C"—Delays at signalized intersections range from 20 to 35 seconds and from 15 to 25 seconds for
side street / STOP controlled traffic at unsignalized intersections.
Newport Beach General Plan
18-59
Circulation Element
■ LOS "D"—Delays at signalized intersections range from 35 to 55 seconds and from 25 to 35 seconds for
side street / STOP controlled approaches at unsignalized intersections.
■ LOS "E"—Delays at signalized intersections range from 55 to 80 seconds on average, while delays for side
street / STOP controlled traffic at unsignalized intersections range from 35 to 50 seconds.
■ LOS "F"—All vehicles at signalized intersections can be expected to wait through more than a single signal
cycle with average delays in excess of 80 seconds, while delays to side street / STOP controlled approaches
at unsignalized intersections will exceed 50 seconds on average.
The City of Newport Beach has traditionally set LOS —`D--' as its goal for intersection performance;
-tee where possible. At the same time, the City has reeogniq!ed that aekieving this goal in evel-lY
ease woti4d Establishing and maintaining a target requires a eirettlation system with oversized
elements gee .... odat. s- n efbalance between goals such as accessibility for all travel modes
congestion, delay, emergency response, community character, and capital expenditure. It is also
important to recognize that some sources of traffic (such as summertime beach trafficor gienal
through "affie. The City has chosen to provide a cirettlation system that is sized to meet the needs of
residents and local businesses afid fespects the character of Newport Beach. This Cirettlatiofi Hlefnefft
continues that lo#gstanding practice. The vast majority of ifitersections in Newport Beach will contini
to ` nctio~ at or bettef than-) may expand to use any new capacity provided. In the past�LOS "D" with
staftdard f6- "E" was established standard c.. a ' ffiitea ffib r- E�
- - - � -- L - - - -f- - - .•
Newport Beach General Plan M
18-60
Circulation Element
specific intersections in Corona del Mar is a pedestrian or-ilented, neighbef-head sefving eaffiffiefeial area that is
being upgraded - _ _ wit_ _ Corona _ Alar V4sian Plan that has reeeive_ - _ _ _ __ _ - __ __
and efforts of the Corona del Mar commuftity. For these intersections, LOS "E" is the standard set by policy in the
Circulation Hlement.to achieve the desired balance.
�. \
A traffic analysis of the General Plan update will forecast future traffic volumes, analyze intersection performance,
and identify necessary roadway and intersection improvements to maintain LOS D. Once those needs are
determined, the City of Newport Beach will consider all goals and will review the Master Plan of Streets and
Highways.
Recentiv. the State has made changes to the measurement of transportation impacts under the California
Environmental Quality Act CEOA). As of July 2020, all jurisdictions must analyze vehicle miles traveled 3=
for the purposes of CEQA. While VMT contributes to congestion, by itself it cannot be used to measure congestion
impacts or congestion relief. VMT is a good measure of effects contributing to climate change. Newport Beach is
concerned about climate change and sea level rise and adopted the Vehicle Miles Traveled Implementation Guide
in May 2020 and requires the analysis of VMT for the purposes of CEOA. However, Newport Beach originally
established the Traffic Phasing Ordinance in 1978, which requires analysis of vehicle LOS when planning
transportation improvements in coordination with land use development. In addition, vehicle LOS analysis is still
required by the Orange County CMP. Therefore, the City of Newport Beach requires the analysis of VMT for the
purposes of CEOA and also requires the analvsis of vehicle LOS for comoliance with the Traffic Phasing Ordinance
and the CMP.
SAFE SYSTEM APPROACH
The Safe System approach takes a holistic approach to reduce fatal and serious injuries occurring on roadways. The
Safe Systems approach was codified on Senate Bill 932. The first core principle of the Safe System approach is to
Newport Beach General Plan
18-61
Circulation Element
view fatal and serious injuries as unacceptable and accept the ethical imperative to reduce and eliminate their
occurrence. Human bodies, especially those using non -motorized transportation, are vulnerable and have limited
tolerance for crash forces before sustaining serious injury. Because humans make mistakes, transportation systems
should be designed to accommodate those mistakes and limit crash forces. Designing for safety should be proactive
with risks identified and mitigated rather than reacting after crashes. The responsibility for safety is shared by
roadway users, roadway managers, and vehicle manufacturers. Designing for safety also means planning for
redundancy so that one failure does not necessitate a bad outcome. The Safe System approach adds layers of
protection by improving the safety of roadway users, vehicles, travel speeds, and roadway design while also
improving post -crash care.
In the past; roadwayspeeds were set by roadway users through speed surveys conducted according to the California
Vehicle Code and the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Assembly Bill 43 (Friedman) was
signed into law in 2021 and will permit local agencies more flexibility starting in 2024 to consider vulnerable groups
when setting lower speed limits than identified b3: speed surveys. The City of Newport Beach will incorporate traffic
safety improvement projects in the annual Capital Improvement Program and will consider vulnerable groups when
setting speed limits when permitted by State law, consistent with a Safe Systems a112roach.
TRUCK TRAFFIC
Trucks are needednecessary to pfavide delivery of he deliver goods to side ees and eaffiffiereialand `e
collect refuse, and service utilities throughout the City. LSl.___eye the C-_; needs
to eantral and Jimit ~ ---e'- tra f .,. to mini ize the Newport Beach. Truck trips can, however, result in noise and other
impacts ento residents, xveid undue daffiage—to in astr.. and ffiiniffiize the potential forincrease traffic
congestion. ., and shorten the lifespan
of infrastructure. Commercial vehicles weighing in excess of 3 tons (6,000 pounds) are prohibited from certain
roadways, as si when posted. Concentrated periods of high truck traffic, such as during construction of large
development projects, have increased potential for noise, congestion, and roadway damage impacts. The City of
Newport Beach could control and limit those impacts by reviewing and approving construction management plans
for large development projects in addition to monitoring construction traffic associated with residential projects.
REGIONAL FACILITIES
i 04�
Many different agencies plan and operate regional transportation
facilities that are used by residents of Newport Beach and vehicles passing through Newport Beach. These include
the State, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) OCTA, the Transportation Corridor
Agencies (TCA), and neighboring cities. The County of Orange owns and operates John Wayne Airport, which is a
generator of special use traffic neighboring Newport Beach. The City of Newport Beach coordinates with outside
agencies on matters relevant to the mobility of Newport Beach residents.
Newport Beach General Plan WE
18-62
Circulation Element
The State, through the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), is the owner/operator of major regional
routes used by Newport Beach residents including I-405, SR-55, Newport Boulevard, and Coast Highway. Coast
Highway is owned and operated by Caltrans with the exception of the segment between Jamboree Road and
Newport Coast Drive. Newport Boulevard from Finley Street to the northerly city limits at Industrial Way is also
under Caltrans jurisdiction. Caltrans controls the signal timing and signal coordination along these roadways,
The City ..eels to wer--of Newport Beach coordinates with Caltrans related to signal timing and seeks greater
coordination related to '
incorporating emerging technology and the latest transportation system management techniques.
SCAG is the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) responsible for preparing the Regional Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy(RTP/SCS) for Southern California. The RTP/SCS is prepared every four
years and outlines the region's vision for use of regional facilities and delivery of mobility. The City of Newport
Beach provides local data for the RTP/SCS process to ensure Newport Beach is accuratelv represented and provides
feedback on draft strategies.
As previously mentioned. OCTA is the regional agency responsible for overseeing the regional transportation
system, the County Master Plan of Arterial Highways, and local agenc3: compliance with regional and statewide
programs such as the CMP, which is prepared every two years. The CMP roadways within Newport Beach are Coast
Highway, Newport Boulevard, MacArthur Boulevard, and -Jamboree Road. The City of Newport Beach provides
local data for the CMP preparation. OCTA also prepares a Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP, every four
years that establishes a vision for Orange County mobility that is submitted to SCAG for inclusion in the RTP/SCS.
The City of Newport Beach monitors the LRTP and provides feedback related to the needs of Newport Beach
residents. The TCA operates the San Toaauin Hills Transportation Corridor (SR-73). The Citv of Newport Beach is
a partner in this joint powers' authori
OCTA provides a forum for communication and coordination between neighboring iurisdictions for the efficient
delivery of mobility across jurisdictional borders through regional plans such as the MPAH, Commuter Bikeways
Strategic Plan, and OC Go. One example of effective cross -jurisdictional coordination has been the Regional Traffic
Signal Synchronization Program. The City of Newport Beach coordinates with neighboring jurisdictions seeking
effective planning and delivery of transportation facilities.
®Newport Beach General Plan
18-63
Circulation Element
JWA is a part of the regional system of airports serving air travel for Orange County residents, workers, and visitors.
The Newport Beach Aviation Committee assists the City in the implementation of Council Policy A-17 (Newport
Beach Council Airport Policy).
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
Fixed route bus service and gkon-demand paratransit
in Newport Beach (and all of Orange County) is operated by OCTA. One of the one
pr-a-v4ded by the Oasis Senior- Center- Ftfld�ef OCT-A. The Pf0g7fftffi fft t1he OffSiS SeflliOf Gentef pff)-104deS
e established network of bus routes
the the b,,ae .,a t a ffi . destine f6r N ___._a ft u.,....,�_in Newport Beach connects the Newport
�_
-------= -- serve ----------- -
Transportation Center located at MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Road
in Newport Center.) to the countywide bus network. In order to maintain State mandated revenue/cost balance,
OCTA occasionally revises their service schedule. During12eriods of increased public transportation use, service
routes are extended and new routes may be added. During periods of decreased public transportation use, service
areas with the lowest ridership are contracted. OCTA's most recent review of bus service, the Bus 360 program,
concentrated bus service in the central hart of Orange Countv and reduced bus service in South Orange Countv
and the periphe
OC Go Project V provides funding for community -based transit/circulators. The Newport Beach summer shuttle
service on the Balboa Peninsula is partially funded by Pro,ject V. The City of Newport each would consider pilot
programs for other shuttle routes,otentially connecting the villages within Newport Beach.
The extensive use of rideshare services has been one of the factors leading to declining bus ridership. As hart of the
Bus 360 program, OCTA even tested use of rideshare operators to provide on -demand mobility service in lieu of
reduced fixed route service. In some markets, rideshare drivers have begun offering subscription rates for customers
with regular medical appointments. The trend is clearly toward more trips being taken with this travel mode and the
Citv of Newport Beach is considering ways to accommodate the demand such as designating curbside drop-off
zones in commercial areas.
TRAILS
Trail systems, while pfovidifig alternatesprovide functional alternatives to automobile travel, also provi and
recreational opportunities for the community. Theexisting trail system in Newport Beach has been developed to
pr-e-Ade aeeess for commuter and recreational bicyclists, *Ieffg-w4h-pedestrians, and equestrians.
Bicycle Trails
Newport Beach General Plan
Circulation Element
Bikeway is a This Circulation Element incorporates the 2014 City of Newport Beach Bicycle Master Plan
and any future updates to designatethat plan. The Bicycle Master Plan identifies four types of bicycle facilities
which pfovide.
1. Bicycle Path (Caltrans Class I). Provides for bicycle travel. The City on a paved right-of-way
separated from any street or highway. Includes sidewalk adjacent to street.
"i Sol, ill.'
Newport Beach General Plan
18-65
Circulation Eleme nt
2. Bicycle Lane (Caltrans Class II). Provides a striped and stenciled lane for bicycle travel on a street or
highway_
3. Bicycle Route (Caltrans Class III). Provides for a shared use with motor vehicle traffic and may be
identified by signing. Stencil markings identifying a recommended position for bicycles may also be
provided.
4;Bicycle Trail. AProvides a dirt pathway designated for the use of bicycles whieh is physiea4lyand pedestrians
completely separated from motor vehicle traffic. Pedestrian tr cc.
Subsequent to adoption of the Bicycle Master Plan, Caltrans has included an additional classification of bicycle
facility in the Highway Design Manual and California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. A Class IV
Bikeway (also known as a cycle track) is an on -road facility separated from vehicle traffic by a physical barrier. The
Camay incorporate this type of facility
into the Bicycle Master Plan in the future.
- --- - I. --- 11-0 -
-- -•- ' . - --- -
The facility needs of bicyclists ill vary with the function of the trip and the speed and skill level of the rider. Those
residents who use bicycles daily for their primary means of transportation likel refer
the most convenient and direct route available to repzeh their destination. These bicyclists normally will select a route
along a primary or a major highway. In contrast, the recreational rider might choose a route for its scenic interest
such as a ride on a bike trail separated from vehicular traffic. New or infrequent bicycle riders may prefer a route
separated from vehicle travel or along a route with low vehicle volume and speeds. Thus, it is necessary to provide
bikeways for bicyclists along major transportation corridors as well as .....4WF-4g*:..' -4qd seenie areaF.alternative routes.
It is also necessary to provide bikeways which separate faster cyclists from pedestrian travel and slower cyclists,
integrating bicycle travel more closely with vehicular traffic, and bikeways which separate slower cyclists from motor
vehicle traffic.
The City has designated additional off -road facilities in the form of sidewalk bikeways, which provide improved
bicycle safety for children within high use corridors in the vicinity of schools, beaches, and residential
neighborhoods. The City will periodically review the Bicycle Sidewalk Resolution to determine whether areas
permitting bicycle use on sidewalks are serving the intended purpose, whether additional permitted areas are
Newport Beach General Plan
18-66
Circulation Element
desirable, and whether restrictions on use (e.g., bicyclepeed limits) are warranted. Review of the Bicycle Sidewalk
Resolution and strategies for separating faster cyclists from pedestrians and slower cyclists will become more
important due to the emergence of electric -assisted bicycles e-bikes
Researchers have noted the rapid uptake of e-bikes by consumers, that e-bikes are more likely than standard bicycles
to replace car trips, and that trips with e-bikes are longer than trips with standard bicycles. The availability of e-bikes
also expands the potential group of users of bicycle facilities and the range of all users of those facilities. This
emerging technology may improve the mobility of Newport Beach residents, but the City would like to ensure that
the benefits to some do not come at the expense of safety to other users and residents.
Pedestrian Corridors
Newport Beach has a variety of pedestrian and multi -use facilities. These include sidewalks inthrough
developed areas, the oceanfront boardwalk on the Balboa Peninsula, bayfront walkways an Balb
island and parts of Balboa Peninst4a and ' Mile, and trails along Upper Newport Bay and in
open sace areas. Coastal areas see high pedestrian activity is 'g in eeastal areas -ue t including
Balboa Island Balboa Peninsula aft&Corona del Mar, with high ~--mbei2sand Mariners' Mile. High
volumes of pedestrians cross Coast Highway through Mariners' Mile.
Newport Beaeh has Where there are opportunities the City of Newport Beach will
consider providing more Bayfront walkways along the Balboa Peninsula and Mariners' Mile. As
these ar-eas aice developed purstiant to the Land Use Element, there will be Opportuilliftes to enhanee
and inereaseThese walkways will help to accommodate high pedestrian volumes while also providing an alternative
network separate from high vehicle volume streets. Closing low volume minor streets and alleys and creating
pedestrian promenades or activity and reduee dfivin areas can also be a strategy to create a pedestrian friendly
network while activating a business district. In addition, overhead pedestrian crossings should be considered to
improve pedestrian safety_
Equestrian Trails
Equestrian trails are primarily located in the Santa Ana Heights portion of the City. These trails, and other equestrian
facilities, are highly valued by residents of this area and provide regional recreation opportunities as well.
Newport Beach General Plan
18-67
T_
R SPOR o- iO N ��_o�.T SYSTEMS _ GEAI �.4T-, COMPLETE STREETS
T
While alternative modes such as bicycles have always been permitted to use the roadway network, the Complete
Streets Act (Assembly Bill 1358) requires that Circulation Elements "plan for a balanced multimodal transportation
network that meets the needs of all users of streets, roads, and highways, defined to include motorists, pedestrians,
bicyclists, children, persons with disabilities, seniors, movers of commercial goods, and users of public
transportation, in a manner that is suitable to the rural, suburban, or urban context of the general plan." Providing
a balance for multiple modes is one strategy toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions and combating climate
change consistent with the City's goals of reducing risks to residents from climate change and sea level rise.
Additionally, research shows that a multimodal transportation system, encouraging choice of bicycle walking and
rolling modes, can enhance local economic development and improve public health. The City of Newport Beach
will use the Orange County Council of Governments (OCCOG) Complete Streets Initiative Design Handbook to
develop the City's complete streets master plan.
Planning for a balanced multimodal transportation network does not mean that every street allocates equal space to
all travel modes. In fact, satisfactory service levels are difficult to provide on all streets for all travel modes due to
the competing interests between modes. Automobile friendly streets have high travel speeds, wide lanes, and
separate turn lanes all of which decrease pedestrian service levels. Rather than tr,jng to simultaneously serve
competing needs, the City of Newport Beach favors a layered network approach to complete streets planning. In a
layered network, a street is prioritized for a particular travel mode (or multiple travel modes benefiting from similar
characteristics.),but the network as a whole provides for the mobility of all users of roadways.
EMERGING TECHNOLOGY
The City of Newport Beach has used and continues to use technology to improve the delivery and performance of
mobility. Transportation System Management techniques have been used to enhance capacity without physical
roadway widening while retaining the community character and limiting the impact of the roadway system on the
environment. Examples of Transportation System Management improvements include intelligent transportation
system improvements at traffic signals, traffic signal coordination and improvements to roadway signage along busy
routes especially to tourist destinations), and the completion of the traffic management center in City Hall allowing
for traffic monitoring and remote signal operation. The City also replaced old street lighting to more efficient LED
fixtures to reduce electricity consumption and the City's carbon footprint.
Technology is changing rapidly, and the City of Newport Beach will respond to the challenges and opportunities
presented by emerging technology. The number of electric vehicles (E , using our roadways will continue to grow
and have fueling needs that are distinct from gasoline powered vehicles. Rideshare services continue to grow
ridership and simultaneously the need for designated places to drop-off and pick-up are growing. Wayfinding apes
help people to navigate our roadways, but the directions provided do not always show the most direct route or
respect roadway classification. Traditional engineering techniques may not be effective in redirecting this source of
traffic volume and the City of Newport Beach is investigating12otential strategies.
Vehicles with limited self -driving capability are already on our roadways. On the horizon, the City anticipates that
vehicle-to-everything(V2X) infrastructure improvements will be needed to accommodate and realize the advantages
18-68
offered by connected and autonomous vehicles. Potential advantages from connected vehicles include feedback
regarding roadway maintenance needs, uniform traffic flows, real time signal synchronization, improved safety for
drivers and other travel modes, and reduced GHQ emissions. While the City of Newport Beach is aware of what is
happening now and what is anticipated in the near future, the City must remain flexible and adapt to rapidly changing
transportation options in order to experience the benefits offered while avoiding the pitfalls of change.
TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT
The City of Newport Beach retains the Travel Demand Management D auee peak
hottr- tr-affie afild possibly r-esult iii intel— se, .,ee le -eels better- thaft these f6feleast iii tbtis Rieffileii
AMORIIIEW
INS
The City's TIDNI Ordinance regtriresrequiring projects to reduce the number of peak -period vehicle trips by
promgproviding facilities to support alternate modes and encouraging the use of alternative transportation
modes, such asr-ideshar-*, carpools, vanpools, public transit, bicycles and walking;
support stteh afteffiate modes. T-DNI methods are enhaneed by ineoiTorating employment near residential ,
providing ineentives for alternative�ffittlti user modes, ete. Employers with large work forees ean tttili5te A of th
, and walking.
Employers can also offer flexible work schedules, including work -from -home. Some TDM strategies will reduce
VMT generated by a land use. All of these techniques are enhanced by emerging technologies. Adopting TDM
measures not onlv reduces peak -period vehicle tries and associated GHG emissions but could also reduce narking
demand.
CURB SIDE MANAGEMENT
Newport Beach manages curb side space seeking the best use for the community needs. Prohibitions, fee
assessment, or time limits are used to induce turnover and ensure availability, perform maintenance such as street
sweeping, preserve sight distance, or provide right -turn lanes.
Within commercial districts. time limitations and metered narking are common. Novel parking management ma
provide greater benefit to Newport Beach residents and visitors. Strategies such as valet and loading zones could
reduce vehicle loads on side streets and alleys. Designating rideshare or delivery space could accommodate emerging
trends. Curb side right of way could also be used as exchange areas for shared non -motorized transportation. Some
of these novel parking management strategies could reduce passenger car use.
18-69
Within residential districts, parking demand can overflow from commercial districts or private residential property
onto public residential streets. Management of curb side right of way can help to provide equal access for all of the
district's residents.
CLIMATE CHANGE
Newport Beach is concerned about climate change and sea level rise. As seen in other parts of the country, climate
change can increase the frequency and intensity of natural emergencies. The City of Newport Beach is planning for
these contingencies using tsunami warning signs, evacuation planning and battery back-up systems for traffic signals.
Initiatives included in the Circulation Element such as planning for a balanced multimodal network including
support for additional transit facilities in higher density areas and measures to reduce VMT help to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and combat climate change. The City of Newport Beach intends to do more to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and combat climate change. On City property, the City can provide more EV charong
stations, bicycle parking, and other supporting facilities. The City can encourage or require these supporting facilities
on privately owned property within Newport Beach. The City can also encourage local businesses to establish and
maintain telework programs in addition to carpooling/vanpooling.
PARKING
Similar to other coastal communities, parking availability is limited in the coastal portions of -Ne"ar*
Beaehci ide, especially in some areas during the peak summer months. Areas of Newport Beach that were largely
subdivided prior to widespread adoption of the automobile are areas of particular concern (i.e.�Balboa Peninsula,
Balboa Island, r4-a4:~-ers' "fille, and Corona Del Mar, .� The Balboa
ViIla�e Parking Management Overlay Plan included recommendations;
w-hieh. The City of Newport Beach has begutimplemented some of the recommendations i.e., beginning to
implement, aparkin meter time limits „providing bus layover area
areas, improving intersection visibility , with additional
red curbing, and monitoring lot utilization). Implementing additional recommendations is being considered
including increasing parking meter fees, consolidating public parking, and initiating a shared parking trrogram.
Similar Parking Management Overlay plans could be implemented in other activity areas including Corona del Mar,
Mariners' Mile, McFadden Wharf, Cannery Village, and Balboa Island.
TechnoloQv chang-es make other innovative solutions possible. The Citv of Newport Beach uses a smartphone a
to allow remote payment of fees at parking meters, which has increased compliance.
This program could be expanded to provide the location of and directions to available parking spaces, which could
reduce circling while looking for a parking space and the congestion those movements cause. Increased use of
rideshare services may reduce parking demand for some land uses or in some areas of Newport Beach. Future
review of off-street parking requirements may allow reuse of vehicle parking spaces for bicycle parking or could
permit , Balboa Pier lot validatlofi
program, and a shafed pafking program. Valet sefviees have also been suggested f6f both the Balboa Peninsul
Mariners' " reallocation of curbside space. Alternatives for management of curbside space include valet or
rideshare pick-up/drop-off and deliveries, further supporting a trend toward less private vehicle parking.
TRANSPORTATION FUNDING
18-70
Newport Beach receives funding for transportation improvements from gasoline tax apportionment, County, state-,
aft& (including SB-1.) O, C Go (also known as Measure Ml local turnback, OC Go competitive programs, the State,
federal funds and developer fees (i.e., the Traffic Phasing Ordinance; and Fair Share Traffic Contribution
Ordinance,, and the General Fund. The City's
develeper-The City of Newport Beach leverages City resources to improve the chances of winning competitive
funding
oft the level of sefv4ee at that intefseetion. This efdinafiee phas— an iffipr-eveffients with de-eelapffient to
1984, establishes a fee, based upon the unfunded eest to iffipleffient the Master- Plan of Streets and Highways, to be
sources (e.g., MacArthur Boulevard improvements,
Superior Avenue pedestrian bridge, and more). The effect of revisions to CEOA measuring transportation impacts
in terms of VMT on developer fees is not known at this time. A regional VMT mitigation program, if established,
may offer a new funding source for public transit or alternative transportation projects.
The City of Newport Beach will have additional expenditures in the future to adapt existing infrastructure with
emerging technology, including traffic signal improvements for compatibility with connected and autonomous
vehicles. The City of Newport Beach is considering potential sources of funding for these expenditures.
18-71
Goals and Policies
Goal
CE 1.1
An overall transportation system that facilitates the movement of people and goods within and through the City of
Newport Beach and accommodates conservative growth within the City of Newport Beach; but is not expanded
primarily to accommodate growth in the surrounding region.
CE 1.1.1 Comprehensive Transportation System
Provide a diverse transportation system that provides mobility options for the
community. (Imp 16.8, 16.11)
CE 1.1.2 Integrated System of Multiple Modes
Provide an integrated transportation system that supports the land use plan set forth in
the Land Use Element. (Imp 2.1)
CE 1.1.3 Levels of Service Related to Community Character
EiRt�Maintain level of service standards that reflect the character of the various
unique districts and neighborhoods of Newport Beach. (Imp 16.2, 16.4, 16.6, 16.7)
Goal M
CE 1.2
Reduced summertime visitor traffic impacts.
olicies
CE 1.2.1 Wayfinding
Implement way -finding signs espeeia4yfor vehicles and pedestrians, specifically for
tourist destinations. destination areas. (Imp 16.7)
CE 1.2.2 Shuttle Service
Encourage and maintain remote visitor parking and shuttle services. (Imp 14.4)
CE 1.2.3 Internal Shuttle
Study the potential of implementing a pilot program, for a shuttle system connecting
the villages of Newport Beach. amp 16.8)
18-72
Goal
CE 2.1
CE 1.2.34 Traffic System Management
1dentify andContinue to implement measures, such as special traffic signal timing, to
reduce the impact of high -volume summer traffic on persons living along and around
the beach and bay, as well as visitors. (Imp 16.7)
C E 1.2.45 Public Transit
Support and encourage OCTA efforts to provide / fund summertime expanded bus
service and/or local shuttle services to reduce visitor traffic. (Imp 16.8)
18-73
A roadway system with no significant gaps that provides for the efficient movement of goods and people in the
City of Newport Beach, while maintaining the community's character and its residents' quality of life.
Policies
CE 2.1.1 Level of Service Standards
Plan the arterial roadway system to accommodate projected traffic at the following level
of service standards:
A. Level of Service (LOS) "D" throughout the City, unless otherwise noted
B. LOS "E" at any intersection in the Airport Area shared with Irvine, and in Corona
del Mar (subject to findings of the most recent General Plan update traffic study)
am
� 16.3�
., •. •_ •
CE 2.1.2 Street and Highway Network
Construct the circulation system described on the map entitled Newport Beach
Circulation Element -Master Plan of Streets and Highways shown in Figure CE1 and
Figure CE2 (cross-section). (Imp 14.9, 16.3)
CE 2.1.3 Current Traffic Data
Monitor traffic conditions on an ongoing basis and update Master Plan as necessary.
(Imp 16.4)
CE 2.1.4 Roadway Improvements
Pursue construction of intersection improvements shown of Figure CE2 subject to
findings of the most recent General Plan update traffic study) or alternate improvements
that achieve an acceptable level of service. (Imp 16.3)
CE 2.1.5 MacArthur Boulevard Widening
Plan the addition of lanes to MacArthur Boulevard between Harbor View Drive and
the prolongation of Crown Drive so that more than four lanes are constructed only
when the daily volume to capacity ratio equals or exceeds 1.0 in that section of
MacArthur Boulevard, not counting trips generated by the MacArthur Boulevard access
drive to Corona del mar Plaza, and after public hearings before the Planning
Commission and City Council, and only by narrowing the median. (Imp 16.3)
CE 2.1.6 Protection of Right -of -Way
18-74
Protect right-of-way for designated future streets and highways through all practicable
means. (Imp 2.1)
Goal M
CE 2.2
A safe and efficient roadway system.
Policies
CE 2.2.1 Safe Roadways
Provide for safe roadway conditions by adhering to nationally recognized improvement
standards and uniform construction and maintenance practices. (Imp 16.4, 16.6)
CE 2.2.2 Safe System Approach
Evaluate traffic collision data annually and review best practices for safe circulation
systems and implement appropriate technologies/infrastructure consistent with the
industry recognized Safe System principles. Incorporate traffic safety improvement
projects in the annual Capital Improvement Program. (Imp 16.2, 16.41)
CE 2.2.3 Up -to -Date Standards
Periodically review and update street standards to current multimodal capacity and
safety practices. (Imp 16.4, 16.6)
CE 2.2.34 Traffic Control
Design traffic control measures to ensure City streets and roads function with safety
and efficiency: for vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. (Imp 16.7)
CE 2.2.45 Driveway and Access Limitations
Limit driveway and local street access on arterial streets to maintain a desired quality of
traffic flow: and limit hazards to active transportation modes. Wherever possible,
consolidate and/or reduce the number of driveways and implement access controls
during redevelopment of adjacent parcels. (Imp 16.1)
CE 2.2.56 Neighborhood Traffic Calming
Balance safety, quality of life, and efficiency when considering cut -through traffic and
traffic calming improvements to local neighborhood streets. Address neighborhood
traffic concerns through City Council Policy L-26. (Imp 16.6)
CE 2.247 Emergency Access
Provide all residential, commercial, and industrial areas with efficient and safe access for
emergency vehicles. An emergency evacuation map shall be prepared as part of an
updated Safety Element. (Imp 16.6)
18-75
CE 2.2.78 Alleys
Alleys in new developments shall be 20' wide to facilitate circulation. (Imp 8.1)
Goal M
CE 2.3
Optimal roadway system operation.
Policies
CE 2.3.1 Coast Highway Ownership
Pursue ownership of Coast Highway throughout Newport Beach, as opportunities arise,
so that Coast Highway can be improved to its ultimate width in Mariners' Mile
consistent with the City's visteltMaster Plan of Streets and Highways and the OCTA
Master Plan of Arterial Highways and to provide the City with more opportunities to
increase operational efficiencies. (Imp 2.1, 14.9)
CE 2.3.2 RoadwayMaintenance
Support roadway maintenance programs that inspect, repair, and rehabilitate pavement surfaces and
sidewalks in order to preserve the high quality of City streets and thoroughfares. (Imp 16.4)
CE 2.3.3 New Development Maintenance Responsibility
Ensure minimization of traffic congestion impacts and parking impacts and ensure
proper roadway maintenance through review and approval of Construction
Management Plans associated with new development proposals in residential
neighborhoods. amb 8.1, 16.9)
CE 2.3. Traffic Conditions Data Base
Monitor traffic conditions and optimize traffic signal operations and coordination on
an ongoing basis. (Imp 16.2)
CE 2.3.45 Improvements to Reflect Changing Traffic Conditions
Based on the monitoring of traffic conditions, consider additional improvements in
areas with operations issues, such as intersections with heavy turn volumes (e.g:_,
additional turn lanes, traffic signal progression, etc.). (Imp 16.2)
CE 2.3.6 San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor
Work with the Transportation Corridor Agency (TCA) to create improvement strategies
and funding mechanisms to address regional through traffic created by the toll road
along East Coast Highway and within the area of influence of the San Joaquin Hills
Transportation Corridor.
18-76
CE 442.4
Truck routes that support goods movement to and from land use in the City while minimizing adverse impacts to
residents or businesses.
Policies
CE 4-.3-.12.4.1 Truck Routes
Allow truck use of City streets except selected residential and arterial streets adjacent to
residential areas and school zones necessary to minimize impacts of truck traffic on
residential areas. (Imp 96.9)
CE 4422.4.2 Impacts of Trucks
Provide appropriately designed and maintained roadways to safely accommodate truck
travel and minimize noise and vibration. (Imp 16.9)
CE 4-.3-.32.4.3 Management of Truck Activities
Actively manage trucking activities related to oversize loads such as large boats and
comparable characteristics. (Imp 16.9)
CE 2.4.4 Construction Management Plans
Develop program to require CMP for large developments to address haul routes; hours
of operation, and number of truck trips. (Imp 16.9)
CE 3.1
A network of regional facilities which ensures the safe and efficient movement of people and goods from within
the City to areas outside its boundaries; and minimizes the use of City streets by regional through traffic.
Policies
CE 3.1.1 Freeway System
Encourage ongoing regional investment in the freeway system. (Imp 14.1, 14.3, 14.9,
14.10)
CE 3.1.2 Integration of Transportation Systems with Adjoining Communities and the
Region
Interface with regional and surrounding local agencies, such as Caltrans, OCTA, the
County of Orange, John Wayne Airport, the Cities of Irvine, Costa Mesa, and
Huntington Beach, and the University of California, Irvine to implement systems that
18-77
serve the needs of regional travelers (vehicles, bicycles, and pedestriansin a way that
minimizes impacts on Newport Beach residents. (Imp 14.9, 14.10, 16.5)
CE 3.1.3 Traffic from Adjoining Communities
Continue to monitor land development applications in adjacent communities and
encourage coordination on land development projects that affect traffic and mobili, in
Newport Beach. (Im1� 14.11)
CE 3.1.4 Regional Consistency
Maintain consistency between the City of Newport Beach Master Plan of Streets and
Highways (shown on Figure CE1) shaH be eonsistent -- i and the Orange County
Master Plan of Arterial Highways. (Imp 16.5)
CE 3.1.45 Regional Traffic Mitigation
Continue to participate in programs (Orange County Congestion Management
Program, Southern California Association of
Governments Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, etc.) to
ffiitigatereduce regional traffic congestion. (Imp 14.1, 14.3, 16.5)
CE 3.1.6 Santa Ana River Future Mobility Alternatives
Advocate for the implementati study and review of needed Master
Pla-a portation improvements, and be a strong advocate for cons"ttetion of the 19th
Street Bridge --along and/or across the Santa Ana River, or alter ativewhich reflects
current planning, that may include active transportation or neighborhood electric
vehicle improvements that
#-sue ;reduce passenger car use, offer mobility choice, enhance recreation and community
health and reduce vehicle miles traveled without disproportionate impacts on Newport
Beach including Coast Highway, consistent with all environmental review requirements.
(Imp 16.5)
Goal
CE 4.1
A public transportation system that provides mobility for residents and encourages use of public transportation as
an alternative to automobile travel.
CE 4.1.1 Public Transit Efficiency
18-78
Support efforts by OCTA and other agencies to increase the effectiveness and
productivity -of transit services, possibly including local shuttle services. (Imp 14.4)
CE 4.1.2 Transit Services for Special Need Populations
Support efforts to increase accessible transit services and facilities for the elderly,
disabled, and other transportation disadvantaged persons. (Imp 16.8)
CE 4.1.3 Seasonal Public Transit
Coordinate with OCTA to provide seasonal, recreational, and special events shuttles.
(Imp 14.4, 16.8)
CE 4.1.4 Land Use Densities Supporting Publie Transit
CE 4�5 John Wayne Airport Shuttles
Encourage the use of airport shuttle services to minimize the impacts of air travelers on
the local roadway system. (Imp 14.4, 16.8)
CE 4.145 Transit Support Facilities
leieCooperate with OCTA in efforts to develapprovide additional regional
transit support facilities, including park -and -ride lots, bus stops, and shelters. in higher
density residential areas or mixed -use development areas to reduce passenger car travel
through and within Newport Beach. (Imp 16.8)
CE 4.1.76 School Transit
Monitor the demand for additional private, public, and school transportation available
to serve the needs of K-12 students and advocate for improvements in traffic from
students. (Imp 14.2, 16.11)
Go
CE 5.1
A transportation system that supports Complete Streets policies and design.
CE 5.1.1 Circulation Complete Streets System for All Users
Develop a Complete Streets master plan and design guide based upon best practices
(e.g., Orange County Council of Governments Complete Streets Initiative Design
Handbook, 2016) that prioritizes Cijy rights of way to allow all users safe and efficient
18-79
mobility. Pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and transit riders of all ages and abilities are
able to safely move along and across the mobility system of Newport Beach. amb 16.1�6.1,
16.8 16.11
CE 5.2
Convenient bicycle trail systems that satisfy recreational desires and transportation needs.
Policies
CE 5.2.2 Integration of the Bicycle Master Plan
Review projects adopted in the 2014 Bicycle Master Plan, the 20-year program of bicycle
capital improvements to facilitate safe and efficient active transportation commute and
recreational mobility, annually and integrate bicycle projects into general mobility capital
improvement programming. (Imp 16.11)
CE 5.2.3 Bicycle Master Plan Vision
Provide for a network of active transportation facilities consistent with the vision in the
current Newport Beach Bicycle Master Plan. (Im16. 11)
CE 5.2.4 Trail System
Promote construction of a comprehensive trail system as shown on Figure C-EACE3 to
connect bicycle trails with hiking trails and transit routes. (Updated figure in process.)
m 16.11
CE 51-.2 Pedestrian.5 Travel Mode Connectivity
hink reside Ensure all active transportation networks are linked and provide
connectivity between transit, transit centers, and other major land uses such as village
areas, commercial centers, activity nodes, recreation facilities, schools, parks, and
eeffimereialers-institutions so that residents can travel within the community
without driving. (Imp 16.8, 16.11, 20.1)
CE 5.4 —2.6 Pedestrian Improvements in New Development Projects
Require new development projects to include safe and attractive sidewalks, walkways,
and bike lanes in accordance with the Master Plan, and, if feasible, trails. (Imp 16.11)
CE 5.14 2.7 Linkages to Citywide Trail System and Neighborhoods
Require developers to construct links to the planned trail system, adjacent areas, and
communities where appropriate. (Imp 16.11)
CE 5.�52.8 Bikeway System
18-80
Cooperate with state, federal, county, and local agencies to coordinate bikeways and
trails throughout the region. (Imp 16.11)
CE 5.44-2.9 Bikeway Legislation
Coordinate with local legislative delegation in Sacramento to address safety regulation
of bicycles and e-bikes; including training, education and modification to the California
Vehicle Code.
CE 5.2.10 Bicycle Supporting Facilities
Incorporate se arate bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the design plans for new streets
and highways and, where feasible, in the plans for improving existing roads. (Imp 16.11)
CE 5.4-.7-2.11 Bicycle Supporting Amenities
Require bicycle facilities such as bike racks, bike stations, or lockers according to
national standards for long-term and short-term bicycle utilization on City property and
with new development and encourage the addition of such bicycle facilities within
existing development. (Imp 16.11)
CE 5.2.12 Bicycle Safety
Provide for safety of conventional bicyclists, e-bicyclists, equestrians, and pedestrians
by adhering to current national standards and uniform practices: especially where modes
interact. (Imp 16.11)
CE 5.1.82.13 Bicycle Conflicts with Vehicles and Pedestrians
Minimize conflict points among motorized traffic, pedestrians, and bicycle traffic.e-
bikes, and conventional bicycle traffic. Support increased enforcement activity for
bicycle and e-bike travel, with a focus on The Oceanfront Boardwalk and around school
zones. (Imp 16.11)
CE 5.4-.19-2.14 Integrated Bicycle Improvements
Coordinate community bicycle and pedestrian facilities in a citywide network for
continuity of travel. (Imp 16.11)
CE 5.1.10-2.15 Bicycle Trail Signage
Develop and implement a uniform signing program to assist the public in locating,
recognizing, and utilizing public bikeways and trails. (Imp 16.11)
CE 5.3
Safe and complete active transportation alternatives near school zones.
Policies M
18-81
CE 5.3.1 .1 1 School Access
Work with schools to promote walking, biking, safe drop-off, and other improvements.
(Imp 14.2, 16. 1>)
CE 5.3.2 School Coordination
Explore opportunities to create working group of decision makers at the City and the
school district to meet regularly to address safe school mobility, access and parking.
CE 5.3.3 Suggested Route to School
Prepare Suggested Route to School maps for all schools in the City.
CE 5.4
Completion of pedestrian infrastructure where planned and necessary.
Policies
CE 5.4.1 .12 Pedestrian Street Crossings
Continue to implement improved pedestrian crossings, such as lighted crosswalk
installations, in key high -volume areas such as Corona Del Mar, Mariners' Mile, West
Newport, Airport Area, Newport Center/Fashion Island, and the Balboa Peninsula. (Imp
16.11)
CE 5.1.134.2 Overhead Pedestrian Street Crossings
Consider overhead pedestrian crossings in areas where pedestrian use limits the
efficiency of the roadway or signalized intersection: and/or where an overhead crossing
provides for improved pedestrian safety. (Imp 16.11)
CE 5.1.14-4.3 Newport Harbor Trails and Walkways
Develop and implement a long-range plan for public trails and walkways to access all
appropriate commercial areas of the harbor, as determined to be physically and
economically feasible including the following:
A. Extension of the Lido Marina Village boardwalk across all of the waterfront
commercial properties in Lido Village
B. Provide a continuous waterfront walkway along the Rhine Channel, connecting
Cannery Village and McFadden Square waterfront commercial areas with Las
Arenas Beach at 19th Street
C. Provide a walkway connecting the Lido Village area with Mariners' Mile
D. Provide a continuous walkway along the Mariners' Mile waterfront from the Coast
Highway/Newport Boulevard Bridge to the Balboa Bay Club (Policy HB 6.2) (Im
16.11)
18-82
CE 5.4454.4 Pedestrian Sidewalk Improvements
As part of the annual capital improvement planning, consider implementation and
construction of new sidewalks and improvements to sidewalks to result in comfortable
widths consistent with industry standards and appropriate for the street/neighborhood.
Provide for safe and ample opportunities to cross streets and design safe crosswalk
enhancements.
CE 5.4.5 Equestrian Trails
Maintain the existing equestrian trail system in Santa Ana Heights (Figure
CE4)• (Imp 16.11)
CE 5.1.164.6 Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety
Provide for the safety of bicyclists and pedestrians through provision of adequate
facilities, including review of locations where sidewalk use by bicyclists is appropriate,
consideration of separate facilities for e-bikes or other semi -motorized modes, and
maintenance and construction of extra sidewalk width where feasible. (Imp 16.11)
CE 5.25
Enhanced and maintained public water transportation services and expanded public water transportation uses and
land support facilities. (Policy HB 6.5)
Policies
CE 5.25.1 Marine Terminals
Coordinate the location of marine terminals with other components of the
transportation system to ensure convenient multi -modal access and adequate parking.
(Policy HB 6.6) (Imp 16.12)
CE 5.5.2 Expanded Water Transportation Modes
Promote opportunities to expand water transportation modes, such as water -based
shuttle services and mother nautical services. (Policy HB 6.7) (Imp 16.12)
18-83
Goal
CE 6.1
An efficient circulation system through the use of transportation systems management.
Policies
CE 6.1.1 Traffic Signals
Improve traffic signal operations by optimizing signal timing, interconnecting
signalized intersections along arterial streets, and installing computerized
master traffic signal control systems in intensively utilized areas. (Imp 16.7)
CE 6.1.2 Intelligent Transportation Systems
Explore and implement intelligent transportation system and infrastructure
improvements which will improve circulation system
performance from that forecast in this Element. (Imp16.4, 16.7
CE 6.1.3 Coordination with Adjacent Jurisdictions
Coordinate operations with adjacent jurisdictions to enhance the efficiency of
inter -jurisdictional roadway system operations. (Imp 14.1, 14.3)
CE 6.1.4 Rideshare Vehicles
Monitor the volume and proliferation of on demand rideshare services (e.g., Uber and Lyft) and respond
with appropriate level of design guidance and regulation of curb side uses Cincluding loading zone) and
parking lot utilization. (Imp 16.10)
CE 6.1.5 Autonomous, Connected, and Future Vehicle Technolq=
18-84
Monitor the development of new vehicle technology and associated
community -based infrastructure. For improvements demonstrated as
practical, plan for the deployment of new vehicle technology within the
existing right-of-way and infrastructure system through the annual budgeting
process and capital improvement programming_ process. am 16�7. 30.11)
CE 6.1.6 Wayfinding Technology
Monitor and communicate with wayfinding technology providers (e.g., Waze
and Google Maps) to reduce routing of traffic through neighborhoods. (Imp
16.7
CE 6.1.7 Parking Technology
Consider deployment of parking app technology that identifies available
parking spaces and reduces vehicle circulation and congestion related to
searching for parking spades. (Imp 16.7)
I
CE 7.1
Promote strategies to reduce the use of internal combustion passenger cars and the attendant greenhouse
gas emissions.
CE 7.1.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis
Follow the analysis methodology for vehicle miles traveled according to the
Newport Beach VMT thresholds policy and as required in Senate Bill 743 and
the revised California Environmental Quality Act (CEEQA) Guidelines. (IMP
91.1
CE 7.1.2 VMT Mitigation Measures
Require implementation of CEQA project related VMT mitigation measures
when warranted and monitor reductions in VMT from new development. (Imp
11.1
CE 7.1.3 Regional VMT Mitigation Measures
18-85
Promote the development of regional VMT mitigation in order to simplify the
CAA process and enhance the effectiveness of VMT and GHG reduction
strategies. (Imb 14.4)
CE 6.2.17.1.4 Alternative Transportation Modes and Practices
Promote and encourage the use of alternative transportation modes, such as
ridesharing, carpools, vanpools, public transit, bicycles, and wall6fig; and
walking and
telecommuting programs, through the planning and development of a
Complete Streets master plan and design guide. (Imp 16.8, 16.11)
CE 6.2.2 7.1.5 Support Facilities for Alternative Modes
Require new development projects to provide facilities commensurate with
development type and intensity to support alternative modes, such as
preferential parking for carpools, bike racks, bike stations, bicycle lockers,
showers, commuter information areas, rideshare vehicle loading areas, water
transportation docks, and bus stop improvements. (Imp 16.8, 16.11)
G E 6.2.3 CE 7.1.6 Public Right of Way Curbside Management
Review areas with commercial uses (such as retail, restaurant, and hospitality
to incorporate strategies to accommodate novel use of curb side right of way
to reduce passenger car use through drop-off or valet and accommodate
rideshare as well as delivery activities where appropriate. (Imb 16.10)
CE 7.1.7 Project Site Design Supporting Alternative Modes
Encourage increased use of public transportation by requiring project site
designs that facilitate the use of public transportation and walking. (Imp 16.8,
16.11)
CE 7.1.8 Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Stations
Install additional EV charging stations on City properties, support existing
private development to add new EV charging stations and develop incentives
for the installation of EV charging stations and other alternative fuels systems
as part of new development.
CE 78.1
18-86
An adequate supply of convenient parking throughout the City.
CE .1.1 Required Parking
Require that new development provide adequate, convenient parking for
residents, guests, business patrons, and visitors. (Imp 16.10)
r'�=CE 8.1.2 Parking Considerations of Rideshare Vehicles
Develop parking demand statistics that consider the efficiency of rideshare
services and the potential for reduction in parking requirements. (Imp 16.10)
CE 8.1.3 Parking In -Lieu Fees
Establish an in -lieu parking fee that the City may require to be paid when a
development is not able to provide required parking. (Imp 16.10)
CE 78.1.34 Funding of Shared Parking Facilities
Use in -lieu fees and other funds to develop public shared parking facilities in
areas with inadequate parking supply. Priority shall be given to spending fees
in areas that will benefit those who contributed the fees. (Imp 16.10)
CE 78.1.45 Expanded Parking in Corona del Mar
Permit conversion of Corona Del Mar residential lots adjacent to commercial
areas and commercial lots for parking to support commercial uses. Encourage
continued use of existing parking on residential zoned lots, as well as existing
shared parking lots. (Imp 2.1, 8.1, 8.2, 24.1)
CE 78.1.56 Parking Consolidation
Evaluate the potential to consolidate underutilized parcels to create parking
districts and to construct areawide parking hubs potentially relieving individual
parcels of some of their parking requirements. (Imp 16.10)
CE 8.1.7 Avon Street Municipal Parking Lot Relocation
Consider relocation of the Avon Street municipal lot to better serve
commercial uses in Mariners' Mile. (Imp 2.1, 16.10)
CE 78.148 Public Use of Private Parking Facilities
Encourage the use of commercial, office, and institutional parking areas for
use as public parking to serve coastal recreational areas during weekends and
18-87
holidays, in conjunction with public transit or shuttles where appropriate. (Imp
8.1, 8.2, 16.10)
CE 78.1.79 Shared Parking Facilities
Consider allowing shared parking in mixed use and pedestrian oriented areas
throughout the City. (Imp 2.1, 8. 1, 8.2, 16.10)
CE 78.1.810 Parking Configuration
Site and design new development to avoid use of parking configurations or
management programs that are difficult to maintain and enforce. (Imp 2.1, 7.1,
8.1)
CE 78.1.$11 Parking Requirements for Pedestrian -Oriented and Local -Serving
Uses
Consider revised parking requirements for small scale neighborhood serving
commercial uses in areas that derive most of their trade from walk-in business,
especially where on -street or other public parking is available. (Imp 2.1, 8.1, 8.2)
CE 78.1.4012 Parking for Marine Recreational Users
Provide adequate parking as necessary in the vicinity of visitor serving marine
uses, including marinas, water transportation terminals, boat ramps, as well as
parking suitable for service vehicles in commercial marinas and berthing areas.
(Imp 16.12)
CE 78.1.1413 Curb Cuts
Require new development to minimize curb cuts to protect on -street parking
spaces. Close curb cuts to create on street parking spaces wherever feasible.
(Imp 2.1, 7.1, 8.1)
CE 78.1.-1214 Alley Access
Require alley access to parking areas for all new development in areas where
alley access exists. (Imp 2.1, 8.1)
CE 78.1.Ul5 Up -to -Date Parking Requirements
Periodically review and update off-street parking requirements Loin the
Municipal Code to account for changes in technology and commuter behavior
and ensure that new development provides off-street parking sufficient to
serve approved uses. (Imp 8.1, 8.2, 16.10)
18-88
CE 78.2
An efficiently operated parking system.
Policies
CE 78.2.1 Parking Management
Develop parking management programs for areas with inadequate parking.
(Imp 16.10)
CE 78.2.2 Parking Technology
Support the development of new technologies, includingparking related apes
to promote wayfinding, barking availability, and parking fee collections in an
efficient manner. (Imp 16.10)
CE 8.2.3 Parking Pricing
Periodically review and update parking fees and rates at on -street locations
and off-street parking lots operated by the City. a-m16. 10
CE 8.2.4 Parking Signage
Provide improved parking information and signage. (Imp 16.10)
CE 78.2.35 Shared Valet Service
Explore the feasibility of shared valet parking programs in areas with high
parking demand and less conveniently located parking facilities, such as
Mariners' Mile and McFadden Square. (Imp 16.10)
CE 89.1
Adequate funding for needed transportation infrastructure and operations including support of measures
for outside funding of transportation improvements.
CE 89.1.1 Transportation User and Benefit Fees
18-89
Support legislation to increase transportation user and benefit fees, and to
index such fees to keep pace with inflation, in order to provide the additional
revenues for needed transportation facilities and services. (Imp 7.3)
CE 89.1.2 State Highway Revenues
Support legislation to increase state highway revenues as needed to maintain
and rehabilitate the existing state highway system and to match all available
federal highway funding. (Imp 14.9)
CE 89.1.3 Innovative Transportation Funding
Support the evaluation and implementation of innovative transportation
financing mechanisms such as local tax increment districts, benefit assessment
districts, and joint development and use of transportation centers. (Imp 31.1)
CE 89.1.4 Local Street and Highway Revenues
Support measures to increase local street and highway revenues as needed to
fund all road reconstruction, operation, and maintenance cost. (Imp 7.3, 20.1)
CE 89.1.5 Comprehensive Funding Program
Support measures to develop and implement a continuing funding program,
including private sector participation and aft equitable c _v_ s :_tu _, to fund
the construction, operation, and maintenance of pedestrian, bicycle, and
transit facilities and services. (Imp 7.2, 7.3, 20.1)
CE 89.1.6 Annual Budgeting for Improvements
Annually review and consider budgeting for projects contributing to
completion of the Master Plan of Streets and Highways., Bicycle Master Plan,
Complete Streets Master Plan, and intelligent transportation system plans. (Imp
7.3, 30.1)
CE 89.1.7 Fair Share Fee Ordinance
Periodically review the Fair Share Fee Ordinance, reassess the unfunded cost
of required improvements, and adjust the required Fair Share Fees as
appropriate. (Imp 7.2)
CE 89.1.8 Roadway Improvements Funding
Fund costs of major roadway facility and intersection improvements through
gas tax revenues, federal, state, and county grants, and City ordinances to avoid
burdening the General Fund to the extent that this is possible. (Imp 7.2, 7.3,
30.2)
CE .1.9 Right -of -Way Dedication
18-90
Require the dedication of needed right-of-way in conjunction with approval
of subdivision maps or other discretionary approvals. (Imp 1.1)
CE 39.1.10 Development Requirements
Require development to provide the needed roadway improvements adjacent
to a site, commensurate with project impact and in accordance with the Master
Plan of Streets and Highways. (Imp 16.3)
CE 39.1.11 Joint Funding with Adjoining Jurisdictions
Pursue joint funding of improvements in areas (such as the Airport Area)
where traffic growth and/or needed improvements are demonstrably based
upon traffic contributions or improvements that are a joint responsibility of
Newport Beach and one or more adjacent jurisdictions/agencies. (Imp 14.1)
CE 89.1.12 Measure M Restrictions
Measure M sales tax revenues shall not be used to replace private developer
funding that has been committed for any project or normal subdivision
obligations. (Imp 16.2)
CE 89.1.13 Transportation Improvement or Special Assessment District
Establish a transportation improvement or special assessment district to fund
improvements needed in the Airport Area. (Imp 31.1)
18-91
Attachment C
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-025
18-92
RESOLUTION NO. PC2022-025
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE
CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE (PA2017-141)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS
AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS.
1. The Circulation Element is one of the mandatory elements of the General Plan that
must be periodically updated in accordance with state law.
2. The Circulation Element governs the long-term mobility system of the city. The
update of the Circulation Element presents a framework to evaluate, improve and
manage the circulation system to meet the current and future needs of the city.
3. The Draft Circulation Element Update ("Draft Circulation Element") incorporates
the mandates of state law since the last update in 2006, including the following:
a. Section 65580 et seq. of the California Government Code ("State Housing
Element Law") which requires each city and county to adopt a housing
element that identifies and analyzes existing and projected housing needs
within their jurisdiction and prepare goals, policies, and programs, and
quantified objectives to further the development, improvement, and
preservation of housing. As a result of State Housing Element Law, the City
of Newport Beach ("City") is in the process of re -adopting the 6th Cycle
Housing Element covering the 2021-2029 period ("6th Cycle Housing
Element") to accommodate the City's Regional Housing Needs Assessment
("RHNA") allocation of 4,845 new housing units. The updated Goals and
Policies in the Draft Circulation Element support the 6th Cycle Housing
Element;
b. Senate Bill 743 ("SB 743"), which establishes Vehicle Miles Traveled
("VMT") as the metric for determining transportation impacts as part of a
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") analysis;
c. Senate Bill 32 ("SB 32") and Senate Bill 375 ("SB 375") by supporting the
State's climate action goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through
coordinated transportation and land use planning; and
d. Assembly Bill 1358 ("AB 1358"), commonly referred to as "The Complete
Streets Act of 2008," by including goals and policies to plan for a balanced
18-93
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-025
Paae 2 of 4
multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of
streets, roads, and highways for safe and convenient travel.
6. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65033, a robust public
participation effort concerning circulation and transportation issues throughout the
city started in November 2020. Since that time, the City of Newport Beach ("City")
has held five community workshops and discussed the Circulation Element and
the project status at eight duly noticed Planning Commission meetings to receive
public input on the Draft Circulation Element.
7. The Draft Circulation Element was posted on the City's website and was available
for public review from March 12, 2021, with comments accepted through the end
of April 2021. A revised draft of the Draft Circulation Element was posted on the
City's website on July 12, 2022, for public review with comments accepted through
August 1, 2022.
8. On September 8, 2022, a public hearing was held in the Council Chambers located
at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and
purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with California Government
Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act") and 65353 of the Government
Code and consistent with City Council Policy K-1 (General Plan and Local Coastal
Program). Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by,
the Planning Commission at this hearing.
SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION
1. The Draft Circulation Element is not a project under CEQA pursuant to Section
15061(b)(3) of the California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3
("CEQA Guidelines"), the common-sense exemption because it involves goals,
policies, and programs that would not cause a significant effect on the
environment. Moreover, the Draft Circulation Element is statutorily exempt under
Section 15262 of the California CEQA Guidelines, which exempts projects
involving feasibility or planning studies for future actions which the City has not
approved or funded.
2. Section 423 of the Charter and Council Policy A-18 require any amendment to the
General Plan be reviewed to determine if a vote of the electorate would be
required. If a project includes a general plan amendment, and, separately or
cumulatively with other projects over a 10-year span, exceeds more than 100
additional peak hour trips (a.m. or p.m.), adds 40,000 square feet or more of non-
residential floor area or adds more than 100 dwelling units in a statistical area, a
vote of the electorate is required. because it involves policies, programs, and
actions to meet the City's RHNA allocation that would not cause a significant effect
on the environment.
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-025
Paae 3 of 4
3. The 6th Cycle Housing Element adds at least 100 dwelling units in several
statistical areas; therefore, voter approval of amendments to the Land Use
Element and the Zoning Code will be required to implement the 6th Cycle Housing
Element. As currently drafted, the Draft Circulation Element is a policy document
that does not include any increases in a.m. or p.m. peak hour trips subject to voter
approval. It will not result in physical environmental impacts at this phase.
SECTION 3. DECISION
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby finds that the Draft
Circulation Element is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to
projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment
pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3)) and is statutorily exempt pursuant to Section
15262 in accordance with the recitals under Section 2 of this Resolution.
2. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby finds that the Draft
complies with all statutory requirements set forth in Section 65302(b) of the
Government Code.
3. In conformance with City Council Policy K-1, the Planning Commission reviewed
and recommended the City Council approve the General Plan Amendment to
update the Circulation Element by adoption of Resolution No. PC2022-025.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 8T" DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022.
AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Kleiman, Lowrey, Rosene, Weigand
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Klaustermeier
BY:
Lauren Kleiman, Chairman
BY: �`�O Z I---
Mark Rosene, Secretary
Exhibit A: Circulation Element Update
18-95
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-025
Paae 4 of 4
Exhibit A
Circulation Element Update
Attachment D
Excerpt of the Planning Commission Minutes, Dated September 8, 2022
18-97
NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS — 100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 2022
REGULAR MEETING — 6:30 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER - The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Commissioner Lowrey
III. ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Chair Lauren Kleiman, Vice Chair Curtis Ellmore, Secretary Mark Rosene, Commissioner
Tristan Harris, Commissioner Lee Lowrey, Commissioner Erik Weigand
ABSENT: Commissioner Sarah Klaustermeier
Staff Present: Community Development Director Seimone Jurjis, Deputy Community Development Director
Jim Campbell, Assistant City Attorney Yolanda Summerhill, City Traffic Engineer Tony Brine,
Principal Planner Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner David Lee, Senior Planner Chelsea
Crager, and Administrative Assistant Clarivel Rodriguez, Department Assistant Savannah
Martinez
IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS
None
V. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES
None
VI. CONSENT ITEMS
ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF JULY 21, 2022
Recommended Action: Approve and file
Motion made by Commissioner Weigand and seconded by Vice Chair Ellmore to approve the minutes of the
July 21, 2022, meeting.
AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Kleiman, Lowrey, Rosene, and Weigand
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Klaustermeier
ITEM NO. 2 GONTERMAN ENCROACHMENT (PA2022-127)
Site Location: 2304 Cliff Drive
Summary:
A request to waive City Council Policy L-6 for proposed private improvements consisting of stairs,
handrails, retaining walls, and planters that encroach up to eight (8) feet -five (5) inches into the Cliff Drive
public right-of-way. The Cliff Drive parkway extends approximately 12 feet from face of curb to the property
line. Council Policy L-6 ("Policy") prohibits the proposed stairs, handrails, retaining walls and planters since
structures are limited to a 1-foot projection into the right-of-way and the height of encroachments are
limited to three (3) feet from the top of curb elevation.
18-98
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
September 8, 2022
Recommended Action:
1. Find the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section
15303 Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), because it has no significant
effect on the environment;
2. Waive City Council Policy L-6, Encroachments in Public Rights -of -Way, for non -compliant private
improvements consisting of stairs, handrails, retaining walls, and planters that encroach into the
Cliff Drive public right-of-way, contingent upon all conditions of the Encroachment Permit process
being met; and
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2022-021 waiving City Council Policy L-6 and approving Encroachment
Permit No. N2022-0147.
Commissioners disclosed no ex parte communications.
Motion made by Commissioner Lowrey and seconded by Secretary Rosene to approve the recommended
action.
AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Kleiman, Lowrey, Rosene, and Weigand
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Klaustermeier
VII. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
ITEM NO. 3 TENNIS CLUB AT NEWPORT BEACH PROJECT AMENDMENT (PA2021-260)
Site Location: 1602 East Coast Highway
Summary:
An amendment to the 2012 approved Tennis Club at Newport Beach project to: 1) increase the number
of future tennis courts from 7 to 8 courts, 2) increase the number of future hotel rooms from 27 to 41
rooms, 3) increase the gross floor area of the ancillary hotel uses by 4,686 square feet, and 4) provide
3 attached condominium units and 2 detached single family residences in -lieu of 5 detached single-
family residences. The proposed changes to the 2012 approved project require the consideration of the
following land use:
• General Plan Amendment: An amendment to Anomaly No. 46 of Table LU2 of the 2006 Newport
Beach General Plan Land Use Element to amend the allowable development limits for the tennis club
site;
• Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan Amendment: An amendment to Local Coastal
Implementation Plan Section 21.26.055.S.2 (Tennis Club of Newport Beach Country Club Planned
Community Coastal Zoning District Development Standards) to amend land use regulations for the
tennis club site;
• Planned Community Development Plan Amendment: An amendment to Planned Community
Development Plan No. 47 (Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community) to amend land use
regulations and development standards on the tennis club site;
• Maior Site Development Review Amendment (SD2011-002): A site development review in
accordance to Section 4.0 (Site Development Review) of Planned Community Development Plan No.
47 and Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 20.52.80 (Site Development Reviews) for
the construction of the proposed project;
• Coastal Development Permit Amendment (CD2017-039): An amendment to Coastal Development
Permit No. CD2017-039 for the demolition of existing structures, further subdivision on the tennis club
site, and implementation of the project;
Page 2 of 9
18-99
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
September 8, 2022
• Tentative Vesting Tract Map Amendment (NT2005-003): An amendment to Tentative Vesting Tract
Map pursuant to Title 19 of the Municipal Code to create separate lots for the tennis club site;
• Limited Term Permit Amendment (XP2011-004): A limited term permit to allow temporary use of
structures during construction pursuant to Section 20.60.015 of the Municipal Code;
• Development Agreement Amendment (DA2008-001): A second amendment to the Development
Agreement between the Applicant and the City, pursuant to NBMC Sections 15.45 (Development
Agreement), which would provide vested right to develop the proposed project while also providing
negotiated public benefits and extend the term of Agreement for additional ten years; and
• Addendum to the 2010 Mitigated Negative Declaration (ND2010-008): Pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), the addendum addresses reasonably foreseeable
environmental impacts resulting from the proposed development
Recommended Action:
1. Conduct a public hearing;
2. Find that the Proposed Project will not result in any new significant impacts that were not previously
analyzed in the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2010-008 (SCH 2O10091052) for the
Approved Project, and the addendum has been prepared to address reasonably foreseeable
environmental impacts resulting from the Proposed Project; and
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2022-022 recommending City Council approval of PA2021-260, which
includes adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration Addendum, and approval of a General Plan
Amendment, Local Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment, Planned Community Development Plan
Amendment, Major Site Development Review Amendment, Coastal Development Permit
Amendment, Vesting Tentative Tract Map Amendment, Limited Term Permit Amendment, and
Development Agreement Amendment for The Tennis Club at Newport Beach Project located at
1602 East Coast Highway.
Commissioner Weigand recused himself due to the Levine Act for a campaign contribution.
Associate Planner Lee used a presentation to review the requested amendment to a previously approved project,
project location, land use, previously approved project inclusions and site plan, 2012 approved entitlements,
proposed amendment details and site plan, site plan comparisons, requested project entitlements, CEQA review,
findings, an additional condition for future consideration for pickleball use, and recommended action.
In response to Vice Chair Ellmore's inquiry, Deputy Director Campbell noted that traffic, parking, and noise are
focus areas for the City as pickleball courts develop and confirmed the tennis and pickleball parking ratio of four
spaces to one court and 12 spaces to one court and the application is for tennis courts only.
In response to Secretary Rosene's question, Deputy Director Campbell stated that property development other
than tennis courts would require future application and review.
Commissioners Lowrey and Harris, Secretary Rosene, and Chair Kleiman disclosed conversations with the
property owner, applicant, and consultants. Vice Chair Ellmore disclosed no ex parte communication.
Chair Kleiman opened the public hearing.
Robert O Hill, managing owner of Newport Beach Country Club, used a presentation to review the modifications
included in the Bungalow and Lofts Plan B amendment, project renderings, Bungalow Loft first floor and top floor
drawings, a floor plan for the Clubhouse and Bungalow Spa, and photos of the pool attendant area, fitness center
desk area, men's and women's locker rooms, massage area, and koi pond area. Mr. O Hill estimated City gains
of $1,300,000, accepted the new condition, thanked staff for their work, and agreed to abide by the conditions
established by the City.
In response to Chair Kleiman's request, Mr. O Hill agreed with the conditions as drafted and the new conditions in
the staff report.
Page 3 of 9
18-100
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
September 8, 2022
In response to Commissioner Harris' inquiry, Mr. O Hill reported adequate parking accommodations and noted
monetary investments to resurface tennis courts for conversion to pickleball courts.
Sean Abdali, The Tennis Club owner and operator, noted Newport Beach having the first private pickleball club in
the world and today the largest, relayed having formed an event company to help run events, identified the different
parking needs for pickleball and tennis users and electric bikes, and explained an agreement with the Irvine
Company for parking space use Monday — Friday, at Corporate Plaza West on weekends and holidays, and
Newport Beach County Club operators on Mondays. Furthermore, he noted a reduction in large events to
accommodate parking availability, residential support of the plan to preserve the Club, and a reduction in noise
with improved pickleball equipment in the future.
Paul Christ, Granville Community Association representative, shared enthusiasm for Mr. O Hill's plans, concerns
for pickleball noise causing reduced property value, suggested installing a sound blanket and a restriction on
amplified sound, and questioned the surface area of the tennis and pickleball courts.
Tracey Miller represented Club members who are in opposition to the project and read their statements of concern.
Bret Feuerstein and Ryan Chase, 50 percent owners of The Tennis Club property, noted an arbitration in progress
to determine if Golf Realty Fund has the authority to unilaterally process the application, opposed the proposed
plan, thanked staff for their work, and expressed interest in finding a solution that enables The Tennis Club to grow
and thrive, and noted a concern that there are no pickleball courts in the applicant's plan.
Jim Mosher expressed concern for clarity in the Land Use table of the General Plan Amendment relative to the
specific allowable development at the "anomaly site," questioned the Greenlight analysis by the City, believed that
the 2012 approval was not approved by the voters, and is of the opinion that a Greenlight vote is required for the
amendment.
Denys Oberman commended staff for bringing up fluid items associated with the use, particularly, impacts of
pickleball noise, events, and capacity within the City and requested the Planning Commission remand the plan to
obtain a committal characterization of what is being proposed and assure compatibility with the surrounding area.
Mark Susson noted contradictions in the proposal and parking, noise, and traffic issues at The Tennis Club.
Deidre Machowski encouraged the Planning Commission to move forward with the plan.
Rogin Moore, The Tennis Club member and employee, challenged anyone claiming having received threatening
emails from Mr. Abdali, noted meetings with members and Mr. Abdali to share the plans and gain input, and
relayed no known opposition.
Mr. O Hill clarified the participants that, in his opinion, supported the approval of the General Plan Amendment
after two previous failed attempts.
Mr. Abdali addressed the noise issues.
At the request of Chair Kleiman, Deputy Director Campbell indicated that City Council policy is being followed
and the amendment does not require a Greenlight vote, pickleball was not examined because it was not
requested in the application and would be subject to review with the added condition if requested in the future,
and special event permits are required for tournaments. Furthermore, he indicated that existing tennis court
conversion requirements are dependent on how the tennis court was originally established, private court
conversion requirements are left up to the Homeowner Associations, and an analysis to identify if the
conversion is consistent with the entitlements would be required for this project along with environment, traffic,
parking, and noise reviews.
Chair Kleiman clarified the multi -step process for approval of the project.
Chair Kleiman closed the public hearing.
Page 4 of 9
18-101
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
September 8, 2022
In response to Secretary Rosene's question, Deputy Director Campbell agreed that the plans are conceptual
and noted that a plan check took place in 2016, more detailed designs have been put forth through the building
division, and the applicant acknowledges an update to the drawings is needed to meet the new building code,
indicated being comfortable moving forward with the recommendation, and assured the Commission that any
deviations from standards in the drawings will be cleaned up at the plan check stage.
Commissioner Lowrey expressed comfort with the findings by staff and explanations of what the General Plan
calls for and noted the popularity of pickleball among all ages, honoring the General Plan, and providing
recreational facilities.
Vice Chair Ellmore concurred with Commissioner Lowrey and clarified that the project is for tennis courts.
Commissioner Lowrey noted that staff will need to identify the parameter for approval relative to pickleball court
development.
Motion made by Commissioner Lowrey and seconded by Vice Chair Ellmore to approve the recommended
action and the additional condition.
AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Kleiman, Lowrey, and Rosene
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Weigand
ABSENT: Klaustermeier
ITEM NO. 4 BAY ISLAND GENERAL PLAN, ZONING CODE, LCP AMENDMENTS (PA2022-087)
Site Location: Bay Island
Summary:
Amendments to the General Plan, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning), and Title 21 (Local Coastal Program
Implementation Plan) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code increasing the development limit specified
for Bay Island from 23 dwelling units to 25 dwelling units. The amendments were initiated by the applicant
who seeks to return the maximum residential density of Bay Island to 25 units, consistent with prior
entitlement under Use Permit No. UP3618.
Recommended Action:
1. Conduct a public hearing;
2. Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section
15303 under Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines,
because it has no potential to have significant effect on the environment; and
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2022-023 (Attachment No. PC 1) recommending the City Council
approve General Plan Amendment No. GP2022-001, Code Amendment No. CA2022-005, and
Local Coastal Program Amendment No. LC2022-003.
Senior Planner Crager used a presentation to review the Bay Island amendments, Bay Island map,
introduction/background, updated General Plan, Zoning Code, and Local Coastal Program maps, CEQA
review, recommended action, and next steps.
Commissioner Weigand disclosed an island tour with Coralee Newman, Commissioners Lowrey and Vice
Chair Ellmore disclosed no ex parte communications, Commissioner Harris and Secretary Rosene disclosed
having spoken with the applicant, and Chair Kleiman disclosed having received a message from the applicant's
consultant.
Page 5 of 9
18-102
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
September 8, 2022
Chair Kleiman opened the public hearing
Coralee Newman, Principal with Government Solutions, agreed with the recommendations by staff and clarified
that every homesite has two parking spaces in the off -site parking garage and some include a third parking
spot on the property for a golf cart, indicated that no additional parking will be added, and asked for Planning
Commission approval.
Jim Mosher questioned the status of the dwelling unit and caretaker count, issues with current parking
availability, and sufficient parking to meet current zoning code standards.
Senior Planner Crager relayed that the caretaker unit is currently being used as a club house, 23 single family
residences exist, 48 parking spaces in the off -site parking structure are required by the Conditional Use Permit
(CUP) and do not consider the caretaker residence, and new development is subject to a Coastal Development
Permit (CDP) which would include a review of parking consistency.
Chair Kleiman closed the public hearing.
Motion made by Secretary Rosene and seconded by Commissioner Weigand to approve the recommended
action.
AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Kleiman, Lowrey, Rosene, and Weigand
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Klaustermeier
ITEM NO. 5 GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE (PA2017-141)
Site Location: Citywide
Summary:
An amendment to the Newport Beach General Plan incorporating changes to the Circulation Element.
The proposed update is a comprehensive statement of the City's transportation and mobility policies and
serves as a guide for implementation of these policies. The purpose of the update is to provide new goals
and policies that comply with State mandates such as Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) legislation and
"Complete Streets" legislation. The updated goals and policies also reflect the community's vision on
trending transportation matters, including electric vehicles (EV) and climate change, rideshare services,
public transportation, bicycle plans, telecommuting, roadway safety, as well as parking management.
Recommended Action:
1. Conduct a public hearing;
2. Find this activity exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section
15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the
environment; and
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2022-025 recommending adoption of the General Plan Circulation
Element Update to the City Council (Attachment No. PC 1).
Page 6 of 9
18-103
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
September 8, 2022
City Traffic Engineer Brine used a presentation to provide an update to the Circulation Element, context,
background, the timelines for Planning Commission review and public involvement, an update to goals and
policies, the State Law mandates, key policies, a summary, and a recommendation.
In response to Commissioner Weigand's question, City Traffic Engineer Brine indicated that the Safety Element
Update will include evacuation zones and maps and be completed at the same time as the Land Use Element
and staff can begin working with the Fire Marshal regarding evacuation plans and maps. Commissioner
Weigand suggested working with landowners on potential evacuation routes and City Traffic Engineer Brine
stated the plan can potentially include hydrogen as well, at which point, Commissioner Weigand thought
hydrogen should be added to reduce fossil fuel reliance.
In response to Chair Kleiman's inquiry, City Traffic Engineer Brine confirmed that the sixth lane on the Pacific
Coast Highway (PCH) is included in the City plan to be consistent with the County Master Plan and planning,
indicated that funding is tied to consistency with the County Master Plan, and noted regular monitoring of traffic
signal timing.
Chair Kleiman opened the public hearing.
Jim Mosher was of the opinion that the Circulation Element Update is an interim place holder document for an
ultimate Circulation Element that would be part of the comprehensive General Plan Update and expressed
concern for consistency of references, policy consequences, residual details, and maps.
Chair Kleiman closed the public hearing.
Motion made by Vice Chair Ellmore and seconded by Commissioner Harris to approve the recommended
action.
AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Kleiman, Lowrey, Rosene, and Weigand
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Klaustermeier
Vill. STUDY SESSION
ITEM NO. 6 RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES (PA2021-292)
Site Location: Citywide
Summary:
An overview of the Residential Care Facilities regulations, limitations of State and Federal law, efforts of
the City Council formed Residential Care Facilities Ad Hoc Committee, and an overview of proposed code
amendments.
Recommended Action:
Receive Presentation and provide staff direction regarding proposed amendments.
Principal Planner Murillo used a presentation to provide background, State and Federal law limitations, an
overview of existing regulations, Residential Care Ad Hoc Committee efforts, and an overview of proposed
code amendments. Furthermore, he noted the differences between licensed and unlicensed Residential Care
Facilities, the Fair Housing Act and American Disabilities Act, drug and alcohol addiction as a disability,
protected licensed facilities for six and fewer occupants, where the City started, the 2008 adopted City
Ordinance, reasonable accommodations, the Newport Beach matrix of allowed uses, the history of Residential
Care Facilities since 2008, the creation of the Ad Hoc Committee, background on Ad Hoc Committee activities,
a Newport Beach and Costa Mesa permitting comparison table, distance requirements in Newport Beach
Page 7 of 9
18-104
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
September 8, 2022
versus Costa Mesa, the Housing Element Law GC Section 655832(c)(3), proposed zoning amendments, the
Local Coastal Program (LCP) update, and next steps.
In response to Commissioner Weigand's question, Principal Planner Murillo indicated that separation
standards apply to larger facilities that meet the updated definition of a Residential Care Facility and require a
hearing officer to consider compatibility with characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood and proximity to
parks, schools, and other conditionally permitted uses of the same or similar type. Community Development
Director Jurjis stated that unlicensed facilities are prohibited by the City and are dealt with by enforcement.
Assistant City Attorney Summerhill noted State legislation for a compliance review and Community
Development Director Jurjis relayed that staff will look further into an annual compliance process.
Commissioner Weigand suggested creating and posting a patient bill of rights in every treatment center
bathroom, posting a CUP in facilities with more than six tenants sleeping on the property, directing people to
call code enforcement with a physical address of the property if they believe their housing is more crowded
than allowed, requiring businesses to provide a plan to keep people off the streets when their insurance does
not permit them to stay any longer, and creating an online education tool and website for complaints.
Derek Davis expressed concerns for safety and suggested not placing Residential Care Facilities in
neighborhoods with small children.
An unidentified speaker noted concern for a neighboring operator having committed various violations to the
Newport Beach building codes, 40 children in the immediate vicinity of a facility, and the types of patients
staying at the homes and asked the Planning Commission to allow for plenty of time for public input of the
proposed changes, vetting, and patient protection.
Jim Mosher inquired if the posted LCP proposal will be reviewed at the next Planning Commission meeting
and, if not, he requested the changed proposal be made available for public review in advance of the next
Planning Commission meeting.
Denys Oberman thought that the current ordinance was a result of a significant overconcentration attributable
to the lack of regulation of Residential Care Facilities and an unaddressed loophole where business operators
leveraged integral, single, six and under licensed facilities and combined them with unlicensed facilities. Ms.
Oberman asked that the Ad Hoc Committee and the public receive a chance to review the staff
recommendations and thoughtfully respond.
Bill Finster is of the opinion that the facilities need to be controlled, suggested that the facilities be investigated
to identify what is happening, and described a home invasion by a person staying in a facility.
Erika Keane thanked Commissioner Weigand for his support, expressed her concern for social rehabilitation
facilities in her neighborhood with 42 children, noted four facilities of its kind to date, and asked that all that is
possible be done to protect the residents and those seeking treatment.
At the request of Chair Kleiman, Principal Planner Murillo reviewed the "History of Residential Care Facilities
Since 2008" slide and stated that it reflects a combination of unlicensed and licensed facilities, new facilities in
the City since 2009 are licensed for six or few occupants, and a zoning clearance and website map are being
used for facility tracking. After Principal Planner Murillo confirmed the City's purview, Chair Kleiman reminded
the public that the City has no ability to deny facilities when they obtain licensing through the State.
In response to Commissioner Harris' question, Principal Planner Murillo reviewed the "Distance Requirements
in Newport Beach versus Costa Mesa" slide and the licensing application and CUP processes.
Commissioner Weigand expressed concern for a two -week timeline, absent public review, ideas, and open
discussion, denial by a judge, sustainable solutions, and support to residents and those in treatment and
thought parts are too rushed.
Chair Kleiman noted that the public education component is a big part, so residents know what's reportable to
code enforcement.
Page 8 of 9
18-105
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
September 8, 2022
Assistant City Attorney Summerhill announced that this study session is for informational purposes and the
Planning Commission will provide the City Council with code amendment recommendations for consideration.
IX. STAFF AND COMMISSIONER ITEMS
ITEM NO. 7 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
None
ITEM NO. 8 REPORT BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OR REQUEST FOR MATTERS
WHICH A PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE
AGENDA
Deputy Community Development Director Campbell announced that the amended Housing Element will be taken
to the City Council for adoption on September 13, 2022, along with an agenda item to establish a General Plan
Advisory Committee, the City is in receipt of a letter from the California Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD) indicating that the Housing Element is certifiable, and two agenda items are planned for the
next Planning Commission. The next Planning Commission meeting will take place on September 22, 2022,
followed by a meeting planned for October 20, 2022.
ITEM NO. 9 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSENCES
►=@ "
X. ADJOURNMENT — The meeting adjourned at 9:17 P.M.
The agenda for the September 8, 2022, Planning Commission meeting was posted on Friday,
September 02, 2022, at 12:45 p.m. in the Chambers binder, on the digital display board located inside
the vestibule of the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, and on the City's website on Friday,
September 02, 2022, at 12:15 p.m.
Lauren Kleiman, Chair
Mark Rosene, Secretary
Page 9 of 9
18-106
Attachment E
Correspondence
18-107
The Coalition to Protect Mariner's Mile
Newport Beach, California
October 7, 2022
City Council Members
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach. CA 92660
Par,ahlori After Agenda Printed
October 11, 2022
Benda Item No. SS2
Re: City of Newport Beach General Plan Update Draft Circulation Element, CE 2.3.1 Coast Highway
Ownership
Dear Mayor Kevin Muldoon and Council Members Diane Dixon, Brad Avery, Duffy Duffield, Joy Brenner,
Noah Blum, and Will O'Neill,
We are writing to you regarding our perspective, suggestions, and exceptions to Coast Highway
Ownership statement in the draft Circulation element.
The City of Newport Beach, the County of Orange, and Southern California are experiencing a major
paradigm shift in human events that is generating a restructuring of the way we live. We have seen a
significant decline in vehicle traffic, transit use, and air travel since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic,
according to a study by Southern California Associations of Governments (SCAG). As U.S. inflation hits a
four -decade high, rising gas prices have led to a sharp decline in vehicle miles traveled, resulting in roads
being used less frequently.
Coastal cities north and south of Newport Beach have transformed Pacific Coast Highway into a walkable
village by calming traffic, reducing speeds, enhancing safety, and widening sidewalks and bike lanes. In
recent years Federal, State, and County Governments have been actively encouraging and providing
substantial funds for local governments to achieve these purposes.
The core value underlying the roadway system and each development project is to enhance a
community's quality of life and do not harm. Residents and community stakeholders realize we are at a
crossroads in shaping the future of Mariner's Mile. Coast Highway Ownership along Mariner's Mile offers
a unique opportunity to assure our scenic corridor is in harmony with the abutting residential communities
of Newport Heights/Cliff Haven and Bayshore's and the Villages surrounding Newport Bay. The health,
safety, welfare, and livability of the community are of primary importance to the residents of Newport
Beach. This focus offers the potential to have a powerful and positive impact. The community's
Ownership of Coast highway can best assure optimizing the above in determining the future of Mariner's
Mile.
Page 1
Respect, Protect, and Preserve the Residential, Commercial and Environmental Qualities of Our
Bayside Town
18-108
The Coalition to Protect Mariner's Mile
Newport Beach, California
Significant concerns about road safety given the horrific and substantial number of vehicle accidents
along Mariner's Mile. Due to the schools in the area and summer activities such as Junior Lifeguards,
the safety of our children is of grave concern.
Newport Beach should remain a charming "coastal town" along the tranquil bay. West Coast Highway
must remain as it is now, adding no new vehicle lanes and retaining street parking. It is not a raceway or
a motor corridor for commuters and commercial traffic. A speedway through the heart of our town is not
safe for our children or our community. Newport Beach cannot not have it both ways. A village attracting
pedestrians and across town freeway are incompatible. Corona del Mar and Laguna Beach decided to
create a village atmosphere by preventing the widening of Coast Highway.
The Coalition to Protect Mariner's Mile was established to bring residents and stakeholders together to
enhance our community's quality of life, protect the environment, and promote appropriate designs for
Mariner's Mile. Our primary goal is to provide a charming and welcoming gathering place which fosters
the flow of pedestrians and bicyclists, not to facilitate the flow of traffic.
In 2017 the Coalition was formed when the initial Newport Village Development Proposal first made its way
into the city's approval process. We have been actively involved by providing input to the City Council and
the Planning Commission. In addition, we are continuing to participate in the on -going General Plan Update
including the Circulation element to effectively deal with the full range of mobility challenges facing our
community.
The Coalition's comments on specific Circulation Element are below:
CE 2.3 Optimal Roadway System Operation. From the current Circulation element
Policies CE 2.3.1 Coast Highway Ownership
"Pursue ownership of Coast Highway throughout Newport Beach, as opportunities arise, so
that Coast Highway can be improved to its ultimate width in Mariners Mile consistent with the
city's vision and to provide the city with more opportunities to increase efficiencies. (Imp 2.1,
14.9)"
Some history: I and two other members of the Coalition to Protect Mariners Mile met with the Local
Director of Cal Trans Mr. Ryan Chamberlain in 2018 regarding the subject of the Cal Trans development
plans for Mariners Mile and their input to the change of ownership to the City of Newport Beach. Mr.
Chamber stated that Cal Trans interregional systems views a number of roadways such and Beach
Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway to be roadways Cal Trans would be willing to relinquish ownership
of when asked by a city and an agreement is reached.
Page 2
Respect, Protect, and Preserve the Residential, Commercial and Environmental Qualities of Our
Bayside Town
18-109
The Coalition to Protect Mariner's Mile
Newport Beach, California
Important Points that we want to be reviewed and changed in the final Circulation Element.
1. Ownership of Coast Highway
Cal Trans would turn over tomorrow the ownership of coast highway to the city of Newport
Beach, if the city where to accept the ownership of the 3 bridges along Pacific Coast Highway,
The bridge over the river jetty, the Newport Blvd., Coast highway bridge and the Corona del
Mar Bridge. They would even give the city some millions of dollars for the continued
maintenance of the bridges.
The coalition to Protect Mariners Mile supports the city of Newport Beach taking over
the ownership of the Pacific Coast Highway along Mariners Mile.
2. Coast Highway to be improved to its ultimate width
Cal Trans was not in favor of the widening of the Coast Highway and would be looking at
ways to improve the Highway along Mariners Mile to be more pedestrian and bicycle friendly.
Traffic calming measures would also be on their agenda as the current traffic speed and the
number of accidents already makes the current highway width too dangerous.
The city of Newport Traffic Engineer provide incorrect information in the staff report regarding
the development review of the 2510 west Coast Highway.
PMM was not comfortable nor satisfied with this response and independently asked the city
of Newport Beach Police department to provide an accident survey regarding the accidents
that had occurred along Mariners Mile. The actual numbers provide the Newport Beach
Police department were staggering higher than what the city staff report contained.
The citizens of Newport beach along with the Coalition to Protect Mariners Mile are
also not in favor of the widening of the Mariners Mile Highway and have repeatedly
made this clear at every attempt by the city or developers to widening the highway. All
you need to do is drive down Mariners Mile and observe what's happened due to the
speed of the current traffic along the highway. It's become a series of derelict non
occupied for sale or lease properties.
From pervious discussions with some of the property owners along Mariner's Mile
they also voiced concerns that if they attempt to develop their properties, they are
faced with the cities current policy requiring them to dedicate 12 feet of their property
along the street frontage of Mariner's Mile.
3. The cities Vision of Mariners Mile to become a Village
Without a clear vision guiding the transformation of Mariner's Mile, ongoing efforts will
continue to be ineffective and disappointing. Newport Beach cannot have it both ways.
A village attracting people and across town freeway are incompatible.
Page 3
Respect, Protect, and Preserve the Residential, Commercial and Environmental Qualities of Our
Bayside Town
18-110
The Coalition to Protect Mariner's Mile
Newport Beach, California
4. Opportunities to the increase the efficiencies of Mariners Mile
There is a growing movement in Beach towns to transform PCH into a more pedestrian
and bicycle friendly thoroughfare. From Seal Beach to San Diego, cities are prioritizing
protecting children, residents, and visitors. And to do so, they have found ways to
slow traffic, enhance safety, widen sidewalks, and bike lanes, and make other changes
more compatible with a village environment.
Newport Beach can optimize the improvements of coast highway to change the current
cross-town freeway to a compatible community roadway that supports the cities future
Village environment plans and provide the city with more opportunities to implement
these plans.
While we have stated several times before we support development, we just need to ensure that proper
planning and decisions are made today that will assure Mariner's Mile is transformed into a village
concept that will endure for years to come.
The Newport City Council must consider the future of Mariner's Mile form a citywide perspective. We now
have a golden opportunity to build a genuine and lasting community consensus. We can make a strong
commitment to work together and to encourage city planners to prioritize safety and community. The
General Plan update process is the most appropriate means to assure enhancing and revitalizing our
beach city's main street Mariner's Mile to create the new village environment for the future.
Sincerely,
James F. Carlson
Chairman
The Coalition to Protect Mariners Mile
protectmarinersmile. org
jfcarlson@roadrunner.com
CC: City Manager: Grace Leung, City Attorney: Aaron Harp,
Community Development Director: Seimone Jurjis
Page 4
Respect, Protect, and Preserve the Residential, Commercial and Environmental Qualities of Our
Bayside Town
18-111
Received After Agenda Printed
October 11, 2022
Written Comments
October 11, 2022, City Council Agenda Comments
The following comments on items on the Newport Beach City Council agenda are submitted by:
Jim Mosher ( iimmosher(@yahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949-548-6229)
Item SS2. Circulation Element Goals and Policies
Rather than coming to the Study Session with no indication of what is to be reviewed at it, it
would have seemed helpful to direct readers of the agenda to the September 8, 2022, meeting
of the Planning Commission, where materials related to the Circulation Element Goals and
Policies were provided for review and a recommendation to the Council was made. At a
minimum, it would have been helpful to provide a link to where the Draft Circulation Element can
be found, if that is the document to be reviewed.
Assuming the presentation to the Council will be similar to that given to the Planning
Commission, it will likely emphasize that the draft element is a "community document" resulting
from numerous well -attended public workshops and Planning Commission reviews (see video).
While is true there have been many public meetings, it seems important to note that the public
workshops were virtual ones, held well over a year ago (the last in April 2021). And that the
decisions as to how, if at all, to incorporate the input received into the policies appear to have
been made privately by the staff and consultants who had written the policies. I do not recall any
citizens deliberative body, like a Transportation Commission, publicly reviewing the input and
controlling what ideas to use, and how. Direction from the Planning Commission seemed
minimal.
And while I appreciate staff wants to see certain policies in place, it seems a bit illogical to me
advance this element ahead of the others that are to be part of a comprehensive update of the
General Plan, and with which this is supposed to be integrated. Among other things, it provides
no clear picture of what kind of transportation improvements may be needed over the life of the
plan to accommodate the other elements. It seems more of a "plan to plan."
I also understand some promises have been made to members of the public to include such
things as a commitment to publishing "Safe Routes to School" maps. But I see nothing about
that in the currently posted draft.
As a result, this seems to me to be a sort of placeholder that will need to be formally
reexamined by the yet -to -be -created General Plan Update Advisory Committee, especially in its
relationship to the other evolving elements.
Item 1. Minutes for the September 27, 2022 City Council Special and
Regular Meetings
The passages shown in italics below are from the draft minutes with suggested corrections
shown in c*%u underline format. The page numbers refer to Volume 65.
Page 393, paragraph 4: "Charles Klobe noted the number of sold shares in Newport Beach
and urged Council to conduct a study and do what it is best for the residents of the City."
18-112
October 11, 2022, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 2 of 5
Page 394, paragraph 1: "Council Member O'Neill stated the importance of reviewing
Government Code Section 65858, which is the standard for a moratorium, and indicated it
does not apply to this situation, so the City's hands are tied by State law."
Page 394, paragraph 4: "In response to Council MemberAvery's question regarding the City
of Beverly Hill's moratorium, City Attorney Harp noted that Beverly Hills enacted a
moratorium almost two years ago, they were the only city in the State to do so, and they
were not challenged." [The video shows Mr.Harp used the word "almost." The moratorium
ordinance in Beverly Hills was adopted on July 15, 2021, much closer to one year ago, so
they are still within the allowable extension period running through July 14, 2023.1
Page 397, Item X, bullet 1, paragraph 2: "Council Member Dixon thanked the Friends of the
Library staff and Board of Trustees, and reported that the City has received $1,481,894 from
the Library Foundation since 2014 and $2, 251, 000 from the Friends of the Library to the City
of Newport Beach General Fund."
[comment: While the contributions from the Friends and Foundation may technically go
into the General Fund, they go into special accounts within that fund were they their use is
restricted to a "wish list" of expenditures requested by the Board of Library Trustees and
where they remain until spent on those purposes.]
Page 398, Mayor Muldoon, bullet 1: "Utilized slides to share the Newport Beach Junior
Lifeguard Groundbreaking, Welcome to Aquatra AguaTrax for daily water use tracking,
water leaks, alerts, and the General Plan Advisory Committee application process
(newportbeachca.gov/vacancy)" [Spelling from City News Splash, although elsewhere it is
"Aquatrax" and "AQUAtraX." In any event, it ends with "x" not "k".]
Page 398, Item XIV, paragraph 3: "Kelly Carlson, President of the Balboa Village ""er-Gha,`;-t
Merchants Association, thanked staff and Code Enforcement for responding to concerns
over the summer and..."
[note: The corporate name of this organization is actually "BVMA, Inc." with "M" most often
standing for "Merchants" (plural) as on page 15 of grant Contract C-8132-6 with the City).
The corporate name "Balboa Village Merchants Association" appears to be owned by
merchants in a different Balboa Village, in San Francisco.]
Page 402, paragraph 1: "In response to Council Member Dixon's questions, Mr. O Hill
identified a new lap pool on the rendering, stated the 28 pickleball courts will remain, ..."
[comment: My recollection is Mr. O Hill assured doubters that the existing pickleball courts
would remain untouched for he had absolutely no plan to demolish any of them. Yet the
conceptual drawing showing the lap pool also showed parts of his new hotel/condo
structures to be built over most of them. In particular, it showed only two of the five tennis
courts in the row closest to the Granville homes surviving. So, although they might be
relocated, 3x4 = 12 of the existing pickleball courts would be demolished during the
construction.]
Page 403, paragraph 8: "Council Member Dixon supported the project and proposed a
motion to approve the General Plan and Coastal Development Permit amendments and
18-113
October 11, 2022, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 3 of 5
amend the Community Development Plan to include a condition requiring 28 pickleball
courts, which Mr. O Hill agreed ."
Page 405, first full paragraph, sentence 2: "Council Member Avery supported removing the
tree aqd but expressed concern for the new tree providing the same benefits to the
environment."
[Council Member Avery's expression of support was conditional on the replacement plan
immediately providing the same benefits as the existing parkway tree. Hence his "no" vote
on replacement by a single, smaller tree.]
Item 6. Resolution No. 2022-71: Establishing "No Parking"
Restrictions on a Portion of Bayside Drive to Improve Street
Sweeping Effectiveness
Seeing this item on the consent calendar seems a little strange, since according to the staff
report, City staff sent notices of the pending item to the potentially impacted residents, but their
response is apparently not yet known. If there are any who do not agree with their HOA, they
may be surprised to see this presented as an item without controversy.
Item 13. Planning Commission Agenda for the October 6, 2022 Special
Meeting
In connection with the Planning Commission's October 6 Item 2 study session on "Initiation of
Zoning Code and Local Coastal Program Amendments Related to Fractional Ownership," the
note in the Action Report that the result was "Staff was directed to return with agenda item
forming an ad hoc committee," conceals the details of a rather extraordinary meeting in which,
in my view, staff directed the Commission to consider something completely different from what
the Council had directed it to do.
To those who attended the Council's September 13 study session on the same subject, and its
September 27 special meeting to initiate code amendments, the Council's direction to staff was
quite clear: they were to ask the Commission to study the timeshare ordinances in the
Cities of Sonoma and St. Helena and, using them as a model, amend Newport Beach's
codes to include fractional homeownership by a set of strangers within the definition of
"timeshare," while not "casting the net so wide" as to include homes shared by family or
friends. And then bring back the revised definition to the Council as quickly as possible,
which staff assured the Council could be done at the Commission's October 20 meeting, and
back to the Council by November, where the Council might consider other policy changes
(currently Newport Beach allows timeshares only in the commercially -zoned districts
where a hotel/motel operation would be allowed).
Tossing that direction aside, staff told the Commission that following St. Helena would be a poor
"Option A" because Newport Beach might be sued (a possibility the Council had considered and
accepted).
18-114
October 11, 2022, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 4 of 5
Instead, and without telling the Commission it was something the Council had never considered,
let alone promoted or asked the Commission to review, staff told the Commission they should
consider a better "Option B" in which "fractional ownership" would be regarded not as a form of
timeshare (as the Council had requested) but rather as an entirely new form of land use that
would be allowed in areas, such as residential districts, where timeshares are prohibited.
And while staff acknowledged the Council had a certain sense of urgency about the matter, staff
agreed with the Commission that before sending anything back to the Council it would be
prudent to appoint a committee to meet privately for the next three months with industry
representatives to work out a set of regulations acceptable to them.
Hence the Action Report the Council sees.
In my view, again, that is completely opposite to what I heard the Council ask for and what I
heard the staff publicly promise it could do.
As a result, I believe many of those who attended the September 13 and 27 Council meetings
will feel betrayed. It seemed clear at those meetings that the Council agreed with them that
fractional homeownership was not acceptable in the residential neighborhoods of Newport
Beach, and that the City was on a quick path to making that its public policy.
Instead, Newport Beach now appears to be on a slightly slower path to becoming what may be
the first city in California to make fractional homeownership explicitly legitimate in all its
residential areas.
And quite troublingly, the City is being steered onto this unwanted path not by our City Council,
but by our hired, professional staff.
Will the Council do anything to get the Planning Commission back on the track it requested?
Item 15. Resolution No. 2022-72: Amending and Re -Titling City
Council Policy B-9 to Provide Guidelines for City Dedication Plaques
This policy has long seemed a bit of a muddle.
Most recently, to accommodate its wishes for naming the new Library Lecture Hall after donors,
the Council found it expedient to waive rather than follow Policy B-9 (Item 11 at the August 23,
2022, meeting). So it seems to have been relegated to the "sometimes follow" category, and it is
not obvious if the present revisions are intended to apply to the dedicatory plaque for that
facility.
And given the continuing role Policy B-9 gives the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission
in recommending namings (when the policy is followed), it is surprising to see it come to the
Council without any new review by PB&R, including review of the opening paragraph, which
could be read as limiting the policy's scope to parks and recreational facilities.
Among the new ambiguities I see the proposed revisions introducing:
1. Does the Council expect every new park and facility (of any kind) to be given a name?
2. Does it expect each to have a naming plaque?
18-115
October 11, 2022, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 5 of 5
3. 1 would guess the answers are "yes." But why, then, does the proposed new Subsection
D refer only to "Plaques for City facilities"? Does the Council want something different
for parks?
4. For multi -year projects, does the new Subsection D.3 mean the plaque should list all the
Council members in office while the project was pending, or just those at the start and
end? And how large is "large" in "large, multi -year projects"? Would it be better to leave
it out?
5. Since this is apparently attempting to promote uniformity, is there a preferred place
where the dedication plaques should go? I am guessing there is one somewhere on the
new City Hall, dedicated in 2013 (without a "name" as far as I know), but I don't have a
clue as to where to look for it.
18-116
September 29, 2022
Tony Brine, P.E., T.E.
City Traffic Engineer
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Subject: Draft Circulation Element Update
Mr. Brine,
Thank you for the email response to my emailed questions.
Per your request I re -reviewed the staff report to the Planning Commission. I attended all the General
Plan Steering Committee meetings where I commented to the Steering Committee and was allowed by the
Committee to ask questions of staff. The public was provided inconsistent, vague, imprecise, unclear general
answers, some of which were incorrect.
Per your September 8, 2022 staff report to the Planning Commission the "purpose of the Update at this time
is to provide new Goals and Policies that will comply with State mandates such as Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
legislation and "Complete Streets" legislation. "It is also being refreshed to reflect the community's vision on
trending transportation matters" and is scheduled for a "City Council public hearing on October 11, 2022" at
which time action can be taken to approve the Draft Circulation Element Update.
Planning staff clarified on September 28th that the October 11, 2022 City Council hearing will be a study session
with this item being re -considered for approval on October 25, 2002.
The Draft Circulation Element Update is being presented for public comment and City Council action as a
whole Element. Resolution No. PC2022-025 recommends adoption of the General Plan Circulation Element
Update to the City Council. There are no exceptions in the Resolution for content/uncompleted items. The
city's piecemeal approach and its impact on the Circulation Element Update's approval process/CEQA
compliance is not discussed Resolution No. PC2022-025.
The Draft Circulation Update has been determined to be exempt from CEQA by staff. (See Resolution No.
PC2022-025). Staff has determined the Draft Circulation Element Update is a planning document and does
not have the potential to impact the environment.
Planning staff acknowledged on September 28th the required traffic analysis is being prepared at this time,
When asked, Staff did not want to speculate if the 9,000+ housing units estimated to be required to satisfy
City RHNA allocation and other actions required to implement the Housing Element Update will have any
impact on the city's circulation system.
The "purpose of the Update at this time is to provide new Goals and Policies that will comply with State
mandates such as Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) legislation and "Complete Streets" legislation." Goals and
Policies have been included in the Draft Circulation Update, but the analysis to support and verify the
feasibility and effectiveness of these Goals and Policies has not been completed at this time. Nor will the
analysis results be known when the City Council is scheduled to approve the Circulation Element Update on
September 25, 2022.
Page 1 of 17
18-117
While Complete Streets and Climate Change/GHG reduction Goals and Policies have been added,
implementation relies on the 2014 General Plan Implementation Program' and the 2014 Program EIR
mitigation measures. There is no discussion of the need to re-evaluate or update these General Plan
components as part of the Draft Circulation Element Update. There should be, it is common sense!
The Draft Housing Element contains a Master Plan of Streets and Highways (Figure CE1) which has been
impacted by the Housing Element Update's Housing Plan. The Housing Plan will impact the pending Land Use
Element Update and require a Municipal Code Amendment. The Draft Circulation Element Update along with
other mandated discretionary actions required to implement the Housing Element must be considered as a
"whole" for the public understand the Draft Circulation Element Update's "balance" between roadway
efficiency, optimization, expansion and reliance on Measure M funding, versus, the impacts planned regional
and city-wide growth will have on the community's circulation network and quality of life. You acknowledge
the future traffic analysis will "guide a policy discussion about the design of the future roadway network."'
• Since you acknowledge there will be a Policy discussion after the traffic analysis, which will be completed
after the scheduled City Council hearing on the Circulation Element Updated, why are you having this
limited/piecemealed policy discussion "at this time"?
• Does this approach of only incorporating Complete Streets and VMT and GHG reduction Goals and Policies
at this time fulfill the City Council's mandate to staff that the Circulation Element Update will "ensure
adequate mobility for the community"?
• Do you believe the Goals and Policies in the Circulation Element are independent from one another and
their feasibility and effectiveness has been verified at this time?
On September 28th planning staff confirmed the Circulation Element will be revised following the Land Use
Element Update and Municipal Code Amendment "Should roadway or intersection deficiencies be identified"?
These revisions will include a re -review of the Circulation Element's Goals and Policies, the General Plan
Implementation Program and CEQA mitigation measures.
• Why update the Circulation Elements Goals and Polices at this time prior to the completing the analysis
to verify their feasibility and effectiveness if they are going to be re-evaluated in the future? What is
gained?
The public is no position to provide the "community vision on trending transportation matters" because staff
has not provided the public with any information about the effects of the Draft Circulation Element Update
on the circulation system. There have been no studies or alternatives presented to the public.
It appears this intentional piecemeal approach is designed to limit the public's participation and
understanding of the proposed changes to the Element and prevent the Element from being voted on
pursuant to the City Charter.
Let me clarify and add to my prior comments and request for information. Information I/the public have vet
to receive.
1) My comments focus heavily on the 6th Cycle Housing Element Updates, Housing Plan which the city
estimates will add 9,649 residential units within the city by 2029. That represents a minimum of a 20%
' Source: 2014 General Plan, Chapter 13 Implementation Program
z Source: September 8, 2022 Planning Commission staff report.
Page 2 of 17
18-118
increase in both housing stock and population by 2029. In contrast from 2000 to 2020 Newport Beach
had an annual growth rate of 1% compared to 0.07 for the region'
I and many members of the public are concerned how the Draft Circulation Element Update
accommodates this growth along with additional population growth allowed by additional State housing
legislation passed after the 2006 Circulation Element was adopted. The residents just don't see how the
city can accommodate this growth within this short timeframe. The public is also concerned about
affordable housing projects avoiding discretionary review and proceeding direct to building permits per
state housing legislation. These projects will be exempt from CEQA and not be required to contribute to
VMT or ADT reductions. Combined, the Draft Housing Element Update and additional housing legislation
have the potential to significantly increase ADT and VMT within the city. The Draft Circulation Element
Update does not address at this time how the Circulation Element will "ensure adequate mobility for the
community".
You know this. The September 8, 2022 staff report to the Planning Commission acknowledges the
following:
"The update of the Circulation Element was prepared simultaneously with the recently approved 6th
Cycle Housing Element."
"In January 2020, the City Council directed staff to update the Housing Element for compliance with
the State Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), along with preparing a simultaneous update
to the Circulation Element to address legal mandates and ensure adequate mobility for the
community."
"The 2006 Circulation Element includes the Master Plan of Streets and Highways, future primary
intersection geometries, and acceptable levels of service at those intersections. The proposed
amendment proposes no changes to these components at this time."
"The updated NBTM will be used in the preparation of the traffic analysis during the Land Use Element
Update process to understand the impact of the additional housing added to the General Plan. Should
roadway or intersection deficiencies be identified, the results will guide a policy discussion about the
design of the future roadway network."
The City Council did not instruct staff to update the Circulation Element in increments!
To reiterate my prior comments, the Draft Circulation Element Update is being circulated for public
comment prior to:
a) Prior to completing the analysis to support and verify the feasibility and effectiveness of the Climate
Change/GHG reduction Goals and Policies;
b) Prior to the completion the Land Use Element Update which in addition to adding 9,649 housing
units could, (according to planning staff) add thousands of square feet of new
commercial/retail/office uses to re -balance the cities jobs/housing balance. The public continues to
request and has not received even basic information, like a Project Description for the project being
analyzed in the Circulation Element Update,
3 Background data: SCAG Pre -Certified Local Housing Data for the City of Newport Beach, Updated April 2021
Link: https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/newport-beach-he-0421.pdf?1620773521
Page 3 of 17
18-119
c) Prior to knowing the potential circulation impacts from other required General Plan Element Updates
(example: Safety Element) required to implement the Housing Element Update;
d) Prior to knowing the effect of the required Municipal Code Amendment on growth. Planning staff
has indicated the Amendment may place a cap the number of RHNA units, as well as the square
footage of any new commercial/retail/office use proposed to re -balance the city's Jobs/Housing
balance;
e) Prior to reviewing the adequacy of the 2014 General Plan Implementation Program and 2014
Program EIR mitigation measures implementing the Circulation Element Goals, Policies and Master
Plan of Roadways; and
f) Prior to the completion of required CEQA documentation including CEQA mitigation measures (many
will be incorporated into an update to the 2014 General Plan Implementation Program), and findings
of technical studies including a VMT/traffic analysis.
These changes have the potential to impact the Circulation Element's Master Plan of Streets and
Highways, Figure CE1, General Plan Roadway Cross -Sections, Figure CE2 and Level of Service (LOS) on city
roadways, all of which have the potential to impact the feasibility and/or desirability of the Draft
Circulation Element's Goals and Policies, public safety and quality of life for residents.
In order to provide meaningful comment on the Draft Housing Element Update Goals and Policies, the
public needs to know What the project is, the results of project changes and analysis to understand how
the Draft Circulation Element proposes to accommodate and "balance" growth and the impacts of this
growth on the community.
2) Second, the Draft Circulation Element Update has the potential to result in one or more potentially
significant adverse impacts on the environment and is not exempt from CEQA. The Draft Circulation
Element Update's required traffic analysis has the potential to result in one or more potentially significant
adverse impacts to the city's circulation network. The city's piecemeal approach to updating the
Circulation Element is not discussed in Resolution No. PC2022-025 CEQA Findings. Given the City Council's
2020 directive to staff to prepare "a simultaneous update to the Circulation Element to address legal
mandates and ensure adequate mobility for the community", this piecemeal approach to updating the
(whole) Circulation Element is not permitted by CEQA and if approved, will subject the city to CEQA
litigation and result in an updated Circulation Element that is inconsistent with the approved Housing
Element Update, Land Use Element and the Local Coastal Program.
It appears this piecemealed approach is designed to limit public participation by limiting information
about the effects of the Draft Circulation Element Update and limit its scope, preventing the Element
from being voted on by the public pursuant to the City's Charter.
The public has a right to know the environmental impacts caused by the Housing Element Update and if
the Draft Circulation Element's Policies and General Plan Implementation Program's measures will in fact
result in actual VMT and GHG reductions prior to commenting on the Draft Circulation Element Update's
Goals and Policies.
The Public has a right to know prior to commenting on the Draft Circulation
Element Update if the real reason the city is piecemealing the Circulation Element
Update is to intentionally reduce the scope and effects of the Circulation Element
Update below the threshold of City Charter, Section 423 to avoid it being subject
to a vote of the public.
Page 4 of 17
18-120
3. Third, why is the city is piecemealing the Circulation Element update process. The Planning Commission
September 8, 2022 staff report states:
"The 2006 Circulation Element includes the Master Plan of Streets and Highways, future primary
intersection geometries, and acceptable levels of service at those intersections. The proposed
amendment proposes no changes to these components at this time."
The reason the "proposed amendment proposes no changes to these components at this time" is because
the analysis has not been completed. Not because the analysis concluded no changes are necessary!
Since January 2020, the city has spent a lot of taxpayer money to substantively update the 2006 Circulation
Element and all the public is getting for our money are a few cut and paste paragraphs and 18 new goals
and policies to address Complete Streets and climate change/GHG reduction!
• Why is the Circulation Element Update being piecemealed?
The city is not up against a legal deadline to update the Circulation Element.
The city will face no penalties if the Circulation Element is updated with the required Land Use Element
and Municipal Code Amendment which would be the standard process.
The State office of Environmental Planning (OPR) identifies "Key CEQA Policies to Remember" when
preparing/updating a general plan. The first policy is that "CEQA should be integrated into planning
processes and guide development of the plan itself." and "The purpose of preparing an environmental
analysis is not only to inform decision -makers and the public of a general plan's potential adverse
environmental impacts, but also to allow environmental considerations to influence the design of the plan
itself. To accomplish this purpose, the CEQA analysis should be prepared in coordination with the
development of the general plan."
An interim report released in August 2022 found that in 2020 anti -housing CEQA lawsuits targeted more
than half of California's annual housing production4. As of August 2022, the report's authors see no
indication of a change in the increasing trend for CEQA litigation targeting housing production. The
legislature when enacting CEQA did not intend CEQA to be used as a statute to control growth. Attorney
and California Senator Scott Weiner, (a pro -growth, pro in -fill affordable housing advocate) has called
CEQA the "law that swallowed California." 5 CEQA has changed, it favors legacy residents and special
interests with wealth, power, or both.
Relying on compliance with the applicable laws and regulations may be sufficient, however "figuring it out
later" as to whether mitigation will be necessary — and if so, whether it will be feasible and meets the
targeted reduction — is not likely going to be a defensible approach.
Given the increasing risk of CEQA litigation involving new housing production, it is imperative the
City of Newport Beach fully comply with CEQA.
4. Fourth, a policy of whatever a future traffic analysis concludes will be the standard(s) incorporated into
the Circulation Element is not acceptable. All Elements of the General Plan have equal standing. The
Updated Land Use Element must be consistent with the approved Housing Element Update (Housing
" August 2022 Interim report by Holland & Knight's Jennifer Hernandez, published by the Center for Jobs & the Economy/California
Business Roundtable, documents that CEQA litigation targeted nearly 50,000 housing units — approximately half the state's total annual
housing production — in 2020 alone.
Link: https://www.cegadevelopments.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/166/2022/08/here-l.pdf
5 Source: SB 118, State Committee on Budge. CEQA the Law that Swallowed California, March 14, 2022.
Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuZFhpwFtS8
Page 5 of 17
18-121
Plan), as well as all other General Plan Elements. Policies such as Policy CE 2.1.1 which establishes
minimum Level of Service (LOS) Standards throughout the city and Figure CE1 and CE2 which establish the
Master Plan of Streets and Highways and General Plan Roadway Cross -Sections are critical to maintaining
public safety and the quality of life for residents.
The September 8, 2022 staff report to the Planning Commission states:
"Senate Bill (SB) 743, approved in 2013, establishes Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) as the metric for
determining transportation impacts in CEQA analysis. The city will utilize VMT analysis as part of
the CEQA process but will also continue to analyze development projects using the Level -of -Service
(LOS) analysis as prescribed in the city's Traffic Phasing Ordinance."
While LOS analysis has been replaced by VMT analysis in CEQA documents for determining GHG
reductions on roadways. LOS is being used by the city to determine congestion (LOS). For example, the
traffic analysis may conclude in order to maintain LOS D, Coast Highway needs to be widened through
Corona Del Mar and Mariners Mile beyond that shown on Figure CE1 and CE2. Or that the LOS standard
must be reduced to LOS E or F. The public has a right to know the conclusions of the VMT/traffic analysis
prior to commenting on the Draft Circulation Element Update's Goals and Policies. Consistent with SB
743 and Caltrans, the public may decide the answer are new or amended Goals and Policies which
significantly reduce VMT and ADT rather than continue to widen roadways to increase traffic volumes
and/or reduce LOS, and that these Goals and Polices to reduce VMT and ADT be prioritized Goals and
Policies to be met in the Land Use Element Update and Municipal Code Amendment.
5. Fifth, it appears the city is claiming the Draft Circulation Element Update is reducing climate change,
greenhouse gas emissions and sea level rise.
• Provide the public the facts/studies which prove these statements in the Draft Circulation Element
Update. Include the targeted GHG threshold reductions in this information.
Just because a property is designated by the Land Use Element for residential mixed -use and zoned for
that use, doesn't mean the residents will work close by or use nearby retail, commercial, business or office
uses. According to the Federal census for Newport Beach for the period 2016-2020, the mean travel time
to work for workers age 16 years+ is 26.2 minutes.' Just because a resident lives within % mile from a bus
stop does not mean the resident will use the bus stop or mass transit. Just because a residential project
is constructed with limited to no on -site parking does not mean that the project residents will not have
cars or use a service such as Uber. Proving this claim at the General Plan level will be challenging.
If the city claims the burden of proof will be on individual development projects, then I wish these
developers good luck in trying to prove this and monitor the effectiveness over time.
Given the increasing risk of CEQA litigation involving unsupported claims of reducing climate change,
greenhouse gas emissions and sea level rise, it is imperative the city not adopt unsupported Goals and
Policies and fully comply with CEQA.
(See additional comments below on Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas Reductions.)
6 Source: United States Census Bureau, Quick Facts Newport Beach.
Link: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/newportbeachcitycalifornia/LFE305220#LFE305220
Page 6 of 17
18-122
6. Sixth, provide information explaining how the Safety Element's Evacuation Plan and Natural Hazards
Mitigation Plan is incorporated in the Draft Circulation Element.
The Draft Circulation Element Update should be revised to include:
a) New Goals, Policies, Figure(s) and text identifying emergency circulation evacuation routes for
the existing and planned circulation system; and
b) An explanation of how these circulation routes will function in the event of an emergency; their
effectiveness during peak hour(s) traffic conditions; under various levels of evacuation (small-
scale evacuation to city-wide evacuation) and under different types of emergency evacuations
(earthquake, wildland/urban fire, flooding, etc.) and weather conditions.
Circulation Element Goals, Policies and Figures are needed now to address existing conditions. They will
be needed even more given the rapid population growth projected to occur within the region and within
the city from the Housing Element Update, pending Land Use Element Update and population growth
allowed by State housing legislation adopted after the 2006 Circulation Element was adopted.
7) Seventh, include a new Section addressing adopted aircraft flight paths and operational characteristic
from John Wayne Airport (JWA) over the city. Include Goals and Policies for aircraft including the use of
drones within the city. "The City Council believes that the impacts related to JWA are now, and will
continue to be, the most significant threat to the quality of life of Newport Beach residents."'
• Revise the Draft Circulation Element Update to include a Figure(s) containing the adopted JWA flight
paths for commercial and private aircraft and Safety and Compatibility zones;
• Add a Figure (cross -sections) identifying the landing and departure flight paths and elevations over
the city;
• Include text summarizing the 1985 JWA Settlement Agreement and its September 30, 2014 extension;
• Include an overview of the Aviation Committee and it role to assist the City in the implementation of
Council Policy A-17;
• Include a history of past and future ALUC action(s) on the Housing Element Update (2022 denial); if
individual development projects will be subject to ALUC notification; and review and what happens if
the ALUC denies one or more individual development projects;
• Include an overview of City Council Resolution 2022-13;
• Include an overview of the JWA Fly Friendly Program; and
• Include Circulation Element Goals, Policies and Implementation Measures for aircraft and drone
overflight throughout the city.
8) Eighth, existing public safety circulation network hazards exist within the city. The Circulation Element
Update's Goals, Policies and Figures must solve existing public safety circulation network hazards. There
has been no acknowledgement, let alone discussion or draft Goals and Policies provided to the public to
address existing public safety circulation network hazards. These hazards are a result of regional growth
and changes in technology occurring after the 2006 Circulation Element was last updated, and since 2014
when the General Plan Implementation Program and General Plan CEQA Mitigation Measures were last
updated.
Bicycle and electric bicycle use of existing public streets and sidewalks has increasing dramatically over
the past few years. It is a concern currently being evaluated by the city.
' Source: City Council Policy A-17 NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL AIRPORT POLICY.
Link: https://www.newportbeachca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/20996/635745355502270000
Page 7 of 17
18-123
The shared use of sidewalks with pedestrians, bicycles, electric bicycles and skateboards along Coast
Highway within the Mariners Mile, West Newport, along Seashore Drive and on the boardwalk on the
peninsula is not safe now and represents a public safety hazard to all who use or cross these facilities.
Approved and pending residential use not yet built will exacerbate this public safety hazard along Coast
Highway (2510 WPCH residential project and the proposed Newport Village Mixed -Use project).
The Housing Element Update and its required implementing actions combined with growth from State
housing streamlining legislation will significantly exacerbate this existing public safety hazard. (See
comments below for specific actions to be taken.)
9. Nineth, there is a need to update the 2014 General Plan Implementation Program and CEQA mitigation
measures referenced in the Circulation Element concurrent with the Circulation Element Update.
Planning staff acknowledges a lot has changed since 2006 when the Circulation Element was las updated
and 2014 when the General Plan Implementation Program and CEQA mitigation measures were last
update. The city's last RHNA allocation contained in its 51" Cycle Housing Element was a total of 5 units.
The city's 61" Cycle RHNA allocation totals 4,845 units. The State has declared a housing emergency. There
have been over 80 housing related bills passed by the state legislature in the last 5 years to facilitate and
streamline housing development. New technologies have been developed which are having a significant
impact on mobility within the city (example: electric bicycles). The State legislature has mandated local
governments incorporate Complete Streets and measures to address climate change in their general
plans.
These changes impact regional growth. The current Department of Finance RHNA allocation for southern
California is 1,341,827 housing units for the 2021-2029 planning period. This number could easily double
as local governments try to meet the RHNA affordability requirements and account for additional
housing/population growth permitted by additional legislation designed to streamline housing
development to address the State declared housing emergency.
Regional growth will impact the regional mobility which will impact the regions circulation network. These
changes will impact the mobility within the city, as well as the city's circulation network. The city's
Circulation Element Update must be coordinated with an update of the 2014 General Plan
Implementation Program and CEQA mitigation measures. This is why OPR OPR) identifies "Key CEQA
Policies to Remember" when preparing/updating a general plan. The State RHNA mandate has upset the
normal general plan update process for many, if not most local governments.
Now that the Housing Element has been updated and HCD approval is expected, it is time to get back on
the normal path for updating the remainder of the General Plan Elements required to implement the
Housing Element Update.
The following additional comments address specific comments on topics, Goals and Policies in the Draft
Circulation Element Update; stress the importance of public involvement; the need to update the General
Plan as a whole; the need to endorse CEQA and protect the environment; and provide mitigation measures
requiring new projects to pay their fair share — not exempt the projects and place the burden on the
residents, versus the current piecemeal approach and finding ways to avoid and exempt projects from CEQA
requiring the residents to bear the burden.
Page 8 of 17
18-124
Additional Comments
The Draft Circulation Element Introduction states:
"The goals and policies in the Circulation Element are balanced with the goals and policies of the Land
Use and Housing Elements in order to provide a correlation between land use and transportation
planning. In so doing the General Plan provides the best possible balance between the City's future
growth, service levels for all travel modes, and community character. The Circulation Element is
consistent with the Complete Streets Act (Assembly Bill 1358), the Sustainable Communities and
Climate Protection Act of 2008 (Senate Bill 375), the Vehicle Miles Traveled provisions of Senate Bill
743, the Transportation Demand Management Ordinance, and the Local Coastal Program." (Page 7-
6)
Taking the statements in the paragraph above individually;
"The goals and policies in the Circulation Element are balanced with the goals and policies of the Land
Use and Housing Elements in order to provide a correlation between land use and transportation
planning. In so doing the General Plan provides the best possible balance between the City's future
growth, service levels for all travel modes, and community character." (Page 7-6)
• Provide the facts to prove "the General Plan provides the best possible balance between the City's future
growth, service levels for all travel modes, and community character".
This is a future statement, a forecast of what the city hopes the General Plan and its Circulation Element
Update will conclude once the Land Use Element, other General Plan Elements are updated, the Municipal
Code is amended, the traffic analysis, and all the other technical analysis required for these actions are
completed. The Draft Circulation Element text acknowledges this when it states:
"A traffic analysis of the General Plan update will forecast future traffic volumes, analyze intersection
performance, and identify necessary roadway and intersection improvements to maintain LOS D. Once
those needs are determined, the City of Newport Beach will consider all goals and will review the
Master Plan of Streets and Highways." (Page 7-6)
• Revise this statement to acknowledge LOS E is allowed by the existing and Draft Circulation Element.$ 9
• Explain how the city can make this statement ("the General Plan provides the best possible balance
between the City's future growth, service levels for all travel modes, and community character") prior to
the update of the Land Use Element, other General Plan Elements, Municipal Code and technical studies
(including a "traffic analysis") required to implement the Housing Element Update. Particularly, when you
acknowledge the traffic analysis "will guide a policy discussion about the design of the future roadway
network". It seems this statement is the goal of the Draft Circulation Element, but there is no evidence at
this time, this goal will be met.
8 Source: August 16, 2022 Draft Circulation Element Update, page 7-6
"In the past, LOS E was established as the goal in the airport area and at specific intersections in Corona del Mar to
achieve the desired balance."
9 Source: August 16, 2022 Draft Circulation Element Update, Policy CE 2.1.1, B. "LOS "E" at any intersection in the Airport
Area shared with Irvine, and in Corona del Mar (subject to findings of the most recent General Plan update traffic study)
(Imp 16.3)"
Page 9 of 17
18-125
A "balance" with the "goals and policies of the Land Use and Housing Elements in order to provide a correlation
between land use and transportation planning" by definition involves compromise. In this case, growth which
compromises public safety and quality of life! Elements of the General Plan are required to be internally
consistent.10 The Draft Circulation Element and the General Plan as a whole must be revised to achieve
internal consistency. The State Office of Planning and Research (OPR) provides guidance on Preparing,
Integrating, and Implementing the General Plan, as well as legal requirements." These guidelines should be
followed to ensure the city General Plan is legally defensible and encourage public participation in this process.
Public input is needed to "reflect the community's vision on trending transportation matters" and what the
public feels is the best "balance" between growth and quality of life. The Circulation Element must explain
how the Element proposes to accommodate and "balance" growth, and the impacts of this growth on the
community. In order to "reflect the community's vision" the public needs the data relied upon by city in
reaching their determination that the Draft Circulation Element represents the best balance in order to make
an informed decision. The community may prefer other options/alternatives, or changes to the Goals and
Policies, such as replacing policies with Outcome -based Policies12 to achieve a designated outcome or
standard.
If as Planning staff stated on September 28th the city's emphasis is on VMT reduction, the public has a right to
know the city's targeted thresholds and the effectiveness of the VMT reduction Policies prior to commenting
on the Draft Circulation Element Update's Goals and Policies.
The Circulation Element Update's Introduction Section also states:
"The Circulation Element is consistent with the Complete Streets Act (Assembly Bill 1358)." (Page 7-6)
The Complete Streets Act is further discussed on page 7-11 of the Draft Circulation Element Update:
..... "the Complete Streets Act (Assembly Bill 1358) requires that Circulation Elements "plan for a
balanced multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of streets, roads, and
highways, defined to include motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists, children, persons with disabilities,
seniors, movers of commercial goods, and users of public transportation, in a manner that is suitable
to the rural, suburban, or urban context of the general plan." Providing a balance for multiple modes
is one strategy toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions and combating climate change consistent
with the City's goals of reducing risks to residents from climate change and sea level rise."
The California Complete Streets Act requires cities and counties making substantive revisions to the circulation
element of their general plans to include modifications to plan for complete streets. By inclusion of Complete
Street in the Circulation Element Update, the city acknowledges this Circulation Element Update is a
substantive revision. The Circulation Element Update is "also being refreshed to reflect the community's vision
on trending transportation matters" and to "ensure adequate mobility for the community".
What does a Complete Street look like in Newport Beach?
Where are/will Complete Streets be located?
io See: https://www.*dsupra.com/legalnews/court-orders-city-to-cure-internal-49755/
11 Source: https://opr.ca.gov/docs/OPR C9 final.pdf
iz Outcome -based Policies specify the desired result that a policy intends to achieve, rather than describing a specific
process or action that must be followed to achieve compliance.
Page 10 of 17
18-126
The Vague, imprecise, unclear generic text in the Draft Circulation Element Update is not adequate! These
answers are needed now to address existing problems.
• Include a Master Plan of Complete Streets Figure in the Circulation Element;
• Include a General Plan Complete Streets Roadways, Cross Sections Figure and a description of the types
of vehicles allowed on Complete Streets;
• Incorporating pedestrian and electrified vehicles for coastal roadways which are being used as Complete
Streets (example: Coast Highway, Seashore Drive & Balboa Blvd.) and pedestrian paths/sidewalks within
the city (examples: the Boardwalk, and sidewalks along the Mariners Mile);
• Include a General Plan Complete Streets Intersection Configuration Figure showing turning movements
for different Streets and Highways shown on Figure CE1, Master Plan of Streets and Highways;
• Include a General Plan Complete Streets Phasing Plan with specific deadlines for planned improvements
(Consider adding new Outcome -based Policies to achieve these standards);
• Include text with supporting data describing how Complete Streets will impact roadway efficiency and
public safety; and
• Include a discussion of Caltrans Director's Policy on Complete Streets (DP-37).
Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas Reductions
The Draft Circulation Element contains the following statement:
"Providing a balance for multiple modes is one strategy toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions
and combating climate change consistent with the City's goals of reducing risks to residents from
climate change and sea level rise." (Page 7-11)
• In places, the language in the Circulation Element is vague, imprecise and unclear. For example, in the
statement above, is the city claiming the Circulation Element is reducing climate change, greenhouse gas
emissions and sea level rise?
• If the city is claiming the Draft Circulation Element Update is reducing climate change, greenhouse gas
emissions and sea level rise, provide the facts to prove the above statement and other statements such
as how the Circulation Element will in -fact reduce "risks to residents from climate change and sea level
rise."
• How effective will the Circulation Element Update be at achieving this goal?
• Are the Climate Change/GHG reduction Goals and Policies feasible? How do you know prior to the
completion of the on -going analysis?
• Explain with supporting data how the impacts of growth from the updated Housing Element (increased
VMT and ADT) and the climate change and greenhouse gas reduction measures (reduced VMT and GHG)
will impact the community's circulation network and the community's quality of life.
• In order to achieve the reductions in VMT and GHG emissions:
Will there be mandator requirements for increased use of mass transit?
Will there be mandatory limits placed on the VMT per day, per person? And if so, how will these standards
be enforced and monitored?
• Explain how the proposed Draft Circulations Element Update's ratio of multiple modes of transportation
represents the best "balance" not only to reduce the "risks to residents from climate change and sea level
rise", but to public safety and quality of life. (Why is this ratio the best "balance". Why not more of one
mode than another.) What is the existing/future ratios of multiple modes of transportation within the
city?
Page 11 of 17
18-127
Roadway Cross -Sections
Update Figure CE2 General Plan Roadway Cross -Sections to include actual conditions by adding
dimensions including:
a) Dimensioned minimum lane widths;
b) Dimensioned on -street parking;
c) Dimensioned pedestrian walkways; and
d) Dimensioned bike lanes and Complete Streets.
Update Figure CE2 General Plan Roadway Cross -Sections to include actual conditions by adding depictions
including, where allowed:
e) Depictions of parked cars and buses;
f) Depictions of bike lanes and the different types of vehicles permitted on Complete Streets;
g) Depictions of landscaping, planter boxes, bus parking benches and infrastructure allowed on public
sidewalks (fire hydrants, signals, street lights, above ground electrical boxes, underground utility
vents);
h) Bicycles and pedestrians on shared sidewalks; and
i) Outdoor dining areas encroaching onto public sidewalks and parking areas or otherwise impacting
required parking and parking lot management.
(Consider adding additional cross -sections to provide the public with a clear depict of these conditions)
Policy CE 1.2.4 Traffic SVstem Management
"Continue to implement measures, such as special traffic signal timing, to reduce the impact of high -
volume summer traffic on persons living along and around the beach and bay, as well as visitors. (Imp
16.7)"
The City's implementation of Policy CE1.2.4 is not working. Currently, traffic signal timing prioritizes
roadway efficiency by increasing the person -carrying capacity of the transportation system in a manner
which has increased signal wait times, not only during the summer but year-round on persons living along
and around the beach. (Examples: West Coast Highway and Balboa Blvd. in the vicinity of Newport Pier).
The public and the city need to re -asses this Policy's feasibility and effectiveness and revise/replace this
Policy with an Outcome -based Policy(s). Policies that set a standard to be achieved (example: establish a
maximum pedestrian wait-time(s) at signalized intersections).
Policy CE 2.1.2 Street and Highway Network
"Construct the circulation system described on the map entitled Newport Beach Circulation Element -
Master Plan of Streets and Highways shown in Figure CE1 and Figure CE2 (cross-section). (Imp 14.9,
16.3)"
Conduct a public survey or vote of the public per the City Charter Section 423 to determine the future of
the Master Plan of Streets and Highways and General Plan Roadway Cross -Sections shown in Figure CE1
and Figure CE2.
The public should be given the current facts (a traffic analysis which incorporates proposed Land Use
Element changes and Municipal Code changes, as well as growth from State housing streamlining
legislation) and circulation related accident data. In addition, the public should be provided with
Page 12 of 17
18-128
alternatives prior to commenting on this Policy. Only by providing the facts and alternatives can the public
provide the "community vision on trending transportation matters" such as the desired language of Policy
CE 2.1.2 Street and Highway Network.
Regional growth combined with residential growth approved by the Housing Element Update and growth
from State legislation streamlining housing will result in changes to the roadways depicted on Figures CE1
and CE2. Information on the impact of this growth on the city circulation network must be provided to
the public to enable the pubic to meaningfully comment on the Draft Housing Element Update.
Policy CE 2.3.1 Coast Highway Ownership
"Pursue ownership of Coast Highway throughout Newport Beach, as opportunities arise, so that Coast
Highway can be improved to its ultimate width in Mariners' Mile consistent with the City's Master Plan
of Streets and Highways and the OCTA Master Plan of Arterial Highways and to provide the City with
more opportunities to increase operational efficiencies. (Imp 2.1, 14.9)"
I support the pursuit of ownership of Coast Highway throughout Newport Beach, as opportunities arise, as
long as the State does not impose land use or circulation related restrictions. If the City is going to acquire
Coast Highway ownership, the public must be given the opportunity to decide if Coast Highway is improved
to its ultimate width along Mariners' Mile consistent with the City's Master Plan of Streets and Highways.
Therefore:
• Conduct a public survey or vote of the public per the City Charter Section 423 to determine the future of
Coast Highway within the City and in particular within the Mariner's Mile and Corona Del Mar;
• Incorporate the existing and increased use of alternate forms of transportation (such as electric bikes) in
the design of Coast Highway within the Draft Circulation Element Update;
• Provide proof bicycle and electric bicycle use of existing sidewalks along Coast Highway within the Mariner
Mile and West Newport is safe for pedestrians. Bicycle, and electric bicycle use of existing sidewalks along
the Mariners Mile is not safe now and represents an existing public safety hazard to pedestrians and
bicyclists. Approved and proposed residential projects not yet built will exacerbate this problem (2510
WPCH and the proposed Newport Village Mixed -Use Project);
• Goals and Policies should be amended to prioritize VMT reduction over increased ADT on Coast Highway;
• Prioritize existing/future tourist retail/commercial interests over vehicle efficiency; and
• Prioritize public safety over vehicle efficiency. Give the public the options, let the
public decide!
Policy CE 2.3.5 Improvements to Reflect Changing Traffic Conditions
"Based on the monitoring of traffic conditions, consider additional improvements in areas with
operations issues, such as intersections with heavy turn volumes (e.g., additional turn lanes, traffic
signal progression, etc.). (Imp 16.2)"
The Circulation Element Update's Goals, Policies and Figures must solve existing public safety hazards. There
is no acknowledgement of existing public safety hazards in the Draft Circulation Element Update. These
hazards are a result in changes in technology occurring after the 2006 adoption of the Circulation Element;
and the 2014 adoption of the General Plan Update, its Program EIR, General Plan Implementation
Program/CEQA Mitigation Measures.
Page 13 of 17
18-129
Bicycle, and electric bicycle use of existing sidewalks along Coast Highway within the Mariners Mile and west
Newport is occurring now and is increasing. It is not safe now and represents a public safety hazard to
pedestrians and bicyclists. Approved residential use (2510 WPCH and the proposed Newport Village Mixed -
Use Project) will exacerbate this public safety hazard. The Housing Element Update; its required implementing
actions; and growth from State housing streamlining legislation will significantly exacerbate this existing public
safety hazard.
• This existing public safety hazard must be addressed now as part of this Circulation Element Update.
• Based on an assessment of the hazards, add Goals, Outcome -based Policies, Figures and implementation
measures to solve existing public safety hazards such as this. For example, the public may prefer VMT
reduction and designation of Coast Highway within the Mariners Mile as a Complete Street over widening
with additional vehicle lanes increasing roadway capacity and safety hazards.
• In so doing the city must also comply with existing Goals and Policies. These include:
Goal CE 2.1
"A roadway system with no significant gaps that provides for the efficient movement of goods and people
in the City of Newport Beach, while maintaining the community's character and its residents' quality of
life."
Policy CE 2.1.3 Current Traffic Data
"Monitor traffic conditions on an ongoing basis and update Master Plan as necessary. (Imp 16.4)"
Goal CE 2.2
"A safe and efficient roadway system."
Policv CE 2.2.3 Up -to -Date Standards
"Periodically review and update street standards to current multimodal capacity and safety practices. (Imp
16.4, 16.6)"
Policv CE 2.2.4 Traffic Control
"Design traffic control measures to ensure City streets and roads function with safety and efficiency for
vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. (Imp 16.7)"
Goal CE 5.5
"Enhanced and maintained public water transportation services and expanded public water transportation
uses and land support facilities. (Policy HB 6.5)"
Policy CE 5.2.12 Bicycle Safety
"Provide for safety of conventional bicyclists, e-bicyclists, equestrians, and pedestrians by adhering to
current national standards and uniform practices especially where modes interact. (Imp 16.11)"
Policv CE 5.2.13 Bicvcle Conflicts with Vehicles and Pedestrians
"Minimize conflict points among motorized traffic, pedestrians, e-bikes, and conventional bicycle traffic.
Support increased enforcement activity for bicycle and e-bike travel, with a focus on The Oceanfront
Boardwalk and around school zones. (Imp 16.11)"
Policy CE 5.2.14 Integrated Bicycle Improvements
"Coordinate community bicycle and pedestrian facilities in a citywide network for continuity of travel. (Imp
16.11)"
Page 14 of 17
18-130
• Creation of new Goals and Policies, as well as, compliance with the existing Goals and Policies above
requires the city obtain current Hazards information and prepare a traffic analysis which incorporates
existing conditions; required Land Use Element changes and Municipal Code changes to implement the
Housing Element Update; and growth from State housing streamlining legislation.
• The city must provide the public with alternative solutions to mitigate this public safety hazard. Only by
providing the facts and alternatives can the public provide the "community vision on trending
transportation matters" such as this, and for the public to comment on the adequacy of existing policies
or provide recommended new Goals and Outcome -based Policies which achieve a designated outcome
or standard.
• Based on the traffic analysis and community input, update Figure CE3 Bikeways Master Plan.
• Update Figure CE2 General Plan Roadway Cross -Sections to include, dimensioned minimum lane widths,
on -street parking, pedestrian walkways, bike lanes and Complete Streets. Add additional cross -sections
as needed to depict the different existing/planned roadway configurations discussed in the Circulation
Element.
• The potential solutions to this existing public safety hazard involve one or more potentially significant
adverse environmental impacts on the environments and triggers CEQA compliance.
• Conduct a public survey or vote of the public per the City Charter Section 423 to determine the future of
Coast Highway within the city and in particular within the Mariner's Mile.
• Prioritize public safety over vehicle efficiency. Give the public the options, let the
public decide!
CE 5.4.2 Overhead Pedestrian Street Crossings
"Consider overhead pedestrian crossings in areas where pedestrian use limits the efficiency of the
roadway or signalized intersection and/or where an overhead crossing provides for improved
pedestrian safety. (Imp 16.11)"
• Given the limited width of public easements combined with the historical increase in the price of real
estate and the cost of construction, the city should review the feasibility and effectiveness of this Policy.
The city has spent a lot of tax payer money on projects that have gone nowhere!
• Review the feasibility of this Policy and report findings to the public to allow the public to make meaningful
comment.
• The public must be given the opportunity to decide what roadways if any, have Overhead Pedestrian
Street Crossings and their location. Example: Coast Highway. Give the public the options, let the public
decide!
• Only by providing the facts and alternatives can the public provide the "community vision on trending
transportation matters" which is one of the stated purposes of the Circulation Element Update at this
time.
• Conduct a public survey or vote of the public per the City Charter Section 423 to determine the future of
overhead pedestrian crossings in areas where pedestrian and bicycle use limits the efficiency of the
roadway (Example: Coast Highway) or signalized intersection and/or where an overhead crossing provides
for improved pedestrian safety. Perhaps reducing VMT and prioritizing policies supporting mass transit
or other forms of mobility is the public's preferred method for improved pedestrian safety.
Policy CE 5.4.2 is driven by the city's prioritization of roadway efficiency (LOS) by replacing public
crosswalks with pedestrian bridges, allowing the adjustment of signal timing to reduce vehicle wait
times at signalized intersections, thereby increasing the number of vehicles passing through the
intersection.
Page 15 of 17
18-131
• Note: The Coastal Commission has stated they do not support removal of existing public access (cross-
walks) to coastal resources. The Coastal Commission supports new public access routes to coastal
resources. Again, you know this!
• Revise this Policy or add a new Policy which clarifies overhead bridges within the Coastal Zone will only
add additional coastal access routes and will not remove or replace existing public access routes.
Policy CE 8.1.5 Expanded Parking in Corona del Mar
"Permit conversion of Corona Del Mar residential lots adjacent to commercial areas and commercial
lots for parking to support commercial uses. Encourage continued use of existing parking on residential
zoned lots, as well as existing shared parking lots. (Imp 2.1, 8.1, 8.2, 24.1)"
While the Policy sounds good, given the historical increase in the price of real estate, the city should review
the feasibility and effectiveness of this Policy as written.
• Review the feasibility of this Policy and report findings to the public to allow the public to make meaningful
comment.
Policy CE 8.2.1 Parking Management
"Develop parking management programs for areas with inadequate parking. (Imp 16.10)"
Since the outbreak of COVID, the city has allowed designated public and private parking areas to be used for
outdoor dining. The Covid emergency has been declared over by the federal government. Yet some areas
still contain dining areas in parking areas extending the impacts of reduced parking on surrounding areas.
Much has been learned from this experience.
Revise Policy CE 8.2.1 to include additional Policy standards and/or conditions addressing the temporary
or permanent use of public and private parking areas for outdoor dining use in the event of emergencies
or non -emergencies. (Example: payment of in -lieu fees to the city to mitigate the impacts on adjacent
properties and/or neighborhoods. The use of said fees shall be used exclusively for the benefit of
impacted properties and/or neighborhoods.)
Incorporate AB 2097 and its effect on-onsite and off -site parking into the circulation Element.13 Explain
how AB 2097 will impact existing residential, commercial, or other development projects. (Note just
because on -site parking is not required does not mean that tenants and or guests will not own and drive
cars and trucks. They will just park off -site burdening the community).
Removal of Vague, Imprecise and Unclear Language
• The Draft Circulation Element Update contains Policies that continue to "consider", "evaluate" and
"review" actions (kick the can down the road). Replace these Policies with Outcome -based Policies which
achieve the desired outcomes or standards.
• Expand the Scope of the Ad Hoc Municipal Code and Council Policy Review Committee or General Plan
Advisory Committee or create a new committee or hire an independent legal counsel to review the Draft
Circulation Element and remove or clarify vague, imprecise and unclear language.
" AB 2097, Friedman. Residential, commercial, or other development types: parking requirements. Adopted September
22, 2022. "This bill would prohibit a public agency from imposing any minimum automobile parking requirement on any
residential, commercial, or other development project, as defined, that is located within 1/2 mile of public transit, as
defined." Link: https://Ieginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/bilINavClient.xhtml?bill id=202120220AB2097
Page 16 of 17
18-132
The Draft Circulation Element Update contains many statements of what the city "can", "could" or steps
that are "recommended". These statements should be replaced with precise and clear statements of
what the city is going to do, not what it could do, a time period for completion and a monitoring plan to
insure completion.
Thank you for this opportunity to provide comments on the Draft Circulation Element Update. Please consider
these comments along with my prior email comments to be part of the public record.
If you have any questions/responses, please provide them in writing so they can be included in the public
record.
Thank you,
Dave Tanner
223 62nd Street
Newport Beach, CA 92663
dave@earsi.com
Page 17 of 17
18-133
From: Brine, Tony
Sent: September 14, 2022 11:45 AM
To: 'Jimmy Thomas'
Cc: Houlihan, James
Subject: RE: Ensign ... Resolving The Beacon Street Issue
Hello Jimmy,
Thank you for your comments. There will be a new Policy in the Circulation Element Update to prepare
Suggested Route to School maps for all schools citywide.
Tony Brine, P.E., T.E.
City Traffic Engineer
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Phone : (949) 644-3329
e-mail : tbrine@newportbeachca.gov
From: Jimmy Thomas <jtx12@hotmail.com>
Sent: September 13, 2022 6:36 PM
To: NMUSD Board of Education<NMUSDBoardOfEducation@nmusd.us>; Dept - City Council
<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Cc: Brine, Tony <tbrine@newportbeachca.gov>; Houlihan, James <JHoulihan@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Ensign ... Resolving The Beacon Street Issue
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
Summary
Changes made at Ensign in March 2022 created dangerous conditions for students on Beacon
Street.
These dangerous conditions can be mitigated by distributing a "Suggested Routes To School
Map" to Ensign parents and students.
18-134
"School Route Plans" are required by regulations ( MUTCD ). Regulations require these plans
to be produced by the city and the school district. A "Suggested Routes To School Map" is
derived from a "School Route Plan".
I recommend the school district hire or contract a traffic engineer with school area experience
to facilitate the development of a "School Route Plan" for Ensign.
Background
When Ensign opened in August 2021, one major student safety benefit of the single entrance
design was, for the first time in decades, most bikes traveled in bike lanes and most pedestrians
traveled the network of sidewalks. This was a relief for everyone living in and commuting
through the area.
In March 2022, changes were made at Ensign that rerouted most bikes from Cliff Drive bike
lanes to Beacon Street travel lanes, and many pedestrians from Cliff Drive sidewalks to Beacon
travel lanes. Now, Beacon Street travel lanes are a dangerous mix of moving vehicles, high
speed ebikes, dropoffs/pickups, and pedestrians with very little separation. We are routinely
seeing 25mph ebikes coming within inches of pedestrians. Some of these kids are as young as
12. This dangerous condition is a violation of regulations that can be corrected if the school
district routes bikes back into bike lanes and pedestrians back onto sidewalks by distributing a
"Suggested Routes to School Map" to parents and students..
For example, the Irvine School District and the Coalinga School District publish "Suggested
Routes to School" maps. These maps are derived from the "School Route Plan" required by
regulations in MUTCD. The following link shows Irvine's "Suggested School Route Map"
distributed to parents and students:
https:HlegacV.cityofirvine.org/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=29589
Here is another example from Coalinga which contains good background material.
18-135
s://www.coalinaa.com/DocumentCenter/View/l 23/Coalinaa-ATP-1I I-WEB-PDF
A School Route Plan Is Required by the MUTCD - It Is Not Optional
The "School Route Plan" is a regulatory requirement. ( Section 7A.01 06 )
Regulations require that the school school district, the police department, and traffic engineering
work in unison to develop the plan, ( Section 7A.01 07 )
The safe separation between bikes, pedestrians, and vehicles comes from developing the
school route plan in a "systematic manner". ( Section 7A.01 07 ) In practice, "systematic
manner" means applying generally accepted planning principles.
The "School Route Plan" includes all traffic control devices in the school area. ( Section 7A.01
09 ). This means the plan would include existing bike lanes and drop off zones, since they are
classified as traffic control devices. Many school route plans extend up to 1 mile or more from
the school to cover the student walk zone.
MUTCD also refers to a remedy providing the school board the jurisdiction they need to make
road improvements on a school route defined in the "School Route Plan" when justified by a
traffic study. (CVC 21372, CVC21373)
In MUTCD, guidance means a deviation from the regulation is only allowed if engineering
judgment or an engineering study indicates the deviation to be appropriate. In other words,
potential liability is not an exception to school route plan regulations.
Important Excerpts California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Part 7: Traffic
Control for School Areas
18-136
7A.01
Guidance:
06 A school route plan for each school serving elementary to high school students should be
prepared in order to develop uniformity in the use of school area traffic controls and to serve as
the basis for a school traffic control plan for each school.
07 The school route plan, developed in a systematic manner by the school, law enforcement,
and traffic officials responsible for school pedestrian safety, should consist of a map (see Figure
7A-1) showing streets, the school, existing traffic controls, established school walk routes, and
established school crossings.
08 The type(s) of school area traffic control devices used, either warning or regulatory, should
be related to the volume and speed of vehicular traffic, street width, and the number and age of
the students using the crossing.
09 School area traffic control devices should be included in a school traffic control plan.
California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Part 7: Traffic Control for School
Areas
https:Hdot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/safety-programs/documents/ca-
mutcd/rev6/camutcd2014-part7-rev6. pdf
18-137