HomeMy WebLinkAboutGPAC_2005_05_1611111111 lill 1111111111111111111111111 lill III III
*NEW FILE*
G PAC 2005 05 16
n
LJ
May 16, 2005
7:00-9:00 p.m.
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
AGENDA
OASIS Senibr Center
5t" and Marguerite
7:00
I.
Call to Order
7:05
II.
General Plan Traffic Study Preliminary
Alternatives Analysis - Continued Discussion
**BRING REPORT FROM 5/9 AGENDA PACKET**
8:45
III.
Discussion of Future Agenda Items
•
8:50
IV.
Public Comments
•
Public Comments are invited on items generally considered to
be within the subject matter jurisdiction of this Committee --
Speakers are asked to limit comments to 5 minutes. Before
speaking, please state your name and city of residence for the
record.
*Reports are available on line at www.nbvision2025.com
11
•
TABLE ES-1
RECOMMENDED OVERALL GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT ALTERNATIVES SUMMARY
SUBAREA
TRUE MINIMUM
SUBAREA OPTIONS
ONLY MINIMUM
SUBAREA OPTIONS
ONLY MAXIMUM
Airport Area
Adopted General Plan
Option 2
Option 3
Balboa Village
Option 3
Option 3
Option 4
Banning Ranch
Option 1
Option 1
Option 2
Cannery Village TAZ 1449
Adopted General Plan
Option 1
Option 1
Cannery Village TAZ 1454
Option 2
Option 2
Option 1
Corona Del Mar
Option 2
Option 2
Option 1
Lido Isle
Option 1
Option 1
Adopted General Plan'
Lido Village TAZ 1452
Adopted General Plan
Option 3
Option 1
Lido Village TAZ 1453
Adopted General Plan
Option 1
Option 2
Mariner's Mile
Adopted General Plan
Option 1 or 2
Option 1 or 2
McFadden Square TAZ 1450
Adopted General Plan
Option 1
Option 1
McFadden Square TAZ 1451
Adopted General Plan
Option 1
Option 1
Newport Center / Fashion Island
Adopted General Plan
Option 2
Option 1
Old Newport Boulevard
Adopted General Plan
Option 2
Option 1
West Newport Highway and AdjoiningResidential
Option 16
Option 16
Option 5
West Newport Industrial
Option 3
Option 3
Option 2
' Only alternatives considered are option 1 (existing densities) and currently adopted General Plan
C:\Documents and Settings\dlektorich\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK2\[ESforPresentationMayl605.xis]ES-1
L
TABLE ES-2
TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
PRELIMINARY
ALTERNATIVE'
DAILY TRIP GENERATION
EXISTING
ALTERNATIVE
4 EXISTING
%A EXISTING
A (ADOPTED)
%AADOPTED
1. CURRENTLY ADOPTED
687,141
879,759
1 192.618
28.03%
0
0%
2. TRUE MINIMUM
687,141
842,368
155,227
22.59%
37,391
-4%
3. SUBAREA MINIMUM
1 687,141
880,085
192,944
28.08%
326
0%
4. SUBAREA MAXIMUM
687,141
961,043
273,902
39.86%
81.284
9%
1 Alternative = General Plan buildout scenario.
C:\Documents and Settings\dlektorich\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK2\[ESforPresentationMay1605.xls]ES-2
•
Ij
TABLE ES-3 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
AM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NS/EW
EXISTING
CURRENTLY1
I ADOPTED
TRUE
I MINIMUM
SUBAREAl
I MINIMUM
SUBAREA
I MAXIMUM
ICU
I LOSI
ICU
I LOS
I ICU
I LOS
I ICU
I LOS
I ICU
I LOS
1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw.
DNE
DNE
1.27
F
DNE
DNE
DNE
DNE
1.281
F
2. Superior Av. & Placentia Av.
0.661
B
0.72
C
0.74
C
0.73
C
0.721
C
3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw.
0.841
D
1.01
F
0.98
E
1.00
E
1.031
F
4. Newport Bl. & Hospital
Rd.
0.54
A
0.79
C
0.79
C
0.84
D
0.931
E
5. Newport Bl. & Via
Lido
0.41
A
0.54
A
0.52
A
0.55
A
0.601
A
6. Newport BI. & 32nd St.
0.73
C
0.52
A
0.47
A
0.48
A
0.57
A
7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw.
0.84
D
1.03
F
1.01
F
1.02
F
1.04
F
8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw.
0.80
C
1.021
F
1.011
F
1 1.04
F
1.06
F
9. MacArthur Bl. & Campus Dr.
0.61
B
0.761
C
0.75
C
0.77
C
0.81
D
10. MacArthur Bl. & Birch St.
0.49
A
0.711
C
0.70
B
0.75
C
0.79
C
11. Von Karmen Av. & Campus Dr.
0.55
A
0.66
B
0.64
B
0.69
B
0.74
C
12. MacArthur BI. & Von Kerman Av.
0.46
A
0.54
A
0.54
A
0.51
A
0.52
A
13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr.
0.74
C
0.92
E
0.93
E
0.93
E
0.98
E
14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St.
0.55
A
0.79
C
0.80
C
0.81
D
0.87
D
15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. N
0.77
Cl0.96
E
0.96
E
0.97
E
1.00
E
16. Birch St. & Bristol St. N
0.66
B
0.92
El
0.93
El
0.92
E
0.91
E
17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. S
0.72
C
0.93
E
0.91
E
0.93
E
0.93
E
18. Birch St. & Bristol St. S
0.46
A
0.52
A
0.52
A
0.54
A
0.53
A
19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.
0.70
B
0:68
B
0.68
B
0.70
B
0.73
C
20. Irvine Av. & University Dr.
0.82
D
1.14
F
1.15
F
1.161
F
1.14
F
21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr.
0.66
B
0.70
B
0.69
B
0.70
B
0.71
C
22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr.
0.57
A
0.61
B
0.61
B
0.62
B
0.63
B
23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr.
0.721
C
0.78
C
0.78
C
0.79
C
0.82
D
24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr.
0.57
Al0.67
B
0.66
BI
0.69
B
0.70
B
25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr.
0.38
A
0.391
A
0.40
Al0.40
A
0.41
A
26. Dover Dr. & 16th St.
0.55
A
0.641
B
0.64
BI
0.64
B
0.64
B
27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.70
B
0.861
D
0.84
DI
0.871
D
0.891
D
28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.69
B
0.83
D
0.82
D
0.831
D
0.84
D
29. MacArthur Bl. & Jamboree Rd.
0.88
D
0.96
E
0.97
E
0.96
E
0.96
E
30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. N
0.55
A
0.70
B
0.71
C
0.71
C
0.69
B
31. Ba view Pl. & Bristol St. S
0.48
A
0.60
A
0.59
A
0.61
B
0.61
B
32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S
0.75
C
0.96
E
0.97
E
0.97
E
0.94
E
33. Jamboree Rd. & Ba view W .
0.411
A
0.48
A
0.48
A
0.48
A
0.48
A
34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr.
0.60
A
0.64
B
0.65
B
0.66
B
0.65
B
35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av.
0.45
A
0.51
A
0.501
A
0.51
A
0.52
A
36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd.
0.69
B
0.78
C
0.761
C
0.79
C
0.81
D
37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.56
A
0.61
B
0.601
A
0.60
A
0.64
B
38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr.
0.47
A
0.55
A
0.54
A
0.58
A
0.69
B
39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw.
10.581Al
0.68
B
0.85
D
0.85
D
0.87
D
0.88
D
40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.36
A
0.36
A
0.34
A
0.38
A
0.39
A
41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.32
A
0.39
A
0.39
A
0.39
A
0.43
A
42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.401
Al0.50
A
0.50
Al0.50
A
0.551
A
44. Avocado Av. &San Miguel Dr. 1
0.33
0.37
A
0.38
Al0.39
Al0.43
A
45. Avocado Av. & Coast Hw.
0.77
C
0.78
C
0.80
' C
0.81
D
TABLE ES-3 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
AM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NS/EW
EXISTING
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
TRUE
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
ICU
LOS
ICU
LOS
ICU
I LOS
I ICU
I LOS
I ICU
I LOS
46. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.31
A
0.47
A
0.47
Al0.471
A
0.47
A
47. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.26
A
0.38
A
0.39
A
0.38
A
0.38
A
48. MacArthur Bl. & Bison Av.
0.63
B
0.78
C
0.77
C
0.79
C
0.81
D
49. MacArthur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.71
C
0.77
C
0.77
C
0.78
C
0.79
C
50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.64
B
0.77
C
0.77
C
0.81
D
0.83
D
51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr.
0.56
A
0.63
B
0.62
B
0.63
B
0.71
C
52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw.
0.60
A
0.74
C
0.74
C
0.73
C
0.74
C
53. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.55
A
0.69
BI
0.691
B
0.69
B
0.721
C
54. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.30
A
0.45
A
0.45
A
0.46
A
0.461
A
55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd.
0.28
A
0.30
A
0.301
A
0.30
A
0.31
A
56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr.
0.44
A
0.52
A
0.511
A
0.55
A
0.54
A
57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw.
0.99
E
1.08
F
1.061
F
1.06
F
1.08
F
58. Marguerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.31
A
0.38
A
0.381
A
0.38
A
0.39
A
59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw.
0.83
D
0.90
D
0.88
D
0.89
D
0.90
D
60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.441
Al0.60
A
0.59
A
0.60
A
0.62
. B
61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw.
0.61
B
0.67
B
0.68
B
0.67
B
0.68
B
62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR-73 NB Rams
0.45
A
0.54
A
0.54
A
0.53
A
0.55
A
64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.37
A
0.63
B
0.63
B
0.63
61
0.66
B
65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.47
A
0.57
A
0.57
A
0.561
Al0.57
A
C:\Documents and Settings\dlektorich\Local Settings\Temporary Internet FileslOLK2\[ESforPresentationMay1605.xls]EE
5
TABLE ES-4 (PAGE 1 OF 2)
PM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NS/EW
EXISTING
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
TRUE
MINIMUM
I SUBAREA
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
I MAXIMUM
I
Sl
ICU
I LOS
I ICU
I LOS
I ICU
I LOS
I ICU
I LOS
1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw.
DNE
DNE
1.29
F
DNE
DNE
DNE
DNE
1.281
F
2. Superior Av: & Placentia Av.
0.67
B
0.82
D
0.86
D
0.86
D
0.83
D
3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw.
0.90
D
0.99
E
0.94
E
0.95
E
1.04
F
4. Newport BI. & Hospital Rd.
0.70
B
0.97
E
0.96
E
1.01
F
1.18
F
5. Newport BI. & Via Lido
0.37
A
0.46
A
0.41
A
0.45
A
0.52
A
6. Newport BI. & 32nd St.
0.78
C
0.71
C
0.58
A
0.63
B
0.81
D
7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw.
0.93
E
1.12
F
1.10
F1
1.15
F
1.19
F
8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw.
0.671
BI
0.85
D
0,831
DI
0.871
D
0.921
E
9. MacArthur BI. & Cam us Dr.
0.85
DI
1.26
F
1.251
F1
1.29
F
1.29
F
10. MacArthur BI. & Birch St.
0.66
B
0.80
C
0.80
Cl0.86
D
0.86
D
11. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr.
0.79
C
0.93
E
0.94
E
1 0.98
E
1.02
F
12. MacArthur BI. & Von Karman Av.
0.53
A
0.64
B
0.64
BI
0.64
B
0.65
B
13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr.
0.85
D
1.24
F
1.23
Fj
1.25
F
1.26
F
14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St.
0.60
A
0.80
C
0.80
Cl0.80
C
0.81
D
15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. N
0.94
E
1.08
F
1.08
F1
1.08
F1
1.08
F
16. Birch St. & Bristol St. N
0.61
B
0.72
C
0.72
C
I �0.731
C
0.72
C
17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. S
0.58
A
0.77
C
0.76
Cl0.78
C
0.771
C
18. Birch St. & Bristol St. S
0.44
A
0.53
A
0.53
A
0.54
A
0.541
A
19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.
0.94
E
0.90
D
0.90
D
0.91
E
0.941
E
20. Irvine Av. & University Dr.
0.89
D
1.19
F
1.16
F
1.17
F
1.181
F
21. Irvine Av. & Santiago Dr.
0.72
C
0.78
C
0.76
C
0.78
C
0.77
C
22. Irvine Av. & Highland Dr.
0.60
A
0.63
B
0.63
B
0.65
B
0.66
B
23. Irvine Av. & Dover Dr.
0.64
B
0.70
B
0.71
C
0.72
C
0.72
C
24. Irvine Av. & Westcliff Dr.
0.77
C
0.82
D
0.80
C
0.80
C
0.83
D
25. Dover Dr. & Westcliff Dr.
0.48
A
0.561
A
0.57
Al0.58
A
0.59
A
26. Dover Dr. & 16th St.
0.57
A
0.64
B
0.65
B
0.651
B
0.64
B
27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.74
C
0.90
D
0.88
D
0.91
E
0.94
E
28. Ba side Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.70
B
0.94
E
0.93
E
0.95
E
0.98f
E
29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd.
0.91
E
0.99
E
0.99
E
1.00
E
1.08
F
30. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. N
0.59
A
0.69
B
0.68
B
0.69
B
0.72
C
31. Ba view PI. & Bristol St. S
0.56
Al0.63
B
0.63
B
0.63
B
0.64
B
32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S
0.72
C
0.85
D
0.84
D
0.86
D
0.87
D
33. Jamboree Rd. & Bayview W .
0.57
A
0.701
B
0.70
BI
0.71
C
0.71
C
34. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. /University Dr.
0.64
B
0.691,
B
0.681
Bj
0.70
B
0.71
C
35. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Av.
0.51
A
0.581
A
0.68
Al0.59
A
0.62
B
36. Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr./Ford Rd.
0.65
B
0.72
C
0.73
C
0.73
Cl0.76
C
37. Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.57
A
0.65
B
0.65
B
0.68
B
0.71
C
38. Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr.
0.63
B
0.71
C
0.71
C
0.78
Ct4l
39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw.
0.74
C
0.89
D
0.87
D
0.86
D
40. Santa Cruz Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.36
A
0.34
A
0.34
A
0.36
A
41. Santa Rosa Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.52
A
0.71
C
0.70
B
0.68
B
42. Newport Center Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.52
Al0.63
B
0.62
B
0.62
B
44. Avocado Av. & San Miguel Dr.
0.72
C
0.79
C
0.78
C
0.79
C45.
Avocado Av. & Coast Hw.
0.66B
0.80
, C
0.79
C
0.83
D
►�I
TABLE ES-4 (PAGE 2 OF 2)
PM OVERALL CONSTRAINED IMPROVEMENTS ICU SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NS/EW
EXISTING
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
TRUE
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
ICU
I LOS
ICU
LOS
ICU
I LOS
I ICU
LOS
ICU
I LOS
46. SR-73 NB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.37
A
0.56
A
0.56
Al0.561
A
0.56
A
47. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bison Av.
0.17
A
0.29
A
0.29
A
0.29
A
0.29
A
48. MacArthur BI. & Bison Av.
0.60
A
0.80
C
0.80
C
0.81
D
0.81
D
49. MacArhtur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.90
D
1.06
F
1.06
F
1.06
F
1.09
F
50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.93
E
1.04
F
1.02
F
1.06
F
1.08
F
51. MacArthur BI. & San Miguel Dr.
0.65
B
0.77
C
0.76
C
0.76
C
0.80
C
52. MacArthur BI. & Coast Hw.
0.71
C
0.83
D
0.80
C
0.79
C
0:81
D
53. SR-73 NB Ram s & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.431
Al0.53
A
0.521
A
0.53
A
0.541
A
54. SR-73 SB Ramps & Bonita Canyon Dr.
0.41
Al0.59
A
0.571
A
0.59
Al0.60
A
55. San Miguel Dr. & Spyglass Hill Rd.
0.31
Al0.38
A
0.381
A
0.38
A
0.39
A
56. San Joaquin Hills Rd. & San Miguel Dr.
0.54
Al0.68
B
0.681
B
0.68
B
0.71
C
57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw.
0.69
BI
0.79
C
0.751
C
0.75
C
0:77
C
58. Mar uerite Av. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.35
A
0.51
A
0.491
A
0.50
A
0.53
A
59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw.
0.82
D
0.91
E
0.90
D
0.92
E
0.91
E
60. Spyglass Hill Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.30
A
0.46
A
0.45
A
0.46
A
0.50
A
61. Poppy Av. & Coast Hw.
0.65
B
0.76
C
0.75
C
0.75
C
0.741
C
62. Newport Coast Dr. & SR-73 NB Rams
0.31
A
0.40
A
0.39
A
0.40
A
0.41
A
64. Newport Coast Dr. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
0.29
A
0.47
A
0.46
A
0.48
A
0.51
A
65. Newport Coast Dr. & Coast Hw.
0.501
A
0.60
A
0.60
A
0.60
Al0.611
B
• C:\Documents and Settings\dlektorich\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK2\[ESforPresentationMay1605.xls]EE
•
`1
TABLE ES-5
• DEFICIENT INTERSECTION SUMMARY
INTERSECTION NS/EW
EXISTING
CURRENTLY
ADOPTED
TRUE
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MINIMUM
SUBAREA
MAXIMUM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
1. Bluff Rd. &Coast Hw.
DNE
ONE
F
F
DNE
DNE
DNE
DNE
F
F
3. Superior Av. &Coast Hw.
D
D
F
E
E
E
E
E
F
F
4. Newport BI. & Hospital Rd.
A
B
C
E
C
E
D
F
E
F
6. Newport BI. & 32nd St.
C
C
C
D
B
C
C
C
D
E
7. Riverside Av. &Coast Hw.
D
E
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
8. Tustin Av. &Coast Hw.
C
B
F
D
F
D
F
D
F
E
9. MacArthur BI. &Campus Dr.
B
D
C
F
C
F
C
F
D
F
11. Von Kerman Av. &Campus Dr.
A
C
B
E
B
E
B
E
C
F
13. Jamboree Rd. &Campus Dr.
C
D
E
F
E
F
E
F
E
F
14. Jamboree Rd. &Birch St.
A
A
D
D
D
D
D
D
E
E
15. Campus Dr. &Bristol St. N
C
E
E
F
E
F
E
F
E
F
16. Birch St. &Bristol St. N
B
B
E
C
E
C
E
C
E
C
17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. &Bristol St. S
C
A
E
C
E
C
E
C,
E
C
19. Irvine Av. &Mesa Dr.
B
E
B
D
B
D
B
E
C
E
20. Irvine Av. & University Dr.
D
D
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
27. Dover Dr. &Coast Hw.
B
C
D
D
D
D
D
E
D
E
28. Ba side Dr. &Coast Hw.
B
B
D
E
D
E
D
E
D
E
29. MacArthur BI. &Jamboree Rd.
D
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
F
32. Jamboree Rd. &Bristol St. S
C
C
E
D
E
D
E
D
E
D
39. Jamboree Rd. &Coast Hw.
B
C
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
E
49. MacArthur BI. &Ford Rd./Bonita C n. Dr.
C
D
C
F
C
F
C
F
50. MacArthur BI. &San Joaquin Hills Rd.
B
E
C
F
C
F
D
F
57. Goldenrod Av. &Coast Hw.
E
B
F
C
F
C
ADE
F
C
59.Mar uerite Av. &Coast Hw.
D
D
D
E
D
D
D
E
•
•
C:1Documents and SettingsldlektorichlLocal SettingslTemporary Internet FileslOLK21[ESforPresentationMayl60
00
TABLE ES-7
• NUMBER OF DEFICIENT INTERSECTIONS BY ALTERNATIVE
NUMBER OF DEFICIENT INTERSECTIONS
SCENARIO
AM ONLY
PM ONLY
AM&PM
TOTAL
EXISTING
1
5
0
6
CURRENTLY ADOPTED GENERAL PLAN
5
7
1 7
1 19
TRUE MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE
5
6
6
17
SUBAREA MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE
5
9
6
20
SUBAREA MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE
4
10
10
24
C:\Documents and Settings\dlektorich\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK2\[ESforPresentationMay160E
•
•
TABLE ES-8 (1 OF 3)
ADDITIONAL INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS SUMMARY
INTERSECTION ICURRENTLY
ADOPTED IMPROVEMENT
TRUE MINIMUM IMPROVEMENT
SUBAREA MINIMUM IMPROVEMENT
SUBAREA MAXIMUM IMPROVEMENT
Bluff Rd. (NS) at:
• Coast Hw. (EW)
Provide 1st SB right turn lane.
Provide 1st SB right turn lane.
Allow right turn movement from SB
Allow right turn movement from SB
through lane.
through lane.
Change N/S phasing to Split.
Change N/S phasing to Split.
Provide 2nd EB left turn lane
Provide 2nd EB left turn lane.
Provide 4th and 5th EB through lane.
Provide 4th and 5th EB through lane.
Provide 4th WB through lane.
Provide 4th WB through lane.
Superior Av. (NS) at.
• Coast Hw. (EW)
Provide 1st NB right turn lane.
Provide 1st NB right turn lane.
Provide 1st NB right turn lane.
Provide 1st NB right turn lane.
Install SB right turn overlap phasing.
Provide SB free right turn lane.
Provide 4th EB through lane.
Provide 4th EB through lane.
Provide 4th EB through lane
Provide 4th EB through lane.
Provide 5th WB through lane.
Provide 5th WB through lane.
Provide 5th WB through lane.
Provide 5th WB through lane.
Convert WB defacto to 1st WB right turn
lane.
Install WB right turn overlap phasing.
Newport BI. (NS) at.
• Hospital Rd. (EW)
Provide 2nd NB left turn lane.
Provide 2nd NB left turn lane.
Provide 2nd NB left turn lane
Provide 2nd NB left turn lane
(Can Eliminate 1st NB right turn lane.)
Provide 2nd EB through lane.
Restripe 2nd WB through lane to shared
Restripe 2nd WB through lane to shared
Restripe 2nd WB through lane to shared
through left lane.
through left lane.
through left lane.
Change EfW phasing to Split.
Change PJW phasing to Split.
Change EM/ phasing to Split.
Newport BI (NS) at:
• 32nd St. (EW)
Provide 1st SB right turn lane.
Riverside Av. (NS) at.
• Coast Hw. (EW)
Provide SB free right turn lane.
Provide SB free right turn lane.
Provide SB free right turn lane.
Provide SB free right turn lane.
Provide 2nd EB left turn lane.
Provide 2nd EB left turn lane.
Provide 2nd EB left turn lane.
Provide 3rd EB through lane.
Provide 3rd EB through lane.
Provide 3rd EB through lane.
Provide 3rd EB through lane.
Provide 4th WB through lane.
Provide 4th WB through lane.
Provide 4th WB through lane.
Provide 4th WB through lane.
Can Eliminate WB right turn lane.
Can Eliminate WB right turn lane.
Can Eliminate WB right turn lane.
Tustin Av. (NS) at: -
• Coast Hw. (EW)
Provide 3rd EB through lane.
Provide 3rd EB through lane.
Provide 3rd EB through lane.
Provide 3rd EB through lane.
Provide 41h WB through lane.
MacArthur BI. (NS) at:
- Campus Campus Dr. (EW)
Provide 2nd NB left turn lane.
Provide 2nd NB left turn lane.
Provide SB free right turn lane (in
Provide SB free right turn lane (in
Provide SB free right turn lane (in
Provide SB free right turn lane (in
unincorporated County).
unincorporated County).
unincorporated County).
unincorporated County).
•
TABLE ES-8 (2 OF 3)
ADDITIONAL INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS SUMMARY
INTERSECTION ICURRENTLY
ADOPTED IMPROVEMENJ
TRUE MINIMUM IMPROVEMENT
SUBAREA MINIMUM IMPROVEMENT
SUBAREA MAXIMUM IMPROVEMENT
Von Kansan Av. (NS) at
• Campus Dr. (EW)
Provide 1st SS right turn lane
Provide 1st SB right turn lane.
Provide 1st WB right turn lane (in Irvine).
Provide 1st WS right turn lane (in Irvine).
Provide 1st WB right turn lane (in Irvine).
Provide 1st WB right turn lane (in Irvine)
Jamboree Rd. (NS) at:
• Campus Dr. (E1N)
Provide NB free right turn lane.
Provide NB free right turn lane.
Provide NB free right turn lane.
Provide NB free right turn lane.
Provide 4th SB through lane (in Irvine).
Provide 4th SB through lane (in Irvine).
Provide 4th SB through lane (in Irvine).
Provide 4th SB through lane (in Irvine).
Provide 1st SB right turn lane (in Irvine).
Provide 1st SB right turn lane (in Irvine).
Provide 1st SB right turn lane (in Irvine).
Provide 1st SB right turn lane (in Irvine).
Provide 3rd EB left turn lane (in Irvine).
Provide 3rd EB left turn lane (in Irvine).
Provide 3rd EB left turn lane (n Irvine).
Provide 3rd EB left turn lane (in Irvine).
Provide WB free right turn lane.
Provide WB free right turn lane.
Provide WB free right turn lane.
Jamboree Rd. (NS) at:
• Birch St (EW)
Provide 2nd EB left turn lane.
Provide 1st WB right turn lane.
Campus Dr. INS) at:
• Bristol St. N (EW)
Provide SB shared through right lane.
Provide SB shared through right lane.
Provide SB shared through right lane.
Provide SB shared through right lane.
Provide 5th WB through lane
Provide Sth WB through lane.
Provide 5th WB through lane
Provide 5th WB through lane.
Provide 1st WB right turn lane.
Provide tat WB right turn lane.
Provide 1st WB right turn lane.
Provide 1st WB right turn lane.
Birch St. (NS) at.
• Bristol St. N (EW)
Provide 3rd NB through lane.
Provide 3rd NB through lane.
Provide 3rd NS through lane.
Provide 1st WB right turn lane.
Provide 1st WB right turn lane.
Provide 1st WB right turn lane.
Provide WB free right turn lane.
Campus Dr.11rvine Av. INS) at:
• Bristol St. S (EW)
Provide 1st NB right turn lane.
Provide 1st NB right turn lane.
Provide 1st NB right turn lane.
Provide 1st NB right turn lane.
Irvine Av. (NS) at:
• Mesa Dr. (EW)
Restripe 2nd WB through lane to shared
through left lane.
Change ENV phasing to Split.
[Nine Av. INS) at:
• University Dr. (EW)
Provide 3rd NB through lane.
Provide 3rd NB through lane.
Provide 3rd NB through lane.
Provide 3rd NB through lane.
Provide 3rd SS through lane.
Provide 3rd SB through lane.
Provide 3rd SB through lane.
Provide 3rd SB through lane.
Restripe 2nd EB through lane to shared
Restripe 2nd EB through lane to shared
Restripe 2nd EB through lane to shared
Restripe 2nd EB through lane to shared
through left lane.
through left lane.
through left lane.
through left lane.
Change EW phasing to Split.
Change EM! phasing to Split
Change E/W phasing to Split.
Change ENV phasing to Split.
Dover Dr. (NS) at
. Coast Hw. (EW)
Provide 4th WB through lane.
N
TABLE ES-8 (3 OF 3)
ADDITIONAL INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS SUMMARY
INTERSECTION ICURRENTLY
ADOPTED iMPROVEMENA
TRUE MINIMUM IMPROVEMENT I
SUBAREA MINIMUM IMPROVEMENT
SUBAREA MAXIMUM IMPROVEMENT
Bayside Dr. INS) at:
• Coast Hw. (EW)
Provide 1st NB through lane.
Restripe SB through lane to shared
Restripe SB through lane to shared
Restripe SS through lane to shared
Restripe SB through lane to shared
through left lane
through left lane.
through left lane.
through left lane.
Convert SB defacto to 1st SB right turn
Convert SB defacto to 1st SB right turn
Convert SB defacto to 1st SB right turn
Convert SB defacto to 1st SB right turn
lane.
lane.
lane.
lane.
Install SB right turn overlap phasing.
Install SB right turn overlap phasing.
Install SB right turn overlap phasing.
Install SB right turn overlap phasing.
Provide Sth WB through lane.
Provide 1st WB right turn lane.
Provide 1st WB right turn lane.
Provide 1st WB right turn lane.
MacArthur BI. INS) at:
• Jamboree Rd (EW)
Provide 4th NB through lane.
Provide 4th NB through lane.
Provide 4th NB through lane.
Provide 4th NB through lane.
Provide 4th EB through lane.
Provide 4th EB through lane.
Provide 4th EB through lane.
Provide 3rd WB left turn lane.
Provide 3rd WB left turn lane.
Provide 3rd WB left turn lane.
Provide 3rd WB left turn lane.
Jamboree Rd. INS) at:
• Bristol St. S (EW)
Provide 2nd EB left tam lane.
Provide 2nd EB left turn lane.
Provide 2nd EB left turn lane.
Provide 2nd EB left turn lane.
Jamboree Rd. (NS) at:
• Coast Hw. (EW)
Provide 1st NB right turn lane.
MacArthur Bl. INS) at:
• Ford Rd /Bonita
Provide 3rd SB left turn lane.
Provide 3rd SB left turn lane.
Provide 3rd SB left turn lane.
Provide 3rd SB left turn lane.
Canyon Dr. (EW)
Eliminate SB free right turn lane.
Eliminate SB free right turn lane.
Eliminate SB free right turn lane.
Restripe 2nd EB left turn lane to through
Restripe 2nd EB left turn lane to through
lane.
lane.
Provide 3rd EB through lane
Provide 3rd EB through lane.
MacArthur BI. INS) at:
• San Joaquin Hills Rd. (EW)
Provide 4th NB through lane.
Provide 4th NB through lane.
Provide 4th NB through lane.
Provide 4th NB through lane.
Provide 3rd EB left turn lane.
Provide 3rd ES left turn lane.
Provide 3rd EB left turn lane.
Provide 3rd EB left turn lane.
Goldenrod Av. (NS) at:
• Coast Hw. (EW)
Provide 3rd WB through lane.
Provide 3rd WB through lane.
Provide 3rd WB through lane.
Provide 3rd WB through lane.
Can Eliminate WB defacto right turn lane.
Can Eliminate WB defacto right turn lane.
Can Eliminate WB defacto right turn lane.
Can Eliminate WB defacto right turn lane.
Marguerite Av. INS) at:
• Coast Hw. (EW)
Provide 1st NB right turn lane.
Provide 3rd EB through lane.
Provide 3rd EB through lane.
Provide 3rd EB through lane.
Can Eliminate EB right turn lane.
Can Eliminate EB right turn lane.
Can Eliminate EB right turn lane.
Provide 1st WB right turn lane.
aria oemngswiekioncHiLec i aenmgsu emporarymtemet rneswurcZgt5torvresentauonmayibub xisltS-a
0
Newport Beach General
Plan Update
Deficient Intersections and Their
Possible Causes
• • •
Deficient Intersection Summary
INTERSECTION NS/EW
EXISTING
zA90dAMjPM0
SUBAREAEA
MINIMUMUM
AM
PM
M
1. Bluff Rd. & Coast Hw.
DNE
DNE
-'`"`
DNE
I DNEJ
DNE
DNE'
3. Superior Av. & Coast Hw.
D
D
4. Newport BI. & Hospital Rd.
A
B
C
C
D
6. Newport BI. & 32nd St.
C
C
C
D
B
C
C
C
D
7. Riverside Av. & Coast Hw.
D
E
8. Tustin Av. & Coast Hw.
C
B
D
D
D
9. MacArthur BI. & Campus Dr.
B
D
C
C
C
D
11. Von Karman Av. & Campus Dr.
A
C
B
B
B
C
13. Jamboree Rd. & Campus Dr.
C
D
14. Jamboree Rd. & Birch St.
A
A
D
D
D
D
D
D
15. Campus Dr. & Bristol St. N
C
16. Birch St. & Bristol St. N
B
B
C
C
C
C
17. Campus Dr./Irvine Av. & Bristol St. S
C
A
C
C
C
C
19. Irvine Av. & Mesa Dr.
B
B
D
B
D
B
C
20. Irvine Av. & University Dr.
D
D
27. Dover Dr. & Coast Hw.
B
C
D
D
D
D
D
D
28. Bayside Dr. & Coast Hw.
B
B
D
D
D
D
29. MacArthur BI. & Jamboree Rd.
D
E
32. Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. S
C
C
D
D
D
D
39. Jamboree Rd. & Coast Hw.
B
C
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
49. MacArthur BI. & Ford Rd./Bonita C n. Dr.
C
D
C
C
C
C
50. MacArthur BI. & San Joaquin Hills Rd.
B
C
C
D
D
57. Goldenrod Av. & Coast Hw.
B
C
C
C
C
59.Mar uerite Av. & Coast Hw.
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
0 0
U
Possible Causes
Subarea
Issue Corridors
Coast
Hwy.
MacArthur
Blvd.
Airport
Area
Banning Ranch
X
Mari-ner's Mile
X
West Newport
X
Newport Center
X
X
Airport
X
C
GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Monday, May 16, 2005
Roger Alford
Ronald Baers
Patrick Bartolic
Phillip Bettencourt
Carol Boice
Elizabeth Bonn
Gus Chabre
John Corrough
Lila Crespin
Laura Dietz
Grace Dove
Nancy Gardner
Gordon Glass
Louise Greeley
Ledge Hale
Bob Hendrickson
Tom Hyans
Mike Ishikawa
Kim Jansma
Mike Johnson
Bill Kelly
Donald Krotee
Lucille Kuehn
Philip Lugar
William Lusk
Barbara Lyon
0
1
Marie Marston
• Jim Naval
Catherine O'Hara
Charles Remley
Larry Root
John Saunders
Hall Seely
Jan Vandersloot
Tom Webber
Ron Yeo
Raymond Zartler
•
0
rj
M'► kxp, C-k:5,5;"
8ss
nJul C- Z3(W el1,Ba�
err WL15LA
IcLrreA) 54-
��Q,GG'LA�`�
`� c2ri
tope ft el 900 sa
I
GENERAL PLAN AWISORY COMMITTEE
Monday, May 16, 2005
PUBLIC SIGN -IN
Ll
NAME ADDRESS/PHONE E-MAIL ADDRESS
n
u
f�
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Minutes of the General Plan Advisory Committee Meeting held on Monday,
May 16, 2005, at the OASIS Senior Center.
Members Present:
Roger Alford
Phillip Bettencourt
Carol Boice
Elizabeth Bonn
Lila Crespin
Laura Dietz
Grace Dove
Nancy Gardner
Gordon Glass
Members Absent:
Ronald Baers
Patrick Bartolic
Gus Chabre
John Corrough
Staff Present:
Louise Greeley
Ledge Hale
Bob Hendrickson
Mike Ishikawa
Kim Jansma
Mike Johnson
Donald Krotee
Lucille Kuehn
William Lusk
Tom Hyans (sick leave)
Bill Kelly
Philip Lugar
Barbara Lyon
Marie Marston
Jim Navai
Charles Remley
Larry Root
Hall Seely
Jan Vandersloot
Ron Yeo
Raymond Zartler
Catherine O'Hara (sick leave)
John Saunders
Tom Webber
Sharon Wood, Assistant City Manager
Rich Edmonston, Transportation/Development Services Manager
Debbie Lektorich, Executive Assistant
Woodie Tescher, EIP Consultant
Carleton Waters, Urban Crossroads
Members of the Public Present:
Allan Beek Brandon Johnson Terry Welsh
Mike Erickson Coralee Newman
I. Call to Order
Nancy Gardner called the meeting to order.
U. General Plan Traffic Study Preliminary Alternatives Analysis
Carleton Waters reviewed revised tables distributed with the agenda packets.
Ray Zartler pointed out that pedestrian overpasses were not on the list. Mr. Waters
indicated it was a viable improvement if an intersection was deficient because of the
number of pedestrians. Laura Dietz stated she raised the issue years ago and was
discouraged from pursuing it because of the cost factor.
Lila Crespin asked why the intersection of MacArthur and Coast Highway didn't make
the list of deficient intersections. Mr. Waters indicated the intersection was included in
the analysis however he suspected that the deficiency there didn't occur during the
entire peak hour. Ms. Gardner added that it is probably due to the roadwork being
done in Corona del Mar.
Kim Jansma asked why the intersection at Irvine and 17'' Street also was not included.
Mr. Waters again thought it might be a 15-30 minute situation when traffic causes the
deficiency.
Phillip Bettencourt asked about Table ES-8 regarding the open space option for Banning
Ranch, stating it appeared the Bluff Road has been eliminated from the master plan of
arterial highways. Even if the area was entirely open space, there would need to be a
road for the adjacent active park. Mr. Waters indicated nothing has been eliminated
• from the master plan, however without substantial development to provide the
mechanism to have the roadway constructed we are not counting on it. Based on his
experience, a two lane road would allow plenty of access to the adjacent park. Ms.
Wood reminded everyone that the assumptions are for the purposes of analysis only,
not recommendations.
Jan Vandersloot stated he didn't think we are balancing land use with the circulation
system when the true minimum triples the number of deficient intersections.
Gordon Glass pointed out that on the Possible Causes chart, it indicates that 4 out of
the 6 issue corridors are regional conduits with traffic beyond our control, and asked if
we were wasting time talking about something we can't control. Mr. Waters agreed
that it was a difficult issue, however he has presented improvements that could bring all
intersections to LOS D. Mr. Glass thought the only alternative we would support would
be the true minimum based on this information. Mr. Tescher indicated that would be
true if traffic is the sole determinant, however there may be tradeoffs in certain areas
where we will choose to accept a lower LOS to preserve community character.
Bob Hendrickson indicated he thinks the biggest problems are regional issues we have
no control over. Ms. Gardner asked if the Irvine development had been factored in.
Mr. Waters said yes they had.
Mr. Vandersloot indicated both Costa Mesa and Huntington Beach had reduced their
• general plan recently and thought that Newport Beach should do the same.
7
. Roger Alford asked if each of the alternatives assumed improvements which may be
required of the developer if new development was added. Mr. Waters stated Table ES-
8 lists improvements that would be needed to improve conditions to the current LOS
standard which could be linked to the new development.
Hall Seely asked if the improvements listed on Table ES-8 would change the color of the
intersections on the Deficient Intersection Summary. Mr. Waters explained that if all
the improvements listed on Table ES-8 were implemented, it would bring all the
intersections up to current LOS standards.
Mike Johnson asked about page 2 of ES-8 and why improvements on Birch would not
carry over to the Subarea Maximum. Mr. Waters explained that when adding residential
to that area you create a more efficient development pattern with homes and jobs
closer together and you end up with less roadway improvement needs.
Carol Boice asked why the improvements on MacArthur are the same when the
alternatives for Newport Center add 7,000 for options 2 & 3 and 23,000 for option 1.
Mr. Waters explained that what the analysis tells us is the increase in numbers isn't
enough to change the improvements needed in that area. Ms. Boice also asked about
the intersection of Jamboree at Eastbluff/Ford and why it is only LOS D in the AM
because of all the traffic caused by the schools. Mr. Waters stated it sounds like a
focused problem that doesn't last an entire hour.
• Charles Remley asked if GPUC and the City Council would consider reducing the
buildout to existing levels and not consider all the options we've developed. Mr. Waters
explained that the forecasts for the intersections under the alternatives considers the
conditions outside the City as well as the options within the City in trying to represent
what we think we will be facing. Ms. Wood pointed out that when the alternatives were
brought before GPUC she made it clear which areas were showing an increase in
development over the existing general plan and asked if we should have one that
shows reduced levels, GPUC did not recommend doing that. They recommended going
forward with the analysis on the alternatives GPAC recommended, which is what we are
doing. She added that the Planning Commission and City Council are waiting to see
what recommendations come out of this committee.
Mr. Tescher asked for a discussion about the airport area and the options we might
consider in that area.
Mr. Vandersloot indicated he would prefer to have the all of the affordable housing
requirement put in that area. Ms. Gardner added that the subcommittee'discussed this
idea because the area is already urbanized, and if we accept some deficiencies there
other areas where community character or open space come into play could be saved.
Mr. Remley disagreed with that idea, he thought there was a potential for
"ghettoization." Ms. Gardner pointed out that the subcommittee talked about the area
where the Pacific Club is located instead of right next to the airport.
0
• Ms. Boice asked if the airport traffic had been combined with the Newport Center traffic
to determine what the impacts would be on Jamboree and MacArthur if the maximum
options were recommended for both areas. Mr. Waters pointed out that the data
shows only one additional deficient intersection on MacArthur during the PM peak hour
for the maximum in both areas.
Ms. Gardner suggested adding some service industry development to capture some of
the money from people moving into the area.
Mr. Hendrickson pointed out that the intersection improvements in the airport area
seem doesn't sound like an expensive list.
Don Krotee stated he sees the airport area as the most urban and would accept the
sacrifices in that area.
Mr. Vandersloot asked about Table 2-7 and suggested when adding residential that
general commercial and office should be subtracted so we don't have traffic problems.
Mr. Tescher then moved the discussion to Newport Center.
Ms. Boice asked about Option 3 and with the students increasing by 226% how can the
school district absorb that many students.
Mr. Vandersloot asked why we"are not decreasing the office and commercial when .the
residential is increasing.
Ms. Gardner asked about the cultural learning center in Option 1.
Mr. Krotee asked what logic the City Council used when they suggested more
residential in this area. Ms. Wood stated she thought it was the Planning Commission
who asked to Jeave the commercial at the current level and add residential because
they thought the traffic impacts would be too great if both were increased. Ms.
Gardner didn't remember hearing the recommendation for more commercial space. Mr.
Alford said he was on the subcommittee and they just talked about buildout levels. Mr.
Hendrickson agreed.
Laura Dietz recalled a concept discussed where office and housing were in one
structure. •
Ron Yeo asked about getting a spreadsheet which would provide environmental;
economic and traffic impact together.
Mr. Glass stated he thought the airport area and Newport Center were the only two
areas that hold the possibility of some land use changes and if that should be conveyed
in the public workshop. Mr. Tescher added West Newport Industrial, Banning Ranch
and Mariner's Mile could be added to that list.
2
III. Discussion of Future Agenda Items
Mr. Tescher reminded everyone about the public workshop scheduled for June 25th at
the OASIS Senior Center.
Ms. Gardner asked the group if meeting on two Saturdays in July would be more
productive at this point rather than the Monday evening meetings. Mr. Tescher added
that the plan was to meet on July 16t" and 23rd to get through all the areas in a timely
manner. After discussion, it was agreed to meet half day July 16th and a full day on
July 23rd
Mr. Bettencourt asked if the schedule shared with GPUC today would be made available
to this group. Mr. Tescher indicated once the dates were confirmed that could happen.
Mr. Vandersloot asked for two more pieces of information, one is on Table ES-7 provide
a combined number of the a.m. and p.m. intersections. Mr. Waters indicated that is on
Table ES-6. Mr. Vandersloot also asked for information on the surrounding cities as to
what they did with their general plans the last go around. Mr. Tescher indicated they
would do research on that.
IV. Public Comments
Cora Newman, Newport Beach, commented on the Costa Mesa general plan stating
they are going through a similar process. They are not looking at broad brush
reductions, they are looking at progression and a lot of movement toward mixed use
development. Ms. Newman also stated that people throughout the county are looking
to live near airports, railroads and transportation. She was also concerned about the
discussion tonight regarding the Bluff Road and at the same time the 19t" Street Bridge.
The bridge has gone through a lengthy public process involving tremendous community
debate whereas the Bluff Road has not.
Allan Beek, Newport Beach, stated he felt a big piece of data was missing, revenue is
projected for the increased development however the costs for improvements is not
known. Mr. Beek felt it would be worthwhile to make an effort to get that cost figure.
Terry Welsh, Costa Mesa, stated the Banning Ranch Task Force was still working on
acquiring Banning Ranch for open space and told the group about their efforts.
Brandon Johnson, Corona del Mar, agreed with Mr. BeeWs comments. Mr. Johnson
commented that the efforts of the Greenlight Committee had shot down proposed
development in the last couple years and asked how the recommendations by GPAC
would interact with Greenlight. Ms. Wood responded that if the recommendations that
were approved by the Planning Commission and City Council exceeded the thresholds
outlined in Measure S, the plan would be put to a vote of the residents. Ms. Gardner
added the public comment we are going to receive will help with the final plan. Mr.
Vandersloot asked Ms. Wood if that was the official position of the City. Ms. Wood
responded that Measure S is the law and the City intended to follow it.
5