HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-01-08_BVAC_AgendaCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
BALBOA VILLAGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDA
ExplorOcean
600 East Bay Avenue
Wednesday, January 8, 2014 - 4:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.
Committee Members:
Michael Henn — Council Member (Chair)
Tony Petros — Council Member
Gloria Oakes — Balboa Peninsula Point Association
Ralph Rodheim — Balboa Village Merchant Association Member
Grace Dove — Central Newport Beach Community Association
Tom Pollack — ExplorOcean Representative
Jim Stratton — At -Large Representative
Staff Members:
Kimberly Brandt, Community Development Director
Brenda Wisneski, Deputy Community Development Director
Tony Brine, City Traffic Engineer
Fern Nueno, Associate Planner
I. Call Meeting to Order
II. Public Comment on Non - Agendized Items (comments limited to 3 minutes)
III. Approval of Minutes (Attachment 1)
Recommended Action: Approve December 11, 2013 Minutes.
IV. Finalize Parking Implementation Plan (Attachment 2)
Recommended Action: Review Parking Strategies and Recommend City Council Approval
V. Review 2014 Work Program (Attachment 3)
Recommended Action: Finalize 2014 Work Program
VI. Public Comment
VII. Adjournment Next Meeting Date: Wednesday, February 12, 2014, 4:00 p.m.to 5:30 p.m.
Please refer to the City Website, http:// www .newportbeachca.gov /index.aspx ?paqe =2196, for additional
information regarding the Balboa Village Advisory Committee.
AN AGENDA FOR THIS MEETING HAS BEEN POSTED AT LEAST 72 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING AND THE PUBLIC IS
ALLOWED TO COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS.
IT IS THE INTENTION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TO COMPLY WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA)
IN ALL RESPECTS. IF, AS AN ATTENDEE OR A PARTICIPANT AT THIS MEETING, YOU WILL NEED SPECIAL ASSISTANCE
BEYOND WHAT IS NORMALLY PROVIDED, THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH WILL ATTEMPT TO ACCOMMODATE YOU IN EVERY
REASONABLE MANNER. PLEASE CONTACT LEILANI BROWN, CITY CLERK, AT LEAST 72 HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING TO
INFORM US OF YOUR PARTICULAR NEEDS AND TO DETERMINE IF ACCOMMODATION IS FEASIBLE (949- 644 -3005 OR
CITYCLERKCNE WPORTBEACHCA.GOV).
1
ATTACHMENT 1
December 11, 2013 Meeting Minutes
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
BALBOA VILLAGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES
Regular Meeting
Location: ExplorOcean, 600 East Bay Avenue
Wednesday, December 11, 2013 - 4:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.
Call Meeting to Order
Chair Henn called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m.
The following persons were in attendance:
Balboa Village Advisory Committee Members:
Michael Henn — Council Member (Chair)
Ralph Rodheim — Balboa Village Merchant Association
Grace Dove — Central Newport Beach Community Association
Tom Pollack— ExplorOcean Representative
Jim Stratton — Member -At -Large Representative
Tony Petros — absent
Gloria Oaks — absent
Staff Members:
Kimberly Brandt, Community Development Director
Brenda Wisneski, Deputy Community Development Director
Fern Nueno, Associate Planner
il. Public Comment on Non - Agendized Items
Interested parties were invited to address the Committee on Non - Agendized Items.
Howard Hall noted that he is feeling disheartened because even with concurrence from the
consultant regarding the residential parking permit program (RP3) boundary and regular
attendance at the meetings, his opinion does not have an effect on the Committee's
recommendation. However, when someone else came in for just two meetings and expressed an
anti -RV sentiment, that idea was removed from the Committee's recommendations. He feels
discouraged and thinks that his opinions on the boundary are not taken into consideration by the
Committee.
Chair Henn responded that the Committee members have heard Mr. Hall's comments and while
it is not currently an appropriate time to address this issue, they will soon be making specific
actions for Council regarding boundary changes.
3
Jim Mosher noted that this Committee was the innovator of recordings being made available on
the City website; however, a few weeks ago the links with the recordings all disappeared and are
no longer accessible. Additionally, the Committee has now met thirteen times and while the
agendas and documents are posted, they are poorly organized on the website and are difficult to
locate. He noted that it is hard to follow what the Committee is working on and public
engagement could be improved if the website is re- organized.
Kimberly Brandt, Community Development Director, responded that staff is able to pull the
documents and will organize the website better.
Jim Mosher added that he could not find a record of the Merchant Association on the Secretary
of State's website
Committee Member Rodheim answered that Scott Palmer is the administrator and he will email
to find out the status.
There being no others wishing to address the Committee, Chair Henn closed the Public Comment
on Non- Agendized Items portion of the meeting.
III. Approval of Minutes
Recommended Action: Approve November 13, 2013 Minutes
Committee Member Stratton arrived to the meeting at 4:11 p.m.
Committee Member Pollack moved to approve the minutes of the November 13, 2013 meeting
as presented, and Committee Member Rodheim seconded the motion; the motion carried
unanimously.
Iv. Non - Residential Parking Requirements
Recommended Action: Confirm Modified Parking Requirements
Chair Henn introduced the item, asking for clarification regarding the schedule and timeline, as
previously agreed upon and discussed.
Brenda Wisneski, Deputy Community Development Director, answered, noting that all the
parking programs and projects that were reviewed by the Committee thus far will be presented
as a package in January to better see how they all work together. Among the topics that will be
reviewed include residential parking, the creation of the parking district, demand -based pricing,
and parking requirements.
Chair Henn reviewed the list of items and asked how each item would be incorporated.
Brenda Wisneski replied that current requirements, existing parking situations, and any potential
4
changes to provide flexibility in parking would be discussed.
Chair Henn noted that the January agenda would allow time for a quick recap and discussion of
the work program.
Brenda Wisneski presented on the non - residential parking requirements, noting that the Parking
Management Plan, as adopted by the Council, recommends the reduction of parking
requirements in the short term and the establishment of a multi -modal fee to fund parking
improvements and alternative transportation in the area. Ms. Wisneski continued presenting the
existing regulations, possible parking waivers through discretionary review, and the results of the
survey work. She discussed the occupancy rate maps and the tables that she compiled that
demonstrate which locations exceed the target rates and which are at or below the target rates.
She noted that even if the parking standards were made more flexible, that would not result in
drastic changes due to the size of the parcels and development standards such as floor area and
height limitations.
Chair Henn asked how ExplorOcean is treated in the analysis of the proposed parking standards.
Kimberly Brandt explained that the parking analysis was done based on the existing square
footage within Balboa Village, including the existing ExplorOcean facility. The analysis does not
include the General Plan Amendment and future project for ExplorOcean, which is a unique
situation.
Brenda Wisneski explained that the following options are available for parking requirements:
1. Eliminate Parking Requirements for:
a) New development, additions, and change of use, or
b) Additions and change of use, or
c) Change of use
2. Allow reconstruction and maintain existing parking conditions
3. Modify parking requirements for retail and restaurant
4. Increase shared parking opportunities
5. Monitor increased demand and parking conditions
Ms. Wisneski noted that the General Plan and Zoning Code allow for nonconforming buildings
within Balboa Village to be redeveloped at the same intensity, height, and parking, but do not
have a similar provision for conforming buildings.
Discussion carried regarding the options of which way to vote, between options a, b, and c, and
numbers one through five, as explained by Ms. Wisneski.
Ms. Brandt discussed the three or more year monitoring and analysis, and how there could be a
more frequent annual reporting period.
J
It was noted by Ms. Wisneski that Brian Canepa continues to recommend the elimination of
parking requirements in conjunction with the impact fee, while she encourages eliminating
parking requirements for change of use only, which would be option 1 -c, as well as options 2, 3,
4, and 5.
Chair Henn clarified that any parking program would be reviewed 3 -5 years after implementation,
also noting that the least restrictive would be option a, which is also most appealing to a
developer.
Brenda Wisneski discussed additional square footage requirements, as they would apply to
restaurants or small businesses.
Committee Member Rodheim asked how a small restaurant would grow, as the use would not be
changed but simply improved, while complying with a parking requirement.
Kimberly Brandt explained that if they are not adding floor area, there would no parking
requirement. If the City wishes to encourage additions, then option b should be adopted.
Chair Henn noted current design guidelines and parking restriction options, explaining that as
they go down the ladder, they become more restrictive.
Mr. Rodheim expressed concern over small developments being discouraged from growth, while
he would like development to be encouraged.
Discussion carried regarding the ladder of restrictions, noting that to provide equitable outcomes,
option a would most fairly allow for that.
Committee Member Dove discussed resulting changes in character that the Committee may want
to be maintained, if the incentive is for buildings to be torn down.
Chair Henn noted that architectural design guidelines need to be amended to maintain the
historic feel.
Ms. Dove noted that there are many preservation programs available that can be used as
incentives.
Brenda Wisneski explained the Fagade Improvement Program and the need to possibly discuss
sign guidelines and design guidelines.
Committee Member Pollack noted that he is more in favor of a over c, as people would have
incentives to try new things out with better results over a decade of growth and review.
Mr. Rodheim spoke out in favor of 1 -a, 4, and 5, and Chair Henn agreed, explaining that over a
span of time, it will do more for new businesses and growth.
0
Chair Henn stated that design guidelines could be implemented without the creation of a historic
district.
Ms. Dove discussed intensification and how residents would be impacted. The Newport Beach
Hotel was discussed for the very successful work they have done.
Mr. Stratton noted that several very successful entertainment, recreation, and cultural
establishments would be impacted by the elimination of parking requirements. Their parking
would be maxed out and would have a huge, adverse affect on the establishment.
Mr. Rodheim encouraged practical parking solutions including an off -site shuttle.
Ms. Dove noted that off -site shuttle systems have, historically, crashed and burned through
bankruptcy.
Mr. Stratton encouraged members to face reality that there is not enough parking, despite the
report's findings.
Chair Henn noted that the requirements are inclusive of employees.
Ms. Dove replied that healthy restaurants have too many employees that are not reflected in the
parking requirements or the study so far, as well as people who visit the beach.
Mr. Stratton noted that residents in the Village use blue pole parking, and that additional parking
needs to be built.
Chair Henn replied that developers would not elect to have no parking on site.
Mr. Rodheim answered that the City does not have to approve that, either.
Mr. Stratton discussed the Bubbles establishment and the in -lieu fee.
Ms. Brandt commented on the multi -modal fee and the uniqueness of the Bubbles situation. It is
also important to remember that these standards that are being discussed are for commercial
uses not residential uses.
Chair Henn asked how much would be lost if 1 -a was adopted, and that the actual impact would
be very minimal as not many spaces are being eliminated.
Mr. Pollack noted that a restaurant such as Bubbles would attract locals and not encourage
people to drive long distances.
Fern Nueno, Associate Planner, stated that existing restaurants would be allowed to more easily
rW,
move locations or expand.
Chair Henn replied that this would be temporary and that it would take a decade to fully assess,
and City Council still needs to have a discussion over each item. The recommendations of this
group carry weight for the Council's discussion.
Committee Member Rodheim moved to adopt 1 -a, 4, and 5, with the design guidelines,
Committee Member Stratton seconded the motion.
Before voting, Committee Member Dove noted that she has issues with businesses being
required to share parking.
Brenda Wisneski explained that new developers can come in and utilize existing lots and it would
be addressed with an agreement.
Chair Henn asked how other jurisdictions handle this issue.
Ms. Wisneski responded that shared parking would be a condition of approval of the project and
would be made available to the public, and noted that there is also the option of leasing meters.
Chair Henn discussed shared use of parking spaces, as well as the mixed uses of parking spaces.
Mr. Rodheim encouraged the wording to be edited so that "must" be deleted, thus amending the
motion to delete the word "must."
Mr. Pollack noted that ExplorOcean has some of the largest parking available in the area and has
a parking agreement with the Pavilion.
Chair Henn opened public comments for the item.
Janis Dinwiddie discussed self - parking versus valet parking, and which option is most popular,
utilized, and appealing to patrons of the Village.
Jim Mosher wanted to clarify if this would be reviewed again in 3 years as well as parking
occupancy and whether the separate memo is available. Additionally, the square footage and
off - street provided spaces do not seem to be comparable.
Brenda Wisneski replied that the numbers will be reviewed.
Committee Member Rodheim moved to adopt 1 -a, 4, and 5, with the design guidelines,
Committee Member Stratton seconded the motion; the motion carried unanimously.
Chair Henn noted that the term "temporary" needed to be defined, and whether or not it would
be 3 years or more.
U
Mr. Pollack suggested that specific terms needed to be defined in the annual report for increased
parking opportunities.
Mr. Rodheim stated that there should be incentives for residents and Brenda Wisneski replied
that there is new meter technology available.
Mr. Pollack thanked Ms. Wisneski for the thorough memo.
In response to a question from Chair Henn, Ms. Brandt noted that the Coastal Commission review
of the integrated parking strategies plan would be submitted as an entire package for a Coastal
Development Permit (CDP) and the goal is to have someone at Coastal Commission assigned
exclusively to the Newport Beach projects. With recent funding, a hiring process is underway at
the Coastal Commission.
Chair Henn asked about the timeline for implementation.
Kimberly Brandt noted that at the City level, it will be completed in 2014 and it should be through
the Coastal Commission process by 2015. Discussion continued regarding the process and timing.
V. Public Comment
Committee Member Rodheim addressed special events, with a direct thank you to the City of
Newport Beach, as goals have been achieved, and the power outlets have been added to the
poles and the poles have been decorated and lighted. Mr. Rodheim also thanked Janis Dinwiddie
for her work. He noted that attendance was excellent for recent events. A "Paint the Town"
event was highly successful, bringing back the sentiment that the Village is for the community
and for the people. Progress is being made and a good plan needs to be established for 2014.
Janis Dinwiddie stated that she also thanks the City for the events.
Jim Mosher asked that the documents for the current committee work plan be placed on the City
website, as well as being mindful of creating realistic work plans.
Howard Hall asked if he could address comments made during public comment on non- agendized
items, and noted resentment over the decisions made by the Committee despite the comments
he submitted and the consultant agreeing with him over lack of congestion issues.
Chair Henn noted that the item would be discussed at the next meeting.
VI. Adjournment
There being no further business to come before the Committee, Chair Henn adjourned the
meeting at 5:34 p.m.
Next Meeting Date: Wednesday, January 8, 2014, 4:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.
I
ATTACHMENT 2
DRAFT Balboa Village Parking Implementation Plan
10
BALBOA VILLAGE PARKING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
OVERARCHING CONCEPT
The overarching concept of managing parking in Balboa Village is to create a "park- once" environment
which, in turn, will make parking more convenient and provide greater flexibility for meeting future
parking demands. The management strategies are intended to work together as a cohesive package to
ensure their highest effectiveness. The strategies have been tailored to Balboa Village based on
extensive outreach, field research and guidance from the Balboa Village Advisory Committee (BVAC).
REVIEW PROCESS
To date, the parking strategies have been accepted at the conceptual level with the Newport Beach City
Council's approved the Balboa Village Master Plan in September 2012. Since then, the strategies have
been further developed by the Balboa Village Advisory Committee with the intent that they would be
forwarded to the City Council for final approval and implementation. The following lists the steps and
schedule for gaining final approval and ultimate implementation.
1. Public Outreach — Feb /March 2014
a. Merchants Association
b. Property Owners
c. Residents
2. CEQA Review— Feb /March 2014
3. Public Hearings— Planning Commission April 2014; City Council May 2014
4. Coastal Commission -Potential to incorporate into proposed Local Coastal Program, rather than
submittal of a Coastal Development Permit.
STRATEGIES
Extensive analysis and background information has been developed for each
strategy. The following is intended to provide a summary for purposes of final
review and approval. The links to the strategy memos and meeting minutes are
provided for each strategy for additional information.
Strategy 1: Establish Parking Benefit & Shared Parking District
download the memo detailing the concept at:
http://newportbeachco. aov /Modules /ShowDocument. aspx ?documen tid= 17388)
1. Program Guidelines
a. Boundary— All commercial streets and public parking lots within
the Village (see Figure 1)
b. Use of Parking Revenue (approx. $150,000 annually)
i. Fagade Improvement Program
ii. Streetscape improvements (including signage, ped /bike
access)
iii. Special events
Figure 1
Parking District Boundary
DRAFT - December 23, 2013
22
iv. Shuttle System
v. Reserve funding for parking in future
c. Shared Parking
d. Governance Structure
i. City to manage funds with input from merchants, property owners and
residents.
ii. Monitoring /Evaluation at appropriate times to be conducted by experts, vetted
by the community and reviewed by Council.
2. Committee Comments
a. Maintain parking revenue within District
b. Revenue should not be used toward standard "maintenance"
c. BVAC Approved the concept on August 14, 2013. The meeting minutes can be accessed
here: http: / /www.newportbeachca.gov//Ptn /BVAC Aoendas 108-14- 201312013 -08-
14 BVAC Minutes Approved.pdf
3. Implementing Documents
a. Amendment to Municipal Code
Strategy 2: Employee Parking Permit Program (download the memo detailing the program at:
http : / /newportbeachca.gov /index.aspx ?page =2197)
1. Program Guidelines:
a. Boundary
I. Peak - Median on Balboa Blvd., Medina Way to 8`h Street— 4 blocks; 104 spaces
ii. Off -Peak (Labor to Memorial Day) - Balboa Pier Lot
b. Enforcement through License Plate Recognition
c. Employers register on behalf of employees with license plate information. Simple
process needed
d. Outreach needed to share goals of the project and gain support from employers and
employees
e. Pricing $50 annual permit; $25 seasonal (4 months)
f. Hours of Operation — not valid between 3am and Sam to discourage overnight parking
g. Monitor permit issues and utilization rates of employees through LPR data
2. Committee Comments /Action:
a. Confirm # of Employees: peak and off -peak season
b. Confirm availability of median — Survey results during off peak indicated less than 75%
occupancy with the exception of Medina and Island Ave on Saturday afternoon.
c. Employer Feedback
d. No tiered costs
e. Conflict with Tuesday street sweeping (8:30am to 12:30am) during off peak.
f. May 8, 2013 — Approved in concept with amendments (the link to the meeting minutes
maybe accessed at: htto ://www.newportbeachca.gov//Pln /BVAC Agendas /05 -08-
2013/2013-05-08 BVAC Minutes Approved.pdfl
3. Implementing Documents
DRAFT - December 23, 2013
12
a. Permit mechanism -coordinate with finance and parking consultant
Strategy 3: Suspend In -Lieu Parking Fees
1. Program Guidelines
a. Nine locations in Balboa Village participate in the existing in -lieu fee program which
generates $13,950 annually for the area.
b. These locations would be freed of this obligation.
2. Committee Comments
a. Agreed with the elimination of program.
3. Implementing Documents
a. Amend Ordinance repealing in -lieu parking program.
Strategy 4: Eliminate Parking Requirements (the memo addressing this concept can be accessed at:
http: / /www. newportbeachca. gov /ModulesIShowDocument. osox ?documentid= 173931
1. Program Guidelines
a. Require no additional parking for new development or intensification of uses
b. Discretionary process would evaluate potential loss of private parking spaces.
2. Committee Comments
a. Need to revise Design Guidelines
b. Reassess Program within 5 years of implementation. Document land use changes and
present information to decision- makers.
c. Concerned potential loss of private parking spaces. There are 285 private spaces, 180
are within Newport Landing.
d. December 11, 2013 - BVAC approved in concept (see draft minutes)
3. Implementing Documents
a. Zoning Code Amendment: CEOA review, PC /CC Hearings, Coastal Commission
b. Potential to incorporate into proposed Local Coastal Program, rather than CDP.
Strategy 5: Parking Meter Rates
1. Program Guidelines
a. Demand Based Pricing - variable pricing to account for seasonal fluctuations, higher
rates at meters to increase turn over at desired spaces
b. Use of Smart Meters for all curb spaces
c. Hours & Rates
On- street
Peak period (Summer)
- 8 AM - 6 PM, 7 days
- $2.00 per hour (0 -2 hours)
- $2.50 per hour (2+ hours)
Off -peak period (non- Summer)
- 8 AM - 6 PM, 7 days
- $1.00 per hour (0 -2 hours)
DRAFT - December 23, 2013
13
- $1.50 per hour (2+ hours)
Off- street
Peak period (Summer)
- $1.50 per hour (no max)
Off -peak period (non- Summer)
- $.50 per hour (no max)
d. Monitor and Adjust as needed. Allow for staff adjustments up or down $0.25 per hour
up to 4x per year, with upper limit of $3.00 per hour.
e. Commercial validation up to 2 hours in pier lot year round.
f. Residents free parking during off - season - $10 /year.
2. Committee Comments
a. Need validation and reduced rates for residents
3. Implementing Documents
a. Amend Municipal Code
Strategy 6: Residential Permit Parking Program (download the memo detailing the report here
htto://newoortbeachco. oov /Mod ules/ShowDocument. asnx ?documentid= 17385)
1. Program Guidelines
a. Permit required to park on residential streets between 7`h Street and Adams Street.
b. Hours of Operation: 4pm to gam, 7 days a week, excluding holidays.
c. All residents within the boundaries, Bay Island and mooring owners are eligible.
d. Maximum of 4 permits per household
e. With use of license plate recognition (LPR) the issuance of a physical permit would not
be required. "Permit' issuance may be entirely on -line.
f. Vacation rentals may acquire guest passes. "Hangtags" will be easier to manage,
however, will also more expensive to enforce.
g. One guest permit (hangtag) per household per calendar
year at no cost. Option to acquire one -day hangtags for Figure 2 Residential Permit Parking
special occasions. Identify maximum number of Program Boundary
temporary permits per household per year.
Temporary guest permit $1 /hangtag.
2. Committee Comments
a. Cost of guests passes should be no higher than cost
to administer.
b. Identify maximum number of guest permits on
holidays.
3. Implementing Documents
a. Amend Municipal Code
DRAFT - December 23, 2013
7
ATTACHMENT 3
2014 Work Program
zs
Page I 1
Memorandum
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660
(949) 644 -3227
To:
Balboa Village Advisory Committee
From:
Fern Nueno, Associate Planner
Date:
December 19, 2013
Re:
2014 Work Program
At the first meeting of the Balboa Village Advisory Committee (BVAC) in December 2012, the
BVAC established priorities for Year One (2013) and Year Two (2014). The items in process
and completed to date include the parking strategies, restructuring of the Balboa Village
Business Improvement District, maintenance of the boardwalk area, a special events
initiative, continued focus on code enforcement efforts, and support of new cultural facilities
(ExplorOcean and Balboa Theater). The proposed priorities for Year Two (2014) are listed
below:
Year Two Priorities (2014)
1. Develop a conceptual streetscape plan, including targeted improvements to bicycle and
pedestrian facilities.
2. Develop a coordinated public signage and wayfinding sign program.
3. Revise the existing Design Guidelines, including modifying the implementation process.
4. Develop and implement a commercial facade improvement program.
5. Develop and implement a targeted tenant attraction program.
The report from the Urban Land Institute (ULI) Technical Assistance Panel (TAP) will be
reviewed by the Committee and used to execute the Year Two priorities. Each
recommendation within the TAP report will be vetted at a future BVAC meeting and
incorporated as appropriate into the plans and programs established in 2014.
Items 1 -3 are major programs that will require sufficient review and effort in order to
implement meaningful changes in a timely manner. Staff recommends that the City retain a
consultant with experience and extensive knowledge in these areas to assist in the
development of these plans.
10
Page 12
Items 4 and 5 should be implemented concurrently with Items 1 -3 so that the Facade
Improvement and Tenant Attraction Programs are tied to the streetscape and public realm
plans developed for the area. An outside consultant is not necessary to develop Items 4 and
5 as the Committee and staff have adequate resources to accomplish these priorities.
The priorities are discussed in the Master Plan (excerpts attached), which is available online:
http: / /newr)ortbeachca.gov/ Modules /ShowDocument.aspx ?documentid =14799
The 2014 priorities are summarized below:
Develop a conceptual streetscape plan, including targeted improvements to bicycle and
pedestrian facilities.
The streetscape and public rights -of -way in Balboa Village are generally in good condition,
but there is room for improvement. The City has put forth effort to improve the area,
including installing new decorative sidewalks, street trees, and planters. In addition, the City
acquired property and expanded the Palm Street public parking lot. The intent is to
incorporate existing improvements and build upon the original work. Creating an enhanced
landscape /streetscape design plan will also guide future development in the area.
Develop a coordinated public signage and wayfinding sign prog ram.
The streetscape improvement plan will also address signage in the area, including
wayfinding signs. Wayfinding signage helps orient visitors, shoppers, and residents, pointing
them to area parking facilities, restaurants, retail establishments, pedestrian and bicycle
routes, and other important destinations. The City currently has a themed wayfinding sign
program for key areas of the City. Further study of this program is warranted to identify
additional signage needs in Balboa Village to enhance effectiveness and visibility.
Revise the existing Design Guidelines, including modifying the implementation process.
The City Council adopted Design Guidelines for Balboa Village in November 2002. These
guidelines are not contained in the Zoning Code as development standards but rather are
intended to guide owners, developers, and staff in the review of new development in Balboa
Village. The guidelines address building form, setbacks, architectural features, and signage
considerations. The current guidelines are still applicable and additional changes may not be
necessary. However, the Design Guidelines are important for implementing other
revitalization strategies and should be reviewed in further detail by the Committee. The
BVAC has the opportunity to recommend stronger enforcement options for projects to be
designed consistent with the guidelines.
Develop and implement a commercial facade improvement program.
In an effort to incentivize property owners to invest in the rehabilitation of their buildings, the
Master Plan recommends creating a facade improvement program and funding a portion of
17
Page 13
the costs to rehabilitate the commercial structures. These types of programs are common in
special districts such as Balboa Village, and the success of such a program would lead to a
renewed sense of place.
Develop and implement a targeted tenant attraction program.
A complementary effort to the Facade Improvement Program is a key tenant, targeted
marketing program. In order to attract a few key tenants and developments to the area (e.g.,
sit -down restaurant, quality boutique retail) financial incentives on the part of the City may be
required to encourage such uses to locate in Balboa Village. These could include fee
waivers for plan check and building permits or a tenant improvement loan program to offset
the expense of opening a new restaurant in the area. Once the incentive programs are
developed, a method to provide outreach will be needed to make potential tenants aware of
the opportunities.
Proposed Schedule
Following the work on the parking strategies, the 2014 work program priorities can be
initiated in March. Staff and the Committee will begin to work on the facade improvement
and tenant attraction programs (Items 4 and 5) in March 2014. For Items 1 -3, funding for the
consultant work will need to be requested of the City Council for the next budget year.
Therefore, staff and the Committee can being working on these items beginning in July 2014,
pending budget approval.
M
• Residential development is an economic engine for mixed -use development
opportunities; carries the cost of ground floor commercial
• Cultural catalysts - ExplorOcean and Balboa Theater
• City -owned parking lot on Palm Street may be developed and serve as a catalyst
to promote economic development in Balboa Village
Strategies:
• Pursue adoption of a Local Coastal Plan to expedite project review /permit
issuance
• Eliminate parking requirements for new or intensified commercial uses
• Support/facilitate development of ExplorOcean/Balboa Theater
• Create financial incentive programs to encourage facade improvement and
rehabilitation of commercial properties
• Support and encourage a variety of events and activities in the Village to improve
community interest and increase business sales for local merchants
• Consider developing the Palm Street parking lot with a mixed use project, either
hotel or residential with a small amount of ground -floor commercial
• Identify new revenue sources to assist in funding programs and projects
recommended for Balboa Village
The following recommendations were made by the CAP in order of priority by category
based on need and the ability to make the greatest impact with the limited resources
available.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
A number of economic development related tools and strategies must be employed in
Balboa Village to enhance its ability to be a viable commercial and tourist district. The
following priority recommendations are ranked in the order provided:
1. Develop and Implement a Commercial Facade Improvement Program
There are approximately 55 commercial buildings located in Balboa Village, some of
which contain residential units above the ground floor commercial space. Many of these
buildings are in need of exterior renovations, such as paint, signage, awnings, window
casings, and structural repairs. The KMA report concluded that, while commercial space
rents in this area are adequate by market comparison, on balance, the property owners do
not perceive that investing in exterior improvements will generate significant rent
increases. The deterioration of these buildings is a key contributor to the overall declining
appearance and appeal of the area to residents and visitors alike.
In an effort to incentivize property owners to invest in the rehabilitation of their
buildings, it is recommended that the City Council create a facade improvement program
and fund a portion of the costs to rehabilitate these commercial structures. These types of
Balboa Village Master Plan
L9
programs are common in special districts such as Balboa Village, and the success of such
a program would lead to a renewed sense of place.
As noted in the KMA study, there are several options the City could consider when
developing such a program. The CAP is recommending that a tiered, matching fund
grant program be created. The program would be designed to insure that City funds are
not expended until such time as the owner's funds are available, such as requiring an
escrow account for draw -down purposes. The City should consider a range of rebates
based on the extent of improvements needed for a particular building, as suggested
below:
Minor Building Improvements
These would include items such as sign removal and replacement, and exterior painting
(no major repairs involved). The rebate would be based on scope as opposed to building
frontage, with a not to exceed rebate of $15,000 per building.
Major Building Improvements
MW
Up to 25' frontage $15,000
25' to 50' frontage $25,000
50' to 75' frontage $37,500
75' and above $50,000
Id
Key to the program's success will be the targeting of initial funding to a model block that
will have the most impact upon completion. This will demonstrate to the owners the
potential for their buildings, and give tenants, residents and visitors renewed hope in the
Balboa Village Master Plan
revitalization of the area's commercial district. Often, these building improvements will
lead to interior tenant improvements with existing businesses and /or attract new tenants
to better serve the area. The specifics of such a program and potential funding sources
will be developed if, and when, the City Council approves moving forward with such an
incentive. A potential funding source would be the use of CDBG funding which is
discussed in further detail below.
2. Develop and Implement a Targeted Tenant Attraction Program.
A complementary effort to the Facade Improvement Program is a key tenant, targeted
marketing program. Based on the findings of the KMA market study, there exists a
limited opportunity to attract a few key tenants and developments to the area(e.g., sit -
down restaurant, quality boutique retail, and a boutique hotel). To do so, however, may
require financial incentives on the part of the City to encourage such uses to locate in the
Village. These might include fee waivers for plan check and building permits, and
perhaps a tenant improvement loan program to offset the expense of opening a new
restaurant in the area. Once the incentive programs are developed, a method to provide
outreach will be needed to make potential tenants aware of the opportunities. First
Balboa Village Master Plan
• Designated area: approximately 100 spaces in the north western portion of the
Balboa Village municipal beach parking lot
• Hours of operation: 6 a.m. - 10 a.m., weekdays
• Number of permits issued: 1 per employee
• Permit Cost: $50 per year, no proration
• Compliance with California Coastal Commission
5. Revise minimum parking requirements for new development, and terminate in
lieu parking program for existing participants.
As noted above, there is adequate parking in Balboa Village to serve existing commercial
uses as well as proposed future development opportunities, such as the Balboa Theater,
ExplorOcean and the limited amount of new commercial development that might occur.
This also takes into consideration the intensification of existing land uses, e.g., retail
converting to restaurant. See recommendations in the Planning/Zoning section below.
6. Formally establish Balboa Village as a shared parking district.
Shared parking is the most effective tool in parking management. Due to different
periods of peak demand, uses can easily share parking facilities, thereby limiting the need
to provide additional off - street parking. Key policy recommendations are noted below:
• Work with existing owners and businesses to ensure private parking is made
available to the public when not needed for its primary commercial use
• Develop mutually agreeable operating and liability arrangements for public use of
private parking facilities
• Require as a condition of approval that all newly constructed private parking in
any non - residential development or adaptive reuse project be made available to
the public.
• Allow parking to be shared among different uses within a single mixed -use
building by right.
• If new public parking supply is needed in the future, first purchase or lease
existing private parking lots or structures from willing sellers, and add to the
public parking supply before building new lots /garages.
7. Develop a coordinated wayfinding program for Balboa Village.
Wayfinding signage helps orient visitors, shoppers and residents alike, pointing them to
area parking facilities, restaurants, retail establishments, pedestrian and bicycle routes,
and other important destinations. Parking wayfinding signs can also display real -time
availability data.
The City of Newport Beach currently has a theme wayfinding sign program for key areas
of the city. Further study of this program is warranted to identify additional signage
needs in Balboa Village to enhance the effectiveness and visibility for visitors, customers,
and residents.
Balboa Village Master Plan
8. In coordination with the City's Bicycle Safety Committee, identify and implement
targeted improvements to bicycle and pedestrian facilities in Balboa Village.
The City's Bicycle Safety Committee is currently in the process of developing a plan and
set of strategies to improve bicycle safety and conditions, including Balboa Village.
Their recommendations should be implemented in collaboration with the strategies
identified in this plan.
PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE /STREETSCAPE
The streetscape and public rights -of -way in Balboa Village are generally in good
condition, but there is room for improvement. Since 2000, the City has invested over $12
million in the area, including new decorative sidewalks, street trees, and planters. hi
addition, the City acquired property and expanded the Palm Street public parking lot. A
walking tour of the area revealed the need for new or improved streetscape, street
furniture, wayfmding /parking signage and enhanced maintenance of the area.
Balboa Village Master Plan
The following actions are recommended to address the physical appearance of the public
areas in Balboa Village:
1. Engage an architectural firm to update the original conceptual streetseape and
public signage (wayfinding and parking) plan for the Village, taking into
consideration the improvements made to date by the City and the future
development plans of ExplorOcean along the bay front.
The intent with this recommendation is not to reinvent the wheel, but rather take into
account the various public improvements made in the area over the last ten years such as
the planter pots along Main Street and Balboa Boulevard, enhanced pavement, street
trees, street furniture and signage. In addition, the boardwalk area will be added to the
modified streetscape plan. The intent is to incorporate existing improvements to the
extent possible, and build upon the original work for the plan into the future. Creating
an enhanced landscape /streetscape design plan will also guide future development in the
area, such as ExplorOcean, along key public access routes such as the Boardwalk. A
unified streetscape will then become the "theme" if you will, rather than imposing a
theme design for the commercial buildings in the Village. The plan will also address
additional public signage in the area, which was a recommended action by the parking
consultant in order to ease traffic congestion and direct people easily to public parking
options, etc.
i The cost to undertake an updated
t conceptual landscape design is
approximately $20,000. Once
completed, then the next steps would
be replacement of the planting in the
pots along Main Street and Balboa
Boulevard and refurbishment
_ replacement or installation of new
trash receptacles, benches and other
i streetscape items identified in the
plan. There is currently $100,000
allocated to improve disability street
_ access citywide (curb access ramps)
in Community Development Block
Grant funds. Upon approval of the Master Plan, the City Council could re- consider
allocating these funds or allocate future funds for the enhanced streetscape design and
improvements. Installation of additional enhanced streetscape improvements will be
build upon the improvements previously installed and will further unify and enhance the
physical appearance of Balboa Village.
Balboa Village Master Plan