HomeMy WebLinkAboutSS04 - Balboa Pier Parking Lot RedesignSeptember 13, 1999
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
ITEM NO. 1 N
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Public Works Department
SUBJECT: BALBOA PIER PARKING LOT REDESIGN
RECOMMENDATION:
Direct staff to proceed with the preparation of plans, specifications and engineer's final
estimate for redesigning the Balboa Pier parking lot in general conformance with
Alternative 6A.
DISCUSSION:
On June 22, 1998, the City Council authorized the preparation of a Parking and
Circulation Study of the Balboa Pier parking lot and Main Street/Central Balboa area. A
Professional Services Agreement was executed with the engineering firm of Austin -
Foust Associates for the preparation of this study. A copy of the study is included as
an attachment for your review. This study includes a detailed engineering analysis of
possible alternatives for re- designing the existing parking lot and access. The goals of
any re- design would be to improve pedestrian, private auto, public transit, and private
tour bus circulation. The other primary goal of the study is to address parking concerns
and needs in the area. The study was coordinated with the preparation of the
peninsula -wide Parking Management Plan, prepared by Meyer - Mohaddes Associates.
The 1997 Balboa Peninsula Planning Advisory Committee (BPPAC) Project 2000 report
included a recommendation to redesign the Balboa Pier parking lot and to close Main
Street, south of Balboa Boulevard, to pedestrian use only. This study analyzes the
feasibility of that proposed plan. In 1991, the Balboa Pier parking lot and Central
Balboa area was also studied in detail. A parking lot re- design plan was developed
after a series of public meetings were held to develop a community consensus. The
1991 recommended plan is also included as an alternative in this study.
The 1991 concept was incorporated in the adoption of the Central Balboa Specific Area
Plan adopted by the City Council in 1994. The Public Improvement Component of the
Specific Area Plan classifies the modifications to the Balboa Pier Parking Lot as a
Priority I improvement to be implemented within 2 years.
SUBJECT: BALBOA PIER PARKING LOT REDESIGN
September 13, 1999
Page 2
The approach for the new study was to review the plans developed for the Balboa Pier
parking lot area, to craft new alternatives, and to compare the alternative plans against
each other and the existing parking lot layout. The design process included a
community outreach component so that residents and business owners would have
input throughout the preparation of the study. Three public workshops were held to
solicit the public's input.
At the first workshop, the public was invited to comment on the BPPAC proposal and
the 1991 Central Balboa Study proposal. The main component of the BPPAC proposal
was the conversion of Main Street south of Balboa Boulevard to pedestrian use only,
and the channeling of exiting vehicles from the parking lot out Washington Street to
Balboa Boulevard. This plan would require a new traffic signal at Washington Street
and Balboa Boulevard. Comments at the workshop indicate that area business owners
are very interested in providing more parking for their customers and layover spaces for
tour buses. The business owners raised concerns about restricting vehicular access on
Main Street. Residents are concerned about tour buses, which currently park in the
residential areas. The residents also support the construction of tour bus layover
spaces to take the tour buses away from the residential areas. Both groups oppose the
closure of Main Street because it would require a new traffic signal on Balboa
Boulevard at Washington Street. Residents are strongly opposed to the installation of
a new traffic signal on Balboa Boulevard. Residents also indicated that they were
opposed to expanding the physical size of the parking lot, and that they supported
additional landscaping around the perimeter of the lot.
In response to these and other comments, a total of 7 alternative plans were identified
and evaluated. These plans are presented and discussed in more detail in the attached
study. The alternative plans are numbered 1 through 6 and 6A, with 6A being a minor
variation of Alternative 6. Alternatives 2 and 4 ( BPPAC alternatives) were eliminated
from consideration during the process because of the inability of using i the one -lane
Washington Street as the only egress street during peak periods. Both alternatives also
included the installation of a new traffic signal on Balboa Boulevard at Washington
Street, which is strongly opposed by the residents. None of the other alternatives
include a new traffic signal. Towards the end of the project, Alternative 6 was
developed from a concept plan presented to the City by the Balboa Performing Arts
Theatre Foundation. Their goal was to provide more short-term metered parking
outside of the pay lot. Alternative 6 was presented at the final public meeting on
February 10, 1999. Subsequent discussions with business owners and residents at
both informal meetings and the August PROP meeting show support for Alternative 1
and Alternative 6A.
A table is included on Page 14 of the study that compares the alternative plans to the
existing parking lot. It should be noted that the existing parking lot has approximately
20 parking "spaces" which are currently being used for interior lot landscaping. There
was significant discussion of the benefit of additional parking spaces vs. the loss of
interior parking lot landscaping. The general consensus was that if additional
SUBJECT: BALBOA PIER PARKING LOT REDESIGN
September 13, 1999
Page 3
landscaping was provided around the perimeter of the parking lot, then the interior
landscaping spaces should be converted to additional parking spaces.
Alternative 1 is the 1991 Central Balboa Study recommended plan. This alternative
produces the most net parking space gain of 84 spaces. The metered parking area
adjacent to the boardwalk is eliminated, and the additional new bus parking spaces are
closer to the residential area. The pedestrian access from the lot to Main Street is
improved, and landscaping is added around the perimeter of the lot. The engineer's
estimate for Alternative 1 is $ 750,000.
Alternative 6A is the recommended plan in this study. This plan provides for: 40
additional parking spaces, an expanded metered parking lot to serve the theatre and
businesses, moving the bus parking further away from the residential area and
providing for 10 bus spaces, improving the pedestrian access from the lot to Main
Street and adding landscaping around the perimeter of the lot. The proposed
improvements would require the reconstruction of the entire parking lot as it exists
today. The engineer's cost estimate for Alternative 6A is $ 663,000. The FY99 -00
budget includes $430,000 from the Off- Street Parking Fund for design and construction
of this project. Additional funds are available in the Off- Street Parking Fund for this
project.
Respectfully submitte
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Don Webb, Director
By: & -
Anton
Senior Civil Engineer
Attachment: Austin -Foust Balboa Pier Parking Lot Final Report, May 1999
CWsers\ obw% haredbounUlUy99- Ofteptember- 13tbalboa pier parking lot redesign.dx
BALBOA PIER PARKING LOT
AND MAIN STREET ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS
Final Report
Prepared for:
City of Newport Beach
Prepared by:
Austin -Foust Associates Inc.
2020 North Tustin Avenue
Santa Ana, California 92705 -7827
(714) 667 -0496
May 12, 1999
BALBOA PIER PARKING LOT AND
MAIN STREET ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS
FINAL REPORT
rraII3U111149liCOW
On June 22, 1998, the City Council authorized the preparation of a Parking and Circulation
Study of the Balboa Pier parking lot and Main Street /Central Balboa area. This study is one of the
first steps in the Balboa Peninsula Revitalization Program. This studyincludes an engineering analysis
of possible alternatives for re- designing the existing parking lot and access. The goals of any re- design
would be to improve pedestrian, private auto, public transit, and private tour bus circulation. The
other primary goal of the study is to address parking concerns and needs. The City's approach to
completing the study included a community outreach component so that the residents and business
owners would have input at the start and at key milestones during the study. Austin -Foust Associates,
Inc. (AFA) held a series of public workshops on behalf of the City to solicit resident and business
owners input. This study has been coordinated with the preparation of the peninsula -wide Parking
Management Study.
BACKGROUND
In 1991 a Parking and Circulation Study for Central Balboa was conducted at the direction of
the City Council. Five public workshops were held to develop a community consensus on the traffic
problems and solutions for this area. The key parking recommendation was to increase the amount
of parking in the existing Balboa Pier parking lot. The parking lot redesign proposal developed in the
1991 study was incorporated into the Central Balboa Specific Area Plan as approved by the City
Council in 1994.
More recently, both the Urban Design Camp Peninsula Planning Study and the Balboa
Peninsula Planning Advisory Committee (BPPAC) Project 2000 reports include an improvement to
the Balboa Pier parking lot as well as a proposal to reconstruct Main Street south of Balboa Boulevard
for pedestrian use only.
Balboa Pier Parking Lot and Main Street 1 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc
Aocess Improvements Final Report 017058rpt.wpd
The City's current budget includes funds for the preparation of plans and specifications for
the Balboa Pier parking lot and Main Street pedestrian access. The design process includes a
community outreach component so that residents and business owners would have input in the
process. The two parking lot concept plans previously developed, the 1991 Recommended Plan and
the BPPAC Recommendation, were used as a starting point for this study. This study analyzes and
compares the previous proposals, and outlines new alternatives developed to improve Central Balboa
parking and circulation.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The existing Balboa Pier parking lot contains 609 parking spaces in the main lot and 56 spaces
in metered lots for a total of 665 parking spaces. Parallel spaces for OCTA bus layovers are provided.
The existing parking lot layout is illustrated in Figure 1. Inbound parking lot traffic: approaches the
lot entrance via Palm Street. Palm Street is a two -lane one -way street southbound south of Balboa
Boulevard. There is an existing signal at the intersection of Palm Street and Balboa Boulevard.
Outbound traffic exits the area via Main Street or via Washington Street if the motorist has not
entered the main parking lot area. Main Street is a two -lane one -way street northbound south of
Balboa Boulevard. The intersection of Main Street and Balboa Boulevard is signalized. Washington
Street is a one -lane one -way street northbound south of Balboa Boulevard.
Traffic counts along Palm Street, Washington Street and Main Street were collected during
summer weekends in 1998. On a typical summer weekend (July 24 -26) the parking lot attracts
approximately 5,400 trips daily. During the Fourth of July weekend, the parking lot attracts
approximately 5,600 trips daily. During the Labor Day weekend, the parking lot attracts
approximately 4,300 trips daily. Figure 2 illustrates the existing traffic in the study area. These streets
are currently operating at capacity during the peak arrival and departure periods.
Balboa Pier Parking lot and Main Street 2 Austin -Foust Associates, Ina
Access Improvements Final Report 017058rptwpd
A
NEW
„
„
a
I
„
ti
„
r
„
„
I - I
NEW
„
„
a
I
„
ti
„
„
„
I - I
i
5
t.
-
-
-
-
— 5
C
—
C
—
C
r
J
5
z
11
a
E
O
a
Z
Ito
k• a
z
z
w
Balboa Pier Panting Lot and Main Street 3 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc
Acres Improvements Final Report 017058rpt.wpd
C
BALBOA
— no scale
z
0
�0
a
z
0
z0
Q o
a
=
ao
r�
L6
a
3
TYPICAL SUMMER WEEKEND
BALBOA
— no scale
z
0
g 0
CD
C~7
o
z O
O
ao
=a00
<O
Ln
—1110-
4TH OF JULY WEEKEND
BALBOA
— no scale
z
O
o
(~ry
O
Z O
a
—
0
g 0
in
LABOR DAY WEEKEND
Figure 2
EXISTING ADT VOLUMES
Balboa Pier Parking Lot and Main Street
4
Austin•Fousl Associates, Inc
Aoxss Improvements Final Report
017058rpt.wpd
C
PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
A total of seven parking lot alternatives have been developed and evaluated. These
alternatives are numbered 1 through 6 and 6A, 6A being a relatively minor variation of Alternative
6. There is no enlargement of existing asphalt area in any of the alternatives; therefore, there is no
encroachment into the beach or park areas.
Alternative 1 is the plan that emerged from the 1991 Balboa Pier parking study with a minor
modification to incorporate diagonal OCTA/tour bus parking. Alternative 1 requires separate
attendants for traffic entering and exiting the lot, provides four bus layover spaces, and improves
pedestrian access to Main Street; however, Alternative 1 reduces storage for vehicles entering the lot.
This alternative produces the most net parking spaces (84) while at the same time costing $750,000
or about $9,000 per space. On the basis of cost per parking space alone, Alternate 1 is perhaps the
optimum choice. Figure 3 illustrates Alternative 1.
Alternative 2, shown in Figure 4, is the BPPAC recommendation. This plan eliminated any
vehicular access to Main Street and introduced a new signal on Balboa Boulevard at Washington
Street. Alternative 4, shown in Figure 5, modified the BPPAC plan to partially retain vehicular access,
at least for local businesses, to Main Street which was reduced to one lane. However, public reaction
to a proposed third traffic signal on Balboa Boulevard overwhelmingly negative, thereby eliminating
both Alternatives 2 and 4 from further consideration. Other reasons for eliminating Alternatives 2
and 4 were related to the question of whether Washington Street is wide enough for two lanes of
traffic, whether buses can turn on Washington Street and whether traffic could be handled with one
lane on Washington Street.
Alternative 3 is the modified existing plan which largely retains the existing parking lot layout
and circulation. The central parking area has been redesigned to provide 10 tour bus spaces (in
addition to OCTA buses) and make better use of an area of the current lot deemed relatively
inefficient by some people. Other than tour bus parking this design does not increase automobile
parking. However at a cost of `only" $281,000 it is also the least expensive. Some people expressed
that $281,000 for 10 tour bus spaces was quite high. Nonetheless, several residents, who did not favor
Balboa Pier Parking Lot and Main Street 5 Austin -roust Associates, lnc
Aoaess Improvements Final Report 017058rpt.wpd
E
r
®E
a
u �
E
S a
t I r I
e
IIIIII m'-111
m................
z
0
6
z
„z
w
0
U
W
m as
(r w
6E
m
m
Balboa Pier Parking Lot and Main Street 6 Austin-Foust Associates, Ine.
Access Improvements Final Repon 017058rpt.wpd
J
Balboa Pier Parking Ut and Main Street
Ao Improvements Final Report
z
0
E
NQ
d �W
:3 zo
m aU
w Wa
a
6U
a
a
a
w
Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
017058rpt.wpd
-M
is
-M
fi
iii
IM
1.
as C
illlllllllllliliil
I It
Z
Balbm Pier Puking Lot and Main Street 8 Austin -Foust Associates. Inc
Access Improvements Fine( ! Report 017058rpe.wpd
I . ............
zr-;r,�O
i al-
................. .... t . ...................
. ....
. .............. .......... .................
...........
1.
as C
illlllllllllliliil
I It
Z
Balbm Pier Puking Lot and Main Street 8 Austin -Foust Associates. Inc
Access Improvements Fine( ! Report 017058rpe.wpd
any change at all to the existing lot, did indicate this option was the least objectionable. Figure 6
illustrates Alternative 3.
Alternative 5 was the outcome of a public workshop discussion regarding the placement of the
bus parking. This plan merely shifted the tour bus layover spaces to a point in front of the hotel
instead of existing residences. The owners of the Balboa Inn strongly opposed this alternative because
of the potential impacts to their hotel. While this option was initially supported by some business
interests, that limited support was quickly withdrawn when it became apparent the issue simply boiled
down to residents versus hotel uses. Statistically, Alternative 5 is quite similar to Alternative 1.
Alternative 5 is illustrated in Figure 7.
Alternative 6 also emerged from the public workshop process, only this time a group
representing the theater and other businesses sought more short -term metered parking. Alternative
6 provided such an option but at a very high cost, $818,000, with essentially no gain in total parking.
Alternative 6 provides for bus layover spaces which are located further from the residences than
currently or with any of the other alternatives. Figure 8 illustrates Alternative 6. Alternative 6A,
illustrated in Figure 9, was developed in response to the criticism of the high cost but otherwise
appealing aspect of the added short -term meters of Alternative 6. A significant cost reduction (down
to $663,000) is achieved through retention of the northerly third of the existing lot, and only affecting
new construction of the remainder of the lot with the exterior landscaping. Table 1 presents a matrix
comparison of the alternatives. Table 2 summarizes the cost of each alternative.
PUBLIC WORKSHOPS
The first public workshop was held September 9, 1998. The subject of the first workshop was
development of alternatives for the Balboa Pier parking lot. Approximately 45 residents and business
owners attended the workshop. A questionnaire was circulated to the workshop attendees seeking
their opinions on the main concerns with the Balboa Pier parking lot, their solutions to the parking
lot problems, and which features of the BPPAC recommendations they oppose or support. The main
component of the BPPAC recommended plan is the conversion of Main Street south of Balboa
Boulevard to pedestrian use only and the channeling of exiting vehicles out Washington Street to
Balboa Pier Parking tat and Main Street 9 Austin -Foust Associates, Ine.
Access Improvements Final Report 019058rpt wpd
101
z 2
8 M tl
So 0 a
4—
Miss
911:2
0 E.
z
1r E
N
Balboa Pier Puking Lot and Main Street 10 Austin-Foust Associates, Inc
Aocess Improvements Final Report 017058rpt.wpd
. . .
t t
. . . . . . ....
173
..
........
. ................
45 •---
1.1414f."n,
.1.4
I 1
W1 I
f
-I-fl 1-11,
I Hill
L._....__ w._.................._.
...........
. ...... . ............... . ......... . .......
............. Lw
...... ..
911:2
0 E.
z
1r E
N
Balboa Pier Puking Lot and Main Street 10 Austin-Foust Associates, Inc
Aocess Improvements Final Report 017058rpt.wpd
M�
•I+A -i
e
>t
.y
Y
� 3
N N
V C
- U
U Y
2
a H 3
a x �
W W N
f
nla
I
�! 1
�r 1
fr J r
I
aoaolaxa.. _
MM4
.V% t"rtt
s I
R
w
�aln
t t
I
II
N
8
T}
n y O G"s
4y1 � �LS
y V ry
Qq
$I N N U L
= II
II II I I II IIIII
I II 111111 L I
= Illllvilll Ili
= IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIII � IIIIIIIII
II IIIIIIIIII II
IIIIIIIIIIIII � III
IIIIIIIIIIIII (IIII
II I I I I I I 1 1I1II J
II II II 111111 IIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII IIII IG II
�IIIIIII�H H i Mi 1111111111111
L
lIL
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ; 1111111 ll
IIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIII1111 Ililll
" IIIII �IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII II I
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII � IIIIII
V101 -.►
}
W
0 z
a
w FF
Balboa Pier Parking Lot and Main Street 11 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Access Improvements Final Report 017058rpt.wpd
pd- ldi8SOLTO
-3uT •satepossy isnog -unsny
a
r
a c
M m
W
uodaa Ieu!d sluawaeoidwl ss=v
iT taaitS umw pue io-I SuiVed jay eoqlep
a
0
9
n
Oros
s
n
ti
n
g
F
2
pd- idigSOLIO
�uI •salemssy isnag -unsny £I
a
H
W
z00
a ;
H CD
t0
a
� � IV/,, P!
A %_
4
QoQ�
O$
N N
n n +
ptli Z n = o
x
N
uodaa jeuU sjuawaeoJdwl ss=V
pang weK put! Io18un Jed Ja,d eOQIeH
b
R.
I i
I
I I
I I
1 1
I I
I 1
I i
, I
I I
,tea
,
C
I
4 111
pg
t
E
C
i
0 I
I
111
1 � r
1 ,
\ w
A %_
4
QoQ�
O$
N N
n n +
ptli Z n = o
x
N
uodaa jeuU sjuawaeoJdwl ss=V
pang weK put! Io18un Jed Ja,d eOQIeH
b
R.
I i
I
I I
I I
1 1
I I
I 1
I i
, I
I I
,tea
,
Table 1
COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES MATRIX
CONDITION EVALUATED
EXISTING
ALT.1
ALT.3
ALTS
AL,T.6
ALT. 6A
1.
Additional Parking Spaces
+20•
+84•
+21'
+83•
+28'
+40•
No interior landscaping
2.
Additional parking spaces
N.C.
+49
-2
+50
4.2
+16
With interior landscaping
3.
Tour Bus Spaces
0
4
10
4
8
10
4.
Accommodate OCCA
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
5.
Landscaping in Front of Residential
N.C.
YES
Partial N.C.
YES
YES
YES
6.
Main Street Pod Mall
NO
Partial
Partial
Partial
Partial
Partial
7.
Impact on Ferry Access
N.C,
N.C.
N.C.
N.C.
N.C.
N.C.
8.
Impact on Safety @ Boardwalk
N.C.
N.C.
N.C.
N.C.
N.G
N.C.
9.
Improved Ped Access from Parking Lai
N.C.
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
10.
Engineer's Estimate of Probable
--
$750,000
$281,000
$732,000
5818,000
$663,000
Construction Cost
• Includes peripheral landscaping and conversion of interior landscaping to parking spaces
N.C. - no change
Balboa Pier Parking Lot and Main Street 14 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc
Access Improvements Final Report 017058rpt.wpd
BID ITEMS
ALT
Table 2
ENGINEER'S COST ESTIMATE
ALT3 ALTS
ALT6
ALT6A
1. Asphalt
$150,000
$50,000
$150,000
$150,000
$100,000
2. PCC Curb
$100,000
$50,000
585000
$120,000
S90A00
3. Landscaping
$200,000
$100,000
$200,000
$200,000
$200,000
4. Ticket Booth
$100,000
-
$100,000
$100,000
$100,000
5. Striping
$50.000
$5000
350.000
$50.000
$40_000
Sub -4otal
$600,000
$225,000
$585,000
5620,000
$530,000
Contingencies 15%
$90,000
$34,000
$88,000
$136,000
$80,000
Engineering &
Program Admin 10%
$60.000
$22.000
559.000
$62.000
553.000
TOTAL
$750M
5281,000
$732,000
$818,000
$663,000
Balboa Pier Parking Lot and Main Street 15 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
Access Improvements Final Report 017058rpt.wpd
Balboa Boulevard, which would require signalization of the intersection of Washington Street and
Balboa Boulevard. Nine new parking spaces would be added to the Balboa Pier parking lot.
Comments at the workshop indicate that area business owners are interested in providing more
parking for their customers, increased nighttime lighting, and layover spaces for tour buses. The
business owners also raised concerns about restricting vehicular access to Main Street. Residents are
concerned about tour buses which currently park in residential areas. The residents would like layover
spaces provided for tour buses also. Both groups oppose concentrating exiting traffic onto the narrow
Washington Street and signalizing the intersection of Washington Street at Balboa Boulevard.
Peninsula Point residents strongly oppose signalizing the intersection. Residents also oppose
expanding the physical size of the Balboa Pier parking lot, support removing interior parking lot
landscaping to gain additional spaces, providing perimeter landscaping to screen parked vehicles, and
support raising parking fees and prohibiting overnight parking in the parking lot.
The second workshopwas held December9,1998 and was attended by28 people. Alternatives
1 through 4 were presented to the residents and business owners. The residents and business owners
in attendance were surveyed to determine their preferences for the alternatives. Out of 30
questionnaires, Alternatives 1 and 3 received 25 (83 percent) and 22 (73 percent) votes, respectively.
Alternatives 2 and 4 were eliminated based on the infeasibility of using Washington Street as the only
egress street from the lot during peak hours. Also the strong objection from residents to an added
signal on Balboa Boulevard at Washington Street was a secondary factor. Approximately half the
residents would prefer perimeter landscaping to landscaping within the parking lot. Residents
between Palm Street and Washington Street do not want the tour buses parked directly in front of
their homes, but the hotel owners do not want the tour buses parking directly in front of their pool
area. Theater and business owners requested more short -term metered parking. Based on comments
received at the meeting and from the questionnaires, two additional alternatives were developed.
The final workshop was held February 10, 1999. Thirty-two residents and business owners
were in attendance. Alternatives 5 and 6 were presented. Business owners sent letters indicating their
support for Alternative 1(AppendixB) prior to this workshop and the discussion of Alternatives 5 and
6. Results of a survey at the third workshop indicate that the majority of the residents and business
owners support Alternative 3 (48 percent) and Alternative 1 (37 percent). Alternative 6 received
support also (19 percent).
Balboa Pier Palling Lot and Main Street 16 Austin•Foust Aucidates, Inc
Aoom; Improvements Final Report 017058rpt.wpd
RECOMMENDATIONS
The results of the public workshops indicates there is support for both Alternatives 1 and 3.
Alternative 1 provides the most additional parking spaces while Alternative 3 provides only an
increase in OCTA/tour bus layover spaces. The bus layover spaces in Alternatives 1 and 3 would have
to be modified to provide handicapped access. Alternative 6A provides a compromise between
Alternatives 1 and 3.
Balboa Pier Parking Lot and Main Street 17 Austin -Foust Associates, Ina
Across Improvements Final Report 0170.98rpt.wpd
APPENDIX A
WORKSHOP PRESENTATION
Balboa Pier Parking Lot and Main Street A -1 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc
A Improvements Final Report 017058rpl.wpd
BALBOA PIER PARKING LOT
DESIGN STUDY
WORKSHOP NO, 1
ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT
B Y:
JOE FOUST, P.E.
AUSTIN -FOUST ASSOCIATES9 INC.
2020 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE
SANTA ANA, CA 92705
(714) 667-0496
PENINSULA REVITALIZATION
BALBOA PARKING DESIGN STUDY
ALTERNATIVES IDENTIFICATION
WORKSHOP NO. 1
SEPTEMBER 9, 1 99B
PURPOSE OF STUDY
1 DESIGN ENGINEERING FOLLOW-ON TO BALB❑A
PENINSULA PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN
2. IDENTIFY AND EVALUATE PARKING LOT DESIGN
A. EXISTING LAYOUT
B. BPPAC 2000 RECOMMENDATIONS
C. "WORKSHOP" CREATED ALTERNATIVE(S)
TAS KS
1. EVALUATE BPPAC RECOMMENDATIONS
A. BALB ❑A PIER PARKING AND CIRCULATION?
B. MAIN STREET "PEDESTRIAN ONLY" PLAN?
2. SOLVE IDENTIFIED PARKING MANAGEMENT ISSUES
A. OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS RESIDENTIAL PARKING
PROBLEMS - TOUR BUS LAYOVER
B. IMPROVE AESTHETICS
C. OTHER ISSUES
3. DEVELOP AND EVALUATE ALTERNATIVES FROM
COMMUNITY INPUT C
BALBOA PARKING DESIGN STUDY
ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION QUESTIONNAIRIE
WORKSHOP NO. 1
WHAT IS (ARE) YOUR MAIN CONCERN(S) REGARDING THE CURRENT
BALBOA PIER PARKING LOT?
2. WHAT, IF ANYTHING, COULD SE DONE TO IMPROVE THE PARKING
LOT?
". DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION REGARDING THE BPPAC
RECOMMENDATION FOR THE BALBOA PIER PARKING LOT?
YES_ NO_
IF SO, WHAT FEATURES DO YOU SUPPORT OR OPPOSE?
4. WHAT OTHER TRAFFIC OR PARKING RELATED CONCERNS DO YOU
HAVE REGARDING THE BALBOA PIER PARKING LOT?
NAME (OPTIONAL) ADDRESS
BALBOA PIER PARKING LOT
DESIGN STUDY
WORKSHOP NO. 2
ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION
BY:
JOE FOUST, P.E.
AUSTIN -FOUST ASSOCIATES, INC.
2020 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE
SANTA ANA, CA 92705
(71 4) 667 -0496
�C
OU�
z�
r� H
I�
O
q0T^
q r�
U
+
oo
: a
z
z
d
z
9w`R
R
a.
d
z
z
a.
a
R
a.
c
zu)
CN
ON
c
cn
g m
R
o
Q+
+
Y
O
Z
.r-°
0
0 c
eo rn
E EU
to
�
W
Y
C
o.
-�
•
°
p
°
U
U
+
+
z
z
z
O
R
z
o
N
V
W
W
O
U
O
U
V
U
C R y
UF]
z
O
z
z
z
z
z
z
52
x+
> ` N
C � v
b
_
Y
s
F
n
o
R
c
o
a
E
cz 00"
H.y..
u
_
O
t
►�
fA
r
3
w
N
O
w o
o
Cw
Q.
V
s
o
cc bo
co
o
C
R
R
c
�.
a
s
I-
00
O.
O
ti
•
BALBOA PARKING DESIGN STUDY
ALTERNATIVE EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE
WORKSHOP NO. 2
1 WHICH OF THE ALTERNATIVES COULD YOU SUPPORT
(INCLUDING USE OF LANDSCAPED SPACES IN I EXISTING
LOT)?
2. D❑ Y❑U BELIEVE ANY ADDITIONAL ALTERNATIVES NEED
TO BE EVALUATED? IF SO, BRIEFLY DESCRIBE.
3. DD Y❑U SUPPORT THE IDEA OF INCREASING AND
IMPROVING THE PERIPHERAL LANDSCAPING AROUND THE
BALBOA PARKING LOT IN EXCHANGE FOR INCREASED
PARKING ATTAINED THROUGH REMOVAL OF THE INTERNAL
LANDSCAPING (I.E., PALM TREES)?
4. DO YDU SUPPORT INCREASED NIGHTTIME LIGHTING,
PERHAPS WITH LOW LEVEL MOUNTING HEIGHTS, FOR
SECURITY PURPOSES?
S. D❑ YOU SUPPORT THE IDEA OF PROVIDING TOURING BUS
PARKING IN THE BALBOA PIER PARKING LOT?
6. ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS?
NAME (OPTIONAL) ADDRESS
ALTERNATIVE EVALUATION
WORKSHOP #3
Prepared by:
Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
2020 North Tustin Avenue
Santa Ana, California 92705 -7827
(714) 667 -0496
February 10, 1999
�C
E�
H
O�
a�
p
p�
N
U
W
U
O
U
U
U
o
00
C14
00
00
cn
rn
_
•`-°
o;
U
z
U
z'
y
o
eq
en
Ch
cn
a
i
00
Itr
t:
(cn
4s
N
U
W
U
O
U
U
U
o
en
+
o
+'
o
rn
rn
_
•`-°
o;
U
z
U
z'
y
o
eq
en
Ch
cn
i
Itr
t:
(cn
U
a
o
N
�y
O
z
�
•y
U
U
o
CD
a
N
U
W
U
O
U
U
U
0
+
z
o
z
z
z
z
z
0
Ch
cn
i
Itr
t:
(cn
a
�
N
U
W
U
O
U
U
U
+
z
o
z
z
z
z
z
i
Y om
c.
cc
.. o`
c°3
a
�,
,;;
U
k.
Cc
rn
P.
o
•.�.
C
N
p
c
•app"
Y
�- .V
C
C
O
O
C
CC
Ol
O
H
\
/
\
\
a
\
/
/
.
\
\
/
.
\
_
..
C
\
k
k
§
\
2
®
k
k
K&/
co
i\
_ §
§
§
0
�
\ )
/
CD
|
d
\
\
/
\
__
_
_
w 0
En
/
k § \
Q_
§_
k
\
\
§
§
\
§
f
E d
2
\�
2
7\
6
k
k
k
_
\0
° ®i
_
�
b
_
S
2
2
J
]
-
\
/
w
ri
¥
w
BALBOA PARKING DESIGN STUDY
ALTERNATIVE EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE
WORKSHOP NO. 3
FEBRUARY 1 O, 1 999
1 . WHICH OF THE ALTERNATIVES COULD Y ❑U SUPPORT?
2. D❑ YOU SUPPORT THE IDEA OF INCREASING THE
PERIPHERAL LANDSCAPING AROUND THE BALB❑A
PARKING LOT?
3. SHOULD THE INTERNAL LANDSCAPED ISLANDS BE
CONVERTED TO PARKING SPACES?
4. WHERE D❑ YOU BELIEVE BUS PARKING SHOULD BE
LOCATED?
S. D❑ YOU SUPPORT DEDICATION OF A LARGER PORTION OF
THE EXISTING PARKING LOT TO METERED PARKING (SUCH
AS ALTERNATIVE 6)?
NAME (OPTIONAL)
ADDRESS
APPENDIX B
CORRESPONDENCE
Balboa Pier Parking Lot and Main Street B-1 Austin -Poust Associates, Inc.
Access Improvements Final Report 017058rptwpd
r►.4 % %1
01/19/99
Balboa
Merchants(Owners
Association
Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
2020 N. Tustin Ave.
Santa Ana, CA 92701
Attn: Joe Foust
Dear Joe,
The Balboa Merchants/Owners Association Board of Directors reviewed the Alternative
Plans for the Balboa Municipal Lot your firm presented at workshop 92 in December of
1998. Our conclusions were unanimous and strongly recommend the following:
1. Alternative #1 is the best choice.
2. Increase the peripheral landscaping around the lot in exchange for increased
parking attained through the removal of internal landscaping inside the lot. This
would be in addition to the increased landscaping proposed in front of the
Rendezvous Condominiums and the additional landscaping on the boardwalk
from Palm St to Adams.
3. We strongly recommend increased nighttime pedestrian lighting for security
purposes within and around the lot, extending to the entry ways into town on
Palm St, Washington St. and Main St.
4. If this plan or another is approved, construction should not take place in the
summer months, and should be phased in so that the lot is never completely
closed to parking
In addition to our recommendation, I have enclosed six other questionnaires completed
by various businesses in the Balboa area.
If you have any questions please feel free to call at any time.
Sincerely,
Britta Pulliam
President, BMOA
P.O. Box 84-0 Balboa, CA., 92661
Ba.lbna. BIA th.e Seri - A Wom.derfill Pface to Be!
J
41106�
Oalboa 9nnn
O N T X E S A N D A T N E W P O R T
December 10, 1998
Mr. Joe E. Foust
Austin Foust Associates Inc.
2020 N. Tustin Avenue
Santa Ana CA 92705
Re: Balboa Parking Design Study /City Counsel Meeting
Dear Mr. Foust,
Pursuant to our phone conversation, this letter shall confirm that Balboa Inn strongly supports
alternatives 1 and 3 as proposed in your meeting of Dec 9th, 1999.
Alternative 5 was proposed to relocate the bus parking area close to the pier and the Balboa Inn
swimming pool. We strongly oppose this plan. The bus lay over area in front of the hotel will
seriously increase the noise level for the hotel residents and guests using the pool area as well as
obstructing the views form all rooms. This change will probably result in substantial loss of
income for the hotel operation.
I will be looking forward to hearing from you in the next few days.
Sinc r ly yours,
Raymond artin Pourmussa
Property Manager
cc:Tony Brian City of Newport (parking and traffic)
105 Main Sneer • Balboa, California 92661 • (714) 675 -3412
'LOG Wet
fAS y
LOTS A FISH
f `PEP
�ArBLYD. NEw��
March 2, 1999
Anthony Brine, P.E.
Transportation Engineer
City of Newport Beach
P.O. Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915
Mr. Joe E. Foust
Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.
2020 W. Tustin Avenue
Santa Ana, CA 92605
Re: Balboa Pier Parking Proposal
Action Plan
Dear Mr. Brine and Mr. Foust:
Following the last meeting on the Balboa Pier Parking Lot, I reflected upon the
various proposals and I have reconsidered some of my comments. At that meeting, I may have given
t.`.e - pression that $10,000.00 per parking space mmy not be a practical solution.
By this letter, I want to make clear that my earlier judgment was in error. Having
given further thought to the comments of you, Mr. Foust, and after consulting with other
knowledgeable people, I now believe that $10,000.00 per parking space is a very wise and prudent
investment for our city.
Also, the removal of the small landscaped medians within the parking lot in order to
allow for more parking spaces makes a great deal of sense. This parking lot is a needed facility
which should be utilized to its greatest potential.
We all know that the greatest need of the merchants within our community is an
increased number of patrons. We all know that those patrons would include visitors, residents and
Anthony Brine, P.E.
Joe E. Foust
March 2, 1999
Page 2
seasonal renters, all of whom need, make use and benefit from greater parking facilities. As such,
increasing the City's ability to provide for more parking and accommodate more people only serves
to fill its obligations to the public as a steward of our beautiful beach lands.
I thank both of you for your time and effort in conducting a most fine and useful
meeting.
Very truly yours,
Robert Roubian
DJG:vaa
f: \client \00809 \63 \briafous.302