Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSS5 - Mariner's Mile - PowerPointWest Coast Highway May 24, 2016 Item No. SS5 Mariners' Mile Capacity Discussion City Council Study Session May 24, 2016 First, in order to better understand highway capacity issues, lets start some Background and Relevant Information. Lis Pacific Coast Highway ➢ Iconic Highway running along the US West Coast (1,400 miles between Canada and Mexico) ➢ Primarily constructed in the 1920s as Roosevelt Highway, runs 37 miles through Orange County ➢ Renamed Pacific Coast Highway in 1941 ➢ Functions as Rural or Urban Highway serving Interstate, Regional and Local Traffic needs ➢ Designated by State in 1976 as Pacific Coast Bike Route Mariners' Mile Segment ➢ 1.35 Mile portion from Newport Blvd. to Dover Drive ➢ Currently 100' -112' wide Right -of Way ➢ Currently 2 South Bound Lanes, 2 & 3 North Bound Lanes ➢ Scattered On -Street Parking (both metered & non -metered) ➢ Designated as a 6 Lane Major Arterial on the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways ➢ City's General Plan calls for 6 Lane Major Arterial ➢ Both Adjacent Segments are Currently 7 Lanes ➢ Also Serves as a Major Utility Corridor 2006 Newport Beach General Plan The GP Vision Statement "Traffic flows smoothly throughout the community. The transportation and circulation system is safe and convenient for automobiles and public transportation, and friendly to pedestrians and bicycles. Public parking facilities are well planned for residents and visitors." 2006 Newport Beach General Plan Key Circulation Policies and Goals • CE 1.1.2 Provide an integrated transportation system that supports the land use plan set forth in the Land Use Element • CE 2.1.1 Plan the arterial roadway system to accommodate projected traffic at the following level of service standards: LOS "D" throughout the City, unless otherwise noted. LOS "E" at the following intersections in the pedestrian oriented area of Coast Highway in Mariners' Mile: Dover Drive at Coast Highway • CE 2.1.3 Construct the circulation system described on the map entitled Newport Beach Circulation Element Master Plan of Streets and Highways. City's Role in Planning & Maintenance of WCH • Maintain Conformance with the County's Master Plan of Arterial Highways and City's Circulation Element. • Ensure City's Transportation/Circulation Needs Are Met in Accordance with the General Plan Vision for: • Vehicles (Car,. Trucks and Transit) • Bicyclists • Pedestrians • Aesthetic Appearance (Property Frontage & Streetscape) • Develop and Implement Proper Zoning and Land Use (Past/Current Developments and Traffic Impacts based on Six Lanes) • Coordinate with State and Utilities on Capital Improvement and Maintenance Projects. • Maintain City Installed Landscaping. County Master Plan of Arterial Highways • Orange County Transportation Authority is the Current Administrator of the County's Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH) • Established in 1956 to Ensure that a Regional Arterial Highway Network would be Planned, Developed and Preserved. • Critical Element for overall Transportation Planning and Operations to Support Existing and Planned Land Uses (Development) • In Order to Receive Measure M and CTFP Funding, City's General Plan Circulation Element must be Consistent with County MPAH. 1958 Master Plan MASTER STREET Ek HIGHWAY PLAN ADOPrED 1-13-59 LEGEND PROPOSED FREEWAY MAJOR STREETS WOUR [ARES URL€sS UTHEMSE +F..... SECONDARY STREETS tnb uvesl OTHER STREETS T TRUCK ROUTES PROPOSED STREETS I. TRAFFIC DIRECTION, LANES T A •�tUllf���`dlli I� !.. ' a�ll�itltilC��1 CITY OF Nj3.WPOnzT BE , CALIFORNIA JANUARY. 1957 PL1lYIpli6 W.'iY4TWli PA0FIG w J .rte � x OCEAN %* 'IV 1963 Master Plan 17 v� / I _ _ aQ ave e j"x e, � �r" J I `��✓ Qom' v r go GEND: s i - - -� EXISTING- ��r� �F F2EEIW4Y (AV)OPTED) ouoA¢v td wines �WOY oE°a «•? { 7� MASTED STREET AND --4 Z) - I4IGIWAY PLAN, CITY OF N�_WPORT B.�ACI-I, CAUFORNIp - 2Es. Ro. 642 mE264fo�' a9B7 _, l EvoEo COAST � -FREE WAY ONLY .ADOPTED, BY ''T14E STATE AND NOT APPROVED I BY THE CITY, 2015 flaaftr Plan of Arterial Highways I r'I E � f) qj 11, T I OCTA County Master Plan of Arterial Highways Master Plan Depicts a Network of Major Thoroughfares • Freeways • Transportation Corridors • Arterial Highway Classifications • Principal 8 Lanes Divided 451000 to 601,000 ADT • Major 6 Lanes Divided 33,900 to 45,000 ADT • Primary 4 Lanes Divided 221500 to 30,000 ADT • Secondary 4 Lanes Undivided 151000 to 20,000 ADT • Collector 2 Lanes Undivided 7,500 to 10,000 ADT * ADT Ranges provide for Level of Service from A to C Practice is to use LDS = C for capacity analysis for links County Master Plan of Arterial Highways Arterial Capacity Rating - "Level of Service (LOS)AP LOS is a Performance Measure ranging from A — F LOS A - Primarily Free -Flow Operation LOS B -Reasonably Unimpeded Operation LOS C -Stable Operation LOS D -Less Stable Condition in which Small Increases in Flow may Cause Substantial Increases in Delay LOS E -Unstable Operation &Significant Delay LOS F —Extremely Slow Speed LEGEND ARTERIAL HIGHWAYS aTA@LISxED MPD ED uro*+u£xt AAIpxuENT - ■ ■ ■ I PRINCIPAL ■■••• MAJOR -- PRIMARY ------ SECONDARY COLLECTOR ROADS OU1 SHOWN FOI FREEWAY* TRANSPOR' CORRIDOR SMART STR SMART STR SMART STR • EXISTING II+ • PROPOSED RIGHT -OF -V shown ror refarence CLASSIFIC PRINCIF 8 Lane Divided Accommodates 45,00 MAJO 6 Lane Divided Accommodates 30,00 PRIMARY 4 Lane Divided Roadway Accommodates 20,000 to 30,000 ADT SECONDARY 4 Lane Undivided Roadway Accommodates 10,000 to 20,000 ADT COLLECTOR 2 Lane Undivided Roadway Accommodates 7,500 to 10,000 ADT Master Plan of Arterial Highways (Newport Beach Area) Mariners' Mile Newport Boulevard to Dover Drive Current Citywide Traffic Volumes Counts (Counts are Average Daily Traffic in the 1,000's) -f' w L L — ._ 381u- 11L—� AOA S 7 r 6• <' 18. -VN ,I / I f ., f f i Q' 1 18 1826' 29' 31' 34' 3511 �.o g9 ? f T 111 MUNGT014 g g8gLWA J •� ��� 3y� 8 8g N c df+! 23 No��--- ff N� LTJ L �N 7' 18' 1815' 1©' a a —� — wascr4J a r Lx°�6°�/J- /1 w' f1Jf(i unavEasrr 33. 'fl ;•2 12 _-17�t\34 15 FL Ln L \ OT 'L .J 27-i0-30 III m29.v 28 y fr �jnR r Wt ,, ti 9Q g e 12-� 17 2$ a j 1 49m m v gP ` 'y` � "�T ��--3 3' f �7-�v� v I � v •Q f i 1 �- }� •��8r� � � _15 811. —� 32. �` °".3- � ,'a, Iu� / 17 7 Lo -10 �tsroF�'- �I '• Yy' TBT �`"]l�/J/�/ CLASSIFICATION —� fi4 ul 4�f, } 2� PRINCIPAL)a4. (lr 19 8 Lane Divided Roadway E ccommodates 45,000 to 60,000 AD �; �i �? /, W MAJOR 6 Lane Divided Roadway tE r F Accommodates 30,000 to 45,000 ADT PRIMARY 4 Lane Divided Roadway' Accommodates 20,000 to 30,000 ADT ,`�~' -► SECONDARY 4 Lane Undivided Roadway -� Accommodates 10,000 to 20,000 ADT COLLECTOR Operating Volumes Today 2 Lane Undivided Roadway Accommodates 7,500 to 10,000 ALIT Current and Future Traffic Volumes Through Mariners' Mile PCH - Newport Blvd. to Tustin Avenue Current (2011) - Future (2030) - 9 %Truck Traffic 48,000 ADT 57,000 ADT PCH —Tustin Avenue to Dover Drive Current (2013) - Future (2030) - 9 %Truck Traffic 44,000 ADT 53,000 ADT Some Examples 6 Lane Arterials with Similar ADT + Jamboree s/o 405 in Irvine and Newport Beach 35-47K ADT •'• Harbor Blvd. through Costa Mesa 29-43K ADT •'• Brookhurst Street through North Huntington Beach and Fountain Valley 42-53K ADT •'• Warner Ave. through the middle of Huntington Beach 40K ADT ❖ Imperial Hwy. through Brea, Fullerton, & La Habra 42-47K ADT •'• Valley View through Los Alamitos and Cypress 42-52K ADT Mariners' Mile - Level of Service (LOS) Based on Recent HDR Circulation Element Review Newport Blvd. To Tustin Avenue ICurrent I Future Tustin Avenue to Dover Drive I Current Future No. of Lanes ADT LOS ADT LOS 4 44,000 F 53,000 F 5 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 44,000 E 53,000 F 6 44,000 C 1 53,000 E _ Current Configuration _ Current Configuration i So now we can more specifically look at what to do to address current and future Transportation Capacity and Mobility Needs through Mariners' Mile Mariners' Mile - Highway Configuration and Land Use Review ➢ Residents and Traveling Public wants Traffic Congestion Relief. ➢ Bicycling Community wants clear On -Street Bike Lanes. ➢ Mariner's Mile Business Association wants Area Revitalization Mariners' Mile - Highway Configuration and Land Use Review To Get Things Started: Congress for New Urbanism Conducted a Mariners' Mile Design Charrette in October 2014 Mariners' Mile Charrette Report Congress for the New Urbanism Cal ifornia Chapter October 17 - 21, 2014 " �� y, �y Avon Street Extension Bike Path along Cliff Avon Street fntersection Alternative 2•' Pedtrian Crossing \ Preferred Flan Village Ccxe Site Plan �+ + ° q L �iA!Of L r l � + Alternatiye2 * Access Alahagement$locks Pacific Coast Highway Countywide Corridor Study Conducted by: Orange County Transportation Authority Caltrans Coastal Cities c'ota+aO�non�,ld HDR, Inc. Transportation Engineering Pacific Coast Highway Countywide Corridor Study GOW CORRIDOR 87UDY 'K eep, W co" ftvinq M M 7 T 10 Needs were determined based on the existing and future conditions. analysis of the Newport Beach subarea. • Conflicts between bicyclists using northbound PCH and parked, cars and moving vehicles • Heavy volumes, of pedestrians, bicycles, and traffic aggravate conflict potential in west Newport • Recurring peak hour traffic c o n,g esi i o n delays — limited mobility • Heavy traffic volumes and high pedestrian Grossing activity delays through Mariners Mile area Conflicts between bicyclists and parked cars and moving vehicles Heavy volumes of pedestrian crossings in Mariners Mile conflicts with traffic Subarea Objectives Objectives for the subarea were then defined to be used as the basis for identifying and recommending potential future improvements. Reduce potential for conflict between bicycles and moving vehicles Reduce potential for conflict between bicycles and parked vehicles Reduce potential for Gonflict between vehicles and pedestrians Grossing PCH Reduce recurring congestion and delays • Improve continuity of traffic flow Improve aesthetics • Reduce or eliminate conflicts between bicycles and right -turning vehicles Web�NilYmpYW �gi�l@�iutl� � NMW pedestrian aimummg M cora am d li rtrrers We (rNw RMm!si a Ave ar Tusfm Vie). kniall median mW hknd to s WLm arassirg distarrae and „M&&ian strial tim ing. 'rRArk a to pruMe three travel lanes in each Jriq dkin wMi a aNdor two way left turn nwdian and Class II laika hms wIh rernavat of arc -Moot purl ng ta� Ekulward and Dmw anw- Carr ruct r6m w CIS I bike tragi at wd ofAvm Sta-et linking to Rld % Apo rt BmAy#ard and dinxtug bWiM D the klap lam to end Newport Rou la vard .lD access Bad PwIrm la. 1 Im m b Ial estr�r arm ��hMxo� pmr ped�� Nj� to beach fra�rn RMwsida AGrum using s&walk an ocan sided Caast Highway to acs Balt Pani-Rsula fSR-55 ta DDvej- to bcnr alef rnumflsl a M. - Add Add sK*nd srmetbDtnd kifi turn lam on PCH at Rim rs - WdnhshO and avid Chn 1 taxa low by remmft rezhO pk ft. h-09mord a enanagermem1t sategies inckling lid j amass paints and radhn dnvevrays. ImpfmmN9PC-Hfiwoqh irrt€ mhange SR -55 by irrcItAmg additional dim* lee, turning pc t, and Class II brlce Ione. PA- and nJQ lot bgvw SR -B and Old wrput paved k I on the rutwast qui of the intersoc5on all Old Melt Bol rd Mrd PCH. City/Consultant Conducted a Drill Down Capacity Review of Mariners' Mile Segment of PCH • City contracted with HDR Inc. to review options in more detail to address capacity needs through Mariners' Mile. • Reviewed 5 Configurations for Mariners' Mile to address current and future Traffic and Mobility. 1) Current Configuration (reference only— will not discuss. LOS E&F) 2) Full MPAH Configuration per City Standard (Min R/W -128') 3) Five/Six Lane "Hybrid" Configuration 4) Minimum MPAH Configuration (R/w-112') 5) Minimum MPAH Configuration Alternative Full MPAH Configuration per City Standard ❖Adopted City Standard Right -of -Way Width for a Major Arterial (6 Lanes) is 128 feet across. •'• Greater Impacts to Shallow lots and/or Waterfront. •'• Did not Consider this Option Further at this time as there could be Workable Alternatives. R/W R/w EQ' k0N. R/w 10'--740' AIfN. TO NOTES: (s} (1) STREETS AIAY RfWRE SPECAL DESIGN (2) AWAY bE R£ODCED TO �--•J 6 FT. 1F WQ SMEWALiC LOCAL STREET (TSI TS R'EQUR€a, 1,14" Oct? r StQPE (3) WHERE B)CYCLE TRAf1 4" P. C. G WALK 0E9GNA7E0, SDEWALK 10` 36' Aw.. }0 MOTHS SHALL BE TYPE "C" CURD 7sTr E , �} UEivarr 'zYP) MAJOR STREET R/W 2" 2 CUL -BOE -SAC SINGLE FRONTAGE OR LOOP STREET 104' ow.R%W i0' 84° M. 10' 01— 0/4- PER FT SLOPE PRIMARYSTREET f71f31 R%W R/W SMN. M¢, 64, W. 1 Q' P20' " SLEC ONDARY S TREET 0)(3) R/w EQ' k0N. R/w 10'--740' AIfN. TO NOTES: (s} (1) STREETS AIAY RfWRE SPECAL DESIGN (2) AWAY bE R£ODCED TO �--•J 6 FT. 1F WQ SMEWALiC LOCAL STREET (TSI TS R'EQUR€a, REV. JAN. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC 'WC'�K$ CIEPF RTIMENT STAN,D7ARD STREET WIDTHS R�� ND. 'A�io� DATE 07 „47rro, 2002 SG'ALE N. TS 10RAW CRAC7A I STD -100-L R,'`VY Rj4V (3) WHERE B)CYCLE TRAf1 M, ARN. 0E9GNA7E0, SDEWALK 10` 36' Aw.. }0 MOTHS SHALL BE 2 AD,J±U'STEO AS SHOW ON STD. --720—L. 2" 2 CUL -BOE -SAC SINGLE FRONTAGE OR LOOP STREET REV. JAN. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC 'WC'�K$ CIEPF RTIMENT STAN,D7ARD STREET WIDTHS R�� ND. 'A�io� DATE 07 „47rro, 2002 SG'ALE N. TS 10RAW CRAC7A I STD -100-L Mariners' Mile — Five/Six Lane "Hybrid" Configuration --------------------- ----------------- - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ -�� - f -'■Y as r T1; I a o' - LEGEND EX EX PROPEX EX /9Y RA{W R W R!W R/w EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY = 100' 12, ,y, EXISTING RIGHT 6F WAY = 100' DIRECTION OF TRAVEL EXISTING LANE WFST ED Np i EAST 13OUND I WE5T BOUND __j 1. EAST BOUND DIRECTION OF TRAVEL FUTURE LANE 423R 4S 6' 8' 1 12' 1 11' 11' 14" 11' 15' 12' 8' I' 12' 12' 1F EXISTING CORN / CURB &GUTTER / STRIPING t r ;IV'I} 5IVI7 YIVI7 _ (ILJ11 [ILJIy m PROPOSED 57RIPIND o a DROP ma l o PROPOSED CURB / CURB & GUTTER in LANE N EXISTING RIGHT -DF -WAY DEDICATION JJr UTILITY EASEMENT J - POTENTIAL RAISED ISLAND EXISTING SECTION TRAFFIC VOLUME - 48,000 EXISTING RIGHT -CF -WAY LEVEL OF SERVICE = E /1 /� _-___-_____ ULTIMATE RIGHT-OF-WAY TYPICAL S E C TIO N A- A G 12' 1?' 17' 7' 12' GRAPHIC SCALE mo I c DRAFT —_ __— FOR REFERENCE ONLY PROPOSED SECTION HYBRID OPTION (1/3) LEVEL OF SERVICE = D OCTOBER 2015 Mariners' Mile — Five/Six Lane "Hybrid" Configuration i°i E Ex EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY 100' EX Xnl — €x x(R Hn €x EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY = 100' WEST_ BOUND L EAST B011NQ E' NESTOLM 4 1d' 11' EAST 801110 6'' WEST B NM B' EAST BOIPrIQ 12' 12' -0-0 I 42 6' 9' 12' 11' 11' f+'.1'� t,w 12' ' 6' 122'' 12' 12, 2 IG' e2' 12' 1■I 12' V V V 11 '1�I1' LJ �1j4�t' LJ mo o 7 � � `11000, ■ � � � ■ "3 � a 1' i i PROPOSED SECTION TRAFFIC VOLUME = 93.000 LEVEL OF SERVICE = C LEVEL OF SERVICE = D TYPICAL m�l in ft w I — EXISTING SECTION PROPOSED SECTION LEVEL OFF SER TRAFFIC SERVICE = E 96,000 LEVEL OF SERVICE = D TYPICAL SECTION B -B a DRAFT F©p pEFE11EMCE 6NiT EX EXISTING RIGHT OF 'RAY 100' Ex PROF E% Ex ,Nnl EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY = 100' Nlll 7 WEST DDH EAST_ BIX1HQ WEST_ BOUND L EAST B011NQ E' 44 B' 12' 11'. 12' 4 1d' 11' 12' &' 6'' B' -1 7 Y' 12' 12' 12' 12' 12' I t,w t t t o� 1' EXISTING SECTION PROPOSED SECTION TRAFFIC VOLUME = 93.000 LEVEL OF SERVICE = C LEVEL OF SERVICE = D TYPICAL SECTION C -C M y 1 Fw ., ; .� � ` �--- .* ,��� f - _ i`.,_c�� {��.- .,� � ���•� °'�. � R � _ O�*a ��. ��' �� ��''�.�y,. _ "gyp St dr : L L w al ^ems m �,:��-•---�„-�-� ,. � — - ar ' -- ! - Mariners' Mile — Five/Six Lane "H ;► brid" Confi ITA W uration 11 : t I e i _-- -_ --i A I ._ tis s v err EX EX PROP EX EX 1 R/,W EXISTING RI�HI �F war = 104' R{w R/,W ,RiB EXISTING RIGHT 4F war = tG4' RJR i i w GRAPHIC SCALE GIREC7IGN OF TRAVEL EXISTING LANE i I ��- OIREC7I0N OF TRAVEL FUTURE LANE II i 1 1 -12' 112' 1F' g 7' 12' 12' 121 12, 12' 12 2'-N' 7'6. EXISTING CURB / CURB 6 GUTTER / STRIPING �C�_LI fLJI ILII i i f DRAFT ogflP]SEO STRIPING o s o r;SLo CURB + CURB a GUTTER FOR REFERENCE ONLY EXISTING PIOHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION r_ 11N UTILITY EASEMENT HYBRID OPTION (3/3) - POTENTIAL RAISED ISLAND EXISTING SECTION PROPOSED SECTION OCTOBER 2015 TRAFFIC VOLUME = U,OCO LEVEL OF 5ERVICE = O EXISTING RIGHT -OF -RAT LEVEL OF SERVICE = F ----------- ULTIMATE RIGHT-OF-WAY TYPICAL SECTION F -F Mariners' Mile — "Minimum MPRH" Configuration rrrrrrr � ------------------ ---------------- - - - - i r r r r r■■ r r■ � LEGEND EX EX PROR EX Rrwa{w R'iw tz,w EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY = 100' DIRECTION OF TRAVEL EXISTING LANE W B01111 I EA5T BOUND DIRECTION OF TRAVEL FUTURE LANE 42 3U 11' I1' 14" 11' 15' 12' 1 B" 7' 1 EXISTING CURB / CURB & CUTTER / STRIPING r VI VI7 CIYI7 (u) (uj PaoRoseo STRIPING a g DROP m PROPOSED CURB / CURB & GUTTER LANE CyL EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION UTILITYEASEMENT /s - POTENTIAL RAISED ISLAND EXISTING SECTION TRAFFIC VOLUME = 48,000 EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY LEVEL OF SERVICE = E ULTIMATE RIGHT-OF-WAY TYPICAL SECTION A - A U , ; yI If I�ir i � 7, - � WZ� FPO, EXISTING RIGHT OF WAV = 100' GRAPHIC SCALE ST BOUNDEAST BOUND ® 12' 12' 6, 12' 1 12' 12' + t t m r DRAFT FOR REFERENCE ONLY MPAN OPTION (1/3) PROPOSED SECTION OCTOBER 2015 LEVEL OF SERVICE = D Mariners' Mile — "Minimum MPRH" Configuration EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY = 100' EXISTING SECTION TRAFFIC VCLLNE = 98,000 LEVEL OF SERVICE - E PROP €X EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY = 100' REx 'WEST OUN RM R!A Rn EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY = 100' no. WEST B 0 N 93 EAST BOUND W' 7' a i52 12' 12' 12' fi4 12' 9 fi' 12' 12' 12' 2' 10' 10' 1222 12' 12' 6' 12' i o m � � � � � ■ � � � x g ISI mN PROPOSED SECTION LE, -'EL OF �E;VICE = D EH Ek aiw EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY = 100' Rn WEST BOUNDEAST BOUND 9d I. 9q 6' 8' 12' 1/' 12 1-0' 11' 12' 9 ©abbb�44�4''� EXISTING SECTION TRAFFIC VOLUME = 53,000 LEVEL OF SERVILE = G PROP E%. RI# nix EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY = 100' REx 'WEST OUN EAST BOUND 4 S' 93 W' 7' a t12' 12' 12' 12' 12 12' 9 ® ■ t t ® o PROPOSED SECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE = C TYPICAL SECTION B -B TYPICAL SECTION C -C Mariners' Mile — "Minimum MPRH" Configuration �. - EX EX PROP Ex Ex a,�T R/.W EXISTING RIGFIT OF WAY = 140' R/,,W RCW 'R/W E%ISTING RIGHT OF WAY - 194' HJ4T �`I= f DIRECTION OF TRRYEL EXISTING LANE WEST ROUND 1 FA N A. N `- fib' I 4 �► DIRECTION 4F TRAVEL FUTURE LANE q2' F 1212 1112' $22,' I�, 1y�?'- 122' 10' 9' R. T' 72' I, 12' 12' 1■2' 12 1■■■2' 7' 6'' 13RAPHIC SCALE EXISTING CURB / CURB 6 GUTTER / STRIPING ��"'�17�0 t t t PROPOSED STRTP1NG PROPOSED CURD / CURB A, GUTTER DRAFT %t.,✓jyj EXISTING RICHT-9F-WAY DEDICATION FOR REFERENCE ONLY UTILITY CASE14ENT - POTENTIAL RAISED ISLAND EXISTING RECTION TRAFFIC VOL -ME - 41,roT PROPOSED SECTION WAN OPTION (3/3) EXISTING RIGHT -or -WAY LEVEL OF SERVICE = F LEVEL OF SERVICE ' C OCTOBER 2015 ------ ULTIMATE RIGHT-OF-WAY TYPICAL SECTION F- F Mariners' Mile — "Minimum MPRH with Alternative" Configuration E% Rllf FX RYII EX STING RIGHT OF WAY = 100' E% R/Y WEST IR! MET 0PN + EAST 90LNP EAST lIOUNQ 'i A2 94 WEST IR! EAST BG1NP Aq 1. 40 i 12" 92' �om#ff'��f 12' A. 6'� RRGR R (II FX RYII EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY = 100' E% EXI5TINE RIGHT OF WAY = 100' R' E% R{W WEST IR! EX STING RIGHT OF WAY = 100' EAST 90LNP FA Rllf A2 WEST IR! EAST BG1NP Aq 1. 40 i 12" 92' �om#ff'��f 12' A. 6'� tt mw Y w�b�44ai w fff4fff EXISTING SECTION PROPOSED SECTION TRAFFIC VOLUME = 948,000LEVEL EE SERVICE = O LEVEL OF SERVICE = E TYPICAL SECTION B -B Y EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY = 100' E% R{W 1R©R E% Rj9l ,R/Y EX STING RIGHT OF WAY = 100' FA Rllf WE'ST ROL NPEAST 90UM WEST IR! EAST BG1NP Aq 1. 40 i 43 12' A. 6'� w�b�44ai w fff4fff of N Y]�ING EXISTING SECTION TRAFFIC VOLUME = 43,OOC PROPOSED SECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE = C LEVEL OF SERVICE = C TYPICAL SECTION C -C ♦ w - � i i l� _ ^� ° _ .. pry �y■� F Y7 I • A 10 t- -Am;r d yG-rrr� 6� kin d + EMOTING BECTION s ■Baa , r ;u � �, �� �- ,� . , . ,•lawTGA Conclusion of HDR Capacity Review • HDR's review of the current and future capacity volumes identifies excessive levels of congestion during peak periods. • General Plan calls for all roads to have a minimum LOS "D" throughout the City, unless otherwise noted. Note: LOS "E" allowed at the following intersection: • Dover Drive at Coast Highway Newport Blvd. To Tustin Avenue Current I Future No. of Lanes _M LOS ADT LOS 5 48,000 E 57,000 F 6 481000 D 571000 F Tustin Avenue to Dover Drive Current I Future No. of Lanes ADT LOS ADT LOS 4 44,000 F 1 53,000 F 5 44, 000 E 5 3, 000 F 6 1 441000 C 1 531000 E � Addressing Street Parking • Scattered On -Street Parking exist throughout Mariners' Mile (both metered & non -metered) • Removal of Parking on Arterials is Recommended as it Causes Safety Concerns, Increases Congestion and Conflicts with Bicyclist. • Developments are Required to be Self -Parked. • Replacement of lost Public Street Parking is Required by Coastal Commission. • During recent OCSD Sewer Main project that removed all street parking, it appeared there was ample on-site parking available. • OCTA Study and funding guidelines should assist with construction of off-street parking lots to replace on -street parking. Funding Highway Capacity Improvements • State has Primary Responsibility, however due to known long term budget shortfalls & higher priorities, Major Caltrans Funding is unlikely • OCTA's Combined Transportation Funding Program (Grants) would be the Primary Funding Means for Arterial Widening and Improvements • Current OCTA/Caltrans PCH Corridor Study Supports Need for Commitment of OCTA Measure M and Grant funding • City Gas Tax, Measure M2, and Traffic Impact Fee funding could Provide Necessary Match Funding Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan • Mariners' Mile is the last of Six Areas Targeted for Revitalization • Purpose is to Identify Obstacles and Incentives for Encouraging Revitalization and possibly off -set affects of highway configuration. ■� 411► _ �` ��� �4•i` �+'►.. � ���`'-: �����'~ ���`� �r���*iii j�► `�,►/t►►II11111t�t��t1�111t�1��t'~`� �1 s1�1►�� 1111 �■� �\"�_ ^� J�. >..,� Q . ... ,.. 11111■ ■■ �,� :� +! �n�uuwuumiinumunu r-"'. ■11111 II■111- � - ♦rriw! _ Q .�� Ir■rn n n. i � �rrr 4 t utunuunrti• ��u■un JI! `` � =iii 111111111 y►! .Q►11u�� ■� II 111p — .: w�. girl. !!r• +'�- ■ JI/� �Ct.a 1111■ ■IIIR ���► "\"E..�c'►.: ..�r-.`ry•<r`�-. ` j ylil �I�rj��'i'rrir�Jir� :�-- 091 ��,7�+ � A .i Rsi aE /i1� +�T� r � .���`!/Ii✓j �jj !�lpl����►,\� r �� � r ti � � �� �~ � i Q ��' �Jj�r jjj !r!!It'► i� •�L� ► � � �ti1.►M+a '.ice `�' ��tlgrq ��� I Ipgyi _ -AN•r��� • �. rjgrri ■ USE POLICY Harborand Marine -Related Commercial, Institutional Buildings (Housing Above rand Mixed -Use on Maximum of l'Commercial Highway Frontage Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan • Conducted Request for Proposal (RFP) process and staff recommends retaining PlaceWorks to assist in developing the Plan • Scope of Work ✓ Public Engagement — including stakeholders ✓ Evaluate existing Policies & Regulations — what's working, what's not ✓ Development of possible Standard Changes or Incentives ✓Parking Management — is this an obstacle to redevelopment? ✓ Urban Form Visual Simulations of Potential Development Scenarios ✓ Pedestrian and Bike Connections, as well as Street Design Schedule —June to December 2016 �I Recommendations for Mariners' Mile With this recent capacity review confirming that the Current Approved MPAH and General Plan Roadway Designation for West Coast Highway through Mariners' Mile requires at least a 6 Lane Major Arterial, staff would recommend that the City: 1) Work to Remove the Remaining On -Street Parking and Construct a Class II On -Street Bike Lanes. Look into possibly relocating Public Street Parking to On -Site Lots. 2) Undertake a Land Use Study to Review and Recommend Possible Land Use and Zoning Modification for the Mariners' Mile Business Areas to assist with Property Redevelopment and Revitalization in conjunction with Ultimate Roadway Widening and Improvements. Recommendations for Mariners' Mile 3) Work with Caltrans to use a Modified (reduced) Major Arterial Typical Cross -Section for Right -of -Way and Roadway Design as Shown Below. (112" rather than 128') DROP FX R.sW , i.R EF R.�® Preferred Cross -Section � w R/w 112 100 -6--7--12--12--12--14 12--12--12--7 SIDEWALh BICYCLE TRAVEL TRAVEL TRA. VEL TWO WAY TRAVEL TRAVEL TRAVEL BICYCLE mntw LANE LANE LANE LANE LEFT TURN LANE LANE LANE LANE LANE Alternative Cross -Section Questions & Comments /o; 01_1*170�rl' Your Public Works Department A Well -Engineered Machine Protecting and Providing Quality Public Improvements and Services