Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.0_Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan_PA2016-081CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT July 20, 2017 Agenda Item No. 4 SUBJECT: Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) SITE LOCATION: Mariners' Mile (generally bounded by properties along West Coast Highway between Dover Drive and Newport Boulevard) APPLICANT: City of Newport Beach PLANNER: Makana Nova, Associate Planner 949-644-3249, mnova(@newportbeachca.gov PROJECT SUMMARY In 2011, the City Council recognized the need to revitalize Mariners' Mile and designated it as one of six "revitalization areas" in Newport Beach. The draft Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan serves as a roadmap to imbue new life and vitality in the corridor and provides guidance on how future change associated with the revitalization can result in the best outcome for residents, business and property owners, employees, and visitors. The Planning Commission is tasked with providing a recommendation for adoption of this document to the City Council. If adopted by the City Council, the Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) will supersede the Mariners' Mile Strategic Vision and Design Framework adopted by the City Council on October 10, 2000. A separate public notice will be sent for the City Council's consideration of this item. RECOMMENDATION 1) Conduct a public hearing; 2) Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section'! 5262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because the project involves possible future actions, which the agency, board, or commission has not approved, adopted, or funded which do not require the preparation of an EIR or negative declaration but do require consideration of environmental factors. 3) Adopt Resolution No. _ recommending City Council adoption of the Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (Attachment Nos. PC 1 and 2). Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan Planning Commission, July 20, 2017 Page 2 INTRODUCTION Project Setting Mariners' Mile is the area generally bounded by Newport Boulevard to the West, Dover Drive to the east, Newport Harbor to the south, and the Newport Heights and Cliff Haven residential communities to the north. The boundary for Mariners' Mile is currently identified in the General Plan under Figure LU26. The boundary in the draft Master Plan is shown below as identified in Figure 2 of Exhibit "A" to Attachment No. PC 1: z Background c Legend: Mariners' Mile Boundary — — — Coastal Zone Boundary Prior to initiating the process to create the draft Master Plan, a number of studies have been conducted for the Mariners' Mile area including: • 2000 Mariners' Mile Strategic Vision and Design Framework • 2008 Mariners' Mile Walker Parking Study • California Chapter of the Congress of New Urbanism's Annual Design Charrette • 2014 Bicycle Master Plan • 2016 Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Corridor Study The draft Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan is the result of an extensive public outreach process, which began in June of 2016. The City held three public workshops on July 25, 2016, September 26, 2016, January 26, 2017, and a number of specific meetings with stakeholders and interested parties regarding the draft Master Plan. Following the input of the public and stakeholders in the area, staff is recommending that the draft Master Plan supersede the 2000 Mariners' Mile Strategic Vision and Design Framework. The draft Master Plan builds upon the concepts first identified in this Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan Planning Commission, July 20, 2017 Page 3 guidance document (adopted in 2000) and updates areas to be consistent with the 2006 General Plan. DISCUSSION The Master Plan seeks to leverage both public and private investment through a series of recommended physical improvements, presented in the Plan's Framework Plan (Section 3). The Master Plan is not a specific development project in and of itself. Rather it is a guidance document to direct future public and private improvements for the area. The Framework Plan addresses four key topic areas, including land use & urban design, mobility & streetscape improvements, the public waterfront, and parking solutions in an integrated manner in an effort to create a bright, prosperous, and sustainable future for the corridor. The Master Plan does not include recommendations for any new private property dedications and the framework map shown in Figure 10 (Attachment No. PC 2) provides development concept plans based on the existing General Plan land use designations, density/intensity limitations, and building height limits. The Master Plan also includes corridor -wide design guidelines (Section 4) that provide guidance for buildings and structures and streetscape enhancements to ensure that future development is consistent with the character and history of the corridor and achieves the quality of design expected for this area by the community. Finally, the Master Plan concludes with an implementation section (Section 5), grounded in collaboration among the City of Newport Beach, its constituents, and external agencies & organizations, that identifies key action items and funding strategies to implement the recommendations and parking management strategies of the Master Plan. Summary of Draft Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan The draft Master Plan is divided into the following five sections summarized below: 1. Introduction & Background Information: This section provides an overview of the purpose and process of the Master Plan including prior studies, the public workshops leading to the development of the current draft plan, and an overview of the Master Plan document's organization. 2. Plan Vision and Existing Conditions: This section discusses the vision statement for the area and provides an overview of opportunities and challenges of the existing Mariners' Mile development pattern. The full detailed Existing Conditions Report is provided as Appendix A to the Master Plan. 3. Mariners' Mile Framework Plan: The bulk of the framework plan and concepts for the Master Plan are presented in this section. The plan focuses on future improvement for the following opportunity areas: Avon Street (east, central, and Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan Planning Commission, July 20, 2017 Page 4 west), safe pedestrian crossings, the public waterfront, the East -End Commercial Corridor, and recommended parking management strategies for the area. 4. Design Guidelines: This section provides a detailed list of architectural styles and design guidelines to direct future public and private improvement projects. 5. Implementation: This section outlines priorities and funding strategies for implementation of the various design concepts presented in Sections 3 and 4 of the Master Plan. An informational flyer has also been prepared to further summarize the Master Plan scope and content (Attachment No. PC 3). April 20, 2017 Planning Commission Study Session The Planning Commission received a staff presentation of the proposed project at the Planning Commission Study Session on April 20, 2017. Four Planning Commissioners were present. Chair Kramer has a conflict of interest and may not participate in the Mariners' Mile discussions. Commissioners Hillgren and Zak had excused absences. The Planning Commission Study Session Minutes are provided as Attachment No. PC 4. During the Planning Commission Study Session, City Staff and the public identified several sections in the public draft of the Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan that should be modified. The errata provided as Attachment No. PC 5 summarizes these recommended changes. Public Comments On July 12, 2017, City staff met with a small group of residents, business owners, and property owners that have been involved in the development of the Master Plan to discuss the draft plan in greater detail. Written public comments received since the April 20, 2017 Planning Commission Study Session are provided as Attachment No. PC 6. Summary and Alternatives Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend City Council adoption of the Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan. The plan provides guidance forfuture public and private development and investment for the area and is recommended in anticipation of large projects that could catalyze additional future redevelopment in the area. The following alternative actions are available for the Commission: The Planning Commission could recommend modifications to the draft Master Plan necessary to alleviate concerns for the City Council to adopt the draft Master Plan. Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan Planning Commission, July 20, 2017 Page 5 Should the Planning Commission choose to do so, the recommended changes would be incorporated into the draft errata (Attachment No. PC 5). 2. The Planning Commission could recommend that the City Council not adopt the Master Plan. 3. The Planning Commission could recommend that adoption of the draft Master Plan be set aside until the Planning Commission and City Council have the opportunity to consider a citywide General Plan update (anticipated process to begin in late 2017). Environmental Review This action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because the project involves possible future actions, which the agency, board, or commission has not approved, adopted, or funded which do not require the preparation of an EIR or negative declaration but do require consideration of environmental factors. This proposed plan will not have a legally binding effect on later activities as prescribed by this statutory exemption. The project does not authorize any specific development but rather establishes enhanced urban design principals and a series of priorities for future development. Future development projects guided by the proposed policies and standards will be required to be evaluated for potential environmental effects in accordance with CEQA and necessary mitigation measures applied as necessary. Public Notice Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all owners and occupants within the Mariners' Mile area. Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website. Prepared by: Mak a N a Associate Planner ATTACHMENTS Submitted by: *na i, r ICP, Deputy Director PC 1 Draft Resolution with Findings and Conditions PC 2 Draft Framework Map -Figure 10 Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan Planning Commission, July 20, 2017 Page 6 PC 3 Master Plan Information Flyer PC 4 Planning Commission Study Session Minutes of April 20, 2017 PC 5 Addenda and Errata PC 6 Public Comments Attachment No. PC 1 Draft Resolution with Findings and Conditions RESOLUTION NO. #### A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF THE MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN (PA2016-081) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS. 1. Mariners' Mile is a mixed-use area generally bounded by Newport Boulevard to the west, Dover Drive to the east, Newport Harbor to the south, and the Newport Heights and Cliff Haven residential communities to the north. The area is characterized by small locally oriented businesses including restaurants, entertainment, offices, and specialty shops with a focus on marine activities. The area also serves as a major thoroughfare along West Coast Highway from one end of the City to the other. 2. In 2011, the City Council recognized the need to revitalize Mariners' Mile and designated it as one of six "revitalization areas" in Newport Beach. 3. The Mariners' Mile Strategic Vision and Design Framework was adopted by the City Council on October 10, 2000, and is used to help define goals for specific areas of Mariners' Mile and unify the architectural style for a dynamic sense of place. 4. An update to the framework is justified to identify land use and design strategies to direct future public and private investment, better define architectural styles, improve parking management for the area, and establish future priorities in a manner that preserves and enhances the Mariners' Mile character and scale. 5. The Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan is intended to serve as a roadmap for revitalization of the corridor and provides guidance on how future change associated with the revitalization can result in the best outcome for residents, business and property owners, employees, and visitors. 6. The City held a series of public workshops on July 25, 2016, September 26, 2016, and January 26, 2017, where the general public was invited to attend and provide input upon a number of studies for the Mariners' Mile area during the process to create the draft Master Plan. 7. A public hearing was held on July 20, 2017, in the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the meeting was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this meeting. Planning Commission Resolution No. #### Paqe 2 of 4 SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. This action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section15262 (Feasiblity and Planning Studies) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because the project involves possible future actions, which the agency, board, or commission has not approved, adopted, or funded which do not require the preparation of an EIR or negative declaration but do require consideration of environmental factors. This proposed plan will not have a legally binding effect on later activities as prescribed by this statutory exemption. The project does not authorize any specific development but rather establishes enhanced urban design principals and a series of priorities for future development. Future development projects guided by the proposed policies and standards will be required to be evaluated for potential environmental effects in accordance with CEQA and necessary mitigation measures applied as necessary. SECTION 3. FINDINGS. 1. The Planning Commission believes that the Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan should be adopted and used as a planning guide for future development of the district. The Master Plan affects general development guidelines including landscaping, architecture, parking, and coastal views & access, which will not increase the development intensity nor change building height limits which could potentially affect the environment. 2. General Plan Land Use Policy 5.3.5 establishes a policy for Pedestrian -Oriented Architecture and Streetscapes. The Master Plan establishes suitable design standards and land use objectives, which are based upon sound urban planning principals, with the intent to improve landscaping, overall site and building design without unjustly limiting private property rights or the flexibility of owners to design projects appropriate for their individual properties. 3. General Plan Land Use Policy 5.3.6 establishes a policy for Parking Adequacy and Location. The Master Plan includes parking management strategies and an implementation timeline to help address parking challenges in the area in a comprehensive manner. 4. General Plan Land Use Policies 6.16.1 through 6.16.6 establish policies for corridors throughout the City to establish development along arterial corridors that is compatible with adjoining residential neighborhoods and open spaces, is well designed and attractive, minimizes traffic impacts, and provides adequate parking. The Master Plan is consistent with current policies identified in the General Plan and accommodates the future widening of West Coast Highway. 5. General Plan Land Use Policies 6.19.1 through 6.19.16 establish policies for Mariners' Mile to reflect and take advantage of the location on the Newport Bay waterfront, support 01-03-17 Planning Commission Resolution No. #### Paqe 3 of 4 and respect adjacent residential neighborhoods, and exhibit a quality visual image for travelers on Coast Highway. The Master Plan does not change the marine use incentive provisions and encourages the use of nautical design elements, which strengthen the maritime heritage of the district. The Master Plan identifies improvement priorities and design concepts to strengthen the area's connection with waterfront areas and surrounding residential communities while acknowledging the corridor character created by the presence of West Coast Highway. The Master Plan identifies implementing strategies to improve the district to better reflect the prosperity and quality image of the City and to make the area a more vibrant part of the community. SECTION 4. DECISION. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends adoption of the Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan to the City Council as set forth in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference. 2. If adopted by City Council, the Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan will supersede the Mariners' Mile Strategic Vision and Design Framework, adopted by City Council Resolution No. 2000-89 on October 10, 2000. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 20TH DAY OF JULY, 2017. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: W Peter Koetting, Chairman BY: Erik Weigand, Secretary 01-03-17 Planning Commission Resolution No. #### Paqe 4 of 4 EXHIBIT A MARINERS' MILE REVITLIZATION MASTER PLAN 01-03-17 ERS' MILE LIZATION MASTER PU DRAFT I, ad.� -ago T y TAW. Table of Contents ExecutiveSummary................................................................................................................ i INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND INFORMATION...................................................................................1-1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................... 1-1 Purpose& Process................................................................................................................. 1-1 PlanningProcess................................................................................................................... 1-6 PlanOrganization................................................................................................................. 1-8 PLAN VISION AND EXISTING CONDITIONS..............................................................................................2-1 VisionStatement.................................................................................................................... 2-1 ExistingConditions................................................................................................................2-2 MARINERS' MILE FRAMEWORK PLAN.......................................................................................................3-1 LandUse & Urban Design...................................................................................................... 3-4 Mobility Network & Streetscape Design.................................................................................. 3-9 Vibrant Public Waterfront........................................................................................................ 3-20 ParkingManagment.............................................................................................................. 3-25 DESIGN GUIDELINES................................................................................................................................4-1 Guidelines For Buildings &Structures...................................................................................... 4-1 EnhancingStreetscape........................................................................................................... 4-12 IMPLEMENTATION.....................................................................................................................................5-1 ImmediateAction Steps.......................................................................................................... 5-4 Financing............................................................................................................................. 5-6 lel»►1]Ef/: �� ExistingConditions................................................................................................................ 6-1 MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN This page intentionally left blank. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2011, the City Council recognized the need to revitalize Mariners' Mile and designated it as one of six "revitalization areas" in Newport Beach. The Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (Master Plan) serves as a roadmap for revitalization of the corridor and provides guidance on how future change associated with the revitalization can result in the best outcome for residents, business and property owners, employees, and visitors. The Plan seeks to leverage both public and private investment through a series of recommended physical improvements, presented in the Plan's Framework Plan. The Framework Plan addresses four key topic areas, including land use & urban design, mobility & streetscape improvements, the public waterfront, and parking solutions in an integrated manner in an effort to create a bright, prosperous, and sustainable future for the corridor. The Master Plan also includes corridor -wide design guidelines that provide guidance for buildings and structures and streetscape enhancements to ensure that future development is consistent with the character and history of the corridor and achieves the quality of design expected for this area by the community. Finally, the Master Plan concludes with and implementation section, grounded in collaboration among the City of Newport Beach, its constituents, and external agencies and organizations that identifies key action items and funding strategies to implement the recommendations and strategies of the Master Plan. A summary table of action steps, a suggested timeframe, and key partners from the implementation section is provided below (insert summary table). MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN Implementation Action Timeframe Key Partnerships CD = Community Development CM = City Manager FD = Finance Department PW = Public Works Department Organization and Coordination Strategies 0-1 yrs. 2-5 yrs. City Other Mariners' Mile Lead and Team X CM, CD, PW Appoint a lead staff member and a cross -departmental City team to coordinate improvement efforts moving forward to ensure coordination following adoption. Mariners' Mile Steering Committee X CD, PW Residents, Business & In advance of establishing a Business Improvement District (BID) Property Owners establish an ad-hoc steering committee composed of individuals and organizations who can effectively act as advocates for implementing the Master Plan's revitalization action. Business Improvement District X CM, CD Business & Property Work with business and property owners to form a Mariners' Owners Mile BID that could fund corridor -wide maintenance, marketing and promotion, and public safety. Application of Mariners' Mile Design Guidelines X CD Business & Property Application of the plan's design guidelines will play a key role Owners, Developers in enhancing the aesthetic character of the built environment, including buildings and structures, streetscape, and landscape. Pilot Improvement Project X CD, PW Residents, Business Create a pilot improvement project that includes lower- & Property Owners, California Coastal cost, high -impact creative interventions bringing immediate Commission, improvements to the Mariners' Mile corridor. Caltrans, OCTA Catalyst Development Sites X CD, PW Caltrans, OCTA, Coordinate with owners of properties within the Village Core, California Coastal East Commercial End, and Harbor -Frontage Districts to foster Commission the redevelopment of key opportunity sites in those areas for projects with uses and of scale that distinctly identify and create value for Mariners' Mile. Parking Strategies Institute Employee Parking Shuttle X CD, PW Business Owners, Expand the Employee Shuttle Program currently operating Institutional uses along the Balboa Peninsula to also serve businesses in Mariners' Mile, enabling employees to park off-site and board shuttles to employment in Mariners' Mile. Standardize Valet Parking Agreements X CD, FD Business & Property Establish and manage a standardized valet program instituting Owners consistent pricing of valet agreements with private valet operators, allowing incoming businesses to use parking spaces in municipal lots directly within or adjacent to Mariners' Mile. Institute an Employee Permit Parking Program X FD, CD, PW Business & Property Institute a permit parking program to allow employees to park Owners at currently underutilized City -owned lots within or directly adjacent to Mariners' Mile, including the Avon Street municipal lot, or at designated on -street parking spaces. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN Implementation Action Timeframe Key Partnerships CD = Community Development CM = City Manager FD = Finance Department PW = Public Works Department Parking Strategies 0-1 yrs. 2-5 yrs. City Other Encourage Private Lots for Public Use X PW, CD Business & Property Work with property owners interested in providing their Owners parking resources for public use, increasing the number of spaces offered for visitors to Mariners' Mile without having to construct new parking facilities. Parking Wayfinding Program X PW, CD Caltrans, OCTA Design and install a coordinated set of wayfinding signage directing visitors and employees to parking locations in Mariners' Mile and providing coordinated informational and regulatory signage. Parking Management District X CD, PW Business & Property Establish a parking management district, allowing all publicly Owners accessible parking, including operations/programs, code adjustments, and financing mechanisms, to be managed as one integrated system and providing a mechanism to create and share parking resources. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN This page intentionally left blank. IN AwlC MARI • E MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN w■ .. ■ ILII �. TIM - IP J In INTRODUCTION The Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (Master Plan) is a comprehensive strategy to revitalize this important and treasured area of Newport Beach. As displayed in Figure 1 Local Vicinity Map, the Mariners' Mile corridor is located in scenic coastal Orange County, extending along approximately 1.5 miles of Coast Highway in southwest Newport Beach. The Master Plan addresses the 65 -acre planning area, displayed in Figure 2 Project Location Map, generally bound by Newport Boulevard to the west and Dover Drive to the east and lies between Newport Harbor to the south and the Newport Heights and Cliff Haven residential communities to the north. The entire western portion of the planning area is located in the City's Coastal Zone, while only the harbor -side south of West Coast Highway is within the Coastal Zone on the eastern portion of the plan area. PURPOSE & PROCESS In 2011, the City Council recognized the need to revitalize Mariners' Mile and designated it as one of six "revitalization areas" in the community. Planning for revitalization in the other areas, including Corona del Mar, Balboa Village, Lido Village, West Newport, and Santa Ana Heights is well underway and in some instances completed. The corridor has been the focus of or considered by the following studies since 2006. • The 2008 Mariners' Mile Parking Study (2008 Parking Study) was conducted to provide parking recommendations that would result in the efficient and equitable use of existing parking supply in Mariners' Mile. The Study recognized the fact that commercial interests in Mariners' Mile are greater than other parts of the of Newport Beach and as such sought to balance the commercial needs with those of nearby residents. The Study found that parking is generally available in Mariners' Mile, however in certain areas parking demand is greater than supply during peak parking hours, and conversely in certain areas parking supply is greater than the demand for parking in the area. This condition results in a spatial imbalance, in certain areas, of parking supply and demand. • To alleviate the parking imbalance, Walker encouraged the City to initiate a paid parking system for Mariners' Mile that raises rates in the most impacted areas and reduces or eliminates rates in underutilized areas. Additionally, the Study encourages implementation of pay and display stations or multi -space meters as the most convenient means by which to implement a paid parking management system. Finally, FIGURE 1. LOCAL VICINITY MAP Fountain Valley luntington Beach Costa Mesa MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN Santa Ana Irvine V v Newport Beach ZIl 4 LEGEND = Newport Beach City Boundary 0 Mariners Mile Planning Area o .5Mi 1Mi 2Mi f-, I. sthI 73 m Laguna Beach MARINERS' FIGURE 2. PROJECT LOCATION C�Pw,a fry Mui, Boundary ---GmnuR m8,,; d, mxmrvewvocera�o Mariner's Mile O Cm'mN .nI h Mariners' Mile Charrette Report Nm CNU Charrette Report the Study recommends expanding hours or enforcementto possibly 10:00 PM to discourage employees and visitors from occupying parking spaces for a long period. • To alleviate the parking imbalance, Walker encouraged the City to initiate a paid parking system for Mariners' Mile that raises rates in the most impacted areas and reduces or eliminates rates in underutilized areas. Additionally, the Study encourages implementation of pay and display stations or multi -space meters as the most convenient means by which to implement a paid parking management system. Finally, the Study recommends expanding hours or enforcementto possibly 10:00 PM to discourage employees and visitors from occupying parking spaces for a long period • In 2014, the Mariners' Mile corridor was the focus of the California Chapter of the Congress for the New Urbanism's (CA-CNU) annual by - design charrette. CNU defines a charrette as an intensive planning session where citizens, designers and others collaborate on a vision for development. It provides a forum for ideas and offers the unique advantage of giving immediate feedback to the designers. More importantly, it allows everyone who participates to be a mutual author of the plan. The project consisted of a 3 -month Pre-Charrette data/information MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN IN WWRR v v O rt w �f 2014 Bicycle Master Plan gathering phase, the comprehensive 5 -day Charrette event phase, and the approximately 2 -month Post-Charrette final report delivery phase, resulting in a plan that included new ideas and concepts to improve the corridor. • The 2014 Bicycle Master Plan best reflects the City's current objectives and approaches to active transportation planning. The Plan presents a broad policy framework as well as targeted strategies for implementing the City's vision of an integrated, high-quality bicycle network. The Plan's policies are general in nature, approaching topics such as facility design, bicycle parking, bicycle education/ encouragement programs, bike share, etc. Specific recommendations focusing on the Mariners' Mile corridor include: » 1.4 -mile Class II lanes on West Coast Highway between Newport Boulevard and Dover MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN �m C*. 2016 Corridor Study Report Drive 0.2 -mile Class III route on Santa Ana Avenue between Old Newport Boulevard and Cliff Drive » 0.3 -mile Class III route on Avon Street between Riverside Avenue and Avon Street's western terminus, with a new Class I segment (approximately 180') connecting the western terminus of Avon Street with Santa Ana Avenue / Old Newport Boulevard "Bicycle Boulevards" on Tustin Avenue and Fullerton Avenue, adjacent to the Mariners' Mile study area. These provide opportunities for bicycle facilities, signage and wayfinding in Mariners' Mile that guide people bicycling to these safe, neighborhood -friendly routes (which are also routes to schools) • 2016 OCTA Corridor Study for the Pacific Coast Highway (OCTA Study) identifies mobility needs and potential improvement strategies for West Coast Highway in Orange County's six coastal cities, with the primary objective "97 of enhancing safety and efficiency for all modes. The Study recognizes the need for multi -agency cooperation, especially between local jurisdictions and Caltrans. Mariners' Mile is in Subarea 3, which spans Newport Beach from Santa Ana River to Pelican Point Drive. The Study's 7 -step process included the identification of potential improvement options, the development of possible alternatives, and the evaluation of these alternatives in terms of benefits, costs, and feasibility. The OCTA Study recommended travel lanes in each direction with Class II bike lanes and the removal of on - street parking in Mariners Mile. Following completion of the Corridor Study, in May 2016 City Council directed Public Works staff to, among other things, work with Caltrans to use a Modified (reduced) Major Arterial Typical Cross- Section for Right -of -Way and Roadway Design that would result in a 112 -foot right- of-way for West Coast Highway that would include three east and west bound travel lanes Corridor Study for dw Pacific Coast Highway _ BeMeen AveniN %coeM In A�gelas counry LMe ORAWECWRfYlMR990RfATLNM rrY _ 0"couft U 93 .,-.IOIRRIRu 1 µ, 3347Mk[ nO ,3u14100 � MIY I'IR( Xk.4! - n WrnlE: SxrE Ap Hmb{�Oyq lrt. oxsA„e<mm� unawcw 2016 Corridor Study Report Drive 0.2 -mile Class III route on Santa Ana Avenue between Old Newport Boulevard and Cliff Drive » 0.3 -mile Class III route on Avon Street between Riverside Avenue and Avon Street's western terminus, with a new Class I segment (approximately 180') connecting the western terminus of Avon Street with Santa Ana Avenue / Old Newport Boulevard "Bicycle Boulevards" on Tustin Avenue and Fullerton Avenue, adjacent to the Mariners' Mile study area. These provide opportunities for bicycle facilities, signage and wayfinding in Mariners' Mile that guide people bicycling to these safe, neighborhood -friendly routes (which are also routes to schools) • 2016 OCTA Corridor Study for the Pacific Coast Highway (OCTA Study) identifies mobility needs and potential improvement strategies for West Coast Highway in Orange County's six coastal cities, with the primary objective "97 of enhancing safety and efficiency for all modes. The Study recognizes the need for multi -agency cooperation, especially between local jurisdictions and Caltrans. Mariners' Mile is in Subarea 3, which spans Newport Beach from Santa Ana River to Pelican Point Drive. The Study's 7 -step process included the identification of potential improvement options, the development of possible alternatives, and the evaluation of these alternatives in terms of benefits, costs, and feasibility. The OCTA Study recommended travel lanes in each direction with Class II bike lanes and the removal of on - street parking in Mariners Mile. Following completion of the Corridor Study, in May 2016 City Council directed Public Works staff to, among other things, work with Caltrans to use a Modified (reduced) Major Arterial Typical Cross- Section for Right -of -Way and Roadway Design that would result in a 112 -foot right- of-way for West Coast Highway that would include three east and west bound travel lanes (six total), a center turning lane, and a Class II bike -lane in each direction consistent with the 2016 General Plan. Public Works staff prepared detailed concept plans showing the six -lane facility. The plans also identified all existing easements acquired from property owners for ultimate widening. In 2016, the City initiated a planning process to develop a plan identifying land use and, design, strategies to foster revitalization of the Mariners' Mile area. At the core of the Plan is the intent to preserve the mix of uses, intensities, and height of development permitted by the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The result of this process is this Master Plan. PLANNING PROCESS The process of preparing the Master Plan included four primary steps, described below, that took the plan from idea, to creation, and ultimately adoption by City Council. STEP 1: EXISTING CONDITIONS. OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS The first step in preparing the Master Plan was to understand the existing conditions and current opportunities and challenges relative to the built environment and mobility network. The City and consultant team used a combination of field visits to the plan area, review of City plans, policies, and regulatory documents, and analysis of recent and proposed development activity to develop a detailed understanding of existing conditions, opportunities, and constraints within the area related to the following topic areas: • Existing land uses • Building location and form • Access and circulation • Parking arraignment and utilization MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN '()PPU(TllNi'C1E5 OPPOKIYNI'I�Es Gp(+pRTUNTts Workshop 1 The information obtained in this initial step is compiled into a Mariners' Mile Existing Conditions Report (ECR) is included as an attachment to this plan. Key background information from the ECR is provided in Section II below. STEP 2: COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Throughout the planning process, the City conducted a robust program of stakeholder meetings and three public workshops to engage the community to inform and receive input from a variety of stakeholders, including residents, business and property owners, and advocacy groups among others. COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS During the planning process, three public workshops were conducted inviting residents, business and property owners, and other interested parties to participate in the planning process. The public workshops were conducted at key benchmarks in MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN the planning process to allow workshop participants to discuss and provide input for key topic areas. July 25, 2016: Opportunities, Challenges, and Dreams. At this workshop participants identified their perceptions of opportunities and challenges currently found in Mariners' Mile and shared them dreams for what Mariners' Mile could be in the future. Participants broke out into small groups and were provided aerial photos of the study area on which they placed color -coded dots to identify and document where and how opportunities, challenges, and dreams could be addressed. A representative of each group shared a summary of the groups' findings with the larger audience. September 26, 2016: Framework for Planning (Joint Planning Commission meeting/ community workshop). At this workshop participants responded to and commented on a preliminary "Framework Plan" developed in response to the team's technical studies and public input at the first workshop, including conceptual land use and urban design principles, parking strategies, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, and streetscape enhancements. Similar to the first workshop, participants broke out into small groups and were provided with a large- format version of the Framework Plan and markers to respond and comment on plan concepts. January 26, 2017: Master Plan Key Concepts. At this workshop, the planning team presented key concepts for development, design, mobility, and parking as they evolved in response to public comments and through further study to be included in the Master Plan. Workshop participants were invited to provide input and feedback to the team during a question and answer period following the presentation. Participant input was instrumental in shaping the final plan document. STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS The project team conducted a series of interviews with key stakeholder and constituent groups in Mariners' Mile, including residents, property owners, restaurant and commercial business owners, marine-related/marine-related business owners, and members of the Harbor Commission. The stakeholder interview sessions were intended to provide a forum for identifying and documenting issues and opportunities specific to the various stakeholder groups. MARINERS' MILE WEBSITE The City of Newport Beach established a Mariners' Mile Master Plan website (http://www. newportbeachca.gov/trending/projects-issues/ other-important-issues/mariners-mile-planning- charrette/mariner-s-mile-revitalization-master- plan) to provide residents, business persons, and other stakeholders a comprehensive, one-stop resource regarding the Master Plan and planning process. The website included information on the project schedule, pre-existing studies, policies, and guidelines, applicable reports and documents, and noticed public community workshops and events. STEP 3: MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT Based on the work completed in steps 1 and 2, and consideration of best practices, City staff and the consultant team developed the Master Plan document. A draft version of the document was published for public review and comment in April 2017. The Master Plan was revised based on feedback received from the public and finalized for adoption hearings. STEP 4: PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR MASTER PLAN ADOPTION The Planning Commission and City Council conducted public hearings for the Master Plan's approval and adoption. The Commission's authority is to make recommendations to the Council, while the Council has the sole approval authority. Public Hearing TBD del►[11Ze1e1►1r�er [1l9 Following this introductory chapter, the Mariners' Mile Master Plan consists of the following chapters: SECTION II. VISION AND EXISTING CONDITIONS The Plan's vision and existing conditions provides the foundation for the plan, this chapter describes where the community's aspirations for the corridor in the future and the context of where the corridor is today. SECTION III. FRAMEWORK PLAN The Framework Plan is the heart of the Master Plan. The Framework Plan consists of a Framework Map displaying the conceptual physical location of proposed improvements and narrative text describing the intent of and relationship between the improvements. The Framework Plan is organized into three primary topic areas: Land MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN Use & Urban Design, Streetscape & Mobility, and Parking Management. SECTION IV. DESIGN GUIDELINES Corridor -wide design guidelines follow the Framework Plan. The design guidelines address a variety of topics related to the physical design of the Mariners' Mile, organized into two categories: Buildings & Structures and Streetscape & Landscape. The guidelines provide a point of reference for City staff in evaluating development projects and provide residents, business and property owners, and developers with a comprehensive overview of the City's expectation for quality development in the corridor. SECTION V. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM The Master Plan concludes with an Implementation chapter that identifies and prioritizes immediate actions that the City can take to implement the plan and documents local, state, and federal funding sources to fund improvements in the plan. MASTER'I The 2006 General Plan provides a vision for the future of Mariners' Mile. The vision statement expresses the community's shared intentions and expectations for what Mariners' Mile will be 25 to 30 years in the future. These expectations are based on Newport Beach residents' values about the characteristics and qualities of life important today and which should be retained in the future, as well as how the corridor should evolve and change in response to changing demographic, economic, and market factors. The community engagement process for this Master Plan confirmed that the community's vision for Mariners' Mile today is largely unchanged from the vision established in the 2006 General Plan. As such, the 2006 General Plan vision statement remains the foundation for this Master Plan and serves as the basis from which all plan components are defined. VISION STATEMENT "The Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan provides for the enhanced vitality of the Mariners' Mile corridor by establishing a series of distinct retail, mixed-use, and visitor -serving centers. Harbor fronting properties would accommodate a mix of visitor -serving retail and marine -related businesses, with portions of the properties available for housing and mixed-use structures. View and public access corridors from Coast Highway to the Harbor would be required, with a pedestrian promenade developed along the length of the Harbor frontage. Parcels on the inland side of Coast Highway, generally between Riverside Avenue and the southerly projection of Irvine Avenue, would evolve as a pedestrian -oriented mixed-use "village" containing retail businesses, offices, services, and housing. Sidewalks would be improved with landscape and other amenities to foster pedestrian activity. Inland properties directly fronting onto Coast Highway and those to the east and west of the village would provide for retail, marine -related, and office uses. Streetscape amenities are proposed for the length of Mariners' Mile to improve its appearance and identity." MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS A key element in achieving the vision for Mariners' Mile is understanding the corridor's existing conditions. The following provides an overview of the existing conditions related to land use and urban design, mobility and streetscape, and parking in Mariners' Mile. LAND USE & URBAN DESIGN As displayed in Figure 3 Existing Land Use multi - tenant commercial land uses occupy just under a quarter (24 percent) of the total land area. Hotel/lodging uses and marine sales/services are prominent uses in Mariners' Mile, each occupying 14 percent of the total land area. Eating/ drinking (11 percent) and auto sales/services (10 percent) are also prominent, while residential (7 percent), office (8 percent), general retail (6 percent), and parking areas (5 percent) occupy smaller portions of Mariners' Mile. The remaining land uses include utilities and vacant land, each accounting for approximately 1 percent of the land area. High land and property values inhibit the amount of marine - dependent and marine -related uses historically found in Mariners' Mile. Collectively, existing development in Mariners' Mile includes 883,618 square feet of non-residential space and 180 residential dwelling units. MARINERS MILE REVITM2 MN MASTER PLAN LEGEND Eefing/ Mi � W.1 Mil H mUkndgieg � Multii iewm(mmmerciol m DNrce Niq Nws mnl GO Hoon ® Veoom p Mnrtmfs M4 Pmjam Bormdory r= p w fW FIGURE 3. EXISTING LAND USE � Aum SaleyServim ®EpH�yoankmg kuni Recoil HomU(odgi,g � Monne kles/ServiLe MA-Te..nt( tml � HPoIe h,k,g Reg Ad Win. � Vomm The unique physical geography and topography of Mariners' Mile is a key factor in shaping the physical form, type, and location of development in the corridor. The area's location between the bay to the south and the bluffs to the north creates a finite amount of flat land suitable for development. Variations in the distance between the bay and bluffs has resulted in extremely shallow lots in some portions of the corridor that constrain the location and design of buildings, particularly the eastern half of the inland side, as well as deeper lots in the center portion of the corridor, as displayed in Figure 4 Mariners' Mile Parcel Map. Individual parcels in Mariners' Mile range in size from 2,178 square feet to 358,833 square feet. Existing building heights range from one-story commercial buildings to an eight -story residential tower; however, the majority of buildings are one to two -stories tall. Buildings are generally interspersed throughout Mariners' Mile without a consistent building orientation or placement on parcels. Some buildings are built directly on street frontages, while others are set back from the street by surface parking lots. Additionally, several parcels are occupied entirely by surface parking lots or storage areas, resulting in a significant gap in the area's development pattern. Building size, type, and architectural style play a significant role in shaping the visual and functional character of Mariners' Mile. Individual buildings are indicative of and reflect the variety of uses, parcel size, and geography and topography of the corridor. The result is a range of building types and sizes that include large buildings on large parcels housing automotive dealerships to small buildings located on small parcels home to personal services. The diversity in building size and type as well as the incremental nature of development and redevelopment of the corridor has led to an eclectic mix of architectural styles lacking a corridor -wide MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN theme or character. However, recent development projects in Mariners' Mile, such as the Orange Coast College and Chapman University rowing and seamanship facilities and the Boy Scouts of America Newport Sea Base, have incorporated unifying nautical design themes. STREETSCAPE The current streetscape presents many challenges for pedestrians, bicyclists, and automobiles traveling through and across the area. Sidewalks vary in width, but the majority are less than eight feet wide making them less suitable for active pedestrian use. Frequent curb cuts along the sidewalks provide access for vehicles, but create a billowing and unsafe walking experience for pedestrians, especiallywhere sidewalks are narrow. In addition to the narrow sidewalks and frequent curb cuts, most the corridor lacks basic streetscape amenities, such as trees, plantings, pedestrian benches, trash receptacles, and wayfinding or directional signage. In many cases, particularly along Coast Highway, large cobra -head light poles, parking signage, parking meters, and other utility infrastructure is located directly in the pedestrian sidewalk. Additionally, the limited number of north -south pedestrian crossings and the long linear distances between the crossings make it difficult for pedestrians to safely access uses along both sides of Coast Highway. This condition is exacerbated by the fact that off-street parking for many harbor - side businesses is located on inland properties, requiring patrons to cross Coast Highway on foot. Parking, including surface parking lots and auto/ yacht sales yards, dominate the land area of parcels fronting Coast Highway, which creates an inactive ground level and limited visual appeal. Although the surface parking lots fronting Coast Highway help preserve view corridors to the bay, the lack of MARINERS MU RMTW ON MASTER PLAN FIGURE 4. MARINERTMILE PARCEL MAP LEGEND ftm k. Bdu6, h.k E BF Ed,, active commercial uses has a negative impact on the visitor experience. MOBILITY NETWORK The Mariners' Mile mobility network consists of three primary components; the automobile network, bicycle network, and pedestrian network, which collectively provide access to and connectivity within Mariners' Mile. There are four roadways that pass all the way through Mariners' Mile, including West Coast Highway, a regional facility owned and operated by Caltrans, Riverside Avenue, Tustin Avenue, and Avon Street, all local facilities owned and operated by the City. Automobile Network The eastern section of West Coast Highway (east of Tustin Avenue) has a slightly narrower right- of - way accommodating two westbound and two eastbound vehicle travel lanes, a center turn lane, and curbside parking in some locations. The western half of Coast Highway, on the other hand, includes three westbound vehicle travel lanes, two eastbound vehicle travel lanes, a center turn lane, and curbside parking on both sides except for the southern side west of Riverside Avenue. Riverside Avenue, Tustin Avenue, and Avon Street are generally more pedestrian in scale because of their narrower roadway widths. Sidewalks on all three streets are directly adjacent to the roadway, although they are typically buffered from vehicular traffic by either curbside vehicle parking or bike lanes. Riverside Avenue is a convenient route from Mariners' Mile north to adjacent residential neighborhoods and to schools within these neighborhoods. In addition, children living in the Balboa Peninsula attending Ensign Middle School and Newport Harbor High Schools use Riverside Avenue as their principal route to -and -from MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN home to school. Therefore, volumes for bicyclists, pedestrians and motorists alike are higher along Riverside Avenue compared to volumes along Tustin Avenue and Avon Street. At the southern section of Riverside Avenue at Coast Highway, there are four travel lanes and two curbside bike lanes. As the road continues northward, its configuration transitions to two travel lanes, two bike lanes, and curbside parking on the north side (within the same right-of-way width). Avon Street and Tustin Avenue are primarily local - serving streets providing access to commercial and office uses in the Avon Village area. Both roadways provide two travel lanes and curbside parking on both sides. Although Tustin Avenue continues up the hill a few blocks to the residential neighborhoods just above Mariners' Mile, it's very narrow right- of-way width (28' with no sidewalks) discourages automobile through traffic, and residents have expressed a desire to prohibit cut -through traffic through this section of Tustin Avenue. Bicycle Network Coast Highway is a popular route for residents, tourists, and long-distance recreational cyclists. There are no designated bicycle facilities or roadway markings along West Coast Highway between Newport Boulevard and Dover Drive. Those who travel along the corridor must negotiate a variety of conditions along the route, and this inconsistency provides challenges to both motorists and bicyclists Dangerous Ped Crossing MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN as they maneuver the shared roadway space. One condition is a westbound "shared" vehicle -bicycle travel lane in which bicyclists ride between vehicle traffic and parked vehicles; this is interspersed with sections where the absence of street parking provides a wide (but still undesignated) bicycle travel area. Another condition is eastbound travel, where solid striping separates the vehicle travel lane from the curbside parking lane, providing quasi -markings to separate bicyclists from vehicle traffic but no inner striping to provide a designated bicycle lane. There are even sections near Newport Boulevard where riding on the sidewalk is allowed — and even preferred due to vehicle travel lanes that abut the curb. Class II bicycle lanes on Riverside Drive provide a valuable connection to residential neighborhoods, Ensign Intermediate School, and Newport Harbor High School, via Cliff Drive and Irvine Avenue bicycle lanes. The lanes lack "best practice' enhancements such as painted buffers, markings through driveway crossings and intersections, or green paint. Pedestrian Network In general, West Coast Highway prioritizes vehicles over pedestrians, bicycles, and public transit. Sidewalks are adjacent to the curb and lack landscape buffers for virtually the entire corridor length, although pedestrians are often buffered from vehicular traffic by curbside vehicular parking lanes. Sidewalks vary in width along the corridor but are generally narrow, with typical widths of 5-7 feet. However, some areas, including significant north -side sections along the eastern half of the West Coast highway corridor, are as wide as 12 feet. On the western end of the plan area, the intersection of West Coast Highway and Newport Boulevard poses many challenges for pedestrians and bicyclists, and existing infrastructure, especially on the north side, does not address connectivity through the underpass There are two long stretches without pedestrian crossings, although there is generally not a lot of demand for crossing West Coast Highway along these stretches: an approximately 0.6 -mile stretch between Tustin Avenue and Balboa Bay Club, and an approximately 0.4 -mile stretch between the Balboa Bay Club and Dover Drive. Riverside Avenue, Avon Street, and Tustin Avenue are more pedestrian friendly than Coast Highway, with narrower widths (34' for Avon Street and Tustin Avenue, 56' for Riverside Avenue) and lower vehicular volumes and slower vehicle speeds, particularly on Avon Street and Tustin Avenue. Traffic speeds and volumes are higher on Riverside Avenue, which has four lanes north from West Coast Highway until it is reduced to two lanes a short distance north of Avon Street. Parking Parking in Mariners' Mile consists of a combination of approximately 2,981 on -street, curb -side parking, private surface parking lots, and public surface parking lots. On -street curbside parking is provided along most portions of West Coast Highway and along public streets within Mariners' Mile, including Tustin Avenue, Avon Street, and Ocean View Avenue. Generally, the free, no time limit parking spaces along West Coast Highway start approximately 400 feet east of Tustin Avenue, which are free and with no time limits. Coin-operated parking meters are Dangerous Ped Crossing located from approximately 400 feet west of Tustin Avenue to the Newport Boulevard interchange. Parking meters are also located along a segment of approximately 100 feet of Tustin Avenue north of West Coast Highway. The current parking cost is $1.75 per hour between 8 AM and 6 PM daily including weekends and holidays. Meter zones and fees are established by Municipal Code Sections 12.44.020 and 12.44.040. Parking time restrictions of 2 hours from 8 AM to 6 PM daily (except Sundays and Holidays) are present on Avon Street, as well as on a portion of Tustin Avenue just south of Avon Street. The City has several parking permit programs to accommodate the needs of residents and visitors. The most popular of which is the Annual Permit, which allows parking at selected meters and public parking lots, and the Master Parking Permit, which allows parking at almost any public parking location in the City without further payment. The City of Newport Beach's parking permit program is available to residents, businesses, and visitors. It was observed that several cars occupied the public lots displaying Annual and Master permits at metered locations. Public off-street parking lots are located on Avon Street. Avon Lot 1,just east of Tustin Avenue, includes MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN 16 metered spaces. Avon Lot 2, approximately 300 feet east of Tustin Avenue, includes 125 metered spaces. In addition, several private lots are located in the study area with access driveways from West Coast Highway and the local roads. Per the 2008 Parking Study, there are 2,981 public and private parking spaces, of which, 514 (17% of the total) are on -street. Overall, parking occupancy in Mariners' Mile area remains below 50 percent, however certain areas have a much higher occupancy than average, with some areas approaching full occupancy. The highest parking demand generally occurs at on - street spaces along the segment of Coast Highway from Old Newport Boulevard extending a half - mile east, and on to the segment of Avon Street between Tustin Avenue and Riverside Avenue. In these areas, parking demand reaches capacity. The parking demand in these areas is driven by the mix of uses near these areas, including restaurant patrons located on harbor -side of Coast Highway and commercial businesses in the core shopping area between Tustin Avenue and Riverside Avenue. Parking remains underutilized in other areas of Mariners' Mile, including Avon Lot 2, which does not benefit from a clearly marked or direct pedestrian route to area commercial uses. Avon Street MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN The disparity in parking availability in the area can also be attributed by the presence of parking meters and restrictions in certain blocks, free but time restricted parking along some blocks, and free unrestricted parking along others. These inconsistencies in parking regulations incentivize users to park in areas without time or cost restrictions. Free curbside parking along Avon Street is more utilized than the spaces on Tustin Avenue between Avon Street and West Coast Highway, due to the parking restrictions and fees along Tustin Avenue. The same situation was observed on West Coast Highway at the "free" spaces just east of the segment where parking meters are present. Development Regulations Development of properties in Mariners' Mile is guided and regulated by four primary documents: The City's General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Local Coastal Plan. These documents serve as the regulatory foundation of the Mariners' Mile Master Plan, as such all of the plan's recommendations are consistent with I Avon Street Parking -x0 LEGEND Canna dpl Baran, and fall G =CV SOA Mal Dolme, Mal MU -WI Puhlip Semi- PAN and lmliNHonol PF =Amada.: Moa radian adadadN Coo9B11ore 0aunllory I — wu MARINERSMILE REVRALRAIION MASTER PLAN FIGURE 5. MARINERS' MILE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS r ®� GENERAL Faa COMMERCIAL losnRMPastre CCG 031I3I as undshh edl RECREATIONAL commensal development B.5 Max M r3 AND MARINE a, orh ar ma m1a1a1. COMMERCIAL courage the conenuaaon (CM 0,5) of coanalEaeanaene cose'll rob too uses whda n ds,,mr —ra arde theme old rnarzcrer. VISITOR Remmerclal aanalnpmehe BS Max FAR SERVING a, orhea, Rewpo,t cum tear COMMERCIAL nagaa are con., (CV( or ccaellePandam awn -relored oeeeanaa l aar,h, and reereadunal usss. MIXED-USE coastal+mated and highway single tree. mmmarnel HORIZONTALI oriented general commercial Max os FAR/ (MU -HI) Paul,mrsed-Bee commercial/ Roodental PB.l-267 Mallossa, ana abna Son a on/.,. mu munl[ reeldentlallYared Mbsa Use: Max 13 Fail LM' hour CwSt Highway' (Rl5-0SC de FAR/ hangs. Man]A Res. FART MIXED-USE SReems-hosted, vain.- Smgleuea comas WATER 1 IND. ear,mgcommeAb1, mlxad- Mm FAR/Rea. i1 it./ WI) real/amdbear, ders,l on max ofl..l aM multlunINandeardal. Ircru l- .I.11ae: Mm LIS FAR is ns.5 Rhin. FAR /Rd, , Max.du/a—1 PUBLIC Public famNes holding N/a FACILITIES(PF) Black drool cultural InsdWdane, ,——t nndm a.mmee.il doeoaala, and ppddt n Ilex m�dcn nasgnanen amass newaaaas wham Ines a'..11weam MARINERS' MILE REVILWZAIll MASTER PLAN r LEGEND Lor mA (G -General Cell (M14 carrir iA Barri and Mdrine e� CR Carol Thwer String Mxae wu it - �\_____ \V' MMU -MMM- stole = Wl Mui Use Wmer R:lome 0%a hllfiam MIT Kf1linak Fara PC Pl Mi0mmunlry Calls Mile Pmlttl Boundary ` 111J C7. C:(oslol Eone EouMRry�m� ear FIGURE 6. MARINERS'MILEZONING/COASTAL ZONING DISTRICTS ®0 GENERAL Awme.aneryottommernal da -os Mav FAR PI COMMERCIAL amomes onemm pdmanly (CG 0.3/0.5) to serve egwlde or regional need,. COMMERCIAL mm—calspree emaat as Mae FAR RECREATIONAL aatl martaldepeadent dad AND MARINE eoastal.elared uses. (CM 0.5) COMMERCIAL A[mmmaaamors, idea, one e_5 MyI FAR VISITOR -SERVING pal that primarily se. (CV O5) .Idtort'i, MIXED USE sorrel or Sldral eCom. os MARINER'S MILE residenneL or mined -use Max FAR (Mu -MM) resdeard1lrhrla l tall Use ma. u es. Peeidendal ueee 0 25U FAP/Ree, p n e mlmW la Mev fAR e y MPkDQUSE In rz w e l Rrale Use. cora. n5 WATER(MU-W1)-al, are dolestral Mae FAR IudlnB pralls,- Mi.d Uae, Com. tl p tl Mand I 4.55-0S 'AR /R. related-uaea. 4.5 Max FAR PLANNED Appnas to he area cormled cumulanve COMMUNITY by me dale. Ray a..,, er.ebpm— (PC-05) allowmR a dub ha4ty and 488 FAR otlglag. PUBLIC PunicR lmaa: housing RA FACILITIES (PF) munitytemeq eunml Imatudon; government Purl nbramen, public bospidlp audlla unmade, and public schools. Yu lkhadiltle MPF O Mmioeh Mile Progrr Boundary r= Cardin Zone Boondury v wa am 1. MAWNER$MILE REVITAUR VON MAtiIER PLAN FIGURE 7. MARINERS' MILE COASTAL LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATIONS ®® GENERAL Avanary or rommamtalarnvmea n.ag./s as FnR COMMERCIAL ormnteepamaeptoaords ((G-A/(G-B) etywlad or aglonal need: RECREATIONAL fnmmeraal tlevelopmem use:on os m"I'AR AND MARINE by near the bay in a manner that COMMERCIAL maregaz to. ronhnoedon or (CM-B(rtal-aapenaem and 1.111 (elated bommosa, vi awing antl re ra anal ui antl pnyeiral ana viaccess ro Me has sual VISITOR vrsboraerving.aaes, gootlr, ana N -A a3 mad FAR SERVING modadonr. umlred urd /. no, Max COMMERCIAL llroor duo er-lenmss FAR (CV-A/CV-B) leg.. nme shards, fraraonet, rondommmm bptaral IwovAl are ,.11-1 d.h pmvmeetogether vim tarmnnal ovarpveht, hmm shorraid—rhortfimb MIXED USE Rononally distributed max smgleure HORIZONTAL , whfw maymrwpa Randal rvemaddehhol (MD -H( neigFbmhaod mmmdrdial, Main 5FAR/ a Itrends, mulnfrmny Reslaenealz¢1— mzitlenaal,oiznor-zervmg antl 11111 oh, marinr,re al ed are, and/or Mixed Lm Max b'do,m gatverd am 1sfAR droorl rerldentlal whM1 [ommemal user. FART Max R/Man, 19 Re IO Rer. F0.R) MIXED USE fnmmarrntdevelopment on or angle uu: WATER ane day than anrouraRa: rvona:mannel. RELATED the rondnaatlon x ruaaal- os May FAR/ (MU -W) deaanda eaod roanal-homes aar. 11 da/ada asrand vincan—mg uses, Mixed Use'. Max Lem -are rommdraal/rerledntlaL 15 FAR lo.3s-0.v and oaarmann ancommoaanpns, Nch,aa. Fns/Rea. 'maading LLJ.1 Freemneing OR Maa FART bodentlal.. are O hblonal In the MU -W PUBLIC tabor taalmdr, inaaaing pabnr WA EACH TIES(PEI e homa, rultpalm hno government f,,, odd, llbroarler. un,, ren rs, public he,, only antl pabll r 11d.r. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN these documents and the goals, policies, and development standards contained within. Figures 5,6, and 7 display the various General Plan, Zoning Code, and Coastal Land Use Plan designations and/ or districts in Mariners' Mile. Opportunities and Challenges Mariners' Mile is home to unique opportunities and challenges. These opportunities and challenges are the result of or shaped by several factors — including the areas physical setting, the historic development pattern, mobility network, and parcel size and configuration. Figure 8 Mariners' Mile Opportunities and Figure 9 Mariners' Mile Challenges highlight key opportunities and challenges within the Mariners' Mile corridor. MARINER$MILE REVITALLENVON MASTER PLAN FIGURE 8. OPPORTUNITIES LAND USE AND URBAN DESIGN © There are a number of underium (zed parcels with surface parking lots along the corridorthat have Infill and redevelopment potential. © The corridor is between two attractive natural environments -the bay to the south and the bluffs to the north PARKING © The City -owned parking lot at Avon Street has a large area that could be used for a parking structure to improve parking efficiency. MOBILITY AND CIRCULATION OTice Mtn Avenue/Avon Street/Oeean View Avenue Intersection provides an opportunity to better connect the residential neighborhood with the commercial district. i The City has an easement in line with Avon street behind the Holiday Inn Express, potentially allowing extension of Avon Street eastward. Avon Street west of Riverside Avenue (behind Sterling BMW) could be extended as an east - west alternative to Coast Highway for bicyclists and pedestrians and a valuable connection to the retail district. O Infill and redevelopment provides opportunity to create continuous boardwalks. M Pmjttt Sde Source: sees ided M p 0 an par MARINERS MILE REVILWZAPON hilkyl PLAN FIGURE 9. CHALLENGES LAND USE AND URBAN DESIGN 0 High land and property values Inhibit desired marine -related and marine -dependent uses such as boat building and services, © Buildings are generally Interspersed throughout Mariners' Mile without s consistent building orientation or placement on parcels. PARKING © Inadequate parking an the harbor side of Coast Highway requires the use of valuable Inland property to provide parking. OThe layout and distributor of private parking lots are inefficient and do not serve supporting uses to their highest potential. MOBILITY AND CIRCULATION © There are few locations for pedestrians to zs Coast Highway, limiting the ability and/or desirability to park and walk to dissonance, OThe 'mtersecton of Coast Highway and Newport Boulevard poses many challenges for pedestrians and bicyclists, and existing infrastructure, especially on the north side, does not address connectvity through the underpass. O PmsdS➢s Source: ESRl, leas MQ' -60P aS' IW' MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN This page intentionally left blank. REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN IP A vision is incomplete without a plan to achieve the vision. The Framework Plan is the roadmap for how future development and improvements within Mariners' Mile can collectively achieve the community's vision for the corridor, its physical development, and achieve the best outcome for current and future residents, business and property owners, and visitors to this special part of Newport Beach. The Framework Plan takes an integrated, corridor -wide approach, addressing how land use & urban design, mobility&streetscape improvements, a vibrant public waterfront, and parking solutions can provide a framework for a bright, prosperous, and sustainable future for the corridor. The Framework Plan encapsulates future public and private investments and improvements in four distinct yet interrelated categories: Land Use & Urban Design, Mobility & Streetscape, Vibrant Public Waterfront, and Parking Management. While the categories and the recommended investments and improvements contained within are each individually relevant, the strength of the Framework Plan is in its collective components and coordinated approach to improving the corridor. The Framework Plan displays the conceptual physical location of proposed improvements and narrative text describing the intent of and relationship between the improvements. Figure 10 Framework Map displays the conceptual physical locations of proposed land use & urban design and mobility & streetscape investments and improvements. While it is important to show conceptual or illustrative locations of possible investments and improvements to provide a visual picture of a possible future of Mariners' Mile, the exact location, design, and timing of investments and improvements are dependent on a variety of market and economic factors, as well as the City's design review and approval process. FIGURE 10. FRAMEWORK MAP �/�/%/ 1' _ "rte M NERS MILE REV TAUR 1ON MASTER PLAN MARINERS MILE REVITW ON MASTER PLAN WAIN 11111:1111: 3 0 M 1e1► The built environment - the parcels, buildings, streets, parking lots, and public spaces — reflects the land use plans, policies, and regulations and the geographic and topographic setting of the corridor. The fragmented and irregular development pattern that is characteristic of the built environment today has resulted in few sites within Mariners' Mile being developed to their full potential. Given its ideal location along Coast Highway in the heart of coastal Orange County and strong local and regional economic conditions, it is reasonable to anticipate that as revitalization efforts begin, Mariners' Mile will experience increasing market pressures for adaptive re -use of existing buildings, infill, and redevelopment opportunities. Certain areas within Mariners' Mile have great potential for future positive change in the corridor. These "opportunity areas" are locations currently developed at intensities significantly less than permitted under existing zoning regulations (e.g., properties with small commercial buildings and large surface parking lots) and exhibit site characteristics — such as size, visibility, and/or location - conducive to the quality, contextually appropriate development desired for the area. As displayed in Figure 11 Area Districts Map opportunity areas form three unique districts within the Mariners' Mile corridor: Village Core, East -End Commercial District, and Harbor -Frontage Area. Each district has a unique, yet complimentary role to play in the revitalization of the corridor. The following provides an overview of the mix of uses and character and scale of development envisioned for each district. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN 4 .�I"4 aii kec Vc—p 5j 1 Ii T� - H�, Foy s 3.5 L , 4 .�I"4 aii kec Vc—p 5j 1 Ii T� - H�, Foy s 3.5 RELATIONSHIP TO THE GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CODE The MasterPlan maintains the land use designations and applicable development standards specified by the General Plan and Zoning Code. As such, the following mix of uses, character, and scale of development described for the three opportunity areas would conform to the existing General Plan and Zoning Code and would not require any amendments for approval. VILLAGE CORE (DISTRICT 4) The Village Core is intended to transition from a predominantly auto -oriented strip commercial area to a pedestrian -oriented neighborhood -serving commercial village environment. As displayed in Figure 12 Village Core, Avon Street would serve as the village core main street, providing a spine for infill development and redevelopment projects. Avon Street is situated to allow buildings to front on both sides of the street, creating a true village character. Streetscape improvements, discussed in the Mobility & Streetscape section, would MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN create an improved pedestrian and bicyclist environment in the core area. Cumulatively, these improvements would facilitate a small- scale commercial area providing neighborhood - serving uses to residents of the surrounding neighborhoods and visitors to the corridor. The Framework Plan envisions the ground floors of building occupied by active commercial uses, such as restaurants or coffee shops, retail stores, and other active uses. Commercial uses would continue to occupy buildings fronting on West Coast Highway. A limited number of residential uses would be located a minimum distance of 100 feet from West Coast Highway, as required by the Zoning Code, oriented toward Avon Street and Tustin Avenue. The residential uses would primarily consist of attached single-family townhouse residences located along Avon Street (central). The new residential uses, along with residents of adjacent neighborhoods, would provide a customer base for new commercial uses, and introduce a new housing product to the area. FIGURE 12. VILLAGE CORE MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN EAST -END COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (DISTRICT 7) The Framework Plan recognizes the existing auto - oriented commercial nature of the east -end and proposes a series of recommendations to improve and enhance this commercial area while respecting the natural environment and adjacent residential neighborhoods and commercial areas. Like the Village Core, the east -end commercial district is characterized by infill development of underutilized parcels. Development is encouraged to occur as a series of smaller, clustered buildings rather than a single large structure. As displayed in Figure 13 East End Commercial District, multiple buildings on a site or parcel should be clustered around and oriented toward small public plazas, and building frontages should be modulated to establish the visual character of individual buildings and storefronts. The Framework Plan envisions parking located at the rear or side of parcels rather than fronting directly on Coast Highway. Curb cuts and driveways should be consolidated when possible to reduce points of conflict with pedestrians and bicyclists and improve the flow of vehicular traffic. Under General Plan Policy LU 6.19.13, development intensities can be increased to a floor area ratio of 0.5 where parcels are consolidated to accommodate larger commercial development projects that provide sufficient parking. The east -end commercial district would include extensive on-site landscaping between new commercial development and the public right-of-way and in surface parking lots to soften the commercial strip nature of the district. The existing composition of permitted, conditional, and prohibited uses would remain on the east end, however, new uses would be reviewed and approved subject to compliance with design guidelines, provided in Section IV of this document, established for the area. The design guidelines are intended to reflect the community's desire for quality design in the corridor without negatively impacting a property owner's ability to develop or utilize their property. nPW�p�wYlnn ornnimn� wma Ors'n6 o auM�.,w s= MemKVla@ SMod pCa�4M FIGURE 13. EAST END COMMERCIAL DISTRICT HARBOR -FRONTAGE AREA (DISTRICT 3) The Harbor -Frontage area is intended to serve as a gateway to the Harbor, linking inland residential neighborhoods and commercial uses to the water and linking the harbor -frontage area to the rest of Mariners' Mile corridor. Buildings would be oriented toward the water, with public plazas and open spaces and oriented away from West Coast Highway. As displayed in Figure 14 Harbor Frontage Area, public plazas and open spaces would provide physical and visual connections to the water, while also providing public outdoor space for residents and visitors to connect, interact, and relax. The area would continue to provide a mix of visitor -serving and harbor -related uses, as well as a limited amount of mixed-use development (up to 50 percent of the Harbor -Frontage area), incorporating residential dwelling units with the existing nonresidential uses. A future public dock would allow residents and visitors to access the harbor- frontage area from the water, allowing the harbor to function as an additional "roadway" connecting the east and west sides of Mariners' Mile and linking the corridor to other harbor -adjacent areas of Newport Beach. Additionally, the development of a public dock would activate water-based recreation and leisure activities, such as use of Duffy boats, charters, and MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN non -motorized water sports. While the plan does not address the specific mix of uses in the area, the plan encourages retention of existing harbor - related and dependent uses that help preserve the area's nautical history. Additional streetscape and public space amenities for the harbor -frontage area are discussed in the Mobility and Streetscape section of the plan FIGURE 14. HARBOR FRONTAGE AREA MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN MOBILITY NETWORK & STREETSCAPE DESIGN INTRODUCTION This section describes the mobility network & streetscape design component of the Framework Plan. The improvements support the vision and are correlated with the land use and development opportunities described in the previous section to cumulatively result in a better -connected and revitalized Mariners' Mile corridor. A variety of physical improvements would contribute to a public realm that provide improved access to the water from inland properties and adjacent residential neighborhoods, a safe and well-connected pedestrian and bicycle network, more accessible public parking spaces, improved automobile circulation and safety, and a stronger and more cohesive sense of place throughout the Mariners' Mile corridor. Like the Land use & Urban Design section, the Mobility Network & Streetscape Design section of the Framework Plan consists of illustrative or conceptual locations for certain public realm features. Final improvements and locations for public realm features would be determined in consideration of the location of new development, FIGURE analysis to ensure that traffic patterns and volumes are not adversely impacted, engineering design, and funding availability. To account for this flexibility, this section describes overarching guiding principles for the placement of public realm features and/or alternative siting locations. STRENGTHENING THE CORE Avon Street acts as the organizing element of the Village Core area and has the potential to become the backbone of the western half of the inland side of Mariners' Mile. Improving Avon Street is a critical element in strengthening the village core of Mariners' Mile. Proposed improvements vary along the length of the roadway, due to a variety of factors including the existing right-of-way width, existing land uses, proposed land uses, and urban design improvements. As displayed in Figure 15 Avon Street, Avon Street improvements are broken into three segments: west, central, and east. rn AVON STREET (WEST) Currently, this westerly segment of Avon Street in Mariners' Mile is a narrow roadway located at the foot of the bluffs leading to a dead end just before Santa Ana Avenue. The roadway is especially narrow adjacent to the existing BMW dealership building. Extending the roadway to allow for vehicular access would require significant alteration of the slope and a retaining wall system. Therefore, it is not recommended. Proposed improvement, provide bicycle connectivity between Avon Village, the residential areas north of Avon Street, to a proposed pedestrian bridge crossing West Coast Highway via a proposed parking structure at the auto dealership. Current conditions and proposed improvements to the westerly portion of Avon Street are displayed in Figures 15 & 17. To improve bicycle and pedestrian connectivity within the Plan area, the Plan proposes to add bicycle and pedestrian facilities on the existing roadway. This section of Avon Street would maintain the existing curb -to -curb width of the roadway, however, Class III sharrow markings would be added on the travel lanes for shared lanes with bicyclists and a pedestrian sidewalk developed on the north side of the street by constructing and relocating the existing retaining wall. In addition, a linear park would be developed along the foot of the existing hillside, extending Avon Avenue toward Santa Ana Avenue. The park would consist of a 12 -foot wide multi -use (pedestrian/ bicycle) shared path with landscaping and open space on either side. Existing conditions and the proposed improvements to the west end of Avon Street are displayed in Figures 18 and 19. From the improved western portion of Avon Street, pedestrians and bicyclists will be able to use a multi -use corridor to enter a proposed parking structure shared with BMW (discussed below) and connect with a new pedestrian/bicycle bridge, as displayed in Figure 20 Santa Ana Ped/ Bike MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN wsnNG rswev WILNN fila —n 90EWAllt IRA. IAHE MAO LANE uNos M We A5'—O" TO 50'-0' FIGURE 16. EXISTING AVON (WEST) ADJACENT TO CAR DEALERSHIP FIGURE 17. PROPOSED AVON (WEST) ADJACENT TO CAR DEALERSHIP MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN FIGURE 18. EXISTING AVON (WEST) TERMINATION - �.YNNG C{E-$IREEI MRA pgMINL FIGURE 19. PROPOSED AVON (WEST) MULTI -USE PATH Connection providing access across Coast Highway to the waterfront. To accommodate bikes, the parking structure and pedestrian bridge would be equipped with elevators. The existing Sterling BMW parking lot at the west end of Mariners' Mile between Coast Highway and Avon Street provides a potential site for a multilevel parking structure. Currently, the lot is utilized by the automobile dealership and does not provide public parking. A future parking structure could be used by both the dealership and the public, with dealership vehicles securely separated from public parking areas. A parking structure would comply with a height restriction of 35 feet to minimize visual impact and preserve views to the water from blufftop residences. The top parking level could be open to the sky or covered with a roof. If covered, a roof could be partially or fully covered with a landscaped green roof. With a lot area of approximately 54,000 square feet, the structure would likely have three parking levels providing roughly 400 regular parking spaces. If the dealership occupied one -and - a -half levels, it would have a significantly increased capacity to store vehicle inventory on site — with the added benefit of covered parking for some or all of its inventory. With vehicles parked closely and in rows "valet style", it is likely that the dealership could store around 250 vehicles in the parking structure. One -and -a -half levels of public parking, with approximately 200 spaces, would increase the public parking supply in Mariners' Mile by around 30 percent. The proposed parking structure would provide additional public parking near popular restaurants and destinations, including yacht charter departure areas. The proposed parking structure would be easily accessible from Coast Highway via Avon Street and provide additional parking capacity to accommodate future demand for area business, including a location for a future centralized valet and employee parking area. Development of the parking structure would require close coordination between the City and the property owner, and require significant construction, maintenance, and operational costs. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN FIGURE 20. AVON STREET PED/BIKE CONNECTION LEGEND f Q Project Boundary r:.,' icHi Shared Plaza Pedestrian/Bike Bridge Coastal Zone Boundary ♦..... f Boardwalk Access _ \ f Vehicular Circulation � Enhanced Crossing ---; Potential Infill �� Vehicular Access ------- - Development ® Streeiscape • • •� Bicycle Circulation u {�/ WCH Growin g Improvements ^ \. Gateway E----► Pedestrian Circulation ® Infill Prototypes f •••••I, Plaza Circulation Potential New Public Dock Location J. i Potential Parking Structure (shared with BMW! IM Source: ESR1, 2015 IML - MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN AVON STREET (CENTRAL) Existing sidewalks in Avon Village are narrow with multiple driveway entrances, little separation from parking lots at the back of sidewalk, and are not ideal for a walkable retail corridor environment. To the immediate south, the City owns a 30 -foot - wide alley in the Village Core, which exclusively serves as access to the existing surface parking lot. A land swap between the City and the Village Core properties at 2615 and 2651 Avon Street would enable the Avon Street right-of-way width to be increased to accommodate wider sidewalks and streetscape amenities and establish a more pedestrian- friendly environment. The increased right-of-way on Avon Street would allow for roadway and streetscape improvements, including Class II bike lanes, wider sidewalks, seating areas, landscaping, outdoor dining, and other streetscape improvements. Figure 21 Existing Central Avon Street displays an existing section of Avon Street, while Figure 22 Proposed Central Avon Street displays proposed improvements to the central segment of Avon Street. The proposed central Avon Street section assumes a 1:1 land swap ratio that yields an additional 30 feet of right-of-way. If the land swap occurs at a lower ratio, the width of the sidewalk on the south side could be reduced. Proposed enhancements on Avon Street create a more walkable public space, increasing foot traffic for existing and new businesses, and providing a pedestrian -friendly neighborhood retail environment for residents. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN O.. SURFACE PARKING LOT 7 _O.� 8• O.� lO..� �10' O.� 8• O„ 7, O"z• O,� SIDEWALK PARKING TF A V-1 [ALF TRAVFI I ANF ?ARKING SIDEWALK LANDSCAPE CURB �0'-0ROW FIGURE 21. EXISTING AVON (CENTRAL) STREET SIDEWALK PARKING/ BIKE TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE BIKE PARKING/ SIDEWALK BULBOUT LANE LANE BULBOUT -O"ROw- FIGURE 22. PROPOSED AVON (CENTRAL) STREET IMPROVEMENTS MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN AVON STREET (EAST) Avon Street currently terminates at the intersection of Ocean View and Tustin Avenues. As displayed in Figure 23 Existing Avon Street East, an alleyway connects to the east of this intersection and leads to a City -owned parking lot and pedestrian staircase and pathway to the Newport Theatre Arts Center (Arts Center) located on the upper portions of the bluff. The City is considering modifying the alleyway so that it becomes an extension of Avon Street to the east with Avon connecting to West Coast Highway at a new signalized intersection in one of two potential locations (1) to the west of the existing Holiday Inn Express (2332 West Coast Highway) or (2) on the western edge of the existing boatyard parcel (2244 West Coast Highway). Future private property dedication would be required to accommodate the increased right-of-way width associated with conversion of the alleyway to an extension of Avon Street. This would be coupled by removal of the traffic signal at the West Coast Highway -Tustin Avenue intersection and limiting turn -movements to right -turn in only from the Highway and to the Highway from Tustin Avenue. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN 1 -25'-0" 12'-6" j 12'-6"--k-7'-0" LANDSCAPED TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE SIDEWALK PARKING CURB w 34'-0" ROW - FIGURE 23. EXISTING AVON (EAST) STREET 3 40'-6" ° 0 � rl, 0 z� �v,'- - I Ir- P.- _rr 6'-O" 10'-6" 10'-6"-16'-0"-+-7'-6" 8'-0" LANDSCAPED BIKE TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE BIKE PARKING SIDEWALK CURB LANE LANE -50'-0" ROW FIGURE 24. PROPOSED AVON (EAST) STREET RESIDENTIAL/ MIXED-USE MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN Figure 24 Proposed Avon Street East displays proposed improvements to the alleyway between the terminus of Avon Street and the City -owned parking lot. Figure 25 Avon Street Visual Simulation provides a conceptual visualization of future improvements to the existing Avon alleyway. Figure 26 Conceptual Avon Street Extension displays a conceptual vignette of the options for extending Avon Street to connect with West Coast Highway. The City standard design is 36 feet curb -to -curb for two travel lanes and parking on both sides of the street does not include separated bicycle facilities. To accommodate bicycle lanes, the Plan proposes increasing the street right-of-way to include separated bicycle lanes and reduced widths l91111RISMPL1LP11IIL113guy K11e1611JUIRM[1l,11 J No I \7�n FIGURE 26. CONCEPTUAL AVON STREET EXTENSION of the parking lanes. A pedestrian/bike pathway could continue at the ground level as a link to a pedestrian/bicycle crossing over Coast Highway to create a continuous connection from the north side to the harbor side. The rooftop park and pedestrian and bicycle bridge would not only provide access between Mariners' Mile and the Newport Theatre Arts Center, but would also provide a green link for residents living above Kings Road to the water as well as the Village Core and Harbor -Frontage districts. A conceptual eastern extension of Avon Street is displayed in Figure 27. The envisioned parking structure would comply with a height restriction of 35' to minimize visual impact, and a rooftop park space would further minimize potential visual impacts when viewed from the blufftop. A parking structure with three parking levels and a rooftop park would likely provide approximately 300-350 public parking spaces, adding 175-225 spaces over the existing MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN parking lot capacity. The parking lot will increase the public parking supply in Mariners' Mile by 36 percent. The proposed design of the Avon Street segment from the Avon/Ocean View/Tustin intersection to this important park/parking structure encourages multimodal uses and a pedestrian -friendly MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN SIDEWALK PARKING SHARED SHARED PARKING SIDEWALK TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE FIGURE 27. AVON STREET CONNECTOR TO COAST HIGHWAY- CITY -STANDARD SECTION MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN Street could also benefit potential development fronting onto Avon Street (parallel to the bluffs). VIBRANT PUBLIC WATERFRONT A major asset of Mariners' Mile is its proximity to Newport Bay, which provides scenic, idyllic views of the waterfront. Currently, access to the waterfront is limited and not intuitive. Very few public pedestrian pathways lead to the water and a there are not any public spaces oriented to the sidewalk on Coast Highway. This section describes proposed improvements that would enhance the existing public realm, which includes the public and privately owned areas of Mariners' Mile that are available for everyone to use or see, including streets, squares, and plazas. The proposed improvements create additional public spaces south of West Coast Highway and encourage pedestrian activity and circulation along the waterfront. The public realm includes any publicly- owned streets, MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN pathways, rights- of -way, parks, publicly accessible open spaces, and any public and civic building and facilities. PUBLIC PLAZAS The Plan proposes to activate the public waterfront by creating a series of interconnected plazas that front onto the public sidewalk along the harbor side of WestCoast Highway. Manyof the proposed plazas are located at West Coast Highway crossings (i.e., enhanced crossings and pedestrian/bicycle bridges) to help serve as gateways from the village side to the harbor side. Plazas situated at pedestrian nodes serve as public spaces that are harmonious with FIGURE 28. VISUAL SIMULATION OF CONCEPTUAL PLAZA and contribute to nearby waterfront development. Pedestrian circulation through the connection of these plazas provides points of access to the waterfront. As previously discussed, a future public dock would work in concert with the proposed public plazas to activate the public waterfront and provide access and improve connectivity to harbor - side businesses for a wide range of Newport Beach residents and visitors to the area. A future public dock should be located at a location that allows a seamless transition from harbor side business and public amenities, such as public plazas, to the water. The exact location, size, and configuration of the dock should be determined by working with the City's Harbor Commission, business owners, and recreational water users. Waterfront plazas adjacent to surface parking areas and businesses designed appropriately with attractive landscaping and paving materials create a shared space to allow a flexible, integrated dynamic between pedestrians, bicyclists, parking motorists, delivery motorists, and valet services. Surface parking continues to act as an interim solution to address Mariners' Mile's short-term parking needs. As Mariners' Mile revitalizes and the proposed parking structures are built in the area, a greater amount of consolidated parking will allow these surface parking areas to develop as standalone public plazas or as public plazas integrated into an infill or redevelopment project. The City and future parking district could work with property owners to facilitate an agreement to improve the space in exchange for use of spaces in a City -owned parking lot or future structure. The replacement of existing surface parking spaces removed as a result from the creation of public plazas will depend on overall parking supply and demand for Mariners' Mile. Figure 28, below, shows a visual simulation of the Conceptual Plaza of a future harbor -side public plaza. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN CIRCULATION ALONG THE WATERFRONT A key aspect of creating a vibrant public waterfront is providing convenient access to and views of the water and its bustling marine activities. The location of existing buildings, bulkheads, and other improvements constrain the ability to develop a continuous boardwalk directly along the harbor front within Mariners' Mile. However, it is possible to create a designated circulation path utilizing a combination of the sidewalk along Coast Highway, shared paths between waterfront plazas, and sections of existing or new boardwalk. Where the boardwalk is not continuous, pedestrian circulation would be supplemented by a circulation network between plazas, while providing connections to boardwalk access points. This approach still provides a continuous pedestrian path through the entire south side of Coast Highway with respites to the water in certain areas. Wayfinding elements and the plaza design need to be incorporated into the circulation pathway to help ensure that the pathway is intuitive to users, attractive, and contributes to the aesthetic and character of Mariners' Mile. As an initial step in developing a harbor -front circulation path, it is recommended that a detailed plan be developed evaluating existing building and infrastructure constraints along the harbor edge and identifying appropriate design solutions to accommodate continuous pedestrian movement parallel to the Harbor. A proposed initial alignment is displayed in Figure 29 Circulation Network. There are several constraints that do not allow for continuous circulation along the waterfront, the circulation plan should prioritize pedestrian circulation on the harbor -side, allowing residents, employees, and visitors the opportunity to enjoy this community asset. The location of the circulation network should be prioritized according to the following hierarchy: MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN FIGURE 29. CONCEPTUAL CIRCULATION NETWORK FIGURE 30. EXISTING BOARDWALK FIGURE 31. CANTILEVERED BOARDWALK FIGURE 32. SECOND LEVEL ALTERNATIVE CANTILEVERED BOARDWALK 1. Locate boardwalk improvements directly along the harbor frontage. 2. Develop pathways to connect public plazas where buildings, infrastructure, and other improvements limit a water -adjacent path. 3. Locate pedestrian pathways along West Coast Highway sidewalks where infeasible to locate on the harbor frontage. As discussed above, while a continuous path directly adjacent to the water is preferred, the circulation plan may involve alignments moving the boardwalk to inland portions of properties where the frontage is constrained. A wider boardwalk (8' to 12') would provide a more comfortable walking experience MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN to encourage pedestrian activity. However, there are instances along the existing boardwalk where the boardwalk is structurally integrated into the existing building, as displayed in Figure 30 Existing Boardwalk. Due to these constraints, the existing boardwalk should not be expanded until the adjacent property is redeveloped. If the current boardwalk is constrained by existing development, and there is available air space adjacent to the bulkhead and/or existing boardwalk the City should consider constructing an additional cantilevered boardwalk off the existing bulkhead, as displayed in Figure 31 & 32 Cantilevered Boardwalk. This approach would likely require the adjacent docks to be reconfigured to accommodate the cantilevered boardwalk. In the event that infeasible to develop a first level public waterfront boardwalk, a second level boardwalkshould be considered in conjunction with new retail or restaurant use. Valet stands in the area MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN PARKING MANAGMENT The parking management section of the Framework Plan provides a menu of short, medium and long-term parking management strategies for the Master Plan area. These strategies work in conjunction with land use and urban design and mobility network and streetscape design sections to support a cohesive and revitalized corridor. Short-term recommendations focus on operational enhancements that can be implemented without adjustments to the City's parking regulations. Medium-term strategies, which begin with the implementation of a parking management district, include setting up locally generated financing mechanisms, as well as enabling adjustments to existing parking regulations within Mariners' Mile. Once these mechanisms are created, the long-term, capital -intensive opportunities, such as constructing two proposed parking structures discussed previously may be realized. to increase neighborhood parking supply once efficiencies in operations and management of the area's existing supply are fully utilized. Parking wayfinding signage examples, real-time occupancy signage with directional arrows SHORT-TERM OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS Consolidate Loading and Drop-off Zones Businesses in Mariners' Mile depend on curbside spaces for a variety of important loading and unloading functions including commercial deliveries, taxis/on-demand services, and valet services. However, there are few or no existing dedicated spaces for such functions in Mariners' Mile, so delivery and on -demand car services must compete for space with constituents parking in the area. Creating consolidated drop-off zones for all types of loading and unloading functions will best utilize limited curb space compared to single -use loading zones for separate functions. In Mariners' Mile, commercial deliveries are most common in the early mornings, when restaurants and retail businesses are closed, while customer -related car services (e.g., on -demand rideshare, taxis, and valets) occur largely during the lunch hour and evenings. For the recommendations to be most effective in the consolidated loading zones, different time limits will likely need to be in place for the longer-term loading/unloading of goods in the late-night/morning (20-30 minutes) versus the loading/unloading of people from lunch time through the evening (5-10 minutes). Institute an Employee Parking Shuttle With limited, convenient opportunities to park near their places of employment, employees of Mariners' Mile businesses often are pushed to use on -street parking spaces on the residential streets north of Mariners' Mile. This is not only inconvenient and potentially dangerous, particularly for employees of harbor -side businesses crossing West Coast Highway, it is disruptive to residents of the adjacent neighborhoods. To ensure that employees working in Mariners' Mile are not parking in surrounding residential neighborhoods or on -street parking spaces, it is recommended that the City expand the Shuttle Program soon-to-be operating along the Balboa Peninsula to also serve businesses in Mariners' Mile. This agreement will enable employees to park at Hoag Hospital parking structures and board shuttles to restaurants, retail establishments, and offices in Mariners' Mile. Standardize Valet Parking Agreements It is recommended that the City establish and manage a standardized valet program instituting consistent pricing of valet agreements with private valet operators. These agreements would allow incoming businesses to use parking spaces in municipal lots directly within or adjacent to Mariners' Mile. Standardized valet parking agreements would streamline the City's valet parking agreement process through the application of consistent rates and designation of specific areas for valet services. This will encourage patrons to use valet services and for operators to use underutilized municipal lots for vehicle parking. Additionally, it would encourage businesses, especially those with limited parking options, to enter into agreements with the City. Existing valet agreements would remain unchanged; however, over time as businesses transition out of and into Mariners' Mile, the existing valet agreements would be replaced. There may be conflict with existing users of City parking resources, particularly during times of peak occupancy. The City would need to carefully manage the agreements and hours of operation to ensure that the valet program does not create unwanted or unintended impacts on area businesses and their customers. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN Create a Coordinated Wayfinding Program As part of improvements proposed for Mariners' Mile, it is recommended that the City design and install a coordinated set of wayfinding signage directing visitors and employees to parking locations in Mariners' Mile. In addition to directional signage, the wayfinding program would design and install coordinated informational and regulatory signage conveying practical information such as parking fees and hours of operation. The wayfinding program should be part of coordinated signage program unique to Mariners' Mile, that recognizes the history and character of the area. In addition to parking signs, the program may include gateway signs and pedestrian/bicyclist wayfinding FIGURE 33. SHARED PARKING Before Regulation 1111 ' ■ - ■ ■ ■ 11111 After Regulation 111111 - 111111 ■ ■ Building * Business with shared parking plan ® Parking lot ■ Permitted shared parking spaces MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN and directory signage. Any parking signs that were previously in existence would need to be removed to ensure that messaging is consistent and clutter is minimized. Once parking signs have been installed, it is recommended that parking sensors be installed in public parking structures to allow for the display of real-time parking occupancy on signage and online or through a parking app. This "Smart Parking System" could also incorporate occupancy sensors for public on -street spaces. Wayfinding to parking resources can reduce vehicular traffic, as the number of people driving with the primary purpose of finding parking spaces will decrease as well as direct patrons to easily but previously underutilized parking. MEDIUM-TERM MANAGEMENT AND REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS Create Parking Managment District A key component to parking recommendations in the Mariners' Mile corridor is to create a parking management district for the area, allowing for all publicly accessible parking to be managed as one integrated system. The formation of a parking management district will enable the consolidation of individual parking operations/programs, code adjustments and financing mechanismsto ultimately expand efficiency and use of available supply, focusing on sharing existing parking resources. A parking management district for Mariners' Mile will also allow the City to more effectively respond to issues unique to the neighborhood without requiring code changes in other parts of Newport Beach, while also having the flexibility to adjust regulations as parking demand and supply in the area changes. Revise Shared Parking Agreements While there is abundant parking supply available in Mariners' Mile, even during peak hours, many of these available parking spaces are either not available for public use or are perceived to be that way. It is recommended that existing regulations as described in Chapter 20.40 of the Municipal Code be adjusted to require incoming businesses who submit a shared parking plan (for permits to park off-site) to satisfy code -required parking at one consolidated site, versus being able to provide spaces at multiple sites. This will reduce the "scattered" nature of parking currently encountered in Mariners' Mile. Additionally, off- site parking approvals will focus on parking that is accessible and proximate to businesses applying for agreements and agreements will more accurately reflect where patrons actually park when visiting businesses. This recommendation is not intended to prohibit or limit new business growth or expansion of existing businesses in Mariners' Mile, as such a revision should allow off-site parking to be satisfied across multiple lots when a single location is not feasible. Institute an Employee Permit Parking Program An alternative to operating an employee parking shuttle for employees would be to institute a permit parking program to allow employees to park at currently underutilized City -owned lots within or directly adjacent to Mariners' Mile, including the Avon Street municipal lot, or at designated on- Step 1: Drop off carat first destination iw ■ - it Step 2: Walk to other destinations) ■ ■ ■ ■ ------------ ----------- L -----------tr r r r street parking spaces. This program may be similar to the existing "ticketless' Balboa Village Employee Parking Permit program. Permits in this program can be purchased seasonally and are tracked by the permit holder's license plate number. For Mariners' Mile, monthly permits are recommended due to restaurant employee turnover, and only allowing permits to be valid during certain hours of the day. This program would target underutilized on -street parking spaces and is flexible and easily enforced by the City through license plate recognition software. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN Step 1: Drop off carat first destination ■■' R WE ■WI Step 2: Walk to other destination(s) Stip , n _ ,. �.I .it tinal lestiii,ition FIGURE 34. UNIVERSAL VALET PROGRAM A Example patron vehicle drop-off/pick-up location Q Patron's first destination © Patron's final destination ., Patron's path fiijp... Vehicle delivery path ■ Building a Parking lot Regular valet stand (individual operators) universal valet stand (single district -wide operator) MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN OUR �NG PARKM,6"m Y S Nc 8 NOLIDAS Institute a Universal Valet Program After the successful implementation of the standardized valet parking agreement recommendation discussed above, the City should consider instituting a universal valet program within Mariners' Mile. This program would utilize a single valet operator to allow for flexibility in drop-off/pick-up of vehicles at valet stands, similar to a successful program currently operating in other southern California destination areas -such as Old Pasadena. If this program is instituted in Mariners' Mile, customers can drop their car off at any designated valet stand in the corridor and can arrange to have their car waiting for them at a different stand. A universal program would promote customer convenience, enabling a customer to visit multiple businesses in the neighborhood without having to return to the original valet drop off location, while also maximizing efficiency of valet operations, especially in times of peak demand. It also encourages patrons to park at the nearest available valet stand and enjoy the outdoor environment, rather than a business -specific stand, which may reduce vehicular congestion within Mariners' Mile. A universal valet program would require the City or parking district operator to negotiate a contract with one or a limited number of valet providers. Additionally, without regulatory changes, businesses may choose to not participate in the program, preferringto use their own valet operator. On -street Parking Regulations and Pricing Parking regulations in Mariners' Mile currently change block -by -block, with no relation to pricing or the convenience of the parking location. It is recommended that timing and pricing for on - street parking be adjusted with one regulation throughout the entire corridor area (for example, 2 -hour maximum at $1.75 per hour from 8am-6pm, -.1000 6 PARANG are there. yyhae Y°u leayeg When car with Y°u' �Qa� �osted Signs KhOshbiws L, a he each A Signage M NERS MILER TAUR VON MASTER PLAN FIGURE 35. PRIVATE& PUBLIC PARKING (OFF-STREET LEGEND bik ` i Puaote � MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN Monday through Saturday) to in crease turnover and availability of on -street parking spaces. Consistent parking regulations and pricing throughout Mariners' Mile would balance parking occupancy throughout the corridor, improve the resident, customer, and visitor experience by eliminating the guesswork associated with choosing when and where to park, and increases the availability of on -street parking spaces for patrons by reducing long-range on -street parking. However, spillover into surrounding residential neighborhoods can be greatly reduced or eliminated as other recommendations, such as the employee shuttle or permit program are implemented. Encourage Private Lots Available for Public Use As parking demand increases in Mariners' Mile, it is recommended that the City work with property owners interested inprovidingtheirparkingresources for public use. By executing an agreement with property owners to advertise their private lots for public use through developing clear parking signage consistent with the Mariners' Mile Wayfinding Program, this can dramatically increase the number of spaces offered for visitors to Mariners' Mile without having to construct new parking facilities. This recommendation would be especially relevant if funding has not been secured for constructing a parking structure in the neighborhood. Based on the 2008 Parking Study, there are approximately 79 percent (2,342) of the 2,967 parking spaces in Mariners' Mile are privately -owned. Although not all of these spaces would be suitable for public use, many are, including the use of two large privately owned lots displayed in Figure 35 Private & Public Parking (off-street). The City may be required to assume liability coverage during times of public use at privately -owned lots, which could potentially carry significant costs. Additionally, to be effective, recommendations should be coordinated alongside Poystation wayfinding/signage recommendations to ensure that patrons understand that parking spaces are publicly accessible. Install Smart Meters for On -Street Parking Spaces Encourage the installation of smart parking meters or pay -by -space meters, which accept credit cards, debit cards, and coins, allowing for ease of payment. Meters may also enable ease of enforcement for the City to ensure regulations are being abided by through updated digital interfaces. Investments to replace existing coin-operated meters may be justified once use of parking lots and on -street spaces increase. Smart meters Increase flexibility of payment for on -street meters, improving the customer experience and reducing ticket anxiety. This lengthens stays in commercial areas as a result. Additionally, pay -by -space meters reduce clutter generated by individual parking meters, providing additional space for walking and landscaping. Smart meters require significant up -front investment in upgrading infrastructure, replacing existing coin- operated meters with meters containing credit-card readers and/or pay by -space meters. In addition to up -front capital investments, maintenance and operation costs for meters will also increase in the short-term. Develop an In -Lieu Fee It is recommended that incoming developments or changes of use in Mariner's Mile could incorporate a fee in -lieu of providing code -required parking. In -lieu fees can increase design flexibility, often used for adaptive reuse projects that would not be financially or architecturally feasible if required to provide all parking spaces onsite. In -lieu fees are approved through ordinance as adopted by City Council. A public vote is not required to institute an in -lieu fee. A suggested maximum of 50% of required parking spaces is recommended to be provided on-site for new construction (to minimize short-term adverse impacts to existing supply), while change -of -use projects would qualify satisfying up to 100% of required parking spaces off-site. Fees collected will be dedicated for the construction of city - owned parking facilities within the Mariners' Mile corridor. Revenue is locally generated, with no federal or statewide funding strings attached (i.e. funding deadlines, required project completion), and specifically earmarked for construction of a consolidated parking facility. When developing an in -lieu fee for Mariners' Mile, the cost of the fee itself needs to be substantially lower than the actual cost (50% or less of the cost to build a parking space in a parking structure) in order for incoming developments to use this tool. Since the fee is voluntaryto meet required parking needs, the growth of the fund depends on turnover of existing uses and new development projects, which may be limited in times of economic downturn or if the site can satisfy code -required parking on-site without the use of an In -Lieu Fee. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN Consider an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD) to Finance Parking Structures and Other Improvements An Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD) for Mariners' Mile could provide an alternative financing mechanism for infrastructure projects with an emphasis on sustainability. Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts (EIFDs) are financed through tax increment generated from the growth in property taxes collected from within a designated district boundary. Because EIFDs are typically used for larger -scale infrastructure projects, it can be considered as a potential way to finance an assortment of infrastructure projects, including parking facilities with green roof treatments, potentially eliminating the need for an in -lieu fee. Because EIFDs are generally intended for large infrastructure projects, it is likely that improvements to Mariners' Mile parking facilities would be integrated into a corridor - wide program of infrastructure improvements. Development and implementation of an EIFD would require public participation and input, as fifty-five percent of voter approval is required for the issuance of bonds. LONG-TERM OPPORTUNITIES TO EXPAND PARKING SUPPLY Following the implementation of the short-term operational enhancements, the medium-term management, and regulatory considerations, the City will be well positioned to initiate long-term opportunities to expand the existing parking supply in the corridor. This expansion, as discussed in the network and streetscape design section of the Framework Plan, includes construction of a parking structure at the existing City -owned parking lot on East Avon Street and a parking structure on Avon Street near the existing BMW dealership. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN This page intentionally left blank. 11111 '�`F 11 Ir A, W-1 fv1ARl • - f'MILE REVITALIZATION fill ER'I II 9 C 2 e bi Mariner's Mile is a unique corridor within the City of Newport Beach with its own set of design issues and opportunities. The Vision and Framework Plan components outlined in the previous chapters can, in part, be achieved through the implementation of specific design recommendations guiding infill and adaptive re -use of public and private properties and improvements to the streetscape and public right-of-way. The Design Guidelines which follow are intended to create opportunities for quality design and development, while maintaining design elements that convey the area's historic setting on the California coastline and its marine and nautical character. The guidelines are applicable to all development within Mariners' Mile and supplement the mandatory, regulatory use, and design standards of the Zoning Ordinance. The guidelines will be considered in the development review and approval process to encourage and allow high quality design and creativity. The guidelines should be employed as a basis for the creative design process, involving the applicant and City staff in a dialogue to achieve appropriate design solutions. The guidelines are not quantitative standards, and therefore allow for some flexibility. The Mariners' Mile Design Guidelines are intended to supplement the use and development standards for each applicable zoning district in Mariners' Mile, as identified in Chapter 1: Introduction of this document and located in the City of Newport Beach Zoning Ordinance. Development standards are mandatory regulations that must be satisfied by all development to which the standards apply prior to the issuing of a development permit. Guidelines however are not mandatory requirements, but provide a defined framework of the design principles that supplement the zoning development standards. Not all guidelines will be applicable to every project or circumstance, depending on the scope, location, and size of the project. The appropriateness of a guideline for a project or circumstance will ultimately be made by the final review authority. Nothing in the design guidelines should prevent an applicant or City staff from proposing design alternatives that meet the intent of an encouraged design guideline and result in quality design. GUIDELINES FOR BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES BUILDING SITING AND ORGANIZATION The siting and organization of buildings on an individual parcel or as part of a larger development are fundamental in establishing the overall look, feel, and function of an area. These building and siting guidelines will help reinforce desired development patterns to implement the vision for Mariners' Mile. • Building Configuration. Buildings should be configured and clustered to the extent feasible so that the building facade provides a street edge, frames public open space, and maintains views of the bay and the bluffs. • Building Orientation. Buildings should orient towards the street or public open spaces and away from parking areas. • Parking Configuration. Required off-street parking should be consolidated on a site or clustered on a block to the extent feasible to avoid scattered and inconsistent parking configurations. Parking location. Required off-street parking on the inland side of West Coast Highway should be located at the rear of the lot behind street -facing buildings, not fronting a street or public space. • Screening. Utilities, trash and recycling receptacles, and mechanical equipment should not be located within any front setback areas, public right-of-way or private street, pedestrian/bicycle path, or within 50 feet of a corner and should be screened by landscaping or site -appropriate materials. Building Siting & Organization MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN STREET FRONTAGE A successful commercial and mixed-use district should provide interesting and inviting building facades and street frontages. This can be achieved through design and use guidelines that encourage shopping, walking, and other sidewalk activities. • Avon Village Building Location. New buildings to be constructed as infill of underutilized properties in the Avon Village area should be built to the street -facing property line, unless the size and configuration of the parcel preclude reasonable use of the building, with parking located to their rear or in shared or subterranean structures. • East End Building Location. New buildings to be constructed as infill • Ground Floor Transparency. At least 50 percent of the ground floor fapade of buildings fronting a street or public space should consist of transparent, non -reflective windows or doors allowing for a connection and interaction between individuals and activities inside and outside of the buildings. • Maximum Width. The maximum width of a blank facade without any vertical or horizontal architectural design feature or articulation should not exceed 25 feet. • Active Uses. Ground floor spaces of commercial and mixed-use buildings should consist of street -activating commercial uses. Street Frontage MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN • Residential Orientation. Where allowed, ground -floor residential dwelling units should be oriented toward the street. BUILDING MASSING Building mass or scale is defined by the building's components, including the size of the footprint, number of stories, roof shapes, and upper level setbacks. The following guidelines are intended to ensure that new buildings and development complement and enhance the existing built form and natural beauty of Mariners' Mile. • Surrounding Uses. Building mass and form should respect the scale and character of adjacent buildings and surrounding neighborhoods and commercial uses. • Large Development Projects. Large development projects should be designed to appear as a collection of buildings, and should integrate public open space, including plazas, pocket parks, and the like. • Varied Size and Mass. Multiple buildings in single projects should be varied in size and mass. A transition from low buildings at the site perimeter to larger and taller structures on the interior of the site is generally encouraged. Buildings in the Harbor Frontage District should be oriented to provide view corridors from West Coast Highway toward the water. • Building Articulation. Buildings should include vertical and horizontal articulation and modulation to reduce the perception of large- scale, monotonous development. • Variety in Fa4ade. Changes in fapade materials, textures, colors, and window patterns should be used. • Entrances. Building entrances should be highly visible to pedestrians and consist of special features designed to activate the street and Articulotion highlight storefronts. Such features should include glazing, projecting forms, architectural details, and/or awnings. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN Mariner's Mile, due in part to its history of uses and the auto -oriented commercial -corridor development pattern, encompasses a vast range of building types and architectural styles. The building types range from large automobile dealerships and marine supply outlets to strip retail centers, small shops, traditional and drive-through restaurants, and individual offices. The diversity in building types has resulted in an equally diverse and eclectic architectural style in the corridor. Given the existing mix of building types and architectural styles in the area, it is not reasonable to suggest or encourage a singulartype ortheme for the corridor. However, it is important to respect the nautical history and character of the area. Through the Plan's community engagement process, three nautical -based styles were determined to be most appropriate for the corridor. Thethree styles include Coastal, Rustic Nautical, and Modern Nautical. The Coastal architectural style can be found in certain areas of Mariners' Mile and in other harbor -fronting areas of Newport Beach. This style, characterized by classic shiplap cladding with white or light colored trim and simple gable roofs, block massing, designed to withstand coastal conditions, and weather or age well. Representative suggestive materials to be considered during the architectural design process include: • Shiplap/clapboard/shingled siding for building walls • Varnished teak for balustrades and handrails • Navy blue or other dark canvas for awnings and sunshades • White nylon or Dacron for shade spaces • Brass or bronze for hardware and ornament • Stainless steel/polished chrome for rails, cable and fittings, and hardware Existing local examples of this style are displayed below. i Coastal Architecture Style MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN The Rustic Nautical Style, characterized by features such as metal/copper roofing, an eclectic mix of trim colors, and outdoor decks, is representative of the area's historic harbor -dependent uses and beach town environment. Existing local examples of the Rustic Nautical style are displayed below. Representative suggestive materials to be considered during the architectural design process include: • High pitched roofs • High pitched beams • Corrugated steal • Weathered wood • Ship materials, such as wheels, nets, masts, and anchors Rustic Nautical Style Modern Mariners' provides an opportunity to incorporate modern design within the traditional nautical framework. Recent institutional uses, such as City Hall, Marina Park, and the Newport Sea Base have been designed in this style, characterized by large windows, neutral hues, and accents material consisting of stone and metal. This design style incorporates a modern interpretation of harbor features such as ocean waves, light houses, ships hulls, etc. Existing local examples are displayed on the next page. Representative suggestive materials to be considered during the architectural design process include: • Wood and exposed beams • Large open windows and glass features • Stainless steel and polished chrome • Light, neutral colors • Non -ornamental design • Sweeping building lines By drawing inspiration from these three styles and adhering to the guidelines provided below, the buildings and development in Mariners' Mile will match the aesthetic beauty of the surrounding natural environment. • Individual Projects. Individual buildings and development projects should adopt a clear and appropriate design concept, presenting a consistent, unifying theme. • Compatibility. Buildings should be designed to fit in with complement existing development, rather than stand out and adversely impact existing development. • Building Materials. Exterior building materials should consist of quality, durable materials that produce long-lasting buildings that can be adaptively reused over time, complement and 4-6 a MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN enhance surrounding uses, and respect the nautical history and character of the corridor. • Building Form and Mass. Large buildings, including both single and multi -tenant buildings, should use modulation and articulation to create the appearance of a series of smaller buildings to reduce the overall scale and mass of the building. Modulation and articulation should be uses in a manner that respects and is consistent with the building's architectural theme. • Colors and Features. Building colors and features should be selected based on compatibility with surrounding uses and respect the nautical history and character of Mariners' Mile. • Innovative Design. Building design should respect and be compatible with adjacent and surrounding development, while also introducing innovative, quality architectural design into the area. • Accent Materials.The use of select architectural features including but not limited to weather vanes, anchors, ships wheels, flags, metal railings, and porthole windows are encouraged to express and reflect the nautical heritage of Mariners' Mile without overstating this aspect of the design. Accent materials should be used Sustainable Building and Site Design on all facades of the building, not just the front or street -facing facade. • Unifying Element. The subtle hint of nautical character should serve as a unifying theme or element throughout Mariners' Mile. The overuse of multiple architectural features or gaudy and overstated nautical elements is discouraged. • Mixing of Styles. Designers, architects, and developers should avoid combining elements of more than architectural style or mixing of decorative motifs within a building or development project. SUSTAINABLE BUILDING AND SITE DESIGN Energy and water efficiency should be integrated into a project's building and site design from the very beginning stages. The following guidelines suggest the use of natural materials, systems, and features of the site and its surroundings as integral components of building design. • Materials and Techniques. Buildings and development projects should be designed and constructed using the sustainable, energy efficient materials and techniques and should incorporate strategies for the conservation of water, energy, and other natural resources. • Natural Climate. Buildings and development projects should be designed to take advantage of the natural climate, including sun and sea breeze, to limit the use of artificial heating, cooling, and ventilation systems. • Windows. Windows should be situated to take advantage of natural light and be operable to allow residents and patrons of business to enjoy natural ventilation. • Solar Access. Upper levels of buildings should be shaped to allow solar access, light, and air to circulate to adjacent structures, open spaces, and adjoining land uses. • Heat and Glare. Non -reflective coatings, low - emissivity glass, and external shade devices should be used to control heat and glare. • Roofs. White or green roofs should be used as much as possible, while the use of pavement, asphalt, and other heat producing surfaces should be minimized to reduce the heat island effect. Exterior Lighting • Design. Exterior lighting should be designed as an integral part of the building design, and should complement and enhance the selected Lighting should _ include cutoffs to minimize — illuminationofthe li night sky I Llll's Area of Pedestrian Activity Should have Pedestrian -scaled Lighting Pedestrian Scaled Lighting style of the building. • Security. Exterior lighting should be placed to mitigate security concerns, especially in parking lots, pedestrian paths, outdoor gathering spaces, building entries, and any other pedestrian -accessible areas. Light Direction. To avoid lighting of the night sky, lighting sources should be kept as low to the ground as possible while ensuring safe and functional levels of illumination. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN • Illuminated Features. Major architectural sculptural features and landscape focal points should be illuminated or have lighting integrated. • Parking Lots. Parking lots should be designed with a greater number of shorter, low -wattage, tightly spaced fixtures rather than a lesser number of taller, higher -wattage fixtures. • Uplighting. Uplighting of buildings, if appropriate, should be minimized and be designed to gently light the building rather than the sky. • Limit Light Pollution. Illumination should generally be focused down toward the ground, avoiding all unnecessary lighting of the night sky. Light sources that are mounted closer to and focus illumination directly onto the ground plane, such as bollard -mounted lighting, stair lighting, and wall- and bench -mounted down - lighting, are desirable. Light fixtures should include internal reflector caps, refractors, or shields that provide an efficient and focused distribution of light and avoid glare or reflection into upper stories of adjacent buildings. Limit timing for exterior lighting in areas where sensitive uses occur nearby such as the East Commercial End, where residential dwellings are located in close proximity to commercial development along West Coast Highway. Site Access and Circulation MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN SITE ACCESS AND CIRCULATION Site access and circulation, how you get to and move within an area, are key factors in the overall user experience of an area. Access and circulation are particularly important in a corridor such as Mariners' Mile, which straddles a major state highway and bound by two natural barriers (the harbor and the bluffs). The following guidelines are intended to facilitate safe and convenient access and circulation for all modes of transportation to and through Mariners' Mile. • Accommodate All Modes. New development should be designed to accommodate all modes of transportation (pedestrians, bicycles, public transportation, vehicles, etc.), rather than serving or focusing on a single mode. • Parking Linkage. Required off-street parking should be connected by a safe and clearly marked pedestrian route to the use or building that it is serving. • Consolidated Parking. If located off-site, all required off-street parking for a use should be located on a single lot or parcel not scattered across multiple lots or parcels. • Drop-off/Pick-up. Valet and ride -sharing drop- off/pick-up locations should be consolidated on a block or site and serve multiple uses or buildings. • Street Crossings. Street crossings, particularly crossings of West Coast Highway, should lead to active retail uses or public spaces. • Driveways and Curb -cuts. The number and distribution of driveways and curb -cuts should be limited, with each being no wider than required by City standards. Multi -building development projects should utilize shared driveways wherever possible. • Clear Visual Path. Where a driveway crosses a sidewalk or bicycle path, the sidewalk or bicycle path should be clearly demarcated across the entire width of the driveway. • Harbor Frontage Walkway. Emphasize pedestrian access across the waterfront on properties in the Harbor Frontage District. CIRCULATION ELEMENTS The following guidelines for circulation elements are intended to provide guidance on the siting, design, and function of the respective improvements. Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridges. The Plan recommends pedestrian/bicycle bridges as a method to provide north/south crossings of West Coast Highway to connect non -motorized travelers safely across highway traffic. A pedestrian bridge is currently planned to connect the new inland Orange Coast College Training Center to existing facilities on the Harborfrontage. General guidelines regarding the selection of a viable location for and design of a future pedestrian/bicycle bridge are outlined below. • Pedestrian/bicycle bridges should provide safe connections between key destinations and pedestrian generators such as: n Connectivity with primary pedestrian paths, Circulation Elements plazas, and activity nodes Connectivity with major destination uses and places Connectivity with proposed parking structures Connecting to other structures as a part of new development (e.g., Riverside Avenue with the potential redevelopment of Avon Village) Connecting to bikeways • Pedestrian/bicycle bridges should provide adequate on -the -ground and vertical building volume to accommodate access for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, the elderly, and the disabled. These features include: Elevator(s) and/or » Ramps at 300 feet length on both sides with an accessible slope of 4.9% and landings as required » Adequate bridge height to allow enough clearance over Coast Highway • Pedestrian/bicycle bridges should be designed to enhance the aesthetic and character of Mariners' Mile. The pedestrian/bicycle bridge should be: Visible to motorists and pedestrians, especially at a distance » Iconic to serve as a gateway and/or landmark for Mariners' Mile Permeable so that it does not create a visual barrier » Is architecturally consistent with the design character of other buildings in the Mariner's Mile area Enhanced Crossings. The Plan suggests locations for enhanced pedestrian/bicycle crossings to improve the visibility and safety for pedestrian crossings at signalized intersections along Coast Highway. Traffic and engineering analyses will be required MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN at each location to determine the suitability of DIAG NAL CROSSING OK Diagonal Crossing Highly Visible Crosswalk MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN crossing improvements and potential impacts of these on traffic volumes, flow, and congestion. The implementation of enhanced crossings, including higher -visibility cross -walks, pedestrian/bicycle scrambles, signage, lighting, and other materials could occur in a phased and experimental approach as described in detail below. • Provide enhanced crossings to increase pedestrian connectivity, pedestrian safety, and awareness of pedestrian activity to motorists • Locate enhanced crossings at intersections that provide access to key destinations that generate high pedestrian activity such as: At high pedestrian activity plazas » At signalized intersections • Enhanced crossing improvements should be implemented in a phased approach to test feasibility and respond to available funding. • Phase 1: Stripe perpendicular high -visibility crosswalks • Phase 2: Add appropriate signage and/ or signalization such as pedestrian countdowns, flashing beacons, in -pavement flashing lights, etc. • Phase 3: Consider transition of crossing to pedestrian and bicycle scramble as pedestrian and bicycle traffic increases. OT Shared Plazas Public Plazas. The Plan illustrates possible locations of and connections between new harbor -side and inland public plazas. On the harbor -side, implementation is largely dependent on the willingness of the land owner to work with the City to convert the existing use of the parcel, in many cases surface parking, to enhance public space. On the inland side, public plazas can be incorporated into future redevelopment or infill projects. General guidelines about creating and locating public plazas are outlined below. • Public spaces should be located near or integrated with infill or redevelopment projects to encourage a strong sense of character and identity for the area. • Public plazas should be designed to be shared spaces, integrating pedestrian, bicycle, vehicle, and valet circulation. • Areas to sit, congregate, recreate, relax, or recharge should be integrated into the design of public plazas. • Public plazas should provide locations for outdoor entertainment; landscaping and trees; and maintain view corridors to the water. • Public plazas should be sited in locations that take advantage of or encourage future pedestrian activity, including the following: » Adjacent to existing pedestrian -active uses such as restaurants, retail, and hotels » At/near West Coast Highway crossings » At/near access points to the boardwalk MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN ENHANCING STREETSCAPE This section provides general guidelines for enhancing the overall streetscape in the Mariners' Mile corridor. These guidelines are intended to improve pedestrian -sidewalks and paths within Mariners' Mile with streetscape amenities that enhance the walking environment for residents, patrons of local businesses, and coastal visitors. The guidelines are designed to facilitate streetscape improvements that are complementary with adjacent development, and establish the visual context, unity, and identity of the corridor. Streetscape guidelines apply to both the public and private realms. The public realm serves several interrelated and overlapping roles, which include providing circulation and access throughout the corridor for non -motorized and motorized travel modes; providing public open space areas for people to meet, interact, and linger; and helping establish the visual context and character to unify and give identity to the entire corridor. The private realm includes building frontages along public sidewalks and/or private pedestrian pathways as well as private gathering spaces such as building entryways and outdoor seating areas. Elementsthat contribute to streetscape include landscaping, fences & walls, lighting, stormwater management, paving, pedestrian design, street furnishings, wayfinding signage, and gateways. Each of these elements are described in further detail within this section. Although the guidelines described in this section are applicable throughout the Mariners' Mile Plan Area, including the Avon Village, along West Coast Highway, the Harbor -frontage, and the East -End, several distinctions between the application of the guidelines in different areas are noted throughout this section. It should also be noted that these guidelines may have limited use along West Coast MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN Landscaping provides a buffer between pedestrians and parking. Landscape Buffer Highway since it is a State highway under Caltrans' jurisdiction. Coordination between the City and Caltrans is encouraged for the implementation of the following design guidelines. LANDSCAPE DESIGN AND FUNCTION The standards and guidelines in this section are intended to achieve the following objectives: • Ensure that the overall design of landscaped areas contributes to identity of public and private spaces within Mariners' Mile and to the enjoyment and comfort of the public. • Conserve water and energy resources to create a more sustainable development. For the public realm, landscaping should be utilized along the public sidewalk to provide tree canopies for shade and to reduce heat island effect for pedestrians, to sequester carbon emissions, and to promote a unique identity for the area. Forthe private realm, landscaping should be utilized to help define the perimeter of the property and to activate building fagades; soften building contours; highlight important architectural features; screen less attractive elements; add color, texture, and visual interest; and provide shade. For both public and private spaces, landscaping should be used at the edges of paths and open space areas to help define the spatial organization of the site. Landscaping can also be placed in areas with a large amount of pavement, such as surface parking lots, to add visual interest and increase tree coverage. Tree/Plant Palette A coordinated selection and spacing of tree species and other plantings can help to establish a distinctive identity for Mariners' Mile. Street trees and other plant materials enrich the pedestrian experience, provide a buffer between pedestrians and the street, enhance the streetscape aesthetics, and improve the health, sustainability, and ecological function of the urban environment. The provision of trees and plants should be at different intensities for different areas within Mariners' Mile. The most extensive number of plantings and trees should be located within Avon Village with a focus on providing trees that provide tree canopies and shade since it is anticipated this area will have the highest amount of pedestrian activity. Lesser amounts of trees and plantings should be located along West Coast Highway; taller types of trees would be more suitable for this context. • Plant Palette. The selection of a plant palette for Mariners' Mile should be consistent and well -adapted to the climate and conditions of Newport Beach, contribute to the creation of a walkable pedestrian corridor, and create continuity and identity within various public spaces (i.e., Avon Village, Harbor frontage and plazas). A small palette of species should be repeated regularly over the length of a block or throughout the Plan Area to provide visual continuity and applies to both public and private landscapes. For example, if the sidewalk has adequate width for street trees MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN TABLE 4-1: TREE & PLANT PALETTE West Coast Highway Edge Tree. Washingtonia filibusta (Washingtonia Hybrid) Landscape (along the sidewalk) Hedge. Ligustrum j.'Texanum' (Texas Privet) to match existing medians or Myrtus communis compacta (dwarf myrtle) or Nadina domestica'Compacta' (heavenly bamboo) planted at 30 inches on center located at back of walk and/or between walk and curb, trimmed to 30 inches high. Groundplane. Agave attenuate (Agave), Acacia redolens 'Low Boy' (Prostrate Acacia), Callistemon 'Little John' (Dwarf Callistemon) to match existing median West Pacific Coast Highway Groundcover/Shrub. Carissa m. 'Green Carpet' at 24 inches on center for island medians Traffic Island Landscape up to 6 feet wide; or Bougainvillea 'Crimson Jewel', 'La Jolla', or 'Temple Fire' at 42 inches on center for islands/medians that are at least 6 feet wide. Tree. Arbutusmarina' (Marina Madrone) Geijera parvifolia (Australian Willow) Magnolia grandiflora "Little Gem' (Southern Magnolia) Syagrus romanzoffianum (queen Palm) Parkway Understory. Myrtus communis compacta, dwarf myrtle or Nadina domestica 'Compacta' heavenly bamboo Groundplane. Bougainvillea Sp. (Bougainvillea) Juncus patens (California Gray Rush) Lantana montevidensis, New Gold (Trailing Lantana) Muhlenbergia rigens (Deer Grass) Salvia greggi (Autumn Sage) Senecio mandraliscae (Succulents) Property Wall Landscape Vine. Bougainvillea 'Barbara Karst' and Bougainvillea 'San Diego Red' at 5 feet on center in (for private properties) front of the wall if space is available, or behind the wall. An alternative for tighter conditions is Ficus pumila (Creeping Fig) at 5 feet on center. Parking Lot Landscapes Tree. (1) Inland of Coast Highway: Evergreen trees such as Arbutus'marina' (Marina Madrone) or Magnolia grandiflora 'Little Gem' (Southern Magnolia) at one tree planted for every 4 cars. (2) Waterfront side of Coast Highway: Palm trees such as Washingtonia fllibusta (Mexican Fan Palm) with an 8 -feet trunk and a subdrainage system to break up expanse of parking lots at one tree planted for every 4 cars. Perimeter Shrub. Ligustrum j. 'Texanum' (Texas Privet), or Myrtus communis compacta, dwarf myrtle or Nadina domestica 'Compacta' heavenly bamboo at 30 inches on center located at back of walk to create hedge to hide bumpers and tires of parked vehicles. Shrub Internal to Parking Lot. Raphiolepis i. 'Clara' (India Hawthorn) at 30 inches on center. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN Bluff Landscape Top and Bottom of Bluff. Minimum two rows of Bougainvillea 'San Diego Red' at 5 feet on center with triangular spacing approximately 10 feet below the crest of the bluff. Central Bluff Zone. Shrubs, groundcover, and scattered, informally -placed trees. Place trees with sensitivity to views from bluff -top residences. Recommended plants for this area are the following: Trees. Pinus pinea (Italian Stone Pine) with sparse spacing, Lophostemon confertus (Brisbane Box) with sparse spacing, and Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Palm) with accent/sparse spacing Medium to Tall Shrubs. Arbutus unedo 'Compacta' (Dwarf Strawberry Tree) at 30 inches on center, Myoporum carsonii (Carson's Myoporum) at 4 feet on center, Myoporum lateum (Myoporum) at 10 to 12 feet on center, Rhamnus californica (Coffeeberry) at 8 feet on center, Rhamnus California 'Eve Case' (Eve Case Coffeeberry) at 30 inches on center Groundplane. Baccharis p. 'Twin Peaks'(Dwarf Chaparral Broom) at 8 to 10 feet on center, Ceanothus g.h. 'Yankee Point' (Yankee Point Ceanothus) at 8 to 10 feet on center, Coprosma kirkii (NCN) at 42 inches on center, Myoporum m.'Pacificum' (Myoporum) at feet on center, Lonicera j. 'Halliana' (Hall's Honeysuckle) at 2 feet on center Nurse Crop during Establishment. Achillea millefolium (Common Yarrow) and a planting area, the plant palette applies to plantings along the public sidewalk. If there is limited or no adequate width on the sidewalk for planting, then the plant palette applies to the adjacent private property to provide landscaping along the edge of its front property line (edge landscape). Table 4-1 describes the tree/plant palette for distinct areas along the Mariners' Mile corridor. • Private Property. In areas with limited right - or -way, or when it is too much of a strain on public resources, street trees can be planted on private property adjacent to the public sidewalk. In these instances, the private property owner would need to take on responsibility for maintenance as displayed in Figure 36. • Horizontal Clearance. Appropriate horizontal clearance, or spacing distance between plants, is dependent upon species and subject to approval. Generally, to maintain proper clearance and sight lines, street tree centerlines should be located no closer than: » 10-20 feet from a building fagade, depending upon tree type » 10-25 feet from the curb line of an intersection, depending upon tree type » 5 feet from service walks, driveways or alleys » 10 feet from fire hydrants, underground utilities (meters and sewers), utility poles, and parking meters » 3 feet from sidewalk furniture » 3 feet from curb adjacent to vehicular lanes » 10-15 feet from street lights » 25 feet from stop signs. • Tree Spacing. The maximum spacing for street trees should not exceed 40 feet on center. The minimum spacing for street trees should be 12 feet for trees with small mature size. The optimum spacing should be responsive to species type and canopy characteristics. As a general rule, the following spacing should be used: » Large canopy trees: 30 to 40 feet on center » Medium canopy trees: 20 to 30 feet on center Roadway Parcel Line aPrivate -{- Building I. Z Tree Well on - Private Property 2.5' / 1 5.0' \ 2' MIN 10' MAX Curb & Sidewalk Additional Sidewalk on Gutter Private Property MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN Roadway Line im te Building 2.0' Tree Well on —Private Property 2.5' / 5.0' / \ 2' MIN 10MAX Curb & Sidewalk Additional Sidewalk on Gutter Private Property FIGURE 36. STREET TREES PLANTED ADJACENT TO THE SIDEWALK ON PRIVATE PROPERTY Small canopy trees: 15 to 20 feet on center • Pruning. To maintain the health of trees (e.g. safety, longevity) and provide a pleasing form, existing street trees should be pruned per ANSI standards, and should not be topped. • Vertical Tree Clearance. Canopy street trees should be selected that have a branching pattern and bottom canopy height at maturity—generally 14 feet or higher—that will not obscure commercial signage and storefront windows or conflict with truck access. Lower branching heights may be appropriate in plazas or other open spaces. • Planting Conditions. Efforts should be made to provide the best possible conditions for proper tree growth when planting new street trees, including ample soil planting depth, subsurface preparation, aeration, root protection, irrigation, and drainage. Newly planted street trees will need supplemental irrigation until they are established. Irrigation guidelines should be consistent with the City's adopted Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (WELD). Street trees should be provided with adequate sub -surface root space to allow for growth. • Planting Type. Primary street trees should be planted directly in the ground. The use of above - grade pots or raised planters for primary street trees is discouraged. The use of above -grade pots or raised planters may be appropriate for smaller accent trees. • Protecting Tree Roots. In order to avoid damage MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN to pavement, appropriate, deep-rooted trees should be selected, and root barriers should be installed as necessary. • Accent Trees. Accent trees should be used to help distinguish the plant palette from the village area to the waterfront. Accent trees are generally smaller than standard street trees and are used to accentuate key locations, such as shopping areas, plazas, and gateways. Accent trees are selected for the foliage color or flower showing. Accent trees should be interspersed as appropriate to the type and use for either spots of color, or large canopies for shading pedestrian gathering areas. • Tree Wells. The size of tree wells, or the soil area in which trees are planted, is an important design consideration when planning for street trees. Tree wells should be used in higher - intensity areas with high levels of pedestrian activity, particularly where there is cross - traffic between on -street parking and adjoining buildings. Tree well size will help to determine which species to plant and will affect available sidewalk width. • Where possible, individual tree wells should be connected with linear planting strips or larger planting areas. This will increase the soil volumes and potential for a more robust urban forest. • The minimum square footage of a tree well is 24 square feet (4 feet X 6 feet). Where space is extremely limited, the tree well could be reduced to 16 square feet (4 feet X 4 feet) and planted with appropriately sized trees. • Tree Grates. Tree grates can incorporate decorative art while allowing air and water circulation for healthy trees. Tree grates should be used for all trees placed in the sidewalk within Mariners' Mile. Tree grates should be Decorative Tree Grote Tree Grote flush with the sidewalk, not impede foot traffic, and meet accessibility guidelines. Understory Landscaping Understory landscaping refers to the plants at the ground level that grow beneath tree canopies. Understory landscaping may be developed as a component of streetscape improvements to contribute to the quality of the pedestrian experience by adding color, texture, and form that add visual interest, and provide scale, shade, and buffering contributing to the sense of comfort. • Location. The parkway or landscaped buffer separating the sidewalk from the street and adjacent private property are the primary landscape zones Local Climate and Ecology. Plant species should be selected that are suited to climatic conditions in the coastal zone • Reduction of Water Consumption and Conservation. To minimize maintenance and water consumption, emphasis should be placed on the selection of California friendly, drought - tolerant species, and all landscape areas should be irrigated with high -efficiency automatic drip and low -flow watering systems. The amount of turf grass in landscaping should be minimized, and alternatives to turf should be used wherever practical. Water conservation measures such as gray water irrigation should be prioritized in all public and private landscape areas. • Maintenance. Landscaped areas should be properly maintained, which includes watering, removing debris and litter, modifying tree grates, and pruning and replacing plants when necessary. • Decorative non -vegetative groundcover. River cobble, pebbles, and crushed stone should be used for landscaping composition. Non -vegetative groundcovers should allow proper drainage. Light-colored stone products in colors that harmonize with the native soils and rock formations are recommended. Accent materials such as landscape glass rocks may be used if they are analyzed on-site before installation and determined not to be highly reflective and not to produce undue glare. Any material, such as crushed tires, that may leach harmful chemicals into the soil or generate heat is not permitted. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN Irrigation Guidelines All landscaping should include water efficient landscaping and irrigation, consistent with the City's adopted Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (WELO), found in Chapter 14.17 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. The City has set standards for all projects requiring permits and all City projects to meet WELO requirements. Fences and Walls Guidelines for fences and walls apply primarily to private development. Fences and walls are used on private properties to define property boundaries and create enclosed spaces. • Height. Fences and walls that are tall enough to obscure buildings should not be used between buildings and public rights-of-way. Exceptions should be made for fences and walls that are necessary to screen maintenance or service areas. • Aesthetics. Fences and walls should use similar materials, heights, and construction techniques throughout a development. These design elements should reflect the material, colors, and design details of nearby buildings. • Screening. Screening fences adjacent to residential properties should be designed so that they maintain a character and scale appropriate to the residential neighborhood. • Materials. Chain link fencing, unfinished or unsurfaced concrete block walls, and barbed wire should not be used in commercial, mixed- use, or multi -family residences. • Transparency. Fences and walls over 42 inches in height should generally be semi -transparent. They should be opaque only at interior property lines or where shielding maintenance or service areas. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN Low walls can be used to better deliniate uses but still provide visual transparency Low Walls • Delineation. Fences or walls that are over 60' in length and visible from a public right-of-way should incorporate changes in appearance along their length. This can be achieved through a change in design details, material, texture, or wall plane. Stormwater Management Vegetated swales and rain gardens are examples of landscape features that can be used for stormwater management. Vegetated swales are linear open channels planted with vegetation that filter out sediments as the runoff flows across the surface. Rain gardens are depressions that infiltrate and treat runoff through evaporation and transpiration. • Design Features. Cisterns and other design features should be used to capture, store, and reuse stormwater. • Paved Area. The amount of paved area dedicated to parking should be minimized. • Stormwater Detention. Stormwater detention features should be used to minimize runoff into streets and parking lots. Stormwater detention features include drainage swales and detention basins. • Stormwater Runoff. Stormwater runoff from roofs should be diverted to vegetated swales or detention areas rather than storm drains. • Side Slopes. Side slopes for vegetated swales and rain gardens should have a ratio of 2:1, with 3:1 or flatter preferred. • Plant Material. Plant material used in vegetated swales and rain gardens needs to tolerate inundation and drying periods. Grasses and fine leaf plants are preferred to trap sediments. However, mowed turf is discouraged due to the use of fertilizers and herbicides. Drought tolerant no -mow turf varieties are more desirable. Infiltrate Stormwater Runoff Permeable Paving Permeable paving significantly reduces the quantity of runoff entering the storm drain systems. Paving systems using open -jointed block paving with permeable aggregates have proven to be a viable approach to stormwater management. The pre- cast pavers are designed to lock together for strength and stability, with openings in the joints where open -graded aggregates allow water to infiltrate. • Location. Permeable pavers should be placed strategically to collect stormwater, such as spots between tree plantings to create a continuous permeable strip or along parallel street parking spots to maximize stormwater intake. • Aesthetic. Permeable paving should complement the character of the street and be appropriate for the space available. Street Right -of -Way Standards and Guidelines This section provides standards and guidelines for the design of all new public street rights-of- way, as well as improvements to existing rights- of-way within the Plan Area. Application of these standards and guidelines may be limited on West Coast Highway since it is a State highway and under Caltrans' jurisdiction. Any streetscape improvements in the public right-of-way of West Coast Highway would require the approval of Caltrans. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN Pedestrian Design • Sidewalks. Sidewalks should be continuous, their widths adequate to support the level of pedestrian activity that is intended and desired, and comply with all applicable requirements of the American with Disabilities Act (ADA). • Sidewalk Materials. Sidewalks should be constructed of high-quality materials and installed to ensure long term use, avoiding frequent replacement. Recycled and/or locally sourced paving materials should be specified wherever feasible. • Driveways and Curb Cuts. Driveways and curb cuts should be minimized to limit conflicts between vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists. Wherever possible, driveways for adjacent uses should be consolidated. • Curb Ramps. Curb ramps should be provided at every intersection, and wherever possible, one curb ramp should be provided perpendicular to every pedestrian crossing. • Street Furnishings. Except where infeasible, street furnishings, including street furniture, street lights, tree wells, and utility vaults should be located adjacent to the curb or property line, and kept out of pedestrian pathways. Clear Pedestrian Pathways MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN Street Furnishings and Amenities Street furnishings and amenities can help establish the character and identity of an area, support public use, and contribute to the social and economic vitality of the corridor. Street furniture and other amenities should be located on the sidewalk near the curb or parkway to unambiguously indicate public use, while still maintaining a clear zone for walking. • Location. Street furniture and other amenities such astrash receptacles, kiosks, and newsstands should be located in conjunction with active pedestrian areas such as intersections, key building entries, public open spaces, bus stops, important intersections, and pedestrian streets. • Design. At an area -wide scale, street furniture, such as benches, bollards, shade structures, and refuse containers should be coordinated in type, color, and material to contribute to a sense of identity in the area. • Access. Street furniture should be designed for universal access and to facilitate use by those of all ages and abilities. Lighting Pedestrian -scale street lighting will not only help improve security, but will also add to the character of the street and neighborhood. Sidewalks and landscaped areas should be illuminated to enhance safety and comfort. Light standards should be located near the curb and parkway of the sidewalk and should not interfere with pedestrian circulation to ensure that public safety and security criteria are met. The design of light fixtures and the quality of the illumination should add visual interest to the streetscape and contribute to the overall character and attractiveness of the street. • Location. The placement of light fixtures should not interfere with pedestrian movement. • Lighting Style. Street lighting fixtures should be selected to highlightthe Mariners' Mile maritime character and oriented towards pedestrians. The light poles should have an aesthetic that complements a high-end maritime character, allow for the fixation of banners, and focuses on potential opportunities for solar energy supply. • Banners. Banners can be affixed to all light public/street poles within Mariners' Mile, or within public plazas and/or on key streets such as Avon Street and Coast Highway. Banners should be designed so that they are attractive and are cohesive with the branding of Mariners' Mile. Pedestrian -Scaled Street Lamp • Unifying Scheme. A single consistent style and size of pole and fixture should be used within a given area (e.g., Avon Village or harborside) to create a unifying scheme of illumination that is appropriate to the scale of the street and the level and character of nighttime activity. Pole and fixture design should be coordinated with other street furniture and amenities to establish an attractive and unified design character. • Height. The height of light fixtures generally should be kept low to promote a pedestrian scale and to minimize light spill to adjoining properties. In active and more intimately scaled pedestrian zones, outside of the West Coast Highway right-of-way and frontage, pole - mounted fixtures should not exceed 12 to 15 feet in height from grade to light source. At major intersections, a mounting height of up to 18 feet is acceptable. • Spacing. Generally, shorter light standards should be more closely spaced to provide appropriate levels of illumination. Although in lower activity areas where lower lighting levels are acceptable, closer spacing may not be necessary. Limit Light Pollution. Ilumination should generally be focused down toward the ground, avoiding all unnecessary lighting of the night sky. Light sources that are mounted closer to and focus illumination directly onto the ground plane, such as bollard -mounted lighting, stair lighting, and wall- and bench -mounted down - lighting, are desirable. Light fixtures should include internal reflector caps, refractors, or shields that provide an efficient and focused distribution of light and avoid glare or reflection into upper stories of adjacent buildings. Exterior illumination and electronic signage should be limited to the hours of operation or greatly reduced outside of the hours of operation for MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN businesses in the East End Commercial District. • Levels of Activity and Illumination. Levels of illumination should be responsive to the type and level of anticipated activity, without over - illuminating the area. The level of illumination for pedestrian areas generally should range from 0.5 foot candles in lower activity areas up to 1.0 -foot candle at the property line in more critical areas. (A foot candle is a unit of illumination, measured at the distance of one foot from the source of light.). Illumination levels for exterior lighting in the East -End Commercial District should be informed by the results of a photometric study provided by the applicant or property owner. • Illumination of Conflict Areas. Higher lighting levels should be provided in areas wherethere is potential for conflict between pedestrians and vehicles, such as intersections and crosswalks, and areas with high levels of nighttime activity. Thus, commercial shopping streets should have higher levels of illumination. • Color Balance. Color -balanced lamps that provide a warm white illumination and realistic color rendition should be used. • Energy Efficiency. Energy Star -certified lamps should be used for all pedestrian realm lighting, and hours of operation should be monitored and limited to avoid waste. Benches Benches encourage pedestrian activity and enhance gathering spaces along the street. Benches can also provide for the opportunity to include artwork custom designed by artists or the community, reflecting the aesthetics and culture of the neighborhood. • Aesthetic. Public seating should be attractive, yet easy to maintain and enhance the identity MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN of the neighborhood. The design of benches could integrate elements of maritime history and nautical features to enhance the character of Mariners' Mile. • Groupings. Groupings of benches should be of the same style rather than differing styles adjacent to each other. Benches Facing Eachother • Location. Bench placement should consider social activity on the street, and seek to enhance areas where people tend to meet and congregate. Benches should also be provided for people to sit while waiting for transportation services such as at internal shuttle bus and/or transit stops. • Clear Path. Where possible, benches should be placed against a building wall, property line, or curb to allow clear pedestrian paths of travel, and to face the sidewalk accommodating neighborhood interaction. • Facing Benches. Facing bench placement is encouraged to help create "outdoor rooms' in areas where people meet and gather. • Placement. Bench placement should not interfere with the pedestrian path of travel. • Informal Seating. The creation of seat walls, steps, and planters that can serve as informal seating areas is encouraged as a means of expanding the seating potential and providing diverse opportunities for social interaction Trash and Recycling Receptacles Trash and recycling receptacles encourage cleanliness and recycling, resulting in a more pleasant street environment. • Placement. Trash and recycling receptacles should be provided for outdoor public spaces such as along sidewalks and/or within plazas. • Receptacles should not interfere with pedestrian path of travel. • Separate trash and recycling receptacles should be located regularly at intersections, near major building entrances, near Orange County Transportation Authority bus stops, and adjacent to outdoor seating areas. • Design. Each receptacle should be designed to accommodate recycling with a separate compartment dedicated to recycled waste, prevent wind and rain from entering the container, facilitate convenient access to the liner, and have the option of being anchored to the pavement. • Aesthetic. The style and color of the corridor's trash receptacles should be coordinated with the selected bench design and be consistent throughout each distinct district within Mariners' Mile. Bollards to separate vehicular and pedestrian traffic Bollards Bollards are used to prevent vehicles from entering pedestrian zones. Bollards may also be used to mark pathway entries at public-private interfaces. • Location. Bollards should be installed in areas along the curb side of the sidewalk if additional buffer space is needed between the sidewalk and street. • Arrangement. Bollards are typically arranged in a path to separate vehicle traffic from pedestrians and to control parking zones along sidewalks. • Placement. Bollards should be strategically placed to allow a clear path of travel for pedestrians and should not distract or interfere with vehicular circulation. • Shared Areas. Bollards should be carefully utilized in "shared" areas to delineate areas for motorized uses apart from areas for non - motorized uses (i.e., drop-off/pick-up areas in public plazas). • Emergency Access. Bollard placement and design should be coordinated with emergency vehicle access; in certain locations, removable bollards may be appropriate to balance pedestrian protection with emergency access. • Aesthetic. Bollard style and color should be decorative, complement or contribute to Mariners' Mile's maritime aesthetic, and be consistent throughout the corridor or within each distinct area within Mariners' Mile. Bicycle Racks Bicycle racks support bicycling by providing safe and convenient locations to park and store bicycles. Bicycle parking within the public sidewalk generally should be accommodated with a number of smaller racks distributed along the length of a block, rather than one or two large concentrations of bike racks MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN to provide for a convenient, safe and user-friendly place for cyclists to leave their bicycles. Bicycle racks can be free standing or attached to stationary objects such as buildings. Bicycle parking facilities should be provided on Avon Street adjacent to major destinations where there is adequate capacity on the sidewalk. • Placement. Bicycle racks should be located so that parked bicycles do not blockthe travel path of pedestrians, infringe upon seating areas, or block ingress and egress to parked vehicles. The placement of bicycle racks should also consider the user's ease of entry and exit with a bicycle. Larger racks should be provided within bulbouts where there is additional public space, while smaller racks should be placed near the curb on sidewalks, where necessary and feasible. • Prominent Location. Bicycle racks should be located in prominent locations on the sidewalk. Placement in view of doors and windows will ensure adequate surveillance from building occupants and visitors. Bicycle parking should not be located in isolated areas, dark locations, or garage recesses. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN • Design. Bike racks should be designed to allow the bicyclist to secure the bicycle frame to the device at two points of contact. Appropriate bicycle rack designs include the inverted U, the ribbon type rack, or the corkscrew. The design of bike racks may also be a form of public art that is both creative and functional to enhance the character of the street. Wayfinding Pedestrian -scale elements such as directional signage, gateways, and surface treatments can help pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists navigate public spaces, lead them to key destinations, and help create a lively and vibrant atmosphere. The City should consider the development and incorporation of an iconographic logo and/or other graphics that are repeated throughout Mariners' Mile's wayfinding features such as on signs, banners, and gateway features. These graphics could also be used in marketing materials such as brochures llht Rail SWG on Beach y Wayfinding Signage and maps. More specific guidance for different wayfinding elements are described as follows: SURFACE TREATMENTS Surface treatments, such as colored, decorative, and/or patterned paving, can greatly enhance the character of Mariners' Mile's distinct areas, direct pedestrian flow, make street crossings more visible to drivers, and can be used as a street - calming measure. New surface treatments can be incorporated into new sidewalks and plazas. It should be noted that new surface treatments along parcels facing West Coast Highway would be limited and require coordination with Caltrans. • Placement. Placement of decorative paving should complement the character, materials, and design of the street and be appropriate for the space available. • Decorative Paving. Consider using colored or decorative paving as a subtle and intuitive method of creating pedestrian pathways and directing pedestrian travel on the harbor -side. DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE Directional signage for the Harbor -front, bicycle routes, parking, neighborhood shops, and amenities can enhance street character and orient visitors to major destinations. Walking maps, signs with distances and/or arrows, or plaques could be strategically placed, marking unique places in Mariners' Mile. Continuous Line of Paving in Crosswalk • Complimentary. Signs should be appropriately integrated into their surroundings in terms of size, shape, color, texture, and lighting in order to complement the architecture of the buildings and the immediate neighborhood context. • Thematic. Directional signage should consist of a coordinated system of nautical -inspired signage that guide residents and visitors to and among key destinations and amenities. • Placement. Signs should be strategically placed to ensure a clear path of travel for pedestrians and should not distract or interfere with vehicular circulation. The wayfinding system should be visible to pedestrians and motorists, while maintaining compatibility and consistency with existing signage. Where possible, wayfinding signs should be co -located with other streetscape furniture (e.g., light standards, transit shelters) where possible to reduce visual clutter in the public realm. • Consistency. Signs should have a consistent MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN and/or complementary theme and aesthetic (e.g., a common style and/or color palette) and be professionally constructed of durable high- quality materials to create a unified maritime character within Mariners' Mile. • Solar Panels. Solar powered signs or panels or LED pedestrian lights or other low-energy lights should be installed along the bikeway/ pedestrian paths or at crossings or buildings to provide a flexible illuminated solution with no external powering requirement MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN GATEWAYS Gateways are symbols that help establish a destination and signify an arrival. Gateways can help to brand the identity of key destinations in Mariners' Mile. Gateways should be delineated by architectural treatments, landmarks or visual cues, such as signage and wayfinding design elements, to create virtual borders and inform pedestrians and drivers that the area has changed. The design of gateways could include accentuated landscaping with iconic trees, florals, and/or shrubs, highlighted by gentle, context -sensitive up -lighting at night; decorative arches with the words "Mariners' Mile" incorporated; monument signs in the form of low free-standing walls; and public art featuring a nautical theme such as boats or sea creatures. These gateway locations should be designed with elements that unify the key destination to reflect the desired maritime identity and unique character of the area. This Plan recommends siting gateways at any of the following areas: • Public Plazas. Public plaza adjacent to West Coast Highway • Avon Village. At signalized intersections to signify the arrival into the Avon Village. • Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridges. Along West Coast Highway, incorporated into the design of a potential pedestrian/bicycle bridge • Flags/Banners. Installation of flags or banners mounted on the Arches Bridge and the Back Bay Bridge to notify travelers the proximity of Mariners' Mile and to create a more pleasant pedestrian experience. Gateways MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN This page intentionally left blank. REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN on fill on an Adoption of the Master Plan is not the end of the process, but the beginning. The Master Plan presents what is possible in the Mariners' Mile corridor and how the City, working with private property owners, business owners, developers, agencies, and other private and public stakeholders, can achieve the community's vision for the corridor. The Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan addresses key areas of the built environment, including land use and urban design, streetscape and mobility improvements, and parking solutions. The next steps toward realizing the plan and revitalizing the Mariners' Mile corridor involves prioritizing improvements for the area then exploring management and funding options. With the exception of a future General Plan amendment to revise the Mariners' Mile boundary area in the General Plan, adoption of the Master Plan does not change or modify the standards, regulations, or entitlement procedures of the applicable sections of the City's Zoning Code, General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, or Local Coastal Program. Adoption does set in motion a series of next steps to move the Mariners' Mile vision forward. Many of these next steps will require their own process, timeline, and approval. However, if they are conducted in a comprehensive and holistic manner as recommended by this Plan, the sum of improvements will be much greater than their individual pieces. The Plan provides a path to transforming the corridor with a vibrant village area, enhanced streetscapes, improved connectivity from inland surrounding neighborhoods to harbor -side properties, and a range of open space amenities. Revitalizing a corridor of this scale will require phased implementation, most likely triggered by private property owners as they move forward with redeveloping land and public infrastructure and capital improvement projects. As such, most of the recommendations of the Master Plan are long-term in nature and will require significant coordination by City staff with a variety of stakeholders, including local business and property owners, residents, and outside government agencies. However, there are certain immediate action steps that the City can do to kick-start the revitalization process. A summary table of the action steps, timeframe, and key partners is provided in Table 5-1. A full description of the steps and implementation financing sources follows Table 5-1 . MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN Implementation Action Timeframe Key Partnerships CD = Community Development CM = City Manager FD = Finance Department PW = Public Works Department yrs. 2-5 yrs. City Other Organization0-1 .. . Mariners' Mile Lead and Team X CM, CD, PW Appoint a lead staff member and a cross -departmental City team to coordinate improvement efforts movingforward to ensure coordination following adoption. Mariners' Mile Steering Committee X CD, PW Residents, Business & In advance of establishing a Business Improvement District (BID) Property Owners establish an ad-hoc steering committee composed of individuals and organizations who can effectively act as advocates for implementing the Master Plan's revitalization action. Business Improvement District X CM, CD Business & Property Work with business and property owners to form a Mariners' Owners Mile BID that could fund corridor -wide maintenance, marketing and promotion, and public safety. Application of Mariners' Mile Design Guidelines X CD Business & Property Application of the plan's design guidelines will play a key role Owners, Developers in enhancing the aesthetic character of the built environment, including buildings and structures, streetscape, and landscape. Pilot Improvement Project X CD, PW Residents, Business Create a pilot improvement project that includes lower- & Property Owners, California Coastal cost, high -impact creative interventions bringing immediate Commission, improvements to the Mariners' Mile corridor. Caltrans, OCTA Catalyst Development Sites X CD, PW Caltrans, OCTA, Coordinate with owners of properties within the Village Core, California Coastal Commission East Commercial End, and Harbor -Frontage Districts to foster the redevelopment of key opportunity sites in those areas for projects with uses and of scale that distinctly identify and create value for Mariners' Mile. Parking Strategies Institute Employee Parking Shuttle X CD, PW Business Owners, Expand the Employee Shuttle Program currently operating Institutional uses along the Balboa Peninsula to also serve businesses in Mariners' Mile, enabling employees to park off-site and board shuttles to employment in Mariners' Mile. Standardize Valet Parking Agreements X CD, FD Business & Property Establish and manage a standardized valet program instituting Owners consistent pricing of valet agreements with private valet operators, allowing incoming businesses to use parking spaces in municipal lots directly within or adjacent to Mariners' Mile. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN Implementation Action Timeframe Key Partnerships CD = Community Development CM = City Manager FD = Finance Department PW = Public Works Department 0-1 yrs. 2-5 yrs. Parking Strategies City Other Institute an Employee Permit Parking Program X FD, CD, PW Business & Property Institute a permit parking program to allow employees to park Owners at currently underutilized City -owned lots within or directly adjacent to Mariners' Mile, including the Avon Street municipal lot, or at designated on -street parking spaces. Encourage Private Lots for Public Use X PW, CD Business & Property Work with property owners interested in providing their Owners parking resources for public use, increasing the number of spaces offered for visitors to Mariners' Mile without having to construct new parking facilities. Parking Wayfinding Program X PW, CD Caltrans, OCTA Design and install a coordinated set of wayfinding signage directing visitors and employees to parking locations in Mariners' Mile and providing coordinated informational and regulatory signage. Parking Management District X CD, PW Business & Property Establish a parking management district, allowing all publicly Owners accessible parking, including operations/programs, code adjustments, and financing mechanisms, to be managed as one integrated system and providing a mechanism to create and share parking resources. IMMEDIATE ACTION STEPS MARINERS' MILE LEAD AND TEAM. Consider appointment of a lead staff member and a cross -departmental City team to coordinate improvement efforts moving forward to ensure coordination among City departments, residents, business and property owners, and outside governmental agencies. A key responsibility for the Mariners' Mile lead staff will be to initiate the formation of a future business improvement district (BID). This should involve informing business and/or property owners of the range of benefits and capabilities of the BID and discuss the overall process of and procedures for forming the district. As discussed below, BIDS are created at the request of business and/or property owners within the corridor, therefore an initial education and outreach effort by the City will be beneficial in this process. MARINERS' MILE STEERING COMMITTEE In advance of establishing a legally constituted Business Improvement District (BID) for the Mariners' Mile area, the City should conside establishing an ad-hoc steering committee composed of individuals and organizations who can effectively act as advocates for implementing the Master Plan's revitalization action. This can be an important tool in "jump-starting" and maintaining momentum following Plan approval, communicating the Plan's content (what it will do and not do), and achieving community support. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN (such as the Urban Land Institute) may also be considered to serve as a conduit to understanding of market conditions and development trends, though participants should be limited to those with no specific development interest in Mariners' Mile. The Steering Committee would be scheduled to meet with Lead City staff on a periodic basis and sunset upon establishment of a BID. Roles may include: • Acting as a champion in attracting investment, new development, and revitalization of the area. • Servingasaconduittofinancialresourcestofund public realm improvements and development, including financial institutions, regional and state grants, public-private partnerships, and others. • Providing insights regarding evolving market demands and development opportunities in the Mariners' Mile area, including developer perspectives of the elements necessary to achieve successful development of desired uses and improvements. r • Identifying priority public realm revitalization opportunities and priorities. Steering Committee members would be appointed by the City Council for a specified term (1-2 years) with possible re -appointment and consist of a diversity of interests including local property owners, business tenants, residents, institutions, real estate brokers, and financing companies. Representatives from the development industry • Working with developers to ensure that projects meet Master Plan objectives and guidelines. BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. Business Improvement Districts (BIDS) are created by the City of Newport Beach at the request of the business and/or property owners within a respective district or corridor. However, following adoption of the Master Plan, as discussed previously, the lead City staff should immediately begin meeting with business and property owners in the corridor to discuss the purpose and benefit of a Mariners' Mile BID. When a BID is established, every business in the MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN district is assessed a levy, based on a percentage of the business license fee, that is allocated for district -specific improvements and/or marketing. BIDS deliver services that supplement services already provided by the City such as: • Maintenance: installing and repairing various public realm improvements, such as identification signage, banners, streetscape improvements, and the like. • Public safety: Led by a dedicated team of public safety "ambassadors" the BID could provide services to ensure residents, employees, and visitors feel safe. This could be particularly valuable for people traveling by foot or bicycle from public parking structures to various businesses during the evening and nighttime hours. • Marketing and Promotion. The BID could develop and implement marketing and promotional material and campaigns to attract quality developers, retail, restaurant, and entertainment, hotel uses to locate in the area. The marketing and promotion efforts could also market Mariners' Mile as an ideal destination for residents of Newport Beach and greater Orange County to shop, dine, live, and recreate. PILOT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Following adoption of the Plan, the City should consider creating a pilot improvement project that includes lower-cost, high -impact creative interventions that will bring immediate improvements to the Mariners' Mile corridor and will help carry forward momentum achieved during the planning process. The selected pilot improvement project could include the following: • Use paint and/or wayfinding signage to identify and direct residents and visitors to the existing harbor -side boardwalk. • Creation of a pop-up plaza in an underutilized surface parking lot or on -street parking space. • Installation of temporary streetscape improvements, such as street furnishing, banners, public art, or enhanced pedestrian/ bicycle crossings. The pilot improvement project should be consistent with the framework map and create community excitement for and interest in future improvements. Additionally, pilot improvement projects may help the City obtain funding for future permanent improvements. PARKING STRATEGIES The parking strategies identified in Section 3 include several immediate/short-term actions that can be pursued to implement the Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan. Immediate/short-term parking -related action steps, discussed in further detail in the parking section of Chapter 3, are generally operational in nature and include the following: • Institute an Employee Parking Shuttle • Standardize Valet Parking Agreements • Institute an Employee Permit Parking Program • Encourage Private Lots to be Available for Public Use PARKING MANAGEMENT DISTRICT A key component to parking recommendations in the Mariners' Mile corridor is to create a parking management district for the area, allowing for all publicly accessible parking to be managed as one integrated system. The City should consider the formation of a parking district, following the successful implementation of immediate/short- term parking strategies. The formation of a parking management district will enable the consolidation of individual parking operations/programs, code adjustments, and financing mechanismsto ultimately expand efficiency and use of available supply, focusing on sharing existing parking resources. A parking management district for Mariners' Mile will also allow the City to more effectively respond to issues unique to the neighborhood without requiring code changes in other parts of Newport Beach, while also having the flexibility to adjust regulations as parking demand and supply in the area changes. The parking management district would also function as a funding source for future physical improvements in the area. CATALYST DEVELOPMENT SITES Following adoption of the plan, the City should coordinate with owners of properties within the Village Core, East Commercial End, and Harbor - Frontage Districts to foster the redevelopment of key opportunity sites in those areas for projects with uses and of scale that distinctly identify and create value for Mariners' Mile. This can catalyze additional development consistent with the vision for the corridor. The first step in the process should be the facilitation of a Developer's Roundtable, which would bring together City staff, property owners within the corridor, local developers, and other key stakeholders to discuss the various development sites and feasible development solutions for those sites that align with the vision for the corridor. I ky.,WNILIto This section presents the various local, regional, state, and federal funding mechanisms and financing strategies that could be used to implement the recommendations of the Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan. This section should be monitored and updated on a regular basis, as new funding sources become available and the MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN requirements of existing funding mechanisms and financing strategies evolve. LOCAL FUNDING SOURCES Capital Improvement Program The Public Works Department is responsible for the design and construction of the City's roads, intersections, bridges, sidewalks, storm drains, and parks while also protecting and maintaining public property. The City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) serves as a plan for the provision of public improvements, special projects, on-going maintenance programs, and the implementation of the City's master plans. As such, public, capital improvements included in the Mariners' Mile Master Plan should be integrated into the CIP as appropriate. The CIP budget is adopted annually along with the City's operating budget. Generally, sufficient funds are appropriated for the work to be performed one year at a time. Funding estimates for future components of a project appear in a Five Year Look Ahead section. Projects within the CIP are organized by primary function or benefit into one of the following categories: Facilities; Streets and Drainage; Transportation; Parks, Harbors and Beaches; Water Quality and Environmental; Water; Wastewater; and Miscellaneous. The City should consider including the following projects identified in the Framework Plan into the CIP: • Streetscape and roadway improvements identified for Avon Street, Riverside Avenue, and Tustin Avenue. • Potential parking structures to be constructed on the City -owned surface parking lot and BMW dealership lot. • Harbor -Frontage pedestrian and open space improvements, such as potential pedestrian plazas and public boardwalk. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District As discussed previously, an EIFD could provide an alternative financing mechanism for capital infrastructure projects with an emphasis on sustainability. EIFDs are financed through tax increment generated from the growth in property taxes collected from within a designated district boundary. An EIFD is a separate government entity formed to finance infrastructure projects of communitywide benefit within a given district, using the property tax increment of consenting taxing agencies including cities, counties, special districts, but not schools. A corridor -wide EIFD could be used to finance several large infrastructure projects or facilities contained in the Master Plan, including but not limited to the following types of infrastructure or facilities: • West Coast Highway pedestrian and bicycle bridges connecting the inland and harbor -side areas of Mariners' Mile. • Future parks, plazas, and open space areaE identified in the Harbor -Frontage area. recreational facilities, open space and libraries. • Projects which implement a sustainable communities strategy, such as the Avon Street (west) multi -use pedestrian and bicycle path. Assessment District This tool may be particularly useful given the anticipated revitalization of the corridor and the increase in taxable value that may follow. In existing neighborhoods and corridors such as Mariners' Mile, groups of property owners may desire to have public facilities and infrastructure improvements sooner rather than waiting for grant funds, funds generated by an EIFD or BID, or general fund monies to become available. Assessment districts could help finance the construction of public improvements on public property, public rights-of- way, and public easements in these areas. Owners of the real property that receives a special benefit are assessed for the costs, proportional to the level of benefit received. Assessment districts are intended to finance construction of physical improvements. They cannot pay for operations and maintenance or additional services. If additional improvements are desired after an assessment district is established, the entire process is required for those additional improvements. Assessment districts may be used to finance improvements in one of two general ways. The assessments may repay the City for the upfrontcosts of improvements. The City may also issue bonds pursuant to an assessment district and use the proceeds to fund the infrastructure improvements and use the assessments to repay the bonds. Generally, assessment districts can be used to finance the following types of improvements that are recommended by the plan: • Local streets and streetlights • Parking facilities • Landscaping • Sidewalks Establishment of an assessment district cannot occur if a majority of the affected property owners object (weighted by the value of the proposed assessment). Prior to holding a vote on an assessment district, the City must pay for engineering design and construction documents and bid the project out. If a majority of property owners reject the assessment district, then the City is out the cost of developing the construction documents. Thus, establishing an assessment district usually requires a great deal of time working with property owners so that the City is relatively certain that they will not vote against establishing the district. Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District Landscaping and lighting maintenance districts (LLMD) can fund the construction of certain public improvements and the operation and maintenance of public improvements. Whether in new development areas of existing neighborhoods, public facility and infrastructure improvements will require ongoing operations and maintenance. A landscaping and lighting maintenance district is one alternative to the general fund for paying those costs. A LLMD requires an annual assessment process for any assessments other than previously approved assessments to pay previously approved and issued debt. A LLMD may fund the following projects identified in the Framework Plan: • Landscaping improvements in the Avon Street, Riverside Avenue, and Tustin Avenue public rights-of-way • Public lighting, including a proposed new traffic signal where a possible Avon Street extension connects to West Coast Highway. • The installation or construction of curbs, gutters, walls, sidewalks, or paving along Avon Street, Riverside Avenue, and Tustin Avenue. STATE FUNDING SOURCES Active Transportation Program (ATP) In September 2013, the State created the Active Transportation Program (ATP), consolidating existing federal and state transportation programs, including the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP), the Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA), and the Federal and State Safe Routes to School (SRTS). The ATP is intended to promote the use of active modes of transportation, such as walking and biking. The program budget is allocated by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) and varies per year. The ATP program is administered by Caltrans. The most recent Cycle 3 Call -for -Projects MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN includes 19/20 and 20/21 state funding years totaling about $240 million. Fifty percent of ATP funds are distributed on a competitive statewide basis, forty percent is provided to Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) in urban areas with populations greater than 200,000 for the large urbanized area competitive program, and the final ten percent goes to small urban and rural areas with populations of less than 200,000. The ATP funds infrastructure and non -infrastructure projects that increase biking and walking, improve mobility and safety for active transportation, enhance public health, and achieve greenhouse gas reduction goals. Projects eligible for ATP funding identified in the Framework Plan may include: • The West Coast Highway pedestrian and bicycle bridge. • Avon Street (west) multi -use pedestrian and bicycle path. • Harbor -Frontage boardwalk improvements • Pedestrian and bicycle connections between the Newport Theatre Arts Center and future parking structure rooftop park. "Urban Greening Program" as funded by the State of California Natural Resources Agency. The Urban Greening Grant is a state -funded grant program established by the Legislature to fund projects that transform the built environment into places that are more sustainable, enjoyable, and effective in creating healthy and vibrant communities. Funded projects are intended to establish and enhance parks and open space, using natural solutions to improve air and water quality. The grant program sees eligible projects as satisfying this by reducing energy consumption and creating more walkable and bikeable trails. The current grant cycle (2017) expects to award approximately 76 million dollars of funds to local, state, and federal governmental agencies and to MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN nonprofit organizations for projects that sequester and store carbon by planting trees, reduce building energy use by strategically planting trees to shade buildings, and/or reduce commute vehicle miles traveled by constructing bicycle paths, bicycle lanes or pedestrian facilities that provide safe routes for travel between residences, workplaces, commercial centers, and schools. Eligible projects include but are not limited to green streets and alleyways, greening of public lands and structures, expansion of community spaces, and urban heat island mitigation. Grants are awarded on a competitive basis, with 25 percent of awards to projects that demonstrate a benefit to disadvantaged communities. Potential projects in the Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan that may potentially be eligible for Urban Greening funding include: • Street -greening improvements to Avon Street, Riverside Avenue, and Tustin Avenue. • Avon Street (west) multi -use pedestrian and bicycle path. • Greening/park improvements at existing municipal -owned parking lots throughout Mariners' Mile. • Future Harbor -Frontage area public plazas and open space areas. FEDERAL FUNDING SOURCES USDOT and HUD Funding The primary sources of federal funding for bicycle and pedestrian facilities are from the US Department of Transportation (USDOT) and the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Federal funding sources provide large sums of money to fund projects and programs, but are very competitive, have stringent guidelines, and require robust resources for the initial application process and subsequent reporting. If the City appoints a lead staff member to oversee the implementation of the Master Plan, that staff should monitor these grant programs and manage projects that receive funding. Projects that are most suitable for federal funding include those that meet the program's requirements, have a high price tag of $1 million dollars or more, and those in which the City can contribute a percentage (usually 10 to 20 percent) as a local matching fund. Projects eligible for USDOT and HUD funding identified in the Framework Plan may include: • West Coast Highway pedestrian and bicycle bridges connecting the inland and harbor -side areas of Mariners' Mile. • Avon Street (west) multi -use pedestrian and bicycle path. • Harbor -Frontage boardwalk improvements. • Avon Street (central) pedestrian and bicycle -friendly roadway and streetscape improvements. Surface Transportation Block Grant In 2015, President Obama signed into law the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act). The FAST Act replaces the previous two-year transportation authorization bill, Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP -21), and provides long-term funding certainty for surface transportation. The FAST Act includes a set- aside Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) program funding for transportation alternatives (TA), which were previously a part of MAP -21's Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP). Eligible projects for STBG TA funding include smaller -scale transportation projects, including pedestrian and bicycle facilities, recreational trails, and Safe Routes to School projects. TA funding is sub -allocated based on population through a competitive process. Projects, such as the Avon Street (west) multi -use pedestrian and bicycle path and Harbor- MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN Frontage boardwalk improvements may be eligible for STBG funding. Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is also a part of the FAST Act and helps fund projects that reduce fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. Eligible projects include projects on any public road, bicycle or pedestrian pathway, or trail. The program is data -driven and requires data such as crash experience (data that has already been collected to identify intersections with potential for improved safety), crash potential (further refined data to identify locations with high-risk roadway characteristics), crash rate, etc. HSIP funds are managed and distributed by Caltrans. The minimum funding amount is $100,000. Projects eligible for HSIP funding identified in the Framework Plan include those projects listed as eligible for USDOT and HUD funding. Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) Grants The TIGER grant is funded by the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) and provides funding for the construction of large-scale transportation infrastructure projects, including higher -priced bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. Projects in Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan that may be eligible for TIGER funding could potentially include the proposed bicycle and pedestrian bridges over West Coast Highway. The grant program is highly competitive and supports projects that are considered innovative, including multi -modal and multi -jurisdictional projects. IN C . -- id MARILE REVITALIZATION MA'ER�PLAN ' I _ "W 2 o an EXISTING CONDITIONS _ 5 MARINERS'MILE REVITALIZATION STER P Existing Conditions Report October, 2016 tv� PLACEW�,.,.. L TABLE OF CONTENTS 3 Introduction 4 Location 7 Land Use and Urban Form Plans, Policies, and Regulations 22 Existing Conditions 37 Parking Plans, Policies, and Regulations 40 Existing Conditions 45 Mobility and Circulation Plans, Policies, and Regulations 47 Existing Conditions 51 Opportunities and Challenges . 4 _. NTR CT 3 Mariners' Mlle Revitalization Master Plan INTRODUCTION The Mariners' Mile corridor is a local destination and regional attraction that exemplifies the merging of highway- and water -oriented commercial that typifies many commercial areas along Coast Highway. In 2011, the Newport Beach City Council recognized the need to revitalize Mariners' Mile and designated it one of six revitalization areas in the community. The work in the other areas is already underway or has been completed, but the Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan is the first step in the revitalization of Mariners' Mile. This existing conditions report will serve as the baseline resource and reference throughout the planning process and—along with input from the community—as the foundation for development of the master plan. The report is organized into three topics, each of which plays a key role in the revitalization of Mariners' Mile: • Land Use and Urban Form • Parking • Mobility and Circulation For each topic area, the report includes an analysis of existing plans, policies, and regulations, as well as an analysis of the existing conditions in Mariners' Mile today. The report concludes with a section identifying the opportunities and challenges to revitalization, organized around the three topic areas. Chapter 1. Introduction LOCATION The Mariners' Mile corridor is in scenic coastal Orange County, straddling approximately 1.5 miles of Coast Highway in southwest Newport Beach. As displayed in Figure 1.1, Project Location, the 65 -acre site is generally bounded by Newport Boulevard to the west and Dover Drive to the east and lies between Newport Bay to the south and the Newport Heights and Cliff Haven residential communities to the north. FIGURE 1.1 PROJECT LOCATION O Mariners We Project Boundary to Source: mly or Newport Beam, 2016 Cityof NewportBeach Mariner's Mile y�p1a Source: mly or Newport Beam, 2016 MIA" NiA-to fi-IL' 7 Mariners' Mlle Revitalization Master Plan LAND USE AND URBAN FORM PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATIONS GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT Overview The General Plan Land Use Element provides the framework for land use and the overall development pattern of the community. The foundation of this framework is the Land Use Diagram, which establishes the various land use categories, depicts the distribution of those land uses throughout the City, and establishes density and intensity standards for the various land uses. The Land Use Diagram is supported by a series of goals and policies that guide future growth and development. Goals and policies are provided for specific land use categories as well as for key districts and corridors, including the Mariners' Mile corridor. The policy overview for Mariners' Mile states: The General Plan provides for the enhanced vitality of the Mariners' Mile corridor by establishing a series of distinct retail, mixed-use, and visitor -serving centers. Harbor -fronting properties would accommodate a mix of visitor -serving retail and marine -related businesses, with portions of the properties available for housing and mixed-use structures. View and public access corridors from Coast Highway to the Harbor would be required, with a pedestrian promenade developed along the length of the Harbor frontage. Parcels on the inland side of Coast Highway, generally between Riverside Avenue and the southerly projection of Irvine Avenue, would evolve as a pedestrian -oriented mixed-use "village" containing retail businesses, offices, services, and housing. Sidewalks would be improved with landscape and other amenities to foster pedestrian activity. Inland properties directly fronting onto Coast Highway and those to the east and west of the village would provide for retail, marine -related, and office uses. Streetscape amenities are proposed for the length of Mariners' Mile to improve its appearance and identity. Policies The following summarizes several key policies in the Mariners' Mile section of the Land Use Element: LU 6.19.1 Differentiated Districts. Differentiate and create cohesive land use districts for key subareas of Mariners' Mile by function, use, and urban form, including a harbor -oriented district along the waterfront, highway - oriented commercial corridor, and community/ neighborhood -serving village. • W 6.19.2 Bay -Fronting Properties. Encourage marine -related and visitor -serving retail, restaurant, hotel, institutional, and recreational uses, and allow residential uses above the ground floor on parcels with a minimum frontage of 200 lineal feet. LU 6.19.3 Marine -Related Businesses. Protect and encourage facilities that serve marine -related businesses and industries and encourage coastal -dependent industrial uses to locate or expand within existing sites. LU 6.19.4 Inland side of Coast Highway. Accommodate a mix of visitor -and local - serving retail commercial, residential, and public uses. • W 6.19.6 Corridor Identity and Quality. Implement landscape, signage, lighting, sidewalk, pedestrian crossing, and other amenities consistent with the Mariners' Mile Specific Plan District and Mariners' Mile Strategic Vision and Design Plan. • LU 6.19.7 Architecture and Site Planning. The form, materials, and colors of buildings along the harbor front should be designed to reflect the area's setting and nautical history. • LU 6.19.9 Harbor and Bay Views and Access. Require that buildings be located and sites designed to provide clear views of and access to the harbor and bay from Coast Highway and Newport Boulevard. • LU 6.19.10 Waterfront Promenade. Require that development on the bay frontage implement amenities that ensure access for coastal visitors. Pursue development of a pedestrian promenade along the bay front. • LU 6.19.11 Pedestrian -Oriented Village. Require that inland properties that front internal streets in the Community/ Neighborhood Village locate buildings so that they form a semicontinuous building wall along the sidewalk. • LU 6.19.13 Lot Consolidation on Inland Side of Coast Highway. Permit development intensities in areas designated as XG(0.3)" to be increased to a floor area ratio of 0.5 where parcels are consolidated to accommodate larger commercial development projects that provide sufficient parking. • LU 6.19.14 Parking Lot Relocation. Consider options for the relocation of the City parking lot on Avon Street to better support the corridor's retail uses. Chapter 2. Land Use and Urban Form 9 Mariners' Mlle Revitalization Master Plan General Plan Land Use Categories Mariners' Mile is home to six different land use categories: General Commercial (CG 0.3/0.5), Visitor Serving Commercial (CV), Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM), Mixed Use Horizontal (MU -Hl), Mixed Use Water Related (Ni and Public Facilities (PF), as displayed in Figure 2.1, Mariners' Mile General Plan Land Use Diagram. MIXED-USE HORIZONTAL 1(MU-Hl). The MU -Hl category, fronting Coast Highway and adjacent to the Newport Heights and Cliff Haven residential neighborhoods, is intended for both marine -related and highway -oriented general commercial uses. Portions of properties to the rear of the commercial frontage on Coast highway are permitted to be developed for freestanding neighborhood -serving retail, multifamily residential units, or mixed-use buildings that integrate residential with retail uses on the ground floor. MIXED-USE WATER 1(MU-WS). The MU -W1 category, fronting both Coast Highway to the north and Newport Bay to the south, is intended for marine -related, visitor -serving commercial and residential uses, as well as mixed-use buildings that include residential units above ground floor commercial or office uses. The MU -W3 category restricts the amount of square footage dedicated to mixed-use structures to less than 50 percent of the total area between the Arches Bridge and the Newport Sea Base. GENERAL COMMERCIAL (CG 0.3/0.5). The CG 0.3/0.5 category, fronting the inland side of Coast Highway on the east and west ends. of Mariners' Mile, is intended to allow a variety of citywide and regional - serving commercial uses. VISITOR SERVING COMMERCIAL (CV). Located in the southeast corner of Mariners' Mile, the CV category provides commercial development on or near Newport Bay that will encourage the continuation of coastal -dependent and -related uses and visitor -serving and recreational uses, while providing physical and visual access to the bay on waterfront commercial and industrial sites. RECREATIONAL AND MARINE COMMERCIAL (CM 0.5). The CM designation in the southwest corner of Mariners' Mile is intended to provide for commercial development on or near the bay and to encourage the continuation of coastal -dependent and coastal -related uses, maintain the marine theme and character, encourage mutually supportive businesses, encourage visitor -serving and recreational uses, and encourage physical and visual access to the bay on waterfront commercial and industrial building sites on or near the bay. PUBLIC FACILITIES (PF). The PF category, intended for public facilities, including public schools, cultural institutions, government facilities, libraries, community centers, public hospitals, and public utilities, is on public property on both sides of Coast Highway. IN 6o— City of Newport Beach, 2016 Chaptel Land Use and Urban Form 10 FIGURE 2.1 GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DIAGRAM Commercial E lmicis and Cathode l CG il CV ll CM Mixed -Ilse Glstram MII.HI ® Mu-w1Pu,S blicemi-Public and Institutional PF 0 Marine¢ Mlle Project Boundary --- Coastal Zone Boundary City of Newport Beach Mariner's Mile Oo- y 313016 11 Mariners' Mlle Revitalization Master Plan FIGURE 2.2 GENERAL PLAN LAND USES Development Standards LEGEND - General Commercial (CG) - Visitor Serving Commercial (CV) - Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM) Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -Hl) = Mixed -Use Water Related (MU -W3) Public Facilities (PF) The General Plan provides standards that guide the physical development of particular sites or properties in the different land use categories, in the form of permitted residential densities and nonresidential intensities, as displayed in Table 2.A. TABLE 2.A GENERAL PLAN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS LAND USE CATEGORY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Single Use: Commercial Max 0.5 FAR / Residential 20.1-26.7 du/acre MU -H1 Mixed Use: Max 1.5 FAR (0.25-0.5 Com. FAR / Max 1.0 Res. FAR) Single Use: Com. 0.5 Max FAR / Res. 12 du/acre (on max of 50% of property). MU -W3 Mixed Use: Max 1.25 FAR (0.35-0.5 Com. FAR / Res. Max 12 du/acre) CG 0.3/0.5 All Uses: 0.3/0.5 Max FAR CV All Uses: 0.5 Max FAR CM All Uses: 0.5 Max FAR PF N/A COASTAL LAND USE PLAN Policies Overview The following summarizes key policies in the Coastal Land Use Plan: The Coastal Land Use Plan of Newport Beach's Local Coastal Program, prepared in accordance with the California Coastal Act of 1976, sets forth goals, objectives, and policies and establishes land use categories that govern the use of land and water in the coastal zone in Newport Beach. The Coastal Land Use Plan was derived from the Land Use Element of the General Plan to identify the distribution of land uses in the coastal zone. Like the Land Use Element, the Coastal Land Use Plan has development standards for specific land use categories in the form of residential densities and nonresidential intensities. In the event of a conflict between the development limits of the two documents, the limit that is deemed most protective of coastal resources takes precedence. 2.1.4-1. For properties on the inland side of Coast Highway in the Mariners' Mile Corridor that are designated MU -H, the Coast Highway frontages shall be developed for marine -related and highway -oriented general commercial uses, and portions of properties to the rear of the commercial frontage may be developed for freestanding neighborhood -serving retail, multifamily residential units, or mixed-use buildings that integrate residential with retail uses on the ground floor. • 2.1.4-2. For bay -fronting properties that are designated MU -W, encourage marine -related and visitor -serving retail, restaurant, hotel, institutional, and recreational uses. Vertically integrated mixed-use structures are allowed when a minimum of 50 percent of the permitted square footage shall be devoted to nonresidential uses. Mixed-use structures may only be developed on sites with 200 feet or more of street frontage along Coast Highway. In aggregate, no more than 50 percent of the waterfront landarea along Coast Highway between the Arches Bridge and the [Newport] Sea Base may be developed with mixed-use structures. • 2.1.4-3. Permit development intensities in areas designated CG to be increased to a floor area ratio of 0.5 where parcels are consolidated to accommodate larger commercial development projects that provide sufficient parking. Chapter 2. Land Use and Urban Form • 2.1.4-4. For bay -fronting properties that are designated CV or CM, encourage marine - related and visitor -serving retail, restaurant, hotel/motel, institutional, and recreational uses. • 2.1.4-7. For bay -fronting properties, provide plazas and other open spaces that protect existing and provide new view corridors and access from Coast Highway to the harbor. • 2.1.4-8. For bay -fronting properties, require that development on the bay frontage implement amenities that ensure access for coastal visitors, including the development of a public pedestrian promenade along the bay front. 12 13 Mariners' Mlle Revitalization Master Plan Coastal Land Use Plan Categories Mariners' Mile is home to six land use categories—General Commercial (CG-A/CG-B), Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM -B), Visitor Serving Commercial (CV), Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H), and Mixed Use Water Related (MU -W), and Public Facilities (PF), as displayed in Figure 2.3. GENERAL COMMERCIAL (CG-A/CG-B). The CG category is intended to provide for a wide variety of commercial activities oriented primarily to serving citywide or regional needs. RECREATIONAL AND MARINE COMMERCIAL (CM -B). The CM category is intended to provide for commercial development on or near the bay in a manner that will encourage the continuation of coastal - dependent and coastal -related uses, maintain the marine theme and character, encourage mutually supportive businesses, encourage visitor -serving and recreational uses, and encourage physical and visual access to the bay on waterfront commercial and industrial building sites on or near the bay. VISITOR SERVING COMMERCIAL (CV-A/CV-B). The CV category is intended to provide for accommodations, goods, and visitor -serving services. Limited Use Overnight Visitor Accommodations (e.g., time shares, fractionals, condominium -hotels) (LUOVA) are an allowed use when provided together with traditional overnight, hotel visitor accommodations. MIXED USE HORIZONTAL (MU -H). The MU -H category is intended to provide for the development of a horizontally distributed mix of uses, which may include general or neighborhood commercial, commercial offices, multifamily residential, visitor -serving and marine -related uses, and/or buildings that vertically integrate residential with commercial uses. MIXED USE WATER RELATED (MU -W). The MU -W category is intended to provide for commercial development on or near the bay that will encourage the continuation of coastal -dependent and coastal - related uses and visitor -serving uses as well as allow for the development of mixed-use structures with residential uses above the ground floor. Freestanding residential uses are prohibited in the MU -W. Overnight accommodations are allowed, as are LUOVA in lieu of allowable residential development, provided the use is above the ground floor. PUBLIC FACILITIES (PF). The PF category is intended to provide public facilities, including public schools, cultural institutions, government facilities, libraries, community centers, public hospitals, and public utilities. Chapri Land Use and Urban Form FIGURE 2.3 COASTAL LAND USE PLAN 14 General Commercial - CG CG -A,(0.0-0.30 FAR) CG -B, (0.0- 0]S FAR) Recreational and Marine Commercial CM CM-13,(0.0-0.501FAR) VlsitOr Strong Commercial - CV CV -A, (0.0.0.15 FAR) CV -8, (0.00. 1.50 FAR) Mixed Use MU -H -Mixetl Use Rantoul MU -W- Mixed Use Water Related Public Facilities PF PF = Madam Mile Project Boundary Clry of Newlrort8each Mariner's Mile 0i . =„>n.. 15 Mariners' Mlle Revitalization Master Plan FIGURE 2.4 COASTAL PLAN LAND USES LEGEND = General Commercial (A) - General Commercial (B) - Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM) - Visitor Serving Commercial (A) Visitor Serving Commercial (B) Mixed Use Horizontal = Mixed Use Water Related Public Facilities Development Standards Like the Land Use Element, the Coastal Land Use Plan provides standards that guide the physical development of particular sites or properties in the different land use categories, as displayed in Table 2.6 below. TABLE 2.B COASTAL LAND USE PLAN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS LAND USE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CATEGORY CG-A/B All Uses: 0.3/0.75 Max FAR CM -13 All Uses: 0.5 Max FAR CV -A All Uses: 0.3 Max FAR CV -13 All Uses: 0-1.5 Max FAR Single Use: Nonresidential Max 0.5 FAR / Residential 20.1-26.7 du/acre MU -H Mixed Use: Max 1.5 FAR (0.25-0.S Retail. FAR/ Max 1.0 Res. FAR) Single Use: Nonresidential. 0.5 Max FAR / Res. 15 r acre MU -W Mixed Use: Max 1.5 FAR (0.35-0.7 Nonres. FAR / Res. 0.8 Max FAR) PF N/A Chapter 2. Land Use and Urban Form 16 ZONING CODE Zoning Districts Overview • GENERAL COMMERCIAL (CG 0.3/0.5). The intent of the CG 0.3/0.5 zones are to provide areas The land use categories, permitted densities/ appropriate for a wide variety of commercial activities oriented primarily to serve Citywide or regional intensities, and goals and policies established needs. Permitted uses include a range of general commercial uses, including retail and office uses. for the Mariners' Mile corridor in the Land Use • COMMERCIAL VISITOR -SERVING (CV 0.5). The CV district is intended to provide areas appropriate for Element translate into zoning districts, permitted accommodations, goods, and services that primarily serve visitors to the City. Permitted uses include a uses, and permitted development standards in range of visitor -serving commercial uses, such as eating and drinking establishments, entertainment and the City's zoning ordinance. As displayed in Figure excursion services, and personal services. 2.5, Zoning, the Mariners' Mile corridor consists of seven zoning districts—General Commercial • COMMERCIAL RECREATIONAL AND MARINE (CM 0.5). The CM district is intended to provide areas (CG 0.3/0.5), Commercial -Visitor Serving (CV), appropriate for commercial development on or near the waterfront that encourage the continuation Commercial Recreational and Marine, Mixed- of coastal -dependent and coastal -related uses, maintain the marine theme and character of the area, Use Mariners' Mile (MU -MM), Mixed -Use Water encourage mutually supportive business, uses, and maintain physical and visual access to the bay. (MU -W1), Public Facilities (PF), and the Balboa Bay • MIXED-USE MARINER'S MILE (MU -MM). The MU -MM district applies specifically to properties on Planned Community (PC 45). the inland side of Coast Highway in the Mariners' Mile Corridor. Properties fronting Coast Highway may be developed for nonresidential uses only, and properties to the rear of the commercial frontage may be developed for freestanding nonresidential uses, multiunit residential, or mixed-use residential/ commercial structures. Residential uses are not permitted within 100 feet of Coast Highway. • MIXED-USE WATER [MU -W1). The MU -Hl district applies to waterfront properties along the Mariners' Mile Corridor. The MU -W1 district permits both commercial and select residential uses, including marine -related sales, general retail sales and office uses, and food service. A minimum of 50 percent of the allowed square footage in a mixed-use development shall be for nonresidential uses in which marine -related and visitor -serving land uses are mixed. Permitted residential uses must be above the ground floor and are only allowed on lots with a minimum of 200 lineal feet of frontage on Coast Highway. • PUBLIC FACILITIES (PF). The intent for the PF zone is to provide for areas appropriate for public facilities, including community centers, cultural institutions, government facilities, libraries, public hospitals, public utilities, and public schools. • PLANNED COMMUNITY 45 (PC -45). The PC -45 district applies to the area occupied by the Balboa Bay Club, a water oriented, multi -use facility located in the southeast corner of the Mariners' Mile corridor. PC -45 includes two sub -areas, which permit a club facility and lodging facility respectively. The PC designation is intended to implement the goals and policies of the City's General Plan and Local Coastal Plan and ensure City control of a quality development through the adoption of a comprehensive development program. 17 Mariners' We Revitalization Master Plan aour[s'Cny or xe«oon P. -o ]ole FIGURE 2.5 ZONING Commercial CG -General Commercial CM- Commercial Recreational and Marine CV -Commercial VlsitorSeMng Mind Use Vertical laaaa� MU -MM- Mariner's Mile MU.WI- Mixed Use Water Related Other PF -Public Facilities PC -Planned Community Manners Mlle Project Boundary --- Coastal Zone Boundary City Newport Beach Mariner's Mile � s�z�za,s rom Development Standards The Zoning Code provides district -specific standards that regulate development in each district. Key development standards are provided in Table 2.C. TABLE 2.0 DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS BY ZONING DISTRICT 1. Flat roof, pitched roof 2. Abutting residential, abutting non-residential 3. Abutting an alley, not abutting an alley, abutting residential 4. Minimum dimensions of 15 ft. x 15 ft. 5. Minimum dimensions of 6 ft. x 6 ft. 6. Along the Bayshores property Chapter 2. Land Use and Urban Form FIGURE 2.6 ZONING DISTRICTS LEGEND - Commercial General - Commercial Visitor -serving - Commercial Recreational and Marine Mixed -Use Mariners' Mile _ Mixed -Use Water Related Balboa Bay Planned Community (45) Public Facilities (PF) BASE DISTRICT 1 HEIGHT OPEN SPACE SETBACKS Front: O ft. Rear': 0/5/10 ft. CG 0.3-0.5 Max FAR 26 R / 31 ft. N/A Side 0/5 ft. Bulkhead: 10 ft. Side street: 0 ft. Front: O ft. Rear': 0/5/10 ft. Cv 0.5 0.5 Max FAR 26 ft. / 31 ft. N/A Side into: 0/5 k. Bulkhead: 10 ft. Side street: O ft. Front: Oft. Rear': 0/5/10 ft. CM 0.5 0.5 Max FAR 26 ft. 31 ft. N/A Side int":0/5 ft. Bulkhead: 10 ft. Side street: 0 ft. Single Use: Com. 0.5 Common: 75 Max FAR Front: 0 ft. sq.ft./ it U4 Rear': 0/5/5 ft. MU -MM Mixed Use: Com. 26 ft. / 31 ft. Side int': 0/5 k. Private: 59'o Bulkhead: 10 ft. 0.25-0.5 FAR / Res. Side street: Oft. GFA/du' 1.0 Max FAR Single Use: Com. 0.5 Common: 75 Max FAR sq.ft./du" Front: O ft. Rear: 0/0/0 ft MU -W1 Mixed Use: Com. 26 ft. / 31 ft. Private: 5% Side int': 0/5 ft. Bulkhead: 10 ft. 0.35-0.5 FAR / Res. GFA/du' Side street: 0 ft. 0.5 Max FAR Cumulative Develop- Front: 50 ft. Rear: 10 ft. PC -45 26 ft. / 31 ft. ment: 0.88 FAR Side': 150 ft. Bulkhead: 10 ft. PF N/A N/A N/A N/A 1. Flat roof, pitched roof 2. Abutting residential, abutting non-residential 3. Abutting an alley, not abutting an alley, abutting residential 4. Minimum dimensions of 15 ft. x 15 ft. 5. Minimum dimensions of 6 ft. x 6 ft. 6. Along the Bayshores property Chapter 2. Land Use and Urban Form FIGURE 2.6 ZONING DISTRICTS LEGEND - Commercial General - Commercial Visitor -serving - Commercial Recreational and Marine Mixed -Use Mariners' Mile _ Mixed -Use Water Related Balboa Bay Planned Community (45) Public Facilities (PF) __ 1111 ►1 111 1 � / IIgMI� Yd Fol7MNB(@�I! Ill dll�••'•, I' scu— cry ar Newvart 31, z . Figure 2.7 Residential Uses Permitted Meed -Use Vertical MU -MM -Mariner's Mile MU -W3- Mixed Use Water Related Coast Highway 100ft Buller — Coast Hwy North Cut O Mariners Mlle Project Boundary City M Newport Beach Mariner's Mile Citywide Standards and Regulations In addition to the establishment of zoning districts and development standards and regulations, the Zoning Code provides regulations that are applicable to land citywide and differentiate by use, rather than zoning district. • LANDSCAPING. Landscaping standards in Chapter 20.36 of the Zoning Code are applicable to all new multiunit residential and nonresidential projects and to alterations or expansions of existing multiunit residential and nonresidential projects to the greatest extent feasible. The landscaping standards provide safety, maintenance, and water use/ irrigation requirements in all zoning districts. Additionally, Chapter 20.36 requires that all setbacks, open areas, and easements be landscaped, except where they are retained and maintained in their natural state. Finally, the landscaping standards provide regulations related to plant material, generally requiring the use of noninvasive, drought -tolerant trees, shrubs, and groundcovers. • SIGNAGE. Signage standards are provided in Chapter 20.42 of the Zoning Code, which generally regulates the types of signs allowed, maximum number of signs and sign area per building, maximum height, location requirements, and lighting requirements by zone district. Additionally, the chapter provides development standards specific to the various signs, including awning signs, changeable copy signs, freestanding signs, ground signs, and wall signs. • TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR). TDR standards are provided in Chapter 20.46 of the Zoning Code. The standards allow for the transfer of development rights in all zoning districts from a "donor" property to one or more "receiving" properties in the same statistical area, as identified in the Land Use Element. When the transfer involves residential units, the transfer must be on a unit -for -unit basis. Approval of a TDR request requires completion of a traffic analysis by the City Traffic Engineer and a land use intensity analysis by the Director of Community Development. When considering approval of a TDR application, the City Council considers findings related to potential community benefits, traffic and development impacts, neighborhood compatibility, and site planning and urban design. Following the transfer of development, the maximum gross floor area allowed on a donor site must be reduced by the amount of the transfer of development to the receiver site. HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS. The Nonresidential Shoreline Height Limit Area allows the base height limit for nonresidential and mixed-use structures with a flat roof to increase from 26 to 35 feet and nonresidential and mixed-use structures with a sloped roof to increase from 31 to 35 feet. The shoreline height limit applies to all nonresidential zoning districts and mixed- use zoning districts within the boundaries of the Nonresidential Shoreline Height Limit Area. The Mariners' Mile corridor lies entirely within the Nonresidential Shoreline Height Limit Area. OFF-STREET PARKING: Off-street parking standards are provided in Chapter 20.40, Off - Street Parking, of the Zoning Code. A detailed analysis of Chapter 20.40 is provided in section 3, Parking. Chapter2. Land Use and Urban Form 20 21 Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan Planned and Entitled Development Projects There are currently three development projects going through the entitlement process in the Mariners' Mile corridor: a S.1— Cllr If If, rf,,, CSScIi.2." FIGURE 2.8 PLANNED AND ENTITLED PROJECTS n 191 Riverside Avenue. This project, which Includes facade and site improvements to the existing retail shopping center, requires a general plan amendment, rezoning to MU - MM, and local coastal plan amendment for a future development project. 2500 Coast Highway. The project consists of a minor use permit to establish a preschool.(Approved) EXISTING CONDITIONS LAND USE The Mariners' Mile corridor consists of a variety of marine -related and auto -oriented commercial and retail uses, as well as neighborhood -serving commercial, office, and limited residential uses. As displayed in Figure 2.9, Existing Land Use Diagram, inland properties on the east side of the corridor include various eating and drinking establishments, multitenant commercial businesses, and auto sales and service establishments that occupy the shallow and narrow lots fronting Coast Highway, characteristic of this portion of Mariners' Mile. Auto sales and service facilities are dispersed throughout the inland side of Coast Highway and include a large auto sales business on the west end of the corridor and multiple auto sales businesses between Tustin Avenue and Dover Drive. Inland properties along the west side of the corridor also consist of a mix of multitenant commercial, office, and general retail uses— including salons, restaurants, apparel, and other specialty shops. A cluster of neighborhood -serving multitenant commercial and office uses is on the north side of Avon Street between Riverside Avenue and Tustin Avenue, with businesses such as a coffee shop, hardware store, veterinary clinic, and personal service businesses, among others. In addition to the range of commercial and retail uses, a hotel and large boat sales yard occupy prominent positions in the central area of the inland side of Mariners' Mile. Bay -side properties are developed with an assortment of marine sales and service uses, including boat sales and storage, sailing schools, and marinas as well as eating and drinking establishments, general retail, and multitenant commercial uses. The majority of these uses are visitor -serving and/or destination uses whose location on the bay attract customers from across Orange County and travelers passing through the area on Coast Highway. A large site on the eastern end of the project area is developed as the Balboa Bay Club and Resort, which includes a hotel, private club, and residential uses on City tidelands. Residential uses currently consist of the Balboa Bay Club (145 total units) and the Newport Towers (36 total units) on the west end of Mariners' Mile. As displayed in Figure 2.10 the land use with the greatest share of total area, multi -tenant commercial, occupies less than a quarter (23 percent) of the total land area. Hotel/lodging uses and Marine sales/services are prominent uses in Mariners' Mile, occupying 15 percent and 14 percent of the total land area, respectively. Eating/ drinking (11 percent) and Auto sales/services (10 percent) are also prominent in the corridor, and residential (8 percent), office (7 percent), general retail (6 percent), and parking areas (5 percent) occupy smaller portions of Mariners' Mile. The remaining land uses include utilities and vacant land, each accounting for approximately 1 percent of the land area. Chapter 2. Land Use and Urban Form 22 23 Mariners' We Revitalization Master Plan t sy— City m Newport Beach, Hols FIGURE 2.9 EXISTING LAND USE DIAGRAM Existing Land Use Residential Eating/Oelni ng 111= General Retail MuILLTenanat Commercial Auto Sales/Service Hotel/Lodging Marine Sales/Smvice Office ParWng Utllitles B Vacant O Mariners Mile Project Bountlary, --- Central Zone Bountlary, Citynf Newport Beach Mariner's Mile FIGURE 2.10 EXISTING LAND USES LEGEND - Auto Sales/Service Eating/Drinking - General Retail - Hotel/Lodging - Marine Sales/Service - Multi -Tenant Commercial - Office Parking Residential - Utilities - Vacant URBAN FORM The unique physical geography and topography of Mariners' Mile is a key factor in shaping the physical form, type, and location of development in the corridor. The area's location between the bay to the south and the bluffs to the north creates a finite amount of flat land suitable for development. Variations in the distance between the bay and bluffs has resulted in extremely shallow lots in some portions of the corridor, particularly the eastern half of the inland side, as well as deeper lots in the center portion of the corridor. The base maximum building heights of 26 ft./31 ft. and maximum of 35 ft. in the Local Coastal Program have helped preserve view from the top of the bluff, which has a grade differential of approximately 50 ft. from top to bottom. The following provides an analysis of key components of the urban form in the Mariners' Mile corridor today. Chapter 2. Land Use and Urban Form 24 25 Mariners' We Revitalization Master Plan Existing Building Location As displayed in Figure 2.11, buildings are generally interspersed throughout Mariners' Mile without a consistent building orientation or placement on parcels. Parking lots and garden walls occupy more than 70 percent of the street frontage in the Mariners' Mile corridor, resulting in a fragmented street frontage and public realm. Buildings along the north side of Coast Highway, particularly toward the west end of the project area, tend to be oriented to the street, creating a more consistent street frontage. Buildings on the bay side of Coast Highway are generally oriented and positioned closer to the water, often separated from Coast Highway by surface parking lots. However, a small number of bay -side buildings near the intersection of Tustin Avenue and Coast Highway are oriented toward the street, providing a uniform street front in the center of the corridor. FIGURE 2.11 EXISTING BUILDINGS City of ll w od Buch Mariner's Mile O�m fYaMt6 Chapter 2. Land Use and Urban Form 26 Building Heights Building heights throughout the Mariners' Mile corridor range from one-story commercial buildings to an eight -story residential tower. As displayed in Figure 2.12, the majority of buildings are two to three stories, which allow views to the water from properties on top of the bluffs. The two tallest buildings in the project area are at either end of the corridor—the eight -story residential tower to the west and the six -story Balboa Bay Club to the east. FIGURE 2.12 BUILDING HEIGHTS c IStory ED 2Stories 3Sterfes 4Stories 5Steries 6 Stories 8Stories Cfty of Newport 8eacs Mariner's Mile O �i iowaoie 27 Mariners' We Revitalization Master Plan Existing Viewshed General Plan Figure NR -3 designates the stretch of Coast Highway passing through Mariners' Mile as a Coastal View Road. However, views of the water are opportunistic—through surface parking lots along the bay side, between buildings, or through drive aisles. Viewsheds from Coast Highway are blocked by buildings or street walls, with the most impeding along the perimeter of Balboa Bay Club resort. Views from the bluffs to the bay are generally preserved by the predominantly low building heights throughout the corridor. Figure 2.13 displays viewsheds to the bay from Coast Highway. FIGURE 2.13 VIEWSHED ♦m Major fir• Minor Small wall eftld"Marscli Mariner's Mile Chapter2. Land Use and Urban Form 2$ Building Relationship to Street Buildings that produce a positive relationship to the street—creating an environment that is comfortable for pedestrians—are generally close to the street frontage, include transparent windows, and are occupied by uses such as retail and eating and drinking establishments. Buildings that moderately contribute to street life are typically set back from the street frontage and separated from the street and adjacent sidewalk by surface parking lots, generally providing a less comfortable pedestrian experience. Finally, buildings with large expanses of blank walls built directly adjacent to the sidewalk or set back a large distance from the street do not provide a positive contribution to street life. As displayed in Figure 2.14 the largest concentration of properties providing a positive contribution to the street are on either side of Coast Highway in the general vicinity of Riverside Avenue and Tustin Avenue. Properties providing a moderate contribution to the street are dispersed throughout the plan area. Finally, as indicated in Figure 2.14, the large wall traveling the length of the Balboa Bay property creates a negative impact on the street environment, particularly for pedestrians and bicyclists FIGURE 2.14 BUILDING RELATIONSHIP TO STREET _J Positive Fair Negative City of Nequat Beach Mariner's Mile O_. ,n.mne 29 Mariners' Mlle Revitalization Master Plan Streetscape Mariners' Mile is bounded by both natural and manmade edges, including Newport Boulevard to the west, Dover Drive to the east, the bluffs to the north, and the bay to the south. Gateway entrances at Newport Boulevard and Dover Drive provide access through the project area, and minor gateways at Riverside Avenue and Tustin Avenue provide local access in and out of the Avon strip commercial center on the inland side. Activity nodes are dispersed throughout the corridor and include the Balboa Bay Club, the Newport Sea Base, the Holiday Inn Express Newport Beach, the Avon commercial center, and other commercial and retail uses along the inland edge, where residents and visitors live, shop, eat, and congregate. The existing streetscape presents many challenges for pedestrians and bicyclists traveling through and across the area. Sidewalks throughout the project area vary in width, but the majority are less than eight feet wide. Frequent curb cuts along the sidewalks provide access for vehicles, but create an undulating and unsafe walking experience for pedestrians, especially where sidewalks are narrow. Additionally, street lights placed within the sidewalk create physical conflicts for pedestrians and are especially harmful for those with disabilities and families with strollers. Additionally, there is no signage or formal pathway that indicates or provides public access to the boardwalk, and pedestrians must pass through numerous surface parking lots to access the boardwalk. Finally, the limited number of north - south pedestrian crossings and the long distances between them make it difficult for pedestrians to safely access uses along both sides of Coast Highway. This condition is exacerbated by the fact that off-street parking for many bayside businesses is on inland properties, requiring patrons to cross Coast Highway. Parking, including surface parking lots and auto/ yacht sales yards, dominate the land area of parcels fronting Coast Highway, which creates an inactive ground level and limited visual appeal. Although the surface parking lots fronting Coast Highway help preserve view corridors to the bay, the lack of active commercial uses has a negative impact on the visitor experience. FIGURE 2.15 EXISTING STREETSCAPE CONDITIONS (PROJECT SITE) PmfBct B,undary ---- Coastal Zone eased., Parcela Waley pcD Gateway 00 A OCTA Bus Stop Activity Nate VeNlWar Circulation W PCH C.aing Building footprint Shearing land Use Residential Eating/Drinking General Retail Multi- Tenant Co..,,I.l Auto 5a1ea/Service Hotel/ladling � Marine Sales/Service ONlce parking utlllues o V,aant I,A B- C U City of Newport Beacti Mariners' Mile O' Nawpen Bny FIGURE 2.16 EXISTING STREETSCAPE CONDITIONS (FOCUS AREA A) assmaww Project Boundary •••••• Coastal Zone Boundary O Parcels O Building Footprint Cliff Side Slreel Tree o-� Street Light At BCTA Bus Slop Curb Cul H Vehicular Access 00000 Dd,.y/Allay ■ ■ ■ Pedestrian Pathway Circulation Boardwalk Crasswalk Standard Crosswalk 1111 Ladder Crosswalk Sidewalk Whdlh � Lessthan8reet � Btamteel 11 to d2fact - s�More than 12 feel M'' 04 10" City of Nawport Beach Mariners' Mile O as yn ---- ^Avon VUla a Av nVil rage AIA {F' l l — _ _Avcn Street ■ ss r— — — tilis - ■ � M = 5■ I' S y}T I� _ WL k1 r m re Arye. h�� Mariners'Mlle Bque4 •■ �r 1l��1 Pamfm Coast Highway L It, `=■' B'iilvs at a, the Bea h F - 1 Rusty - � , Joe's Crab Pelican Shack71 L ' r1 T p FIGURE 2.17 EXISTING STREETSCAPE CONDITIONS (FOCUS AREA B) ■■ms, Project Boundary •••••• Coastal Zone Boundary I—� Parents C� Building Footprint AN Cliff Srde Slreel Tree o—� Street Light OCTA Bus Slop Curb Cul H Vehicular Access 00000 Brireway/Alley ■ ■ ■ Pedestrian Pathway Circulatron Boardwalk Crosswalk Standard Cmsswalk 0800. Ladder Crosswalk sidewalkwLmh Lessihan8feet 8 t 10 feet 11 to 12 feel More than 12 feel War ip HC�pGrt iM1xdlR b I �r� � se _ e Aw .�r- illdaY . E. ..�. . h�y'I y 'r 6 • >0I Baja O 1 Beach p Cate 4 S, O aa �u, {r - Aroarees • � •yv silluo F A 10 FIGURE 2.18 EXISTING STREETSCAPE CONDITIONS (FOCUS AREA C) aamm• Project Boundary •••••• Coastal Zone Boundary Parcel. o Building Footprint vw CliffShol. Slract Tree o—Q Streetlight BCTABus Slop Curb Cul (� Vehicular Access 30000 Bdreway/Alley ■ ■ ■ Pedestrian Pathway Circulation Boartlwalk CrosewalN Standard Crosswalk 7MD0. Ladder Crosswalk Sidewalk Widlb � Lessthan8feet F 8 t 10 feel Ll to 12 feel More than 12 feet WA ON �- " %� City of Newport Beach Mariners' Mile O e � s r I as '' ✓ 9�Y.. QSIB —p ��'u cNr4hwaY �' S r rote ,Collegiate Sailing Rowing Base FIGURE 2.19 EXISTING STREETSCAPE CONDITIONS (FOCUS AREA D) assassass, Foulest Boundary ••• Coastal Zone Boundary Parteis D Building Footprint CIII Siroet Ree Street Light AL OCTA Bus Slop Curb Cut H Vehicular Access 00000 Brireway/Alley ■ ■ ■ Pedestrian Pathway Circulation Boartlwalk Crosswalk Standard Crosswalk OGEO Ladder Crosswalk Sidewalk Wrdth Lessthan Bfeet 8 t 10 feel 11 to 12 feet More than 12 feet �rru'r"+�LrjilrrC�\Yi�:''r, - vsy�,1.,i�i7 ., D City of Newport Beach T Mariners' Mile O° 35 Mariners' Mile Corridor Fevlta llratlon Master Plan `viii 7 w "rte y o � H105 b: r w 1`+ PARKING 37 Mariners' Mlle Revitalization Master Plan PARKING PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATIONS GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT Overview The General Plan and Zoning Code are the primary documents that guide and regulate the provision and distribution of off-street parking. The General Plan provides parking policies and implementation programs intended to ensure there is an adequate supply of parking throughout the City. Policies Parking Policies and Implementation Programs specifically related to Mariners' Mile include the following: • CE 7.1.5 Avon Street Municipal Parking Lot Relocation. Consider relocation of the Avon Street. municipal lotto better serve commercial uses in Mariners' Mile. • Implementation Program 16.10, Improve Parking Supply and Management. Consider parking management programs for commercial and residential areas of the City with inadequate onsite parking, Consider the development of public parking lots or structures and permit street parking, valet programs, and similar techniques as feasible. Existing public parking lots should be evaluated fortheir accessibility, utilization, and proximity to the uses they support. Possible relocation should be considered where they do not effectively support surrounding land uses. > Funding for public parking facilities may be derived from the establishment of parking districts, supported by local businesses and organizations, including business improvement districts. > Work with commercial, office, and institutional property owners to encourage the use of parking areas on weekends and holidays in conjuncnon with transit services. • LU 6.19.5 Parking. Require adequate parking and other supporting facilities for charters, yacht sales, visitor -serving uses, and other waterfront uses for the Mariners' Mile area. • LU 6.19.14 Parking Lot Relocation. Consider options for the relocation of the City parking lot on Avon Street to better support the corridor's retail uses in the Mariners' Mile area. • LU 6.19.16 Parking and Supporting Facilities for Waterfront Uses. Explore additional options for the development and location of parking and other supporting facilities for charters, yacht sales, and other waterfront uses. ZONING CODE (CHAPTER 20.40) Overview Off-street parking standards are provided in Chapter 20.40, Off -Street Parking, of the zoning code. The chapter requires that each use, including any expansion or change of use, provide appropriately maintained off-street parking and loading areas in compliance with Table 3-10, Off - Street Parking Standards, of the chapter. Table 3-30 provides use -specific, minimum off-street parking standards, generally expressed as a ratio of the number of spaces required per square feet of gross floor area. Table 3.A includes the parking requirements of a representative sample of key existing and permitted land uses in the Mariners' Mile area. Chapter 3. Parking Standards and Regulations In addition to the off-street parking requirements of Table 3-10, Chapter 20.40 includes the fallowing standards and regulations. • 20.40.070, Development Standards for Parking Areas. Design standards for parking lots and parking spaces, including minimum setbacks and parking space size. • 20.40.100, Off -Site Parking. A conditional use permit (CUP) is required for a parking facility not on the same site it is intended to serve. The parking facility would have to be within a convenient distance and would not create undue traffic hazards or impacts in the area. A long-term parking agreement would be required. • 20.40.110, Adjustments of Off -Street Parking. A reduction of the parking requirement may be granted given certain conditions. This section also provides standards and procedures forjoint use of parking facilities and for the development of a parking management plan. • 20.40.120, Parking Management Districts. Properties in a parking management district established through the parking management overlay district may be exempted from the off-street parking requirements in Table 3-10. • 20.40.125, Commercial In -Lieu Parking Fees. Commercial businesses may pay an annual fee in lieu of providing off-street parking pursuant to requirements in Title 20 of the City's municipal code. • 12.44, Stopping, Standing and Parking Restrictions. This section of the municipal code establishes parking meter zones and fees, time restrictions, in -lieu parking fees, and parking prohibitions. 0.1 39 Mariners' Mlle Revitalization Master Plan TABLE 3.A PARKING REQUIREMENTS BY LAND USE LAND USE ZONINGDISTRICTS PARKING SPACES REQUIRED Retail Sales CG, MU -MM, MU -W1 1 per 250 sq. ft. Visitor -Serving Retail CV, MU -W1 1 per 250 sq. ft. Marine Retail Sales CG, CV, MU -MM, MU -W1 1 per 250 sq. ft. Vehicle/Equipment Rentals CG, MU -MM 1 per 1,000 sq. ft. of lot area and Sales 1 per 1,000 sq. ft. of lot area, plus 1 per Boat Rentals and Sales CG, CV, MU -MM, MU -W1 350 sq. ft. of office area Offices—Medical and CG, CV, MU-W1(above Dental Offices 1st fir only), MU -MM 1 per 200 sq. ft. Financial Institutions and CG, CV, MU -MM, MU -W1 1 per 250 sq. ft. Related Services Bars, Lounges, and Night- 1 per each 4 persons based on allowed occu- clubs CG, CV panty load or as required by CUP 1 per 30-50 sq. ft. of net public area, includ- Food Service with/without ing outdoor dining areas exceeding 25% of alcohol, with/without late CG, CV, MU -MM the interior net public area or 1,000 sq. ft., hours whichever is less.25%of the interior net pub- lic area or 1,000 sq. ft., whichever is less. Food Service—Fast food CG, CV, MU -MM, MU -W1 1 per 50 sq ft. and 1 per 100 sq. ft. for out- door dining areas Hotels and Accessory Uses CG, CV, MU -MM, MU -W1 As required by CUP Marinas N/A 0.75 per slip or 0.75 per 25 feet of mooring space Multiunit Dwelling, 4+ 2 per unit covered plus units (above 1st floor) MU-MMMU-W1 0.5 guest parking spaces per unit Source: Zoning Code Chapter 20.40, Table 3-10 EXISTING CONDITIONS According to the 2008 Mariner's Mile Parking Study, a total of 2,981 parking spaces are in the project area, of which 514 (17 percent of the total) are on street. Curbside parking is provided along most portions of Coast Highway and along public streets in Mariners' Mile, including Tustin Avenue, Avon Street, Ocean View Avenue, Cliff Drive, Old Newport Boulevard, and Santa Ana Avenue. Just east of Tustin Avenue, parking spaces along Coast Highway are generally free and with no time limits. Coin-operated parking meters are on Coast Highway just west of Tustin Avenue up to Newport Boulevard and along a short segment of Tustin Avenue. Avon Street has parking time restrictions, as does a portion of Tustin Avenue just south of Avon Street. Two public off-street parking lots are on Avon Street east of Tustin Avenue, with a total of 125 metered parking spaces. In addition, several private lots with public parking access are in the study area, with access driveways from Coast Highway and local roads. The City has several parking permit programs to accommodate the needs of residents, businesses, and visitors. The most popular are the Annual Permit, which allows parking at selected meters and public parking lots without further payment, and the Master Parking Permit, which allows parking at almost any public parking location in the City without further payment. Based on various site visits and the 2008 Parking Study, parking is generally underutilized in the Mariners' Mile area. The highest occupancy in the study area was observed on a weekday, with weekends never surpassing 43 percent occupancy. Although the overall occupancy in the entire Mariners' Mile area is below 50 percent, certain areas were observed to have much higher occupancy, and some areas approach full occupancy. The highest parking demand is generally at on -street spaces along Coast Highway from Old Newport Boulevard to approximately''/: mile to the east, and on the segment of Avon Street between Tustin Avenue and Riverside Avenue. High parking demand in these areas is driven by patrons of restaurants that are mostly on the bay side of Coast Highway and commercial businesses in the core shopping area between Tustin Avenue and Riverside Avenue. The 2008 Parking Study also concluded that a significant number of vehicles stayed in a space for most of the day, suggesting that employees were using many of the desirable andconvenient public on -street parking spaces. In comparison, at peripheral commercial areas such as the western half of Coast Highway and Santa Ana Avenue, Avon Lot 2, parking remains underutilized since it is not conveniently located for those visiting Mariners' Mile, especially for restaurant patrons on the bay side of Coast Highway. The disparity in parking availability in the area can also be attributed to the presence or lack of parking meters and restrictions on certain blocks. Users park more frequently along areas without time or cost restrictions, including Avon Street and on Coast Highway just east of the segment with parking meters. Existing surface lots and meters are displayed in Figure 3.1. Chapter 3. Parking Source, Cut, of Newport ..r,l 2016 Existing Surface Lots & Meters City Owned Public Parking Metered Parking = Mariners Mile Project Boundary c" of Newport Beath Mariner's Mile r r AW �1 43 Mariners' We Revitalization Master Plan f .�di : '�ti�tl C 45 Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan MOBILITY AND CIRCULATION PLANS, POLICIES, AND REGULATIONS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT Overview The Circulation Element presents a series of mostly high-level policies to guide multimodal mobility planning in the City. An overarching goal of the Circulation Element is to maintain the character of the community by focusing on planning roadways for the "shoulder season" rather than the heavily utilized summer season, thereby avoiding oversized roads and excess capacity. In terms of active transportation, the Circulation Element incorporates goals, policies, and implementation programs related to the enhancement of areas with higher pedestrian activity, such as Mariners' Mile. The element also addresses an objective for quality bicycle facilities and a cohesive bicycle network. The Circulation Element includes network maps for the proposedroadway network (Master Plan of Streets and Highways) and the proposed bicycle network (Master Plan of Bikeways). The Bicycle Master Plan was updated in August of 2014. Policies Key policies in Circulation Element specifically target or mention Mariners' Mile: • CE 2.1.2 - Street and Highway Network. Construct the circulation system described on the map entitled Newport Beach Circulation Element - Master Plan of Streets and Highways. Provide a walkway connecting the Lido Village area with Mariners' Mile • CE2.2.4- Driveway and Access Limitations. ' Provide a continuous walkway along the Limit driveway and local street access on Mariners' Mile waterfront from the West arterial streets to maintain a desired quality of Coast Highway/Newport Boulevard Bridge to traffic flow. Wherever possible, consolidate the Balboa Bay Club. driveways and implement access controls during redevelopment of adjacent parcels. CE 2.3.1- Coast Highway Ownership. Pursue ownership of Coast Highway throughout Newport Beach, as opportunities arise, so that Coast Highway can be improved to its ultimate width in Mariners' Mile consistent with the City's vision and to provide the City with more opportunities to increase operational efficiencies. CE 3.1.3 - Regional Consistency. The City of Newport Beach Master Plan of Streets and Highways (shown on figure CE1) shall be consistent with the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways. (Imp 16.5), CE 5.1.12 - Pedestrian Street Crossings. Implement improved pedestrian crossings in key high volume areas such as Corona del Mar, Mariners' Mile, West Newport, Airport Area, Newport Center/Fashion Island, and the Balboa Peninsula. • CE 5.1.14 - Newport Harbor Trails and Walkways. Develop and implement a long- range plan for public trails and walkways to access all appropriate commercial areas of the harbor, as determined to be physically and economically feasible, including the following: Ch apter 4. Mobility and Circulation 46 BICYCLE MASTER PLAN (2014) Strategies Overview In addition to the policy framework, the Bike Plan makes specific recommendations for adding new bicycle facilities and enhancing existing facilities. The Bicycle Master Plan (Bike Plan) best reflects the • 1.4 -mile Class It lanes on West Coast Highway between Newport Boulevard and Dover Drive. City's current objectives and approaches to active transportation planning. The plan presents a broad . 0.2 -mile Class III route on Santa Ana Avenue between Old Newport Boulevard and Cliff Drive. policy framework as well as targeted strategies for implementing the City's vision of an integrated, • 0.3 -mile Class III route on Avon Street between Riverside Avenue and Avon Street's western terminus, high-quality bicycle network. The plan's policies with a new Class I segment (approximately 180 feet) connecting the western terminus of Avon Street are general in nature, addressing topics such as with Santa Ana Avenue / Old Newport Boulevard. facility design, bicycle parking, bicycle education/ • "Bicycle Boulevards' on Tustin Avenue and Fullerton Avenue, adjacent to the Mariners' Mile study encouragement programs, bike share, etc. area. These provide opportunities for bicycle facilities, signage, and wayfinding in Mariners' Mile that guide people bicycling to these safe, neighborhood -friendly routes (which are also routes to schools). The Bike Plan also recommends "spot improvements" to enhance particular areas for pedestrian and bicycle mobility; these provide general guidance rather than address specifics such as roadway configuration or street geometries. Recommendations for the Mariners' Mile area are: • Coast Highway/ Riverside Avenue intersection. Improve signage, markings, and wayfinding (working with Caltrans). • Coast Highway between Newport Boulevard and Riverside Drive. Improve signage, markings, and wayfinding to guide cyclists using sidewalks designated for bicycling; review sidewalks to remove and relocate utilities and posts. • Dover Drive/ West Coast Highway intersection. Improve signage, markings and wayfinding. 47 Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan r CORRIDOR STUDY FOR PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY (ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY AND CALTRANS, 2016) Overview The Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) Countywide Corridor Study identifies mobility needs and potential improvement strategies for PCH in Orange County's six coastal cities, with the primary objective of enhancing safety and efficiency for all modes. The study recognizes the need for multiagency, cooperation, especially between local jurisdictions and Caltrans. Mariners' Mile is in Subarea 3, which spans Newport Beach from the Santa Ana Riverto Pelican Point Drive. The study's seven -step process included identifying potential improvement options; developing possible alternatives; and evaluating the alternatives in terms of benefits, costs, and feasibility, which are to be covered in later analysis. The corridor study recognizes the following existing key issues/needs relevant or specific to the Mariners' Mile area: • Heavy traffic volumes, high pedestrian crossing activity, constrained capacity, bicycle activity, and on -street parking friction delaying travelers along Coast Highway, limiting mobility through the Mariners' Mile area, and creating conflicts between cars and other transportation modes. • General delays throughout the entire Mariners' Mile corridor. • Bicyclists using Coast Highway face potential conflicts when traveling between parked cars and moving vehicles (SR -55 to Dover Drive). • The constrained right-of-way through most of the corridor limits improvement opportunities. MISTING CONDITIONS In general, Coast Highway prioritizes vehicles over people walking, bicycling, and riding transit. It generally has narrow sidewalks that put pedestrians in close proximity to the roadway, although pedestrians are often buffered from vehicular traffic by curbside parking lanes. Due to the proximity of physical development to the street, there are limited opportunities to expand the right-of-way to accommodate multimodal opportunities. Any enhancements will take place within the existing rights-of-way and future dedications. COAST HIGHWAY CONFIGURATION The eastern section of Coast Highway has a slightly narrower existing right-of-way, accommodating two vehicle travel lanes westbound and two eastbound, a center turn lane, and sections of curbside parking on both sides. The western half has three westbound vehicle travel lanes, two eastbound vehicle travel lanes, a center turn lane, and sections of curbside parking on both sides. BICYCLING AND WALKING ON COAST HIGHWAY Coast Highway is a popular route for local residents, tourists, and long-distance recreational cyclists; however, there are no designated bicycle facilities or roadway markings along Coast Highway between Newport Boulevard and Dover Drive. The lack of designated facilities poses challenges to both motorists and bicyclists as they maneuver the shared roadway space. Westbound bicyclists ride between vehicle traffic and parked vehicles, interspersed with sections where the absence of street parking provides a wider (but still undesignated) bicycle travel area. On the eastbound side, solid striping separates the vehicle travel lane from the curbside parking lane, providing quasi -markings to separate bicyclists from vehicle traffic but no inner striping to provide a designated bicycle lane. There are even sections near Newport Boulevard where riding on the sidewalk is allowed—even preferred—due to vehicle travel lanes that abut the curb. The Coast Highway pedestrian environment is characterized by narrow sidewalks that put pedestrians in close proximity to the roadway, although pedestrians are often buffered from vehicular traffic by curbside parking lanes. There are two long stretches without pedestrian crossings, although there is generally not a lot of demand for crossing Coast Highway along these stretches—an approximately 0.6 -mile stretch between Tustin Avenue and Balboa Bay Club, and an approximately 0.4 -mile stretch between the Balboa Bay Club and Dover Drive. In addition to the narrow sidewalks, obstacles such as light poles and parking signs are often located in the sidewalk.. Finally, Coast Highway lacks pedestrian amenities, such as shade trees and street furniture. BICYCLING AND WALKING ON RIVERSIDE AVENUE, AVON STREET, AND TUSTIN AVENUE Class II bicycle lanes on Riverside Drive provide a valuable connection to residential neighborhoods, Ensign Intermediate School, and Newport Harbor High School, via Cliff Drive and Irvine Avenue bicycle lanes. The lanes lack "best practice" enhancements such as painted buffers, markings through driveway crossings and intersections, or green paint. Riverside Avenue, Avon Street, and Tustin Avenue are generally more pedestrian in scale, with narrower widths (34 feet for Avon Street and Tustin Avenue, 56 feet for Riverside Avenue). Vehicle traffic volumes and speeds on Avon Street and Tustin Avenue are low. Traffic speeds and volumes are higher on Riverside Avenue, which has four lanes from Coast Highway to a short distance north of Avon Street, where it is reduced to two lanes. These conditions contribute to a positive pedestrian environment on Tustin Avenue, Avon Street, and Riverside Avenue and offer an opportunity to improve pedestrian connections between the bluff neighborhoods to the north and the commercial areas of Mariners' Mile. Ch apter 4. Mobility and Circulation 48 �Ny .� G I7 W4 rl m l � 1 Just Dogs �D PC u11WRA I t CO $1 Mariners' Mlle Revitalization Master Plan OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES The opportunities and challenges to the revitalization of Mariners' Mile were identified basedon the existing conditions in the corridor today. LAND USE AND URBAN DESIGN Opportunities • There are a number of underutilized parcels with surface parking lots along the corridor that have infill and redevelopment potential. • The corridor is between two attractive natural environments—the bay to the south and the bluffs to the north. The adjacent residential neighborhood provides an important base of customers to support neighborhood -serving retail and services. Vehicle traffic on Coast Highway provides an important base of customers to support visitor - serving retail and services. • Location on the bay is conducive to preservation and enhancement of marine - related uses. General Plan land use designations and zoning code use standards and regulations allow for development that is aesthetically and functionally compatible with existing development. Challenges • Coordination among multiple property owners in the area. • A fragmented mix of retail, restaurant, and office uses that do not provide a unified theme or character for the area. High land and property values inhibit desired marine -related and marine -dependent uses such as boat building and services. • Highway -oriented commercial nature inherently prioritizes cars over people. • Buildings are generally interspersed throughout Mariners' Mile without a consistent building orientation or placement on parcels. Parking lots and garden walls occupy more than 70 percent of the street frontage, resulting in an inconstant building wall and fragmented street public realm. • Competing interests between various stakeholder and resource groups. Inadequate existing right-of-way for Master Plan of Arterial Highways designated 5 -lane facilitiy. 1.� PARKING violate the time limits and/or do not pay parking meters, occupying the most desirable Opportunities parking spaces that should allow for high turnover. • The City -owned parking lot at Avon Street has a large area that could be used for a parking Inadequate parking on the bay side of Coast structure to improve parking efficiency. Highway requires the use of valuable inland property to provide parking. The high supply of private parking spaces could provide an opportunity to work with property owners to consider time limits in private street lots to work in conjunction with a parking strategy for the area. • Parking in the northern portion of the Mariners' Mile area is convenient. The intersections of Coast Highway at Riverside Avenue and Tustin Avenue are signalized, with marked crosswalks on all approaches and pedestrian signal heads and push buttons. • The current parking conditions may present opportunities for the City to allow additional building and context -appropriate development to take advantage of surplus parking. Challenges Long-term plans for Coast Highway would remove curbside parking. The California Coastal Commission is normally against removal of parking in coastal areas because it considers parking an access issue. The removal of parking along Coast Highway may require the City to replace the lost parking spaces, which may have cost and land use implications. Violation of time limits and payment at parking meters is common because of a lack of enforcement. Visitors and employees often • If parking regulations are modified (time and cost restrictions), parking could spill over into surrounding residential neighborhoods. • The layout and distribution of private parking lots are inefficient and do not serve supporting uses to their highest potential. • A lack of unified parking program and wayfinding signage may inhibit ease and comfort of visitor parking. Chapter 5. Oppo rtunities an d Constraints 52 53 Mariners' Mlle Revitalization Master Plan MOBILITY AND CIRCULATION Opportunities The Tustin Avenue / Avon Street / Ocean View Avenue intersection provides an opportunity to better connect the residential neighborhood with the commercial district. The City has an easement in line with Avon Street behind the Holiday Inn Express, potentially allowing extension of Avon Street eastward. • On the bay side, a currently discontinuous boardwalk or pathway can be made continuous, as required by land use policy, through new dedications as properties are redeveloped. • The low traffic volumes and speeds on Tustin Avenue and Avon Street make walking convenient and attractive, with plenty of opportunities to cross streets and link parking to the uses they serve. • The potential removal of vehicle parking lanes would open up considerable space for Class II bicycle lanes along Coast Highway. Avon Street west of Riverside Avenue (behind Sterling BMW) could be extended as an east - west alternative to Coast Highway for bicyclists and pedestrians and a valuable connection to the retail district. The City would have to work with a couple of property owners to complete the connection west of Santa Ana Avenue's dead end to Old Newport Boulevard. Challenges: • There are few locations for pedestrians to cross Coast Highway, limiting the ability and/or desirability to park and walk to destinations. • The intersection of Coast Highway and Newport Boulevard poses many challenges for pedestrians and bicyclists, and existing infrastructure, especially on the north side, does not address connectivity through the underpass. • Businesses may oppose the removal of on - street parking on Coast Highway (valet parking and customer parking spaces). • The existing rights-of-way on Coast Highway do not accommodate the desired right-of- way widths in the Master Plan of Streets. Any roadway widening would require further dedications. • Sidewalk widening would likely require costly utility relocation. • Lack of local transit limits mobility options for a large segment of the community, including children, some elderly residents, and those without access to a car. • Traffic volumes on Coast Highway, particularly through -traffic, impacts local trips and internal circulation. —i- �r e.s;• Chapter 5. Opportunities and Constraints 54 NONE= � ! _Iw 1' r` y u prepared by PlaceWorks 3 MacArthur Place, Suite 1100 Santa Ana, CA 92707 714.966.9220 Attachment No. PC 2 Draft Framework Map -Figure 10 Attachment No. PC 3 Master Plan Information Flyer Purpose and Intent Draft Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan The purpose of the Master Plan is to identify land use and design strategies to foster revitalization (i.e. imbue new life and vitality including public and private investment) into the Mariners' Mile area. At the core of the Master Plan is the intent to preserve the mix of land uses, intensities, and height of development permitted by the current adopted General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. This process has incorporated public engagement through a series of workshops and evaluation of existing policies and regulations, review of existing standards, and identification of opportunities for incentives, parking management, urban form, visual simulations, pedestrian & bike connections, and street design. What the Plan DOES: • Establish goals for specific areas of Mariners' Mile to direct the design of future public and private property investment in the Mariners' Mile area. The exhibits provide conceptual ideas for the implementation of these goals. • Clarify and define architectural styles for Mariners' Mile. • Prioritize an approach to improve parking management for the area. What the Plan DOES NOT Do: • Take private property for public redevelopment projects. • Add a new requirement to widen Pacific Coast Highway. This is already required per City Council Resolution 8448 (March 1975) and the City's Circulation Element within the current adopted General Plan. A 12 -foot dedication for new and redevelopment projects on the north side of West Coast Highway is also required by Municipal Code Section 13.05.010 (Street Widening and Improvements as a Condition of Building Permitsl for large redevelopment projects that add more than 25,000 square feet of gross floor area or 300 average daily trips. Additionally, Coast Highway is defined as a 6 -lane facility on the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Master Plan of Highways. • Modify density or height limits allowed under the current adopted General Plan. Summary of Draft Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan The draft Master Plan is divided into the following five sections summarized below: 1. Introduction & Background Information: This section provides an overview of the purpose and process of the Master Plan including prior studies, the public workshops leading to the development of the current draft plan, and an overview of the Master Plan document's organization. Draft Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan Prrn Vision and Existing Conditions: This section discusses the vision statement forth e area and provides an overview of opportunities and challenges of the existing Mariners' Mile development pattern. The full detailed Existing Conditions Report is provided as Appendix A to the Master Plan. 3. Mariners' Mile Framework Plan: The bulk of the design framework and concepts for the Master Plan are presented in this section. The plan focuses on future improvement for the following opportunity areas: • Avon Street (east, central, and west), enhanced pedestrian crossings, the public waterfront, the east commercial corridor, and recommended parking management strategies for the area. 4. Design Guidelines: This section provides a detailed list of architectural styles and design guidelines to direct future public and private improvement projects. 5. Implementation: This section outlines priorities and funding strategies for implementation of the various design concepts presented in Sections 3 and 4 of the Master Plan. Draft Plan r The City of Newport Beach has completed the draft Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan, which is available for public review. The Framework Plan addresses four key topic areas, including land use & urban design, mobility & streetscape improvements, the public waterfront, and parking solutions. A hard copy is available for review in the Community Development Department, 100 Civic Center Drive, Bay B- 1, Newport Beach, CA 92660, from 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday through Thursday, and 7:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. on Friday. The draft Master Plan and project updates can be accessed online on the project webpage: http://www.newportbeachca.gov/trending/projects-issues/other-important-issues/mariners-mile-planning- charrette/mariner-s-mile-revitalization-master-plan. Planning Commission Study Session The Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing to consider the Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan on July 20, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. The Planning Commission's recommendation will then proceed for City Council consideration, tentatively scheduled for September 12, 2017. Contact Makana Nova, Associate Planner, City of Newport Beach, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660, phone: 949-644-3249, email: mnova@newportbeachca.gov Attachment No. PC 4 Planning Commission Study Session Minutes of April 20, 2017 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 04/20/2017 VII. CURRENT BUSINESS ITEM NO. 2 DRAFT MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN (PA2016-081) Site Location: Mariners' Mile (West Coast Highway between Dover Drive and Newport Boulevard) Deputy Director Wisneski requested the Planning Commission review the MasterPlan in detail, provide comments or request additional information. The Master Plan would return to the Planning Commission in May for a public hearing and action. In 2011, the City Council identified Mariners' Mile and five other areas of the City as needing revitalization. Staff held three public workshops with a premise of identifying potential barriers to revitalization, incentives for redevelopment, and public improvement realms while maintaining General Plan policies and Zoning Code regulations. Requirements for land use, height, and development intensity would not change. Several studies have determined that land uses and densities are appropriate in the area. The Master Plan is not a regulatory document but an idea document with guidelines for redevelopment and private development and with ideas for public improvements. The Master Plan would not result in any direct projects and would not modify Coast Highway. Associate Planner Makana Nova reported staff had received quite a few public comments regarding widening West Coast Highway. The widening of West Coast Highway is a separate project. The draft Master Plan does not modify density, intensity, or height requirements allowed in the General Plan. The draft Master Plan addresses parking and traffic in depth. Public comments also concern views, view corridors from West Coast Highway and Cliff Drive, maintaining a nautical theme throughout Mariners' Mile, encouraging small restaurants and boutique retail businesses, and keeping the Vision and Design Framework in place. Ms. Nova clarified that the Master Plan is intended to supersede the Vision and Design Framework and set implementing strategies for ideas. Woody Tescher, PlaceWorks, advised that the Master Plan built upon the visions contained in the Vision and Design Framework which provided the foundation for General Plan goals and policies regarding Mariners' Mile. The Master Plan will be an implementation tool for the content of the General Plan. The Master Plan is not contingent upon improvements to West Coast Highway. Mariners' Mile is a series of three distinct places: the village core, the harbor area, and the east commercial corridor. The village core was oriented to pedestrians and contained many underutilized properties. Mr. Tescher outlined proposed changes to the alley and traffic signals in the Riverside Drive/Tustin Avenue/Avon Street areas that could improve traffic, parking, and pedestrian access. In response to Vice Chair Koetting's questions, City Traffic Engineer Brine indicated on -street parking on Avon Street (central) would provide parking immediately adjacent to businesses. Associate Planner Nova clarified that Avon Street currently has metered spaces in this area and the public does utilize them. Mr. Tescher reported the harbor area could be more pedestrian -oriented by integrating public areas into sites where additional building occurred. Buildings could be offset to maintain view corridors of the harbor. The General Plan included the notion of a continuous boardwalk along the harbor frontage, but buildings constructed to the bulkhead would prevent a continuous boardwalk. The Master Plan suggested a number of alternative options to replicate a boardwalk without it being along the waterfront. In the east commercial corridor, automobile dealerships would continue to require a conditional use permit. The Master Plan would also encourage the consolidation of small lots as much as feasible, which would facilitate traffic flow on West Coast Highway by clustering driveways. Consolidation of lots would also create a visual sense of smaller building groups rather than a continuous wall of buildings. Bikeways along the inland properties of the village core would relieve bicycling pressure on Coast Highway, increase safety, and create better pedestrian circulation. Crossing improvements over Coast Highway could include pedestrian bridges, enhanced sidewalks, or scrambles. A technical analysis of parking spaces in the area determined sufficient spaces currently existed for employees and customers but in the wrong places. The Master Plan identified several strategies to manage parking better, such as a universal valet operator, an employee parking permit program, adjustment of time limits and pricing, public access to private lots, and in -lieu parking fees. In reply to Commissioner Weigand's inquiry, Mr. Tescher stated the City could implement a revenue -generating contract for a universal valet operator. In response to Vice Chair Koetting's question, Mr. Tescher advised that the Master Plan contained a strategy for shuttle service that could also serve employees in an employee permit -parking program. PAGE 2of6 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 04/20/2017 Mr. Tescher noted the Master Plan suggested the village core buildings be brought to the street and the core harbor areas be oriented to plazas. Mr. Tescher presented three images demonstrating nautical styles of architecture proposed in the draft Master Plan. The implementation program is geared to achieve the concepts presented in the General Plan, Vision and Design Framework, and the Master Plan. Recommendations are to name a Mariners' Mile advocate on City staff, form a steering committee, create a Business Improvement District, designate the Master Plan as the standard for reviewing development applications, determine a pilot project, identify sites likely to change and catalyze change, and identify funding sources. Vice Chair Koetting noted the Master Plan contained the likelihood of additional residential uses and zoning allowances. Vice Chair Koetting opened the public hearing. James Johnson opposed the proposal for Avon Street East regarding private property dedication because it seemed to mean the City would condemn and take property. He suggested view corridors be wider. Sharon Ray requested the 200 block of Santa Ana Avenue not be forgotten in planning improvements. Parking along that block was available until approximately 4 p.m., when employees filled the spaces. She suggested multistory parking lots have roofs. Gary Sokolich requested the inclusion of safeguards to prevent glare from white or "cool" roofs Craig Kennedy remarked that the report referred to 3121 West Coast Highway as a commercial building when it was residential condominiums. Nancy Skinner did not want the view from Cliff Drive Park to be lost. She recalled residents' opposition to afreeway through Newport Beach. Coralee Newman, Government Solutions, advised that the owners of 2332 West Coast Highway were planning to redevelop the property when the current lease expired. The proposed connection through the property would be a taking of property. She had encouraged the owners to meet with City staff regarding redevelopment of the parcel. In response to questions, she indicated that the owners owned the half -acre adjacent to the City parking lot. Ken Gould commented that owners of 2500 West Coast Highway were opposed to the proposed 12 residential units, because they would block access to 2500 West Coast Highway and surrounding parcels. Slavica Milosavljevic questioned the reality of implementing all the improvements proposed in the Master Plan. She supported multistory parking structures. Jim Mosher noted the possibility of a comprehensive revision of the General Plan and questioned whether the Master Plan should conform to the existing or potentially updated General Plan. He found no mention of the Vision and Design Framework in the Master Plan. The City adopted a specific area plan for Mariners' Mile in 1977 which he did not believe had been repealed. Peggy Palmer did not foresee traffic and bicyclists taking Avon Street (west) unless the bluff was cut into. She noted a high level of traffic from the car dealership and vehicles that park along this section of roadway. Norm Beres expressed concern for the view corridor from the cliff above Avon Street. Making Avon Street a two- lane highway did not conform to a village concept. He suggested the Avon Street (east) extension should only be extended for pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Deputy Director Wisneski reiterated that the Master Plan and images shown were conceptual. The intent was to repeal the Vision and Design Framework. Staff pulled from the Vision and Design Framework the areas most relevant to today's vision. Associate Planner Nova indicated the improvements shown on private property were concepts and the uses shown are allowed under current zoning. PAGE 3 of 6 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 04/20/2017 Commissioner Dunlap remarked that the City could not inhibit existing planning applications from continuing through the process. Deputy Director Wisneski reiterated that the Master Plan did not propose any changes to the General Plan or Zoning Code. Thus, projects currently in the planning process would be consistent with the Master Plan. Public Works Director Webb reported the public perception is that the Master Plan was driving the widening of Coast Highway. The General Plan's Circulation Element was drafted to support land development. Existing congestion would increase as development followed the General Plan. In the late 1960s, the City opposed a freeway through the town, and the freeway was moved north. In 1975, the City adopted a resolution for the Mariners' Mile segment of Coast Highway to be six lanes and to be 12 feet wider on the north side. As part of requirements for Measure M funding, the City's Circulation Element had to conform to the Orange County Master Plan Circulation Element. Over the years, many plans for roadway improvements did not occur which resulted in increased pressure on Mariners' Mile. Traffic counts showed 48,000 cars going through Mariners' Mile between Newport Boulevard and Tustin Avenue and 44,000 cars between Tustin Avenue and Dover Drive. General guidelines for the size of roads indicated a six -lane roadway for 30,000 and 45,000 average daily trips. The General Plan called for Level of Service D for arterials and roadways. Currently, the level of service was E. If the General Plan was developed to its full potential, the level of service would be an F. In 1975, the City Council determined the minimum width for Coast Highway through Mariners' Mile could be 112 feet. As a general rule, traffic signals should be 1,000 feet apart. The signals at Tustin Avenue and Riverside Drive are closer together than 1,000 feet and cause more congestion. With six lanes, the lanes would be narrower, which would slow traffic. The third lane would increase traffic capacity. In 2016, the City Council reviewed the traffic analysis, confirmed the plan for six lanes and a width of 112 feet, and directed the removal of on -street parking and the addition of a Class 2 bike lane. The preferred configuration was an 8 -foot sidewalk on the inland side, a 7 -foot bike lane, three 12 -foot lanes, a 12 -foot center lane, three more lanes, a 7 -foot bike lane, and a 6 -foot sidewalk on the ocean side. This concept for Mariners' Mile would not be a freeway or a superhighway but comparable to Harbor Boulevard through Costa Mesa. In reply to Commissioner Dunlap's questions, Public Works Director Webb advised that Caltrans no longer had jurisdiction in Corona del Mar. The median of Coast Highway through Corona del Mar is likely 14 feet wide with landscaping. City Traffic Engineer Brine added that the traffic lanes are 12-14 feet wide through Corona del Mar. The preferred width for a through -lane is 12 feet with 11 feet being the minimum width. Public Works Director Webb stated the traffic count in Corona del Mar is 51,000 cars a day. The two congestion spots in the City are Mariners' Mile and Corona del Mar. The Council has instructed staff to work on a bypass around Corona del Mar in an attempt to relieve traffic congestion. In response to Commissioner Weigand's inquiries, Public Works Director Webb stated Measure M funds did not expire. The City could apply for those funds but had not yet done so. Once the City obtained the right-of-way, it would likely apply for funds for a spot widening. The City is currently in the process of pursuing a spot widening at West Coast Highway and Old Newport Boulevard. CityTraffic Engineer Brine reported the trafficvolumes on Tustin Avenue were relatively low, primarily serving the residential area. The City plans to add an additional left turn -lane from Coast Highway onto Riverside Drive in the future. Because of the number of driveways, raised landscape medians were not feasible along most of Coast Highway. Landscape medians were an aesthetic consideration. Public Works Director Webb added that the medians did not have to be raised. Patrick Gormley remarked that Mariners' Mile had been an issue before the City and the Commission since 1963. While the City and the State seemed to prefer accommodating traffic, the residents preferred to accommodate pedestrians and cyclists. He suggested that bike lanes be redirected below the bluff. Christopher Cuse suggested removing bike lanes and on -street parking from Coast Highway and requested the actual data for the traffic counts be made public. Jack Mau felt widening Coast Highway would increase traffic speeds and decrease safety. Jill Ayers remarked that no one seemed to consider the three schools, the lack of sidewalks, or the safety of pedestrians in the Heights. PAGE 4 of 6 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES VIII. 04/20/2017 Lynn Lorenz stated the most recent Council discussion regarding the configuration of Pacific Coast Highway was a May 24, 2016 study session. No action was taken. The minutes reflected Council acquiescence to a six -lane configuration with no on -street parking as a planning option for future consideration. The topic had not been placed on an agenda for public input and a formal decision. Yet, City staff seemed to be claiming it was operating under irrevocable direction from the City Council. Jim Mosher concurred with Ms. Lorenz's comments. He was not aware of an approved widening project for West Coast Highway. The General Plan included a plan for acquiring rights-of-way for the possibility of a future widening of the highway. The widening project was many years in the future because the City had obtained only 50 to 60 percent of the needed rights-of-way. He wondered whether the Master Plan should consider a use for the public benefit of the rights-of-way acquired. David Grant felt the traffic counts were not accurate. The City did not have to implement the concepts in the Master Plan. He encouraged the Commission to leave Coast Highway alone. Tom Szulga understood the City was attempting to make Pacific Coast Highway a freeway in an attempt to alleviate traffic on the freeways. He suggested traffic signals remain green for a longer time on Coast Highway. Leslie Kennedy expressed concern regarding the speed of traffic coming from Newport Boulevard and Huntington Beach. She suggested additional traffic signals be installed to increase safety for bicycles and pedestrians. Commissioner Weigand felt the item was not ready for action based on public comments. Further study and community engagement was needed. Perhaps the City should delay the item and consider it as part of the General Plan revision. In response to Vice Chair Koetting's question, Commissioner Weigand felt both the Master Plan and the widening plan were not readyfor action. These items should be considered in the revision of the General Plan. Deputy Director Wisneski clarified that the Master Plan was before the Commission. The configuration of Coast Highway was neither in the Planning Commission's purview nor part of the Master Plan. Public comments had focused on the highway configuration. The Master Plan was not affected by the upcoming General Plan update. Commissioner Weigand viewed the two as coinciding. Commissioner Lawler viewed the two as separate issues. The Master Plan was ready for discussion. He had many questions regarding synchronized signals, adaptive traffic measures, and analysis of each intersection for Coast Highway. He had no specific concerns about the Master Plan. Commissioner Dunlap noted existing planning projects might not be part of the revitalization effort. Coast Highway reconfiguration was a separate issue. Public input had been great. He wanted the Master Plan to continue forward, but the Coast Highway configuration should be a separate discussion with more public input. Vice Chair Koetting agreed that the two issues were separate. The Master Plan needed to be refined. Deputy Director Wisneski requested absent Commissioners review the video of the meeting prior to a discussion on May 18. Staff anticipated a General Plan update would occur later in the year and would include a review of circulation patterns through the City. ITEM NO. 3 MOiI6N.EOR RECONSIDERATION None. Attachment No. PC 5 r_ Menai WIM ME 1. Pagel, Executive Summary ADDENDA AND ERRATA May S, 2017 The following lists proposed revisions to the April 2017 draft of the "Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan" to correct errors, clarify its content and modify recommendations in consideration of additional staff review and public and Planning Commission comments. a. Add the following text at the conclusion of the first paragraph: "Buildings, pedestrian pathways, plazas, and other improvements depicted for private properties on figures and images throughout the Master Plan conceptually illustrate how new development could be located and designed based on application of the Plan's policies and design guidelines. These do not require that future development projects adhere precisely to the illustration. Dedications of private property for public purposes are not prescribed by this Plan, except for a 12 foot dedication on the north side of West Coast Highway currently required by the City's ordinances." b. Revise the second paragraph as follows: "The Master Plan also includes corridor -wide design guidelines that provide guidance for buildings and structures and streetscape enhancements to ensure that future development is consistent with the character and history of the corridor and achieves the quality of design expected far ea by the community. Finally, the Master Plan concludes with and implementation section, grounded in collaboration among the City of Newport Beach, its constituents, and external agencies and organizations that identifies key action items and funding strategies to im cachieve its tyre recommendations and 548t,.gje of the 14@4PF "',R These encompass a mix of actions including direction from the City Council, City department programs, capital budgeting, and private investment. A summary table of action steps, a suggested timeframe, and key partners from the implementation section is provided below "RS^µ SHMMaFy tab4e- " 2. Page 1-1, Purpose and Process a. Revise the first paragraph as follows: "Prior and subsequent to the action, Tthe corridor has been the focus of or considered by a number of studies and planning documents including the following 4 el;ea e:,RP PAA;;. b. Add the following text following the preceding: "Mariners' Mile Strategic Vision & Design Framework (October 4, 2000). This document was developed to 'provide a thoughtful, imaginative, and integrated set of design strategies, goals, and specific ideas to guide and assist the City, landowners, tenants, and involved citizenry in reversing its negative image and improving the future prospects for Mariners' Mile.' Its recommendations built on overarching goals establishing a committee composed of the area's MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN ADDENDA AND ERRATA 11 P a g e stakeholders for encouraging lot and parking consolidation, coordination of site design, upgrading landscaping and fencing, unifying streetscape, upgrading signage standard, developing a public signage program, enhancing pedestrian access to businesses, upgrading entry monuments, reducing curb cuts on West Coast Highway, and provision of public views to the Bayfront. The Strategic Vision differentiated the corridor into three distinct districts: auto -reliant strips on shallow inland parcels east of the hypothetical projection of Irvine Avenue and the westernmost portion near the Newport Boulevard bridge, a 'vibrant' public waterfront along the Harbor, and a pedestrian -oriented core in the vicinity of Tustin Avenue, Riverside Avenue, and Avon Street. Within these areas, it defined potential catalytic development opportunity locations, strategies for parking consolidation and management, and guidelines for landscape, signage, and architectural design." 3. Page 1-4, CNU Report Delete the first bulleted sub -section as follows: lil 1 0101 ill 11 ON 4. Pages 1-5, 2016 Corridor Study Report Revise text in the right column as follows: "The OCTA Study recommended three travel lanes in each direction with Class II bike lanes and the removal of on -street parking in Mariners' Mile." 5. Page 1-6, 2016 Corridor Study Report Revise text in top left column as follows: "...(six total), a center turning lane, and a Class II bike -lane in each direction consistent with the 201£ 2006 General Plan. Public Works.." 6. Page 2-3, Figure 3, Existing Land Use Revise the land use designation for the property located at 3121 West Coast Highway from "Office' to "Residential" to reflect its existing use. 7. Pages 2-6 to 2-7, Mobility Network, Bicycle Network Revise the text as follows: "Coast Highway is a popular route for residents, tourists, and long-distance recreational cyclists. There are no existing on -street striped bicycle lanes designated la eyele °^^""'es ar read fill FnaFIE ngs along West Coast Highway, though there is a designated bike sidewalk on its south side between Newport Boulevard and Pa -P. Riverside Drive... Another condition is eastbound travel between the MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN ADDENDA AND ERRATA 2 1 P a g e Sea Base and Dover Drive where solid striping separates the vehicle travel lane from the curbside parking lane... Class II bicycle lanes on Riverside Drive provide a valuable connection to residential neighborhoods, Ensign Intermediate School, and Newport Harbor High School, via Cliff Drive and Irvine Avenue bicycle lanes. The ..Res Iaek "best ..Faetiee" ....L.......,... eRtS S Gh aS @ .ted 9 4eF5 ......L. R95 thF& '9 8. Page 2-7, Parking Revise the text as follows: "Parking in Mariners' Mile consists of a combination of approximately 2,981 total spaces including on - street, curb -side parking, private surface parking lots, and public surface parking lots... Generally, the free, no time limit parking spaces along West Coast Highway start approximately 400 feet east of Tustin Avenue, ..01.161...,, f.,... and — th RR tiRp ,m;# 9. Page 3-4, Land Use and Urban Design Revise last paragraph as follows: "As displayed in Figure 11 Opportunity Area Districts Map form three unique districts within the Mariners' Mile corridor: Village Core, East -End Commercial District, and Harbor -Frontage Area..." 10. Page 3-5, Figure 11, Opportunity Area Districts Map Revise map re -designating the Mariners' Point project site (west of the West Coast Highway and Dover Street intersection) from "Opportunity' to "Stability." 11. Page 3-6, Village Core (District 4) "The Framework Plan envisions the ground floors of buildings occupied by active commercial uses, such as restaurants or coffee shops, retail stores, and other active uses ... The residential uses ...9 ld pwRarily could consist of attached single-family townhouse residences located along Avon Street (central). The new residential uses, along with residents of adjacent neighborhoods, would provide a customer base for new commercial uses, and introduce a new housing product to the area." 12. Pages 3-10, Avon Street (West) a. Revise first paragraph as follows: "...Extending the roadway to allow for vehicular access would require significant alteration of the slope and a -retaining walls system TL eFefBF and is not recommended. PFE)Pesed However, improved bicycle paths and pedestrian sidewalks within this corridor are recommended. The bicycle path would be routed through ; gpFavement, ..,,.,, de la ey^ ,...,,..ne t,.,,t., between AVen I, lag the ^,dO ,t,, FP;]g RP14h of Avan ctpeet t„ a proposed parking structure at the existing auto dealership and pedestrian bridge that crosses over West Coast Highway connecting Avon Village and residences on the bluffs with the Harbor frontage. pedest^^^ bFidge eFessing West Geast Highway v"^ pFepesed paplkiRg s4up't,,.,, At the al,t,, dee epsh . C;upp nt eend,tieRs The existing right-of-way and proposed improvements to the westerly portion of Avon Street are disrylayed-illustrated in Figures 16 grand 17. To l.:,.yele and .., destF aR ,-....Reet�„it„ WithR the RIaR . Fea the Plan ...,...,.SeS t,. MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN ADDENDA AND ERRATA 3 1 P a g e add biGyGle and pedes# RR f@G1 tie ,.. the a StiR . FOadWay In Tthis section, „f A.,..., c«r,.,.« ,. Iia mea R the existing curb -to -curb width of the roadway would be maintained ander Class III sharrow markings wedld be added OR the travel I@RP9 f9Pgh;;PPd IARkq 40 -fit h'9 GYG1145 and with a pedestrian sidewalk developed on the north side of the street by constructing and relocating the existing retaining wall." b. Revise last sentence of second paragraph as follows: "Existing conditions and the proposed improvements to the terminus of the paving on west end of Avon Street are displayed in Figures 18 and 19." 13. Page 3-10, Aerial Photograph and Figures 16 and 17 a. Add a caption to the aerial map at the top of the page to indicate that the circled numbers refer to the figure numbers on this page and the following page and correct the aerial to indicate that Figure 19 is located further to the west. b. Revise Figures 16 and 17 to clarify that the public right-of-way does not extend into the private property line of the existing 3 -story structure depicted on the graphic. 14. Page 3-11, Figures 18 and 19 Revise to clarify that Figure 18 depicts the current termination of the paved roadway and Figure 19 depicts possible improvements to the west of this location. 15. Page 3-13, Avon Street (Central) Add a caption to the aerial map at the top of the page indicating that the circled numbers refer to the figures on Page 3-13. 16. Page 3-14, Figures 21 and 22 Revise figures deleting the building heights. 17. Pages 3-15, Avon Street (East) a. Delete the aerial map at the top of the page to reflect deletion of Figures 23 and 24. b. Revise the text as follows: "Avon Street... The City is considering modifying the alleyway within the existing right-of-way so that it becomes an extension of Avon Street to the east with Avon ultimately connecting to West Coast Highway at a new signalized intersection ...Future private property dedication would be required to accommodate the ;..,..,,aSed .,ght 4 ,.,;dth a.S,.618te, ... thG8A"PFA11;ROf «l a .,.., .. « an extension of Avon Street..." 18. Pages 3-16, Avon Street (East) Delete Figures 23 and 24 MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN ADDENDA AND ERRATA 4 1 P a g e 19. Pages 3-17 to 3.18, Avon Street (East) a. Delete the following text: b. Revise the following text "Figure 26 Conceptual Avon Street Extension displays a conceptual vignette of the options for extending Avon Street from the existing public parking lot to connect with West Coast Highway. The City standard design is 36 feet curb -to -curb for two travel lanes a444 with parking on both sides of the street and does not include separated bicycle facilities. To accommodate bicycle lanes, the Plan suggests either pfeyeses increasing the street right-of-way to include separated bicycle lanes aad redtreed or reducing the widths ef-or eliminating the parking lanes...." c. Delete Figure 25, Avon Street Visual Simulation" 20. Page 3-18, Revise Figure 26 caption as follows: "Figure 26. Conceptual Avon Street Extension, Parking Structure to West Coast Highway" 21. Page 3-18, Revise photo ("Bicycle Friendly Street") position on the bottom of the page so that it does not overlap the text indicated below in bold lettering: "The proposed design of the Avon Street segment from the Avon/Ocean View/Tustin intersection to this important park/parking structure encourages multimodal uses and a pedestrian -friendly environment. Additionally, a more walkable Avon Street could also benefit potential development fronting onto Avon Street (parallel to the bluffs)." 22. Page 3-19, Revise Figure 27 caption as follows: "Figure 27. Conceptual Avon Street Connector, Parking Structure to Coast Highway— City -Standard Section" 23. Page 3-20, Vibrant Public Waterfront a. Revise the following text: "...Very few public pedestrian pathways lead to the water and 8 -there are not any public spaces oriented to the sidewalk on Coast Highway..." b. Continue text from Page 3-21 24. Page 3-25, Parking Management Revise the following text: "...Once these mechanisms are created, the long-term, capital -intensive opportunities, such as constructing two proposed parking structures discussed previously may be realized to increase MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN ADDENDA AND ERRATA 5 1 P a g e neighborhood parking supply once efficiencies in operations and management of the area's existing supply are fully utilized." 25. Page 4-2, Street Frontage, East End Building Location Revise text as follows: "• East End Building Location. New buildings to be constructed as infill of underutilized properties should be located in proximity to and the predominant elevation face the street frontage. Setbacks may be allowed to incorporate landscaping, areas for outdoor dining, and/or public plazas; however parking will not be allowed in these areas. Buildings may wrap around and orient to publicly accessible plazas developed internally within a project." 26. Page 4-23, Benches Revise caption for photo as follows: "Benches Facing Each Other" MARINERS' MILE REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN ADDENDA AND ERRATA 6 1 Attachment No. PC 6 Public Comments Nova, Makana From: leegoodin@gmail.com on behalf of Leeson Goodin <lee@cynb.com> Sent: April 24, 2017 4:17 PM To: Nova, Makana Cc: Norm Goodin; Kent Snyder Subject: Mariners Mile Revitalization Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Categories: Red Category Hello Makana Nova, Thank you for taking my phone call a few moments ago and being so helpful on the clarification of the Mariners Mile Revitalization plan. As I mentioned, we are the owners of both 2436 W. Coast Hwy as well as the owners of the bay side property at 2523 thru 2537 West Coast Hwy and feel that much of your conceptual revitalization plan is of a vision that is much different than what we at land owners have. Below are the two concerns that I took from the plan that has been presented. Effecting our property at 2436 W. Coast hwy, within the Mariners Mile Revitalization Plan that is published online as well as was available at the meeting, included on pages 3-2 (34), 3-6 (38), 3-15 (47), 3-17 (49) and 3- 18 (50) illustrations of "Residential/Mixed Use" being built on a section of Avon "East'. This along with on page 3-15 (47) the verbiage "future private property dedication would be required" is extremely alarming to us as well felt that a number of other who attended your April 20th meeting where extremely opposed to such an idea. If your intention is only to provide a conceptual idea of what you hope the street could be, then I strongly suggest removing such alarming language to your overall plan because under no circumstances would we at 2436 W. Coast hwy be open to the idea of redeveloping the back half of our property and most certainly would never consider an unopposed dedication of the land as it is suggested as it would greatly devalue this property. Effecting our property from 2523 to 2537 and on page 3-23 (55) is the mention of a public waterfront boardwalk and footpath access. The illustration presented on this page shows the boardwalk turning inland in the form of a footpath at the current "Pizza Nova" location, going only half way to PCH before turning East and cutting across 2547 W. Coast Hwy and crossing into our property line from the West at 2537 W. Coast Hwy. From there, the footpath cuts half way across the center of our property and then once again turns and heads North again where it then rejoins the sidewalk at PCH and before continuing East. This footpath that cuts across our property would greatly impact our properties parking as well as the main electrical vault which is located along the Western edge of the property where the proposed footpath is illustrated. It would make far more sense to have the footpath turn North from the boardwalk at the Pizza Nova property location and intersect at the sidewalk of PCH and Tustin Ave, as this would allow pedestrians store front access to both 2547 W. Coast hwy as well as our own 2537 and 2535 W. Coast hwy. I would hope that my comments would be taken with consideration. Thank you Leeson Goodin owner leeA,cynb.com (949) 244-9830 Cell (949) 515-1950 Office Nova, Makana From: Biddle, Jennifer Sent: April 24, 2017 1:01 PM To: Wisneski, Brenda; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: Planning Commission Strategy Session 4/20/17 (Mariners' Mile) The below email was sent to all the Commissioners 01:1101011yA1.4:11U911q Administrative Specialist to the Community Development Director City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive, Bay 1 B, Newport Beach CA 92660 '949-644-3232 1 ®jbiddle@newportbeachca.gov I Aqwww.newportbeachca.gov From: Peggy Palmer [mailto:pvombaur@aol.com] Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 12:13 PM To: Kramer, Kory <kkramer@newportbeachca.gov>; Dunlap, Bill <bdunlap@newportbeachca.gov>; Koetting, Peter <pkoetting@newportbeachca.gov>; Hillgren, Bradley <bhillgren@newportbeachca.gov>; Lawler, Ray <rlawler@newportbeachca.gov>; Weigand, Erik <eweigand@newportbeachca.gov>; Zak, Peter <pzak@newportbeachca.gov>; Biddle, Jennifer <JBiddle@newportbeachca.gov>; Campagnolo, Daniel <DCampagnolo@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: Planning Commission Strategy Session 4/20/17 (Mariners' Mile) Dear Planning Commissioners, Thank you for your time this past Thursday with regard to the Revitalization Plan of Mariners' Mile and the proposed expansion of West Coast Highway. A couple of points to that I would like to bring to your attention that are illustrated in the photos below: 1. Riverside Ave. is carrying a lot of "cut through" traffic on the weekends. People are finding different routes through Newport Heights to avoid Newport Blvd. when traveling to the beach. 2. Many families and children also travel down Riverside Ave. on their bikes to get to the beach and are crossing Pacfic Coast Highway. 3. The smaller portion of Avon is exactly 24 feet wide. This narrow road is the back entrance to Sterling BMW. This is where a portion of car carriers pick up and deliver cars and the BMW mechanics exit to make their test drives up Riverside Ave. to Cliff Drive. This road is also connected to the Cliff Park Bluff. According to the Placeworks's design, this particular area is planned for vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian traffic and would be utilized as a thoroughfare to the proposed parking structure. 4. The proposed expansion of PCH/West Coast Highway is also suggesting that there is no street parking allowed. The three sailing schools, OCC, Chapman and the Sea Scouts base use the street parking for practices and competitions. There are many students that attend classes at these three sailing/rowing schools. These schools also provide summer camps to many children. Has anyone considered the ramifications of where these trailers and boats would go, if parking were to be taken off PCH? 5. The measure "M" funding is available for many different projects. For example, monies could be used for the synchronization of signals, safety studies, (Bayside Drive), transit and environmental. These funds are available to Newport Beach for many projects, not just the widening of PCH. I would think that Public Works would want to take advantage of these funds. 6. The 2000 Strategic Vision of Mariner's Mile, developed by Keenan Smith does include PCH in it general plan. This is addressed on page 35. This document was created as a collaborative effort with the Congress for the New Urbanism. This was the design framework that outlines the principles, policies and guidelines. http://www.neyTortbeachca.gov/PLN/MAP DOCUMENTS/DESIGN GUIDELINES/Mariners M ile Vision Desiun.ndf 7. The Maritime Training School will be constructed below my home located at 1701 Kings Road. It is a beautiful building that encompasses the heart of Newport Beach. It was designed by Keenan Smith. There is frustration when the current consultant, Placeworks continues to present obsolete photos that have been "cut and pasted" into their powerpoint presentation. They claim these are ideas; however, in this day and age one would think that their firm would present conceptual drawings of the framework, architecture and designs. The Placeworks plan is disconnected and their dots are dislocated. This is not a good plan for our seaside community. I would highly recommend that another architect / consultant be allowed to draft and present a realistic vision of Marner's Mile to the Planning Commission. 8. QUESTION: Mark and Manouch Moshayedi, the real estate investors that have purchased a vast amount of land on Mariner's Mile, have they submitted any plans to the Planning Commission? Lastly, the property owners, the business owners and the residents are looking forward to the Revitalization of Mariner's Mile. I believe that every project has a starting point, it would be in everyone's best interest to get off to a good start. In closing, Planning Commissioner, Mr. Eric Weigand had the "pulse" of the people exactly right in his assumptions and observations regarding Mariner's Mile last Thursday, April 20, 2017. Thank you for your time, Peggy V. Palmer (949)887-2471 I MIT" - ArIO L t I E I.I i 0 M- T16I a 10V Y r + ' 1 a w t. • M • K . �� �. ti�� A� Y 1 y __.'_wl_�IRYL �I..' Nova, Makana From: Patrick <pfg1941@gmail.com> Sent: May 07, 2017 10:39 AM To: D12SRlNewport@dot.ca.gov Cc: Dixon, Diane; Avery, Brad; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Herdman, Jeff; Peotter, Scott; O'Neill, William; Kramer, Kory; Koetting, Peter; Zak, Peter; Dunlap, Bill; Campbell, James; Brandt, Kim; Kiff, Dave; Wisneski, Brenda; Nova, Makana; Webb, Dave (Public Works); Hillgren, Bradley; Lawler, Ray; Weigand, Erik; karina@karinaonofre.com; lisa.bartlett@ocgov.com; michelle.steel@ocgov.com; Jem Consulting Subject: Mariners' Mile Attachments: April 14, 2017 Leter re. Widening of WPCH to City of Newport Beach.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Charles Baker Senior Environmental Planner Department of Transportation, District 12 State of California Dear Charles, Mariners' Mile The Newport Beach Community is committed to working together with the State of California and the City of Newport Beach for Mariners' Mile along West Pacific Coast Highway to become a more friendly village encouraging people to ride their bikes, walk around, and dine and shop. The State of California's Department of Transportation, District 12 and the City of Newport Beach City Council, Planning Commission, City Manager and Staff must do all within their authority to assure West Pacific Coast Highway is transformed into a village that is welcoming and safe for pedestrians and bicyclists. I request that the enclosed letter presenting my views be included in District 12's evaluation and published documents and be forwarded to the Head of the State of California Department of Transportation and the Governor of California. The future is about building Coastal Cities for people. Enclosed is my April 14, 2017, letter to the City of Newport Beach which was published on Saturday, April 18, 2017, in the Los Angeles Times Daily Pilot. Please acknowledge receipt of this email and confirmation that my views were received by the Head of the State of California Department of Transportation and the Governor of California. Kindest regards, Patrick Gormley Past President Bayshores Community Association Newport Beach, California Patrick Gormley 2441 Marino Drive Newport Beach, California 92663 949-650-4024 jeml981@roadrunner.com April 14, 2017 City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Drive Newport Beach, California 92660 Mariner's Mile Widening of West Pacific Coast Highway Through Newport Beach An indispensable General Plan Goal is to enhance vitality for residents and visitors, yet traffic conflicts among vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians continue to plague traveling conditions along Orange County's portion of Pacific Coast Highway, according to a published transportation study. In coastal cities North and South of Newport Beach there is a historical and growing movement to transform Pacific Coast Highway to a more pedestrian and bicycle friendly thoroughfare. From Seal Beach to San Diego, cities are looking to slow traffic, enhance safety, widen sidewalks and bike lanes and implement a variety of changes that encourage people to walk around their community. The future is about building coastal cities for people. Seaside towns from Sunset Beach to San Clemente are two lanes. The communities of Corona Del Mar and Laguna Beach have grappled with this issue and have remained two lanes. To most Newport Beach residents, "Mariners' Mile is considered one of the iconic "Main Streets" and the "Heart" of our town. This regional artery services our schools, neighborhoods, business districts and post office. Newport Beach should remain a charming "coastal town" along the tranquil bay. West Pacific Coast Highway is not a "raceway" or a "motor corridor" for commuter and commercial traffic." Varying perspectives, emphases, and competing interests continue to struggle with a variety of issues that create conflicts along Mariner's Mile. The businesses, neighborhoods and residents living along Mariner's Mile envision a community village fostering the flow of pedestrians and bicyclists ahead of facilitating the flow of traffic. The City of Newport Beach, the County of Orange and CalTrans envision a cross town freeway facilitating the maximum flow of traffic within the shortest amount of time while accommodating limited pedestrians and bicyclists. Clearly, the businesses, residents along Mariner's Mile, the City of Newport Beach, the County of Orange and State of California are conflicted. Several study groups over the years have struggling with these varying perspectives and conflicts, and the studies have attempted to build a consensus. Without a clear vision of the prevailing/ underlying concept and outcome to be achieved along Mariner's Mile, these efforts will continue to be suboptimal and disappointing. The Newport Beach Community is conflicted and cannot have it both ways. A consensus must be reached. A village attracting pedestrians and a cross town freeway are not compatible. A choice must be made. Corona Del Mar and Laguna Beach have resolved their differing perspectives and decided upon a Village and stopped the widening of West Pacific Coast Highway. Why can't Newport Beach reach the same decision for Mariner's Mile as decided for Corona Del Mar? Mariner's Mile business owners, homeowners living in the communities of Newport Heights, Bayshores and throughout Newport Beach agree West Pacific Coast Highway should. • Remain as it is now with no new vehicular lanes. • Be transformed to a more friendly village attracting pedestrians and bicycles. • Retain street parking. • Be taken back from Caltrans. The Newport Beach Community is committed to working together with the City of Newport Beach for Mariner's Mile along West Pacific Coast Highway to become a more friendly village encouraging people to ride their bikes, walk around and shop. The Newport Beach City Council must do all within their authority to assure West Pacific Coast Highway is transformed into a village that is welcoming to and safe for pedestrians and bicyclists. Your Neighbor, Patrick Nova, Makana From: Jeanne Fobes <jeannefobes@gmail.com> Sent: May 05, 2017 4:47 PM To: Nova, Makana Subject: Re: Draft Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan -Schedule Update Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear Ms. Nova, I am pleased to be on your list of interested Newport Beach residents. Actually, I am rather more than "interested" --I am distressed!!! Please continue to keep me informed of all meetings concerning this project, which I consider to be little short of a disaster for our neighborhood of Newport Heights. A long-time resident, Jeanne Fobes On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 10:27 AM, Nova, Makana <MNova(c�r�,newportbeachca.gov> wrote: Good morning, Thank you for your continued interest in the draft Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan. A Planning Commission public hearing was tentatively scheduled for May 18, 2017, but has been postponed for 30 to 60 days as we continue to refine the document. A public notice and email to the interest list will be sent once a Planning Commission public hearing date has been scheduled. We continue to welcome any comments you would like to submit regarding the draft document, available HERE. Please submit any written comments to me via email or mail and feel free to contact me with any questions. Thank you, 4444,s.h Nosh I ASSOCIATE PLANNER, AICP Planning Division I Community Development Department City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive I Newport Beach, CA 92660 P. 949.644.3249 m no v a(a) new oo rtheachcaa ov www. newoortbe a ch ca. a ov Nova, Makana From: Biddle, Jennifer Sent: May 08, 2017 10:00 AM To: Wisneski, Brenda; Nova, Makana Subject: FW: PCH/Mariner's Mile FYI ... this was sent to the Commissioners. Jenni f .r 3 i&d Administrative Specialist Community Development Department From: Mark Larson [mailto:mark.larson@lee-associates.com] Sent: Monday, May 08, 2017 7:52 AM To: Kramer, Kory <kkramer@newportbeachca.gov>; Dunlap, Bill <bdunlap@newportbeachca.gov>; Koetting, Peter <pkoetting@newportbeachca.gov>; Hillgren, Bradley<bhillgren@newportbeachca.gov>; Lawler, Ray <rlawler@newportbeachca.gov>; Weigand, Erik <eweigand@newportbeachca.gov>; Zak, Peter <pzak@newportbeachca.gov>; Biddle, Jennifer <JBiddle@newportbeachca.gov>; Campagnolo, Daniel <DCam pagnolo@ newportbeachca.gov> Subject: PCH/Mariner's Mile I live in Bayshores. I get all these things in the mail/email about leaving Mariner's Mile alone. I am FOR redeveloping Mariner's Mile even if it includes the widening of PCH. I trust your opinions, judgements and decisions. Thanks. Mark J. Mark Larson Vice Chairman Lee & Associates - Investment Services Group Corp ID # 00546735 A Member of the Lee & Associates Group of Companies LEE Sc ASSC7CIATES' COPAVERC1AL HEAL ESTATE SERVICES INVESTMEM BEHMCES GROUP Phone: 213 623 2022, Fax: 866 593 3685 Headquarters: 515 S Flower Street, 361" Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Mailing Address: 333 Bayside Drive Suite 106 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Email: mark.larson@lee-associates.com Web: www.Lee-Associates.com This email and any files transmitted with it may contain confidential or privileged material which is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful. Dear Mr. Charles Baker, On behalf of the property owners, local merchants and residents of the Mariner's Mile area. I wanted to inform you that we are strongly opposed to any widening of Pacific Coast Highway at Newport Blvd., specifically the proposed project area known as the Arches Bridge. This small corridor intersects Mariner's Mile, as well as, the historical Arches. Originally built as a restaurant and service station, construction began on the Arches in 1925, the same year Coast Highway opened up from Huntington Beach to Newport Beach. This building has always been considered a recognizable staple of Newport Beach and it has helped to shape and inspire the town in its early stages and continues to be a part of the heart of our town to this day. This particular area of Mariner's Mile is a 1.3 mile stretch that is also a residential corridor with 1,900 homes combined in Newport Heights and Bayshores. It is also home to three schools, 4,300 children within 1/3 of a mile from each other located in Newport Heights. In addition, there are four sailing and rowing schools located on PCH, The OCC Sailing School, Collegiate Rowing School, Chapman Crew Base and the Boy Scout Sea Base. The soon to be built Maritime Training Center will be located across the street from these sailing and rowing schools. All of these schools listed above have classes, camps and collegiate rowing courses all year long. This 1.3 mile section of PCH, should not become a thoroughfare for commuter and commercial traffic. As you can imagine, safety is a huge concern as children, bicyclists and pedestrians utilize PCH to go to and from schools, homes and work. There are close to 1,500 Jr. Lifeguards traveling to and from the peninsula during the summer season. There are many bicycle enthusiasts traveling through to the next coastal town on the stretch of West Coast Highway. Expanding this corridor of PCH would endanger too many lives, especially those of our children. Almost all seaside communities are two lanes in each direction, from Long Beach to San Clemente, including Corona Del Mar ... Why not West Newport? On the weekdays the current traffic flow moves without an issue, with the exception of the typical 5:00 PM traffic, which has an approximate commuter time of 15-20 minutes with only the southbound lanes affected during peak traffic hours. Furthermore, there are 44 curb cuts within this particular area of West Coast Highway; slowing down traffic is the only responsible and reasonable plan to consider. The dynamics of the traffic flow are completely different on the weekends. The automotive dealerships along this stretch of Mariner's Mile include BMW, Porsche, Audi, Ferrari, McLaren, Lamborghini and Maserati to name just a few. PCH becomes a racetrack in which the dealerships use PCH in Mariner's Mile through Brookhurst to test drive cars with their customers at speeds that far exceed the current speed limit. Before noon, the motorcycle clubs, the car clubs along with beach and bicyclists take to the streets. There is a "roar along the shore" for 48 hours straight on Saturday and Sunday. Widening this area of Mariner's Mile is a bad idea and certainly not a welcome one. It was a bad idea in the 1960's when the property owners, local merchants and residents, who were referred to as `The Freeway Fighters', fought the expansion. The time may be different, however, the message remains the same. We do not want what according to Dave Webb, the traffic engineer for the City of Newport, would replicate a large arterial highway. Mr. Webb's assertion that our bayside corridor should have three lanes in each direction should be considered gross negligence with regard to our children, our community and our valued tourists. Examples of six lane Arterial Highways — (Average Daily Trips) • Jamboree south of the 405 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 and La Habra (42-47K ADT) • Valley View through Los Alamitos and Cypress (42-52K AD) Interestingly, The top five most dangerous intersections in Newport Beach are currently six lane highways' • Jamboree/Bristol, MacArthur/San Joaquin Hills MacArthur/Bonita Canyon Civic Center Newport Center Drive San Miguel/Avocado "source OC Register The above highways are an example of exactly what we DO NOT want to happen in our community. Mr. Baker, on behalf of the property owners, local merchants and residents, we ask that you do not succumb to the whims of a City engineer who is aggressively going against the wishes of its taxpaying citizens. We have made our concerns known to the City of Newport Beach. At this time, I ask that you carefully review this disastrous plan of widening PCH and stop this project immediately. We do not want to refer to PCH as "slaughter alley", at least not on our watch. Thank you for your time and consideration. Peggy V. Palmer (949)887-2471 1701 Kings Road Newport Beach, CA 92663 McLaren Plaza 106-120 Tustin Avenue and 2540 -2542 West Coast Highway, Newport Beach, CA 92663 May 12, 2017 Newport Beach Planning Commission ✓ Kory Kramer, Chair Peter Koetting, Vice Chair Peter Zak, Secretary Bradley Hillgren Ray Lawler Erik Weigand 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 ,�kE,CEIVEO By COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MAY 2 5 2017 CITY OF "%PORT DEPCt\ RE: Proposed Mariners' Mile Revitalization Plan and Pacific Coast Highway Expansion Dear Commissioners: Over the past several months, we have had the opportunity to review the various components of the proposed Mariners' Mile Revitalization Plan. While we generally support new development design guidelines to improve this area, we oppose the expansion of Pacific Coast Highway, in general, along Mariners' Mile and have concerns with the proposed removal of the traffic light at West Coast Highway and Tustin Avenue. We believe that our current and potential customers will be negatively impacted should traffic be limited to Riverside Drive. Most notably, not being able to turn left onto or off of Tustin Avenue as vehicles drive south on Pacific Coast Highway would seriously affect our ability to provide convenient customer access to our businesses. Further, the existing light is consistent with the vision of a pedestrian and business friendly environment by helping to ensure reasonable vehicle speeds and traffic flow and safe crosswalk access. As a result, we collectively oppose the removal of the traffic light at the intersection of West Coast Highway and Tustin Avenue. Your support is appreciated. Sincerely, McLaren Plaza Tenants Rolf's Thea' � Y The= Word emological Services Nova, Makana From: Lynn Lorenz <lynnierlo@aol.com> Sent: May 31, 2017 12:21 PM To: Dixon, Diane; Avery, Brad; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Herdman, Jeff; Peotter, Scott; O'Neill, William; Campbell, James; Brandt, Kim; Kiff, Dave; Wisneski, Brenda; Nova, Makana; Webb, Dave (Public Works); Hillgren, Bradley; Lawler, Ray; Weigand, Erik; karina@karinaonofre.com; Lisa.Bartlett@ocgov.com; michelle.steel@ocgov.com Subject: Letter to Charles Baker Attachments: Mariner's Mile April 29, 2016.doc; the Dichtotomy of Newport.doc May 30, 2017 Charles Baker Senior Environmental Planner Department of Transportation, District 12 State of California Dear Mr. Baker, I join my fellow neighbors in opposition to the construction of a six lane freeway along what is fondly referred to as Mariner's Mile. To turn several established neighborhoods upside down to construct a six lane highway for such a short stretch of land appears to us in Newport Heights, Cliffhaven and Bay Shores as a frivolous act with no discernible benefits to the community or to visitors passing through our esteemed neighborhoods. It is doubtful that these extra lanes will have an effect if any on traffic flow while they will turn our "village -like neighborhoods " upside down, creating dangerous conditions for tourists who want to visit the businesses along the stretch, school children who will have to cross the highway to get to schools in the Heights, and residents who will find their streets used as by -ways to an even greater extent than they are now. Turning PCH into six lanes is totally incompatible with revitalizing the Mariner's Mile Area as a " walkable village type" community, the other goal espoused by the City. We strongly urge you and the City of Newport Beach to abandon your unpopular idea to build a six lane highway along the Mariner's Mile. Attached are two articles of mine that were published recently in the Daily Pilot (one was in the online letter section) and the Newport Beach Independent Newspaper pertaining to changes to Mariner's Mile. Respectfully yours, Lynn Lorenz 434 Redlands Avenue One of the most important issues before Newport residents right now is that of the Revitalization Plan of Mariner's Mile and the widening of Pacific Coast Highway along that area to six lanes. The reason that this is such a hot topic is that this area which encompasses about 1.3 miles, is considered by most inhabitants of Newport Beach as the traditional center of the city with its nautical structures and proximity to beautiful Newport Bay. As a result, this revitalization would not only greatly affect the "locals" who live in the Heights, Cliffhaven, Bayshores and Lldo Isles areas, but all of Newport Beach as well. This traditional area juxtasposed to the opulence of Fashion Island, Big Canyon, Irvine Terrace, Newport Coast and other similar environs makes for the dichotomy of the beautiful and traditional coastal town that those of us who live in Newport Beach have learned to love so well. Are there areas of Mariner's Mile that would benefit from a revitaliztion effort? Most decidedly so. But most importantly, any major changes to this area should only come with input from the homeowners and business owners who reside there, particularly those who will be directly affected. At the Planning Commission Meeting on April 20th many of the residents and business owners spoke about how some of the plans envisoned by the city for this area would have a negaive impact on them. One gentleman expressed the desire of many residents in the area when he said that the best plan for Mariner's Mile would be to convert the area to a "village that is welcoming to and safe for pedestrians and bicyclists." Still another resident from Cliff Drive spoke of the importance of making the area safe for the large number of school children who pass through the adjacent residential streets which lack adequate signage and sidewalks. One thing for sure that a majority of all residents in Newport Beach could agree upon is that it is their input which should drive any Revitalization Plans, not just the whims of City Hall. At the base of the controversy regarding development and expansion in Mariner's Mile is the dichotomy of the two images that are associated with Newport Beach. There is the side of Newport Beach that conveys wealth and glamour and the side which relishes its nautical image, beach cottages and other traditional buildings which provide the comfortable image of the past. While most residents admire the beautiful structures, opulence and variety of architecture in Fashion Island, they envision the part of Newport Beach that begins at Dover and extends almost to Hoag Hospital as the " downtown area." It is the only downtown area that Newport Beach really has if you count out Balboa Island. The two images of Newport are not incompatible in a city whose population exceeds 70,000. There are areas which are entirely modern such at Newport Coast, Big Canyon, Newport Terrace and many more. A beach cottage or a small nautically designed business would look out of place in these neighborhoods. And for the same reason, overly large buildings with other than "beach friendly" architecture stand out in the "downtown" area -Mariner's Mile. These two images of Newport are at the base of the controversy over the style of buildings and the expansion of Mariner's Mile. Because the three neighborhoods closest to Mariner's Mile are older more traditional neighborhoods (although these areas are showing more and more of the " glamour" image we associate with other areas of the city), the majority of the residents in these areas and probably many of the other areas in Newport as well still want to hold onto their past. This nostalgia is expressed by the desire for "beach appropriate architecture" on a scale that matches as much as much as possible the other traditional buildings in the area. Large modern structures look out of place in this architectural environment. Also overly large structures in this perceived "downtown area" risk not only destroying the views of property owners but also what has made Newport so unique and so popular ----this dichotomy. Newport Beach, California 92663 Lynn Lorenz lynnierlo@aol.com Nova, Makana From: Patrick <jem 1981@ road runner.com > Sent: July 07, 2017 7:51 AM To: Dixon, Diane; Avery, Brad; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Herdman, Jeff; Peotter, Scott; O'Neill, William; Kramer, Kory; Koetting, Peter; Zak, Peter; Dunlap, Bill; Hillgren, Bradley; Lawler, Ray; Weigand, Erik; Lowrey, Lee; Kleiman, Lauren Cc: Campbell, James; Brandt, Kim; Kiff, Dave; Wisneski, Brenda; Nova, Makana; Webb, Dave (Public Works); CalTrans District 12; Flynn, Chris C@DOT; Hart, Lindsey@DOT; Timothy.Dutton@dot.ca.gov Subject: The Future of Mariners' Mile Attachments: July 7„ 2017 July 7, 2017 Leter re. Mariners' Mile Future to City of Newport Beach .pdf Dear Newport Beach City Council, Planning Commission, City Manager and Staff, The Newport Beach Community is committed to working together with the City of Newport Beach for Mariners' Mile along West Pacific Coast Highway to become a more friendly village encouraging people to ride their bikes, walk, dine, and shop. The Newport Beach City Council, Planning Commission, City Manager and Staff must do all within their authority to prioritize protecting children, residents, and visitors and find ways to slow traffic, enhance safety, and widen sidewalks and bike lanes to transfer West Pacific Coast Highway to a more pedestrian and bicycle friendly thoroughfare. I request that the enclosed letter presenting my views be included in the packet of material for the July 20, 2017, Planning Comission Hearing re. Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan. I also request my letter be included in the 2018 update of the City's General Plan. Please acknowledge receipt Illy letter. Let's build a coastal city for people to enjoy now and in the future. Your Neighbor, Patrick Gormley Past President Bayshores Community Association Patrick Gormley 2441 Marino Drive Newport Beach, California 92663 949-650-4024 jeml981@roadrunner.com July 7, 2017 City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Drive Newport Beach, California 92660 Golden Opportunity Not To Be Missed The Future of Mariners' Mile Must Be Determined Within The Framework of The Citywide General Plan Let's build a coastal city for people to enjoy now and in the future: Newport Beach should remain a charming "coastal town" along the tranquil bay. To most Newport Beach residents, Mariners' Mile is our "Main Street" and the "Heart" of our town. This access to the beaches services our schools, neighborhoods, business districts and post office. West Pacific Coast Highway should not be a "raceway" or a "motor corridor" for commuter and commercial traffic. Newport Beach's stretch of PCH should instead be a meeting place that's welcoming to and safe for walkers and bicyclists. Research shows there is a growing movement in beach towns to transform Pacific Coast Highway to a more pedestrian and bicycle friendly thoroughfare. From Seal Beach to San Diego, cities are prioritizing protecting children, residents and visitors and to do so they have found ways to slow traffic, enhance safety, widen sidewalks and bike lanes, and make other changes that facilitate the flow of pedestrians and bicyclists. On April 15, 2017, in the enclosed article published by the Los Angeles Times in the Daily Pilot, I presented a historical perspective based upon such studies as well as ongoing efforts within coastal towns North and South of Newport Beach. My article points out that several Orange County study groups over the years have been struggling with varying perspectives and conflicts. They have attempted to build a consensus, however, they have had only marginal success. Without a clear vision guiding the transformation of Mariners' Mile, ongoing efforts will continue to be suboptimal and disappointing. Newport Beach cannot have it both ways. A village attracting people and a crosstown freeway are incompatible. The City's Planning Department says "The widening/expansion of West Coast Highway is not a part of the Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan" when in reality they co -exist, are interdependent, and cannot be separated. Adding a third lane to West Coast Highway has been an ongoing aim since 1975 and is currently required by the City's General Plan. However, community norms have changed dramatically over the last 47 years. Today's property owners, residents and community strongly desire that Mariners' Mile be transformed into a village akin to Corona del Mar. The continuing evolution is most evident in the Mariner's Mile Strategic Vision and Design Framework dated October 4, 2000. This document recognized the inherent conflict in designing a welcoming village and high volume highway, and it set forth a strategy "to discourage the policy of widening Pacific Coast Highway through Mariner's Mile". Additional support for rethinking the widening of PCH along Mariner's Mile comes from the concept of "induced demand." Induced demand suggests widening a road to ease congestion, but typically ends up causing more people to choose to drive the road and therefore does not achieve the intended aim. Property owners, local merchants, residents, and communities throughout Newport Beach are now contesting the Mariner's Mile Revitalization Plan under consideration by the Planning Commission. (See website "Protect Mariner's Mile"http://www.protectmarinersmile.org ) Constituents living in the vicinity of Mariner's Mile desire Mariner's Mile to be transformed into a Village akin to Corona Del Mar and to prevent the widening of West Pacific Coast Highway. In 2018 the City's General Plan will be updated. This is when the City Council must consider the future of Mariner's Mile from a citywide perspective. We now have a golden opportunity to build a genuine and lasting community consensus. We can make a strong commitment to work together and to encourage city planners to prioritize safety and community. The General Plan process is the most appropriate means to assure enhancing and revitalizing our beach city's main street to create a village for our enjoyment. A clear vision must guide the General Plan's city wide framework. We can look to seaside towns from Sunset Beach to San Clemente that have limited their highway to two lanes. Recently Corona Del Mar and Laguna Beach have grappled with these issues and have chosen to remain two -lanes highways. The Newport Beach City Council must determine Mariners' Mile future within the comprehensive framework of the citywide General Plan and work to have West Pacific Coast Highway fall under the City's jurisdiction, not Caltrans' jurisdiction, to assure that the city determines the destiny of Mariners' Mile. Your Neighbor, Patrick PATRICK GORMLEY Mariners' Mile should be transformed into a village aldn to Corona del Mar An indispensable General Plan goal is to enhance vitality for residents and visitors, yet traffic conflicts among vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians continue to plague traveling conditions along Or- ange County's portion of Pacific Coast Highway. In coastal cities north and south of Newport Beach there is a historical and growing movement to transform Pacific Coast High- way to a more pedestrian- and bicycle -friendly thoroughfare. From Seal Beach to San Diego, cities are looking to slow traffic, enhance safety, widen sidewalks and bike lanes and implement a variety of changes that encourage people to walk around thew com- munities. The future is about building coastal cities for people. Seaside towns, from Sunset Beach to San Clemente, are two lanes. The communities of Co- rona del Mar and Laguna Beach have grappled with this issue and have remained two lanes. To most Newport residents, Mariners' Mile is considered one of the iconic main streets and the heart of our town. This regional artery services our schools, neighborhoods, business districts and post office. Newport should remain a charming "coastal town' along the tranquil bay. West Pacific Coast highway is not a raceway or a motor corridor for commut- ers and commercial traffic. The businesses, neighborhoods and residents living along Mari- ners' Mile envision a community village fostering the flow of pe- destrians and bicyclists ahead of facilitating the flow of traffic. The city, the county and Cal- trans envision a crosstown free- way facilitating the maximum flow of traffic within the shortest amount of time while accommo- dating limited pedestrians and bicyclists. Several study groups over the years have been struggling with these varying perspectives and conflicts, and the studies have attempted to build a consensus. Without a clear vision of the prevailing/underlying concept and outcome to be achieved along Mariners' Mile, these ef- forts will continue to be subopti- mal and disappointing. Newport Beach cannot have it both ways. A consensus must be reached. A village attracting pe- destrians and a crosstown free- way are incompatible. Corona del Mar and Laguna Beach have resolved their differ- ing perspectives and decided upon a village and stopped the widening of West PCH. Why can't Newport reach the same decision for Mariners' Mile? Business owners and home- owners living in Newport Heights, Bayshores and through- out Newport Beach agree West PCH should remain as it is now, with no new vehicular lanes, and be transformed to a more - friendly village attracting pedes- trians and bicycles, retain street parking and be taken back from Caltrans. The community is committed to working with the city for Mari- ners' Mile to become a more friendly village, encouraging people to ride their bikes, walk around and shop. The City Council must do all within its authority to assure West PCH is transformed into a village that is welcoming to and safe for pedestrians and bicy- clists. PATRICK GORMLEY lives in Newport Beach. Nova, Makana From: Lynn Lorenz <lynnierlo@aol.com> Sent: July 10, 2017 6:06 PM To: Nova, Makana Subject: letter to be included in packet for Planning Commission Meeting, July 20th, 2017 Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Hi Makana, Please acknowledge receipt of this letter for the packet. From Lynn Lorenz, 434 Redlands Avenue, Newport Beach, Ca 92663 949 646 2054 One of the most important issues before Newport residents right now is that of the Revitalization Plan of Mariner's Mile and the widening of Pacific Coast Highway along that area to six lanes. The reason that this is such a hot topic is that this area which encompasses about 1.3 miles, is considered by most inhabitants of Newport Beach as the traditional center of the city with its nautical structures and proximity to beautiful Newport Bay. As a result, this revitalization would not only greatly affect the "locals" who live in the Heights, Cliffhaven, Bayshores and Lido Isles areas, but all of Newport Beach as well. This traditional area juxtasposed to the opulence of Fashion Island, Big Canyon, Irvine Terrace, Newport Coast and other similar environs makes for the dichotomy of the beautiful and traditional coastal town that those of us who live in Newport Beach have learned to love so well. Are there areas of Mariner's Mile that would benefit from a revitaliztion effort? Most decidedly so. But most importantly, any major changes to this area should only come with input from the homeowners and business owners who reside there, particularly those who will be directly affected. At the Planning Commission Meeting on April 20th many of the residents and business owners spoke about how some of the plans envisoned by the city for this area would have a negaive impact on them. One gentleman expressed the desire of many residents in the area when he said that the best plan for Mariner's Mile would be to convert the area to a "village that is welcoming to and safe for pedestrians and bicyclists." Still another resident from Cliff Drive spoke of the importance of making the area safe for the large number of school children who pass through the adjacent residential streets which lack adequate signage and sidewalks. One thing for sure that a majority of all residents in Newport Beach could agree upon is that it is their input which should drive any Revitalization Plans, not just the whims of City Hall. 1 Nova, Makana From: Lynn Lorenz <lynnierlo@aol.com> Sent: July 10, 2017 6:27 PM To: Nova, Makana Subject: letter to be included in packet for July 20th PC Meeting Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Hi Makana, Here is a second letter to include in packet for the meeting. It also is on Mariner's Mile. Lynn Lorenz, 434 Redlands avenue, Newport Beach, Ca 92663 949 646 2054 Please acknowledge receipt of this letter also. Thank you. Mariner's Mile Many of my neighbors and I in the Heights are in opposition to the construction of a six lane freeway along what is fondly referred to as Mariner's Mile. To turn several established neighborhoods upside down to construct a six lane highway for such a short stretch of land appears to us in Newport Heights, Cliffhaven and Bay Shores as a frivolous act with no discernible benefits to the community or to visitors passing through our neighborhoods. It is doubtful that these extra lanes will have any effect on traffic flow while they will turn our "village -like neighborhoods " upside down, creating dangerous conditions for tourists who want to visit the businesses along the stretch, school children who will have to cross the highway to get to schools in the Heights, and residents who will find their streets used as by -ways to an even greater extent than they are now. Turning Pacific Coast Highway into six lanes is totally incompatible with revitalizing the Mariner's Mile Area as a " walkable village type" community, the other goal espoused by the City. We strongly urge the City of Newport Beach to abandon this unpopular idea. submitted by Lynn Lorenz Nova, Makana From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Makana Nova, Behzad Faridnia <behzad@octechinnovations.com> July 10, 2017 10:40 PM Nova, Makana The Coalition to Protect Mariner's Mile - Petition letter for inclusion in 7/20/17 Planning Commission Hearing Protect Mariners Mile - 07.20.17 Hearing Petition Letter.pdf Follow up Flagged My name is Behzad Faridnia and I am a Consultant working with The Coalition to Protect Mariner's Mile. Please find attached our Petition Letter to be put on the record and included/printed in the packet provided at the Planning Commission Hearing meeting to take place on July 20th, 2017, Best, Behzad Faridnia Founder & Chief Innovator OC Tech Innovations and Technology Consultant representing The Coalition to Protect Mariner's Mile. (408) 489-1502 www.octechinnovations.com Lic. 1007989 11026027 Petition to Protect Mariner's Mile Respect, Protect, and Preserve the Residential, Commercial, and Environmental Qualities of Our Bayside Town • To The Newport Beach Planning Commission & City Council: • Local residents consider Mariner's Mile to be Newport's Main Street and the heart of our town. This regional artery services our business district, post office, schools and bayside neighborhoods. • The City of Newport Beach has proposed that West Coast Highway, between the Arches Bridge and Dover Drive, be widened to three lanes in each direction, essentially becoming an alternate route for the 405 Freeway. Children traveling on bikes from the peninsula and surrounding neighborhoods to Newport Heights Elementary, Horace Ensign and Newport Harbor High should not be required to cross a major six -lane highway. • The City should not use eminent domain to acquire private property to further the plan to widen the highway. • Until the City Council completes the process of updating the General Plan, which is scheduled to start within the next few months, the City needs to postpone any consideration of wholesale changes to Mariner's Mile. Adopting a Mariner's Mile Revitalization Plan now is simply putting the cart before the horse. • After the General Plan is updated, residents need to direct the Mariner's Mile Revitalization effort, to ensure that density, scale and height of redevelopment projects are congruent with, and respectful of the two natural features that form the boundaries of the corridor: the bluff and the harbor. This will ensure that our quality of life is maintained and that the plan supports residents and local business owners. • The proposed Mariner's Mile Revitalization Plan along with the expansion of West Coast Highway will otherwise come at a high cost to taxpayers while decreasing our quality of life and property values. Newport Beach is our town. We believe in the common good that includes honoring its historic and natural character of Mariner's Mile. We will value Mariner's Mile property and business owners, surrounding residents and the harbor and the bluffs. Signed, Submission Date Zip Code Comments 2017-07-10 21:10:03 92625 2017-07-10 20:22:15 92663 2017-07-10 20:21:46 92663 2017-07-10 20:20:50 92663 2017-07-10 20:19:29 92660 2017-07-10 20:18:56 92661 2017-07-10 20:18:03 92663 2017-07-10 20:17:21 92663 2017-07-10 20:16:26 92663 2017-07-10 18:49:09 92663 2017-07-10 18:46:22 92663 2017-07-10 18:46:00 92663 2017-07-10 18:44:41 92663 2017-07-10 18:43:51 92627 2017-07-10 18:41:17 92663 2017-07-10 18:39:55 92663 2017-07-10 18:39:07 92663 2017-07-10 18:37:31 92663 2017-07-10 18:35:35 92663 2017-07-1018:34:55 92625 2017-07-10 18:34:30 92663 2017-07-1018:33:57 92663 2017-07-10 18:33:02 92627 2017-07-10 18:32:28 92663 2017-07-1018:31:57 92663 2017-07-1018:31:17 92627 2017-07-1018:30:34 92663 2017-07-10 18:30:08 92663 2017-07-10 18:29:37 92603 2017-07-10 18:29:12 92663 2017-07-10 18:28:29 92663 2017-07-10 18:28:07 92663 2017-07-10 18:27:11 92663 2017-07-10 18:26:28 92663 2017-07-10 18:25:38 92663 2017-07-10 18:23:23 92663 2017-07-10 18:22:32 92663 2017-07-10 18:19:50 92663 2017-07-10 18:18:40 92663 2017-07-10 18:18:06 92663 2017-07-10 18:17:11 92663 2017-07-10 18:16:32 92662 2017-07-10 18:15:54 92626 2017-07-10 18:14:34 92663 2017-07-10 18:13:52 92663 2017-07-10 18:13:09 92626 2017-07-10 18:12:42 92662 2017-07-10 13:15:56 92663 2017-07-10 13:09:20 92625 2017-07-10 13:08:41 92625 2017-07-10 13:05:45 92660 2017-07-10 11:57:14 92660 2017-07-10 08:55:49 92627 2017-07-09 20:41:57 92660 2017-07-09 20:40:07 92660 2017-07-09 19:44:01 92627 2017-07-09 18:30:33 92663 2017-07-09 18:24:13 92663 2017-07-09 18:23:32 92663 2017-07-09 18:22:10 92663 2017-07-09 18:21:25 92663 2017-07-0918:20:56 92663 2017-07-09 18:20:31 92663 2017-07-09 18:18:46 92663 2017-07-09 18:18:16 92647 2017-07-09 18:16:49 92663 2017-07-09 18:15:31 92663 2017-07-09 18:14:01 92663 2017-07-09 18:13:18 92663 2017-07-09 18:12:31 92663 2017-07-09 18:11:11 92663 2017-07-09 18:09:23 92663 2017-07-09 18:08:26 92627 2017-07-09 18:07:27 92627 2017-07-09 18:06:34 92663 2017-07-09 18:05:35 92663 2017-07-0918:04:38 92663 2017-07-09 18:04:11 92663 2017-07-09 18:02:18 92663 2017-07-0918:01:55 92663 2017-07-0918:01:14 92663 2017-07-09 18:00:15 92660 2017-07-0917:59:38 92660 2017-07-09 17:58:43 92660 2017-07-09 17:58:08 92625 2017-07-09 17:57:11 92625 2017-07-09 17:56:55 92663 2017-07-09 17:56:22 92649 2017-07-09 17:56:06 92663 2017-07-09 17:55:15 92663 2017-07-09 17:54:36 92663 2017-07-09 17:53:30 92663 2017-07-09 17:52:21 92663 2017-07-09 17:51:20 92663 2017-07-09 17:50:31 92663 2017-07-09 17:49:21 92663 2017-07-0917:48:38 92663 2017-07-09 17:48:05 92663 2017-07-09 17:47:30 92625 2017-07-09 17:46:20 92627 2017-07-09 17:45:32 92660 2017-07-09 17:44:48 92663 2017-07-09 17:43:59 92625 2017-07-09 17:42:15 92625 2017-07-0917:40:52 92663 2017-07-09 17:39:31 92663 2017-07-09 17:36:03 92626 2017-07-0917:35:36 92663 2017-07-0917:34:54 92660 2017-07-09 17:34:06 92657 2017-07-09 17:33:26 92660 2017-07-09 17:32:50 92660 2017-07-09 17:32:05 92660 2017-07-0917:31:35 92660 2017-07-09 17:30:59 92660 2017-07-09 17:30:30 92660 2017-07-09 17:30:21 92660 2017-07-0917:29:38 92660 2017-07-09 17:29:14 92663 2017-07-09 17:29:08 92660 2017-07-09 17:28:24 92660 2017-07-09 17:26:45 92663 2017-07-09 17:26:05 92663 2017-07-09 17:25:11 92660 2017-07-09 17:25:04 92663 2017-07-09 17:24:18 92663 2017-07-0917:23:52 92663 2017-07-09 17:23:25 92663 2017-07-09 17:22:53 92663 2017-07-09 17:22:19 92663 2017-07-09 17:19:50 92660 2017-07-09 17:18:38 92627 2017-07-09 17:17:26 92627 2017-07-09 17:15:58 92627 2017-07-09 17:15:27 92663 2017-07-09 17:14:38 92657 2017-07-09 17:14:00 92627 2017-07-09 17:12:34 92660 2017-07-09 17:11:44 92663 2017-07-09 17:11:21 92660 2017-07-09 17:10:19 92660 2017-07-09 17:09:18 92627 2017-07-09 17:08:15 92663 2017-07-09 17:06:57 92627 2017-07-0917:05:52 92627 2017-07-09 17:05:13 92660 2017-07-09 17:03:44 92662 2017-07-0917:02:36 92660 2017-07-09 17:01:31 92646 2017-07-0916:55:43 92657 2017-07-09 16:53:48 92657 2017-07-09 16:52:37 92663 2017-07-0916:51:17 92660 2017-07-09 16:50:16 92627 2017-07-0916:48:59 92649 2017-07-09 16:48:16 92705 2017-07-09 16:47:24 92663 2017-07-09 16:46:07 92663 2017-07-09 16:44:54 92627 2017-07-0916:43:40 92603 2017-07-09 16:43:06 92663 2017-07-09 16:42:08 92663 2017-07-09 16:40:36 92649 2017-07-09 16:40:00 92627 2017-07-09 16:39:20 92663 2017-07-0916:38:39 92663 2017-07-09 16:33:12 92663 2017-07-09 16:32:43 92663 2017-07-09 16:31:44 92663 2017-07-09 16:30:46 92663 2017-07-09 16:29:46 92663 2017-07-09 16:28:11 92663 2017-07-0916:26:46 92663 2017-07-09 16:25:43 92663 2017-07-09 16:24:30 92663 2017-07-09 16:23:24 92646 2017-07-0916:21:33 92663 2017-07-09 16:21:03 92663 2017-07-0916:03:58 92663 2017-07-09 16:03:20 92663 2017-07-09 16:01:44 92663 2017-07-0916:00:59 92627 2017-07-09 15:59:15 92625 2017-07-09 15:58:13 92625 2017-07-09 15:56:48 92625 2017-07-0915:54:35 92612 2017-07-09 15:53:03 92612 2017-07-0915:51:57 92660 2017-07-09 15:50:19 92660 2017-07-09 15:49:43 92625 2017-07-09 15:48:29 92660 2017-07-09 15:45:47 92663 2017-07-09 15:34:28 92663 2017-07-09 15:33:20 92663 2017-07-09 14:34:17 92663 2017-07-09 12:11:20 92663 2017-07-09 12:02:41 92663 2017-07-09 10:57:45 92663 2017-07-09 10:54:07 92625 2017-07-09 08:45:09 92663 2017-07-08 23:56:30 92663 2017-07-08 22:12:20 92660 2017-07-08 22:08:25 92619 2017-07-08 13:07:40 92660 Keep Newport Small. Thank you for protecting Mariners' Mile. Keep up the good work. 2017-07-0812:01:03 92627 2017-07-02 15:39:48 92627 2017-07-08 11:59:31 18:52:27 92663 2017-07-08 11:57:32 2017-07-07 92663 2017-07-07 22:47:32 92625 92660 2017-07-07 21:17:50 92663 2017-07-07 19:42:00 92627 2017-07-0719:36:33 92627 2017-07-02 15:39:48 92663 92663 2017-07-07 18:52:27 92663 2017-07-02 15:38:21 92627 2017-07-07 17:13:30 2017-07-0215:34:36 92660 92625 2017-07-07 14:18:16 92662 2017-07-07 02:08:45 92663 2017-07-0616:37:35 15:26:05 92625 2017-07-0615:59:53 15:24:00 92663 2017-07-06 12:43:21 92625 2017-07-05 16:14:05 92663 2017-07-04 11:47:51 92660 2017-07-04 07:24:37 92662 2017-07-02 15:44:04 92625 2017-07-02 15:43:31 92660 2017-07-02 15:42:31 92663 2017-07-0215:41:50 92626 2017-07-02 15:40:44 92627 2017-07-02 15:39:48 92663 2017-07-02 15:39:25 92663 2017-07-02 15:38:55 92663 2017-07-02 15:38:21 92667 2017-07-02 15:37:28 92663 2017-07-0215:34:36 92660 2017-07-0215:31:48 92663 2017-07-02 15:29:46 92660 2017-07-02 15:29:12 92869 2017-07-02 15:28:12 92663 2017-07-0215:26:47 92660 2017-07-02 15:26:05 92660 2017-07-02 15:24:00 92660 Safety should be the number one priority Here. The proposed would only increase the danger factor I am against widening PCH as proposed by the City Council. Besides, we don't need to eliminate or lesson the already small amount of parking in that area. Dangerous, bad idea to widen PCH at Mariner's Mile. Why do we have the worst City Council in the world? Idea:How about they do this in CDM first and see how that goes! Message to our City Council: Stop spending $ on projects that are ridiculous. How about feeding the millions of starving/dying children in Africa instead? 2017-07-02 15:23:17 92663 2017-07-02 15:22:48 92663 2017-07-02 12:15:15 92660 2017-07-0112:28:53 92663 2017-06-30 18:59:23 92663 2017-06-30 14:17:58 92627 2017-06-30 00:26:35 92663 2017-06-29 22:29:17 92663 2017-06-29 22:28:06 92663 Stops the fascists 2017-06-29 21:44:42 92660 2017-06-29 19:17:06 92627 2017-06-28 17:10:50 92625 2017-06-28 17:10:16 92660 2017-06-2817:09:42 92660 2017-06-28 17:06:19 92660 2017-06-28 17:05:10 92625 2017-06-28 17:03:10 92663 2017-06-28 17:02:27 92663 2017-06-2817:01:48 92663 2017-06-28 17:00:34 92660 2017-06-2816:58:37 92661 2017-06-2816:57:38 92659 2017-06-28 16:56:16 92661 2017-06-2816:55:35 92660 2017-06-28 16:53:51 92627 2017-06-2816:51:00 92800 2017-06-2816:49:57 92663 2017-06-2816:48:54 92663 2017-06-2816:47:20 92663 2017-06-2816:46:43 92663 2017-06-28 16:46:07 92663 2017-06-28 16:45:01 92663 2017-06-26 20:46:27 92663 2017-06-26 20:45:42 92663 2017-06-26 20:18:19 92663 1 am willing to help any way I can. 2017-06-26 18:55:32 92662 Thank you. 2017-06-26 12:49:19 92662 2017-06-26 08:43:52 92663 1 may be on your mailing list already. Patrick and I have been involved an have made a donation. 2017-06-24 15:54:32 92660 2017-06-24 15:02:51 92663 2017-06-24 11:37:19 92663 2017-06-24 02:24:09 2017-06-19 18:49:39 92663 2017-06-19 18:23:31 2017-06-23 14:01:41 2017-06-19 17:00:49 92663 92625 2017-06-2311:09:08 community. 92625 92663 AQMD would find this detrimental to our health 2017-06-2215:05:59 92663 Keep PCH no more than 2 lanes each way. Cars race through 92663 when 3 lanes are available. 2017-06-19 16:56:26 2017-06-22 13:10:32 2017-06-19 16:55:37 92625 92663 2017-06-19 16:54:46 92663 2017-06-2210:27:47 Raceway -Residents have rights! 92663 92663 2017-06-22 08:41:02 2017-06-19 16:51:46 92663 Why make traffic worse??? 2017-06-19 16:51:11 2017-06-22 08:39:30 2017-06-1916:50:33 92663 92663 2017-06-19 16:50:02 92663 2017-06-22 08:37:46 and speed zone that needs more policing now! 92663 92660 2017-06-22 08:21:48 2017-06-19 16:47:12 92663 No high density No 6 lanes 2017-06-22 03:04:14 92663 2017-06-22 02:08:47 92663 2017-06-2118:43:13 92660 2017-06-2118:39:38 92660 6 lanes is not necessary 2017-06-20 20:04:41 92663 We dont need it! I am a Newport beach resident a go onto PCH and all nearby highways and we dont need to widen! It will cause more trouble than it helps. 2017-06-20 20:02:30 92663 We dont need it! I am a Newport beach resident a go onto PCH and all nearby highways and we dont need to widen! 2017-06-20 02:44:11 92660 2017-06-19 18:49:39 92663 2017-06-19 18:23:31 92662 2017-06-19 17:00:49 92663 Keep it quaint, no widening of PCH - Do not want another Huntington Beach here on PCH -or anywhere in our community. 2017-06-19 16:58:23 92663 AQMD would find this detrimental to our health 2017-06-19 16:57:27 92663 Keep PCH no more than 2 lanes each way. Cars race through when 3 lanes are available. 2017-06-19 16:56:26 92660 No 6 lanes on PCH in Newport Beach No density 2017-06-19 16:55:37 92625 Keep Mariner's Mile like it is no major development 2017-06-19 16:54:46 92663 No six lane PCH + No Eminent Domain! No Old Newport Blvd. Raceway -Residents have rights! 2017-06-19 16:53:25 92663 2017-06-1916:52:48 92657 2017-06-19 16:51:46 92663 Why make traffic worse??? 2017-06-19 16:51:11 92663 2017-06-1916:50:33 92663 2017-06-19 16:50:02 92663 Please do not widen the highway -It is already a traffic hazard and speed zone that needs more policing now! 2017-06-1916:48:32 92660 2017-06-19 16:48:04 92660 2017-06-19 16:47:12 92663 No high density No 6 lanes 2017-06-19 16:45:41 92663 2017-06-19 16:43:55 92663 2017-06-19 16:42:21 92663 2017-06-1916:40:34 92663 2017-06-19 16:39:41 92663 2017-06-19 16:39:12 92663 2017-06-19 16:37:03 92620 2017-06-1916:35:39 92663 2017-06-19 16:34:05 92663 2017-06-19 16:32:39 92663 2017-06-19 16:27:17 92663 2017-06-19 16:24:29 92660 2017-06-19 16:23:09 92627 2017-06-19 16:22:18 92663 2017-06-19 16:21:06 92663 2017-06-19 16:20:02 92663 2017-06-19 16:18:21 92663 2017-06-19 16:17:00 92663 2017-06-19 16:15:48 92663 2017-06-19 16:13:38 92663 2017-06-19 16:12:04 92663 2017-06-19 16:11:05 92663 2017-06-19 16:10:09 92663 2017-06-1916:08:34 92663 2017-06-19 16:06:15 92663 2017-06-19 16:02:56 92663 2017-06-1916:01:48 92663 2017-06-19 15:59:18 92663 2017-06-19 15:58:09 92663 2017-06-19 15:57:24 92660 2017-06-1915:56:30 92625 2017-06-19 15:55:05 92663 2017-06-1915:53:54 92663 2017-06-19 15:52:34 92663 2017-06-19 15:51:47 92663 2017-06-1915:51:18 92663 2017-06-1915:50:30 92663 2017-06-1915:49:42 92663 2017-06-19 15:49:08 92663 2017-06-1911:36:54 92663 2017-06-19 00:10:44 92663 Do Not Widen PCH Car Spa Objects Strongly oppose change in height construction 2017-06-18 21:59:48 92663 2017-06-15 92660 2017-06-1818:53:36 92661 2017-06-1414:01:09 92663 2017-06-18 18:19:24 92625 2017-06-12 92663 2017-06-18 17:39:03 92660 2017-06-1121:11:29 92663 2017-06-18 15:49:23 92663 2017-06-1118:49:22 92660 2017-06-18 15:05:22 92657 2017-06-1118:48:33 92663 2017-06-18 13:49:00 92660 2017-06-1118:47:40 92663 2017-06-18 08:58:12 92663 2017-06-1118:47:04 92663 2017-06-18 03:19:56 92663 2017-06-1118:46:28 92663 2017-06-18 00:40:37 92663 2017-06-1118:46:03 92660 2017-06-17 23:58:44 92660 2017-06-1118:45:15 92663 2017-06-16 14:06:39 92663 2017-06-1118:44:46 92663 2017-06-15 18:08:50 92663 2017-06-1118:44:05 92663 2017-06-1517:35:46 92663 2017-06-1118:43:36 92663 2017-06-15 16:00:32 92663 2017-06-1118:42:35 92663 2017-06-15 15:59:47 92663 2017-06-15 09:52:50 92661 2017-06-1414:01:09 92625 2017-06-12 15:01:10 92660 2017-06-1121:11:29 92663 2017-06-1118:49:22 92657 2017-06-1118:48:33 92660 2017-06-1118:47:40 92663 2017-06-1118:47:04 92663 2017-06-1118:46:28 92663 2017-06-1118:46:03 92660 2017-06-1118:45:15 92663 2017-06-1118:44:46 92663 2017-06-1118:44:05 92663 2017-06-1118:43:36 92663 2017-06-1118:42:35 92663 2017-06-1118:42:02 92663 2017-06-1118:41:37 92663 2017-06-1118:40:56 92627 2017-06-1118:40:28 92663 2017-06-1118:39:57 92663 2017-06-1118:39:04 92663 2017-06-1118:38:00 92663 2017-06-1118:37:01 92661 2017-06-1118:36:27 92660 2017-06-1118:35:56 92663 Let's keep Mariner's Mile our "downtown" . I own a small business and our office is in this zone. Do not compromise my livelihood by turning PCH into a Freeway! We don't need more than two lanes We don't need it!! No need to widen W. Coast Hwy. NO TO WIDENING OF COAST HIGHWAY! NO TO HIGHWAY WIDENING! 2017-06-1118:35:28 92663 2017-06-1118:35:04 92663 2017-06-1118:33:44 92663 2017-06-1118:32:36 92663 2017-06-1115:53:38 92663 2017-06-1017:21:22 92663 2017-06-10 13:45:21 92663 2017-06-09 23:56:30 92663 2017-06-0919:58:53 92663 2017-06-09 17:59:15 92663 2017-06-09 17:48:29 92663 2017-06-09 17:35:10 92663 2017-06-09 15:23:07 92663 2017-06-09 00:02:37 92663 2017-06-08 23:57:58 92663 2017-06-08 22:23:18 92658 2017-06-08 17:34:49 92660 2017-06-08 15:25:14 92660 2017-06-08 15:23:56 92821 2017-06-0815:22:48 92627 2017-06-0815:20:34 92673 2017-06-08 15:19:44 92649 2017-06-08 15:18:16 91320 2017-06-08 15:16:17 92649 2017-06-08 15:14:50 92627 2017-06-08 15:13:20 90742 2017-06-08 15:12:31 92869 2017-06-08 15:10:18 92689 2017-06-08 15:08:12 93001 2017-06-08 15:05:30 92651 2017-06-08 14:54:21 92627 2017-06-08 14:53:28 92663 2017-06-0814:51:09 92663 2017-06-08 14:49:32 92660 2017-06-08 14:48:22 92663 2017-06-08 14:46:54 92649 2017-06-08 14:45:41 92621 2017-06-08 14:43:53 92663 2017-06-08 14:41:24 92663 2017-06-08 14:40:23 92627 2017-06-08 14:37:09 93514 2017-06-08 14:36:03 92627 2017-06-0814:30:35 92625 2017-06-08 14:29:28 92649 2017-06-0814:25:56 92660 2017-06-0814:24:35 92651 2017-06-08 14:23:46 92660 2017-06-0814:21:34 92663 2017-06-08 14:20:07 92663 2017-06-08 14:18:20 92661 2017-06-08 14:15:36 90740 2017-06-08 14:14:18 92677 2017-06-08 14:12:53 92677 2017-06-08 14:10:07 92661 2017-06-08 14:08:28 92661 2017-06-08 14:07:35 92604 2017-06-08 14:03:10 90602 2017-06-08 14:02:01 92661 2017-06-08 14:01:14 92677 2017-06-08 13:58:01 92683 2017-06-08 13:55:27 92629 2017-06-08 13:53:48 92663 2017-06-0813:52:58 92663 2017-06-0813:48:39 92843 2017-06-08 13:45:19 92660 2017-06-08 13:44:10 92844 2017-06-08 13:42:48 92661 2017-06-0813:41:50 92661 2017-06-0813:39:32 92663 2017-06-08 13:38:09 92622 2017-06-08 13:27:44 92708 2017-06-08 13:25:04 92886 2017-06-08 13:22:31 92627 2017-06-0813:20:34 92627 2017-06-08 13:18:06 92663 2017-06-08 13:16:33 92660 2017-06-08 13:14:42 92840 2017-06-08 11:13:39 92663 2017-06-07 22:05:35 92663 2017-06-07 21:06:45 92663 2017-06-07 21:03:18 92780 2017-06-07 21:01:35 92627 2017-06-07 21:01:00 21:47:30 92663 92627 2017-06-07 20:59:29 92663 2017-06-06 19:07:48 92663 2017-06-07 20:57:42 2017-06-06 92866 2017-06-07 20:56:42 18:10:16 90244 2017-06-07 20:55:47 17:55:16 92663 90915 2017-06-07 20:52:58 92663 92663 2017-06-07 20:51:15 92663 2017-06-07 20:48:35 92660 2017-06-07 20:44:56 92660 2017-06-07 20:43:56 92663 2017-06-07 20:43:16 92663 2017-06-07 20:42:06 92663 2017-06-07 20:40:49 92663 2017-06-07 20:39:56 92663 2017-06-07 20:38:49 92663 2017-06-07 20:36:04 92663 2017-06-07 20:35:04 92663 2017-06-07 20:33:36 92663 2017-06-07 20:32:12 92663 2017-06-0719:58:59 92663 2017-06-07 18:29:19 92663 2017-06-0715:51:08 92663 2017-06-0712:39:58 92661 2017-06-07 09:28:56 92663 2017-06-07 02:19:51 92663 2017-06-06 22:58:37 92663 2017-06-06 21:47:30 92663 2017-06-06 20:09:58 92663 2017-06-06 19:07:48 92660 2017-06-06 19:06:22 92663 2017-06-06 18:43:01 92627 2017-06-06 18:10:16 92663 2017-06-06 17:55:16 92663 2017-06-0617:35:58 92663 Is there any mention of bike lanes with the new traffic lanes, there are thousands of cyclists on the weekends and let's not forget the many kids that ride bikes from the peninsula to Ensigna don Harbor. Additionally, 3 lanes of traffic will certainly increase the speed vehicles travel, which will add to safety concerns, plus let's not forget about pollution, dirt and debris with the additional vehicle traffic. No reason to make it easier for people that don't live here to simply speed through our town without adding any value to our city. 2017-06-06 16:27:20 92663 2017-06-06 14:35:50 92660 2017-06-06 14:28:56 92663 2017-06-0613:52:42 18:02:43 92663 2017-06-0613:48:33 17:55:25 92663 2017-06-0611:26:32 17:08:19 92663 2017-06-06 11:13:51 92663 2017-06-06 09:28:49 92663 2017-06-06 08:13:42 92663 2017-06-06 07:47:31 92663 2017-06-06 00:51:15 92663 2017-06-06 00:00:20 92661 2017-06-05 23:56:28 92661 2017-06-05 23:22:09 92663 2017-06-05 23:12:20 92663 2017-06-05 23:02:48 92663 2017-06-05 21:19:44 92663 2017-06-05 19:52:11 92663 2017-06-05 18:23:50 92663 2017-06-0518:20:45 92623 2017-06-05 18:19:31 92663 2017-06-05 17:48:15 92663 2017-06-05 17:18:52 92625 2017-06-05 16:29:00 92663 2017-06-0515:30:58 92663 2017-06-05 15:20:28 92663 2017-06-05 15:13:47 92663 2017-06-05 03:15:26 92663 2017-06-04 18:02:43 92660 2017-06-04 17:55:25 92627 2017-06-04 17:08:19 92663 2017-06-04 16:38:55 92663 2017-06-04 16:22:49 92663 I will email this to my friends. I'm completely against the expansion) Warning to residents and merchants. Plans that are presented at public hearings can and have been significantly changed behind the backs of members of the planning commission and behind the backs of impacted nearby residents. I speak from personal experience . See Planning Commission Meeting of 4/20/2017, PA2016, document items 2j and 2m. http://newportbeach.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?publish id=b4a1ed45-2b5a-11e7-b343-f04da2064c47 2017-06-04 16:20:46 92663 2017-06-04 11:16:33 92663 2017-06-0410:01:56 92663 2017-06-03 23:50:09 92663 Pili �LQ���li]✓cI�[�].YIYdc1 2017-06-03 20:08:00 92611 2017-06-03 18:31:09 92663 2017-06-03 18:18:27 92663 2017-06-03 18:10:21 92663 2017-06-0318:09:42 92663 2017-06-03 16:47:31 92663 2017-06-03 15:33:27 92663 2017-06-03 15:25:13 92663 2017-06-03 13:41:53 92663 2017-06-03 12:28:30 92663 2017-06-02 22:32:47 92663 2017-06-0214:42:58 92623 2017-06-02 14:30:07 92649 2017-05-30 17:45:41 92660 2017-05-29 23:23:31 92620 2017-05-29 18:15:28 92663 2017-05-29 18:14:38 92660 2017-05-29 18:13:25 92662 2017-05-29 18:12:19 92625 2017-05-2918:11:32 92662 2017-05-29 18:10:53 92662 2017-05-29 18:10:03 92663 2017-05-2918:08:56 92660 2017-05-29 18:08:02 92625 2017-05-29 18:07:10 92660 2017-05-29 18:06:07 92625 2017-05-29 18:05:04 92660 2017-05-29 18:03:55 92662 2017-05-2918:02:47 92660 2017-05-29 18:01:44 92662 2017-05-29 18:01:11 92625 I would like to make a donation but can only send a check to where ? Thanks i do not want the city to widen the lanes. it will take away from the charm and beauty of the area. it is not necessary to do such an expansion. this is not a freewayH Larger highways cause traffic deaths, especially for pedestrians. They decrease the value of the homes nearby. We would like a safe crossing for pedestrians and bicyclists to cross PCH. 2017-05-29 18:00:40 92660 2017-05-29 18:00:20 92662 2017-05-29 17:58:44 92627 2017-05-29 17:58:05 92662 2017-05-29 17:57:10 92663 2017-05-29 17:56:36 92627 2017-05-2917:55:30 92660 2017-05-29 17:54:02 92662 2017-05-29 17:53:20 92646 2017-05-2917:52:40 92662 2017-05-29 17:51:13 92662 2017-05-29 17:49:37 37886 2017-05-29 17:49:04 92663 2017-05-29 17:47:23 92660 2017-05-29 17:44:49 92660 2017-05-29 17:42:21 92663 2017-05-2917:41:20 92661 2017-05-29 17:40:14 92660 2017-05-29 17:37:15 92627 2017-05-29 17:36:46 92662 2017-05-29 17:35:45 92649 2017-05-29 17:34:24 92660 2017-05-29 17:33:35 92603 2017-05-29 17:33:00 92660 2017-05-2917:31:44 92780 2017-05-2917:31:00 92660 2017-05-29 17:30:07 92625 2017-05-2917:28:54 92662 2017-05-29 17:28:20 92662 2017-05-2917:27:04 92663 2017-05-29 17:26:09 92627 2017-05-29 17:25:09 92660 2017-05-29 17:24:18 92662 2017-05-2917:23:44 92660 2017-05-2917:22:43 92663 2017-05-2917:21:43 92625 2017-05-29 17:11:52 92662 2017-05-29 17:10:55 92662 2017-05-29 17:10:10 92662 2017-05-2917:08:56 92603 2017-05-29 17:07:54 92625 2017-05-29 17:05:06 92660 2017-05-29 17:03:23 92660 2017-05-2917:01:57 92625 2017-05-2917:00:47 92646 2017-05-29 16:59:47 92627 2017-05-2916:58:37 92604 2017-05-29 16:57:50 92660 2017-05-29 16:57:04 92660 2017-05-2916:55:43 92662 2017-05-29 16:54:57 92625 2017-05-29 16:54:19 92625 2017-05-2916:52:56 92660 2017-05-29 16:51:23 92660 2017-05-29 16:50:22 92660 2017-05-29 16:48:58 92660 2017-05-29 16:47:06 92663 2017-05-29 16:46:29 92663 2017-05-2916:45:33 92663 2017-05-29 16:44:39 92663 2017-05-29 16:43:20 92663 2017-05-2916:42:33 92663 2017-05-2916:41:28 92663 2017-05-2916:40:39 92663 2017-05-2916:39:36 92663 2017-05-29 16:38:20 92627 2017-05-29 16:36:20 92663 2017-05-29 16:34:24 92663 2017-05-2718:35:33 92646 2017-05-27 18:16:49 92660 2017-05-2717:58:24 92662 2017-05-2717:57:37 92662 2017-05-2717:56:35 92662 2017-05-27 17:54:58 92662 2017-05-27 17:54:09 92625 2017-05-2717:53:04 92660 2017-05-27 17:50:19 92663 2017-05-27 17:49:45 92662 2017-05-27 17:48:14 92660 2017-05-27 17:47:24 92662 2017-05-2717:46:33 92663 2017-05-27 17:45:49 92660 2017-05-27 17:44:20 92663 2017-05-27 17:43:12 92625 2017-05-27 17:42:25 92660 2017-05-2717:40:44 92625 2017-05-27 17:39:41 92662 2017-05-27 17:39:07 92657 2017-05-27 17:38:17 92660 2017-05-27 17:37:28 92625 2017-05-2717:34:49 92627 2017-05-27 17:33:17 92617 2017-05-2717:32:07 92663 2017-05-2717:31:16 92662 2017-05-2717:30:32 92660 2017-05-27 17:24:22 92662 2017-05-27 17:23:36 92662 2017-05-2717:22:54 92660 2017-05-2717:21:44 92662 2017-05-27 17:21:11 92660 2017-05-27 17:20:32 92683 2017-05-27 17:18:51 92661 2017-05-27 17:18:01 92662 2017-05-27 17:16:52 92657 2017-05-27 17:15:53 92662 2017-05-27 17:15:20 92646 2017-05-27 17:14:36 92701 2017-05-27 17:13:47 92662 2017-05-27 17:12:42 92662 2017-05-2717:11:36 92662 2017-05-27 17:10:41 92657 2017-05-2717:09:44 92660 2017-05-27 17:08:55 92660 2017-05-27 17:07:55 92660 2017-05-27 17:07:03 92662 2017-05-27 17:05:55 92618 2017-05-2717:04:45 92662 2017-05-27 17:03:33 92662 2017-05-27 17:03:01 92662 2017-05-27 17:00:26 92660 2017-05-27 16:59:21 92662 2017-05-2716:57:52 92660 2017-05-27 16:54:57 92663 2017-05-27 16:52:56 2017-05-27 16:49:39 2017-05-27 16:48:11 2017-05-27 16:46:58 2017-05-27 16:45:43 2017-05-27 16:45:09 2017-05-27 16:44:42 2017-05-27 16:43:26 2017-05-27 16:38:10 2017-05-27 16:37:47 2017-05-27 16:37:14 2017-05-27 16:35:20 2017-05-27 16:33:31 2017-05-27 16:32:55 2017-05-27 16:32:08 2017-05-27 16:31:32 2017-05-27 16:30:11 2017-05-27 16:28:12 2017-05-27 16:26:05 2017-05-27 16:25:02 2017-05-27 16:23:28 2017-05-27 16:22:44 2017-05-27 16:22:05 2017-05-27 16:21:17 2017-05-27 16:20:49 2017-05-27 16:19:06 2017-05-27 16:18:36 2017-05-27 16:18:06 2017-05-27 16:09:18 2017-05-27 16:08:27 2017-05-27 16:07:53 2017-05-24 21:43:05 2017-05-24 20:57:11 2017-05-23 17:20:50 2017-05-22 16:16:34 92660 92660 92660 92662 92662 92657 92663 92663 92661 92648 92662 92663 92663 92660 92657 92663 92663 92661 92627 92627 92659 92663 92649 92663 92663 92663 92663 92663 92663 92663 92663 92625 92660 These proposed changes will ruin life as we know it and endanger the children who ride their bikes to school. Thank you for not doing this! Expanding residential and business without more square footage for parking, Not a smart move going forward. Thank you. I drive PCH from Balboa Island to Riverside Drive everyday NO WAY do I want this enjoyable section to become a freeway type stressful drive ... NO NO NO No More Traffic... We need safety here! Stop Car Accidents. Too Much Traffic! 90272 1 own 2400 West Coast Highway and I support the Petition To Preserve Mariner's Mile 92626 This is a great cause!! 2017-05-20 18:15:25 92663 2017-05-20 10:14:59 92660 2017-05-1914:07:54 92663 2017-05-19 09:03:43 92660 2017-05-19 00:38:55 92663 2017-05-16 15:23:22 92663 2017-05-15 19:11:23 92663 2017-05-15 17:28:58 92660 2017-05-15 17:28:28 92663 2017-05-15 17:13:10 92663 2017-05-15 17:12:30 92663 2017-05-15 17:10:39 92663 2017-05-15 17:10:05 92663 2017-05-1517:08:58 92663 2017-05-15 17:08:09 92660 2017-05-15 17:07:23 92663 2017-05-15 17:06:38 92663 2017-05-15 17:06:00 92662 2017-05-1517:04:59 92663 2017-05-15 17:04:09 92661 2017-05-1517:02:52 92660 2017-05-1517:01:45 92663 2017-05-15 17:01:15 92662 2017-05-15 16:59:44 92663 2017-05-15 16:59:12 92663 2017-05-1516:58:30 92663 2017-05-1516:57:34 92663 2017-05-1516:56:34 92663 2017-05-15 16:55:24 92663 2017-05-15 16:54:35 92663 2017-05-1516:52:33 92663 2017-05-15 16:51:42 92663 2017-05-15 16:50:17 92663 2017-05-15 16:49:14 92663 2017-05-15 16:48:23 92662 2017-05-15 16:47:32 92663 2017-05-1516:46:30 92663 2017-05-1516:43:40 92663 2017-05-15 16:42:55 92663 2017-05-15 16:42:03 92663 2017-05-1516:41:18 92663 no more traffic No more traffic on PCH! No more traffic on P.C.H. Please don't have anymore traffic on Coast Highway. 2017-05-15 16:39:29 92663 2017-05-15 16:38:42 92663 2017-05-1516:36:35 92663 2017-05-1516:35:37 92663 2017-05-15 16:35:03 92663 2017-05-15 16:32:48 92663 2017-05-15 16:29:07 92663 2017-05-15 16:27:06 92663 2017-05-1516:25:57 92663 2017-05-15 16:24:37 92663 2017-05-15 16:22:32 92663 2017-05-1516:21:24 92663 2017-05-15 16:20:43 92663 2017-05-15 16:18:26 92663 2017-05-15 16:17:05 92663 2017-05-15 16:15:38 92663 2017-05-15 16:14:53 92663 2017-05-15 16:14:02 92663 2017-05-15 16:13:07 92663 2017-05-15 16:05:13 92663 2017-05-15 16:04:13 92663 2017-05-15 16:03:09 92663 2017-05-15 16:01:51 92663 2017-05-1514:35:32 92663 2017-05-1510:11:55 92660 2017-05-13 16:00:42 92663 2017-05-1219:25:50 92663 2017-05-12 17:43:21 92625 2017-05-12 10:16:53 92663 2017-05-1113:35:18 92663 2017-05-1113:28:35 92663 2017-05-10 22:29:43 92663 2017-05-10 16:15:01 92663 2017-05-10 12:51:54 92663 2017-05-10 11:26:31 92663 2017-05-10 02:01:53 92663 2017-05-09 20:53:05 92832 2017-05-09 20:50:19 92660 2017-05-09 20:47:52 92819 2017-05-0912:09:33 92663 2017-05-08 23:19:20 92663 Thank you for your hard work! Will help gather signatures and/or go door to door. 2017-05-08 17:47:42 92663 Letws get this thing cranked up, and send the "City" a 92663 2017-05-07 message. 2017-05-08 10:49:42 92663 2017-05-07 2017-05-08 01:47:37 92648 92663 2017-05-07 23:52:11 92663 2017-05-07 22:56:26 92663 Thank you!! I can't tell you how delighted I am that there is 92663 92663 now a committee in our neighborhood acting to protect us 11:38:20 from the Planning Commission's ideas. 2017-05-07 21:16:49 92663 2017-05-07 21:13:13 00:38:26 92663 2017-05-07 20:56:17 2017-05-07 92663 2017-05-0719:21:47 92663 92663 2017-05-07 14:23:24 92663 92663 2017-05-07 11:38:20 92663 1 am already involved. 2017-05-07 09:38:32 92660 2017-05-07 08:22:45 2017-05-06 92663 1 commend and support this community wide initiative and 92663 Thank you for all the ground work done up to effort. 2017-05-07 06:16:15 92663 2017-05-07 00:38:26 92663 2017-05-07 00:06:42 92663 2017-05-07 00:05:22 92663 2017-05-06 22:18:50 92663 2017-05-0619:39:57 92663 2017-05-06 18:18:10 92663 Thank you for all the ground work done up to this date. Betty 2017-05-06 17:48:22 92663 Stop the Newport Freeway !!! 2017-05-06 17:13:58 92663 2017-05-0617:02:35 92663 2017-05-0616:45:54 92653 2017-05-0615:51:34 92663 2017-05-0615:51:06 92663 2017-05-06 15:39:40 92663 2017-05-06 14:57:45 92660 2017-05-06 13:14:20 92660 2017-05-06 13:13:28 92663 2017-05-06 11:08:07 92663 2017-05-06 08:47:45 92660 Awesome website!!! You can use my house for meetings. 2017-05-06 01:24:53 92660 Fantastic work you are doing! 2017-05-06 00:06:45 92663 2017-05-05 10:16:29 92663 1 will stay in touch. Thanks so very much!! Nova, Makana From: Patrick <jem1981@roadrunner.com> Sent: July 11, 2017 4:37 AM To: Hart, Lindsey@DOT Cc: Ryan P@DOT; Chris C@DOT; Dutton Timothy@DOT; Dixon, Diane; Avery, Brad; Duffield, Duffy, Muldoon, Kevin; Herdman, Jeff; Peotter, Scott, O'Neill, William; Kramer, Kory; Koetting, Peter; Zak, Peter; Dunlap, Bill; Hillgren, Bradley; Lawler, Ray; Weigand, Erik; Lowrey, Lee; Kleiman, Lauren; Campbell, James; Kiff, Dave; Wisneski, Brenda; Nova, Makana; Webb, Dave (Public Works); Brandt, Kim Subject: The Future of Mariners' Mile - Let's Build Our Costal City for People to Enjoy Now and In The Future Attachments: July 9, 2017 Daily Pilot 10072017.pdf; July 7„ 2017 July 7, 2017 Leter re. Mariners' Mile Future to City of Newport Beach .pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Good Morning Lindsey, As suggested in Tim Dutton, Public Information Officer, Caltrans District 12 letter dated June 8, 2017, 1 sent the City of Newport Beach a letter dated July 7, 2017, asking the City of Newport to determine the future of Mariners' Mile within the framework of the Citywide General Plan to be updated in 2018. In this letter I also presented the view that the City must work with Caltrans to have West Pacific Coast Highway fall under the City's jurisdiction, not Caltrans jurisdiction, to assure that the city determine the destiny of Mariners Mile. On Sunday, July 10, 2017, the LA Time's Daily Pilot published my views in the Commentary Section with the title "Mariners's Mile should become a village akin to Corona Del Mar, Laguna Beach" and ask you to forward this article to the appropriate parties within District 12, Orange County. A coalition composed of business owners and property owners along West Pacific Coast Highway and homeowners in adjacent neighborhoods has joined together in response to the City's proposed Revitalization of Mariner's Mile Plan. The primary goal of the coalition is to ensure that our Bayside Community's integrity is preserved now and for future generations. The website titled Preserve Mariner's Mile hiip://preservemarinersmile.org provides a historical perspective of our seaside community, highlights critical facts and community issues that must be addressed in determining the future of where we live and the neighborhoods our children are raised. Please pass along my comments to the Governor and the California Department of Transportation Director. Kindest regards, Patrick Gormley Past Present Bayshores Community Association Newport Beach, California On Jul 10, 2017, at 5:29 PM, Hart, Lindsey@DOT <Lindsey.Hart(c),dot.ca.gov> wrote: Mr. Gormley, Good afternoon. I apologize for the delayed response. I am acknowledging receipt of your email and letter on behalf of Caltrans District 12 in Orange County. I have forwarded this information to the appropriate parties within our district. Thank you, Lindsey Hart Chief of Public Affairs Caltrans OC (District 12) 949.279.8931 @caltrans 12 From: Patrick[mailto:jeml981(a)roadrunner.com] Sent: Friday, July 7, 2017 7:51 AM To: ddixon(a),newportbeachca.gov; bavery(aa),newportbeachca.gov; DDuffieldA,NewportBeachCa.gov; kmuldoon(a,newportbeachca.goy; iherdmanknewportbeachca.gov; speotter(anewportbeachca.gov; woneillknewportbeachca.gov; kkramerknewportbeachca.gov; Koetting Peter <pkoetting(a,newportbeachca.gov>; Zak Peter <pzak ,newportbeachca.gov>; Dunlap Bill <bdunlap(a,newportbeachca.gov>; bhillgrenAnewportbeachca.gov; Lawler Bill <rlawler(a),newportbeachca.goy>; Weigand Erik <eweigand(ibnewportbeachca.goov llowrey(a),newportbeachca.gov; lkleiman(a),newportbeachca.gov Cc: City of Newport Planning Department <jcampbellknewportbeachca.gov>; Brandt, Kimberly@City of Newport Beach <kbrandtknewportbeachca.gov>; Kiff Dave <dkiffna,newportbeachca.gov>; bwisneski(a),newportbeachca.gov; mnova(a,newportbeachca.gov; Webb David <dawebbAnewportbeachca.gov>; Chamberlain, Ryan P@DOT <rvan.chamberlain(iWot.ca.gov>; Flynn, Chris C@DOT <chris.flynn(0),dot.ca.gov>; Hart, Lindsey@DOT <Lindsev.Hart(a),dot.ca.gov>; Dutton, Tim@DOT <Tim.Dutton(a),dot.ca.gov> Subject: The Future of Mariners' Mile Dear Newport Beach City Council, Planning Commission, City Manager and Staff, The Newport Beach Community is committed to working together with the City of Newport Beach for Mariners' Mile along West Pacific Coast Highway to become a more friendly village encouraging people to ride their bikes, walk, dine, and shop. The Newport Beach City Council, Planning Commission, City Manager and Staff must do all within their authority to prioritize protecting children, residents, and visitors and find ways to slow traffic, enhance safety, and widen sidewalks and bike lanes to transfer West Pacific Coast Highway to a more pedestrian and bicycle friendly thoroughfare. I request that the enclosed letter presenting my views be included in the packet of material for the July 20, 2017, Planning Comission Hearing re. Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan. I also request my letter be included in the 2018 update of the City's General Plan. Please acknowledge receipt my letter. Let's build a coastal city for people to enjoy now and in the future. Your Neighbor, Patrick Gormley Past President Bayshores Community Association Daily P116t SUNDAY, JULY S. 2017 /// Now including Coastline Pilot and Huntington Beach Independent /// dailypilot.com COMPAENNTARY I "'lil' - Mariners' Mile should become a village akin to Corona del Mar, Laguna Beach Let's build a coastal city for people to enjoy now and in the future. Newport Beach should remain a charming "coastal town" along the tranquil bay. To most Newport Beach residents, Mariners' Mile is our Main Street and the heart of our town. This access to the beaches services our schools, neighborhoods, business districts and post office. West Pacific Coast Highway should not be a race- way or a motor corridor for commuter and com- mercial traffic. Newport Beach's stretch of PCH should instead be a meeting place that's welcom- ing to and safe for walkers and bicyclists. There is a growing movement in beach towns to transform PCH into a more pedestrian- and bicy- cle -friendly thoroughfare. From Seal Beach to San Diego, cities are prioritizing protecting children, resi- dents and visitors, and to do Without a C so, they have found ways to slow traffic, enhance safety, the transfo widen sidewalks and bike Mlle, ong0 lanes, and make other changes that facilitate the Continue to Bow of pedestrians and bicyclists. disappoin Without a clear vision guiding the transformation of Mariners Mile, ongoing efforts will continue to be suboptimal and disappointing. Newport Beach cannot have it both ways. A village attracting peo- ple and a cross-town freeway are incompatible. Today's property owners, residents and commu- nity strongly desire that Mariners' Mile be trans- formed into a village akin to Corona del Mar. The continuing evolution is most evident in the Mariners' Mile Strategic Vision and Design Frame- work, dated Oct. 4, 2000. This document recog- nized the inherent conflict in designing a welcom- ing village and high-volume highway, and it set forth a strategy "to discourage the policy of widen- ing Pacific Coast Highway through Mariners Mile." Additional support for rethinking the widening of PCH along Mariners' Mile comes from the con- cept of "induced demand." Induced demand sug- gests widening a road to ease congestion, but typically ends up causing more people to choose to drive the road and therefore does not achieve the intended aim. Property owners, local merchants, residents and communities throughout Newport Beach are now contesting the Mariners' Mile Revitalization Plan under consideration by the Planning Commission. information is available at prorecrmariners mile.org. The council must consider the future of Mari- ners' Mile from a citywide perspective. We now have a golden opportunity to build a genuine and lasting community consensus. We can make a strong commitment to work together and to en- courage city planners to Lear vision guiding prioritize safety and rmation of Mariners' community. iIlefforts 11/111 The General g Plan process be suboptimal and is the most appropriate tiIlg means to assure en- hancing and revitalizing our beach city's main street to create a village for our enjoyment. A clear vision must guide the plan's citywide framework We can look to seaside towns, from Sunset Beach to San Clemente, that have limited their highway to two lanes. Recently Corona del Mai and Laguna Beach have grappled with these issues and have chosen to remain two-lane high- ways. The Newport council must determine Mariners' Mile's future within the comprehensive framework of the citywide General Plan and work to have West PCH fall under city jurisdiction, not Caltrans', to assure that the city determines its destiny. PATRICK GORMLEY lives in Newport Beach. Nova, Makana From: Peggy Palmer <pvpalmer@icloud.com> Sent: July 11, 2017 8:46 AM To: Nova, Makana Subject: Patrick Gormley's Letter from Cal -Trans Attachments: CAL-TRANS.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed Dear Makana, Please make certain that this letter is included in the Planning Commission Meeting on July 20, 2017. This letter clearly indicates that Caltrans is not involved with the Mariner's Mile widening as it pertains to the Revitalization Plan. Without a clear vision vision guiding the transformation of Mariner's Mile, ongoing efforts will be fragmented and disappointing. A village attracting people and a crosstown freeway are incompatible. While past Mariner's Mile Plans have recognized the inherent conflict in designing a welcome village and high volume highway is reckless disregard for our community. The Mariner's Mile Revitalization plan should not exclude Pacific Coast Highway. Thank you, Peggy V. Palmer (949) 887-2471 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 12 1750 EAST 4TM STREET, SUITE. 100 SANTA ANA, CA 92705 PHONE (657) 328.6000 FAX (657) 32M522 TTY 711 %v w.dot.mgovld12 June 8, 2017 Mr. Patrick Gormley Past President Bayshores Community Association Newport Beach, CA Dear Mr. Gormley: 0 Sertoas Drought. Making Consennfion a California way of Life. Thant: you for taking the time to share your comments about plans for Mariners' Mile in Newport Beach. Normally, all comments received during the public comment period for our projects receive a written response at one time. Our responses are made public when the environmental document is finalized, which can be weeks or even months after the end of the comment period. The comment period for this particular project just ended on Monday, June 5, and we are still drafting our responses. However, I can tell you that we share your concern about pedestrians and bicyclists. In fact, one of the goals of the current project is to promote bicycle safety by extending the bike lane through this section of Pacific Coast Highway. You and a number of others voiced strong concerns about the city's overall plans for revitalizing the Mariners' Mile section of PCH. Please keep in mind that the current Caltrans project primarily aims to revamp the right -tum lane from PCH onto Old Newport, as well as extend the bicycle lane on PCH. Any comments about the city's plans for Mariners' Mile should be directed to the City of Newport Beach. We thank you for your comments and we have passed them along to the Governor and the California Department of Transportation Director as you have requested. We will also provide a more formal response in writing to your comments with the final version of the environmental document for this project. Sincerely, ''nn Tim Dutton Public Information Officer Caltrans District 12 Santa Ana, CA Provide a safe, sustainable. integrated and efficient transportation sysiem Nova, Makana From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Makana, Peggy Palmer <pvpalmer@icloud.com> July 11, 2017 8:48 AM Nova, Makana STROAD What the City has planned for Mariner's Mile flies in the face of new research for pedestrian friendly neighborhoods.docx Follow up Flagged Please make certain that the included in the Planning Commission Packet for the July 20, 2017 meeting. Thank you, Peggy V. Flamer What the City has planned for Mariner's Mile flies in the face of new research for pedestrian friendly neighborhoods. The Revitalization of Mariner's Mile encourages responsible development projects combining multiple lots. This redevelopment of property would mean a big stimulus for the economy of Newport Beach, yet at the same time it would also discourage transportation policies and traffic engineering practices which promote increased traffic volumes and speeds on Mariner's Mile. Increased volumes and speeds would discourage a family friendly destination and a 'village like' feel in the heart of our town. It is engineering malpractice to try to convince property owners, local merchants and residents that when it comes to our road that the City assumes to know more than we do. Essentially, the City would be turning PCH into a 'STROAD'. This is a term used to describe what is referred to as part street, part road; a 'STROAD' is unsafe, unattractive and bad for local economies. A STROAD is a street/road hybrid that would create a very dangerous environment, mixing a high-speed highway with pedestrians, bicyclists and turning traffic. It is built at the expense of property owners by eminent domain and is ultimately financially unproductive. Basically, high-speed automobiles and pedestrians shouldn't be in the same place; the result is an expensive highway that moves cars too fast to support productive private sector enterprises. In turn, this will ultimately lead to a declining tax base. (Research has shown that anytime you are traveling between 30 and 50 miles per hour, you are basically in an area that is too slow to be efficient, yet too fast to provide a framework for capturing a productive rate of return.) If we want to build places that are financially productive, we need to eliminate STROADs. California Coastal Towns are now adopting two sweeping initiatives, Vision Zero and Mobility Plan 2035, in an effort to decrease traffic lanes and increase bike lanes in an attempt to reduce vehicle speeds and collisions. These plans call for reducing traffic deaths and improving transit and bike infrastructure across the city. The focus is building strong neighborhoods and social cohesion. Why not adopt this same model for Mariner's Mile? In addition, the City Engineers' plan for this 1.3 mile stretch of road calls for off street parking. Removing parking entirely could put the City at odds with the California Coastal Commission, which has traditionally held that removing parking in the coastal zone is a form of denying access to public beaches and harbor sides. If the City continues to pursue the expansion of PCH along with the Revitalization efforts of Mariner's Mile, they are guilty of engaging in a process of 'groupthink' gone wrong. Encouraging the best form of development for Mariner's Mile needs to come from the highest level of leadership and filter all the way down the chain. Change needs to come from the elected officials, who are making safety their first priority before those of speed and travel time. Most importantly, any change should include the valuable and constant input of its residents. When children can't ride their bikes to and from school, junior guards and summer camps, because the traffic speed is too dangerous, the engineering profession is NOT acting responsibly. It's time to stand up and demand change. Peggy V. Palmer The Coalition to Protect Mariner's Mile Newport Beach, CA www.noPCHfreeway.org Nova, Makana From: Peggy Palmer <pvpalmer@icloud.com> Sent: July 11, 2017 8:51 AM To: Nova, Makana Subject: Mariner's Mile Article for the PC Meeting 7/20/2017 Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Makana, Please male certain that this article is included in the Planning Commission Meeting that will be held on July 20, 2017. Thank you, Peggy Palmer http://www.latimes. com/socalldaily_pilotlopinionitn-dpt-me-0205-mailbag-20170204-story.html Mailbag: Mariners' Mile proposal remains foggy The Jan. 26 Mariners' Mile public workshop at Marina Park was intended to provide residents with a clear vision of what the city and the consultant, Placeworks, have been working on since their last community meeting. It was clear that the city and the consultant have their vision, and this vision was not shared with the community. The same visual presentation was shown, with the same conceptual sketches. Only this time the discussion shifted to phrases as, "building mass," "harbor frontage," "commercial corridors" and "master opportunities." The "master opportunities" were specifically directed at the property owners along Pacific Coast Highway, and this term was further defined as "discretionary actions," "dedications" and "land offers." This would allow the city to work with Caltrans to increase the lanes on PCH to six. This would encroach on and impact many private properties along Mariners' Mile. The proposed Avon Village, which would be located between the streets of Riverside and Tustin, are some of the most narrow and compacted streets in Newport Beach. The mobility of this particular area is impractical and ill-considered, as these streets are within feet of the residential community of Newport Heights. This area is also home to three schools, Newport Heights Elementary, Horace Ensign Middle and Newport Harbor High. This critical area should not be used as focal point for development. Furthermore, increasing PCH to six lanes, and to include Avon Street's two lanes, could potentially make this small area of town an eight -lane artery. This would not be a harmonious merger for the families, or the school children, and for the general quality of life in this residential community. In addition, the Master Plan was never presented with the updated conceptual drawings, yet this project will be "revealed" to the city in the near future. It seems that transparency is antiquated in the city of Newport Beach and that listening to the taxpayers' concerns is not necessary anymore, but listening to the guy in town with the most money is the name of the game. Newport Beach citizens' vision is clear, and that after six months of Mariners' Mile workshops, it is apparent that the city's vision remains foggy. Peggy Palmer Newport Beach Congressman is too pro -Russia In recent weeks, our federal government revealed clear and credible evidence that there was interference in our presidential election by a hostile, foreign nation, Russia. I was dismayed to find out that my congressman, Dana Rohrabacher (R -Costa Mesa), has been a longtime cheerleader for Russian President Vladimir Putin. In December, Rohrabacher said it was "terrific" that the Democratic campaign was hacked, according to CNN. Alarmed by this cavalier, and deeply unpatriotic stance, I looked into my congressman's background. What I found was appalling. He has supported Putin and Russian invasion into neighboring countries, according to Saton, for years. He admires Putin, according to the Washington Post, and announced that Putin was right, and the U.S. was wrong, about the Russian invasion into Georgia in 2008, according to the Telegraph. Gregory Cohen Laguna Beach Nova, Makana From: Peggy Palmer <pvpalmer@icloud.com> Sent: July 11, 2017 8:53 AM To: Nova, Makana Subject: Commentary: Contemplating the future of Mariner's Mile - Daily Pilot Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Makana, Please include this editorial in the Planning Commission Packet for the meeting to be held on July 20, 2017. Thank you, Peggy Palmer htip://www.latimes. comisocalldaily_pilotlopinionitn-dpt-me-0804-commentary-20160729- stor Commentary: Contemplating the future of Mariner's Mile With very limited parking, and a very steep staircase to climb, the residents of Newport Beach did not disappoint to fill the Newport Beach Sea Base Yacht room to attend a public workshop for the Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan. This was presented by the city's newly appointed consultant, PlaceWorks. The PlaceWorks Professional Service Agreement that was signed by the city states that PlaceWorks will review the Newport Beach General Plan and document its descriptive visualizations for the future of Mariners' Mile. This would include conceptual drawings, templates and outline Mariners' Mile vision and design framework. PlaceWorks has prepared a series of conceptual drawings that depict the potential land use, residential housing, streetscape conditions, mobility and connectivity of the roads that will include a "highway -oriented corridor." According to the city, Coast Highway is carrying approximately 44,000 cars trips a day. The 14 massive projects that have been approved and or are near completion by the most conservative estimate this will likely generate an estimated 100,000 car trips daily on PCH. The workshop consisted of a "pop -quiz" in which one of the questions was, "How Do You Spell Mariners' Mile?" There were vague and incomplete aerial maps of Mariners' Mile placed on each of the six tables with blue, green and red round stickers. Then each group was given a black marker to list the challenges, opportunities and dreams for Mariners' Mile. This is when the meeting ended for the consultant, and where it began for the residents. It was evident that the maps, stickers and charts were all a juvenile and futile attempt for the residents to believe that they had a say in this project. It wasn't lost on the residents that after 21/2 months, P1aceWorks and the city of Newport Beach must have a vision of the 11/2 mile area. The residents wanted to know what that vision was and pleaded for transparency. Why wasn't their vision presented at this meeting? The citizens' vision is clear; they do not want to replicate Huntington Beach or Marina del Rey. What was apparent was that there will be impacts of the "view -shed" along PCH and the bluffs to the Harbor frontage. In fact, there is talk of making PCH will six lanes in the area. What is the definition of "view shed" and what does this mean for all of Newport Beach and especially for Newport Heights? The concerns were apparent and these impacts were not addressed at the workshop: • Newport Beach/Lido/Newport Heights property values. • Views. • PCH, potentially increased to six lanes. • Impact of Traffic for Corona del Mar, West Newport and Newport Heights. • Light pollution. • Noise. • Water. Newport Beach continues to regulate a mandatory 15% reduction, unlike the surrounding cities and the rest of California. • Project commencement date and project completion date. There are two more scheduled workshops. These meetings need to be held at the City Hall for convenience of parking, pedestrian and handicapped access. A friendly reminder to P1aceWorks and the city of Newport Beach: Please bring the Master Plan with the conceptual drawings to the next workshop, as you can be assured that the Newport Beach residents will bring the rest. PEGGY V. PALMER lives in Newport Beach. Nova, Makana From: Peggy Palmer <pvpalmer@icloud.com> Sent: July 11, 2017 9:01 AM To: Nova, Makana Subject: When car ownership fades, this parking garage will be ready for its next life - LA Times Makana, Please include this article in the Planning Commission Packet for the meeting to be held on July 20, 2017. We have a golden opportunity toibuild our coastal City for people to enjoy now and in the future. The future of Mariner's Mile must be determined within the framework of the City Wide Plan to be updated in 2018. If the top their developers, such as Rick Caruso recognize that their is a "TRANSPORTATION REVOLUTION" that will drastically reduce vehicle use, then maybe the City needs to look toward the future and not in the rear view mirror. Thank you, Peggy Palmer htto://www.latimes.comlbusiness/la-fi-car-future-real-estate-20170405-story.html When car ownership fades, this parking garage will be ready for its next life One of the country's biggest apartment developers is working on plans for a grand residential complex in downtown Los Angeles that includes what appears to be an ordinary garage. There will be row upon row of lined stalls at street level and two floors underground to store nearly 1,000 cars of tenants and visitors to the trendy Arts District, where parking is relentlessly hard to find. But when it's completed in about four years, the ample garage will be one of the first of its kind in Los Angeles: It's designed to eventually serve other uses. AvalonBay Communities Inc. has planned the garage for a time when ride -sharing services such as Uber and self -driving taxis whittle down car ownership until parking places become expendable. That might mean its level rather than inclined floors common to many garages could someday be converted into shops, a gym and a theater. "Our world is going to change radically and we are going to be alive to see it. It's not a generation away, it's 10 years away," said Los Angeles architect Andy Cohen, who is not involved with the project but has created a presentation he gives to clients about the architectural implications of the transportation revolution. AvalonBay is not the only real estate developer that has bought into the idea. Rick Caruso, the owner of the Grove and other upscale shopping centers, is working with Google to prepare for the arrival of self -driving cars and is looking forward to eventually swapping mall parking spaces for apartments, restaurants and stores. The strategy reflects a consensus among some developers and planners that California's vaunted car culture is inevitably going to run out of gas as inconceivable as that might be for many adults who have spent decades controlling their own destiny behind the wheel. Cohen, co -chief executive of architecture firm Gensler, predicts car ownership will peak around 2020 and then start to decline, with more Americans relying on some form of ride -sharing than their own vehicles by 2025. That means cars gradually would disappear from home garages, curbs and parking structures, freeing up acre upon acre of real estate for new uses. "One of the great changes in the next 20 years is going to be redevelopment of parking garages," said Christopher Leinberger, chairman of the Center for Real estate & Urban Analysis at George Washington University. Sections of the garage could still be used for parking even as other parts are converted for other uses. (Gensler) There is a lot to work with: About 500 million parking spaces serve this nation of nearly 326 million people, according to Gensler. Parking infrastructure covers an estimated 3,590 square miles, an area larger than Delaware and Rhode Island combined. The public is already fascinated with the race to perfect self -driving cars, which would free up garage space even if most Americans were to own one of the new high-tech vehicles. A car could drop off a couple at the front door of their apartment building and then disappear into a garage untrammeled by wandering humans where vehicles delicately park themselves inches apart. The total amount of garage space needed to maneuver and park a car would be more than cut in half, Leinberger said But he expects self -driving cars to become commodities, not possessions. People will summon them only when they need them, so the rate of car ownership should drop drastically, he predicts. "Cars will be wandering the city 24-7, so you don't need to own one," Leinberger said. "You just rent it as you need it." How cities would look and function if far fewer people owned cars is impossible to say, however, so the best real estate developers can do now is start hedging their bets. Residential landlord AvalonBay has been expanding the number of electric -car charging stations in apartment complexes it is building in West Hollywood and Hollywood and making prominent drop-off points for ride sharing. But it has far more dramatic car -related ideas for the 475 -unit apartment complex it is planning for downtown L.A. The Virginia-based company, which operates nearly 84,000 apartments in 10 states, is beginning to plan for a future with fewer — and autonomous — cars. "We're just starting to do this as a company on a nationwide level," said Mark Janda, senior vice president of development. Preliminary concepts for the Arts District project set to start construction in 2019 presume that demand for parking will fall in years ahead. Garage floors are typically slanted to eliminate the need for ramps, but AvalonBay will make these floors flat so that they can more easily be repurposed when parking demand dips. Janda envisions portions of the two levels of underground parking being converted to a gym, a theater and perhaps other recreational uses when cars can park themselves two or three deep in tighter spaces. The first floor could be reconfigured to plug in more shops and restaurants and enable smooth and constant pick-ups and drop-offs. "We are designing it so in the future, if demand for parking decreases dramatically, we have the flexibility to go back to the city and ask for additional entitlements to change uses from parking to whatever," Janda said. Cohen, the L.A. architect, advised that garages on the drawing board also have higher -than - normal ceilings — up to 13 feet — to accommodate future uses such as offices. He also would place elevators and stairs in the middle the way they are in offices. And he would put what he calls knock -out panels in the ceiling and floors to create future light wells. The exterior design cannot be an afterthought too, he said. If the garage is above ground with offices above, it has to look like the rest of the building so windows can be added after the conversion. But don't expect that developers today will start constructing projects without a garage, Janda said. "People in California still rely on their cars and expect to be able to park them," he said. For that matter, despite what some believe is the inevitability of a transportation revolution, many builders are reluctant to pay for flexibility until changes in driving habits are more pronounced, said Los Angeles real estate attorney Justin Thompson of Nixon Peabody. A lot of developers may think, "Well, that's going to be on the back burner for a while," Thompson said, "but the progressive developers are going to factor this in." Shoppers at the Grove wait for Uber and Lyft rides in a designated zone on the east side of the property. (Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times) Shopping center magnate Caruso counts himself among the more progressive. He said he is committed to spending millions of dollars preparing for autonomous cars, and he's already working with a division of Google called Intersection to improve the arrival and departure experience at his high-end developments. Intersection is developing technology that integrates beams, sensors, license -plate recognition and phone apps that can radically improve the experience, he said. When the concierge knows you are about to arrive, he might mix a cup of coffee the way you like it to hand to you as you alight. The goal, Caruso said, is to make coming and going to the shopping center as frictionless as possible. He's already experienced the changes wrought by Silicon Valley. The Grove, in L.A.'s Fairfax district, is one of the city's busiest Uber destinations, Caruso said, with thousands of people arriving and departing every day at the mall's designated ride -sharing point. This popularity of ride sharing has convinced him that more big changes in driving habits are coming as autonomous cars gain a share of the auto market. He expects that between ride sharing and autonomous cars he might have to start converting his parking garages to other uses as soon as 2025 or 2030. Surface parking lots at his suburban malls such as the Promenade at Westlake and the Commons at Calabasas could turn from asphalt into verdant mixed-use complexes with apartments, offices and more stores and restaurants. The big garages at the Grove and Americana at Brand in Glendale could see the addition of grocery stores and other retail outlets on the ground floors. "As you go above that, it gets more complicated," he acknowledged. The towering garages "may become obsolete and have to come down and be replaced." While the prospect of dramatic changes in the way people get around stirs the blood of developers like Caruso, the anticipated years -long transition period to widespread autonomous vehicle use holds some dread for the general manager of the Los Angeles Department of Transportation, Seleta Reynolds. "I think it's going be very chaotic," she said. This isn't a fleeting moment, some interesting blip that will come and go. This will change traffic in L.A. in a very positive way. — Rick Caruso, owner of the Grove Falling parking fees and fines could take a big bite out of public budgets and landlords' income, Reynolds said. And the time period when "a vehicle drives itself until a human intervenes is probably going to be the worst, but that is a place we are going to have to muddle through." Other challenges and technical improvements loom to be worked out, Reynolds said. If cars know where they are going, do streets still need curbs? Perhaps some streets could be electronically "closed" after rush hour and used for recreation. "We should be focusing on strong neighborhoods and social cohesion," Reynolds said. "That's the promise of autonomy if we're really able to get it right." Caruso dismisses skeptics who say Angelenos will never quit driving their own vehicles — and that ride sharing and autonomous cars are just a passing fancy. "This isn't a fleeting moment, some interesting blip that will come and go," he said. "This will change traffic in L.A. in a very positive way." To read the article in Spanish, click here roger.vincent(a),latimes.com Twitter: 6d roaervincent ALSO Apple receives permit to test self -driving cars in California Doing auto repairs at an HOA parking lot? Here's a crash course in the violations Robert W. Taylor, visionary figure in the birth of personal computing and the Internet, dies at 85 Nova, Makana From: Peggy Palmer <pvpalmer@icloud.com> Sent: July 11, 2017 9:23 AM To: Nova, Makana Subject: Accident at the Sea Scout Base Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Attachment available until Aug 10, 2017 Makana, Please make certain that this video is sent to all of the Planning Commissioners prior to the July 20, 2017. It is a miracle that this happened at night instead of the day when hundred of students are attending the sailing schools on Pacfic Coast Highway. There is also a tutoring school and soon to be preschool that will be located on the West Coast Highway. With 1,500 Junior lifeguards crossing PCH everyday in the Summer and 4,300 children in Newport Heights, expanding PCH is dangerous and a hideous concept and needs to be addressed in the Revitalization plan for Mariner's Mile. It is inconceivable to discuss one without the other. Thank you, Peggy Palmer http://ecros.newportbeachca.gov/Web e/d�ocIT2D752Ff/Manners_Nlil7ide4 IMG_9210.MOV 71.9 MB Sent from my iPhone Nova, Makana From: Peggy Palmer <pvpalmer@icloud.com> Sent: July 11, 2017 9:41 AM To: Nova, Makana Subject: Sailing and Aquatic Schools Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Makana, Please make certain that this is included in the Planning Commission Packet on July 20, 2017. It defies logic not to address the sailing and aquatic schools along PCH that conduct classes and camps all year long. There is `Squid" Day Camp for the little children and there is the Paddle Sports Camp, kayaking, rowing, canoeing and stand up paddle board camp and the Junior Aquatics Camp. These classes and camps begin at 8:30 AM and end at 4:30 PM. It is imperative that the City consider both the artery that is runs through the heart of our town, known as Mariner's Mile in the Revitalization Plan. Not to do so would be gross negligence on the part of the City. Thank you, Peggy Palmer 2 pedestrians injured when struck by car TWo pedestrians "TrV hospitalized Thursday night after being struck by a car that veered off �Ycst coast HighwaY in Newport Beach. Newport Beach police nsponded to the 19M WWI of tlac higluvay at about 9:40 p.m. after re, cc iving a report that a vahi- de hail hit two people and craslwd frau a btuilding, authorities said. policc said the car was driving east when it veered off the mad and stntck the paYlestrians. it wasnY clear what caused the car to veer. The extent of the pedes - mans' injuries was not im- mediately known. Alcohol or drags do rW appear to be a factor Ln the crash, police said. NO at n�t4 were made. — Hannah Fir 0 a., 9 Dear Mr. Charles Baker, On behalf of the property owners, local merchants and residents of the Mariner's Mile area. I wanted to inform you that we are strongly opposed to any widening of Pacific Coast Highway at Newport Blvd., specifically the proposed project area known as the Arches Bridge. This small corridor intersects Mariner's Mile, as well as, the historical Arches. Originally built as a restaurant and service station, construction began on the Arches in 1925, the same year Coast Highway opened up from Huntington Beach to Newport Beach. This building has always been considered a recognizable staple of Newport Beach and it has helped to shape and inspire the town in its early stages and continues to be a part of the heart of our town to this day. This particular area of Mariner's Mile is a 1.3 mile stretch that is also a residential corridor with 1,900 homes combined in Newport Heights and Bayshores. It is also home to three schools, 4,300 children within 1/3 of a mile from each other located in Newport Heights. In addition, there are four sailing and rowing schools located on PCH, The OCC Sailing School, Collegiate Rowing School, Chapman Crew Base and the Boy Scout Sea Base. The soon to be built Maritime Training Center will be located across the street from these sailing and rowing schools. All of these schools listed above have classes, camps and collegiate rowing courses all year long. This 1.3 mile section of PCH, should not become a thoroughfare for commuter and commercial traffic. As you can imagine, safety is a huge concern as children, bicyclists and pedestrians utilize PCH to go to and from schools, homes and work. There are close to 1,500 Jr. Lifeguards traveling to and from the peninsula during the summer season. There are many bicycle enthusiasts traveling through to the next coastal town on the stretch of West Coast Highway. Expanding this corridor of PCH would endanger too many lives, especially those of our children. Almost all seaside communities are two lanes in each direction, from Long Beach to San Clemente, including Corona Del Mar ... Why not West Newport? On the weekdays the current traffic flow moves without an issue, with the exception of the typical 5:00 PM traffic, which has an approximate commuter time of 15-20 minutes with only the southbound lanes affected during peak traffic hours. Furthermore, there are 44 curb cuts within this particular area of West Coast Highway; slowing down traffic is the only responsible and reasonable plan to consider. The dynamics of the traffic flow are completely different on the weekends. The automotive dealerships along this stretch of Mariner's Mile include BMW, Porsche, Audi, Ferrari, McLaren, Lamborghini and Maserati to name just a few. PCH becomes a racetrack in which the dealerships use PCH in Mariner's Mile through Brookhurst to test drive cars with their customers at speeds that far exceed the current speed limit. Before noon, the motorcycle clubs, the car clubs along with beach and bicyclists take to the streets. There is a "roar along the shore" for 48 hours straight on Saturday and Sunday. Widening this area of Mariner's Mile is a bad idea and certainly not a welcome one. It was a bad idea in the 1960's when the property owners, local merchants and residents, who were referred to as `The Freeway Fighters', fought the expansion. The time may be different, however, the message remains the same. We do not want what according to Dave Webb, the traffic engineer for the City of Newport, would replicate a large arterial highway. Mr. Webb's assertion that our bayside corridor should have three lanes in each direction should be considered gross negligence with regard to our children, our community and our valued tourists. Examples of six lane Arterial Highways — (Average Daily Trips) • Jamboree south of the 405 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 and La Habra (42-47K ADT) • Valley View through Los Alamitos and Cypress (42-52K AD) Interestingly, The top five most dangerous intersections in Newport Beach are currently six lane highways' • Jamboree/Bristol, MacArthur/San Joaquin Hills MacArthur/Bonita Canyon Civic Center Newport Center Drive San Miguel/Avocado "source OC Register The above highways are an example of exactly what we DO NOT want to happen in our community. Mr. Baker, on behalf of the property owners, local merchants and residents, we ask that you do not succumb to the whims of a City engineer who is aggressively going against the wishes of its taxpaying citizens. We have made our concerns known to the City of Newport Beach. At this time, I ask that you carefully review this disastrous plan of widening PCH and stop this project immediately. We do not want to refer to PCH as "slaughter alley", at least not on our watch. Thank you for your time and consideration. Peggy V. Palmer (949)887-2471 1701 Kings Road Newport Beach, CA 92663 Nova, Makana From: Peggy Palmer <pvpalmer@icloud.com> Sent: July 11, 2017 10:09 AM To: Nova, Makana Subject: A Matter of Life and Death Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Attachment available until Aug 10, 2017 Makana, Please present this video to the Planning Commission for the July 20, 2017 meeting. This video illustrates two emergency vehicles and a police motorcycle trying to navigate on PCH in an emergency. If PCH were to widened and the lanes narrowed at what cost would this come to those people in route to Hoag? How many more minutes would it take for emergency vehicles to get through this area? The expansion of PCH, needs to be part of the Revitalization plan. Thank you, Peggy Palmer hftp://ecms.newportbeachca.gov/Web/O/edoc/1207527/Mariners Mile_Video_1. mp4 IMG_8348-1.MOV 86.3 MB Nova, Makana From: Peggy Palmer <pvpalmer@icloud.com> Sent: July 11, 2017 10:14 AM To: Nova, Makana Subject: Street Parking Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Makana, Please make certain that the Planning Commissioners review these photos prior to the Planning Commission Meeting. These photos contradict the City Engineers thoughts to remove parking along Pacfic Coast Highway. We need to consider all of the components of Mariner's Mile, if we are to have a successful Revitalization Plan on Mariner's Mile. Thank you, Peggy Palmer �oil ,lein, �fi,�-i Wwa Fur .L1iW\gin,\1,.1„bA.L�,\1:1111►G:�.\.. r�`�"i1� , +.q• .7 ,. ft�-Nbmh6' r c t � 2 f-3 9 r. s Nova, Makana From: Peggy Palmer <pvpalmer@icloud.com> Sent: July 11, 2017 10:24 AM To: Nova, Makana Subject: Accidents along PGH Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Makana, Please make certain that this photo is presented to the Planning Commission Meeting on July 20, 2017. Almost everyday there is an accident on PCH. The traffic is going too fast. Please note that there are 44 curb cuts on the inland parcels along this 1.3 stretch of road and the speed limit is 45 miles per hour. (Most vehicles are averaging 50-60 miles per hour, this is extremely dangerous to pull our from a drive way on to PCH.) What are the thoughts of the Panning Commissioners with regard to try to create a family friendly village and walkability factor in the midst of collisions and chaos? We simply can not consider one without the other. Thank you, Peggy Palmer U Nova, Makana From: Peggy Palmer <pvombaur@aol.com> Sent: July 11, 2017 10:35 AM To: Nova, Makana Subject: Marshall Duffield Sr. Transcripts Attachments: 1492_VOl.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Makana, Please include Mr. Marshall Duffield Sr. transcripts in the Planning Commission Packet. Although, this was taken in 1972, it is eerily ironic and highly relevant today with regard to Mariner's Mile. It is the same message that is resonating in our City today. Thank you, Peggy Palmer onnunity'History MUSHALL DD rT.D -* 3ax.-cy Leigh CoagtfO Rmmmy Deletion Jmie 22, 1976 Jane Mueller DDFI al a R Li This interview with 71arsball Duffield. for California Mate University, i llerton Community History Project by Barry .Leigh at 694 Lest 17th street on June 22, 1976 about 9:45 a.m. lie are in AIr. Duffield's office and with that lead-in let's go over here to the first question. Let's begin by having you tell your recollection of the Pacific Coastal Zreeway deletion in ,lewport Beach. D: It's rather a complex question to answer. The original concept of the free- way running up and down the coast seemed to make some sense 1 think, to most everyone. It was the location, the original location of the freeway, or the various locations that caused the trouble. The concept of running the feee- way right thooh„h the middle of liewport Beach was what aggravated everyone that lived in the community. That' where the real confusing started, otherwise I don't think ther's been any opposition. For example, there was a group including most of the citizens of Costa :!was most of the slong people up therep=ml who wanted the freeway to come right down/the Coast liighway through Newport Beach and that would have taken off the tax rolls the most expensive land in all of southern California. Haddthey taken the alternate croute, on the borderline between Costa Mesa and ,iewport Beach, they would hzve been a mile shorter, which would have saxed something like ten or fifteen million dollars, it cost about ten or fifteen million dollars a mile to construct the freeway, and the property they would have had to dollar condemn would have been twenty thousand/an acre property instead of ;,A60,000 an acre property and also the concept of cutting the city in two is what most that everyone dorm here was upset about. Yet it seemedbwith all the hearings and everything else, all the objections of idewport Beach, that they were being overruled by the adjoining cities who were going to force the Coastal, the selection of the coastal route, which for some reason or other, 1 don't quite understand the thinking of some of these engineers. They were going DUFFIMD 9 to, between Huntington Beach and A,,rport Beach, the concept was to teas up the Coast Highway and all the utilities underneath it, and build a freeway along Wt route and rebuild the Coastal fiteewray a hundred yatxds inland from the new freeway, thereby building two roads for the need of one. I couldn't conceive them nol leaving the Coast Highway where it was and putting the freeway a hundred yards in, but the engineers have reasons that are some- wre tines a little beyond our , and at the outset we --1 guess were all kind of awed by the engineers and their learning till W finally figured out that they weren't that '!might, so that's when a group of us down here decided there was Oomething wrong with this whole thing and that we would would see what we/do about it. Then the fight started there$ because here was a freeway that the head of the Division of highways, the Chief hgineers of the Division of Highways of California selected the inland route and he wauld said that the coastal route/cost something in excess of 4VW90000000 more to come dorm and hang a freeway along the bluffs, parallel to the Coast Highway there$ and tear up the Coast highway too. That's needless expen- diture in our opinion, of extra monies and it was aomething worth fight- ing against. 3o we took off from there. Ue found a „roup... Cne of the bas&B of my original activity in it, the Hoag Hospital had some extra pxo= perty on which they had planned expansion right along the bluffs, in front of them and the Coastal ib•eeway was designed to go right across the from; of Hoag Hospital$ taking their expansion property from them. Isere was a very e:,Tensive and very much needed facility for the area that vas, going to be damaged by the freeway. :bot only that, they were going to have the Zewport iTt-eeuay come down and join at that juncture right under the front door of that iIoag hospital and have a five -layer spagetti interchange them. probably which was going to bo he most herendous thing. That would clog up the DUI -4=0 3 the Lido Isle, the peninsula and everything else. Jo we had too many people here a2reaay with really an old-fashioned subdivision, or I should say, an under subdivision, for parking, gaxgges and so forth, no Balboa Island and on the peninsula, and to make it easier for more people to comet irhen /Ve have too many here already, it seemed to be kind of ridiculous, land to pile it all right there at the Lido Peninsula and the Coast Highway, the Hoag Hospital and everything else, was, wo thought going to make an impo:;.;i- ble situation. 'Je started, oh, the fiiw4eHospital joined with us in the fight and I ... really,my fdnd raising activities were to pfarily to get funds for the Hoag Hospital, donations to the Hoag Hospytal, to help fight the battle of their property. All ire were ai#cing tha*was to put it behind the Hoag Iiospltif not in front @$ it. But again, I said, they did. ..'ow ire had sort of a oTI groups of citizens got together that wore interested, but no real leadership until some of us who were, who had been through a few problans before like this, decided that we needed some real leadership and we hired, brought dorm a guy from Los Angeles who was an old classmate of mine, and he helped us organize a real campaign against the freeway, even to the extent of making dateq for going to zJa"CW to present a petition of 20,000 signatures to the Director of 'transportation back there in l;ashington. I must say we got short -tripped there, nobby gave us much attention. Je did get in because he had gone through, he knew somebody in Uxon's Ile at least got in an office, but ire sure never got to folic to the top guys. And I know, , that I'm sure tlat they couldn't wait to through that petition into the ashcan. 3v�verybody kept telling use "You're never going to got anywhere," and we imet to Na,cremento and ire hdd bills introduced up there by our Assemblymen to this from the free - of stay packet, and they never would got out/a committee) it would always be Dul-ITTao 71 blocked, and up there we'd always find that Auntingt4n poach and lagnma Beach and CoWA ;esa would be up there fighting against us, so Newport Beach was all 1jr itself and being sort of the sibk stocking district, Well, we couldn't get much help. Then we figured another approach that the Divi- sion of Ughwa;s generally don't usually condemn land and go through a piece of property unless they can make a deal with the community or with the local governing body, like the city of Newport, to close the local marls. They have to close the "al roads in order to build the i'reesray. Obvious ly they can't build it on stilts or skyhooks, alp if the local community refused to allow the roads to be closed, there was probably no way for the freeway to be built, and as a result, the State Di*sion of highways, I think, in general practices have always worI;ed with the 4ity and refusod to build a freeway if they didn't have the local governing body's sunpnrt. T So, we dkUded that the city council then, could vote against helpmng or against signing any agreement or any contract with the Division of Ugh- wayst which would stop the freeway. Then, of course, the developers down here would have some new Guys elected to the city council who would be up for grabs every four years as to who would get up for city council, and who was going to change the rules. So then we decided after some research we decided that by chanUIng the Charter of the city , we could... and them bring this up to get a charter change we had to get a referendum, we had to get three or four thousand signatures, and as a referendum we modify, we'd change the charter of :iewport peach to read t* no city council or no contracts $huuld be made by a city council with the Division of Ilitghways, to close any of the roads or build the freeway through the city of ;rewrport Beach unless the freewaay plan was first approv ,. by sixty percent of the votersq in the community. So it would always be a FIRW-59—MI e public vote or a public referendum as to irhat the people wanted. 3o we had to have a local election hese first. Jo went out and inside of a week mostly frith our organization, xxtumskmf wonderful gals, irho really do more of the work than the guys doT-one little old waaan went out and I think she and her husban:1 got over throe thousand signa.turea. I donut Y.now how you do this, but anyway he had eleven or twelve thousand signatures and we needed three. Ie had that many in there the first wee:, so obviously this went ai the ballot and at the eloation ire had, we took one of the local newspapers that had a weekly circulation and we used their headlines and stuff, and with their support ere printed our own newspaper with the help of this Pi: guy from toim. .ie had banners saying "_�eway Aghteiu" and spud, and anyway delivered that to every home in the community. That' about all the money we had to spend, because that cost us soveral thousand dollars and that eras about all our shots, right there. The election, as it turned out was eight or nine to one opposed to the freeway for the charter change, inspite of the fact that all the local papers in Orange County the Daily Pi.1ot, the Los Angeles Times and the Register, all of them were ag*nst usi they were for the freeway going right through iiewport Beach. ii'ow Laguna wasn't for the freeway going through Laguna, and Huntington Beach wasn't for the freeway going through Huntington Beach, and Ban Clemente never did like the freeway down the middle there, but they were all for st going through Newport, and Costa Iiesa said they already had too many freeways going through them. 2verybody felt they should legislate what we should have and I guess what they planned to do, was to slow dorm going through Laguna and risk your life ciming to a tiro lane deal down through Laguna, and then when you get to Newport you can go the sixty miles an hour and race right through. And the same way, then you'd have to slow down in Huntington Beach again. That is, if you want DUFFILU 6 UP to go xI g the coast. But here, along the coast, they were going to have a window to the ocean or something, and at seventy miles an hour you axe supposed to watch these sailboat races I guess. The scenic freeway, we used to call it S}}.ughter Alley because thats what it would amount to. Imagine, guys r acing along here at high speed when you are supposed to cut back on the speed and all these beautiful sailboats out there working aroudd in the bay, too much temptation, I'm afraid, for the driver to look, slut anywayrI got sidetracked there --at the end of the election we, the vote was either eight or kine in our favor. It was a complete landslide. Then, of coursepwo had to get this charter ammendment approved by the tate of Califonaia, by the Assembly and the Senate. �Je thought the fight was all over; ire got up there and foun{I we were still fighting. But we took our group up to Sacramento, I guess, for the last time and Denny Car- penter, thank heavens,our State Senator, he got us a good hearing up there in front of the dente and one Senator from Rakersfield, I forget his name but he played football at Jashington State and we had played against each other, which I didn't know, but he remembered. So we were in the front of this thing up there, we got visiting together, and he said,"You know," he was on the Senate floor, he says,"I used to think 111ghway aigineers, road engineers, road people were real smart guys and that they knew what they were doing." Then he said," As I look back, if you'll think now of Baker.- -field, they built the first freeway through Dakersfield diagonally, right across the city and by doing this they out every... the water main, the everything electric line/on every street in town. Had they paralled the streets instead of cutting diagonally across they would have cut od1gtonto cross the streets, they would have out into half of them. Had hhey/avoided community a little, which they now have done, they would have saved toarin DUFr LLD p up 111 those utilities and putting them in again. I'm referring to a state senator that was up fro, Bakersfield. Them he says,"After seeing that," he said,"I think it's fair to say that maybe these guys are idiots, and have no concern for money, and it's time we put the brakes on them." So ire just happened to hit jacramento at a time when everybody, the comm- unities throughout the state? Monterrey, Pasadena,Santa Barbara, Oxnard# those people in those areas were fighting the freeways, started opposing Vie freeways and the manner in which they were pushed through to a cer- tain city without giving the local people any say what -so -ever. Oh, they g,* us lip service, they had a ... the Division of Highways would call it a hearing and they'd have three routes picked out and then they always had people there without oven trying to have people there who were defen- ding each route or supporting each separate route or different route, and then they would say, 'Seep you cant settle it, so we'll go back and we'll settle it." So then they would do what they wanted todo inn the first ploce. They paid no attenction to chat the community wanted in most cases, as evidenced by the general uprising throughout the state. And I guess that was the end of our freeway fight and now we have a char- ter anmendment here and they could put a itreeway thruugh here, but we'd have to vote on it, and the people here would have something to say about it. Incidentally, this harbor down here, that people seem to laugh at, and they treat us as country cousins in the County of Ornge, produces, I think, tax-wisep I've had boats and you pay a pretty fair tab each year on oats, on these yachts that run up and down here and there are millions of dollars going into the county treasure, the county funds each yeas. Out of the water's Wge dorm here, I know the ecologists have offered opening it up and all *at, but this is one of the great recreation areas , in my opinion, one of the great recreation areas in Southern Californiap marine oriented and I noticed what they've done in San Diego and the use that's DUMEM 0 coming out of that area, the use by all the people of the state, not just by a few, and with the upper bayr had we put a tunnel in there and eliaina- ted this concept of a bridger we would have then opa4 up that upper bay which is a couple or throe miles of bay, and incidentally, there's only two land -locked haxborsbetween San Diego and,.. one of them j is Porro Bay and the other is liewport Beach. The only two natural harbors batwoen here and Nonterreye between San Diego and Idonterrey. .10 it isn't a:: though we had a lot of these harbors to play around with, but here we'v_ got a L;reat facility there that now I guess, the upper bay is—because of 411 this fuss and some of it I 1*1ped start, we're not going to be able to do anything with the daze stuff except leave it for worms and minnows to hatch and i Vds to stand on their toes and look at the sand e=*p and whatever they want. The hiidwatehers, I don't mean to say anything aga:ins then, }ess theme I think that's finer but I bet ire launch more boats in one Sunday in our lam.ching ramp than they have bi.rdiiatchers in California; If you are talking about davelop&nk anX;area for the use of the people gen- we should have galowed orally of the state and I think they should have beane/the upper bay not the home on the edge of the bay with the boat, and the boat slip and aU that stuff, but for the crew races up there, and maybe for skiing; or for whatever, but there's all kinds of uses to be made of that kind of especially when we're fresh out of it. 1 -hey built a jetty at Santa .Barbara, they built a jetty at to maize a harbor at San Pedro, and we don't have har*r bore down here. This and iiorro Day are the two natural harbors. To put that a *oeway or a bridge/could strange that upper bay also was a OLd con- cept, we thought. So that was our fight and I guess we kind of won it. Lo I just want to compliment you on your total recall. Of all the interviews so far, thtt was just fantastic. The best overall summary of the situa- tion. I'm going to go into my last question, first, because you'de done such an outstanding job discussing it, and that is, you mentioned some- DUr' PLD BPI thing about the preservation of the bay in relation to somethng, in a sense the idea of you started a little bit. In other words, lxd*U SK ecology or environ- mbntalism. To what extent do you think the ecology movement helped the Freeway righters defeat the freeway? D: Well, the fact that it was going to have a bridge, an eight -lane or twelve lane bridge asamms over the upper bay, across the upper bay was one thing and the :.oast Guard was with us and we got the Sierra Club to join in the fight with us. The building of that bridge itself, the structure itself, was going to be damaging to the upper bay, and also in a sense, strangle it, the useeof the upper bay, any bridge is going to reduce its use up there, by boating facilities, not by the fish nec- essarily, but ... and when I say started, we called in the Sierra Club, s a friend, we'd grab. anybody we could get as a L: Jere there any other environmental issues in town; D: I think we've got an issue that is still here, is still with us. Those kho are subdividers and developers are anxious to develop any acre of land, and you can't blame them. If I owned the land, I'd want to deve- lop it also, but there's really only two people kho are interested in a high-rise and that's the landowner and the builder of the high-rise. The community of i+ewport Beach , the people who live here and pay the taxes, they are not going to make a nicket out of thsse subdivisions, so , they have no in6erest in a dense community adding thousands of cars to their present highways. We have a substandard, so many areas are sub- standard here. Thegewere built and followed little community roads, narrow roads and substandard roads and as a result, they are not designed to take care of heavy traffic loads, yet we're imposing high-rise build - right Ings/now, all around it that will envision bringing in an awful lot more traffic on the same roads and now the cry is going up agin,"we've got to DUFFIELD 10 have a freeway." But the freeway... the people who live down, they have a house on the peninsula, on Balboa Island, along in there, they have no Antorest in what goes on inland, they're with the Irvine Company, they're going to make the money, not the people who live on the oefan front down there, the people who live there. They're primarily interested iu the village atmosphere. So you're going to have a constant fight there, bete teeen the landowner developer and the guy who wants to build, to maintain and retain the village atmosphere. The reason we all came down here wsa to get away from all the traffic in Los Angeles. I to drive down Olympic Boulevard, and I don't know, there are more people going down Olympic Boulevard than have ever gone down the Coast Highway in one day, for any designated hour or set time. We don't know what traffic is down here compared to what it is in ;Aos Angeles. do loft that to get down here where there wouldn't be that. And here it comes again. A lot of people say," You can't sit here and say we won't let anybiy elsq in, I would close the door when you got in." .io, that's right, but I do think we need a second bridge over the bay, somewhere up in the middle to take care of the big commercial center that the Irvine will be developing, because xhtckxtKx=the way it is now if you want to go west or up the coast, west or north, you either have to go around gad of the bay or you have to come across that little bridge. That's the only way to get north or west. A second bc-idge would be, I thick, a mat adjunct. Originally the Ir - vines wanted it a bridge to b across the nazTows, but I don't know how enough of fax away from reality that is. .'ell anyway, that is/that. Ls There's a lot of that genetal studf in there that chimes right in with all the things I've been studying. How about back -tracking a little bib. Your personal role in the issue. I've been told you were thef'f 9d raiser I DUFFIMjD 11 dould you like to dicuss that at t tl? Is that .that you did for thet-ee- way .'fighters or..., your own personal role in the freeway fight. Ds Yes, I was chairman of the fund raising, but for the Hoag Hospital, ie got it for Hoag because Hoag was the only big insittution along that route with their approval and the di'rectors/wanted to oppose the 10e4ion of the freeway, noir the ft - freeway, but the location of the freeway. They wanted to move it in. It was very logical, they wanted to save their property and so within the environs there i Waig got the donations made to the hospital and then later or, 1 6'Oess we had our own budget Freeway Aghters. de got an awful lot of one dollar and three dollar and five dollar contributions. A lot of that came in, which is very helpful, out of course, it takes a lot of that to pay any of these bt71s, Ls Did you get any larger? Ds I guess the largest contribution we got was probably a thousand dollars of any one contribution, there were several people. I shouldn't say who they were without their permission, anyway, but there were several thousand dolr- lar contributions, and some fiw'e hundreds, but there were an awful lot of fives and tens and twenty -fives, de had a finance4committee with bankers that put it into the bank and all that stuff, kept track of it. All I did was ask people for help. Ls You were involved rightalong from the Hoag protests back in 1964 and 1965 late 1964, all the way through to 1972. Than you were involved wi6h all ,freeway fight organizations. There were three of them, right? Ds Well, Ls orAone general movement? Ds Yea, it was one general movement. P*orona iAl iiar had one kind. .:e found When we first started that ire were talking about7ewpovt:—'each's problem and talking about moving the freeway into 17th street or the boderline of DUFFI CLD 12 Costa Mesa and Newport Beach around 1$th, and another bridge, but not thinking of the Corona Del, 1,,T r people. Then, all of a sudden, *hey had a big organization and they were gatxgxta conceried about tb-4;t freeway cutt- the middle of ing right through/Corona Del. "Ur with a five level interchange. have you ever seen a five level interchange? It's almost ... it's unbelieveabel, and that was going to be right at the Coast Highway and MacArthur. That was in the design. Of course, the Corona Del ilar people were up in arms about it. .io then, ire decided wezwere not going to be engineers and we got that group in with us end we said,"we're not going to tell them where to go, we're going to tell them,here it cannot go.'Te're not saying where you should put a freeway beca*se we are not engineers, but we're telling you that we're not going to accept this. Mat's when we started making progress. Then we could unite. Jo we dedetkuljy by working on deleting the whole think we brought in whatever groups had wanted in. L: The Corona Del Mar issue was a big one, wasn't it? Ds It was a big one, vest it was a big one. L: alas it 5th avenue? D: Fifth avenue and As I say we were nto alert to let that support go at the outset. de should have had it right from the start, all of a sudden but ire didn't think about it until/one of their groups started showing up at our meetings explaining to us what they wanted dogn at that end. And it was so much more Iogiaal because, believe me, but when you start talk- ing to these guys, these public officials about saving forth or fifty million dollars, I thought I had uncovered something. They ignored me. I couldn't believe it. I couldn't believe that epople that were employed to spend our tax money wouldn't have any concern about something that mm would save forty million dollars as presented by their own chief engineer. They completely ignored me, and that got me angry. That's when I started ire were going to do something about it. They were going to have to listen DUFFI O to us sea^.er or later. U L: Do you think it made any difference when the governorship changed li<*:ds, ilora Droim to Reagan? a matter of fact was Di Nell, we thought Reagsn...Roagan the one who gave us lip service. He was the one who was going to help us, but he didn't. Ile didn't get into that. It wao hands off. Thatjs 111 I could get out of his office. " ":muds off"because that ims a controversy. Costa ffesa has 70,000 voters and we have fifty, or forty, so everytime iye got before a politician, We got to lot �Ie got to lose right noir, there. no only thing we had in our favor was that ar; wdia lot of the money that goes to the politicians comes out of here. Then we told them pretty forcefully one night, that at a 'Lag Ublicai: meeting that they could treat us like 3outhenz Democrats all they please, knowing that we had to vote Republican and just go ahead and abusa us but don't come doom for any more money. (laughter) And that started to get some of their attention. 3ecause we did have all the well - to -do people in the eommunity on our side. Hundred dollar donations wasn'�, lia.xd to get for this kind of a t*g. sition to it when they saw tho story. There were so many people in oppo- L: I read oxieplace where John a me endorced the movenent. D: Yes, Duke was with us. He and I were, not classmates, fad ternity brothers and at school at the same time, one yeax4, rie was ahead of me, we were at UdC together. Duke, of course, lives down here, and sure glad he doesn't have a 12 -lane freeway about 50 y*O from his house. 1 don't think he'd be living there still. L: How about Assemblyman Badhan? D: Bob was helpful in many ways, he really was. Bob was with us. He had his political fences to worry about too. He ... one very 9r:portant meeting we needed his vote. Ile was called to O"an Diego. It seems to be what they DUFFlao 14 cart do up there when they don't want to face an issue, they're not there. They're absent. And all you c«L do is swj,'well, you weren't there", and he wasn't ite's got au excuse why yAufzmaLat there. But outside of that one time, Bob was +4;reat �,1td very, vary 4ble. IIe had fAgends and surntorters that wore there. Io did this in s denocr tic assembly and senate fron a Republican district. rghts Ls The first time/in W state of Cylifornail that was ever done? Ds Yes. Ls -Ckay, I might have one more. ]kind of know already about the trip to ,:auhington. Didn't iara.ay ,,-et you inthere Ds T;^.nt's riglid That's who 114 was. Ls was still in Califonlia when you ;rot back there. 83 'As ,ras -,there we weren't. Ls liow about the Irvine Company? .1ould you lice to characterize their role in the issue at all? Ds The Irvines have always beer; sort of "hands off", They were idlling to wozk with us in whatever way and when it was settled that it would hang instead of going down the coast, on the Uuffs/they said, Umy, that's fine with us." They were very neu- tral. Gt course, they had axepresenta.tive up there in 3acranento at the tine &,sent up there, but I think only once or twice did. they openly oppos# this, our position. They didn't support it, no, they were against it, rightly ;o, because they had a lot of property to develop and these guys were employees of the Irvine Company and this was going to 'olocic some of their develojement, iu tl-ieir. opinion. Cr this would help their development if they had a freolk coning into their shopping center or right by one. But they really weren't effective ly active anyway. U-ey didn't mace any donations to us. ifsacsx 'lie sat dorm with Bill Masonfter the elec- tion was over, we sat doen with ;3111 and said, "Now we have to get this DUFFT i. LD 15 tieing straightened out." 4e said, what aoout`ryxing to revive... Sill i anon said, 'shat about trying to revive a route that will be acceptable fx every- body?" And I said, "idll, 1 folk we've born ourselves a tier here, I do don't know anybody that can got this...get any sepient of the community to vote a freecray though thaw .co matter where you put its it will have to be a public vote dad 1 don't thirdt you g^u}rs would trait it on 22nd Streets you wouldn't trant it or, 17th street, they wouldn't wart it in Corona Del all ?far or anyplace. 90 the only thir* ..e could/really settle on eras this Bonita GEuyon. Just lii:e iagua wants it behix.d Lagsuia, and Huntingtoli Beach had it behind iiu::tinCton Beach axed .iewport wants it behind Newport. But that rums right into Costa Ilesa. �3o if you tate the through traffic and run it u.2. nd o n the xiew freeway. the Corona Del Liar itceway, then put them in five miles or si.^t miles. If they want to come on the coast, let them drove 4 stop signal:., like you do through Hunting 3ea.ch. i,ow with the development up there in the street, 1 think that's very s attractive with the center divider in there and the flowers aid stuff they have in t -ere, Remember it used to be barren when you amoe dri-ving there, now it's a most atia.active drive and you hit a lot of stop signals. 5o why shouldn't they, here? If th#,y could only go two lanes at 14 miles all hour through Huntington :Aachs why lot them go 60 males an hour th-rou -i ilewport leach? ihy build six lanes here? Just to go fast? 30 whatever then do ill 'lg na or whatever they do in .'.untingto:: 'each, rlon; the coasts 1 think there should be some continuity. Ls You mentioned SLU ilason. That was after the election? Ds Yes, it rras after... Li i+ere you still meeting with 'sill hese': or was it Nay 4atson? Ds Ile, it trans :.x.7.1 ilason. .ie had one brealtfact with Bill I•lason and a, very F17Fn�iail�, 16 iendly ono, X there was anything we could do and that's when we generall; atxoed that there was...that we had ourselves a jwo i em, because it was ease''lough to defeat the freeway after our , but it was going to be w,.-Eul lid to sell mtybody a freeway, to tum right around and sell them a f:ceeway. At least, I. (lidn't think I waS Going to list of that pack - .,,;;e. Lt G:.e more P):&, area to cover and that's the city council, How do you think ti.o cotutcil politics effected the issue throuGh the years7 lou night irmt to refer to sane iudividuals, Ds '.:e71, we ,mxtorally, we had some opposition, always .in the city council. L pedally the fo=ar mayors ca.^ie in the act. Dora, Iit17 , and two or three oth. hart +1and Ntoadzxd? Ds Stoddard and JAV tho„e gys all came in and they came out. Ls Lorena? Ds haus Loren';; canj out for the froeay and against us, but we had., in the city council we had 11owascl Rogers =rdha was strong on our side. He was a real ttP,ller for it there and Iaa Aber, the former mayor. He was ve_y active in our cozaunity. Paul did an awful lot of work, very effec- tive uo-?c, especially in gottinC the precinct workers and the petition side, -WA wont overyrhere with this, cone to think of it. then lie was mayor, as spalcesman ae ;alts.. ,he dRi a �;.-ea.t job on it. I don't know wI�y kua.dn't thou thought of 13.: before. Then Ilal rorregut over at Leslie Layout , he was In .Wv,, act. lie got 9n the act a:td he was always ready to do so nething. anytiae thoxe was any kind of a, fight he was all for it. Let's sea, who else? Ls How do you mean that, Al, a egut was ready for any kind of a fight? :„310 17 Dt I; ail., 1 zd of all clocti.wi fig�t. 1 don't moan streot fight. .�; olection. S fight over a issue ora 3iscussion. As a matter of fact, people --ZLU th t13a:o we shouldn't Iv-ve called ours s Freeway Fighters because that soun- ded like a ixzach of roughaec11=. But there's no wo4 that you could eu'o- stitute that ,re could find, better thL1..0 _leeway ii'ighters. '.Av.t olse are- you reyou goi:ig to say? It's ;,rot to be there, and it told the story about it, WlYW- Li inose people on the couac:l that you montiened, ware, the e<rly ones were against i t, but the h;,xd woe ers for �'i Rogers, i�cuber and Forregut. ;;au anybody on the oouncil that i'orregut and Rogers had to fight a�inst? Gf aignificance? Dt ::ot of any...thcy never made too big, an issue. iiorr Ire dids:'t have ... be- cause the city council of ilewport Beach alsap voted for sending Paul Gruber to a meeting to ask for an IaLnd routi;g and they .fere alleys in accord there. ;:e always had a majority there and. I can't think of any- body on tlj-_ council t1r_ t really opposed it. �tople that oppoaed it sea a :filson and ?i ukley aiul those OVs in Cost,. More's another little issue here t1lat I have. ''The sales tax dollar was extremely im- jaortant L, _:olrport Reach. I've lorgotLen the figures, but I'm C. o ng to J,Uozs, the proportions Ir be right, but maybe the fi.,,arss won't be exact. _ think there was something liko four htu;drecl thousand u year came in s .,ales trrx from the automobile a.gonts that Ire O.onG the i:iracle Ule there. „e had Lincold-11ncury, Bhevrolet, Pontiao, and Buick, I think I've cvo. forgotten w;ac:ily, but this was Automobile aow. A segment of this Iran Aitomobile Row luoluoin(,; the highest +ec tax inoaae of any businesses in the community, euid by driving; the freeway down_ there, they forced all the automobile dealers out end they invited thea^_ all u_i to ;ar- bor Boulevard in Costa iiesa, No, very effectively they transferred all DUFFILUX 18 THAT sales tax income to Costa Siesa. Dy the threat of a freeway, all the businesses... you ask Robbins, of 1rd., he's gone now. He was verf active in *s fight because he had this place down there and he was trying to han on to it. The ti-aeat of the fremay, the automobile dealers and the nye ?d, "you'd better get youself c. location. :You'd better go up next to the Chevrolet, or go up next to the Ca.dillao# or next to the Lin- coln-Ilerouxy. And they drove them all out. 'There was an awful lot of mon- ey that left here, left :i-ewport Beach, and went to Costa Mesa, Jo their interests ;Tc --e not altruistic, you know. They were effective, they drove everybody out of here. A guy with a freeway condemnation hanging over his xWdxw6=dkhJ=txa head with the property almady condemmed. The state had to soli it back. Ls Jo{E.l.d .you like to talk about that prop that was acquiesodX Ds Bill Cagiey, it was the funniest thing. 3571 Cagiey zad he and his brot- her Jin were partners, I guess, and they owned an awful lot of land. I don't think I'm telling any secrets, but he sold to the freeway guys who needed some dirt, he sold all that bluff along there in front of Hong Hos- pital. He owned a hundred acres there, and he sold, there were about ten or fourteen acres there and he sold ten all that dirt and they took all that dirt out. It set the cliff back aways. This was under the bridge, right pact the bridge on the way to Huntington Beach. Ls I know where you lmean, but they're not building the Coast iteeway yet. Da Ao, this was when they were talkin,3 about the Coast 17'reeway, but before they had actually decided on the route,Wwfore condemning any property he sold to the Division of Highways, all this dirt and they dug all this dirt out. Then they came in and condemned fourteen acres of his land gaip hin three million --I saw the check—n-$3,600000 or something. He paid .x11000 an acne for a hundred acres there, ten yeas before that and they con- denned and took... after he sold the dirt, then they were going to have to DUFFIELD 19 put the dirt 'oack iii. That was the fi"iy part; , because the free- way was desigued forty feet high at that end and right in level with the Hoag Hospital and they had to come right bacL through there and pit all that dist back There (inaudible) Ls Broufaht that dirt twice, right? Ds Yes. Lt Wham was that dirt go"g? Ds It was going $P the 6a'n Diego ilreeway. Ls Oh, I see. Yes, because the man Diego Rreeway was,... De They had taken it out of there, tie was a pecular guy. Am used to... Hill used to give me some money for the freeway fight too. In spite of the fact that he Got ... well, some people considered you could get rich by the one condemnation, but they had an awful lot of property, the Cagneys do. i'hat was just a small segpent of their holdings. than the Ls Do they have more to the ;1anninE.uffs? D: :fell, the Gagneys are spread, I gWadn't say more than the 2amings do -nn here, but they have property in Ja;i Diego and they go into Hollywood. They stili owl,duuset Joulevard stuff and a lot of other places. All Oagrney never wants -o set. lie Owt bay-- and holds, that's his concept. Lt It kind of workd in Oalifoiznia, I bet. x1kt's just outstanding. * When I started back on that council questiai, what I roally .sited to ask about was Dee Cook. Do you rcmie�mbor Yin? Ds JAh, i do. I don't know why I had forgotten "bout hi -n. He was always chas- ing us axound is .,aorameato. he stuck leis oar into it. He said he tiros make his opposed to irewport's Mau a:d he cr2S...iELu1 Gruber the mayor would/presenf ation and Dee Cook WOUld be there to oppose it. ,then he ,m,-n't a councilman, he would still be there fighting. :le was abigst us zal the way. DUFFIELD 20 P�. Li Cee, noir that pas my question. =lior, when I was studying Cook and. erre Gut are together the i*eeway, there's a movement In town in the early ?mo - tests, Coat cinaages ins aind about the froeway and he begins to endorse th the :free;ay about ,.ou: ;team..; later, about 1967 or 1968, and I wanted to know i£ you linea why Dee Cools changed his lain .bout the feeeway. De I don't :mow specifioa1 y, I really don'tknow. Dut I do know that he and i7orregut used almost ca:e to blows, yelling and ho3.lring at each other and Dee Cook, I had a.]r ost forgotten all about him. I don't know why shouldn't have. Deets opposition was there and hie voice ;ms heard many a time, lie tras always trydin g to stick his foot in the spaces. Lt Let mod a stop farther. ho,;ard Roger. suggestal that porhaps... Dee Coac changed districts lie wan on the council, thorn he wras off the council, i bFilove he was on the council one (ore tine Crax the Coro:ia Del iiar District, and then into the Corona Del Max Chamber. He kind of changed places in torm a little bit. Howard suggested that maybe the Irvine Company had something to do nrlth Coo't's change rf nine, Do It nigh.- have. A:, I say, there was neve_ any open efforto by the ir»ne Compa4... any public posit=ion to the... -ie irn a way, they ware trilling to have the freeways it was acceptable, my route ryas acceptable they didn't necessarily have any favorite route, as I recall. Lt Even if tl:cy :lid, somotvnes it was tough to tell, with the Irvine Company right2 D They wert_'t toe Ath their... They did have representatives there trro or three tL-!es, rney had engLneeis that would speak for the freelmy, and the aced for the freeway, and the ta~,%`fic problem which, in a sense, ,as in opposition to us, lip in Oacra_*iento even they would have a guy up DU-,4r7JZU 21 there.-cve-,:al tiiaer, the fellow woi ICL speak up. They really didn't need Divif anybody because they lutd all the -road commissioners, everybody in the 5dgk- sion of Highways x= xxg P.raattdt Aori ; outlx,.zn ualifori,ia tk t were against *ier:port 7leach, so they h:.d ell ki:ids of suplb--1:. Ls Thi:: has just been sum this moniing sir. Duffield and I jUst would like to conclude with just one last question. If yrou have anythini you want to and d at all, any interesting sidol:iglrtu or stories or personalities in- volved you right have left out so Sar, Also, I shouldn't ask you two ques- tions at once, 'out maybe you'd Bant to refI34t on the intone of transpor- tation is ITewport 'Teach. Dt I thins; Istarted to touch or_ that when V.. I do thinl: the most important thing we can do now is to a0ee on some kind of a road system that eill h handl the proposel traffic here, -,ad then, based on that, try to tie in tho development with the completion of these roads, beca.usc there's no point of strangling this community with new high-rises around, inland or down the coast until there is such a time a7 they have road faciIi'tca. I don't p-rotent to be kn engineers but 1 think it's pretty simp14 that throu14 roals ought to ;-;o on the che<.pest land possible, i my i opinion, saving the t.a:: payers mkiey, and the sh est routes possible. Par examale, we all know the is substanlard and the housing do✓elopment on Dalboa Islanl is a pretty good wzvzple of being substand- asd.The houres axe in ?_j or 30 foot lots and they're a foot apart, pushed h right togethor. 'Tows bus is not 41lowed anymore, but what are you going to do nor; People lk%ve Ilved there for 60 years, j0 years. The only GOA - tion is to Imm down every other ixlocks I guess, and mace paiking spaces. Th -t isn't Going to satisfy verf nary people so barrgin that 1 thiel: you have to say," Ue;l, we can't iapose, we can't strsgle these peonla, so DUFi'I LJ 22 or these people ,rho live in Jay51101-Vneri- to the clu'>. "Leine Uo g to have to allow throe people to Got i i -:rd oui; of the!,-- commmitaus les bece triose properties ,pay a to -tic tax. 'he va .uo of those waterfront home on Ba3uoa island, the ta:c value,,there, are sometl*g stupendous. They are worth oonslderirrg beczasa 'thay produce auch more money than we get out of Costa l;esa. 1 thin::, for oxarmple, 1n the shcool districts Newport !each , file LhUfied achool Aztriot, which is another thin- that was a prob— lam 11axo 70 pexcout of the income of the schools cafe fr(n ;;ew,)ort 3each, and 70 pecLv ant o£ the stuiorits came fran Costa ilesa,. I would say thet !sift bad but you eau sec that the ratios are there. You don't take this 11,41 productive area, the Golden zoost and do anything with them. You kind of aurtura them. You've get probe aly, I thSntc tip said, the si-rgle dxelliu , 3 r develoisaent 12.o Lido Isle is the high - eat avid 'cast possible use of that land. :From another st�-rdroint, it pro- duces more money, more income to the Irvines, more real value, a, -ngle family On a piece of bay front. If that's the care tax-krise, it's true too. A produces the highest possi'cue taxes and it then follo„n-, if you've got thea:, people pairing all thew t»Yos and supporting Coata :•�esa rind VA;. otl= comrmuULSUes, it seams to me-, leave iblboa Island almie d r.O_adu- ally, as people tear doze and rebuild, You raise the stendarr7sj 'out other than that it's golag to tai:e a San Viacisco fi:re to correct the lsrohlems on the pa.iasula or on Balboa Island.. Dart I've talked enotz^ about all that problera. 4%k is there anybody you'd suggest tlkst I, It would bo goad for me to tal3k to D: 4 you see ':!ally Cool:? Li I talked 'co '";ally ori the ,here. DI rl"allf was vaxy active in it. i DUFFI LD Ds Did you see rail Gruber? 23 Ls Paul is a little retiscent to talk to me. i talked to him a couple of tines on the phone and he just„ r he was such a leader in itq lie's loo- bably talked to a thousand people about it already I think he's a little tired of talking. Ds, Stell, if you want to call him again tell lain that 1 did aad what I told hin and the fact that he was so active in it that I felt that certainly ought to have a litle say in !t. Lt I tell you what I think it iso he's proua D.-JIMTV . Ds lie's not too well. La He's not too well and he's been interviewed by so many pooplet maybe if I could show him this is a fairly serious attempt Art at wome scholaxly work and this would be preserved in historical archives, if L could impreaz him a little bits then perhaps 1 could achieve an interview with him. And it if you don't winds I'll use your name. Ds *D ahead. I dolthink Paul will be remiss and then maybe Ara. Leek. Ls Yes. I did do Carroll just last wee$.. Joys she's ne . Ds Isn't she something? ,She's a great gal. ,iho were some ' the other gals who croaked? Le Che mentioned ;'tango okill. Do 'vkwgo mak. 11. have you seen :;argo? Ls No. Ds Boys she's a, whingdi.nger. ;largo's there at every meeting. You bette:c g get herlbecause there's the gals. iou have to get the gals in this thing. They did those petitions and it is unbiaieveable what they did. Ll U leg work. Ds Yes$ they got out on theri bibycles... DUFFIELD La Maus you very such for this rio=Llg, :"r. Duffield - D: You're very gloom--. Li is *,+u�zj just outstanding. Dc Tl -=2, you. 24 Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4a Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) To: Additional Materials Subject: FW: What is the Future of Marine Mile? Attachments: What is the Future of Mariners' Mile July 20, 2017 Planning Commission Hearing.pdf From: Patrick[mailto:iem1981(@roadrunner.com] Sent: July 16, 2017 5:16 PM To: Dixon, Diane <ddixon@newportbeachca.gov>; Avery, Brad <bavery@newportbeachca.gov>; Duffield, Duffy <dduffield@newportbeachca.gov>; Muldoon, Kevin <kmuldoon@newportbeachca.gov>; Herdman, Jeff <iherdman@newportbeachca.gov>; Peotter, Scott <speotter@newportbeachca.gov>; O'Neill, William <woneill@newportbeachca.gov>; Kramer, Kory <kkramer@newportbeachca.gov>; Koetting, Peter <pkoetting@newportbeachca.gov>; Zak, Peter <pzak@newportbeachca.gov>; Dunlap, Bill <bdunlap@newportbeachca.gov>; Hillgren, Bradley <bhillgren@newportbeachca.gov>; Lawler, Ray <rlawler@newportbeachca.gov>; Weigand, Erik <eweigand@newportbeachca.gov>; Lowrey, Lee <llowrevC@newportbeachca.gov>; Kleiman, Lauren <Ikleiman@newportbeachca.gov> Cc: Campbell, James <JCampbell@newportbeachca.gov>; Brandt, Kim <KBrandt@newportbeachca.gov>; Kiff, Dave <DKiff@newportbeachca.gov>; Wisneski, Brenda <BWisneski@newportbeachca.gov>; Nova, Makana <MNova6@newportbeachca.gov>; Webb, Dave (Public Works) <DAWebb@newportbeachca.gov>; CalTrans District 12 <ryan.chamberlain@dot.ca.gov>; Flynn, Chris C@DOT <chris.flynn@dot.ca.gov>; Hart, Lindsey@DOT <Lindsey.Hart@dot.ca.gov>; Dutton Timothy@DOT <Timothy.Dutton@dot.ca.gov> Subject: What is the Future of Marine Mile? Dear Newport Beach City Council, Planning Commission, City Manager and Staff, A clear vision of what Mariners' Mile can become must guide the transformation of Mariners' Mile. The City Council, Planning Commission, Caltrans, business and property owners, local merchants, and residents working together can build a genuine and lasting community consensus. The Citywide General Plan offers a Golden Opportunity to build a community consensus among stakeholders. The City of Newport Beach must acquire ownership of West Pacific Coast Highway from Caltrans and determine the destiny of Marines' Mile based upon the community's consensus. Attached are slides containing my comments to be presented at the July 20, 2017, Planning Commission Meeting. Would it be possible to have the slides placed into the audio visual system to be used in my presentation? Please let me know. I request that the enclosed letter and attachments be included in the packet of material for the July 20, 2017, Planning Comission Hearing re. Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan. I also request my letter and attachments be included in the 2018 update of the City's General Plan. Please acknowledge receipt my letter. Let's build a coastal city for people to enjoy now and in the future. Your Neighbor, Patrick Gormley Past President Bayshores Community Association Yfr.N1CYlM1iaWJi.iir �s IR�IwrAVDYrP W a WY4.N.lr��x YYY fhealwF r_'aen.r vv�.r� YYn.� rwawcmMarP�Y.wre h+_r�remrry Yy.r�,oa .yrr4q.,w FIF4� wrwY r.tl.ryflYtY.. N�YwIwA�rlyr,irY �gYY6,r,iWY I wYirrew rre..n Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4a Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4a Additional Materials Mariner` Mile Revitalization Masterflan (PA2016-081) Future of Mariners Mile ? A Clear Vision of What Mariners' Mile Can Become Must Guide the Transformation of Mariners' Mile. Patrick Gormley Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4a Additional Materials City `for `revlo izatpnQMaster Plan (PA2016-081) Let's Build Our Coastal to Enjoy Now and In The Future *Before Significant Investments, Newport Beach Needs To Create The Community's Vision Of What Mariners' Mile Can Become •AVillage attracting people and a crosstown Freeway are incompatible -While past Mariners' Mile Plans have recognized the inherent conflict in designing a welcomingVillage and a high volume Highway, the City has attempted to have it both ways with Limited Success. •A Choice Must Be Made, Newport Beach can not have it both ways. *What's Needed? The City Council, Planning Comission, Caltrans, Property Owners, Local Merchants, and Residents work together to build a genuine and lasting Community Consensus. Z Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4a Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) Golden Opportunity •Beach Towns along Pacific Coast Highway are bringing back "Main Streets" by finding ways to slow traffic, enhance safety, widen sidewalks and bike lanes and make other changes that facilitate the flow of pedestrians and bicycles. •The Citywide General Plan offers a Golden Opportunity to build a community consensus among stakeholders and a clear vision of what Mariners' Mile can become to guide the transformation of Mariners' Mile. •The City of Newport Beach must acquire ownership of West Pacific Coast Highway from Caltrans and determine the destiny of Marines' Mile based upon the community's consensus. i Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4b Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) To: Additional Materials Subject: FW: Mariners Mile Revitalization -OPPOSED to PCH widening From: Vallejo Gallery [mailto:vallelogallery@earthlink.net] Sent: July 15, 2017 6:23 PM To: Nova, Makana <MNova@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: Mariners Mile Revitalization -OPPOSED to PCH widening Dear Planning and City Council, Regarding Mariners Mile Revitalization, I am OPPOSED to the proposed expansion of Pacific Coast Highway to six lanes. I feel we would all like Newport Beach to be a DESTINATION and PLACE TO LIVE, not a DRIVE THROUGH. Our main thoroughfare through the city is Pacific Coast Highway, which should represent a beautiful, friendly, thriving area of the City. Traveling through the city with six lanes is counter productive. Also, Mariners mile would benefit from a face lift to create a warmer environment, with strong thought given to the addition of greenery, such as palm tress lining the highway, lower shrubs and flowers, and the creation of some medians, from Pelican Point to Dover. Brick or other type of tiles in the intersections and crosswalks would also be beneficial. This is an area of PCH that could go in a negative direction, referring to the businesses located there. Yes I do own a building within that stretch of highway where I had a business for 41 years, closing four years ago. If the street parking is taken away from this section without replacing it with an alternative that would also make it harder for the businesses to survive, resulting in lower -end tenants and vacancies, thus creating a negative vision of the city. Good positive examples are the revitalization of 17th street and 19th street in Costa Mesa. Thank you for considering the residents and business owners comments to help improve our wonderful city. Sincerely. Joseph Vallejo 2501 Ocean Blvd, Corona del Mar 949-677-5713 Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4c Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) To: Additional Materials Subject: FW: The Revitalization of Mariner's Mile Study Attachments: M M G P2.pdf From: Peggy Palmer [mailto:pvpalmer@icloud.com] Sent: July 17, 2017 4:07 PM To: Koetting, Peter <pkoetting@newportbeachca.gov>; Zak, Peter <pzak@newportbeachca.gov>; Weigand, Erik <eweigand@newportbeachca.gov>; Dunlap, Bill <bdunlap@newportbeachca.gov>; Kleiman, Lauren <Ikleiman@newportbeachca.gov>; Kramer, Kory<kkramer@newportbeachca.gov>; Lowrey, Lee <I Iowrey@ newportbeachca.gov> Cc: Nova, Makana <MNova@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: The Revitalization of Mariner's Mile Study Dear Planning Commissioners, Please review our summary of objections that we have assembled for your review with regard to the proposed Revitalization Plan for Mariner's Mile. We really need to address these issues prior to moving forward with the plan, we also need to evaluate ALL of the components of Mariner's Mile in its entirety. We have an opportunity to have a beautiful development and we are looking forward to a refreshed village, however, making a premature decision to approve this plan in its current state would be detrimental to the stakeholders, local merchants and the surrounding communities. We are requesting that you postpone The Mariner's Mile Revitalization Plan until 2018 when the City's General Plan will be updated. Without a clear vision guiding the transformation of Mariner's Mile, ongoing efforts will be prove to be disappointing. Thank you for your consideration, we will look forward to meeting with you this coming Thursday evening. If you should have any additional questions in the inertia, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Peggy V. Palmer (949) 887-2471 Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4c Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) MARINER'S MILE GENERAL PLAN Objections 1. Stake Holders: a. Who determines what is referred to as underutilized usage? b. Has Sterling BMW agreed to build a public parking garage on their property that would be a shared space? c. If the 2600 block of Avon assumes a 30 foot right of way, what happens to the businesses along this street? This referred to a land swap? d. The parcel known as "A's" and Memorial Care Medical, Sterling BMW (the 3000 block) is in jeopardy of losing a 12' right of way in the front of the parcel. How much of their land will be taken from their back parcels? e. The 2400 block parcel has a roadway going right through the property and actual building. f. The 400 block parcel on a narrow lot is in jeopardy of losing a 12' right of way. g. The General Plan illustrates that the 2200 block is part of the MU plan. However, this parcel is not mentioned in the redevelopment process. Why not? How many property owners will have their properties seized by eminent domain? It appears that a substantial amount of private property will be taken. The City will be in litigation for years to come. 2. Proposed Parking Structure at Sterling BMW: a. The proposed public parking structure would be located on private property. Vehicles entering into the proposed parking structure from the northbound PCH, would have a problematic and hazardous turn across the highway, which could lead to traffic build up under the Arches Bridge. Note that No U -Turns are allowed at Riverside Drive, with the premise that the vehicles would miss the turn, causing a back flow of traffic. The infrastructure components are incompatible with this plan. 3. Proposed Foot -Bridge: a. The foot -bridge that is proposed from the Sterling BMW parcel (or there about), ends at the Newport Dialysis Center located at 3333 Pacific Coast Highway. This is a medical center and should not be considered a tourist destination. b.Pedestrian Bridges are not highly utilized by pedestrians and people riding bikes to and from the beach. It is highly unlikely that the bicyclist will stop and push their bikes up a foot -bridge or take the elevator to cross the street. c. The connection to Lido Village has a steep ramp, which would make it very complicated for a wheel chair to be pushed up the slope. This would be a pointless project to have the bridge next to the Arches bridge that would be required to be ADA compliant. Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4c Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) d. According to Pedestrian.org, long winding ramps, stairs or elevators are perceived as inherently inconvenient by most pedestrians when a grade level crossing is possible. These studies have shown that when bridges are built to replace a grade crossing, they fail miserably. e. According to the plan, the bridges would be "adequate height". What constitutes adequate height? There is a transport of very large boats and yachts along this corridor; that is why it is called Mariner's Mile. f. The City would be responsible for the continued cost of the maintenance of all of the footbridges. What is this cost to the tax payers? A foot -bridge going to and from a car dealership to a dialysis center should not be considered a well thought-out plan. Do we need four foot- bridges in a 1/4 of a mile? 4. Mobility and Circulation a. The plans states the following, "There are few locations for pedestrians to cross Coast Highway, limiting the ability and/or desirability of park and walk to destinations. The intersection of Coast Highway and Newport Boulevard poses many challenges for pedestrians and bicyclists, and existing infrastructure. b. According to Tim Dutton, Public Information Officer, any comments about the City's plans for Mariner's Mile should be directed to the City of Newport Beach. c. The Revitalization of Mariner's Mile encourages responsible key development projects of multiple lots to improve business access and promote safe pedestrian crossing at Pacific Coast Highway. This plan also discourages transportation policies and traffic engineering practices, which promote increased traffic volumes and speeds on Mariner's Mile. Increased volumes and speeds contradicts a family friendly destination and a 'village' feel in the heart of our town. It is engineering malpractice to convince the property owners, local merchants and residents that when it comes to our road that the City assumes to know more than we do and would turn PCH into a 'STROAD': Part street, part road, a `STROAD' is unsafe, ugly and bad for local economies. d. Auto's New Ecosystem: In 10 key markets surveyed, each vehicle used in car -sharing is likely to replacing the need for 19 personal vehicles. e. The plan suggests pedestrian scrambles. This simply defies logic at the rate of speed in which PCH flows. f. The recent traffic study began at Royal Thai through to Porsche Audi Dealership, almost 3/4 of a mile of additional roadway, Was this study for Mariner's Mile? if not what was it for? The current plan and previous plans have always addressed PCH and future developments, yet the two have been separated? Who separated them and why? Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4c Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) 5. Avon Street a. Avon Street that connects through to the back parcel of Sterling BMW is 24 feet and thus too narrow to become a bicycle and pedestrian friendly corridor. There are protected wetlands on the bluff side and the newly remodeled area referred to as the Garden on the adjacent side. This small alley is used for the auto mechanic test drives and for car haulers, which has an average length of 44 feet. This should not be considered a safe route for vehicle, bicyclist and pedestrians. b. Creating a connection at Avon through to Santa Ana and descending on Old Newport Blvd. would not be accessible from the northbound lanes of PCH and is of no value to the community. c. The same can be said be said for the south side of Avon, which is also a narrow corridor. This are combines residential and retail in at the connection of Tustin and Avon. Again, if this artery were to b opened up, it would drive more traffic into the Newport Heights. This alley way would lead to a parking proposed public structure, where there is already adequate parking. This is creating a road that is incompatible within this residential area. Are the citizens financing new new roadways to provide development abilities to the land owner? What is the fate of the building located a 124 Tustin? These are basically a road to nowhere, this connection should be considered dangerous and does not serve anyone or purpose, but to divert traffic into Newport Height that has little or no sidewalk of lights. 6. Additional Observations: a. The Plan calls for off street parking. Where do the busses unload the children at the Sailing Schools? How are the racing shells unloaded for training and competition? Where do the fire trucks and utility vehicles that service these schools park? These vehicles are too large for the standard parking lot. b. Will the charter boats continue to occupy their current location? If not, where will they go? If these boats are moved, does that not increase the supply of parking? c. Landscape medians would inhibit a safe egress and ingress of police and emergency transportation vehicles going to and from Hoag Hospital. d. The plan discussed single-family multi level residences, where are they located in the plan, how many and what are the heights? e. The posted speed limit before the Arches bridge is 40 MPH? Perhaps, if this was changed to 25 MPH with signage and road bumps, the need to seize 12 feet of "A"'s restaurant's parcel would be unnecessary. There are too many disconnects with the framework of this plan. Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4c Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) Summary: The last development -the most important one of all, is marked by a large question mark. The question mark is located on the part of the Revitalization Plan that is the most significant , yet few people know about it. It is like the proverbial elephant in the room. This development which will be located on both the inland and bayside of Mariner's Mile, and will be the biggest one since the Balboa Bay Club in 1964, is not being discussed. We need to move forward with transparency, especially since that all eyes will be on The City of Newport Beach now that the California Coastal Commission granted the City the authority with a Local Coastal Program. Not knowing about this important part of the puzzle is one more reason why the Revitalization developments and the proposed expansion of PCH should be postponed until a new General Plan for 2018 is developed -providing a platform and framework for these important issues can be aired out and discussed sufficiently. According to the General Plan, a vision is incomplete without a plan to achieve the vision. The framework plan is the roadmap for how future development and improvements within Mariner's Mile can collectively achieve the community's vision for the corridor, its physical development and achieve the best outcome for the current and future residents, business and property owners and visitors to this special part of Newport Beach. This plan DOES NOT support the required framework. We ask that this plan be denied and referred to the General Plan update in 2018 that will address ALL of the parcels, arteries and components along Mariner's Mile. �rrrsr '1( r lC Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4c Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) WHAT GOES HERE? Why No Consider Reducing Speed, Signage and Road Matts for the Arches Turn, Before Seizing Their Property? No' Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4d Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) To: Additional Materials Subject: FW: Coalition to Protect Mariner's Mile's Public Comment Letter re Draft Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan Attachments: Coalition Letter re MM Revitalization Master Plan (without enclosures).pdf From: Aaron J. Ehrlich[mailto:aehrlich@berdingweil.coml Sent: July 17, 2017 4:15 PM To: Koetting, Peter <pkoetting@newportbeachca.gov>; Zak, Peter <pzak@newportbeachca.gov>; Weigand, Erik <eweigand@newportbeachca.gov>; Dunlap, Bill <bdunlap@newportbeachca.gov>; Kleiman, Lauren <Ikleiman@newportbeachca.gov>; Kramer, Kory <kkramer@newportbeachca.gov>; Lowrey, Lee <I Iowrey@ newportbeachca.gov> Cc: Dixon, Diane <ddixon@newportbeachca.gov>; Avery, Brad <bavery@newportbeachca.gov>; Duffield, Duffy <dduffieldCa@newportbeachca.gov>; Muldoon, Kevin<kmuldoon[a)newportbeachca.gov>; Herdman, Jeff <iherdman@newportbeachca.gov>; Peotter, Scott <speotter@newportbeachca.gov>; O'Neill, William <woneill@newportbeachca.gov>; Kiff, Dave <DKiff@newportbeachca.gov>; Brandt, Kim <KBrandt@newportbeachca.gov>; Wisneski, Brenda <BWisneski@newportbeachca.gov>; Nova, Makana <MNova@newportbeachca.gov>; Webb, Dave (Public Works) <DAWebb@newportbeachca.gov>; Harp, Aaron <aharp@newportbeachca.gov>; Torres, Michael <mtorres@newportbeachca.gov>; Brown, Leilani <LBrown@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: Coalition to Protect Mariner's Mile's Public Comment Letter re Draft Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan Dear Members of the City of Newport Beach's Planning Commission, Please find attached an electronic copy of our office's public comment letter on behalf of the Coalition to Protect Mariner's Mile for July 20, 2017's public hearing concerning the Draft Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan. The attached copy of this letter omits the enclosures thereto due to file size. The letter with its enclosures can be downloaded through the following secure Cloud link: https://berding.egnyte.com/fl/e76vPkkxYg. A hard copy of the letter with its enclosures will be hand delivered to City Hall tomorrow. Thank you in advance for your time and consideration of the issues raised in this letter. Best, Aaron J. Ehrlich I Partner aehrlicha.berdina-weil.com I vCard B=RDING I WEIL ATTORNEYS AT LAW NORTHERN CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 2175 N California Blvd, Suite 500 575 Anton Blvd, Suite 460 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 P 925.838.2090 P 714.429.0600 F 925.820.5592 F 714.429.0699 www. be rd i na-we i I. co m This communication is intended to be protected by all applicable privileges, including those protecting attorney client communications and attorney work product information. Use of this communication or its information without approval is prohibited. B-RDING WEIL ATTORNEYS AT LAW VIA EMAIL & HAND DELIVERY July 17, 2017 Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4d Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) BERDING & WEIL LLP NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 2175 N. California Blvd. Suite 500 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 925.838.2090 925.820.5592 f SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 575 Anton Boulevard Suite 460 Metro Center Costa Mesa, CA 92626 714.429.0600 City of Newport Beach 714.429.0699 f Planning Commission WWW.BERDING-WEIL.COM 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Re: The Coalition to Protect Mariner's Mile's Public Comment Letter on the Draft Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan Subject to Public Hearing on July 20, 2017 before the City of Newport Beach's Planning Commission Dear Members of the City of Newport Beach's Planning Commission: This letter submits certain public comments of the Coalition to Protect Mariner's Mile (the "Coalition") concerning the Draft Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (the "Draft Plan") in advance of the noticed July 20, 2017 public hearing (the "Hearing") on the same before the City of Newport Beach's (the "City") Planning Commission (the "Planning Commission"). We are land use and environmental legal counsel for the Coalition. The purpose of the Coalition is to maintain the existing historic, safe, family -friendly, low-density characteristics of Mariners' Mile and its surroundings, including, the Newport Heights and Cliff Haven residential neighborhoods. This letter is submitted on behalf of the broad, diverse base of hundreds of homeowners, business owners, and land owners in and near Mariners' Mile who comprise or support the Coalition and will be directly affected by the destructive actions and vision the Draft Plan propagates for Mariners' Mile.' While the Coalition's members and supporters will separately address the deleterious impacts that the Draft Plan would have on Mariners' Mile and its surroundings, this I This letter should not be construed as the sole expression of public comments concerning the Draft Plan by the Coalition's members and supporters. We anticipate that a significant number of the Coalition's members and supporters will separately submit written public comments concerning the Draft Plan in advance of the Hearing and/or submit oral public comments concerning the Draft Plan at the Hearing. The Coalition will also separately present the Planning Commission with a petition signed by its members and supporters supporting the Coalition's purpose and efforts. »:r_Fyaea»&1ez 1111KOE01.11e1151Y1EX019a1410 Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4d Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) Planning Commission City of Newport Beach July 17, 2017 Page 2 letter focuses on the violations of law, including, without limitation, the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and its Guidelines, which would occur should the Planning Commission, and City Council, follow Staff's recommendation to adopt the Draft Plan and find that said adoption is exempt from CEQA compliance. The public notice for the Hearing and the Planning Commission Staff Report for the same (the "Staff Report") both assert that the Planning Commission's adoption of the Draft Plan is exempt from CEQA compliance under Section 15262 of the CEQA Guidelines.2 For the reasons set forth in this letter, that assertion is wrong and is contradicted by the substance of the Draft Plan and apposite case law. Even if it were correct, the Planning Commission still cannot lawfully adopt the Draft Plan since it patently fails to reasonably consider environmental factors as required by Section 15262. Accordingly, the Planning Commission should either recommend that the City Council not adopt the Draft Plan or recommend that the consideration of the Draft Plan be delayed until after the General Plan update occurs which will start later this year. Staff Asserts that the Draft Plan's Adoption is Subject to a Statutory Exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15262 The Staff Report recommends that the Planning Commission: "Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies) of the CEQA Guidelines ... because the project involves possible future actions, which the agency, board, or commission has not approved, adopted, or funded which do not require the preparation of an EIR or negative declaration but do require consideration of environmental factors." The revised public notice for the Hearing references the some. Under the Environmental Review section of the Staff Report, the following is added: "This proposed plan will not have a legally binding effect on later activities as prescribed by this statutory exemption. The project does not authorize any specific development but rather establishes enhanced urban design principals and a series of priorities for future development. Future 2 We note that the initial public notice for the Hearing physically and electronically posted by the City and published by the City in the Daily Pilot asserted that Draft Plan's adoption was exempt from CEQA compliance under Section 15306 of the CEQA Guidelines. The public hearing for the Hearing was subsequently revised to instead reference Section 15262. No reference is made in the revised public notice to this material change and the prior version of the public notice was subsequently removed from the City's website. This material change vitiates the public notice requirements of the California Government Code and the City's Municipal Code, contradicts Staff's statement in the Public Notice section of the Staff Report, and thus the Coalition asserts that the Hearing has not been properly noticed. 800.838.2090 WWW.BERDING WEIL.coM B- R D I N G V V _ I L Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4d Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) Planning Commission City of Newport Beach July 17, 2017 Page 3 development projects guided by the proposed policies and standards will be required to be evaluated for potential environmental effects in accordance with CEQA and necessary mitigation measures applied as necessary." The Staff Report does not contain any further discussion related to CEQA compliance. Of particular note, Staff fails to assert that the Draft Plan complies with the requirement that environmental factors be considered as required by Section 15262. The Draft Plan's Adoption Constitutes a "Proiect" Under CEQA Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 There does not appear to be a dispute that the Draft Plan's adoption constitutes a "project" under CEQA Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 since the Staff Report consistently references the consideration of the Draft Plan as the "proposed project" and Staff would not need to assert that an exemption applies to the Draft Plan's adoption if it did not constitute a "project" since CEQA would not apply to the action. Accordingly, on the face of the Staff Report and revised public notice for the Hearing, the City agrees that the CEQA compliance is required for the Draft Plan's adoption absent the existence of an applicable exemption. The Coalition agrees with Staff that the Draft Plan's adoption constitutes a "project" for CEQA purposes since the Draft Plan will cause a physical change in the environment or a reasonable foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. (CEQA Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15378; See also, Save Tara v. City of West Hollywood (2008) 35 Cal.4th 116, 139.) The Draft Plan will both directly and indirectly cause physical changes in the environment. Direct and indirect physical changes in the environment that will be caused by the Draft Plan's adoption include, for example and without limitation, the following "immediate/short term" categorized actions which are authorized therein: • Institution of an employee parking shuttle to relocate employee parking of vehicles (see Page 3-25 of the Draft Plan); • Standardization of valet parking agreements to affect the means, manner, and location of valet parking of vehicles (see Page 3-25 of the Draft Plan); • Institution of an employee permit parking program to affect the means, manner, and location of employee parking of vehicles (see Page 3-27 of the Draft Plan; and 800.838.209' WWW.BERDING WEIL.COM B- R D I N G V V _ I L Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4d Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) Planning Commission City of Newport Beach July 17, 2017 Page 4 • Encourage of private lots to be available for public use so that vehicles driven by the public can be parked in such locations (see Page 3-31 of the Draft Plan). All of the above actions, which are authorized by the Draft Plan's adoption as a means "to kick-start the revitalization process" (page 5-1), will physically change the environment in terms of, in part, air quality, odors, growth inducement, health and safety, land use, noise, public services and facilities, transportation, circulation, parking, and visual effects and neighborhood character. Accordingly, the Coalition agrees with Staff that the Draft Plan's adoption constitutes a "project" for CEQA purposes. A Statutory Exemption Under CEQA Guidelines Section 15262 Does Not Apply to the Draft Plan's Adoption Staff is mistaken in its assertion that the Draft Plan's adoption is exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15262. That statutory exemption patently does not apply to the Draft Plan. CEQA Guidelines Section 15262 provides: "A project involving only feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions which the agency, board, or commission has not approved, adopted, or funded does not require the preparation of an EIR or Negative Declaration but does require consideration of environmental factors. This section does not apply to the adoption of a plan that will have a legally binding effect on later activities." Staff claims that this exemption applies to the Draft Plan's adoption because "[tlhe project does not authorize any specific development but rather establishes enhanced urban design principals and a series of priorities for future development." However, as enumerated under the preceding heading, the Draft Plan authorizes specific actions, several of which are discretely identified, without the need for any further approval. Accordingly, the Draft Plan does not merely analyze potential future actions, and instead it adopts a specific vision for Mariner's Mile and authorizes immediate and/or short term actions in furtherance of that vision. Case law supports the Coalition's argument that the Draft Plan's adoption is not exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15262. The seminal case on this exemption is the California Supreme Court's opinion in Save Tara v. City of West Hollywood (2008) 35 Cal.4th 116. The California Supreme Court therein clarified that Section 15262 applies when "[a]gencies sometimes provide preliminary assistance to persons proposing a development in order that the proposal may be further explored, 800.838.2090 WWW.BERDING WEIL.coM B- R D I N G I W- I L Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4d Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) Planning Commission City of Newport Beach July 17, 2017 Page 5 developed or evaluated." (Id. at p. 136.) The Draft Plan does not constitute preliminary assistance for future development since it adopts a specific physical and aesthetic vision for Mariner's Mile that it seeks to dictate for the City's desired redevelopment of Mariner's Mile and the Draft Plan authorizes the specific actions addressed above, among others, to facilitate the some, and thus is not merely prospective. A Court of Appeal opinion added that Section 15262 can also apply in the context of "long-range planning proposals." (Berkeley Keep Jets Over the Bay Com. v. Board of Port Cmrs. (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 1344, 1358.) The Draft Plan does not constitute a long-range planning proposal since it, again, specifies aesthetic and physical changes for the redevelopment of Mariner's Mile and approves the above -referenced immediate and/or short term actions, among others, in furtherance of the desired redevelopment, and thus cannot reasonably be considered "long-range" when immediate changes are authorized and specified—Staff acknowledges that the Draft Plan is not wholly "long-term in nature" on page 5-1. In another Court of Appeal opinion, Section 15262 was applied in the context of a city's expressed preference for a tunnel to be constructed and agreement to study its feasibility without approving the tunnel. (East Sacramento Partnerships for a Livable City v. City of Sacramento (2016) 5 Cal.App.5th 281, 292.) Unlike the subject tunnel in that case, the Draft Plan approves immediate and/or short term actions to be taken as the first steps towards the redevelopment of Mariner's Mile. Further, the Draft Plan does not merely consider options for potential future actions but specifies a discrete aesthetic and physical vision for further development. The above cases demonstrate that the Draft Plan is not subject to a Section 15262 exemption because it does not merely analyze options for future actions, but rather, adopts a specific vision for the City's desired redevelopment of Mariner's Mile and approves immediate and/or short term actions to facilitate and commence such redevelopment. Accordingly, the Coalition asserts that the City is required to comply with CEQA and prepare an EIR or Negative Declaration for the Draft Plan to the extent that the City desires to move forward with the Draft Plan's consideration. If that is the case, a program EIR is particularly fitting since the Draft Plan is the first step in a series of actions the City apparently desires for Mariner's Mile's redevelopment. Those actions are related geographically (since they are all within Mariner's Mile) and are logical parts in the chain of contemplated actions (since the Draft Plan sets forth the aesthetic and physical vision of the City's desired redevelopment of Mariner's Mile). (See CEQA Guidelines Section 15168.) Regardless, additional environmental review is required before the City may lawfully adopt the Draft Plan. 800.838.209` WWW.BERDING WEIL.COM B- R D I N G V V _ I L Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4d Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) Planning Commission City of Newport Beach July 17, 2017 Page 6 Even if the Draft Plan's Adoption was Exempt Under CEQA Guidelines Section 15262, Said Adoation Would Violate CEQA's Project Solittina/Piecemealina Prohibition The Draft Plan attempts to avoid CEQA compliance by splitting what is a larger project (the widening PCH through Mariner's Mile as part of the City -desired redevelopment) into a smaller project (the Draft Plan's adoption) in order to avoid a full environmental review and to make the Draft Plan appear more innocuous than the true full project. This failure violates CEQA's project splitting/piecemealing prohibition. (Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of the University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 390.) While the Draft Plan has been sanitized to eliminate all references to the widening of the Pacific Coast Highway through Mariner's Mile, the City's Community Workshop materials concerning the Draft Plan make clear the inextricable link between the PCH widening and the first step towards redevelopment of Mariner's Mile facilitated through the Draft Plan. More specifically, the July 25, 2016 Community Workshop presentation prepared by the City concerning the Draft Plan, a copy of which is enclosed with this letter as Tab "A," acknowledges that the Draft Plan is the initial step towards addressing "residents and traveling public wants traffic congestion relief' (page 6) which is elaborated on the following five pages thereafter and attachments thereto of "'Minimum MPRH' Configuration," including, discussion of the City's options "to address capacity needs through Mariner's Mile" (page 8), depictions of the City's "preferred cross-section" for PCH's widening among five options (page 11), and discussion of other improvements to accommodate more traffic traveling through the Mariner's Mile portion of PCH (page 10). Then again in the September 26, 2016 and January 29, 2017 Community Workshop presentations prepared by the City concerning the Draft Plan, a copy of which is respectively enclosed with this letter as Tab "B" and "C," the City referenced the widening of PCH through Mariner's Mile as part of the Draft Plan's vision (page 3 of both). The September 26, 2016 presentation depicted the widening of PCH as part of the Draft Plan's discussion (page 7) similar to the July 25, 2016 presentation. While the City considered PCH's widening to be part of the overall changes for its desired redevelopment of Mariner's Mile and the Draft Plan's vision, in response to sweeping public opposition to PCH widening and in an attempt to obscure the Draft Plan's purposes, the City has abruptly changed course by now contending that there is no relationship between PCH widening and the Draft Plan and does not consider or reference PCH widening in the Draft Plan. This specious attempt to untie the relationship between PCH widening and the Draft Plan is too little, too late and manifests prohibited project splitting /piece mea ling. As the City recognized from the outset of this process, the Draft Plan and PCH widening are linked and must be considered together for CEQA purposes. 800.838.209' WWW.BERDING WEIL.COM B- R D I N G V V _ I L Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4d Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) Planning Commission City of Newport Beach July 17, 2017 Page 7 In the Unforeseeable Event that the Draft Plan's Adoption is Determined to be Exempt Under CEQA Guidelines Section 15262 and No Project-Splittina/Piecemealina Has Occurred, the Draft Plan Still Cannot be Adopted Since it Fails to Reasonably Consider Environmental Factors Even if the Coalition's arguments above are incorrect, and the Draft Plan's adoption is exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15262 and does not project-split/piecemeal, the Draft Plan is still patently deficient since it does not reasonably consider environmental factors as required by Section 15262. While Section 15262 may exempt the lead agencies of certain feasibility and planning studies from the preparing an EIR or Negative Declaration, that section affirmatively requires that the lead agency consider the environmental factors implicated by the subject feasibility or planning study. The Draft Plan fails to reasonably do so and thereby violates the requirements of Section 15262. The Draft Plan's Framework Plan calls for pervasive physical changes to Mariner's Mile divided into "Land Use & Urban Design," "Mobility & Streetscape," "Vibrant Public Waterfront," and "Parking Management" sections. The incumbent environmental factors related to those physical changes are neither discussed in each according section of the Draft Plan or elsewhere therein and thus cannot be reasonably considered. As examples: • The "Land Use & Urban Design" section fails to discuss how views, light, glare, and noise will be affected by the proposed aesthetic and physical changes within Mariner's Mile or whether Staff considered the same environmental factors in drafting this section, let alone how this section was influenced by consideration of those environmental factors; • The "Mobility & Streetscape" section fails to discuss how the proposed physical and aesthetic changes within Mariner's Mile will affect traffic, circulation, views, light, glare, noise, air quality, odors, health and safety, and hydrology or whether Staff considered the some environmental factors in drafting this section, let alone how this section was influenced by consideration of those environmental factors; • The "Vibrant Public Waterfront" section fails to discuss how views, light, glare, noise, traffic, air quality, odors, and health and safety will be affected by the proposed physical and aesthetic changes within Mariner's Mile or whether Staff considered the same environmental factors in drafting this section, let alone how this section was influenced by consideration of those environmental factors; 800.838.209' WWW.BERDING WEIL.COM B- R D I N G V V _ I L Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4d Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) Planning Commission City of Newport Beach July 17, 2017 Page 8 • The "Parking Management" section fails to discuss how the proposed physical changes within Mariner's Mile will affect views, light, glare, noise, air quality, odors, health and safety, and hydrology or whether Staff considered the same environmental factors in drafting this section, let alone how this section was influenced by consideration of those environmental factors. The Draft Plan's Design Guidelines section similarly fails to consider how the proposed aesthetic changes inherent with the potential new design criteria will impact the above -discussed environmental factors and fails to state whether Staff considered the some environmental factors in drafting that section, let alone how that section was influenced by consideration of those environmental factors. Given these shortcomings, the Draft Plan fails to fulfill the requirements of Section 15262 and thus would violate CEQA if adopted. The Draft Plan's Adoption is Premature Putting aside the above legal deficiencies with the Draft Plan's potential adoption, now is simply not the time for the Planning Commission and the City Council to consider the Draft Plan. As the Staff Report acknowledges, the City will embark on General Plan amendments later this year. The wholesale redevelopment of Mariner's Mile should be considered as part of those amendments instead of in a vacuum as now attempted. The Draft Plan's myriad proposed changes affect the entire City, not just those in and near Mariner's Mile. By separating the Draft Plan from the imminent broader consideration of the populous' vision for the City as a whole, it appears to be the City's intent to preempt the public's consideration of General Plan amendments. Moreover, the Draft Plan contemplates that the General Plan's amendment will "revise the Mariners' Mile boundary area." The Draft Plan's adoption is entirely premature since the area that constitutes Mariner's Mile will imminently change causing the Draft Plan to be immediately incomplete and outdated. It is irresponsible public policy and planning to adopt sweeping changes for an area that the City acknowledges will unavoidably change in the next couple of years. Not knowing how the boundaries will change, all of the recommendations and conclusions contained in the Draft Plan are unreliable and misleading since what may appear to be appropriate and desirable today based on Mariner's Mile present bounds may not be so once those boundaries change. Since neither the Draft Plan nor the Staff Report states any good faith reason why the Draft Plan's adoption is necessitated prior to the General Plan amendments, the Draft Plan's consideration should be deferred until thereafter. Only then can the prudence of the proposed wholesale changes to Mariner's Mile be fairly and intelligently considered. 800.838.209' WWW.BERDING WEIL.COM B- R D I N G V V _ I L Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4d Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) Planning Commission City of Newport Beach July 17, 2017 Page 9 Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Draft Plan. The Coalition trusts that the City will not adopt the Draft Plan at this time given the numerous problems addressed above which is vital to the health, safety, well-being, and quiet enjoyment of property of the Coalition's members and supporters. Very truly yours, BERDING & WEIL LLP A, ) Aaron J. Ehrlich Partner aehrlich@berdinaweil.com Counsel for The Coalition to Protect Mariner's Mile AJE:aje Enclosures cc: Mayor and Members of the City Council (with enclosures via hand delivery and email) David Kiff, City Manager (with enclosures via hand delivery and email) Kim Brandt, Community Development Director (with enclosures via hand delivery and email) Brenda Wisneski, Deputy Community Development Director (with enclosures via hand delivery and email) Makana Nova, Associate Planner (with enclosures via hand delivery and email) David Webb, Public Works Director (with enclosures via hand delivery and email) WWW.BERDINr.WE38.COM B. R D I N G W -1 L Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4d Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) Planning Commission City of Newport Beach July 17, 2017 Page 10 Aaron C. Harp, City Attorney (with enclosures via hand delivery and email) Michael D. Torres, Assistant City Attorney (with enclosures via hand delivery and email) Leilani I. Brown, City Clerk (with enclosures via hand delivery and email) 800.838.209' WWW.BERDING WEIL.COM B- R D I N G V V _ I L Memorandum To: Planning Commission Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No, 4e Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) COMMUNITY DEVELOP .IVr 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, California 92660 949 644-3200 newportbeachca.gov/communitydevelopment From: Brenda Wisneski, Deputy Community Development Director Makana Nova, Associate Planner Date: July 18, 2017 Re: Item No. 4 - Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) Staff Withdrawal of Application Based upon significant concerns expressed by the community, staff believes this is not the appropriate time to pursue the adoption of the Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan. Therefore, staff has withdrawn this item from Planning Commission consideration. The draft Master Plan may be considered again following the comprehensive General Plan update, scheduled to begin in late 2017. Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4f Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) To: Additional Materials Subject: FW: Mariners Mile- 2332 W. Pacific Coast Highway Attachments: 2332 W Pacific Coast Hwy - Avon St. Connection.pdf From: Coralee Newman [mailto:cora@govsol.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 2:02 PM To: Koetting, Peter <pkoetting@newportbeachca.gov>; eweigand@gmail.com; Dunlap, Bill <bdunlap@newportbeachca.gov>; Kleiman, Lauren <Ikleiman@newportbeachca.gov>; kkramer@pacifichospitality.com; Lowrey, Lee <Ilowrey@newportbeachca.gov>; Zak, Peter <pzak@newportbeachca.gov> Cc: Nova, Makana <MNova@newportbeachca.gov>; Wisneski, Brenda <BWisneski@newoortbeachca.gov>; Brandt, Kim <KBrandt@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: Mariners Mile- 2332 W. Pacific Coast Highway Dear Chairman Koetting and Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission: While we understand no action will be taken on the Mariners Mile Revitalization Project tomorrow evening at your Planning Commission meeting, we wanted to get this letter into the record so that our concerns were noted. Thanks so much. Coralee Newman On behalf of the Bhathal Family Owners of 2332 W Pacific Coast Highway Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4f Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) GOVERNMENT SOLUTIONS,-, July 18, 2017 Chairman Peter Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission The City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 RE: Mariners Mile Revitalization Plan 2332 West Coast Highway- Avon Street Connection Dear Chairman Koetting & Members of the Newport Beach Planning Commission: On Tuesday, July 18th, we were notified that this item will be pulled from the agenda and your deliberations at the Thursday, July 20`h Planning Commission hearing. While we do understand that no action will be taken on this item at this time, we felt our concerns should registered for the record. Please review this letter in that context. Per my testimony to you at your April 20, 2017 Planning Commission meeting, 1 represent the Bhathal family, owners of property located within the boundaries of the proposed Mariners Mile Revitalization Plan. The property is located at 2332 West Coast Highway and is .53 acres in size. Currently, the Baja Beach Cafe leases the site and operates a restaurant. The property has been owned by the Bhathal family for over 70 years and is held under the Sadie Stegmann Trust. In the very near future, it is their goal to redevelop the property with plans underway for a mixed use development which could include a restaurant and office uses. While we are concerned with the Revitalization Plan as it is currently drafted, we do understand and acknowledge that some of the suggestions in the plan are positive and could stimulate private property owners to upgrade their properties. We appreciate many of the suggestions in Section 4.0 which include Design Guidelines. Additionally, we applaud the concept of a pedestrian friendly village. 881 Dover Drive, Suite 390 • Newport Beach, CA 92663 Mailing Address: 1048 Irvine Avenue, #618 • Newport Beach, CA 92660 949-717-7943 main • 949-717-7942 Fax • www.govsol.com Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4f Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) That being said, our primary concern with the Revitalization Plan is its overarching dependence on the utilization of private property as its basis, without which, much of the plan is infeasible. Specifically in our case, one of the conceptual Avon Street extensions identified as Avon Street (East) suggests our property be utilized for the extension: "The City is considering to modify the alleyway so that it becomes an extension of Avon Street to the east with Avon connecting to West Coast Highway at a new signalized intersection in one of two potential locations (1) to the west of the existing Holiday Inn Express (2332 West Coast Highway) or (2) on the western edge of the existing boat yard parcel (2244 West Coast Highway)." If this plan were to be approved by the Planning Commission, we would request this extension using our property be removed from the plan. We see this proposal as a taking. In that our property is only .5 acres in size, bisecting our property for the extension of Avon Street would deem our property unfit for future redevelopment. It appears that laced through the entire Revitalization Plan, the assumption on the use of our private property is integral to many of the concepts presented. Again in Section 3-6 Village Core (District 4) Figure 12. it appears our property is being utilized as the spine connection from West PCH to Avon Street. The plan goes on to describe how this connection would create "Avon Street as the village core main street, providing a spine for infill development and redevelopment projects." We are very concerned with the Revitalization Plan's dependence on Avon Street as its main street without garnering support of the local business and property owners such as ourselves. If Avon Street is proposed as the core main street, in essence the critical link to making this plan happen, impacted property owners need to be in concurrence with the plan prior to it proceeding any further. Finally, we suggest that if such a connection is ultimately required to be made, the western edge of the existing boat yard parcel (2244 West Coast Highway) is the appropriate parcel to utilize. It is our understanding that this parcel is owned by MSM Global Ventures (The Moshayedi Family). It is also our understanding, that MSM owns the property directly across the street (formerly known as the Ardell property) and that the Avon Street connection(s) directly serve as future access for the redevelopment of their properties. If that be the case, it would seem only fair and appropriate that their properties be utilized for the development of their properties and the Avon Street connection. We appreciate city staff's recommendation to have this item pulled and that no public hearing be conducted on this matter. We support that recommendation as based on the level of concerns being expressed, it is not appropriate to move this item forward at this time. Sincerely, e� & �l� Coralee S. Newman CC: Brenda Wisneski (BWisneski@newportbeachca.gov) Makana Nova (MNova@newportbeachca.gov) Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4g Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) To: Additional Materials Subject: FW: Mariners Mile Revitalization Comments From James Thomas Kociiuba From: Jimmy Thomas [mailto:itxl2@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 9:55 AM To: Wisneski, Brenda <BWisneski@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: Fw: Mariners Mile Revitalization Comments From James Thomas Kociiuba I send this to the planning commission and am forwarding you a copy. Thank You. From: Jimmy Thomas Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 12:50 PM To: pkoetting@newportbeachca.gov; pzak@newportbeachca.gov; eweigand@newportbeachca.gov; bdunlap@newportbeachca.gov; Ikleiman@newportbeachca.gov; kkramer@newportbeachca.gov; llowrev@newportbeachca.gov Subject: Mariners Mile Revitalization Comments From James Thomas Kociiuba To: Newport Beach Planning Commission Re: Mariners Mile Revitalization and Coast Highway Widening From: James T. Kociuba, (949) 933-0145 Dear Planning Commission, I own homes in the Newport Heights and Corona Del Mar sections of Newport Beach. I am excited about Mariners Mile revitalization, and I strongly support your revitalization plan. This would be a huge improvement to our community, and especially benefit Newport Heights and Cliff Haven homeowners. To me, it appears planners and engineers have determined Coast Highway needs improvements to support the Mariners Mile revitalization traffic. From what I can tell, there appears to be regulations and/or laws that require Coast Highway improvements to increased traffic loads from the revitalization. This leaves us with two legal choices. We can do the revitalization right, and improve Coast Highway to six lanes. Or we can either forget the revitalization, or adopt a mini -revitalization plan that short changes the community and leave Coast Highway as is. Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4g Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) Many residents with properties that are very close to Coast Highway want Mariners Mile revitalized while leaving Coast Highway as is. It is an unacceptable solution because the gridlock on Coast Highway would cause a flood of vehicles in Newport Heights and Cliffhaven. So, I would hope Mariners Mile is revitalized and Coast Highway is widened and improved. But, please, do not revitalize Mariners Mile if you decide to not improve Coast Highway. What concerns me the most is where Mariners Mile is revitalized with the promise that Coast Highway will be improved in the future, but the improvements never happen. The revitalization and Coast Highway improvements need to be linked. Thank You James T. Kociuba Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4h Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) Subject: FW: -----Original Message ----- From: Chuck Horning [mailto:chuck@preservationpartners.com] Sent: July 18, 2017 10:11 PM To: Nova, Makana <MNova@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: I think it fair to the residents who don't want urbanization of Coast Hwy, to know who on staff in the Town of Newport Beach, is pushing this, requiring such an effort from residents. Thank you. Chuck Horning Chairman, Newport Federal Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4i Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) To: Additional Materials Subject: FW: PCH Improvements and Mariners Mile Revitalization - Move forward with a 3X plan From: Chris Budnik [mailto:clbudnik2003@vahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 1:50 PM To: Koetting, Peter <pkoetting@newportbeachca.gov>; Zak, Peter <pzak@newportbeachca.gov>; Weigand, Erik <eweigand@newportbeachca.gov>; Dunlap, Bill <bdunlap@newportbeachca.gov>; Kleiman, Lauren <Ikleiman@newportbeachca.gov>; Kramer, Kory<kkramer@newportbeachca.gov>; Lowrey, Lee <Ilowrev@newportbeachca.gov>; Wisneski, Brenda <BWisneski@newportbeachca.gov> Subject: PCH Improvements and Mariners Mile Revitalization - Move forward with a 3X plan Dear Planning Commission, I live in Newport Heights and own residential properties here. I am hopeful the city will move forward to fix the traffic problem on PCH and revitalize Mariners Mile. Over the past decades MM has become a compilation of marginal businesses, many languish or fail, some survive, very few thrive. Most importantly for Heights residents, PCH MM is a traffic nightmare which has caused substantially higher traffic levels in the Heights. It's important to understand how we reached this point in order to design a project that Heights residents will support. It started decades ago with a Newport Beach strategy, promoted by vocal residents backing PCH, to re-route PCH up Dover Drive and across the Heights between 16t' and 17`t'. Costa Mesa successfully repelled this effort. So the NB strategy shifted to restricting traffic on PCH MM as much as possible, diverting it into the Heights and East Side Costa Mesa. To mitigate impacts in the Heights, NB modified the Master Plan of Highways, taking away traffic -flow -friendly routes. For example 15th street once connected directly to Dover Drive and went straight across Newport Blvd. Irvine Avenue was supposed to connect to PCH. MM was supposed to be 3 lanes each direction. Northbound PCH MM was supposed to have a free right tum lane directly to northbound Newport Blvd. The 55 Fwy was supposed to end just south of 15th. All these things were changed and there were serious negative consequences for traffic in the Heights years later. I believe the majority of residents in the Heights would support the revitalization project and PCH improvements, IF it reduces traffic in the Heights. So we need to increase capacity on PCH to handle more than is needed for revitalization and get regional traffic that always belonged on PCH off the streets in the Heights. We can accomplish this as follows: 1. Accurately measure the increased load for the Revitalization 2. Increase PCH MM capacity by 3X the Revitalization load 3. Commit one third of the added capacity to the Revitalization, one third to longer term MM development and one third to permanently reduce traffic in the Heights Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4i Additional Materials Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) The strategy of restricting traffic on PCH MM benefitted a few residents with property backing PCH. Everyone else lost including the city tax base, business owners and the other Heights residents as neighborhood traffic levels exploded. Costa Mesa used the NB strategy to their advantage and created a vibrant business district on 17th Street. It's time we had a vibrant shopping and dining district on Mariner's Mile. Most importantly, it's time to put regional traffic back on PCH where it always belonged. I hope you will continue to pursue this project and not be discouraged by a vocal few residents backing PCH. Best Regards, Christopher Budnik Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4j Additional Materials Received After Meeting Mariners' Mile Revitalization Master Plan (PA2016-081) Subject: FW: Thank you from The Coalition To Protect Mariner's Mile From: Peggy Palmer [mailto:pvpalmer@icloud.com] Sent: Friday, July 21, 2017 11:28 AM To: Dixon, Diane <ddixon@newportbeachca.gov>; Avery, Brad <bavery@newportbeachca.gov>; Duffield, Duffy <dduffield@newportbeachca.gov>; Muldoon, Kevin <kmuldoon@newportbeachca.gov>; Herdman, Jeff <iherdman@newportbeachca.gov>; Peotter, Scott <speotter@newportbeachca.gov>; O'Neill, William <woneill@newportbeachca.gov>; Kramer, Kory<kkramer@newportbeachca.gov>; Koetting, Peter <pkoetting@newportbeachca.gov>; Zak, Peter <pzak@newportbeachca.gov>; Dunlap, Bill <bdunlap@newportbeachca.gov>; Campbell, lames <JCampbell@newportbeachca.gov>; Brandt, Kim <KBrandt@newportbeachca.gov>; Kiff, Dave <DKiff@newportbeachca.gov>; Wisneski, Brenda <BWisneski@newportbeachca.gov>; Nova, Makana <MNova@newportbeachca.gov>; Weigand, Erik <eweigand@newportbeachca.gov>; Kleiman, Lauren <Ikleiman@newportbeachca.gov>; Lowrey, Lee <I lowrey@ newportbeachca.gov> Subject: Thank you from The Coalition To Protect Mariner's Mile Dear Planning Commissioners & Staff, On behalf of the Coalition to Protect Mariner's Mile, we would like to personally thank the Planning Commissioners and the dedicated Staff for their efforts to take a step back and reevaluate the Mariner's Mile Revitalization Plan. Moving forward, we need to look at all the plans in their entirety along Mariner's Mile to make certain that they are compatible and most importantly responsible developments. Unfortunately, the efforts to continue to widen Pacific Coast Highway, in our opinion, is the number one obstacle that will continue to impede the progress regarding future projects, as a family friendly village and tourist destination is in direct conflict with a six -lane highway. It simply defeats the purpose of the redevelopment, it would also remove an immense amount of private property from the inland parcels along Mariner's Mile. We have almost 2,000 people that include the property owners, local merchants and the residents in the surrounding areas that have opposed this Revitalization Plan in its current state, as well as, the expansion of PCH. Planning Commission - July 20, 2017 Item No. 4j Additional Materials Received After Meeting In closing, there is a phenomenon, c dol'6 'i!I?61t6lijfi'P � t98ii1 #► 6 081) two can be crucial to success --While failure can help you understand where your true passion lies, and where you should focus your energy moving forward, imagination is what will allow you to empathize with other people, so you can use your influence to do good. We need a vision and the power to imagine better. Together, we need to roll -up our sleeves, get to work and imagine better for Mariner's Mile. Thank you for your time and consideration. Peggy V. Palmer z