Staff has attached a draft City Council resolution for approval based on the March 25, 2024 Planning Commission’s decision, including the two added conditions of approval (operational conditions of approval number 27 and 28). Should the City Council determine to overturn the Planning Commission’s decision, staff requests that the City Council articulates its reasons for denial based on the required aforementioned findings in order for staff to incorporate those reasons into a resolution.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
If considered for City Council approval, t he project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, for the permitting and/or minor alteration of Existing Facilities, involving negligible or no expansion of the existing or prior use. This project site contains existing structures that have been in continual commercial/residential use. The application does not propose an increase in commercial floor area or otherwise expand the prior commercial use, nor increase residential density. Furthermore, none of the exceptions that bar the application of a categorical exemption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 applies. Specifically, the project would not result in a cumulative impact; would not have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances; would not result in damage to scenic resources; is not located on a hazardous site or location; and would not impact any historic resources.
If the project is denied by the City Council, the project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15270(a) for projects that a public agency rejects or disapproves.
ALTERNATIVES:
The City Council has the following alternatives:
Uphold the Planning Commission’s decision and adopt a Resolution to approve the application subject to conditions of approval (including any additional conditions required by the City Council);
Overturn the Planning Commission’s decision and adopt a Resolution to deny Planning Application 22-08; or
Remand Planning Application 22-08 the Planning Commission to reconsider the matter based on specific City Council direction.
FISCAL REVIEW:
There are no fiscal impacts with this agenda item.
LEGAL REVIEW:
The City Attorney has reviewed and approved this report as to form.
477
Item #: 24-141 Meeting Date: 5/7/2024
PUBLIC NOTICE:
Pursuant to Title 13, Section 13 -29(d), of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code, three types of public notification have been completed no less than 10 days prior to the date of the public hearing:
1. Mailed notice. A public notice was mailed to all property owners and occupants within a 500 -foot radius of the project site. The required notice radius is mea sured from the external boundaries of the property.
2. On-site posting. A public notice was posted on each street frontage of the project site.
3. Newspaper publication. A public notice was published once in the Daily Pilot newspaper.
Public comments received prior to the May 7, 2024, City Council meeting, may be viewed at this link:
CITY OF COSTA MESA - Calendar (legistar.com).
CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:
This item is administrative in nature.
CONCLUSION:
The subject review is intended to provide the City Council with an opportunity to conduct a de novo hearing for the application and make findings on the final disposition to uphold or overturn the Planning Commission’s decision on the Newport Wellness cannabis retail Conditional Use Permit.
478
ATTACHMENT 1
Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 1 of 17
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-xx
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COU NCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA, TO UPHOLD THE PLANNING COMMISSION ’S DECISION AND APPROVE PLANNING APPLICATION 22-08 FOR A RETAIL CANNABIS STOREFRONT BUSINESS WITH DELIVERY LOCATED AT 2490 NEWPORT
BOULEVARD (NEWPORT WELLNESS)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA HEREBY FINDS AND DECLARES AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, Planning Application 22-08 was filed by Sean Maddocks representing Newport Wellness, the authorized agent for the property owner, Anne Tostle Johnson , requesting approval of the following:
A Conditional Use Permit to operate a storefront retail and cannabis delivery business within an existing 2,076-square-foot commercial building located at 2490 Newport Boulevard . The business would sell pre -packaged cannabis and pre - packaged cannabis products directly to customers onsite and through delivery , subject to conditions of approval and other City and State requirements; WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on March 25, 2024 with all persons having the opportunity to speak for and against the proposal, and the project was approved by the Planning Commission on a 3-2 vote; WHEREAS, Councilmember Marr and Councilmember Harper filed applications for review on April 1, 2024;
WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council on May 7, 2024 with all persons having the opportunity to speak for and against the application; WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the project is exempt from the provisions of CEQA per Section 15301 (Class 1), for Existing Facilities;
WHEREAS, the CEQA categorical exemption for this project reflects the independent judgement of the City of Costa Mesa; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered all public comments which have been received either in writing or at the public hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA HEREBY RESOLVES as follows:
479
Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 2 of 17
BE IT RESOLVED that based on the evidence in the record and the findings contained in Exhibit A, and subject to the conditions of approval contained within Exhibit B, the City Council hereby upholds the approval of Planning Application 22-08 with respect to the property described above.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Costa Mesa City Council does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon the activity as described in the s taff report for Planning Application 22-08 and upon applicant’s compliance with each and all of the conditions in Exhibit B, and compliance with all applicable federal, State, and local laws. Any approval granted by this resolution shall be subject to review, modification or revocation if there is a material change that occurs in the operation, or if the applicant fails to comply with any of the conditions of approval.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any section, division, sentence, clause, phrase or porti on of this resolution, or the document in the record in support of this resolution, are for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of May, 2024.
_____________________________
John Stephens, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________ _____________________________ Brenda Green, City Clerk Kimberly Hall Barlow, City Attorney
480
Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 3 of 17
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss
CITY OF COSTA MESA )
I, BRENDA GREEN, City Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing is the original of Resolution No. 2024-XX and was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa at a regular meeting held on the 7th day of May 2024, by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereby set my hand and affixed the seal of the City of Costa Mesa this 8th day of May 2024.
_________________________________
Brenda Green, City Clerk
481
Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 4 of 17
EXHIBIT A
FINDINGS
A. Pursuant to CMMC Section 13-29(g), when granting an application for a conditional use permit , the review authority shall find that the evidence presented in the administrative record substantially meets required findings.
Finding: The proposed development or use is substantially compatible with developments in the same general area and would not be materially detrimental to other properties within the area.
Facts in Support of Findings: The subject site is located within a commercial zone (C1, Local Business District) where commercial development is specifically allowed to include retail uses. In addition, the property is located on one of the City’s primary commercial corridors that is predominantly intended for commercial uses. Pursuant to the CMMC, cannabis retail storefronts are permitted uses in the C1 zone and are subject to extensive regulation. Additionally, the proposed cannabis retail storefront use is not located within 1,000 feet of a K-12 school, playground, licensed child daycare, homeless shelter, or youth center as defined in the CMMC.
As proposed and conditioned, the storefront would operate in a manner that is compatible with developments in the area. Proposed and conditioned storefront operations include limiting the hours of operation to the hours between 7 AM and 10 PM, posting signs in the parking lot directing customers to use consideration, having a security guard onsite, having a staff member periodically monitor the parking lot, limiting the hours the trash enclosure can be used, and shielding security lighting down and away from residences.
City records indicate that the subject site has been used for both commercial and residential uses since the 1950s or earlier. The most recent previous commercial uses include auto parts retail and automobile window tinting. Staff observed deferred property and building maintenance as well as several nonconforming conditions such as parking in required setbacks. If approved, the applicant would invest in significant site improvements, including bringing a com mercial structure up to current building codes, adding landscaped planters and trees, constructing a parking lot to meet Code design standards, adding a bike rack, and replacing chain -link fencing with high quality fencing and walls. Staff does not anticip ate that the proposed use, as proposed and conditioned, would be materially detrimental to properties in the area.
Finding: Granting the conditional use permit will not be materially detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the public or o therwise injurious to property or improvements within the immediate neighborhood.
Facts in Support of Finding: The proposed cannabis retail storefront has the potential to improve safety through a significant remodel that includes bringing 482
Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 5 of 17
a commercial building up to current building codes, improving accessibility, replacing aging fencing and walls, adding security lighting, removing dilapidated structures, and removing parking from required setbacks and from encroaching into public rights-of-ways.
In addition, the proposed business would follow safety measures detailed in a professionally prepared security plan. The security plan was evaluated for compliance by the City’s cannabis consultant, HdL. Measures designed to maintain safety at th e site include, but are not limited to, security devices including window and door alarms, motion-detectors, limited access areas, and a monitored video surveillance system covering all exterior entrances, exits, exterior loading and unloading, and all interior limited access spaces. In addition, all employees must pass a live scan background check and obtain an identification badge from the City. The City and State requirements are designed to ensure that the proposed use would not be materially detrimenta l to the health, safety and general welfare of the public or be otherwise injurious to property or improvements within the immediate neighborhood.
Finding: Granting the conditional use permit will not allow a use, density or intensity which is not in accordance with the general plan designation and any applicable specific plan for the property.
Facts in Support of Finding: The property has a General Plan land use designation of “Commercial Residential”. The intent of this land use designation is to a llow a mix of commercial and residential zones along Newport Boulevard. The use is consistent with General Plan policies related to providing a mixture of commercial goods, services, and employment opportunities; expanding the City’s tax base; and promoting the incubation of specialized businesses. The City’s General Plan sets forth long -term policies that guide future development, whereas the Zoning Ordinance implements general plan policies through detailed development regulations, such as specific use types and building standards. Therefore, in determining General Plan compliance for the proposed cannabis retail storefront use, a comparison of the proposed use with the use, density and intensity allowed by the applicable zoning district is required. In this case, the applicable zoning district is “Local Business District” (C1). A variety of commercial uses are allowed in the C1 zone, including a retail cannabis storefront, subject to a CUP. No additional square footage is proposed; therefore, the proposed use would not increase the floor area ratio (building intensity) or increase the number of residential units onsite (density).
B. If considered for City Council approval, t he project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, for the permitting and/or minor alteration of Existing Facilities, involving negligible or no expansion of the existing or prior use. This project site contains existing structures that have been in continual commercia or residential use. The application does not propose an increase in commercial floor area or 483
Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 6 of 17
otherwise expand the prior commercial use nor incre ase residential density .
Furthermore, none of the exceptions that bar the application of a categorical exemption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 applies. Specifically, the project would not result in a cumulative impact; would not have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances; would not result in damage to scenic resources; is not located on a hazardous site or location; and would not impact any historic resources.
C. The project is subject to a traffic impact fee, pursuant to Chapter XII, Article 3 Transportation System Management, of Title 13 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code.
484
Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 7 of 17
EXHIBIT B
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
General
Plng. 1. The use of this property as a cannabis storefront business shall comply with the approved plans and terms described in the resolution, these conditions of approval, and applicable sections of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code (CMMC). The Planning Commission may modify or revoke any planning application based on findings related to public nuisance and/or noncompliance with conditions of approval [Title 13, Section 13-29(o)].
2. Approval of the planning/zoning application is valid for two years from the effective date of this approval and will expire at the end of that period unless the applicant establishes the use by one of the following actions: 1) a building permit has been issued and construction has commenced, and has continued to maintain a valid building permit by making satisfactory progress as determined by the Building Official, 2) a certificate of occupancy has been issued, or 3) the use is established and a business license has been issued.
A time extension can be requested no less than 30 days or more than sixty (60) days before the expiration date of the permit and submitt ed with the appropriate fee for review to the Planning Division. The Director of Development Services may extend the time for an approved permit or approval to be exercised up to 180 days subject to specific findings listed in Title 13, Section 13-29 (k) (6). Only one request for an extension of 180 days may be approved by the Director. Any subsequent extension requests shall be considered by the original approval authority.
3. No person may engage in any cannabis business or in any cannabis activity within the City including delivery or sale of cannabis or a cannabis product unless the person:
a. Has a valid Cannabis Business Permit from the City;
b. Has paid all Cannabis Business Permit and all application fees and deposits established by resolution of the City Council, including annual Community Improvement Division inspection deposits;
c. Has obtained all applicable planning, zoning, building, and other applicable permits from the relevant governmental agency which may be applicable to t he zoning district in which such cannabis business intends to operate;
d. Has obtained a City business license pursuant to Chapter I of the Municipal Code;
e. Is in compliance with all requirements of the Community Improvement Division regarding the property;
f. Has obtained any and all licenses required by State law and/or regulations; and
g. Has satisfied all CUP conditions of approval.
485
Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 8 of 17
4. Any change in the operational characteristics of the use shall be subject to Planning Division review and may require an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit, subject to either Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission approval, depending on the nature of the proposed change.
5. No cultivation of cannabis is allowed anywhere on the premises.
6. The uses authorized by this Conditional Use Permit must be conducted in accordance with all applicable State and local laws, including, but not limited to compliance with the most current versions of the provisions of the California Code of Regulations that regulate the uses permitted hereby.
Any violation thereof shall be a violation of the conditions of this permit and may be cause for revocation of this permit.
7. Except for operations allowed by this Conditional Use Permit and under an active Cannabis Business Permit and Sta te Type 10 license, no permit holder or any of its employees shall sell, distribute, furnish, and/or otherwise provide any cannabis or cannabis product to any person, firm, corporation, group or any other entity, unless that person or entity is a lawful, bona fide customer, or it possesses all currently valid permits and/or licenses required by both the State of California and applicable local governmental entity to lawfully receive such cannabis and to engage in a “cannabis activity” as defined by Costa Me sa Municipal Code sec. 9-485.
The permit holder shall verify that the recipient, regardless of where it is located, of any cannabis or cannabis product sold, distributed, furnished, and/or otherwise provided by or on behalf of the permit holder, possesses all required permits and/or licenses therefor.
8. The applicant, the property owner and the operator (collectively referred to as “indemnitors”) shall each jointly and severally defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officials, agents, officers and employees from any claim, legal action, or proceeding (collectively referred to as "proceeding") brought against the City, its elected and appointed officials, agents, officers or employees arising out of City's approval of the project, including but not limited to any proceeding under the California Environmental Quality Act. The indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded against the City, if any, and cost of suit, attorney's fee s, and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred in connection with such proceeding whether incurred by the applicant, the City and/or the parties initiating or bringing such proceeding. This indemnity provision shall include the indemnitors’ joint and several obligation to indemnify the City for all the City's costs, fees, and damages that the City incurs in enforcing the indemnification provisions set forth in this section.
9. If any section, division, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this approval is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions.
10. The use shall operate in accordance with the approved Security Plan. Any changes to the Security Plan must be submitted to the Planning Division with 486
Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 9 of 17
a written explanation of the changes. If the Director determines that changes are substantial, a modification to the Cannabis Business Permit and/or amendment to the CUP may be required.
11. A parking and security management plan, including techniques described in Operational Condition of Approval No. 7, must be approved by the Director of Economic and Development Services or designee prior to any grand opening or other high-volume event on the subject property.
Bldg. 12. Development shall comply with the requirements of the following adopted codes: 2022 California Residential Code, 2022 California Building Code, 2022 California Electrical Code, 2022 California Mechanical Code, 2022 California Plumbing Code, 2022 California Green Building Standards Code and 2022 California Energy Code (or the applicable adopted, California Residential Code, California Building Code, California Electrical Code, California Mechanical Code, California Plumbing Code, California Green Building Standards and California Energy Code at the time of plan submittal or permit issuance) and California Code of Regulations also known as the California Building Standards Code, as amended by the City of Costa Mesa. Requirements for accessibility to sites, facilities, buildings and elements by individuals with disability shall comply with chapter 11B of the 2022 California Building Code.
CBP 13. The operator shall maintain a valid Cannabis Business Permit and a valid Business License at all times. The Cannabis Business Permit application number associated with this address is MQ -21-39. Upon issuance, the Cannabis Business Permit will be valid for a two-year period and must be renewed with the City prior to its expiration date, including the payment of permit renewal fees. No more than one Cannabis Business Permit may be issued to this property.
14. The use shall operate in accordance with the approved Business Plan. Any changes to the Business Plan must be submitted to the Planning Division with a written explanation of the changes. If the Director determines that changes are substantial, a modification to the Cannabis Business Permit and/or amendment to the CUP may be required.
15. A Cannabis Business Permit may be revoked upon a hearing by the Director of Economic and Development Services or designee pursuant to Section 9 -120 of the CMMC for failing to comply with the terms of the permit, the applicable provisions of the CMMC, State law or regulation and/or any condition of any other permit issued pursuant to this code.
Revocation of the Cannabis Business Permit shall trigger the City’s proceedings to revoke the Conditional Use Permit and its amendments.
The Conditional Use Permit granted herein shall not be construed to allow any subsequent owner/operator to continue operating under PA -22-08 until a valid new Cannabis Business Permit is received from the City of Costa Mesa.
16. A change in ownership affecting an interest of 51 or more percent, or an incremental change in ownership that will result in a change of 51 or more percent over a three year period, shall require submittal and approval of a 487
Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 10 of 17
new Cannabis Business Permit. A change in ownership that affects an interest of less than 51 percent shall requi re approval of a minor modification to the Cannabis Business Permit.
State 17. The business must obtain any and all licenses required by State law and/or regulation prior to engaging in any cannabis activity at the property.
18. The applicant shall obtain State License Type 10 prior to operating. The uses authorized by this Conditional Use Permit must be conducted in accordance with all applicable State and local laws, including, but not limited to compliance with the most current versions of the provisions of the California Code of Regulations that regulate the uses permitted hereby.
Any violation thereof shall be a violation of the conditions of this permit and may be cause for revocation of this permit.
19. Suspension of a license issued by the State of California, or by any of its departments or divisions, shall immediately suspend the ability of a cannabis business to operate within the City, until the State of California, or its respective department or di vision, reinstates or reissues the State license. Should the State of California, or any of its departments or divisions, revoke or terminate the license of a cannabis business, such revocation or termination shall also revoke or terminate the ability of a cannabis business to operate within the City. This Conditional Use Permit will expire and be of no further force and effect if any State issued license remains suspended for a period exceeding six (6) months. Documentation of three violations during rou tine inspections or investigations of complaints shall result in the Community Inprovement Division scheduling a hearing before the Director of Development Services to consider revocation of the Cannabis Business Permit.
20. Third parties are prohibited fro m providing delivery services for non - storefront retail.
21. Persons under the age of twenty -one (21) years shall not be allowed on the premises of this business, except as otherwise specifically provided for by state law and CMMC Section 9 -495(h)(6). It shall be unlawful and a violation of this CUP for the owner/operator to employ any person who is not at least twenty-one (21) years of age.
PD 22. Every manager, supervisor, employee or volunteer of the cannabis business must submit fingerprints and other in formation specified on the Cannabis Business Permit for a background check by the Costa Mesa Police Department to verify that person’s criminal history. No employee or volunteer may commence paid or unpaid work for the business until the background checks have been approved. No cannabis business or owner thereof may employ any person who has been convicted of a felony within the past 7 years, unless that felony has been dismissed, withdrawn, expunged or set aside pursuant to Penal Code sections 1203.4, 1000 or 1385, or who is currently on probation or parole for the sale, distribution, possession or manufacture of a controlled substance.
CID 23. Should any employee, volunteer or other person who possesses an identification badge be terminated or cease their em ployment with the 488
Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 11 of 17
business, the applicant shall return such identification badge to the City of Costa Mesa Community Improvement Division within 24 hours, not including weekends and holidays.
24. The property owner and applicant shall use “Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design” techniques to reduce opportunities for crime, loitering and encampments on the property as deemed appropriate by the Community Improvement Manager and Director of Ec onomic and Development Services.
Finance 25. This business operator shall pay all sales, use, business and other applicable taxes, and all license, registration, and other fees and permits required under State and local law. This business operator shall cooperate with the City with respect to any reasonable request to audit the cannabis business’ books and records for the purpose of verifying compliance with the CMMC and this CUP, including but not limited to a verification of the amount of taxes required to be paid during any period.
26. The following records and recordkeeping shall be maintained/conducted:
a. The owner/operator of this cannabis business shall maintain accurate books and records, detailing all of the revenues and expenses of the business, and all of its assets and liabilities. On no less than an annual basis, or at any time upon reasonable request of the City, the owner/operator shall file a sworn statement detailing the number of sales by the can nabis business during the previous twelve month period (or shorter period based upon the timing of the request), provided on a per-month basis. The statement shall also include gross sales for each month, and all applicable taxes paid or due to be paid. b. The owner/operator shall maintain a current register of the names and the contact information (including the name, address, and telephone number) of anyone owning or holding an interest in the cannabis business, and separately of all the officers, managers , employees, agents and volunteers currently employed or otherwise engaged by the cannabis business. The register required by this condition shall be provided to the City Manager upon a reasonable request. c. The owner/operator shall maintain an inventory co ntrol and reporting system that accurately documents the present location, amounts, and descriptions of all cannabis and cannabis products for all stages of the retail sale process. Subject to any restrictions under the Health Insurance Portability and Ac countability Act (HIPPA), the owner/operator shall allow City officials to have access to the business’s books, records, accounts, together with any other data or documents relevant to its permitted cannabis activities, for the purpose of conducting an au dit or examination. Books, records, accounts, and any and all relevant data or documents will be produced no later than twenty-four (24) hours after receipt of the City’s request, unless otherwise stipulated by the City.
d. The owner/operator shall have in place a point-of-sale tracking system to track and report on all aspects of the cannabis business including, 489
Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 12 of 17
but not limited to, such matters as cannabis tracking, inventory data, and gross sales (by weight and by sale). The owner/operator shall ensure that such information is compatible with the City’s record - keeping systems. The system must have the capability to produce historical transactional data for review by the City Manager or designees.
Insp. 27. The City Manager or designees may enter this business at any time during the hours of operation without notice, and inspect the location of this business as well as any recordings and records required to be maintained pursuant to Title 9, Chapter VI or under applicable provisions of State law.
If the any areas are deemed by the City Manager or designee to be not accessible during an inspection, not providing such access is cause for the City to begin a cannabis business permit (CBP) and/or conditional use permit (CUP) and/or business license revocation process as prescribed by the applicable Municipal Code revocation procedures.
28. Inspections of this cannabis business by the City will be conducted, at a minimum, on a quarterly basis. The applicant will pay for the inspections according to the adopted Fee Schedule.
29. Quarterly Fire & Life Safety Inspections will be conducted by the Community Risk Reduction Division to verify compliance with the approved operation. The applicant will pay for the inspection according to the Additional Required Inspections as adopted in the Fee Schedule.
30. Annual Fire & Life Safety Inspections will be conducted by the Fire Station Crew for emergency response pre-planning and site access familiarization.
The applicant will pay for the inspection according to the adopted Fee Schedule.
31. Pursuant to Title 9, Chapter VI, it is unlawful for any person having responsibility for the operation of a cannabis business, to impede, obstruct, interfere with, or otherwise not to allow, the City to conduct an inspection, review or copy records, recordings or other documents required to be maintained by a cannabis business under this chapter or under State or local l aw. It is also unlawful for a person to conceal, destroy, deface, damage, or falsify any records, recordings or other documents required to be maintained by a cannabis business under this chapter or under State or local law.
Prior to Issuance of Building Permits
1. Plans shall be prepared, stamped and signed by a California licensed Architect or Engineer.
2. The conditions of approval and ordinance or code provisions of Planning Application 22-08 shall be blueprinted on the face of the site plan as part of the plan check submittal package.
490
Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 13 of 17
3. Prior to the Building Division issuing a demolition permit, the applicant shall contact the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) located at:
21865 Copley Dr.
Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4178
Tel: 909- 396-2000
Or visit its website:
http://www.costamesaca.gov/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid =23381. The Building Division will not issue a demolition permit until an Identification Number is provided by AQMD.
4. Odor control devices and techniques shall be incorporated to ensure that odors from cannabis are not detected outside the property, anywhere on adjacent property or public right-of-way. Building and mechanical permits must be obtained from the Building Division prior to work commencing on any part of the odor control system.
5. Plan check submittal shall:
Provide a trash enclosure.
Remove all chain link gates and fencing.
Replace perimeter walls/fencing with block walls or other high - quality material (subject to the 10’x10’ visibility triangle at driveways).
Replace the gate fronting Newport Boulevard with wrought iron or another high-quality material.
Provide a wood, wrought iron, or other high quality material fence to separate the residential area from the commercial use. Include landscaping and irrigation plans featuring landscaped planters along Newport Boulevard and Monte Vista Avenue and other locations where feasible, at least five 24-inch box size shade trees (not palm trees), shrubs, and living ground cover emphasizing drought-tolerant plants and native California plants (see condition no. 10 below).
Provide a permanent bike rack that is easily accessed via Newport Boulevard and has a minimum capacity of two bicycles and a minimum clearance of 2’x6’.
Provide odor control device specifications.
Provide an updated lighting plan and photometric study, including the new fence separating the reside ntial units from the storefront use. The lighting plan shall show the locations of all security lighting.
Lighting levels on the property including the parking lot shall be adequate for safety and security purposes (generally, at least 1.0 foot candle), l ighting design and layout shall minimize light spill at the residential units, and at other light-sensitive uses (generally, no more than 0.5 -footcandle at the property line), and glare shields may be required to prevent light spill.
491
Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 14 of 17
Provide sidewalk, curb , and gutter along Monte Vista Avenue designed to Public Works standards.
6. No signage shall be installed until the owner/operator or its designated contractor has obtained permits required from the City. Business identification signage shall be limited to that needed for identification only.
Business identification signage shall not include any references to cannabis, whether in wor ds or symbols. All signs shall comply with the CMMC.
7. The plans and business operator shall comply with the requirements of the applicable California Fire Code, including any referenced standards as amended by the City of Costa Mesa.
8. The Traffic Im pact Fee as calculated by the Transportation Services Division shall be paid in full.
9. Construction documents shall include a temporary fencing and temporary security lighting exhibit to ensure the site is secured during construction and to discourage crime, vandalism, and illegal encampments.
10. Two (2) sets of detailed landscape and irrigation plans, which meet the requirements set forth in Costa Mesa Municipal Code Sections 13 -101 through 13-108, shall be required as part of the project plan check review and approval process. Plans shall be forwarded to the Planning Division for final approval prior to issuance of building permits.
Prior to Issuance of a Certificate of Use/Occupancy
1. The operator, contractors, and subcontractors must have valid business licenses to do business in the City of Costa Mesa. Final occupancy and utility releases will not be granted until all such licenses have been obtained.
Prior to Issuance of Cannabis Business Permit
1. The applicant shall contact the Planning Division for a facility inspection and provide a matrix of conditions of approval explaining how each was met prior to issuance of a Cannabis Business Permit.
2. The applicant shall pay the Planning Commission public notice fee ($1 per notice post card) and the newspaper ad publishing cost.
3. The final Security Plan shall be consistent with the approved building plans.
4. Each entrance to the business shall be visibly posted with a clear and legible notice stating the following:
a. That smoking, ingesting, or otherwise consuming cannabis on the premises or in the areas adjacent to the cannabis business is prohibited; b. That no person under the age of twenty -one (21) years of age is permitted to enter upon the premises of the cannabis b usiness unless the business holds a retail medical cannabis license (M-license) issued by the state;
492
Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 15 of 17
c. That loitering by persons outside the facility both on the premises and within fifty (50) feet of the premises is prohibited; and d. The premise is a licensed cannabis operation approved by the City of Costa Mesa. The City may also issue a window/door sticker, which shall be visibly posted.
5. The owner/operator shall obtain and maintain at all times during the term of the permit comprehensive general liability insurance and comprehensive automotive liability insurance protecting the permittee in an amount of not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000.00) per occurrence, combined single limit, including bodily injury and property damage and not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000.00) aggregate for each personal injury liability, products-completed operations and each accident, issued by an insurance provider admitted and authorized to do business in California and shall be rated at least A -:viii in A.M. Best & Company's Insurance Guide.
Such policies of insurance shall be endorsed to name the City of Costa Mesa as an additional insured. Proof of said insurance must be provided to the Planning Division before the business commences operations. Any changes to the insurance policy must be submitted to the Planning Division within 10 days of the date the change is effective.
6. The applicant shall submit an executed Retail Cannabis Business Permit Defense and Indemnity Agreement on a form to be provided by the City.
7. The applicant shall post signs within the p arking lot directing the use of consideration such as no loud voices, loud music, revving car engines, etc.
The language of the parking lot signs shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division prior to installation.
Operational Conditions
1. No product deliveries to the facility shall occur after 10:00 PM and before 7:00 AM.
2. Onsite sales hours of operations are limited to 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM Monday through Sunday.
3. The applicant shall submit an updated delivery vehicle list each quarter with the quarterly update to the employee roster which is required pursuant to the CBP. The number of delivery vehicles parked onsite shall not exceed the number of available onsite surplus parking spac es. Delivery vehicles shall not be parked on City streets.
4. At least one licensed security guard shall be onsite at all times.
5. The operator shall maintain free of litter all areas of the property under which applicant has control.
6. The use shall be conducted, at all times, in a manner that will allow the quiet and safe enjoyment of the surrounding neighborhood. The operator shall institute appropriate security and operational measures as necessary to comply with this requirement.
7. If parking shortages or other parking -related problems develop, the business owner or operator will be required to institute appropriate 493
Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 16 of 17
operational measures necessary to minimize or eliminate the problem in a manner deemed appropriate by the Director of Economic and Development Services or designee. Temporary or permanent parking management strategies include, but are not limited to, reducing operating hours of the business, hiring an additional employee trained in traffic control to monitor parking lot use and assist with customer parking lot circulation, and offering discounts for online and phone orders.
8. While working, employees shall not park on residential streets unless doing so temporarily to make a cannabis delivery.
9. All employees must wear an identification badge while on the premises of the business, in a format prescribed by the City Manager or designee.
When on the premises, badges must be clearly visible and worn on outermost clothing and above the waist in a visible location.
10. The operator shall ensure that all vehicles are properly maintained, all delivery drivers have a good driving record, and each driver conducts a visual inspection of the vehicle at the beginning of each shift.
11. The operator shall ensur e that deliveries are grouped to minimize total vehicle trips.
12. During each delivery stop, the delivery vehicle shall be parked in a safe manner (i.e., not impeding traffic circulation), the engine shall be turned off and the vehicle shall be locked.
13. Delivery/vendor vehicle loading and unloading shall only take place within direct unobstructed view of surveillance cameras, located in close proximity to the vendor entry door, as shown on an exhibit approved by the Director of Economic and Development Services or designee. No loading and unloading of cannabis products into or from the vehicles shall take place outside of camera view. The security guard shall monitor all on -site loading and unloading of vehicles. Video surveillance cameras shall be installed on the exterior of the building with direct views of the vendor entry door and the entire parking lot. Any modifications or additional vehicle loading and unloading areas shall be submitted to the Director of Economic and Development Services or designee for approval.
14. Delivery/vendor vehicle standing, loading and unloading shall be conducted so as not to interfere with normal use of streets, sidewalks, driveways and on-site parking.
15. The sale, dispensing, or consumption of alcoholic beverages on or about the premises is prohibited.
16. No outdoor storage or display of cannabis or cannabis products is permitted at any time.
17. Cannabis shall not be consumed on the property at any time, in any form.
18. The owner/operator shall prohibit loitering on and within fifty (50) feet of the property.
19. No cannabis or cannabis products, or graphics depicting cannabis or cannabis products, shall be visible from the exterior of the property, or on any of the vehicles owned or used as part of the cannabis business. 494
Resolution No. 2024-xx Page 17 of 17
20. The owner or operator shall maintain air quality/odor control devices by replacing filters on a regular basis, as specified in the manufacturer specifications.
21. If cannabis odor is detected outside the building, the business owner or operator shall institute corrective measures necessary to minimize or eliminate the problem in a manner deemed appropriate by the Director of Economic and Development Services.
22. Cannabis liquid or solid waste must be made unusable and unrecognizable prior to leaving a secured storage area and shall be disposed of at facility approved to receive such waste. No cannabis products shall be disposed in the exterior trash enclosure. If any damaged or expired cannabis products must be disposed, the owner or operator shall return the damaged or expired cannabis products to the original licensed distributor or vendor and follow all applicable State and City regulations.
23. Waste disposal to the exterior trash enclosure shall be limited between the hours of 8 AM and 8 PM to prevent noise impacts to the abutting residential units.
24. Each transaction involving the exchange of cannabis goods between the business and consumer shall include the following information: (1) Date and time of transaction; (2) Name and employee number/identification of the employee who processed the sale; (3) List of all cannabis goods purchased including quantity; and (4) Total transaction amount paid.
25. All cannabis products shall be secured in a locked container during transportation between the facility and delivery and vendor vehicles. Prior to a vendor’s arrival, vendors are required to give notice to facility personnel.
Upon arrival, authorized facility personne l shall escort the vendor to the facility.
26. A staff person shall be required to periodically monitor the exterior including the parking lot especially during the evening to ensure customers and vendors are using consideration (i.e. abiding by the parking lot signs as conditioned in Cannabis Business Permit Condition No. 7 ) when entering or leaving the business.
27. Any proposed modification to operational condition of approval No. 4 (which requires a security guard to be present at the subject property 24 hours per day) shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission for approval or denial.
28. A parking attendant shall be required to monitor the parking lot during business hours for at least the first three months from business opening, and after that time, the applicant may request that staff consider eliminating this requirement if parking conditions do not warrant the further need for the attendant.
495
ATTACHMENT 2
-1-
496
-2-
497
Newport Wellness - 2490 Newport Blvd - City Council Review - Applicant Letter
Application for Cannabis Retail Store
Newport Wellness
2490 Newport Blvd
Dear Mr. Mayor and Esteemed City Council,
Newport Wellness would like to offer the following Applicant Letter in response to a “Request for Review”.
About Newport Wellness:
Newport Wellness is led by a Costa Mesa resident, and a Team of locals with experience in the regulated cannabis industry and has adjacent Hemp industry experience. This venture represents the opportunity of a local resident to pursue his aspiration of opening a retail cannabis business in his hometown.
Relied on City Cannabis Process for over 2 years:
The Applicant has relied on the City developed Regulatory Scheme and Application process that was based on:
• The City’s polling of Residents to seek regulatory input, including:
o Where to locate buffers to sensitive uses, buffers to homeless shelters, buffers between store, buffers to residential, should there be a security guard, hours of operation • The City Council’s discussion and deliberation:
o All the elements of a Cannabis Ordinance
o With members of the Cannabis Industry
o With Staff and Hdl, the City’s subject matter expert
• The City Council’s drafted and approved Cannabis Ordinance, which implemented these considerations • The City Council’s putting this Ordinance to a vote of Costa Mesa Residents o Vote passed by 65%, 2 out of 3 Costa Mesa voters agreed Staff Recommended Approval:
Planning Staff worked long and hard to bring a vetted and thoughtful Application to the Planning Commission:
• Reviewed Application, made comments and modifications. Worked with Applicant over 18+ months to offer a project that complied with Land Use and all other regulatory requirements under the City’s Cannabis Ordinance and General Plan.
• Outlined necessary “Findings” specifically related to the proposed project and its location • Articulated “Facts in support of Findings”
• Recommended Approval
ATTACHMENT 3
498
Newport Wellness - 2490 Newport Blvd - City Council Review - Applicant Letter
Planning Commission Approved:
The Planning Commission listened to Staff, heard the Applicant Presentation and asked a lot of questions:
• Deliberated, discussed and considered “Findings of Fact”. This included deliberating the very factors being brought in front of Council and making a professional recommendation to approve the Application.
• Planning Commission’s ultimate decision was based on Following the Rule of Law based on the project’s conformity with City Ordinances and the General Plan • Approved the Application
Recent Cannabis Ordinance Modifications do not apply to this Application:
During Planning Commission and City Council public consideration of the Cannabis Ordinance modifications, it was made clear that these modifications would only impact future Applications and not be applied to any current Applications. This Application was brought to the Planning Commission prior to any final changes or amendments that apply to future Applications.
Proximity to Residential:
Below you will see 14 other projects either in similar or closer proximity, have been previously approved.
We heard concerns from Residents across Monte Vista, which is a Gated Community. No concerns were raised at the Planning Commission Hearing from any other residents in proximity to the location. 2 Residents potentially most impacted are in support of the Application:
The Applicant and Property owner have committed to retaining the Residents who are located on the same parcel as shown on the Site Plan.
• 2 most impacted Residents are in support, have written and letter and intend to speak in support • Rather than displacement, we have the support because of recognition of improvements and that the security will help mitigate impacts of life on Newport Blvd Significant Improvement to Mid Century, differed maintenance property:
• Please note the Before and After pictures below which evidence a vast improvement of the subject property and presumably a positive impact for surrounding properties • Cannabis Retail Stores have made significant investments to modernize the Commercial Retail Corridor • The new modern configuration will no longer have cars backing out onto Newport Blvd Cannabis Retail Stores have not caused issues:
Cannabis Retail Stores are the most regulated business in Costa Mesa and as a result, have not caused any substantive issues, despite to date, unfounded concerns by many. • Public Records indicate there are no significant concerns with Police Calls for Service for such businesses
• The Police Chief has verified this on several public occasions 499
Newport Wellness - 2490 Newport Blvd - City Council Review - Applicant Letter
• There are no significant Code Enforcement issues
• There are no parking impact complaints for these types of businesses • A recently published Orange County Grand Jury Report had several key findings relating to Legal and Licensed Cannabis Businesses, which include:
o A decrease in Crime
o Significant reduction in unregulated, unpermitted cannabis retail stores o Significant Tax Revenue contribution to support the public good Parking:
Our Application has demonstrated an improvement in circulation and that the project is parked, as supported by Staff. We are concerned about Residents sharing concerns of residential parking impacts on Monte Vista. The existence of a current parking problem should not have a bearing on a project with conscientious parking considerations and agreed upon conditions of approval relating to parking and traffic. We encourage City Council to investigate and consider the causes of current parking issues so they can be corrected and not impact our business.
Significant Tax Revenue and Economic Contributions:
The proposed project offers the opportunity to generate significant local economic contributions, including:
• ~$3m in annual revenue, likely to go higher over time • ~$200,000 for the Arts
• ~$200,000 for First Time Home Buyers
• ~$300,000 in Annual Employee Compensation
Conclusion:
This project not only represents the culmination of a local Costa Mesa resident pursuing his aspirations of opening a business in his hometown, but the proposed business is also in conformance with the City’s Ordinance, Land Use Principals, and General Plan while offering substantial benefits to the City and surrounding area. We respectfully request City Council to follow the rule of law and uphold the Planning Commission’s approval of our project, consistent with Staff’s recommendation.
Sincerely,
Keith J. Scott
Owner & Costa Mesa Resident
500
Newport Wellness - 2490 Newport Blvd - City Council Review - Applicant Letter
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW - - REASONS FOR REQUESTING REVIEW Council Member Don Harper
REASONS APPLICANT RESPONSE
• Negative Impacts on Residential • Of important note, the 2 most potentially impacted residents on the site are both in support of the project. Those what should have the most impacts are not concerned • Public Records indicate Cannabis Retail Stores have low incidents of Police Calls for Service • Police Chief has shared at City Council meetings that there are no issues with Cannabis Retail • There have been no residents going to Planning Commission or City Council with documented or specific issues. All are theoretical, hypothetical or demonstrate an individual position against cannabis in general.
• Cannabis Saturation • There are no regulatory numeric limits for current cannabis applicants • There are no separation buffers for current cannabis applicants • Process of developing the Cannabis Regulatory Scheme and outcome:
o City Council polled residents to seek feedback on what elements to include in ordinance o Developed a customized ordinance based on that poll, lengthy discussions with the industry and with residents
o That Ordinance was put to the voters: 2 out of 3 voters supported o The Applicant relied on this process and the outcome in selecting a property, paying fees, preparing the application and enduring the high carrying costs of a long process • Distance to existing Cannabis Retail Stores
o North on Newport Blvd: 2664 Newport is 0.4 miles / over 2,000 feet / 9 minute walk o South on Newport Blvd: 2332 Newport is 0.4 miles / 2,000 feet / 9 minute walk o Across Newport Blvd: 2301 Newport is 2,500 feet away, across 8 lanes of freeway • Proximity to Christian University • There are no State distance requirements to Universities • There are no City distance requirements to Universities • The only distance requirements for schools are K-12
• There are no “youth centers” at the Christian University • Anyone traveling south on Newport Blvd from the Christian University would pass directly by 3 approved Cannabis Stores
• Hours of Operation • Cannabis Retail Store hours are restricted with a Conditional Use Permit 501
Newport Wellness - 2490 Newport Blvd - City Council Review - Applicant Letter
• There are by right use options that would not be have hours conditioned and could operate earlier and later hours
• An example is a Vape Shop, that could open earlier and stay open till midnight • Increased Traffic • Staff used the International Traffic Engineer standard of a Pharmacy with Drive through to determine traffic impacts
o The City has collected over $1 million in Traffic Impact Fees o This project will pay a Traffic Impact Fee to mitigate impacts o Applicant does not agree there will be impacts
• To date, there are no reports of increased traffic associated with Cannabis Retail Stores • Simple drive-bys of any of the open Cannabis Retail Stores evidence the lack of parking issues • By adding an additional Cannabis Retail Store, this would create fewer traffic issues • Lack of Resident Street Parking • The Application has demonstrated an ability to park the project, as reviewed and approved by City Staff, we has determined to make a recommendation to support the approval of the CUP • The Applicant has heard of issues with street parking and has been monitoring the issue • The applicant offered an additional condition relating to parking monitoring • If it is determined the parking issues are a result of the residential uses in proximity, what can be done to control this impact? Can we make sure all garages are not used for storage and are available for parking? This might alleviate the parking issues raised by neighboring residents • Business Lighting • Each Cannabis Business Application has been required to have a Lighting Engineer produce a Photometric Study, demonstrating how placement and strength of light and use of science indicate where light is and light is not
• Please note, that this is a condition introduced by the planning commission. It was important to Commission to have enough light to support the Police Department’s visual patrol and not adversely impact the residents of adjacent businesses
• A by right use, like a vape shop, would have no such requirement • This project has utilized “Crime Prevention through Environmental Design”
502
Newport Wellness - 2490 Newport Blvd - City Council Review - Applicant Letter
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW - - REASONS FOR REQUESTING REVIEW Council Member Andrea Marr
REASONS APPLICANT RESPONSE
• Land Use Compatibility of Location • STAFF:
o In the professional opinion of Staff, Staff recommended approval of the project o Staff prepared Exhibit A.
o Staff’s report Includes specific Findings and supporting facts • PLANNING COMMISSION:
o In the professional opinion of Staff, Staff recommended approval of the project o Planning Commission voted to approve the Application after careful deliberation of the issues before Council
• Compliance with Costa Mesa’s
General Plan
• STAFF:
o In the professional opinion of Staff, Staff recommended approval of the project o Staff prepared Exhibit A.
o Includes Findings and supporting facts
o Staff report included specific findings of General Plan conformance • PLANNING COMMISSION:
o In the professional opinion of Staff, Staff recommended approval of the project o Planning Commission voted to approve the Application based on conformance with the General Plan
• Cannabis Ordinance Modifications,
when they become final, will only be
applied to future Applications and
not applied to current Applications
• This Application came to Planning Commission before Ordinance modifications finalized • Public discussion indicated City Council intent to only apply the new regulations to future Applications and that these modifications would not be applied to existing Applications • The current Applicant chose this location over 2 years ago relying on the Council’s original ordinance.
503
Newport Wellness - 2490 Newport Blvd - City Council Review - Applicant Letter
• Professional Staff Recommended Approval
• Professional Staff outlined necessary “FINDINGS”
• Professional Staff articulated “FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDING” • Planning Commission deliberated, discussed and considered Findings and Facts, and APPROVED the Application
504
Newport Wellness - 2490 Newport Blvd - City Council Review - Applicant Letter
RESIDENTIAL PROXIMITY
14 Cannabis Stores Approved in similar Proximity to Residential
2490 Newport Blvd is 40 feet from GATED Residential
PA # ADDRESS NAME Distance: PL - PL
21-14 1921 Harbor Blvd High Seas 0 ft
21-17 2845 Harbor Blvd Mr Nice Guy 50 ft (across st)
21-18 1854 Newport Blvd Mr Nice Guy 90 ft
21-19 2710 Harbor Blvd Stiiizy 50 ft
21-29 170 E 17th St Catalyst 50 ft (across st)
21-31 167 Cabrillo Native Garden 50 ft (across st)
21-37 2146 Newport Blvd Off the Charts 30 ft
21-34 2332 Newport Blvd Flower Factory 20 ft (across alley) 21-39 770 W 19th st Nebrina 0 ft
21-40 2664 Newport Blvd Secret Garden 0 ft
22-02 1860 Newport Blvd Newport Flower 0 ft
22-05 1505 Mesa Verde SCCC 75 ft (across st)
22-07 2013 Newport Blvd Strains 0 ft (across access)
21-21 2001 Harbor Blvd South Coast Safe Access 50 ft (across st)
505
Newport Wellness - 2490 Newport Blvd - City Council Review - Applicant Letter
Photometric Study to demonstrate Crime Prevention through Environmental Design
506
Newport Wellness - 2490 Newport Blvd - City Council Review - Applicant Letter
SIGNIFICANT SITE IMPROVEMENTS
NO CANNABIS-IDENTIFYING SIGNAGE
507
Newport Wellness - 2490 Newport Blvd - City Council Review - Applicant Letter
508
UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED
MEETING MINUTES OF THE CITY OF
COST
A MESA PLANNING COMMISSION
March
25, 2024
PUBLI
C HEARINGS:
1. PLANNI
NG APPLICATION 22 -08 FOR A RETAIL CANNABIS STOREFRONT
BUSINESS WITH DELIVERY LOCATED AT 2490 NEWPORT BOULEVARD (NEWPORT WELLNESS)
Pro
ject Description: Planning Application 22- 08 is a request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow an approximate 2,000- square-foot retail cannabis storefront use with delivery in an existing single- story commercial building located at 2490 Newport Boulevard.
Envi
ronmental Determination: The project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (Class 1), Existing Facilities.
The fol
lowing two ex-parte Planning Commission communications were reported:
Comm
issioner Viviar spoke on the phone with Kate Klimow.
Chair
Ereth spoke on the phone with Kate Klimow. and spoke with Attorney Alexander Haberbush who is representing some Eastside Costa Mesa residents.
Mic
helle Halligan, Senior Planner, presented the staff report.
The Com
mission asked questions of staff including discussion of number of units on the property, proposed trash enclos ure, security lighting impacts on nearby vacant or occupied residential units, light shielding and light fixtures, type of fence proposed to be built, existing businesses, overnight security guards, proximity to other approved cannabis applications, neighborhood compatibility, and employee parking requirements.
The C
hair opened the Public Hearing.
Sean Ma
ddocks, applicant’s representative, stated he had read and agreed to the conditions of approval.
The Co
mmission asked questions of the applicant including discussion of community outreach, unhoused individuals in the surrounding area, reason for holding community outreach meeting in January, and current tenants onsite.
The C
hair opened Public Comments.
ATTACHMENT 4
-1-
509
UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED
Speak
er one spoke in opposition of the item.
Rober
t White spoke in opposition to the item.
Speak
er three spoke in opposition of the item.
Speak
er four spoke in opposition of the item.
Al
exander Haberbush spoke in opposition to the item.
The
Chair closed Public Comments.
The Co
mmission asked additional questions of a pplicant and staff regarding property owners’ decision to lease to a cannabis business, whom the community can contact for more information, reduced hours of operation, dis advantages of reducing operation hours are reduced, if there are sensitive uses located nearby, and for staff to elaborate on the pending Cannabis Ordinance update.
The
Chair closed the Public Hearing.
The C
ommission deliberation included the number of cannabis storefronts already approved, the proposed cannabis ordinance changes, community concerns, neighboring residential uses , adequate security lighting and i f it impacts the neighboring residents, positive and negative impacts on the community, General Plan, compliance findings, and codes the Commission must abide by.
Com
missioner Vivar made a motion to Deny Planning Application 22- 08.
Seconded by Commissioner Andrade.
The C
ommission discussed the motion including that the proposed development may not be compatible with residential units on the property and nearby , the potential negative impacts on the neighborhood, and that maintenance of the property should be done by the property owner.
Vi
ce Chair Toler made a substitute motion to approve Planning Application 22-08.
Seconded by Commissioner Rojas.
The C
ommission discussed the motion and added conditions to have the applicant come back to the Planning Commission if the 24-hour security condition is revised, and to require a parking atten dant for three months and then after the three months, the staff will decide if the parking attendant will continue.
MO
VED/SECOND: Toler/Rojas
MOTION: Approve staff’s recommendation.
The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
-2-
510
UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED
Ayes: Ereth, Toler, Rojas
Nay
s: Andrade, Vivar
Absent: Klepack, Zich
Abstain: None
Motion carried: 3-2-2
ACTI
ON: The Planning Commission adopted a resolution to:
1. Fi
nd that the project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (Class 1) Existing Facilities; and
2. Appr
ove Planning Application 22- 08 subject to the conditions of approval as contained in the Resolution.
RES
OLUTION PC- 2024-09 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING PLANNING APPLICATION 22 -08 FOR A STOREFRONT RETAIL CANNABIS BUSINESS WITH DELIVERY (NEWPORT WELLNESS) IN THE C1 ZONE AT 2490 NEWPORT BOULEVARD
The C
hair explained the appeal process.
-3-
511
ATTACHMENT 5
-1-
512
-2-
513
-3-
514
-4-
515
-5-
516
-6-
517
-7-
518
-8-
519
-9-
520
-10-
521
-11-
522
-12-
523
-13-
524
-14-
525
-15-
526
-16-
527
-17-
528
ATTACHMENT 6
-1-
529
-2-
530
-3-
531
-4-
532
-5-
533
-6-
534
-7-
535
-8-
536
-9-
537
-10-
538
-11-
539
-12-
540
-13-
541
-14-
542
-15-
543
-16-
544
-17-
545
-1-
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: MARCH 25, 2024 ITEM NUMBER: PH-1
SUBJECT: PLANNING APPLICATION 22-08 FOR A RETAIL CANNABIS STOREFRONT BUSINESS WITH DELIVERY LOCATED AT 2490
NEWPORT BOULEVARD (NEWPORT WELLNESS)
FROM: ECONOMIC AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT/
PLANNING DIVISION
PRESENTATION BY: MICHELLE HALLIGAN, SENIOR PLANNER
FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
MICHELLE HALLIGAN
714-754-5608
[email protected]
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution to:
1. Find that the project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (Class 1) Existing Facilities; and
2. Approve Planning Application 22-08 subject to the conditions of approval as contained in the Resolution.
APPLICANT OR AUTHORIZED AGENT
The applicant/authorized agent is Sean Maddocks on behalf of Newport Wellness, LLC and the property owner, Anne Trostle Johnson.
ATTACHMENT 7
546
-2-
PLANNING APPLICATION SUMMARY
Location: 2490 Newport Boulevard Application Number: PA-22-08 Request: Planning Application 22-08 is for a Conditional Use Permit for the establishment of a cannabis retail storefront with delivery.
SUBJECT PROPERTY: SURROUNDING PROPERTY:
Zone: C1 (Local Business District) North: R3 (Multiple-Family Residential District, High Density)
General Plan: Commercial Residential South: C1 (Local Business District) Lot Dimensions: 108’ x 156’ East: C1 (Local Business District) Lot Area: 15,912 West: State Route 55
Existing
Development:
The property is developed with a 2,076-square-foot single-story multi-tenant commercial building, approximately 1,300-square-feet of other commercial structures, and two detached residential dwelling units.
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMPARISON
Development Standard Required/Allowed
C1 Zone
Provided/Proposed
Building Height 2 stories/30’ 1 story/15’
Setbacks:
Front 20’ 20’
Side 15’/0’ 16’/12’-6”
Rear 0’ 78’
Landscape Setback – front 20’ 20’ 1
Parking 8 12 2
Floor area ratio (FAR) 0.20 0.13
1 The existing front setback is currently developed as parking that encroaches into the public right-of-way and does not conform to the City’s parking design standards. 2 Proposed parking includes a bike rack credit of one space. Parking for the residential use is legal non- conforming.
CEQA Status Exempt per CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (Class 1, Existing Facilities) Final Action Planning Commission
BACKGROUND
The subject property is an approximate 16,000-square-foot site and is located at 2490 Newport Boulevard at the southwest corner of Newport Boulevard and Monte Vista Avenue. The site is zoned C1 (Local Business District) and is surrounded by C1 properties to the south and east, the State Route 55 to the west, and residential properties, zoned R3 (Multiple-Family Residential District, High Density) are located to the east. The site has a General Plan Land Use Designation of “Commercial Residential”. Vehicular ingress/egress is obtained from a driveway located on Monte Vista Avenue. The subject property is located on one of the City’s primary corridors paralleling State Route 55. Existing uses in the area include, but are not limited to, specialty stores, salons, restaurants, mini warehousing, automobile services, a hotel, and multi-family and single-family homes.
547
-3-
Existing development on the subject property consists of a 2,076-square-foot, one-story multi-tenant commercial building, as well as approximately 1,300-square-feet of unpermitted commercial structures, and two detached residential units. As proposed, the unpermitted structures would be demolished. The proposed cannabis retail establishment with delivery, Newport Wellness, would occupy the commercial building.
Although currently vacant, the two previous commercial tenants included an import vehicle parts store and a vehicle window tinting business, which have since relocated.
The two businesses generally operated from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM Monday through Saturday.
Non-Conforming Development
The existing development is legal nonconforming in terms of parking design, residential guest parking, landscaping, and residential use, and therefore is subject to the nonconforming provisions of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 13-204. Pursuant to this code section, a conforming use may be located on a nonconforming property so long as the new site modifications do not result in greater site nonconformities, and such improvements bring the site into greater conformance with Code requirements.
The proposed project would include demolishing unpermitted commercial structures and removing nonconforming parking stalls from required setbacks and public rights-of-way.
Improvements would be made to bring the commercial building into conformance with current building and safety codes; however, and as specifically allowed by the CMMC, the existing nonconformities can remain pursuant to the City’s legal nonconforming provisions. The applicant is proposing to bring the property into closer conformance by adding landscaping in the front and side setbacks, at least five trees, a bicycle rack, removing parking from required setbacks and replacing it with landscaping, adding sidewalk, curb, and gutter, and constructing a parking lot designed to meet Code requirements.
City of Costa Mesa Medical Marijuana Measure (Measure X) and Costa Mesa Retail Cannabis Tax and Regulation Measure (Measure Q)
In November 2016, Costa Mesa voters approved Measure X, allowing medical cannabis manufacturing, packaging, distribution, research and development laboratories, and testing laboratories in “Industrial Park” (MP) and “Planned Development Industrial” (PDI) zoned properties north of South Coast Drive and west of Harbor Boulevard (“The Green Zone,” excluding the South Coast Collection property located at 3303 Hyland Avenue).
Measure X provisions are included in Titles 9 and 13 of the CMMC.
In 2018, non-medical adult use cannabis became legal in California under the State’s Medicinal and Adult-Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (Proposition 64). On April 3, 2018, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 18-04 to allow non-medical cannabis facilities in the same manner and within the same geographic area as were previously allowed pursuant to Measure X.
548
-4-
On November 3, 2020, Costa Mesa voters approved Measure Q, the Costa Mesa Retail Cannabis Tax and Regulation Measure. This measure allowed the City to adopt regulations permitting retail storefronts and non-storefront retail (delivery) within the City subject to extensive conditions of approval. On June 15, 2021, the City Council adopted Ordinances No. 21-08 and No. 21-09 to amend Titles 9 and 13 of the CMMC to establish regulations for legal cannabis storefront and non-storefront uses (a “non-storefront” retailer sells packaged cannabis goods to customers through direct delivery).
Cannabis Business Permit (CBP) Application Process
The process to establish a retail cannabis business is subject to an extensive submittal and application review procedure. Pursuant to the CMMC, retail cannabis applicants must obtain the following City approvals and obtain State approval before conducting business in Costa Mesa:
Pre-Application Determination;
CBP Notice to Proceed;
Conditional Use Permit (CUP);
Building Permit(s);
Final City Inspections;
CBP Issuance; and
City Business License.
The “Pre-Application Determination” includes staff review of a detailed applicant letter that describes the proposed business, an existing site plan, statement attesting that there is/has been no unpermitted cannabis activity at the site within one year, and a detailed map demonstrating the proposed storefront’s distance from sensitive uses.
Staff also conducts a site at this time. Planning staff has completed the aforementioned pre-application review, visited the site, and issued a letter indicating that the application complies with the City’s required separation distances from sensitive uses and may proceed to submittal of a CBP.
Following completion of the pre-application review, the applicant submitted a CBP application for the initial phase of the CBP review. Staff’s initial CBP review includes:
A background check of the business owner(s)/operator(s); An evaluation of the proposed business plan (including a capitalization analysis); and
An evaluation of the proposed security plan by the City’s cannabis security consultant, HdL Companies (HdL).
The applicant successfully passed these evaluations and staff issued a “CBP Notice to Proceed,” which allows the applicant to submit a CUP application.
The CUP application and required supportive materials were submitted by the applicant and reviewed for conformance with City standards and regulations by the Planning Division, Building Division, Public Works Department (including Transportation and Engineering Divisions), Fire Department, and Police Department. If the Planning 549
-5-
Commission approves the CUP, the applicant may then begin the remaining steps of the CBP process, which include:
Obtaining building permits;
Completing tenant improvements; and
Demonstrating through various City reviews/inspections that all conditions of approval have been satisfied, and that all other requirements of the CMMC have been met.
After passing the final City and HdL inspections, the CBP would be issued. CBP approval is valid for a two-year period and must be renewed (every two years) prior to expiration. During the two-year CBP period, the Community Improvement Division (CID), along with other City staff, will conduct site inspections to verify that the business is operating in compliance with CUP and CBP requirements. Violations identified during site inspections may be grounds for revocation of issued permits or non-renewal of a CBP.
After obtaining the CBP, the applicant would apply for and obtain a City Business License through the City’s Finance Department. Lastly, the applicant must obtain the appropriate license from the State Department of Cannabis Control (DCC) prior to operating.
Cannabis retail businesses are subject to a City established seven-percent gross receipts tax, which must be paid to the City of Costa Mesa’s Finance Department. Records and revenues are audited regularly by the Finance Department and HdL Companies.
DESCRIPTION
Planning Application 22-08 is a request for a CUP to allow a 2,076-square-foot retail cannabis storefront with delivery in an existing multi-tenant commercial building at 2490 Newport Boulevard. The affiliated State license is a Type 10 “storefront retailer” license.
If the CUP is approved and the operator also obtains a CBP, City Business License, and State license, the business would be allowed to sell pre-packaged cannabis and pre-packaged cannabis products to customers onsite and by delivery, subject to conditions of approval and other City and State requirements.
ANALYSIS
Conditional Use Permit Required
Pursuant to CMMC Sections 13-28(B) and 13-200.93(c)(1), subject to the approval of the Planning Commission, a CUP is required for the establishment of cannabis retail storefronts in a commercial zone. To obtain a CUP, an applicant must show that the proposed use is compatible with the City’s applicable zoning and General Plan provisions/policies, and will not be detrimental to public health, safety, and welfare.
The subject site is located within a commercial zone (C1 – Local Business District) where commercial development is allowed to include retail uses. As defined in the CMMC, “This district is intended to meet the local business needs of the community by providing a wide 550
-6-
range of goods and services in a variety of locations throughout the City.” Pursuant to the CMMC, cannabis retail storefronts are subject to extensive regulation (as specifically described in this report). These regulations are adopted to prevent land use inconsistencies with adjacent properties. Pursuant to the CMMC, the approval of a CUP requires that the Planning Commission make findings related to neighborhood compatibility, health and safety, and land use compatibility. Proposed uses subject to CUPs will generally have site-specific conditions of approval to ensure the required findings can be met. A detailed project analysis regarding CUP findings is provided below in this report.
Separation Requirements
CMMC Section 13-200.93(e) stipulates that no cannabis retail storefront use shall be located within 1,000 feet from a K-12 school, playground, licensed child daycare, or homeless shelter, or within 600 feet from a youth center as defined in CMMC Title 9-485, that is in operation at the time of submission of a completed cannabis business permit application. All separation distances are measured in a straight line (“as the crow flies”) from the “premises” (with the exception of playgrounds), where the cannabis retail use is to be located, to the closest property line of the sensitive use(s). (For playgrounds, the property line is a 30-foot radius from the exterior physical boundaries of the playground equipment area.) Premises is as defined in the State’s Business and Professions Code Section 26001 as the designated structure or structures and land specified in the application that is owned, leased, or otherwise held under the control of the applicant or licensee where the commercial cannabis activity will be or is conducted. The premises shall be a contiguous area and shall only be occupied by one licensee. Therefore, the premises only include the retail cannabis activity areas (including sales, storage, back-of- house and/or other ancillary areas) and excludes the parking lot and other areas that are not part of the area licensed by the State for commercial cannabis activity. The subject site complies with required separations from sensitive uses per the CMMC.
Exterior Improvements
The applicant proposes to bring the commercial building up to Code and significantly improve the building façade with new finishes, marquee awnings, windows, and doors.
Other proposed or conditioned exterior improvements include:
Removing nonconforming parking spaces from the front setback, side setback, and public rights-of-way;
Constructing sidewalk, curb, and gutter along Newport Boulevard and Monte Vista Avenue;
Creating a parking lot that is compliant with the City’s Parking Design Standards (refer to the parking discussion below);
Adding bicycle racks to encourage multi-modal transportation; Adding a trash enclosure;
Adding irrigated landscaping planters to bring the property into closer conformance with the CMMC landscape requirements. Landscaping would include at least five 551
-7-
new 24-inch box trees and live, drought-tolerant groundcover. A detailed landscaping plan would be reviewed during the building plan check process; Installation of security lighting and surveillance cameras. Should the CUP be approved, a detailed lighting and photometric plan will be further reviewed during the building plan check process; and
All chain link fencing/gates would be removed, block walls would be installed along the west and southern property lines, the gate facing Newport Boulevard would be replaced with wrought iron or a similar high-quality material, and new fencing would be constructed around the residential area.
Proposed business signs would be reviewed and permitted separately per the City’s sign code requirements. Pursuant to Condition of Approval No. 6 (Prior to Issuance of Building Permits), business signage shall not include references to cannabis, whether in words or symbols.
Interior Tenant Improvements
The proposed interior remodel includes combining the two tenant spaces to accommodate the cannabis storefront, and improvements such as, but not limited to, installation of new flooring, installation of a new restroom, adding commercial showroom finishes, and installation of an odor control system,. A proposed floor area summary is provided in Table
1. Table 1 – Floor Plan Summary
Operational Area Square Feet
Lobby/Reception 233
Retail Area 1,352
Receiving 253
Office 180
Restroom 58
Total 2,076
Customer and Employee Access
Customer access would be limited to the lobby and retail area. Customer circulation into the proposed establishment includes entering the licensed premise through the door fronting Newport Boulevard where a greeter employee would verify the customer’s identity and age before allowing the customer to enter the retail sales area. After a customer’s identity and age is verified and their transaction is completed, they must leave the premise through the exit door facing Monta Vista Avenue. As further conditioned, staff and a security guard would monitor the area to ensure that customers are following regulations.
All other areas of the premises would be accessible only to employees with the proper security credentials. Employees would enter through the customer entrance or an 552
-8-
employee only access-controlled entrance that leads directly into the back-of-house areas.
Employees would be able to exit through the customer exit or the access-controlled door.
Vendor Delivery Operations and Access
All vendors (licensed distributors) will have pre-committed arrival times set by the storefront’s operational managers for product delivery. All vendor vehicles will load and unload at the designated parking space located approximately ten feet from the limited access door. Vendors would only be allowed to enter the premise while accompanied by an employee with the proper security credentials. The access-controlled door, product path of travel, and vehicle loading/unloading area would be under camera surveillance at all times.
Storefront Operations
The proposed business is required to comply with the City’s adopted retail storefront operational requirements as follows:
Display State license, CBP, and City business license in a conspicuous building location;
The hours of operations are limited to 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM Monday through Sunday;
Shipments of cannabis goods may only be accepted during regular business hours; Cannabis inventory shall be secured using a lockable storage system during non- business hours;
At least one licensed security guard shall be on premises 24-hours a day; The premises and the vicinity must be monitored by security and/or other staff to ensure that patrons immediately leave and do not consume cannabis onsite or within close proximity. The CMMC prohibits the consumption of cannabis or cannabis products in public areas; cannabis consumption is limited to non-public areas, such as within a private residence. State law further prohibits cannabis consumption and open container possession within 1,000 feet of sensitive uses and while riding in or driving a vehicle;
There must be continuous video monitoring and recording of the interior and exterior of the premises;
Adequate security lighting shall be provided and shall be designed to prevent offsite light spill;
Onsite sales of alcohol or tobacco products and on-site consumption of alcohol, cannabis, and tobacco products is prohibited;
No one under the age of 21 is allowed to enter the premises. If the business holds a retail medical cannabis license (M-license) issued by the State, persons over the age of 18 may be allowed with the proper medical approvals i.e. physician’s recommendation or medical card pursuant to CMMC Section 9-495(h)(6); Prior to employment, all prospective employees must successfully pass a background check conducted by the City, and the employee must obtain a City issued identification badge;
553
-9-
Customers are only granted access to the retail area after their age and identity has been confirmed by an employee;
Each transaction involving the exchange of cannabis goods between the business and consumer shall include the following information:
o Date and time of transaction;
o Name and employee number/identification of the employee who processed the sale;
o List of all cannabis goods purchased including quantity; and o Total transaction amount paid.
There must be video surveillance of the point-of-sale area and where cannabis goods are displayed and/or stored;
Cannabis products shall not be visible from the exterior of the building; Free samples of cannabis goods are prohibited;
When receiving new inventory from licensed distributors, employees will verify the distributor’s identity and license prior to allowing them to enter the facility through an access-controlled door. After distributor’s credentials have been confirmed, an employee will escort the distributor to the shipping and receiving area and remain with them throughout the process;
Cannabis goods to be sold at this establishment (either storefront or delivery) must be obtained by a licensed cannabis distributor and have passed laboratory testing; Cannabis product packaging must be labeled with required test results and batch number;
Packaging containing cannabis goods shall be tamper-resistant; if packaging contains multiple servings, the package must also be re-sealable; When processing orders for cannabis delivery, employees will collect the pre- packaged materials, load products into a secured container and transport the containers to delivery vehicles outside the building. Video surveillance cameras will be installed with direct views of the path of travel and loading and unloading area. All loading and unloading of delivery vehicles will be monitored by the required security guard;
Cannabis deliveries must be made in-person by an employee of the licensed retailer. An independent contractor, third-party courier service, or an individual employed through a staffing agency would not be considered employed by the licensed retailer;
The applicant shall maintain proof of vehicle insurance for any and all vehicles being used to deliver cannabis goods;
During delivery, the employee shall maintain a physical or electronic copy of the delivery request and shall make it available upon request by the licensing authority and law enforcement officers;
A delivery employee shall not leave the State of California while possessing cannabis products and while performing their duties for the cannabis retailer; The business shall maintain a list of all deliveries, including the address delivered to, the amount and type of product delivered, and any other information required by the State;
Any delivery method shall be made in compliance with State law, as amended, including use of a vehicle that has a dedicated global positioning system (GPS) 554
-10-
device for identifying the location of the vehicle (cell phones and tablets are insufficient);
Signs, decals or any other form of advertisement on the delivery vehicles are prohibited;
Deliveries must be made to a physical address that is not on publicly owned land and cannot be a school, a day care, homeless shelter, or a youth center; and A cannabis delivery employee shall not carry cannabis goods valued in excess of $5,000 at any time, with no more than $3,000 of cannabis goods that are not already part of a customer order that was processed prior to leaving the premises.
Business Plan
The applicant has submitted a detailed business plan that was evaluated by the City’s cannabis consultant (HdL). The business plan describes the owner’s experience, proof of capitalization, start-up budget, a three-year pro forma, target customers, key software, and daily operations. The business plan contains proprietary details and is therefore not included as an attachment to this staff report. The City’s cannabis consultant determined that the applicant’s business plan was appropriate for the proposed retail storefront use.
Security Plan
The applicant has submitted a professionally prepared security plan for the proposed retail cannabis establishment. The City’s cannabis consultant reviewed the security plan and determined that appropriate security measures were included to address the City’s security requirements pursuant to CMMC Title 9, Chapter VI, and State law. Since the security plan contains sensitive operational details that require limited public exposure to remain effective, the plan is not included as an attachment. However, the following is a list of general security measures that are included in the operations for the proposed cannabis retail establishment:
One security guard will be on-site 24-hours a day;
All employees must pass a “Live Scan” background check; City-issued identification badges are required for employees; An inventory control system shall be maintained;
Exterior and interior surveillance cameras shall be monitored and professionally installed;
An alarm system shall be professionally installed, maintained, and monitored; Surveillance footage must be maintained for a minimum of 90 days; Cash, cannabis, and cannabis products shall be kept in secured storage areas; Sensors shall be installed that detect entry and exit from all secured areas; Security lighting (interior and shielded exterior) shall be installed; Emergency power supply shall be installed;
Employees shall be trained for use with any/all emergency equipment; Employees and vendors will be trained regarding cash and product transportation protocol;
555
-11-
Visitor/customer specific security measures shall be required; and All facility entry and exit points and locations where cash or cannabis products are handled or stored shall be under camera surveillance.
Parking and Circulation
Retail cannabis establishments are subject to the same parking ratio as other retail storefronts in the City; four spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. The parking required pursuant to the CMMC for the 2,076-square-foot retail building is approximately eight parking spaces, and the applicant is proposing an eleven-car parking lot with an additional credit of one-space with the installation of a bicycle rack.
However, the site also includes two detached apartments and the CMMC requires on- site parking for these residential uses. For each of these existing one-bedroom units, the City’s parking standards require a total of 2.5 parking spaces for each unit. The below Table 2 provides a summary of the required site parking, based on use:
Table 2 – Parking Summary
Use CMMC required
Commercial 8.3 spaces
(4 spaces per 1,000 square feet.)
Residential 5 spaces
(2.5 spaces for each one-bedroom unit)
Total Required: 13.3 spaces
Total Provided: 12 spaces
Since the uses on the site require a combined total of 13.3 parking spaces and only 12 parking spaces (including credit for one-space for the proposed bicycle rack) are proposed, the CMMC considers the site as nonconforming in regard to parking.
However, pursuant to CMMC Section 13.204 (Nonconforming Provisions), a commercial use can replace an existing and/or previous existing commercial use, without providing additional parking, as long as the new use does not require additional parking. Pursuant to the CMMC, no additional parking is required with the proposed project and therefore the Code allows the “continuance of a use permitted”. In addition, the CMMC also stipulates that “other uses on the same site (two existing residential units) may continue with the existing nonconforming parking”.
Staff has included Operational Condition of Approval No. 7 which requires that if parking shortages or other parking-related problems occur, the business owner or operator will be required to monitor the parking lot and institute appropriate operational measures necessary to minimize or eliminate the problem in a manner deemed appropriate by the Director of Economic and Development Services (see “Operational Conditions” of Approval No. 7 in the attached Resolution). Examples of parking demand management techniques include, but are not limited to, offsite parking for employees, reducing operating hours of the business, hiring an employee to monitor parking lot use and assist with customer parking lot circulation, and incentivizing employee carpooling/cycling/walking. As conditioned, cannabis operators would also provide a 556
-12-
parking plan to the Director of Economic and Development Services or their designee in advance of any special event such as a grand opening.
The applicant proposes to upgrade the parking area in the rear of the property to provide a parking lot that meets CMMC parking stall design standards. The parking lot would be accessed via a two-way driveway off Monte Vista Avenue.
Traffic
CMMC Section 13-275(e) indicates that any increase in traffic generation by a change of use that is required to obtain a discretionary permit, shall be subject to review by the appropriate reviewing authority, which may impose fees to address increased trip generation. If required, the fee collected is used to fund the City’s comprehensive transportation system improvement program. The purpose of the program is to ensure that the City’s transportation system has the capacity to accommodate additional trips.
The Citywide Traffic Impact Fee related to new and expanding developments is determined using estimated Average Daily Trips (ADT), which is the combined total number of vehicular trips both in and out of a development generated throughout an average weekday. The Transportation Services Division determined that the appropriate ADT for a cannabis retail establishment is approximately 108 trips per 1,000 square feet based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) 11 th Edition Trip Generation Manual for the most similar use “pharmacy/drug store with drive-through”. The City’s traffic engineering review focuses on net trip increase for both the ADT and peak hour trips. Therefore, the trip generation is estimated for the previous/existing use(s) and is credited (subtracted) from the proposed use to estimate potential changes in trip generation for ADT and peak hour trips. The proposed use would be subject to a traffic impact fee based on net ADT. The estimated traffic impact fee is $36,836.25. The fee calculation would be finalized during the building permit plan check process and must be paid prior to building permit issuance.
CMMC Section 13-275(a), specifies that “a traffic impact study shall be required for all development projects estimated by the Public Works Department to generate one hundred (100) or more vehicle trip ends during a peak hour.” The highest peak hour trips in either the AM or PM is used to estimate the number of vehicular trips generated both in and out of a new or expanded development known as vehicle trip-ends during a peak hour. Staff reviewed and determined that the proposed use does not meet the threshold of 100 peak hour trips requiring a traffic study based on the net peak hour trips.
Odor Attenuation
If approved, cannabis products would arrive in State compliant packaging that is odor- resistant sealed, and remain unopened while on the premises. Pursuant to the CMMC, “odor control devices and techniques shall be incorporated in all cannabis businesses to ensure that odors from cannabis are not detectable off site”. Further, as conditioned, if cannabis odor is detected outside of the building or off-site, the business owner/operator 557
-13-
will be required to institute further operational measures necessary to eliminate off-site odors in a manner deemed appropriate by the Director of Economic and Development Services or their designee. Lastly, cannabis products are not allowed to be disposed of in the exterior trash enclosure.
Proximity to Residential
Similar to many commercial areas in the City, this portion of Newport Boulevard is characterized by a mixture of commercial and residential uses. There are two detached residential buildings on the subject commercial property. Based on City records, the property has contained both residential and commercial uses since the 1950s. The shortest distance between the proposed storefront and the onsite residential building is
10.5 feet.
In addition, there are residentially zoned properties across Monte Vista Avenue and farther west down Monte Vista Avenue. The shortest distance between the proposed licensed premise and the nearest offsite residential building is approximately 90 feet.
Block walls, landscaping, and the public right-of-way provide adequate buffers between the proposed storefront and nearby properties zoned for residential use. To ensure neighborhood compatibility, proposed project conditions and requirements include the following:
A new fence to be constructed between the commercial use and residential uses on the property;
The business hours are limited from 7 AM to 10 PM;
Signs shall be posted within the parking lot to remind customers and vendors to keep noise levels to a minimum;
Security lighting would be shielded and directed down/away from the residential properties to prevent light spill. As conditioned, a photometric study would be updated during plan check to demonstrate that light levels at the residential property are appropriate;
Disposal of waste at the trash enclosure shall be limited between 8 AM and 8 PM to avoid noise impacts to nearby residential uses during sensitive hours; A security guard shall be onsite 24 hours a day to patrol the property including parking areas; and
A staff person will help monitor the site’s parking areas to ensure that customers are quiet, turn off vehicle engines promptly, do not play loud music, and generally do not create excessive neighbor disturbances. The parking lot monitoring will be especially diligent to prevent noise and other neighbor disturbance during early morning and evening business hours.
GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
The Costa Mesa General Plan establishes the long ‐range planning and policy direction that guides change and preserves the qualities that define the community. The 2015-2035 General Plan sets forth the vision for Costa Mesa for the next two decades. This vision 558
-14-
focuses on protecting and enhancing Costa Mesa’s diverse residential neighborhoods, accommodating an array of businesses that both serve local needs and attract regional and international spending, and providing cultural, educational, social, and recreational amenities that contribute to the quality of life in the community. Over the long term, General Plan implementation will ensure that development decisions and improvements to public and private infrastructure are consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies contained in this Plan.
The following analysis evaluates the proposed project’s consistency with applicable policies and objectives of the 2015-2035 General Plan.
1. Policy LU-1.1: Provide for the development of a mix and balance of housing opportunities, commercial goods and services and employment opportunities in consideration of the need of the business and residential segments of the community.
Consistency: The proposed project would provide commercial goods, employment opportunities, and housing on the subject property. Approval of the proposed use would result in the revitalization and reuse of a commercial space and allow nonconforming residential uses to remain. Although there are other cannabis storefronts in Costa Mesa, none of the approved cannabis storefront CUPs (including open storefronts), CUP applications in progress, or applications in the CBP phase are located within close proximity of the subject property.
2. Objective LU-6B: Encourage and facilitate activities that expand the City’s revenue base.
Consistency: Retail cannabis uses are subject to a unique local tax that does not apply to other retail businesses in Costa Mesa. Retail cannabis uses are expected to generate increased tax revenues due to this seven-percent local tax on gross receipts. This revenue will then be used for community services and infrastructure improvements that serve the community.
3. Policy LU-6.15: Promote unique and specialized commercial and industrial districts within the City which allow for incubation of new or growing businesses and industries.
Consistency: The proposed use is part of the specialized cannabis industry that is very limited in Orange County. Out of 34 cities in the county, only three have cannabis storefronts--Costa Mesa, Santa Ana, and Stanton. Approval of this CUP would facilitate a business opportunity in a specialized and expanding industry along the City’s commercial corridors.
4. Policy LU-3.1: Protect existing stabilized residential neighborhoods, including mobile home parks (and manufactured housing parks), from the encroachment of incompatible or potentially disruptive land uses and/or activities. 559
-15-
Consistency: The cannabis retail facility is proposed in an existing commercial building on a property that also contains two detached residential structures.
Historic records indicate that the property was developed with commercial and residential structures prior to 1958. The proposed storefront would not result in the removal of the residential units. As conditioned, a new fence would be constructed to create a distinct separation between the residential units and storefront. Similar to other commercial properties located along Newport Boulevard, the subject property is located within relatively close proximity to other residential uses. As conditioned, the proposed use would be required to control odor, noise, limit trash enclosure access, and provide adequate security and parking lot monitoring to ensure compatibility between uses. The aforementioned cannabis operation controls exceed typical requirements for other retail uses.
5. Policy N-2.9: Limit hours and/or attenuation of commercial/entertainment operations adjacent to resident and other noise sensitive uses in order to minimize excessive noise to these receptors.
Consistency: The proposed cannabis storefront would be located on a site that has included both retail and residential uses since the 1950s, possibly earlier. With the proposed storefront use, parking lot activity and associated noise could be greater than past operations; however, conditions of approval requiring security features, parking lot monitoring, signage regarding noise, and limiting the hours the exterior trash enclosure are intended to ensure compatibility between the proposed use and residences.
FINDINGS
Pursuant to Title 13, Section 13-29(g), Findings, of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code, in order to approve the project, the Planning Commission must find that the evidence presented in the administrative record substantially meets specified findings as follows:
The proposed development or use is substantially compatible with developments in the same general area and would not be materially detrimental to other properties within the area.
The subject site is located within a commercial zone (C1, Local Business District) where commercial development is specifically allowed to include retail uses. In addition, the property is located on one of the City’s primary commercial corridors that is predominantly intended for commercial uses. Pursuant to the CMMC, cannabis retail storefronts are permitted uses in the C1 zone and are subject to extensive regulation (as described in this report). Additionally, the proposed cannabis retail storefront use is not located within 1,000 feet of a K-12 school, playground, licensed child daycare, homeless shelter, or youth center as defined in the CMMC.
560
-16-
As proposed and conditioned, the storefront would operate in a manner that is compatible with developments in the area. Proposed and conditioned storefront operations include limiting the hours of operation to the hours between 7 AM and 10 PM, posting signs in the parking lot directing customers to use consideration, having a security guard onsite, having a staff member periodically monitor the parking lot, limiting the hours the trash enclosure can be used, and shielding security lighting down and away from residences.
City records indicate that the subject site has been used for both commercial and residential uses since the 1950s or earlier. The most recent previous commercial uses include auto parts retail and automobile window tinting. Staff observed deferred property and building maintenance as well as several nonconforming conditions such as parking in required setbacks. If approved, the applicant would invest in significant site improvements, including bringing a commercial structure up to current building codes, adding landscaped planters and trees, constructing a parking lot to meet Code design standards, adding a bike rack, and replacing chain-link fencing with high quality fencing and walls. Staff does not anticipate that the proposed use, as proposed and conditioned, would be materially detrimental to properties in the area.
Granting the conditional use permit will not be materially detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the public or otherwise injurious to property or improvements within the immediate neighborhood.
The proposed cannabis retail storefront has the potential to improve safety through a significant remodel that includes bringing a commercial building up to current building codes, improving accessibility, replacing aging fencing and walls, adding security lighting, removing dilapidated structures, and removing parking from required setbacks and from encroaching into public rights-of-ways.
In addition, the proposed business would follow safety measures detailed in a professionally prepared security plan. The security plan was evaluated for compliance by the City’s cannabis consultant, HdL. Measures designed to maintain safety at the site include, but are not limited to, security devices including window and door alarms, motion-detectors, limited access areas, and a monitored video surveillance system covering all exterior entrances, exits, exterior loading and unloading, and all interior limited access spaces. In addition, all employees must pass a live scan background check and obtain an identification badge from the City.
The City and State requirements are designed to ensure that the proposed use would not be materially detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the public or be otherwise injurious to property or improvements within the immediate neighborhood.
Granting the conditional use permit will not allow a use, density or intensity which is not in accordance with the General Plan designation and any applicable specific plan for the property.
561
-17-
The property has a General Plan land use designation of “Commercial Residential”. The intent of this land use designation is to allow a mix of commercial and residential zones along Newport Boulevard. The use is consistent with General Plan policies related to providing a mixture of commercial goods, services, and employment opportunities; expanding the City’s tax base; and promoting the incubation of specialized businesses. The City’s General Plan sets forth long-term policies that guide future development, whereas the Zoning Ordinance implements general plan policies through detailed development regulations, such as specific use types and building standards. Therefore, in determining General Plan compliance for the proposed cannabis retail storefront use, a comparison of the proposed use with the use, density and intensity allowed by the applicable zoning district is required. In this case, the applicable zoning district is “Local Business District” (C1). A variety of commercial uses are allowed in the C1 zone, including a retail cannabis storefront, subject to a CUP.
No additional square footage is proposed; therefore, the proposed use would not increase the floor area ratio (building intensity) or increase the number of residential units onsite (density).
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, for the permitting and/or minor alteration of Existing Facilities, involving negligible or no expansion of the existing or prior use. This project site contains an existing commercial building that has been used continuously for commercial activities. The application does not propose an increase in commercial floor area or otherwise expand the prior commercial use. The project is consistent with the applicable General Plan land use designation and policies as well as with the applicable zoning designation and regulations. Furthermore, none of the exceptions that bar the application of a categorical exemption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 applies. Specifically, the project would not result in a cumulative impact; would not have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances; would not result in damage to scenic resources; is not located on a hazardous site or location; and would not impact any historic resources.
ALTERNATIVES
The Planning Commission can consider the following decision alternatives:
1. Approve the project . The Planning Commission may approve the project as proposed, subject to the conditions outlined in the attached Resolution.
2. Approve the project with modifications . The Planning Commission may suggest specific changes that are necessary to alleviate concerns. If any of the additional requested changes are substantial, the hearing should be continued to a future meeting to allow a redesign or additional analysis. In the event of significant 562
-18-
modifications to the proposal, staff will return with a revised Resolution incorporating new findings and/or conditions.
3. Deny the project . If the Planning Commission believes that there are insufficient facts to support the findings for approval, the Planning Commission must deny the application, provide facts in support of denial, and direct staff to incorporate the findings into a Resolution for denial. If the project is denied, the applicant could not submit substantially the same type of application for six months.
LEGAL REVIEW
The draft Resolution and this report have been approved as to form by the City Attorney’s Office.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Pursuant to Title 13, Section 13-29(d) of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code, three types of public notification have been completed no less than 10 days prior to the date of the public hearing:
1. Mailed notice. A public notice was mailed to all property owners and occupants within a 500-foot radius of the project site. The required notice radius is measured from the external boundaries of the property.
2. On-site posting. A public notice was posted on each street frontage of the project site.
3. Newspaper publication. A public notice was published once in the Daily Pilot newspaper.
As of the date this report was circulated, no public comments have been received. Any public comments received prior to the March 25, 2024 Planning Commission meeting will be provided separately.
CONCLUSION
The proposed project is a retail cannabis storefront business at an existing commercial property that is located on one of the City’s commercial corridors and meets separation requirements established in CMMC 13-200.93(e). Staff and the City’s cannabis consultant completed the Pre-application Determination, Business Plan and Security Plan evaluations, owner background checks, and thoroughly reviewed the CUP materials. If approved, the operation would be required to comply with all conditions of approval and extensive City and State regulations.
If the Planning Commission approves the project, the applicant would next obtain building permits, complete significant site and building improvements, and pass City inspections prior to obtaining a CBP and City Business License. The CBP would be valid for two years and must be continuously renewed, including inspections, prior to expiration. During each two-year CBP period, the Community Improvement Division, 563
-19-
along with other City staff, conducts site inspections to verify that the operation complies with CUP and CBP requirements.
As proposed and conditioned, the use would be consistent with other commercial uses in the C1 zone, the Zoning Code, and the City’s General Plan. The required findings for the CUP can be made, as described above, and therefore, staff recommends approval of Planning Application 22-08 subject to conditions of approval. 564
CITY OF COSTA MESA
Agenda Report
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
File #: 24-139 Meeting Date: 5/7/2024
TITLE:
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PGPA-23-0001 TO AMEND THE 2015-2035 GENERAL PLAN
CIRCULATION ELEMENT BY ADDING A REFERENCE TO THE COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN AND REVISING POLICIES UNDER GOALS C-1 TO C-12; AND APPROVAL OF
THE DRAFT COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN AND FIND THE PROJECT EXEMPT
FROM CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15262 AND 15061(B)(3)
DEPARTMENT: TRANSPORTATION SERVICES DIVISION/
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
PRESENTED BY: JENNIFER ROSALES, TRANSPORTATION SERVICES MANAGER AND
BRETT ATENCIO THOMAS, ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION COORDINATOR CONTACT INFORMATION: JENNIFER ROSALES, TRANSPORTATION SERVICES MANAGER, (714) 754-5343
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommends the City Council:
1. Find that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies), 15276 (Transportation Improvement Programs), and 15061 (b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption);
2. Approve the Draft Pedestrian Master Plan (PMP) as recommended by the City’s Planning Commission by adoption of a resolution; and
3. Approve General Plan Amendment PGPA-23-0001, amending the Circulation Element to revise and include new policies outlined in the PMP by adoption of a resolution.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On March 11, 2024, the Planning Commission found that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies), Section 15276 (Transportation Improvement and Congestion Management Program) and Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption).
The project is specifically excluded from CEQA pursuant to statutory exemptions defined under Sections 15262 and 15276. Section 15262 excludes a project from CEQA if it involves only feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions which the City has not approved, adopted, or funded and does not require the preparation of an environmental impact report or negative declaration, but does require consideration of environmental factors. Section 15276 states that CEQA does not apply
565
File #: 24-139 Meeting Date: 5/7/2024
does require consideration of environmental factors. Section 15276 states that CEQA does not apply to the development or adoption of a regional transportation improvement program.
The draft PMP complements the City’s 2018 Active Transportation Plan (ATP) by providing pedestrian programs, pedestrian infrastructure toolbox, and policy recommendations to improve the pedestrian experience in the City. The proposed project will update the Circulation Element to incorporate the PMP by reference and will include policies to ensure that future projects will consider and include street design elements to enhance pedestrian mobility. Therefore, the project is statutorily exempt from CEQA pursuant to Sections 15262 and 15276.
Furthermore, the proposed project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15061 (b)(3), which states that “where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA.” The PMP provides guidance on improving the environment where pedestrian activities occur and does not implement any specific project, action, or funding. Therefore, there is no possibility that the project (adoption of the PMP and General Plan Amendment) will have a significant effect on the environment.
BACKGROUND:
PROJECT SUMMARY
The proposed project includes the following:
· Review and recommend approval of the Draft Pedestrian Master Plan (Attachments 2 and 3) as recommended by the City’s Planning Commission.
· A General Plan Amendment (PGPA-23-0001) to update the City’s 2015-2035 General Plan Circulation Element as follows:
o Revise policies and recommendations under Goals C-1 through Goal C-12 to incorporate the recommended policies outlined in the Draft PMP (Attachment 4). 2015-2035 General Plan
During the preparation of the General Plan, the City held various workshops and study sessions that helped shape the 2015-2035 General Plan update that was adopted on June 21, 2016. One outcome of the General Plan workshops was the formation of the Bikeway and Walkability Committee. The City Council created the Bikeway and Walkability Committee on April 7, 2015, and renamed it as Active Transportation Committee (ATC) in 2022. The ATC makes recommendations for active transportation related improvements to the City Council.
On June 5, 2018, the City Council approved General Plan Amendment GP-18-01 to revise the Conceptual Bicycle Master Plan and revised policies of the Circulation Element and adopted the ATP.
The ATP outlines the vision, strategies and actions that will improve the active transportation experience in Costa Mesa. The ATP developed a Bicycle Facilities Map and primarily focused on completing the local bicycle network. An additional plan is needed to complement the ATP by providing a primary focus on walking for users of all types, ages, and abilities.
566
File #: 24-139 Meeting Date: 5/7/2024
In accordance with the General Plan Circulation Element, Goal C-12: Monitor, Evaluate, and Pursue Funding for Implementation of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, staff have sought out grant funding for the development of a Pedestrian Master Plan from various sources since 2018. In January 2020, City staff was successful in securing grant funding from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) to develop a PMP through its Sustainability Planning Grant Program in the amount of $125,000, and City Council approved a local match in the amount of $75,000. Following the initiation of the PMP project, the City Council identified the following Strategic Objective: “Present the Pedestrian Master Plan update to the City Council for direction,” under the City Council Goal to Advance Environmental Sustainability and Climate Resiliency.
The proposed PMP includes additional General Plan polices and tools specific for improving the pedestrian experience to support the following ATP vision for active transportation in the City: “The City of Costa Mesa will have a comprehensive and visible active transportation network and will promote safety, education, health, recreation and access to important locations within the City while connecting to the larger regional network.”
ANALYSIS:
The Draft PMP expands upon the pedestrian opportunity zones developed in the ATP with further analysis and provides pedestrian programs, a pedestrian infrastructure treatment toolbox, and specific policy recommendations to improve the pedestrian experience in the city. The draft PMP is intended to:
1. Promote a pedestrian-friendly transportation system in Costa Mesa;
2. Create a safer place to walk;
3. Integrate pedestrian elements into the circulation system and land use planning;
4. Promote a culture of walking;
5. Promote the positive air quality, health, and economic benefits of walking; and
6. Monitor, evaluate, and pursue funding for implementation of the PMP.
Community outreach and engagement played a central role in the development of the draft PMP. A combination of in-person public events, electronic and in-person surveying, and online mapping exercises were employed to help the project team understand community sentiment on pedestrian infrastructure. Community members participated throughout the development of the plan through the following opportunities:
• Six (6) Walk Audits
• Three (3) Community Workshops
• Seven (7) ATC Presentations
• One (1) Project Survey
• One (1) Online Mapping Tool
From these community engagement efforts, a total of 551 unique community member comments were received. A qualitative analysis was conducted from the comments gathered to identify common concerns and input shared by community members. This analysis is reflected in the PMP.
567
File #: 24-139 Meeting Date: 5/7/2024
Components of the PMP
The draft PMP contains seven chapters and seven supporting appendices that outline the vision, strategies, and actions that will be implemented to improve the pedestrian experience in Costa Mesa.
The chapters of the PMP follow:
1. Introduction - provides a plan overview and summary of the City’s policies and programs;
2. Community Engagement - discusses community participation in plan development;
3. Existing Conditions - documents the planning context to the pedestrian environment;
4. Policy Recommendations - outlines policies and recommendations to create a pedestrian- friendly environment for users of all types, ages, and abilities.
5. Pedestrian Infrastructure Toolbox - provides treatment options to be considered for ongoing and planned projects;
6. Infrastructures Projects - provides recommendations to help advance the PMP and ATP vision; and
7. Implementation Strategy - provides a list of grant opportunities.
Active Transportation Committee
In June 2022, the ATC unanimously voted to recommend the Draft PMP, as prepared, to the Planning Commission and City Council and recommend that staff proceed with next steps on a General Plan amendment. In December 2023, the ATC discussed the Draft PMP for a second time, and re-affirmed their support of the draft PMP, with the following provisions:
· Inclusion of the 2022 City of Costa Mesa Local Road Safety Plan and 2021 Berkeley SafeTREC City of Costa Mesa Complete Streets Safety Assessment as appendices to the PMP;
· Additional language to the PMP for future expansion of the scope of the PMP including additional corridors; and
· A one (1) year project implementation horizon.
The above was included in a letter from the ATC to the Planning Commission supporting approval of the PMP on March 6, 2024. As noted in the Planning Commission Agenda report, staff can incorporate the two documents identified for inclusion as appendices to the PMP. The pedestrian treatments identified in the PMP as well as walk-audits along additional corridors can be included as part of the City’s ongoing capital improvement projects and proposed five-year capital improvement program. However, staff cannot commit to timelines and further additions to the PMP, such as an implementation plan, outlined in the ATC letter to the Planning Commission as it is outside the scope of the project and will require additional resources, both in staff and funding. In addition, the upcoming Safe Routes to School Action Plan will significantly complement the PMP.
Planning Commission Action
The Planning Commission considered this item at its March 11, 2024 meeting. The Commission recommended approval of the Draft Pedestrian Master Plan by adoption of Resolution No. PC-2024- 07; the Commission also recommended approval of the General Plan Amendment PGPA-23-0001 amending the Circulation Element to revise and include new policies outlined in the Pedestrian Master Plan by adoption of Resolution No. PC-2024-08. Both actions were approved on a 6-0 vote
568
File #: 24-139 Meeting Date: 5/7/2024
Master Plan by adoption of Resolution No. PC-2024-08. Both actions were approved on a 6-0 vote and their resolutions are included as Attachment 5.
On March 11, 2024, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council find that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies), 15276 (Transportation Improvement Programs), and 15061 (b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption).
The Planning Commissioners made individual suggestions for City Council consideration regarding the content of the Draft Pedestrian Master Plan and proposed revisions to the policies in the amendment to the Circulation Element. The Planning Commissioner’s suggestions are outlined in the March 11, 2024, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes (Attachment 6). While the Planning Commission as a body did not authorize staff to make any changes to the Draft PMP, they requested staff to make the suggestions available for Council consideration. Some of the major suggestions include:
· The General Plan Amendment includes several “Recommendations” and “Policies” per earlier Council approval. The Commission suggested converting the following Recommendations to Policies: C-7.11, C-7.25, C-7.28, C-8.13, C-8.21, C-9.16, C-10.3. · Commissioners provided comments on pedestrian toolbox treatments regarding pedestrian crossing times, left turn signal phasing, driveways, crosswalks, pedestrian lighting, and speed feedback signs.
General Plan Amendment
The proposed General Plan Amendment (PGPA-23-0001) will update the Circulation Element policies to ensure that the PMP goals and provisions are considered and implemented as private and public projects are approved by the City. The proposed Circulation Element policy amendments can be found in Attachment 4 to this report.
The intent of the revised and additional policies is to add long-term programs and policy recommendations that would enhance the pedestrian environment for all pedestrian types, ages, and abilities. This will help the City achieve the vision identified in the ATP and further highlighted in the PMP that states that “the City of Costa Mesa will have a comprehensive and visible active transportation network and will promote safety, education, health, recreation, and access to important locations within the City while connecting to the larger regional network.” Applicable to this project, Senate Bill (SB) 18 (Government Code Section 65352.3), requires that prior to the adoption of a general plan amendment, the City shall provide an opportunity for consultation to the Native American tribes as informed by the Native American Heritage Commission.
The purpose of the consultation is to avoid and protect impacts to cultural places when creating or amending General Plans, Specific Plans and Community Plans. In May 2023, staff notified the local Native American tribes identified by the Native American Heritage Commission of the opportunity for consultation as required by SB 18. Following the notification to the tribes, staff did not receive any requests for consultation. However, the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation requested notification if any ground disturbances would occur in the future. The City will include the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation in the notification lists for any future implementation pedestrian
569
File #: 24-139 Meeting Date: 5/7/2024
Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation in the notification lists for any future implementation pedestrian projects that require ground disturbances.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Pursuant to Title 13, Section 13-29(d), of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code, a 1/8th page public notice was published once in the Daily Pilot newspaper no less than 10 days prior to the May 7, 2024 public hearing.
ALTERNATIVES:
The City Council could propose amendments to the Circulation Element and the Draft PMP. If these amendments are minor, they could be incorporated without any further analysis. Significant changes may require additional review by staff and will be brought back at a future meeting.
Another alternative is to not approve the proposed amendments and the Draft PMP. However, this alternative will result in gaps in pedestrian infrastructure improvements as a part of private and public developments and may result in lowering grant funding opportunities for pedestrian improvement projects.
FISCAL REVIEW:
There is no fiscal impact with the adoption of the recommended actions. Active transportation projects that include pedestrian treatments outlined in the Draft PMP are programmed through the budget process and subject to approval by the City Council.
LEGAL REVIEW:
The proposed resolutions (Attachment 1) and General Plan Amendment have been reviewed and approved as to form by the City Attorney’s Office.
CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:
This project works toward achieving the following City Council goals:
· Strengthen the Public’s Safety and Improve the Quality of Life. · Advance environmental sustainability and climate resiliency. · Maintain and Enhance the City’s Facilities, Equipment and Technology.
CONCLUSION:
The Draft PMP and recommended Circulation Element policies have been reviewed at public workshops, Active Transportation Committee meetings and the Planning Commission. Approval of the PMP and the General Plan Circulation Element Amendment will promote a pedestrian-friendly environment and complete streets network. The recommended policies and PMP will help the City achieve the vision identified in the City’s Active Transportation Plan for a comprehensive and visible active transportation network promoting safety, education, health, recreation, and access to important locations within the city while connecting to the larger regional network.
570
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA APPROVING ADOPTION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PGPA-23-0001 TO
AMEND THE CIRCUALTION ELEMENT OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA GENERAL
PLAN BY ADDING A REFERE NCE TO THE COSTA MESA PEDE STRIAN MASTER
PLAN AND REVISING POLICIES ASSOCIATED WITH CIRCULATION ELEMENT GOALS C-1 THROUGH C-12.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA HEREBY FINDS AND DECLARES AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, the City of Costa Mesa’s 2015 -2035 General Plan was adopted o n June 21, 2016;
WHEREAS, the 2015-2035 General Plan includes ten elements, one of which is known as the Circulation Element;
WHEREAS, the Circulation Element includes policies to implement Goals C -1 through C-12;
WHEREAS, the City of Costa Mesa app roved the Active Transportation Plan and an amendment (GP-18-01) to the General Plan’s Circulation Element on June 5, 2018; WHEREAS, the City of Costa Mesa, through its consultant, conducted a series of public workshops and meetings from 2020 through 2022 concerning active transportation matters, including opportunities to improve pedestrian circulation; WHEREAS, these outreach meetings resulted in the preparation of a draft Costa Mesa Pedestrian Master Plan (“PMP”);
WHEREAS, the PMP includes policies that require the Circulation Element of the City of Costa Mesa General Plan be amended in order to provide consistency and implement the PMP;
WHEREAS, the PMP policies have been reviewed and recommended by the City Council-appointed Active Transportation Committee to be included as part of the General Plan’s Circulation Element;
WHEREAS, General Plan Amendment PGPA -23-0001 includes revisions to the policies contained in Circulation Element Goals C-1 and C-12, which are included as an attachment (Exhibit 1) to this resolution; and
WHEREAS, on March 11, 2024, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommended approval of the General Plan Amendment PGPA-23-0001 and the Pedestrian Master Plan on a 6-0 vote;
571
ATTACHMENT 1
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the General Plan Amendment PGPA- 23-0001 includes the following revisions to the Circulation Element:
a. Amend the General Plan Circulation Element to add reference to the Costa Mesa Pedestrian Master Plan.
b. Amend policies and recommendations under Goals C-1 to C-12 as included in the Excerpt of the Circulation Element itemized in Exhibit 1.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Costa Mesa City Council does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon the activity as descr ibed in the staff report for General Plan Amendment PGPA-23-0001 and the Pedestrian Master Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that that the adoption of General Plan Amendment PGPA-23-0001 is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies) , 15276 (Transportation Improvement Programs) , and section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption).
BE IT F URTHER RESOLVED that if any section, division, sentence, clause, phrase or portion o f this resolution, or the documents in the record in support of this resolution, are for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of May, 2024.
John Stephens, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________ _______________________________ Brenda Green, City Clerk Kimberly Hall Barlow, City Attorney
572
ATTACHMENT 1
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss
CITY OF COSTA MESA )
I, BRENDA GREEN, City Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoin g is the original of Resolution No. 2024 -xx and was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa at a regular meeting held on the 7th day of May, 2024, by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereby set my hand and affixed the seal of the City of Costa Mesa this 7th day of May 2024.
_______________________________
BRENDA GREEN, CITY CLERK (SEAL)
573
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA
MESA APPROVING THE CITY’S PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, the City of Costa Mesa’s 2015 -2035 General Plan was adopted on June 21, 2016;
WHEREAS, the City of Costa Mesa approved the Active Transportation Plan (“ATP”) and an amendment to the General Plan Circulation Element (GP-18-01) on June 5, 2018;
WHEREAS, the ATP focused on completion of the bicycle network by identi fying existing and absent bikeway segments to improve connectivity and providing recommendations for potential improvements to the system and programs; WHEREAS, in accordance with the General Plan Circulation Element Goal C -12, Monitor, Evaluate, and Pursue Funding for Implementation of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, the City was secured grant funding from Southern California Association of Governments to develop a Pedestrian Master Plan (“PMP”); WHEREAS, following the initiation of the Pedes trian Master Plan project, the City Council identified the following Strategic Objective: “Present the Pedestrian Master Plan update to City Council for direction” under th e City Council Goal to Advance Environmental Sustainability and Climate Resiliency;
WHEREAS, the Community outreach played a central role in the development of the PMP;
WHEREAS, the PMP expands upon the pedestrian opportunity zones developed in the ATP with further analysis and provides pedestrian programs, a pedestrian infrastructure treatment toolbox, and specific policy recommendations to improve the pedestrian experience in the City;
WHEREAS, following a series of workshops and public meetings in 2020 through 2022, a draft Costa Mesa Pedestrian Master Plan have been reviewed and recommended for approval by the City’s Planning Commission and Active Transportation Committee; and
574
ATTACHMENT 1
WHEREAS, the PMP is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to pursuant to Section 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Stu dies), Section 15276 (Transportation Improvement and Congestion Management Program) and Section -515061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve the Pedestrian Master Plan as recommended by the Active Transportation Committee and the Planning Commission included as Exhibit 2.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Costa Mesa City Council does hereby find and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon activity as described in the staff report for General Plan Amendment PGPA-23-0001 and the Pedestrian Master Plan
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if any section, division, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this resolution, or the documents in the record in support of this resolution, are for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of May, 2024.
John Stephens, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________ _______________________________ Brenda Green, City Clerk Kimberly Hall Barlow, City Attorney
575
ATTACHMENT 1
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss
CITY OF COSTA MESA )
I, BRENDA GREEN, City Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing is the original of Resolution No. 2024 -xx and was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa at a regular meeting held on the 7th day of May, 2024, by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
IN WITNESS WHEREO F, I have hereby set my hand and affixed the seal of the City of Costa Mesa this 7th day of May 2024.
_______________________________
BRENDA GREEN, CITY CLERK (SEAL)
576
June 2022
ATTACHMENT 2
577
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLANII
This plan was funded by a grant from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG).
*The Committee is formerly known as the Bikeway and
Walkability Committee.
Mayor and City Council
John Stephens, Mayor
Andrea Marr, Mayor Pro Tem
Manuel Chavez, Council Member
Loren Gameros, Council Member
Jeff Harlan, Council Member
Don Harper, Council Member
Arlis Reynolds, Council Member
City of Costa Mesa
Raja Sethuraman, Public Services Director
Jennifer Rosales, Transportation Services Manager
Seung Yang, City Engineer
Ramin Nikoui, Associate Engineer
Brett Atencio Thomas, Active Transportation
Coordinator
Southern California Association of Governments
(SCAG)
Cory Wilkerson
Hannah Keyes
Active Transportation Committee *
Cynthia McDonald, Chair
Jim Erickson, Vice Chair
Bryan Estrada, Member
Bridget Gleason, Member
Richard Huffman II, Member
Flo Martin, Member
David Martinez, Member
Michael Moses Nolf, Member
Ralph Taboada, Member
Emily Webb, Member
Trace Yulie, Member
John Lux, Alternate Committee Member
Jimmy Vivar, Alternate Committee Member
Consultant Team
KOA Corporation, Prime Consultant
Katherine Padilla & Associates
Rock E. Miller & Associates
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
578
IIITABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 3: Existing Conditions
Chapter 4: Policy Recommendations
Chapter 5: T oolbox
Chapter 2: Community Engagement
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.1 Introduction 6
1.2 Plan Location 6
1.3 Project Context 7
2.1 Introduction 12
2.2 Public Outreach And Information Sharing 14
2.3 Walk Audits 15
2.4 Community Workshops 15
2.5 Active Transportation Committee 16
2.6 Community Feedback & Input T ools 16
2.7 Findings From Outreach Effort 17
3.1 Introduction 22
3.2 Demographic characteristics 23
3.3 travel characteristics 26
3.4 Land use and destinations 29
3.5 Roadway Characteristics 31
3.6 Pedestrian Infrastructure 35
3.7 Pedestrian Safety 42
4.1 Introduction 52
4.2 Policy recommendations 53
Chapter 6: Infrastructure Projects
Chapter 7: Implementation Strategy
5.1 Introduction 74
5.2 Sidewalk-Related Treatments 75
5.3 Crossing-Related Treatments 77
5.4 General Traffi c Behavior and Other Concerns 81
5.5 Cost Estimates 83
6.1 introduction 85
6.2 Pedestrian Project Corridors 86
6.3 Project Factsheets 86
7.1 Introduction 113
7.2 Project Prioritization 113
7.3 Time and cost 115
7.4 funding Opportunities 116
Appendices
Appendix A: Plan And Policy Review
Appendix B: Walk Audit Event Summaries
Appendix C: Community Workshop Summaries
Appendix D: Project Survey
Appendix E: T oolbox Reference
Appendix F: Pedestrian Counts
579
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLANIV
List of Figures
Figure 2.1 Process Diagram 13
Figure 3.1 T otal Population by Census Block 24
Figure 3.2 Median Household Income 25
Figure 3.4 Pedestrian Count Locations 28
Figure 3.5 Land Use Map 30
Figure 3.6 Average Daily Traffi c Volumes 32
Figure 3.7 Posted Speed Limits in the City of Costa Mesa on MPAH Streets of Collector Arterial and Higher 34 Figure 3.8 Sidewalk Coverage in North Pedestrian Opportunity Zone 36 Figure 3.9 Sidewalk Coverage in South Pedestrian Opportunity Zone 37 Figure 3.10 Crosswalk Types 38
Figure 3.11 OCTA Bus Stops 40
Figure 3.12 OCTA Bus Ridership Heat Map 41
Figure 3.13 Heat Map of Pedestrian Collisions 43
Figure 3.14 Heat Map of Police Citations 47
Figure 6.1 Pedestrian Project Corridors 86
580
VTABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Tables
T able 2.1 Overview of Walk Audits 15
T able 2.2 Overview of Community Workshops 15
T able 2.3 Overview of Bikeway and Walkability Committee Presentations 16 T able 2.4 Summary of Comment Themes, Sub-themes, and Number of Comments 19 T able 3.1 Population Distribution by Median Household Income 23 T able 3.2 Age Distribution 23
T able 3.3 Commute to Work 26
T able 3.4 Commute to Work - Five Year Trend 26
T able 3.5 Pedestrian Counts at Selected Locations 27
T able 3.6 Average Daily Traffi c (ADT) within the Opportunity Zones 31 T able 3.7 Percentage of Posted Speed Limit on MPAH Streets of Collector Arterial and Higher 33 T able 3.8 Summary of Sidewalk Coverage in Pedestrian Opportunity Zones 35 T able 3.9 T op Five Collision Hotspots, Citywide and at Pedestrian Opportunity Zones, from July 2015 to June 2020 44 T able 3.10 T op Five Collision Corridors, Citywide and at Pedestrian Opportunity Zones, from July 2015 to June 2020 45 T able 3.11 Summary of Citations Given 48
T able 5.1 Pedestrian Treatment Cost Estimates 83
T able 6.1 Pedestrian Project Corridors Details 86
T able 6.2 Crosswalk Improvement Locations On Minor Streets Along Major Corridors 109 T able 7.1 Project Prioritization Criteria 113
T able 7.2 Ranked Projects List 114
T able 7.3 Infrastructure Cost and Time Continuum 115
T able 7.4 Funding Opportunities 116
581
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLANVI
This page left intentionally blank
582
Executive
Summary
583
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN2
PURPOSE
The Costa Mesa Pedestrian Master Plan, also known as
the Plan or CMPMP, offers additional support to the City’s 2018 Active Transportation Plan (ATP). The ATP provides a bold vision for active transportation in the city: “The City of Costa Mesa will have a comprehensive and visible active transportation network and will promote safety, education, health, recreation and access to important locations within the City while connecting to the larger regional network.” The CMPMP supplements the ATP by providing additional
infrastructure, programs, and policy recommendations
specifi c to improving the pedestrian experience in the city.
PLAN STRUCTURE
The Plan contains seven chapters and seven supporting
appendices.
Chapter 1: Introduction provides a Plan overview and a
summary of the City’s policy, program, and existing/planned infrastructure projects.
Chapter 2: Community Engagement discusses the
strategies used to gather community input for the planning process and outcomes of the community engagement
effort.
Chapter 3: Existing Conditions documents the planning
context through different analyses that pertain to the
pedestrian environment in the city.
Chapter 4: Policy Recommendations provides a list of
goals, objectives, and recomm endations to help achieve the vision identifi ed in the ATP, offering additional long-term recommendations to enhance the pedestrian environment.
Chapter 5: Pedestrian Infrastructure Toolbox provides a starting point on what infrastructure treatments (tools) can be considered for ongoing and planned projects that would enhance the pedestrian environment and increase the
safety and accessibility for pedestrians.
Chapter 6: Infrastructure Projects discusses a set
of infrastructure projects the City can begin work on
to help advance the CMPMP and ATP Vision. These
recommendations provide a short-term roadmap that
complement the recommendations discussed in Chapter
4, Policy Recommendations, and Chapter 5, Pedestrian
Infrastructure Toolbox, by providing Project Factsheets for fi ve identifi ed pedestrian project corridors.
Chapter 7: Implementation Strategy offers a list of
prioritized projects that the City could start with to
implement the Plan and a list of grant opportunities that the City could seek to fund the projects.
584
3EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PLANNING CONTEXT
The project team analyzed fi ve categories of data to better understand the existing conditions of the study corridors and to help identify and develop new recommendations to help enhance the pedestrian environment:
• Demographic statistics & travel characteristics
• Land use and destinations
• Roadway characteristics
• Pedestrian infrastructure
• Pedestrian safety
The analysis was concentrated in the Pedestrian
Opportunity Zones. The opportunity zones were fi rst
discussed in the General Plan and were included in the
Active Transportation Plan. According to the General
Plan, the City will pursue street enhancements to create pedestrian-friendly environments in the Pedestrian
Opportunity Zones.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Community outreach and engagement played a central
role in the Plan development. A combination of in-person public events, electronic and in-person surveying, and
online mapping exercises were employed to help the project planning team (the team) understand community sentiment on pedestrian infrastructure. The engagement strategy was continuously adapted to challenges stemming from the
COVID-19 pandemic.
Community members participated in the planning efforts
through the following opportunities:
• Six (6) walk audits
• Three (3) Community workshops
• Five (5) Active Transportation Committee presentations • One (1) Project survey
• One (1) Online mapping tool
A qualitative analysis was conducted from the comments
gathered in the outreach effort to identify common
concerns and input shared by community members.
Community members provided a total of 547 location-
specifi c comments.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Plan provides four separate, yet interrelated
components of recommendations for pedestrian
improvements that the City could implement to realize the vision for the Plan.
Plan goals and long-term program and policy
recommendations: The Plan has six (6) goals and 62
objectives and policies that were adapted from the Active Transportation Plan and 35 new recommendations to
585
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN4
enhance and better support the ATP vision.
Pedestrian project corridors: The Plan contains ten
Pedestrian Project Corridors. The corridors were identifi ed through the Existing Conditions Analysis and comments
received from the community engagement effort and the
Active Transportation Committee. These project corridors revolve around the Pedestrian Opportunity Zones identifi ed in the City’s General Plan.
Pedestrian infrastructure framework: The Pedestrian
Infrastructure Framework is a toolbox that provides
guidance on a variety of infrastructure treatments that could be incorporated in ongoing and planned projects to enhance the pedestrian network and increase pedestrian
safety.
Priority project factsheets:
The Plan provides project factsheets for fi ve Pedestrian Project Corridors. Each factsheet contains a description of the corridor, along with a summary of existing
conditions and concerns as well as proposed treatment
recommendations including photos and a sample concept
plan of a specifi c treatment for the corridor.
586
01 Introduction
587
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN6
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Walking is an important form of transportation and a
valuable recreation activity. As a transportation mode, it allows people to access destinations with minimal
assistance from mobility devices, unlike a vehicle or bicycle.
As a recreational activity, walking brings many health
benefi ts.
The Costa Mesa Pedestrian Master Plan, also known as the Plan or CMPMP, offers additional support to the City’s 2018 Active Transportation Plan (ATP) and the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The ATP provides a bold vision for active transportation in the city, “The City of Costa Mesa will have a comprehensive and visible active transportation network and will promote safety, education, health, recreation
and access to important locations within the City while connecting to the larger regional network.”
The Plan also contains a policy framework with many goals, objectives, policies, and reco mmendations that would help the city achieve the Vision.
The Circulation Element of the General Plan identifi ed four Pedestrian Priority Areas, also known as Pedestrian Opportunity Zones, where the City will pursue street
enhancements to create pedestrian-friendly environments.
The CMPMP supplements the ATP and the General Plan
by providing additional infrastructure, programs, and
policy recommendations that are specifi c to improving the pedestrian experience in the city. In particular, the CMPMP focuses on improvements at the Pedestrian Opportunity
Zones.
1.2 PLAN LOCATION
The City of Costa Mesa is home to more than 113,000
residents according to the 2019 America Community
Survey. It is located in central Orange County and shares a border with the cities of Huntington Beach, Fountain Valley, Santa Ana, Irvine, and Newport Beach, as well as the John Wayne (JWA) Santa Ana Airport. The City is well-connected via three major freeways – Interstate 405 (I-405), State Route 55 (SR-55), and State Route 73 (SR-73), and has a network of existing pedestrian facilities. The City is host to major employers in Orange County, including: the Auto Club of Southern California, Fairview Developmental Center, South Coast Plaza, and OC Fair and Event Center. The City is comprised of different neighborhoods, which include
Eastside Costa Mesa, South Coast Metro, Mesa Verde, and Westside Costa Mesa. Each neighborhood features unique
roadway characteristics and built environments, which
range from high-density residential units surrounded by wide roadways (such as in South Coast Metro) to single- family residential housing with curvilinear residential streets like those found in the Mesa Verde neighborhood.
588
01 INTRODUCTION 7
1.3 PROJECT CONTEXT
The Pedestrian Master Plan builds upon many local and
regional planning and engineering efforts. These are
summarized below while Appendix A, Plan And Policy
Review contains more detailed information.
CITYWIDE PLANNING EFFORTS
Costa Mesa General Plan Circulation Element (2015)
The Circulation Element of the General Plan includes goals, objectives, and policies that th e City uses to make decisions about transportation network improvements. The Plan
emphasizes expanding travel mobility for bicycles and
pedestrians, as well as implementing complete streets
strategies in the city.
Costa Mesa Active Transportation Plan (2018)
The Costa Mesa Active Transportation Plan (ATP), provides strategies and actions that will improve the active
transportation experience in Costa Mesa. It analyzes
existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the city, provides a policy framework behind the City’s active transportation vision, and proposes facilities for future funding.
Complete Street Safety Assessment (2021)
The assessment was completed as a collaboration between the City and SafeTREC at UC Berkeley. It reviewed several corridors in the City and provided recommendations for
infrastructure improvements.
589
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN8
Multi-Purpose Trails Plan (2016)
Completed in June 2016, the Costa Mesa Multi-Purpose
Trails Plan analyzes the strategies needed for implementing a multi-use trail system within the City, focusing on the area between the Santa Ana River Trail and Newport Bay in the middle of the City.
Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP)
The City's Local Road Safety Plan identifi es safety
countermeasures for all travel modes including walking and bicycling. The Plan helps ongoing efforts to make safety improvements by analyzing cr ash data, selecting emphasis areas, and identifying countermeasures through public
outreach and diverse stakeholder collaboration.
LOCAL PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS
Go Human Explore Merrimac (2018)
On April 21, 2018, Costa Mesa hosted a SCAG Go Human
demonstration project on Merrimac Way from Harbor
Boulevard to Fairview Road to explore potential pedestrian and bicycle improvements. The demonstration project led to the construction of pedestrian and bicycle facilities in 2021.
Reimagining 19th Street
In the summer of 2020, the Costa Mesa Alliance for Better Streets, a community organization, collaborated with the Costa Mesa community and the City on the “Reimagine 19th Street” project. The project resulted in a tactical urbanism 590
01 INTRODUCTION 9
demonstration on 19th Street to showcase potential new
infrastructure improvements along the corridor and to
gather community feedback
Costa Mesa Community Pedestrian & Bicycle Safety
Training
The Costa Mesa Active Transportation Committee,
California Walks, and the University of California, Berkeley’s Safe Transportation Research and Education Center
(SafeTREC) collaboratively planned a training on August 28, 2020, which included walking and biking assessments.
Assessments were conducted along three routes: Newport
Boulevard from 17th Street to 19th Street, 19th Street from the western city limit to Harbor Boulevard, and Fairview Road from Baker Street to Fair Drive (adjacent to Orange Coast College)
Other Planned and Funded Active Transportation
Projects Within Costa Mesa
The City is currently working on many projects with
pedestrian elements. Examples of such projects include:
Mesa Del Mar multi-modal access and circulation
improvements, Mesa Drive and Santa Ana Avenue bicycle
facility improvements, Randolph Avenue parking and
pedestrian improvements, W 18th Street at Lions Park HAWK Signal, Wilson Street HAWK Signal, and Adams Avenue and Pinecreek Drive Intersection Project.
REGIONAL & ADJACENT CITY EFFORTS
OC Active (2019)
OC Active is Orange County’s Bike and Pedestrian Plan. It provides a framework for bikeway and pedestrian planning across the county. OC Active replaces the Orange County Commuter Bikeways Strategic Plan developed in 2009.
Connect SoCal (2020):
Connect SoCal is the 2020 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy from Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). The Plan includes
a technical report outlining the existing state of active transportation and the impacts of active transportation investments within the SCAG region.
City of Newport Beach Bicycle Master Plan (2014)
The Plan guides the development and maintenance of a
comprehensive bicycle network and set of programs until 2034. The City contains 18.9 miles of Class I Shared-Use Paths which allow joint pedestrian and bicycle use. In 2014, there were 93 miles of existing bikeways, which include 26 miles of sidewalks that allow bicycling.
City of Irvine Strategic Active Transportation Plan (2020) The 2020 Plan seeks to balance new technologies,
innovative pedestrian treatments, and bicycle
transportation options to establish an environment that is 591
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN10
comfortable and convenient for users. On-street facility connections are planned via Red Hill Avenue and along Main Street.
City of Huntington Beach Bicycle Master Plan (2013)
The Bike Master Plan discusses opportunities for pedestrian travel via off-street shared-use paths. Connections are made to Costa Mesa via the Santa Ana River Trail. The Santa Ana River Trail is maintained and operated by the County of Orange.
City of Santa Ana Active Transportation Plan (2019)
The goal of the Santa Ana Active Transportation Plan (2019) document is to create a City that provides multi-modal
access for walking, biking, and rolling. Santa Ana forms the northern boundary with the City of Costa Mesa along Sunfl ower Avenue.
City of Fountain Valley General Plan Update (forthcoming) The City is currently working on updating its General Plan, and it may include discussions on active transportation. The City shares a short border with Fountain Valley.
592
02 Community
Engagement
593
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN12
2.1 INTRODUCTION
Interactive community feedback outlets were foundational to the development of the Plan. A combination of in-person public events, electronic and in-person surveying, and
online mapping exercises were employed to help the project team understand community sentiment on pedestrian
infrastructure. The engagemen t strategy was continuously adapted to challenges from the COVID-19 pandemic.
Opportunities made available for community members to
participate in included:
• Walk audits
• Community workshops
• Active Transportation Committee presentations
• Project survey
• Online mapping tool
The engagement effort was conducted between November
2020 and April 2022. It focuse d on two primary audiences:
the general public and key stakeholders as represented by the Bikeway and Walkability Committee.
Figure 2.1, Process Diagram, shows how the engagement
effort aligned with the overall development of the Plan. 594
02 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 13
Figure 2.1 Process Diagram
595
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN14
2.2 PUBLIC OUTREACH AND
INFORMATION SHARING
The project team employed many strategies to inform the Costa Mesa community about opportunities to participate in the planning effort.
Project Branding
A logo and branding style were created to establish a project identity. The logo and branding style were used across all project communication materials.
/gid00023/gid00010/gid00019/gid00021/gid00022/gid00002/gid00013/gid00004/gid00016/gid00014/gid00014/gid00022/gid00015/gid00010/gid00021/gid00026 /gid00014/gid00006/gid00006/gid00021/gid00010/gid00015/gid00008 /gid00021/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00004/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00042/gid00033/gid00001/gid00004/gid00042/gid00046/gid00047/gid00028/gid00001/gid00014/gid00032/gid00046/gid00028/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00049/gid00036/gid00047/gid00032/gid00046/gid00001/gid00052/gid00042/gid00048/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001 /gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00046/gid00032/gid00030/gid00042/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00049/gid00036/gid00045/gid00047/gid00048/gid00028/gid00039/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00048/gid00041/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00040/gid00032/gid00032/gid00047/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001 /gid00045/gid00032/gid00049/gid00036/gid00032/gid00050/gid00001/gid00017/gid00032/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00036/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00014/gid00028/gid00046/gid00047/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00017/gid00039/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00043/gid00045/gid00042/gid00043/gid00042/gid00046/gid00032/gid00031/gid00001 /gid00045/gid00032/gid00030/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00032/gid00041/gid00031/gid00028/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00046/gid00163 /gid00186/gid00001 /gid00013/gid00032/gid00028/gid00045/gid00041/gid00001/gid00028/gid00029/gid00042/gid00048/gid00047/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00033/gid00032/gid00032/gid00031/gid00029/gid00028/gid00030/gid00038/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00039/gid00039/gid00032/gid00030/gid00047/gid00032/gid00031/gid00001/gid00031/gid00048/gid00045/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001 /gid00050/gid00028/gid00039/gid00038/gid00001/gid00028/gid00048/gid00031/gid00036/gid00047/gid00046/gid00164/gid00001/gid00042/gid00041/gid00039/gid00036/gid00041/gid00032/gid00001/gid00046/gid00048/gid00045/gid00049/gid00032/gid00052/gid00164/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00046/gid00028/gid00033/gid00032/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00028/gid00039/gid00052/gid00046/gid00036/gid00046/gid00163/gid00001 /gid00186/gid00001 /gid00017/gid00045/gid00042/gid00049/gid00036/gid00031/gid00032/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00043/gid00048/gid00047/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00043/gid00045/gid00042/gid00043/gid00042/gid00046/gid00032/gid00031/gid00001/gid00045/gid00032/gid00030/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00032/gid00041/gid00031/gid00028/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00046 /gid00186/gid00001 /gid00013/gid00032/gid00028/gid00045/gid00041/gid00001/gid00028/gid00029/gid00042/gid00048/gid00047/gid00001/gid00041/gid00032/gid00051/gid00047/gid00001/gid00046/gid00047/gid00032/gid00043/gid00046 /gid00021/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00031/gid00032/gid00049/gid00032/gid00039/gid00042/gid00043/gid00040/gid00032/gid00041/gid00047/gid00001/gid00042/gid00033/gid00001/gid00028/gid00001/gid00017/gid00032/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00036/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00014/gid00028/gid00046/gid00047/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00017/gid00039/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00033/gid00042/gid00045/gid00001 /gid00004/gid00042/gid00046/gid00047/gid00028/gid00001/gid00014/gid00032/gid00046/gid00028/gid00001/gid00036/gid00046/gid00001/gid00048/gid00041/gid00031/gid00032/gid00045/gid00050/gid00028/gid00052/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00046/gid00032/gid00045/gid00049/gid00032/gid00001/gid00028/gid00046/gid00001/gid00028/gid00001/gid00045/gid00042/gid00028/gid00031/gid00001/gid00040/gid00028/gid00043/gid00001 /gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00036/gid00031/gid00032/gid00041/gid00047/gid00036/gid00033/gid00052/gid00001/gid00046/gid00042/gid00039/gid00048/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00046/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00036/gid00040/gid00043/gid00045/gid00042/gid00049/gid00032/gid00001/gid00050/gid00028/gid00039/gid00038/gid00028/gid00029/gid00036/gid00039/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001 /gid00004/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00163/gid00001/gid00021/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00017/gid00039/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00050/gid00036/gid00039/gid00039/gid00001/gid00043/gid00045/gid00042/gid00043/gid00042/gid00046/gid00032/gid00001/gid00043/gid00032/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00036/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001 /gid00036/gid00041/gid00033/gid00045/gid00028/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00048/gid00030/gid00047/gid00048/gid00045/gid00032/gid00001/gid00036/gid00040/gid00043/gid00045/gid00042/gid00049/gid00032/gid00040/gid00032/gid00041/gid00047/gid00046/gid00001/gid00028/gid00036/gid00040/gid00032/gid00031/gid00001/gid00028/gid00047/gid00001 /gid00030/gid00042/gid00041/gid00041/gid00032/gid00030/gid00047/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00048/gid00041/gid00036/gid00047/gid00036/gid00032/gid00046/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00046/gid00030/gid00035/gid00042/gid00042/gid00039/gid00046/gid00164/gid00001/gid00043/gid00028/gid00045/gid00038/gid00046/gid00164/gid00001 /gid00029/gid00048/gid00046/gid00036/gid00041/gid00032/gid00046/gid00046/gid00032/gid00046/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00042/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00036/gid00041/gid00028/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00046/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00004/gid00042/gid00046/gid00047/gid00028/gid00001 /gid00014/gid00032/gid00046/gid00028/gid00163/gid00001/gid00010/gid00041/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00031/gid00032/gid00049/gid00032/gid00039/gid00042/gid00043/gid00040/gid00032/gid00041/gid00047/gid00001/gid00042/gid00033/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00017/gid00032/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00036/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001 /gid00014/gid00028/gid00046/gid00047/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00017/gid00039/gid00028/gid00041/gid00164/gid00001/gid00046/gid00036/gid00051/gid00001/gid00050/gid00028/gid00039/gid00038/gid00001/gid00028/gid00048/gid00031/gid00036/gid00047/gid00046/gid00001/gid00050/gid00032/gid00045/gid00032/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00041/gid00031/gid00048/gid00030/gid00047/gid00032/gid00031/gid00001/gid00042/gid00041/gid00001 /gid00004/gid00042/gid00046/gid00047/gid00028/gid00001/gid00014/gid00032/gid00046/gid00028/gid00001/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00032/gid00032/gid00047/gid00046/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00014/gid00028/gid00045/gid00030/gid00035/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00002/gid00043/gid00045/gid00036/gid00039/gid00001/gid00050/gid00036/gid00047/gid00035/gid00001 /gid00003/gid00036/gid00038/gid00032/gid00050/gid00028/gid00052/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00024/gid00028/gid00039/gid00038/gid00028/gid00029/gid00036/gid00039/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00004/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00036/gid00047/gid00047/gid00032/gid00032/gid00001/gid00040/gid00032/gid00040/gid00029/gid00032/gid00045/gid00046/gid00164/gid00001 /gid00004/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00046/gid00047/gid00028/gid00126/gid00164/gid00001/gid00043/gid00045/gid00042/gid00037/gid00032/gid00030/gid00047/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00041/gid00046/gid00048/gid00039/gid00047/gid00028/gid00041/gid00047/gid00001/gid00047/gid00032/gid00028/gid00040/gid00001/gid00040/gid00032/gid00040/gid00029/gid00032/gid00045/gid00046/gid00164/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001 /gid00040/gid00032/gid00040/gid00029/gid00032/gid00045/gid00046/gid00001/gid00042/gid00033/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00048/gid00041/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00163/gid00001/gid00010/gid00041/gid00001/gid00028/gid00031/gid00031/gid00036/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00164/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001 /gid00042/gid00041/gid00039/gid00036/gid00041/gid00032/gid00001/gid00046/gid00048/gid00045/gid00049/gid00032/gid00052/gid00001/gid00050/gid00028/gid00046/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00041/gid00031/gid00048/gid00030/gid00047/gid00032/gid00031/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00002/gid00043/gid00045/gid00036/gid00039/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00014/gid00028/gid00052/gid00001/gid00033/gid00042/gid00045/gid00001 /gid00028/gid00031/gid00031/gid00036/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00028/gid00039/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00043/gid00048/gid00047/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00017/gid00032/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00036/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00014/gid00028/gid00046/gid00047/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00017/gid00039/gid00028/gid00041/gid00163/gid00001 /gid00023/gid00036/gid00045/gid00047/gid00048/gid00028/gid00039/gid00001/gid00004/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00048/gid00041/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00014/gid00032/gid00032/gid00047/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00001 /gid00023/gid00036/gid00028/gid00001/gid00027/gid00042/gid00042/gid00040 /gid00050/gid00050/gid00050/gid00163/gid00001/gid00053/gid00042/gid00042/gid00040/gid00163/gid00048/gid00046 /gid00016/gid00045/gid00001/gid00037/gid00042/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00029/gid00052/gid00001/gid00043/gid00035/gid00042/gid00041/gid00032/gid00165/gid00001/gid00337/gid00132/gid00183/gid00137/gid00137/gid00140/gid00183/gid00140/gid00131/gid00131/gid00183/gid00137/gid00139/gid00134/gid00134/gid00001/gid00042/gid00045/gid00001 /gid00337/gid00132/gid00183/gid00134/gid00135/gid00137/gid00183/gid00133/gid00135/gid00139/gid00183/gid00138/gid00138/gid00140/gid00140/gid00001/gid00042/gid00045/gid00001/gid00337/gid00132/gid00183/gid00133/gid00136/gid00134/gid00183/gid00133/gid00132/gid00136/gid00183/gid00139/gid00138/gid00139/gid00133/gid00001 /gid00024/gid00032/gid00029/gid00036/gid00041/gid00028/gid00045/gid00001/gid00010/gid00005/gid00165/gid00001/gid00140/gid00139/gid00133/gid00001/gid00136/gid00132/gid00136/gid00136/gid00001/gid00138/gid00131/gid00140/gid00138 /gid00017/gid00028/gid00046/gid00046/gid00030/gid00042/gid00031/gid00032/gid00165/gid00001/gid00136/gid00131/gid00137/gid00131/gid00136/gid00135 /gid00013/gid00036/gid00049/gid00032/gid00001/gid00020/gid00043/gid00028/gid00041/gid00036/gid00046/gid00035/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00047/gid00032/gid00045/gid00043/gid00045/gid00032/gid00047/gid00028/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00001/gid00050/gid00036/gid00039/gid00039/gid00001/gid00029/gid00032/gid00001/gid00043/gid00045/gid00042/gid00049/gid00036/gid00031/gid00032/gid00031/gid00163/gid00001 /gid00017/gid00032/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00036/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00014/gid00028/gid00046/gid00047/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00017/gid00039/gid00028/gid00041 /gid00004/gid00042/gid00046/gid00047/gid00028/gid00001/gid00014/gid00032/gid00046/gid00028 /gid00011/gid00042/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00048/gid00046/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00040/gid00028/gid00038/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00001/gid00028/gid00001/gid00040/gid00042/gid00045/gid00032/gid00001/gid00050/gid00028/gid00039/gid00038/gid00183/gid00033/gid00045/gid00036/gid00032/gid00041/gid00031/gid00039/gid00052/gid00001/gid00030/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052 /gid00050/gid00036/gid00047/gid00035/gid00001/gid00052/gid00042/gid00048/gid00045/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00043/gid00048/gid00047/gid00163 /gid00016/gid00030/gid00047/gid00042/gid00029/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00137/gid00164/gid00001/gid00133/gid00131/gid00133/gid00132/gid00164/gid00001/gid00137/gid00165/gid00131/gid00131/gid00001/gid00017/gid00014/gid00001/gid00183/gid00001/gid00138/gid00165/gid00134/gid00131/gid00001/gid00017/gid00014 Project logo Event fl yer using project branding
Communication Channels
Project communications and outreach content such
as press releases, fl yers, and social media messages
were developed to inform community members about
opportunities to provide input on the Costa Mesa Pedestrian Master Plan. The fl yers and social media messages were in both English and Spanish, allowing more community
members to participate in the planning process. The project team worked collaboratively with the City’s communications team to deliver the information through various
communication channels.
596
02 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 15
Event # Event Date Focus Area
1 Wednesday, March 31, 2021
1:00 pm - 3:00 pm
The Triangle
2 Saturday, April 3, 2021
10:00 am - 12:00 pm
19th Street Commercial
3 Wednesday, April 7, 2021
1:00 pm - 3:00 pm
North Harbor Commercial
(Adams)
4 Saturday, April 10, 2021
10:00 am - 12:00 pm
Baker Street and Fairview
Road
5 Wednesday, April 14, 2021
1:00 pm - 3:00 pm
South Harbor Commercial
(Wilson)
6 Thursday, April 15, 2021
9:00 am - 11:00 am
LAB Anti-Mall
Event # Event Date Topic
1 Tuesday, July 27, 2021
6:00 pm - 7:00 pm
Project overview and
potential pedestrian
treatments
2 Wednesday, October 6, 2021
6:00 pm - 7:30 pm
Draft recommendations
3 Wednesday, April 27, 2022
6:00 pm - 7:30 pm
Draft report
Table 2.1 Overview of Walk Audits
Table 2.2 Overview of Community Workshops
2.3 WALK AUDITS
A Walk Audit is an event that allows participants to walk along a predefi ned route and discuss opportunities and barriers to walking along the route with the project team members leading the walk audits.
The project team conducted in-person Walk Audits at six focus areas. The focus areas were identifi ed during Bikeway and Walkability Committee meet ings and in the Pedestrian Opportunity Zones in the General Plan Circulation Element. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, a project website was created with information detailing how community members could conduct a self-guided Walk Audit. Table 2.1 offers an overview of the Walk Audits while Appendix B provides a summary of each Walk Audit.
2.4 COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS
The project team conducted three community workshops
to gather input from community members for the Plan. The workshops were held virtually via Zoom due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Workshop participants included community
members, members of the Bikeway and Walkability
Committee, elected offi cials, and commissioners.
Table 2.2 provides a snapshot of the Community Workshops.
Appendix C offers a summary of each event.
597
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN16
2.5 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION
COMMITTEE
The project provided fi ve presentations to the Active
Transportation Committee, formerly the Bikeway and
Walkability Committee (BWC), to update committee members on key milestones and gather feedback on the next steps.
The committee provided valuable comments and input that helped shape the Plan. Table 2.3 gives an overview of the presentations.
Event
# Event Date Presentation Topics
1 Wednesday, November 4,
2020: 3:00 pm - 4:00 pm
Expectations from the BWC, Strategic
objectives, Project schedule, and
Outreach & engagement
2 Wednesday, January 6,
2021: 3:00 pm - 4:00 pm
Project recap, Preliminary collision
analysis, and Potential Walk Audit
locations
3 Wednesday, March 3,
2021 3:00 pm -4:00 pm
Project update, walk audit events,
bicycle racks,
4 Wednesday, July 7, 2021
4:00 pm - 6:00 pm
Project overview, Update on outreach
& engagement, and Sample of
pedestrian treatments
5 Wednesday, December 1,
2021: 6:00 pm -7:30 pm
Draft recommendations
6 Wednesday, January 19,
2022: 6:00 pm -7:30 pm
Draft report
7 Wednesday, June 22,
2022: 4:00 pm -6:00 pm
Updated report review
Table 2.3 Overview of Active Transportation Committee
Presentations
2.6 COMMUNITY FEEDBACK & INPUT
TOOLS
A project survey and online mapping tool were created to allow community members to share their input.
Project Survey
Between February and May, 2021, the project team
administered an online survey offering community members an opportunity to participate in the planning process on their own time. It also allowed Walk Audit participants to provide additional detailed feedback after each event. All materials were available in English and Spanish.
Appendix D, Project Survey, provides a discussion of the survey results.
Online Mapping Tool
An online mapping tool was developed for community
participants to identify active transportation-related
concerns or desired areas of improvement in the Pedestrian Opportunity Zones. The team received more than 350
comments from the online mapping tool.
598
02 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 17
2.7 FINDINGS FROM OUTREACH
EFFORT
A qualitative analysis was conducted from the comments
gathered in the outreach effort to identify common
concerns and input shared by community members. The
analysis was focused on location-based comments in order to identify potential infrastructure improvements that could address the concerns.
The data used in this analysis focused on comments
received from the following sources:
• Walk audits
• Online mapping tool
• Virtual workshops
• Project survey
• Bikeway And Walkability Committee (BWC) meetings
Top Corridors and Spot Locations/Destinations
Community members provided a total of 547 location-
specifi c comments. Of these comments, 68 pertained to
corridors and 479 were associated with a particular location or destination. The most popular corridors and intersections are shown in the following lists.
Note: The number of comments associated with the corridor is in the parentheses.
Top corridors, with comments:
1. Newport Boulevard (6)
2. Harbor Boulevard (5)
3. Bristol Street (5)
4. Wilson Street (4)
5. Baker Street (4)
6. Fairview Road (4)
7. Paularino Avenue (3)
8. Pomona Avenue (2)
9. W 19th Street (2)
10. W 17th Street (2)
Top intersections or destinations, with comments:
1. Fairview Road and Adams Avenue (12)
2. Bristol Street and Paularino Avenue (9)
3. Bristol Street and Hotel Way (9)
4. Fairview Road and Village Way (9)
5. Harbor Boulevard and Adams Avenue (9)
6. Harbor Boulevard and Gisler Avenue (9)
7. Victoria Street and Maple Street (8)
8. Wilson Street and Center Way (8)
9. Bristol Street and Sobeca Way (8)
10. Baker Street and Jeffrey Drive (8)
599
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN18
Common Themes
Comments provided by community members can be
categorized into four major themes and many sub-themes.
The major themes are:
• Sidewalk-related infrastructure
• Crossing-related infrastructure
• Other crossing improvements
• Other roadway infrastructure
The most popular theme is "other infrastructure" with
250 comments. This is followed by sidewalk-related
infrastructure with 153 comments and crossing-related
infrastructure with 131 comments. Other items with high number of comments include the sub-themes "lack of
crossings (at intersections)" and "missing ramps/not ADA compliant" under the "crossing-related infrastructure
characteristics" theme, and "d estinations" under the "other" theme.
Table 2.4, Summary of Themes, shows the themes, sub-
themes, and the total comments received. A detailed
summary of the majority of comments received, along
with their locations, is available in Appendix B, Walk Audit Summaries.
Note: Some comments fall into multiple themes; as a result, the total number of comments evaluated in this section of the analysis exceeds the total comments received in the outreach effort.
600
02 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 19
Theme Sub-Theme Comments Received
Sidewalk-related
infrastructure
• Missing sidewalk/connection
• Narrow sidewalk
• Buckled (raised) sidewalk
• Sidewalk obstructions
• Bicyclists on sidewalk 153
Crossing-related
infrastructure
• Lack of crossings (in-between long
roadway stretches)
• Lack of crossings (at intersections)
• 3 legged crosswalk intersection
• Half-delta ramps
• Not ADA compliant ramps/missing
ramps
• Other curb issues
• Traffi c control: insuffi cient
countdown/push button
• Traffi c control: insuffi cient signal
timing
• Visibility
131
Crossing
Improvements
• Lack of crossings
• No right turn on red
• Pedestrian refuge island
• Lead pedestrian interval
• Curb extension 17
Other roadway
infrastructure
• Road diet/traffi c calming/speeding
• Destination
• Compliment
• Project-relevant notes
• Non-project related
• General walking
• Other specifi c comments
• Landscaping/shade
• Traffi c volume
• Bike improvement
• Motorist behavior
• Driveway issues
• Roadway rehabilitation
• Lighting
• Drainage
• Transit
250
Table 2.4 Summary of Comment Themes, Sub-themes, and Number of Comments 601
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN20
This page left intentionally blank
602
03 Existing
Conditions
603
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN22
The existing city fabric presents many opportunities and constraints for improving walkability in Costa Mesa. The City has an area of 15.81 square miles, which includes 0.96 square miles of park and outdoor spaces. On average, it also has a walk score of 65, which means residents can travel to some destinations by walking.
This section examines some of the essential existing
conditions that pertain to walking. Many datasets were also analyzed to position the city for a future application for the Walk Friendly Community designation.
3.1 INTRODUCTION
The project team analyzed fi ve categories of data for the effort:
• Demographic statistics & travel characteristics
• Land use and destinations
• Roadway characteristics
• Pedestrian infrastructure
• Pedestrian safety
The analysis is concentrated on the Pedestrian Opportunity Zones. The opportunity zones were fi rst discussed in the General Plan and were included in the Active Transportation Plan.
604
03 EXISTING CONDITIONS 23
POPULATION
The population in the city serves as a proxy for
understanding the origins of walking trips and possible community needs for walking in frastructure improvements and programs. According to the 2019 American Community
Survey (ACS), the City is home to 113,011 residents, with a population density of 7,148 person per square mile. The Median Household Income (MHHI) in the city is $84,138,
which is higher than the state MHHI ($75,235), but lower than the MHHI for Orange County ($90,234). Approximately a quarter of residents are under the age 20 (24.5%).
According to the 2019 ACS, the areas with the highest
populations (3,001 to 4,000 people) are located north of Interstate 405 (I-405), around Anton Boulevard, where
large townhomes and apartment developments are located.
Several areas in Westside Costa Mesa also have a large
number of townhomes and apartment developments.
Table 3.1, Population Distribution by Median Household
Income, Table 3.2, Age Distribution, Figure 3.1, Total
Population by Census Block, and Figure 3.2, Median
Household Income provide additional detail about each
demographic characteristic.
Note: The level of analysis used for this portion of the analysis is Census block groups, which are smaller units of area than Census tracts.
3.2 DEMOGRAPHIC
CHARACTERISTICS
Age Percent of Households (citywide)
Under 20 24.5%
20-64 63%
65-84 10.8%
Over 85 1.8%
Median Household
Income Group
Total
Households
(Estimate)
Percent of Households
(citywide)
< $50,000 1,981 4.76%
$50,001 - $75,000 8,338 20.04%
$75,001 - $100,000 1,8261 43.9%
$100,001 - $125,000 6,048 14.54%
> $125,000 5,832 14.02%
No MHHI data 1,138 2.74%
Table 3.2 Age Distribution
Table 3.1 Population Distribution by Median Household Income Note: The total % is over 100 (100.1) because these are rounded estimates.
Note: For Census block groups within Costa Mesa that extend outside city boundary, a ratio was applied to estimate total number of households in the Census block group (based on percent area of Census block group that exists within Costa Mesa city limits).
605
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN24
Figure 3.1 Total Population by Census Block
SANTA ANA
NEWPORT BEACH
FOUNTAIN
VALLEY
COSTA
MESA
IRVINE
HUNTINGTON
BEACH
§¨¦
405
§¨¦
405
55 73
1 Irvine Av
Santa Ana Av
22nd St
Wilson St
Harbor Blvd
Fairview Rd
Victoria St
Adams Av
M
esaVerdeDr
Gisler Av
Paularino Av
MacArthur Blvd
Newport Blvd
Fair Dr
17th St
Baker St
19th St
Red Hill Av
Placentia Av
Bear St
Anton Blvd
Legend
Waterways
Costa Mesa City Boundary
Railway
Total Population - Census Block Group
0 - 1,000
1,00 1 - 2,000
2,00 1 - 3,000
3,00 1 - 4,000
Pedestrian Opportunity Zone
Source: American Commmunity Survey 20 1 9
0 0.5 1
Miles
N
606
03 EXISTING CONDITIONS 25
Figure 3.2 Median Household Income
SANTA ANA
NEWPORT BEACH
FOUNTAIN
VALLEY
COSTA
MESA
IRVINE
HUNTINGTON
BEACH
§¨¦
405
§¨¦
405
55 73
1 Irvine Av
Santa Ana Av
22nd St
Wilson St
Harbor Blvd
Fairview Rd
Victoria St
Adams Av
M
esaVerdeDr
Gisler Av
Paularino Av
MacArthur Blvd
Newport Blvd
Fair Dr
17th St
Baker St
19th St
Red Hill Av
Placentia Av
Bear St
Anton Blvd
Legend
Waterways
Costa Mesa City Boundary
Railway
Median Household Income
Pedestrian Opportunity Zone
Source: 20 19 American Community Survey
$1 00,00 1 - $1 25,000
> $1 25,000
< $50,000
$50,00 1 - $75,000
$75,00 1 - $1 00,000
No Data
0 0.5 1
Miles
N
607
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN26
MODE SHARE
Mode share is a breakdown of the travel modes that
travelers take to reach a destination. The U.S. Census
Bureau collects data on the travel mode share for
commuters. According to the 2010 Census, 3.4% of people walk to work in Costa Mesa, while 73.8% drive to work in single-occupancy vehicles, as shown in Table 3.3 Commute to Work. A review of the fi ve-year trend since 2010 shows that a slightly lower percentage of people were walking to work, as shown in Table 3.4, Commute to Work- Five Year Trend. The information will be useful in the application for the Walk Friendly Community designation.
Data collected for the CMPMP, however, suggests that
many community members walk in the opportunity zones.
Of the 63 responses collected, 74.6% selected walking as an option for how they most frequently get around within the opportunity zones. This was followed by 60.3% of the participants who preferred getting around by car. The third most popular selection was bike at 41.3%. Lastly, scooter and bus were the two least po pular selections which only
3.2% of participants used to get around. Figure 3.3, Travel Mode Preferences in the Opportunity Zones summarizes this fi nding.
Mode Percent of Households (citywide)
Walking 3.4%
Bicycling (and other means) 3.7%
Public Transit 3.4%
Single Occupant Vehicles 73.8%
Carpool 10.5%
Mode Percent of Households (citywide)
Walking (2006-2010) 3.4%
Walking (2010-2014) 2.1%
Public transit (2006-2010) 3.4%
Public transit (2010-2014) 2.9%
Table 3.3 Commute to Work 3.3 TRAVEL CHARACTERISTICS
Table 3.4 Commute to Work - Five Year Trend
Figure 3.3 Travel Mode Preferences in the Opportunity Zones Walk 74.6%
60.3%
Bike 41.3%
Bus
Car
Scooter 3.2%
3.2%
608
03 EXISTING CONDITIONS 27
PEDESTRIAN COUNTS
Pedestrian counts were conducted at 10 locations to better assess pedestrian sidewalk traffi c along major corridors across the city. The counts were collected on a typical weekday in Fall 2021 during morning and afternoon peak
#L o c a t i o n S i d e s o f S t r e e t North/East - AM Peak
North/East - PM
Peak
South/West - AM
Peak
South/West - PM
Peak
1 Paularino Avenue btwn Garfi eld
Avenue and Madison Avenue N/S 62 19 13 10
2 Baker Street btwn Jeffrey Drive and
Century Place N/S 12 11 9 5
3 Wilson Street btwn Maple Street and
Miner Street N/S 31 34 26 25
4 Wilson Street btwn College Avenue
and Fordham Drive N/S 11 15 29 42
5 Placentia Avenue btwn Wilson Street
and Congress Street E/W 95 54 56 18
6 Victoria Street btwn San Michel Drive
and Maple Street N/S 17 12 33 30
7 19th Street btwn Federal Avenue and
Placentia Avenue N/S 30 28 12 19
8 19th Street btwn Park Avenue and
Harbor Boulevard N/S 12 25 43 64
9 Harbor Boulevard btwn 19th Street
and Newport Boulevard E/W 18 63 4 16
10 17th Street btwn Orange Avenue and
Westminster Avenue N/S 10 23 4 8
Table 3.5 Pedestrian Counts at Selected Locations
intervals (7-9 AM and 4-6 PM, respectively). The counts documented pedestrian activities for either side of the street at the locations listed in Table 3.5. Appendix G:
Pedestrian Counts provides a more refi ned breakdown of the pedestrian counts collected.
609
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN28
Figure 3.4 Pedestrian Count Locations
! !
!!! !
! !!
!
SANTA ANA
NEWPORT BEACH
FOUNTAIN
VALLEY
COSTA
MESA
IRVINE
HUNTINGTON
BEACH
§¨¦
405
§¨¦
405
55 73
1 55
Irvine Av
Santa Ana Av
22nd St
Wilson St
Harbor Blvd
Fairview Rd
Victoria St
Adams Av
M
esaVerdeDr
Gisler Av
Paularino Av
MacArthur Blvd
Newpo
rt Blvd
Fair Dr
17th St
Baker St
19th St
Red Hill Av
Placentia Av
Bear St
Anton Blvd
Legend
Parks and Recreation
Waterways
Costa Mesa City Boundary
Railway
Pedestrian Screenline Counts
School Boundaries
!! Count Locations
Pedestrian Opportunity Zone11
#
2 1010
3 45
6 7 89
0 0.5 1
Miles
N
610
03 EXISTING CONDITIONS 29
LAND USE
Existing land uses within the City identify the locations of where people live, work, and play. Land uses such as low, medium, and high-density residential areas highlight population centers. Meanwhile commercial and public/
institutional land uses suggest typical destinations for shopping and entertainment.
Comparing land uses in opportunity zones to the city as a whole, citywide distributions show a higher allocation of residential uses, while opportunity zones are largely comprised of commercial and industrial uses. Land within the opportunity zones accounts for 22% of all city land.
Figure 3.5 Land Use Map shows the spatial distribution of existing land uses at a citywide scale.
3.4 LAND USE AND DESTINATIONS
ACTIVITY CENTERS
Activity centers are destinations that community members can reach through non-motorized transportation. Examples of activity centers include schools, parks, commercial areas, and municipal facilities.
The City of Costa Mesa has many local and regional
destinations. Some of the popular attractors include South Coast Plaza, Segerstrom Center for the Arts, Downtown, The Triangle, commercial areas on 19th Street and 17th Street, the LAB Anti-Mall, the Camp, Orange Coast College, Herzog Community Center and the OC Fair and Event Center.
611
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN30
Figure 3.5 Land Use Map
Costa Mesa General Plan | LU-25
612
03 EXISTING CONDITIONS 31
ROADWAY NETWORK
The roadway network in the City of Costa Mesa provides
inter-and intra-city multimodal connectivity. Major and primary arterials such as Harbor Boulevard, Fairview
Road, Placentia Avenue, and Bristol Street offer access in the north-south direction. Meanwhile, roadways such as
Sunfl ower Avenue, Baker Street, Adams Avenue, Victoria Street, 19th Street, and 17th Street allow travelers to move in the east-west direction. Local streets form the bulk of the roadway network and offer access to predominately
residential land uses.
AVERAGE DAIL Y TRAFFIC VOLUME
The Average Daily Traffi c (ADT) volumes shows the vehicular trip volume along a corridor on a given date. It gives an understanding on where roadways have higher or lower
vehicular usage. ADT data was sourced from the City of
Costa Mesa, Transportation Services Division for the years 2014 to 2020.
The roadways with the highest ADT volume mirror the
roadway classifi cations for major and primary arterials.
These include Harbor Boulevard, Fairview Road, Adams
Avenue, Victoria Street, and Bristol Street.
3.5 ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS
ADT Category Length (mi) %
0-3,500 1.57 9.54
3,501-10,000 4.31 26.2
10,001-20,000 1.99 12.1
20,001-30,000 4.4 26.75
30,001-40,000 2.1 12.77
40,001-55,000 0.72 4.38
> 55,000 1.36 8.27
Grand Total 16.45 100%
Table 3.6 Average Daily Traffi c (ADT) within the
Opportunity Zones
Within the Pedestrian Opportunity Zones, slightly more
than a third (39.51%) of all centerline miles where ADT data was available had vehicular volumes between 20,001 and
40,000.
ADT volumes are shown in more detail in Table 3.6 Average Daily Traffi c within Pedestrian Opportunity Zones and Figure
3.6 Average Daily Traffi c Volumes.
613
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN32
Figure 3.6 Average Daily Traffi c Volumes
SANTA ANA
NEWPORT BEACH
FOUNTAIN
VALLEY
COSTA
MESA
IRVINE
HUNTINGTON
BEACH
§¨¦
405
§¨¦
405
55 73
1 Irvine Av
Santa Ana Av
22nd St
Wilson St
Harbor
Blvd
Fairview Rd
Victoria St
Adams Av
M
esa Verde Dr
Gisler Av
Paularino Av
MacArthur Blvd
Newport Blvd
Fair Dr
17th St
Baker St
19th St
Red Hill Av
Placentia Av
Bear St
Anton Blvd
Legend
Parks and Recreation
Waterways
Costa Mesa City Boundary
Railway
Average Daily Trip Volume (Veh., 201 4+)
School Boundaries
1 0,00 1 - 20,000
20,00 1 - 30,000
30,00 1 - 40,000
40,00 1 - 55,000
> 55,000
Pedestrian Opportunity Zone
< 3,500
3,50 1 - 1 0,000
Source: City of Costa Mesa, Transportation Services Division 0 0.5 1
Miles
N
614
03 EXISTING CONDITIONS 33
POSTED SPEED LIMIT
Posted speed limits indicate how fast motorists are legally allowed to drive, with optimal conditions in place, along each roadway. Data on posted speed limits were sourced from
the 2019 City of Costa Mesa Speed Map. The dataset shows primary corridors that represent non-residential roadways where the speed limit is over 25 Miles Per Hour (MPH), and only refers to streets on OCTA’s Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH) with classifi cations of Collector Arterial, Secondary Arterial, Primary Arterial, and Major Arterial.
The roadways with the highest speed limits are along Red Hill Avenue between SR-73 and I-405 (50 MPH) and Adams
Avenue where the speed limit is 45 MPH. Except for a short portion of Adams Avenue, speed limits within the Pedestrian Opportunity Zones are 40 MPH.
The distribution of speed limits across the City roadways is shown in Table 3.7, Percentage of Posted Speed Limit on Speed Limit Total Centerline (ft) %
Blank 2,433 0.87%
25 2,755 0.99%
30 11,785 4.24%
35 64,777 23.28%
40 144,423 51.91%
45 42,367 15.23%
50 9,692 3.48%
Total 278,231 100%
Table 3.7 Percentage of Posted Speed Limit on MPAH Streets of Collector Arterial and Higher
Primary Corridors and Figure 3.7 Posted Speed Limits in the City of Costa Mesa on MPAH Streets of Collector Arterial and Higher.
615
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN34
Figure 3.7 Posted Speed Limits in the City of Costa Mesa on MPAH Streets of Collector Arterial and Higher
SANTA ANA
NEWPORT BEACH
FOUNTAIN
VALLEY
COSTA
MESA
IRVINE
HUNTINGTON
BEACH
§¨¦
405
§¨¦
405
55 73
1 55
Irvine Av
Santa Ana Av
22nd St
Wilson St
Harbor Blvd
Fairview Rd
Victoria St
Adams Av
M
esaVerdeDr
Gisler Av
Paularino Av
MacArthur Blvd
Newport Blvd
Fair Dr
17th St
Baker St
19th St
Red Hill Av
Placentia Av
Bear St
Anton Blvd
Legend
Parks and Recreation
Waterways
Costa Mesa City Boundary
Railway
Posted Speed Limit
School Boundaries
30 MPH
35 MPH
40 MPH
45 MPH
50 MPH
Pedestrian Opportunity Zone
25 MPH
0 0.5 1
Miles
N
616
03 EXISTING CONDITIONS 35
SIDEWALKS
Sidewalks provide a designated right-of-way for pedestrians and separate pedestrian activities from other travel
modes. Sidewalk coverage was analyzed in the Pedestrian Opportunity Zones.
Overall, there are 42.77 miles of roadway curb edges on both sides of roadways in the Pedestrian Opportunity Zones.
Of these, 39.06 miles (91.33%) have sidewalk infrastructure and 3.71 miles (8.67%) have missing sidewalks. Table 3.8 Summary of Sidewalk Coverage in Pedestrian Opportunity
Zones illustrates the sidewalk coverage discussed in this section.
The Northern Pedestrian Opportunity Zones, as shown
in Figure 3.8, Sidewalk Coverage in North Pedestrian
Opportunity Zones, has 20.3 miles of sidewalk, and 0.88 miles of missing sidewalks. Most of the missing sidewalks are clustered around South Coast Plaza, particularly along Sunfl ower Avenue. Several roadway segments along Bristol Street also lack sidewalk facilities.
The Southern Pedestrian Opportunity Zones, as shown
in Figure 3.9, Sidewalk Coverage in South Pedestrian
Opportunity Zones, contain more areas with missing
sidewalks. Of the 21.56 roadway curb miles in the area, 2.83 miles have missing sidewalk infrastructure, which account for 13.11% curb space. Many of the missing sidewalks are located around the intersection of Newport Boulevard and
3.6 PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE 17th Street and along Superior Avenue. The area offers several retail options and could generate more pedestrian traffi c with enhanced sidewalk coverage.
There are also several key missing sidewalk segments along Harbor Boulevard. Just south of the intersection of Harbor Boulevard and Victoria Street , southbound Harbor Boulevard is missing small portions of sidewalks from Victoria Street to Hamilton Street, where parking overfl ow of adjacent auto-related businesses use the space. This is an important pedestrian corridor, linking some of the highest-traffi c OCTA bus stops along Harbor Boulevard to relatively dense residential areas.
Another area with limited sidewalk connectivity is
the Westside neighborhood. Roadways such as Arbor
Street, Whittier Avenue, and Continental Avenue in the
neighborhood have front yards that extend to the end of the curb.
Table 3.8 Summary of Sidewalk Coverage in Pedestrian Opportunity Zones
Opportunity
Zone
Length -
Sidewalks
(Miles)
Length –
Sidewalks
Missing (Miles)
Sidewalk
Availability (%)
North 20.30 0.88 95.85%
South 18.76 2.83 86.89%
Total 39.06 3.71 91.33%
617
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN36
Figure 3.8 Sidewalk Coverage in North Pedestrian Opportunity Zone
NEWPORT
BEACH
SANTA ANA
§¨¦405
73 55
Orange Coast
College
Costa Mesa
High School
TeWinkle Park
Vanguard
University
College Park
Elementary
School
TeWinkle
Middle School
Killybrooke
Elementary
School Paularino
Elementary
School
Wakeham
Park
Wimbledon
Park
Sonora
Elementary
School
Red Hill Ave
Anton Blvd
Sunflower Ave
Bristol St
Bear St
Sakokia Dr
SOUTH
COAST
PLAZA
South Coast Dr
Baker St
Fairview Rd
Harbor Blvd
Newport BlvdFair Dr
Merrimac Way
Adams Av
Gisler Av
Legend
Parks and Recreation
Waterways
Costa Mesa City Boundary
Railway
Sidewalk Coverage
(North Pedestrian Opportunity Zone)
School Boundaries
Sidewalk Present
Sidewalk Missing
Pedestrian Opportunity Zone
0 0.45 0.8
Miles
N
618
03 EXISTING CONDITIONS 37
Figure 3.9 Sidewalk Coverage in South Pedestrian Opportunity Zone 1 NEWPORT BEACH
E 19th St
W 19th St
Harbor Blvd
Placentia Ave
W 17th St
Victroria St
Wilson St
Newport Blvd
Fairview Rd
22nd St
Lions
Park
Fairview Park
Canyon Park
Wilson
Street
Park
Lindbergh
Park
Irvine Ave
Harper
Park
Pinkley
Park
Heller
Park
Kaiser
Elementary
School
Woodland
Elementary
School
Rea
Elementary
School
Pomona
Elementary
School
Estancia
High
School
Wilson
Elementary
School
Victoria
Elementary
School
Whittier
Elementary
School
College Park
Elementary
School
Vanguard
University
Legend
Parks and Recreation
Waterways
Costa Mesa City Boundary
Railway
Sidewalk Coverage
(South Pedestrian Opportunity Zone)
School Boundaries
Sidewalk Present
Sidewalk Missing
Pedestrian Opportunity Zone
0 0.45 0.8
Miles
N
619
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN38
CROSSWALKS
Crosswalks clearly delineate the pedestrian right-of-way at areas where crossings may likely occur, and they are typically located at intersections. Figure 3.10, Crosswalk Types details the different kinds of crosswalks available.
Currently, the City has four types of crosswalks that
help facilitate pedestrian crossings: continental, ladder, decorative, and standard crosswalks. There are many
intersections that have marked crosswalks on three legs of four-leg intersections. The lack of a fourth leg may present additional barriers for pedestrians to cross the intersection.
Several of these three-legged crosswalk intersections
are in high pedestrian traffi c areas, such as The Triangle and along Harbor Boulevard. The City is in the process of upgrading all crosswalks to either ladder or continental for arterials and high pedestrian volume intersections and school crossings.
PEDESTRIAN COUNTDOWN SIGNALS
Pedestrian signals with countdown timers show the
remaining time left for pedestrians to cross the roadway.
Pedestrian countdown signals exist at intersections where new construction or signal improvements have been
made (typically in the last fi ve years). In situations where signal upgrades have yet to take place, these pedestrian countdown signals fl ash without a countdown. It is a
City and ADA standard to upgrade any signal heads with
pedestrian countdown fl ashers for all new construction Figure 3.10 Crosswalk Types
Source: CA MUTCD
620
03 EXISTING CONDITIONS 39
or signal upgrades. Over time the City will have more
widespread offerings of such features.
TRANSIT ACCESS
Walking is an important mode of transportation for travelers to travel to/from transit hubs. It allows transit users to complete their “First/Last Mile” trips. The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) is the primary service
provider within the city. Bus transit stop locations are shown in Figure 3.11, OCTA Bus Stops.
There are 215 OCTA bus stops within the city. Of these, 94 (44%) are located within the Pedestrian Opportunity
Zones. From the average daily boarding bus ridership data acquired from OCTA for June 2019, the major hubs of bus ridership can be found in the opportunity zones. Ridership is particularly concentrated near South Coast Plaza (Bristol Street), major retail destinations along Harbor Boulevard between Wilson Street and Victoria Street, and along
19th Street in Westside Costa Mesa. Figure 3.12, OCTA Bus Ridership Heat Map, further highlights the higher bus
ridership in these major destinations.
Despite the opportunities available for community members in Costa Mesa to take transit, there are some constraints.
Bus ridership is much lower in low-density residential
(single-family home) neighborhoods such as Victoria Street, around Mesa Verde, and along E 17th Street near Newport Beach. For certain routes such as the ones along Wilson Street and Harbor Boulevard, transit users must walk a long distance to transfer between routes. Additionally, there are minimal transit connections between Downtown Costa
Mesa and the Newport Pier area, a popular local destination. 621
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN40
Figure 3.11 OCTA Bus Stops
SANTA ANA
NEWPORT BEACH
FOUNTAIN
VALLEY
COSTA
MESA
IRVINE
HUNTINGTON
BEACH
§¨¦
405
§¨¦
405
55 73
1 Irvine Av
Santa Ana Av
22nd St
Wilson St
Harbor Blvd
Fairview Rd
Victoria St
Adams Av
M
esaVerdeDr
Gisler Av
Paularino Av
MacArthur Blvd
Newport Blvd
Fair Dr
17th St
Baker St
19th St
Red Hill Av
Placentia Av
Bear St
Anton Blvd
Legend
Parks and Recreation
Waterways
Costa Mesa City Boundary
Railway
OCTA Bus Stops
School Boundaries
! OCTA Bus Stop
Pedestrian Opportunity Zone
0 0.5 1
Miles
N
622
03 EXISTING CONDITIONS 41
Figure 3.12 OCTA Bus Ridership Heat Map
SANTA ANA
NEWPORT BEACH
FOUNTAIN
VALLEY
COSTA
MESA
IRVINE
HUNTINGTON
BEACH
§¨¦
405
§¨¦
405
55 73
1 Irvine Av
Santa Ana Av
22nd St
Wilson St
Harbor Blvd
Fairview Rd
Victoria St
Adams Av
M
esaVerdeDr
Gisler Av
Paularino Av
MacArthur Blvd
Newport Blvd
Fair Dr
17th St
Baker St
19th St
Red Hill Av
Placentia Av
Bear St
Anton Blvd
Legend
Parks and Recreation
Waterways
Costa Mesa City Boundary
Railway
Pedestrian Opportunity Zones
OCTA Average Daily
Boarding and Alighting
(20 19 Heat Map)
HighLow
1/4-Mile Transit Daily Boarding Density
School Boundaries
Transit Data Source:
Orange County Transit Authority (OCTA)
0 0.5 1
Miles
N
623
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN42
To understand pedestrian safety, the project team evaluated vehicular collisions and police citations given to motorists who exhibited behaviors that could create an unsafe
environment for pedestrians. Traffi c collisions are incidents where a vehicle collides with a bicyclist, pedestrian, and/ or vehicle. For this study, pedestrian-involved collisions were assessed. Pedestrian-involved collisions typically result from a vehicle or bicyclist colliding with one or more pedestrians. Police citations could be interpreted as “near- miss” collisions. While not all citation indicate a collision, the locations of police citations can indicate hotspots that may be prone to collisions. A full report of pedestrian safety in the city is available in Appendix E: Pedestrian Safety Analysis.
PEDESTRIAN COLLISION ANAL YSIS
Citywide vehicular collision data from July 1, 2015 to
June 30, 2020 was obtained through the Statewide
Integrated Traffi c Records System (SWITRS) published by the California Highway Patrol. This analysis focused on pedestrian-involved collisions. At the citywide scale, a total of 175 collisions over the 5-year timeframe involved a pedestrian. Within opportunity zones, 83 collisions involved a pedestrian.
3.7 PEDESTRIAN SAFETY Top Collision Hotspots
Collision hotspots are classifi ed as intersections with high collision density within 250 feet of the intersection.
Pomona Avenue and 19th Street had the highest number
of pedestrian-involved collisions at the citywide scale and within the opportunity zones. Figure 3.13, Heat Map of Pedestrian Collisions and Table 3.9, Top Five Collision Hotspots, Citywide and at Pedestrian Opportunity Zones, shows the top fi ve collision hotspots across the city and in the Pedestrian Opportunity Zones, with the corresponding collision severity.
Top Collision Corridors
A “corridor” is defi ned as the primary road of travel where a collision occurs. The collisions may occur at intersections along the corridor or outside of an intersection. The top fi ve collision corridors are showcased in Table 3.10, Top Five Corridors. Harbor Boulevard had the highest pedestrian- involved collision density across all scales of analysis.
Newport Boulevard also had high collision density at the citywide scale and within opportunity zones.
624
03 EXISTING CONDITIONS 43
Figure 3.13 Heat Map of Pedestrian Collisions
!!
!!!!!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!!!
!! !!!!!!
!! !!!!!!!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!! !!
!!!!
!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!! !!
!!
!!!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!! !!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!!!
!!
!!!!
!!!!
!!!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!!!!!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!!!
!!
!! !!
!!!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!
!!!!
!! !!
!!
!!!!
SANTA ANA
NEWPORT BEACH
FOUNTAIN
VALLEY
COSTA
MESA
IRVINE
HUNTINGTON
BEACH
§¨¦
405
§¨¦
405
55 73
1 Irvine Av
Santa Ana Av
22nd St
Wilson St
Harbor Blvd
Fairview Rd
Victoria St
Adams Av
M
esaVerdeDr
Gisler Av
Paularino Av
MacArthur Blvd
Newport Blvd
Fair Dr
17th St
Baker St
19th St
Red Hill Av
Placentia Av
Bear St
Anton Blvd
Legend
Parks and Recreation
Waterways
Costa Mesa City Boundary
Railway
Pedestrian Opportunity Zones
Citywide Ped-Involved Collisions
20 1 5-2020
HighLow
1/4-Mile Collision Density
Fatal and Severe Injury
Other Injury
Property Damage Only
School Boundaries
0 0.5 1
Miles
N
625
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN44
Corridor Fatal or Severe Injury Visible Injury Complaint of Pain Property Damage Only Total 1 Citywide
Pomona Avenue and
19th Street 02406
Harbor Boulevard and
Merrimac Way 013 0 4
Gisler Avenue and
Harbor Boulevard 210 0 3
19th Street and Harbor
Boulevard 00303
Fairview Road and
Merrimac Way 02 1 03
Opportunity Zones
Pomona Avenue and
19th Street 02406
Harbor Boulevard and
Merrimac Way 013 0 4
Harbor Boulevard and
Victoria Street 0 111 3
19th Street and
Newport Boulevard 03003
Broadway and
Newport Boulevard 020 1 3
Table 3.9 Top Five Collision Hotspots, Citywide and at Pedestrian Opportunity Zones, from July 2015 to June 2020 626
03 EXISTING CONDITIONS 45
Corridor Fatal or Severe Injury Visible Injury Complaint of Pain Property Damage Only Total 1 Citywide
Harbor Boulevard1 41 09 12 4
Newport Boulevard2 975 1 2 2
Bristol Street 3 5 2 0 10
19th Street 2 4 4 0 10
Fairview Road 0 5 4 0 9
Opportunity Zones
Harbor Boulevard1 389 12 1
Newport Boulevard2 963 11 9
19th Street 2 4 4 0 10
Bristol Street 0 4 2 0 6
17th Street 1 1 1 0 3
Table 3.10 Top Five Collision Corridors, Citywide and at Pedestrian Opportunity Zones, from July 2015 to June 2020 1- A safety improvement project on Harbor Boulevard was completed in 2019, which installed medians and landscaping between sidewalks. 2- Includes Caltrans Right of Way.
627
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN46
POLICE CITATION ANAL YSIS
Police citation data from January 2016 to January 2021 was acquired from the City of Costa Mesa Police Department. A total of 20,419 citations were recorded citywide between January 2016 and January 2021. Within the Pedestrian
Opportunity Zones, 11,141 citations were recorded, which account for approximately 54% of all citations. The major clusters of citations were centered around 19th Street and Newport Boulevard, and alon g Harbor Boulevard between
Baker Street and Adams Avenue.
The top fi ve locations with police citations are:
• Harbor Boulevard & Village Way
• Newport Boulevard & W 19th Street
• Newport Boulevard & W 18th Street
• Placentia Avenue & Swan Circle
• Harbor Boulevard & Victoria Street
Figure 3.14, Heat Map of Police Citations, illustrates the hotspots where police citations were issued. Table 3.11, Summary of Citations Given shows a list of the citations given out based on different violation categories.
628
03 EXISTING CONDITIONS 47
Figure 3.14 Heat Map of Police Citations
SANTA ANA
NEWPORT BEACH
FOUNTAIN
VALLEY
COSTA
MESA
IRVINE
HUNTINGTON
BEACH
§¨¦
405
§¨¦
405
55 73
1 Irvine AvSanta Ana Av
22nd St
Wilson St
Harbor Blvd
Fairview Rd
Victoria St
Adams Av
M
esaVerdeDr
Gisler Av
Paularino Av
MacArthur Blvd
Newport BlvdFair Dr
17th St
Baker St
19th St
Red Hill Av
Placentia Av
Bear St
Anton Blvd
Legend
Parks and Recreation
Waterways
Costa Mesa City Boundary
Railway
Citywide Citations
(Jan 2016 - Jan 202 1)
HighLow
1/4-Mile Citation Density
School Boundaries
Pedestrian Opportunity Zone
0 0.5 1
Miles
N
629
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN48
Table 3.11 Summary of Citations Given
Violation Code Description Count Percent
Cell Phone Use 6364 31.17%
23123-5A Prohibit text-based communication while driving 4566 22.36% 23123A Using wireless phone while driving 1798 8.81%
Speeding 5463 26.75%
22350 Unsafe speed for prevailing conditions 5225 25.59% 22349A No person should travel at speeds greater than 65 mph 226 1.11% 21703 Vehicle follow too closely 12 0.06%
Signals and Signs 5140 25.17%
22450A Failure to stop at stop sign limit line, crosswalk, or entrance of intersection 1757 8.60% 21453A Driver failing to stop at traffi c signal limit line 1223 5.99% 21461A Failure to obey sign or signal 1184 5.80%
22101D Disobeying the directions of a traffi c control device 330 1.62% 21453C Failure to obey red arrow signal 264 1.29%
21950 Crosswalks, failure to yield to pedestrians within. 158 0.77% 38300 Failure to obey sign 67 0.33%
21802 Fail to yield right of way at stop sign/intersection 75 0.37% 38300 Failure to obey sign 67 0.33%
21451A Driver shall proceed straight through or right, left, or U-turn on green signal unless U-turn sign is present 11 0.05%
21457B Driver shall stop at fl ashing red signal 4 0.02% 630
03 EXISTING CONDITIONS 49
Violation Code Description Count Percent
DUI 1177 5.76%
23152A Unlawful for a person under the infl uence of alcohol to operate a vehicle 1102 5.40% 23153A Unlawful for a person under the infl uence of alcohol to operate a vehicle and concurrently do any act forbidden by law 75 0.37%
Wrong Side of Road 483 2.37%
21650 Failure to drive on right half of roadway 483 2.37% Pedestrian 935 4.58%
21955 Jaywalking 412 2.02%
21954A Pedestrian failing to yield to traffi c (not in crosswalk) 183 0.90% 21456 Pedestrian failing to abide to pedestrian control signal at crosswalk 159 0.78% 21456B Pedestrian failing to obey to "DON'T WALK" or "WAIT" or approved "Upraised Hand" symbol with a countdown 152 0.74%
21453D Pedestrian failing to obey to red or red arrow signal 24 0.12% 21956A No pedestrian may walk upon any roadway 5 0.02%
Unsafe Turning 681 3.34%
22107 Unsafe turn and/or without signal 244 1.19%
21804A Driver of vehicle about to enter or cross a highway from public/private property or an alley shall yield the ROW to all traffi c 132 0.65%
21651A2 Improperly making left, semicircular, or U-turn on divided highway 121 0.59% 21801A Vehicle intending to turn left or to complete a U-turn shall yield the ROW to traffi c in the opposite direction 105 0.51%
Table 3.11 Summary of Citations Given (Cont.)
631
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN50
Table 3.11 Summary of Citations Given (Cont.)
Violation Code Description Count Percent
21453B Failing to properly turn right or left from a one-way street onto a one-way street 74 0.36% 21800A Driver of vehicle approaching an intersection shall yield the ROW to any vehicle which has entered the intersection from a different highway 2 0.01% 21803A Driver of vehicle approaching an intersection controlled by a yield ROW sign shall yield to the ROW to any vehicles that have entered the intersection 2 0.01% 21952 The driver of any motor vehicle, prior to driving over or upon any sidewalk, shall yield the right-of-way to any pedestrian approaching thereon 1 0.00% Unsafe Lane Change 171 0.84%
21658A Vehicle shall not move from a lane until movement can be made with reasonable safety 163 0.80%
21750 Overtake vehicle/bike:left pass violation 4 0.02% 21755 Use shoulder/etc to pass on right 4 0.02%
24400B Vehicle headlamps not equipped or improperly equipped 72 0.35% Lights 72 0.35%
24400B Vehicle headlamps not equipped or improperly equipped 72 0.35% TOTAL 20,419 100%
632
04 Policy
Recommendations
633
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN52
4.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter provides a list of goals, obje ctives, and recommendations that will help the City achieve the vision identifi ed in the Active Transportation Plan: “The City of Costa Mesa will have a comprehensive and visible active transportation network and will promote safety, education, health, recreation, and access to important locations within the city while connecting to the larger regional network.” The goals, objectives, and recommendations mirror those in the Costa Mesa Active Transportation Plan (ATP) by offering additional long-term programs and policy recommendations that would enhance the en vironment where pedestrian activities occur.
Adapted from the ATP, the Costa Mesa Pedestrian Master Plan, has the following goals:
• Goal 1.0: Promote a pedestrian-friendly system in Costa Mesa • Goal 2.0: Create a safer place to walk
• Goal 3.0: Integrate pedestrian elements into the circulation system and land use planning
• Goal 4.0: Promote a culture of walking
• Goal 5.0: Promote the positive air qual ity, health, and economic benefi ts of walking
• Goal 6.0: Monitor, evaluate, and pursue funding for implementation of the Pedestrian Master Plan
Objectives and policies that are identifi ed in blue-green are adapted from the Active Transportation Plan, while the objectives and policies in orange are additional recommendations from the Pedestrian Master Plan.
634
04 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS 53
GOAL 1.0: PROMOTE A PEDESTRIAN-FRIENDLY SYSTEM IN COSTA MESA
Create a pedestrian-friendly environment for users of all types, ages, and abilities.
The pedestrian-friendly environment will be designed in accordance with the six “Es":
Education, Encouragement, Enforcement, Engineering, Evaluation, and Equity.
OBJECTIVES & RECOMMENDATIONS
Pedestrian Network
A pedestrian network offers pedestrians a protected right-of-way for walking activities to occur. It also allows pedestrian s to safely reach their destinations within and outside of the city.
ATP Objective 1.1
Expand, enhance, and protect the existing pedestrian network to provide a comprehensive system to increase connec tivity between homes, jobs, schools, transit, and recreational resources in Costa Mesa.
ATP Policy 1.1
Develop an extensive pedestrian backbone network through the use of standard and appropriate innovative treatments.
4.2 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
635
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN54
ATP Policy 1.4
Prioritize safe access to major regional trails such as the OC Loop/ Santa Ana River Trail and the Newport Back Bay Trail System. Where feasible, plan and provide a continuous low-stress Class I and/or Class IV facility from east to west across the City between these facilities.
ATP Policy 1.8
Designate walkable districts in the city.
ATP Policy 1.9
Pursue the following mode split goal for walking: 20%.
ATP Recommendation 1.4
Identify citywide infrastructure needed to create the interconnected multi-trail system.
ATP Recommendation 1.5
Low-stress design techniques should be considered where necessary to attract a wide variety of users.
ATP Recommendation 1.9
Improve the quality, aesthetics and safety of high-use pedestrian corridors.
ATP Recommendation 1.10
Establish a goal for all trips of less than 1 mile to be 30 percent by walking.
ATP Recommendation 1.14
Establish designated suggested routes to schools for biking and walking. 636
04 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS 55
Recommendation 1.1
Develop an annual list of pedestrian projects to be proposed as part of the city’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Use the Pedestrian Project Corridors Map and the project factsheets in Chapter 6 Infrastructure Projects as a starting point.
Recommendation 1.2
Leverage the tools discussed in the Pedestrian Infrastructure Toolbox (e.g. sidewalk connectivity, curb ramps, and crosswalks) to continue to develop a pedestrian network that is accessible by users of all ages and abilities.
Recommendation 1.3
Continue to work with the ADA Coordinator (or someone in a similar role) to ensure that new roadway projects, particularly pedestrian infrastructure projects, are ADA compliant.
Recommendation 1.4
Collaborate with adjacent jurisdictions and Caltrans to develop and seek funding for pedestrian projects along corridors that promote intercity connectivity. Examples of such projects include Bristol Street which provides access to South Coast Plaza, commercial centers, residential neighborh oods within Costa Mesa, and adjacent jurisdiction (Santa Ana); Victoria Street which provides access to commercial centers, schools, residential neighborhoods within Costa Mesa, and adjacent jurisdiction (Huntington Beach); 17th Street which offe rs connectivity to commercial areas, residential neighborhoods within Costa Me sa, and adjacent jurisdiction (Newport Beach); and Newport Boulevard along Caltrans jurisdiction.
Recommendation 1.5
Conduct an analysis to identify roadways that have excess vehicle capacity. For roadways with excess vehicle capacity, consider the reduction of travel lanes and use the reclaimed space for other purposes. Examples include widening the sidewalk 637
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN56
and expanding the frontage zones (as identifi ed in the General Plan, Circulation Element), adding in street landscaping, offering more transit amenities, providing diagonal parking, and converting the space in to a small parklet or other public space.
Examples of such corridors could include Placentia Avenue and South Coast Drive.
Recommendation 1.6
Collaborate with Caltrans, OCTA, and other local agencies to re-envision the future of Newport Boulevard in the area between and adjacent to 17th Street and 19th Street as a destination that facilitates placemakin g and pedestrian activities with enhanced pedestrian infrastructure that provide for connectivity in the east-west direction.
First and Last Mile Programs
“First/Last Mile” refers to the fi rst and last-mile connections that transit users typically have to take to reach a transit stop or hub from the trip origin to the fi nal destination.
Walking is an important mode of transportati on that allows transit users to complete the trip.
ATP Objective 1.3
Encourage walking to fi ll gaps between the fi rst and last miles of trips.
Lighting
Pedestrian-scaled lighting provides additional visibility for pedestrians walking along the roadway. Nicely designed lighting could also enhance the character of the roadway.
Recommendation 1.7
Conduct a study on pedestrian network lighting conditions with a focus to increase the presence of pedestrian-scaled lighting across the city's pedestrian network.
Corridors that could benefi t from more pedestrian-scaled lighting include: Wilson Street, Pomona Avenue, Orange Avenue, and Santa Ana Avenue. 638
04 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS 57
Street Canopies
Street trees and landscaping offer many benefi ts that enhance the pedestrian environment. They provide shade for pedestrians and can contribute to a more comfortable and pleasant environment for pedestrian activities to occur.
Recommendation 1.8
For new pedestrian infrastructure projects, incorporate street trees that provide shade whenever possible.
Recommendation 1.9
Address areas where the pedestrian infrastructure is disrupted by street trees.
Examples of such concerns include buckl ed sidewalks and sidewalk obstruction caused by street trees. Corridors identifi ed from the Walk Audits that had concerns include Fairview Road and Wilson Street.
Refer to Appendix F: Toolbox Reference for recommendations on how to address concerns related to street trees and landscaping.
GOAL 2.0: CREATE A SAFER PLACE TO WALK
Provide a safe, convenient, and attractive pedestrian environment. Apply design standards, equitable enforcement of traffi c laws, maintenance practices, and safety awareness campaigns to encourage and incr ease the use of pedestrian facilities.
OBJECTIVES & RECOMMENDATIONS
Design & Wayfi nding
There are many manuals that contain approved uniform design standards, as well as guidance for pedestrian infrastructure treatments. Examples include the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and California Manual on Uniform Traffi c Control 639
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN58
Devices (CAMUTCD), Caltrans Highway Design Manual (HDM), Public Right of Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG), ADA Guidance, and National Association of City Transportation Offi cials (NACTO) Urban Street Design Guide.
ATP Objective 2.1
Develop pedestrian facilities with approved uniform design standards, and implementation of way-fi nding signage providing information on various destinations.
ATP Policy 2.1
Utilize Complete Streets elements as demonstrated in most recent version of National Association of City Transportation Offi cials (NACTO) Urban Street Design Guide.
ATP Policy 2.2
Develop, install, and maintain a pedestrian wayfi nding signage program to indicate route turns, the presence of intersecting bikeways, streets and distances to nearby local and major destinations.
ATP Policy 2.5
Where feasible reduce or eliminate confl ict points such as driveways that cross the sidewalk.
ATP Recommendation 2.1
Require that all facilities be designed in accordance with the latest federal, state, and local standards.
ATP Recommendation 2.2
Provide and maintain pedestrian signal dete ctors, informational signage, and lighting, along city bikeways.
640
04 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS 59
ATP Recommendation 2.3
Crosswalks will include high-visibility treatments.
Safe Roadway Conditions
Safe roadway conditions provide a more comfortable environment for pedestrian activities to occur. Many infrastructure tools are available to create a safer walking environment.
ATP Objective 2.3
Maintain pedestrian facilities that are clear of debris and provide safe conditions for all users.
ATP Recommendation 2.4
Establish an expedited process to report maintenance and safety concerns.
ATP Recommendation 2.5
Establish routine maintenance schedule/standards for pedestrian facilities for sweeping, litter removal, landscaping, repa inting of striping, signage, and signal actuation devices.
ATP Recommendation 2.12
Promote effi cient reporting mechanisms for behaviors that endanger pedestrians.
ATP Recommendation 2.15
Encourage and empower citizens to report maintenance issues that impact pedestrian safety including, but not limited to, potholes, sidewalk lifting, and overgrown vegetation.
ATP Recommendation 2.16
Establish procedures for responding to citizen reports in a timely manner. 641
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN60
Recommendation 2.1
Identify traffi c calming infrastructure improvements in areas with high collision frequencies across the city. Reference the Local Road Safety Plan for projects.
Examples of such corridors could includ e Harbor Boulevard, Newport Boulevard, Bristol Street, 17th Street, 19th Street, and Fairview Road.
Recommendation 2.2
Identify opportunities to update signal timing and phases in different areas across the city.
Recommendation 2.3
At regular intervals, conduct a study to re-evaluate speeds along the city’s roadways in response to AB 43.
Recommendation 2.4
Assess and implement enhanced crossing treatments to reduce pedestrian- automobile collisions at multi-lane cros sings, including median refuge islands, rapid-rectangular fl ashing beacons, pedestrian hybrid beacons, raised crosswalks and other treatments. Reference Chapter 5 Pedestrian Infrastructure Toolbox for treatments that address different concerns.
Recommendation 2.5
Conduct analysis to identify intersections to prohibit or regulate right-turn-on-red (RTOR) movement at intersections with high frequencies of this collision/citation type.
Consider the use of blank-out signs and add Lead Pedestrian Interval (LPI) where feasible.
Recommendation 2.6
Develop a program to help maintain clear zones for pedestrians waiting and crossing areas, including increased parking setbacks.
642
04 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS 61
Recommendation 2.7
Develop a program to review traffi c signal locations with prohibited pedestrian crossings and where feasible and appropriate, modify to restore prohibited crossings.
Education
Educational programs help educate the public on how to safely walk and use pedestrian facilities along the City’s roadways. For example, a pedestrian traffi c safety program for school children may teach students on when to safely cross an intersection. It is important that all program materials are available in both English and Spanish to accommodate the City’s large Hispanic population.
ATP Objective 2.4
Increase education of bicycle and pedestrian safety through programs and training of school children and the public.
ATP Policy 2.6
Support marketing and public awareness ca mpaigns aimed at improving pedestrian safety.
ATP Recommendation 2.19
Develop and distribute education material regarding pedestrian responsibilities and laws.
Recommendation 2.8
In tandem with new pedestrian or multi-modal projects, promote a campaign to educate roadway users of all modes on new active transportation infrastructure projects and how the projects will promote safety for all users. 643
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN62
Safety Data
An important component of evaluating pedestrian safety is analyzing pedestrian collisions along the City’s roadways. The California Highway Patrol maintains the Statewide Integrated Traffi c Record System (SWITRS), a statewide database of vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle collisions that is accessible for to the public.
ATP Objective 2.5
Monitor and analyze bicycle and pedestrian safety.
ATP Recommendation 2.9
Request pedestrian collision reports from local law enforcement periodically and consider improvements to address problem areas.
ATP Recommendation 2.10
Conduct Roadside Safety Audits (RSAs) on a regular basis to provide periodic snapshots of roadway safety, including bicycle, pedestrian, equestrian, skateboard, and other non-motorized modes of travel.
Recommendation 2.9
Develop a program to regularly collect and share citywide pedestrian count data, and add as a requirement for all traffi c studies/impact analyses conducted within the city's jurisdiction.
GOAL 3.0: INTEGRATE PEDESTRIAN ELEMENTS INTO THE
CIRCULATION SYSTEM AND LAND USE PLANNING
Provide walkway facilities that are integrated with other transportation systems and land use planning decisions.
644
04 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS 63
OBJECTIVES & RECOMMENDATIONS
ATP Objective 3.1
Consider pedestrian facilities during land use planning process.
ATP Objective 3.2
Integrate pedestrian facility improv ements during planning, design and implementation of transportation projects.
ATP Policy 3.1
Require new developments to provide adequate pedestrian access.
ATP Recommendation 3.1
Provide a fully integrated network of modern pedestrian facilities to and from major activity centers and residential centers.
ATP Recommendation 3.2
Identify areas where an increase in the need for pedestrian activities can reasonably be anticipated due to housing/ business growth.
ATP Recommendation 3.4
Improve the safety of all road users through the implementation of neighborhood traffi c calming treatments.
ATP Recommendation 3.5
Make commercial and recreational areas more enjoyable for pedestrians by implementing measures such as providing sh ade, planting trees, eliminating visible parking lots and vacant lots, and long stretches of bland building façade.
ATP Recommendation 3.6
Support the incorporation of pedestrian facilities into capital improvement projects, where appropriate to maximize leveraging of funds.
645
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN64
ATP Recommendation 3.8
Proactively seek new opportunities for ac quisition of abandoned rights-of-way and other lands for the development of new multi-use pathways that integrates with the planned network.
ATP Recommendation 3.10
Detours through or around construction zones should be designed for safety and convenience, and with adequate signage for pedestrians.
Recommendation 3.1
Encourage new developments to provide pedestrian access that serves their intensity of use and complements the existing pedestrian network.
Recommendation 3.2
Study the potential to establish “transition zones” (an area which is communicated to motorists that the roadway environment is changing and their travel speeds or behavior should change as well) between major commercial and employment centers, and residential areas to better support pedestrian access.
Recommendation 3.3
Whenever feasible, incorporate pedestrian improvements to the public right-of-way as a part of the conditions of approval or development agreement with the city.
Recommendation 3.4
At commercial corridors (such as 19th Street and Harbor Blvd), update design standards on surface parking and driv eways to reduce surface parking and driveways along the pedestrian infrastruc ture network. Whenever possible, have storefronts face the street to encourage pedestrian traffi c. 646
04 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS 65
GOAL 4.0: PROMOTE A CULTURE OF WALKING
Develop engagement, encouragement, an d promotional programs to increase pedestrian usage that respects and accommodates all users to foster a more balanced transportation system.
OBJECTIVES & RECOMMENDATIONS
ATP Objective 4.1
Encourage more people to walk by supporting programs that foster community support for walking, and raise pu blic awareness about walking.
ATP Policy 4.1
Support marketing and public awareness campaigns through a variety of media aimed at promoting walking as a safe, he althy, cost-effective, environmentally friendly transportation choice.
ATP Policy 4.3
Support programs aimed at increasing walk trips by providing incentives, recognition, or services that make walking a more convenient transportation mode.
ATP Policy 4.4
Promote walking at city-sponsored and publ ic events, such as Earth Day, Bike to Work Day/Month, farmers’ markets, public health fairs, concerts in the park, art walks, craft fairs, civic events, etc.
Safe Routes to School
Safe Routes to School is an approach that focuses on infrastructure treatments that improve safety on routes to school and non-infrastructure programs that educate and encourage students to walk and bike to school.
647
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN66
ATP Recommendations 2.7
Develop a partnership with the school community to establish and update suggested routes to schools for bicycling and walking.
Recommendation 4.1
Expand student and school participation in Walk to School Week events with the Newport-Mesa Unifi ed School District.
Recommendation 4.2
Seek funding for a permanent citywide Safe Routes to School non-infrastructure program.
Recommendation 4.3
Develop a Safe Routes to School Plan for all elementary, middle, and high schools located in Costa Mesa.
Recommendation 4.4
On a regular basis, have meetings with school representatives and active parents to discuss opportunities to improve pedestrian safety and connectivity to schools and school facilities.
Recommendation 4.5
Encourage the Safe Routes and Accessibility Subcommittee from the Active Transportation Committee to continue to actively participate in projects related to schools.
Engagement and Encouragement Programs
Engagement and encouragement programs help promote new walking routes and changes to the existing roadway. Programs such as tactical urbanism demonstrations and quick-builds allow community members to experience 648
04 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS 67
infrastructure change on the roadway on a temporary basis and provide feedback. "Open Streets" events close down a portion of a roadway altogether for the public to reclaim the roadway as an open space. Me anwhile, walking tours and walking groups encourage community members to enjoy the experience of being a pedestrian.
ATP Recommendation 4.4
Promote walking events in Costa Mesa to raise awareness and encourage walking, including, but not limited to, those that may involve temporary road closures, historic walks, and ciclovias.
ATP Recommendation 4.6
Encourage participation in pedestrian promotion activities by education facilities, arts programs, active transportation clubs, and entertainment providers.
Recommendation 4.6
Plan and install tactical urbanism demonstr ations and/or quick-build projects along corridors or at areas with high pedestrian activity to showcase potential new traffi c calming and pedestrian infrastructure treatments to improve the pedestrian environment. Potential projects could be located on Park Avenue, Arlington Drive, Mesa Verde Drive, and various residential roadways near commercial centers.
Recommendation 4.7
Host "Open Streets" events where a portion of the roadway is closed off from vehicular traffi c and converted into a public space. Collect and evaluate public feedback and conduct traffi c operational and other studies to consider closing the streets for longer period of time or even permanently for pedestrian activities.
Recommendation 4.8
Develop a network of walking paths in different commercial districts and neighborhoods to encourage community me mbers to walk. The walking paths could 649
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN68
be artistic and each path could have its own wayfi nding signs and stylistic fl air to create a sense of place.
Recommendation 4.9
Build partnerships with local businesses and community groups such as Parks and Community Services, R.O.C.K.S Afterschool Program, Costa Mesa Historical Society, and Costa Mesa Walk Tour to host regu lar walk tours and other walking-related activities, and promote walking as a form of physical exercise.
GOAL 5.0: PROMOTE THE POSITIVE AIR QUALITY, HEALTH, AND
ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF WALKING
Encourage active transportation by prom oting air quality, he alth, and economic benefi ts.
OBJECTIVES & RECOMMENDATIONS
ATP Objective 5.1
Improve air quality and public health and reduce ambient noise by promoting walking programs.
ATP Policy 5.1
Coordinate with appropriate federal, state, and county health agencies on active transportation/ pedestrian programs to achieve health benefi ts.
ATP Policy 5.2
Encourage developers to include features, amenities and programs that are proven to increase walking.
ATP Policy 5.3
Encourage the Chamber of Commerce and the business community to promote active transportation in commercial areas to stimulate economic vitality. 650
04 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS 69
ATP Recommendations 5.1
Determine baseline emissions levels, th en track and communicate changes in emissions as modes of transportation trips shift to encourage more walking.
ATP Recommendations 5.3
Offer incentives for businesses whose employees walk to work.
ATP Recommendations 5.4
Incentivize the business community to support pedestrians in tangible ways.
ATP Recommendations 5.5
Improve the quality of life in Costa Mesa by reducing neighborhood traffi c and noise.
ATP Recommendations 5.6
Increase pedestrian trips, thereby reducing vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled.
Recommendation 5.1
Provide economic incentives for expandin g and enhancing pedestrian facilities.
Recommendations 5.2
Collaborate with major employers and civic institutions such as Orange Coast College and the OC Fair and Event Center to increase multi-modal access.
GOAL 6.0: MONITOR, EVALUATE, AND PURSUE FUNDING FOR
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
Observe and assess the usage of pedestrian facilities periodically and pursue funding for projects that will help ac hieve the overall implementation of the Pedestrian Master Plan.
651
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN70
OBJECTIVES & RECOMMENDATIONS
ATP Objective 6.1
Continuously monitor and evaluate Costa Me sa’s implementation progress on the Pedestrian Master Plan policies, programs, and projects.
ATP Objective 6.2
Pursue grants and other sources of funding for pedestrian projects.
ATP Policy 6.1
Establish a monitoring program to measure the effectiveness and benefi ts of the Plan by tracking citywide trends in walking through the use of Census data, pedestrian counts, travel surveys, and online surveys as part of annual reviews of the General Plan.
ATP Policy 6.2
Ensure that programs and projects ar e implemented in an equitable manner, geographically, socioeconomically, an d serving disadvantaged communities.
ATP Policy 6.3
Consider designating a portion of development traffi c impact fees to fund pedestrian facilities.
ATP Recommendations 6.1
Strategize the use of resources on developing effective and effi cient grant application and program administration.
ATP Recommendations 6.2
Pursue multiple sources of funding and support efforts to maintain or increase federal, state and local funding for the implementation of the Pedestrian Master Plan. 652
04 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS 71
Recommendations 6.1
Develop a program to evaluate the citywide collected pedestrian count data and identify areas of increased pedestrian activity to evaluate the potential development of new pedestrian-related improvements to further enhance the pedestrian environment.
Recommendations 6.2
Develop a program to evaluate new technologies and infrastructure treatments on a regular basis that will support a safe pedestrian environment. Update the Pedestrian Infrastructure Toolbox with any new fi ndings.
653
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN72
This page left intentionally blank
654
05 Pedestrian
Infrastructure Toolbox
655
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN74
5.1 INTRODUCTION
Costa Mesa has many improvements and features
that improve walkability. Although Costa Mesa has won
awards for walkability in recognition of its historical efforts, improving walkability continues to be an ongoing goal of the City.
This chapter is meant to provide a starting point on what infrastructure treatments (tools) can be considered when designing safer and connected streets for pedestrians. It complements the policy recommendations discussed in
Chapter 4, Policy Recommendations.
The tools were selected to help address many of the
comments received from the community engagement
process.
They fall into in following three categories:
• Sidewalk-Related Treatments: Infrastructure that could enhance the pedestrian right-of-way on the sidewalk
realm.
• Crossing-Related Treatments: Infrastructure that could improve pedestrian crossings on the roadway.
• General Traffi c Behavior and Other: Discussions
of strategies to address broader concerns that
tangentially impact walkability in the city.
Oftentimes, pedestrian infrastructure is available on the roadway; however, the infrastructure could be better
designed to better accommodate pedestrians’ needs. Cost estimate for each type of treatments are provided at the end of the chapter to serve as a guide for approximately how much each treatment cost. Appendix E, Toolbox
Reference builds upon this chapter to include discussions of the benefi ts of each tool and their design considerations. 656
05 PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE TOOLBOX 75
5.2 SIDEWALK-RELATED TREATMENTS
Many comments from the community engagement efforts
refer to the general condition of sidewalks and the function of the overall sidewalk network. Many principles of sidewalk design can apply to all sidewalks, while others apply based upon the land use in the area, with commercial, high-density residential, and heavily used sidewalks requiring more area for walking than lower density residential areas.
SIDEWALKS
Sidewalks are perhaps the most important component of
the pedestrian network. Whenever feasible, they should
be provided on both sides of all roadways within the city.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) sets minimum
requirements for width and grades, but wider sidewalks can improve walkability.
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO THE SIDEWALK
NETWORK
Improve sidewalk connectivity: Address gaps in the
sidewalk network, and through retrofi t of existing sidewalks when adding new developments, widen the pedestrian
right-of-way and limit the size and frequency of curb cuts along major corridors to increase pedestrian comfort and reduce confl icts between pedestrians and motorists.
Provide for a clear, continuous sidewalk: For new
construction, any required obstructions for streetlights, utilities, poles, and other above-ground features should be located within the parkway area (street side) so that the sidewalk is generally continuous and does not require pedestrians to be watchful to follow the clear, direct path.
Improve the bicycle network: To reduce the use of bicycle riding on sidewalks, it is necessary to examine and improve the bicycle network so that bicyclists of all ages and skill levels would be comfortable riding in the dedicated facilities.
Improve sidewalk connectivity to land uses: When
evaluating the site plans for development proposals, include an analysis of the condition and directness of walking
routes. Providing direct walking paths from street corners to the commercial areas can reduce the overall walking
distances and time needed to travel to and from these
destinations, while also encouraging pedestrians to more frequently opt for walking trips.
Address buckled, lifted, stained, physical defects
on sidewalks: Develop a citywide program to identify
sidewalk locations that are buckled, lifted, or have physical defects, such as cracks and voids, and scheduled remedial repairs. In areas with ongoing root issues, conduct routine inspections to monitor the situation.
Redesign driveways: Every driveway that crosses
a sidewalk is a potential location for confl ict between motorists and pedestrians. Driveways should be designed to be no wider than necessary. The rise from street level to curb level should be kept as short as possible so that the walking surface can be preserved as a level surface
Incorporate new sidewalk treatments into the existing
network: Consider including some of the tools identifi ed in the following section to improve the sidewalk realm.
657
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN76
Bus Stops and Amenities
Bus stops are locations where
sidewalks experience multiple
uses, such as walking, waiting
for buses, and bus boarding and
alighting. Amenities are often
provided at bus stops, including
benches, shelters, trash disposals,
and system service information.
Street Trees and Landscaping
Street trees and landscaping
are typically located between
the curb and the sidewalk within
the landscaped parkway. They
are typically planted at regular
intervals in a thematic manner.
Many varieties of street trees
provide shade for sidewalk users.
Pedestrian Lighting
Tall streetlights can provide
adequate illumination to permit
walking after dark. Lower-
level lighting is often provided
in commercial areas. These
treatments increase the
illumination level along the
sidewalk and provide for a more
constant level of illumination.
Curb Extension / Bulb-out
Curb extensions / bulb-outs
generally narrow the roadway
at intersections or at mid-block
locations, primarily to reduce the
crossing distance for pedestrians,
widen the sidewalk, and/or slow
down vehicular right turns.
Curb Ramp
Curb ramps are required by
ADA at all street corners where
sidewalks are present and where
pedestrians may cross. ADA
guidelines encourage provision of
directional ramps at corners rather
than a single diagonal curb ramp.
Destination Wayfi nding Signs
Pedestrian wayfi nding signs are
often used in walkable areas to
help visitors and locals know
where to go. They can also be
helpful in advising that the walking
travel time may be lower than
expected.
Photo Credits: Wayfi nding Signage –
Downtown Long Beach Alliance
658
05 PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE TOOLBOX 77
5.3 CROSSING-RELATED TREATMENTS
Many comments received from the community engagement
process also discussed the general condition of crossings and the function of crossings overall in the pedestrian infrastructure network. Many principles of crosswalk design apply to all crossings, while others may be applied based upon the land use in the area. Heavily us ed pedestrian crossings require additional visibility and improvements than lower-density residential areas.
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS FOR PEDESTRIAN
CROSSINGS
Consider appropriate design for uncontrolled pedestrian crossings: An appropriate design will consider the
surrounding context, roadway cross-section, volume of
pedestrians crossing, vehicular Average Daily Traffi c, and prevailing speeds. Reducing the number of travel lanes
and crossing distance for an uncontrolled crossing helps reduce pedestrian exposure in the roadway. Crossings
may be enhanced with other treatments discussed in this section such as median refuge islands, advance yield lines, Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB), Pedestrian
Hybrid Beacons (HAWK signal), signalized crosswalks, and street lights.
Maintain crosswalk markings: Develop a citywide program to identify faded/poorly maintained crosswalks and other pavement markings, and routinely maintain them.
Improve sight distances at crosswalks and intersection
corners: Use strategies such as prohibiting parking along the curb approaching the cr osswalk and providing curb
extensions (bulb-outs) that allow pedestrians to have better visibility of motorists.
659
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN78
Add missing crosswalks at traffi c signals: Conduct a
study to evaluate for adding crosswalks at traffi c signals where crosswalks are not provided across all legs of the signalized intersection.
Improve pedestrian crossing times: Minimum crossing
times are specifi ed in the California MUTCD. Often the minimum times are present and adequate, but pedestrians may not fully understand the operation. Pedestrian
Countdown Signals could better communicate how much
time is left for pedestrians to cross.
Provide Pedestrian Push Buttons (PPBs) at appropriate
locations: Pedestrian Push Buttons are generally
prescribed to be located near the crosswalk and at a
location that meets ADA requirements, and per MUTCD
guidelines, preferably near the level landing. The location should be intuitive and generally allow for actuation while standing or waiting near the beginning of the crosswalk.
Regulate Right Turn on Reds: Conduct a study to evaluate for Right Turn on Red restrictions and explore using the red turn arrows, extinguishable (blank out) message signs, or regular signs to seek compliance for the restrictions.
Prohibiting right turns on red can improve safety for
pedestrians.
Redesign Slip Turn Lanes: Uncontrolled free right turn lanes, also known as slip lanes, are not friendly to pedestrians, because they help vehicles make the turns at much higher speeds, take motorists’ eyes off of the pedestrian crosswalk within the slip lane, and do not provide pedestrian signals to facilitate the crossing. Programs to remove or modify these turn lanes are common, and design approaches that minimize their future need are preferred.
Manage Pedestrian Delays: Pedestrians experience
substantial delays at signalized intersections. The average delay per pedestrian is equal to about one-half of the
amount of time that the signal does not display a WALK
indication. It can amount to 45 seconds or more at typical large intersections.
Incorporate pedestrian crossing treatments into the
existing network: The tools identifi ed in the following sections can improve the experience of pedestrian
crossings. Consider including some of the tools in new
projects, and reference Appendix E, Toolbox Reference, on the design considerations of the treatments.
660
05 PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE TOOLBOX 79
High Visibility Crosswalks
Marking of crosswalks more
clearly indicates where
pedestrians are given the right-
of-way. Their presence may
better remind drivers to watch for
pedestrians, and there also may
be a traffi c calming effect.
Advanced Stop Bars
Advance stop bars help improve
the visibility of pedestrians
by motorists as it provides an
indication of where the vehicle
must stop at the intersection
approach.
Advanced Yield Lines
Advanced yield lines are roadway
markings that provide guidance as
to where drivers should wait while
a pedestrian is crossing. They
are placed in advance to provide
separation between the crossing
pedestrians and vehicles.
Pedestrian Scramble
A crosswalk scramble operation
is a special traffi c signal
operation and phasing design
that stops motor vehicle traffi c
in all directions while allowing
pedestrians to cross between all
corners at the same time.
Median Refuge Islands
Median refuge islands are
protected spaces placed in the
center of the street to facilitate
pedestrian crossings. The median
refuge islands help shorten the
crossings, especially at large
intersections.
Mid-Block Crosswalk
Mid-block crosswalks facilitate
crossings to places that people
want to go but are not well served
by the existing traffi c network.
Photo Credits: Raised Crosswalk-Jeff Gulden |
Mid-Block Crosswalk - Josh Mello | Advanced
Yield markings – ATS Traffi c
661
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN80
Countdown Pedestrian Signals
Pedestrian countdown signals
indicate how many seconds of
DON'T WALK remain before the
traffi c signal turns to yellow. The
use of countdown indications
is required for all signalized
crosswalks except for extremely
short crossings.
Accessible Pedestrian Signal
(APS) Push Buttons
Accessible Pedestrian Signal (APS)
push buttons are devices that
communicate information about the
“WALK” and “DON’T WALK” intervals
at signalized intersections in non-
visual formats (audible tones and
vibrotactile surfaces) to pedestrians
who are visually impaired.
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon
(HAWK Signal)
A pedestrian hybrid beacon
provides traffi c control to existing
uncontrolled or newly proposed
marked crosswalk locations. It
is only activated by pedestrians
when the push button is pressed.
Flashing Yellow Arrows (FYA)
Flashing Yellow Arrows (FYA) are
implemented on traffi c signals
for left turn movements. The FYA
indicates to motorists that they
may turn left only when there is no
oncoming traffi c and crosswalks
are clear of pedestrians and
bicyclists.
Leading Pedestrian Interval
(LPI)
This traffi c signal operation
technique provides a head start
for pedestrians at crossings,
allowing them to leave the curb
and establish a presence in the
crosswalk before confl icting traffi c
is given a green to proceed. Typical
leading pedestrian intervals (LPIs)
range from 3-7 seconds.
Rectangular Rapid Flashing
Beacon (RRFB)
RRFBs are a traffi c control device
that uses a strobing LED light bar
and pedestrian warning signs
to inform motorists that there is
someone at the crosswalk and
that they must yield. They are
activated through a pedestrian
push button or by passive
pedestrian detection.
Photo Credits: Flashing Yellow
Arrows - City of Roseville
662
05 PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE TOOLBOX 81
Speed Feedback Sign
A dynamic message sign that
uses radar or laser technology
to determine the speed of an
approaching vehicle and then
displays the speed to the driver.
If motorists are speeding, the
sign fl ashes the exceeded speed
along with “SLOW DOWN” or “YOUR
SPEED”.
Roadway Pavement
Rehabilitation
Paving in pedestrian crossing
areas can be important to
providing a safe walking surface
and should be monitored.
Pavement condition in the travel
way that does not serve walking
is less important to walkability. But
when streets are repaved, it is an
appropriate time to review issues
regarding how the street is used.
Photo Credits: Roadway Pavement
Rehabilitation - City of San Mateo | Speed
Feedback Sign - Richard Drdul
5.4 GENERAL TRAFFIC BEHAVIOR AND
OTHER CONCERNS
A majority of comments received from the community engagement pr ocess were either related to the sidewalk realm or pedestrian crossings. However, there were a handful of comments that pertain to general motor vehicle traffi c behaviors or that are well beyond the scope of the Plan. The following tools could improve general traffi c behavior on the roadway. Reference Appendix F , Toolbox, on the design considerations of the treatments.
Roadway Reconfi guration
In many communities, multilane arterials have been modifi ed to reduce the number of through travel lanes. It is especially common for roadways with 4-lanes undivided (no left turn lanes) to be reduced to 2 lanes (with left turn lane), where traffi c needs are clearly met by fewer lanes. Roads that carry fewer than 20,000 vehicles per day and have no more than 4 lanes are the best candidates. The fi gure below shows an example of a roadway reconfi guration.
Travel Lane Center Left
Turn Lane
Travel Lane
After
Travel Lane Travel Lane Travel Lane Travel Lane
Before
663
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN82
OTHER CONCERNS HEARD FROM THE
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT EFFORT:
Transit access: Walking is an important consideration in encouraging or using transit. A typical walkshed of ¼ mile is considered in transit planning around each bus stop.
Special attention to the walkability for all potential routes to bus stops is appropriate. Walking routes from bus stops to nearby shopping centers should be reviewed to ensure that the route is direct and relatively free of high-traffi c aisles.
Excessive traffi c volumes: Traffi c volume, high speeds, and traffi c noise detract from a positive walking environment.
However, achieving reductions in traffi c is diffi cult.
Agencies who have removed traffi c lanes or taken action to discourage traffi c have often encountered intense public resistance. It is generally more successful to increase the separation between pedestrians and motor vehicles,
provide buffers to add to the separation, ensure that
convenient crossing locations are available to meet walking needs, and improve overall conditions for walking.
Motorist Behavior: Some of the most common concerns
heard from the community engagement effort pertained
to vehicle speeds, improper turns, and disregard for traffi c controls. Many of the strategies in this Plan could help to reduce these behaviors. Police enforcement can help
reduce speeds in regulating improper motorist behavior.
Drainage: Urban road systems are generally designed to
incorporate a drainage system that carries water along the curb line to storm drain inlets. On occasions, the roadway will develop a condition that causes pools of water to persist in areas that are desirable for walking. When concerns over standing water are received, the location should be researched to determine if it can be corrected through
routine maintenance.
664
05 PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE TOOLBOX 83
5.5 COST ESTIMATES
Cost estimates were derived from similar recent projects across Southern California in 2022. Each pedestrian treatment has two cost estimates: a low-range estimate and a high-range estima te to account for the variability in existing conditions. When developing cost estimates for a project, it is recommended to include additional costs for design, environmental, construction management, mobilization, construction, an d a 30% contingency to ensure that cost estimates cover the full fi nancial expectations of each project.
Treatment Unit of
Measurement Low-Range High-Range Average Cost
Advanced Yield Lines each $75 $300 $188
Mid-Block Crosswalk square foot $5.00 $7.00 $6
Median Refuge Islands/ Pedestrian Refuge Islands square foot $10 $15 $13 Pedestrian Scramble (includes signal equipment and
signing and striping) each $50,000 $100,000 $75,000
Countdown Pedestrian Signals (includes removal
and replacement) each $2,000 $2,500 $2,250
Accessible Pedestrian Signal (APS) Push Buttons each $750 $1,500 $1,125 Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (HAWK Signal) each $21,000 $128,000 $74,500 Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) each $4,500 $8,000 $6,250 Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI) lump sum $500 $5,000 $2,750 Flashing Yellow Arrows (FYA) (includes retrofi t
installation) each $1,500 $1,650 $1,575
Roadway Reconfi guration linear foot $16 $26.10 $21
Roadway Pavement Rehabilitation square yard $1.50 $2.25 $2 Speed Feedback Sign each $1,900 $7,500 $4,700
Table 5.1 Pedestrian Treatment Cost Estimates
665
06 Infrastructure
Projects
666
06 INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS 85
6.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter discusses a set of infrastructure projects that the City can start to help advance the Plan vision. The recommendations identifi ed are short-term treatments
that the City can install in a small amount of time. They complement the recommendations discussed in Chapter
4, Policy Recommendations, and Chapter 5, Toolbox.
Infrastructure projects are comprised of two components:
Pedestrian Project Corridors and Project Factsheets.
Pedestrian Project Corridors (PPC): PPCs are corridors that would benefi t from pedestrian improvements, such as those identifi ed in the toolbox. The corridors are concentrated in the Pedestrian Opportunity Zones to directly address the General Plan’s priority of pursuing street enhancements to create pedestrian-friendly environments within the zones.
Project Factsheets: Project factsheets provide more
information about recommende d pedestrian improvements
for the projects. Each factsheet contains a project
description, roadway characteristics of the project location, and pictures. The projects were selected based on the
feasibility of completion within a short time frame.
667
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN86
6.2 PEDESTRIAN PROJECT
CORRIDORS
Nine [9] corridors citywide are designated as Pedestrian Project Corridors. The corridors provide connectivity
throughout the Pedestrian Opportunity Zones, and
they were identifi ed based on the Walk Audits that were conducted as part of the community engagement effort.
Figure 6.1, Pedestrian Project Corridors and Table 6.1, Pedestrian Project Corridors Details, show the location and extent of each corridor.
6.3 PROJECT FACTSHEETS
The following section presents factsheets for six projects.
The projects include fi ve corridors and a citywide project.
Projects with factsheets include:
• 19th Street Corridor
• Baker Street Corridor
• Harbor Boulevard Corridor (North)
• Harbor Boulevard Corridor (South)
• Wilson Street
• Citywide: High-Visibility Crosswalk Markings
Corridor From To Length (Miles)
19th Street Whittier Avenue Santa Ana Avenue 2.28
Wilson Street Canyon Drive Newport Boulevard 2.51
Baker Street Mesa Verde Drive Bristol Street 2.99
Harbor Boulevard Gisler Avenue Newport Boulevard 3.84
Bristol Street Sunfl ower Avenue Bear Street 1.63
Fairview Road McCormack Lane Merrimac Way 1.45
Adams Avenue Mesa Verde Drive Fairview Road 0.84
Newport Boulevard 19th Street 17th Street 0.44
17th Street Superior Avenue Irvine Avenue 1.27
Table 6.1 Pedestrian Project Corridors Details
668
06 INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS 87
Figure 6.1 Pedestrian Project Corridors
SANTA ANA
NEWPORT BEACH
FOUNTAIN
VALLEY
COSTA
MESA
IRVINE
HUNTINGTON
BEACH
§¨¦
405
§¨¦
405
55 73
1 Irvine AvSanta Ana Av
22nd St
Wilson St
Harbor Blvd
Fairview Rd
Victoria St
Adams Av
M
esa Verde Dr
Gisler Av
Paularino Av
MacArthur Blvd
Newport Blvd
Fair Dr
17th St
Baker St
19th St
Red Hill Av
Placentia Av
Bear St
Anton Blvd
Bristol St
Legend
Parks and Recreation
Waterways
Costa Mesa City Boundary
Railway
Pedestrian Project Corridors
School Boundaries
1 7th Street
1 9th Street
Adams Avenue
Baker Street
Bristol Street
Fairview Road
Harbor Boulevard
Newport Boulevard
Wilson Street
0 0.5 1
Miles
N
669
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN88
PROJECT LOCATION
The 19th Street corridor is located between Whittier Avenue and Santa Ana Avenue in the southern portion of the city. The corridor is classified as a Primary Arterial* west of Newport Boulevard and a Collector Arterial east of Newport Boulevard.
Average Daily Traffi c (ADT) volumes are noted to be in the 3,500 – 40,000 vehicles per day range. The corridor provides direct access to State Route 55 (SR-55) at Newport Boulevard. The posted speed limit along this corridor is 35 MPH.
The corridor is located in the Westside Costa Mesa area and adjacent to the Downtown area to the south. Some local
destinations include Canyon Park, Talbert Regional Park, Marina View Park, The Triangle Square, Lions Park, Costa Mesa-Donald Dungan Library, Downtown Recreation Center, and several commercial centers.
19TH STREET CORRIDOR
Sidewalk interrupted by driveway on 19th StreetPedestrian activity at 19th Street and Pomona AvenuePedestrian crossing on a yellow light * OCTA's 2021 Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH) and City of Costa Mesa General Plan 19th Street
670
06 INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS 89
19TH STREET CORRIDOR
EXISTING CONDITIONS & CONCERNS
No Bicycle Facilities: Corridor is not cyclist-friendly as there is signage indicating that cyclists are not allowed on the sidewalk, yet the corridor does not provide on-street bike lanes.
Sidewalks: Some areas along the corridor provide sidewalks that are not wide enough for two pedestrians to walk side by side. Obstructions in the sidewalk network were noted to be present throughout the corridor.
Intersection Crossings: The intersection of 19th Street and Meyer Place provides high visibility crosswalks, but does not provide a crossing on the east leg of the intersection.
Pavement Markings: Crosswalk markings at the
intersection of 19th Street and Pomona Avenue show signs of wear, which can be less visible to motorists.
Pedestrian Crossing Times and Right Turns: Motorists
have been observed to make right turn movements on red
in front of pedestrians that are in the crosswalk. Pedestrian crossing times have been observed by the community to be too short for pedestrians of all ability levels.
High Vehicle Speeds: Vehicles traveling at higher than the posted speed limit were observed along the corridor.
Street Trees: Community members noted there is a lack of shade along areas of the corridor.
Sidewalk Conditions: Lifted and cracked sidewalks.
PROPOSED TREATMENTS
Bicycle Facilities: Reconfi gure the roadway to install Class II bike lanes on West 19th Street from Sundance Drive to Pomona Avenue and Class III bike sharrows from Pomona
Avenue to Park Avenue, according to the West 19th Street Improvement project. Providing bicycle facilities along the corridor will provide separation between cyclists and pedestrians along the corridor.
Sidewalks: Evaluate the sidewalk network along the corridor to identify, remove, and/or relocate obstructions that may create challenges for pedestrians of all ability levels to navigate around.
High-Visibility Crosswalks: Install high-visibility crosswalks at existing marked crossings along the corridor (Fullerton Avenue, Orange Avenue, Whitter Avenue, Monrovia Avenue, and Orange Avenue). Additionally, install high visibility crosswalks at Sundance Drive, Whittier Avenue, Monrovia Avenue, Federal Avenue, and Wallace Avenue, according to the West 19th Street Improvement project.
Curb Ramps: Install new ADA-compliant curb ramps at
locations where new crossings are installed.
Pavement Markings: Conduct a study to evaluate adding
crosswalks at traffi c signals where crosswalks are not provided across all legs of the signalized intersection, such as Meyer Place, and at unsignalized intersections such as Fullerton Avenue and Santa Ana Avenue.
671
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN90
Improved Pedestrian Crossing Times: Evaluate traffi c
signal timing to adjust/improve pedestrian crossing times, as needed at all signalized intersections.
Countdown Pedestrian Signals: Install countdown
pedestrian signals at the intersection of 19th Street and Newport Boulevard.
Leading Pedestrian Intervals: Evaluate traffi c signal timing to include a Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI), especially for pedestrian crossings adjacent to high vehicle right-turn movements.
Regulate Right Turn on Reds: Consider installation of a "blank out" No Right Turn changeable message sign that
activates during the LPI WALK interval, then simply shuts off once pedestrians are in the crosswalk and can be seen.
Pedestrian Lighting: Install pedestrian lighting/safety lighting at intersections where new pedestrian crosswalks are to be provided and where pedestrian activities are
present.
Speed Feedback Signs: Consider installation of vehicle speed feedback signs on 19th Street between Pomona
Avenue and Meyer Place, and between Orange Avenue and
Westminster Avenue to help maintain vehicle speeds within the speed limit. (See concept plan on following page)
Street Trees: Evaluate the corridor to install new street trees within the City parkway areas where there are gaps in the sidewalk network. City to collaborate with developers to 19TH STREET CORRIDOR
install new street trees adjacent to the new developments and within the City parkway areas to eliminate any gaps along the corridor.
Corridor-wide Improvements/Maintenance: Evaluate the
corridor on a six-month or yearly basis to identify and repair sidewalk areas that have physical defects such as buckled or lifted pavement, stains, cracks, voids, or ongoing tree root issues to eliminate potential hazards for pedestrians of all ability levels.
672
06 INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS 91
19TH STREET CORRIDOR SAMPLE CONCEPT PLAN
673
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN92
BAKER STREET CORRIDOR
PROJECT LOCATION
The corridor is located on Baker Street between Mesa Verde Drive and Bristol Street. It is classifi ed as a Secondary Arterial from Mesa Verde Drive to Harbor Boulevard, Primary Arterial from Harbor Boulevard to Bear Street, and Major Arterial from Bear Street to Bristol Street. Average Daily Traffi c (ADT) volumes are noted to be in the 3,500 – 30,000 vehicles per day range. Baker Street provides access to State Route 73 (SR-73) via Bear Street and access to State Route 55 (SR-55) via Newport Boulevard.
The posted speed limit along this corridor is 30 MPH from Mesa Verde Drive to Harbor Boulevard and 40 MPH from Harbor
Boulevard to easterly city limit.
The corridor is located in the Halecrest area and adjacent to the Mesa Del Mar area to the south. Some local destinations include commercial areas such as the LAB Anti-mall and The Camp.
Multi-lane STOP controlled intersection on Baker StreetSidewalk on Baker StreetBicyclist crossing Fairview Road at Baker Street Baker Street
674
06 INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS 93
BAKER STREET CORRIDOR
EXISTING CONDITIONS & CONCERNS
Sidewalks: Some areas along the corridor provide sidewalks that were noted to not feel wide enough for two pedestrians to walk side by side, and felt narrower especially at
locations with utility poles, guy wires, utility boxes, and other obstructions.
Intersection Crossings: The Baker Street corridor contains high pedestrian activity, especially at several intersections such as Mesa Verde Drive, Harbor Boulevard, College Avenue, Fairview Road, Coolidge Avenue, Randolph Avenue, and
Bristol Street crossings. Additionally, intersections where crosswalks are not provided at all legs were noted to have a desire for additional crossings to be added.
Pedestrian Crossing Times: Pedestrian crossing times
have been noted by the community to be too short for
pedestrians of all ability levels.
Pedestrian Crossing at Signalized Intersections: The
intersection of Baker Street and Fairview Road is lacking pedestrian countdown signal heads.
High Vehicle Speeds: Vehicles traveling at higher than the posted speed limit were observed along the corridor.
Mid-Block Crossings: Community members noted
there is a need for mid-block crossings on Baker Street between College Avenue and Fairview Road. High mid-block pedestrian and bicyclist crossing activity at Loren Drive, across Baker Street
Sidewalk Conditions: Lifted and cracked sidewalks.
Bus Stop Shelters & Amenities: Various bus stops along the corridor do not provide shelters for transit riders.
PROPOSED TREATMENTS
Bicycle Facilities: Evaluate Baker Street from Royal Palm Drive to Coolidge Avenue to design and install a Class II bike lane as identifi ed in the City's Active Transportation Plan to complete the bicycle network on Baker Street and reduce confl icts between pedestrians and bicyclists on the sidewalk.
Sidewalks: Evaluate the sidewalk network along the corridor to identify, remove, and/or relocate obstructions that may create challenges for pedestrians of all ability levels to navigate around.
Marked Crosswalks: Evaluate the traffi c operations at
signalized intersections where marked crosswalks are not provided at all legs to install new marked crosswalks at intersection legs where not currently provided.
Curb Ramps: Install new ADA-compliant curb ramps at
locations where new crossings are installed.
High-Visibility Crosswalks: Install high-visibility crosswalks at existing marked crossings along the corridor to improve motorists visibility of the crossings and potential pedestrians within the crosswalks (Mesa Verde Drive, Labrador Drive, Harbor Boulevard, College Avenue, Fairview Road, Coolidge Avenue, Babb Street, Milbro Street, and Bear Street).
675
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN94
BAKER STREET CORRIDOR
Improved Pedestrian Crossing Times: Evaluate traffi c
signal timing to adjust/improve pedestrian crossing times, as needed at all signalized intersections.
Countdown Pedestrian Signals: Install countdown
pedestrian signals at the intersection of Baker Street and Fairview Road.
Leading Pedestrian Intervals: Evaluate traffi c signal timing to include a Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI), especially for pedestrian crossings adjacent to high vehicle right-turn movements.
Regulate Right Turn on Reds: Consider installation of a "blank out" No Right Turn changeable message sign that
activates during the LPI WALK interval, then simply shuts off once pedestrians are in the crosswalk and can be seen.
Speed Feedback Signs: Consider installation of vehicle speed feedback signs between Bear Street and Century
Place to encourage motorists to reduce speeds within the posted speed limit.
Mid-Block Crossing: Evaluate corridor between College
Avenue and Fairview Road to install a mid-block crossing with RRFB and push buttons to provide additional crossing areas along this segment of the corridor (potentially at Donnybrook Lane).
Corridor-wide Improvements/Maintenance: Evaluate the
corridor on a six-month or yearly basis to identify and repair sidewalk areas that have physical defects such as buckled or lifted pavement, stains, cracks, voids, or ongoing tree root issues to eliminate potential hazards for pedestrians of all ability levels.
676
06 INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS 95
BAKER STREET CORRIDOR SAMPLE CONCEPT PLAN
677
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN96
HARBOR BOULEVARD CORRIDOR (NORTH)
PROJECT LOCATION
The corridor is located on Harbor Boulevard between Gisler Avenue and Adams Avenue. It is classifi ed as a Major Arterial based on OCTA’s 2021 Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH).
Average Daily Traffi c (ADT) volumes are noted to be over 55,000 vehicles per day. Harbor Boulevard provides direct access to Interstate 405 (I-405) at the northern end of the corridor. The posted speed limit along this corridor is 40 MPH.
The corridor is located in the Halecrest Neighborhood and adjacent to the Mesa Del Mar area. Some nearby local
destinations include Fairview Development Center, Orange Coast College, Early College High School, and Costa Mesa Golf Course.
Sidewalk on Harbor Boulevard south of Adams AvenueDecorative Crosswalk at Adams AvenueSidewalk on Harbor Boulevard north of Adams Avenue Harbor Boulevard
678
06 INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS 97
HARBOR BOULEVARD CORRIDOR (NORTH)
EXISTING CONDITIONS & CONCERNS
Sidewalks: Some areas along the corridor provide sidewalks that are narrower than four feet, especially in front of commercial areas north of Adams Avenue, where wider
sidewalks are provided south of Adams Avenue.
Intersection Crossings: Various crosswalk markings are
faded, causing visibility issues for motorists approaching the crossings. These faded crosswalk markings have been noted to be at various intersections along the corridor.
Pedestrian Crossing Times & Right Turns: Pedestrian
crossing times have been noted by the community to be
too short for pedestrians of all ability levels. Also, many motorists make right turn movements at intersections
while pedestrians are starting to cross the street or in the crosswalk, violating the pedestrian right-of-way.
Bus Stop Shelters & Amenities: Various bus stops along the corridor do not provide shelters for transit riders or amenities such as trash receptacles.
Street Trees: The community expressed support for more
street trees and landscaping along the corridor.
Sidewalk Conditions: Lifted and cracked sidewalks.
PROPOSED TREATMENTS
Bicycle Facilities: Evaluate Harbor Boulevard from Gisler Avenue to Newport Boulevard to design and install Class II bike lanes as identifi ed in the City's Active Transportation Plan to complete the bicycle network on Harbor Boulevard and reduce confl icts between pedestrians and bicyclists on the sidewalk.
Sidewalks: Evaluate the sidewalk network along the corridor to identify, remove, and/or relocate obstructions that may create challenges for pedestrians of all ability levels to navigate around.
Marked Crosswalks: Evaluate the traffi c operations at
signalized intersections where marked crosswalks are not provided at all legs to install new marked crosswalks at intersection legs where not currently provided (Date Place and Nutmeg Place).
Curb Ramps: Install new ADA-compliant curb ramps at
locations where new crossings are installed.
High-Visibility Crosswalks: Install high-visibility crosswalks at existing marked crossings along the corridor to provide motorists better visibility of the crossings and potential pedestrians within the crosswalks.
Improved Pedestrian Crossing Times: Evaluate traffi c
signal timing to adjust/improve pedestrian crossing times, as needed at all signalized intersections.
679
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN98
HARBOR BOULEVARD CORRIDOR (NORTH)
Regulate Right Turn on Reds: Consider installation of a "blank out" No Right Turn changeable message sign that
activates during the LPI WALK interval, then simply shuts off once pedestrians are in the crosswalk and can be seen.
Leading Pedestrian Intervals: Evaluate traffi c signal timing to include a Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI), especially for pedestrian crossings adjacent to high vehicle right-turn movements.
Corridor-wide Improvements/Maintenance: Evaluate the
corridor on a six-month or yearly basis to identify and repair sidewalk areas that have physical defects such as buckled or lifted pavement, stains, cracks, voids, or ongoing tree root issues to eliminate potential hazards for pedestrians of all ability levels.
680
06 INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS 99
HARBOR BOULEVARD CORRIDOR (NORTH) SAMPLE CONCEPT PLAN
681
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN100
HARBOR BOULEVARD CORRIDOR (SOUTH)
PROJECT LOCATION
The corridor is located on Harbor Boulevard between Adams Avenue and Newport Boulevard. It is classifi ed as a Major Arterial.
Average Daily Traffi c (ADT) volumes are noted to be in the 10,000 – 55,000 vehicles per day range. Harbor Boulevard provides direct access to State Route 55 (SR-55) at Newport Boulevard at the south end of the corridor. The posted speed limit along this corridor is 40 MPH.
The corridor is located in the Westside Costa Mesa and
Downtown area and adjacent to the College Park area to the east. Harbor Boulevard terminates at Newport Boulevard. Some local destinations include Fairview Development Center, Estancia High School, Orange Coast College, Early College High School, Fairview Park, and Lions Park.
East leg crossing at Mesa Verde Dr./ Peterson PlaceStandard crosswalks at Wilson StreetNorth leg of Harbor Boulevard at Fair Drive, looking west Harbor Boulevard
682
06 INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS 101
HARBOR BOULEVARD CORRIDOR (SOUTH)
EXISTING CONDITIONS & CONCERNS
Sidewalks: Street furniture such as landscaping and utility boxes create obstructions on the sidewalk and reduce the sidewalk width. Additionally, more sidewalk and bicycle infrastructure is desired throughout the corridor to complete gaps in the network and provide a better experience for pedestrians and bicyclists.
Intersection Crossings: The intersections of Harbor
Boulevard with Fair Drive, as well as Bay Street and
Newport Boulevard do not provide a crossing at all legs of the intersections. The community desires more marked crosswalks at these intersections to facilitate pedestrian crossings from various directions.
Pedestrian Countdown Signals: The intersection of Harbor Boulevard and Newport Boulevard is lacking pedestrian
countdown signals.
Right Turns vs Pedestrians: Many motorists make right
turn movements at intersections while pedestrians are
starting to cross the street or in the crosswalk, violating the pedestrian right-of-way.
Pedestrian Visibility: On-street parking has been noted to present visibility concerns for pedestrians crossing the roadway.
Bus Stop Shelters & Amenities: Various bus stops along the corridor do not provide shelters for transit riders.
Sidewalk Conditions: Lifted and cracked sidewalks.
PROPOSED TREATMENTS
Bicycle Facilities: Evaluate Harbor Boulevard from Gisler Avenue to Newport Boulevard to design and install Class II bike lanes as identifi ed in the City's Active Transportation Plan to complete the bicycle network on Harbor Boulevard and reduce confl icts between pedestrians and bicyclists on the sidewalk.
Sidewalks: Evaluate the sidewalk network along the corridor to identify, remove, and/or relocate obstructions that may create challenges for pedestrians of all ability levels to navigate around. Widen sidewalks along the corridor where right-of-way is available.
Marked Crosswalks: Evaluate the traffi c operations at
signalized intersections where marked crosswalks are not provided at all legs to install new marked crosswalks at intersection legs where not currently provided (Fair Drive, Bay Street and Newport Boulevard).
Curb Ramps: Install new ADA-compliant curb ramps at
locations where new crossings are installed.
Countdown Pedestrian Signals: Install countdown
pedestrian signals at the intersection of Harbor Boulevard and Newport Boulevard.
High-Visibility Crosswalks: Install-high visibility
crosswalks at existing marked crossings along the corridor to improve motorists visibility of the crossings and potential pedestrians within the crosswalks (Fair Drive, Wilson Street, Victoria Street, Hamilton Street, and Bay Street).
683
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN102
HARBOR BOULEVARD CORRIDOR (SOUTH)
Improved Pedestrian Crossing Times: Evaluate traffi c
signal timing to adjust/improve pedestrian crossing times, as needed at all signalized intersections.
Regulate Right Turn on Reds: Consider installation of a "blank out" No Right Turn changeable message sign that
activates during the LPI WALK interval, then simply shuts off once pedestrians are in the crosswalk and can be seen.
Leading Pedestrian Intervals: Evaluate traffi c signal timing to include a Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI), especially for pedestrian crossings adjacent to high vehicle right-turn movements.
Corridor-wide Improvements/Maintenance: Evaluate the
corridor on a six-month or yearly basis to identify and repair sidewalk areas that have physical defects such as buckled or lifted pavement, stains, cracks, voids, or ongoing tree root issues to eliminate potential hazards for pedestrians of all ability levels.
684
06 INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS 103
HARBOR BOULEVARD CORRIDOR (SOUTH) SAMPLE CONCEPT PLAN
685
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN104
WILSON STREET CORRIDOR
PROJECT LOCATION
The corridor is located on Wilson Street between Canyon Drive and Newport Boulevard in the southern portion of the City. It is classifi ed as a Secondary Arterial. Average Daily Traffi c (ADT) volumes are noted to reach 10,000 vehicles per day. Major arterial roadways in the vicinity include Harbor Boulevard perpendicular to Wilson Street and Fairview Road at the east end of the corridor. The posted speed limit along this corridor is 35 MPH.
The corridor is located in the Westside Costa Mesa and College Park areas of the city. It provides access to State Route 55 (SR- 55) via Newport Boulevard on the east side of the corridor. Some local destinations include Wilson Elementary School, Wilson Street Park, and various residential communities and commercial areas along the corridor.
Cracked and buckled sidewalks near Wilson ParkPedestrians crossing College Avenue on Wilson StreetPedestrian signage south of Harbor Blvd without mid- block marked crosswalks
Wilson Street
686
06 INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS 105
WILSON STREET CORRIDOR
EXISTING CONDITIONS & CONCERNS
Sidewalks: Street furniture such as landscaping and
utility boxed create obstructions on the sidewalk and
reduce the sidewalk width. Pedestrians were observed to share the sidewalk with bicyclists, despite Wilson Street’s designation as a bike route. Additionally, more sidewalk and bicycle infrastructure is desired throughout the corridor to complete gaps in the network, provide a better experience for pedestrians and bicyclists, and provide better access to local destinations, such as Wilson Park.
Intersection Crossings: The intersection of Wilson Street and Pomona Avenue does not provide a crossing at the east leg and the intersection of Wilson Street and Center Way does not provide a crossing at the west leg. The community desires an additional marked crosswalk at these locations to facilitate pedestrians crossing from various directions.
Additionally, more marked crosswalks are desired throughout the corridor to facilitate pedestrian crossings.
Pedestrian Crossing Times: Pedestrian crossing times
have been noted by the community to be too short for
pedestrians of all ability levels.
Street Lighting: Community members expressed the desire for better street lighting along the corridor.
High Vehicle Speeds: Vehicles traveling at higher than the posted speed limit were observed along the corridor and the desire for traffi c calming features along the corridor was noted.
Pedestrian Visibility: On-street parking has been noted to present visibility concerns for pedestrians crossing the roadway.
Bus Stop Shelters & Amenities: Various bus stops along the corridor do not provide shelters for transit riders (Wilson- Anaheim and Wilson-College).
Sidewalk Conditions: Lifted and cracked sidewalks.
PROPOSED TREATMENTS
Bicycle Facilities: Evaluate Wilson Street west of Placentia Avenue and from Harbor Boulevard to Newport Boulevard to design and install Class II bike lanes as identifi ed in the City's Active Transportation Plan to complete the bicycle network on Wilson Street and reduce confl icts between pedestrians and bicyclists on the sidewalk.
Sidewalks: Evaluate the sidewalk network along the corridor to identify, remove, and/or relocate obstructions that may create challenges for pedestrians of all ability levels to navigate around. Widen sidewalks along the corridor where right-of-way is available.
Marked Crosswalks: Evaluate the traffi c operations
at Wilson Street and Pomona Avenue where marked
crosswalks are not provided at all legs to install new marked crosswalks at intersection legs where not currently provided.
Curb Ramps: Install new ADA-compliant curb ramps at
locations where new crossings are installed.
687
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN106
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (HAWK Signal): Install a
pedestrian HAWK signal at the west leg of Wilson Street and Fordham Drive intersection. (see concept)
Pedestrian Lighting: Install pedestrian lighting/safety lighting at intersections where new pedestrian crosswalks are to be provided and where pedestrian activities are
present. Evaluate the corridor to install additional street lighting in areas where there is a gap in street lighting along the corridor.
Countdown Pedestrian Signals: Install countdown
pedestrian signals at Placentia Avenue, Fairview Road, and Newport Boulevard.
High-Visibility Crosswalks: Install high-visibility crosswalks at existing and new marked crossings along the corridor to improve motorists visibility of the crossings and potential pedestrians within the crosswalks.
Speed Feedback Signs: Consider installation of vehicle speed feedback signs on Wilson Street, National Avenue, and Continental Avenue.
Mid-Block Crossing: Evaluate the segment of Wilson Street between Maple Street and Miner Street for the design and installation of a new mid-block crossing with RRFB and push buttons.
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB): Evaluate the segment of Wilson Street between Maple Street and Miner Street for the design and installation of RRFBs and push buttons to accompany the new mid-block crossing.
Improved Pedestrian Crossing Times: Evaluate traffi c
signal timing to adjust/improve pedestrian crossing times, as needed at all signalized intersections.
Leading Pedestrian Intervals: Evaluate traffi c signal timing at signalized intersections to include a Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI), especially for pedestrian crossings adjacent to high vehicle right-turn movements.
Regulate Right Turn on Reds: Consider installation of a "blank out" No Right Turn changeable message sign that
activates during the LPI WALK interval, then simply shuts off once pedestrians are in the crosswalk and can be seen.
Advance Yield Lines: Install advance yield lines at
approaches to existing and new mid-block crossings.
Corridor-wide Improvements/Maintenance: Evaluate the
corridor on a six-month or yearly basis to identify and repair sidewalk areas that have physical defects such as buckled or lifted pavement, stains, cracks, voids, or ongoing tree root issues to eliminate potential hazards for pedestrians of all ability levels.
WILSON STREET CORRIDOR
688
06 INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS 107
WILSON STREET CORRIDOR SAMPLE CONCEPT PLAN
689
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN108
(CITYWIDE) HIGH-VISIBILITY CROSSWALK LOCATIONS
PROPOSED TREATMENTS
Install high-visibility crosswalk
markings parallel to the major street
and across the minor street, within all
commercial corridors and near schools,
parks, and regional attractors (such
as the OC Fair & Event Center). A list of
the locations is illustrated in Table 6.2,
Crosswalk Improvement Locations On
Minor Streets Along Major Corridors.
690
06 INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS 109
Street Name Corridor Orientation Minor Street Signalized Intersection On Ramps Total Crosswalks Sunfl ower Avenue
Northside 3 6 0 9
Southside 0 8 0 8
Bear Street
Eastside 1 4 0 5
Westside 0 4 0 4
South Coast Drive
Northside 2 2 0 4
Southside 0 4 0 4
Bristol Street
Eastside 1 10 1 12
Westside 0 13 2 15
Baker Street
Northside 4 6 0 10
Southside 5 5 2 12
Randolph Avenue
Eastside 0 2 0 2
Westside 1 2 0 3
Arlington Drive
Northside 2 1 0 3
Southside 1 1 0 2
Fair Drive
Northside 3 6 1 10
Southside 2 6 0 8
Harbor Blvd
Eastside 5 14 0 19
Westside 3 13 0 16
Adams Avenue
Northside 1 6 1 8
Southside 2 4 1 7
Table 6.2 Crosswalk Improvement Locations On Minor Streets Along Major Corridors 691
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN110
Street Name Corridor Orientation Minor Street Signalized Intersection On Ramps Total Crosswalks Mesa Verde Drive E
Eastside 1 2 0 3
Westside 2 2 0 4
19th Street
Northside 6 6 0 12
Southside 2 5 0 7
17th Street
Northside 5 8 0 13
Southside 1 8 0 9
Baker Street and Fairview
Road
Eastside 4 11 0 15
Westside 4 12 0 16
Newport Boulevard and Del
Mar Avenue
Eastside 8 7 0 15
Westside 0707
Bay Street
Northside 1 2 0 3
Southside 1 2 0 3
Ford Road
Northside 3 0 0 3
Southside 3 0 0 3
Park Avenue
Eastside 1 1 0 2
Westside 2 1 0 3
Orange Avenue
Eastside 3 2 0 5
Westside 0 2 0 2
Table 6.2 Crosswalk Improvement Locations On Minor Streets Along Major Corridors (Cont.) 692
06 INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS 111
This page left intentionally blank
693
07 Implementation
Strategy
694
07 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY 113
This chapter discusses fi ve approaches the City can
take to implement the infrastructure and long-term
recommendations discussed in Chapters 4-6. The
approaches, both proactive and reactive, could be used
together or individually, depending on the resources
available. They include:
• Project prioritization: Implement the infrastructure
projects by order of priority using a data-driven
approach.
• Project cost and time: Construct the infrastructure
projects based on the available time and fi nancial
resources.
• Funding availability: Develop infrastructure projects based on available funding opportunities. Many
funding sources are available for pedestrian
improvements.
• Collaboration with different city departments and
community stakeholders: Work with city departments
and community stakeholders to implement the long-
term recommendations.
• Project options: Certain circumstances, such as
fi ndings from a new study or community members
voicing their concerns, may prompt the City to take a
reactive approach to implement the recommendations
identifi ed in the Plan.
The purpose of project prioritization is to develop a
list of ranked infrastructure projects based on the
recommendations that offer the greatest potential benefi t that supports pedestrian activities within a short time frame.
The specifi c measures for each category, along with the weights, are shown in Table 7.1, Project Prioritization Criteria.
Table 7.2, Ranked Projects List, shows the list of prioritized projects, with their respective score out of 100.
7.1 INTRODUCTION 7.2 PROJECT PRIORITIZATION
Group Item Weight
Need and
Equity
Disadvantaged Community (DAC) 20%
Median Household Income (MHHI)
Safety Bicycle and Pedestrian Collisions 30%
Vehicle Citations
Community
Support
Community Support 30%
Network
Connectivity
Transit Accessibility 20%
Connects to priority destinations including
commercial areas, parks, and schools
Total 100%
Table 7.1 Project Prioritization Criteria
695
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN114
Rank Corridor From To Length (in Miles) Score
1 Newport Boulevard 19th Street 17th Street 0.44 62.8
2 Fairview Road McCormack Lane Merrimac Way 1.45 53.3
3 Adams Avenue Mesa Verde Drive Fairview Road 0.84 52.0 4 Bristol Street Sunfl ower Avenue Bear Street 1.63 51.1 5 Harbor Boulevard Gisler Avenue Newport Boulevard 3.84 46.0 6 Wilson Street Canyon Drive Newport Boulevard 2.51 30.8 7 17th Street Superior Avenue Irvine Avenue 1.27 27.3
8 19th Street Whittier Avenue Santa Ana Avenue 2.28 24.2 9 Baker Street Mesa Verde Drive Bristol Street 2.99 19.6 Table 7.2 Ranked Projects List
696
07 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY 115
Infrastructure improvements roughly follow along a time/cost cont inuum. Small-scale projects such as signing and striping can be completed in a short amount of time with relatively low co st. On the other hand, large-scale projects such as a roadway confi guration and new traffi c signals could require more time and cost more. Table 7.3, Infrastructure Cost and Time Continuum, provides some examples of pedestrian improvements that fall in to three categories: short-term/low-cost, mid-term/mid-cost, and long-term/high cost.
7.3 TIME AND COST
Type Description Estimated Time
Frame and Cost
Example of Infrastructure
short-term/low cost
These types of infrastructure
improvements present
opportunities for more rapid
implementation to address
community concerns.
0-2 years
$500 - $50K
• ADA-compliant curb ramps
• high visibility crosswalks
• pavement markings
• signage
• rectangular rapid fl ashing
beacons (RRFB)
• pedestrian intersection
enhancements
• neighborhood traffi c calming
measures (e.g curb extensions,
speed humps, and raised
crosswalks)
mid-term/mid cost
These types of projects either
require additional research or
are ready for implementation,
but roadway impacts such as
vehicular right-of-way, utility
easements, and/or other
constraints must be considered.
2-5 years
$50K - $200K
• sidewalk (with curb and gutter)
• curb extensions at major
intersection and arterial street
• protected intersection
• minor traffi c control signal
improvements
long-term/high cost
This type of projects can be
considered as planned projects
and require added resources
prior to implementation. These
projects require more studies,
right-of-way acquisition, and/or
include the need for coordination
with adjacent agencies or
county governing bodies.
5+ years
>$200K
• traffi c signals
• roundabouts
• projects that require modifying
or adding hard wiring
infrastructure
Table 7.3 Infrastructure Cost and Time Continuum
697
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN116
The following section presents potential federal, state, region al, and local funding sources that the City can seek for Plan implementation. Table 7.4, Funding Opportunities, lists differen t grant programs by source, agency, program name, and project eligibility, with a brief description for context. The City can consider applying for a variety of funding opportunities to imp lement the recommendations.
7.4 FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES
Source Program Administering
Agency
Program Description
Federal
Congestion
Mitigation and Air
Quality (CMAQ)
Program via F AST
Act
OCTA The program funds transportation projects likely to contribute to the attainment or maintenance of a national ambient air quality standard, with a high level of effectiveness in reducing air pollution, and are included in the MPO's current transportation plan and transportation improvement program. OCTA directs these funds mainly to transit and high occupancy vehicle lane projects, but 10% is set aside for bike and pedestrian projects.
Federal
Highway Safety
Improvement
Program (HSIP)
Caltrans Projects that improve safety for any public road, bicycle facility, pedestrian pathway, or trail.
Federal
Community
Development Block
Grant (CDBG)
Orange County
Housing and
Community
Development
CDBG is a fl exible program that provides communities with resources to address a wide range of unique community development needs. The federally-funded program is administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). On the local level, these funds are administered by the Orange County Housing and Community Development and can fund a range of projects including transportation services, public safety programs, fl ood and drainage facilities, water/sewer improvements, street improvements/sidewalks, etc.
Federal
(Forthcoming) Safe
Streets and Roads
for All (SS4A) Grant
Program
US Department of
Transportation
The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) established the new Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) discretionary program with $5 billion in appropriated funds over the next 5 years. In fi scal year 2022 (FY22), up to $1 billion is available. The SS4A program funds regional, local, and Tribal initiatives through grants to prevent roadway deaths and serious injuries.
Table 7.4 Funding Opportunities
Note: The program descriptions are retrieved from the program websites. 698
07 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY 117
Table 7.4 Funding Opportunities (Cont.)
Source Program Administering
Agency
Program Description
Federal/State
Offi ce of Traffi c Safety
(OTS) Grants
California Offi ce of
Traffi c Safety
Bicycle and pedestrian projects have been funded through this program. Promotes traffi c safety education.
State
Affordable Housing
and Sustainable
Communities Program
(AHSC)
Strategic Growth
Council
and Department
of Housing and
Community
Development
The program funds land-use, housing, transportation, and land preservation projects to support infi ll and compact development that reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
State
Active Transportation
Program (ATP)
Caltrans Funds active transportation-related infrastructure projects, plans, and education/ encouragement/enforcement activities. Consolidates previous programs (Transportation Alternatives Program, Bicycle Transportation Account, and Safe Routes to Schools).
State
Sustainable
Transportation Planning
Grant Program
Caltrans Projects that plan for reductions in GHG and VMT, and/or integrate Land Use and Transportation planning are eligible. This includes: SRTS, ATP, trail master plans, pedestrian master plans, bicycle master plans, Vision Zero, bike parking facilities planning, educational outreach, traffi c calming, health equity studies, fi rst mile/last mile, station area planning, etc.
Regional/Local
Sustainable Planning
Grant
SCAG The Sustainability Planning Grant Program (formerly known as the Compass Blueprint Grant Program) provides technical support to members in SCAG’s jurisdictions. Grants can be used toward planning and policy efforts that allow for the implementation of the regional RTP/SCS. Grants in the program falls into three categories:
Integrated Land Use – Sustainable Land Use Planning, Transit Oriented Development (TOD) and Land Use & Transportation Integration.
Active Transportation – Bicycle, Pedestrian and Safe Routes to School Plans.
Green Region – Natural Resource Plans, Climate Action Plans (CAPs) and Green House Gas (GHG) Reduction programs.
Note: The program descriptions are retrieved from the program websites. 699
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN118
Table 7.4 Funding Opportunities (Cont.)
Source Program Administering
Agency
Program Description
Regional/Local
Comprehensive
Transportation Funding
Program (CTFP) Project
O Regional Capacity
Program
OCTA Approximately $32 million in M2 funds that are available through the RCP (Project O) for Arterial Capacity Enhancements, Intersection Capacity Enhancements, and Freeway Arterial/Street Transitions.
Regional/Local
Comprehensive
Transportation Funding
Program (CTFP) Project
P Regional Traffi c
Signal Synchronization
Program (RTSSP)
OCTA Competitive funding from M2 funds that are available for traffi c signal synchronization updates.
Note: The program descriptions are retrieved from the program websites. 700
07 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY 119
701
Plan & Policy
Review
APPENDIX A
ATTACHMENT 3
702
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
1 INTRODUCTION
The Pedestrian Master Plan builds upon many local and
regional planning and engineering efforts. The following provides a description of the citywide planning efforts, local programs and projects, and regional and adjacent city efforts that were available at the time of the writing (in 2021).
CITYWIDE PLANNING EFFORTS
Costa Mesa General Plan Circulation Element (2015)
The Costa Mesa General Plan (GP) was last updated in 2015.
The Circulation Element of the General Plan includes goals, objectives, and policies that the City uses to make decisions about transportation network improvements. The Plan
emphasizes expanding the travel ability for bicycles and pedestrians and implementing “complete streets” strategies in the city, in accordance with the California Complete Streets Act of 2008.
The Circulation Element advocates for pedestrians via the following methods:
• Safe, accessible, and well-maintained sidewalks.
• Sidewalk zones in commercial areas with frontage zone, pedestrian-through zone, street furniture zone, and
enhancement/buffer zone.
• Properly designed, marked, and signed crossings.
• Street and intersection improvements for pedestrian safety (pedestrian refuge islands, advance stop and yield lines, flashing lights and beacons, raised crosswalks, etc.)
It also lays out Pedestrian Opportunity Zones, areas where pedestrian improvements should be targeted.
The Circulation Element includes the following goals related to pedestrian planning:
• Goal C-1: Implement “Complete Streets” policies on roadways in Costa Mesa
• Goal C-7: Promote a friendly active transportation system in Costa Mesa (initiating “First and Last Mile” Programs)
• Goal C-8: Create a safer place to walk and ride a bicycle • Goal C-9: Integrate active transportation elements into circulation system and land use planning
• Goal C-10: Promote an active transportation culture
• Goal C-11: Promote the positive air quality, health, and economic benefits of active transportation
• Goal C-12: Monitor, evaluate, and pursue funding for the implementation of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Costa Mesa Active Transporation Plan (ATP) (2018)
The Costa Mesa Active Transportation Plan, adopted in
2018, provides strategies and actions that will improve the active transportation experience in Costa Mesa. It
analyzes existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities in
Costa Mesa, provides a policy framework behind the
City’s active transportation vision, and proposes facilities for future funding. The existing conditions analysis and recommendations emphasize analysis related to bicycle
travel.
The Active Transportation Plan includes the following goals:
• Goal 1.0: Promote a friendly active transportation system in Costa Mesa
• Goal 2.0: Create a safer place to walk and ride a bicycle • Goal 3.0: Integrate active transportation elements into the circulation system and land use planning
703
APPENDIX A PLAN & POLICY REVIEW
2 • Goal 4.0: Promote an active transportation culture
• Goal 5.0: Promote the positive air quality, health, and economic benefits of active transportation
• Goal 6.0: Monitor, evaluate, and pursue funding for
implementation of the Active Transportation Master Plan.
Recommended pedestrian accommodations mirror those found in the General Plan, with an emphasis on sidewalks located within Pedestrian Opportunity Zones, including suggested routes to school:
Frontage Zone: Functions as an extension of a building, including entryways and sidewalk cafes.
Pedestrian Through Zone: Primary accessible pathway for pedestrians, 5-7 feet wide in residential settings and 8-12 feet wide in commercial areas.
Street Furniture Zone: Location of street furniture such as lighting, benches, utility poles, tree wells, and bicycle parking.
Enhancement/Buffer Zone: Space between street and sidewalk with curb extensions, parklets, or cycle tracks.
The Plan also recommends drought tolerant landscaping for shading and heat reduction, and the development of multiuse trails, which would accommodate both pedestrians and bicycles.
A list of proposed shared-use paths is also included. There is one proposed multiuse trail within a pedestrian opportunity zone along the Paularino Channel adjacent to the Bristol Street opportunity zone.
Complete Street Safety Assessment (2021)
The Complete Street Safety Assessment was completed
as a collaboration between the City and SafeTREC at UC
Berkeley. It reviewed six focus areas in the city and provided recommendations for improvements. The six corridors
include:
• Placentia Avenue
• Placentia Avenue access to Joann Street Path
• Pomona Avenue between 19th Street and Wilson Street
• Wilson Street
• Del Mar Avenue, Newport Boulevard- Santa Ana Avenue
• Bristol Street, Irvine Avenue - Sunflower Avenue
Multi-Purpose Trails Plan (2016)
Completed in June 2016, the Costa Mesa Multi-Purpose Trails Plan analyzes the strategies needed to implement a multi-use trail system within the City, focusing on the area between the Santa Ana River Trail and Newport Bay (in the middle- third of the City). Two public workshops and two stakeholder meetings helped inform the recommendations.
While the proposed multi-use trails largely do not intersect the Pedestrian Opportunity Zones, new facilities are
proposed on Tanager Drive and Adams Avenue adjacent to
the zone surrounding Harbor Blvd. This includes pedestrian improvements, including sidewalk widening and enhanced
crosswalks on Adams Avenue and traffic calming on Tanager Drive. “Project 12” provides an alternate (bicycle) route to Adams Avenue on Mesa Verda Drive, Harla Avenue, and
Peterson Place.
Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) (2022)
The City's Local Road Safety Plan identifies safety
countermeasures for all travel modes including walking and bicycling. The Plan supports ongoing efforts to make safety improvements by analyzing crash data, selecting emphasis areas, and identifying countermeasures through public
outreach and collaboration with diverse stakeholders.
ATTACHMENT 3
704
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
3 LOCAL PROGRAMS & PROJECTS
Go Human Explore Merrimac (2018)
On April 21, 2018, Costa Mesa hosted a SCAG Go
Human demonstration project on Merrimac Way, from
Harbor Boulevard to Fairview Road, to explore potential improvements to bicycle and pedestrian safety. Temporary demonstrations included a protected bike lane, sidewalk seating and shade, and an activated community event
hub. The project included engagement with Orange Coast
College, and was advised by the Costa Mesa Bikeways and Walkability Committee and OCTA. The demonstration project attracted 400 participants.
The top three desired walking improvements (from 93 surveys collected at the event) were:
• Improved sidewalks
• Public space/parks
• Street lighting
Reimagining 19th Street
In the summer of 2020, the Costa Mesa Alliance for Better Streets (CMABS), a community organization, led the
Reimaging 19th Street project. CMABS is a non-profit active transportation community group that facilitated and led grassroots activities. For the project, the organization planned and implemented a tactical urbanism demonstration to test out potential active transportation treatments, which included traffic circles, along the 19th Street Corridor. The organization also developed infrastructure recommendations for construction. The project received positive support from community members. However, following the project, the
City of Costa Mesa received mixed reviews about the project, particularly regarding the traffic circles.
Costa Mesa Community Pedestrian & Bicycle Safety
Training:
The Costa Mesa Planning Committee, California Walks, and the University of California at Berkeley’s Safe Transportation Research and Education Center (SafeTREC) collaboratively led a training session on August 28, 2020. The session
included walking and biking assessments along three
key routes within the City: Newport Boulevard from 17th Street to 19th Street, 19th Street from the western city limit to Harbor Boulevard, and Fairview Boulevard from Baker
Street to Fair Drive (adjacent to Orange Coast College).
The first two corridors correspond to areas within the
Pedestrian Opportunity Zones, which are prioritized as a part of the Pedestrian Master Plan. Following the training, recommendations were proposed for the three corridors.
PLANNED AND FUNDED ACTIVE
TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS
WITHIN COSTA MESA
Active Transportation Improvements
Several active transportation projects are proposed as part of the FY 2021-22 CIP. These include:
• Bicycle and pedestrian Infrastructure Improvements
• Citywide Bicycle Wayfinding Signage
• Citywide Class II, III, & IV Bicycle Projects
• Mesa Del Mar Multi-Modal Access and Circulation
Improvements
• Mesa Drive and Santa Ana Avenue Bicycle Facility
Improvements
• Mesa Verde Drive East/Peterson Place Class II Bicycle Facility • Randolph Avenue Parking and Pedestrian Improvements
• West 18th Street and Wilson Street Crosswalks
ATTACHMENT 3
705
APPENDIX A PLAN & POLICY REVIEW
4 The Merrimac Way project final design has been completed.
The project create several improvements between Harbor
Boulevard and Fairview Road, including cycle tracks, a multi- use path, and pedestrian crossing with pedestrian hybrid beacon. Construction is expected to be completed by end of July 2021.
Adams Avenue Improvements Project – This project will
build a raised center median and Class I Multi-Use Path with landscaped buffer from Harbor Boulevard to the Santa Ana River.
Adams Avenue Bicycle Facility Project – This project will add new bike lanes on both directions from Harbor Boulevard to Fairview Road, as well as, provide new lighting on the south side of Adams Avenue.
Adams Avenue & Pinecreek Drive Intersection Project – The project will enhance the traffic patterns and accessibility of the area by adding an additional crosswalk across
Adams Avenue, converting the northbound slip lane to a
conventional right-turn-lane, reconstructing the eastbound slip lane to slow right-turning vehicular traffic, constructing a wider sidewalk and trail along the west edge of the south leg of the intersection, and providing a crosswalk across the eastbound right turn lane. The project will also include traffic signal modifications at the intersection to accommodate the improvements.
West 19th Street Bicycle Facility Improvements – This project will provide improved bicycle connectivity and multi-modal accessibility between Pomona Avenue and Marina View Park by adding Class II bicycle lanes, bicycle boxes, high-visibility bike lane markings, sharrows, and pedestrian crosswalks.
Project W, Transit stops – This project will improve transit stops and construct new transit shade structures at three locations: Fairview Road north of Arlington Drive, Harbor Boulevard north of Wilson Street, and Placentia Avenue south of 19th Street.
Traffic signals that are currently in construction:
• Fairview Road HSIP Project (at the intersection of Fairview Road & Village Way)
• Baker Street & Randolph Avenue
• VANS Headquarters driveway along Hyland Avenue
• The Press driveway along S. Coast Drive
Traffic signals and HAWK signals that are currently in
design:
• HAWK signal at W. 18th Street between Lions Park and the Westside Police Substation.
• W. 19th Street & Wallace Avenue traffic signal.
Traffic Signal Synchronization Project (TSSP)
• Fairview Road TSSP (implementation complete and O&M
underway).
• Bear Street TSSP (implementation is under construction). • Red Hill Avenue TSSP (design is underway and
implementation/construction beginning in 2021).
• Baker, Placentia, Victoria, and 19th Street TSSP – design phase to begin Sept 2021-time frame with construction/
implementation starting in 2022.
Roadway Resurfacing Projects
Wilson Street resurfacing project – construction to begin in 2021. The City has a FY 21-22 CIP project for a new pedestrian crossing (location to be determined) on Wilson Street near Wilson Park; improvement likely to include a HAWK signal (pedestrian hybrid beacon).
Neighborhood Traffic Improvements – This project features neighborhood traffic improvements including signs, approved ATTACHMENT 3
706
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
5 speed humps, crosswalk enhancements, and other
landscape improvements to enhance the neighborhood
character.
Randolph Avenue Improvements - This project will construct new signing, striping, and traffic calming improvements along Randolph Avenue and St. Clair Street between Bristol Street and Baker Street. A roundabout at the intersection of Randolph Avenue and St. Clair Street has been designed. The project includes speed cushions on Randolph Avenue, a mid- block raised crosswalk on Randolph Avenue, a Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) at the mid-block raised
crosswalk, and new street lighting for pedestrian crossings.
The project will increase available on-street parking,
encourage slower traffic speeds on Randolph Avenue,
improve circulation, and improve pedestrian crossings.
Citywide Street Improvements – Several streets in the
Westside and Eastside neighborhoods of Costa Mesa were
improved as part of this project. Major streets improved over the current fiscal year include Bear Street, Santa Ana Avenue and Hamilton Street. A total of 1.14 million square feet of pavement was reconstructed as part of this project.
REGIONAL AND ADJACENT CITY
EFFORTS
OC Active: Orange County's Bike and Ped Plan (2019)
OC Active: Orange County’s Bike and Ped Plan aims to
enhance walking and biking countywide. The Plan contains seven primary goals:
• Reduce pedestrian and bicyclist collisions
• Advance strategic walking and biking network
• Enhance walking and biking access to transit
• Improve high-need pedestrian areas
• Strengthen stakeholder partnerships
• Incorporate diverse community perspectives
• Leverage funding opportunities
Pedestrian focus area maps were established for the
entire county, emphasizing the areas with the greatest
activity and demand for pedestrian travel. They were
based on a GIS-based analysis of generators, barriers, and attractors. Results from the analysis indicate that pedestrian improvements should be concentrated in the area southwest of Wilson Street and Newport Boulevard.
OC Supervisorial District Bikeway Plan:
OCTA created bikeways strategies by district to promote cross-jurisdictional and regional bicycle corridors. Costa Mesa was included in the OCTA Districts 1 and 2 Bikeways Strategy. This plan primarily focuses on the region's bicycle network rather than pedestrian improvements.
Connect SoCal (2020)
Connect SoCal is the 2020 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy from the Southern
California Association of Governments (SCAG). The Plan
includes a technical report outlining the existing state of active transportation and the impacts of investments in active transportation within the SCAG region. The Plan contains ten goals for active transportation in the region:
• Encourage regional economic prosperity and global
competitiveness.
• Improve mobility, accessibility, reliability, and travel safety for people and goods.
• Enhance the preservation, security, and resilience of the regional transportation system.
ATTACHMENT 3
707
APPENDIX A PLAN & POLICY REVIEW
6 • Increase person and goods throughput and travel choices within the transportation system.
• Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality. • Support healthy and equitable communities.
• Adapt to a changing climate and support an integrated regional development pattern and transportation network. • Leverage new transportation technologies and data-driven solutions that result in more efficient travel.
• Encourage development of diverse housing types in areas well supported by multiple transportation options.
• Promote conservation of natural and agricultural lands and restoration of critical habitats.
City of Newport Beach Bicycle Master Plan (2014)
The Newport Beach Bicycle Master Plan guides the
development and maintenance of a comprehensive bicycle
network and set of programs until 2034. Class I Shared-Use Paths are present within the City allowing joint pedestrian and bicycle use for a total of 18.9 miles. There were 93 miles of bikeways in 2014, including 26 miles of sidewalks that allow bicycling
Major existing connections (Class I Shared-Use Paths)
are made from Newport Beach, which is geographically
southeast of Costa Mesa, at the following streets/shared-use paths: Back Bay Open Space Trail and the Santa Ana River Trail. The Santa Ana River Trail is maintained and operated by the County of Orange.
City of Irvine Strategic Active Transportation Plan (2020) The 2020 Plan seeks to balance new technologies and
innovative pedestrian and bicycle transportation options to establish an environment that is comfortable and
convenient for users. The vast array of off-street facilities is complimented by a complete on-street mobility network. On- street facility connections are made via Red Hill Avenue and along Main Street.
City of Huntington Beach Bicycle Master Plan (2013)
The Bicycle Master Plan discusses opportunities for
pedestrian travel via off-street shared-use paths.
Connections are made to Costa Mesa via the Santa Ana River Trail. The Santa Ana River Trail is maintained and operated by the County of Orange.
City of Santa Ana Active Transportation Plan (2019)
The goal of the Santa Ana Active Transportation Plan (2019) document is to create a City which provides multi-modal access for walking, biking, and rolling. Santa Ana forms the northern boundary with the City of Costa Mesa along Sunflower Avenue.
City of Fountain Valley General Plan Update
(Forthcoming)
The City is currently working on updating its General Plan, and it may include discussions on active transportation. The City shares a small border with Fountain Valley.
ATTACHMENT 3
708
Walk Audit
Event Summaries
APPENDIX B
ATTACHMENT 3
709
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
7 online platform. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, in- person walk audit events were restricted to a small number of participants who registered on a first-come-first-served basis. For the virtual walk audits, community members were directed to an event website with instructions on how to share their input through an online mapping tool. The website was both in English and Spanish in order to properly include the Hispanic population in the planning process.
This section discusses the findings from the in-person walk audits. Comments received from the virtual walk audits were incorporated into the findings for the overall community engagement efforts, which were discussed in Chapter 2,
Community Engagement.
INTRODUCTION
In the spring of 2021, the project team hosted walk audits to collect participant feedback on existing street conditions and desired improvements. The input collected helped inform the recommendations development for the Costa Mesa
Pedestrian Master Plan. The walk audits allowed community members to explore major pedestrian corridors in the city, as identified in the General Plan as Pedestrian Opportunity Zones.
Community members were provided opportunities to
conduct the walk audits in-person or virtually through an ATTACHMENT 3
710
APPENDIX B WALK AUDIT EVENT SUMMARIES
8 IN-PERSON WALK AUDITS
The in-person walk audits had 39 participants who provided a wealth of input for the Plan. The dates and locations of each in-person walk audit are as follows:
• Wednesday, March 31, 2021 (1pm-3pm) – The triangle
• Saturday, April 3, 2021 (10am-12pm) – 19th Street
Commercial
• Wednesday, April 7, 2021 (1pm-3pm) – N. Harbor
Commercial (Merrimac)
• Saturday, April 10, 2021 (10am-12pm) – N. Harbor
Commercial (Baker)
• Wednesday, April 14, 2021 (1pm-3pm) – S. Harbor
Commercial (Wilson)
• Thursday, April 15, 2021 (9am-11am) – LAB Anti Mall
Event Activities
Each in-person walk audit was comprised of three activities:
event overview, the walk, and the event debrief.
Event Overview: Participants were introduced to the planning effort for the Costa Mesa Pedestrian Master Plan, the walk audit process, and the walking route.
The Walk: Event attendees took a walk along the pre-
determined route. Along the way, participants pointed out areas of concern and brainstormed potential solutions.
Event Debrief: Following The Walk, participants discussed common infrastructure and behavioral themes that they saw on the walk and discussed next steps.
ATTACHMENT 3
711
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
9 THE TRIANGLE
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 31, 2021
1:00 PM – 3:00 PM
7 ATTENDEES
EVENT SUMMARY
WALK AUDIT #1
OVERVIEW
On Wednesday, March 31, 2021, the project team conducted the first scheduled walk audit, held at The Triangle area in Downtown Costa Mesa, which includes Newport Boulevard,
19th Street, and Harbor Boulevard. The event had 7 attendees, excluding the project team and city staff.
The following section documents the key findings and
observations discussed at the walk audit.
KEY FINDINGS
• Pedestrian clearance intervals at some locations
should be extended to accommodate adequate time for
senior pedestrian crossings.
• Tree planters are raised and interfere with the effective width of the sidewalks.
• The pedestrian experience is noisy along major corridors. • At driveways/intersections, vehicles were observed to block pedestrian crossings.
• Landscaped buffer is more preferred by participants
than a wider sidewalk with no buffer.
• Vehicles were observed to make right turns on red
without coming to a complete stop.
• Some intersections had high visibility ladder-style
crosswalks while others did not.
• Pedestrians were observed crossing outside of marked
crosswalks at several mid-block locations.
ATTACHMENT 3
712
APPENDIX B WALK AUDIT EVENT SUMMARIES
10 CORRIDORS
Corridor #1 (19th Street)
• Utility wires create obstructions on the sidewalk
network.
• The sidewalk has obstructions due to raised tree
planters.
• The corridor is noisy.
• The sidewalk is approximately 6 feet wide and does not have a landscaped area along the curb to provide a
buffer between pedestrians and vehicles.
• At driveways/intersections, vehicles were observed to block pedestrian crossings.
Corridor #2 (Newport Boulevard)
• Participants expressed positive feedback for the wide sidewalk with buffer along the corridor.
• The majority of crosswalks are decorative.
Corridor #3 (Harbor Boulevard)
• The corridor has high vehicular volumes.
• Participants expressed positive feedback for the wide sidewalk with buffer along the corridor.
• Vehicles turning in and out of signalized driveways
presented some conflict with pedestrian crossings
Corridor #4 (Park Avenue)
• The sidewalk is approximately 6 feet wide.
Corridor #5 (Rochester Street)
• Pedestrians were observed to cross mid-block outside
of crossing designations to travel to and from the park and facilities to the south of Rochester Street.
ATTACHMENT 3
713
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
11 INTERSECTIONS
Intersection #1 (19th Street & Park Avenue)
• Crosswalk markings are not high-visibility style
crosswalks.
• Pedestrian countdown signals are present at
intersection.
Intersection #2 (19th Street & Anaheim Avenue)
• Crosswalk markings at the intersection are faded.
• High volume of vehicles lined up for the In-N-Out,
creating poor visibility of pedestrians crossing the
intersection.
Intersection #3 (Newport Boulevard & 19th Street)
• In conversations with community members, drivers
have to make quick decisions at the southbound
approach of 19th Street coming off the freeway.
• The pedestrian clearance interval is not long enough to accommodate pedestrians.
• The traffic signal does not have pedestrian countdown signals.
• The intersection has high vehicular volumes.
• Location is along Caltrans' right-of-way.
Intersection #4 (Newport Boulevard & Broadway)
• The intersection has decorative crosswalks.
Intersection #5 (Newport Boulevard & Harbor Boulevard)
• The intersection has decorative crosswalks.
• The pedestrian clearance interval is not long enough to accommodate pedestrians.
Intersection #6 (Newport Boulevard & Rochester Street/
Park Avenue)
• Westbound merge lane limits visibility of pedestrians crossing east/west at Park Avenue.
• The crosswalks are not high visibility.
Participants attended a brief overview of the walk audit process prior to the walk Traffic signal poles obstruct the sidewalk and crosswalk on 19th Street and Park Avenue
ATTACHMENT 3
714
APPENDIX B WALK AUDIT EVENT SUMMARIES
12 Participants crossed a decorative crosswalk on 19th Street and Harbor Boulevard Nice sidewalk infrastructure on Park Avenue adjacent to the Norma Hertzog Community Center
Vehicle parked on the crosswalk which blocked off access for pedestrians Transit stop at Broadway and 19th Street
ATTACHMENT 3
715
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
13 OVERVIEW
The project team conducted the second scheduled walk audit on Saturday, April 3 2021 at the 19th Street commercial area.
The event had 11 participants who gave valuable feedback on how to improve the pedestrian experience of walking on 19th Street, Pomona Avenue, and Placentia Avenue. The following section documents the key findings and observations made at the walk audit.
KEY FINDINGS
• Several areas lack sidewalks, particularly near Pomona Elementary School.
• Signage around the schools is worn out and could be
upgraded to include “yield to pedestrians” signs.
• Many locations do not feature enough separation
between vehicular traffic and pedestrians.
• Pedestrians were observed to cross mid-block along
19th Street due to long stretches without designated
crossings.
• 19th Street is a loud corridor.
• Participants noted a lack of street lighting along the minor streets that provide connectivity to 19th Street. • Participants expressed concern that Santa Ana Avenue
has a higher speed limit than desired as compared to
other areas near schools.
19TH STREET COMMERCIAL AREA
SATURDAY, APRIL 3, 2021
1O:00 AM – 12:00 PM
11 ATTENDEES
EVENT SUMMARY
WALK AUDIT #2
ATTACHMENT 3
716
APPENDIX B WALK AUDIT EVENT SUMMARIES
14 CORRIDORS
Corridor #1 (19th Street)
• Sidewalks are not wide enough to allow two pedestrians to walk side-by-side, from Placentia Avenue to Pomona
Avenue.
• Pedestrians crossed outside of marked crosswalks at
several mid-block locations
• There are areas where the buffer between sidewalk and street is wider than sidewalk itself.
• Radar speed feedback signs are available to alert
motorists of their speeds.
• There is sporadic landscaping (i.e. trees and shrubs) along the corridor.
• Bus stops exist along this corridor and are heavily used. • E-bikes are allowed on sidewalks except in certain
zones.
INTERSECTIONS
Intersection #1 (Meyer Place & 19th Street)
• The intersection has crossings on three sides.
Intersection #2 (Meyer Place & Surf Street)
• There is no sidewalk on either sides of Surf Street.
Intersection #3 (Meyer Place & Beach Street)
• There is no sidewalk on the north side of Beach Street.
Intersection #4 (Pomona Ave & 19th Street)
• Crosswalks are faded.
Intersection #5 (Wallace Avenue & 19th Street)
• A new signalized intersection is being considered at this location.
ATTACHMENT 3
717
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
15 Intersection #4 (Placentia Avenue & 19th Street)
• The intersection may have sight distance issues that
result in vehicles moving forward into the crosswalk
and/or turning on red in front of pedestrians.
• The pedestrian clearance interval is not long enough to accommodate pedestrians.
• The intersection lacks shade and participants noted the high noise volumes.
OUTSIDE WALK AUDIT RADIUS
The project team received the following comments from walk audit participants about areas that were not within the walk audit radius.
Corridor (19th Street)
• Participants noted that motorists frequently speed.
• Many locations do not provide enough separation
between vehicular traffic and pedestrians.
• This corridor contains wide driveways that interrupt the sidewalk infrastructure.
• Participants expressed the need to beautify and clean the sidewalks.
• The sidewalk has many obstructions that create
obstacles for pedestrians.
Corridor (Monrovia Avenue)
• Participants noted that motorists frequently speed.
• There may be a lack of street lighting along Monrovia Avenue.
Corridor (Placentia Avenue)
• Bus stops along the corridor have no shade structure.
Corridor (Center Street)
• The corridor lacks street trees.
• Participants noted sidewalk improvements over the
years.
Corridor (Ross Street)
• There are no sidewalks on either side of the street.
Corridor (Seal Street)
• There are no sidewalks on either side of Seal Street (near Meyer Place).
Intersection (Federal Ave & 19th Street)
• Participants noted that motorists frequently speed.
Intersection (Monrovia Ave & 19th Street)
• This is intersection has high pedestrian volumes and
provides access to many bus stops.
Intersection (Placentia Ave & Center Street)
• Participants noted that motorists frequently speed.
Intersection (Monrovia Ave & Center Street)
• Participants observed pedestrians cross Monrovia
Avenue despite the lack of designated markings or
pedestrian facilities.
Intersection (Meyer Place & Cove Street)
• A utility pole and street light create an obstruction to the pedestrian path at the curb of the intersection.
ATTACHMENT 3
718
APPENDIX B WALK AUDIT EVENT SUMMARIES
16 The project team reviewed the walk audit route with participants Sidewalk interrupted by driveway into a strip mall on 19th Street Pedestrians at the intersection of 19th Street and Pomona Avenue Pedestrian crossing on a yellow light
ATTACHMENT 3
719
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
17 • Many roads and driveways show signs of deterioration, especially along Harbor Boulevard.
• Participants expressed support for having more street trees and landscaping along the corridors.
• Orange Coast College also has plans to make
improvements that could benefit pedestrians traveling
to and from the college.
• The roadways near the car sales lots could benefit from pavement rehabilitation.
• Several bus stops lack covered canopies.
• Participants observed bicyclists biking on the sidewalk due to the lack of bike lanes on the roadways.
• Participants observed pedestrians crossing Mesa Verde Drive mid-block between Harbor Boulevard and Harla
Avenue to reach the shopping on the south side.
OVERVIEW
On Wednesday, April 7, 2021, the project team conducted the third scheduled walk audit. At the event, the participants walked along Harbor Boulevard, Adams Avenue, Merrimac
Way, and Baker Street. The event had 3 attendees, excluding the project team and city staff. The following section
documents the key findings and observations made at the walk audit.
KEY FINDINGS
• Adams Avenue has wide sidewalks that get narrower in
each direction as you move away from Adams Avenue
and Harbor Boulevard.
• ADA access could be improved as various driveways
are not wheelchair accessible.
NORTH HARBOR COMMERCIAL
AREA (ADAMS AVENUE)
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 7, 2021
1:00 PM – 3:00 PM
3 ATTENDEES
EVENT SUMMARY
WALK AUDIT #3
ATTACHMENT 3
720
APPENDIX B WALK AUDIT EVENT SUMMARIES
18 CORRIDORS
Corridor #1 (Adams Avenue)
• Several sections of the sidewalk are buckled.
• Participants provided positive feedback for the
separation between vehicular traffic and pedestrians.
Corridor #2 (Harbor Boulevard)
• The sidewalk width north of Adams Avenue is narrower
than that south of Adams Avenue.
• The Harbor-Ponderosa bus stop does not have a bus
shelter.
• Participants noted that more trash cans are desired
along Harbor Boulevard.
• Roads and driveways along Harbor Boulevard show
signs of deterioration.
• Drainage issues were observed, north of Adams Avenue, along Harbor Boulevard’s east sidewalk.
INTERSECTIONS
Intersection #1 (Adams Ave & Harbor Boulevard)
• Crossing times were observed to be insufficient and
motorists were observed to violate the pedestrian right- of-way when turning at intersections.
• Crosswalks are faded.
• Curb ramps are not ADA compliant.
Intersection #2 (Adams Ave & Peterson Place)
• Pedestrians cross Peterson Place without a designated crosswalk.
Intersection #3 (Adams Ave & Royal Palm Drive)
• A countdown pedestrian signal is missing at the east leg.
ATTACHMENT 3
721
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
19 OUTSIDE WALK AUDIT RADIUS
The project team received the following comments from walk audit participants about areas that were not within the walk audit radius.
Corridor (Harbor Boulevard)
• North of Adams Avenue, Harbor Boulevard has various
sidewalks on the east side that are 3 feet wide.
• Many curb ramps are not ADA compliant.
• Participants reported an incorrectly placed curb ramp along the median island north of Dale Way.
• There is no separation between pedestrians and traffic on the east side of Harbor Boulevard between Dale Way
and Village Way.
Corridor (Baker Street)
• This corridor has heavy pedestrian activity.
Corridor (College Avenue)
• Participants supported having more curbs painted red
at intersections and more street trees to provide shade. • The corridor has wide sidewalks.
Corridor (Pinecreek Drive)
• Curb ramps are missing on Pinecreek Drive, Village Way, and residential streets to the south of Village Way.
Intersection (Adams Avenue & Mesa Verde Drive)
• This intersection provides pedestrian crossings along the north, east, and south legs of the intersection.
Crossing along the west leg is prohibited.
Intersection (Adams Avenue and Pinecreek Drive)
• The City is in the process of redesigning the intersection. • Pedestrians cross mid-block along Adams Avenue, west
of Pinecreek Drive.
Intersection (Harbor Boulevard & Village Way)
• The intersection lacks crosswalks in all directions.
Intersection (Mesa Verde Drive & Harla Avenue)
• Participants noted the popularity of the intersection for pedestrian and bicycle crossings.
Intersection (Baker Street & College Avenue)
• Participants noted the popularity of the intersection for pedestrian crossings.
ATTACHMENT 3
722
APPENDIX B WALK AUDIT EVENT SUMMARIES
20 Bicyclists ride on the sidewalk along College Avenue Decorative crosswalk at Harbor Boulevard and Adams AvenueStaff waiting for participants to arrive Participants walk along the walk audit corridor
ATTACHMENT 3
723
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
21 OVERVIEW
On Wednesday, April 10 2021, the project team conducted the fourth scheduled walk audit. Participants had an opportunity to walk along Baker Street, Fairview Road, and Adams Avenue, and discussed areas of concern and improvement with
the project team. The following section documents the key findings and observations made at the walk audit.
KEY FINDINGS
• Sidewalk along the south side has no separation while the north side does have separation, along Baker Street. • There are various obstructions (trees, signs, utility boxes) throughout the walk audit areas.
• Participants reported observing pedestrians cross mid- block on Fairview Road to get to and from commercial
areas.
• At various intersections, traffic signal poles block the curb ramps and obstruct the pedestrian path.
• Where curb ramps are available, many are not ADA
compliant.
• Many portions of the sidewalk along Fairview Road are buckled due to uprooted trees. However, participants
expressed support for street trees since they provide
shade.
• At the intersection of Fairview Road and Adams Avenue, curb ramps do not face the direction of crosswalks,
and the north leg of the intersection does not have a
crosswalk.
• Slip lanes on Adams Avenue create challenges for
BAKER STREET & FAIRVIEW ROAD
SATURDAY, APRIL 10, 2021
10:00 AM – 12:00 PM
7 ATTENDEES
EVENT SUMMARY
WALK AUDIT #4
ATTACHMENT 3
724
APPENDIX B WALK AUDIT EVENT SUMMARIES
22 pedestrians. Pedestrian push buttons are located on
the pork chop islands; consequently, pedestrians first
have to navigate through the slip lanes, which do not
have instructions on how to safely do so.
• Along Fairview Road between Baker Street and Adams
Avenue, the City is going install with new pedestrian
upgrades which include a new traffic signal near
Paularino Channel, as well as crosswalks and sidewalk
improvements.
• Orange Coast College is planning new sidewalk
improvements.
CORRIDORS
Corridor #1 (Baker Street)
• Baker Street contains narrow sidewalks that
participants reported to feel narrower at locations
with utility pole, guywires, utility boxes, and other
obstructions.
• Certain sidewalk segments are buckled.
• Pedestrians cross mid-block between Fairview Road
and McClintock Way to get to and from businesses and
apartments on south side of Baker Street.
• Radar speed sign flashes during school hours.
• Participants noted that bicyclists and pedestrians use Donegal Place/Paularino Avenue and the residential
neighborhoods to travel east/west as an alternative to
using Baker Street.
Corridor #2 (Fairview Road)
• Participants observed high vehicular speeds.
• The corridor has sidewalks that are between 6-7 feet
ATTACHMENT 3
725
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
23 wide. Participants reported sidewalk space feeling
cramped especially in areas where pedestrians and
bicyclists need to share the sidewalk.
• Trees, utility boxes, and street light poles obstruct the sidewalk and present challenges for pedestrians.
• Many sections of the sidewalk are buckled.
• Participants expressed concern for walking near the
Paularino Channel at night due to insufficient lighting. • Participants observed bicyclists riding on the sidewalk due to the lack of bicycle facilities on Fairview Road. • Between the I-405 freeway and Paularino Avenue, there are no designated crossings for pedestrians to cross
Fairview Road.
• The City is planning a new traffic signal near the
Paularino Channel, south of Baker Street.
INTERSECTIONS
Intersection #1 (Baker Street & Fairview Road)
• Traffic signal poles and street furniture are located adjacent to non-ADA-compliant curb ramps that block
pedestrians from accessing the crosswalks.
• The traffic signals do not have pedestrian countdown
timers.
• The City will repaint the intersection and provide new stop bars at the intersection.
Intersection #2 (Baker Street & Coolidge Avenue)
• The pedestrian clearance interval is not long enough to accommodate pedestrians.
• The Baker-Coolidge bus stop is missing shaded cover.
Intersection #3 (Fairview Road & Paularino Avenue)
• The west leg of the crosswalk does not provide direct access to curb ramps.
• Pedestrian push buttons are located far away from the crosswalks.
• Participants reported high vehicular speeds.
• This intersection does not provide a crosswalk on the south leg.
Intersection #4 (Baker Street & Loren Lane)
• Participants identified this intersection as a high priority crossing; they observed heavy pedestrian and bicycle
activity.
OUTSIDE WALK AUDIT RADIUS
The project team received the following comments from walk audit participants about areas that were not within the walk audit radius.
Corridor (Fairview Road)
• Buckled and uneven sidewalks that also have various
obstructions along this corridor.
• Driveways along this corridor do not have standard
ramps, based on City’s Standard Plans for commercial
and multi-use areas.
• The curb on Fairview Road, in front of Costa Mesa High School, has a curb cut but no crosswalk or signage to
the north east.
Corridor (Paularino Avenue)
• Participants noted high vehicular speeds.
• The corridor has pedestrian signage around Paularino
Park.
Corridor (Cheyenne Street)
• Sidewalks are buckled along the corridor.
• Intersections are uncontrolled and do not have
crosswalks.
Intersection (Fairview Road & Adams Avenue-El Camino
Drive)
• Curb ramps are not aligned with the crosswalks.
ATTACHMENT 3
726
APPENDIX B WALK AUDIT EVENT SUMMARIES
24 • The north leg of the intersection does not have a
crosswalk.
• Slip lanes on Adams Avenue create challenges for
pedestrians. Pedestrian push buttons are located on
the pork chop islands; consequently, pedestrians first
have to navigate through the slip lanes, which do not
have instructions on how to safely do so.
Intersection (Fairview Road & Monitor Way)
• The north leg of the intersection does not have a
crosswalk.
Intersection (Paularino Avenue & Coolidge Avenue)
• Pavement markings show signs of deterioration.
Intersection (Coolidge Avenue & Austin Street)
• Pavement markings shows signs of deterioration.
Walk audit participants walked along Fairview Road
Participants and the project team gathered for an overview of the walk audit ATTACHMENT 3
727
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
25 Bicyclist riding on the crosswalk High wall gives the impression that the sidewalk feels narrower Intersection with high visibility crosswalks and pedestrian signage Residential street with landscape parkway between the sidewalk and the road ATTACHMENT 3
728
APPENDIX B WALK AUDIT EVENT SUMMARIES
26 Participants discussed opportunities for pedestrian improvements on the roadways adjacent to Orange Coast College
A utility pole creating an obstruction for pedestrians walking along the sidewalk on Fairview Road
Bicyclist crossing mid-block on Fairview Road
A utility box creating an obstruction for pedestrians walking along the sidewalk on Fairview Road
ATTACHMENT 3
729
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
27 OVERVIEW
On Wednesday, April 10 2021, the project team conducted the fifth scheduled walk audit. At the event, participants discussed challenges and opportunities for walking along Harbor Boulevard, Wilson Street, Victoria Street, and Maple Street. The event had 5 attendees, excluding the project team and city staff. The following section documents the key findings and observations made at the walk audit.
KEY FINDINGS
• Pedestrians were observed sharing the sidewalk with
bicyclists, despite Wilson Street’s designation as a bike route.
• Many intersections would benefit from new crosswalks
which would help facilitate safer pedestrian crossings. • Utility boxes and other street furniture create
obstructions on the sidewalk.
• Many portions of the sidewalk facilities are buckled or uneven.
• Participants expressed the desire for improved
pedestrian connectivity to Wilson Park.
• Pedestrian clearance intervals at some locations should be extended to better accommodate senior pedestrian
crossings.
CORRIDORS
Corridor #1 (Harbor Boulevard)
• The sidewalk is uneven or buckled.
• Street furniture such as landscaping and utility boxes create obstructions on the sidewalk and reduce the
sidewalk width.
HARBOR BOULEVARD & WILSON
STREET
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 14, 2021
1:00 PM – 3:00 PM
5 ATTENDEES
EVENT SUMMARY
WALK AUDIT #5
ATTACHMENT 3
730
APPENDIX B WALK AUDIT EVENT SUMMARIES
28 • The bus stop at Harbor Boulevard and Wilson Street has no bus shelter.
• Participants noted that the driveway adjacent to the
Motel Tahiti Inn does not provide enough space for
pedestrian access.
Corridor #2 (Wilson Street)
• The corridor has “Watch for Peds” signs; however, it
could benefit from additional pedestrian treatments to
provide access to Wilson Park.
• Pedestrians were observed to share the sidewalk with
bicyclists, despite Wilson Street’s designation as a bike route.
• The Wilson-Anaheim and Wilson-College bus stops do
not have bus shelters.
• The sidewalk has many obstructions from street
furniture and is uneven or buckled at many locations.
• Participants observed high vehicular speeds.
• Many pedestrians travel along Wilson Street to reach
the Harbor Center.
• Participants expressed desire for better street lighting, sidewalk infrastructure, and traffic calming measures.
Corridor #3 (Maple Street)
• Participants observed high vehicular speeds.
• The corridor could benefit from additional pedestrian and traffic calming treatments to provide access to
Ketchum-Libolt Park. Participants showed support for
speed bumps or signage.
• Participants noted that motorists who turn right on red encroach on the crosswalk to have improve their of
oncoming vehicular traffic.
ATTACHMENT 3
731
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
29 Corridor #4 (Victoria Street)
• The corridor has areas with adequate sidewalks and
bicycle infrastructure; however, they are not continuous.
Participants expressed the desire for more continuous
pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure.
• The corridor contains widespread on-street parking
which presents visibility concerns for pedestrians
crossing the roadway.
INTERSECTIONS
Intersection #1 (Harbor Boulevard & Wilson Street)
• Curb ramps at all four corners may not be ADA-
compliant.
Intersection #2 (Wilson Street & College Avenue)
• The roadway width transitions from 40 feet east of the intersection to 65 feet west of College Avenue.
Intersection #3 (Wilson Street & Center Way)
• The east leg has pedestrian countdown timers; however, the pedestrian clearance interval is not sufficient for pedestrians to safely cross Wilson Street.
• The south and west legs do not have marked crossings. • The curb ramps on all corners may not provide
truncated domes.
OUTSIDE WALK AUDIT RADIUS
The project team received the following comments from walk audit participants about areas that were not within the walk audit radius.
Corridor (Wilson Street)
• Portions of the sidewalk infrastructure are missing,
uneven, or buckled.
• Street furniture such as landscaping and utility boxes create obstructions on the sidewalk and reduce the
sidewalk width.
• Participants expressed support for parkways which act as a separation between motorists and pedestrians.
• The City has plans for pedestrian improvements along
the corridor, south of Wilson Park.
Intersection (Wilson Street & Placentia Avenue)
• Traffic signals do not have pedestrian countdown timers. • Participants noted that the curb ramps do not provide adequate space for pedestrian access.
Intersection (Wilson Street & Pomona Avenue)
• The intersection is a dog leg intersection which has a staggered cross street.
• The east intersection is signalized, while the west
intersection is STOP-controlled on the southbound
direction.
• The east intersection does not have a crosswalk on its east leg and the curb ramps may not be ADA-compliant.
• The west intersection does not have a marked
crosswalk.
Intersection (Wilson Street & Meyer Place)
• The intersection is a dog leg intersection which has a staggered cross street.
• Both intersections are STOP-controlled on the north/
southbound directions and do not have marked
crosswalks in any direction.
Intersection (Wilson Street & Fordham Drive)
• The City is planning to provide pedestrian improvements. • Participants expressed support for pedestrian
treatments that facilitate access across Wilson Street
and connect the residential area to Wilson Park.
Intersection (Wilson Street & Rutgers Drive)
• There are no marked crosswalks in any direction.
• Pedestrian signage is posted to warn motorists of
pedestrian crossings.
ATTACHMENT 3
732
APPENDIX B WALK AUDIT EVENT SUMMARIES
30 Intersection (Wilson Street & Colgate Drive)
• The west leg has pedestrian signage to warn motorists of pedestrian crossings. The southwest corner also has
a curb ramp. However, the intersection does not have a
crosswalk on the west leg.
• There are no delineated crosswalks in any direction.
Intersection (Wilson Street & Avalon Street)
• Intersection is not ADA-accessible.
• South leg of intersection features a wide crossing but no crosswalk.
Intersection (Wilson Street & Columbia Drive)
• There are no marked crosswalks in any direction.
Intersection (Wilson Street & Fairview Road)
• Participants expressed support for curb ramps on the
northwest and southwest corners. The corners each
have two curb ramps that align with the crosswalks.
• Traffic signals do not have pedestrian countdown timers.
Participants gathered at the beginning of the event to learn about the walk audit process
Participants walking on the sidewalk
ATTACHMENT 3
733
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
31 Speed feedback sign
Pedestrian signage adjacent to an intersection without crosswalks on Wilson Street
Bus stop without a shelter
Pedestrians crossing a minor street without a marked crosswalk ATTACHMENT 3
734
APPENDIX B WALK AUDIT EVENT SUMMARIES
32 Driveway ramp that hampers pedestrian using sidewalk Pedestrians walking across Wilson Street and College Avenue Sidewalk condition along Fordham Drive
Walk audit participants documenting the sidewalk condition ATTACHMENT 3
735
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
33 OVERVIEW
On Thursday, April 15, 2021, the project team hosted a walk audit at The LAB Anti-Mall area. The event site included Bristol Street, Randolph Avenue, Paularino Avenue, and Bear Street.
The event had 6 attendees, excluding the project team and city staff. The following section documents the key findings and observations discussed at the time of the walk audit.
KEY FINDINGS
• Many portions of the sidewalk infrastructure along the corridors were buckled.
• Several intersections along Bristol Street (with marked crosswalks) have broken countdown pedestrian timers
(participants were able to see numbers but the timers
do not light up).
• The Camp and The LAB Anti-Mall could help encourage
high pedestrian activity on the roadways adjacent to
the attractors.
• The SR-73 underpass has dirt run-off that accumulates on the sidewalk which presents challenges for
pedestrians using the facility.
• Many intersections have curb ramps; however, they do
not connect or align directly to crosswalks.
ORRIDORS
Corridor #1 (Baker Street)
• Many portions of the sidewalk infrastructure were
buckled.
• Has a bus stop on Baker Street and Randolph Avenue.
• Trees, utility boxes, and poles obstruct the south side of the sidewalk.
LAB ANTI- MALL AREA
THURSDAY, APRIL 15, 2021
9:00 AM – 11:00 AM
6 ATTENDEES
EVENT SUMMARY
WALK AUDIT #6
ATTACHMENT 3
736
APPENDIX B WALK AUDIT EVENT SUMMARIES
34 • Participants expressed support for the landscaped
parkway by the Baker Fire Station 2.
Corridor #2 (Bristol Street)
• The corridor has wide sidewalks. However, various
sections are uneven or buckled and/or have
obstructions.
• Some commercial areas have steep driveways.
• Participants expressed support for the landscaped
parkway in front of The LAB Anti-mall; however, they
noted that the sidewalk is narrow.
• Participants also showed their support for street trees.
But they acknowledged that tree roots could buckle the
sidewalk.
Corridor #3 (Randolph Avenue)
• Participants reported insufficient street lights at night. • The corridor provides access to several breweries,
eateries, as well as The Camp and The LAB Anti-Mall.
• Many curb ramps may not be ADA-compliant.
• The City is working on new traffic calming, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities along the corridor.
INTERSECTIONS
Intersection #1 (Baker Street & Bristol Street)
• Traffic signal poles on the northeast corner create
obstructions along the pedestrian path.
• The intersection has high vehicular traffic volumes.
Intersection #2 (Bristol Street & Paularino Avenue)
• The traffic signal poles on the west leg create
obstructions along the pedestrian path.
• Participants noted that motorists turn right on the red light and do not respect the traffic signals.
ATTACHMENT 3
737
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
35 • Curb ramps do not align with the crosswalks.
Intersection #3 (Baker Street & Randolph Avenue)
• The City is working on installing a traffic signal to connect the commercial area on the south side with residential
communities on the north side.
• The curb ramps are not ADA-compliant.
Intersection #4 (Bristol Street & Sobeca Way)
• A crosswalk is not provided along the north leg of the intersection.
• Participants noted that the Camp driveway is
uncomfortable to cross.
• Participants commented that pedestrians used the
crosswalk to get between The Camp and The LAB Anti-
Mall.
OUTSIDE WALK AUDIT RADIUS
The project team received the following comments from walk audit participants about areas that were not within the walk audit radius.
Corridor (Baker Street)
• Participants commented that pedestrians cross mid-block. • The SR-73 underpass has dirt run-off that accumulates on the sidewalk which presents challenges for pedestrians
using the facility.
Intersection (Baker Street & Jeffrey Drive)
• The intersection has wide curb radii and lacks curb ramps.
Intersection (Baker Street & Bear Street)
• The intersection does not have a crosswalk on the east leg.
Intersection (Bristol Street & Bear Street)
• The intersection does not have a crosswalk on the east leg. • South of Bear Street, the corridor does not have sidewalk on the south side.
Participants gathered for an overview of the walk audit Artistic utility box on Bristol Street
ATTACHMENT 3
738
APPENDIX B WALK AUDIT EVENT SUMMARIES
36 Faded crosswalks at the intersection of Bristol Street and Randolph Avenue Sidewalk facility underneath SR-73 at Bristol Street
Construction workers installing new curb ramp
Sidewalk with a manicured landscape at the entrance to The LAB Anti-Mall ATTACHMENT 3
739
Community Workshop
Summaries
APPENDIX C
ATTACHMENT 3
740
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
37 COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #1 EVENT
SUMMARY
EVENT INFORMATION
Date: Tuesday, July 27, 2021
Time: 6:00 PM – 7:00 PM
Location: Virtual via Zoom
EVENT OVERVIEW
The City of Costa Mesa organized a Virtual Workshop to
gather input from community members for the Costa Mesa
Pedestrian Plan. The workshop was held virtually via Zoom due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Virtual Workshop had 26 participants that included community members, city staff, and members of the consultant team. The Participant List shown in Exhibit A documents the participants that were present during the Virtual Workshop. Community participants included elected officials, members of the Bikeway Walkability Committee, and Costa Mesa residents.
The Virtual Workshop was comprised of three parts: 1)
PowerPoint presentation, 2) Q&A session, and 3) discussion of next steps. The PowerPoint presentation provided
a project overview, status update of the stakeholder
engagement efforts, highlights of findings from the Existing Conditions Analysis, and an overview of different preliminary pedestrian treatments recommended for the City. Following the presentation, the project team (which consisted of the consultant team and City Staff) fielded questions from
community participants. Comments received will help guide the development of the recommendations to address
community concerns.
SUMMARY OF COMMENTS
Community members provided input on many different topics.
These include:
• Support for different pedestrian infrastructure treatments presented in the PowerPoint presentation
• Identified areas that could benefit from pedestrian
infrastructure treatments
• Safety concerns in different areas within the city, such as the interaction between pedestrians and bicyclists, and high vehicular speeds
• Integration of the Plan with new planned developments • Opportunities for tactical urbanism demonstrations or quick- build projects
• Overall vision for a more pedestrian-friendly city
COMMUNITY QUOTES
“When the OCC [Orange City College] starts again, there will be a lot of pedestrian activity.”
“Thank you for hosting this workshop!”
“I really like the raised crosswalks, and pedestrian refuge island, especially on Newport Blvd.”
“I am concerned about three-legged intersection; there are so many in Costa Mesa. I would like to see greater emphasis to finish intersections with four crosswalks.”
“What makes for a good pedestrian experience? Big shade trees, bulb-outs, and traffic calming measures.”
“I would love to see a design that is really pedestrian infrastructure in the city so that folks can really see what it can be.”
ATTACHMENT 3
741
APPENDIX C COMMUNITY WORKSHOP SUMMARIES
38 Flyer of Community Workshop #1
/gid00004/gid00042/gid00046/gid00047/gid00028/gid00001/gid00014/gid00032/gid00046/gid00028/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00009/gid00042/gid00046/gid00047/gid00001 /gid00023/gid00036/gid00045/gid00047/gid00048/gid00028/gid00039/gid00001/gid00004/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00048/gid00041/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001 /gid00014/gid00032/gid00032/gid00047/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00001/gid00033/gid00042/gid00045/gid00001/gid00028/gid00001 /gid00017/gid00032/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00036/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00014/gid00028/gid00046/gid00047/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00017/gid00039/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001 /gid00042/gid00041/gid00001/gid00011/gid00048/gid00039/gid00052/gid00001/gid00133/gid00138 /gid00011/gid00016/gid00010/gid00015/gid00001/gid00022/gid00020/gid00167 /gid00021/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00031/gid00032/gid00049/gid00032/gid00039/gid00042/gid00043/gid00040/gid00032/gid00041/gid00047/gid00001/gid00042/gid00033/gid00001/gid00028/gid00001/gid00017/gid00032/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00036/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00014/gid00028/gid00046/gid00047/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00017/gid00039/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001 /gid00033/gid00042/gid00045/gid00001/gid00004/gid00042/gid00046/gid00047/gid00028/gid00001/gid00014/gid00032/gid00046/gid00028/gid00001/gid00036/gid00046/gid00001/gid00048/gid00041/gid00031/gid00032/gid00045/gid00050/gid00028/gid00052/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00046/gid00032/gid00045/gid00049/gid00032/gid00001/gid00028/gid00046/gid00001/gid00028/gid00001/gid00045/gid00042/gid00028/gid00031/gid00001 /gid00040/gid00028/gid00043/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00036/gid00031/gid00032/gid00041/gid00047/gid00036/gid00033/gid00052/gid00001/gid00046/gid00042/gid00039/gid00048/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00046/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00036/gid00040/gid00043/gid00045/gid00042/gid00049/gid00032/gid00001 /gid00050/gid00028/gid00039/gid00038/gid00028/gid00029/gid00036/gid00039/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00004/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00163/gid00001/gid00021/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00017/gid00039/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00050/gid00036/gid00039/gid00039/gid00001/gid00043/gid00045/gid00042/gid00043/gid00042/gid00046/gid00032/gid00001 /gid00043/gid00032/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00036/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00033/gid00045/gid00028/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00048/gid00030/gid00047/gid00048/gid00045/gid00032/gid00001/gid00036/gid00040/gid00043/gid00045/gid00042/gid00049/gid00032/gid00040/gid00032/gid00041/gid00047/gid00046/gid00001/gid00028/gid00036/gid00040/gid00032/gid00031/gid00001 /gid00028/gid00047/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00041/gid00041/gid00032/gid00030/gid00047/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00048/gid00041/gid00036/gid00047/gid00036/gid00032/gid00046/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00046/gid00030/gid00035/gid00042/gid00042/gid00039/gid00046/gid00164/gid00001/gid00043/gid00028/gid00045/gid00038/gid00046/gid00164/gid00001 /gid00029/gid00048/gid00046/gid00036/gid00041/gid00032/gid00046/gid00046/gid00032/gid00046/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00042/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00036/gid00041/gid00028/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00046/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00004/gid00042/gid00046/gid00047/gid00028/gid00001 /gid00014/gid00032/gid00046/gid00028/gid00163/gid00001/gid00010/gid00041/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00031/gid00032/gid00049/gid00032/gid00039/gid00042/gid00043/gid00040/gid00032/gid00041/gid00047/gid00001/gid00042/gid00033/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00017/gid00032/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00036/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001 /gid00014/gid00028/gid00046/gid00047/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00017/gid00039/gid00028/gid00041/gid00164/gid00001/gid00046/gid00036/gid00051/gid00001/gid00050/gid00028/gid00039/gid00038/gid00001/gid00028/gid00048/gid00031/gid00036/gid00047/gid00046/gid00001/gid00050/gid00032/gid00045/gid00032/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00041/gid00031/gid00048/gid00030/gid00047/gid00032/gid00031/gid00001 /gid00042/gid00041/gid00001/gid00004/gid00042/gid00046/gid00047/gid00028/gid00001/gid00014/gid00032/gid00046/gid00028/gid00001/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00032/gid00032/gid00047/gid00046/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00014/gid00028/gid00045/gid00030/gid00035/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00002/gid00043/gid00045/gid00036/gid00039/gid00001/gid00050/gid00036/gid00047/gid00035/gid00001 /gid00003/gid00036/gid00038/gid00032/gid00050/gid00028/gid00052/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00024/gid00028/gid00039/gid00038/gid00028/gid00029/gid00036/gid00039/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00004/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00036/gid00047/gid00047/gid00032/gid00032/gid00001/gid00040/gid00032/gid00040/gid00029/gid00032/gid00045/gid00046/gid00164/gid00001 /gid00004/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00046/gid00047/gid00028/gid00126/gid00164/gid00001/gid00043/gid00045/gid00042/gid00037/gid00032/gid00030/gid00047/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00041/gid00046/gid00048/gid00039/gid00047/gid00028/gid00041/gid00047/gid00001/gid00047/gid00032/gid00028/gid00040/gid00001/gid00040/gid00032/gid00040/gid00029/gid00032/gid00045/gid00046/gid00164/gid00001 /gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00040/gid00032/gid00040/gid00029/gid00032/gid00045/gid00046/gid00001/gid00042/gid00033/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00048/gid00041/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00163/gid00001/gid00010/gid00041/gid00001/gid00028/gid00031/gid00031/gid00036/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00164/gid00001 /gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00042/gid00041/gid00039/gid00036/gid00041/gid00032/gid00001/gid00046/gid00048/gid00045/gid00049/gid00032/gid00052/gid00001/gid00050/gid00028/gid00046/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00041/gid00031/gid00048/gid00030/gid00047/gid00032/gid00031/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00002/gid00043/gid00045/gid00036/gid00039/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001 /gid00014/gid00028/gid00052/gid00001/gid00033/gid00042/gid00045/gid00001/gid00028/gid00031/gid00031/gid00036/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00028/gid00039/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00043/gid00048/gid00047/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00017/gid00032/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00036/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001 /gid00014/gid00028/gid00046/gid00047/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00017/gid00039/gid00028/gid00041/gid00163/gid00001 /gid00021/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00048/gid00041/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00036/gid00046/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00049/gid00036/gid00047/gid00032/gid00031/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00028/gid00047/gid00047/gid00032/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00028/gid00001/gid00023/gid00036/gid00045/gid00047/gid00048/gid00028/gid00039/gid00001 /gid00004/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00048/gid00041/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00014/gid00032/gid00032/gid00047/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00031/gid00036/gid00046/gid00030/gid00048/gid00046/gid00046/gid00001/gid00046/gid00042/gid00039/gid00048/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00046/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001 /gid00036/gid00040/gid00043/gid00045/gid00042/gid00049/gid00032/gid00001/gid00050/gid00028/gid00039/gid00038/gid00028/gid00029/gid00036/gid00039/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00004/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00042/gid00041/gid00001 /gid00011/gid00048/gid00039/gid00052/gid00001/gid00133/gid00138 /gid00164/gid00001/gid00133/gid00131/gid00133/gid00132/gid00001 /gid00033/gid00045/gid00042/gid00040/gid00001/gid00137/gid00165/gid00131/gid00131/gid00001/gid00043/gid00163/gid00040/gid00163/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00138/gid00165/gid00134/gid00131/gid00001/gid00043/gid00163/gid00040/gid00163/gid00001 /gid00002/gid00047/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00040/gid00032/gid00032/gid00047/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00164/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001 /gid00004/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00050/gid00036/gid00039/gid00039/gid00001/gid00043/gid00045/gid00032/gid00046/gid00032/gid00041/gid00047/gid00001/gid00033/gid00036/gid00041/gid00031/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00046/gid00001/gid00033/gid00045/gid00042/gid00040/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00048/gid00041/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001 /gid00032/gid00041/gid00034/gid00028/gid00034/gid00032/gid00040/gid00032/gid00041/gid00047/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00031/gid00028/gid00047/gid00028/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00039/gid00039/gid00032/gid00030/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00001/gid00032/gid00126/gid00042/gid00045/gid00047/gid00046/gid00164/gid00001/gid00042/gid00126/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001 /gid00042/gid00043/gid00043/gid00042/gid00045/gid00047/gid00048/gid00041/gid00036/gid00047/gid00036/gid00032/gid00046/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00045/gid00032/gid00030/gid00032/gid00036/gid00049/gid00032/gid00001/gid00028/gid00031/gid00031/gid00036/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00028/gid00039/gid00001/gid00033/gid00032/gid00032/gid00031/gid00029/gid00028/gid00030/gid00038/gid00001 /gid00033/gid00045/gid00042/gid00040/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00048/gid00041/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00164/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00031/gid00036/gid00046/gid00030/gid00048/gid00046/gid00046/gid00001/gid00041/gid00032/gid00051/gid00047/gid00001/gid00046/gid00047/gid00032/gid00043/gid00046/gid00163 /gid00017/gid00032/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00036/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00014/gid00028/gid00046/gid00047/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00017/gid00039/gid00028/gid00041 /gid00004/gid00042/gid00046/gid00047/gid00028/gid00001/gid00014/gid00032/gid00046/gid00028 /gid00011/gid00042/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00048/gid00046/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00040/gid00028/gid00038/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00001/gid00028/gid00001/gid00040/gid00042/gid00045/gid00032/gid00001/gid00050/gid00028/gid00039/gid00038/gid00183/gid00033/gid00045/gid00036/gid00032/gid00041/gid00031/gid00039/gid00052/gid00001/gid00030/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052 /gid00050/gid00036/gid00047/gid00035/gid00001/gid00052/gid00042/gid00048/gid00045/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00043/gid00048/gid00047/gid00163 /gid00021/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00034/gid00042/gid00028/gid00039/gid00001/gid00042/gid00033/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00004/gid00042/gid00046/gid00047/gid00028/gid00001/gid00014/gid00032/gid00046/gid00028/gid00001/gid00017/gid00032/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00036/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00014/gid00028/gid00046/gid00047/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001 /gid00017/gid00039/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00036/gid00046/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00040/gid00028/gid00038/gid00032/gid00001/gid00036/gid00047/gid00001/gid00032/gid00028/gid00046/gid00036/gid00032/gid00045/gid00164/gid00001/gid00046/gid00028/gid00033/gid00032/gid00045/gid00164/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00040/gid00042/gid00045/gid00032/gid00001 /gid00030/gid00042/gid00040/gid00033/gid00042/gid00045/gid00047/gid00028/gid00029/gid00039/gid00032/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00050/gid00028/gid00039/gid00038/gid00001/gid00033/gid00042/gid00045/gid00001/gid00045/gid00032/gid00030/gid00045/gid00032/gid00028/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00164/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00048/gid00047/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00164/gid00001 /gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00042/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00031/gid00028/gid00036/gid00039/gid00052/gid00001/gid00041/gid00032/gid00032/gid00031/gid00046/gid00164/gid00001/gid00046/gid00048/gid00030/gid00035/gid00001/gid00028/gid00046/gid00001/gid00034/gid00032/gid00047/gid00047/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001 /gid00046/gid00030/gid00035/gid00042/gid00042/gid00039/gid00046/gid00001/gid00042/gid00045/gid00001/gid00039/gid00042/gid00030/gid00028/gid00039/gid00001/gid00029/gid00048/gid00046/gid00036/gid00041/gid00032/gid00046/gid00046/gid00032/gid00046/gid00163/gid00001/gid00021/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00029/gid00032/gid00041/gid00032/gid00033/gid00036/gid00047/gid00046/gid00001/gid00042/gid00033/gid00001 /gid00050/gid00028/gid00039/gid00038/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00001/gid00028/gid00045/gid00032/gid00001/gid00041/gid00048/gid00040/gid00032/gid00045/gid00042/gid00048/gid00046/gid00164/gid00001/gid00046/gid00048/gid00030/gid00035/gid00001/gid00028/gid00046/gid00001/gid00029/gid00042/gid00042/gid00046/gid00047/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00001 /gid00032/gid00030/gid00042/gid00041/gid00042/gid00040/gid00036/gid00030/gid00001/gid00028/gid00030/gid00047/gid00036/gid00049/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00164/gid00001/gid00036/gid00040/gid00043/gid00045/gid00042/gid00049/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00001/gid00035/gid00032/gid00028/gid00039/gid00047/gid00035/gid00164/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001 /gid00045/gid00032/gid00031/gid00048/gid00030/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00001/gid00034/gid00045/gid00032/gid00032/gid00041/gid00035/gid00042/gid00048/gid00046/gid00032/gid00001/gid00034/gid00028/gid00046/gid00001/gid00032/gid00040/gid00036/gid00046/gid00046/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00046/gid00001/gid00028/gid00046/gid00001/gid00050/gid00032/gid00001 /gid00031/gid00045/gid00036/gid00049/gid00032/gid00001/gid00039/gid00032/gid00046/gid00046/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00050/gid00028/gid00039/gid00038/gid00001/gid00040/gid00042/gid00045/gid00032/gid00163/gid00001/gid00021/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00017/gid00039/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00033/gid00036/gid00047/gid00046/gid00001 /gid00030/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00048/gid00041/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00049/gid00028/gid00039/gid00048/gid00032/gid00046/gid00001/gid00028/gid00045/gid00042/gid00048/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00035/gid00032/gid00028/gid00039/gid00047/gid00035/gid00052/gid00001/gid00039/gid00036/gid00033/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00052/gid00039/gid00032/gid00046/gid00164/gid00001 /gid00046/gid00048/gid00046/gid00047/gid00028/gid00036/gid00041/gid00028/gid00029/gid00036/gid00039/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00164/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00032/gid00030/gid00042/gid00041/gid00042/gid00040/gid00036/gid00030/gid00001/gid00049/gid00036/gid00047/gid00028/gid00039/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00163/gid00001/gid00001 /gid00023/gid00036/gid00045/gid00047/gid00048/gid00028/gid00039/gid00001/gid00004/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00048/gid00041/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00014/gid00032/gid00032/gid00047/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00001/gid00049/gid00036/gid00028/gid00001/gid00027/gid00042/gid00042/gid00040 /gid00050/gid00050/gid00050/gid00163/gid00053/gid00042/gid00042/gid00040/gid00163/gid00048/gid00046 /gid00016/gid00045/gid00001/gid00037/gid00042/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00029/gid00052/gid00001/gid00043/gid00035/gid00042/gid00041/gid00032/gid00165/gid00001/gid00132/gid00183/gid00137/gid00137/gid00140/gid00183/gid00140/gid00131/gid00131/gid00183/gid00137/gid00139/gid00134/gid00134/gid00001/gid00001 /gid00024/gid00032/gid00029/gid00036/gid00041/gid00028/gid00045/gid00001/gid00010/gid00005/gid00165/gid00001/gid00140/gid00139/gid00133/gid00001/gid00136/gid00132/gid00136/gid00136/gid00001/gid00138/gid00131/gid00140/gid00138 /gid00017/gid00028/gid00046/gid00046/gid00030/gid00042/gid00031/gid00032/gid00165 /gid00001/gid00136/gid00131/gid00137/gid00131/gid00136/gid00135 /gid00013/gid00036/gid00049/gid00032/gid00001/gid00020/gid00043/gid00028/gid00041/gid00036/gid00046/gid00035/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00047/gid00032/gid00045/gid00043/gid00045/gid00032/gid00047/gid00028/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00001/gid00050/gid00036/gid00039/gid00039/gid00001/gid00029/gid00032/gid00001/gid00043/gid00045/gid00042/gid00049/gid00036/gid00031/gid00032/gid00031/gid00163 /gid00001
ATTACHMENT 3
742
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
39 Screenshot of Community Workshop #1 held via Zoom
ATTACHMENT 3
743
APPENDIX C COMMUNITY WORKSHOP SUMMARIES
40 Screenshot of Community Workshop #1 held via Zoom
ATTACHMENT 3
744
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
41 COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 EVENT
SUMMARY
EVENT INFORMATION
Date: Wednesday, October 6, 2021
Time: 6:00 PM – 7:00 PM
Location: Virtual via Zoom
EVENT OVERVIEW
On Wednesday, October 6, 2021, the City of Costa Mesa
organized the second Virtual Workshop to solicit feedback from community members on the Costa Mesa Pedestrian
Master Plan. The primary purpose of the workshop was to draft preliminary recommendations. The workshop was held virtually via Zoom due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Virtual Workshop had 22 attendees that included
community members, city staff, and members of the
consultant team. Community participants included elected officials, members of the Bikeway Walkability Committee, and Costa Mesa residents.
The Virtual Workshop had three parts: 1) PowerPoint
presentation, 2) Q&A session, and 3) discussion of next steps. The primary focus of the PowerPoint presentation was to share the draft recommendations with the community.
Following the presentation, the project team answered
questions from workshop participants. Comments received were incorporated into the draft report.
SUMMARY OF COMMENTS
Community members shared a lot of feedback about the draft recommendations. Their comments are categorized into the following themes:
• Include discussions on new technology, such as the
pedestrian scramble crossings and upgrading traffic
signals to include APS systems (Accessible Pedestrian
Signals)
• Provide bigger and bolder recommendations that
contribute to a more walkable city
• Address right turn-on red vehicular movements,
intersections with crosswalks on three out of four sides, , and obstructions along the sidewalk infrastructure
• Provide traffic calming infrastructure treatments where appropriate
• Add more street trees and landscaping
• Provide bicycle facilities so bicyclists won’t ride on the sidewalk and conflicts with pedestrians
• Specific infrastructure improvements on certain corridors or locations such as Newport Boulevard and pedestrian
refuge islands on Wilson Street.
COMMUNITY QUOTES
“Want to see more technology discussed, e.g. pedestrian scramble, and pedestrian push button.”
“I’m in favor of slowing traffic as a tradeoff for better pedestrian safety.”
“We need a bigger and bolder plan in a vision for a longer future.”
“The City needs a grand vision, like closing down streets like Paris. We need more trees.”
ATTACHMENT 3
745
APPENDIX C COMMUNITY WORKSHOP SUMMARIES
42 Flyer of Community Workshop #2
/gid00023/gid00010/gid00019/gid00021/gid00022/gid00002/gid00013/gid00004/gid00016/gid00014/gid00014/gid00022/gid00015/gid00010/gid00021/gid00026 /gid00014/gid00006/gid00006/gid00021/gid00010/gid00015/gid00008 /gid00021/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00004/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00042/gid00033/gid00001/gid00004/gid00042/gid00046/gid00047/gid00028/gid00001/gid00014/gid00032/gid00046/gid00028/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00049/gid00036/gid00047/gid00032/gid00046/gid00001/gid00052/gid00042/gid00048/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001 /gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00046/gid00032/gid00030/gid00042/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00049/gid00036/gid00045/gid00047/gid00048/gid00028/gid00039/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00048/gid00041/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00040/gid00032/gid00032/gid00047/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001 /gid00045/gid00032/gid00049/gid00036/gid00032/gid00050/gid00001/gid00017/gid00032/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00036/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00014/gid00028/gid00046/gid00047/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00017/gid00039/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00043/gid00045/gid00042/gid00043/gid00042/gid00046/gid00032/gid00031/gid00001 /gid00045/gid00032/gid00030/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00032/gid00041/gid00031/gid00028/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00046/gid00163 /gid00186/gid00001 /gid00013/gid00032/gid00028/gid00045/gid00041/gid00001/gid00028/gid00029/gid00042/gid00048/gid00047/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00033/gid00032/gid00032/gid00031/gid00029/gid00028/gid00030/gid00038/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00039/gid00039/gid00032/gid00030/gid00047/gid00032/gid00031/gid00001/gid00031/gid00048/gid00045/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001 /gid00050/gid00028/gid00039/gid00038/gid00001/gid00028/gid00048/gid00031/gid00036/gid00047/gid00046/gid00164/gid00001/gid00042/gid00041/gid00039/gid00036/gid00041/gid00032/gid00001/gid00046/gid00048/gid00045/gid00049/gid00032/gid00052/gid00164/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00046/gid00028/gid00033/gid00032/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00028/gid00039/gid00052/gid00046/gid00036/gid00046/gid00163/gid00001 /gid00186/gid00001 /gid00017/gid00045/gid00042/gid00049/gid00036/gid00031/gid00032/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00043/gid00048/gid00047/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00043/gid00045/gid00042/gid00043/gid00042/gid00046/gid00032/gid00031/gid00001/gid00045/gid00032/gid00030/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00032/gid00041/gid00031/gid00028/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00046 /gid00186/gid00001 /gid00013/gid00032/gid00028/gid00045/gid00041/gid00001/gid00028/gid00029/gid00042/gid00048/gid00047/gid00001/gid00041/gid00032/gid00051/gid00047/gid00001/gid00046/gid00047/gid00032/gid00043/gid00046 /gid00021/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00031/gid00032/gid00049/gid00032/gid00039/gid00042/gid00043/gid00040/gid00032/gid00041/gid00047/gid00001/gid00042/gid00033/gid00001/gid00028/gid00001/gid00017/gid00032/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00036/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00014/gid00028/gid00046/gid00047/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00017/gid00039/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00033/gid00042/gid00045/gid00001 /gid00004/gid00042/gid00046/gid00047/gid00028/gid00001/gid00014/gid00032/gid00046/gid00028/gid00001/gid00036/gid00046/gid00001/gid00048/gid00041/gid00031/gid00032/gid00045/gid00050/gid00028/gid00052/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00046/gid00032/gid00045/gid00049/gid00032/gid00001/gid00028/gid00046/gid00001/gid00028/gid00001/gid00045/gid00042/gid00028/gid00031/gid00001/gid00040/gid00028/gid00043/gid00001 /gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00036/gid00031/gid00032/gid00041/gid00047/gid00036/gid00033/gid00052/gid00001/gid00046/gid00042/gid00039/gid00048/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00046/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00036/gid00040/gid00043/gid00045/gid00042/gid00049/gid00032/gid00001/gid00050/gid00028/gid00039/gid00038/gid00028/gid00029/gid00036/gid00039/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001 /gid00004/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00163/gid00001/gid00021/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00017/gid00039/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00050/gid00036/gid00039/gid00039/gid00001/gid00043/gid00045/gid00042/gid00043/gid00042/gid00046/gid00032/gid00001/gid00043/gid00032/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00036/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001 /gid00036/gid00041/gid00033/gid00045/gid00028/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00048/gid00030/gid00047/gid00048/gid00045/gid00032/gid00001/gid00036/gid00040/gid00043/gid00045/gid00042/gid00049/gid00032/gid00040/gid00032/gid00041/gid00047/gid00046/gid00001/gid00028/gid00036/gid00040/gid00032/gid00031/gid00001/gid00028/gid00047/gid00001 /gid00030/gid00042/gid00041/gid00041/gid00032/gid00030/gid00047/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00048/gid00041/gid00036/gid00047/gid00036/gid00032/gid00046/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00046/gid00030/gid00035/gid00042/gid00042/gid00039/gid00046/gid00164/gid00001/gid00043/gid00028/gid00045/gid00038/gid00046/gid00164/gid00001 /gid00029/gid00048/gid00046/gid00036/gid00041/gid00032/gid00046/gid00046/gid00032/gid00046/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00042/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00036/gid00041/gid00028/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00046/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00004/gid00042/gid00046/gid00047/gid00028/gid00001 /gid00014/gid00032/gid00046/gid00028/gid00163/gid00001/gid00010/gid00041/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00031/gid00032/gid00049/gid00032/gid00039/gid00042/gid00043/gid00040/gid00032/gid00041/gid00047/gid00001/gid00042/gid00033/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00017/gid00032/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00036/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001 /gid00014/gid00028/gid00046/gid00047/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00017/gid00039/gid00028/gid00041/gid00164/gid00001/gid00046/gid00036/gid00051/gid00001/gid00050/gid00028/gid00039/gid00038/gid00001/gid00028/gid00048/gid00031/gid00036/gid00047/gid00046/gid00001/gid00050/gid00032/gid00045/gid00032/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00041/gid00031/gid00048/gid00030/gid00047/gid00032/gid00031/gid00001/gid00042/gid00041/gid00001 /gid00004/gid00042/gid00046/gid00047/gid00028/gid00001/gid00014/gid00032/gid00046/gid00028/gid00001/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00032/gid00032/gid00047/gid00046/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00014/gid00028/gid00045/gid00030/gid00035/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00002/gid00043/gid00045/gid00036/gid00039/gid00001/gid00050/gid00036/gid00047/gid00035/gid00001 /gid00003/gid00036/gid00038/gid00032/gid00050/gid00028/gid00052/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00024/gid00028/gid00039/gid00038/gid00028/gid00029/gid00036/gid00039/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00004/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00036/gid00047/gid00047/gid00032/gid00032/gid00001/gid00040/gid00032/gid00040/gid00029/gid00032/gid00045/gid00046/gid00164/gid00001 /gid00004/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00046/gid00047/gid00028/gid00126/gid00164/gid00001/gid00043/gid00045/gid00042/gid00037/gid00032/gid00030/gid00047/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00041/gid00046/gid00048/gid00039/gid00047/gid00028/gid00041/gid00047/gid00001/gid00047/gid00032/gid00028/gid00040/gid00001/gid00040/gid00032/gid00040/gid00029/gid00032/gid00045/gid00046/gid00164/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001 /gid00040/gid00032/gid00040/gid00029/gid00032/gid00045/gid00046/gid00001/gid00042/gid00033/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00048/gid00041/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00163/gid00001/gid00010/gid00041/gid00001/gid00028/gid00031/gid00031/gid00036/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00164/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001 /gid00042/gid00041/gid00039/gid00036/gid00041/gid00032/gid00001/gid00046/gid00048/gid00045/gid00049/gid00032/gid00052/gid00001/gid00050/gid00028/gid00046/gid00001/gid00030/gid00042/gid00041/gid00031/gid00048/gid00030/gid00047/gid00032/gid00031/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00002/gid00043/gid00045/gid00036/gid00039/gid00001/gid00028/gid00041/gid00031/gid00001/gid00014/gid00028/gid00052/gid00001/gid00033/gid00042/gid00045/gid00001 /gid00028/gid00031/gid00031/gid00036/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00028/gid00039/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00043/gid00048/gid00047/gid00001/gid00047/gid00042/gid00001/gid00047/gid00035/gid00032/gid00001/gid00017/gid00032/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00036/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00014/gid00028/gid00046/gid00047/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00017/gid00039/gid00028/gid00041/gid00163/gid00001 /gid00023/gid00036/gid00045/gid00047/gid00048/gid00028/gid00039/gid00001/gid00004/gid00042/gid00040/gid00040/gid00048/gid00041/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052/gid00001/gid00014/gid00032/gid00032/gid00047/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00001 /gid00023/gid00036/gid00028/gid00001/gid00027/gid00042/gid00042/gid00040 /gid00050/gid00050/gid00050/gid00163/gid00001/gid00053/gid00042/gid00042/gid00040/gid00163/gid00048/gid00046 /gid00016/gid00045/gid00001/gid00037/gid00042/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00029/gid00052/gid00001/gid00043/gid00035/gid00042/gid00041/gid00032/gid00165/gid00001/gid00337/gid00132/gid00183/gid00137/gid00137/gid00140/gid00183/gid00140/gid00131/gid00131/gid00183/gid00137/gid00139/gid00134/gid00134/gid00001/gid00042/gid00045/gid00001 /gid00337/gid00132/gid00183/gid00134/gid00135/gid00137/gid00183/gid00133/gid00135/gid00139/gid00183/gid00138/gid00138/gid00140/gid00140/gid00001/gid00042/gid00045/gid00001/gid00337/gid00132/gid00183/gid00133/gid00136/gid00134/gid00183/gid00133/gid00132/gid00136/gid00183/gid00139/gid00138/gid00139/gid00133/gid00001 /gid00024/gid00032/gid00029/gid00036/gid00041/gid00028/gid00045/gid00001/gid00010/gid00005/gid00165/gid00001/gid00140/gid00139/gid00133/gid00001/gid00136/gid00132/gid00136/gid00136/gid00001/gid00138/gid00131/gid00140/gid00138 /gid00017/gid00028/gid00046/gid00046/gid00030/gid00042/gid00031/gid00032/gid00165 /gid00001/gid00136/gid00131/gid00137/gid00131/gid00136/gid00135 /gid00013/gid00036/gid00049/gid00032/gid00001/gid00020/gid00043/gid00028/gid00041/gid00036/gid00046/gid00035/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00047/gid00032/gid00045/gid00043/gid00045/gid00032/gid00047/gid00028/gid00047/gid00036/gid00042/gid00041/gid00001/gid00050/gid00036/gid00039/gid00039/gid00001/gid00029/gid00032/gid00001/gid00043/gid00045/gid00042/gid00049/gid00036/gid00031/gid00032/gid00031/gid00163/gid00001 /gid00017/gid00032/gid00031/gid00032/gid00046/gid00047/gid00045/gid00036/gid00028/gid00041/gid00001/gid00014/gid00028/gid00046/gid00047/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00017/gid00039/gid00028/gid00041 /gid00004/gid00042/gid00046/gid00047/gid00028/gid00001/gid00014/gid00032/gid00046/gid00028 /gid00011/gid00042/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00048/gid00046/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00001/gid00040/gid00028/gid00038/gid00036/gid00041/gid00034/gid00001/gid00028/gid00001/gid00040/gid00042/gid00045/gid00032/gid00001/gid00050/gid00028/gid00039/gid00038/gid00183/gid00033/gid00045/gid00036/gid00032/gid00041/gid00031/gid00039/gid00052/gid00001/gid00030/gid00036/gid00047/gid00052 /gid00050/gid00036/gid00047/gid00035/gid00001/gid00052/gid00042/gid00048/gid00045/gid00001/gid00036/gid00041/gid00043/gid00048/gid00047/gid00163 /gid00016/gid00030/gid00047/gid00042/gid00029/gid00032/gid00045/gid00001/gid00137/gid00164/gid00001/gid00133/gid00131/gid00133/gid00132/gid00164/gid00001/gid00137/gid00165/gid00131/gid00131/gid00001/gid00017/gid00014/gid00001/gid00183/gid00001/gid00138/gid00165/gid00134/gid00131/gid00001/gid00017/gid00014 ATTACHMENT 3
746
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
43 Title Page of PowerPoint Presentation presented at the Community Workshop #2 Virtual Public Workshop
Meeting #2
October 6, 2021
ATTACHMENT 3
747
APPENDIX C COMMUNITY WORKSHOP SUMMARIES
44 Slide of Draft Recommendations from PowerPoint Presentation presented at the Community Workshop #2
3. Draft
Recommendations
11 Citywide – High Visibility Crosswalk Markings
- Sunflower Avenue
- South Coast Drive
- Baker Street
- Adams Avenue
- Mesa Verde
- Arlington Drive
- Fair Drive
- Bay Street
- 19th Street
- 17th Street
- Harbor Boulevard
- Park Avenue
- Orange Avenue
- Fairview Road
- Bristol Street
- Newport Boulevard
* Parallel to the major street and across the minor street ATTACHMENT 3
748
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
45 COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #3 EVENT
SUMMARY
EVENT INFORMATION
Date: Wednesday, April 27, 2022
Time: 6:00 PM – 7:30 PM
Location: Virtual via Zoom
EVENT OVERVIEW
The City of Costa Mesa organized a third Virtual Workshop on Wednesday, April 27 to engage with the community about the Costa Mesa Pedestrian Master Plan (CM PMP). The primary focus of the event was to gather input for the Draft Costa Mesa Pedestrian Master Plan. The workshop was conducted virtually through Zoom.
The Virtual Workshop had 33 attendees, with 22 community participants and 11 members of the project team. Community participants included elected officials, members of the Bikeway Walkability Committee, and Costa Mesa residents.
The event was comprised of three parts: 1) PowerPoint
presentation, 2) Q&A session, and 3) discussion of next steps.
For the presentation, the project team shared highlights of the Draft CM PMP. Following the presentation, the project team fielded questions from workshop participants. The public had an opportunity to continue providing feedback until the end of May.
SUMMARY OF COMMENTS
Community members gave many inputs about the Draft
Costa Mesa Pedestrian Master Plan. Their comments are
categorized into the following overarching themes:
• Overall appreciation for the updates to the CM PMP
based on the previous workshop and input received from
the Active Transportation Committee, formerly known as
the Bikeway and Walkability Committee
• Connection between the CM PMP and changes to land
use and urban design
• Placement of street trees and furniture along the
roadway to increase pedestrian comfort
• Consistency between the CM PMP and other planning
documents/ studies
• Opportunities to provide additional input for the Draft CM PMP
• Additional coordination between the Active
Transportation Committee and the City
COMMUNITY QUOTES
“I appreciate that the Plan is really readable and easy to digest.”
“Everyone in Costa Mesa is a pedestrian in the city and as we work to make the city more walkable and safe, it benefits everyone.”
“It would be nice to have more references to Safe Routes to School in this plan.”
ATTACHMENT 3
749
APPENDIX C COMMUNITY WORKSHOP SUMMARIES
50 Flyer of Community Workshop #2
Wednesday, April 27, 2022 at 6:00 PM
The City of Costa Mesa invites you to a virtual
community meeting to review a Draft
Pedestrian Master Plan developed with the
participation of the Active Transportation
Committee and community members.
The Draft Plan is ready for community review.
The Plan proposes pedestrian improvements
to connect communities to schools, parks,
businesses and other key destinations.
To review t he Draft Plan, visit:
https://www.costamesaca.gov/city-
hall/commissions-and-committees/active-
transportation-committee
We
would love to hear your ideas for
the plan!
The City of Costa Mesa invites you to a
community meeting to review the
Pedestrian Master Plan with proposed
recommendations.
Virtual Community Meeting
Via Zoom
www.zoom.us
Or join by phone: (669) 900 6833
Webinar ID: 858 5073 7643
Passcode: 590594
Live Spanish interpretation will be provided.
ATTACHMENT 3
750
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
51 Screenshot of Community Workshop #3 held via Zoom
ATTACHMENT 3
751
APPENDIX C COMMUNITY WORKSHOP SUMMARIES
52 Slide of PowerPoint Presentation presented at the Community Workshop #3 ATTACHMENT 3
752
Project
Survey
APPENDIX D
ATTACHMENT 3
753
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
53 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
The Costa Mesa Pedestrian Master Plan (CMPMP) online
survey was created as an opportunity to engage
stakeholders who were unable to participate in the Walk Audits that were conducted in Spring 2021. The survey also provided stakeholders who participated in the Walk Audits with an opportunity to give additional detailed feedback.
The survey was hosted on the website developed for the
project (cmpmp-wa.weebly.com). Stakeholders who visited the website landed on a welcome page that included links to the following:
• Project survey
• Walk audit sign ups
• Short video on how to use the Public Feedback Tool
• Public Feedback Tool
All materials were available in English and Spanish.
The survey was available on the website from February 18, 2021, to May 25, 2021. The following report summarizes the responses received.
SURVEY OVERVIEW
The survey had seven questions. Five of the seven survey questions were multiple choice and participants could
select more than one response. Questions #3 and #7 were open-ended. In addition to the project-relevant questions, the survey included six optional questions to gather survey respondents’ contact information.
PARTICIPANTS
A total of 64 responses were received. Of these, 63
participants provided their names and email addresses
and 42 participants also provided a phone number. Four
participants identified themselves as being part of the Costa Mesa Bikeway and Walkability Committee.
Zip codes were sourced from 58 participants. Participants live in the following zip codes: 92627 (34), 92626-2012 (22), 92663 (1), and 92704 (1).
Of the 63 responses, 96.8% selected English as their
preferred language. Spanish and Other each accounted for
1.6%.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Participants’ responses to the key questions are presented below using their own words as much as possible.
QUESTIONS
1. Do you live/work/attend school within ½ mile of a
pedestrian zone?
Of the 63 responses, 88.9% said yes and 11.1% said no.
ATTACHMENT 3
754
APPENDIX D PROJECT SURVEY
54 2. Which pedestrian zone(s) would you be most likely to use? The pedestrian area most likely to be used by the respondents was Zone D (The Triangle). A total of 73% of participants selected this zone. This was followed by Zone B (Commercial, Harbor Boulevard, Baker Street, and Adams Avenue) with 33.3%. The least used areas were Zone C with 19% and Zone A with 9.5%. Figure C.1 Pedestrian Zone Preferences shows the breakdown of the survey responses.
Figure D.1 Pedestrian Zone Preferences
ATTACHMENT 3
755
55 CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
3. Please identify top pedestrian destinations within
your selected pedestrian zone.
The most frequently selected top destinations within the selected pedestrian zone were:
• 17th Street
• 19th Street
• Harbor Boulevard
• Newport Boulevard
These were followed by:
• Ogle Street and Santa Ana Avenue
• Baker Street and Fairview Road
• Wilson Street-between Harbor Boulevard & Fairview Road • E. Bay St/Newport Boulevard
• Bus stop on Harbor Boulevard and W. Bay Street
• Harbor Boulevard & Baker Street and Fairview Road & Baker Street
• Mesa Verde North to anywhere south of the 405
• Harbor Boulevard near Adams Avenue
• Gisler Avenue to get to the Santa Ana River Trail (SART) The Triangle received the greatest number of comments as a top destination. This area was followed by Sprouts, parks (Lions Park, Canyon Park, Talbert Regional Park, Tanager Park, and Ketchum-Libolt Park), the Donald Dungan Library, Target, The Camp, Vons, and numerous stores located on both 17th Street and 19th Street.
Four schools were also mentioned by survey respondents:
• Ensign Middle School
• Harbor High School
• Newport Heights Elementary School
• Costa Mesa High School
4. How do you most frequently get around the
pedestrian zone selected above?
Of the 63 responses collected, 74.6% selected walking as an option for how they most frequently get around. This was followed by 60.3% getting around by car. The third selection was bike at 41.3%. Lastly, only 3.2% of respondents selected scooter and bus as a travel mode preference. Figure C.2 Travel Mode Preferences in the Pedestrian Zones illustrates the survey responses.
5. What would most improve your walk within your
selected pedestrian zone?
Answers to this question were spread out and divided among several options. The two options with the most responses were safe and visible street crossings, and accessible
sidewalks, with 73% and 65.1% respectively. This was
followed by 49.2% selecting street trees/shade and 47.6% choosing to regulate the speed of vehicles. The last group of responses were all in the 30% range and included
traffic signal timing changes with 39.7%, a flashing beacon supported crossing systems (Rectangular Rapid Flashing
Beacon or Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon) with 34.9%, accessible countdown pedestrian signal heads with 33.3%, and curb
extensions with 30.2%. The two options with the lowest
responses were pedestrian wayfinding signage with 17.5% and accessible sidewalk ramps with 11.1%. Survey responses to this question are illustrated in Figure C.3 Pedestrian Improvement Preferences in the Pedestrian Zones
ATTACHMENT 3
756
APPENDIX D PROJECT SURVEY
56 Figure D.2 Travel Mode Preferences in the Pedestrian Zones Figure D.3 Pedestrian Improvement Preferences in the Pedestrian Zones ATTACHMENT 3
757
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
57 6. What would make it easier to walk or roll from your home/neighborhoods within your selected pedestrian
zone?
Survey participants identified safe street crosswalks
and connected, safe sidewalks as their top treatments
which would make it easier to walk or roll from their home/ neghborhood, both receiving 69.8% of selections. This
was followed by sidewalks/pathways widening (49.2%);
ramps, curb cuts, signage to remind people of the presence of wheelchair accessibility (28.6%); and sidewalk lighting (25.4%). Lastly, ADA accessibility received 12.7%.
Survey responses to this question are shown in Figure C.4 Pedestrian Treatments Preferences in the Pedestrian Zones.
7. Please provide any comments for us:
A total of 52 responses were submitted for this question.
Received responses are listed below (in each respondent’s own writing with minor grammar edits):
• Fear of getting hit by a car
• Concern over mailboxes on the sidewalks
• Speed limit signs should be posted
• Maintenance of sidewalks is needed
• Cleanliness/upkeep of sidewalks is needed
• Lighted street crossings are needed
• Sidewalks are missing, incomplete, and/or narrow
• High speed / reduce speed
• Right turns on red
• Lack of trees/shade
• No bike lanes
• Create more distance between roads and sidewalks
• There are a lot of blind spots from shopping center/
businesses’ driveways
• Cars don’t slow down near freeway ramps
• Add protection from automobiles
• Transient issues
Locations outlined in the responses include:
• Wilson Street at Rutgers Drive
• Newport Boulevard
• Harbor Boulevard
• Rochester Street / West 18th Street
• Harbor Boulevard and Gisler Avenue
• Wallace Street
• Weelo Drive
• Fullerton Avenue
• I-405 at Bristol Street
• Bristol Street
• Baker Street
• Mesa Verde North
• Ogle Street and Santa Ana Avenue
• Irvine Avenue and 19th Street
Noteworthy:
• CM (Costa Mesa) has potential for pedestrian and biking activities
• Would like to see bicycle boulevards
• Shared bike paths
• The In-N-Out has generated a lot of traffic
ATTACHMENT 3
758
APPENDIX D PROJECT SURVEY
58 Figure D.4 Pedestrian Treatments Preferences in the Pedestrian Zones Excerpts:
• Eliminate free street parking on a street like Pomona Avenue and separate cars from pedestrians/cyclists OR make speed limits 15 miles per hour with up/down curbing on pedestrian- friendly streets.
• Walkability and bikeability need to go hand-in-hand. High density and low parking requirements should also be a part of this.
• My household enjoys walking to destinations in the Area B and Area C zones. We would like to walk more than drive for additional exercise as well as eliminating drinking and driving and need to call an Uber.
• Wide protected and continuous sidewalks along with friendly plantings would be a huge improvement for pedestrians... improve them and they will come. Walking spaces need to be inviting and safe.
• Bicycle space and accessibility are extremely poor, especially on Tustin Avenue between 17th Street and 15th Street where there is no space for cars and bikes. It would be best to remove parking on one side of the street or make it a one-way street with speed controls (such as on Broadway). More bike lanes everywhere!!!
• There are bricks over the grass on Superior Avenue and E 17th Street to walk to the Del Taco. However, there is no sidewalk or crosswalk to those bricks, and the street doesn’t have lighting. There is one STOP sign with no crosswalk. There should be two crosswalks or a sidewalk.
• Create safe and highly visible bike lanes and bike crossing access.
• A protected path on Bear Street.
ATTACHMENT 3
759
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
59 • It would be very nice if there was a protected bike route up to South Coast Plaza/Crystal Court/ Metro Pointe in addition to Area C.
• Need longer time to cross street (especially Harbor Boulevard and Gisler Avenue)
• Need to increase time for pedestrians to safely cross intersections
• We live in the Del Mesa neighborhood, and Paularino
Avenue and Baker Street are busy/unsafe cross streets for pedestrians and cyclists. My son goes to CM High School and I am not comfortable with the bike lanes/access from our neighborhood to CM High School. I would really like to see Bristol Street/Baker Street/Paularino Avenue add much- needed wider bike lanes and signage.
• The ramps at the crosswalks force you to walk or ride your bike, stroller, scooter, etc into the green light traffic lanes in order to walk across the street that has the red light specifically on Irvine Avenue and 19th Street because that’s the one we use most frequently
• More crosswalks would be great. There are no crosswalks on Wilson Street between Harbor Boulevard and Fairview
Road. This makes it challenging to safely access Wilson Street Park for neighborhoods south of Wilson Street. It is also challenging to get across Newport Boulevard/ the 55 since crossings at 19th Street, Bay Street, 22nd St, Santa Isabel Avenue, Del Mar Avenue, and Bristol Street are at roughly 1/2 mile intervals.
• Wilson Street between Fairview Road and Harbor Boulevard, Fairview Road between Wilson Street and Fair Drive, and Fair Drive between Harbor Boulevard and Loyola Road are great examples of stretches that have FAR too much distance
between crosswalks which causes people to dash across
the street. It would be great to add some pedestrian-triggered crossing opportunities to them.
• Please provide better bike-ability and walkability in and around the Harbor Boulevard Corridor. Also, note the lack of a northbound Harbor Boulevard bus stop at Merrimac Way. This is a huge problem for my community as I have a lot of disabled neighbors who utilize what used to be the bus stop here, which is now moved to in front of the former Ace Hardware.
ATTACHMENT 3
760
APPENDIX D PROJECT SURVEY
60 ATTACHMENT 3
761
Toolbox
Reference
APPENDIX E
ATTACHMENT 3
762
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN61
E.2 SIDEWALK-RELATED
TREATMENTS
A large number of comments from the community
engagement efforts refer to the general condition of
sidewalks and the function of the overall sidewalk network.
Many principles of sidewalk design can apply to all sidewalks, while others are applied based upon the land use in the area, with commercial, high-density residential, and heavily used sidewalks requiring more area for walking than lower density residential areas.
E.1 INTRODUCTION
While Costa Mesa features several qualities that improve its walkability, and has won awards in recognition of its historical efforts for enhancing the pedestrian experience, improving walkability continues to be an ongoing goal of the City.
This appendix builds upon Chapter 5, Infrastructure Toolbox to include discussions of each tool's benefi ts and design considerations.
The tools were selected to help address many of the
comments received from the community engagement
process. They fall into three categories:
• Sidewalk-Related Treatments: Infrastructure that could enhance the pedestrian right-of-way on the sidewalk
realm.
• Crossing-Related Treatments: Infrastructure that could improve pedestrian crossings on the roadway.
• General Traffi c Behavior and Other: Discussions
of strategies to address broader concerns that
tangentially impact walkability in the city.
The guide consolidates information from various state,
national, and well-recognized institution design standards.
These include, but are not limited to, California Manual on Uniform Traffi c Control Devices (CA MUTCD), Caltrans Design Standards and Specifi cations, and Caltrans Highway Design Manual. Additionally, many standards were referenced from the following organizations: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), National Association of City Transportation Offi cials (NACTO), and American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Offi cials (AASHTO).
The Design Guidelines do not contain discussions of
additional infrastructure that may be needed to fully install the infrastructure. Examples of such infrastructure include signage, striping, and traffi c signal modifi cations.
ATTACHMENT 3
763
APPENDIX E TOOLBOX REFERENCE62
Wide sidewalk with street trees at the Donald Dungan Library ATTACHMENT 3
764
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN63
SIDEWALK NETWORKS
Sidewalks are perhaps the most important component of
the pedestrian network. Whenever feasible, they should
be provided on both sides of all roadways within the city.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) sets minimum
requirements for width and grades, but expanding sidewalk widths beyond this minimum requirement can improve
walkability. Most of the city's roadways contain sidewalks, but the network has gaps in some neighborhoods, requiring pedestrians to walk off the sidewalk and along the roadway, resulting in discomfort and greater exposure to traffi c. Many sidewalks have been constructed to a minimum width and
are adjacent to the curb, which can require pedestrians to yield to pedestrians traveling in the opposite direction and also generally increases pedestrian discomfort. These barriers to the pedestrian experience can occur in areas with higher pedestrian activity or near transit stops.
Through retrofi t of existing sidewalks or for new
developments, widening the pedestrian right-of-way and
limiting the size and frequency of curb cuts along major corridors can increase pedestrian comfort and reduce
confl icts between pedestrians and drivers.
Benefi ts
A well-designed sidewalk network encourages walking,
and also improves safety by discouraging walking on the roadway. Proper placement of sidewalks also ensures that potential obstructions to the pedestrian walkway are located between the sidewalk and the curb line of the roadway,
known as the “parkway”, and not within the direct travel route along the sidewalk.
Design Considerations
A minimum total width of 8 feet is desired from the curb face to the back of the sidewalk with a minimum sidewalk width of 4 feet. In residential areas, a planter strip should be located between the curb and the sidewalk (parkway), and the
sidewalk should be continuous with minimum obstructions.
Driveway ramps should be located between the roadway and the nearest edge of the sidewalk, to maintain a level sidewalk at driveways. Above ground utilities, sign posts, street trees, and other obstructions should be located in the parkway, if possible, and alternatively on the side of the sidewalk closest to the street. Residential driveway standards should be evaluated and modifi ed as appropriate. Ensure that driveway fl ares rise only 4 feet from the nearest curb, in order to maintain a level sidewalk. Sidewalks should be level wherever possible.
Walkable commercial areas often provide areas for sidewalks that are wider than 8 feet. A 12-foot area can allow for street trees in two parallel rows, with one row adjacent to the street curb and a second row behind the sidewalk. When applied to north/south streets, this can provide shade for most typical sun angles. Many cities provide special treatments such as installing unique scoring patterns or tactile treatments such as bricks directly behind the curb. These treatments are most appropriate in commercial areas and are used as a cohesive design feature for place-making within the commercial
areas and to provide a visual element for pedestrians as a separating buffer between the roadway and the sidewalk
areas.
1 ATTACHMENT 3
765
APPENDIX E TOOLBOX REFERENCE64
Design Considerations
As street and sidewalk design has evolved, the best
practices from several decades are no longer appropriate to meet current active transportation and complete street goals. Sidewalks along streets and in walkable areas should have distinct and purposeful designs. They should follow new best practice design principles that make walking more accessible and enjoyable. Some sidewalk enhancements can include relocation of obstructions, widening of sidewalks, and realignment of sidewalks to provide more direct routes. On some streets, widening sidewalks may require relocating the curbs further into the street; however, this will be to detriment of other uses of the street area and studies may be needed to identify the optimal street confi guration.
Program Considerations
In addition to the Design Considerations for new sidewalk facilities, it is recommended for City to develop several programs that could address obstructions on the sidewalk.
These include:
• Study the potential to relocate street furniture, utility poles, access covers/vaults, and obstructions within
the pedestrian right-of-way, with a goal to provide more direct walking routes by placing obstructions outside of the direct walking path.
• Update permitting requirements and enforcement
policies for outdoor dining, construction zones, and
temporary sidewalk closures to ensure the pedestrian
right-of-way remains accessible and clear for
pedestrians.
CLEAR CONTINUOUS SIDEWALK
Well-designed residential sidewalks provide for a minimum 4-foot-wide walking surface that is free of obstructions.
For new construction, any required obstructions such as streetlights, utilities, poles, and other above-ground features should be located within the parkway area (street side) so that the sidewalk is generally continuous and does not require pedestrians to be alert to potential obstructions in their walking path. Placing required obstructions within the parkway area also provides greater separation between
pedestrians and adjacent traffi c, which further enhances the pedestrian experience.
Benefi ts
A straight and direct walking path minimizes travel time and effort for walking. Maintaining a clear 4-foot passage allows two people to walk side-by-side, which is preferable for walking together. Walkable communities strongly emphasize the need for direct walking routes. There are many places in the city where the walking route deviates from being immediately adjacent to the curb to being further from the roadway, separated by a parkway (and vice versa). This
varied sidewalk design can provide for more interesting landscape architecture, but it can also increase the diffi culty of walking to destinations, requiring pedestrians to be alert to obstructions and walk longer distances.
2 ATTACHMENT 3
766
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN65
• Expand education/outreach efforts focused on sidewalk maintenance for property owners and businesses.
• Coordinate with street cleaning and maintenance
divisions to ensure that curb ramps, crossings and other pedestrian facilities are regularly maintained and kept clean, well-lit and in a state of good repair.
• Implement a sidewalk inspection program focused on
pro-active efforts to identify and repair sidewalk and
curb ramp damage.
SEPARATE BICYCLE FACILITY
To the detriment of pedestrians, bicyclists often use
sidewalks to reach their destinations. Riding bicycles on sidewalks is legal except where signage prohibits the use, or where there is a dedicated on-street bicycle lane. Even with a dedicated bicycle facility, use of sidewalks by very young bicyclists is normal and expected. However, if used by older bicyclists, this usually indicates that the existing bicycle facility is unappealing or uncomfortable. To reduce the frequency of bicycle riding on sidewalks, it is necessary to examine and improve the bicycle network so that bicyclists of all ages and skill levels may be comfortable riding in the dedicated facilities.
Benefi ts (of separate bicycle facilities)
Bicycle use on sidewalks creates excessive and
unnecessary confl icts with pedestrians, especially in
commercial areas where sidewalk use by pedestrians is high.
The walking experience is improved if bicyclists are drawn away from sidewalks in these areas. This provides a more 3 comfortable and enjoyable pedestrian experience without the concern of potential confl icts with bicyclists on the sidewalks.
Bicycle use on sidewalks, especially while riding opposite the direction of adjacent traffi c, can cause safety concerns for bicyclists as motorists are less likely to observe a bicyclist moving against the adjacent fl ow of traffi c especially while turning into or out of driveways and side streets.
Design Considerations
Class I Multi-Use Paths need to be carefully designed to ensure safe use for both bicyclists and pedestrians. If substantial frequencies of both modes are present, it is often more appropriate to separate their fl ows into parallel channels, which can be done through striping, signage,
pavement textures, and/or physical separation. When
separating the fl ows, the bicycle pathway is usually placed closer to the vehicular traffi c.
Many arterials in the city have bicycle lanes, but many of the existing lanes currently provide the minimum width. There may be opportunities to widen existing bike lanes to provide buffers between the bikeway and the travel way. If travel way lanes are 11 feet or wider, a buffer may be feasible and may increase the attractiveness of the bicycle lanes.
Class IV bike lanes provide additional separation from
vehicle travel lanes by placing fl exible posts or other vertical elements in the buffer area to create more protected and inviting/attractive bicycle facility.
The City's Active Transportation Plan and proposed bicycle network goals align with providing separate bicycle facilities to reduce confl icts with pedestrians.
ATTACHMENT 3
767
APPENDIX E TOOLBOX REFERENCE66
SIDEWALK CONNECTIVITY TO LAND USES
In its current state, the sidewalk network can often result in out-of-direction travel for pedestrians. A common example is the location of a landscaped strip near street corners, which requires pedestrians to travel a longer distance to reach destinations such as shopping areas. For example, commercial centers with landscaped strips along the street frontage - without any breaks or pedestrian access points- require pedestrians to walk from the street corner to the nearest driveway to access the commercial center, rather than providing pedestrians direct access to driveways
located near the street corners, which creates a more
direct walking route. When evaluating the site plans for development proposals, the length and directness of walking routes should be considered.
Benefi ts
This concept is very important to encourage transit usage and walking to destinations. While unintended, current
walking routes can be up to three times longer than the direct distance because of failure to provide walking connections to buildings. Providing direct walking paths from street corners to the commercial areas can reduce the overall walking
distances and time needed to travel to and from these
destinations, while encouraging pedestrians to make more frequently walking trips.
Design Considerations
There may be limited opportunities to address these issues in residential areas, but improvements can be made to the commercial/business areas. Improving a sidewalk connection over a landscaped area that separates the sidewalk from the business parking lots can increase connectivity and access.
SIDEWALK NETWORK GAPS
Sidewalk gaps can discourage walking and expose
pedestrians to traffi c. The City’s long-term goal should be to provide a continuous sidewalk network on all streets. During the Costa Mesa Pedestrian Master Plan (CM PMP) walk audits, community members identifi ed several critical gaps in the system that should be prioritized for improvements, especially in commercial areas and areas that connect to commercial areas.
Benefi ts (of gap closures)
Filling sidewalk gaps, with special focus on walking routes to destinations, removes barriers to walking and eliminates the need for pedestrians to walk along the roadway to reach another sidewalk.
Design Considerations
The City should review and revise its standard plans for construction of sidewalks to ensure that it incorporates the best practices for sidewalk design. These include clear width, providing a separate zone for obstructions, and amenities.
Filling of sidewalk gaps can be controversial in some
neighborhoods or with some homeowners especially if the area is heavily landscaped.
Areas with minimal landscaping and worn paths (“goat
tracks”) may be high priorities for fi lling sidewalk gaps.
Landscaping provides no value to pedestrians, but a worn path indicates that a signifi cant walking demand is present. 4 5
ATTACHMENT 3
768
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN67
hazard and to then schedule remedial repairs. In areas
with ongoing tree root issues, the inspections may be
required annually, but there should be a routinely scheduled inspection program.
Temporary ramping can address the uplifted sidewalk
immediately but delaying correction can endanger trees if tree roots are involved and allowed to grow further. More aggressive removal and replacement of sidewalk sections may be effective to minimize damage to trees from root
pruning. An arborist may be required to properly diagnose the effective remedy to preserving benefi cial shade and trees.
BUCKLED AND LIFTED SIDEWALKS
Community outreach efforts resulted in many comments
regarding sidewalks that were uneven, buckled, raised by tree roots, or other factors that made walking uncomfortable.
In the past, the City allowed or provided street trees that were later discovered to have invasive roots that raised and damaged the sidewalk. Most of these trees have been replaced where the condition could not be corrected without removal of the trees. Sidewalk defi ciencies can impact ADA compliance and can pose trip-and-fall hazards. However, it's important to note that street trees create a sense of enclosure/increased buffer to the street, as well as shade and are a major benefi t to overall walkability.
Benefi ts
Continuous level sidewalks are more pleasant and desirable for walking. Efforts to address sidewalk condition should be a part of any program to improve walkability.
Design Considerations
Uplifted sidewalks of more than one inch are often considered to pose a safety hazard. Uplifted sidewalks of ¾ inch may also be an issue if the uplifted sidewalk limits a pedestrian's visibility of the elevation change. An effective program will monitor sidewalks citywide proactively to identify buckled and/or lifted sidewalk locations before they pose a safety 6 ATTACHMENT 3
769
APPENDIX E TOOLBOX REFERENCE68
RAISED CROSSWALK
A raised crosswalk is an internationally accepted design treatment that maintains a raised pedestrian path of travel across a minor street at midblock crossings. Traffi c rises from street level over the raised pavement area and drops back to street level, similar to a speed hump. The design indicates that the pedestrian has the right-of-way over crossing
vehicles.
Benefi ts
A raised crosswalk acts as a traffi c calming measure,
slowing vehicles as they approach from both sides. It makes pedestrians more visible since they are above road-grade.
If constructed with asphalt and at sidewalk grade, raised crosswalks can be designed to allow pedestrians to cross a street along a continuous, level grade, without needing to drop down to street level while crossing.
Design Considerations
The treatment works best when the roadway volume is
9,000 daily vehicles or less for a 2 lane roadway or a 3 lane roadway with or without a raised median. The treatment can also be effective for creating a safe crossing for a separated Class IV bikeway adjacent to the walkway. Appropriate
locations for raised crosswalks include residential roadways in school areas where mid-block crossings are provided or planned.
7 DRIVEWAY ISSUES
Every driveway that crosses a sidewalk is a potential location for confl ict between motorists and pedestrians. Every
driveway that causes pedestrians to travel down toward
street level, move aside to walk on a level surface, or give apparent right-of-way to motorists increases pedestrian inconvenience, and hampers the walking experience.
Pedestrians are supposed to have the right-of-way where sidewalks cross driveways, but the presence of street-type or alley-type entrances, especially with large intersection curb return radii, should be avoided, where possible.
Benefi ts
Walkability is best served when pedestrians are given the highest priority. Pedestrians should be provided sidewalks that are direct, level, and have a minimum number of confl icts with traffi c.
Design Considerations
Driveways should be designed to be no wider than necessary.
The rise from street level to curb level should be kept as short as possible, so that the walking surface can be preserved as a level surface (less than 2% crossfall). If the driveway rise can be accomplished to maintain a minimum 4-foot
level sidewalk, the sidewalk condition will be improved. In some cases, where parking is allowed, the driveway can be extended out into the street using curb extensions to provide more distance to change grade.
8 ATTACHMENT 3
770
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN69
Oftentimes street entrances are provided in conjunction with short deceleration lanes. This design along with signalized intersections where one of the legs is a driveway also
causes misleading or confusing right-of-way assignments.
Marked crosswalks should be installed along the sidewalk in the direction of foot travel, so that turning vehicles on the roadway understand that they must yield to pedestrians
before turning into the driveway. The curb return radius should also be tight enough to require motorists to slow while making right turns.
BUS STOPS AND BUS SHELTERS
Bus stops are locations where sidewalks experience multiple uses, such as walking, waiting for buses, and bus boarding and alighting. Amenities are often provided at bus stops, including benches, shelters, trash disposals, and system service information.
Benefi ts
Transit trips often begin as walking, biking, riding scooters, and other non-motorized modes of travel. The vast majority of transit riders are a pedestrian at some point of their trip.
Paying attention to conditions at or near bus stops can be especially important. A bus stop's condition and amenities can encourage (or discourage) transit usage. These
conditions include both the surrounding sidewalk network and the design and provision of amenities at the stop.
9 Design Considerations
ADA space must be provided to access the bus stop area.
This includes the ability to use the ADA lift so all users can access the bus. The walking path to the bus stop should generally be direct along the alignment of the sidewalk. Bus benches, shelters, and furniture should not obstruct the walkway and should also provide space in front of the bench or shelter for sitting as well as ADA access. Optimal design of a bus stop may require more space than is available in a typical 8-foot-wide parkway/sidewalk area. Many agencies are using curb extensions to widen the sidewalk area into the street, in part to maximize the area that can be used to meet bus stop needs. This also results in the bus stopping in the curb travel lane. This approach may not be feasible on most corridors, but should be explored where high pedestrian volumes are present and wider sidewalks would benefi t the high pedestrian demand. This potentially increases the risk of rear-end or lane change collisions with following vehicles, but it improves travel time and reduces delay for the bus. It is normally a consideration on roadways with speeds of 35 mph or less.
Providing or maintaining space for bicycle infrastructure is also appropriate. This is often accomplished by providing a bikeway behind the bus stop area and a marked or raised crossing that connects the bus stop with the sidewalk.
ATTACHMENT 3
771
APPENDIX E TOOLBOX REFERENCE70
STREET TREES
Street trees are typically located between the curb and the sidewalk within the landscaped parkway. They are typically planted at regular intervals in a consistent theme to help create a sense of place. Many varieties of street trees provide shade for sidewalk users.
Benefi ts
The benefi ts of street trees cannot be underestimated.
They include shade, cooling, air quality, traffi c calming, and property value enhancement. Street trees are a typical
component of all well-designed streets.
Design Considerations
Some tree species are more appropriate than others for
planting alongside roadways. Much of the city was developed with Ficus trees. These trees have advantages, but their invasive roots are diffi cult to control to prevent damage to sidewalks. Tree varieties that are better suited to the street and sidewalk environment should be used for all new tree plantings. Palm trees grow well in the local climate, but they do not offer the shade benefi ts of other tree types. The City is recommended to select a sustainable palette of plants that a) provides shade for people walking or standing at gathering points, b) will not uplift or damage sidewalks with their root structures and c) plantings are large enough that they will provide shade canopy within a few years of being planted.
Installation of tree well grates in commercial areas allow for maintaining sidewalk widths without requiring a parkway.
A landscape architect can provide advice on optimal street trees. Some cities have established detailed tree plans and employ an arborist on staff or contract.
Many streets considered to be “Great Streets” have dual rows of trees: A row behind the curb and a row between
the sidewalk and private property. This treatment is most feasible if 12 feet or more is available behind the curb line. 10 ATTACHMENT 3
772
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN71
LANDSCAPING
Landscaping is an important feature when located within or adjacent to the sidewalk. In addition to trees, landscaping may include turf or shrubs.
Benefi ts
Landscaping can provide walkability benefi ts when placed alongside of sidewalks. Landscaping is most benefi cial when it is located between the curb and the sidewalk as it provides a buffer between vehicles and pedestrians. It also can be a positive amenity if located along the outside edge of the sidewalk within the public right-of-way or on private property.
Design Considerations
There can be a trade-off between landscaping and the
providing an adequate width for walking. In commercial areas, sidewalks should be wide enough for pedestrians to pass and preferably wide enough for 3 pedestrians to walk side-by- side. Long sections of sidewalk that are continuously 8 feet wide or wider without poles, posts, or above ground utility equipment next to the curb can benefi t from the introduction of landscaping adjacent to the curb. This increases
pedestrian comfort especially if there is no curbside parking.
SIDEWALK CONDITION
During the walk audits, community members regularly
commented on the condition of the city's sidewalks. These comments referred to cosmetic issues such as stains,
discoloration, as well as physical defects such as cracks, lifted sections, and voids.
Benefi ts
Desirable sidewalks create desirable walking conditions.
Maintenance can make a difference. This can include
maintaining a level surface and ensuring the condition is appealing and appropriate for the location.
Design Considerations
It is important to have an inspection system and a program to manage the sidewalk surface, replacing sidewalk panels or entire sections that are cracked, chipped, or uplifted.
Sidewalks in walkable commercial areas may also benefi t from a cleaning program that can include sweeping as
needed and deep cleaning via pressure washing to remove stains.
11 12
CURB RAMPS
Curb ramps are required by the ADA at all street corners where sidewalks are present, and pedestrians may cross. the ADA also has requirements for minimum dimensions
13 ATTACHMENT 3
773
APPENDIX E TOOLBOX REFERENCE72
and maximum grades. Many curb ramps are located at the
midpoint of curb returns at intersections. ADA guidelines encourage the placement of directional ramps at corners rather than a single diagonal curb ramp.
Benefi ts
Directional curb ramps allow better guidance for visually- impaired pedestrians and provide a level sidewalk surface for wheelchair users at sidewalk level. They also shorten the crosswalk distance for all users and increase the distance from the crosswalk to adjacent traffi c lanes.
Design and Other Considerations
Retrofi tting existing signalized corners with directional ramps can be diffi cult and costly. Existing traffi c signal poles are often located at the desirable location for these ramps. Also, available space at these corners is often limited due to the radius of the corner curb or the right-of-way available behind the corner, which can make directional ramps impractical.
Directional ramps are well suited for newly constructed corners or existing street corners that have been redesigned with curb extensions or bulbouts. Detectable warning
surfaces (i.e. truncated domes) signal to the sight impaired/ blind that they have entered or exited areas where there may be confl icts with vehicles and/or bicycles. These detectable warning surfaces should be used at curb ramps where width allows for their inclusion. Standard Plans should be reviewed for compliance with current ADA requirements and should provide directional ramps for all new construction projects.
CURB EXTENSIONS / BULBOUTS
Curb extensions / bulbouts generally narrow the roadway at intersections or at mid-block locations. They are especially appropriate on roadways where on-street parking is allowed or where the road travel way is wider than necessary. By providing only the width necessary to meet traffi c needs, the sidewalks can be greatly expanded, leaving more
room for walking. Crossing distances can also be reduced, which shortens the duration of time where a pedestrian is vulnerable to vehicular traffi c.
Benefi ts
The primary benefi ts for pedestrians are to shorten the crossing length, widen sidewalks, and/or to slow down
vehicular right turns. Bulbouts, in combination with other design considerations such as the reduction in curb return radii, can be benefi cial for pedestrians because they
decrease the crossing distance (which reduces the time
pedestrians are in the roadway) and also slow down right turning traffi c.
Design and Other Considerations
These improvements can pose design challenges for
maintaining existing drainage facilities. They may require adjusting the street elevation or providing new catch basins and storm drain facilities. In other cases, the natural terrain or existing drains may allow for adjustment. When designing for roadways with bicycle facilities, care should be taken to preserve space for bicyclists and provide a continuous surface without requiring the bicyclist to cross onto the gutter in front of the new curb.
14 ATTACHMENT 3
774
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN73
The community also discussed the general condition
of crossings and the function of crossings overall in the pedestrian infrastructure network. Many principles of
crosswalk design apply to all crossings, while others may be applied based upon the land use in the area. Heavily E.3 CROSSING-RELATED TREATMENTS
used pedestrian crossings require additional visibility and improvements than lower-density residential areas.
Mid-block crossing with pedestrian beacons, pedestrian island, and crosswalk with aesthetic treatment at Gisler Ave, east of Ca lifornia Ave
ATTACHMENT 3
775
APPENDIX E TOOLBOX REFERENCE74
MARKED CROSSWALKS
Though not common knowledge for most motorists, the
California Vehicle Code defi nes intersections as locations of legal crossing, whether or not a crosswalk is marked.
Benefi ts
Adding a crosswalk marking more clearly indicates that
pedestrians have the right-of-way at intersections, and encourages more walking. Their presence may better remind drivers to watch for pedestrians, and there may be a traffi c calming effect.
Design Considerations
Cities often mark crosswalks to highlight locations that are frequently crossed by pedestrians. The City may
wish to adopt a clear policy on when to mark crosswalks which may include factors such as traffi c volumes, lane confi gurations, pedestrian volumes, sight distance, and if a supplemental traffi c control device would be required (RRFB, HAWK or signal) to facilitate safe crossing of the marked crossing. Marking unwarranted crosswalks at uncontrolled locations can lead pedestrians into a false sense of security.
Pedestrians are usually more cautious and observant to
oncoming vehicles when crossing a location without a
marked crosswalk.
ADVANCE STOP BARS
Motorists occasionally stop too close to the crosswalk or their vehicle encroaches into the crosswalk when stopped at an intersection, crowding the pedestrians in the crosswalk.
Benefi ts
Advance stop bars help improve the visibility of pedestrians by motorists as it provides an indication of where the vehicle must stop at the intersection approach, before the crosswalk.
Design Considerations
Communities routinely include advance limit lines located approximately 5 feet in front of all continental style
crosswalks. Costa Mesa has done this in some locations but in a few locations the setback distance is less than 4-5 feet. Advance limit lines tend to encourage motorists to stop further from the crosswalk and reduce vehicle encroachment into the crosswalk area.
Traffi c loops are also set back to align with these new limit lines. This treatment can also allow for crosswalks to be shifted to better align with the wheelchair ramps, while the limit line continues to advise traffi c on where to wait.
Staggered advance stop bars can also be used to help
combat the multiple-threat situation between stopped cars, pedestrians in the crosswalk, and fast-approaching right turn traffi c with impacted sight distance of pedestrians.
1 2
ATTACHMENT 3
776
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN75
ADVANCED YIELD LINES
Advanced yield lines are roadway markings that provide
guidance as to where drivers should wait while a pedestrian is crossing. They are placed in advance of a crosswalk to provide separation between the crossing pedestrians and vehicles.
Benefi ts
Advanced yield lines offer more visibility of pedestrians crossing the roadway and reduce the likelihood of multiple- threat crashes.
Design Considerations
These markings must be placed 20 to 50 feet in advance of the crosswalk and must include R1-5 or R1-5a MUTCD signage.
These markings are typically used at mid-block crossings or at unsignalized slip lanes.
HIGH-VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS
High-visibility ladder, continental, or triple four (double continental) crosswalks are crosswalk designs that provide greater visibility to motorists to help increase awareness of pedestrians crossings.
Benefi ts
High-visibility crosswalks are more likely to draw a motorist's attention and have been shown to improve yield behavior.
These crosswalks also create a more comfortable crossing experience for pedestrians.
Design Considerations
Costa Mesa uses standard crosswalk markings and high-
visibility (continental, ladder, and triple-four (or double continental)) depending on existing factors such as volumes, speeds, grades, available sight distance and surrounding context (schools, commercial areas, major arterials, etc.).
These types of crosswalks are typically installed in areas with high pedestrian demand and high vehicle activity to increase the safety of pedestrians. The horizontal bars of a continental or ladder crosswalk should be aligned with the nearest lane alignment (upstream or downstream) to maximize the visual effectiveness of the treatment as motorists approach the crosswalk.
3 4
ATTACHMENT 3
777
APPENDIX E TOOLBOX REFERENCE76
PEDESTRIAN CROSSING TREATMENTS
Recent pedestrian safety studies continue to indicate that marked uncontrolled pedestrian crossings can increase the risk of collisions with pedestrians, as well as rear-end and other types of collisions between motor vehicles.
Benefi ts
Pedestrian crossing treatments should be considered
wherever an uncontrolled pedestrian crossing exists. These treatments can reduce the risk of collisions with pedestrian and other types of collisions between motor vehicles.
Design Considerations
An appropriate design will consider the surrounding context, roadway cross section, pedestrian crossing volume, vehicular ADT, and prevailing speeds. Reducing the number of travel lanes and crossing distance for an uncontrolled crossing helps reduce pedestrian exposure in the roadway. Other
treatments include median refuge islands, advance yield lines, rectangular rapid fl ashing beacons (RRFB), pedestrian hybrid beacons (HAWK), signalized crosswalks, and special traffi c signal operations. The California MUTCD provides minimum guidance on use thresholds for some of these facilities, and guidance for FHWA is also available for selection of crossing treatments. It is also important to note that recent studies have indicated that crosswalk collisions are far more likely during darkness. Evaluation or enhancement of street
lighting may be appropriate in locations where uncontrolled crosswalks exist or are planned.
MID-BLOCK CROSSING
Mid-block crosswalks facilitate crossings to popular
destinations that are not well-served by the existing traffi c network. Mid-block crossings may be suitable in roadway segments where there is a large gap between signalized
intersections and pedestrians are more likely to cross the roadway at a mid-block location, instead of traveling to one of the signalized intersecting and then crossing the roadway.
Benefi ts
Mid-block crossings can lessen the amount of walking
needed for pedestrians to access a popular destination.
These crossings help maintain a pedestrian travel network and minimize the number of mid-block crossings that
occur throughout different parts of the block by attracting pedestrians to a marked crossing where there is high
pedestrian demand or anticipated demand.
Design Considerations
When considering mid-block crossings, pedestrian demand should be considered for optimal placement and usage.
Controlled mid-block crossings require pedestrian crossing treatments to improve visibility and safety. The design of these crossings needs to consider stopping sight distances, effects of grade, cross slope, need for lighting, and other factors.
5 6
ATTACHMENT 3
778
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN77
MAINTENANCE OF CROSSWALK MARKINGS
Many community member comments from the walk audits
were related to worn or poorly maintained markings. The community is concerned that poorly marked or maintained locations may be less safe than properly and clearly marked sites.
Benefi ts
Crosswalk markings that are in good condition (free form major cracks, chips or faded color), can maintain conspicuity of the crossing, especially from a long distance. Crosswalks that are properly installed will also retain their retro- refl ectiveness.
Design Considerations
Since pedestrians in California have similar rights at both marked and unmarked crossings, the condition of markings is not a large factor in litigation, but poorly marked locations are often noted as a cause of a collision. Gaps in thermoplastic markings are often created by utility trenches or pavement spot repair. Existing pavement quality needs to be accounted for before installing crosswalk markings. Poor pavement quality such as asphalt with major cracks and chips are not ideal for thermoplastic installation as the thermoplastic will then also crack and chip easily. Thermoplastic is also not ideal for installation over existing painted asphalt, or over concrete where a side street has a concrete swale/cross gutter across the street. Thermoplastic should be allowed to properly dry prior to motor vehicle travel, especially for high- visibility crosswalks, which will cause indentations and scuff marks by motor vehicles that cannot be removed.
SIGHT DISTANCES AT CROSSWALKS AND
INTERSECTION CORNERS
During the walk audits, community members often noted that they witnessed sight distance issues at crosswalks and at intersection corners, generally due to on-street parking near an intersection. It is not necessary to paint red curb around curb returns to provide adequate sight distance, but this treatment is often omitted on the opposite site of the street at T-intersections. Prohibiting parking on the approach to marked uncontrolled crosswalks is also normally encouraged to ensure that motorists and pedestrians can observe each other before the pedestrian enters the roadway.
Benefi ts
Parking management and providing adequate sight distances is important where pedestrian crossings are expected or encouraged. The key benefi t of this practice is safety.
Design Considerations
Providing adequate sight distance at all crossing
locations in residential areas is a good practice. This can be accomplished by prohibiting parking along the curb
approaching the crosswalk. Sight distance can also be
improved by providing a curb extension that allows the
pedestrian to step forward and improve their vision of
approaching traffi c without stepping into the street. Curb extensions also can provide a traffi c calming effect that helps achieve more reasonable vehicle speeds in residential areas. General design considerations for curb extensions, including drainage impacts, and bus stop opportunities, are discussed in other sections of this toolbox.
7 8
ATTACHMENT 3
779
APPENDIX E TOOLBOX REFERENCE78
ADDING MISSING CROSSWALKS AT TRAFFIC
SIGNALS
Community feedback from the walk audits noted that
crosswalk markings were not provided across all legs at many signalized intersections. The absence of crosswalk markings can increase the time and distance required
to reach destinations. Crossings are typically prohibited where the effi ciency of traffi c signalization is improved by eliminating the pedestrian crossing or where allowing the crossing increases the potential for a collision. Typical locations include 4-way intersections with heavy turning movements from one leg of the intersection and light traffi c on the opposite direction, such as Newport Boulevard at 19th Street, or Adams Avenue at Fairview Road; intersections that use “split phasing” and prohibit the crosswalk that would operate with the lightly used approach. Crossing movements are also often prohibited for one leg at T-intersections where left turns from the terminating street confl ict with pedestrians using the crosswalk at the left leg of the intersection.
Benefi ts
Providing controlled pedestrian crossings reduces the
amount of street crossings, since a pedestrian may be
required to use three crosswalks because of a missing
crosswalk leg. Many crosswalks are prohibited in commercial areas at this time, and these crossing prohibitions can be an impediment to walkability.
Design Considerations
Prohibiting crossings at signalized intersections should be carefully considered to verify that the prohibition is justifi ed and that other countermeasures are not suitable. In some cases, the potential ineffi ciency of requiring increased pedestrian crossing time to travel around the prohibited crossing may not be signifi cant. If the parallel and adjacent through traffi c movement already regularly requires enough time to serve a pedestrian crossing, there may be limited justifi cation for the prohibition.
In many cases the added time needed to add a pedestrian crossing can be easily incorporated into the existing signal operation. This may be most relevant at intersections with minor cross streets where surplus time is often available in the signal cycle to meet the needs of the added crossing.
Some traffi c signal design and phasing treatments can
minimize the time lost for vehicles, by allowing non-confl icting traffi c movements while the pedestrian crossing continues, including potentially other crosswalk movements or left turns that do not confl ict with the crossing movement. While studying whether or not a missing crosswalk should be
added, it is important to coordinate with emergency services.
Pedestrian crossings can confl ict with emergency vehicle preemption because the preemption cannot be triggered
during an active and confl icting pedestrian phase.
9 ATTACHMENT 3
780
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN79
CROSSWALK SCRAMBLE OPERATIONS
A crosswalk scramble operation is a special traffi c signal operation and phasing design that stops motor vehicle traffi c in all directions while allowing pedestrians to cross between all corners at the same time.
Benefi ts
By eliminating nearly all confl icts between vehicles and pedestrians, this technique can enhance safety at locations with a high number of pedestrians. It is appropriate in areas where pedestrian fl ows are so heavy that motorists may have diffi culty turning through pedestrian streams. They are seeing increased usage in Southern California near beaches, colleges, and in busy walkable retail areas with heavy
pedestrian volumes.
Design Considerations
While providing unique service to pedestrians, this technique can also increase delays to pedestrians, especially if a pedestrian can begin their crossing of two consecutive
intersection legs as soon as one direction indicates a WALK signal. The time required to serve the crossing is lost to other traffi c movements, so heavily used intersections can experience substantial delays and queuing. They are rarely implemented at heavily used intersections between multi- lane roadways.
PEDESTRIAN ISLANDS
Pedestrian islands are protected spaces placed in the center of the street to facilitate pedestrian crossings. The pedestrian islands help shorten the crossings especially at large
intersections.
Benefi ts
Pedestrian islands can provide a protected space for
pedestrians to wait for an acceptable gap in traffi c. They reduce the overall crossing length and a pedestrian's
exposure to vehicular traffi c. The islands can decrease the amount of delay that a pedestrian will experience to cross a street by not requiring a pedestrian to fi nd gaps in vehicular traffi c in order to cross street safely.
Design Considerations
Pedestrian islands should be at minimum 4 feet wide and preferably 8 feet wide to accommodate pedestrian comfort and safety. At mid-block crossings, pedestrian islands, in combination with curb extensions/bulb-outs, can provide traffi c calming benefi ts along with shorter crossings for pedestrians across each direction of travel way.
Detectable warning surfaces (i.e. truncated domes) signal to the sight impaired/blind to inform them that they have entered or exited areas where there may be confl icts with vehicles and/or bicycles. These detectable warning surfaces should be used at pedestrian islands where width allows for their inclusion.
1110
ATTACHMENT 3
781
APPENDIX E TOOLBOX REFERENCE80
IMPROVED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING TIMES
Community feedback from the walk audits often reported
inadequate pedestrian crossing times. Minimum crossing
times are specifi ed in the California MUTCD. Providing less time can increase liability and increase the potential for a pedestrian collision. Often the minimum times are present and adequate, but pedestrians may need additional crossing time if they do not fully understand the operation. The use of countdown indications is discussed in this toolbox and is an effective solution for this concern.
Benefi ts
Providing adequate crossing times allows for the last
pedestrian entering at the end of the “walk” cycle to clear the intersection safely before any confl icting vehicular movements begin. This reduces the potential for pedestrian- related collisions.
Design Considerations
The California MUTCD lowered the standard minimum walking rate from 4 feet per second (fps) to 3.5 fps over 10 years ago with an allowance that the times did not need to be implemented until other traffi c signal work or retiming was required. In addition to the walking speed of 3.5 fps, the method of measuring the crossing distance greatly affects the crossing time. A conservative approach to measuring the crossing distance is to measure from the bottom of
the curb ramps at both ends of the crossing, with the
path measured through the center of the crosswalk. This is more conservative than MUTCD guidance and provides
pedestrians with suffi cient time to cross.
PEDESTRIAN COUNTDOWN SIGNALS
Pedestrian countdown signals indicate how many seconds
of DON'T WALK remain before the traffi c signal turns to yellow.
The use of countdown indications is required for all signalized crosswalks except for extremely short crossings.
Benefi ts
Countdown pedestrian signals have greatly reduced concern that signals do not provide adequate time to complete a crossing. They are extremely useful in allowing pedestrians to gauge whether or not they have suffi cient time to cross.
Countdown pedestrian signals have signifi cantly reduced collisions caused by pedestrians beginning to cross near the end of the pedestrian phase due to not knowing the
remaining time. This type of incident was common prior to the emergence of countdown pedestrian signals.
Design Considerations
It is recommended that all remaining standard pedestrian signals be retrofi tted to a pedestrian countdown signal. 12 13
ATTACHMENT 3
782
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN81
PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON LOCATIONS
Pedestrian Push Buttons (PPBs) are generally located near the crosswalk and at a location that meets ADA requirements, and per MUTCD guidelines, preferably near the level landing.
The location should be intuitive and generally allow for activation while standing or waiting near the beginning of the crosswalk. PPBs located outside the crosswalk area may provide misleading information about the crossing location, especially to visually impaired pedestrians who may stand beside the push button and begin to cross outside of the crosswalk.
Benefi ts
Proper design of pedestrian push buttons reduces the
chance that a visually-impaired pedestrian will cross against a WALK signal or outside the crosswalk area. This greatly reduces the potential that a pedestrian will be struck by a moving vehicle which then increases walkability.
Design Considerations
Traffi c signal design guides and the California MUTCD provide guidance for the optimum location of pedestrian push
buttons. Where possible, a 4’ x 2.5’ level landing should be provided in front of the pedestrian push button for ADA adherence. Push buttons should not be installed in ramp fl ares. Pedestrian push buttons with older style push buttons consisting of a ½ inch round button need to be replaced with ADA compliant push buttons. Older push buttons are too
diffi cult to press for some and ADA- compliant pedestrian push buttons requires buttons to require less force to push. 14 A pedestrian will not have diffi culty locating a pedestrian push button (PPB) if it is properly designed. Improperly located PPBs are often due to unusual placement of traffi c signal poles, mounting the PPB on the wrong side of the pole, or the use of non-standard designs for traffi c signals at street corners. Where there is concern for PPB placement, site research will normally confi rm if the PPB is placed at a proper location. It may be necessary to install a separate push button and post closer to the crosswalk, but this installation is not as costly as attempting to move a large signal pole to a different location.
ATTACHMENT 3
783
APPENDIX E TOOLBOX REFERENCE82
ACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN SIGNALS (APS)
PUSH BUTTONS
Accessible Pedestrian Signal (APS) push buttons are devices that communicate information about the “WALK” and
“DON’T WALK” intervals at signalized intersections, in non- visual formats (audible tones and vibrotactile surfaces) to pedestrians who are visually impaired.
Benefi ts
APS pedestrian push buttons benefi t the visually-impaired by alerting them to the activation of a "WALK" interval as well as the status of the walk cycle.
Design Considerations
APS pedestrian push buttons should meet the current
requirements of the MUTCD and should include features such as a “Locate Tone” that sounds once per second, which
is intended to direct a visually impaired pedestrian to the location of the push button. APS pedestrian push buttons should also have a raised tactile arrow pointing in the direction of the crosswalk, which helps orient pedestrians in the direction of the crosswalk. The APS push buttons also emit an audible sound after the button is pushed, using sounding the word “Wait” each time the button is pushed. 15 PEDESTRIAN HYBRID BEACON (HAWK SIGNAL)
A pedestrian hybrid beacon, also known as a HAWK signal, is a traffi c control device used to provide additional pedestrian protection to existing uncontrolled or newly proposed marked crosswalk locations. A HAWK signal is distinct from traffi c signals and constant fl ash warning beacons because it
is only activated by pedestrians when the push button is pressed.
Benefi ts
HAWK signals can lead to lower confl ict and crash rates for pedestrians and vehicles. They clearly indicate that a crosswalk is being used and that all motorists must come to a complete stop. When the pedestrian phase of the
HAWK signal ends, the HAWK signal goes dark until the next activation by a pedestrian.
Design Considerations
HAWK signals should be located outside the functional area of a signalized intersection. CA MUTCD allows for installation at intersections or driveways. In addition to the signal head displays, stop lines and marked crosswalks are required at HAWK signal crossings. Advance stop lines should be used on at crossings to reduce the potential for crashes.
16 ATTACHMENT 3
784
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN83
RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACONS
(RRFB)
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) are a traffi c control device that uses a combination of a strobing LED light bar and pedestrian warning signs to help facilitate pedestrian crossing at marked crosswalks by informing motorists that there is someone in the crossing and that they must yield.
The devices fl ash when activated through a pedestrian push button or by passive pedestrian detection.
Benefi ts
RRFBs promote safer driver yielding behavior at crossings because they use an irregular fl ash pattern similar to emergency fl ashes on police vehicles to bring awareness to pedestrians using the crosswalk.
Design Considerations
RRFBs should be used in combination with a marked
crosswalk, ADA curb ramps, advance warning signs or
pavement markings, and overhead lighting. Reserve the use of RRFBs for locations with signifi cant pedestrian safety issues, as over-use of RRFB treatments may diminish their effectiveness.
17 LEADING PEDESTRIAN INTERVALS
This traffi c signal operation technique provides pedestrians a head start for crossing, allowing them to leave the curb and establish presence in the crosswalk before adjacent traffi c is signaled to proceed. They are most effective where vehicular right turns are frequent, and motorists are highly likely to enter the crosswalk during the fi rst few seconds of WALK. Typical leading pedestrian intervals (LPIs) range from 3-7 seconds.
Benefi ts
Confl icts between pedestrians and right-turning vehicles are most likely to occur within the fi rst few seconds, so the use of LPIs can be a great safety benefi t. Agencies who use the treatment in downtown location or heavily-used crossings report signifi cant reductions in reported pedestrian-related collisions. A reduction of 10-20 percent may arise, according to ongoing safety studies.
Design Considerations
LPI duration is an important consideration in the signal timing of an intersection. LPIs of 3 seconds may be too short to allow pedestrians adequate time to enter the roadway, and LPIs of 7 seconds may be too long and cause unnecessary delays for adjacent through movements where the right turn is not its own dedicated phase. Since motor vehicles are stopped during LPIs, implementing them on every intersection leg can cause signifi cant delays to motorists, especially where pedestrian and vehicular demand is high. LPIs can also be programmed to be active during specifi c times of the day. This allows the LPI to serve the time period of the highest pedestrian demand, if demand varies throughout the day. 18 ATTACHMENT 3
785
APPENDIX E TOOLBOX REFERENCE84
REGULATING RIGHT TURNS ON RED
Pedestrians occasionally mention right turns on red that confl ict with pedestrian crossings. Motorists making right turns may not always observe pedestrians to their right because their vision is directed to traffi c approaching from the left. The problem may be more pronounced at locations with designated right turn lanes or locations where most of the traffi c in the curb lane turns right.
Benefi ts
Prohibiting right turns on red can improve safety for
pedestrians. It is unknown how many pedestrian injuries occur due to allowing Right Turn on Red. However, there can be challenges to effective prohibitions.
Design Considerations
Motorists are highly accustomed to turning right on red and may resist measures without heavy enforcement. The
use of red turn arrows or the use of extinguishable (blank out) message signs or regular message signs have been
employed to seek better compliance. Prohibited locations normally have visibility issues that discourage motorists from trying to turn on red. Locations where the through lane limit line is set further back from the side street also see better compliance.
Right turn on red restrictions, however, need to be carefully studied before implementation because right turning
movements with high volumes can lead to long queues that spill back to the main line which may cause other safety concerns.
19 FLASHING YELLOW ARROWS (FYA)
Flashing Yellow Arrows (FYA) are implemented on traffi c signals for left/right turn movements. The FYA indicates to motorists that they may turn left/right only when there is no oncoming traffi c and crosswalks are clear of pedestrians and bicyclists. During the fl ashing yellow arrow, the left/right turn movement becomes a permissive left/right turn and when the yellow arrow turns solid, vehicles should prepare to stop and not proceed into the intersection to turn left/right.
Benefi ts
Flashing yellow arrows help make motorists more aware
of the permissive situation and makes them more alert to pedestrians. Depending on the traffi c volumes and opposing through traffi c conditions, the permissive green light may not allow more opportunities than a protected left turn arrow.
Therefore, potential locations for fl ashing yellow arrows will need to be studied to determine the feasibility of this treatment.
Design Considerations
Flashing yellow arrows can be useful for intersections with permissive left/right turns where there is a high level of non- compliance of motorists yielding to pedestrians. Flashing yellow arrows are more conspicuous and bring greater
attention to the required yield than a green light
20 ATTACHMENT 3
786
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN85
21 REDESIGN OR REMOVE SLIP TURN LANES
Uncontrolled free right turn lanes, also known as slip lanes, are lanes that allow motorists to turn right at signalized intersections, often without stopping, even when the traffi c signal is red for adjacent through traffi c. They were designed at intersections to reduce the delays and queues of right turning movements with very large right turning volumes. Slip lanes are usually equipped with a large median “porkchop” island which is used by pedestrians as a refuge. Slip lanes usually require right turning traffi c to either yield to cross- traffi c or the slip lane has its own dedicated receiving lane which merges onto the side street mainline.
Benefi ts (of Redesign or Removal)
These types of lanes are not friendly to pedestrians, because they help vehicles make the turns at much higher speeds and divert motorists' attention away from the pedestrian crosswalk within the slip lane. Programs to remove or modify these turn lanes are common, and design approaches that minimize their future need are preferred.
Design Treatments
The most common design treatment is to remove the slip
lane median island and, if necessary, reconstruct the
corner curb adjacent to the slip lane. This removes the uncontrolled crosswalk across the slip lane and creates a conventional right turn condition. Where such lanes are needed to accommodate the traffi c volumes, or where
construction funds are limited, their designs can be modifi ed.
This can by done by redesigning the slip lane to have a more perpendicular approach to the cross-street which reduces the angle of a motorist’s head turn needed to look for a gap in oncoming traffi c. This allows for a better sight distance to pedestrians crossing from the right to the left of the slip lane, which would normally be in the motorist’s blind spot as they are looking to the left. Another treatment is to remove the dedicated receiving lane of existing slip lanes. This would slow down vehicles as they approach the crosswalk because then motorists would need to yield to cross-traffi c before turning.
ATTACHMENT 3
787
APPENDIX E TOOLBOX REFERENCE86
PEDESTRIAN DELAY MANAGEMENT
Pedestrians experience substantial wait time when they want to cross the minor leg of the intersection, parallel to the major roadway, with a coordinated movement as the cycle lengths during the coordinated phase are longer.
Benefi ts
Turning on the "Pedestrian re-service" function on a
signalized intersection controller, if a pedestrian arrives at the intersection and the coordinated phase has enough time to service the pedestrian phase, then the pedestrian phase will turn on. This prevents pedestrians from needing to wait until the cycle fi nishes and the coordinated phase starts back up.
Design Considerations
Alternative intersection types have greatly reduced
pedestrian delays. These include all-way stops, roundabouts, and crossings of lightly traveled streets where no control is needed for pedestrians. When new traffi c signals are being considered, equal consideration to alternative intersections should be included, especially if an alternative intersection can meet expected usage requirements of all users.
22 23
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING
Street lighting can be an important amenity. Tall streetlights can provide adequate illumination to permit walking after dark, but lower-level lighting is often provided in commercial areas. These treatments increase the illumination level along the sidewalk and provide for a more constant level of illumination.
Benefi ts
Higher illumination is especially benefi cial in commercial areas.
It makes the area more attractive, and it better illuminates pedestrians as they walk along the sidewalk or across
driveways. Illumination is less needed in residential areas, but it should be suffi cient to allow for walking without carrying fl ashlights. It can also provide comfort and personal safety benefi ts for walking alone.
Design Treatments
Adequate lighting needs to be provided for sidewalks, trails/ MUPs, and crossings. Lighting at crossings needs to be either adjacent to the crossing or upstream from the crossing as to not create a backlight contrast issue which only allows a silhouette of the pedestrian to be visible.
ATTACHMENT 3
788
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN87
A majority of comments received from the community
engagement process were either related to the sidewalk
realm or pedestrian crossings. However, there were a handful of comments that pertain to general motor vehicle traffi c E.4 GENERAL TRAFFIC BEHAVIOR AND OTHER CONCERNS
behaviors or that are well beyond the scope of the Plan. The following tools could improve general traffi c behavior on the roadway.
Pedestrian bridge on Bristol Street
ATTACHMENT 3
789
APPENDIX E TOOLBOX REFERENCE88
ROADWAY RECONFIGURATIONS
In many communities, multi-lane arterials have been modifi ed to reduce the number of through travel lanes. It is especially common for roadways with 4-lanes undivided (no left turn lanes) to be reduced to 2 lanes (with left turn lane), where traffi c needs are clearly met by fewer lanes. Roads that carry fewer than 20,000 vehicles per day and have no more than 4 lanes are the best candidates for reconfi guration.
Benefi ts
Roadway reconfi gurations may create reduction in distance to cross active lanes, freeing space for bicycle lanes and other purposes, and slowing the fl ow of traffi c by inhibiting passing, especially along roadways with high pedestrian activity, such as roadways near schools.
Design Considerations
Reducing roadways from 4 lanes to 2 lanes (with traffi c volumes of less than 20,000 vehicles per day) can improve pedestrian safety, motorist safety, and result in traffi c calming benefi ts. Furthermore, a traffi c analysis may be appropriate for roadways in the 15-20,000 vehicle range to ensure that potential side effects are identifi ed.
The need to initiate a roadway reconfi guration should be considered based upon the identifi cation of safety issues or other needs that can be alleviated by reducing the width required for motor vehicle travel. A project that provides public enhancements will generally be treated more positively than a project which reduces travel lanes.
1 ATTACHMENT 3
790
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN89
restripe the roadway to a different confi guration is when it is repaved. The best time to test a trial confi guration is a few months to a year before it is repaved, if there is a potential that it would be changed back after a demonstration is
completed.
If a roadway is being considered for modifi cation to change the location of the curbs, either at an intersection or for a longer distance, consideration of including the curb change may be more affordable if done together with repaving.
There is often hesitancy to changing roadway soon after new pavement or other roadway features is completed. It is better to plan for the future of the roadway, and then undertake maintenance based upon moving toward the future plan.
ROADWAY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION
The roadway pavement conditions was often discussed
by community members during the walk audits. Paving in
pedestrian crossing areas can be an important factor in providing a safe walking surface and pavement condition should be monitored. But when streets are repaved, it is an appropriate time to review issues regarding how the street is used.
Benefi ts
When walkability measures are incorporated strategically with pavement rehabilitation, the costs can be reduced
substantially. Also the potential to reconstruct a feature that was recently constructed in its existing condition can result in expenditures that could be eliminated or reduced.
Integrating potential street changes into the rehabilitation schedule, often a year or more in advance, can save funds or allow for more work with the same amount of funding.
Design Considerations
The marking treatment, alignment, and location of marked crosswalks is best addressed when the existing crosswalk is repaved. The crosswalk can be shifted to better align with wheelchair ramps, the marking treatment can be converted to high visibility, and advance limit lines can be provided to move motorists further from the crosswalk when stopping.
The feasibility of road diets should also be a consideration before and after pavement rehabilitation. The best time to 2 ATTACHMENT 3
791
APPENDIX E TOOLBOX REFERENCE90
SPEED FEEDBACK SIGNS
A dynamic message sign that uses radar or laser technology to determine the speed of an approaching vehicle and then displays the speed to the driver. If motorists are speeding, the sign fl ashes the exceeded speed along with “SLOW DOWN” or “YOUR SPEED”.
Benefi ts
Speed feedback signs activate when drivers exceed posted speed limit by fi ve miles per hour. These can be effective in reducing motorists’ speeds on wide roadways or near high pedestrian areas such as schools.
Design Considerations
Physical constraints in installing speed feedback signs include requiring a special type of pole, space for footing, and if the signs are not solar – a source of electricity. Speed feedback signs should be strategically placed, where
warranted, such as locations with historical speeding
violations or collisions due to speeding.
TRANSIT ACCESS
Walking is an important consideration in encouraging or using transit. A typical walk shed, an area around a central destination that is reachable on foot by the average person, of ¼ mile is considered in transit planning around each bus stop. Special attention to the walkability for all potential routes to bus stops is appropriate. The walking route to high activity generators is especially important. Walking routes from bus stops to nearby shopping centers should be reviewed to ensure that the route is direct and relatively free of high traffi c aisles.
Design Considerations
Bus stops should be carefully integrated into the walking environment. Bus stops and shelters can impede the direct travel path of pedestrians. If space is available, they should be located between the travel way of the sidewalk and the curb line. If the space is not adequate, the furniture should be located toward the back of, or behind, the sidewalk.
Costa Mesa has constructed bus bays to move buses
out of the fl ow of vehicle traffi c. Many communities are constructing curb extensions to locate transit stops further into the street area. This location improves bus speed and provides more space for bus stop amenities. It can increase confl icts between stopping buses and through traffi c, but it can also discourage use of the curb lane, increasing the separation between walkers and heavy traffi c. Often, the combination of bus stops, slowing for pedestrians crossing driveways and intersections can greatly reduce the use of the curb travel lane.
3 4
ATTACHMENT 3
792
Pedestrian
Counts
APPENDIX F
ATTACHMENT 3
793
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Tue, Oct 5, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 1
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 7:15 AM 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7:30 AM 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 7:45 AM 1 7 4 5 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 8:00 AM 4 0 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 8:15 AM 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 8:30 AM 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:45 AM 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 TOTAL AM 6 15 10 16 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 62 04:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:15 PM 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5:00 PM 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 5:15 PM 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:30 PM 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 5:45 PM 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 TOTAL PM 3 3 6 7 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:15 AM 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 7:30 AM 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:45 AM 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:00 AM 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:30 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL AM 5 1 1 6 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 04:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4:45 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5:00 PM 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:15 PM 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:30 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:45 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 TOTAL PM 4 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
Garfield and Madison
Paularino
AM
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male
NORTH SIDE
Female Child Male Female Child
PM
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child
AM PM
Child Male Female Child Male Female
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN91
ATTACHMENT 3
794
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Wed, Oct 6, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 1
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7:15 AM 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7:30 AM 1 4 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 7:45 AM 2 5 3 3 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 8:00 AM 2 2 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 8:15 AM 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 8:30 AM 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 8:45 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 TOTAL AM 7 17 9 13 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 57 04:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:15 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:30 PM 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4:45 PM 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5:15 PM 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:30 PM 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:45 PM 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL PM 3 2 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:30 AM 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7:45 AM 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 8:00 AM 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:15 AM 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL AM 3 3 2 3 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 04:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:45 PM 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5:00 PM 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:15 PM 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5:30 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL PM 5 3 3 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 AM PM
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male Female Child Male Female Child
AM PM
Male Female Child
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
Garfield and Madison
Paularino
TOTALOTHER WHEELED DEVICE
Child
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS
NORTH SIDE
Male Female Child Male Female
APPENDIX F PEDESTRIAN COUNTS 92
ATTACHMENT 3
795
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Sat, Oct 2, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 1
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 11:00 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:00 PM 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 12:15 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 12:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:45 PM 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 TOTAL MD 2 1 6 3 0 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 11:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11:15 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12:15 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:45 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 TOTAL MD 2 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 MD
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male Female Child Male Female Child
STROLLERS
MD
Male Female Child Male
TOTAL
NORTH SIDE
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
Garfield and Madison
Paularino
OTHER WHEELED DEVICE
ChildFemale Child Male Female
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN93
ATTACHMENT 3
796
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Tue, Oct 5, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 2
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:15 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:30 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 8:00 AM 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8:15 AM 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 8:30 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8:45 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 TOTAL AM 2 4 2 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 16 04:00 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5:00 PM 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 5 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5:45 PM 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL PM 2 2 3 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 15
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:15 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:30 AM 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:45 AM 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 TOTAL AM 3 1 1 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 12 04:00 PM 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:45 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL PM 0 3 2 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
Jeffrey and Century
Baker
AM
TOTAL
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male
NORTH SIDE
Female Child Male Female Child
PM
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child
AM PM
Child Male Female Child Male Female
94APPENDIX F PEDESTRIAN COUNTS
ATTACHMENT 3
797
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Wed, Oct 6, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 2
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:30 AM 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:45 AM 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:00 AM 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8:15 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8:30 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:45 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL AM 2 2 3 3 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 04:00 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:45 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5:15 PM 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:30 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5:45 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 TOTAL PM 0 2 3 1 0 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 AM 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL AM 2 0 1 0 0 0 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 04:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:15 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:30 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4:45 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5:00 PM 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:15 PM 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:30 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5:45 PM 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 TOTAL PM 5 4 2 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 TOTAL
OTHER WHEELED DEVICE
Child
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS
NORTH SIDE
Male Female Child Male Female
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
Jeffrey and Century
Baker
Female Child
AM PM
Male Female Child
AM PM
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male Female Child Male
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN95
ATTACHMENT 3
798
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Sat, Oct 2, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 2
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 11:00 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11:30 AM 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 11:45 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 TOTAL MD 0 4 0 1 0 1 2 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 15
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 11:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11:15 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11:45 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12:00 PM 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 12:15 PM 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 12:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 TOTAL MD 4 4 0 0 0 0 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 TOTAL
NORTH SIDE
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
Jeffrey and Century
Baker
OTHER WHEELED DEVICE
ChildFemale Child Male Female
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR
Child
STROLLERS
MD
Male Female Child Male
MD
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male Female Child Male Female
96APPENDIX F PEDESTRIAN COUNTS
ATTACHMENT 3
799
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Tue, Oct 5, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 3
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 AM 0 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 7:45 AM 1 2 1 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 8:00 AM 2 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 10 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8:30 AM 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 8:45 AM 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 TOTAL AM 4 7 8 6 3 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 34 04:00 PM 1 0 1 0 0 11 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 15 4:15 PM 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 4:30 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4:45 PM 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 5:00 PM 0 1 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 7 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5:30 PM 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 5:45 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 TOTAL PM 2 2 5 6 2 11 1 4 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 1 2 0 0 0 1 41
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:15 AM 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7:30 AM 0 5 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7:45 AM 1 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8:15 AM 3 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 6 8:30 AM 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8:45 AM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL AM 5 10 3 3 1 3 4 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 32 04:00 PM 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4:15 PM 1 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 4:30 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 4:45 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:15 PM 2 3 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 5:30 PM 2 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 5:45 PM 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 TOTAL PM 8 8 0 3 1 1 9 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 40
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
Maple and Miner
Wilson
AM
TOTAL
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male
NORTH SIDE
Female Child Male Female Child
PM
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child
AM PM
Child Male Female Child Male Female
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN97
ATTACHMENT 3
800
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Wed, Oct 6, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 3
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:45 AM 3 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 8:00 AM 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:15 AM 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 8:30 AM 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 8:45 AM 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 6 TOTAL AM 8 1 3 5 6 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 29 04:00 PM 2 2 2 0 1 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 4:15 PM 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 6 4:30 PM 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 4:45 PM 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 5:00 PM 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 8 5:15 PM 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5:45 PM 1 1 1 2 2 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 TOTAL PM 7 11 5 4 4 6 4 9 1 0 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 60
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 2 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 7:15 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:45 AM 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 8:00 AM 1 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 8:15 AM 1 2 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 8:30 AM 0 1 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 8:45 AM 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 TOTAL AM 7 9 6 6 0 1 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 04:00 PM 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4:15 PM 1 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 4:30 PM 1 3 0 2 0 3 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 4:45 PM 3 1 2 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 5:00 PM 2 0 1 1 0 1 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 5:15 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 4 5:30 PM 0 2 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5:45 PM 3 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 TOTAL PM 11 10 5 6 1 5 10 6 2 2 2 1 0 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 66 AM PM
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male Female Child Male Female Child
AM PM
Male Female Child
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
Maple and Miner
Wilson
TOTAL
OTHER WHEELED DEVICE
Child
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS
NORTH SIDE
Male Female Child Male Female
98APPENDIX F PEDESTRIAN COUNTS
ATTACHMENT 3
801
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Sat, Oct 2, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 3
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 11:00 AM 1 1 2 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 9 11:15 AM 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 11:30 AM 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11:45 AM 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 12:00 PM 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 12:15 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 12:30 PM 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 12:45 PM 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 7 TOTAL MD 7 4 6 8 0 0 2 8 1 5 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 1 1 47
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 11:00 AM 1 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 11:15 AM 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 11:30 AM 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 11:45 AM 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 12:00 PM 2 2 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 12:15 PM 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 12:30 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 6 12:45 PM 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 TOTAL MD 8 3 7 10 1 0 5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 4 0 0 0 0 47 MD
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male Female Child Male Female Child
STROLLERS
MD
Male Female Child Male
TOTAL
NORTH SIDE
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
Maple and Miner
Wilson
OTHER WHEELED DEVICE
ChildFemale Child Male Female
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN99
ATTACHMENT 3
802
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Tue, Oct 19, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 4
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7:15 AM 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 AM 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:30 AM 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL AM 3 1 5 2 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 04:00 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4:15 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:30 PM 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:15 PM 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5:30 PM 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 5:45 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 TOTAL PM 3 2 5 4 0 0 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 22
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:15 AM 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 7:30 AM 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7:45 AM 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 8:00 AM 2 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 8 8:15 AM 1 0 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 8:30 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL AM 7 10 3 7 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 32 04:00 PM 2 1 2 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 4:15 PM 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4:30 PM 3 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4:45 PM 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 5:00 PM 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 5:15 PM 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5:30 PM 2 4 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 5:45 PM 2 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 TOTAL PM 15 8 12 7 0 0 4 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 52
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
College and Fordham
Wilson
AM
TOTAL
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male
NORTH SIDE
Female Child Male Female Child
PM
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child
AM PM
Child Male Female Child Male Female
100APPENDIX F PEDESTRIAN COUNTS
ATTACHMENT 3
803
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Wed, Oct 20, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 4
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 AM 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7:30 AM 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7:45 AM 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:00 AM 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 8:15 AM 1 3 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 8:30 AM 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 8:45 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 TOTAL AM 7 9 4 4 1 0 0 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 04:00 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:45 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:30 PM 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 5:45 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 TOTAL PM 1 3 3 1 0 0 4 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 17
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:15 AM 3 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7:30 AM 0 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 7:45 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8:00 AM 2 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 8:15 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8:30 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8:45 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 TOTAL AM 6 7 4 6 0 0 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 04:00 PM 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4:15 PM 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 4:30 PM 3 1 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 4:45 PM 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 5:00 PM 2 1 2 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 5:15 PM 2 2 2 3 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 5:30 PM 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 5:45 PM 3 0 5 2 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 TOTAL PM 16 7 16 10 1 2 6 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 62 AM PM
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male Female Child Male Female Child
AM PM
Male Female Child
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
College and Fordham
Wilson
TOTAL
OTHER WHEELED DEVICE
Child
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS
NORTH SIDE
Male Female Child Male Female
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN101
ATTACHMENT 3
804
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Sat, Oct 23, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 4
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 11:00 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11:15 AM 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 11:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11:45 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12:00 PM 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 12:15 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 12:30 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12:45 PM 1 1 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 TOTAL MD 3 5 0 6 3 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 21
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 11:00 AM 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 11:15 AM 1 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 11:30 AM 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 11:45 AM 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 12:00 PM 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 12:15 PM 1 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 12:30 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12:45 PM 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 TOTAL MD 6 9 8 7 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 MD
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male Female Child Male Female Child
STROLLERS
MD
Male Female Child Male
TOTAL
NORTH SIDE
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
College and Fordham
Wilson
OTHER WHEELED DEVICE
ChildFemale Child Male Female
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR
102APPENDIX F PEDESTRIAN COUNTS
ATTACHMENT 3
805
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Tue, Oct 5, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 5
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB 7:00 AM 2 5 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 7:15 AM 2 4 2 1 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 7:30 AM 12 4 5 2 0 1 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 7:45 AM 3 2 5 1 5 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 21 8:00 AM 0 1 6 3 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 8:15 AM 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 8:30 AM 2 1 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 8:45 AM 1 0 3 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 TOTAL AM 22 18 22 13 12 2 13 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 111 04:00 PM 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4:15 PM 1 3 0 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 11 4:30 PM 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 7 4:45 PM 1 3 1 2 0 5 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 17 5:00 PM 3 0 2 0 5 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 5:15 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 5:30 PM 1 0 0 2 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 9 5:45 PM 0 0 1 0 0 3 4 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 TOTAL PM 9 8 6 6 5 10 13 3 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 1 3 5 0 0 0 1 74
NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB 7:00 AM 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 7:15 AM 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7:30 AM 8 0 9 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 25 7:45 AM 2 1 7 0 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 8:00 AM 0 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 6 8:15 AM 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 8:30 AM 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 8:45 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 TOTAL AM 11 5 21 5 8 0 5 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 67 04:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 4:15 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 4:30 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4:45 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5:15 PM 0 1 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 5:30 PM 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 5:45 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 TOTAL PM 1 4 6 5 0 0 1 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 29 Child
AM PM
Child Male Female Child Male Female
PM
WEST SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female
Female Child Male Female Child
AM
TOTAL
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
Placentia
Wilson and Congress
EAST SIDE
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN103
ATTACHMENT 3
806
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Wed, Oct 6, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 5
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB 7:00 AM 2 3 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 7:15 AM 3 4 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 7:30 AM 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7:45 AM 1 1 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 8:00 AM 5 1 7 3 8 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 29 8:15 AM 11 0 9 1 4 0 5 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 36 8:30 AM 3 1 3 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 8:45 AM 2 0 2 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 TOTAL AM 29 10 26 7 16 5 11 2 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 1 3 0 1 0 0 0 117 04:00 PM 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 4:15 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 5 4:30 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4:45 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 5:15 PM 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 5:30 PM 1 1 1 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 8 5:45 PM 1 2 1 3 0 2 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 TOTAL PM 7 6 2 4 1 4 12 4 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 1 47
NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB 7:00 AM 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 7:15 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7:30 AM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7:45 AM 1 0 3 0 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 10 8:00 AM 3 1 4 5 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 18 8:15 AM 2 0 3 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 10 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 8:45 AM 1 1 1 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 TOTAL AM 7 3 14 8 12 0 5 9 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 63 04:00 PM 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4:45 PM 1 1 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 5:00 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 5:15 PM 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 5:30 PM 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:45 PM 1 3 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 12 TOTAL PM 2 7 3 4 7 1 0 5 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 37 AM PM
WEST SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male Female Child Male Female Child
AM PM
Male Female Child
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
Placentia
Wilson and Congress
TOTAL
OTHER WHEELED DEVICE
Child
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS
EAST SIDE
Male Female Child Male Female
104APPENDIX F PEDESTRIAN COUNTS
ATTACHMENT 3
807
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Sat, Oct 2, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 5
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB 11:00 AM 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 4 11:15 AM 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 11:30 AM 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 11:45 AM 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 12:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 12:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:30 PM 1 0 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 8 12:45 PM 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 4 TOTAL MD 5 6 4 2 0 0 2 1 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 4 0 32
NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB 11:00 AM 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 11:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11:45 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 12:00 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12:15 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 12:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12:45 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 TOTAL MD 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 7 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 MD
WEST SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male Female Child Male Female Child
STROLLERS
MD
Male Female Child Male
TOTAL
EAST SIDE
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
Placentia
Wilson and Congress
OTHER WHEELED DEVICE
ChildFemale Child Male Female
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN105
ATTACHMENT 3
808
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Tue, Oct 5, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 6
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:15 AM 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7:30 AM 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 7:45 AM 2 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8:30 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8:45 AM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL AM 6 4 2 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 20 04:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4:45 PM 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5:15 PM 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:30 PM 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 5:45 PM 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 TOTAL PM 5 3 0 3 1 0 2 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 7:15 AM 2 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7:30 AM 1 1 1 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 7:45 AM 1 0 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:30 AM 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 8:45 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL AM 5 7 2 6 6 1 5 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 42 04:00 PM 1 2 0 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 4:15 PM 1 2 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 4:30 PM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4:45 PM 1 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5:00 PM 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:15 PM 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 5:30 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:45 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL PM 6 10 4 3 0 7 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
San Michel and Maple
Victoria
AM
TOTAL
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male
NORTH SIDE
Female Child Male Female Child
PM
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child
AM PM
Child Male Female Child Male Female
106APPENDIX F PEDESTRIAN COUNTS
ATTACHMENT 3
809
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Wed, Oct 6, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 6
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:30 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:45 AM 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 8:00 AM 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 8:15 AM 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 8:30 AM 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL AM 2 7 4 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 04:00 PM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4:15 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4:30 PM 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 6 4:45 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:30 PM 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:45 PM 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 TOTAL PM 3 6 0 2 1 1 2 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 28
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 7:15 AM 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 7:30 AM 1 1 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7:45 AM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8:00 AM 2 1 2 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 8:15 AM 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 8:30 AM 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:45 AM 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 TOTAL AM 7 7 8 7 2 0 3 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 40 04:00 PM 2 0 2 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 4:15 PM 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 6 4:30 PM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 4:45 PM 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 5:00 PM 1 2 1 2 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 10 5:15 PM 3 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 8 5:30 PM 2 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5:45 PM 0 3 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 TOTAL PM 9 10 6 8 1 10 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 59 TOTAL
OTHER WHEELED DEVICE
Child
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS
NORTH SIDE
Male Female Child Male Female
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
San Michel and Maple
Victoria
Female Child
AM PM
Male Female Child
AM PM
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male Female Child Male
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN107
ATTACHMENT 3
810
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Sat, Oct 2, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 6
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 11:00 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 11:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 7 11:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 11:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 12:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 12:15 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 TOTAL MD 2 0 0 0 0 0 4 20 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 32
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 11:00 AM 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 11:15 AM 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 5 12:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12:15 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 12:30 PM 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 5 12:45 PM 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 TOTAL MD 4 2 2 3 0 0 6 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 3 1 2 0 1 0 0 30 TOTAL
NORTH SIDE
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
San Michel and Maple
Victoria
OTHER WHEELED DEVICE
ChildFemale Child Male Female
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR
Child
STROLLERS
MD
Male Female Child Male
MD
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male Female Child Male Female
108APPENDIX F PEDESTRIAN COUNTS
ATTACHMENT 3
811
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Tue, Oct 5, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 7
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:15 AM 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:30 AM 5 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7:45 AM 2 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 8 8:00 AM 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 8:15 AM 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:30 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8:45 AM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 TOTAL AM 15 12 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 32 04:00 PM 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4:15 PM 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4:30 PM 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 4:45 PM 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:00 PM 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:15 PM 1 2 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 5:30 PM 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 5:45 PM 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 TOTAL PM 9 8 5 4 0 0 3 5 2 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 40
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7:15 AM 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:30 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 AM 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8:30 AM 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL AM 2 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 04:00 PM 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4:15 PM 1 0 2 4 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 5:00 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:15 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 5:30 PM 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 5:45 PM 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 TOTAL PM 3 2 4 5 2 0 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 28 Child
AM PM
Child Male Female Child Male Female
PM
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female
Female Child Male Female Child
AM
TOTAL
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
Federal and Placentia
19th
NORTH SIDE
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN109
ATTACHMENT 3
812
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Wed, Oct 6, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 7
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 AM 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7:30 AM 2 2 3 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 7:45 AM 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 8:00 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:45 AM 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 TOTAL AM 5 7 5 1 2 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 04:00 PM 3 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 4:15 PM 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4:30 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:00 PM 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5:15 PM 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 5:30 PM 2 5 2 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 5:45 PM 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 TOTAL PM 8 11 4 5 0 0 5 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:15 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:45 AM 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 8:00 AM 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:15 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8:30 AM 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL AM 3 4 3 0 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 17 04:00 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:15 PM 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4:30 PM 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4:45 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:00 PM 0 1 2 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 11 5:15 PM 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 5:30 PM 1 3 2 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 5:45 PM 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 TOTAL PM 4 5 4 8 1 2 6 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 39 AM PM
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male Female Child Male Female Child
AM PM
Male Female Child
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
Federal and Placentia
19th
TOTAL
OTHER WHEELED DEVICE
Child
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS
NORTH SIDE
Male Female Child Male Female
110APPENDIX F PEDESTRIAN COUNTS
ATTACHMENT 3
813
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Sat, Oct 2, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 7
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 11:00 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 8 11:15 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11:45 AM 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 12:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 12:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 12:30 PM 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 5 TOTAL MD 2 1 2 1 0 0 3 13 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 29
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 11:00 AM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11:15 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 7 11:30 AM 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 11:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 12:00 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 12:15 PM 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 12:30 PM 0 3 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 12:45 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL MD 5 5 2 3 0 0 9 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 33 MD
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male Female Child Male Female Child
STROLLERS
MD
Male Female Child Male
TOTAL
NORTH SIDE
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
Federal and Placentia
19th
OTHER WHEELED DEVICE
ChildFemale Child Male Female
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN111
ATTACHMENT 3
814
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Tue, Oct 5, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 8
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:15 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:30 AM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 AM 1 2 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 8:15 AM 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 8:30 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8:45 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 TOTAL AM 2 6 0 4 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 04:00 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4:15 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:45 PM 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5:00 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 5:15 PM 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:30 PM 3 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 8 5:45 PM 2 0 1 3 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 TOTAL PM 8 9 2 5 0 0 5 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 36
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 7:15 AM 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7:30 AM 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7:45 AM 6 1 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 8:00 AM 0 1 1 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 8:15 AM 2 4 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 8:30 AM 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 8:45 AM 0 4 2 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 TOTAL AM 16 13 8 6 0 0 7 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 53 04:00 PM 3 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 4:15 PM 2 3 0 2 0 0 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 4:30 PM 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 4:45 PM 1 2 1 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 5:00 PM 2 0 4 1 0 0 1 2 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 5:15 PM 4 3 1 3 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 14 5:30 PM 0 5 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 5:45 PM 5 5 1 2 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 TOTAL PM 17 22 9 14 0 0 10 10 1 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 90 Child
AM PM
Child Male Female Child Male Female
PM
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female
Female Child Male Female Child
AM
TOTAL
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
Park and Harbor
19th
NORTH SIDE
112APPENDIX F PEDESTRIAN COUNTS
ATTACHMENT 3
815
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Wed, Oct 6, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 8
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 7:15 AM 3 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 7:30 AM 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7:45 AM 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 8:00 AM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:30 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8:45 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 TOTAL AM 8 4 4 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 20 04:00 PM 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4:15 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4:30 PM 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL PM 3 3 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 11
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7:15 AM 4 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 7:30 AM 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7:45 AM 0 1 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 8:00 AM 3 1 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 8:15 AM 3 4 2 2 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 8:30 AM 4 3 3 4 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 20 8:45 AM 2 4 5 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 TOTAL AM 21 16 17 20 0 0 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 88 04:00 PM 0 1 2 3 0 0 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 4:15 PM 4 3 5 4 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 20 4:30 PM 4 6 2 3 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 4:45 PM 1 1 0 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 5:00 PM 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5:15 PM 2 3 2 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 5:30 PM 3 2 2 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 5:45 PM 2 4 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 TOTAL PM 17 20 15 18 0 0 11 11 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 96 AM PM
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male Female Child Male Female Child
AM PM
Male Female Child
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
Park and Harbor
19th
TOTAL
OTHER WHEELED DEVICE
Child
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS
NORTH SIDE
Male Female Child Male Female
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN113
ATTACHMENT 3
816
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Sat, Oct 2, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 8
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 11:00 AM 1 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 11:15 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 11:30 AM 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 11:45 AM 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 12:00 PM 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 12:15 PM 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 12:30 PM 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12:45 PM 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 TOTAL MD 12 5 7 2 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 31
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 11:00 AM 4 2 6 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 11:15 AM 3 1 3 4 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 15 11:30 AM 5 6 2 2 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 19 11:45 AM 4 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 12:00 PM 3 1 2 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 12:15 PM 3 3 2 2 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 12:30 PM 4 6 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 12:45 PM 1 3 3 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 TOTAL MD 27 23 21 13 1 1 10 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 106 MD
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male Female Child Male Female Child
STROLLERS
MD
Male Female Child Male
TOTAL
NORTH SIDE
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
Park and Harbor
19th
OTHER WHEELED DEVICE
ChildFemale Child Male Female
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR
114APPENDIX F PEDESTRIAN COUNTS
ATTACHMENT 3
817
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Tue, Oct 5, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 9
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB 7:00 AM 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:45 AM 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:00 AM 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 8:15 AM 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:45 AM 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 TOTAL AM 7 4 3 4 0 0 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 04:00 PM 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 4:15 PM 0 2 0 3 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 4:30 PM 1 3 2 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 11 4:45 PM 1 1 5 4 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 14 5:00 PM 3 4 1 1 1 1 0 2 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 5:15 PM 2 2 6 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 5:30 PM 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:45 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL PM 9 14 14 18 2 3 2 6 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 77
NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:30 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8:15 AM 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL AM 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 11 04:00 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:00 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:15 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:30 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:45 PM 2 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 TOTAL PM 3 7 3 1 0 0 3 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 24
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
Harbor
19th and Newport
AM
TOTAL
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male
EAST SIDE
Female Child Male Female Child
PM
WEST SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child
AM PM
Child Male Female Child Male Female
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN115
ATTACHMENT 3
818
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Wed, Oct 6, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 9
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB 7:00 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:15 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:45 AM 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 8:00 AM 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 8:15 AM 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:30 AM 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8:45 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 TOTAL AM 6 6 2 1 0 0 2 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 04:00 PM 2 2 0 0 0 0 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 4:15 PM 3 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 4:30 PM 1 1 1 2 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 4:45 PM 4 7 1 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 5:00 PM 1 1 0 4 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 5:15 PM 2 1 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 5:30 PM 1 3 1 3 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 14 5:45 PM 3 6 3 3 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 20 TOTAL PM 17 22 7 19 1 1 12 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 3 0 0 0 0 94
NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:45 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:00 AM 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:15 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8:30 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:45 AM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 TOTAL AM 1 6 1 1 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 18 04:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4:15 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:30 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 4:45 PM 3 0 6 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 12 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 5:15 PM 0 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 5:30 PM 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:45 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL PM 7 6 7 2 0 0 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 31 TOTAL
OTHER WHEELED DEVICE
Child
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS
EAST SIDE
Male Female Child Male Female
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
Harbor
19th and Newport
Female Child
AM PM
Male Female Child
AM PM
WEST SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male Female Child Male
116APPENDIX F PEDESTRIAN COUNTS
ATTACHMENT 3
819
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Sat, Oct 2, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 9
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB 11:00 AM 0 2 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 11:15 AM 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11:30 AM 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11:45 AM 3 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 12:00 PM 1 2 2 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 12:15 PM 1 2 0 3 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 12:30 PM 2 2 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 12:45 PM 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 TOTAL MD 14 11 6 10 0 1 4 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51
NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB 11:00 AM 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 11:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11:30 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11:45 AM 2 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 12:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12:15 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12:45 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL MD 4 5 2 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 TOTAL
EAST SIDE
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] Costa Mesa
Harbor
19th and Newport
OTHER WHEELED DEVICE
ChildFemale Child Male Female
PEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR
Child
STROLLERS
MD
Male Female Child Male
MD
WEST SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male Female Child Male Female
CITY OF COSTA MESA PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN117
ATTACHMENT 3
820
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Tue, Oct 5, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 10
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7:30 AM 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8:00 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 8:15 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:45 AM 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL AM 4 3 1 0 0 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 15 04:00 PM 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4:15 PM 1 1 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 4:30 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 4:45 PM 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:00 PM 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5:15 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:30 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5:45 PM 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 TOTAL PM 5 8 3 5 0 1 1 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 29
EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB EB WB 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:30 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7:45 AM 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL AM 1 1 2 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 04:00 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:30 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:00 PM 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5:15 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5:30 PM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5:45 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 TOTAL PM 5 2 0 1 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 AM
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
Costa Mesa
Orange and Westminster
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 [email protected] 17th
NORTH SIDE
Female Child Male Female Child
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female Child Male
PM
SOUTH SIDE
TOTALPEDS BYCICLIST WHEELCHAIR STROLLERS OTHER WHEELED DEVICE Male Female ChildChild Male Femal e
AM PM
Child Male Female
118APPENDIX F PEDESTRIAN COUNTS
ATTACHMENT 3
821
DATE: LOCATION: PROJECT #: SC3096
Wed, Oct 6, 21 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #: 10
EAST & WEST: CONTROL: NO CONTROL