The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2016-123 - Adopting Negative Declaration No. ND2016-004 (SCH No. 2014011028) for Land Use and Zoning Amendments Located at 191 Riverside AvenueRESOLUTION NO. 2016-123 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. ND2016-004 (SCH NO. 2014011028) FOR LAND USE AND ZONING AMENDMENTS LOCATED AT 191 RIVERSIDE AVENUE WHEREAS, an application was filed by Pacific Coast Architects, with respect to property located at 191 Riverside Avenue, and legally described as Lot F of Tract 919, requesting approval of amendments to the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan to change the land use category from Public Facilities (RF) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -1-11) and an amendment to the Zoning Code to change the zoning from Public Facilities (PF) to Mixed -Use Mariners' Mile (MU -MM) (collectively, Project); WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on October 20, 2016, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC). Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning Commission voted (5 ayes, 1 noes, 1 abstain) to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2032 recommending City Council adoption of Negative Declaration ND2016-004 (SCH NO. 2014011028) and approval of General Plan Amendment No. GP2016-002, Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2016-002 and Code Amendment No. CA2016-005; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on November 22, 2016, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this public hearing; WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq. (CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code of Regulations, Sections 15000 et seq.), and City Council Policy K-3, the Project is such subject to environmental review; WHEREAS, the City thereafter caused to be prepared an Initial Study/Negative Declaration (SCH No. 2014011028) (ND) in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and City Council Policy K-3; WHEREAS, notice of the availability of the draft ND was given in accordance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and City Council Policy K-3. The draft ND was made available for public review for a 30 -day comment period beginning on September 20, 2016, and ending October 20, 2016. The City received four comments letters during the public review period and the comments were considered during consideration of the Project and the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, found that the comments contained did not include substantial evidence that a potential environmental effect may occur; Resolution No. 2016-123 Page 2 of 3 WHEREAS, on the basis of the entire environmental review record, the Project will have a less than significant impact upon the environment; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA determinations and approvals of land use projects are costly and time consuming. In addition, project opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges. As project applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate that such applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial challenge, and bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which may be awarded to a successful challenger. Therefore, to the fullest extent permitted by law, applicant and property owner shall defend, indemnify, release and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its boards and commissions, officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any and all claims, demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including without limitation, attorney's fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever which may arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to the Project, the Project's approval based on the City's CEQA determination and/or the City's failure to comply with the requirements of any federal, state, or local laws, including, but not limited to, CEQA, General Plan and zoning requirements. This indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages awarded against the City, if any, costs of suit, attorneys' fees, and other expenses incurred in connection with such claim, action, or proceeding whether incurred by applicant, City, and/or the parties initiating or bringing such proceeding. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, hereby resolves as follows: Section 1: The City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby adopts Negative Declaration No. ND2016-004 (SCH NO. 2014011028), which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A," and incorporated herein by reference. Section 2: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are incorporated into the operative part of this resolution. Section 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Section 4: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution. ADOPTED this 22nd day of November, 2016. ATTEST: Leilani L E City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Z?/ (Fr) Aaron C. Harp City Attorney Resolution No. 2016-123 Page 3 of 3 Exhibit "A" Negative Declaration SCH No. 2014011028 NEGATIVE DECLARATION for 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments General Plan Amendment No. GP2016-002 Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2013-003 Zoning Code Amendment No. CA2016-005 (PA2016-127) Lead Agency Contact: Patrick J. Alford City of Newport Beach Community Development Department Planning Division 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, California 92660 SEPTEMBER 16, 2016 Declaration 1.0 Introduction 1.0 Introduction The City of Newport Beach (hereafter "City") received applications from Mariners Center M2, LLC (hereafter "Project Applicant") for amendments to the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan to change the land use category from Public Facilities (PF) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU - H1) and an amendment to the Zoning Code to change the zoning from Public Facilities (PF) to Mixed -Use Mariners Mile (MU -MM) for a 0.52 -acre site located at 191 Riverside Avenue (hereafter "Project" or "proposed Project"). The proposed Project is the subject of analysis in this document pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This Negative Declaration (ND) was compiled by the City of Newport Beach, serving as the Lead Agency for the proposed Project pursuant to CEQA §21067 and CEQA Guidelines Article 4 and §15367. "Lead Agency" refers to the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project. This introduction is included to provide the reader with general information regarding: 1) the location of the proposed Project and a summary of the Project's proposed discretionary actions; 2) standards of adequacy for a ND under CEQA; 3) a summary of Initial Study findings supporting the Lead Agency's decision to prepare a ND for the proposed Project; 4) a description of the format and content of this ND; and 5) the governmental processing requirements to consider the proposed Project for approval. 1.1 Document Purpose This document is a Negative Declaration (ND) prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), including all criteria, standards, and procedures of CEQA (California Public Resource Code Section 21000 et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Section 15000 et seq.). This ND is an informational document intended for use by the City of Newport Beach, Trustee and Responsible agencies, and members of the general public in evaluating the physical environmental effects of the proposed Project. 1.2 Proiect Location The subject property (hereafter, "proposed Project Site" or "Project Site") is located on the southwest corner of the intersection of Riverside Avenue and Avon Street. The proposed Project Site comprises approximately 0.52 acres, located in the City of Newport Beach, Orange County, California in the Mariners Mile commercial district. Newport Bay is located approximately 650 feet to the southwest. Specifically, the subject property is bounded by Avon Street to the north, Mariners Center to the south and west, and Riverside Avenue to the east. The current addresses of the proposed Project Site are 149 and 191 Riverside Avenue, Newport Beach, California 92660. The assessor's parcel numbers (APNs) are 049-110-17 and 049-110-27. 1.3 Prosect Summary The proposed Project consists of applications for a General Plan Amendment (GP2016-002) and Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment (LC2016-002) to change the land use category from Public Facilities (PF) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H1) and a Zoning Code Amendment (CA2016-005) to change the zoning from Public Facilities (PF) to Mixed -Use Mariners Mile (MU - 1191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16. 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1-1 Declaration 1.0 Introduction MM) for a 0.52 -acre site located at 191 Riverside Avenue. No demolition or new construction is proposed at this time. If the Project is approved by the City Council, the Project's Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment would then require review by the California Coastal Commission (CCC). 1.4 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 1.4.1 CEQA Objectives CEQA is a statewide environmental law contained in Public Resources Code §§ 21000-21177 that applies to most public agency decisions to carry out, authorize, or approve actions that have the potential to adversely affect the environment. The overarching goal of CEQA is to protect the physical environment. To achieve that goal, CEQA requires that public agencies inform themselves of the environmental consequences of their discretionary actions and consider alternatives and mitigation measures that could avoid or reduce significant adverse impacts when avoidance or reduction is feasible. It also gives other public agencies and the general public an opportunity to comment on the information. If significant adverse impacts cannot be avoided, reduced, or mitigated to below a level of significance, the public agency is required to prepare an EIR and balance the project's environmental concerns with other goals and benefits in a statement of overriding considerations. The principal objectives of CEQA are to: 1) inform governmental decision makers and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of proposed activities; 2) identify the ways that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced; 3) prevent significant, avoidable damage to the environment by requiring changes in projects through the use of alternatives or mitigation measures when the governmental agency finds the changes to be feasible; and 4) disclose to the public the reasons why a governmental agency approved the project in the manner the agency chose if significant environmental effects are involved. 1.4.2 CEQA Requirements for Negative Declarations (NDs) A ND is a written statement by the Lead Agency briefly describing the reasons a proposed project, which is not exempt from the requirements of CEQA, will not have a significant effect on the environment and therefore does not require preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). (CEQA Guidelines § 15371) The CEQA Guidelines require the preparation of a ND if the Initial Study prepared for a project identifies no potentially significant effects. 1.4.3 Initial Study Findings Section 5.0 contains a copy of the Initial Study that was prepared for the proposed Project pursuant to CEQA and City of Newport Beach requirements. The Initial Study determined that implementation of the proposed Project would result in no impacts or less than significant environmental effects. Therefore, and based on the findings of the Initial Study, the City of Newport Beach determined that a ND shall be prepared for the proposed Project pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15070(b). 1.4.4 CEQA Requirements for Environmental Setting and Baseline Conditions CEQA Guidelines § 15125 establishes requirements for defining the environmental setting to which the environmental effects of a proposed project must be compared. The environmental setting is defined as "...the physical environmental conditions in the vicinity of the project, as 2191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16. 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1-2 Declaration 1.0 Introduction they exist at the time the notice of preparation is published, or if no notice of preparation is published, at the time the environmental analysis is commenced..." (CEQA Guidelines § 15125[a]) In the case of the proposed Project, the Initial Study determined that a ND is the appropriate form of CEQA compliance document, which does not require a Notice of Preparation (NOP). Thus, the environmental setting for the proposed Project is the approximate date that the Project's environmental analysis commenced. The City of Newport Beach commenced environmental review of the proposed Project in September 2016. Accordingly, the environmental setting for the proposed Project is defined as the physical environmental conditions on the proposed Project Site and in the vicinity of the proposed Project as they existed in September 2016. Section 2.0 provides a summary of the existing physical environmental conditions of the proposed Project Site and surrounding areas as they existed in September 2016. 1.4.5 Format and Content of this Negative Declaration This document, including all Sections. Section 5.0 contains the completed Environmental Checklist/Initial Study and its associated analyses which document the reasons to support the findings and conclusions of the Initial Study. 1.4.6 Preparation and Processing of this Negative Declaration The City of Newport Beach Planning Division directed and supervised the preparation of this ND. The content contained within and the conclusions drawn by this ND reflect the sole independent judgment of the City. Following completion of this ND, A Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt the ND will be distributed to the following entities: 1) organizations and individuals who have previously requested such notice in writing; 2) direct mailing to the owners of property contiguous to the Project and property owners within a 300 -foot radius as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll; 3) the Orange County Clerk; and 4) Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse for review by state agencies. The NOI will identify the location(s) where the ND, Initial Study is available for public review. In addition, notice of the public review period also will occur via posting of a notice on- and off-site (at City Hall, 100 Civic Center Drive) in the area where the Project is to be located and publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the Project area. The NOI also establishes a 30 -day public review period during which comments on the adequacy of the ND document may be provided to the City of Newport Beach Planning Division. Following the 30 -day public review period, the City of Newport Beach will review any comment letters received and will determine whether any substantive comments were provided that may warrant revisions to the ND document. If substantial revisions are not necessary (as defined by CEQA Guidelines §15073.5[b]), then the ND and Initial Study would be finalized and forwarded to the Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council for review as part of their deliberations concerning the proposed Project. The City of Newport Beach Planning Commission has the authority to recommend or not recommend the Project for approval by the City Council. The Newport Beach City Council has the authority to approve or deny the Project. Accordingly, public hearings will be held before the Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council to consider the proposed Project and the adequacy of this ND. Public comments will be heard and considered at the hearings. At the conclusion of the public hearing process, the City Council will take action to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the proposed Project. If approved, the City Council will adopt findings relative to the Project's environmental effects as disclosed in the ND and a Notice of 3191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16. 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1-3 Declaration 1.0 Introduction Determination (NOD) will be filed with the Orange County Clerk. If the Project is approved by the City Council, the Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) amendment would then be considered by the California Coastal Commission. 4191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach September 16. 2016 Page 1-4 Declaration 2.0 Environmental Setting 2.1 Project Location 2.0 Environmental Setti As shown on Figure 2-1, Regional Location Map, and Figure 2-2, Vicinity Map, the proposed Project Site is located within the southwestern portion of the City of Newport Beach, in the Mariners Mile commercial district. Newport Bay is located approximately 650 feet to the southwest. Specifically, the subject property is bounded by Avon Street to the north, Mariners Center to the south and west, and Riverside Avenue to the east. The current addresses of the proposed Project Site are 149 and 191 Riverside Avenue, Newport Beach, California 92660. The assessor's parcel numbers (APNs) are 049-110-17 and 049-110-27 and is located in the southeast quadrant of Section 28 of Township 6 South, Range 10 West, San Bernardino Baseline and Meridian. 2.2 Existing Site and Area Characteristics 2.2.1 Site Access The proposed Project Site is accessible by Riverside Avenue, a four -lane Local Road, and Avon Street, a two-lane Local Road. Riverside Avenue provides access to West Coast Highway (State Highway 1), a six -lane Major Road, located approximately 315 feet southwest of the proposed Project Site. Newport Boulevard (State Route 55) is located approximately 0.30 miles west of the proposed Project Site. 2.2.2 Existing Site Conditions Under existing conditions, the proposed Project Site is developed with an existing, one-story institutional building, currently used as a United States Post Office distribution facility. The institutional building is constructed of concrete block and has a footprint of 9,242 square feet. A surface parking lot containing 20 spaces surrounds the building to the south and west. Landscaping consists of trees and shrubs dispersed in the parking lot. The proposed Project Site's frontage at Riverside Avenue and Avon Street contains curb -adjacent sidewalks with parking meters and street lights. Figure 5-1, depicts the site's existing conditions as seen from above, while Figure 5-2 and Figure 5-3 depict views of the site. 2.2.3 Site Topography Under existing conditions, the proposed Project Site is fully developed and relatively flat exhibiting very little topographic variation. Elevations on the site range from approximately 16 to 14 feet above mean sea level (MSL). 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2-1 Negative Declaration 2.0 Environmental Setting Figure 2-1 Regional Location Map 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2-2 Declaration Figure 2-2 Vicinity Map 2.0 Environmental Setti 1 COSTA REACH MMA C\ y E1 A P e rl vuar u� IRVINE ' t . ProjecA Site } a A w? 5f r' R C • t y } t�0 f � we � wr tsi i.santi, uA�,} •r �-y �dl�fft PEM qqq❑Geee � IR pR@IIT ff¢3}'T l� ' }Tl[I Pdn l Figure 2-3 Aerial Photograph 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2-3 Declaration 2.0 Environmental Setti 2.2.4 Surrounding Land Uses and Development The proposed Project Site is located within a portion of the City of Newport Beach that is fully developed with a variety of residential, office, and commercial land uses. To the north, at the northwestern corner of Riverside Avenue and Avon Street, there is an existing three-story commercial office building currently occupied by a restaurant, offices, and retail sales; single - unit residences with access off of Cliff Drive are located on the bluffs above; beyond to the northeast is Cliff Drive Park and other single -unit residences. To the south and west is Mariners Center, a single -story commercial center, which is occupied with retail sales, restaurants, and personal services. To the east, across Riverside Avenue, are commercial and office buildings; beyond, to the southeast is Mariners Mile Square commercial center, which is occupied with retail sales, restaurants, and personal services. The Mariners Mile commercial corridor is located to the south along West Coast Highway (State Highway 1), which is developed with restaurants, automobile and yacht dealerships, retail sales, personal services, and marine - related retail sales and services. The Newport Heights residential community, which is predominately single -unit residences, is located on the mesa above the Mariners Mile commercial district. 2.3 Planning Context 2.3.1 On -Site General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Zoning Designations As shown on Figure 2-4, Existing General Plan Land Use Designations, under existing conditions the proposed Project Site is designated by the Newport Beach General Plan (hereafter, "General Plan") for "Public Facilities (PF)" land uses. The PF land use designation "...is intended to provide public facilities, including public schools, cultural institutions, government facilities, libraries, community centers, public hospitals, and public utilities" (Newport Beach 2006a). The City of Newport Beach has an adopted Coastal Land Use Plan prepared in accordance with the California Coast Act of 1976. As shown on Figure 2-5, Existing Coastal Land Use Plan Designations, the Newport Beach Coastal Land Use Plan also designates the proposed Project Site is for "Public Facilities (PF)" land uses. As stated in the Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan, the PF land use designation is intended to "...to provide public facilities, including public schools, cultural institutions, government facilities, libraries, community centers, public hospitals, and public utilities (Newport Beach, 2009). As shown on Figure 2-6, Existing Zoning Designations, under existing conditions, the proposed Project Site is zoned for "PF (Public Facilities)" (Newport Beach 2010a). The PF Zoning District "...is intended to provide for areas appropriate for public facilities, including community centers, cultural institutions, government facilities, libraries, public hospitals, public utilities, and public schools" (Newport Beach, 2010b). 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2-4 Nmdm Declaration 2.0 Environmental Setting Figure 24 Existing General Plan £an§ Use Designations 13 ^ 4 + .. FAU e mm !q Riverside Avenue Lnd Use and Zoning Amendmen September 16, 2]B Lead Ae*w City R Newport Beach Pge »s ■ Negative Declaration 2.0 Environmental Setting Figure 2-5 Existing Coastal Land Use Plan Designations p h rPi xm � i3 caQ 7L � w � +p +L 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2-6 Negative Declaration Figure 26 Existing Zoning Designations 2.0 Environmental Se 191 Riverside Avenue Lnd Use and Zoning Amendmen September 16, 216 Lead Agency: City RNewport Beach Page 2-7 � .. w I � - ^^- :§ ©- ^ / . 2 . . a � - - � . s 4 di . - ' MU -PAM Z PF. ® 191 Riverside Avenue Lnd Use and Zoning Amendmen September 16, 216 Lead Agency: City RNewport Beach Page 2-7 Negative Declaration 2.0 Environmental Setting 2.3.2 Surrounding General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Zoning Designations As shown on Figure 2-4 and Figure 2-5, General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan designations surrounding the proposed Project Site are Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -1-11), General Commercial (CG), Parks and Recreation (PR) and Single Unit Residential Detached (RS -D). As shown on Figure 2-6, Existing Zoning Designations, zoning designations surrounding the proposed Project Site are Mixed -Use Mariners Mile (MU -MM), General Commercial (CG), Parks and Recreation (PR), and Single -Unit Residential (R-1). 2.3.3 Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport According to the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport (JWA), which is the nearest public airport to the proposed Project Site, the proposed Project Site is not located within the AELUP Notification Area for JWA, nor is the site subject to any impacts (safety or noise) due to airport operations. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not require review by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for Orange County. The proposed Project Site does, however, occur within the transitional flight path of the JWA Obstruction Imaginary Surfaces zone established pursuant to Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77, although review by the ALUC only would apply if a project is proposed that exceeds the height limits established by FAR Part 77 (OCALUC, 2008). 2.4 Existing Environmental Characteristics 2.4.1 Geology The proposed Project Site is located within the Orange County coastal plain and is underlain by Quaternary alluvial and fluvial sedimentary deposits. As with much of the Southern California region, the proposed Project Site is located in an area subject to seismic hazards, with the nearest fault (Newport -Inglewood Fault Zone) occurring approximately 0.5 mile to the southwest of the proposed Project Site. The proposed Project Site is not located in an Earthquake Fault Zone per the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Map. The proposed Project Site and the surrounding area is such to liquefaction (Newport Beach, 2006a). 2.4.2 Hydrology Under existing conditions, Storm water runoff surface flows off the site to the adjacent streets (Riverside Avenue and Avon Street), where water is collected in surface gutters and conveyed to the south. Flows are then conveyed to a catch basin where they empty into the Newport Bay. According to mapping by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the proposed Project Site is located outside of the 100 -year floodplain (Newport Beach, 2016). 2.4.3 Vegetation & Wildlife The proposed Project Site is fully developed with an existing building, a surface parking lot, sidewalks, ornamental landscaping, and hardscape. As indicated in the General Plan EIR, the Project Site is not identified as containing any sensitive biological resources and is not located within any Environmental Study Areas that have the potential to support sensitive biological resources. The Project Site therefore has no potential to contain sensitive vegetation habitats or sensitive plant or animal species (Newport Beach 2006b). 2.4.4 Historical, Archaeological, and Paleontological Resources According to General Plan EIR Figure 4.4-1, the proposed Project Site is not identified as containing any historical resources. None of the existing buildings are included on the National 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2-8 Negative Declaration 2.0 Environmental Setting Register of Historic Places or on the California Register of Historical Resources, nor are they eligible for listing. As it is fully developed, the proposed Project Site is very unlikely to contain subsurface archaeological resources. The proposed Project Site also is not located within a portion of the City that is identified as having the potential to contain fossil -bearing soils or rock formations (Newport Beach 2006b). 2.4.5 Mineral Resources According to the City's General Plan EIR, which relies on mapping conducted by the California Geological Survey (CGS) for areas known as Mineral Resources Zones (MRZs), the proposed Project Site is mapped within MRZ-3. Areas mapped MRZ-3 are defined as "areas containing mineral deposits of undetermined significance" (Newport Beach 2006b). 2.4.6 Agricultural Resources The proposed Project Site is developed with urban uses and does contain agricultural uses. According to mapping conducted by the California Department of Conservation (CDC) as part of the Farmland Mapping & Monitoring Program (FMMP), the proposed Project Site is identified as containing "Urban and Built -Up Land." The proposed Project Site and surrounding areas do not contain any soils mapped by the CDC as Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Local Importance. 2.4.7 Rare and Unique Resources As required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(c), "Special emphasis should be placed on resources that are rare or unique to that region and would be affected by the project." Based on the site's existing condition and developed nature, the proposed Project Site does not contain any resources that are rare or unique to the region. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2-9 Declaration 3.0 Project Description 3.0 Proiect Descri The Project evaluated by this ND is located in the City of Newport Beach, within the Mariners Mile Planning Sub -Area (Statistical Area H4) of the City's General Plan. The inland properties of the Mariners Mile Planning Sub -Area are developed predominantly for highway -oriented retail, neighborhood commercial services. A number of sites contain automobile dealerships and service facilities and neighborhood -serving commercial uses. The latter includes salons, restaurants, apparel, and other specialty shops ranging from wine stores to home furnishings stores. While single use free-standing buildings predominate, there are a significant number of multi -tenant buildings that combine a number of related or complementary uses in a single building or buildings that are connected physically or through design. The proposed Project Site consists of approximately 0.52 acres of developed land bounded by Avon Street to the north, Mariners Center to the south and west, and Riverside Avenue to the east. The proposed Project consists of applications for a General Plan Amendment and Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment to change the land use category from Public Facilities (PF) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H1) and a Zoning Code Amendment (CA2016-005) to change the zoning from Public Facilities (PF) to Mixed -Use Mariners Mile (MU -MM). No demolition or new construction is proposed at this time. The Newport Beach City Council will consider the following actions requested by the Project Applicant. In advance of the City Council's consideration, advisory recommendations regarding the actions listed below will be considered by the City's Planning Commission. 1. General Plan Amendment No. GP2016-002; 2. Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2016-002; and 3. Zoning Code Amendment No. CA2016-005. Each of the proposed actions is described in more detail below. If the Project is approved by the City Council, the land use amendment would then be considered by the California Coastal Commission. 3.1 Proposed Discretionary Approvals 3.1.1 General Plan Amendment No. GP2016-002 The City of Newport Beach General Plan assigns land uses to all areas of the City. Under existing conditions, the General Plan designates the proposed Project Site for "Public Facilities Institutions (PF)" land uses. Proposed General Plan Amendment No. GP2016-002 would change the designation of the proposed Project Site from "Public Facilities (PF)" to "Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -1-11)". As stated in the General Plan. The MU -H1 land use designation "...provides for a horizontal intermixing of uses". More specifically applicable to the proposed Project Site, the MU -H1 land use designation provides that "...portions of properties to the rear of the commercial frontage may be developed for free-standing neighborhood -serving retail, multi -family residential units, or mixed-use buildings that integrate residential with retail uses on the ground floor in accordance with the CN, RM, CV, or MU -V designations respectively" (Newport Beach, 2006a). 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 3-1 Declaration 3.0 Proiect Descri 3.1.2 Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2016-002 The City of Newport Beach has an adopted Coastal Land Use Plan, prepared in accordance with the California Coastal Act of 1976. Under existing conditions, the Newport Beach Coastal Land Use Plan designates the proposed Project Site for "Public Facilities Institutions (PF)" land uses. Proposed Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2016-002 would change the designation of the proposed Project Site from "Public Facilities (PF)" to "Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H)". As stated in the Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan, the MU -H land use designation is intended to "...provide for the development of areas for a horizontally distributed mix of uses, which may include general or neighborhood commercial, commercial offices, multi -family residential, visitor -serving and marine -related uses, and/or buildings that vertically integrate residential with commercial uses" (Newport Beach, 2009). 3.1.3 Zoning Code Amendment No. CA2016-005 The City of Newport Beach Zoning Code is contained as Title 20 "Planning and Zoning" of the City's Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the proposed Project Site is zoned for "PF (Public Facilities)." The PF Zoning District "...is intended to provide for areas appropriate for public facilities, including community centers, cultural institutions, government facilities, libraries, public hospitals, public utilities, and public schools." Proposed Zoning Code Amendment No. CA2016-005 would change the zoning to the Mixed -Use Mariners Mile (MU -MM) Zoning District. According to City Municipal Code Section 20.22.010.13, the MU -MM Zoning District "...applies to properties located on the inland side of Coast Highway in the Mariners' Mile Corridor. Properties fronting on Coast Highway may be developed for nonresidential uses only. Properties to the rear of the commercial frontage may be developed for freestanding nonresidential uses, multi -unit residential dwelling units, or mixed-use structures that integrate residential above the ground floor with nonresidential uses on the ground floor."' 3.1.4 Development Potential Although no demolition or new construction is proposed at this time, the proposed Project would allow land uses and property development that are not allowed under the current land use and zoning designations. Under the current PF (Public Facilities) Zoning, land uses are limited to public facilities, such as community centers, cultural institutions, government facilities, libraries, public hospitals, public utilities, and public schools. All land uses, with the exception of minor utilities, require either a conditional use permit or a minor use permit. Floor area, height, and parking standards are established also by conditional use permits. The proposed MU -MM (Mixed -Use Mariners Mile), Zoning would allow retail and service uses. Some uses, such as commercial recreation and entertainment, eating and drinking establishments, and vehicle sales require either a minor use permit or a conditional use permit. Non-residential development would be limited to a floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.50, which would result in a maximum floor area of approximately 11,326 square feet. The MU -MM designation would also allow residential uses as part of a mixed-use development. A minimum of 10 and a maximum of 13 dwelling units would be permitted. Site Development Review approval is required for any mixed-use project. Mixed-use projects are also subject to the site planning, development, and operational standards of Section 20.48.130 of the Zoning Code. A mixed-use development would have to provide a minimum FAR of 0.25 (5,663 square 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 3-2 Declaration 3.0 Proiect Descri feet) and the maximum FAR would be 0.50 (approximately 11,326 square feet). The maximum residential FAR would be 1.0 (22,651 square feet). 3.1.5 Approvals Required from Other Agencies Assuming that the City Council approves the Project's proposed Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2016-002, the Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment would require review and approval from the California Coastal Commission (CCC) as part of a noticed public hearing. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 3-3 ive Declaration 4.0 Project Information 1. Project Title 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments 2. Lead Agency Name and Address City of Newport Beach Community Development Department Planning Division 100 Civic Center Drive (P.O. Box 1768) Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 3. Contact Person and Phone Number Patrick Alford, Planning Manager Planning Division, (949) 644-3235 PAlfordC@newportbeachca.gov 4. Project Location 4.0 Prosect Information The proposed Project Site consists of an approximately 0.52 -acre site located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Riverside Avenue and Avon Street, within the City of Newport Beach's Mariners Mile Sub -Area (Statistical Area 1-14). The site's existing address is 191 Riverside Avenue, Newport Beach, CA 92663. Figure 2-2 and Figure 2-3 (previously presented) depict the proposed Project Site's location. 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address Mariners Center M2, LLC 2220 University Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 6. General Plan Designation The proposed Project Site is designated by the General Plan for "Public Facilities (PF)." 7. Zoning The proposed Project Site is zoned as "PF (Public Facilities) Zoning District." 8. Description of Project: Please refer to Section 4.0 for a detailed description of the proposed Project. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the Project's surroundings: As previously discussed and presented, the proposed Project Site is located within a portion of the City of Newport Beach that is fully developed with a variety of residential, office, and commercial land uses. To the north, at the northwestern corner of Riverside Avenue and Avon 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4-1 Declaration 4.0 Proiect Information Street, there is an existing three-story commercial office building currently occupied by a restaurant, offices, and retail sales; single -unit residences with access off of Cliff Drive are located on the bluffs above; beyond to the northeast is Cliff Drive Park and other single -unit residences. To the south and west is Mariners Center, a single -story commercial center, which is occupied with retail sales, restaurants, and personal services. To the east, across Riverside Avenue, are commercial and office buildings; beyond, to the southeast is Mariners Mile Square commercial center, which is occupied with retail sales, restaurants, and personal services. The Mariners Mile commercial corridor is located to the south along West Coast Highway (State Highway 1), which is developed with restaurants, automobile and yacht dealerships, retail sales, personal services, and marine -related retail sales and services. The Newport Heights residential community, which is predominately single -unit residences, is located on the mesa above the Mariners Mile commercial district. 10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement) The Project's proposed amendment to the City's Coastal Land Use Plan and subsequent issuance of a Coastal Development Permit would require discretionary review and approval by the California Coastal Commission. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4-2 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis 5.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. There were no issues identified as a "Potentially Significant Impact." ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture and Forestry ❑ Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Greenhouse Gas ❑ Emissions ❑ Land Use and Planning ❑ Population and Housing ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Geology/Soils ❑ Hydrology/ Water Quality ❑ Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Hazards & Hazardous will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or Materials ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Public Services ❑ Utilities/ Service Systems ❑ Geology/Soils ❑ Hydrology/ Water Quality ❑ Noise ❑ Recreation ❑ Mandatory Findings of will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or Significance 5.2 Determination (To Be Completed By the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or ❑ agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ❑ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has ❑ been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or ❑ mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Submitted by: Patrick Alford, Planning Manager, Planning Division (Signature) 09/16/16 Date 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-1 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis 5.3 City of Newport Beach Environmental Checklist Summary 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-2 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Significant Impact Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated I. AESTHETICS Would the Project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 historic buildings within a state scenic highway? C) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site ❑ ❑ 21 ❑ and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ affect day or nighttime views in the area? 11. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES Would the Project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 contract? C) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(8)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(8))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non- ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 in conversion of Farmland, to non- agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-2 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-3 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Significant Impact Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated III. AIR QUALITY Would the Project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ projected air quality violation? C) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ❑ ❑ D ❑ concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ a substantial number of people? IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the Project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-3 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-4 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 migratory wildlife corridors, or impeded the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? tJ Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the Project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or ❑ ❑ D ❑ site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of ❑ ❑ D ❑ formal cemeteries? VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the Project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse ❑ ❑ Q ❑ effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ p ❑ 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-4 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-5 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact iii) Seismic -related ground failure, ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ D b) Result in substantial soil erosion or ❑ ❑ ❑ the loss of topsoil? C) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in on- ❑ ❑ D ❑ or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), ❑ ❑ D ❑ creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Would the Project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a ❑ ❑ D ❑ significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the Project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through ❑ ❑ Q ❑ routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-5 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-6 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Significant Impact Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated C) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, ❑ ❑ ❑ D or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites which complied pursuant to Government Code ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the Project: a) Violate any water quality standards ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-6 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-7 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact G) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a ❑ ❑ Q ❑ manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on - or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of a course of a stream or river, or ❑ ❑ Q ❑ substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater ❑ ❑ Q ❑ drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade ❑ ❑ Q ❑ water quality? g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or ❑ ❑ ❑ Q Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would ❑ ❑ ❑ Q impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including ❑ ❑ Q ❑ flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or ❑ ❑ Q ❑ mudflow? X. LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the Project: a) Physically divide an established ❑ ❑ ❑ Q community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local ❑ ❑ Q ❑ coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-7 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis C) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? XI. MINERAL RESOURCES Would the Project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? XII. NOISE Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 0 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the Project: Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact ❑ ❑ ❑ D ❑ I ❑ I ❑ 1 0 ❑ I ❑ I ❑ 1 0 ❑ 1 ❑ 1 0 1 ❑ ❑ I ❑ 1 0 1 ❑ ❑ 1 ❑ 1 0 I ❑ ❑ I ❑ I 0 I ❑ ❑ 1 ❑ 1 ❑ 1 0 ❑ I ❑ I ❑ I 0 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-8 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-9 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 construction of replacement housing elsewhere? C) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? ❑ ❑ p ❑ Police protection? ❑ ❑ p ❑ Schools? ❑ ❑ p ❑ Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ p ❑ XV. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction of or expansion of ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would the Project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ mass transit and non -motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-9 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-10 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standard and travel demand ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? C) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) ❑ ❑ D ❑ or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency ❑ ❑ Q ❑ access? t) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities? XVII. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the Project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of ❑ ❑ Q ❑ existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? C) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, ❑ ❑ D ❑ or are new or expanded entitlements needed? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-10 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-11 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Significant Impact Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? 1J Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulation related ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 to solid waste? XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major period of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a ❑ ❑ Q ❑ project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) C) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-11 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis 5.4 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 5.4.1 Aesthetics Discussion Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less -than -Significant Impact. The proposed project would not affect a scenic vista. Figure 5- 4 (Designated Public View Points) identifies the existing public view points and coastal view roads identified in the General Plan. The segment of West Coast Highway from the Newport Boulevard Bridge to Bay Shores is identified as a coastal view road; however, this segment is so designated for the intermittent views of Newport Bay. As the proposed Project Site is located on the inland side, the views of the Newport Bay from this segment of West Coast Highway will not be impacted. Cliff Drive Park and Ensign View Park are located on the bluffs above the proposed Project Site. These parks provide views of Newport Bay, the Pacific Ocean and Santa Catalina Island. As shown in Photos 1-4 of Figure 5-6, the proposed Project Site is visible from several areas in Cliff Drive Park and Ensign View Park. However, the building on the proposed Project Site, as well as those nearby, is not tall enough to block views of the water. Furthermore, any future development on the proposed Project Site would have to conform to the 26-foot/31-foot Height Limit Area and 35 -foot Shoreline Height Limit Zone. Since any future development would be restricted to these height limits, there would Be no substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista; impacts would be less than significant. There are also public view points across Newport Bay at the end of Central Avenue and on the Lido Isle Bridge. However, as shown in Photos 6-7 of Figure 5-6, the proposed Project Site is not visible from these viewpoints due to intervening development. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-12 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Would the Project: Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and ❑ ❑ ❑ D historic buildings within a state scenic highway? C) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ affect day or nighttime views in the area? Discussion Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less -than -Significant Impact. The proposed project would not affect a scenic vista. Figure 5- 4 (Designated Public View Points) identifies the existing public view points and coastal view roads identified in the General Plan. The segment of West Coast Highway from the Newport Boulevard Bridge to Bay Shores is identified as a coastal view road; however, this segment is so designated for the intermittent views of Newport Bay. As the proposed Project Site is located on the inland side, the views of the Newport Bay from this segment of West Coast Highway will not be impacted. Cliff Drive Park and Ensign View Park are located on the bluffs above the proposed Project Site. These parks provide views of Newport Bay, the Pacific Ocean and Santa Catalina Island. As shown in Photos 1-4 of Figure 5-6, the proposed Project Site is visible from several areas in Cliff Drive Park and Ensign View Park. However, the building on the proposed Project Site, as well as those nearby, is not tall enough to block views of the water. Furthermore, any future development on the proposed Project Site would have to conform to the 26-foot/31-foot Height Limit Area and 35 -foot Shoreline Height Limit Zone. Since any future development would be restricted to these height limits, there would Be no substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista; impacts would be less than significant. There are also public view points across Newport Bay at the end of Central Avenue and on the Lido Isle Bridge. However, as shown in Photos 6-7 of Figure 5-6, the proposed Project Site is not visible from these viewpoints due to intervening development. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-12 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Figure 5-1 Aerial and Site Photos Key Map Figure 5-2 Site Photos 1-2 Photo 1 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Photo 2 September 16, 2016 Page 5-13 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Figure 5-3 Site Photos 3 through 8 Photo 3 Photo 4 Photo 5 Photo 6 Photo 7 MMPWq- Photo 8 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-14 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Figure 5-4 Designated Public View Points 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-15 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Figure 5-7 Photos 3 through 5 Photo 3 Photo 4 Photo 5 Photo 7 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Photo 6 September 16, 2016 Page 5-17 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings along a scenic highway? No Impact. There are no designated scenic highways in the vicinity of the proposed project (CalTrans, 2009). The segment of West Coast Highway from the Newport Boulevard Bridge to Bay Shores is identified as a coastal view road; however, this segment is so designated for the intermittent views of Newport Bay. As the proposed Project Site is located on the inland side, the views of the Newport Bay from this segment of West Coast Highway will not be impacted. Furthermore, the proposed Project Site does not consist of any rock outcroppings that are of significant visual quality or historic buildings on site. Therefore, the proposed project would not damage a scenic resource along a scenic highway and no impacts would occur. c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Less -than -Significant Impact. Photos in Figure 5-2 and Figure 5-3 show development in the immediate area. The proposed Project would not affect the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings because the proposed project is located in a developed commercial area and would not damage any scenic resources. The proposed Project Site is located in an area that is primarily developed with commercial buildings zoned for mixed-use development. The proposed Project Site does not provide scenic qualities. The proposed Project would include land use changes to either commercial or mixed-use development, which would be aesthetically consistent with the surrounding commercial per the Zoning Code and the Mariners Mile Design Framework. These land use changes and subsequent future development of the Project Site also would be consistent with the General Plan Land Use Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan designations for the surrounding properties; therefore, impacts would be less than significant. d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area? Less -than -Significant Impact. As mentioned in Response 5.4.1 (c) above, the proposed Project is located in an area that is primarily developed with commercial buildings. Any lighting associated with the subsequent future development would not add significant amounts of lighting to the proposed Project area. All lighting would be developed in accordance to Zoning Code Section 20.30.070 (Outdoor Lighting), which requires all outdoor lighting fixtures to be designed, shielded, aimed, located, and maintained to shield adjacent properties and to not produce glare onto adjacent properties or roadways; therefore, impacts would be less than significant. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-18 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis 5.4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources Discussion Would the project: a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? No Impact. The proposed Project would not convert any farmland to a non-agricultural use. The proposed Project Site is not designated as Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Local Importance (California Department of Conservation, 2012). The proposed Project Site and the surrounding land are identified as "urban and built-up land" by the California Department of Conservation's Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. Furthermore, the proposed Project Site is located in a developed urban setting with no agricultural uses on or surrounding the site; therefore, no impacts would occur. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-19 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Would the Project: Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 contract? C) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non- ❑ ❑ ❑ Q forest use e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 in conversion of Farmland, to non- agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? Discussion Would the project: a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? No Impact. The proposed Project would not convert any farmland to a non-agricultural use. The proposed Project Site is not designated as Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Local Importance (California Department of Conservation, 2012). The proposed Project Site and the surrounding land are identified as "urban and built-up land" by the California Department of Conservation's Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. Furthermore, the proposed Project Site is located in a developed urban setting with no agricultural uses on or surrounding the site; therefore, no impacts would occur. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-19 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or conflict with a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The proposed Project would not conflict with existing zoning or agricultural use. The proposed Project Site is currently zoned PF (Public Facilities), which does not allow agricultural uses. The Williamson Act applies to parcels consisting of least 20 acres of Prime Farmland or at least 40 acres of farmland not designated as Prime Farmland. The proposed Project Site is not located in a Prime Farmland designation, nor does it consist of more than 40 acres of farmland. Therefore, the site is not eligible to be placed under a Williamson Act Contract, and no impacts would occur. c. Involve other changes in the existing environment that, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? No Impact. The proposed Project would not result in the conversion of farmland to non- agricultural use. The proposed Project Site is not currently used for agriculture. The proposed Project Site is not located near or adjacent to any areas that are actively farmed. Therefore, the proposed Project would not disrupt or damage the operation or productivity of any areas designated as farmland, and no farmland could be affected by the proposed land use changes. No impacts would occur. 5.4.3 Air Quality 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-20 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Would the Project: Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air ❑ ❑ ❑ D quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or ❑ ❑ D ❑ projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ❑ ❑ D ❑ ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ❑ ❑ D ❑ concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ a substantial number of people? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-20 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Discussion Would the project: a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? No Impact. The proposed Project Site is located in the South Coast Air Basin (Basin). The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is required, pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act, to reduce emissions of criteria pollutants for which the Basin is in nonattainment (i.e., ozone [03], and particulate matter equal to or less than 10 and less than 2.5 microns in diameter [PM10 and PM2.5, respectively]). As such, the Project would be subject to the SCAQMD's 2007 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The AQMP contains a comprehensive list of pollution control strategies directed at reducing emissions and achieving ambient air quality standards. These strategies are developed, in part, based on regional population, housing, and employment projections prepared by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). SCAG is the regional planning agency for Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Imperial Counties and addresses regional issues relating to transportation, economy, community development, and environment. With regard to air quality planning, SCAG has prepared the Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP), which includes Growth Management and Regional Mobility chapters that form the basis for the land use and transportation control portions of the AQMP. These documents are used in the preparation of the air quality forecasts and consistency analysis included in the AQMP. Both the RCP and AQMP are based, in part, on projections originating with County and City General Plans. Emissions generated by subsequent construction and operation would not exceed thresholds as described in the analysis below in 5.4.3 (b) and 5.4.3 (c). The thresholds in 5.4.3 (b) and 5.4.3 (c) are based on the AQMP and are designed to bring the Basin into attainment for the criteria pollutants for which it is in nonattainment. Therefore, because the proposed project does not exceed any of the thresholds it will not conflict with SCAQMD's goal of bringing the Basin into attainment for all criteria pollutants and, as such, is consistent with the AQMP. Impacts would not occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Less -than -Significant Impact. As discussed in Response 543 (a), the proposed Project Site is located in the Basin. State and federal air quality standards often are exceeded in many parts of the Basin. The proposed project involves amendments to the land use plans, which would not in themselves result in any construction or operational impacts. However, the proposed land use and zoning changes could result in the future construction of up to 11,326 square -feet for commercial floor area and 13 dwelling units. Subsequent construction activities are estimated to extend over a period of approximately twelve months. For the purpose of estimating emissions associated with the construction activities, a project time frame of January 2, 2017, through December 11, 2017 was assumed. Emissions were calculated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEMod) Version 2013.2.2. As shown in Table 5-1 and Table 5-2 below, all criteria pollutant emissions would remain well below their respective SCAQMD daily significance thresholds; therefore, impacts would be less than significant. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-21 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Table 5-1 Overall Construction Emissions Activity NOx SOx PM,o PMs.s Maximum Daily 0.5255 2.3436 1.8438 2.8300 0.1814 0.1541 Emissions lbs/day SCAQMD Regional Emissions Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 lbs/day Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No ROG = reactive organic gas. NOX = oxides of nitrogen. CO = carbon monoxide. SOX = sulfur oxides. PM10 = particulate matter equal to or less than 10 microns in diameter. PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter. Table 5-2 Overall Operational Emissions Activity IROG NOx CO SOx PM,o PMz.s Maximum Daily 0.1531 2.7100 0.2192 1.4000 0.0131 0.0131 Emissions lbs/da SCAQMD Regional Emissions Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 (lbs/day) Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No ROG = reactive organic gas. NOX = oxides of nitrogen. CO = carbon monoxide. SOX = sulfur oxides. PM10 = particulate matter equal to or less than 10 microns in diameter. PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter. c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is a nonattainment area for an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Less -than -Significant Impact. SCAQMD's approach for assessing cumulative impacts is based on the AQMP forecasts of attainment of ambient air quality standards in accordance with the requirements of the Federal and State Clean Air Acts. As discussed earlier in Response 5.4.3 (a), the proposed project would be consistent with the AQMP, which is intended to bring the Basin into attainment for all criteria pollutants.2 In addition, the mass regional emissions calculated for the proposed project (Forecast of Regional Construction Emissions and Forecast of Regional Operational Emissions) are less than the applicable SCAQMD daily significance thresholds that are designed to assist the region in attaining the applicable state and national ambient air quality standards. The regional daily significance thresholds take into account other activity occurring in the region, and therefore, inherently address a project's contribution to cumulative air quality impacts. As such, cumulative impacts would be less than significant. d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less -than -Significant Impact. As described in Response 5.4.3 (b) above, construction and operation of the proposed project would not result in any substantial localized or regional air 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-22 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis pollution impacts and therefore would not expose any nearby sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Any subsequent development would not likely result in any land uses typically associated with emitting objectionable odors. Land uses generally associated with odor complaints include agricultural uses (livestock and farming), wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting operations, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding facilities, none of which are permitted under the proposed MU -MM Zoning District. The potential for odor sources associated with construction resulting from the proposed Project, which would be limited to construction equipment exhaust and the application of asphalt and architectural coatings during construction activities. Construction -related odors would be temporary and intermittent in nature and would cease upon completion of the respective phases of construction activity. These odors are common in urban and suburban areas and are generally not objectionable to a large majority of the population. Additionally, mandatory compliance with SCAQMD Rules would limit odor emissions from construction vehicles. For these reasons, temporary and intermittent construction -related odors would be less than significant. 5.4.4 Biological Resources 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-23 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Would the Project: Impact Incorporated Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 migratory fish or wildlife species or 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-23 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Discussion Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special -status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact. The proposed Project would not modify or have an adverse effect on existing habitat. The proposed Project Site is fully developed with an existing, one-story institutional building and a surface parking lot and is located in a fully urbanized setting. The General Plan and the Coastal Land Use Plan identify Environmental Study Areas (ESA) that provide an overview of known and potential biological resources. Figure NR2 of the General Plan Natural Resources Element and Map 4-1 of the Coastal Land Use Plan show that the proposed Project Site is not located in an ESA (Newport Beach 2006a, 2009a). The proposed Project Site is void of any native vegetation or wildlife habitat; therefore, the proposed Project would not modify habitat or adversely affect sensitive biological resources, and no impacts would occur. b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact. The proposed Project would not have an adverse effect on any riparian habitat. According to Map 4-1 of the Coastal Land Use Plan and Figure NR2 of the General Plan Natural Resources Element, the proposed Project Site is not located in an ESA (Newport Beach 2006a, 2009a). The proposed Project Site is fully developed and void of any riparian habitat or other natural communities. Therefore, the proposed project would not accommodate riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community, and no impacts would occur. c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marshes, vernal pools, coastal wetlands, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-24 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Would the Project: Impact Incorporated Impact with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impeded the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological Q resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? 1J Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Discussion Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special -status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact. The proposed Project would not modify or have an adverse effect on existing habitat. The proposed Project Site is fully developed with an existing, one-story institutional building and a surface parking lot and is located in a fully urbanized setting. The General Plan and the Coastal Land Use Plan identify Environmental Study Areas (ESA) that provide an overview of known and potential biological resources. Figure NR2 of the General Plan Natural Resources Element and Map 4-1 of the Coastal Land Use Plan show that the proposed Project Site is not located in an ESA (Newport Beach 2006a, 2009a). The proposed Project Site is void of any native vegetation or wildlife habitat; therefore, the proposed Project would not modify habitat or adversely affect sensitive biological resources, and no impacts would occur. b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact. The proposed Project would not have an adverse effect on any riparian habitat. According to Map 4-1 of the Coastal Land Use Plan and Figure NR2 of the General Plan Natural Resources Element, the proposed Project Site is not located in an ESA (Newport Beach 2006a, 2009a). The proposed Project Site is fully developed and void of any riparian habitat or other natural communities. Therefore, the proposed project would not accommodate riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community, and no impacts would occur. c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marshes, vernal pools, coastal wetlands, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-24 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis No Impact. The proposed Project Site is fully developed and does not have federal wetlands present on site nor are there wetlands in the general vicinity of the proposed Project Site. Furthermore, the proposed Project Site is completely lacking any jurisdictional waters; therefore, no impacts would occur. d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? No Impact. The proposed Project would not interfere with the movement of fish or wildlife. The proposed Project Site is located in fully urbanized setting and is not connected to other undeveloped lands. According to Figures NR1 and NR2 of the City of Newport Beach General Plan Natural Resources Element, the proposed Project Site is not identified as a biological resources area or located in an ESA and is not connected to any wildlife corridors (Newport Beach 2006a). Therefore, the proposed Project Site does not act as a wildlife corridor that would facilitate movement of wildlife species. It does not support daily movement of species from breeding, roosting, and nesting sites nor does it provide stopover habitat for migratory bird species; therefore, no impacts would occur. e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact. The proposed Project Site does not contain any biological resources that are protected by local policies. The proposed Project Site has several ornamental trees. According to the City of Newport Beach General Plan Natural Resources Element, the proposed Project Site is not located in an area where sensitive and rare terrestrial and marine resources occur (Newport Beach 2006a). Furthermore, according to the County of Orange General Plan Resources Element, the proposed Project Site is not located within the boundaries of the Orange County Natural Communities Conservation Plan (County of Orange 2005). For additional details regarding local policies or ordinances, refer to Section IX, Land Use and Planning. The project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources; therefore, no impacts would occur. f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? No Impact. The City of Newport Beach is a signatory to a Natural Resource Community Conservation Plan agreement. However, per Figure VI -5 of the Resources Element of the Orange County General Plan, the proposed Project Site is not located within a designated Natural Communities Conservation Plan area (Newport Beach, 2006a, County of Orange, 2005).. Therefore, it not subject to the provisions of any local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan or Natural Communities Conservation Plan area and no impacts would occur. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-25 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis 5.4.5 Cultural Resources Discussion Would the project: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? No Impact. According to the City of Newport Beach General Plan Historical Resources Element, the proposed Project Site does not have any structures listed on local, state, or federal historic resource lists or structures that are eligible for such lists. There are no such historical structures adjacent to or in the general vicinity of the proposed Project Site. Furthermore, according to HR1 in the General Plan Historic Resources Element and Map 4-4 in the Coastal Land Use Plan there are no historical resources or structures located onsite or within the general vicinity of the proposed Project Site (Newport Beach 2006a, 2009); therefore, no impacts would occur. b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? Less -than -Significant Impact. The proposed Project Site is located in an urbanized area and is currently developed. Ground disturbances from the previous development in the last century likely would have uncovered or inadvertently destroyed any unknown archeological resources. No known recorded archeological resources are located in the proposed Project Site. The proposed project would involve minimal surface soil disturbance and grading. Therefore, it is highly unlikely the proposed project would disturb any unknown archaeological resources, and impacts would be less than significant. c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Less -than -Significant Impact. As discussed above in 5.4.5 (b), the proposed Project Site is currently developed. There are no unique geological features currently on site. Ground 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-26 Less Than Potentially Significant with Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Would the Project: Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? C) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or ❑ ❑ D ❑ site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of ❑ ❑ D ❑ formal cemeteries? Discussion Would the project: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? No Impact. According to the City of Newport Beach General Plan Historical Resources Element, the proposed Project Site does not have any structures listed on local, state, or federal historic resource lists or structures that are eligible for such lists. There are no such historical structures adjacent to or in the general vicinity of the proposed Project Site. Furthermore, according to HR1 in the General Plan Historic Resources Element and Map 4-4 in the Coastal Land Use Plan there are no historical resources or structures located onsite or within the general vicinity of the proposed Project Site (Newport Beach 2006a, 2009); therefore, no impacts would occur. b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? Less -than -Significant Impact. The proposed Project Site is located in an urbanized area and is currently developed. Ground disturbances from the previous development in the last century likely would have uncovered or inadvertently destroyed any unknown archeological resources. No known recorded archeological resources are located in the proposed Project Site. The proposed project would involve minimal surface soil disturbance and grading. Therefore, it is highly unlikely the proposed project would disturb any unknown archaeological resources, and impacts would be less than significant. c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Less -than -Significant Impact. As discussed above in 5.4.5 (b), the proposed Project Site is currently developed. There are no unique geological features currently on site. Ground 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-26 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis disturbances from previous development likely would have either uncovered or inadvertently destroyed any unknown buried paleontological resources. Furthermore, the proposed Project Site is not listed as an area that has yielded archaeological and paleontological resources (Newport Beach 2006a). Any subsequent development resulting from the proposed Project would involve minimal surface soil disturbance and grading. Therefore, it is highly unlikely the proposed Project would disturb any unknown paleontological resources, and impacts would be less than significant. d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less -than -Significant Impact. The proposed Project Site is not a formal cemetery and it is not adjacent to a formal cemetery. The proposed Project Site is not known to contain human remains interred outside formal cemeteries. The proposed Project Site is not known to be located on a burial ground. The proposed Project Site is currently developed and has been disturbed in the past. Any subsequent development resulting from the proposed Project would likely involve grading and shallow soil disturbance. Discovery of human remains is governed by state law, which requires stopping work and reporting to authorities. Disturbance of human remains, including those of Native Americans, is possible. Should human remains be uncovered during construction, as specified by State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, no further disturbance will occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code 5097.98. If such a discovery occurs, excavation or construction will halt in the area of the discovery, the area will be protected, and consultation and treatment will occur as prescribed by law. If the Coroner recognizes the remains to be Native American, he or she will contact the Native American Heritage Commission, who will appoint the Most Likely Descendent (MLD). Additionally, if the bones are determined to be Native American, a plan will be developed regarding the treatment of human remains and associated burial objects, and the plan will be implemented under the direction of the MLD. 5.4.6 Geology and Soils 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-27 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Would the Project: Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ shaking? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-27 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Discussion Would the project: Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: a1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. No Impact. There are no Alquist-Priolo zones in the City of Newport Beach; therefore, no impacts would occur (Newport Beach, 2006b). Fault rupture impacts generally occur near the fault line where the fault shears or slips and the ground is offset in some way; therefore, no impact would occur. a2. Strong seismic groundshaking? Less -than -Significant Impact. All of Southern California, including the City of Newport Beach, is located in a seismically active area and is subject to strong seismic groundshaking. The City of Newport Beach is located in the northern part of the Peninsular Ranges Province, an area that is exposed to risk from multiple earthquake fault zones. The highest risks originate from the Newport -Inglewood fault zone, the Whittier fault zone, the San Joaquin Hills fault zone, and the Elysian Park fault zone, each with the potential to cause moderate to large earthquakes that 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-28 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Would the Project: Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including ❑ ❑ Q ❑ liquefaction? iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q b) Result in substantial soil erosion or ❑ ❑ Q ❑ the loss of topsoil? C) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in on- ❑ ❑ Q ❑ or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), ❑ ❑ Q ❑ creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal ❑ ❑ ❑ Q systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Discussion Would the project: Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: a1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. No Impact. There are no Alquist-Priolo zones in the City of Newport Beach; therefore, no impacts would occur (Newport Beach, 2006b). Fault rupture impacts generally occur near the fault line where the fault shears or slips and the ground is offset in some way; therefore, no impact would occur. a2. Strong seismic groundshaking? Less -than -Significant Impact. All of Southern California, including the City of Newport Beach, is located in a seismically active area and is subject to strong seismic groundshaking. The City of Newport Beach is located in the northern part of the Peninsular Ranges Province, an area that is exposed to risk from multiple earthquake fault zones. The highest risks originate from the Newport -Inglewood fault zone, the Whittier fault zone, the San Joaquin Hills fault zone, and the Elysian Park fault zone, each with the potential to cause moderate to large earthquakes that 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-28 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis would cause ground shaking in Newport Beach and nearby communities. Policies contained in the Newport Beach General Plan (Newport Beach, 2006a) would ensure that adverse effects caused by seismic and geologic hazards such as strong seismic ground shaking are minimized. For example, Policy S4.1 requires regular update to building and fire codes to provide for seismic safety and design, and Policies S4.4 and S4.5 ensure that new development is not located in areas that would be affected by seismic hazards. Additionally, new development would be required to comply with the building design standards of the California Building Code Chapter 33 for construction of new buildings and/or structures, and specific engineering design and construction measures would be implemented to anticipate and avoid the potential for adverse impacts (Newport Beach, 2006b). All proposed demolition and building would occur in accordance with building and safety standards as specific by the City Building Division. All buildings would be constructed in compliance with the latest earthquake -resistant design available and relevant codes. All project components would be in compliance with the most up- to-date building codes and plans would be reviewed and approved by City Building Division prior to construction. Furthermore, the dwelling units would be inspected by a trained and qualified building inspector under the supervision of the Building Official prior to occupation; therefore, impacts would be less than significant. a3. Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less -than -Significant Impact. Figure 5-8 (Existing Liquefaction and Seismic Hazard Areas) identifies areas of potential liquefaction in the City of Newport Beach. The proposed Project Site is located in an area identified as having a potential for soil liquefaction when subject to a seismic event (Newport Beach 2006a). Liquefaction is a geologic process that causes ground failure and typically occurs in loose, saturated sediments primarily of sandy composition (Newport Beach 2006a). It is likely that a nearby moderate to strong earthquake would cause extensive damage to buildings and infrastructure in the area. However, compliance with the standards set forth in the current California Building Code and City policies in its General Plan Safety Element would minimize risk of injury, loss of life, and property damage caused by earthquake hazards or geologic disturbances. Specifically, Policies S4.1 through S4.6 include requiring new development to be in compliance with the most recent seismic and other geologic hazard safety standards (Newport Beach 2006b). All proposed project components would occur in accordance with building and safety standards; furthermore, the foundations would be engineered to address liquefaction potential. Therefore, impacts on people or structures as a result of seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction, are less than significant. a4. Landslides? No Impact. The proposed Project would have no impact related to landslides. Figure 5-8 (Existing Liquefaction and Seismic Hazard Areas) identifies areas with landslide potential and the proposed Project Site is not located within any area with landslide potential. The proposed Project Site is generally flat and implementation of the Project would not require slope cuts that could result in landslides; therefore, no impacts associated with landslides would occur. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-29 Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Ana Figure 5-8 Existing Liquefaction and Seismic Hazard Areas as I 3 niu1111111111111L ,c -_. ;+i s�lllllllllllllit I II ,.�_ - ry,_�' nniggmmi�i ( { p,.N lit"� y t 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-30 Cli NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN Figure S2 SEISMIC HAZARDS Legend �o City Boundary Areca whth iipuefaclion Potential Areas with San Mide potential Fault DLsclosu re Zone for real-estate disclosure purposes Fniult Line M ajar fault iro ces on mapped by Morton. 1999. Presumed active, ex cept where shown ulherw'se based on geotogicoi si a dies Southward projeciion of active faun traces bases v'Sy, on asubsurtoce study on the west ban icof the Santa Ana River 0'%,, Highway —I— Local Road 1 7 Counly o as :��[cr aur�eet: ras�ual rpx: ocm�� '. EI1n Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis b. Result insubstantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less -than -Significant Impact. The proposed Project Site does not contain substantial amounts of topsoil. The proposed Project Site is currently developed and consists of mostly impermeable surfaces (building and surface parking). Small amounts of exposed on-site soils would be prone to soil erosion during the construction phase of any subsequent development. However, any such development would likely involved minimal cut and fill and therefore loss of topsoil is greatly minimized. As required by the City's Municipal Code, grading activities will obtain a grading permit from the City's Building Official (Newport Beach 2006b). Chapter 15.10 contains grading, fill, drainage, and erosion control standards that will be applied to the corresponding construction activity (Newport Beach 2006b). Any subsequent development will implement standard erosion control measures and construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would minimize impacts; therefore, impacts would be less than significant. c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in an on-site or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? Less -than -Significant Impact. The proposed Project Site has been developed and is located in an area identified by the City of Newport Beach General Plan as having a potential for soil liquefaction when subjected to a seismic event. As discussed above in 5.4.6 VI (a3), it is likely that a nearby moderate to strong earthquake would cause extensive damage to buildings and infrastructure in the area. However, compliance with the standards set forth in the current California Building Code and City policies in its General Plan Safety Element (Newport Beach 2006a) would minimize risk of injury, loss of life, and property damage caused by earthquake hazards or geologic disturbances. All proposed Project components would occur in accordance with building and safety standards. Furthermore, as discussed in Response 5.4.6 VI(a4), no impacts would occur on people or structures as a result of landslide. Impacts on people or structures as a result of seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction (as discussed in Response 5.4.6 VI (a3), lateral spreading, subsidence or collapse are less than significant. d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Less -than -Significant Impact. Fine-grained soils, such as silts and clays, may contain variable amounts of expansive clay minerals. These minerals can undergo significant volumetric changes as a result of changes in moisture content. The upward pressures induced by the swelling of expansive soils can have significant harmful effects upon structures and other surface improvements (Earth Consultants International, 2003). Most of the Newport Mesa area are underlain by marine terrace deposits and young alluvial/alluvial fan sediments that are compressed primarily of granular soils (silty sand, sand, and gravel) (Earth Consultants International, 2003 and USGS, 1965). Such units are typically in the low to moderately low range for expansion potential. However, thick soil profiles developed on the older marine deposits exposed west of Newport Bay are typically clay -rich and will probably fall in the moderately expansive range. Areas underlain by beach and dune sands have very little expansion potential (Earth Consultants International 2003). Any subsequent development would likely involve a minimal amount of cut and fill. As discussed in Response 5.4.6 V(b), the proposed Project Site is primarily underlain by nonnative soil and/or artificial fill with identified alluvial sediments (USGS 1965). Typically fill is made to have low expansive potential because it is designed to support the structures which are built upon it. Therefore, it is assumed that the proposed Project Site is located in an area with low expansive soil potential. Any subsequent 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-31 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis development would occur in accordance with building and safety standards, and impacts would be less than significant. e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems in areas where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? No Impact. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems are included as part of the proposed project. The proposed Project Site would tie into the existing sewer line; therefore, no impacts would occur. 5.4.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a ❑ 0 El significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the El 11 El 0 purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Discussion Would the Project: a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? The City of Newport Beach considers projects emitting 3,000 metric tons of CO2e per year or less to be a less -than -significant contribution to greenhouse gasses, thereby not requiring further analysis. As discussed earlier in Response 5.4.3 (b), the amounts of GHG emissions that would result from development and operations of the proposed project are less than the applicable screening level threshold set by the City of Newport Beach. As such, any subsequent development would be consistent with the state's goals of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020; therefore, the proposed project's contribution to cumulative climate change GHG emissions would be less than significant. b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? No Impact. The proposed Project would comply with all applicable plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions; accordingly, no impact due to a conflict with any plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions would occur. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-32 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis 5.4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Would the Project: Potentially Significant Less Than Significant with Less than Significant No Impact Mitigation Incorporated Impact Impact a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and ❑ ❑ ❑ accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? G) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, ❑ ❑ ❑ D or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites which complied pursuant to Government Code ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-33 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Discussion Would the Project: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Less than Significant Impact. Any subsequent development may involve remodeling or demolition of the existing building. Asbestos -containing building materials or lead-based paint may be present. However, the City of Newport Beach requires building permit applications to include a declaration of compliance with Code of Federal Regulations Part 61 of Title 40 and AQMD Rule 1403 to ensure proper disposal of any hazardous materials, if discovered. Impacts therefore are considered less than significant. b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Less -than -Significant Impact. Any subsequent development or operation resulting from the proposed Project would not result in the reasonably foreseeable upset or release of any hazardous materials. The Newport Beach Fire Department is an all risk Fire Department. This means it has the resources to respond and provide services to all types of emergencies including: fires, medical emergencies, hazardous materials problems, beach rescues, traffic accidents, high rise incidents, wildland fires, major flooding and disaster (Newport Beach 2009). Furthermore, the Fire Department enforces city, state, and federal hazardous materials regulations for Newport Beach. City regulations include Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials Management Regulatory Program, Chapter 9.04 of the City's Municipal Code, and implementation of the California Accidental Release Prevention Program (Newport Beach 2006b). Elements of these programs include spill mitigation and containment and securing of hazardous materials containers to prevent spills. Compliance with these requirements is mandatory as standard permitting conditions and would minimize the potential for the accidental release or upset of hazardous materials, helping to ensure public safety. Construction equipment that would be used in any development resulting from the proposed Project has the potential to release oils, greases, solvents, and other finishing materials through accidental spills. Spill or upset of these materials would have the potential to affect surrounding land uses. However, the consequences of construction -related spills are generally reduced in comparison to other accidental spills and releases because the amount of hazardous material released during a construction -related spill is small as the volume in any single piece of construction equipment is generally less than 50 gallons. Construction -related spills of hazardous materials are not uncommon, but the enforcement of construction and demolition standards, including BMPs by appropriate local and state agencies (e.g., Newport Beach Fire Department), would minimize the potential for an accidental release of petroleum products and/or hazardous materials or explosions during construction. Federal, state, and local controls have been enacted to reduce the effects of potential hazardous materials spills. Any construction and operation resulting from the proposed Project would not create significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment; therefore, impacts would be less than significant. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-34 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No Impact. The proposed Project would not emit hazardous emissions or require handling hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste. The closest school to the proposed Project Site is Horace Ensign Intermediate School, located 0.40 miles northeast of the proposed Project Site at 2000 Cliff Drive. Therefore, the proposed project would not emit hazardous emissions within one-quarter mile of a school, and no impacts would occur. d. Be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites that complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? No Impact. The proposed Project Site is not included on any list of hazardous materials sites that complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. (Newport Beach 2006b). Furthermore, the proposed Project Site is not identified in any of the California hazardous materials databases. A search of 191 Riverside Avenue in the California Environmental Protection Agency (CaIEPA) Cortese List as a Department of Toxic Substances and Control Hazardous Waste site did not yield any results, and the proposed Project Site address is not in the EnviroStor database of hazardous substances release sites (CaIEPA 2009a, 2009b). Geotracker, the California database of leaking underground storage tanks, does not report any leaking underground storage tanks at the proposed Project Site or in the vicinity of the proposed Project Site (Geotracker 2009). Finally, there are no active Cease and Desist Orders or Clean Up and Abatement Orders for hazardous materials/facilities in the Project vicinity or at the proposed Project Site (CaIEPA 2009c). Therefore, the proposed Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment, and no impacts would occur. e. For a project within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The closest airport is John Wayne Airport, which is approximately 3.7 miles northeast of the proposed Project Site. The proposed Project Site is not located within the boundaries of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne Airport. Furthermore, according to the City of Newport Beach General Plan Safety Element (Newport Beach, 2006a), the proposed Project Site is not located in the John Wayne Airport Accident Potential Zone. Therefore, no impacts would occur. f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. As described above in 5.4.8 (e) the John Wayne Airport is located approximately 3.7 miles northeast of the proposed Project Site. There is no private airstrip in the vicinity of the proposed Project. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing the project area; no impacts would occur, and impacts would be less than significant. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-35 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No Impact. The proposed Project would not impair or physically affect any adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan. The proposed Project would not require the closure of any public or private streets or roadways and would not impede access of emergency vehicles to the Project Site or any surrounding areas during construction or operation. In the event of any temporary closures of the private streets adequate access would be maintained for the residents and emergency vehicles. Further, the proposed Project would provide all required emergency access in accordance with the requirements of the Newport Beach Fire Department during plan review by the Fire Department. For additional information regarding the tsunami evacuation plan please refer to Section 5.4.9 Q), Hydrology and Water Quality. No impacts on emergency response would occur. h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No Impact. The proposed Project Site is not located in an area adjacent to or intermixed with wildlands. Furthermore, the City of Newport Beach General Plan Safety Element (Newport Beach, 2006b) identifies the proposed Project Site as Low/None Fire Susceptibility. Therefore, people or structures would not be exposed to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires as a result of the proposed Project. No impacts would occur. 5.4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality Would the Project: Potentially Significant Less Than Significant with Less than Significant No Impact Mitigation Incorporated Impact Impact a) Violate any water quality standards or ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the El ❑ ❑ 0 production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? C) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on - or off-site? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-36 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Would the Project: Potentially Significant Less Than Significant with Less than Significant No Impact Mitigation Incorporated Impact Impact d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of a course of a stream or river, or substantially increase ❑ ❑ Q ❑ the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or ❑ ❑ Q ❑ provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ quality? g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect ❑ ❑ ❑ Q flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death ❑ ❑ ❑ involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? P Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ mud flow? Discussion Would the project: a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? No Impact. The City of Newport Beach is included in four watersheds: Newport Bay, Newport Coast, Talbert, and San Diego Creek (Newport Beach 2006a). Each of these watershed areas is under the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) and subject to the objectives, water quality standards, and BMPs requirements established in the Sana Ana River Basin Plan and Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP). Under the provisions of City of Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 14.36 (Water Quality), any discharge that would result in or contribute to degradation of water quality via stormwater runoff is prohibited. New development or redevelopment projects are required to comply with provisions set forth in the DAMP, including the implementation of appropriate BMPs identified in the DAMP, to control stormwater runoff so as to prevent any deterioration of water quality that would impair subsequent or competing beneficial uses of water (Newport Beach 2006a). Newport Bay is designated as "water quality -limited" for four impairments under the Federal Clean Water Act's Section 303(d) List. Under Section 303(d), states, territories, and authorized tribes are required to develop lists of impaired waters, establish priority rankings for waters on the lists, and develop total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) for these waters. For these water 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-37 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis quality limited bodies, the SARWQCB and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have developed TMDLs for the following substances in Newport Beach: sediment, nutrients, fecal coliform, and toxic pollutants (Newport Beach 2009). Furthermore, a municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) permit is provided to the City by the SARWQCB under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to regulate the amount of stormwater contaminants that are delivered into the City's waterways (Newport Beach 2009). MS4 permits require an aggressive water quality ordinance, specific municipal practices to maintain City facilities, and the use of BMPs in development activities to further reduce the amount of contaminants in urban runoff (City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006b). b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, resulting in a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? No Impact. The proposed Project Site is currently developed and is not considered a source for groundwater recharge (Newport Beach 2006b). The proposed Project would not increase the impervious area on the site. The proposed Project also would not directly withdraw groundwater from beneath the site. No impacts would occur. c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on site or off site? Less -than -Significant Impact. No streams or rivers are located on site, and therefore, the proposed Project would not directly affect the flow of a river or stream. Any subsequent development may involve some minor grading for construction. These activities would minimally alter the existing drainage pattern of the site. The proposed Project would not increase the impervious area on the site as the existing site fully developed with a building and pavement, save for a small 225 -square -foot landscaped area near the southeast corner of the Project Site. Therefore, impacts from erosion, either on site or off site would be less than significant. d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on site or off site? Less -than -Significant Impact. No streams or rivers are located on site, and therefore, the proposed Project would not directly affect the flow course of a river or stream. Because of the urban character of the area and the the proposed Project Site is almost fully -developed, substantial amounts of stormwater are not readily absorbed into the soil. Any subsequent development would minimally alter the existing drainage pattern of the site but would not increase the impervious area. e. Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Less -than -Significant Impact. Any subsequent development would minimally alter the existing drainage pattern of the Project Site and would not increase the impervious area. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-38 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Therefore, there would not be a substantial increase in runoff water that would exceed the capacity of the existing or planned stormwater drainage system. Therefore, increased runoff would not exceed the capacity of existing storm drain systems or generate polluted runoff. Impacts on stormwater, therefore, would be less than significant. f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Less -than -Significant Impact. The proposed Project would not substantially degrade water quality. See Response 5.4.9 (e). Impacts on water quality would be less than significant. g. Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? No Impact. Figure 5-9 (Flood Hazards) identifies the flooding hazards in the City of Newport Beach. The proposed Project Site is not located in an area of a 500 -year flood or a 100 -year flood according to the City of Newport Beach General Plan (Newport Beach 2006a). Therefore, there would be no impact. h. Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood flows? No Impact. As discussed in Section 5.4.9 (g), the proposed Project Site is not located in an area of a 100 -year flood (Newport Beach 2006a). Therefore, the proposed project would not impede or redirect 100 -year floodflows, and there would be no impacts. i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Less -than -Significant Impact. As discussed in Section 5.4.9 (g), the proposed Project Site is not flood area. Implementation of the flood protection policies contained in the General Plan and City Municipal Code would reduce impacts from flooding as a result of levee failure, and impacts would be less than significant. j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Less -than -Significant Impact. The proposed Project Site is located in a 100 -year zone for tsunami inundation at extreme high tide (City of Newport Beach 2006a). Figure 5-10 (Coastal Hazards) identifies the City of Newport Beach evacuation routes in the event of a tsunami. The City also has a tsunami contingency plan and evacuation routes in place (Newport Beach 2006a). Implementation of the land uses of the proposed Project could result in a maximum of 13 additional dwelling units within the identified tsunami inundation zone. This would not substantially increase exposure to existing hazards, or substantially affect evacuation of the Mariners Mile area in the event of a tsunami; therefore, impacts would be less than significant. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-39 Negative Declaration Figure 5-9 Flood Hazards 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Ana 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-40 CIIYof NE,IVPORJBEACH GENERAL PLAN Figure S3 FLOOD HAZARDS Legend - $vedal fbo� Hrnstl Nem Yxrdat� ty IOOI�rAocd Pr�sat 3t30 `Maribod:.9Rasa1 Ido yed' amd wihwxrq�e dtpH'rs dl�s Ywn I €aat v5dp1 lalnagear�slessfhonl b rcile;by aryl area;y—ec Iz�ee frmm 100�v Wao3 �rz v� w�slal boy xne..im Hoary nanra <acrc«q case flo:.a aewtcna aalgsri><ed. o nas as I OMIff -v2'. QYf OINfr�01h :'Yv 3J65 R'tpJEC�Rl1MBBl. �0.5�9 Q1 Q]I2'. 03R]@5 4-p EIP Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Figure 5-10 Coastal Hazards CITYof NEWPORT BEACH G'ENER,NLPLAN Figure S1 COASTAL HAZARDS Legend Qaaslal Erosion Hazards _ Banc--beraf Monte y. fcamrrt'lort—t-a.. blurc "",g und. Prone to km65' ding w maw waetlrg where a nck. �^ut byw�aUe c�Fion, espeab Ily cff pai rRs. Fc� w large bbcks Si�h3one member of Mortrerey forrmlbn: very l'asiband r tolc .p,—.1aL3crmab— of ,b— ® Plesbaene m. a in° tem— depasbs: prase to knud srdkQ a brig t—p-dh {'re. ,ia hway l), —d 1. r®.n by of gond auq�+nq abnel blufftap] - Bexh and ,A— --..d my di the �aysbp gto tel bec,- - Continuo W rewo M. 9 by—ani wi rd ibn Tsunami I—d ian al E»eme W[jt Tide 1 m year Zone (Inr �fion EevaFon_1361 feet - aDyearZ.— {InlurdalionEbvdYlcrdl5? feel} 0 65 I MSv rA I'k'.MM tbxhmtl€aii hrt.4l]. TKUECY wrur AER' 3Lt5J461 Jatz� C'�.ggr05 r 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-41 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis 5.4.10 Land Use and Planning Discussion Would the project: a. Physically divide an established community? No Impact. The proposed Project involves an amendment to the General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan and Zoning Code to change the land use category from Public Facilities (PF) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H1) and a Zoning Code Amendment (CA2016-005) to change the zoning from Public Facilities (PF) to Mixed -Use Mariners Mile (MU -MM). These amendments would be compatible with the adjacent commercial uses, all of which are designated for mixed- use development. Any subsequent development allowed under the proposed Project would not divide the existing community; therefore, no impacts would occur. b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Less -than -Significant Impact. The proposed project involves amendments to the General Plan Land Use Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Zoning Code to change the land use and zoning categories of the proposed Project Site from institutional to mixed-use land use. This is consistent with the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan vision for the Mariners Mile Commercial District, which calls for parcels on the inland side of Coast Highway to "evolve as a pedestrian -oriented mixed-use `village' containing retail businesses, offices, services, and housing." Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in a conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect; impacts would be less than significant. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-42 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Would the Project: Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact a) Physically divide an established ❑ ❑ ❑ 171 community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local ❑ ❑ D ❑ coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 community conservation plan? Discussion Would the project: a. Physically divide an established community? No Impact. The proposed Project involves an amendment to the General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan and Zoning Code to change the land use category from Public Facilities (PF) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H1) and a Zoning Code Amendment (CA2016-005) to change the zoning from Public Facilities (PF) to Mixed -Use Mariners Mile (MU -MM). These amendments would be compatible with the adjacent commercial uses, all of which are designated for mixed- use development. Any subsequent development allowed under the proposed Project would not divide the existing community; therefore, no impacts would occur. b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Less -than -Significant Impact. The proposed project involves amendments to the General Plan Land Use Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Zoning Code to change the land use and zoning categories of the proposed Project Site from institutional to mixed-use land use. This is consistent with the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan vision for the Mariners Mile Commercial District, which calls for parcels on the inland side of Coast Highway to "evolve as a pedestrian -oriented mixed-use `village' containing retail businesses, offices, services, and housing." Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in a conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect; impacts would be less than significant. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-42 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? No Impact. The proposed project is located in an urbanized setting, and no locally designated species or natural communities are known to exist in the project area. The site is not part of any habitat conservation plan or natural community preservation plan. No impacts would occur. 5.4.11 Mineral Resources Would the Project: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? Discussion Would the project: a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? No Impact. According to the City of Newport Beach General Plan Natural Resources Element, the Mineral Resource Zones (MRZ) in the City are either classified as containing no significant mineral deposits (MRZ-1), or the significance of mineral deposits has not been determined (MRZ-3). The proposed Project Site is located in an area designated as MRZ-3 (USGS, 2015). The proposed Project Site is surrounded by land uses that are not compatible with pit mining (residential and roads), all of which would preclude it from being developed as a mine, even if there is indeed an extractable mineral resource present. Therefore, no impacts associated with the loss of a mineral resource would occur. b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? No Impact. The site is not delineated in the City of Newport Beach General Plan as containing a locally important mineral resource (Newport Beach 2006a); therefore, no impacts would occur. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-43 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis 5.4.12 Noise Discussion Would the project result in: a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Less -than -Significant Impact. Subsequent development of the proposed Project Site would expose sensitive receptors (i.e., schools, hospitals, residential) in the area. The nearest sensitive receptors are nearby single -unit residences in Newport Heights that would be subject to a temporary increase in noise from construction activities. However, the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code limits construction activities during specific hours. Operational noise would be regulated by the noise control ordinances of City of Newport Beach Municipal Code. Impacts would be less than significant. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-44 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Would the Project result in: Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons toor generation of excessive ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? C) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 0 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working ❑ ❑ ❑ D in the project area to excessive noise levels? Discussion Would the project result in: a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Less -than -Significant Impact. Subsequent development of the proposed Project Site would expose sensitive receptors (i.e., schools, hospitals, residential) in the area. The nearest sensitive receptors are nearby single -unit residences in Newport Heights that would be subject to a temporary increase in noise from construction activities. However, the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code limits construction activities during specific hours. Operational noise would be regulated by the noise control ordinances of City of Newport Beach Municipal Code. Impacts would be less than significant. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-44 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less -than -Significant Impact. Future construction activities associated with grading and excavation may result in minor ground vibration. Construction of the project would not involve special construction methods such as pile driving or blasting. Vibration from conventional construction activity is typically below a level of human perception and well under levels that would cause damage to existing buildings, when the activity is more than approximately 50 feet from the receiver. Conventional construction activities from future development could take place at distances greater than 50 feet from sensitive receptors. c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less -than -Significant Impact. Noise associated with any subsequent development would be generated primarily by traffic. The City of Newport Beach General Plan Noise Element presents future noise conditions for roadways derived from projected traffic levels for the complete build -out of the General Plan. Primary site access is provided by Riverside Avenue, a four -lane Local Road. Riverside Avenue has a daily capacity ranging from 7,000 to 11,000 vehicles per day (VPD) with a typical daily capacity of 10,000 VPD. Currently, Riverside Avenue has a traffic count of 9,000 VPD (Newport Beach, 2006b). As described in the analysis below in 5.4.6 (a), subsequent development resulting from the proposed land use and zoning changes could generate between 233 and 313 additional average daily trips. Therefore, subsequent development would not cause Riverside Avenue to go over the anticipated capacity and it can be expected that future noise conditions will not change; therefore, impacts would be less than significant. d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less -than -Significant Impact. As stated above, the construction of the proposed Project would result in a temporary increase in noise levels. These levels could be audible at the closest sensitive receptors. However, the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code limits construction activities during specific hours; therefore, impacts from construction would be less than significant. e. For a project located within an airport land use land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The proposed Project Site is not located within a 2 -mile radius of an airport or within an airport land use plan. The closest airport is John Wayne Airport located approximately 3.7 miles to the northeast (OCALUC, 2008). The proposed Project Site is located outside the noise contours of the airport, but may experience some distance airplane noise; therefore, no impacts would occur. f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-45 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis No Impact. The proposed Project Site is not located within the vicinity of an airstrip, private or public; therefore, no impacts would occur. 5.4.13 Population and Housing Would the Project: Potentially Significant Less Than Significant with Less than Significant No Impact Mitigation Incorporated Impact Impact a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the ❑ ❑ ❑ construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Would the project: a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure? Less -than -Significant Impact. The proposed land use and zoning amendments to the City of Newport Beach General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Zoning Code would allow up to 13 dwelling units in a mixed-use development. This could increase the total housing units available in the City of Newport Beach from 44,166 to 44,179. This is less than 1% (approximately 0.003%) of the current total housing available (California Department of Finance 2016). There are approximately 84,000 people in the City of Newport Beach and 2.2 persons per household in the City of Newport Beach; therefore, the proposed project would increase the local population by approximately 29 people (California Department of Finance, 2016). A less than 1% 0.003%) increase in population and housing is negligible to the overall growth of the City and is not considered substantially growth inducing. In addition, the proposed Project Site is surrounded by existing commercial development and would not result in growth inducing efforts caused by the extension of utilities, roads, or other infrastructure into undeveloped area. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. The proposed project would amend the existing land use and zoning designations, which could allow for the construction and operation of a mixed-use development. The proposed Project Site is currently a post office facility and does not consist of housing. Therefore, the proposed project would not displace any housing and would not necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere; no impacts would occur. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-46 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. As discussed in 5.4.13 (b) above, the proposed Project Site is currently developed with a post office facility and no people currently live on the proposed Project Site. Therefore, the proposed Project would not displace any housing or people, and no impacts would occur. 5.4.14 Public Services Discussion Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with: a1. Fire protection? Less -than -Significant Impact. The proposed Project Site is located in the City of Newport Beach Fire Department service area. The City of Newport Beach Fire Department (NBFD) is considered an "all risk" Fire Department. This means it has the resources to respond and provide services to all types of emergencies including: fires, medical emergencies, hazardous materials problems, beach rescues, traffic accidents, high rise incidents, wildland fires, major flooding and disaster operations (Newport Beach, 2009). The proposed Project Site is served by Lido Fire Station #2, which is located at 475 32nd Street at the intersection of 32nd Street and Via Oporto, approximately 0.44 miles to the southwest of the proposed Project Site. The existing post office facility generates minimal demand on fire and emergency services. It is currently open only for post office boxes and only has one employee for half a day, six days a week. Should an emergency or fire occur at the existing post office facility, the NBFD would be first responders. As discussed above, future development could add up to 11,326 square feet of commercial floor area with a potential employee population of approximately 25 people (SCAG, 2001) and 13 dwelling units with approximately 29 people (California Department of Finance, 2016). NBFD has determined that the City's existing fire protection services are adequate to serve the potential future population of the proposed Project Site. Additionally, any subsequent development would be constructed in accordance with current Fire Codes, and would replace an older building that was constructed prior to the enactment of current standards. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. a2. Police protection? Less -than -Significant Impact. The proposed Project Site is located in the City of Newport Beach Police Department (NBPD) service area. The NBPD is located at 870 Santa Barbara Drive, approximately 2.5 miles northeast of the proposed Project Site. As discussed above, the 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-47 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Would the Project: Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ b) Police protection? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ c) Schools? ❑ ❑ D ❑ d) Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ D ❑ Discussion Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with: a1. Fire protection? Less -than -Significant Impact. The proposed Project Site is located in the City of Newport Beach Fire Department service area. The City of Newport Beach Fire Department (NBFD) is considered an "all risk" Fire Department. This means it has the resources to respond and provide services to all types of emergencies including: fires, medical emergencies, hazardous materials problems, beach rescues, traffic accidents, high rise incidents, wildland fires, major flooding and disaster operations (Newport Beach, 2009). The proposed Project Site is served by Lido Fire Station #2, which is located at 475 32nd Street at the intersection of 32nd Street and Via Oporto, approximately 0.44 miles to the southwest of the proposed Project Site. The existing post office facility generates minimal demand on fire and emergency services. It is currently open only for post office boxes and only has one employee for half a day, six days a week. Should an emergency or fire occur at the existing post office facility, the NBFD would be first responders. As discussed above, future development could add up to 11,326 square feet of commercial floor area with a potential employee population of approximately 25 people (SCAG, 2001) and 13 dwelling units with approximately 29 people (California Department of Finance, 2016). NBFD has determined that the City's existing fire protection services are adequate to serve the potential future population of the proposed Project Site. Additionally, any subsequent development would be constructed in accordance with current Fire Codes, and would replace an older building that was constructed prior to the enactment of current standards. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. a2. Police protection? Less -than -Significant Impact. The proposed Project Site is located in the City of Newport Beach Police Department (NBPD) service area. The NBPD is located at 870 Santa Barbara Drive, approximately 2.5 miles northeast of the proposed Project Site. As discussed above, the 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-47 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis existing post office facility generates minimal demand for police services. However, the NBPD has determined that the City's existing police facilities are adequate to serve the future development and population at the proposed Project Site; therefore, impacts would be less than significant. a3. Schools? Less -than -Significant Impact. School services in the City are provided by the Newport -Mesa Unified School District (NMUSD). The demand for new schools is generally associated with population increases or impacts on existing schools. Future development could increase the number of children housed at the proposed Project Site, and therefore would increase the number of students attending schools. The 2006-2008 American Community Survey indicates there are 13,249 children between the ages of 5 and 19 living in Newport Beach; therefore, approximately 16% of the City population is school age children (USCB, 2008). In the City of Newport Beach, the average household size is 2.19 and approximately 19% of the households have an individual living in the household under 18 years of age (i.e., school-age child) (California Department of Finance 2016). The proposed Project could potentially result in up to 13 households and approximately 29 people (2.19 persons per household). Therefore, based on U.S. Census data, it is reasonable to assume the proposed project would generate approximately five school-age children (18% of the 29 persons in the 13 potential households would have school-age children). Although the proposed Project may increase the number of school age children in the City by five, this would not place a significant added burden to the Newport -Mesa Unified School District; therefore impacts would be less than significant. Furthermore, any future residential development would be required to contribute school fees in accordance with Public Education Code § 17072.10-18. a4. Parks? Less -than -Significant Impact. As discussed in 5.4.14 (a3) above, the proposed Project could result in the construction of 13 dwelling units. As such, the proposed Project could increase the number of people by 29, including five children. According to the Newport Beach General Plan Recreation Element, there are two parks in the vicinity of the proposed Project Site: Cliff Drive Park and Ensign View Park (Figure 5-11 Service Area 3 Recreation and Open Space Plan). It is expected that these two parks would be able to handle the increased demand, and the project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts on parks requiring the need for new facilities in order to maintain acceptable performance standards. See Section 5.4.15 (a) and (b) Recreation for additional discussion on parks and recreation. Impacts would be less than significant. a5. Other public facilities? Less -Than -Significant Impact. Other public facilities located in the City of Newport Beach include libraries and senior centers. The City of Newport has four libraries and one senior center. The closest library and senior center to the proposed Project Site are the Mariners Branch at 1000 Irvine Avenue and OASIS Senior Center at 800 Marguerite Avenue, approximately 1.4 miles northeast and 3.6 miles east from the proposed Project Site, respectively. Subsequent development would negligibly increase the local permanent population by 29 people (see Response 5.4.14 (a1) above). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse impacts on other public facilities or require new facilities to maintain acceptable performance standards. Finally, library services receive funding from property tax, a 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-48 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis portion of which from the tax assessment of improvements on the proposed Project Site would be dedicated to the City's Library Fund. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. 5.4.15 Recreation Discussion a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Less -than -Significant Impact. Subsequent development would not significantly affect neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities. The proposed Project Site is located in Service Area 3 (Newport Heights/Upper Newport Bay), which currently supports a total of 50.2 acres of combined park area, which is below the 64.3 acres of parkland "needs" based on the City's current requirements in the Recreational Element of the General Plan. An increase in the use of parks is generally associated with an increase of housing or population in an area. A potential increase in housing as a result of the proposed Project would increase the local population by up to 29 people, based on an average of 2.19 persons per household in Newport Beach. It is not known at this time that if any residential development resulting from the proposed Project will be subdivided or offered as rentals. Pursuit to Chapter 19.52 of the Subdivision Code, only residential subdivisions are be required to pay the requisite Quimby Act fees, which are used by the City to provide new parks and/or recreation facilities. The two neighborhood parks (Cliff Drive Park and Ensign View Park) in the general vicinity of the proposed Project Site as identified by Figure 5-11 could absorb the slight demand placed on them by as much as 29 new residents. Additionally, Service Area 3 has substantial school recreation facilities, including Newport Harbor High School, Ensign Junior High, Mariners Elementary, and Newport Heights Elementary that compensate for the deficiency in total park area. Finally, the 13.67 -acre Sunset Ridge Park opened in 2014. While Sunset Ridge Park is in Service Area 1 (West Newport), it is located less than a mile from the proposed Project Site. Impacts would be less than significant. b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction of or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-49 Potentially Significant Impact p Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact p No Impact a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction of or expansion of 0 recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Discussion a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Less -than -Significant Impact. Subsequent development would not significantly affect neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities. The proposed Project Site is located in Service Area 3 (Newport Heights/Upper Newport Bay), which currently supports a total of 50.2 acres of combined park area, which is below the 64.3 acres of parkland "needs" based on the City's current requirements in the Recreational Element of the General Plan. An increase in the use of parks is generally associated with an increase of housing or population in an area. A potential increase in housing as a result of the proposed Project would increase the local population by up to 29 people, based on an average of 2.19 persons per household in Newport Beach. It is not known at this time that if any residential development resulting from the proposed Project will be subdivided or offered as rentals. Pursuit to Chapter 19.52 of the Subdivision Code, only residential subdivisions are be required to pay the requisite Quimby Act fees, which are used by the City to provide new parks and/or recreation facilities. The two neighborhood parks (Cliff Drive Park and Ensign View Park) in the general vicinity of the proposed Project Site as identified by Figure 5-11 could absorb the slight demand placed on them by as much as 29 new residents. Additionally, Service Area 3 has substantial school recreation facilities, including Newport Harbor High School, Ensign Junior High, Mariners Elementary, and Newport Heights Elementary that compensate for the deficiency in total park area. Finally, the 13.67 -acre Sunset Ridge Park opened in 2014. While Sunset Ridge Park is in Service Area 1 (West Newport), it is located less than a mile from the proposed Project Site. Impacts would be less than significant. b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction of or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-49 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Less -than -Significant Impact. The proposed Project does not include recreational facilities or require the construction of or expansion of recreation facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Impacts would be less than significant. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-50 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Figure 5-11 Service Area 3 Recreation and Open Space Plan 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-51 CFIYof WWPORiBEACH GENERAL FLAN Fgure R5 SEWCE AREA 3 REC REATION AND OPEN SPACE PLAN Fend r'Seuvice Area J � Publc Beach Upper N&. pact Eoolcgtonl Resmv�- •' CiyBaundauy county a2s ai ewe: ek a raym emman [e wcm E i Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis 5.4.16 Transportation/Traffic Discussion Would the project: a. Would the Project conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non -motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-52 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Would the Project: Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non -motorized ❑ ❑ Q ❑ travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standard and travel demand ❑ ❑ ❑ Q measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? C) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change ❑ ❑ ❑ Q in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) ❑ ❑ Q ❑ or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency ❑ ❑ Q ❑ access. f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public ❑ ❑ ❑ Q transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities? Discussion Would the project: a. Would the Project conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non -motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-52 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Less -than -Significant Impact. As shown in Table 5-3, Comparison of Existing versus Proposed Daily Traffic, subsequent development would result in a net increase of 233 total daily trips if developed with commercial uses only or a net increase of 313 total daily trips if developed as a mixed-use project. Primary site access is provided by Riverside Avenue, a four - lane Local Road. Riverside Avenue has a daily capacity ranging from 7,000 to 11,000 vehicles per day (VPD) with a typical daily capacity of 10,000 VPD. Currently, Riverside Avenue has a traffic count of 9,000 VPD (XXX). Subsequent development resulting from the proposed land use and zoning changes would not cause Riverside Avenue to go over capacity. In addition, the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 15.40) requires mitigation for any traffic effects caused by new development; Section 15.40.030.0 (Exemptions) exempts projects that generate no more than 300 ADT. Impacts would be less than significant. Table 5-3 Comparison of Existing versus Proposed Daily Traffic Land Use Size Unit AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily Total Existing Post Office 9.242 1 TSF 14 5 19 7 12 19 200 Proposed Apartment 13 DU 2 6 8 5 3 7 80 General 11.33 TSF 20 9 29 17 23 40 433 Commercial TOTAL: 22 15 37 22 25 47 513 NET CHANGE (Proposed — 6 4 10 10 11 21 233 Existing) Commercial Only NET CHANGE (Proposed — 8 10 18 15 14 28 313 Existing) Mixed -Use TSF = Thousand Square Feet DU = Dwelling Unit Note: AM Peak Hour, PM Peak Hour, and Daily Total reflect the number of trips. The Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO), Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, was established by the City Council to ensure that the effects of new development projects are mitigated by developers as they occur. Specifically, the ordinance was established to provide a uniform method of analyzing and evaluating the traffic impacts of projects that generate a substantial number of average daily trips and/or trips during the morning or evening peak hour period; to identify the specific and near-term impacts of project traffic as well as circulation system improvements that will accommodate project traffic and ensure that development is phased with identified circulation system improvements; to ensure that project proponents, as conditions of approval, make or fund circulation system improvements that mitigate the specific impacts of project traffic on primary intersections at or near the time the project is ready for occupancy; and to provide a mechanism for ensuring that a project proponent's cost of complying with traffic related conditions of project approval is roughly proportional to project impacts. Section 15.40.030 (Standards for Approval — Findings — Exemptions) specifically exempts the following project types from compliance with the Traffic Phasing Ordinance: a) projects that generate three hundred (300) or fewer average daily trips; b) projects that do not increase trips by one percent or more on any leg of any primary intersection during any evening or morning peak hour; and c) any project that meets certain other criteria as specified in the Ordinance. A commercial -only project would be exempt from the TPO and mixed-use project would be required to conduct a traffic analysis to evaluate traffic impacts, identify circulation system improvements and condition the project to make or fund circulation system improvements. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-53 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis The Circulation Element of the General Plan identifies a Class II Bikeway on Riverside Avenue, which is a striped and stenciled lane for bicycle travel on a street or highway. Any subsequent development may involve relocating driveway access points; however, bicycles would continue to have access along the abutting roadway. No existing or planned mass transit facilities are located on or near the proposed Project Site or surrounding area. The nearest mass transit route is the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Route 1 on West Coast Highway. Less Than Significant Impact. b. Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standard and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? No Impact. The proposed Project is not subject to the Orange County Congestion Management Plan (OCCMP). The OCCMP CMP requires that a traffic impact analysis be conducted for any project generating 2,400 or more daily trips, or 1,600 or more daily trips for projects that directly access the OCCMP highway System. The OCCMP system in Newport Beach consists of the following roadways: • MacArthur Boulevard (Jamboree Road to Coast Highway) • Jamboree Road (between city limit and MacArthur Boulevard) • Coast Highway (throughout) • Newport Boulevard (from north city limit to Coast Highway) As subsequent development resulting from the proposed Project would generate a maximum of 313 daily trips. No Impact. c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? No Impact. The closest airport is John Wayne Airport (JWA), which is approximately 3.7 miles northeast of the proposed Project Site. According to the AELUP for the JWA, the proposed Project Site is not located within the Airport Planning Area, the Airport Impact Zones, the AELUP Notification Area for JWA, or the Airport Safety Zones (OCALUC, 2008, Figure 1 and Appendix D). Accordingly, and based on the AELUP, the Project would not occur in a location that results in a substantial safety risk for future Project residents. d. Substantially increase hazards because of a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less -than -Significant Impact. The proposed Project would not alter the shape of any of the adjacent roads. The City of Newport Beach Public Works Department would review and approve all driveway plans prior to any subsequent construction, and impacts would be less than significant. e. Result in inadequate emergency access? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-54 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Less -than -Significant Impact. Any subsequent construction or operation would not affect streets or otherwise affect emergency access routes. The proposed Project would be designed to incorporate all required City of Newport Beach Fire Department standards to ensure that its implementation would not result in hazardous design features or inadequate emergency access to the site or areas surrounding the site; therefore, impacts would be less than significant. f. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? No Impact. The General Plan Circulation Element includes a number of goals and policies that support public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. However, these policies do not provide any guidance that directly applicable to the proposed Project. Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, and no impact would occur. 5.4.17 Utilities and Service Systems 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-55 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Would the Project: Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, ❑ ❑ D ❑ or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity ❑ ❑ D ❑ to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? fl Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-55 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Discussion Would the project: a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Less -than -Significant Impact. The proposed Project would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The City of Newport Beach requires National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, as administered by the RWQCB according to Federal regulations, for both point source discharges and nonpoint source discharges to surface waters of the United States. In addition, wastewater service in the project vicinity is provided by the City of Newport Beach (Newport Beach 2006b). Wastewater from the City's sewer system is treated by the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). The majority of the City's wastewater flow is pumped to the OCSD Plant No. 2, which has a design capacity of 276 million gallons per day (mgd) and operates at under capacity (Newport Beach General 2006b). The existing post office land use currently generates wastewater and has existing sewer ties into OCSD sewer lines. Future land uses resulting from the proposed Project would increase wastewater generation above the current wastewater generation, but would not exceed the wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB and would comply with all provisions of the NPDES program and applicable wastewater discharge requirements issued by the State Water Resources Control Board as discussed in Section 5.4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality. Finally, since OCSD Plant No. 2 operates under capacity, the additional wastewater generated by the proposed project would be accommodated by OCSD. Therefore, the proposed Project would not cause any violation of standards set forth by OCSD, and impacts would be less than significant. b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less -than -Significant Impact. Water service for the proposed Project Site is provided by the City of Newport Beach. Domestic water for the City is supplied by imported water, groundwater and recycled water. No new or expanded water or wastewater treatment facilities would be required to accommodate the proposed Project. The proposed Project would connect to the existing OCSD sewer system. OCSD, as stated above, manages and oversees all wastewater in Orange County and is expected to be able to accommodate the wastewater generated by the proposed Project; therefore, impacts would be less than significant. c. Require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-56 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Would the Project: Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulation related ❑ ❑ ❑ Q to solid waste? Discussion Would the project: a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Less -than -Significant Impact. The proposed Project would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The City of Newport Beach requires National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, as administered by the RWQCB according to Federal regulations, for both point source discharges and nonpoint source discharges to surface waters of the United States. In addition, wastewater service in the project vicinity is provided by the City of Newport Beach (Newport Beach 2006b). Wastewater from the City's sewer system is treated by the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). The majority of the City's wastewater flow is pumped to the OCSD Plant No. 2, which has a design capacity of 276 million gallons per day (mgd) and operates at under capacity (Newport Beach General 2006b). The existing post office land use currently generates wastewater and has existing sewer ties into OCSD sewer lines. Future land uses resulting from the proposed Project would increase wastewater generation above the current wastewater generation, but would not exceed the wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB and would comply with all provisions of the NPDES program and applicable wastewater discharge requirements issued by the State Water Resources Control Board as discussed in Section 5.4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality. Finally, since OCSD Plant No. 2 operates under capacity, the additional wastewater generated by the proposed project would be accommodated by OCSD. Therefore, the proposed Project would not cause any violation of standards set forth by OCSD, and impacts would be less than significant. b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less -than -Significant Impact. Water service for the proposed Project Site is provided by the City of Newport Beach. Domestic water for the City is supplied by imported water, groundwater and recycled water. No new or expanded water or wastewater treatment facilities would be required to accommodate the proposed Project. The proposed Project would connect to the existing OCSD sewer system. OCSD, as stated above, manages and oversees all wastewater in Orange County and is expected to be able to accommodate the wastewater generated by the proposed Project; therefore, impacts would be less than significant. c. Require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-56 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Less -than -Significant Impact. The existing site is mostly impermeable to stormwater because of the impermeable surfaces on site. Any subsequent development would not increase the impervious area. Any subsequent development will implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would minimize impacts; therefore, impacts would be less than significant. d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or would new or expanded entitlements be needed? Less -than -Significant Impact. Land uses resulting from the proposed Project would increase water demand over the current water use. The Urban Water Management Plan for the City identifies that the demand for water can be met; and therefore, the increase in the water demand by the proposed project would not result in a significant impact. Based on the City's evaluation and planning for reliability of water supplies and the anticipated proposed project water demand, no new or expanded entitlements would be required to serve the proposed Project Site, and impacts would be less than significant. e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? Less -than -Significant Impact. See Response 5.4.17 (b) above. f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Less -than -Significant Impact. The City of Newport Beach is under contract with Waste Management of Orange County for solid waste hauling and disposal. The Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill, located at 11002 Bee Canyon Access Road in Irvine, is the closest facility for solid waste disposal. The Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill, which is owned and operated by the Orange County Integrated Waste Management Department (IWMD), opened in 1990 and is scheduled to operate until approximately 2053. The current average disposal rate at the landfill is roughly 5,000 tons per day, and the maximum permitted disposal rate is 8,500 tons per day. The landfill's remaining capacity is approximately 200 million cubic yards or 107 million tons of solid waste. As shown in Table 5-4, Land uses resulting from the proposed project would generate an increase in solid waste production as a result of additional and more intense non-residential uses and potential dwelling units. An additional 151 pounds (0.0755 tons) per day of solid waste would be disposed of at the Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill, representing approximately 0.0009 percent of the amount of solid waste the landfill is allowed to accept daily. With the remaining capacity of approximately 107 million tons, as well as a 39 -year lifespan at the Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill, the increase in solid waste generated by the proposed development would not exceed the capacity of the landfill. No deficiencies currently exist at the Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill, as there is adequate daily surplus capacity to accept the additional solid waste generated from the proposed project. Therefore, impact will be less than significant. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-57 Negative Declaration Table 5-4 Solid Waste Generation 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Land Use Density/Intensity J Generation Rate Total Generation Existing Would the Project: Significant Mitigation Institutional 9,242 sq ft .007 lbs/sq ft/day 64.7 lbs/day Proposed Impact a) Does the project have the potential Commercial 11,326 sq ft 5 lbs/1000 sqft/day 56.6 lbs/day Residential MFR 13 DUs 12.23 lbs/unit/day 159 lbs/day Net Change in Solid Waste Generation environment, substantially reduce 150.9 lbs/day g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? No Impact. Solid waste produced by the proposed project would be picked up by a commercial provider licensed by the City of Newport Beach The proposed Project would comply with all federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste, such as the California Integrated Waste Management Act and city recycling programs; therefore, no impacts would occur. 5.4.18 Mandatory Findings of Significance 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-58 Potentially Less Than Significant with Less than No Would the Project: Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to ❑ ❑ 0 0 eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major period of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) C) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-58 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Discussion a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? No Impact. The proposed Project Site is urban in character and does not contain biological resources that would be affected by subsequent development. Additionally, no cultural resources, either historic or prehistoric, are expected to be affected by any future construction or operation of the project; therefore, no impact would occur. b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) In order to evaluate the proposed Project's potential to result in cumulatively significant impacts, the City of Newport Beach Planning Division compiled a list of other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects. The list of cumulative projects, along with a description of the proposed land uses, location of the projects, a description of the status of each project, and a list of discretionary actions associated with each, is provided in Appendix A. A total of 31 past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects were identified within the City. A discussion and analysis of the proposed Project's potential to result in cumulatively considerable effects to the various issue areas identified in this ND is provided below. Aesthetics Based on the list of projects included in Appendix A, no cumulative development projects are located within the Project's viewshed. Therefore, the proposed Project has no potential to contribute to cumulatively significant impacts. Agriculture and Forestry Resources As indicated in the discussion and analysis of Agriculture and Forestry Resources in Section 5.4.2, the proposed Project would have no impact on agricultural or forestry resources; accordingly, the proposed Project has no potential to contribute to cumulatively significant impacts. Air Quality As indicated under the discussion and analysis of Air Quality in Section 5.4.3, the proposed Project would be consistent with the SCAQMD 2016 AQMP, would not result in near- or long- term emissions that violate the SCAQMD thresholds, would not subject sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, and would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Therefore, cumulative impacts would be less than significant. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-59 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Biological Resources As indicated in the discussion and analysis of Biological Resources in Section 5.4.4, the proposed Project would have no impact on biological resources. Accordingly, the proposed Project would have no potential to contribute to a cumulatively significant impact to biological resources. Cultural Resources As indicated under the discussion and analysis of Cultural Resources in Section 5.4.5, the proposed Project would have no impact to historical resources. Accordingly, the proposed Project would have no potential to contribute to a cumulatively significant impact to historical resources. During any subsequent development, there is a remote possibility of uncovering archaeological or paleontological resources. Any subsequent development resulting from the proposed Project would involve minimal surface soil disturbance and grading. Therefore, it is highly unlikely the proposed Project would disturb any unknown cultural or paleontological resources, and impacts would be less than significant. Other developments within the City subject to CEQA and that have the potential for uncovering subsurface resources would similarly be required to incorporate measures to address the potential for uncovering such resources during ground disturbing activities. Accordingly, and assuming incorporation of the Project -specific mitigation, potential cumulative impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources would be reduced to less -than -significant levels. The Project and all cumulative developments would be required to comply with the provisions of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b), which would preclude cumulatively significant impacts to human remains. Geology and Soils Due to the site-specific nature of potential impacts associated with geology and soils, there is no potential for the proposed Project to contribute to cumulatively significant impacts associated with the site's geology and soil conditions. All development in the City is required to comply with the California Building Standards Code and follow the recommendations of project -specific geotechnical reports, adherence to which preclude cumulatively significant impacts. Greenhouse Gas Emissions As indicated in the discussion and analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Section 5.4.7, the amounts of GHG emissions that would result from development and operations of the proposed Project are less than the applicable screening level threshold set by the City of Newport Beach and would comply with all applicable plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. Therefore, the proposed Project has no potential to contribute to a cumulatively significant impact due to greenhouse gas emissions. Hazards and Hazardous Materials The proposed Project Site does not contain any recognized environmental conditions under existing conditions, and therefore has no potential for cumulatively significant impacts to people 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-60 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis or the environment associated with such conditions. Although construction of the proposed Project has the potential to expose nearby sensitive receptors and construction workers to hazards associated with asbestos -containing materials and lead-based paints, the City of Newport Beach requires building permit applications to include a declaration of compliance with Code of Federal Regulations Part 61 of Title 40 and AQMD Rule 1403 to ensure proper disposal of any hazardous materials, if discovered. Other cumulative developments that contain asbestos -containing materials and/or lead-based paints would similarly be required to dispose of such materials in accordance with applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations. There are no other components of the proposed Project with a potential to create significant public health hazards; accordingly, the proposed Project's potential contribution toward cumulative impacts associated with asbestos and lead based paint abatement would be less than cumulatively considerable following the incorporation of mitigation. Future construction and operation resulting from the proposed Project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school, and the proposed Project Site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5; accordingly, the proposed Project has no potential to contribute to cumulatively significant impacts associated with these thresholds. The proposed Project would replace an older building on the proposed Project Site with new construction, which would reduce the cumulative fire risk associated with the concentration of older structures in the Mariners Mile area that were not built to current fire codes. Similarly, other cumulative projects that replace older buildings with new construction would also assist in lowering cumulative fire risk. As such, the proposed Project has no potential to contribute to cumulatively significant fire risk associated with a potential aircraft accident that poses fire risk in Mariners Mile. Furthermore, the City's Emergency Management Plan incorporates an emergency evacuation plan that addresses cumulative effects associated with public airport operations to a level below significant. The proposed Project Site would have no impacts due to private airport -related hazards or interference with any emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans; accordingly, the proposed Project has no potential to contribute to cumulatively significant impacts associated with private airports or emergency evacuation plans. Although the proposed Project and other cumulative developments located in the Mariners Mile area could be exposed to fire hazards due to the generally older buildings that predominate the area (and their lack of fire resistant construction), the proposed Project and all cumulative development projects would be constructed in accordance with modern building codes, including fire protection measures that would attenuate the risk of fire hazards. As such, the proposed Project and cumulative projects in the Mariners Mile area would result in an incrementally reduced risk of fire hazards; accordingly, the proposed Project would result in a less -than -significant cumulative impact due to fire hazards. Hydrology and Water Quality The proposed Project would have no impacts to groundwater supplies, groundwater recharge areas, flood hazards, or flooding associated with the failure of a levee or dam; accordingly, the proposed Project has no potential to contribute to cumulatively significant impacts associated with these issues. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-61 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Similar to the proposed Project, all cumulative developments in the City would be required to prepare and implement site-specific SWPPPs and WQMPs, which would ensure that any cumulatively considerable impacts to water quality are reduced to less -than -significant levels. Additionally, and as with the proposed Project, all cumulative developments would be required to prepare hydrology studies to demonstrate that any changes to runoff does not result in on- or off-site flooding; accordingly, any cumulative impacts associated with drainage would be less than significant. The proposed Project Site would not be subject to inundation by seiches or mudflow. Although the proposed Project Site and other areas of Mariners Mile are located within the City's tsunami inundation zone, the likelihood of a catastrophic -level tsunami impacting the City is considered remote. Additionally, the City has prepared an Emergency Management Plan, which identifies tsunami evacuation routes, tsunami evacuation sites, and response plans, and utilizes an outdoor emergency siren system to provide residents with advance warnings of potential tsunami emergencies. The proposed Project and cumulative development projects have no potential to adversely affect the implementation of the City's Emergency Management Plan, which would ensure that cumulatively considerable impacts due to tsunamis are reduced to less -than -significant levels. Land Use and Planning The proposed Project would have no impacts due to the physical division of an established community or a conflict with an applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan; accordingly, the proposed Project has no potential to contribute to a cumulatively significant impact associated with these issues. As indicated in the analysis presented under Land Use and Planning in Section 5.4.10, the proposed Project would be consistent with, or otherwise would not conflict with, any applicable land use plan, policies, or regulation of any agency that was adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Other cumulative development projects similarly have been shown to be consistent with all applicable plans, policies, and regulations, or would be required to demonstrate such consistency prior to approval. Accordingly, cumulatively significant impacts would be less than significant. Mineral Resources As indicated under the discussion and analysis of Mineral Resources in Section 5.4.11, the proposed Project would not result in any impacts to mineral resources. Accordingly, the proposed Project has no potential to contribute to a cumulatively significant mineral resource impact. Noise During construction of the proposed Project, there is a potential for exposing nearby sensitive receptors to loud noise levels. Project construction activities have the potential to occur simultaneous with off-site nearby construction activities, which would further increase the construction -related noise level. Construction noise is exempt from Municipal Code Section 10.26 (Community Noise Control), provided such activities adhere to the timing restrictions specified in Section 10.28 (Loud and Unreasonable Noise). As with the proposed Project, construction activities associated with cumulative developments would be required to comply 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-62 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis with the timing restrictions of Section 10.28, thereby ensuring that cumulatively significant impacts do not occur. Future land uses resulting from the proposed Project have the potential substantial noise levels under long-term operational conditions. As with the proposed Project, operational noise associated with cumulative developments would be regulated by the noise control ordinances of City of Newport Beach Municipal Code, thereby ensuring that cumulatively significant impacts do not occur. The proposed Project would result in a net increase in vehicular traffic from the site as compared to existing conditions, which would thereby result in an increase in off-site noise impacts due to traffic. However, the additional traffic would not cause Riverside Avenue to go over capacity and it can be expected that future noise conditions will not change; Accordingly, under long-term operating conditions, the proposed Project's contribution of noise to the cumulative noise environment would not be cumulatively considerable. There would be no cumulatively significant impacts due to airport -related noise, as the proposed Project Site is not exposed to substantial airport -related noise and would have no effect on the level of exposure of other off-site properties. Population and Housing As indicated in the discussion and analysis of impacts to Population and Housing in Section 5.4.13, the proposed Project would have no impacts due to the displacement of substantial numbers of existing housing or people; accordingly, the proposed Project has no potential to contribute to cumulatively significant impacts associated with housing displacement. The Project could result in the construction and operation of up to 13 new multiple family dwelling units on-site, which would result in a projected population increase of approximately 29 persons. As indicated in the list of cumulative development projects provided in Appendix A, a number of other cumulative development projects also could result in the construction of new housing units and/or new or expanded housing units within the City, which, collectively, could result in a substantial increase in the City's population. However, as indicated in the analysis provided throughout this section, the proposed Project would not result in any cumulatively significant impacts, including cumulatively significant impacts that would result from the proposed Project's projected population increase. Accordingly, the approximately 29 new residents that would be generated by the proposed Project would not be cumulatively considerable in relation to associated environmental effects. Public Services As indicated in the discussion and analysis of proposed Project impacts to Public Services in Section 5.4.14, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in an increase in demand for fire protection or police protection services; accordingly, the proposed Project has no potential to contribute to cumulatively significant impacts to fire and police protection services. Other cumulative development projects proposing residential development would similarly be required to contribute school fees. Although the proposed Project could result in approximately five school-age children, any future residential development would be required to contribute school fees in accordance with Public 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-63 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis Education Code § 17072.10-18. Furthermore, the NMUSD determined that its existing student capacity is adequate to serve the projected student population, and the District had no plans for expansion of its school facilities to accommodate projected population growth. Accordingly, cumulatively significant impacts to schools would be less than significant and the Project's contribution would be less than cumulatively considerable. The proposed Project's could increase in the City's population by approximately 29 residents, when considered in the context of population increases that would result from build -out of other cumulative developments, would result in an increased demand for library services. However, the growth of the City's population associated with the proposed Project's potential 29 residents and other cumulative projects would not create the need to construct a new future library or physically expand an existing library facility. Library services receive funding from property tax, a portion of which from the Project's tax assessment would be dedicated to the City's Library Fund. Recreation Subsequent development would not significantly affect neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities. As indicated in the list of cumulative development projects provided in Appendix A, there are no development projects within Service Area 3 that would result in impacts on existing recreational facilities. Accordingly, the proposed Project would result in a less than cumulatively considerable impact to recreational resources. Transportation/Traffic As indicated in the discussion and analysis of Transportation/Traffic in Section 5.4.16, the proposed Project would not cause Riverside Avenue to go over capacity and, the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance requires mitigation for any traffic effects caused by any subsequent development. Nevertheless, the City's Traffic Engineer conducted an additional traffic analysis. As no specific land uses are proposed at this time, the City's Traffic Engineer conducted the analysis based on the existing post office use and the maximum development of the site under the proposed mixed-use land use and zoning: 10,000 sq. ft. Post Office (existing) 13 Apartment Dwelling Units 11,326 sq. ft. of General Commercial Trip generation rates were taken from the updated Newport Beach Traffic Model (NBTM). The NBTM trip generation is: 10, 000 sq. ft. Post Office — 216 trips /day 13 Apartment Dwelling Units — 80 trips /day 11,326 sq. f.t. General Commercial —433 trips /day With credit for the existing Post Office trips, the project would result in a net increase of 297 trips per day. Using Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) standards, no intersection impacts were identified. Required parking for the current PF District is established by conditional use permit. Currently, the Project Site has 20 surface parking spaces. Under the proposed MU -MM District, the Zoning Code off-street parking requirement would be two spaces per dwelling unit and one space per 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-64 Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis 250 square feet of retail floor area. As no development is proposed at this time, it is unknown if future development will be strictly non-residential or a mixed-use project. A The Zoning Code allows a building with nonconforming parking to be occupied with new uses without providing additional parking, provided there is no intensification or enlargement (e.g., increase in floor area, or lot area), and the new use requires a parking rate not higher than one space per 250 square feet of gross building area. Therefore, under the proposed MU -MM District, the existing building could be occupied with new uses that would have a Zoning Code - based parking demand of 37 parking spaces; as there are 20 existing spaces on site, there is the potential for a 17 -space parking deficit under these circumstances. Cumulative development projects provided in Appendix A have been accounted for in traffic forecasts. Accordingly, the proposed Project has no potential to contribute to cumulatively significant impacts associated with transportation/traffic. Utilities and Service Systems As indicated under the discussion and analysis of Utilities and Service Systems in Section 5.4.17, the proposed Project's impacts associated with wastewater, solid waste, and water supply would be less than cumulatively considerable. c. Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less -than -Significant Impact. Any subsequent development would have no impact or less - than -significant impacts on human beings, both directly and indirectly. Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-65 Declaration 6.0 References 6.0 References Cited As Reference California Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2009a. DTSC's Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List—Site Cleanup (Cortese List). Available on-line at: CaIEPA, 2009a http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search.asp?cmd=search&reporttype =CORTESE&site_type=CSITES%2COPEN%2CFUDS%2CCLOSE&status =ACT%2CBKLG%2CCOM&reporttitle=HAZARDOUS%20WASTE%20A ND%20SUBSTANCES%20SITE%20LIST. California Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2009b. Find Cleanup Sites and Hazardous Waste Permitted Facilities. Available on-line at: CaIEPA, 2009b http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search.asp?cmd=search&city=New port%20Beach &zip=&county= Ora nge&federal_superfund=True&state_resp onse=True&voluntary_cleanup=True&school_cleanup=True&perm itted=Tru e&pc_permitted=True&hist_nonoperating=&corrective_action=True&displa y_results=Report&pub=True. California Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2009c. List of "active" CDO and CaIEPA, 2009c CAO from Water Board. Available on-line at: http://www.caIepa.ca.gov/SiteCleanuP/CorteseList/ California Department of California Department Finance, 2016. City/County Population and Finance, 2016 Housing Estimate, 1/1/2016. California Department of Transportation. List of Eligible and Officially Designated CalTrans, 2009 Scenic Highways, 2013. Available on-line at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic/cahisys.htm California Department of Conservation, 2012. State of California Williamson Act CDC, 2012 Contract Land. 2012. Available on-line at: ftp://ftp. consrv.ca.gov/pub/dIrp/WA/2012%20Statewide%20Map/WA 2012 8x11.pdf County of Orange, County of Orange. 2005. County of Orange General Plan. Available on-line at: 2005 http://ocplanning.net/planning/generalplan2005 Earth Consultants Earth Consultants International. 2003. Hazards Assessment Study City of International, 2003 Newport Beach, California. Geotracker. 2009. GeoTracker. Available: Geotracker, 2009 https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?CMD=runreport&myaddress=20 00+east+balboa+blvd. Newport Beach, 2006a Newport Beach, 2006. City of Newport Beach General Plan. July 25, 2006. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 6-1 Declaration 6.0 References Cited As Reference Available online at: http://www.newportbeachca.gov/index.aspx?paqe=1 73 Newport Beach, 2006. City of Newport Beach Draft Environmental Impact Report, Newport Beach, General Plan 2006 Update (SCH No. 2006011119). July 25, 2006. Available on-line 2006b at: http://www.newportbeachca.qov/index.aspx?paqe=196 Newport Beach, 2009. City of Newport Beach Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Newport Beach, Use 2009 Plan. July 14, 2009. Available on-line at: http://www.newportbeachca.qov/index.aspx?page=1317 Newport Beach, 2010a Newport Beach, 2010. Newport Beach Zoning Map. Newport Beach, November 25, 2010. Available 2010a on-line at: http://www. newportbeachca.qov/index. aspx?page= 1689 Newport Beach, 2010a Newport Beach, 2010. Newport Beach Zoning Code. Newport Beach, November 25, 2010. Available 2010b on-line at: http://www.newportbeachca.qov/index.aspx?page=1689 Newport Beach, Newport Beach, 2013a, Newport Beach Geographic Information System 2013a Orange County Airport Land Use Commission, 2008. Airport Land Use Commission (OCALUC, 2008) Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport. April 17, 2008. Available on-line at: http://www.ocair.com/commissions/aluc/docs/JWA AELUP-April-17-2008.pdf Southern California Association of Governments, 2001. Employment Density Study SCAG, 2001 Summary Report. October 31, 2001. Available on-line at: http://www.mwcog.org/uploads/committee- documents/bl5aXl pa20091008155406.pdf United States Census Bureau, 2008. Newport Beach City, California—ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates: 2006-2008. 2006-2008 American Community Survey 3 -Year Estimates. Available on-line at: USCB, 2008 http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ ADPTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=16000US0651182&- qr_name=ACS_ 2008_3YR_G00_DP3YR5&- ds_name=ACS_2008_3YR_G00_&-_Iang=en&-_sse=on. USGS, 1965 United States Geological Survey, 1965. National Geologic Map Database Rogers, T.H., 1965 Geologic map 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach September 16, 2016 Page 6-2 Declaration 6.0 References Cited As Reference of California: Santa Ana sheet: California Division of Mines and Geology, scale 1:250000. United States Geological Survey, 2013. Mineral Resources On Line Spatial Data USGS, 2015 Orange County. Available on-line at: http://tin.er.usgs.gov/mrds/select.php?place=f06O59&div=fips. 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach September 16, 2016 Page 6-3 Negative Declaration 7.0 Persons Contributing to IS/ND Preparation 7.0 Persons Contributing to the ISM Preparation City of Newport Beach Patrick Alford, Planning Manager Tony Brine, City Traffic Engineer Laura Detweiler, Recreation and Senior Services Director 191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments September 16, 2016 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 7-1 Cumulative Projects List This list has three parts: Reasonably Foreseeable Projects, CIP (Capital Improvements Program) Reasonably Foreseeable Projects, and Approved Projects Reasonably Foreseeable Discretionary Projects with CEQA review or Traffic Study: Legend: Projects Pending Coastal Commission Review Project Proposed Land Uses/Project Description Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions Project Planner General Plan Amendment, Planned General Plan Community Text Amendment, Amendment No. Conditional Use Permit, and Major Site GP2015-004 Development Review for a new Planned Community 109,633 -square -foot convalescent and Text Amendment No. Centecongregate P Senior care facility with 133 to 144 Application submitted on 11/23/2015. PD2015-005 Benjamin Living (PA2015-210) Living A20 beds (approximately 128 units). As 101 Bayview Place CEQA RFP sent — response Site Development Zdeba proposed, the facility will be developed received. Under evaluation. with one level of subterranean parking Review No. SD2015-007 and five levels of living area. The Conditional Use Permit project site is currently developed with No. UP2015-047 a single -story restaurant and supporting Mitigated Negative surface parking area. Declaration General Plan Amendment No. GP2015-001 Code Amendment No. CA2015-008 Planned Community Museum House 100 Unit residential tower to replace the NOP Released — Close of comment Text Amendment No. Gregg Residential Tower 24,000 square foot Orange County 850 San Clemente Drive period is March 7, 2016. Preparation PC2015-001 Ramirez (PA2015-152) Museum of Art. of the EIR is underway. Site Development Review Development Agreement Traffic Study Environmental Impact Report Rev: 2016-06-14-j c F:\Users\CDD\Shared\Admi n\Planning_Division\CEQA\Cumulative_Project_List\cumulative_ projects_current.docx Project Proposed Land Uses/Project Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions Project Description Planner Benjamin Mitigated Negative Zdeba Little Corona Infiltration (PA2015- Installation of a diversion and infiltration Little Corona Beach Draft MND issued for public comment Declaration John 096) (15X14) device on a public beach area. on January 15, 2016. Capital Improvement Kappeler, Program, City Council Public Works Site Development Review, Conditional Use Permit, and Traffic Study for the construction and operation of a 33,926 Use Permit No. UP2015- SF automobile sales and service facility Application resubmitted January 025 AutoNation including a showroom, outdoor vehicle display areas, offices, service facility, 320-600 West Coast Highway 2016. Application complete. T&B Site Development Jim (PA2015-095) and vehicle inventory storage and Planning to prepare a MND. Traffic Review No. SD2015-002 Campbell employee parking on the roof of the Consultant to be identified. Tentative Parcel Map building. Tentative Parcel Map to No. NP2015-010 consolidate 11 existing lots creating one lot. Variance for height withdrawn Planned Community Development Plan Amendment Site Development Plan Koll Newport Development of mixed use residential Application submitted and deemed Traffic Study Residential of up to 260 units, 3,000 sf. retail and 4400 Von Karman Ave. incomplete. EIR preparation is Tentative Tract Map Rosalinh (PA2015-024) one -acre park. underway. Development Ung Agreement Environmental Impact Report Rev: 2016-06-14-j c F:\Users\CDD\Shared\Admi n\Planning_Division\CEQA\Cumulative_Project_List\cumulative_ projects_current.docx Project Proposed Land Uses/Project Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions Project Description Planner General Plan Amendment Application submitted 12/05/2014. An Zoning Code The proposed project consists of the MND was prepared and distributed to Amendment demolition of an existing 8,500 -square- the public. Following a Planning Commission Study Session held on Planned Community 150 Newport Center foot car -wash and as station to g 150 Newport Center Drive October 8,2015, the applicant and Development Plan Site Development Makana (PA2014-213) accommodate the development of 49 staff agreed to prepare an EIR for Review Nova condominium dwelling units on a 1.3 this project. NOP Released — Close Tract Map acre site. of comment period is February 11, Development 2016. Preparation of the EIR is underway. Agreement Environmental Impact Report 1701 Corinthian Way, 1660 Application submitted. Draft MND is Planned Development Dove St., 4251, 4253, and completed and being circulated for Permit Newport Place A mixed-use residential project consisting 4255 Martingale Way, 4200, public comment. Planning Lot Merger Residential of up to 384 units and 5,677square feet 4220 & 4250 Scott Drive. Commission study session is Affordable Housing Rosalinh Ung (PA2014-150) of retail use on a 5.7 -acre property Generally bounded by scheduled for March 3, 2016 and Implementation Plan Corinthian Wy., Martingale Dr., public hearing is tentatively Mitigated Negative Dove St. and Scott Dr. scheduled for march 17, 2016. Declaration The project adds an additional southbound through lane along Newport Boulevard from Via Lido to 32nd Street, terminating as a right -turn Andy Tran, only lane at 32nd Street. Proposed Newport/32nd modifications include a raised, Newport Boulevard from Via p City approval in October 2014 Capital Improvement Public modification landscaped median, 6 -foot -wide bike Lido to 30th Street and 3201 Program, City Council Works (PA2014-134) lanes along both sides of the roadway, Newport Boulevard Coastal Development Permit issued Mitigated Negative and the relocation of 27 curbside public February 2016 Declaration Jim parking spaces on Newport Boulevard Campbell to a proposed new public parking lot the northwest corner of Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street and demolition of the former bank building. Rev: 2016-06-14-j c F:\Users\CDD\Shared\Admi n\Planning_Division\CEQA\Cumulative_Project_List\cumulative_ projects_current.docx Project Proposed Land Uses/Project Description Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions Project Planner General Plan Amendment Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment Demolition of an existing one-story, Zoning Code Amendment (Zone square foot commercial building 26,219 s q g Change) and a 55 -space subterranean parking Planned Community garage; and the construction of a Development Plan 70,295 square -foot, 4 -story ocean Adoption literacy facility located on the 600 East Transfer Development Bay parcel; removal of a 63 -metered 600 East Bay, 209 Allocation ExplorOcean space surface parking lot aka: Palm P P 9 ( Washington Street, 600 and 9 Application submitted 04/22/2014. On Site Development Review Rosalinh (PA2014-069) Street Parking Lot) located on the 209 608 Balboa Avenue, and 200 hold per applicant's request. Conditional Use Permit Ung Washington Street, 600 and 608 Palm Traffic Study pursuant to Balboa Avenue, and 200 Palm parcels City's Traffic Phasing and the construction of a 388 -space, Ordinance (TPO) 141,000 square foot, 5 -level off-site Tentative Parcel Map parking structure; and a 6,500 square and Alley Vacation footage floating classroom to be located Harbor Development on the waterside of the project. Permit Coastal Development Permit (by California Coastal Commission) Environmental Impact Report The project was approved by City Request for legislative approvals to Council on February 11, 2014. The General Plan accommodate the future redevelopment Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment Amendment of a portion of the property with a for the project was approved by the Coastal Land Use Plan mixed-use waterfront project. The 300 E. Coast Highway California Coastal Commission on Amendment Back Bay Landing Planned Community Development Plan Generally located at the December 10, 2015, subject to the Code Amendment Jaime (PA2011-216) would allow for the development of a northwesterly corner of east City accepting Suggested Planned Community Murillo new enclosed dry stack boat storage Coast Highway and Bayside Modifications to the amendment. Development Plan facility for 140 boats, 61,534 square Drive Planning Commission hearing Lot Line Adjustment feet of visitor -serving retail and scheduled for March 2016 and City Traffic Study recreational marine facilities, and up to Council in April 2016 to accept Environmental Impact 49 attached residential units. Suggested Modifications and related Report land use amendments. Rev: 2016-06-14-j c F:\Users\CDD\Shared\Admi n\Planning_Division\CEQA\Cumulative_Project_List\cumulative_ projects_current.docx Project Proposed Land Uses/Project Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions Project Description Planner City of Newport Beach Public Access Balboa Marina and Transient Docks and Expansion of IS/MND was approved by City IS/MND Expansion Balboa Marina Council on November 25, 2014. An Site Development (PA2012-103) 201 E. Coast Highway approval in concept was issued for Review Patrick (PA2015-113) 24 boat slips the waterside component. The Conditional Use Permit Alford 14,252 SF restaurant landside component was approved CDP (Coastal 664 SF marina restroom by the City in February 2016. Commission) Project approved by the City General Plan February 2014. Coastal Land Use Amendment Demolition of the approximately 20,500 720 West Bay Avenue, 800 Plan Amendment application Coastal Land Use Plan Newport Harbor square foot yacht club facility and West Bay Avenue, 711-721 withdrawn from California Coastal Amendment Jim Yacht Club construction of a new 23,163 square West Bay Avenue, and 710- Commission in September 2015. Zoning Code Campbell (PA2012-091) foot facility. The yacht club use will 720 Balboa Boulevard Coastal Commission considers a Amendment remain on the subject property. Coastal Development Permit for the Planned Development replacement yacht club on March10, Permit 2016. Conditional Use Permit Development Agreement General Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element The City Council approved the Code Amendment project and certified the Final EIR in Pre -annexation Zone Development of 1,375 residential July 2012. The applicant has a Change dwelling units, a 75 -room resort inn and Generally located north of complete coastal development permit Planned Community Newport Banning ancillary resort uses, 75,000 square West Coast Highway, south of application before the Coastal Development Plan Patrick Ranch feet of commercial uses, approximately 19th Street, and east of the Commission. As currently proposed, Master Development Alford (PA2008-114) 51.4 gross acres of parklands, and Santa Ana River the project consists of 895 residential Plan approximately 252.3 gross acres of dwelling units, a 75 -room coastal inn, permanent open space. a 20 -bed hostel, 45,100 square feet Tentative Tract Map of commercial use, and 323 acres of Affordable Housing permanent open space. Implementation Plan Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study Environmental Impact Report AELUP: Airport Environs Land Use Plan; CDP: Coastal Development Permit; CUP: Conditional Use Permit; cy: cubic yards; DA: Development Agreement; DTSP: Downtown Specific Plan; EIR: Environmental Impact Report; FAA: Federal Aviation Administration; GPA: General Plan Amendment; gsf: gross square feet; HBGS: Huntington Beach Generating Station; 1- 405: Interstate 405 freeway; IBC: Irvine Business Complex; IS: Initial Study; ITC: Irvine Technology Center; LAFCO: Local Agency Formation Commission; LCP: Local Coastal Program; MCAS: Marine Corps Air Station; MND: Mitigated Negative Declaration; ND: Negative Declaration; PA: Planning Area; PC: Planned Community; sf: square feet; SP: Specific Plan; SR -73: State Route 73; TDR: transfer of development rights; TPM: Tentative Parcel Map; TTM: Tentative Tract Map; VTTM: Vesting Tentative Tract Map; ZC: Zone Change Rev: 2016-06-14-j c F:\Users\CDD\Shared\Admi n\Planning_Division\CEQA\Cumulative_Project_List\cumulative_ projects_current.docx CIP Projects with CEQA review: Project Proposed Land Uses/Project Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions Project Description Planner Refurbishment or replacement of the Project design architect was selected Capital Improvement Peter West Newport West Newport Community Center. The in November of 2015. Project is on Program, City Council Tauscher, Community Center current center is one of several public TBD hold at the direction of City (15F17) buildings on the west side being Manager's Office. CEQA TBD, MND Public reviewed for appropriate use and is anticipated. Works potential relocation. Benjamin Mitigated Negative Zdeba Little Corona Infiltration (PA2015- Installation of a diversion and infiltration Little Corona Beach Draft MND issued for public comment Declaration John 096) (15X14) device on a public beach area. on January 15, 2016. Capital Improvement Kappeler, Program, City Council Public Works Widens the westbound side of West IS/Negative Declaration Coast Highway at Old Newport Consultant was selected for project Capital Improvement Patrick Old Newport Boulevard to accommodate a third Intersection of Old Newport design in March of 2016. Negative Program, City Council Arciniega, Blvd./West Coast through lane, a right turn pocket and a Boulevard and West Coast Declaration draft is under review. City Hwy Widening bike lane. Realignment of Old Newport Highway requesting lead agency status from Public (15R19) Boulevard maximizes the right turn Cal Trans. Works pocket storage length and improves roadway geometrics. Lower Sunset View Park Bridge, Parking possible pedestrian overcrossin s, p g Intersection of West Coast An RFP for design services was sent g Capital Improvement Andy Tran, Lot and Park parking and park uses for Lower Sunset Highway and Superior Avenue in December of 2015. CEQA Program, Cit Council 9 Y Public (15R09) View Park. determination TBD. Works Balboa Island Project initiated in 2011. A consultant Mitigated Negative Bob Stein, Seawall New seawall along the Grand Canal Balboa Island has been selected for the project Declaration Public Reconstruction and on the west end of Balboa Island. design. The RFP process has not yet Capital Improvement Works (15H11) been initiated for the MND. Program, City Council Rev: 2016-06-14-j c F:\Users\CDD\Shared\Admi n\Planni ng_Division\CEQA\Cumulative_Project_List\cumulative_ projects_current.docx Project Proposed Land Uses/Project Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions Project Description Planner Arches drain outlet is the endpoint for Capital Improvement two large storm drains that collect and Program, City Council deliver runoff from neighboring areas to Newport Harbor. The west storm drain collects runoff from Hoag Hospital and Project initiated in 2015. CEQA John Arches Storm Drain areas upstream and the east storm Newport Boulevard north of determination TBD (exemption?). Kappeler, Diversion drain runs along Old Newport Coast Highway Anticipated project start date, Public (16X11) Boulevard and into Costa Mesa September 2016. Works upstream of 15th Street. A conceptual plan to divert dry weather flows from these two subwatersheds to the sanitary sewer system has been prepared. Bayview Heights Restores a drainage reach subject to g City Council authorized project in May of 2015Agency permit Capital Improvement John Drainage Treatment erosion and creates a wetland at the Headlands area of Upper Bay . applications were submitted March of Program, Cit Council g y Kappeler, (15X11) end of the reach to benefit downstream of Mesa Drive 2016. CEQA determination TBD Public environmental water quality. (exemption?) Works Divert about one third of the dry- Mitigated Negative weather flow from the creek into a Declaration bioreactor. The bioreactor strips Capital Improvement selenium and other impurities from the Program, City Council flow. Clean flow is returned to the creek John Big Canyon Rehab to reduce the concentration of Big Canyon, downstream of Resource agency applications Kappeler, Project pollutants within the stream by 30-35 Jamboree Road and south of submitted March of 2016. Draft MND Public (15X12) percent. Storm flows from Jamboree Big Canyon Creek issued for public comment March 4, Works Road also will be directed to the top 2016. level of this bioreactor/wetlands to strip roadway pollutants from the flow before the flow rejoins the creek. Partial streambed and canyon restoration are components of this project. Bay Crossings Replaces deteriorating water Capital Improvement Patrick Water Main transmission mains pursuant to the Newport Harbor A consultant has been selected for Program, City Council Arciniega, Replacement Water Master Plan and Bay Crossing the project design. CEQA TBD Public (16W12) Water Transmission Study. Works Rev: 2016-06-14-j c F:\Users\CDD\Shared\Admi n\Planning_Division\CEQA\Cumulative_Project_List\cumulative_ projects_current.docx Discretionary Projects with CEQA review and Traffic Study Approved by the City and Percent Occupied: Project Proposed Land Uses Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions Project Planner Traffic Study Percent Occupied Minor Use Permit No. ENC Preschool Environmental Nature Center 745 Dover Drive Planning Commission Approved 01/21/2016. Class UP2015-020 Makana Nova Yes 0% (PA2015-079) Preschool 32 CEQA Exemption. Traffic Study No. TS2015-001 Park Avenue MND adopted/approved by Bridge Demolish and replace Park Avenue City Council November 25, Mitigated Negative bridge that connects Balboa Island Balboa Island 2014. Declaration No. Gregg Ramirez No 0% Replacement (PA2014-135) and Little Balboa Island. Tentative Construction Start ND2014-002 Date — March 2016 Site Development Review No. SD2014- 005 The project includes the re- Application submitted on Minor Use Permit No. subdivision of four lots into three lots 20350 & 20360 08/05/2014. UP2014-032 Birch Newport for commercial development and for Birch Street Application and Addendum to Traffic Study No. Executive condominium purposes, and the MND approved by Planning TS2014-006 Jaime Murillo Yes 0% Center construction of two, 2 -story medical (Formerly 20352 — Commission on 02/19/2015. Parcel Map No. (PA2014-121) office buildings totaling 64,000 20412 Birch St) Rough grading permits issued NP2014-017 square feet in gross floor area and a February 25, 2016. 324 -space surface parking lot. Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration (PA2006- 280) Rev: 2016-06-14-j c F:\Users\CDD\Shared\Admi n\Planni ng_Division\CEQA\Cumulative_Project_List\cumulative_ projects_current.docx Project Proposed Land Uses Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions Project Planner Traffic Study Percent Occupied The project includes a Tentative Tract Map application to subdivide a 4.7 acre site for 83 residential lots and a Site Development Review Tentative Tract Map application for the construction of 83 No. NT2014-002 single-unit residences, private Application submitted on Traffic Study No. streets, common open space, and 06/20/2014. TS2014-007 Ebb Tide landscaping. The Planned 1560 Placentia An MND was prepared. The Planned Development (PA2014-110) Community Development Plan is Drive project was approved and the Permit No. PL2015- Jim Campbell Yes 0% proposed to establish guidelines for MND was adopted by the development of the project site Planning Commission on 001 consistent with the General Plan. August 6, 2015. Mitigated Negative The Code Amendment is proposed to Declaration No. amend the Zoning Map to change the ND2015-002 Zoning District from Multiple-Unit Residential (RM) to Planned Community (PC). General Plan Amendment General Plan Amendment, Coastal Coastal Land Use Land Use Plan Amendment, and Project approved by the City Lido House Zoning Amendment to change site September 2014. Plan Amendment Hotel from Public Facilities to Visitor- 3300 Newport Zoning Code at the former serving commercial and increase the Boulevard and Coastal Development Permit Amendment Jim Campbell Yes 0% city hall allowable building height. Demolition 47532 nd Street issued February 2016. Site Development complex of former city hall buildings and the Review (PA2013-217) construction of a 130-room upscale Demolition and construction Conditional Use hotel. Fire Station #2 to remain at scheduled to start April 2016. Permit current location. Ground Lease Environmental Impact Report Construction of two building and a 2011, 2043, 2121, three-level parking structure, an and 2131 Class 32 CEQA exemption. p Site Development Westcliff addition to an existing building, and Westcliff Drive. June 19, 2014: Planning Review Medica Medical the demolition of 25,339 square feet Bounded by Commission Approved. Demo Fern Nueno Yes 0% 3-154) of building area. The project would Westcliff Drive, permit issued September Traffic Study result in four buildings totaling 73,722 Irvine Avenue, 2014. Lot Merger square feet. The total amount of off- and Sherington street parking would be 382 spaces. Place. Rev: 2016-06-14-j c F:\Users\CDD\Shared\Admi n\Planni ng_Division\CEQA\Cumulative_Project_List\cumulative_ projects_current.docx Project Proposed Land Uses Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions Project Planner Traffic Study Percent Occupied General Plan Amendment Application approved Coastal Land Use November 12, 2013. CLUP Plan Amendment Request for the demolition of an 3303 and 3355 Amendment approved by CCC Zoning Code Lido Villas existing church and office building Via Lido on March 12, 2014. CDP Amendment (DART) and legislative approvals for the Generally application Approved by CCC Planned Community Makana Nova No o 0/o (PA2012-146) development of 23 attached three- bounded by Via on 10/09/2014. Submitted for Development Plan story townhome condominiums. Lido, Via Oporto, plan check December 22, and Via Malaga. 2014, building permit approval Site Development pending recordation of tract Review map. IS/Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract Map Amendment to the North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC), which is the zoning document that establishes land uses, development standards, and Transfer of San Joaquin procedures for development within The project was approved by Development Plaza seven sub -areas of the Newport 1101 San Joaquin the City Council on August 14, Planned Community Apartments Center Area of the City. Primarily the Hills Road 2012. Text Amendment Jaime Murillo Yes o 0/o (PA2012-020) request involves increasing the Development residential development allocation Under construction. Agreement within the NNCPC from 430 dwelling Traffic Study units to a total of 524 dwelling units (increase of 94 units) and allocating the units to the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area. Rev: 2016-06-14-j c F:\Users\CDD\Shared\Admi n\Planning_Division\CEQA\Cumulative_Project_List\cumulative_ projects_current.docx Project Proposed Land Uses Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions Project Planner Traffic Study Percent Occupied PC Development PlanAmendment EIR, Tentative Tract Map, and Traffic Study, and AHIP were Adoption Uptown approved by City Council on Tentative Tract Map Newport Development of 1,244 residential 4311 & 4321 2/26/2013. The PC Development Plan andJamboree Traffic Study (TPO) Mixed Use units and 11,500 sf. of commercial Rd Development Agreement were AHIP Rosalinh Ung Yes 0% Development retail approved on 3/12/2013. Rough DA (PA2011-134) grading plans have been Airport Land Use issued for Phase 1 Commission development. Environmental Impact Report PC Development Plan Amendment Approved by the City Council Transfer of MacArthur at on October 25, 2011. PC Development Rights Dolphin -Striker Demolition of a 7,996-sf restaurant 4221 Dolphin- Development Plan approved Traffic Study (TPO) Way and development of 12,351 sf Striker Way on November 22, 2011. The CUP Rosalinh Ung Yes 90% (PA2010-135) commercial retail. project is completed. The Waiver of DA freestanding building pad is constructed but not occupied. Modification Permit Mitigated Negative Declaration 10 Big Canyon Mitigated Negative Declaration for IS/MND approved 12/20/2011. (PA2010-092) rough grading for development of a 10 Big Canyon Project has not been IS/MND Makana Nova No 0% single-family residence. constructed. Amendment to Bayview Planned On June 22, 2010 City Council Community (PC -32) text to add approved Resolution N o. D.I.S.C. 3501 outpatient surgery and medical office 2010-070 finding that Traffic Jamboree Rd as permitted uses and to add a parking requirement of 1/200 square 3501 Jamboree Study No. TS2010-002 PC Amendment and 301 feet for such uses. Includes Traffic Rd. and 301 complies with the TPO and on Traffic Study complies Melinda Whelan Yes 100% Bayview Circle study pursuant to TPO for conversion Bayview Circle July 6, 2010 approved with TPO (PA2010-062) of 38, 759 square feet of general Ordinance No. 2010-12 office and retail to outpatient surgical approving Planned Community center. Amendment No. PD2010-004. Rev: 2016-06-14-j c F:\Users\CDD\Shared\Admi n\Planning_Division\CEQA\Cumulative_Project_List\cumulative_ projects_current.docx Project Proposed Land Uses Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions Project Planner Traffic Study Percent Occupied Application approved by Planning Commission on 1/03/13. Staff Approval No. Site Development SA2013-015 (PA2013-245) Review Plaza Corona Development of 1,750 sf new office approved December 10, 2013 Variance del Mar space and six (6) detached 3900-3928 East and Staff Approval No. Conditional Use Makana Nova No 0% (PA2010-061) townhomes. Coast Highway SA2014-April 10 2015 to allow , Permit the reconstruction of Gallo's and reduction of commercial Tentative Tract Map scope. Submitted for plan Modification Permit check June 30, 2014. CEQA Class 32 exemption. General Plan 1600 -East Coast This project was approved by Amendment Newport Demolition of existing golf course and Highway; the City Council on 02/28/2012. CDP issued Planned Community (PC) Text Adoption Beach Country clubhouse to construct of a new northwest of Amended 09/3/14. Temporary Use Permit Club Inc 51,213 sf golf clubhouse and Pacific Coast U12, Under construction. Under Development Rosalinh Ung No 50% (PA2008-152) ancillary facilities including a cart Highway and Anticipated completion date is Agreement barn and bag storage. Newport Center at the end of 2015. Permits CDP (CCC) Drive issued December, 2014. Mitigated Negative Declaration Modification Permit Old Newport Demolition of 3 existing buildings to IS/MND and project approved Traffic Study GPA Project construct a new 25,000-sf medical 328, 332, and 340 on March 9, 2010. Demolition Use Permit Jaime Murillo Yes 0% (PA2008-047) office building. Old Newport Blvd and grading permits issued GP Amendment March 6, 2015. Mitigated Negative Declaration EIR Development includes a public park General Construction and beach with recreational facilities; The Final EIR was certified Activity Storm Water Marina Park restrooms; a new Girl Scout House; a 1600 Balboa Blvd; and the project approved by (NPDES) Permit Project public short-term visiting vessel west of 15th St the City on May 11, 2010. The (RWQCB) Rosalinh Ung Yes 100% (PA2008-040) marina and sailing center; and a new and east of 19th St project is complete. CDP (CCC) community center with classrooms, Section 401 and ancillary office space. Certification (RWQCB) 404 Permit (ACOS) Rev: 2016-06-14-j c F:\Users\CDD\Shared\Admi n\Planning_Division\CEQA\Cumulative_Project_List\cumulative_ projects_current.docx Project Proposed Land Uses Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions Project Planner Traffic Study Percent Occupied EIR Hoag GP Amendment Memorial Reallocation of up to 225,000 sf of 1 Hoag Dr; Final EIR certified and project Planned Community Hospital previously approved (but notnorthwest of West approved on May 13, 2008. No Development Plan Presbyterian constructed) square footage from the Coast Hwy and new major development has (PC) Text Amendment Jim Campbell Yes 0% Master Plan Lower Campus to the Upper Newport Blvd been constructed or is planned Development Update Project Campus. in the near future. Agreement (PA2007-073) Amendment CDP (CCC) General Plan Amendment Koll Center A request construct a 21,311 square MND and project approval in Planned Community Office Building foot, two-story office building over a 4450 MacArthur January 2007. Under Development Plan Rosalinh Ung No ° 100/° (PA2006-095) subterranean parking garage on a Boulevard construction, building permits Amendment (PA2007-046) 1.49 -acre site issued March, 2014. Tentative Parcel Map Mitigated Negative Declaration Residential development including 201-207 EIR the following: (a) the demolition of the Carnation Ave Final EIR was certified and GP Amendment existing residential structures on the and 101 Bayside project approved by the City Coastal Land Use AERIE Project 1.4 -acre site; (b) the development of PI; southwest of on July 14, 2009. A CDP has Plan (CLUP) (PA2005-196) 8 residential condominium units; and Bayside Drive been approved by the Coastal Amendment Jim Campbell No 0% (c) the replacement, reconfiguration, between Bayside Commission. Project is under Zone Change and expansion of the existing PI and Carnation construction with completion Tract Map gangway platform, pier walkway, and Ave, Corona del anticipated by the end of 2016. Modification Permit dock facilities on the site. Mar CDP (CCC) 79 condominium units totaling Santa Barbara IS/MND and project approved IS/MND Meridian approximately 205,232 net sf; Drive west of in January 2006. The CDP has GP Amendment (Santa approximately 97,231 gross sf of Fashion Island been approved by the Coastal CLUP Amendment Barbara) subterranean parking structures fora (900 Newport Commission. Phase 1 (26 Code Amendment Rosalinh Ung Yes 100% Condominium total of 201 parking spaces on site; Center Drive) and units) is completed. It is Parcel Map s Project approximately 79,140 sf of open 1001 Santa anticipated that Phase 2 (53 TTM (PA2004-169) space and approximately 21,300 sf of Barbara Drive units) to be completed by the Modification Permit recreational area. end of 2015. CDP (CCC) Rev: 2016-06-14-j c F:\Users\CDD\Shared\Admi n\Planning_Division\CEQA\Cumulative_Project_List\cumulative_ projects_current.docx Project Proposed Land Uses Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions Project Planner Traffic Study Percent Occupied Newport FEIR certified in February Site Plan Review Marina — A mixed use development consisting 2006. Tentative Tract Map Use Permit ETCO of 27 residential units and 2300 Newport extended in October 2010. The Tentative Tract Map Jim Campbell o 0 /o Development approximately 36,000 square feet of Boulevard project is under constructionand Environmental Impact (PA2001-210) retail and office uses is anticipated to be Report complete by the end of 2016. An IS/MND was released for public review on April 11, GP Amendment 2011. The MND was certified Code Amendment and the project approved by CUP Mariner's A 19,905-sf, two-story commercial 200-300 West the City Council on August 9, Variance Pointe building and a three-story parking Coast Highway 2011. Construction completed Site Development Jaime Murillo Yes 45% (PA2010-114) structure. on October 30, 2014, and Review tenants are beginning to Traffic Study occupy suites. (16% occupied, Mitigated Negative 29% TI in process, 55% Declaration vacant). Newport The City Council approved the GP Amendment Business Demolition of 2 existing connected 4699 Jamboree project on January 25, 2011. PC text amendment Plaza Project buildings to construct a new 46,044 Road and 5190 The project has not been Tentative Parcel Map Janet Brown 0% (PA2008-164) gross square foot business plaza. Campus Drive constructed. Mitigated Negative Declaration Increase the maximum allowable An IS/MND was released for PRES Office entitlement by 11,544 gross sf; public review on May 19, 2010. GP Amendment Building B increase the maximum allowable 4300 Von Karman The MND was certified and the PC Text Amendment Project entitlement in office suite B by 9,917 Ave project approved by the City Parcel Map Janet Brown 0% (PA2007-213) net sf to allow for development of a Council on February 22, 2011. Mitigated Negative new 2 -level office building over a Project has not been Declaration ground -level parking structure. constructed. AELUP: Airport Environs Land Use Plan; CDP: Coastal Development Permit; CUP: Conditional Use Permit; cy: cubic yards; DA: Development Agreement; DTSP: Downtown Specific Plan; EIR: Environmental Impact Report; FAA: Federal Aviation Administration; GPA: General Plan Amendment; gsf: gross square feet; HBGS: Huntington Beach Generating Station; 1-405: Interstate 405 freeway; IBC: Irvine Business Complex; IS: Initial Study; ITC: Irvine Technology Center; LAFCO: Local Agency Formation Commission; LCP: Local Coastal Program; MCAS: Marine Corps Air Station; MND: Mitigated Negative Declaration; ND: Negative Declaration; PA: Planning Area; PC: Planned Community; sf: square feet; SP: Specific Plan; SR -73: State Route 73; TDR: transfer of development rights; TPM: Tentative Parcel Map; TTM: Tentative Tract Map; VTTM: Vesting Tentative Tract Map; ZC: Zone Change Rev: 2016-06-14-j c F:\Users\CDD\Shared\Admi n\Planning_Division\CEQA\Cumulative_Project_List\cumulative_ projects_current.docx STATE OF CALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF ORANGE } ss. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH } I, Leilani I. Brown, City Clerk of the City of Newport Beach, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council is seven; that the foregoing resolution, being Resolution No. 2016-123 was duly introduced before and adopted by the City Council of said City at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 22nd day of November, 2016, and that the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Member Duffield, Council Member Selich, Council Member Curry, Council Member Petros, Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon, Mayor Dixon NAYS: None ABSENT: Council Member Peotter IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the official seal of said City this 23rd day of November, 2016. jpm�� N*,- Leilani I. Brown, MMC V City Clerk Newport Beach, California (Seal) E l �lp0V"�