Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout22 - Adopting Housing Element Implementation Noise-Related Amendments, and Overriding OC ALUC's Determination of InconsistencyTO: FROM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Staff Report November 14, 2023 Agenda Item No. 22 HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL Seimone Jurjis, Community Development Director - 949-644-3232, sjurjis@newportbeachca.gov PREPARED BY: Seimone Jurjis, Community Development Director - 949-644-3232, sjurjis@newportbeachca.gov TITLE: Ordinance Nos. 2023-20 and 2023-21 and Resolution No. 2023-72: Adopting Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments, and Resolution No. 2023-73: Overriding Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency (PA2022-0201) ABSTRACT: For the City Council's consideration is the adoption of legislative amendments to the General Plan Land Use and Noise Elements, and the introduction of ordinances amending Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC), Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60) (Amendments) necessary to accommodate some of the housing units identified by the certified 2021-2029 General Plan Housing Element. Additionally, the City Council will consider adopting a resolution overriding the August 17, 2023, Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's (ALUC), determination that the Amendments are inconsistent with the 2008 John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21676(b). Approval of the Amendments and the adoption of the resolution to override the ALUC requires a two-thirds majority vote of the City Council. RECOMMENDATIONS: a) Conduct a public hearing; b) Find the Amendments are exempt and not subject to further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 because the Amendments would not allow development of greater intensity than is allowed under the 2006 General Plan, including the Newport Airport Village Planned Community, as amended. The updated noise contours, and impacts associated therewith, were also fully analyzed in the 2014 John Wayne Airport (JWA) Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report No. 617; c) Adopt Resolution No. 2023-72, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Approving Amendments to the Land Use and Noise Elements of the General Plan, Related to Noise in the Airport Area Necessary to Implement the 6r" Cycle Housing Element (PA2022-0201); 22-1 Adopting Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments and Overriding Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency November 14, 2023 Page 2 d) Waive full reading, direct the City Clerk to read by title only, introduce Ordinance No. 2023-20, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Approving An Amendment to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code Related to Noise in the Airport Area Necessary to Implement the 6t" Cycle Housing Element (PA2022-0201), and pass on to second reading on November 28, 2023; e) Waive full reading, direct the City Clerk to read by title only, introduce Ordinance No. 2023-21, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Approving Amendments to Newport Place Planned Community Development Plan (PC-11) and Newport Airport Village Planned Community Development Plan (PC-60) Related to Noise in the Airport Area Necessary to Implement the 6t" Cycle Housing Element (PA2022-0201), and pass on to second reading on November 28, 2023; and f) Adopt Resolution No. 2023-73, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Finding Amendments to the Noise and Land Use Elements of the General Plan, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, Newport Place Planned Community Development Plan (PC11) and Newport Airport Village Planned Community Development Plan (PC-60), Related to Noise in the Airport Area Necessary to Implement the 6t" Cycle Housing Element are Consistent with the Purposes of the State Aeronautics Act and Overriding the Orange County Land Use Commission's Determination that the Amendments are Inconsistent with the 2008 John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan (PA2022-0201). DISCUSSION: Background On September 13, 2022, the City Council adopted the 6th Cycle Housing Element (Housing Element) for the housing cycle from 2021 to 2029, and it was certified by the State Department of Housing and Community Development on October 5, 2022. The Housing Element provides a comprehensive set of housing goals and policies, as well as an inventory of potential candidate housing sites to meet the City of Newport Beach's 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation of 4,845 new housing units. The Housing Element established rezone strategies where the identified housing opportunity sites comprising 8,174 units would be provided the necessary zoning for housing development. The Housing Element provides for more housing units than the RHNA due to the high percentages of below market rate workforce housing imposed by the Southern California Association of Governments and the State of California. Several of the sites identified are proximate to John Wayne Airport within the area mapped by the AELUP as being subject to the 65 dBA Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) noise contour area. Currently, there are Land Use and Noise Element policies and zoning regulations that prohibit residential uses within the 65 dBA CNEL area. The opportunity sites are necessary in allowing the City to meet its RHNA allocation obligation. As a result, these General Plan policies and zoning regulations must be updated to eliminate the prohibition. 22-2 Adopting Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments and Overriding Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency November 14, 2023 Page 3 The Airport Area Environs (Airport Area) is one of the five focus areas where new housing opportunity sites are identified to satisfy the RHNA allocation besides West Newport Mesa, Dover-Westcliff/Mariner's Mile, Newport Center, Coyote Canyon, and the 5t" Cycle sites. The Airport Area includes 62 new housing opportunity sites that could accommodate up to 2,577 housing units. This comprises approximately 25 percent of the total housing units identified in the various focus areas included in the Housing Element. When the Housing Element was being drafted, the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) reviewed these sites and found the entire draft Housing Element inconsistent with the AELUP. Ultimately, the City Council overruled the ALUC's determination, consistent with State law, and adopted the Housing Element with sites proximate to the airport included. Proposed Amendments The 2006 General Plan Land Use and Noise Elements, Title 20, and provisions within the Newport Place and Newport Airport Village Planned Communities in the Airport Area, do not allow residential developments in the existing AELUP 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area. As a result, these policies and regulations must be updated to eliminate conflicting policy and regulatory restrictions to provide consistency with the Housing Element. The Amendments are needed to implement the necessary land use changes and overlay zones to allow housing on sites in the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area. No development would be directly authorized by the Amendments. The existing CNEL noise contours, adopted in the 2006 Noise Element, were based on the 1985 JWA Master Plan, and they are outdated due to improvements in aircraft design and modified air traffic patterns. Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 617 was prepared and certified as being compliant with the California Environmental Quality Act by the County of Orange. The EIR assessed the potential impacts of the adoption of the 2014 JWA Settlement Agreement Amendment that extended the agreement. Both the County and the City are signatories to the agreement. The Noise Chapter of EIR No. 617 explained how the dBA CNEL noise contours have reduced in size compared to the 1985 JWA Master Plan CNEL noise contours, in which the City's General Plan policies and maps are based on. The 1985 JWA Master Plan noise contours are considerably larger than the existing noise contours presented previously. This is largely due to a quieter fleet of existing commercial aircraft and a dramatic reduction in the number of general aviation operations. The noise contours in EIR No. 617 are based on more contemporary noise modeling programs, as the EIR explained that "one of the most important factors in generating accurate noise contours is the collection of accurate operational data". Airport noise contours generated in this noise study used the Integrated Noise Model (INM) Version 7.0 which was released for use in May 2013, and is the state -of -art in airport noise modeling. The maps on the next page are the existing and proposed JWA noise contours with the housing sites included in the Housing Element: 22-3 Adopting Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments and Overriding Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency November 14, 2023 Page 4 Existing JWA's Noise Contours Proposed JWA's Noise Contours CNPL 75M 60d6 CNEL roar CNEL CNEL negdeae ssae 70 de CNEL CNEL CNEL Vft" ac AYpal N� C va�g. _ yf . /. ` V 1 • ,gam- a /,' � -,.,o ;/� '� ;?' N-PW Pb PCj Legend ---Cayawnaaly v Legend O7dBCNEL ay Sites \ - �_ � w —' Cd, e-M.'y 51Cede sites q _ otgdrtunry Saes 75 J Sah AHFFA Cycle snea' 7C tlB CNEL _ CNELSO CNEL ES A PS dB CNEL A�- CNEL 70 �3 'y 50 tlB CNEL-CNEL75 The Amendments are required to further the goals, policies and programs of the Housing Element, and to replace the currently outdated CNEL noise contour boundaries in the City's General Plan and PCs' zoning texts with a more updated CNEL contour boundary based on updated operations at JWA, technological advancements in aviation technology, and updated noise modeling data. The following is a summary of the Amendments: • Adopting updated noise contours (Noise Element Figures N4 and N5) to reflect the noise contours identified by the 2014 JWA Settlement Agreement Amendment EIR No. 617; • Updating Land Use and Noise Element Policies, Land Use Element Figures LU11, LU22, and LU23, Title 20, PC-11, and PC-60 to modify and incorporate the updated noise contours identified by EIR No. 617 and to implement additional noise attenuation measures for future housing units proximate to JWA; and • Allowing residential units identified by the Housing Element to be located within the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area as identified in the updated noise contour maps analyzed in EIR No. 617. Parcels or sites bisected by the updated 65 dBA CNEL noise contour could support future housing; whereas parcels or sites located wholly within the updated 65 dBA CNEL noise contour could support housing, if deemed necessary to satisfy the RHNA mandate. 22-4 Adopting Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments and Overriding Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency November 14, 2023 Page 5 The following specific policies, maps and regulations are proposed to be changed: Land Use Element: • Policy LU6.15.3 (Airport Compatibility) • Figure LU11 — Statistical Areas J6, L4 (removal of the outdated 65 dBA CNEL noise contour line) • Figure LU22 — Airport (removal of the outdated noise contour line) • Figure LU23 - Airport Area Residential Villages Illustrative Concept Diagram (removal of the outdated noise contour line) Noise Element: • Policy N1.2 (Noise Exposure Verification for New Development) • Policy N1.5.A (Airport Area Infill Projects [new policy for Airport Area]) • Policy N2.2 (Design of Sensitive Land Uses) • Policy N3.2 (Residential Development) • Figure N4 - Future Noise Contours (update JWA noise contours) • Figure N5 - Future Noise Contours (update JWA noise contours) Title 20 Zoning Code Amendment: • Section 20.30.080(F) (Noise -Airport Environs Land Use Plan) Planned Community Text Amendments: • Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) — Part III. Residential Overlay Zone, Section V.D.1 (Airport Noise Compatibility) • Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60) —Sections I.D (Purpose and Objective), & II.A & B (Permitted & Prohibited Uses) The precise changes to the Land Use and Noise Elements are included in the draft resolution as Attachment A. Updated Land Use Element Figures LU11, LU22, and LU22 and Noise Element Figures N4 and N5 are also referenced and included in the draft resolution. The precise changes to Newport Place and Newport Airport Village Planned Communities are included in the draft ordinance as Attachment C. General Plan Amendment Analysis The Amendments would be consistent with the following Housing Element Policies and Policy Actions: • Housing Policy 1.1 (Identify a variety of sites to accommodate housing growth need by income categories to serve the needs of the entire community.); • Housing Policy 4.2 (Enable construction of new housing units sufficient to meet City qualified goals by identifying adequate sites for their construction.); and • Policy Action 4J (Airport Environs Sub Area Environmental Constraints). 22-5 Adopting Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments and Overriding Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency November 14, 2023 Page 6 The Amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element would be a step in the implementation of the Housing Element. As mentioned above, a total of 62 new housing opportunity sites are identified in the Airport Area according to the Housing Element. Of those sites, 48 are located wholly or partially outside the 65 dBA CNEL contour boundary. Only 14 new housing opportunity sites are located wholly within the updated 65 dBA CNEL contour boundary. By updating the Land Element and Noise Element policies that prohibit residential uses with the 1985 JWA Master Plan 65 dBA CNEL contour, the Amendments will advance the Housing Element's goal of accommodating at least 2,577 housing units at a variety of income levels in the Airport Area. Additionally, by providing uniform and concise conditions of approval identified in the Amendment to Title 20, the City has taken actions to address potential environmental constraints in the Airport Area and ensure continued feasibility of sites, particularly for the lower -income RHNA. Charter 423 Analysis Section 423 of the Charter and Council Policy A-18 (Guidelines for Implementing Charter Section 423) (Council Policy A-18) require any amendment to the General Plan be reviewed to determine if a vote of the electorate would be required. If a General Plan Amendment (separately or cumulatively with other General Plan Amendments within the previous 10 years) generates more than 100 peak hour trips (a.m. or p.m.), adds 40,000 square feet of non-residential floor area, or adds more than 100 dwelling units in a statistical area, a vote of the electorate would be required. The purpose of the Amendments is to eliminate conflicts between the Housing Element, Land Use and Noise Elements (and other ordinances), which prohibit residential development within the outdated 1985 JWA Master Plan 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area, and to adopt more updated CNEL noise contour areas that are based on updated noise modeling data, airport operations, and advances in aviation technology that result in decreased noise levels. As a result, these policies and regulations must be updated to eliminate conflicting policy and regulatory restrictions to provide consistency with the Housing Element. The housing opportunity sites identified in the maps on page 4 of this report are not part of the proposed Amendments and they will be considered separately in 2024, after an environmental impact report is completed. Additionally, no development would be directly authorized by the Amendments. As none of the Charter 423 thresholds are impacted nor exceeded by the Amendments, no vote of the electorate is required. Title 20 Planning and Zoning Amendment Section 20.30.080(F) (Noise -Airport Environs Land Use Plan) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) will be updated (Attachment B) to allow residential uses, including mixed -use residential in the Airport Area, subject to the conditions below. 22-6 Adopting Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments and Overriding Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency November 14, 2023 Page 7 Residential development would be limited to parcels or sites wholly or partially outside the updated 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the parcels or sites wholly within such contour area are needed for the City to satisfy its 6t" Cycle RHNA mandate. Non-residential uses would be encouraged on parcels or sites located wholly within the 2014 65 dBA CNEL contour area. 1) Prior to the issuance of any building permits for such development, a noise study shall be prepared by a City -approved, qualified acoustical consultant and submitted to the Community Development Director for approval; 2) All new residential structures or the residential units within a mixed -use development shall be attenuated to provide an interior noise level of 45 dBA CNEL or less; 3) The design of the residential portions of mixed -use projects and residential developments shall have adequate noise attenuation between adjacent uses and units (common floor/ceilings) in accordance with the California Building Code; 4) New mixed -use developments shall incorporate designs with loading areas, parking lots, driveways, trash enclosures, mechanical equipment, and other noise sources away from the residential portion of the development; 5) Use of walls, berms, interior noise insulation, double paned windows, advanced insulation systems, or other noise mitigation measures as deemed appropriate, shall be incorporated in the design of new residential to bring interior sound attenuation to 45 dBA CNEL or less; 6) Residential uses shall be indoor -oriented to reduce noise impingement on outdoor living areas; 7) On -site indoor amenities, such as fitness facilities or recreation and entertainment facilities shall be encouraged; and 8) Advanced air filtration systems for buildings shall be considered to promote cleaner air. Newport Place (PC-11) and Newport Airport Village (PC-60) Planned Community Amendments PC 11 and PC 60 will be revised to allow residential development or mixed -use development on parcels wholly or partially outside the updated 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area, unless and until the City determines that the sites wholly within such contour area are required to meet the City's 6t" Cycle RHNA mandate. Planning Commission Review and Recommendation On August 3, 2023, the Planning Commission considered and recommended the City Council approve the Amendments. The August 3, 2023, Planning Commission staff report, Planning Commission minutes excerpts, and Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 are included as Attachment E. 22- 7 Adopting Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments and Overriding Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency November 14, 2023 Page 8 Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) Override Section 4.3 of the AELUP and Section 21676(b) of the California Public Utilities Code (CPUC) require the City to submit General Plan and Zoning Code amendments to the ALUC for a consistency determination with the AELUP. ALUC conducted a hearing on the Amendments at its August 17, 2023, meeting and the Commission found the Amendments inconsistent with the AELUP. On September 12, 2023, consistent with CPUC Sections 21670 and 21676, the City Council held a public hearing and adopted Resolution No. 2023-52, containing findings necessary for override of the ALUC determination. On September 13, 2023, a notice of intent to override along with Resolution No. 2023-52 was sent via certified mail and emailed to the ALUC and to the California Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Program. The City received comments from John Wayne Airport on October 10, 2023, the ALUC on October 12, 2023, and Caltrans Aeronautics program on October 13, 2023 (Attachment F). As noted, overriding the determination of the ALUC and adopting the proposed Amendments requires a two-thirds of the majority vote of the City Council to be effective. Airport Land Use Commission Comments ALUC reiterates its determination of inconsistency due to the concerns of airport noise, safety and overflight impacts. ALUC further suggests that the City's reliance on EIR No. 617 is misplaced and inconsistent with the AELUP for JWA as it did not provide an analysis of the potentially significant impacts of placing future residential uses within the 65 dBA CNEL contour. Lastly, ALUC requests individual projects within the airport influence area to be submitted to ALUC for review in the event the City overrules ALUC's determination. Staff disagrees with the contention that the City's reliance on EIR No. 617 is inappropriate. The proposed Amendments require noise analysis and mitigation of future residential projects proximate to JWA. It also includes notification of future residents and owners and signs in outdoor recreational space. Residential use is allowed in Safety Zones 4 and 6 pursuant to the AELUP, so the proposed Amendments are not inconsistent with the AELUP. The City recognizes that future development projects will be subject to compliance with FAR Part 77 surfaces for JWA. Existing regulations and the proposed Amendment require projects to be submitted to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for a review to see if they would be a threat to air navigation. If the FAA makes that finding for any project, it would be required to be modified to receive a favorable finding upon subsequent review. Lastly, if the City overrules the ALUC, there is no requirement for the City to submit individual projects to the ALUC for review. 22-8 Adopting Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments and Overriding Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency November 14, 2023 Page 9 Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Program Comments The Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Program raises same concerns as it did for the Housing Element as related to noise and safety standards, consistency with the purpose and intent of the AELUP, and the possible introduction of incompatible land uses adjacent to JWA. The City appreciates feedback from Caltrans. The issues raised in the letter are the same as others raised and they are addressed in the proposed resolution to override the ALUC. John Wayne Airport Comments Airport Director Charlene Reynolds writes that the Amendments have the potential to increase incompatible land use within the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, which could result in significant land use compatibility, noise, safety, and overflight impacts, and an additional encroachment of incompatible land uses within the airport environs. Additionally, the City must comply with CEQA requirements to adequately analyze these potentially significant environmental impacts prior to considering approval of the Amendments. These comments are not new to the debate and the comments are noted for the record. The County raises a new question of compliance with the 2006 cooperative agreement where the City and the County agreed upon certain principles. The primary points were that the City agreed not to annex County property or the JWA itself while the County agreed not to pursue future physical expansion of the airport. The City did agree to not amend the Santa Ana Heights Specific Plan without consent of the County. The City also agreed it would adopt and maintain General Plan policies and implementing regulations consistent with the AELUP. The proposed Amendments do not change the Santa Ana Heights Specific Plan as it is not necessary. Additionally, overriding the ALUC consistent with CPUC Section 21676(b) should maintain the City's commitment to the 2006 cooperative agreement. The three comment letters are included as Attachment F to this staff report and are incorporated by reference in the draft resolution for overriding (Attachment D). The facts in support of the findings provided in Section 1 of the draft resolution adequately address comments received. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact related to this item. 22-9 Adopting Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments and Overriding Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency November 14, 2023 Page 10 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Amendments are exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15183 because they do not change the underlying land use or zoning designations of any specific parcels, including parcels within the Airport Area or within the updated noise contours. The Amendments, therefore, will not result in development of greater intensity than is allowed under the 2006 General Plan and Newport Airport Village Planned Community, as amended. To the extent new parcels can be developed in the future for residential uses, by nature of no longer being located within areas identified as experiencing 65 dB CNEL or greater, those parcels must be part of a specific proposed project for consideration and processing by the City for approval. The Amendments are also exempt because they fall within the scope of analysis contained within EIR No. 617, prepared, and certified by the County for the 2014 JWA Settlement Agreement Amendment, to which the City is a party. EIR No. 617, fully analyzed impacts on sensitive receptors (including residential uses) in adopting the Settlement Agreement Amendment, including the updated CNEL contour boundaries associated therewith, using both the County and City's thresholds of significance. The City was a responsible agency for EIR No. 617, and co -signatory to the Settlement Agreement Amendment. EIR No. 617 concluded that the Settlement Agreement Amendment (and associated updated CNEL contours) would result in less -than - significant impacts related to noise increases at sensitive receptors, but a significant and unavoidable impact from increasing noise levels at exterior use areas of residences. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted. No lawsuits were filed challenging the adequacy of the EIR No. 617. The Amendments are required for the City to officially adopt the latest and most recently analyzed dBA CNEL noise contours, which are based on state-of-the-art noise modeling, current airport activity and operations at JWA, and technological advances in aviation technology that reduce noise levels from aircraft. Because EIR No. 617 analyzed impacts associated with the updated noise contours, the City's adoption of the updated CNEL noise contours is fully within the scope of EIR No. 617, and the 2006 General Plan, as amended. The Amendments, therefore, do not warrant further environmental review under CEQA. NOTICING: Given the Amendments only involve the properties located in the Airport Area, notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot and mailed to all owners of properties located within PC-11 and PC-60 that are located within the existing 65 dBA CNEL noise contour at least 10 days before the scheduled meeting, consistent with the provisions of Section 20.66.030(B) of the NBMC. Additionally, the item also appears on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website in accordance with the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of the meeting at which the City Council considers the item). 22-10 Adopting Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments and Overriding Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination of Inconsistency November 14, 2023 Page 11 ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — Resolution No. 2023-72: Amendments to Land Use & Noise Elements Attachment B — Ordinance No. 2023-20: Amendment to Title 20 Attachment C — Ordinance No. 2023-21: Amendments to PC-11 & PC 60 Attachment D — Resolution No. 2023-73: Overriding ALUC's Determination Attachment E — Planning Commission Staff Report and Minutes Excerpts Dated August 3, 2023, and Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Attachment F — Agency Comment Letters Regarding Intent to Override the ALUC 22-11 ATTACHMENT A RESOLUTION NO. 2023- 72 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND USE AND NOISE ELEMENTS OF THE GENERAL PLAN, RELATED TO NOISE IN THE AIRPORT AREA NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT THE 61th CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT (PA2022-0201) WHEREAS, Section 200 of the City of Newport Beach ("City") Charter vests the City Council with the authority to make and enforce all laws, rules and regulations with respect to municipal affairs subject only to the restrictions and limitations contained in the Charter and the State Constitution, and the power to exercise, or act pursuant to any and all rights, powers, and privileges, or procedures granted or prescribed by any law of the State of California; WHEREAS, the Noise Element is one of the mandatory elements of the Newport Beach General Plan and was last updated as part of a comprehensive General Plan Update in 2006; WHEREAS, in January 2019, the City Council initiated a comprehensive update of the Newport Beach General Plan, however, due to the Regional Housing Needs Assessment ("RHNA") allocation of 4,845 new housing units to plan for the 2021-2029 housing period, the City Council directed City staff to focus on the Housing Element, Land Use Element, and Circulation Element; WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the 6tn Cycle Housing Element covering the period 2021-2029 planning period ("6th Cycle Housing Element") on September 13, 2022, and it was certified by the State Department of Housing and Community Development on October 5, 2022; WHEREAS, the 6th Cycle Housing Element, including Appendix B, has been subject to extensive public participation in accordance with Government Code Section 65351 including thirteen community workshops, fourteen Housing Element Update Advisory Committee ("HEUAC") meetings, review of the Housing Element by the Planning Commission, and six duly noticed City Council study sessions; WHEREAS, additionally, the HEUAC formed five different subcommittees to thoroughly review and identify all feasible sites for potential redevelopment as residential in the future and those sites are captured in Appendix B (Adequate Sites Analysis), which demonstrates the City's capacity to meet the RHNA allocation; 22-12 Resolution No. 2023- Page 2 of 8 WHEREAS, the 6th Cycle Housing Element identifies five focus areas where future housing opportunities will be created through the adoption of housing opportunity overlays or other rezone strategies to establish the ability to develop additional housing to meet the RHNA; WHEREAS, the increase in units above the minimum RHNA allocation is in response to the unusually high percentage of below market rate units the RHNA mandates coupled with the significant challenges to planning, financing, and constructing workforce housing with higher -than -average land costs; WHEREAS, the entire Airport Area Environs is proximate to John Wayne Airport and subject to the John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan ("AELUP"); WHEREAS, forty-eight housing sites identified in the focus area are within or bisected by the 65 weighted decibel ("dBA") community noise equivalent level ("CNEL") noise contour identified in the AELUP; WHEREAS, the following amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element of the General Plan, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC"), Newport Place Planned Community Development Plan (PC- 11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community Development Plan (PC-60) are necessary to allow residential use, including mixed -use residential, on housing opportunity sites that are wholly or partially located outside the 65 dBA: Land Use Element: • Policy LU6.15.3 (Airport Compatibility), • Figure LU11 — Statistical Areas J6, L4, • Figure LU22 — Airport, and • Figure LU23 -Airport Area Residential Villages Illustrative Concept Diagram (removal of 65 CNEL noise contour line); Noise Element: • Policy N 1.2 (Noise Exposure Verification for New Development), • Policy N1.5.A (Airport Area Infill Amendments (new policy), • Policy N 2.2 (Design of Sensitive Land Uses), • Policy N 3.2 (Residential Development), • Figure N4 - Future Noise Contours, and • Figure N5 — Future Noise Contours; 22-13 Resolution No. 2023- Page 3 of 8 Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC: • Section 20.30.080(F) (Noise -Airport Environs Land Use Plan); Planned Communities: • Newport Place Planned Community Development Plan (PC-11) — Part III. Residential Overlay Zone, Section V.D.1 (Airport Noise Compatibility), and • Newport Airport Village Planned Community Development Plan (PC-60) — Section I.D (Purpose and Objective) & Section II.B.2 (Prohibited Uses). WHEREAS, the Amendments change noise compatibility policies and regulations and do not change the existing underlying land use categories or zoning designations of any property; WHEREAS, the Amendments do not add residential unit capacity to the Land Use Element, and therefore, the General Plan amendments included in the Amendments do not require a vote of the electorate pursuant to Charter Section 423; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on August 3, 2023, in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act") and Chapter 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC2022-015, unanimously (4 ayes and 3 recusals), recommending the City Council approve the Amendments; WHEREAS, Section 21676(b) of the California Public Utilities Code ("CPUC") required the City to refer the Amendments to the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission ("ALUC") for a determination that the Amendments are consistent with the AELUP; WHEREAS, on August 17, 2023, ALUC determined the Amendments were inconsistent with the AELUP; 22-14 Resolution No. 2023- Page 4 of 8 WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 21670 and 21676 of CPUC, the City Council may, after a public hearing, propose to overrule ALUC with a two-thirds vote, if it makes specific findings that the Amendments are consistent with the purpose of Section 21670 of the CPUC to protect the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on September 12, 2023, in the City Council Chambers, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with CPUC Section 21676(b) and the Ralph M. Brown Act. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the hearing, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2023-52 by a unanimous vote (5 ayes, 1 recused, 1 absent), to notify ALUC and the State Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Program ("Aeronautics Program") of the City's intent to override ALUC's inconsistency finding; WHEREAS, notice of the City's intent to override the ALUC inconsistency determination, along with Resolution No. 2023-52 was sent via certified mail and emailed to ALUC and Aeronautics Program on September 13, 2023; WHEREAS, the City received timely comments in response to the notice of the City's intent to override the ALUC inconsistency determination from John Wayne Airport, ALUC, and the Aeronautics Program in accordance with CPUC Section 21676; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on November 14, 2023, in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act"), Chapter 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC, and CPUC Section 21676(b). Evidence both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as follows: 22-15 Resolution No. 2023- Page 5 of 8 Section 1: The City Council hereby approves amendments to the 2006 Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element and Noise Element and the following exhibits which are attached hereto and incorporated by reference: a. Land Use Element Amendment, which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A"; b. Noise Element Amendment, which is attached hereto as Exhibit "B"; C. Land Use Element Figures LU11, LU22 and LU23 to remove the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, which are attached hereto as Exhibit "C," Exhibit "D," and Exhibit "E," respectively; and d. Noise Element Figures N4 and N5 to update the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, which are attached hereto as Exhibit "F" and Exhibit "G". Section 2: Amendments to the 2006 Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element and Noise Element which are legislative acts. Neither Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) nor California Government Code Section 65000 et seq., set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of such amendment. Notwithstanding the forgoing, the amendments to the Land Use and Noise Element are consistent with the following General Plan policies: Findings and Facts in Support of Findings of General Plan Consistency: 1. The amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element would eliminate conflicting general plan policies that prohibit residential developments within the 1985 JWA Master Plan 65 dBA to 70 dBA CNEL noise contour area. 2. The amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element are consistent with the following City of Newport Beach Housing Element Policy and Policy Action: Housinq Policy 1.1 Identify a variety of sites to accommodate housing growth need by income categories to serve the needs of the entire community. The amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element would be a step in the implementation of the 6th Cycle Housing Element. The Housing Element identified 62 new housing opportunity sites in the Airport Area. Of those sites, 48 are located wholly or partially outside the 65 dBA CNEL contour boundary. By updating the General Plan Land Element and Noise Element policies that prohibit 22-16 Resolution No. 2023- Page 6 of 8 residential uses within the outdated, 1985 Master Plan 65 dBA CNEL contour, the Amendments will advance the 6th Cycle Housing Element's goal of accommodating at least 2,577 housing units in a variety of income levels within the Airport Area. Tribal Consultation Findings: Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65352.3 (SB 18), a local government is required to contact the appropriate tribes identified by the Native American Heritage Commission ("NAHC") each time it considers a proposal to adopt or amend the General Plan. If requested by any tribe, the local government must consult for the purpose of preserving or mitigating impacts to cultural resources. Facts in Support of Findings: The City received comments from the NAHC indicating that 12 tribal contacts should be provided notice regarding the Amendments. Notices were sent to the 12 tribes on February 16, 2023. California Government Code Section 65352.3 requires notification 90 days prior to Council action to allow tribal contacts to respond to the request to consult. The 90-day notification period has expired on May 16, 2023. No consultation request were received. 423 Charter Analysis Finding: Section 423 of the Charter and Council Policy A-18 (Guidelines for Implementing Charter Section 423) ("Council Policy A-18") require any amendment to the General Plan be reviewed to determine if a vote of the electorate would be required. If a General Plan Amendment (separately or cumulatively with other GPAs within the previous 10 years) generates more than 100 peak hour trips (a.m. or p.m.), adds 40,000 square feet of non- residential floor area, or adds more than 100 dwelling units in a statistical area, a vote of the electorate would be required. 22-17 Resolution No. 2023- Page 7 of 8 Facts in Support of Findings: The purpose of the Amendments is to eliminate a conflict with the certified 6th Cycle Housing Element and the City's General Plan Land Use Element and Noise Element, which prohibit residential development within the 1985 JWA Master Plan's 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area, and to endorse a more updated CNEL contour areas that are based on updated noise modeling data, airport operations and advances in aviation technology that result in decreased noise levels. As a result, these policies and regulations must be updated to eliminate conflicting policy and regulatory restrictions to provide consistency with the 6th Cycle Housing Element. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no development would be directly authorized by the amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element. As none of the thresholds specified by Charter Section 423 are impacted nor exceeded by the amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element, no vote of the electorate is required. Section 3: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are incorporated into the operative part of this resolution. Section 4: 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 5: The City Council finds the action to override the ALUC's August 17, 2023, determination and the approval of the Amendments exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 because they do not change the underlying land use or zoning designations of any specific parcels, including parcels within the Airport Area or within the updated noise contours based upon the findings set forth in Exhibit "H," which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 22-18 Resolution No. 2023- Page 8 of 8 Section 6: 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 14th day of November, 2023. NOAH BLOM Mayor ATTEST: Leilani 1. Brown City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Aaronar City A rney Attachments: Exhibit A — Amendment to the 2006 General Plan Land Use Element Airport Area Exhibit B — Amendment to the 2006 General Plan Noise Element Exhibit C — Land Use Element Figure LU11 — Statistical Areas J6, L4 Exhibit D — Land Use Element Figure LU22 — Airport Exhibit E — Land Use Element Figure LU23 — Airport Area Residential Villages Illustrative Concept Diagram Exhibit F — Noise Element Figures N4 — Future Noise Contours Exhibit G —Noise Element Figure N5 — Future Noise Contours Exhibit H —CEQA Findings of Consistency 22-19 EXHIBIT "A" Amendment to the 2006 General Plan Land Use Element Airport Area Reference & Page Propose Changes Airport Area Modify the third paragraph on page 3-100 as follows: narrative change Development in the Airport Area is limited res+ri^vtcQ due to the safety restrictions and noise associated ' with Introduction on John Wayne Airport. irroGated in�w dBA GNEL, Whirh is i citable fee Pg 3-100 RG Fes' en and etheF "noise sensitive" uses. Additionally, building heights are restricted for aviation safety. Residential uses can be allowed in the Airport Area on parcels that are wholly or partially outside the 65 dBA CNEL contour as denoted in Figures N4 and N5 of the Noise Element. Figure N5 is largely derived from the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report (E1R No. 617). Residential uses may be approved in these areas provided interior living areas are protected from excessive noise by appropriate construction techniques that reduce the interior noise to 45 dBA CNEL, consistent with state law. (See Cal. Code Regs., tit. 21, § 5014, subd. (a)(1)-(4).) Parcels that are wholly within the John Wayne Airport 65 dB CNEL contour shown in Figure N5 (e.g., those identified as experiencing noise levels above 65 dB CNEL) are unsuitable for residential development unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the site(s) wholly within the 65-70 dB CNEL contours are needed for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. Nonresidential uses are, however, encouraged on parcels located wholly within the 65 dBA CNEL contour area. 22-20 Policy Overview; Modify the fourth sentence in first paragraph on page 3-101 as Pg 3-101 follows: Housing Residential and mixed -use (commercial and residential) buildings would be restricted from areas exposed to exterior noise levels of John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL and higher, based on the dBA CNEL contour boundaries shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence that the sites wholly within such contour area are needed for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. Policy LU6.15.3 Require that all development be constructed in conformance with the (Airport height restrictions set forth by the Federal Aviation Administration Compatibility); (FAA), Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77, and Caltrans Pg 3-101 Division of Aeronautics, and that residential development shall be allowed only on parcels with noise levels of less than lesated outside of the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area as shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan spedfied by the 1995 jVVA Master Plan, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the sites wholly within the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour shown in Figure N5 are needed for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. Nonresidential uses are, however, encouraged on parcels located wholly within the 65 dBA CNEL contour area. (Imp 2.1, 3.1, 4.1, 14.3) 22-21 EXHIBIT "B" Amendment to the 2006 General Plan Noise Element Reference & Page Proposed Changes Narrative -Community Modify the second full paragraph on page 12-9 as follows: Noise Contours; Pg 12- The aircraft noise contours that are used for planning 9 purposes by the County of Orange and Airport Land Use Commission are found in the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) and are derived from the 1985 Master Plan for JWA and the accompanying EIR 508. These noise contours are based on fleet mix and flight level assumptions developed in EIR 508, and are shown in FiguFe N5 Figures N1 and N2." Add the following paragraph after the second full paragraph on page 12-9 as follows: The Noise Chapter within 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report EIR No. 617 illustrated how the dBA CNEL noise contours have reduced in size compared to the 1985 AELUP Master Plan CNEL noise contours, in which the General Plan policies and maps are based on. The noise contours in EIR No. 617 are based on more contemporary noise modeling programs. Airport noise contours generated in this noise study using the INM Version 7.Od which was released for use in May 2013, and is the state - of -art in airport noise modeling. Consequently, Figures N4 and N5 are updated to reflect the noise contours identified by the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report No. 617. Modify the last sentence of the third full paragraph on page 12- 9 as follows: The 65 dBA CNEL contour area describes the area for which new noise -sensitive developments, including residential uses, will be conditionally permitted only if appropriate measures are included such that the standards contained in this Noise Element are achieved. Noise -sensitive uses shall not be located on parcels that are wholly within the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL contour as shown in Figure N5. Modify the fourth full paragraph on page 12-9 as follows: 22-22 Tom_jWA AELUP (last ended in 2002) 9RIY a! rnsideRtial uses and ^tho�eiso_s�tivo uses within a 65 �rtrcrrcrur-a��—arrv—vrrr �.r rr�. a�c� appliGabl^ to single-family rosideRGes Furthermore, residential units should be sufficiently indoor -oriented, consistent with Title 29 of the California Code of Regulations, so as to reduce noise impingement on outdoor living areas. The JWA AELUP also strongly recommends that if 60 dBA GNF=I 6ente it th-at s1iffirnvient GeURd attencrrvvim9 to maintain a 45 dBA GNE intorin Se methods aFe used level.all designated outdoor common or recreational areas provide outdoor signage informing the public of the presence of operating aircraft. Policy N1.2 (Noise Applicants for proposed residential or mixed -use projects Exposure Verification that ^„ir^ nnvirnnmental ro„ loge, And are located in areas for New Development); projected to be exposed to 65-70 dBA CNEL or greater Pg 12-25 GNE 60 dBA and hinhor, as shown on FiguFe N4, Figure N5, and Figwe N6 may must conduct a field suave the-Git noise study to provide evidence that the depicted noise contours do not adequately account for local noise exposure circumstances due to such factors as, topography, variation in traffic speeds, and other applicable conditions. These findings shall be used to determine the level of exterior or interior noise, attenuation needed to attain an acceptable noise exposure level and the feasibility of such measures when other planning considerations are taken into account, consistent with Title 21 of the California Code of Regulations. (Imp 2.1) Policy N1.5 (Infill Allow a higher (above 65 dBA CNEL) exterior noise level Projects); Pg 12-25 standard for infill projects in existing residential areas adjacent to major arterials if it can be shown that there are no feasible mechanisms to meet the exterior noise levels. The interior standard of 45 dBA CNEL shall be enforced for any new residential project or mixed -use project containing a residential component, consistent with Title 29 of California Code of Regulations. (Imp 2.1, 7.1) 22-23 Policy N1.5A (Airport Allow infill residential projects proximate to John Wayne Area Infill Projects) Airport to have a higher exterior noise level standard (65- New Policy 70 dBA CNEL) if it can be shown that there are no practical mechanisms or designs to meet the exterior noise levels. The interior standard of 45 dBA CNEL shall be enforced for any residential component of projects. No residential units may be located on parcels wholly within the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area as shown in Figure N5, of the Noise Element of the General Plan, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the sites wholly within such contour area are needed for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. Nonresidential uses are encouraged on parcels located wholly within the 65 dBA CNEL contour area, shown in Figure N5. Policy N2.2 (Design of Require the use of walls, berms, interior noise insulation, Sensitive Land Uses); double -paned windows, advanced insulation systems, or Pg 12-26 other noise mi+Tmeasures, as appropriate, in the design of new residential developments to attenuate noise levels to not exceed 45 dBA CNEL interior. of 90ther new noise sensitive land uses that are adjacent to major feads-arterials and located proximate to John Wayne Airport (e.g., infill residential) and within the 65-70 dBA CNEL noise contour area are required to be indoor -oriented to reduce noise impacts on outdoor living or recreational areas. Application of the Noise Standards in Table N3 N2 shall govern this requirement. (Imp 7.1) Policy N3.1 (New Ensure new development is compatible with the noise Development); Pg 12- environment 27 to , as guides future pIaRRiRg and development deGiSiORS proximate to John Wayne Airport by not allowing residential units on parcels located wholly within the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, as shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the sites wholly within such contour area are needed for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. Policy N3.2 (Residential Require that residential development in proximate to John Development); Pg 12- Wayne Airport AFea shall not be located eutside on parcels 28 wholly within the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA eutside of 22-24 the 65 d6A CNEL noise contour shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the sites wholly within such contour area are needed for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. the-1985 Rfequire fesideetial-developers of residential or mixed -use land uses with a residential component to notify prospective purchasers or tenants of aircraft noise. Additionally, require outdoor common areas or recreational areas of residential or mixed -used developments to be posted with signs notifying users regarding the proximity to John Wayne Airport and the presence of operating aircraft and noise. (Imp 2.1, 3.1, 4.1) 22-25 EXHIBIT "C" Land Use Element Figure LU11— Statistical Areas J6, L4 22-26 ITY of NEWPORT BEACH mxa e. enm,m, pnml,au wrssv:om e� tro,,, Alp.., GENERALPLAN Lgpvvry Vsu {AV1 wnuxd-utenaucnnll Rlu+,lf .ne eea Anwnslr !''°. °° Ilzv d"wu"e'°'n Figure LU 11 e¢e ]v,snro�m.9 a1 r�r.><t.yet. Ma 4W 45n.S,cad.uE ODGn,F�,e D[) "Oa b STATISTICAL AREAS J6• L4 mlPl, GP10t5�f1. pAZ01 Y110 al/l llml9 Chu�le lvd+rse bnpr�Von lrom Grnerr Conrraml ! ORia ICOGlm man lm W¢aaa lRl vnd •rrtM If MomYy hb. a ro Ybw a1.000 giure iee[ kr i , 11e91denSld! Nelphbdrflooas RanaenoY Gre Fvalry la me Eldedr mrea a, /- tMnae A¢twtlmum Ylwnbk derNopn�enr /./ - '«uM k.yaeerya petneMW ldt l"ZI CPlOIN-0Op PAxaoi_7t3 O1R]Jltlll J A 5 '��p��1� Q - siryy.Vr.I R9yya�W apccMa M¢Lp iI.SN=a,RM fen [M cnana�onulr /.� lY1L`SSG 1Y1�i1n No_7_t fa.,1---RRm¢n. T.-....--..-_". 11LLf1+It6 Two-llnu R.Y4na! 11` i ,•� IUWvbVnd R¢xrderial ® • O -pig � M�lepl.Uni R¢vbrml puch.a O P� �� C—Lal olerkb and C« d� 4+. f raev^b¢rnooa Catnnwnwl � , � � caraaormmm.rcm IA �e' d�t�r� %r � - ® R¢envdvnN vnd Matbw e'e / �Cemm.eeol yyp / /� m - " im Rpvat Comm.rwl / \"n Nc'i� ,l � _ ]Gernnl cnmmncnlprc• \ s ONO .. 17•#2� �austnal olnnns Q% Airport Ruppodln9 Olstdcts / J 5 �Z`i:� ` _ / •o - nepat 0rnr�rrd s�pw�ry Usev 1 ryyrrl!rr�� �`fi \'\� � \ MI ed alae paSdRs M rd llm gor¢onsl R.gAd r ftwk, Sem1�bllc and InvdtVllooal lfj �" �prn,nlM ,F�') � - n Tlarurw.ru setm.rM.a Lards n. 2V } ♦ ��� !r I�¢ C.YMNnvpo Rs¢.ch Va - - �•!% steas�ryel Ma M LEI Bowrds "_ �._".«-..^-_—•....�—..�t�^ ti`\ r`y .� ,_�.: r � ��• laM Vv DNbvewrLw w \� •'�\ i� { . Raf¢rmanmuMteae I _ UP �aovnnr IJme lutl Uu_ArporLArm_Rpr..}.UI I frtwdmertt - 22-27 EXHIBIT "D" Land Use Element Figure LU22 — Airport 22-28 0 CO.G QJh MU-H2 P� U *AO B: Mu-Hx M U-H 2 Ao /\➢ O CO-G � 1 MU-f{2 .. AO f CO m., m MU.H2 BRsr 'Lq •. C6 G U. 0 0< H h LAND USE POLICY ® Underlying Uses: Office, Hotel, Supporting Retail, ® Airport -Supporting Businesses Residential Village: Housing and Mixed -Use (with Guidelines for Design and Development) pR ELF 0 M U-H2 © Cr O PF MU.H2 Q O © Commercial and Office CITY of NEWPORT BEACH GENERALPLAN FIGURE LU22 AIRPORT AREA 0 Sub -Area Conceptual Development Plan Area Land Use Delineator Line �+ Highway .Refer to anomaly table �co 0 250 soo +.000 5a�a f4y al N�wcoR BlR��rW EIPIWana9n PNO'PCTauueEH. ­1, E[P 22-29 EXHIBIT "E" Land Use Element Figure LU23 — Airport Area Residential Villages Illustrative Concept Diagram 22-30 CITY of NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN Figure LU23 AIRPORT AREA RESIDENTIAL VILLAGES ILLUSTRATIVE CONCEPT DIAGRAM Legend OPPORTUNITY SITES PROPOSED OPEN SPACES IMPROVED RESIDENTIAL STREETS —d—'=--' PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL STREET PROPOSED PEULSTRIAN WAYS CONCEPTUAL PLAN REQUIRED I 1 {'!16 -1. 6-1 1 - -- I S--r ROMA gelg, Ur-p PROJECT NUMBER'. 10579-01 ❑ate'. 06ICT136 Document Name: Land_Use_Airport_Area_Figure_LU23_Amendment ESP 22-31 EXHIBIT "F" Noise Element Figures N4 — Future Noise Contours 22-32 CITY of NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL?LAN Figure N4 FUTURE NOISE CONTOURS Roadway Noise Contours 70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL JWA Noise Contours 70 CNEL 05 CNEL 00 CNEL ----- City Boundary John Wayne Airport b ns xrc�eW sbq p+. y-.he a-+�Milti o nw �Ac NJF M 10 Nal E-1P 22-33 EXHIBIT "G" Noise Element Figures N5 — Future Noise Contours 22-34 CITY of NEWPORT BEACH GENERALPLAN Figure N5 FUTURE NOISE CONTOURS Roadway Noise Contours 70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL JWA Noise Contours O 70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL ----^ Gdy Boundary John Wayne Airport r� n.-•v r.w 22-35 EXHIBIT "H" CEQA — Findings of Consistency The California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (California Public Resources Code §§21000 et seq.); the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations §§15000 et seq.); and the rules, regulations, and procedures for implementing CEQA as set forth by the City of Newport Beach ("City") provide guidance regarding when additional environmental review is required. Pursuant to the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, Newport Beach is the Lead Agency charged with the responsibility of deciding whether to approve the Amendments to Newport Beach General Plan Land Use and Noise Elements, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC"), Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60) (Amendments) to accommodate housing units identified by the certified 2021-2029 Sixth Cycle General Plan Housing Element ("6th Cycle Housing Element"). The provisions of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 are applicable to the Amendments. The Amendments are not subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 because the Amendments do not change the underlying land use or zoning designations of any specific parcels, including parcels within the Airport Area or within the updated noise contours; and would not result in new significant impacts or a substantial more adverse impact than addressed in John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report No. 617 (State Clearinghouse No. 2001111135) (EIR No. 617). The Amendments are also exempt because they fall within the scope of analysis contained within the previously certified EIR No. 617, prepared for the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement, to which the City is a party. CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 provides, in relevant part: (a) CEQA mandates that projects which are consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified shall not require additional environmental review, except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project -specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site. This streamlines the review of such projects and reduces the need to prepare repetitive environmental studies. (b) In approving a project meeting the requirements of this section, a public agency shall limit its examination of environmental effects to those which the agency determines, in an initial study or other analysis- (1) Are peculiar to the projector the parcel on which the project would be located, (2) Were not analyzed as significant effects in a prior EIR on the zoning action, general plan, or community plan, with which the project is consistent, 22-36 (3) Are potentially significant off -site impacts and cumulative impacts which were not discussed in the prior EIR prepared for the general plan, community plan or zoning action, or (4) Are previously identified significant effects which, as a result of substantial new information which was not known at the time the EIR was certified, are determined to have a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the prior EIR. (c) If an impact is not peculiar to the parcel or to the project, has been addressed as a significant effect in the prior EIR, or can be substantially mitigated by the imposition of uniformly applied development policies or standards, as contemplated by subdivision (e) below, then an additional EIR need not be prepared for the project solely on the basis of that impact. (d) This section shall apply only to projects which meet the following conditions: (1) The project is consistent with: (A) A community plan adopted as part of a general plan, (B) A zoning action which zoned or designated the parcel on which the project would be located to accommodate a particular density of development, or (C) A general plan of a local agency, and (2) An EIR was certified by the lead agency for the zoning action, the community plan, or the general plan. As part of its decision -making process, the City is required to review and consider whether the Amendments would create new significant impacts or significant impacts that would be substantially more severe than those disclosed in the John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report No. 617 (State Clearinghouse No. 2001111135) (EIR No. 617). Additional CEQA review is only triggered if the Amendments create new significant impacts or impacts that are more severe than those disclosed in EIR No. 617 such that major revisions to the EIR would be required. The Amendments provide for updated noise contours as established in EIR No. 617 and revisions to General Plan policies, Title 20 of NBMC, Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60) to allow for consistency between the certified 6th Cycle Housing Element and the Newport Beach General Plan and NBMC as it applies to future housing uses near John Wayne Airport. The Amendments are proposed to ensure consistency pursuant to the State Planning and Zoning Law and the City's compliance with its RHNA allocation. 22-37 As explained below, none of the Amendments revise the land use designation, density or development standards applicable to residential or non-residential development in the Airport Area. The Amendments do not grant any development entitlements or authorize development. Rather, the purpose of the Housing Element Noise Update is to advance the policies and goals of the 6th Cycle Housing Element by removing the barrier in multiple General Plan and zoning policies that prohibit residential development within the 1985 65 dBA CNEL. The Amendments, therefore, will not result in development of greater intensity than is allowed under the 2006 General Plan and Newport Airport Village Planned Community, as amended. Although the City's 2006 General Plan approved a maximum of 2,200 residential units in the Airport Area at a maximum density of 50 dwelling units per net acre (du/net acre), the General Plan Program EIR evaluated 4,300 residential units in the Airport Area. California courts have upheld reliance on this exemption for programmatic planning decisions. See, e.g., Lucas v. City of Pomona, 92 Cal.App.5th 508 (2023) (city properly relied on CEQA Guidelines section 15183 when approving a zoning overlay district allowing commercial cannabis activities on specific parcels located in certain areas within the City; court noting that "the Project merely imposes an overlay use on existing zoning; it does not guarantee anyone the automatic right to establish a cannabis -related business, but rather, provides the option to apply for a cannabis business permit. In that sense, the Amendments does not cause project -specific effects 'peculiar' to it.") Because no additional CEQA review is required, the City is not required to analyze additional mitigation measures for the Housing Element Noise Update at this time. Furthermore, as noted above, the Housing Element Noise Update requires (as a local regulatory requirement, not CEQA mitigation measure) residential projects located within the 65 dBA CNEL contour line to include appropriate in -door sound attenuation methods. The Noise Chapter of EIR No. 617 explained how the dBA CNEL noise contours have reduced in size compared to the 1985 Airport Environs Land Use Plan ("AELUP") Master Plan CNEL noise contours, in which the City's General Plan policies and maps are based on. The 1985 Master Plan noise contours are considerably larger than the existing noise contours presented previously. This is largely due to a quieter fleet of existing commercial aircraft and a dramatic reduction in the number of generation aviation operations. The noise contours in EIR No. 617 are based on more contemporary noise modeling programs, as the EIR explained that "one of the most important factors in generating accurate noise contours is the collection of accurate operational data". Airport noise contours generated in this noise study using the INM Version 7.Od which was released for use in May 2013, and is the state - of -art in airport noise modeling. As such, the City proposes to update the Noise Element to include these noise contours, which in part, modify where residential uses could occur outside of the 65 CNEL contour in the Airport Area. Based on these updated noise contours, certain Housing Opportunity Sites will now be outside of the 65 CNEL contour while others will be within the 65 CNEL contour. However, the Amendments will not result in development of greater intensity than is allowed under the 2006 General Plan and Newport Airport Village Planned Community, as amended. Residential uses can be allowed in the Airport Area on parcels that are wholly or 22-38 partially outside the 65dBA CNEL contour as denoted in Figure N5 of the Noise Element. The JWA noise contours depicted in Figure N5 as proposed are the noise contours from EIR No. 617. Residential uses may be approved in these areas provided interior living areas are protected from excessive noise by appropriate construction techniques that reduce the interior noise to 45 dBA CNEL, consistent with state law. Parcels that are wholly within the 65 dB CNEL contour shown in Figure N5 (e.g., those identified as experiencing noise levels above 65 dB CNEL) are unsuitable for residential development unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the site(s) wholly within the 65-70 dB CNEL contours are needed for the City to satisfy its 6th Cycle RHNA mandate. The changes would not allow for more development than assumed in the growth assumptions in the General Plan nor would it impact the City's RHNA obligations. To the extent new parcels are able to be developed in the future for residential uses, by nature of no longer being located within areas identified as experiencing 65 dB CNEL or greater, those parcels must be part of a specific proposed project for consideration and processing by the City for approval. Future housing development would be subject to compliance with the established regulatory framework, namely federal, State, regional, and local (including General Plan policies, NBMC standards, and Standard Conditions of Approval). While by -right housing projects may be exempt from CEQA, all future residential uses affected by the Amendments would continue to be subject to further development review, which can include technical supporting reports. The Amendments are also exempt because they fall within the scope of analysis contained within EIR No. 617, prepared and certified by the County for the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment, to which the City is a party. EIR No. 617, fully analyzed impacts on sensitive receptors (including residential uses) in adopting the Settlement Agreement Amendment, including the updated CNEL contour boundaries associated therewith, using both the County and City's thresholds of significance. The City was a responsible agency for EIR No. 617, and co -signatory to the Settlement Agreement Amendment. EIR No. 617 concluded that the Settlement Agreement Amendment (and associated updated CNEL contours) would result in less - than -significant impacts related to noise increases at sensitive receptors, but a significant and unavoidable impact from increasing noise levels at exterior use areas of residences. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted. No lawsuits were filed challenging the adequacy of EIR No. 617. EIR No. 617 fully analyzed impacts on sensitive receptors (including residential uses) in adopting the Settlement Agreement Amendment, including the updated CNEL contour boundaries associated therewith. In April 2014, the County of Orange prepared a EIR in connection with the Airport Settlement Amendment (SHC No. 2001111135). The County Board of Supervisors certified the EIR on September 30, 2014. The County's approval of the Project would be contingent upon the City Council of Newport Beach and the governing boards of Stop Polluting Our Newport ("SPON") and Airport Working Group ("AWG") approving and executing the agreed upon amendment to the Settlement Agreement. The City was a responsible agency and the City Council relied on EIR No. 617 for CEQA purposes in approving the Settlement Agreement Amendment. A 22-39 Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted. No lawsuits were filed challenging EIR No. 617. EIR No. 617 analyzed potentially significant environmental effects of residential land uses in the 65 dB CNEL. Specifically, the noise and land use and planning chapters of EIR No. 617 quantified and analyzed noise and land use incompatibility impacts associated with existing residential uses (and noise receptors) in the 65 dBA CNEL. The cumulative impacts analyses in the 65 dB CNEL expressly reflected future planning trends, growth projections and specific projects located in the Airport Area in proximity to JWA. Noise EiR No. 617 provides an explanation as to why the 2014 dBA CNEL contours are smaller than the 1985 Master Plan CNEL contours. The EIR observed that "the Mater Plan noise contours are considerably larger than existing noise contours ... due to a quieter fleet of existing commercial aircraft and a dramatic reduction in the number of generation aviation operations ...."' The 2014 CNEL contours were also based on a newly adopted, "state- of-the-art" noise modeling program.2 Overall, the EIR found that the 65 dBA CNEL contour area was 114% smaller than the analog from the 1985 Master Plan. • 60 and 65 CNEL contour: Master Plan contours are 114 percent larger than the Existing Condition contours. As allowed by the Master Plan, the area outside the Airport boundaries that would be exposed to noise levels in the 60 to 65 dB CNEL range is 125 percent larger than the currently exposed area. • 65 and 70 CNEL contour: Master Plan contours are almost 50 percent larger than the Existing Condition contours. As allowed by the Master Plan, the area outside the Airport boundaries that would be exposed to the 65 to 70 dB CNEL noise levels is 80 percent larger than the currently exposed area. • 70+ CNEL contour: Master Plan contours are 80 percent larger than the Existing Condition contours. As allowed by the Master Plan, the area outside the Airport boundaries that would be exposed to noise levels that exceed 70 dB CNEL is 311 percent larger than the currently exposed area. EIR No. 617 then quantified the number of sensitive receptors (including residential uses) within the updated 65 dba CNEL contour area, compared those to those covered under the now -outdated 1985 CNEL contours. In doing so, the EIR noted that the area surrounding the Airport is generally urban in character. Surrounding uses include industrial, commercial, and residential uses. The residential area is predominately south and southwest of the Airport. (Id. at 2-12). Specifically, EIR No. 617's Noise Technical Report, prepared by Landrum and Brown,3 quantified the number of sensitive receptors (including residential units) that would be impacted by the Project and its utilization of the 1 2014 EIR at 4.6-34. 2 Id. at 4.6-31. Airport noise contours were generated using the INM Version 7.0d. The latest version, INM Version 7.0d, was released for use in May 2013 and is the state-of-the-art in airport noise modeling. 3https://www.newportbeaclica govipin CEOA REV1EWIJohn%20Wavne %�'20AircloW'.20DEER1i :C" ''0=5A"% _?OAppendices°'o2}to°ib20 FEIR%206171Appendix%20C%20-%o20Noise%20Analysis%620Technica1%20Rep ort pdf 22-40 updated CNEL contours.4 Table 22 of the Noise Technical Report compared the number of residential units within both the 1985 and 2014 65 dBA CNEL contours: • 70 CNEL contour: 379 acres/0.59 square mile, including 1 place of worship (the Orange Coast Free Methodist Church), but no other noise -sensitive land uses. 65 to 70 CNEL contour: 561 acres/0.88 square mile, including 96 residences (of which 49 are sound insulated) and 2 places of worship (Islamic Educational Center of Orange County and Berean Community Church), but no other noise -sensitive land uses. • 60 to 65 CNEL contour: 1,313 acres/2.05 square miles, including 932 residences (of which 348 are sound insulated), 5 places of worship, and 4 schools, as listed below: Using the City's thresholds of significance, E1R No. 617 ultimately concluded that the Project would not result in noise increases at sensitive receptors where existing exposure is 65 CNEL or above, between 60 and 65 CNEL, or 45 and 60 CNEL. However, the EIR determined that the Project would generate aircraft noise that would increase noise levels at exterior use areas of residences or schools to noise levels of 65 CNEL or above or interior areas of residences or schools to noise levels of 45 CNEL. Specifically, the Project would have a significant exterior noise impact on 31 residences in Phase 1, 62 residences in Phase 2, and 77 residences in Phase 3. The Proposed Project would have a potentially significant interior noise impact on 21 residences in Phase 1, 39 residences in Phase 2, and 43 residences and one place of worship in Phase 3. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted to cover this significant and unavoidable impact, which was not subject to legal challenge (nor was EIR No. 617). Land Use and Planning EIR No. 617's land use and planning chapter acknowledged that JWA is located in an urbanized area. The surrounding land uses for areas in the City that are adjacent to JWA included the same land uses that exist today, including but not limited to, AO (Office Airport), CO-G (General Commercial Office), CG General Commercial, MU-H2 (Mixed Use Horizontal). (EIR at 4.5-17). As noted above, the Noise Analysis Technical Report analyzed land uses within the 2014 CNEL contours, to determine "the amount of area and sensitive receptors" in such contours. (See directly above.) EIR No. 617 observed that, "as the 65 CNEL contour expands beyond the existing contour and includes additional residences this would be a significant impact." (EIR at 4.5-32). The EiR ultimately concluded that, with all phases of the Proposed Project, there would be a significant, unavoidable land use and land use impact due to an increase in the number of noise -sensitive uses exposed to noise levels in excess of the 65 CNEL exterior noise standard. There are no feasible mitigation measures for exterior noise levels. implementation of Mitigation Measure LU-1 would potentially reduce impacts associated with excess interior noise levels to less than significant levels. However, until interior noise measurements are taken, it cannot be determined if all the noise sensitive uses with interior noise levels in excess of 45 CNEL would qualify for sound attenuation based on FAA criteria. Given the uncertainty that this measure is feasible to adequately reduce interior noise levels at all potentially impacted residences, the impact was determined to See, e.g., 2014 EIR Table 4.6-18 (at p. 4.8-69); 22-41 be significant and unavoidable. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted to cover this significant and unavoidable impact, which was not subject to legal challenge (nor was EIR No. 617). Cumulative Impacts Chapter 5.0 (Cumulative Impacts) of EIR No. 617 considered existing and future residential uses when analyzing impacts of the Settlement Agreement Amendment and 2014 CNEL lines. For example, the cumulative impacts analysis considered countywide growth and development forecasts based on input from the County of Orange and the cities located in the County. These projections reflect adopted land uses and future growth scenarios based on local land use policies. (EIR at 5-3). The EIR explained: "The OCP-2010 Modified projections provide forecasts to the year 2035 and take into account the projected growth Orange County in its entirety. OCP-2010 Modified projections are particularly useful in evaluating the cumulative impacts associated with traffic, air quality, greenhouse gas ("GHG") emissions, and noise because they provide growth assumptions consistent with the local general plans that have been developed with a long-range horizon year. This allows the cumulative analysis to go beyond just a listing of projects, which would not adequately reflect conditions at Project buildout." (Id.) Further, Section 5.2.2 of the EIR contains a list of reasonably foreseeable probable future projects, some of which are located in the Airport Area of the City. See, e.g., Table 5-2 (including, among others, Koll Mixed Use Development, MacArthur at Dolphin -Striker Way, Newport Business Uptown Newport Mixed Use Development, and the previously considered Land Use Element Update). The cumulative impacts analysis expressly found that "[w]hen compared to existing conditions, the 0 Project and all the alternatives would extend the 65 CNEL contour into areas designed for mixed -use development in the City of Newport Beach's Airport Area. The City of Newport Beach General Plan's Noise Element noise/land use compatibility matrix (see Table N2 in the Noise Element, page 12-23) lists mixed use land uses within the 65 CNEL contour as "normally incompatible; "...If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must be made and noise insulation features must be included in the design." (EIR at 5-37). "Though design plans for the development projects identified as part of the Newport Beach LUE have not been prepared, it is reasonable to assume that the City of Newport Beach would evaluate each of the cumulative projects for policy consistency through the entitlement process. Therefore, the Project would not contribute to any cumulative impacts associated with plan or policy inconsistency." (EIR at 5-39). No new information that was not known at the time the General Plan and EIR No. 617 were prepared is now available that demonstrates that the Amendments will result in a new or increased significant impact. The Amendments would not cause growth beyond that accommodated by the General Plan. The Amendments do not introduce new land use designations or otherwise alter general land use patterns or development standards. 22-42 Therefore, the findings of previously certified EIR No. 617 are applicable to the Amendments. Implementation of the Amendments would not substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts, including but not limited to air emissions and greenhouse gas emissions. Although the noise contours would be updated, the requirements for compliance with noise standards would not change. Finally, overriding ALUC and adoption of the Amendments does not constitute piecemealing. Additional environmental review for the Housing Element Noise Update is not needed for two independent reasons: (i) the update is exempt under CEQA Guidelines section 15183, and (ii) it is fully within the scope of the 2014 Settlement Agreement Amendment No. 617 and the 2014 CNEL contours analyzed therein. For this first determination, a lead agency's finding that a particular proposed project comes within one of the exempt classes necessarily includes an implied finding that the project has no significant effect on the environment." (Davidon Homes v. City of San Jose (1997) 54 Cal.App.4th 106.) If an exemption applies, the project is excused from CEQA's environmental review, which occurs only if an agency determines the project is not exempt from CEQA. (Union of Medical Marijuana Patients, Inc. v. City of San Diego (2019) 7 Cal.5th 1171, 1186, ["Environmental review is required under CEQA only if a public agency concludes that a proposed activity is a project and does not qualify for an exemption."].) California courts have held that improper piecemealing does not occur when "projects have different proponents, serve different purposes, or can be implemented independently." Different projects may properly undergo separate environmental review (i.e., no piecemealing) when the projects can be implemented independently. A project may also be reviewed without reference to potential future projects when it has "significant independent or local utility" and would be implemented with or without approval of the future project, even if the two are related in some other respects. See, e.g., Aptos Council v. Cnty. of Santa Cruz, 10 Cal.App.5th 266, 282 (2017). Here, the Housing Element Noise Update functions independently and does not rely on any future planning decisions or project -level approvals. The Housing Element Noise Update involves removing an inherent barrier based on General Plan policies and zoning regulations that prohibit residential development within the 1985 65 dBA CNEL. The Housing Element Noise Update is a necessary, isolated planning action to allow the City to implement the Housing Element. C'.nnrh minn Thus, because EIR No. 617 analyzed impacts associated with the updated CNEL noise contours, the City's adoption of the updated CNEL noise contours within its own internal policies is fully within the scope of EIR No. 617, and the 2006 General Plan, as amended. The Amendments would not result in any new significant environmental effects that are substantially different from those identified in EIR No. 617 nor would it substantially increase the severity of significant effects previously identified in EIR No. 617. Therefore, based on the provisions of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, no additional CEQA documentation is required. 22-43 ATTACHMENT B ORDINANCE NO. 2023-20 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO TITLE 20 (PLANNING AND ZONING) OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO NOISE IN THE AIRPORT AREA NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT THE 6th CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT (PA2022-0201) WHEREAS, Section 200 of the City of Newport Beach ("City") Charter vests the City Council with the authority to make and enforce all laws, rules, and regulations with respect to municipal affairs subject only to the restrictions and limitations contained in the Charter and the State Constitution, and the power to exercise, or act pursuant to any and all rights, powers, and privileges, or procedures granted or prescribed by any law of the State of California; WHEREAS, in January 2019, the City Council initiated a comprehensive update of the Newport Beach General Plan, however, due to the Regional Housing Needs Assessment ("RHNA") allocation of 4,845 new housing units to plan for the 2021-2029 housing period, the City Council directed City staff to focus on the Housing Element, Land Use Element, and Circulation Element; WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the 6th Cycle Housing Element covering the period 2021-2029 planning period ("6th Cycle Housing Element") on September 13, 2022, and it was certified by the State Department of Housing and Community Development on October 5, 2022; WHEREAS, the 6th Cycle Housing Element, including Appendix B, has been subject to extensive public participation in accordance with Government Code Section 65351 including thirteen community workshops, fourteen Housing Element Update Advisory Committee ("HEUAC") meetings, review of the Housing Element by the Planning Commission, and six duly noticed City Council study sessions; WHEREAS, additionally, the HEUAC formed five different subcommittees to thoroughly review and identify all feasible sites for potential redevelopment as residential in the future and those sites are captured in Appendix B (Adequate Sites Analysis), which demonstrates the City's capacity to meet the RHNA allocation; 22-44 Ordinance No. 2023- Page 2 of 8 WHEREAS, the 6th Cycle Housing Element identifies five focus areas where future housing opportunities will be created through the adoption of housing opportunity overlays or other rezone strategies to establish the ability to develop additional housing to meet the RHNA; WHEREAS, the increase in units above the minimum RHNA allocation is in response to the unusually high percentage of below market rate units the RHNA mandates coupled with the significant challenges to planning, financing, and constructing workforce housing with higher -than -average land costs; WHEREAS, the entire Airport Area Environs is proximate to John Wayne Airport and subject to the John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan ("AELUP"); WHEREAS, forty-eight housing sites identified in the focus area are within or bisected by the 65 weighted decibel ("dBA") community noise equivalent level ("CNEL") noise contour identified in the AELUP; WHEREAS, the following amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element of the General Plan, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC"), Newport Place Planned Community Development Plan (PC- 11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community Development Plan (PC-60) are necessary to allow residential use, including mixed -use residential, on housing opportunity sites that are wholly or partially located outside the 65 dBA: Land Use Element: • Policy LU6.15.3 (Airport Compatibility), • Figure LU11 — Statistical Areas J6, L4, • Figure LU22 —Airport, and • Figure LU23 - Airport Area Residential Villages Illustrative Concept Diagram (removal of 65 CNEL noise contour line); Noise Element: • Policy N 1.2 (Noise Exposure Verification for New Development), • Policy N1.5.A (Airport Area Infill Amendments (new policy), • Policy N 2.2 (Design of Sensitive Land Uses), • Policy N 3.2 (Residential Development), • Figure N4 - Future Noise Contours, and • Figure N5 — Future Noise Contours; 22-45 Ordinance No. 2023- Page 3 of 8 Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC: • Section 20.30.080(F) (Noise -Airport Environs Land Use Plan); Planned Communities: • Newport Place Planned Community Development Plan (PC-11) — Part III. Residential Overlay Zone, Section V.D.1 (Airport Noise Compatibility), and • Newport Airport Village Planned Community Development Plan (PC-60) — Section I.D (Purpose and Objective) & Section II.B.2 (Prohibited Uses); WHEREAS, the Amendments change noise compatibility policies and regulations and do not change the existing underlying land use categories or zoning designations of any property; WHEREAS, the Amendments do not add residential unit capacity to the Land Use Element, and therefore, the General Plan amendments included in the Amendments do not require a vote of the electorate pursuant to Charter Section 423; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on August 3, 2023, in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act") and Chapter 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC2022-015, unanimously (4 ayes and 3 recusals), recommending the City Council approve the Amendments; WHEREAS, Section 21676(b) of the California Public Utilities Code ("CPUC") required the City to refer the Amendments to the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission ("ALUC") for a determination that the Amendments are consistent with the AELUP; WHEREAS, on August 17, 2023, ALUC determined the Amendments were inconsistent with the AELUP; 22-46 Ordinance No. 2023- Page 4 of 8 WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 21670 and 21676 of CPUC, the City Council may, after a public hearing, propose to overrule ALUC with a two-thirds vote, if it makes specific findings that the Amendments are consistent with the purpose of Section 21670 of the CPUC to protect the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on September 12, 2023, in the City Council Chambers, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with CPUC Section 21676(b) and the Ralph M. Brown Act. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the hearing, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2023-52 by a unanimous vote (5 ayes, 1 recused, 1 absent), to notify ALUC and the State Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Program ("Aeronautics Program") of the City's intent to override ALUC's inconsistency finding; WHEREAS, notice of the City's intent to override the ALUC inconsistency determination, along with Resolution No. 2023-52 was sent via certified mail and emailed to ALUC and Aeronautics Program on September 13, 2023; WHEREAS, the City received timely comments in response to the notice of the City's intent to override the ALUC inconsistency determination from John Wayne Airport, ALUC, and the Aeronautics Program in accordance with CPUC Section 21676; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on November 14, 2023, in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, Chapter 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC, and CPUC Section 21676(b). Evidence both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach ordains as follows: 22-4 7 Ordinance No. 2023- Page 5 of 8 Section 1: The City Council hereby approves an amendment to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC amendment, as set forth in Exhibit "A", which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference and finds that an amendment to Title 20 is legislative act. Neither Chapter 20.66 (Planning and Zoning, Amendments) of Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of NBMC, or Article 2 (Adoption of Regulations) of Chapter 4 (Zoning Regulations) of Division 1 (Planning and Zoning) of Title 7 (Planning and Land Use) of the California Government Code set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of such amendments. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the amendment to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC is consistent with the following City of Newport Beach Housing Element Policies and Policy Actions: Findings: 1. Housing Element Policy 4.2. Enable construction of new housing units sufficient to meet City qualified goals by identifying adequate sites for their construction. 2. Policy Action 4J (Airport Environs Sub Area Environmental Constraints). Policy Action 4J requires the City to take the following actions to address potential environmental constraints in the Airport Environs Sub Area and ensure continued feasibility of sites, particularly for lower -income RHNA: a. Require new residential development projects in the Airport Environs Sub Area provide noise studies and acoustical analyses to ensure designs include proper sound attenuation; b. Require new residential development projects in the Airport Environs Sub Area to explore advanced air filtration systems for buildings to promote cleaner air; C. Encourage on -site indoor amenities, such as fitness facilities or recreation and entertainment facilities; and d. Continue to implement park dedication requirements consistent with the City's Park Dedication ordinance and Land Use Element Policy LU 6.15.13 (Neighborhood Parks —Standards) and Policy LU 6.15.16 (On -Site Recreation and Open Space) to ensure adequate recreational space to ensure at least 8- percent of a project's gross land area (exclusive of existing rights -of -way) of the first phase for any development in each neighborhood or '/2 acre, whichever is greater, is developed as a neighborhood park, unless waived through Density Bonus Law. 22-48 Ordinance No. 2023- Page 6 of 8 Facts in Support of Findings: The City has taken actions to address potential environmental constraints in the Airport Area and ensure continued feasibility of sites, particularly for lower -income RHNA by providing the following uniform and concise criteria: a. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for such development, a noise study shall be prepared by a City -approved qualified acoustical consultant and submitted to the Community Development Director for approval; b. All new residential structures or the residential units within a mixed -use development shall be attenuated to provide an interior noise level of 45 dBA CNEL or less; C. The design of the residential portions of mixed -use projects and residential developments shall have adequate noise attenuation between adjacent uses and units (common floor/ceilings) in accordance with the California Building Code; d. New mixed -use developments shall incorporate designs with loading areas, parking lots, driveways, trash enclosures, mechanical equipment, and other noise sources away from the residential portion of the development; e. Use of walls, berms, interior noise insulation, double paned windows, advance insulation systems, or other noise mitigation measures, as deemed appropriate shall be incorporated in the design of new residential to bring interior sound attenuation to 45 dBA CNEL or less; f. Residential uses shall be indoor -oriented to reduce noise impingement on outdoor living areas; g. On -site indoor amenities, such as fitness facilities or recreation and entertainment facilities shall be encouraged; and h. Advanced air filtration systems for buildings shall be considered to promote cleaner air. Lastly, all new housing opportunity sites are located wholly or partially outside the updated 65 dBA noise contour area. By requiring conditions of approval identified in amendment to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of NBMC, the City has taken actions to address potential environmental constraints in the Airport Area and ensure continued feasibility of sites, particularly for lower -income RHNA. Section 2: The recitals provided in this ordinance are true and correct and are incorporated into the substantive portion of this ordinance. 22-49 Ordinance No. 2023- Page 7 of 8 Section 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance 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 ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance 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: The City Council finds the action to override the ALUC's August 17, 2023, determination and the approval of the Amendments are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 because they do not change the underlying land use or zoning designations of any specific parcels, including parcels within the Airport Area or within the updated noise contours based upon the findings set forth in Exhibit "B," which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Section 5: The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the ordinance, or a summary thereof, to be published pursuant to City Charter Section 414. This ordinance shall be effective thirty (30) calendar days after its adoption. 22-50 Ordinance No. 2023- Page 8 of 8 This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held on the 14th day of November, 2023, and adopted on the 28th day of November, 2023, by the following vote, to -wit: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: NOAH BLOM, MAYOR ATTEST: LEILANI I. BROWN, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AARON 0/*KARP, CIT? ATTORNEY Attachment(s): Exhibit A - Amendment to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) Exhibit B - CEQA Findings of Consistency 22-51 EXHIBIT "A" Amendment to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code Amend Section 20.30.080.E (Neise-AirpQTE,^RiFORS L,and Use RaR Residential Use Proximate to John Wayne Airport) of Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code to read as follows: F. Residential Use Proximate to John Wayne Airport F=RRs- Land Use Tlan. Residential uses, including mixed -use residential, shall be allowed on parcels or sites wholly or partially outside the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL noise contour as shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan, as identified in the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 617) and consistent with Title 21 of the California Code of Regulations, subject to the following conditions that apply to all residential projects within the John Wayne Airport 60 dBA CNEL or higher CNEL noise as shown in Figures N4 and N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan: 9) Prior to the issuance of any building permits for such development, a noise study shall be prepared by a City -approved qualified acoustical consultant and submitted to the Community Development Director for approval; 2) All new residential structures or the residential units within a mixed -use development shall be attenuated to provide an interior noise level of 45 dBA CNEL or less; 3) The design of the residential portions of mixed -use projects and residential developments shall have adequate noise attenuation between adjacent uses and units (common floor/ceilings) in accordance with the California Building Code; 4) New mixed -use developments shall incorporate designs with loading areas, parking lots, driveways, trash enclosures, mechanical equipment, and other noise sources away from the residential portion of the development; 5) Use of walls, berms, interior noise insulation, double paned windows, advance insulation systems, or other noise mitigation measures, as deemed appropriate shall be incorporated in the design of new residential to bring interior sound attenuation to 45 dBA CNEL or less; 6) Residential uses shall be indoor -oriented to reduce noise impingement on outdoor living areas; 7) On -site indoor amenities, such as fitness facilities or recreation and entertainment facilities shall be encouraged; and 8) Advanced air filtration systems for buildings shall be considered to promote cleaner air. 22-52 9) Residential development shall be limited to parcels or sites wholly or partially outside the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the parcels or sites wholly within such contour area are needed for the City to satisfy its Wh Cycle RHNA mandate. Non-residential uses are encouraged on parcels or sites located wholly within the 65 dBA CNEL contour area. 22-53 EXHIBIT "B" CEQA Findings of Consistency The California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (California Public Resources Code §§21000 et seq.); the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations §§15000 et seq.); and the rules, regulations, and procedures for implementing CEQA as set forth by the City of Newport Beach ("City") provide guidance regarding when additional environmental review is required. Pursuant to the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, Newport Beach is the Lead Agency charged with the responsibility of deciding whether to approve the Amendments to Newport Beach General Plan Land Use and Noise Elements, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC"), Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60) (Amendments) to accommodate housing units identified by the certified 2021-2029 Sixth Cycle General Plan Housing Element ("6th Cycle Housing Element"). The provisions of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 are applicable to the Amendments. The Amendments are not subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 because the Amendments do not change the underlying land use or zoning designations of any specific parcels, including parcels within the Airport Area or within the updated noise contours; and would not result in new significant impacts or a substantial more adverse impact than addressed in John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report No. 617 (State Clearinghouse No. 2001111135) (EIR No. 617). The Amendments are also exempt because they fall within the scope of analysis contained within the previously certified EIR No. 617, prepared for the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement, to which the City is a party. CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 provides, in relevant part: (a) CEQA mandates that projects which are consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified shall not require additional environmental review, except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project -specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site. This streamlines the review of such projects and reduces the need to prepare repetitive environmental studies. (b) In approving a project meeting the requirements of this section, a public agency shall limit its examination of environmental effects to those which the agency determines, in an initial study or other analysis: (1) Are peculiar to the projector the parcel on which the project would be located, (2) Were not analyzed as significant effects in a prior EIR on the zoning action, general plan, or community plan, with which the project is consistent, 22-54 (3) Are potentially significant off -site impacts and cumulative impacts which were not discussed in the prior EIR prepared for the general plan, community plan or zoning action, or (4) Are previously identified significant effects which, as a result of substantial new information which was not known at the time the EIR was certified, are determined to have a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the prior EIR. (c) If an impact is not peculiar to the parcel or to the project, has been addressed as a significant effect in the prior EIR, or can be substantially mitigated by the imposition of uniformly applied development policies or standards, as contemplated by subdivision (e) below, then an additional EIR need not be prepared for the project solely on the basis of that impact. (d) This section shall apply only to projects which meet the following conditions: (1) The project is consistent with: (A) A community plan adopted as part of a general plan, (B) A zoning action which zoned or designated the parcel on which the project would be located to accommodate a particular density of development, or (C) A general plan of a local agency, and (2) An EIR was certified by the lead agency for the zoning action, the community plan, or the general plan. As part of its decision -making process, the City is required to review and consider whether the Amendments would create new significant impacts or significant impacts that would be substantially more severe than those disclosed in the John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report No. 617 (State Clearinghouse No. 2001111135) (EIR No. 617). Additional CEQA review is only triggered if the Amendments create new significant impacts or impacts that are more severe than those disclosed in EIR No. 617 such that major revisions to the EIR would be required. The Amendments provide for updated noise contours as established in EIR No. 617 and revisions to General Plan policies, Title 20 of NBMC, Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60) to allow for consistency between the certified 6th Cycle Housing Element and the Newport Beach General Plan and NBMC as it applies to future housing uses near John Wayne Airport. The Amendments are proposed to ensure consistency pursuant to the State Planning and Zoning Law and the City's compliance with its RHNA allocation. 22-55 As explained below, none of the Amendments revise the land use designation, density or development standards applicable to residential or non-residential development in the Airport Area. The Amendments do not grant any development entitlements or authorize development. Rather, the purpose of the Housing Element Noise Update is to advance the policies and goals of the 6th Cycle Housing Element by removing the barrier in multiple General Plan and zoning policies that prohibit residential development within the 1985 65 dBA CNEL. The Amendments, therefore, will not result in development of greater intensity than is allowed under the 2006 General Plan and Newport Airport Village Planned Community, as amended. Although the City's 2006 General Plan approved a maximum of 2,200 residential units in the Airport Area at a maximum density of 50 dwelling units per net acre (du/net acre), the General Plan Program EIR evaluated 4,300 residential units in the Airport Area. California courts have upheld reliance on this exemption for programmatic planning decisions. See, e.g., Lucas v. City of Pomona, 92 Cal.App.5th 508 (2023) (city properly relied on CEQA Guidelines section 15183 when approving a zoning overlay district allowing commercial cannabis activities on specific parcels located in certain areas within the City; court noting that "the Project merely imposes an overlay use on existing zoning; it does not guarantee anyone the automatic right to establish a cannabis -related business, but rather, provides the option to apply for a cannabis business permit. In that sense, the Amendments does not cause project -specific effects 'peculiar' to it.") Because no additional CEQA review is required, the City is not required to analyze additional mitigation measures for the Housing Element Noise Update at this time. Furthermore, as noted above, the Housing Element Noise Update requires (as a local regulatory requirement, not CEQA mitigation measure) residential projects located within the 65 dBA CNEL contour line to include appropriate in -door sound attenuation methods. The Noise Chapter of EIR No. 617 explained how the dBA CNEL noise contours have reduced in size compared to the 1985 Airport Environs Land Use Plan ("AELUP") Master Plan CNEL noise contours, in which the City's General Plan policies and maps are based on. The 1985 Master Plan noise contours are considerably larger than the existing noise contours presented previously. This is largely due to a quieter fleet of existing commercial aircraft and a dramatic reduction in the number of generation aviation operations. The noise contours in EIR No. 617 are based on more contemporary noise modeling programs, as the EIR explained that "one of the most important factors in generating accurate noise contours is the collection of accurate operational data". Airport noise contours generated in this noise study using the INM Version 7.Od which was released for use in May 2013, and is the state - of -art in airport noise modeling. As such, the City proposes to update the Noise Element to include these noise contours, which in part, modify where residential uses could occur outside of the 65 CNEL contour in the Airport Area. Based on these updated noise contours, certain Housing Opportunity Sites will now be outside of the 65 CNEL contour while others will be within the 65 CNEL contour. However, the Amendments will not result in development of greater intensity than is allowed under the 2006 General Plan and Newport Airport Village Planned Community, as amended. Residential uses can be allowed in the Airport Area on parcels that are wholly or 22-56 partially outside the 65dBA CNEL contour as denoted in Figure N5 of the Noise Element. The JWA noise contours depicted in Figure N5 as proposed are the noise contours from EIR No. 617. Residential uses may be approved in these areas provided interior living areas are protected from excessive noise by appropriate construction techniques that reduce the interior noise to 45 dBA CNEL, consistent with state law. Parcels that are wholly within the 65 dB CNEL contour shown in Figure N5 (e.g., those identified as experiencing noise levels above 65 dB CNEL) are unsuitable for residential development unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the site(s) wholly within the 65-70 dB CNEL contours are needed for the City to satisfy its 6th Cycle RHNA mandate. The changes would not allow for more development than assumed in the growth assumptions in the General Plan nor would it impact the City's RHNA obligations. To the extent new parcels are able to be developed in the future for residential uses, by nature of no longer being located within areas identified as experiencing 65 dB CNEL or greater, those parcels must be part of a specific proposed project for consideration and processing by the City for approval. Future housing development would be subject to compliance with the established regulatory framework, namely federal, State, regional, and local (including General Plan policies, NBMC standards, and Standard Conditions of Approval). While by -right housing projects may be exempt from CEQA, all future residential uses affected by the Amendments would continue to be subject to further development review, which can include technical supporting reports. The Amendments are also exempt because they fall within the scope of analysis contained within EIR No. 617, prepared and certified by the County for the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment, to which the City is a party. EIR No. 617, fully analyzed impacts on sensitive receptors (including residential uses) in adopting the Settlement Agreement Amendment, including the updated CNEL contour boundaries associated therewith, using both the County and City's thresholds of significance. The City was a responsible agency for EIR No. 617, and co -signatory to the Settlement Agreement Amendment. EIR No. 617 concluded that the Settlement Agreement Amendment (and associated updated CNEL contours) would result in less - than -significant impacts related to noise increases at sensitive receptors, but a significant and unavoidable impact from increasing noise levels at exterior use areas of residences. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted. No lawsuits were filed challenging the adequacy of EIR No. 617. EIR No. 617 fully analyzed impacts on sensitive receptors (including residential uses) in adopting the Settlement Agreement Amendment, including the updated CNEL contour boundaries associated therewith. In April 2014, the County of Orange prepared a EIR in connection with the Airport Settlement Amendment (SHC No. 2001111135). The County Board of Supervisors certified the EIR on September 30, 2014. The County's approval of the Project would be contingent upon the City Council of Newport Beach and the governing boards of Stop Polluting Our Newport ("SPON") and Airport Working Group ("AWG") approving and executing the agreed upon amendment to the Settlement Agreement. The City was a responsible agency and the City Council relied on EIR No. 617 for CEQA purposes in approving the Settlement Agreement Amendment. A 22-57 Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted. No lawsuits were filed challenging EIR No. 617. EIR No. 617 analyzed potentially significant environmental effects of residential land uses in the 65 dB CNEL. Specifically, the noise and land use and planning chapters of EIR No. 617 quantified and analyzed noise and land use incompatibility impacts associated with existing residential uses (and noise receptors) in the 65 dBA CNEL. The cumulative impacts analyses in the 65 dB CNEL expressly reflected future planning trends, growth projections and specific projects located in the Airport Area in proximity to JWA. Noise EIR No. 617 provides an explanation as to why the 2014 dBA CNEL contours are smaller than the 1985 Master Plan CNEL contours. The EIR observed that "the Mater Plan noise contours are considerably larger than existing noise contours ... due to a quieter fleet of existing commercial aircraft and a dramatic reduction in the number of generation aviation operations ...."' The 2014 CNEL contours were also based on a newly adopted, "state- of-the-art" noise modeling program.2 Overall, the EIR found that the 65 dBA CNEL contour area was 114% smaller than the analog from the 1985 Master Plan. • 60 and 65 CNEL contour: Master Plan contours are 114 percent larger than the Existing Condition contours. As allowed by the Master Plan, the area outside the Airport boundaries that would be exposed to noise levels in the 60 to 65 dB CNEL range is 125 percent larger than the currently exposed area. • 65 and 70 CNEL contour: Master Plan contours are almost 50 percent larger than the Existing Condition contours. As allowed by the Master Plan, the area outside the Airport boundaries that would be exposed to the 65 to 70 dB CNEL noise levels is 80 percent larger than the currently exposed area. 70* CNEL contour: Master Plan contours are 80 percent larger than the Existing Condition contours. As allowed by the Master Plan, the area outside the Airport boundaries that would be exposed to noise levels that exceed 70 dB CNEL is 311 percent larger than the currently exposed area. EIR No. 617 then quantified the number of sensitive receptors (including residential uses) within the updated 65 dba CNEL contour area, compared those to those covered under the now -outdated 1985 CNEL contours. In doing so, the EIR noted that the area surrounding the Airport is generally urban in character. Surrounding uses include industrial, commercial, and residential uses. The residential area is predominately south and southwest of the Airport. (Id. at 2-12). Specifically, EIR No. 617's Noise Technical Report, prepared by Landrum and Brown,3 quantified the number of sensitive receptors (including residential units) that would be impacted by the Project and its utilization of the 2014 EIR at 4.6-34. 2 Id. at 4.6-31. Airport noise contours were generated using the INM Version 7.0d. The latest version, 1NM Version 7.0d, was released for use in May 2013 and is the state-of-the-art in airport noise modeling. 3https://www.newportbeaclica,govipiri/CEoA REVIE W/John%2DWavne%20Airoort%o2ODE IR/CC%205A%20Appendices%20to%20 FEI R%206171Appendix%20C%20-%20Noise%20Anafysis%20Technica1%20Report. pdf 22-58 updated CNEL contours, Table 22 of the Noise Technical Report compared the number of residential units within both the 1985 and 2014 65 dBA CNEL contours. a 70 CNEL contour: 379 acres/0.59 square mile, including 1 place of worship (the Orange Coast Free Methodist Church), but no other noise -sensitive land uses. • 65 to 70 CNEL contour: 561 acres/0.88 square mile, including 96 residences (of which 49 are sound insulated) and 2 places of worship (Islamic Educational Center of Orange County and Berean Community Church), but no other noise -sensitive land uses. • 60 to 65 CNEL contour: 1,313 acres/2.05 square miles, including 932 residences (of which 348 are sound insulated], 5 places of worship, and 4 schools, as listed below: Using the City's thresholds of significance, EIR No. 617 ultimately concluded that the Project would not result in noise increases at sensitive receptors where existing exposure is 65 CNEL or above, between 60 and 65 CNEL, or 45 and 60 CNEL. However, the EIR determined that the Project would generate aircraft noise that would increase noise levels at exterior use areas of residences or schools to noise levels of 65 CNEL or above or interior areas of residences or schools to noise levels of 45 CNEL. Specifically, the Project would have a significant exterior noise impact on 31 residences in Phase 1, 62 residences in Phase 2, and 77 residences in Phase 3. The Proposed Project would have a potentially significant interior noise impact on 21 residences in Phase 1, 39 residences in Phase 2, and 43 residences and one place of worship in Phase 3. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted to cover this significant and unavoidable impact, which was not subject to legal challenge (nor was EIR No. 617). Land Use and Plannin EIR No. 617's land use and planning chapter acknowledged that JWA is located in an urbanized area. The surrounding land uses for areas in the City that are adjacent to JWA included the same land uses that exist today, including but not limited to, AO (Office Airport), CO-G (General Commercial Office), CG General Commercial, MU-H2 (Mixed Use Horizontal). (EIR at 4.5-17). As noted above, the Noise Analysis Technical Report analyzed land uses within the 2014 CNEL_ contours, to determine "the amount of area and sensitive receptors" in such contours. (See directly above.) EIR No. 617 observed that, "as the 65 CNEL contour expands beyond the existing contour and includes additional residences this would be a significant impact." (EIR at 4.5-32). The EIR ultimately concluded that, with all phases of the Proposed Project, there would be a significant, unavoidable land use and land use impact due to an increase in the number of noise -sensitive uses exposed to noise levels in excess of the 65 CNEL exterior noise standard. There are no feasible mitigation measures for exterior noise levels. Implementation of Mitigation Measure LU-1 would potentially reduce impacts associated with excess interior noise levels to less than significant levels. However, until interior noise measurements are taken, it cannot be determined if all the noise sensitive uses with interior noise levels in excess of 45 CNEL would qualify for sound attenuation based on FAA criteria. Given the uncertainty that this measure is feasible to adequately reduce interior noise levels at all potentially impacted residences, the impact was determined to ° See, e.g., 2014 ER Table 4.6-18 (at p. 4.6-69); 22-59 be significant and unavoidable. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted to cover this significant and unavoidable impact, which was not subject to legal challenge (nor was EIR No. 617). Cumulative Impacts Chapter 5.0 (Cumulative Impacts) of EIR No. 617 considered existing and future residential uses when analyzing impacts of the Settlement Agreement Amendment and 2014 CNEL lines. For example, the cumulative impacts analysis considered countywide growth and development forecasts based on input from the County of Orange and the cities located in the County. These projections reflect adopted land uses and future growth scenarios based on local land use policies. (EIR at 5-3). The EIR explained: "The OCP-2010 Modified projections provide forecasts to the year 2035 and take into account the projected growth Orange County in its entirety. OCP-2010 Modified projections are particularly useful in evaluating the cumulative impacts associated with traffic, air quality, greenhouse gas ("GHG") emissions, and noise because they provide growth assumptions consistent with the local general plans that have been developed with a long-range horizon year. This allows the cumulative analysis to go beyond just a listing of projects, which would not adequately reflect conditions at Project buildout." (Id.) Further, Section 5.2.2 of the EIR contains a list of reasonably foreseeable probable future projects, some of which are located in the Airport Area of the City. See, e.g., Table 5-2 (including, among others, Koll Mixed Use Development, MacArthur at Dolphin -Striker Way, Newport Business Uptown Newport Mixed Use Development, and the previously considered Land Use Element Update). The cumulative impacts analysis expressly found that "[w]hen compared to existing conditions, the 0 Project and all the alternatives would extend the 65 CNEL contour into areas designed for mixed -use development in the City of Newport Beach's Airport Area. The City of Newport Beach General Plan's Noise Element noise/land use compatibility matrix (see Table N2 in the Noise Element, page 12-23) lists mixed use land uses within the 65 CNEL contour as "normally incompatible,'... If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must be made and noise insulation features must be included in the design." (EIR at 5-37). "Though design plans for the development projects identified as part of the Newport Beach LUE have not been prepared, it is reasonable to assume that the City of Newport Beach would evaluate each of the cumulative projects for policy consistency through the entitlement process. Therefore, the Project would not contribute to any cumulative impacts associated with plan or policy inconsistency." (EIR at 5-39). No new information that was not known at the time the General Plan and EIR No. 617 were prepared is now available that demonstrates that the Amendments will result in a new or increased significant impact. The Amendments would not cause growth beyond that accommodated by the General Plan. The Amendments do not introduce new land use designations or otherwise alter general land use patterns or development standards. 22-60 Therefore, the findings of previously certified EIR No. 617 are applicable to the Amendments. Implementation of the Amendments would not substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts, including but not limited to air emissions and greenhouse gas emissions. Although the noise contours would be updated, the requirements for compliance with noise standards would not change. Finally, overriding ALUC and adoption of the Amendments does not constitute piecemealing. Additional environmental review for the Housing Element Noise Update is not needed for two independent reasons: (i) the update is exempt under CEQA Guidelines section 15183, and (ii) it is fully within the scope of the 2014 Settlement Agreement Amendment No. 617 and the 2014 CNEL contours analyzed therein. For this first determination, a lead agency's finding that a particular proposed project comes within one of the exempt classes necessarily includes an implied finding that the project has no significant effect on the environment." (Davidon Homes v. City of San Jose (1997) 54 Cal.App.4th 106.) If an exemption applies, the project is excused from CEQA's environmental review, which occurs only if an agency determines the project is not exempt from CEQA. (Union of Medical Marijuana Patients, Inc. v. City of San Diego (2019) 7 Cal.5th 1171, 1186, ["Environmental review is required under CEQA only if a public agency concludes that a proposed activity is a project and does not qualify for an exemption."].) California courts have held that improper piecemealing does not occur when "projects have different proponents, serve different purposes, or can be implemented independently." Different projects may properly undergo separate environmental review (i.e., no piecemealing) when the projects can be implemented independently. A project may also be reviewed without reference to potential future projects when it has "significant independent or local utility" and would be implemented with or without approval of the future project, even if the two are related in some other respects. See, e.g., Aptos Council v. Cnty. of Santa Cruz, 10 Cal.App.5th 266, 282 (2017). Here, the Housing Element Noise Update functions independently and does not rely on any future planning decisions or project -level approvals. The Housing Element Noise Update involves removing an inherent barrier based on General Plan policies and zoning regulations that prohibit residential development within the 1985 65 dBA CNEL. The Housing Element Noise Update is a necessary, isolated planning action to allow the City to implement the Housing Element. Conclusion Thus, because EIR No. 617 analyzed impacts associated with the updated CNEL noise contours, the City's adoption of the updated CNEL noise contours within its own internal policies is fully within the scope of EIR No. 617, and the 2006 General Plan, as amended. The Amendments would not result in any new significant environmental effects that are substantially different from those identified in EIR No. 617 nor would it substantially increase the severity of significant effects previously identified in EIR No. 617. Therefore, based on the provisions of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, no additional CEQA documentation is required. 22-61 ATTACHMENT C ORDINANCE NO. 2023-21 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO NEWPORT PLACE PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PC-11) AND NEWPORT AIRPORT VILLAGE PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PC-60) RELATED TO NOISE IN THE AIRPORT AREA NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT THE 6th CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT (PA2022-0201) WHEREAS, Section 200 of the City of Newport Beach ("City") Charter vests the City Council with the authority to make and enforce all laws, rules, and regulations with respect to municipal affairs subject only to the restrictions and limitations contained in the Charter and the State Constitution, and the power to exercise, or act pursuant to any and all rights, powers, and privileges, or procedures granted or prescribed by any law of the State of California; WHEREAS, in January 2019, the City Council initiated a comprehensive update of the Newport Beach General Plan; however, due to the Regional Housing Needs Assessment ("RHNA") allocation of 4,845 new housing units to plan for the 2021-2029 housing period, the City Council directed City staff to focus on the Housing Element, Land Use Element, and Circulation Element; WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the 6tn Cycle Housing Element covering the period 2021-2029 planning period ("6th Cycle Housing Element") on September 13, 2022, and it was certified by the State Department of Housing and Community Development on October 5, 2022; WHEREAS, the 6th Cycle Housing Element, including Appendix B, has been subject to extensive public participation in accordance with Government Code Section 65351 including thirteen community workshops, fourteen Housing Element Update Advisory Committee ("HEUAC") meetings, review of the Housing Element by the Planning Commission, and six duly noticed City Council study sessions; WHEREAS, additionally, the HEUAC formed five different subcommittees to thoroughly review and identify all feasible sites for potential redevelopment as residential in the future and those sites are captured in Appendix B (Adequate Sites Analysis), which demonstrates the City's capacity to meet the RHNA allocation; 22-62 Ordinance No. 2023- Page 2 of 8 WHEREAS, the 6th Cycle Housing Element identifies five focus areas where future housing opportunities will be created through the adoption of housing opportunity overlays or other rezone strategies to establish the ability to develop additional housing to meet the RHNA allocation; WHEREAS, the increase in units above the minimum RHNA is in response to the unusually high percentage of below market rate units the RHNA mandates coupled with the significant challenges to planning, financing, and constructing workforce housing with higher -than -average land costs; WHEREAS, the entire Airport Area Environs is proximate to John Wayne Airport and subject to the John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan ("AELUP"); WHEREAS, forty-eight housing sites identified in the focus area are within or bisected by the 65 weighted decibel ("dBA") community noise equivalent level ("CNEL") noise contour identified in the AELUP; WHEREAS, the following amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element of the General Plan, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC"), Newport Place Planned Community Development Plan (PC- 11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community Development Plan (PC-60) are necessary to allow residential use, including mixed -use residential, on housing opportunity sites that are wholly or partially located outside the 65 dBA: Land Use Element: • Policy LU6.15.3 (Airport Compatibility), • Figure LU11 — Statistical Areas J6, L4, • Figure LU22 — Airport, and • Figure LU23 - Airport Area Residential Villages Illustrative Concept Diagram (removal of 65 CNEL noise contour line); Noise Element: • Policy N 1.2 (Noise Exposure Verification for New Development), • Policy N1.5.A (Airport Area Infill Amendments (new policy), • Policy N 2.2 (Design of Sensitive Land Uses), • Policy N 3.2 (Residential Development), • Figure N4 - Future Noise Contours, and • Figure N5 — Future Noise Contours; 22-63 Ordinance No. 2023- Page 3 of 8 Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC: • Section 20.30.080(F) (Noise -Airport Environs Land Use Plan); Planned Communities: • Newport Place Planned Community Development Plan (PC-11) — Part III. Residential Overlay Zone, Section V.D.1 (Airport Noise Compatibility), and • Newport Airport Village Planned Community Development Plan (PC-60) — Section I.D (Purpose and Objective) & Section II.B.2 (Prohibited Uses), WHEREAS, the Amendments change noise compatibility policies and regulations and do not change the existing underlying land use categories or zoning designations of any property; WHEREAS, the Amendments do not add residential unit capacity to the Land Use Element, and therefore, the General Plan amendments included in the Amendments do not require a vote of the electorate pursuant to Charter Section 423; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on August 3, 2023, in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act") and Chapter 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC2022-015, unanimously (4 ayes and 3 recusals), recommending the City Council approve the Amendments; WHEREAS, Section 21676(b) of the California Public Utilities Code ("CPUC") required the City to refer the Amendments to the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission ("ALUC") for a determination that the Amendments are consistent with the AELUP; WHEREAS, on August 17, 2023, ALUC determined the Amendments were inconsistent with the AELUP; 22-64 Ordinance No. 2023- Page 4 of 8 WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 21670 and 21676 of CPUC, the City Council may, after a public hearing, propose to overrule ALUC with a two-thirds vote, if it makes specific findings that the Amendments are consistent with the purpose of Section 21670 of the CPUC to protect the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on September 12, 2023, in the City Council Chambers, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with CPUC Section 21676(b) and the Ralph M. Brown Act. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the hearing, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2023-52 by a unanimous vote (5 ayes, 1 recused, 1 absent), to notify ALUC and the State Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Program ("Aeronautics Program") of the City's intent to consider overriding ALUC's inconsistency finding; WHEREAS, notice of the City's intent to consider overriding the ALUC inconsistency determination, along with Resolution No. 2023-52 was sent via certified mail and emailed to ALUC and Aeronautics Program on September 13, 2023; WHEREAS, the City received timely comments in response to the notice of the City's intent to consider overriding the ALUC inconsistency determination from John Wayne Airport, ALUC, and the Aeronautics Program in accordance with CPUC Section 21676; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on November 14, 2023, in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act"), Chapters 20.56 (Planned Community District Procedures) and 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC, and CPUC Section 21676(b). Evidence both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach ordains as follows: 22-65 Ordinance No. 2023- Page 5 of 8 Section 1: The City Council hereby approves amendments to the Newport Placed Planned Community (PC-1 1), as set forth in Exhibit "A" and Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60), as set forth in Exhibit "B" which are attached hereto and incorporated by reference. Neither PC-11 and PC-60, Chapter 20.56 (Planning and Zoning, Planned Community District Procedures) or Chapter20.66 (Planning and Zoning, Amendments) of Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of NBMC, or Article 2 (Adoption of Regulations) of Chapter 4 (Zoning Regulations) of Division 1 (Planning and Zoning) of Title 7 (Planning and Land Use) of the California Government Code set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of the amendments. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the amendments to PC-11 and PC-60 are consistent with the following General Plan policies: Findings: 1. Housing Element Policy 4.2. Enable construction of new housing units sufficient to meet City qualified goals by identifying adequate sites for their construction. 2. Policy Action 4J (Airport Environs Sub Area Environmental Constraints). Policy Action 4J requires the City to take the following actions to address potential environmental constraints in the Airport Environs Sub Area and ensure continued feasibility of sites, particularly for lower -income RHNA: a. Require new residential development projects in the Airport Environs Sub Area provide noise studies and acoustical analyses to ensure designs include proper sound attenuation; b. Require new residential development projects in the Airport Environs Sub Area to explore advanced air filtration systems for buildings to promote cleaner air; C. Encourage on -site indoor amenities, such as fitness facilities or recreation and entertainment facilities; and 22-66 Ordinance No. 2023- Page 6 of 8 d. Continue to implement park dedication requirements consistent with the City's Park Dedication ordinance and Land Use Element Policy LU 6.15.13 (Neighborhood Parks —Standards) and Policy LU 6.15.16 (On -Site Recreation and Open Space) to ensure adequate recreational space to ensure at least 8- percent of a project's gross land area (exclusive of existing rights -of -way) of the first phase for any development in each neighborhood or '/2 acre, whichever is greater, is developed as a neighborhood park, unless waived through Density Bonus Law. Facts in Support of Findings: The City has taken actions to address potential environmental constraints in the Airport Area and ensure continued feasibility of sites, particularly for lower -income RHNA by providing the following uniform and concise criteria: a. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for such development, a noise study shall be prepared by a City -approved qualified acoustical consultant and submitted to the Community Development Director for approval; b. All new residential structures or the residential units within a mixed -use development shall be attenuated to provide an interior noise level of 45 dBA CNEL or less; C. The design of the residential portions of mixed -use projects and residential developments shall have adequate noise attenuation between adjacent uses and units (common floor/ceilings) in accordance with the California Building Code; d. New mixed -use developments shall incorporate designs with loading areas, parking lots, driveways, trash enclosures, mechanical equipment, and other noise sources away from the residential portion of the development; e. Use of walls, berms, interior noise insulation, double paned windows, advance insulation systems, or other noise mitigation measures, as deemed appropriate shall be incorporated in the design of new residential to bring interior sound attenuation to 45 dBA CNEL or less; f. Residential uses shall be indoor -oriented to reduce noise impingement on outdoor living areas; 22-67 Ordinance No. 2023- Page 7 of 8 g. On -site indoor amenities, such as fitness facilities or recreation and entertainment facilities shall be encouraged; and h. Advanced air filtration systems for buildings shall be considered to promote cleaner air. Lastly, all new housing opportunity sites located in Newport Place and Newport Airport Village planned communities are located wholly or partially outside the updated 65 dBA noise contour area. By requiring conditions of approval identified in amendment to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of NBMC, the City has taken actions to address potential environmental constraints in the Airport Area and ensure continued feasibility of sites, particularly for lower -income RHNA. Section 2: The recitals provided in this ordinance are true and correct and are incorporated into the substantive portion of this ordinance. Section 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance 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 ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance 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: The City Council finds the action to override the ALUC's August 17, 2023, determination and the approval of the Amendments are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 because they do not change the underlying land use or zoning designations of any specific parcels, including parcels within the Airport Area or within the updated noise contours based upon the findings set forth in Exhibit "C," which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Section 5: The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the ordinance, or a summary thereof, to be published pursuant to City Charter Section 414. This ordinance shall be effective thirty (30) calendar days after its adoption. 22-68 Ordinance No. 2023- Page 8 of 8 This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held on the 14th day of November, 2023, and adopted on the 28th day of November, 2023, by the following vote, to -wit: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: NOAH BLOM, MAYOR ATTEST: LEILANI I. BROWN, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AARON . HARP, UTY ATTORNEY Attachment(s): Exhibit A - Amendment to Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) Exhibit B - Amendment to Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60) Exhibit C - CEQA Findings of Consistency 22-69 EXHIBIT "A" Amendment to Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) Amend Part III. Residential Overlay, Section V.D.1 (Airport Noise Compatibility) to read as follows: 1. Residential development shall be located outside up to the !+,nre 65 d8 GNE ,,,,;g-o the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL noise contour as shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan, and subject to compliance with Section 20.30.080.F (Residential Use Proximate to John Wayne Airport) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Residential development shall be limited to parcels wholly or partially outside the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the sites wholly within such contour area are needed for the City to satisfy its 6rh Cycle RHNA mandate. Non-residential uses are encouraged on parcels located wholly within the 65 dBA CNEL contour area. 22-70 EXHIBIT "B" Amendment to Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60) Amend Section I.D. (Purpose and Objective) to read as follows: "D. Purpose and Objective The purpose of the PCDP is to establish appropriate zoning regulations that govern the land use and development of the PC in a manner that is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan. Implementation of the PCDP will: - Provide a quality mixed -use development that includes residential and supporting commercial uses; as well as, commercial uses that support or benefit from the proximity to the airport. - Create two planning areas to guide the development of the PC District (see Figure 4). Planning Area 1 will include the residential and, potentially, a complimentary retail or service commercial component of the PC District. Planning Area 2 will consist exclusively of non-residential uses. - Provide new housing opportunities in response to increased demand for housing, reduction of vehicle trips, and an encouragement of an active lifestyle by increasing the opportunity for residents to live in proximity to jobs, services, and entertainment. Such housing will be proximate to, and interconnected with, commercial development through pedestrian walkways provided by future development within the PCDP. -Ensure that all residential units are IGGated ,,, itside the Inhn WayneAirpeFt65 dB A GNE ne.se ,.enteur and Safety Zenand noise -sensitive uses (e.g., schools, churches, hospitals, public libraries) regardless of location, shall be designed to maintain the interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL or less and in compliance with Section 20.30.080.F (Residential Use Proximate to John Wayne Airport) of the Municipal Code. " - Protect future residents and other sensitive uses by prohibiting these uses from being developed on parcels that are wholly within the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan. Residential development shall be limited to parcels wholly or partially outside the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the sites wholly within such contour area are needed for the City to satisfy its 6t' Cycle RHNA mandate. Non- residential uses are encouraged on parcels located wholly within the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL contour area as shown in Figures N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan and outside of Safety Zone 3 of the AELUP." Amend Section II.A. (Permitted Uses) to read as follows: 22-71 Table 1 lists the permitted uses for each planning area of the Planned Community. The uses identified within the table are not intended to be a comprehensive list, but rather major use categories. All residential units and noise -sensitive uses, regardless of location, shall maintain the interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL or less, and shall be located on parcels wholly or partially outside the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA noise contour as shown in Figures N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan -area and Safety Zone 3 of the AELUP. Residential development shall be limited to parcels wholly or partially outside the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the sites wholly within such contour area are needed for the City to satisfy its 6th Cycle RHNA mandate. Non-residential uses are encouraged on parcels located wholly within the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL contour area. The Community Development Director may determine other uses not specifically listed herein are allowed or allowed pursuant to an MUP or a CUP, provided they are consistent with the purpose of the planning areas, are compatible with surrounding uses, and are not listed as a prohibited use. Amend Section II.B. (Prohibited Uses) to read as follows: The following uses shall be expressly prohibited from the PCDP: B. Prohibited Uses The following uses shall be expressly prohibited from the PCDP: 1. Any use not authorized by this PCDP unless the Community Development Director determines a particular use consistent with the purpose and intent of the PCDP, 2. Residential dwelling units within John Wayne Airport Safety Zone 3 (residential accessory uses, and amenities are allowed), 3. The following uses, if said structure within 250 feet of any residential dwelling unit: a. Handicraft Industry b. Industry, Small (less than 5,000 sq. ft.) c. Emergency Health Facilities/Urgent Care d. Ambulance Services e. Funeral Homes and Mortuaries f. Maintenance and Repair Services. 22-72 EXHIBIT "C" CEQA Findings of Consistency The California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (California Public Resources Code §§21000 et seq.); the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations §§15000 et seq.); and the rules, regulations, and procedures for implementing CEQA as set forth by the City of Newport Beach ("City") provide guidance regarding when additional environmental review is required. Pursuant to the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, Newport Beach is the Lead Agency charged with the responsibility of deciding whether to approve the Amendments to Newport Beach General Plan Land Use and Noise Elements, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC"), Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60) (Amendments) to accommodate housing units identified by the certified 2021-2029 Sixth Cycle General Plan Housing Element ("6th Cycle Housing Element'). The provisions of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 are applicable to the Amendments. The Amendments are not subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 because the Amendments do not change the underlying land use or zoning designations of any specific parcels, including parcels within the Airport Area or within the updated noise contours; and would not result in new significant impacts or a substantial more adverse impact than addressed in John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report No. 617 (State Clearinghouse No. 2001111135) (EIR No. 617). The Amendments are also exempt because they fall within the scope of analysis contained within the previously certified EIR No. 617, prepared for the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement, to which the City is a party. CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 provides, in relevant part: (a) CEQA mandates that projects which are consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified shall not require additional environmental review, except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project -specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site. This streamlines the review of such projects and reduces the need to prepare repetitive environmental studies. (b) In approving a project meeting the requirements of this section, a public agency shall limit its examination of environmental effects to those which the agency determines, in an initial study or other analysis: (1) Are peculiar to the projector the parcel on which the project would be located, (2) Were not analyzed as significant effects in a prior EIR on the zoning action, general plan, or community plan, with which the project is consistent, 22-73 (3) Are potentially significant off -site impacts and cumulative impacts which were not discussed in the prior EIR prepared for the general plan, community plan or zoning action, or (4) Are previously identified significant effects which, as a result of substantial new information which was not known at the time the EIR was certified, are determined to have a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the prior EIR. (c) If an impact is not peculiar to the parcel or to the project, has been addressed as a significant effect in the prior EIR, or can be substantially mitigated by the imposition of uniformly applied development policies or standards, as contemplated by subdivision (e) below, then an additional EIR need not be prepared for the project solely on the basis of that impact. (d) This section shall apply only to projects which meet the following conditions: (1) The project is consistent with: (A) A community plan adopted as part of a general plan, (B) A zoning action which zoned or designated the parcel on which the project would be located to accommodate a particular density of development, or (C) A general plan of a local agency, and (2) An EIR was certified by the lead agency for the zoning action, the community plan, or the general plan. As part of its decision -making process, the City is required to review and consider whether the Amendments would create new significant impacts or significant impacts that would be substantially more severe than those disclosed in the John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report No. 617 (State Clearinghouse No. 2001111135) (EIR No. 617). Additional CEQA review is only triggered if the Amendments create new significant impacts or impacts that are more severe than those disclosed in EIR No. 617 such that major revisions to the EIR would be required. The Amendments provide for updated noise contours as established in EIR No. 617 and revisions to General Plan policies, Title 20 of NBMC, Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60) to allow for consistency between the certified 6th Cycle Housing Element and the Newport Beach General Plan and NBMC as it applies to future housing uses near John Wayne Airport. The Amendments are proposed to ensure consistency pursuant to the State Planning and Zoning Law and the City's compliance with its RHNA allocation. 22-74 As explained below, none of the Amendments revise the land use designation, density or development standards applicable to residential or non-residential development in the Airport Area. The Amendments do not grant any development entitlements or authorize development. Rather, the purpose of the Housing Element Noise Update is to advance the policies and goals of the 6th Cycle Housing Element by removing the barrier in multiple General Plan and zoning policies that prohibit residential development within the 1985 65 dBA CNEL. The Amendments, therefore, will not result in development of greater intensity than is allowed under the 2006 General Plan and Newport Airport Village Planned Community, as amended. Although the City's 2006 General Plan approved a maximum of 2,200 residential units in the Airport Area at a maximum density of 50 dwelling units per net acre (du/net acre), the General Plan Program EIR evaluated 4,300 residential units in the Airport Area. California courts have upheld reliance on this exemption for programmatic planning decisions. See, e.g., Lucas v. City of Pomona, 92 Cal.App.5th 508 (2023) (city properly relied on CEQA Guidelines section 15183 when approving a zoning overlay district allowing commercial cannabis activities on specific parcels located in certain areas within the City; court noting that "the Project merely imposes an overlay use on existing zoning; it does not guarantee anyone the automatic right to establish a cannabis -related business, but rather, provides the option to apply for a cannabis business permit. In that sense, the Amendments does not cause project -specific effects 'peculiar' to it.") Because no additional CEQA review is required, the City is not required to analyze additional mitigation measures for the Housing Element Noise Update at this time. Furthermore, as noted above, the Housing Element Noise Update requires (as a local regulatory requirement, not CEQA mitigation measure) residential projects located within the 65 dBA CNEL contour line to include appropriate in -door sound attenuation methods. The Noise Chapter of EIR No. 617 explained how the dBA CNEL noise contours have reduced in size compared to the 1985 Airport Environs Land Use Plan ("AELUP") Master Plan CNEL noise contours, in which the City's General Plan policies and maps are based on. The 1985 Master Plan noise contours are considerably larger than the existing noise contours presented previously. This is largely due to a quieter fleet of existing commercial aircraft and a dramatic reduction in the number of generation aviation operations. The noise contours in EIR No. 617 are based on more contemporary noise modeling programs, as the EIR explained that "one of the most important factors in generating accurate noise contours is the collection of accurate operational data". Airport noise contours generated in this noise study using the INM Version 7.Od which was released for use in May 2013, and is the state - of -art in airport noise modeling. As such, the City proposes to update the Noise Element to include these noise contours, which in part, modify where residential uses could occur outside of the 65 CNEL contour in the Airport Area. Based on these updated noise contours, certain Housing Opportunity Sites will now be outside of the 65 CNEL contour while others will be within the 65 CNEL contour. However, the Amendments will not result in development of greater intensity than is allowed under the 2006 General Plan and Newport Airport Village Planned Community, as amended. Residential uses can be allowed in the Airport Area on parcels that are wholly or 22-75 partially outside the 65dBA CNEL contour as denoted in Figure N5 of the Noise Element. The JWA noise contours depicted in Figure N5 as proposed are the noise contours from EIR No. 617. Residential uses may be approved in these areas provided interior living areas are protected from excessive noise by appropriate construction techniques that reduce the interior noise to 45 dBA CNEL, consistent with state law. Parcels that are wholly within the 65 dB CNEL contour shown in Figure N5 (e.g., those identified as experiencing noise levels above 65 dB CNEL) are unsuitable for residential development unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the site(s) wholly within the 65-70 dB CNEL contours are needed for the City to satisfy its 6th Cycle RHNA mandate. The changes would not allow for more development than assumed in the growth assumptions in the General Plan nor would it impact the City's RHNA obligations. To the extent new parcels are able to be developed in the future for residential uses, by nature of no longer being located within areas identified as experiencing 65 dB CNEL or greater, those parcels must be part of a specific proposed project for consideration and processing by the City for approval. Future housing development would be subject to compliance with the established regulatory framework, namely federal, State, regional, and local (including General Plan policies, NBMC standards, and Standard Conditions of Approval). While by -right housing projects may be exempt from CEQA, all future residential uses affected by the Amendments would continue to be subject to further development review, which can include technical supporting reports. The Amendments are also exempt because they fall within the scope of analysis contained within EIR No. 617, prepared and certified by the County for the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment, to which the City is a party. EIR No. 617, fully analyzed impacts on sensitive receptors (including residential uses) in adopting the Settlement Agreement Amendment, including the updated CNEL contour boundaries associated therewith, using both the County and City's thresholds of significance. The City was a responsible agency for EIR No. 617, and co -signatory to the Settlement Agreement Amendment. EIR No. 617 concluded that the Settlement Agreement Amendment (and associated updated CNEL contours) would result in less - than -significant impacts related to noise increases at sensitive receptors, but a significant and unavoidable impact from increasing noise levels at exterior use areas of residences. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted. No lawsuits were filed challenging the adequacy of EIR No. 617. EIR No. 617 fully analyzed impacts on sensitive receptors (including residential uses) in adopting the Settlement Agreement Amendment, including the updated CNEL contour boundaries associated therewith. In April 2014, the County of Orange prepared a EIR in connection with the Airport Settlement Amendment (SHC No. 2001111135). The County Board of Supervisors certified the EIR on September 30, 2014. The County's approval of the Project would be contingent upon the City Council of Newport Beach and the governing boards of Stop Polluting Our Newport ("SPON") and Airport Working Group ("AWG") approving and executing the agreed upon amendment to the Settlement Agreement. The City was a responsible agency and the City Council relied on EIR No. 617 for CEQA purposes in approving the Settlement Agreement Amendment. A 22-76 Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted. No lawsuits were filed challenging EIR No. 617. EIR No. 617 analyzed potentially significant environmental effects of residential land uses in the 65 dB CNEL. Specifically, the noise and land use and planning chapters of EIR No. 617 quantified and analyzed noise and land use incompatibility impacts associated with existing residential uses (and noise receptors) in the 65 dBA CNEL. The cumulative impacts analyses in the 65 dB CNEL expressly reflected future planning trends, growth projections and specific projects located in the Airport Area in proximity to JWA. Noise EIR No. 617 provides an explanation as to why the 2014 dBA CNEL contours are smaller than the 1985 Master Plan CNEL contours. The EIR observed that "the Mater Plan noise contours are considerably larger than existing noise contours ... due to a quieter fleet of existing commercial aircraft and a dramatic reduction in the number of generation aviation operations ...."1 The 2014 CNEL contours were also based on a newly adopted, "state- of-the-art" noise modeling program.2 Overall, the EIR found that the 65 dBA CNEL contour area was 114% smaller than the analog from the 1985 Master Plan. • 60 and 65 CNEL contour: Master Plan contours are 114 percent larger than the Existing Condition contours. As allowed by the Master Plan, the area outside the Airport boundaries that would be exposed to noise levels in the 60 to 65 dB CNEL range is 125 percent larger than the currently exposed area. • 65 and 70 CNEL contour: Master Plan contours are almost 50 percent larger than the Existing Condition contours. As allowed by the Master Plan, the area outside the Airport boundaries that would be exposed to the 65 to 70 d6 CNEL noise levels is 80 percent larger than the currently exposed area. 70+ CNEL contour: Master Plan contours are 80 percent larger than the Existing Condition contours. As allowed by the Master Plan, the area outside the Airport boundaries that would be exposed to noise levels that exceed 70 dB CNEL is 311 percent larger than the currently exposed area. EIR No. 617 then quantified the number of sensitive receptors (including residential uses) within the updated 65 dba CNEL contour area, compared those to those covered under the now -outdated 1985 CNEL contours. In doing so, the EIR noted that the area surrounding the Airport is generally urban in character. Surrounding uses include industrial, commercial, and residential uses. The residential area is predominately south and southwest of the Airport. (Id. at 2-12). Specifically, EIR No. 617's Noise Technical Report, prepared by Landrum and Brown,3 quantified the number of sensitive receptors (including residential units) that would be impacted by the Project and its utilization of the ' 2014 EIR at 4.6-34. 2 Id. at 4.6-31. Airport noise contours were generated using the INM Version 7.0d. The latest version, INM Version 7.0d, was released for use in May 2013 and is the state-of-the-art in airport noise modeling. 3https://www.newportbeachca.gov/pin/CEQA REVIEW/John%20Wayne%20Airport%20DEIR/CC%205A%20Appendices%20to%20 FEIR%20617/Appendix%20C%20-%20Noise%20Analvsis°/a20Technical%20Reportpdf 22-77 updated CNEL contours.4 Table 22 of the Noise Technical Report compared the number of residential units within both the 1985 and 2014 65 dBA CNEL contours: • 70 CNEL contour: 379 acres/0.59 square mile, including 1 place of worship (the Orange Coast Free Methodist Church), but no other noise -sensitive land uses. • 65 to 70 CNEL contour: 561 acres/0.88 square mile, including 96 residences (of which 49 are sound insulated) and 2 places of worship (Islamic Educational Center of Orange County and Berean Community Church), but no other noise -sensitive land uses. 60 to 65 CNEL contour: 1,313 acres/2.05 square miles, including 932 residences (of which 348 are sound insulated), 5 places of worship, and 4 schools, as listed below: Using the City's thresholds of significance, EIR No. 617 ultimately concluded that the Project would not result in noise increases at sensitive receptors where existing exposure is 65 CNEL or above, between 60 and 65 CNEL, or 45 and 60 CNEL. However, the EIR determined that the Project would generate aircraft noise that would increase noise levels at exterior use areas of residences or schools to noise levels of 65 CNEL or above or interior areas of residences or schools to noise levels of 45 CNEL. Specifically, the Project would have a significant exterior noise impact on 31 residences in Phase 1, 62 residences in Phase 2, and 77 residences in Phase 3. The Proposed Project would have a potentially significant interior noise impact on 21 residences in Phase 1, 39 residences in Phase 2, and 43 residences and one place of worship in Phase 3. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted to cover this significant and unavoidable impact, which was not subject to legal challenge (nor was EIR No. 617). Land Use and Planning EIR No. 617's land use and planning chapter acknowledged that JWA is located in an urbanized area. The surrounding land uses for areas in the City that are adjacent to JWA included the same land uses that exist today, including but not limited to, AO (Office Airport), CO-G (General Commercial Office), CG General Commercial, MU-H2 (Mixed Use Horizontal). (EIR at 4.5-17). As noted above, the Noise Analysis Technical Report analyzed land uses within the 2014 CNEL contours, to determine "the amount of area and sensitive receptors" in such contours. (See directly above.) EIR No. 617 observed that, "as the 65 CNEL contour expands beyond the existing contour and includes additional residences this would be a significant impact." (EIR at 4.5-32). The EIR ultimately concluded that, with all phases of the Proposed Project, there would be a significant, unavoidable land use and land use impact due to an increase in the number of noise -sensitive uses exposed to noise levels in excess of the 65 CNEL exterior noise standard. There are no feasible mitigation measures for exterior noise levels. Implementation of Mitigation Measure LU-1 would potentially reduce impacts associated with excess interior noise levels to less than significant levels. However, until interior noise measurements are taken, it cannot be determined if all the noise sensitive uses with interior noise levels in excess of 45 CNEL would qualify for sound attenuation based on FAA criteria. Given the uncertainty that this measure is feasible to adequately reduce interior noise levels at all potentially impacted residences, the impact was determined to ° See, e.g., 2014 EIR Table 4.6-18 (at p. 4.6-69); 22- 78 be significant and unavoidable. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted to cover this significant and unavoidable impact, which was not subject to legal challenge (nor was EIR No. 617). Cumulative Impacts Chapter 5.0 (Cumulative Impacts) of EIR No. 617 considered existing and future residential uses when analyzing impacts of the Settlement Agreement Amendment and 2014 CNEL lines. For example, the cumulative impacts analysis considered countywide growth and development forecasts based on input from the County of Orange and the cities located in the County. These projections reflect adopted land uses and future growth scenarios based on local land use policies. (EIR at 5-3). The EIR explained: "The OCP-2010 Modified projections provide forecasts to the year 2035 and take into account the projected growth Orange County in its entirety. OCP-2010 Modified projections are particularly useful in evaluating the cumulative impacts associated with traffic, air quality, greenhouse gas ("GHG") emissions, and noise because they provide growth assumptions consistent with the local general plans that have been developed with a long-range horizon year. This allows the cumulative analysis to go beyond just a listing of projects, which would not adequately reflect conditions at Project buildout." (Id.) Further, Section 5.2.2 of the EIR contains a list of reasonably foreseeable probable future projects, some of which are located in the Airport Area of the City. See, e.g., Table 5-2 (including, among others, Koll Mixed Use Development, MacArthur at Dolphin -Striker Way, Newport Business Uptown Newport Mixed Use Development, and the previously considered Land Use Element Update). The cumulative impacts analysis expressly found that "[wjhen compared to existing conditions, the 0 Project and all the alternatives would extend the 65 CNEL contour into areas designed for mixed -use development in the City of Newport Beach's Airport Area. The City of Newport Beach General Plan's Noise Element noise/land use compatibility matrix (see Table N2 in the Noise Element, page 12-23) lists mixed use land uses within the 65 CNEL contour as "normally incompatible; "...If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must be made and noise insulation features must be included in the design." (EIR at 5-37). "Though design plans for the development projects identified as part of the Newport Beach LUE have not been prepared, it is reasonable to assume that the City of Newport Beach would evaluate each of the cumulative projects for policy consistency through the entitlement process. Therefore, the Project would not contribute to any cumulative impacts associated with plan or policy inconsistency." (EiR at 5-39). No new information that was not known at the time the General Plan and EIR No. 617 were prepared is now available that demonstrates that the Amendments will result in a new or increased significant impact. The Amendments would not cause growth beyond that accommodated by the General Plan. The Amendments do not introduce new land use designations or otherwise alter general land use patterns or development standards. 22-79 Therefore, the findings of previously certified EIR No. 617 are applicable to the Amendments. Implementation of the Amendments would not substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts, including but not limited to air emissions and greenhouse gas emissions. Although the noise contours would be updated, the requirements for compliance with noise standards would not change. Finally, overriding ALUC and adoption of the Amendments does not constitute piecemealing. Additional environmental review for the Housing Element Noise Update is not needed fortwo independent reasons: (i) the update is exempt under CEQA Guidelines section 15183, and (ii) it is fully within the scope of the 2014 Settlement Agreement Amendment No. 617 and the 2014 CNEL contours analyzed therein. For this first determination, a lead agency's finding that a particular proposed project comes within one of the exempt classes necessarily includes an implied finding that the project has no significant effect on the environment." (Davidon Homes v. City of San Jose (1997) 54 Cal.App.4th 106.) If an exemption applies, the project is excused from CEQA's environmental review, which occurs only if an agency determines the project is not exempt from CEQA. (Union of Medical Marijuana Patients, Inc. v. City of San Diego (2019) 7 Cal.5th 1171, 1186, ["Environmental review is required under CEQA only if a public agency concludes that a proposed activity is a project and does not qualify for an exemption."].) California courts have held that improper piecemealing does not occur when "projects have different proponents, serve different purposes, or can be implemented independently." Different projects may properly undergo separate environmental review (i.e., no piecemealing) when the projects can be implemented independently. A project may also be reviewed without reference to potential future projects when it has "significant independent or local utility" and would be implemented with or without approval of the future project, even if the two are related in some other respects. See, e.g., Aptos Council v. Cnty. of Santa Cruz, 10 Cal.App.5th 266, 282 (2017). Here, the Housing Element Noise Update functions independently and does not rely on any future planning decisions or project -level approvals. The Housing Element Noise Update involves removing an inherent barrier based on General Plan policies and zoning regulations that prohibit residential development within the 1985 65 dBA CNEL. The Housing Element Noise Update is a necessary, isolated planning action to allow the City to implement the Housing Element. Conclusion Thus, because EIR No. 617 analyzed impacts associated with the updated CNEL noise contours, the City's adoption of the updated CNEL noise contours within its own internal policies is fully within the scope of EIR No. 617, and the 2006 General Plan, as amended. The Amendments would not result in any new significant environmental effects that are substantially different from those identified in EIR No. 617 nor would it substantially increase the severity of significant effects previously identified in EIR No. 617. Therefore, based on the provisions of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, no additional CEQA documentation is required. ATTACHMENT D RESOLUTION NO. 2023- 73 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, FINDING AMENDMENTS TO THE NOISE AND LAND USE ELEMENTS OF THE GENERAL PLAN, TITLE 20 (PLANNING AND ZONING) OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE, NEWPORT PLACE PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PC-11) AND NEWPORT AIRPORT VILLAGE PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PC-60) RELATED TO NOISE IN THE AIRPORT AREA NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT THE 6th CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSES OF THE STATE AERONAUTICS ACT AND OVERRIDING THE ORANGE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION'S DETERMINATION THAT THE AMENDMENTS ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE 2008 JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT ENVIRONS LAND USE PLAN (PA2022-0201) WHEREAS, Section 200 of the City of Newport Beach ("City") Charter vests the City Council with the authority to make and enforce all laws, rules, and regulations with respect to municipal affairs subject only to the restrictions and limitations contained in the Charter and the State Constitution, and the power to exercise, or act pursuant to any and all rights, powers, and privileges, or procedures granted or prescribed by any law of the State of California; WHEREAS, in January 2019, the City Council initiated a comprehensive update of the Newport Beach General Plan, however, due to the Regional Housing Needs Assessment ("RHNA") allocation of 4,845 new housing units to plan for the 2021-2029 housing period, the City Council directed City staff to focus on the Housing Element, Land Use Element, and Circulation Element; WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the 6th Cycle Housing Element covering the period 2021-2029 planning period ("6th Cycle Housing Element") on September 13, 2022, and it was certified by the State Department of Housing and Community Development on October 5, 2022; WHEREAS, the 6th Cycle Housing Element including Appendix B has been subject to extensive public participation in accordance with Government Code Section 65351 including thirteen community workshops, fourteen Housing Element Update Advisory Committee ("HEUAC") meetings, review of the Housing Element by the Planning Commission, and six duly noticed City Council study sessions; 22-81 Resolution No. 2023- Page 2 of 15 WHEREAS, additionally, the HEUAC formed five different subcommittees to thoroughly review and identify all feasible sites for potential redevelopment as residential in the future and those sites are captured in Appendix B (Adequate Sites Analysis), which demonstrates the City's capacity to meet the RHNA allocation; WHEREAS, the 6th Cycle Housing Element identifies five focus areas where future housing opportunities will be created through the adoption of housing opportunity overlays or other rezone strategies to establish the ability to develop additional housing to meet the RHNA; WHEREAS, the increase in units above the minimum RHNA allocation is in response to the unusually high percentage of below market rate units the RHNA mandates coupled with the significant challenges to planning, financing, and constructing workforce housing with higher -than -average land costs; WHEREAS, the sites within the Airport Area Environs identified in Appendix B, could generate approximately 25 percent (2,577 additional housing units) of the City's 6th Cycle Housing Element capacity; WHEREAS, the entire Airport Area Environs is proximate to John Wayne Airport and subject to the John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan ("AELUP"); WHEREAS, forty-eight housing sites identified in the focus area are within or bisected by the 65 weighted decibel ("dBA") community noise equivalent level ("CNEL") noise contour identified in the AELUP; WHEREAS, the following amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element of the General Plan, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC"), Newport Place Planned Community Development Plan (PC- 11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community Development Plan (PC-60) are necessary to allow residential use, including mixed -use residential, on housing opportunity sites that are wholly or partially located outside the 65 dBA: Land Use Element: • Policy LU6.15.3 (Airport Compatibility), • Figure LU11 — Statistical Areas J6, L4, • Figure LU22 —Airport, and • Figure LU23 - Airport Area Residential Villages Illustrative Concept Diagram (removal of 65 CNEL noise contour line); 22-s2 Resolution No. 2023- Page 3 of 15 Noise Element: • Policy N 1.2 (Noise Exposure Verification for New Development), • Policy N1.5.A (Airport Area Infill Amendments (new policy), • Policy N 2.2 (Design of Sensitive Land Uses), • Policy N 3.2 (Residential Development), • Figure N4 - Future Noise Contours, and • Figure N5 — Future Noise Contours; Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC: • Section 20.30.080(F) (Noise -Airport Environs Land Use Plan); and Planned Communities: • Newport Place Planned Community Development Plan (PC-11) — Part 111. Residential Overlay Zone, Section V.D.1 (Airport Noise Compatibility), and • Newport Airport Village Planned Community Development Plan (PC- 60),Section I.D (Purpose and Objective) & Section 11.B.2 (Prohibited Uses) ("Amendments"); WHEREAS, the Amendments change noise compatibility policies and regulations and do not change the existing underlying land use categories or zoning designations of any property, - WHEREAS, the Amendments do not add residential unit capacity to the Land Use Element, and therefore, the General Plan amendments provided herein do not require a vote of the electorate pursuant to Charter Section 423; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on August 3, 2023, in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act") and Chapter 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC2022-015, unanimously (4 ayes and 3 recusals), recommending the City Council approve the Amendments; WHEREAS, Section 21676(b) of the California Public Utilities Code ("CPUC") required the City to refer the Amendments to the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission ("ALUC") for a determination that the Amendments are consistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan ("AELUP") for John Wayne Airport; 22-83 Resolution No. 2023- Page 4 of 15 WHEREAS, on August 17, 2023, ALUC determined the Amendments were inconsistent with the following provisions of the AELUP: a. Section 2.1.1 (Aircraft Noise), which provides that the "aircraft noise emanating from airports may be incompatible with the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of an airport"; b. Section 2.1.2 (Safety Compatibility Zones), which provides "the purpose of these zones is to support the continued use and operation of an airport by establishing compatibility and safety standards to promote air navigational safety and to reduce potential safety hazards for persons living, working or recreating near JWK; c. Section 2.1.4 (Air Transportation), which provides that the Commission is charged by Section 21674 of the PUC "to coordinate planning at the state, regional and local levels so as to provide for the orderly development of air transportation, while at the same time protecting the public health, safety and welfare"; and d. Section 3.2.1(1) (General Policy), which provides that "[w]ithin the boundaries of the AELUP, any land use may be found to be Inconsistent with the AELUP which ... [p]laces people so that they are affected adversely by aircraft noise"; WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 21670 and 21676 of CPUC, the City Council may, after a public hearing, propose to overrule ALUC with a two-thirds vote, if it makes specific findings that the Amendments are consistent with the purpose of Section 21670 of the CPUC that protect the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on September 12, 2023, in the City Council Chambers, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with CPUC Section 21676(b) and the Ralph M. Brown Act. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the hearing, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2023-52 (5 ayes, 1 recused, 1 absent), to notify ALUC and the State Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Program ("Aeronautics Program") of the City's intent to override ALUC's inconsistency finding; 22-84 Resolution No. 2023- Page 5 of 15 WHEREAS, notice of the City's intent to override the ALUC inconsistency determination, along with Resolution No. 2023-52 was sent via certified mail and emailed to ALUC and Aeronautics Program on September 13, 2023; WHEREAS, the City received timely comments in response to the notice of the City's intent to override the ALUC inconsistency determination from John Wayne Airport, ALUC, and the Aeronautics Program in accordance with CPUC Section 21676 which are attached hereto as Exhibits "B," "C," and "D," respectively, and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on November 14, 2023, in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, Chapter 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC, and CPUC Section 21676(b). Evidence both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as follows: Section 1: The City Council finds the Amendments are consistent with the purposes of Section 21670 of the CPUC and the AELUP of protecting the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses and hereby overrides ALUC's determination that the Amendments are inconsistent with the AELUP. Findings and Facts in Support of Findings: A. The Amendments are consistent with the noise standards of the AELUP. The AELUP guides development proposals to provide for the orderly development of John Wayne Airport and the surrounding area through implementation of the standards in Section 2 (Planning Guidelines) and Section 3 (Land Use Policies). Implementation of these standards are intended to protect the public from the adverse effects of aircraft noise, ensure that people and facilities are not concentrated in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents, and ensure that no structures or activities adversely affect navigable airspace. 22-85 Resolution No. 2023- Page 6 of 15 Section 2.1.1 of the AELUP sets forth the CNEL standards. A total of 62 new housing opportunity sites are identified in the Airport Area. Of those sites, 48 are located wholly or partially outside the updated 65 dBA CNEL contour boundary. Only 14 new housing opportunity sites are located wholly within the updated 65 dBA CNEL contour boundary. As proposed, residential development would be limited to parcels or sites wholly or partially outside the updated 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the sites wholly within such contour area are needed for the City to satisfy its 6th Cycle RHNA mandate. Sections 3.2.3 and 3.2.4 of the AELUP define the noise exposure in the 60 dBA to 65 dBA CNEL noise contour (Noise Impact Zone 2) as "Moderate Noise Impact" and in the 65 dBA to 70 dBA CNEL noise contour (Noise Impact Zone 1) as "High Impact." Section 3, Table 1 (Limitations on Land Use Due to Noise) of the AELUP identifies residential uses as "conditionally consistent" for the 60 dBA to 65 dBA CNEL noise contour and "normally inconsistent" for the 65 dBA to 70 dBA CNEL noise contour. However, residential uses are not outright prohibited. Instead, Section 3.2.3 of the AELUP requires the residential uses be developed with advanced insulation systems to bring the sound attenuation to no more than 45 dB inside. In addition, residential uses within the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area are required to be "indoor -oriented" to preclude noise impingement on outdoor living areas. The existing CNEL noise contours adopted in the 2006 Noise Element were based on the 1985 AELUP Master Plan, however, Noise Element Figures N4 and N5, are outdated and in need of updating. In 2014, the County of Orange prepared a Draft EIR in connection with the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment (SCH No. 2001111135). E I R N o . 61 7 explains why the 2014 dBA CNEL noise contours have reduced in size compared to the 1985 AELUP Master Plan CNEL noise contours. EIR No. 617 observed that "the Mater Plan noise contours are considerably larger than existing noise contours due to a quieter fleet of existing commercial aircraft and a dramatic reduction in the number of generation aviation operations ...."' The 2014 CNEL contours were also based on a newly adopted, "state-of-the-art" noise modeling program.2 EIR No. 617 found that the 65 dBA CNEL contour area was 114% smaller than the analog from the 1985 Master Plan. EIR No. 617 at 4.6-34. 2 Id. at 4.6-31. Airport noise contours were generated using the INM Version 7.0d. The latest version, INM Version 7.0d, was released for use in May 2013 and is the state-of-the-art in airport noise modeling. 22-86 Resolution No. 2023- Page 7 of 15 As the EIR explained, "one of the most important factors in generating accurate noise contours is the collection of accurate operational data." Airport noise contours generated in this noise study using the INM Version 7.Od which was released for use in May 2013, and is the state -of -art in airport noise modeling. Although the 2014 Settlement Agreement Amendment and associated EIR were predicated on updated noise contours, the AELUP - which ALUC bases its land use compatibility or incompatibility determinations on - still relies on the outdated noise contours from the 1985 JWA Master Plan. The purpose of the Amendments is to eliminate conflicts between the certified 6th Cycle Housing Element and the City's General Plan Land Use Element and Noise Element and zoning codes, which prohibit residential development within the outdated 1985 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area, and to adopt more updated CNEL noise contour areas that are based on updated noise modeling data, airport operations and advances in aviation technology that result in decreased noise levels. As a result, these policies and regulations must be updated to eliminate conflicting policy and regulatory restrictions to provide consistency with the 6th Cycle Housing Element. No development would be directly authorized by the Amendments. By providing uniform and concise conditions of approval identified in the proposed amendments to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of NBMC, the City has taken actions to address potential environmental constraints in the Airport Area and ensure continued feasibility of sites, particularly for lower -income RHNA. With respect to the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA") and the California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics ("Caltrans") comments letters, concerns were raised that FAA and Caltrans have adopted noise and land use compatibility standards which "generally establish a maximum exterior noise level of 65 dB CNEL for private outdoor living areas and an interior noise level of 45 dB CNEL for residential and other sensitive land uses." The comment requests that the Housing Element Noise Update be revised to reflect only non-residential uses within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour. Although FAA and Caltrans have developed land use compatibility guidelines for residential and nonresidential uses near airports, the City maintains that the Housing Element Noise Update is inconsistent with those standards. First, the FAA promulgated regulations codified at Title 14, Part 150 of the Code of Federal Regulations ("CFR") to implement the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act of 1979 ("ASNA"), The "Part 150" regulations consist of compatibility guidelines for aviation noise exposure. These guidelines prescribe standards for land use compatibility for different uses over a range of noise exposure levels, but do not regulate land use decisions. 22-87 Resolution No. 2023- Page 8 of 15 The Part 150 regulations specify that "all land uses are considered to be compatible with noise levels less than 65 dB [day -night average sound level (DNL)]." However, the Part 150 regulations state that the compatibility standards: "...do not constitute a Federal determination that any use of land covered by the [noise compatibility] program is acceptable or unacceptable under federal, state, or local law. The responsibility for determining the acceptable and permissible land uses and the relationship between specific properties and specific noise contours rests with the local authorities. FAA determinations under Part 150 are not intended to substitute federally determined land uses for those determined to be appropriate by local authorities in response to locally determined needs and values in achieving noise compatible land uses." The Part 150 regulations also acknowledge that "[I]ocal needs or values may dictate further delineation based on local requirements or determinations." (14 CFR 150.101). Therefore, the Housing Element Noise Update and its recommendation to allow residential development on sites that are wholly or partially outside the 2014 65 dBA CNEL do not stand in direct conflict with the FAA Part 150 regulations. On the state level, Cal. Code Regs. tit. 21 § 5000 et seq. provides noise standards governing the operation of aircraft and aircraft engines for all airports operating under a valid permit issued by the Department of Transportation. Section 5006 provides that "[t]he level of noise acceptable to a reasonable person residing in the vicinity of an airport is established as a CNEL value of 65 dB for purposes of these regulations. This criterion level has been chosen for reasonable persons residing in urban residential areas where houses are of typical California construction and may have windows partially open." The California compatibility criterion (i.e., 65 dBA CNEL) is only mandated for a few airports (including JWA) that are designated as "noise problem airports." For these airports, four types of land uses are defined as incompatible outside the 65 dBA CNEL, including residences of all types, public and private schools, and other institutional uses. However, these uses are not incompatible if certain sound attenuation methods are incorporated. For example, high rise apartment or condominium "having an interior CNEL of 45 dB or less in all habitable rooms due to aircraft noise, and an air circulation or air conditioning system as appropriate ..." are not incompatible. 21 CCR 5014(a)(3). Resolution No. 2023- Page 9 of 15 The 61h Cycle Housing Element Noise Update requires precisely this as a local regulatory control measure. The General Plan Amendments proposed pursuant to Resolution No. 2023- provide this with a number of examples delineated below: ("Residential uses can be allowed in the Airport Area on parcels that are wholly or partially outside the 65 dBA CNEL contour as denoted in Figures N4 and N5 of the Noise Element. Residential uses may be approved in these areas provided interior living areas are protected from excessive noise by appropriate construction techniques that reduce the interior noise to 45 dBA CNEL, consistent with state law. (See Cal. Code Regs., tit. 21, § 5014, subd. (a)(1)-(4)")); ("The 65 dBA CNEL contour area describes the area for which new noise -sensitive developments, including residential uses, will be conditionally permitted only if appropriate measures are included such that the standards contained in this Noise Element are achieved"); ("Furthermore, residential units should be sufficiently indoor - oriented, consistent with Title 21 of the California Code of Regulations, so as to reduce noise impingement on outdoor living areas."); (Applicants for proposed residential or mixed -use projects located in areas projected to be exposed to 65- 70 dBA CNEL or greater must conduct a noise study to provide evidence that the depicted noise contours do not adequately account for local noise exposure circumstances due to such factors as, topography, variation in traffic speeds, and other applicable conditions. These findings shall be used to determine the level of exterior or interior noise, attenuation needed to attain an acceptable noise exposure level and the feasibility of such measures when other planning considerations are considered, consistent with Title 21 of the California Code of Regulations.") Thus, the Housing Element Noise Update does not conflict with the state prescribed standards for noise and land use compatibility. Last, the Amendments would follow State mandates and local agency regulations by ensuring appropriate noise considerations are made and that mitigation measures are included in the design. Residential development and the residential portion of mixed -use projects would be restricted from areas exposed to exterior noise levels of 70 dBA CNEL and higher. Compliance with these proposed policies and regulations will ensure that future development within the JWA Airport Planning Area will follow the noise standards of the AELUP. B. The proposed Amendments are consistent with the safety standards of the AELUP. Section 2.1.2 (Safety Compatibility Zones) of the AELUP sets forth zones depicting which land uses are acceptable in various portions of JWA environs. Most of the housing opportunity sites, with the exception of portions of three properties, are all within Safety Zone 6. Allowed uses in Safety Zone 6 include residential and most nonresidential uses, excepting outdoor stadiums and similar uses with very high 22-89 Resolution No. 2023- Page 10 of 15 intensities. Uses that should be avoided include children's schools, large day-care centers, hospitals, and nursing homes. Risk factors associated with Safety Zone 6 generally include a low likelihood of accident occurrence. The Newport Beach Golf Course and the Young Men's Christian Association properties are included as housing opportunity sites in the 6th Cycle Housing Element. Portions of those properties are within Safety Zone 4 with the remaining portions lying in Safety Zone 6. Safety Zone 4 limits residential uses to very low density (if not deemed unacceptable because of noise) and advises to avoid nonresidential uses having moderate or higher usage intensities. The City's General Plan Safety Element Policy S 8.6 demonstrates that the City acknowledges the importance of the JWA Safety Zones: "S 8.6 John Wayne Airport Traffic Pattern Zone - Use the most currently available John Wayne Airport (JWA) Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) as a planning resource for evaluation of land use compatibility and land use intensity in areas affected by JWA operations. In particular, future land use decisions within the existing JWA Clear Zone/Runway Protection Zone (Figure S5) should be evaluated to minimize the risk to life and property associated with aircraft operations." In accordance with Policy S 8.6, the Amendments do not include any housing opportunity sites in the JWA Clear Zone/Runway Protection Zone. Compliance with these policies and regulations will ensure that future development within the JWA Airport Planning Area will follow the safety standards of the AELUP. Safety concerns have been raised due to the location of proposed residential sites within the AELUP's Safety Zones, particularly Zone 4 (Outer Approach/Departure Zone) and Zone 6 (Traffic Pattern Zone), therefore, it is recommended that the City recognize safety concerns in the context of the 6th Cycle Housing Element Noise Update and make adjustments and modifications to eliminate, where possible, such safety concerns. The "Basic Compatibility Qualities" listed for Zone 4 (Outer Approach/Departure Zone) state "[i]n undeveloped areas, limit residential uses to very low densities (if not deemed unacceptable because of noise); if alternative uses are impractical, allow higher densities as infill in urban areas." Similarly, the "Basic Compatibility Qualities" for Zone 6 "allow residential uses." The AELUP defines "allow" to mean "use is acceptable." As explained in the Staff Report, a total of 62 new housing opportunity sites are identified in the Airport Area according to the Sixth Cycle Housing Element. Of those sites, 48 are located wholly or partially outside the 65 dBA CNEL contour boundary as identified in 2014 Settlement Agreement Amendment EIR. Fourteen housing opportunity sites are 22-90 Resolution No. 2023- Page 11 of 15 located wholly within the updated 65 dBA CNEL contour boundary. Given the urban and developed state of the Airport Area, future residential development on sites located wholly or partially outside the 2014 65 dBA CNEL contour would constitute urban infill development. The 14 housing opportunity sites located wholly within the 2014 65 dBA CNEL are explicitly recognized as suitable for non- residential uses under the revised policies in the Housing Element Noise Update. Therefore, the Housing Element Noise Update does not create an inherent conflict between the land use compatibility criteria for Zones 4 and 6 and the location of certain housing opportunity sites in the City's Sixth Cycle Housing Element. Comments received by the City suggest that a number of properties in the Housing Element Noise Update are located in the Approach Surface, Transitional Surface and Horizontal Surface of the Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 77, however, no height increases to any particular property or development proposal are proposed in the Housing Element Noise Update. The City will ensure that all appropriate consideration is given to this topic in future planning decisions concerning building heights in the Airport Area. C. The Amendments are consistent with the purpose and intent of the AELUP and will not result in incompatible land uses adjacent to JWA. The standards and policies set forth in AELUP Sections 2 and 3 were adopted to prevent the creation of new noise and safety problems. California Government Code Section 65302 sets forth the requirements for Noise Elements in each jurisdiction's General Plan. Concerns have been raised that the City revise its Housing Element Noise Update to, at a minimum, locate any new residential development outside the 65 dB CNEL noise contour and, preferably, locate any new residential development outside the 60 dB CNEL noise contour. Government Code Section 65302(f) mandates that each local agency's general plan include a noise element that identifies and appraises noise problems in the community. The noise element shall analyze and quantify, to the extent practicable, as determined by the legislative body, current and projected noise levels from airport and airport operations. (Gov. Code Sec. 65302(f)(1)(D). To that end, a noise element must include: "Noise contours ... for all of these sources and stated in terms of community noise equivalent level (CNEL) or day -night average sound level (Ldn). The noise contours shall be prepared on the basis of noise monitoring or following generally accepted noise modeling techniques for the various sources ..." 22-91 Resolution No. 2023- Page 12 of 15 The City, like all local agencies, is required to include noise contours based on "noise monitoring" or generally accepted noise modeling techniques. The CNEL contours from the 2014 Settlement Agreement Amendment EIR No. 617 were based on a newly adopted, "state-of-the-art" noise modeling program. It is reasonable to conclude that the updated noise modeling data taken in conjunction with EIR No. 617 are the more optimal choice to satisfy this statutory requirement than the now -outdated 1985 Master Plan CNEL contours. Accordingly, the City does not agree with the commenter that the Housing Element Noise Update conflicts with Government Code Section 65302. Rather, the Housing Element Noise Update is a necessary step the City must take to update the Noise Element of the General Plan to be consistent with the statutory requirements for noise elements and CNEL contours therein. Furthermore, the Housing Element Noise Update is consistent with the Appendix D Noise Element Guidelines developed by the Governor's Office of Planning & Research ("OPR") (the "Noise Element Guidelines"). The Noise Element Guidelines were developed to aid local agencies adopt (and update) statutorily required noise elements. Among other things, the Noise Element Guidelines recommend that "Noise contours for larger airport facilities and major industrial sites are sufficiently complex that they must be developed via sophisticated computer techniques available through recognized acoustical consulting firms. (Noise Element Guidelines at 371). The Noise Element Guidelines also recommend an "assessment of the present-day noise environment ..." (id.). In addition to this recommendation, the Noise Element Guidelines include recommended exterior and interior noise level standards for local jurisdictions to identify and prevent the creation of incompatible land uses. The Noise Element Guidelines contain a land use compatibility table that describes the compatibility of various land uses with a range of environmental noise levels in terms of the CNEL. As noted in Figure 2 below, Residential -Multifamily Uses are "conditionally acceptable" between 60 and 70 dBA CNELs. 22-92 Resolution No. 2023- Page 13 of 15 Adopt xmd Wly a mmnlugily naji ardiniY fw resoluWndLaisemmplaials — FIGURE 2 hmwh 9— LA" am Lb w[ASl. R SS c� .'] ;5 aA IYRY/Af1A710! Ats�11g41 -L!M lknl�T S�+q. hm.1T. Dvnln e, keErk N]m. MAIM �� Su..W bltl M n LA994oty. R—W.119 Cued m. T! ]SSUR'^, n:11.1 M.ni Fit* pl4f.n7—otd:In of..cl.+.l Cartnrt'twl uvrtlnciar, wYU�I �Yj 5pgLlrn els�4�n I]am.nLs v - T1M,1S. 1101 Mgrb. MIg4 l � G.am].1[ry 4rpbAb sa., .U%rn C..[_ram _1 o dr.w.:fwzi Mq+.a Igrrw iSxtl 1SPM b.i . [}Yf [ olAMo ik,M1 Y ]r r.Sttl .p.t1]+ rkou[nre�l s mla w7..Ia.O A.dnm- CbL'.rl Atrle',tY/YOI IWMIn n[I+MO e Wlh. A.WftYMn iN oesZn ca vww Im=.W. M •T+[hsea .weans xa hHn r Tool!,"-P v woY -v J#o.n Ann. LS.nooel swbSo. SQ.rh Y].r]iAT II4ueYhNk It.rym..]r. rY d .�ICFr'+art NNpRM..OaE hAI rIM LfFSS.C]Cr (! aPr!'pmEN Xt'. C•r.[M 1 ]tQk]JrW,Th CI Ili �„ ��, A�,q ��' g111. rSn n.-..'ICora.c�3 �[.t IR AOnYgI. Gwlnn { FL^1 n1 rwaM xrr .., tar lw_rm Kz]p +'. n, _`rid, 7/lo Wow Ynngn —I—I TIT! t.—I.W - pnkaftno C4]M Cq[u9111n MmYvl. rrtl.tWft ••+-q Lr r' ] r .. _. _. _..nn OYYI M A"aft Y As set forth above, any development on the proposed housing opportunity sites will comply with the noise criteria and safety standards established in Sections 2 and 3, and consistent with policies contained in the Amendments to Land Use and Noise Elements and comply with standard conditions proposed for Title 20 of the NBMC and the Newport Place and Newport Airport Village planned communities. Parcels or sites bisected by the updated 65 dBA CNEL noise contour could support future housing; whereas parcels or sites located wholly within the updated 65 dBA CNEL noise contour could support housing, if deemed necessary to satisfy the RHNA mandate. Lastly, compliance with the AELUP and City standards will also be evaluated and demonstrated at the time development projects are proposed in the future. Future development projects will be subject to compliance with FAR Part 77 surfaces for JWA. Existing regulations and the proposed Amendments require projects to be submitted to the FAA for a review and clearance. D. The Amendments do not result in the City to be out -of -compliance with the 2006 Cooperative Agreement. The City's ability to override ALUC is embodied in Section 21676 and is wholly unrelated to any alleged compliance or non-compliance with the Cooperative Agreement. That said, according to the 2006 Cooperative Agreement, the City and the County of Orange agreed upon certain principles. The City agreed not to annex 22-93 Resolution No. 2023- Page 14 of 15 County property or the JWA itself while the County agreed not to pursue future physical expansion of the airport. The City also agreed to not amend the Santa Ana Heights Specific Plan without consent of the County. The Amendments do not necessitate any changes the Santa Ana Heights Specific Plan. Furthermore, the City agreed it would adopt and maintain General Plan policies and implement regulations consistent with the AELUP. 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: The City Council finds the action to override the ALUC's August 17, 2023, determination and the approval of the Amendments exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 because they do not change the underlying land use or zoning designations of any specific parcels, including parcels within the Airport Area or within the updated noise contours based upon the findings set forth in Exhibit "E," which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 22-94 Resolution No. 2023- Page 15 of 15 Section 5: 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 14th day of November 2023. NOAH BLOM Mayor ATTEST: Leilani I. Brown City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE a,91C. Harp City Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A — Airport Land Use Commission Inconsistency Determination dated August 23, 2023 Exhibit B — Comment Letter from John Waye Airport dated October 9, 2023 Exhibit C — Comment Letter from Airport Land Use Commission dated October 11, 2023 Exhibit D — Comment Letter from State Department of Transportation Aeronautics Program dated October 13, 2023 Exhibit E — CEQA Findings of Consistency 22-95 EXHIBIT "A" Airport Land Use Commission Inconsistency Determination dated August 23, 2023 22-96 AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION ORANGE I COUNTY FOR ORANGE COUNTY .s8�1�G 3160 Airway Avenue • Costa Mesa, California 92626 - 949.252.S170 fax: 949.252.6012 RECEIVED BY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT r\li$Llst 23. 2023 AUG 2 8 202' Rosalinh ling. Principal Planner City ol'Newport Beach CITY OF 1(10 Chic Center i)rive NEWPORT BEACH Newport Beach. CA 92660 Suh.icct: :\H V Determination lily 1 lousing I IenlCnt implementation. Noise-RClated A111C11da1Cllts including Amendments to the band Usc lacnlcnt. Noise Flemem. Zoninu Code. Newnorl Airport Village Planned ('0111111LInity and Newport Place Plaimcd C'onlmunity Dear \1s. I Ong: Duringe the public meeting held on :\ugust 17. 2023. the Airport Land I_;se Commission for 0I.M10e (01111ly COnSldCl-Cd the SUb1CCI ItC111. I Ile 111,1110- was dtll\diSCLISSC(l. alld with a 4-0 rOW. the ('01111111SS10n lMIlld the I lousing I:lemcni illlplelllclltatioll.Noise-Relatcd : \Beni illents including Amendments to Ilse Land Use I'•Ielllent. Noise Fleillent. Zoning C odc. Newport Airport Villaec Planned ('onlmunity and Newport Place Planned C0n1111unity to bC iI)Co11SIStellt with the .I il-pol-I Iarrrrons Land Lace P1cln.0— John iVct-v le :1 h 01-1 (.-I ELI T./ilr ,/11.1 ) per: 1. Section 2.i.1 Ali-cralt Noise that the "aircraft iloisc emanating from airports may be incompatible with general welfare of the inhabitants within file vicinity of all airport. ?. Section 2.1.2 Safety Compatibility Zones in 4yllich "the purpose ol' 111CSc /.odes is to support the continued use and operation ol'an airport by establishint, compatihilit\ and safety standards to prornote air navigational sallety and to reduce potential safety ilaiarcl� 16r persons living. working or recreating near .1WA." 3. Section 2.1.4. and PUC Section 21674 which state That the Commission is char��ed b\ K V Section 21674(a) "to assist local agencies in ensuring coillpalible land uses in the vicinity ol'...existing airports to the extent that the land in the vicinity of those airports is not already devoted to incompatible uses." and PUC Scctlon 21674(b) "to coordinate planning at the state. regional and local levels so as to provide liar the orderly LlcyclopnlCnt ofair transportation. while at t1C Sa111C tulle IN-0teCtlllg the puhliC health. safety and \yelfarc.- 4. 3.2.1 General Policy of which states that the Cieneral Land I*sc policy ofthc Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County shall he -Within the boundaries ol'the .1 LUP. any land use play be tOUnd to be Inconsistent with the :I1:1.1.'1' Wiicll... places people so that they are affected adversely by aircraft noise..... 22-97 Please contact .lulie Fitch at •titclya..:.ocair.com or at (Q49) 252-5170 if YOU would Iike additional inlbrmatson or have questions regarding this procccclin`=. Sincereiy. Lea U. Choum Executive Officer cc: ALUC 22-98 JOHN WAYNE �= AIRPORT OPANGE COUNT'.' rn �a, . r� ; I,� r,`.. ` L. , L. '��,r It ` I��� • ifpTwy -r rat Q�lb =mays41 i •-..,•ti�.� :ly` :, - ' f le " '�'/• •.:ill � + �'� ,xi.�...�� •�:. SY`d ��r -Q r ~ 1 1' •' f!/Jd��'.�1'. `�a 'l� �,�y-1 J5 ray �r 40, + '' ,i .• .,_...--.1 �;`� �i-J 'r:! � ', � , �'�,:a'� . �• fie'• , 4 rat 1'� r'I %" "'. ti '�. �!. i � i, r N si x 'i ;•:�, � ' r 14 1. AY '�-�. , �i%/� I(r1 sr �F" �r(} �i � rf • t ��\ 1. •�1�\ •`} 17 iI \ -A •/' .w ..l •I i John Wayne Airport Access & Noise Office JOHN WAYNE '0, AIRPORT John Wayne Airport t",ccess & Noise Office ORANGE CQUMY yc Ae va11 ?a%. r 40. -44rlit:� K"'� *+ r 3 �APQ- 1;r AiP N." JL F'S H P:; 6L'n A Im f IN -d , x v �j JOH.N WAYNE AIRPORT ORANGE COUNTY John Wayne Airport Access & Noise Office '`_ ''•_ JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT ORANGE. COUNTY rr t John Wayne Airport Access & Noise Office I`r��.. .. ��%` �.. �� � ,xj�••�S '�'ji rA Imo\ !i� - ��)/�,i y F •'� H•i- I�'w" n5� 8 f -I a*� i `. w. r et• Aloft rr �/ _' ' •� #erg°,h. t� �� .i�\� +' r�4 �tA ;�,` "„r ��Sis.�i^-I a�s•!gn f,';� Ap .b�'+'�'�_ r�l(i .1 Jf ^ C•'.'�t ,lf_ l,, r. r#'r�' t � ' A" ��, � ,•� f `�JY� �f,' ''el � �'-r*` a = .r •l`l�!` �,.____.-f-f� `'o' � . � .�'��IF - f +,4�.� :+F-;-.._ - i ''' ..drrE` /• r Y �' 7' • J "i �V; :'` _D r 1 _t�erU 1 h', • v- ,;i. - __--�- 1.40 r�•�•✓/���r� yi+ ,��,` /` � .``,�E� ��; �L=,.R rs � �L J}'. �'•.;"y�- _ J 'J��.il r ,!� -� ,�/ ,' 1 y� � � f,•� sI,} `\ Sig""t'- �I ~t _'' R�;�f ,� { I -� � _ •' � i JZ•� \�l�r r7¢��n _ Jy •-?F .+� s- }T_%'i �sy1i�•._r /f� ld�l �.'_r, r..5�.,, `i4..N �i.,r � - ��` \ \; t � . .�, - - ,• .. �...�/.-' 1, -}♦ �- { ' '1�� i ~{ } :t _ - iL IT Zi a. L•• s'o, � �j r9' t' •.t '}S� I� ��'ry !:�pi tli��, � Y ;� '• � - -' Y i - ;! +� i _„ '' !'- 1i - - Sr -S 1 .Y��� ,..1`��'..�.J+U�M1 „}�j: � ' t-1� •e G .rr S. �=�-. L � — _ - I i � I � •V, �� L.. r'1•':1• 4•-S ` -/f 1ii.ti.G,:fl �- :r�,�... �. _.." .� �• [rsr� ,ti�.a �r ..v .. _._ __. . _ _} • J O H N W A Y N E AIRPORT ORANGE COUNTY ;'. � �__ll►IYvr. .� •.4 4nie' ,!, 1��11Jr''�.;�`�.I�• •►�' .A(� lrYJ 'cif /�� M •%.r 1 �� �� ' � ! ' :r�_3xi�.1'�7f�; n` - ����— � zx f •;'��N4. " ' i! rr { `, " ���`.:..,w. mil► �4 i ♦�,. �y 4v'jr �. /-,;,r rJ�.a, %mil �r� _I! • J 11' .'.ntlth l iij �s~� • r Ap/I F -�-.�` may.. -., �. � f.' •, �hti * � . :'� �'.+' I #4 l','•� �.+;• rr~y •4 � 4 , > . K.I✓ 1 f .Aa� fr-y 4 f y4 4 - �r f slV:�``, i d S I �4�1 - 1 i . 3' F' i � •. � f r' I John Wayne Airport Access & Noise Office JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT ORANGE COUNTY r�, ��t o _ ..Rr i� ;L r -n•r y4t,,:`• ~�l� Mr _!mil "- •� �,� { ��' -� .�J: l fn{: `` ram`• �' ~`;� ��'f {�� "IAl �4�, A •�r{t �r ' J.21f Poe �� .•ram rt' ',, ..}`• fi{I� �vf t.' Y'r -F sY ,rr ,�. fJ�a �1. 1'I let 06 r,/�/ \ `r% ,� �.r•r mot= � 1 -,. ..• .r /irk bj r , - ��. �yJ r _ John Wayne Airport Access & Noise Office EXHIBIT "B" Comment Letter from John Waye Airport dated October 9, 2023 22-105 JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT ORANGE COUNTY October 9, 2023 Rosalinh Ung, Principal Planner City of Newport Beach Community Development Department 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, California 92660 run�new�ortbeachca.gov RE: Newport Beach Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments Dear Ms. Ung: This letter provides comments on behalf of the County of Orange (County), acting in its capacity as the owner and operator of John Wayne Airport, Orange County (SNA) (JWA or Airport), to the City of Newport Beach's (City) proposed noise -related amendments to its Land Use Element, Noise Element, Zoning Code, Newport Place Planned Community, and Newport Airport Village Planned Community (collectively, Housing Element Noise Update or Update). We understand that this Update is intended to accommodate the City's proposed residential sites located within the Airport's 60 and 65 decibel (dB) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) noise contours that were included in the Housing Element Update that was approved by the City in September 2022. The Airport has a number of serious concerns relating to this proposed Housing Element Noise Update including, but not limited to, land use, noise, safety and airspace compatibility issues, compliance with the 2006 Cooperative Agreement between the County and the City, and compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Guidelines) (Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.). Our concerns are addressed in detail below. Background As you know, the City recently submitted the Housing Element Noise Update to the County's Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for a consistency determination. In August 2023, the ALUC found the City's Update to be inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for JWA due to noise, safety and land use incompatibility issues. The City has indicated that it plans to overrule ALUC's most recent inconsistency determination and adopt the Housing Element Noise Update. Our understanding is that the ALUC will submit a separate comment letter relating to the AELUP overrule and the sufficiency of the City's findings for that overrule. Therefore, this comment letter will not address those important ALUC and findings issues. Rather, our comment letter focuses on the important land use, noise, safety and airspace compatibility issues relating to the City's Housing Element Noise Update, as well as issues relating to the 2006 Cooperative Agreement and the City's compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, Charlene V. Reynolds (949) 252-5171 3160 Airway Avenue Airport Director (949) 252-5178 FAX Costa Mesa, CA www.ocair.com 92626-4608 22-106 Rosalinh Ung, Principal Planner City of Newport Beach October 9, 2023 Page 2 Land Use, Noise, Overflight, and Safety Compatibility Issues The City's proposed Housing Element Noise Update identifies approximately twenty-eight (28) new sites for potential residential development within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour and twenty- three (23) new sites for potential residential development within the 60 dB CNEL noise contour. In addition, the 2021 Housing Element Update removed a policy that was included in previous Housing Elements prohibiting residential uses within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour, and the City is now proposing to revise or remove similar policies from the Housing Element Noise Update. Our understanding is that the City's proposal identifies sites that can achieve the City's assigned 2021 Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) for the 2021-2029 planning period. However, many of these sites are now located within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour, which was formerly prohibited by the City's own policies. Noise is one of the most basic land use compatibility concerns. Federal and state statutes and regulations establish the basis for ensuring land use compatibility in areas around airports. Specifically, both the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Califomia Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics (Caltrans) have adopted noise and land use compatibility standards for residential land uses, schools, and other noise sensitive uses. (See, e.g., 49 U.S.C. § 47502, Pub. Util. Code § 21669, Cal. Code Regs. § 5000 of seq.). These standards generally establish a maximum exterior noise level of 65 dB CNEL for private outdoor living areas and an interior noise level of 45 dB CNEL for residential and other sensitive land uses. As indicated in Section 5006 of the California Code of Regulations (Title 21, Division 2.5, Chapter 6): "The level of noise acceptable to a reasonable person residing in the vicinity of an airport is established as a community noise equivalent level (CNEL) value of 65 dB for purposes of these regulations. This criterion level has been chosen for reasonable persons residing in urban residential areas where houses are of typical California construction and may have windows partially open. It has been selected with reference to speech, sleep, and community reaction." Because the City's proposed Housing Element Noise Update could result in new residential development being exposed to excessive noise levels outside these standards, we request that the Housing Element Noise Update be revised to reflect only non-residential uses within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour to ensure compliance with these important state and federal noise standards. In addition to the FAA and Caltrans standards for noise compatibility, general plan guidelines relating to noise compatibility are provided in the Califomia Govemment Code. (See, e.g., Cal. Gov. Code §65302.) These code provisions require noise contours to be used as a guide for establishing a pattern of land uses that minimizes the exposure of community residents to excessive noise. The Housing Element Noise Update, which potentially would expose residents to excessive noise impacts, is not consistent with these general plan guidelines. We therefore, also request that the City revise its Housing Element Noise Update to, at a minimum, locate any new residential development outside the 65 dB CNEL noise contour and, preferably, locate any new residential development outside the 60 dB CNEL noise contour in order to minimize the exposure of community residents to excessive noise. Adding new residential sites within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour would not only subject future residents to excessive aircraft noise due to the proximity of the Airport but would also increase 22-10 7 Rosalinh Ling, Principal Planner City of Newport Beach October 9, 2023 Page 3 the amount of incompatible land use within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour. If the City does not revise its Update to eliminate all residential sites within the 60 and 65 dB CNEL noise contours, specific noise mitigation requirements should be implemented for any future residences located within these noise contours, including appropriate avigation easement and sound attenuation as required under Cal, Code Regs. Tit. 21 §5037. These requirements could be accomplished through an overlay zone in the Housing Element Noise Update that notifies planners processing projects in the airport environs that avigation easements and appropriate sound attenuation requirements must be met. This type of overlay zone will minimize the risk to both the City and County relating to future sound attenuation requirements and/or noise litigation. The proposed residential sites also include properties that fall beneath the approach and transitional obstruction imaginary surfaces for JWA. Therefore, potential future residents would be exposed to significant aircraft overflight annoyance as approaching aircraft fly overhead. In the past, residential land uses located under aircraft approach corridors have generated a significant number of noise complaints from affected residents. Therefore, it is important that the City ensures that appropriate overflight notification requirements be put in place relating to these potential residential sites. Again, this type of notification requirement can be implemented through a Housing Element Noise Update overlay zone or through the CEQA process discussed further below. There are also safety concerns related to proposed residential sites which are located within the AELUP Safety Zones for JWA. The comment letter from the ALUC provides more specifics on this issue, but it is important to note that the proposed residential sites within the Airport environs have been identified in Safety Zone 6: Traffic Pattern Zone and Safety Zone 4: Outer Approach/Departure Zone. As provided in the AELUP's Basic Safety Compatibility Qualities Table (page 9-45), within Safety Zone 4, "[i]n undeveloped areas, limit residential uses to very low densities (if not deemed unacceptable because of noise); if alternative uses are impractical, allow higher densities as infill in urban areas." In this instance, locating residential uses within Safety Zone 4 would place future residents within close proximity to the Airport and locate residential development directly under a general aviation, low -altitude, primary flight corridor. It is important that the City recognize these safety issues in the context of the Housing Element Noise Update and make adjustments and modifications to eliminate, where possible, these safety concerns. Further, there are numerous flights over the proposed residential sites in the Airport environs, with a concentration of flights over the primary approach corridor and proposed sites east of the Airport within Safety Zone 6 and the transitional surface for JWA. The location and number of proposed new residential sites within Safety Zones 4 and 6, with some directly under the flight path of commercial and general aviation flights, again suggests that these new residential land uses would be incompatible with the operations at JWA and subject the future residents to not only excessive noise but also safety risks. In addition to the land use, noise, overflight, and safety compatibility issues identified above, many of the residential sites included in the Housing Element Noise Update are in the Approach Surface, Transitional Surface, and Horizontal Surface of the Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 77 Obstruction Imaginary Surfaces for JWA. (See, e.g., 49 U.S.C. § 44718, 49 U.S.C. § 46301.) Although no height increases are proposed at this time, and with approximate ground elevations of 46 to 53 feet, the City's existing maximum building heights for the sites would not penetrate the Obstruction Imaginary Surfaces, the City has indicated that proposals for changes 22-108 Rosalinh Ung, Principal Planner City of Newport Beach October 9, 2023 Page 4 to the existing height limits may be considered in the future. Therefore, it is important that the City is aware of this issue and the importance of compliance with the FAR Part 77 surfaces for JWA. Cooperative Agreement Between the City and County In addition to the land use, noise, safety, and airspace compatibility issues identified above, if the City moves forward with approving the Housing Element Noise Update which places new residential sites within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour, such actions will undermine the goals set forth in the Cooperative Agreement between the City and County of Orange, dated November 1, 2006. In that Agreement, the City and County agreed to "expand their longstanding efforts to promote compatibility between operations at John Wayne Airport...and land uses within and in proximity to the City." Furthermore, the City agreed to become a "consistent" agency with respect to residential land uses within the airport vicinity and to preserve certain longstanding land use plans, such as the Santa Ana Heights Specific Area Plan (SAHSAP) that were designed to harmonize land uses in Santa Ana Heights with air carrier operations at JWA. The City agreed to retain this consistent agency status through the term of the Agreement provided that the AELUP CNEL contour is not expanded in comparison to that which is in the AELUP as of the effective date. Importantly, the noise contours that the City proposed to utilize for the ALUC Update consistency determination are smaller than those provided in the AELUP. In addition, the City agreed not to repeal/modify the SAHSAP without County consent. The proposed Housing Element Noise Update would require changes to the City Zoning Code, which in turn requires an amendment to the SAHSAP. Consistent with the 2006 Cooperative Agreement, the City is required to obtain County consent prior to any amendments to the SAHSAP. CEQA Compliance With respect to CEQA compliance, because the City's Housing Element Noise Update submittal allows new residential sites within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour, there is a significant land use and noise impact for purposes of CEQA. In addition, and as discussed in detail above, there are also significant safety, airspace protection, and related environmental issues that must be addressed in the CEQA context. The City has mistakenly indicated that the proposed Housing Element Noise Update is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Guidelines section 15183. (See City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Staff Report, dated August 3, 2023, Agenda Item No. 4, Housing Element Implementation, Noise -Related Amendments (PA2022-0201), pp. 1, 10-11; City of Newport Beach Resolution No. 2023-52, Section 6.) However, the referenced CEQA provision does not apply to projects otherwise consistent with a General Plan's development density parameters where it is "necessary to examine whether there are project -specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site." (Guidelines, §15183(a).) As described throughout this comment letter, the proposed Housing Element Noise Update would facilitate the future development of residential land uses in a geographic area that is subject to potentially significant aviation -related noise, airspace, overflight and safety environmental concerns. Guidelines section 15183 does not provide a CEQA compliance pathway that permits the City to abdicate its duty to evaluate, disclose and mitigate these "peculiar" environmental concerns that are unique to the airport environs. (Guidelines, §15183(b).) 22-109 Rosalinh Ung, Principal Planner City of Newport Beach October 9, 2023 Page 5 The City additionally has indicated that the proposed Housing Element Noise Update is not subject to further environmental review based on the erroneous premise that its impacts were fully analyzed in Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) 617, which was prepared for the amendments to the 1985 Settlement Agreement entered into by and between the County and the Orange County Board of Supervisors, the City of Newport Beach, Stop Polluting Our Newport, and the Airport Working Group of Orange County, Inc., (the Settlement Amendment) (see, Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 14-084 [September 30, 20141 and Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 14.088 [September 30, 2014]). (See City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Staff Report, dated August 3, 2023, Agenda Item No. 4, Housing Element Implementation, Noise - Related Amendments (PA2022-0201), pp. 1, 10-11; City of Newport Beach Resolution No. 2023- 52, Section 6.) FEIR 617, however, did not analyze the potentially significant environmental impacts of future residential land uses within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour. This is because, at the time that FEIR 617 was prepared, the City's policies did not allow residential land uses within the 65 dB contour and none were proposed. (See, e.g., FEIR 617, Table 4.5-10 [Goals and Policies Consistency Analysis], City of Newport Beach General Plan Policy 6.15.3: Airport Compatibility ["Require that ... residential development be located outside of the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour specified by the 1985 JWA Master Plan."].) Therefore, the City cannot rely on FEIR 617 for CEQA compliance because it does not analyze the potentially significant land use compatibility, noise, overflight, and safety impacts, among other impacts, of locating future residential development within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour. (See, e.g., CEQA Guidelines §§15006(f) and 15153 [permitting a lead agency to reuse a prior EIR for another project only when it "adequately addresses the proposed project" and where it can be demonstrated that "such projects are essentially the same in terms of environmental impact"]; see also CEQA Guidelines §15162 [providing that a subsequent EIR shall be prepared where "substantial changes" to the project are proposed which trigger the involvement of new significant environmental effects].) Also, and importantly, CEQA is the vehicle not only for the discussion and analysis of potentially significant impacts, but also for the imposition of appropriate mitigation, including, but not limited to, avigation easements and sound attenuation. (See, e.g., Guidelines §15002(a)(1)-(3).) The City must prepare and certify adequate CEQA analysis, including approval of adequate mitigation for significant environmental impacts, prior to considering approval and adoption of the Housing Element Noise Update. Due to the proposed policy amendments which now would allow residential uses within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour, CEQA compliance is required prior to approval of the Housing Element Noise Update. The City cannot wait for a future residential project proposal. CEQA prohibits this type of deferral and piecemealing of the analysis of impacts. (See, e.g., Guidelines §15004 [CEQA compliance "should be prepared as early as feasible in the planning process"]; Guidelines §15378 [the "project" is the "whole of an action" and includes activities "directly undertaken by any public agency including ... the adoption and amendment of local General Plans or elements thereof'].)' ' It is noted that, on June 27, 2023, the City published a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for preparation of a Program EIR relating to its proposed Housing Implementation Program. In the NOP's "Project Summary," the City explains that its Program EIR will "evaluate the potential environmental effects of the implementing actions associated with the 2021-2029 Housing Element," including the housing sites identified in the so-called "Airport Area" (see, e.g., Figure 2E therein) and corresponding revisions to the City's General Plan Land Use Element and Zoning Code. It is unclear how the City's proposed Housing Implementation Program relates to the City's proposed Housing Element Noise Update that is the subject of this comment letter. Absent additional explanation, it appears that the City is improperly piecemealing the CEQA review of the totality of the City's efforts to implement its 2021-2029 Housing Element. (The 22-110 Rosalinh Ung, Principal Planner City of Newport Beach October 9, 2023 Page 6 Conclusion In conclusion, the City's proposed Housing Element Noise Update has the potential to increase incompatible land use within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour, which could result in significant land use compatibility, noise, safety, and overflight impacts and additional encroachment of incompatible land uses within the airport environs. As indicated above, the City must comply with CEQA requirements to adequately analyze these potentially significant environmental impacts prior to considering approval of this Update. In addition, the City's proposed Housing Element Noise Update is inconsistent with the 2006 Cooperative Agreement entered into between the City and the County. Revisions are required to the Update to remove any residential uses within the 65 and 60 dB CNEL noise contours to ensure continued compliance with this important Agreement. We continue to appreciate our close relationship with the City and will make ourselves available to discuss the issues identified in this letter at your convenience. Our hope is that we can continue to work cooperatively to ensure land use compatibility surrounding the Airport. Sincerely, Charlene V. Rey olds Airport Director Cc: Frank Kim, County Executive Officer Lilly Simmering, Deputy County Executive Officer Leon Page, County Counsel Nicole Walsh, Senior Assistant County Counsel referenced NOP for the proposed Housing Implementation Program is available on the City's website at Notice of Preparation and Scoping Meeting 062723.pdf (newportbeachca.ga�>.) 22-111 EXHIBIT "C" Comment Letter from Airport Land Use Commission dated October 11, 2023 22-112- DocuSign Envelope ID: OOD406E1-2E9F-4D91-A4A3-55E230ED583F AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION ORANGE I COUNTY FOR ORANGE COUNTY ALUC- 3160 Airway Avenue - Costa Mesa, California 92626 - 949.2S2.5170 fax: 949.252.6012 October 11. 2023 Rosalinh Ung City of Newport Beach Community Development Department 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Subject: Response to Notice of Intent to Overrule the Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County Determination on Housing Element Implementation Dear Ms. Ung. We are in receipt of the City of Newport Beach (City) letter dated September 13. 2023. and City Council Resolution No. 2023-52 notifying the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for Orange County of the City's intent to overrule the ALUC's inconsistency determination on the proposed Housing Element Implementation - Noise Related Amendments. In accordance with Section 21676 of the Public Utilities Code, the ALUC submits the following comments addressing the proposed overrule findings f'or the above -referenced project. These comments shall be included in the public record of a final decision to overrule the ALUC. Please be advised that California Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 21678 states: "With respect to a publicly owned airport that a public agency does not operate, if the public agency pursuant to Section 21676, 21676.5, or 21677 overrules a commission's action or recommendation, the operator of the airport shall be immune from liability for damages to property or personal injury caused by or resulting directly or indirectly from the public agency's decision to overrule the commission's action or recommendation." Background On August 17. 2023, the ALUC for Orange County found the proposed Housing Element implementation - Noise Related Amendments to be inconsistent with the it iq)or! Environs Land Use flan (AELUP) for John FYayne Air fort (.INVit) on a 4-0 vote. The inconsistent finding was based on AELUP Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.2, and 2.1.4. and PUC Sections 21674(a) and 21674(b). Pursuant to Section 1.2 of the AF..LUP for JWA, the purpose of the AELUP is to safeguard the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of the airport and to ensure the continued operation of the airport. Specifically, the AELUP seeks to protect the public from the adverse effects ofaircraft noise to ensure that people and facilities are not concentrated in areas 22-113 DocuSign Envelope ID: OOD406E1-2E9F-4D91-A4A3-55E230ED563F Housing Element Implementation Overrule Response October I I.2023 Page 2 susceptible to aircraft accidents, and to ensure that no structures or activities adversely affect navigable airspace. Additionally, Section 2.1.4 of the AELUP for JWA and PUC Section 21674 charge the Commission to coordinate at the local level to ensure compatible land use planning. Therefore, because of the City's proposed amendment and potential residential uses, that would occur within Community Noise Equivalent Levels (CNEL) 60 and 65, and Safety Zones 4 and 6, which include exposure to significant risks, noise and aircraft overflight, the City's proposed actions are inconsistent with the AELUP. ALUC has the following additional comments regarding the findings and facts of support included in Resolution No. 2023-52. Response to Finding and Fact in Support A - Regarding Noise Standards: Pursuant to AELUP Section 2.1.1, "... aircraft noise emanating from airports may be incompatible with the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of an airport..." As noted in the City's discussion, the CNEL standards are set forth in the AELUP. As part of the review of the proposed Housing Element Implementation - Noise Related Amendments, it was noted that the "suitable" sites are identified within the JWA 65 dBA and 60 dBA CNEL noise contours. The ALUC believes that the proposed new locations for residential units would be highly affected by airport noise due to the close proximity to the airport (some within less than one mile from the runway end and others directly across the street from the airport), and that the past and current land use designation of Open Space and/or Commercial is the appropriate designation for this site. One of the proposed amendments to the Noise Element is to replace the existing noise contours which are currently consistent with the adopted AELUP for ./WA, with more narrow noise contours which were included in 2014 Settlement Agreement EIR 617. Although a CEQA finding is not required for purposes of making a consistency determination, EIR 617 did not provide an analysis of the potentially significant impacts of placing future residential uses within the 65 dB CNEL contour, therefore, the City's reliance on FE1R 617 is misplaced and inconsistent with the AELUP for MA. The proposed Housing Element Implementation - Noise Related Amendments would allow residential uses which are not suitable and would subject the future residents to excessive noise regardless of which noise contours are utilized. The ALUC has historically found residential uses in the vicinity of JWA to be inconsistent with the AELUP.jor.IWA. Response to Fact in Support B - Regarding Safety: Pursuant to AELUP Section 2.1.2, "[s]afety and compatibility zones depict which land uses are acceptable and which are unacceptable in various portions of airport environs. The purpose of these zones is to support the continued use and operation of an airport by establishing compatibility and safety standards to promote air navigational safety and to reduce potential safety hazards for persons living, working or recreating near JWA." 22-114 DocuSign Envelope ID: OOD406E1-2E9F-4D91-A4A3-55E230ED583F Housing Element Implcmematton Overrule Response October 11, 2023 Page 3 The proposed housing sites in the Housing Element Update and subject to the Noise Related Amendments include property located in Safety Zone 4 — Outer Approach/Departure Zone, and Safety Zone 6 — Traffic Pattern Zone 6. Many of the sites located in Safety Zones 4 and 6 are also located in the 65 dB CNEL contour, According to the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, noise and overflight should be considered in Safety Zone 6 and residential uses should be limited to low density in Safety Zone 4. Flight tracks for the property were included in the ALUC staff report and are attached to this letter. There are few residential uses surrounding the proposed suitable sites, none as dense as the City's proposed sites. Considering the proposed densities, proximity to JWA and the number of flights over the property, the inclusion of these new dense sites in the proposed Housing Element Implementation - Noise Related Amendments is inappropriate. Response to Fact in Support C - Regarding "Intent of the AELUP": By virtue of being clearly stated in AELUP fa- JWA Sections 1.2 "Purpose and Scope" and 2,0 "Planning Guidelines," the ALUC understands the complex legal charge to protect public airports from encroachment by incompatible land use development, while simultaneously protecting the health, safety and welfare of citizens who work and live in the airport's environs. To this end, and as also statutorily required, ALUC proceedings are benefited by several members having expertise in aviation. Based upon careful consideration of all information provided, and input from ALUC members with expertise in aviation, the ALUC unanimously found the proposed Housing Element Implementation - Noise Related Amendments to be Inconsistent with the AELUP for JWA. We urge the City Council to take ALUC's concerns into consideration in its deliberations prior to deciding whether to overrule ALUC. In the event the City overrules ALUC's determinations, ALUC requests that individual projects within the airport influence area are submitted to ALUC for review. Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments. Sincerely, DocuBlyned by: AhA Al.owv, 0 F 3 FF82438 Mar onin Vice Chairman Attachment: John Wayne Airport Flight Tracks for Housing Element Implementation - Noise Related Amendments cc: Members of Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County Members of Newport Beach City Council Jonathan Huff, Caltrans/Division of Aeronautics 22-115 EXHIBIT "D" Comment Letter from State Department of Transportation Aeronautics Program dated October 13, 2023 22-116 STATE OF CALIFORNIA--CALIFORMA STATE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY _ pip -yin Newsom, Govemof DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AERONAUTICS Program-- M.S. #40 1120 N STREET P. O. BOX 942874 SACRAMENTO, CA 94274-0001 PHONE (916) 654-4959 FAX (916) 653-9531 TTY 711 www.dot.ca.gov October 13, 2023 40 Making Conservation a California way of Life. Ben Zdebo, AICP, Principal Planner Electronically Sent City of Newport Beach bzdeba@newportbeachca.gov Community Development Department 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660-3267 Dear Mr. Zdeba: The Aeronautics Program (Program) at the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) appreciates receiving the Notice of Intent dated September 13, 2023, from the City of Newport Beach (City), to overrule a determination of the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). The ALUC has reported that the Sixth Cycle Housing Element Update Project (Project) is inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport (JWA). The Notice of Intent concerns the City's Resolution (No.) 2023-52 (Resolution), and specific "Facts in Support" related to the AELUP. In advance of a public hearing on the Resolution to consider overruling the ALUC's determination, the Program is providing the following comments pursuant to California Public Utilities Code (PUC) section 21676. Please accept this updated response initially dated November 24, 2021. Facts in Support # 1 - The Project is consistent with the noise standards of the AELUP. Citing AELUP section 3.2.3 for "residential uses to be developed with advanced insulation systems to bring the sound after attenuation to no more than 45 dB inside" overlooks a key provision of the section that is seen prior to quoting the conclusion of the section that says, 'residential uses within the 65- 70 dBA CNEL noise contour are required to be 'indoor - oriented' to preclude noise impingement on outdoor living areas." The provision in between says, "All residential units are inconsistent in this area unless it can be shown conclusively that such units are sufficiently sound attenuated for present and projected noise exposures, which shall be the energy sum of all noise impacting the project, so as not to exceed an interior standard of 45 dB CNEL." No "conclusive" support is provided as part of Facts in Support # 1. Instead, the statement is made that the City's existing "General Plan Land Use Element Policy LU 6.15.3 and Noise Element Policy N 3.2 currently require that residential development in the Airport Area are to be located outside of the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour." A claim that follows says, "as part of the City's comprehensive update to the General Plan, these policies will be updated to reflect and allow the additional housing opportunity sites in the higher impact noise zones." The City's proposed overrule of the ALUC, then, is based on a claim yet to be proven, whereas the ALUC's determination of inconsistency is related to existing fact. The Program can only conclude that the Project does not satisfy requirements in PUC section 21670, as "Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated, and efficient transportation system to enhance California's economy and livability" 22-117 Mr. Ben Zdeba October 13, 2023 Page 2 claimed in the Notice of Intent for the purpose of public protection from hazards near airports. Facts in Support #2-The proposed Project is consistent with the safety standards of the AELUP. This Fact in Support is deficient for not adequately citing the reference to Safety Zone 6 (Traffic Pattern Zone) of the AELUP. As used in the Notice of Intent, the statement that says, "risk factors associated with Safety Zone 6 generally include a low likelihood of accident occurrence," is drawn from the AELUP, but it overlooks the AELUP's reference to the 2002 California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (Handbook; published by the Program). It is Table 9B in the 2002 Handbook that refers to "a low likelihood of accident occurrence." Unfortunately, the AELUP does not account for the current Handbook of 2011. The City also does not account for it. The 2011 Handbook allows for low risk of accidents in the zone for an airport traffic pattern, but it goes further to quantify accident risk (Chapter 4, page 4-25). Owing to a relatively large area, the Handbook indicates 18-29 percent of accidents near a runway could occur in the traffic pattern zone (attributable also to lower and slower flight profiles for less time and altitude to recover from distress). The 2011 Handbook also allows for residential land use in the traffic pattern zone, but with the condition that says, "where ambient noise levels are low." By accounting for this discrepancy, the Program recommends that the City evaluate ambient noise levels in the JWA Safety Zone 6 before taking further action on the proposed ALUC overrule. It would be a prudent means for abiding by PUC section 21670 "to prevent new noise and safety problems." Facts in Support #3 - The proposed Project is consistent with the purpose and intent of the AELUP and will not result in incompatible land uses adjacent to JWA. Citing the City's intention related to the Project that says, "any development on the proposed housing opportunity sites will comply with the noise criteria and safety standards," contained in Sections 2 and 3 of the AELUP, is appreciated by the Program. Sections 2 and 3 of AELUP provide overall policies for planning and land use around JWA, including certain specific criteria. The points made in this letter concerning specific criteria should be considered for their value to ensure accurate compliance with PUC section 21670. Otherwise, the Program contends that any less effort compromises both the City's declared position in the Notice of Intent and the public's welfare. Sincerely, Originally signed by Jonathan Huff Associate Transportation Planner c: Lea U. Choum, Executive Officer, Orange County Airport Land Use Commission; ALUCinfo@ocair.com "Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated, and efficient transportation system to enhance California's economy and livability" 22-118 Mr. Ben Zdeba October 13, 2023 Page 2 bc: Lan Zhou, Deputy District Director, District 12; lan.zhou@dot.ca.gov "Provide a safe, sustoinobie, integrated, and efficient transportation system to enhance California's economy and livability" 22-119 EXHIBIT "E" CEQA Consistency Findings The California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (California Public Resources Code §§21000 et seq.); the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations §§15000 et seq.); and the rules, regulations, and procedures for implementing CEQA as set forth by the City of Newport Beach ("City") provide guidance regarding when additional environmental review is required. Pursuant to the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, Newport Beach is the Lead Agency charged with the responsibility of deciding whether to approve the Amendments to Newport Beach General Plan Land Use and Noise Elements, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC"), Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60) (Amendments) to accommodate housing units identified by the certified 2021-2029 Sixth Cycle General Plan Housing Element ("6th Cycle Housing Element"). The provisions of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 are applicable to the Amendments. The Amendments are not subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 because the Amendments do not change the underlying land use or zoning designations of any specific parcels, including parcels within the Airport Area or within the updated noise contours; and would not result in new significant impacts or a substantial more adverse impact than addressed in John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report No. 617 (State Clearinghouse No. 2001111135) (EIR No. 617). The Amendments are also exempt because they fall within the scope of analysis contained within the previously certified EIR No. 617, prepared for the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement, to which the City is a party. CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 provides, in relevant part: (a) CEQA mandates that projects which are consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified shall not require additional environmental review, except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project -specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site. This streamlines the review of such projects and reduces the need to prepare repetitive environmental studies. (b) In approving a project meeting the requirements of this section, a public agency shall limit its examination of environmental effects to those which the agency determines, in an initial study or other analysis: (1) Are peculiar to the projector the parcel on which the project would be located, (2) Were not analyzed as significant effects in a prior EIR on the zoning action, general plan, or community plan, with which the project is consistent, 22-120 (3) Are potentially significant off -site impacts and cumulative impacts which were not discussed in the prior EIR prepared for the general plan, community plan or zoning action, or (4) Are previously identified significant effects which, as a result of substantial new information which was not known at the time the EIR was certified, are determined to have a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the prior EIR. (c) If an impact is not peculiar to the parcel or to the project, has been addressed as a significant effect in the prior EIR, or can be substantially mitigated by the imposition of uniformly applied development policies or standards, as contemplated by subdivision (e) below, then an additional EIR need not be prepared for the project solely on the basis of that impact. (d) This section shall apply only to projects which meet the following conditions: (1) The project is consistent with: (A) A community plan adopted as part of a general plan, (B) A zoning action which zoned or designated the parcel on which the project would be located to accommodate a particular density of development, or (C) A general plan of a local agency, and (2) An EIR was certified by the lead agency for the zoning action, the community plan, or the general plan. As part of its decision -making process, the City is required to review and consider whether the Amendments would create new significant impacts or significant impacts that would be substantially more severe than those disclosed in the John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report No. 617 (State Clearinghouse No. 2001111135) (EIR No. 617). Additional CEQA review is only triggered if the Amendments create new significant impacts or impacts that are more severe than those disclosed in EIR No. 617 such that major revisions to the EIR would be required. The Amendments provide for updated noise contours as established in EIR No. 617 and revisions to General Plan policies, Title 20 of NBMC, Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60) to allow for consistency between the certified 6th Cycle Housing Element and the Newport Beach General Plan and NBMC as it applies to future housing uses near John Wayne Airport. The Amendments are proposed to ensure consistency pursuant to the State Planning and Zoning Law and the City's compliance with its RHNA allocation. 22-121 As explained below, none of the Amendments revise the land use designation, density or development standards applicable to residential or non-residential development in the Airport Area, The Amendments do not grant any development entitlements or authorize development. Rather, the purpose of the Housing Element Noise Update is to advance the policies and goals of the 6th Cycle Housing Element by removing the barrier in multiple General Plan and zoning policies that prohibit residential development within the 1985 65 dBA CNEL. The Amendments, therefore, will not result in development of greater intensity than is allowed under the 2006 General Plan and Newport Airport Village Planned Community, as amended. Although the City's 2006 General Plan approved a maximum of 2,200 residential units in the Airport Area at a maximum density of 50 dwelling units per net acre (du/net acre), the General Plan Program EIR evaluated 4,300 residential units in the Airport Area. California courts have upheld reliance on this exemption for programmatic planning decisions. See, e.g., Lucas v. City of Pomona, 92 Cal.App.5th 508 (2023) (city properly relied on CEQA Guidelines section 15183 when approving a zoning overlay district allowing commercial cannabis activities on specific parcels located in certain areas within the City; court noting that "the Project merely imposes an overlay use on existing zoning; it does not guarantee anyone the automatic right to establish a cannabis -related business, but rather, provides the option to apply for a cannabis business permit. In that sense, the Amendments does not cause project -specific effects 'peculiar' to it.") Because no additional CEQA review is required, the City is not required to analyze additional mitigation measures for the Housing Element Noise Update at this time. Furthermore, as noted above, the Housing Element Noise Update requires (as a local regulatory requirement, not CEQA mitigation measure) residential projects located within the 65 dBA CNEL contour line to include appropriate in -door sound attenuation methods. The Noise Chapter of EIR No. 617 explained how the dBA CNEL noise contours have reduced in size compared to the 1985 Airport Environs Land Use Plan ("AELUP") Master Plan CNEL noise contours, in which the City's General Plan policies and maps are based on. The 1985 Master Plan noise contours are considerably larger than the existing noise contours presented previously. This is largely due to a quieter fleet of existing commercial aircraft and a dramatic reduction in the number of generation aviation operations. The noise contours in EIR No. 617 are based on more contemporary noise modeling programs, as the EIR explained that "one of the most important factors in generating accurate noise contours is the collection of accurate operational data". Airport noise contours generated in this noise study using the INM Version 7.Od which was released for use in May 2013, and is the state - of -art in airport noise modeling. As such, the City proposes to update the Noise Element to include these noise contours, which in part, modify where residential uses could occur outside of the 65 CNEL contour in the Airport Area. Based on these updated noise contours, certain Housing Opportunity Sites will now be outside of the 65 CNEL contour while others will be within the 65 CNEL contour. However, the Amendments will not result in development of greater intensity than is allowed under the 2006 General Plan and Newport Airport Village Planned Community, as amended. Residential uses can be allowed in the Airport Area on parcels that are wholly or 22-122 partially outside the 65dBA CNEL contour as denoted in Figure N5 of the Noise Element. The JWA noise contours depicted in Figure N5 as proposed are the noise contours from EIR No. 617. Residential uses may be approved in these areas provided interior living areas are protected from excessive noise by appropriate construction techniques that reduce the interior noise to 45 dBA CNEL, consistent with state law. Parcels that are wholly within the 65 dB CNEL contour shown in Figure N5 (e.g., those identified as experiencing noise levels above 65 dB CNEL) are unsuitable for residential development unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the site(s) wholly within the 65-70 dB CNEL contours are needed for the City to satisfy its 6th Cycle RHNA mandate. The changes would not allow for more development than assumed in the growth assumptions in the General Plan nor would it impact the City's RHNA obligations. To the extent new parcels are able to be developed in the future for residential uses, by nature of no longer being located within areas identified as experiencing 65 dB CNEL or greater, those parcels must be part of a specific proposed project for consideration and processing by the City for approval. Future housing development would be subject to compliance with the established regulatory framework, namely federal, State, regional, and local (including General Plan policies, NBMC standards, and Standard Conditions of Approval). While by -right housing projects may be exempt from CEQA, all future residential uses affected by the Amendments would continue to be subject to further development review, which can include technical supporting reports. The Amendments are also exempt because they fall within the scope of analysis contained within EIR No. 617, prepared and certified by the County for the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment, to which the City is a party. EIR No. 617, fully analyzed impacts on sensitive receptors (including residential uses) in adopting the Settlement Agreement Amendment, including the updated CNEL contour boundaries associated therewith, using both the County and City's thresholds of significance. The City was a responsible agency for EIR No. 617, and co -signatory to the Settlement Agreement Amendment. EIR No. 617 concluded that the Settlement Agreement Amendment (and associated updated CNEL contours) would result in less - than -significant impacts related to noise increases at sensitive receptors, but a significant and unavoidable impact from increasing noise levels at exterior use areas of residences. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted. No lawsuits were filed challenging the adequacy of EIR No. 617. EIR No. 617 fully analyzed impacts on sensitive receptors (including residential uses) in adopting the Settlement Agreement Amendment, including the updated CNEL contour boundaries associated therewith. In April 2014, the County of Orange prepared a EIR in connection with the Airport Settlement Amendment (SHC No. 2001111135). The County Board of Supervisors certified the EIR on September 30, 2014. The County's approval of the Project would be contingent upon the City Council of Newport Beach and the governing boards of Stop Polluting Our Newport ("SPON") and Airport Working Group ("AWG") approving and executing the agreed upon amendment to the Settlement Agreement. The City was a responsible agency and the City Council relied on EIR No. 617 for CEQA purposes in approving the Settlement Agreement Amendment. A 22-123 Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted. No lawsuits were filed challenging EIR No. 617. EIR No. 617 analyzed potentially significant environmental effects of residential land uses in the 65 dB CNEL. Specifically, the noise and land use and planning chapters of EIR No. 617 quantified and analyzed noise and land use incompatibility impacts associated with existing residential uses (and noise receptors) in the 65 dBA CNEL. The cumulative impacts analyses in the 65 dB CNEL expressly reflected future planning trends, growth projections and specific projects located in the Airport Area in proximity to JWA. Noise EIR No. 617 provides an explanation as to why the 2014 dBA CNEL contours are smaller than the 1985 Master Plan CNEL contours. The EIR observed that "the Mater Plan noise contours are considerably larger than existing noise contours ... due to a quieter fleet of existing commercial aircraft and a dramatic reduction in the number of generation aviation operations ....117 The 2014 CNEL contours were also based on a newly adopted, "state- of-the-art" noise modeling program.$ Overall, the EIR found that the 65 dBA CNEL contour area was 114% smaller than the analog from the 1985 Master Plan. • 60 and 65 CNEL contour: Master Plan contours are 114 percent larger than the Existing Condition contours. As allowed by the Master Plan, the area outside the Airport boundaries that would be exposed to noise levels in the 60 to 65 dB CNEL range is 125 percent larger than the currently exposed area. • 65 and 70 CNEL contour: Master Plan contours are almost 50 percent larger than the Existing Condition contours. As allowed by the Master Plan, the area outside the Airport boundaries that would be exposed to the 65 to 70 dB CNEL noise levels is 80 percent larger than the currently exposed area. 70+ CNEL contour: Master Plan contours are 80 percent larger than the Existing Condition contours. As allowed by the Master Plan, the area outside the Airport boundaries that would be exposed to noise levels that exceed 70 dB CNEL is 311 percent larger than the currently exposed area. EIR No. 617 then quantified the number of sensitive receptors (including residential uses) within the updated 65 dba CNEL contour area, compared those to those covered under the now -outdated 1985 CNEL contours. In doing so, the EIR noted that the area surrounding the Airport is generally urban in character. Surrounding uses include industrial, commercial, and residential uses. The residential area is predominately south and southwest of the Airport. (Id. at 2-12). Specifically, EIR No. 617's Noise Technical Report, prepared by Landrum and Brown,9 quantified the number of sensitive receptors (including residential units) that would be impacted by the Project and its utilization of the 2014 EIR at 4.6-34. 8 Id. at 4.6-31. Airport noise contours were generated using the INM Version 7.0d. The latest version, INM Version 7.0d, was released for use in May 2013 and is the state-of-the-art in airport noise modeling. 9https://,,vww.newportbeacl)ca.gov/`olniCEQA REVIEVV/JohnP,o20Waynel�',20Airport"o20DEIR/CC/�205A°. 20Appendices�b20to�',20 FEIR%20617/Appendix^,%20C°/"20-°S20Noise",'o20Analysis"o20Technical'o20Report.pdf 22-124 updated CNEL contours.10 Table 22 of the Noise Technical Report compared the number of residential units within both the 1985 and 2014 65 dBA CNEL contours: • 70 CNEL contour: 379 acres/0.59 square mile, including 1 place of worship (the Orange Coast Free Methodist Church), but no other noise -sensitive land uses. 65 to 70 CNEL contour: 561 acres/0.88 square mile, including 96 residences (of which 49 are sound insulated) and 2 places of worship (Islamic Educational Center of Orange County and Berean Community Church), but no other noise -sensitive land uses. • 60 to 65 CNEL contour: 1,313 acres/2.05 square miles, including 932 residences (of which 348 are sound insulated), 5 places of worship, and 4 schools, as listed below: Using the City's thresholds of significance, EIR No. 617 ultimately concluded that the Project would not result in noise increases at sensitive receptors where existing exposure is 65 CNEL or above, between 60 and 65 CNEL, or 45 and 60 CNEL. However, the EIR determined that the Project would generate aircraft noise that would increase noise levels at exterior use areas of residences or schools to noise levels of 65 CNEL or above or interior areas of residences or schools to noise levels of 45 CNEL. Specifically, the Project would have a significant exterior noise impact on 31 residences in Phase 1, 62 residences in Phase 2, and 77 residences in Phase 3. The Proposed Project would have a potentially significant interior noise impact on 21 residences in Phase 1, 39 residences in Phase 2, and 43 residences and one place of worship in Phase 3. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted to cover this significant and unavoidable impact, which was not subject to legal challenge (nor was EIR No. 617). Land Use and Planning EIR No. 617's land use and planning chapter acknowledged that JWA is located in an urbanized area. The surrounding land uses for areas in the City that are adjacent to JWA included the same land uses that exist today, including but not limited to, AO (Office Airport), CO-G (General Commercial Office), CG General Commercial, MU-H2 (Mixed Use Horizontal). (EIR at 4.5-17). As noted above, the Noise Analysis Technical Report analyzed land uses within the 2014 CNEL contours, to determine "the amount of area and sensitive receptors" in such contours. (See directly above.) EIR No. 617 observed that, "as the 65 CNEL contour expands beyond the existing contour and includes additional residences this would be a significant impact." (EIR at 4.5-32). The EIR ultimately concluded that, with all phases of the Proposed Project, there would be a significant, unavoidable land use and land use impact due to an increase in the number of noise -sensitive uses exposed to noise levels in excess of the 65 CNEL exterior noise standard. There are no feasible mitigation measures for exterior noise levels. Implementation of Mitigation Measure LU-1 would potentially reduce impacts associated with excess interior noise levels to less than significant levels. However, until interior noise measurements are taken, it cannot be determined if all the noise sensitive uses with interior noise levels in excess of 45 CNEL would qualify for sound attenuation based on FAA criteria. Given the uncertainty that this measure is feasible to adequately reduce interior noise levels at all potentially impacted residences, the impact was determined to 10 See, e.g., 2014 EIR Table 4.6-18 (at p. 4.6-69): 22-125 be significant and unavoidable. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted to cover this significant and unavoidable impact, which was not subject to legal challenge (nor was EIR No. 617). Cumulative Impacts Chapter 5.0 (Cumulative Impacts) of EIR No. 617 considered existing and future residential uses when analyzing impacts of the Settlement Agreement Amendment and 2014 CNEL lines. For example, the cumulative impacts analysis considered countywide growth and development forecasts based on input from the County of Orange and the cities located in the County. These projections reflect adopted land uses and future growth scenarios based on local land use policies. (EIR at 5-3). The EIR explained: "The OCP-2010 Modified projections provide forecasts to the year 2035 and take into account the projected growth Orange County in its entirety. OCP-2010 Modified projections are particularly useful in evaluating the cumulative impacts associated with traffic, air quality, greenhouse gas ("GHG") emissions, and noise because they provide growth assumptions consistent with the local general plans that have been developed with a long-range horizon year. This allows the cumulative analysis to go beyond just a listing of projects, which would not adequately reflect conditions at Project buildout." (Id.) Further, Section 5.2.2 of the EIR contains a list of reasonably foreseeable probable future projects, some of which are located in the Airport Area of the City. See, e.g., Table 5-2 (including, among others, Koll Mixed Use Development, MacArthur at Dolphin -Striker Way, Newport Business Uptown Newport Mixed Use Development, and the previously considered Land Use Element Update). The cumulative impacts analysis expressly found that "[w]hen compared to existing conditions, the 0 Project and all the alternatives would extend the 65 CNEL contour into areas designed for mixed -use development in the City of Newport Beach's Airport Area. The City of Newport Beach General Plan's Noise Element noise/land use compatibility matrix (see Table N2 in the Noise Element, page 12-23) lists mixed use land uses within the 65 CNEL contour as "normally incompatible;"... If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must be made and noise insulation features must be included in the design." (EIR at 5-37). "Though design plans for the development projects identified as part of the Newport Beach LUE have not been prepared, it is reasonable to assume that the City of Newport Beach would evaluate each of the cumulative projects for policy consistency through the entitlement process. Therefore, the Project would not contribute to any cumulative impacts associated with plan or policy inconsistency." (EIR at 5-39). No new information that was not known at the time the General Plan and EIR No. 617 were prepared is now available that demonstrates that the Amendments will result in a new or increased significant impact. The Amendments would not cause growth beyond that accommodated by the General Plan. The Amendments do not introduce new land use designations or otherwise alter general land use patterns or development standards. 22-126 Therefore, the findings of previously certified EIR No. 617 are applicable to the Amendments. Implementation of the Amendments would not substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts, including but not limited to air emissions and greenhouse gas emissions. Although the noise contours would be updated, the requirements for compliance with noise standards would not change. Finally, overriding ALUC and adoption of the Amendments does not constitute piecemealing. Additional environmental review for the Housing Element Noise Update is not needed for two independent reasons: (i) the update is exempt under CEQA Guidelines section 15183, and (ii) it is fully within the scope of the 2014 Settlement Agreement Amendment No. 617 and the 2014 CNEL contours analyzed therein. For this first determination, a lead agency's finding that a particular proposed project comes within one of the exempt classes necessarily includes an implied finding that the project has no significant effect on the environment." (Davidon Homes v. City of San Jose (1997) 54 Cal.App.4th 106.) If an exemption applies, the project is excused from CEQA's environmental review, which occurs only if an agency determines the project is not exempt from CEQA. (Union of Medical Marijuana Patients, Inc. v. City of San Diego (2019) 7 Cal.5th 1171, 1186, ["Environmental review is required under CEQA only if a public agency concludes that a proposed activity is a project and does not qualify for an exemption."].) California courts have held that improper piecemealing does not occur when "projects have different proponents, serve different purposes, or can be implemented independently." Different projects may properly undergo separate environmental review (i.e., no piecemealing) when the projects can be implemented independently. A project may also be reviewed without reference to potential future projects when it has "significant independent or local utility" and would be implemented with or without approval of the future project, even if the two are related in some other respects. See, e.g., Aptos Council v. Cnty. of Santa Cruz, 10 Cal.App.5th 266, 282 (2017). Here, the Housing Element Noise Update functions independently and does not rely on any future planning decisions or project -level approvals. The Housing Element Noise Update involves removing an inherent barrier based on General Plan policies and zoning regulations that prohibit residential development within the 1985 65 dBA CNEL. The Housing Element Noise Update is a necessary, isolated planning action to allow the City to implement the Housing Element. (-nnrh minn Thus, because EIR No. 617 analyzed impacts associated with the updated CNEL noise contours, the City's adoption of the updated CNEL noise contours within its own internal policies is fully within the scope of EIR No. 617, and the 2006 General Plan, as amended. The Amendments would not result in any new significant environmental effects that are substantially different from those identified in EIR No. 617 nor would it substantially increase the severity of significant effects previously identified in EIR No. 617. Therefore, based on the provisions of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, no additional CEQA documentation is required. 22-12 7 Attachment No. E August 3, 2023 Planning Commission Staff Report, Minutes Excerpts, Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 22-128 0.p0 R �. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT r August 3, 2023 CIFOR��P Agenda Item No. 4 SUBJECT: Housing Element Implementation, Noise -Related Amendments (PA2022-0201) ■ General Plan Land Use Element Amendment ■ General Plan Noise Element Amendment ■ Title 20 Planning and Zoning Code Amendment ■ Newport Place Planned Community Amendment ■ Newport Airport Village Planned Community Amendment SITE LOCATION: Various sites in the Newport Beach Airport Area PROPONENT: City of Newport Beach PLANNER: Rosalinh Ung, Principal Planner 949-644-3208 or rung@newportbeachca.gov PROJECT SUMMARY Amendments to Newport Beach General Plan Land Use and Noise Elements, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, Newport Place Planned Community (PC-1 1), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60) (Amendments) to accommodate housing units identified by the certified 2021-2029 Sixth Cycle General Plan Housing Element. RECOMMENDATION 1) Conduct a public hearing; 2) Find the proposed amendments are exempt and not subject to further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15183 because the amendments would not allow development of greater intensity than is allowed under the 2006 General Plan, including the Newport Airport Village Planned Community, as amended. The updated contours, and impacts associated therewith, were also fully analyzed in the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 617); and 3) Adopt Resolution No. PC2023-015 recommending approval of the Housing Element Implementation, Noise -Related Amendments to the City Council (PA2022-0201) (Attachment No. PC 1). 22-129 Planning Commission, August 3, 2023 Housing Element Implementation, Noise -Related Amendments (PA2022-0201) Page 2 EXISTING JWA NOISE CONTOURS and NEW HOUSING SITES l " s 75 dB CNEL o Sao Feet n 9 9 A � ' � o •f 65 dB 60 dB 70 dB CNEL CNEL ' Newport Airport Village PC �O / ♦ / I/ � B �. �• Newport Place PC Legend =s — City Boundary New Housing Sites 7 75 dB CNEL 70 dB CNEL 65 dB CNEL 60 dB CNEL 22-130 Planning Commission, August 3, 2023 Housing Element Implementation, Noise -Related Amendments (PA2022-0201) Page 3 PROPOSED JWA NOISE CONTOURS and HOUSING SITES 75 dB ' CNEL 60 dB CNEL r 65 dB 70 dB CNEL CNEL Newport Airport Village PC 0 'M 1,400 e —9L,, Newport -Place C ClS vx - Legend CNEL 60 E7CNEL 65 F CNEL 70 y� M CNEL 75 { © Opp. Housing sites — City Boundary 22-131 Planning Commission, August 3, 2023 Housing Element Implementation, Noise -Related Amendments (PA2022-0201) Page 4 INTRODUCTION Background On September 13, 2022, the City Council adopted the 2021-2029 City of Newport Beach Housing Element (Housing Element). On October 5, 2022, the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) certified the Housing Element as substantially compliant with State housing laws. The Housing Element provides a comprehensive set of housing goals and policies, as well as an inventory of potential candidate housing sites by income category to meet the City's Sixth Cycle RHNA allocation. Several of the sites identified are proximate to John Wayne Airport within the existing 65 dBA Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) noise contour area. Currently, there are City policies and regulations related to noise that prohibit residential uses in this area. The opportunity sites are necessary allowing the City to meet the City's RHNA allocation obligation. As a result, these policies and regulations must be updated to eliminate the prohibition. The Airport Area Environs (Airport Area) is one of the five focus areas where new housing opportunity sites are identified to satisfy the RHNA allocation: West Newport Mesa, Dove r-Westcliff/Mariner's Mile, Newport Center, Coyote Canyon, and the 5th Cycle sites. The Airport Area includes 62 new housing opportunity sites that could accommodate up to 2,577 housing units. This comprises approximately 25 percent of the total housing units identified in the various focus areas identified in the Housing Element. When the Housing Element was being drafted, the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) reviewed these sites and found the entire draft Housing Element inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP). Ultimately, the City Council overrode their determination consistent with State law and adopted the Housing Element with these sites included. Previous Noise Amendments Request The proposed amendments were initially scheduled to be heard back on April 6, 2023; however, the Commission could not consider the amendments due to a lack of a quorum. Subsequently, staff reexamined the proposed amendments and the goals of the Housing Element, and the initial draft described in the April report has been dropped. Revised Noise Amendments Staff has since had additional time to consider the appropriate CNEL noise contour areas to advance the policies and goals of the Sixth Cycle Housing Element. Staff determined that the existing CNEL noise contours adopted in the 2006 Noise Element were based on 22-132 Planning Commission, August 3, 2023 Housing Element Implementation, Noise -Related Amendments (PA2022-0201) Page 5 the 1985 AELUP Master Plan, specifically Noise Element Figures N4 and N5, and now are outdated and in need of updating. Staff then examined the County of Orange prepared EIR No. 617 as it relates to the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment. In May 2014, the County of Orange prepared EIR No. 617, with the City as the responsible agency. After EIR 617 was certified by the County, the city was a co -signatory to the executed Settlement Agreement Amendment. The Noise Chapter of EIR No. 617 explained how the dBA CNEL noise contours have reduced in size compared to the 1985 AELUP Master Plan CNEL noise contours, in which the City's General Plan policies and maps are based on. The 1985 Master Plan noise contours are considerably larger than the existing noise contours presented previously. This is largely due to a quieter fleet of existing commercial aircraft and a dramatic reduction in the number of generation aviation operations. The noise contours in EIR No. 617 are based on more contemporary noise modeling programs, as the EIR explained that "one of the most important factors in generating accurate noise contours is the collection of accurate operational data". Airport noise contours generated in this noise study using the INM Version 7.Od which was released for use in May 2013, and is the state -of -art in airport noise modeling. The Amendments are required to further the goals, policies, and programs of the Sixth Cycle Housing Element, and replace the currently outdated CNEL noise contour boundaries in the City's General Plan and PCs' zoning texts with a more updated CNEL contour boundary based on updated operations at JWA, technological advancements in aviation technology, and updated noise modeling data. In summary, staff is proposing to revise the proposed amendments as follows: • Adopting updated noise contours (Noise Element Figures N4 and N5) to reflect the noise contours identified by the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report No. 617 (EIR No. 617), • Updating Land Use and Noise Element Policies, Land Use Element Figures LU11, LU22, and LU23, Title 20, PC-11, and PC-60 to modify and incorporate the updated noise contours identified by EIR No. 617 and to implement additional noise attenuation measures for future housing units proximate to John Wayne Airport; and • Allowing residential units identified by the certified 2021-2029 Sixth Cycle Newport Beach Housing Element to be located within the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area as identified in the updated noise contour maps analyzed in EIR No. 617. Parcels bisected by the updated 65 dBA CNEL noise contour could support future housing; whereas parcels located wholly within the updated 65 dBA CNEL noise contour 22-133 Planning Commission, August 3, 2023 Housing Element Implementation, Noise -Related Amendments (PA2022-0201) Page 6 could support housing, if deemed necessary to satisfy the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) mandate. The following specific policies, maps, and regulations are proposed to be changed: Land Use Element: • Policy LU6.15.3 (Airport Compatibility) • Figure LU11 — Statistical Areas J6, L4 (removal of the outdated 65 dBA CNEL noise contour line), Figure LU22 — Airport (removal of the outdated noise contour line), and Figure LU23 - Airport Area Residential Villages Illustrative Concept Diagram (removal of the outdated noise contour line) Noise Element: • Policy N1.2 (Noise Exposure Verification for New Development) • Policy N 1.5.A (Airport Area Infill Projects (new policy for Airport Area) • Policy N2.2 (Design of Sensitive Land Uses) • Policy N3.2 (Residential Development) • Figure N4 - Future Noise Contours (update JWA noise contours) and • Figure N5 - Future Noise Contours (update JWA noise contours) Title 20 Zoning Code Amendment: • Section 20.30.080(F) (Noise -Airport Environs Land Use Plan) Planned Community Text Amendments: • Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) — Part III. Residential Overlay Zone, Section V.D.1 (Airport Noise Compatibility) • Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60) —Sections I.D (Purpose and Objective), & ILA & B (Permitted & Prohibited Uses) The precise changes are included in the draft resolution as Attachment No. PC 1. Updated Land Use Element Figures LU 11, LU22, and LU22 and Noise Element Figures N4 and N5 are also referenced and included in the draft resolution. DISCUSSION Analysis General Plan Amendment The amendments are required to further the goals, policies, and programs of the Sixth Cycle Housing Element, and replace the currently outdated CNEL noise contours adopted and referenced in the Land Use and Noise Elements, Title 20, and Planned Communities with updated CNEL contours analyzed in EIR No. 617. The amendments would modify 22-134 Planning Commission, August 3, 2023 Housing Element Implementation, Noise -Related Amendments (PA2022-0201) Page 7 the General Plan Policies in the Land Use Element and Noise Element for consistency with the Housing Element. The proposed changes include all noise -related policies and referenced figures listed above for the Airport Area. The proposed amendments would be consistent with the following Housing Element Policies and Policy Actions: Housing Policy 1.1 (Identify a variety of sites to accommodate housing growth need by income categories to serve the needs of the entire community.); Housing Policy 4.2 (Enable construction of new housing units sufficient to meet City qualified goals by identifying adequate sites for their construction.); and Policy Action 4J (Airport Environs Sub Area Environmental Constraints) The amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element would be a step in the implementation of the Sixth Cycle Housing Element. As mentioned above, a total of 62 new housing opportunity sites are identified in the Airport Area according to the Sixth Cycle Housing Element. Of those sites, 48 are located wholly or partially outside the 65 dBA CNEL contour boundary as identified in the proposed noise contour map above. Only 14 new housing opportunity sites are located wholly within the updated 65 dBA CNEL contour boundary. By updating the General Plan Land Element and Noise Element policies that prohibit residential uses with the outdated, 1985 65 dBA CNEL contour, the Amendments will advance the Sixth Cycle Housing Element's goal of accommodating at least 2,577 housing units in a variety of income levels in the Airport Area. Additionally, by providing uniform and concise conditions Amendment to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of NBMC, address potential environmental constraints in the Airport feasibility of sites, particularly for lower -income RHNA. Charter 423 Analysis of approval identified in the the City has taken actions to Area and ensure continued Section 423 of the Charter and Council Policy A-18 (Guidelines for Implementing Charter Section 423) ("Council Policy A-18") require any amendment to the General Plan be reviewed to determine if a vote of the electorate would be required. If a General Plan Amendment (separately or cumulatively with other GPAs within the previous 10 years) generates more than 100 peak hour trips (a.m. or p.m.), adds 40,000 square feet of non- residential floor area, or adds more than 100 dwelling units in a statistical area, a vote of the electorate would be required. The purpose of the Amendments is to eliminate conflicts between the certified Sixth Cycle Housing Element and the City's General Plan Land Use Element and Noise Element (and other ordinances), which prohibit residential development within the outdated 1985 65 22-135 Planning Commission, August 3, 2023 Housing Element Implementation, Noise -Related Amendments (PA2022-0201) Page 8 dBA CNEL noise contour area, and to adopt more updated CNEL noise contour areas that are based on updated noise modeling data, airport operations and advances in aviation technology that result in decreased noise levels. As a result, these policies and regulations must be updated to eliminate conflicting policy and regulatory restrictions to provide consistency with the Housing Element. No development would be directly authorized by the amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element. As none of the thresholds specified by Charter Section 423 are impacted nor exceeded by the amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element, no vote of the electorate is required. Title 20 Planning and Zoning Amendment Section 20.30.080(F) (Noise -Airport Environs Land Use Plan) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) will be updated to allow residential uses, including mixed -use residential in the Airport Area, subject to the conditions below. Residential development would be limited to parcels wholly or partially outside the updated 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the sites wholly within such contour area are needed for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. Non-residential uses would be encouraged on parcels located wholly within the 2014 65 dBA CNEL contour area. 1) Prior to the issuance of any building permits for such development, a noise study shall be prepared by a City -approved, qualified acoustical consultant and submitted to the Community Development Director for approval; 2) All new residential structures or the residential units within a mixed -use development shall be attenuated to provide an interior noise level of 45 dBA CNEL or less; 3) The design of the residential portions of mixed -use projects and residential developments shall have adequate noise attenuation between adjacent uses and units (common floor/ceilings) in accordance with the California Building Code; 4) New mixed -use developments shall incorporate designs with loading areas, parking lots, driveways, trash enclosures, mechanical equipment, and other noise sources away from the residential portion of the development; 5) Use of walls, berms, interior noise insulation, double paned windows, advance insulation systems, or other noise mitigation measures, as deemed appropriate shall be incorporated in the design of new residential to bring interior sound attenuation to 45 dBA CNEL or less; 6) Residential uses shall be indoor -oriented to reduce noise impingement on outdoor living areas; 7) On -site indoor amenities, such as fitness facilities or recreation and entertainment facilities shall be encouraged; and 8) Advanced air filtration systems for buildings shall be considered to promote cleaner air. 22-136 Planning Commission, August 3, 2023 Housing Element Implementation, Noise -Related Amendments (PA2022-0201) Page 9 Newport Place (PC-11) and Newport Airport Village (PC-60) Planned Community Amendments PC 11 and PC 60 will be revised to allow residential development or mixed -use development on parcels wholly or partially outside the updated 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area, unless and until the City determines that the sites wholly within such contour area are required to meet the City's Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. Airport Land Use Commission Consistency Determination California Public Utilities Code Section 21676(b) and John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) Section 4.11 require the City to refer the proposed noise amendment to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for consistency determination with the AELUP due to the proposed amendment to the Land Use and Noise Elements, Zoning Code and Planned Communities. The proposed amendments are scheduled for ALUC consideration at its August 17, 2023, meeting. Environmental Review The Amendments are exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15183 because they do not change the underlying land use or zoning designations of any specific parcels, including parcels within the Airport Area or within the updated noise contours. The Amendments, therefore, will not result in development of greater intensity than is allowed under the 2006 General Plan and Newport Airport Village Planned Community, as amended. To the extent new parcels can be developed in the future for residential uses, by nature of no longer being located within areas identified as experiencing 65 dB CNEL or greater, those parcels must be part of a specific proposed project for consideration and processing by the City for approval. The Amendments are also exempt because they fall within the scope of analysis contained within EIR 617, prepared, and certified by the County for the 2014 JWA Settlement Agreement Amendment, to which the City is a party. EIR No. 617, fully analyzed impacts on sensitive receptors (including residential uses) in adopting the Settlement Agreement Amendment, including the updated CNEL contour boundaries associated therewith, using both the County and City's thresholds of significance. The City was a responsible agency for EIR No. 617, and co -signatory to the Settlement Agreement Amendment. EIR No. 617 concluded that the Settlement Agreement Amendment (and associated updated CNEL contours) would result in less -than - significant impacts related to noise increases at sensitive receptors, but a significant and unavoidable impact from increasing noise levels at exterior use areas of residences. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted. No lawsuits were filed challenging the adequacy of the EIR. The Amendments are required for the City to officially adopt the latest and most recently analyzed dBA CNEL noise contours, which are based on state-of-the-art noise modeling, 22-137 Planning Commission, August 3, 2023 Housing Element Implementation, Noise -Related Amendments (PA2022-0201) Page 10 current airport activity and operations at JWA, and technological advances in aviation technology that reduce noise levels from aircraft. Because EIR No. 617 analyzed impacts associated with the updated noise contours, the City's adoption of the updated CNEL noise contours is fully within the scope of EIR No. 617, and the 2006 General Plan, as amended. The Amendments, therefore, do not warrant further environmental review under CEQA. Public Notice Given the proposed amendments only involve the properties located in the Airport Area, notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot and mailed to all owners of properties within PC-11 and PC-60 that located within the existing 65 dBA CNEL noise contour at least 10 days before the scheduled meeting, consistent with the provisions of Section 20.66.030(B) of the NBMC. Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the city website. Prepared by: PA_t_� os linh Ung i ipal Planner ATTACHMENTS Submitted by: Jim Campbell Deputy Community Development Director PC 1 Draft Planning Commission Resolution with Proposed Amendments 22-138 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS — 100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE THURSDAY, AUGUST 3, 2023 REGULAR MEETING — 6:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER — 6:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Commissioner Barto III. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Chair Curtis Ellmore, Vice Chair Mark Rosene, Secretary Tristan Harris, Commissioner Brady Barto, Commissioner Jonathan Langford, Commissioner Lee Lowrey, and Commissioner David Salene ABSENT: None Staff Present: Community Development Director Seimone Jurjis, Assistant City Attorney Yolanda Summerhill, City Traffic Engineer Brad Sommers, Police Investigator Wendy Joe, Senior Planner David Lee, Planning Manager Jaime Murillo, Administrative Assistant Clarivel Rodriguez, and Department Assistant Savannah Martinez IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS None V. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES None VI. CONSENT ITEMS ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF JULY 6, 2023 Recommended Action: Approve and file Motion made by Commissioner Langford and seconded by Secretary Harris to approve the minutes of the July 6, 2023 meeting with Mr. Mosher's edits. AYES: Barto, Ellmore, Harris, Lowrey, Langford, and Rosene NOES: None ABSTAIN: Salene ABSENT: None VII. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS ITEM NO. 2 STAG BAR OCCUPANT LOAD INCREASE AND OPERATIONAL CHANGES (PA2022-0249) Site Location: 121 McFadden Place Summary: A conditional use permit and coastal development permit to increase the allowed occupant load of the existing Stag Bar from 260 persons to a maximum of 290 persons, which requires a waiver of 8 required parking spaces as there is no on -site parking. Additionally, the applicant requests to allow live entertainment and dancing from 11 a.m. to 2 a.m., daily. The current hours of operation from 6 a.m. to 2 Page 1 of 7 22-139 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes August 3, 2023 a.m., daily, are not proposed to be modified. The establishment currently operates with Conditional Use Permit No. UP2018-013, which would be superseded if this application is approved. Recommended Actions: 1. Conduct a public hearing; 2. If the Planning Commission wishes to approve the project, then first find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 under Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment, and adopt Resolution No. PC2023-028 approving a conditional use permit and coastal development permit; or 3. If the Planning Commission wishes to deny the project, then first find the denial of the project statutorily exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15270 and adopt Resolution No. PC2023- 028 disapproving a conditional use permit and coastal development permit. Senior Planner Lee used a presentation to review the Stag Bar operational changes, which included a conditional use permit and coastal development permit. Senior Planner Lee discussed the project location, establishment background, project request, increased occupant load, floor plan options, parking requirements, waiver of parking requirements, late hours, alcohol service, police department review, coastal development permit, and recommendation. The Commissioners disclosed ex-parte communications with the applicant and/or his consultant by way of a conversation. Chair Ellmore opened the public hearing Mario Marovic, Stag Bar and Kitchen owner, used a presentation to review the applicant's background and track record, aerial view of McFadden Square, community outreach and involvement. Mr. Marovic showed before and after photos of improvements to McFadden Square and 22nd Street, provided a project timeline and security plan, and discussed how the Stag Bar is the number one Uber "restaurant" drop off location rating in Orange County with four- and one-half stars on Yelp. Mr. Marovic also discussed the merits of the parking study and agreed to the recommended conditions of approval. Jim Mosher thought that staff inadvertently left out the action that the Planning Commission is approving, which is typically located somewhere between action number one and two on page 28 in the decision portion of the resolution approval. Additionally, a mechanism to appeal the conditional use permit should be included, where the appeal language only pertains to the coastal development permit aspect on page 39. James Bozes expressed support for Stag Bar and Mr. Marovic. Micah Schiesel, Director of Operations of the Lounge Group, expressed support for the changes. Nathan Holthouser, 7t" Street homeowner on the Peninsula, asked the Planning Commission to support the changes and thought everything on the Peninsula should have no parking requirements. In response to Mr. Mosher's comments, Senior Planner Lee stated that the resolution for the action and appeal period for Title 20 and 21 and correct language can be added into the final resolution for signatures. Chair Ellmore closed the public hearing. Commissioner Langford thanked Mr. Mosher for his attention to detail Page 2 of 7 22-140 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes August 3, 2023 Secretary Harris noted that he frequents the area with his young children on his bike, would not have done so in the past, and thought it is a result of the applicant's efforts, trusted the applicant's track record, and expressed support. Vice Chair Rosene thought the operator does wonderful things for the community, acknowledged the operator for McFadden Square being well -maintained, thought the Planning Commission should give Mr. Marovic the opportunity for approval, and expressed support. Commissioner Lowrey noted the traffic engineer's approval of the 2019 parking study, approval for safety items by staff, the operator's control of the areas regarding police department concern, and zero concern that Mr. Marovic, his team, and the police to address and end potential problems relatively quickly. Motion made by Commissioner Lowrey and seconded by Commissioner Barto to approve the item with the recommendations listed and from Mr. Mosher. AYES: Barto, Ellmore, Harris, Langford, Lowrey, Rosene, and Salene NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None ITEM NO. 3 THE HOUSE ANNUAL REVIEW (PA2011-005) Site Location: 2601 West Coast Highway Summary: The review of The House restaurant for compliance with Conditional Use Permit No. UP2011-001, originally approved by the Planning Commission on June 9, 2011. UP2011-001 authorized a restaurant with late hours, live entertainment, alcohol sales, outdoor dining, a parking management plan, and adjustment to off-street parking requirements. Recommended Actions: 1. Conduct a public hearing; 2. Find this review exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 under Class 1 (Existing Facilities) and Section 15321 under Class 21 (Enforcement Actions by Regulatory Agencies) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; 3. Review the current operation, The House, for its compliance with UP2011-001; 4. Find the operator's use of a floating outdoor dining vessel to be in violation of UP2011-001; 5. Direct the operator immediately cease and desist use of the floating outdoor patio vessel, and remove it within 30 days or file the necessary application to amend the use permit within 30 days requesting retention of the vessel; and 6. Direct staff to remove Condition No. 2 from Planning Commission Resolution No. 1844 related to annual reviews of the Use Permit No 2011-001 and perform reviews on an as -needed basis. Assistant City Attorney Yolanda Summerhill noted that additional comments were received from the applicant's representative and suggested a modification from the recommended action to receive a brief presentation from staff, receive feedback from the Planning Commission, and ask for a continuance to bring back to the body for possible action. Page 3 of 7 22-141 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes August 3, 2023 Senior Planner Lee used a presentation to present The House annual review, which included the project location, photos, background information, analysis of compliance with Use Permit (UP) 2011-001, the violation of a floating outdoor patio vessel, other violations, public comments from the applicant, and recommendation. In response to Secretary Harris' question, Senior Planner Lee noted that an additional coastal development permit and review by the California Coastal Commission (CCC) would be required to pursue using the vessel as a patio to serve the restaurant. Additionally, he noted a conditional use permit amendment would be required to use the vessel for boat storage and guests and certain conditions of approval would need to be removed, especially Condition 65. For the boat storage, no coastal development permit would be required. Ex parte communication was disclosed by Commissioners Rosene, Harris, and Lowrey who spoke with the applicant and Commissioner Langford who spoke with the owner. Chair Ellmore opened the public hearing. Jim Mosher noted the challenges with receiving CCC approval for a pier and docks, floats added to expand the pier/dock and uses that are not part of the original permit, and confusion if the area is a vessel or a patio, expressed doubt in the applicant's credibility based on a violation after the owner promised to abide by the rules, and thought the vessel did not seem easy to take out. Chair Ellmore closed the public hearing. At the direction of Assistant City Attorney Summerhill, Chair Ellmore opened the public hearing. In response to Vice Chair Rosene's inquiry, Senior Planner Lee clarified that the Leilani Rose is the patio/float name, and the applicant has stated that it is officially registered as a vessel with the Coast Guard. In response to Commissioner Salene's question, Planning Manager Murillo clarified that the dock was previously approved for boats or vessels so any boat or yacht can park there. He noted the concern among staff is that the vessel serves and functions like a floating patio as an extension to the restaurant which is considered a different type of development that requires CCC approval. He indicated that a condition of approval for CCC permitting would be included in the City's future approval if the Planning Commission decided it is reasonable to use the vessel as a patio. Motion made by Vice Chair Rosene and seconded by Commissioner Salene to continue the item to the September 7, 2023 Planning Commission meeting. AYES: Barto, Ellmore, Harris, Langford, Lowrey, Rosene, and Salene NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None ITEM NO. 4 HOUSING ELEMENT IMPLEMENTATION - NOISE -RELATED AMENDMENTS (PA2022-0201) Site Location: Various sites in the Newport Beach Airport Area Summary: Amendments to the Newport Beach General Plan Land Use and Noise Elements, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC), the Newport Place Planned Community Development Standards (PC-11), and the Newport Airport Village Planned Community Development Plan (PC-60) for the following: • Adopting updated noise contours (Noise Element Figures N4 and N5) to reflect the noise contours identified by the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report No. 617 (EIR No. 617); • Updating Land Use and Noise Element Policies, Land Use Element Figures LU11, LU22, and LU23, Title 20, PC-11, and PC-60 to modify and incorporate the updated noise contours identified by EIR Page 4 of 7 22-142 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes August 3, 2023 No. 617 and to implement additional noise attenuation measures for future housing units proximate to John Wayne Airport; and • Allowing residential units identified by the certified 2021-2029 Sixth Cycle Newport Beach General Plan Housing Element to be located within the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area as identified in the updated noise contour maps identified by EIR No. 617. Parcels bisected by the updated 65 dBA CNEL noise contour could support future housing; whereas parcels located wholly within the updated 65 dBA CNEL noise contour could support housing, if deemed necessary to satisfy the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) mandate. Recommended Actions: 1. Conduct a public hearing; 2. Find the proposed amendments are exempt and not subject to further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15183 because the amendments would not allow development of greater intensity than is allowed under the 2006 General Plan, including the Newport Airport Village Planned Community, as amended. The updated contours, and impacts associated therewith, were also fully analyzed in the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 617); and 3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2023-015 recommending approval of the Housing Element Implementation, Noise -Related Amendments to the City Council (PA2022-0201). Assistant City Attorney Summerhill noted a lack of quorum due to the number of recused Commissioners and announced the process of drawing cards to identify Commissioner participation. Each Commissioner who recused themselves stated the conflict associated with their recusal and cards were drawn. Commissioners Rosene and Ellmore received the top two high cards and remained at the dais to participate in the matter. Planning Manager Murillo used a presentation to review the background, airport area map, context, purpose of the amendments, affected plans and codes, updated noise contour exhibits, existing and proposed John Wayne Airport's (JWA's) noise contours with housing sites, proposed compatibility standards, proposed 65 dBA CNEL allowance, recommended actions, modification to Exhibit C, definition of "site," and next steps. In response to Vice Chair Rosene's question, Project Manager Murillo indicated that within the Santa Ana Specific Plan, standards are in place requiring notification and a noise study to ensure that the interior noise environment of new structures is at 45 dBA. Except for Secretary Harris, ex parte communication was disclosed by the Commissioners for speaking with area parcel representatives. Chair Ellmore opened the public hearing. Jim Mosher expressed displeasure that the Noise Element Subcommittee of the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) has not met yet to discuss the proposed amendments and had been bypassed, thought the amendments are not ready yet, questioned why the City is not using the best modern predictions, disagreed with using a "bisected" approach, and expressed concern for noise provisions throughout the City. Community Development Director Jurjis relayed staff's shared frustration about the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) units and thought staff has taken the best approach to implement State law and used the best available noise contours that are legally defensible. Chair Ellmore closed the public hearing. Page 5 of 7 22-143 Vill. Ka Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes August 3, 2023 Motion made by Vice Chair Rosene and seconded by Commissioner Salene to approve the item as recommended. AYES: Barto, Ellmore, Rosene, and Salene NOES: None RECUSED: Langford, Lowrey, and Harris ABSENT: None DISCUSSION ITEMS ITEM NO. 5 MUNICIPAL CODE REVIEW TO REDUCE OR SUNSET PROVISIONS (PA2022-0219) Site Location: Not Applicable Summary: A review of potential planning -related Municipal Code and City Council Policy amendments for inclusion in a recommendation to the City Council. Recommended Actions: 1. Find the recommended action not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3; and 2. Recommend the City Council review the potential amendments to the Municipal Code identified in Attachment PC-1 to the staff report. Planning Manager Murillo used a presentation to review the support of City Council efforts and five recommended areas. Jim Mosher supported policy review, noted recommended area numbers three and five seem to eliminate redundancy while the others seem to be policy changes, thought including areas that are policy change would be deceptive if they are included in a City-wide package of recommendations from all boards, commissions, and City Council under the title "obsolete code," and suggested the Planning Commission defer the final decision until closer to the deadline of next June 2024 in order to review other potential obsolete code for removal. Community Development Director Jurjis noted that a subcommittee worked on this matter, State law changes are rapid and everchanging, and staff has completed the task and looks forward to the Planning Commission's approval to bring back to the City Council. Motion made by Commissioner Barto and seconded by Commissioner Salene to approve the item as recommended. AYES: Barto, Ellmore, Harris, Langford, Lowrey, Rosene, and Salene NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None STAFF AND COMMISSIONER ITEMS ITEM NO. 6 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION None Page 6 of 7 22-144 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes August 3, 2023 ITEM NO. 7 REPORT BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OR REQUEST FOR MATTERS WHICH A PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA Community Development Director Jurjis noted that the soil vapor extraction (SVE) remediation project appeal at the Ford Aeronutronic Facility was denied by the City Council and the project should move forward. He announced a public hearing by the CCC next Thursday to review the Local Coastal Program amendment that clarifies fractional ownership as a time share use and announced a Planning Commission meeting on August 17 to discuss the increased enrollment at Pacific Christian High School. Jim Mosher relayed that the City Council directed staff to refund the SVE project appeal fees to the appellant ITEM NO. 8 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSENCES Commissioner Barto requested an excused absence from the August 17 Planning Commission meeting. X. ADJOURNMENT — With no further business, Chair Ellmore adjourned the meeting at 7:20 p.m. The agenda for the August 3, 2023, Planning Commission meeting was posted on Thursday, July 27, 2023, at 5:15 p.m. in the Chambers binder, on the digital display board located inside the vestibule of the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, and on the City's website on Thursday, July 27, 2023, at 4:50 p.m. Curtis Ellmore, Chair Tristan Harris, Secretary Page 7 of 7 22-145 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 RESOLUTION NO. PC2023-015 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE NOISE AND LAND USE ELEMENTS OF THE GENERAL PLAN, TITLE 20 (PLANNING AND ZONING) OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE, NEWPORT PLACE PLANNED COMMUNITY (PC-11) AND NEWPORT AIRPORT VILLAGE PLANNED COMMUNITY (PC-60) RELATED TO NOISE IN THE AIRPORT AREA IN ORDER TO IMPLEMENT THE SIXTH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT (PA2022-0201) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: Section 200 of the City of Newport Beach ("City") Charter vests the City Council with the authority to make and enforce all laws, rules and regulations with respect to municipal affairs subject only to the restrictions and limitations contained in the Charter and the State Constitution, and the power to exercise, or act pursuant to any and all rights, powers, and privileges, or procedures granted or prescribed by any law of the State of California. 2. The Noise Element is one of the mandatory elements of the Newport Beach General Plan and was last updated as part of a comprehensive General Plan Update in 2006. In January 2019, the City Council initiated a comprehensive update of the Newport Beach General Plan. Due to the Regional Housing Needs Assessment ("RHNA") allocation of 4,845 new housing units to plan for the 2021-2029 housing period ("Sixth Cycle Housing Element"), the City Council directed City staff to focus on the Housing Element, Land Use Element, and Circulation Element. The City Council adopted the Sixth Cycle Housing Element on September 13, 2022, and it was certified by the State Department of Housing and Community Development ("HCD") on October 5, 2022. The Land Use Element and other elements of the General Plan are being updated in order to implement the Sixth Cycle Housing Element. 3. The Airport Area Environs ("Airport Area") is one of the five focus areas where new housing opportunity sites are identified to satisfy the RHNA allocation. At least 2,577 housing units are planned for the Airport Area, which comprises approximately 25 percent of the City's planned housing capacity, according to the Sixth Cycle Housing Element. A total of 62 new housing opportunity sites are identified in the Airport Area. Of those sites, 48 are located wholly or partially outside the updated 65 dBA CNEL contour boundary. Only 14 new housing opportunity sites are located wholly within the updated 65 dBA CNEL contour boundary. 4. The Sixth Cycle Housing Element including Appendix B has been subject to extensive public participation. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65351, the City held thirteen community workshops, worked with the Housing Element Update Advisory Committee 22-146 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 2 of 29 ("HEUAC") at fourteen Brown Act meetings, and brought iterations of the Housing Element to one duly noticed Planning Commission study session and six duly noticed City Council study sessions where the Housing Element was publicly reviewed and discussed. Additionally, the HEUAC formed five different subcommittees to thoroughly review and identify all feasible sites for potential redevelopment as residential in the future and those sites are captured in Appendix B (Adequate Sites Analysis), which demonstrates the City's capacity to meet the RHNA allocation. 5. The Noise Element and Land Use Elements of the General Plan, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC"), Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60) restrict residential development in the 65 dBA CNEL and higher noise contour area as identified in the 1985 John Wayne Airport Master Plan. 6. The following amendments to the Noise Element, Land Use Element, Title 20, Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC- 60) are necessary to implement the Sixth Cycle Housing Element to allow the identified opportunity sites to realize residential uses, including mixed -use residential, that are wholly or partially located outside the 65 dBA noise contour area identified in the Noise Element ("Amendments") without causing a potential inconsistency issue under the Planning and Zoning Law. Thus, while the Amendments do not change the existing underlying land use or zoning designations of particular parcels, the Amendments do reflect revisions to the following: Land Use Element: • Policy LU6.15.3 (Airport Compatibility); • Figure LU11 — Statistical Areas J6, L4; • Figure LU22 — Airport; and • Figure LU23 - Airport Area Residential Villages Illustrative Concept Diagram (removal of 65 CNEL noise contour line); Noise Element: • Policy N 1.2 (Noise Exposure Verification for New Development); • Policy N1.5.A (Airport Area Infill Projects (new policy); • Policy N 2.2 (Design of Sensitive Land Uses); and • Policy N 3.2 (Residential Development); • Figure N4 - Future Noise Contours; and • Figure N5 — Future Noise Contours; Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC: • Section 20.30.080(F) (Noise -Airport Environs Land Use Plan); Planned Communities: Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) — Part 111. Residential Overlay Zone, Section V.D.1 (Airport Noise Compatibility); and 22-147 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 3 of 29 Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60) — Section I.D (Purpose and Objective) & Section II.B.2 (Prohibited Uses). 7. A public hearing was held on August 3, 2023, in the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with California Sections 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act"), 65090, and 65353 of the Government Code, Chapter 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC and Council Policy K-1 (General Plan and Local Coastal Program). Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by, the Planning Commission at this hearing. SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. The Amendments are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15183 of the California Code of Regulations Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 ("CEQA Guidelines") because they do not change the underlying land use or zoning designations of any specific parcels, including parcels within the Airport Area or within the updated noise contours. The Amendments, therefore, will not result in development of greater intensity than is allowed under the 2006 General Plan, Newport Place Planned Community (PC- 11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60), as amended. To the extent new parcels are able to be developed in the future for residential uses, by nature of no longer being located within areas identified as experiencing 65 dB CNEL or greater, those parcels must be part of a specific proposed project for consideration and processing by the City for approval. The Amendments are also exempt because they fall within the scope of analysis contained within EIR No. 617, prepared and certified by the County for the 2014 John Wayne Airport ("JWA") Settlement Agreement Amendment, to which the City is a party. EIR No. 617, fully analyzed impacts on sensitive receptors (including residential uses) in adopting the Settlement Agreement Amendment, including the updated CNEL contour boundaries associated therewith, using both the County and City's thresholds of significance. The City was a responsible agency for EIR No. 617, and co -signatory to the Settlement Agreement Amendment. EIR No. 617 concluded that the Settlement Agreement Amendment (and associated updated CNEL contours) would result in less -than -significant impacts related to noise increases at sensitive receptors, but a significant and unavoidable impact from increasing noise levels at exterior use areas of residences. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted. No lawsuits were filed challenging the adequacy of the EIR. The accompanying adopted Findings of Consistency which are attached hereto as Exhibit "H" and incorporated by reference. SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS. General Plan Noise Element and Land Use Element Amendments An amendment to the 2006 Newport Beach General Plan Noise Element and Land Use Element are legislative acts. Neither Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) nor California Government Code Section 65000 et seq., set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of such 22-148 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 4 of 29 amendments. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element are consistent with the following General Plan policies. Finding and Facts in Support of Findings: 1. The amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element would eliminate conflicting general plan policies that prohibit residential developments within the 1985 JWA Master Plan 65 dBA to 70 dBA CNEL noise contour area. 2. The amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element are consistent with the following City of Newport Beach Housing Element Policy and Policy Action: Housing Policy 1.1 Identify a variety of sites to accommodate housing growth need by income categories to serve the needs of the entire community. The amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element would be a step in the implementation of the Sixth Cycle Housing Element. The Housing Element identified 62 new housing opportunity sites in the Airport Area. Of those sites, 48 are located wholly or partially outside the 65 dBA CNEL contour boundary. By updating the General Plan Land Element and Noise Element policies that prohibit residential uses within the outdated, 1985 Master Plan 65 dBA CNEL contour, the Amendments will advance the Sixth Cycle Housing Element's goal of accommodating at least 2,577 housing units in a variety of income levels within the Airport Area. Tribal Consultation Findings: Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65352.3 (SB 18), a local government is required to contact the appropriate tribes identified by the Native American Heritage Commission ("NAHC") each time it considers a proposal to adopt or amend the General Plan. If requested by any tribe, the local government must consult for the purpose of preserving or mitigating impacts to cultural resources. Facts in Support of Findings: The City received comments from the NAHC indicating that 12 tribal contacts should be provided notice regarding the Amendments. Notices were sent to the 12 tribes on February 16, 2023. California Government Code Section 65352.3 requires notification 90 days prior to Council action to allow tribal contacts to respond to the request to consult. The 90-day notification period has expired on May 16, 2023. No consultation request received. 22-149 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 5 of 29 423 Charter Analysis Finding: Section 423 of the Charter and Council Policy A-18 (Guidelines for Implementing Charter Section 423) ("Council Policy A-18") require any amendment to the General Plan be reviewed to determine if a vote of the electorate would be required. If a General Plan Amendment (separately or cumulatively with other GPAs within the previous 10 years) generates more than 100 peak hour trips (a.m. or p.m.), adds 40,000 square feet of non-residential floor area, or adds more than 100 dwelling units in a statistical area, a vote of the electorate would be required. Facts in Suaaort of Findinas: The purpose of the Amendments is to eliminate a conflict with the certified Sixth Cycle Housing Element and the City's General Plan Land Use Element and Noise Element, which prohibit residential development within the 1985 JWA Master Plan's 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area, and to endorse a more updated CNEL contour areas that are based on updated noise modeling data, airport operations and advances in aviation technology that result in decreased noise levels. As a result, these policies and regulations must be updated to eliminate conflicting policy and regulatory restrictions to provide consistency with the Sixth Cycle Housing Element. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no development would be directly authorized by the amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element. As none of the thresholds specified by Charter Section 423 are impacted nor exceeded by the amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element, no vote of the electorate is required. Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of NBMC Amendment An amendment to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of NBMC is a legislative act. Neither Chapter 20.66 (Planning and Zoning, Amendments) of Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of NBMC, or Article 2 (Adoption of Regulations) of Chapter 4 (Zoning Regulations) of Division 1 (Planning and Zoning) of Title 7 (Planning and Land Use) of the California Government Code set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of such amendments. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the amendments to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC is consistent with the following General Plan policies. Finding and Facts in Support of Findings: The amendment to Section 20.30.080(F) (Noise -Airport Environs Land Use Plan) of the NBMC is consistent with the following City of Newport Beach Housing Element Policies and Policy Action: 1. Housing Element Policy 4.2. Enable construction of new housing units sufficient to meet City qualified goals by identifying adequate sites for their construction. 22-150 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 6 of 29 2. Policy Action 4J (Airport Environs Sub Area Environmental Constraints). Policy Action 4J requires the City to take the following actions to address potential environmental constraints in the Airport Environs Sub Area and ensure continued feasibility of sites, particularly for lower -income RHNA: a. Require new residential development projects in the Airport Environs Sub Area provide noise studies and acoustical analyses to ensure designs include proper sound attenuation; b. Require new residential development projects in the Airport Environs Sub Area to explore advanced air filtration systems for buildings to promote cleaner air; C. Encourage on -site indoor amenities, such as fitness facilities or recreation and entertainment facilities; and d. Continue to implement park dedication requirements consistent with the City's Park Dedication ordinance and Land Use Element Policy LU 6.15.13 (Neighborhood Parks —Standards) and Policy LU 6.15.16 (On -Site Recreation and Open Space) to ensure adequate recreational space to ensure at least 8- percent of a project's gross land area (exclusive of existing rights -of -way) of the first phase for any development in each neighborhood or '/2 acre, whichever is greater, is developed as a neighborhood park, unless waived through Density Bonus Law. The City has taken actions to address potential environmental constraints in the Airport Area and ensure continued feasibility of sites, particularly for lower -income RHNA by providing the following uniform and concise criteria: a. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for such development, a noise study shall be prepared by a City -approved qualified acoustical consultant and submitted to the Community Development Director for approval; b. All new residential structures or the residential units within a mixed -use development shall be attenuated to provide an interior noise level of 45 dBA CNEL or less; c. The design of the residential portions of mixed -use projects and residential developments shall have adequate noise attenuation between adjacent uses and units (common floor/ceilings) in accordance with the California Building Code; d. New mixed -use developments shall incorporate designs with loading areas, parking lots, driveways, trash enclosures, mechanical equipment, and other noise sources away from the residential portion of the development; e. Use of walls, berms, interior noise insulation, double paned windows, advance insulation systems, or other noise mitigation measures, as deemed appropriate shall 22-151 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 7 of 29 be incorporated in the design of new residential to bring interior sound attenuation to 45 dBA CNEL or less; f. Residential uses shall be indoor -oriented to reduce noise impingement on outdoor living areas; g. On -site indoor amenities, such as fitness facilities or recreation and entertainment facilities shall be encouraged; and h. Advanced air filtration systems for buildings shall be considered to promote cleaner air. Planned Community Development Plan Amendments for the Newport Placed Planned Community (PC-11) and Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60) An amendment to PC-11 and PC-60 is a legislative act. Neither PC-11 and PC-60, Chapter 20.56 (Planning and Zoning, Planned Community District Procedures) or Chapter 20.66 (Planning and Zoning, Amendments) of Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of NBMC, or Article 2 (Adoption of Regulations) of Chapter 4 (Zoning Regulations) of Division 1 (Planning and Zoning) of Title 7 (Planning and Land Use) of the California Government Code set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of the amendment. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the amendments to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC is consistent with the following General Plan policies. Finding and Facts in Support of Findings: The Amendment is consistent with the following Housing Element Policy and Policy Action- 1. See findings in support of amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element and Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC above which are incorporated herein by reference. 2. Additionally, all new housing opportunity sites located in Newport Place and Newport Airport Village planned communities are located wholly or partially outside the updated 65 dBA noise contour area. By requiring conditions of approval identified in amendment to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of NBMC, the City has taken actions to address potential environmental constraints in the Airport Area and ensure continued feasibility of sites, particularly for lower -income RHNA. 22-152 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 8 of 29 SECTION 4. DECISION. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby finds this action is not subject to further environmental review pursuant to Section 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines because the Amendments do not change the underlying land use or zoning designations of any specific parcels, including parcels within the Airport Area or within the updated noise contours. The Amendments, therefore, will not result in development of greater intensity than is allowed under the 2006 General Plan and Newport Airport Village Planned Community, as amended. To the extent new parcels can be developed in the future for residential uses, by nature of no longer being located within areas identified as experiencing 65 dB CNEL or greater, those parcels must be part of a specific proposed project for consideration and processing by the City for approval. The Amendments are also exempt because they fall within the scope of analysis contained within the previously certified EIR No. 617, prepared for the 2014 John Wayne Airport ("JWA") Settlement Agreement, to which the City is a party. 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends the following to the City Council: a. Adopt Land Use Element Amendment, which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A," and incorporated herein by reference; b. Adopt Noise Element Amendment, which is attached hereto as Exhibit "B," and incorporated herein by reference; C. Adopt Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC, which is attached hereto as Exhibit "C," and incorporated herein by reference; d. Adopt Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) Text Amendment, which is attached hereto as Exhibit "D," and incorporated herein by reference; and e. Adopt Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60) Text Amendment, which is attached hereto as Exhibit "E," and incorporated herein by reference, f. Adopt Land Use Element Figures LU11, LU22 and LU23 to remove the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, which are attached hereto as Exhibit "F," Exhibit "G," and Exhibit "H," respectively, and incorporated herein by reference; g. Adopt Noise Element Figures N4 and N5 to update the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, which are attached hereto as Exhibit "I" and Exhibit "J," respectively, and incorporated herein by reference; and h. Adopt CEQA - Findings of Consistency, which are attached hereto as "Exhibit K," and incorporated herein by reference. 22-153 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 9 of 29 3. In conformance with City Council Policy K-1, the Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of the Amendments to the City Council by the adoption of Resolution No. PC2023-015. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 3rd DAY OF AUGUST, 2023. AYES: Barto, Ellmore, Rosene, and Salene NOES: None RECUSED: Harris, Langford, and Lowrey ABSENT: None BY: Curtis Ellmore, Chair BY: TViSfAJA, RAMS Tristan Harris, Secretary 22-154 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 10 of 29 EXHIBIT "A" Amendment to the 2006 General Plan Land Use Element Airport Area Reference & Propose Changes Page Airport Area Modify the third paragraph on page 3-100 as follows: narrative change Development in the Airport Area is limited reS+, �a due to the safety restrictions and noise associated Of jVY7A. with Introduction on John Wayne Airport. n^MUGh of the seuthcrrv"res ,�, for r�do� �l rsr IGGated onthe65 dBA GNE=1 hi� Pg 3-100 URSUiteh�le ether 10neise_c e„ uses. Additionally, building heights are restricted for aviation safety. Residential uses can be allowed in the Airport Area on parcels that are wholly or partially outside the 65 dBA CNEL contour as denoted in Figures N4 and N5 of the Noise Element. Figure N5 is largely derived from the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 617). Residential uses may be approved in these areas provided interior living areas are protected from excessive noise by appropriate construction techniques that reduce the interior noise to 45 dBA CNEL, consistent with state law. (See Cal. Code Regs., tit. 21, § 5014, subd. (a)(1)-(4).) Parcels that are wholly within the John Wayne Airport 65 dB CNEL contour shown in Figure N5 (e.g., those identified as experiencing noise levels above 65 dB CNEL) are unsuitable for residential development unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the site(s) wholly within the 65-70 dB CNEL contours are needed for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. Nonresidential uses are, however, encouraged on parcels located wholly within the 65 dBA CNEL contour area. Policy Overview; Modify the fourth sentence in first paragraph on page 3-101 as Pg 3-101 follows- follows- He HeUSiRg Residential and mixed -use (commercial and residential) buildings would be restricted from areas exposed to exterior noise levels of John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL and higher, based on the dBA CNEL contour boundaries shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence that the sites wholly within such contour area are needed for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. 22-155 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 11 of 29 Policy LU6.15.3 Require that all development be constructed in conformance with the (Airport height restrictions set forth by the Federal Aviation Administration Compatibility); (FAA), Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77, and Caltrans Pg 3-101 Division of Aeronautics, and that residential development shall be allowed only on parcels with noise levels of less than leGated outside of the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area as shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan specified by the 1985 jWA Master Plan, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the sites wholly within the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour shown in Figure N5 are needed for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. Nonresidential uses are, however, encouraged on parcels located wholly within the 65 dBA CNEL contour area. (Imp 2.1, 3.1, 4.1, 14.3) 22-156 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 12 of 29 EXHIBIT "B" Amendment to the 2006 General Plan Noise Element Reference & Page Proposed Changes Narrative -Community Modify the second full paragraph on page 12-9 as follows: Noise Contours; Pg 12- 9 The aircraft noise contours that are used for planning purposes by the County of Orange and Airport Land Use Commission are found in the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) and are derived from the 1985 Master Plan for JWA and the accompanying EIR 508. These noise contours are based on fleet mix and flight level assumptions developed in EIR 508, and are shown in Figure N5 Figures N1 and N2." Add the following paragraph after the second full paragraph on page 12-9 as follows: The Noise Chapter within 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report EIR No. 617 illustrated how the dBA CNEL noise contours have reduced in size compared to the 1985 AELUP Master Plan CNEL noise contours, in which the General Plan policies and maps are based on. The noise contours in EIR No. 617 are based on more contemporary noise modeling programs. Airport noise contours generated in this noise study using the INM Version 7.Od which was released for use in May 2013, and is the state - of -art in airport noise modeling. Consequently, Figures N4 and N5 are updated to reflect the noise contours identified by the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report No. 617. Modify the last sentence of the third full paragraph on page 12- 9 as follows: The 65 dBA CNEL contour area describes the area for which new noise -sensitive developments, including residential uses, will be conditionally permitted only if appropriate measures are included such that the standards contained in this Noise Element are achieved. Noise -sensitive uses shall not be located on parcels that are wholly within the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL contour as shown in Figure N5. Modify the fourth full paragraph on page 12-9 as follows: 22-157 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 13 of 29 The W- AEI I ID (lost amender! in ` 002) onhi allows �-i-r�o-v-v�-�rc��vr�rc���arrr �.�rr�cvvc� r9—crnvvr� and other noose_ sensitive a 65 residential uses uses within ��ucrr i--avcv�art�v ��� dBA noise Genteur if the interior noise standard of 45 dB an a000mnanyino erdinatien of GNELGan he maintained, rd with a—avigat+en easement for noise to the airport nrepriete anlli able to single family resirdenGes Furthermore, `residential units should be sufficiently indoor -oriented, consistent with Title 21 of the California Code of Regulations, so as to reduce noise impingement on outdoor living areas. The JWA AELUP also strongly recommends that if any residential uses are allowed within a 60 dBA G GE)Rtnit that sant seunaatneR nffri d'at i-ig to maintain a 45 dBA GNEL interin metheds are used Jc level.all designated outdoor common or recreational areas provide outdoor signage informing the public of the presence of operating aircraft. Policy N1.2 (Noise Applicants for proposed residential or mixed -use projects Exposure Verification that reg—.-�neRtal review and ar^ located in areas for New Development); projected to be exposed to 65-70 dBA CNEL or greater Pg 12-25 GNEl 60 dBA and higher as shown on Figure 4, Figure N5; and Figure N6 may must ,� conduct a fieldsurvey le to measurements ether medelimanner aGGep the rit„ noise study to provide evidence that the depicted noise contours do not adequately account for local noise exposure circumstances due to such factors as, topography, variation in traffic speeds, and other applicable conditions. These findings shall be used to determine the level of exterior or interior noise, attenuation needed to attain an acceptable noise exposure level and the feasibility of such measures when other planning considerations are taken into account, consistent with Title 21 of the California Code of Regulations. (Imp 2.1) Policy N1.5 (Infill Allow a higher (above 65 dBA CNEL) exterior noise level Projects); Pg 12-25 standard for infill projects in existing residential areas adjacent to major arterials if it can be shown that there are no feasible mechanisms to meet the exterior noise levels. The interior standard of 45 dBA CNEL shall be enforced for any new residential project or mixed -use project containing a residential component, consistent with Title 21 of California Code of Regulations. (Imp 2.1, 7.1) 22-158 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 14 of 29 Policy N1.5A (Airport Allow infill residential projects proximate to John Wayne Area Infill Projects) Airport to have a higher exterior noise level standard (65- 70 dBA CNEL) if it can be shown that there are no practical New Policy mechanisms or designs to meet the exterior noise levels. The interior standard of 45 dBA CNEL shall be enforced for any residential component of projects. No residential units may be located on parcels wholly within the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area as shown in Figure N5, of the Noise Element of the General Plan, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the sites wholly within such contour area are needed for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. Nonresidential uses are encouraged on parcels located wholly within the 65 dBA CNEL contour area, shown in Figure N5. Policy N2.2 (Design of Require the use of walls, berms, interior noise insulation, Sensitive Land Uses); double -paned windows, advanced insulation systems, or Pg 12-26 other noise mi+�atie,Tmeasures, as appropriate, in the design of new residential developments to attenuate noise levels to not exceed 45 dBA CNEL interior. or eOther new noise sensitive land uses that are adjacent to major reads- arterials and located proximate to John Wayne Airport (e.g., infill residential) and within the 65-70 dBA CNEL noise contour area are required to be indoor -oriented to reduce noise impacts on outdoor living or recreational areas. Application of the Noise Standards in Table N3 N2 shall govern this requirement. (Imp 7.1) Policy N3.1 (New Ensure new development is compatible with the noise Development); Pg 12- environment by Ucing airpgrt noise nentei m ng larger +hen 27 the 1985 I\A/center Plan these to Grprta�ned—IR as guides fi it ire planning and development denicienc proximate to John Wayne Airport by not allowing residential units on parcels located wholly within the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, as shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the sites wholly within such contour area are needed for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. Policy N3.2 (Residential Require that residential development in proximate to John Development); Pg 12- Wayne Airport Area shall not be located elide on parcels 28 wholly within the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA outside of the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour shown in Figure N5 of the 22-159 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 15 of 29 Noise Element of the General Plan, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the sites wholly within such contour area are needed for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. the 1985 jWA Master Plan and. Rrequire residential developers of residential or mixed -use land uses with a residential component to notify prospective purchasers or tenants of aircraft noise. Additionally, require outdoor common areas or recreational areas of residential or mixed -used developments to be posted with signs notifying users regarding the proximity to John Wayne Airport and the presence of operating aircraft and noise. (Imp 2.1, 3.1, 4.1) 22-160 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 16 of 29 EXHIBIT "C" Amendment to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code Amend Section 20.30.080.F (Noose Airport Environs Land UsePlanResidential Use Proximate to John Wayne Airport) of Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code to read as follows: F. Residential Use Proximate to John Wayne Airport ERV;r^nE ' and i Se PIResidential uses, including mixed -use residential, shall be prohibited wi " R the 1985 dehR VVaY a Airport ( WA) MaStor DlaR 65 dBA GNE GORt,,,r allowed on parcels or sites wholly or partially outside the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL noise contour as shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan, as identified in the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 617) and consistent with Title 21 of the California Code of Regulations, subject to the following conditions that apply to all residential projects within the John Wayne Airport 60 dBA CNEL or higher CNEL noise as shown in Figures N4 and N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan: 1) Prior to the issuance of any building permits for such development, a noise study shall be prepared by a City -approved qualified acoustical consultant and submitted to the Community Development Director for approval; 2) All new residential structures or the residential units within a mixed -use development shall be attenuated to provide an interior noise level of 45 dBA CNEL or less; 3) The design of the residential portions of mixed -use projects and residential developments shall have adequate noise attenuation between adjacent uses and units (common floor/ceilings) in accordance with the California Building Code; 4) New mixed -use developments shall incorporate designs with loading areas, parking lots, driveways, trash enclosures, mechanical equipment, and other noise sources away from the residential portion of the development, 5) Use of walls, berms, interior noise insulation, double paned windows, advance insulation systems, or other noise mitigation measures, as deemed appropriate shall be incorporated in the design of new residential to bring interior sound attenuation to 45 dBA CNEL or less; 6) Residential uses shall be indoor -oriented to reduce noise impingement on outdoor living areas; 7) On -site indoor amenities, such as fitness facilities or recreation and entertainment facilities shall be encouraged; and 8) Advanced air filtration systems for buildings shall be considered to promote cleaner air. Residential development shall be limited to parcels or sites wholly or partially outside the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the parcels or sites wholly within such contour area are 22-161 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 17 of 29 needed for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. Non-residential uses are encouraged on parcels or sites located wholly within the 65 dBA CNEL contour area. 22-162 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 18 of 29 EXHIBIT "D" Amendment to Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) Amend Part III. Residential Overlay, Section V.D.1 (Airport Noise Compatibility) to read as follows: 1. Residential development shall be located outside up to the iW 65 dB GNEL noise Gonteur-, speGifFec h� 985 iWA Master Plan the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL noise contour as shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan, and subject to compliance with Section 20.30.080.F (Residential Use Proximate to John Wayne Airport) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Residential development shall be limited to parcels wholly or partially outside the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the sites wholly within such contour area are needed for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. Non-residential uses are encouraged on parcels located wholly within the 65 dBA CNEL contour area. 22-163 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 19 of 29 EXHIBIT "E" Amendment to Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60) Amend Section I.D. (Purpose and Objective) to read as follows: "D. Purpose and Objective The purpose of the PCDP is to establish appropriate zoning regulations that govern the land use and development of the PC in a manner that is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan. Implementation of the PCDP will: - Provide a quality mixed -use development that includes residential and supporting commercial uses; as well as, commercial uses that support or benefit from the proximity to the airport. - Create two planning areas to guide the development of the PC District (see Figure 4). Planning Area 1 will include the residential and, potentially, a complimentary retail or service commercial component of the PC District. Planning Area 2 will consist exclusively of non- residential uses. - Provide new housing opportunities in response to increased demand for housing, reduction of vehicle trips, and an encouragement of an active lifestyle by increasing the opportunity for residents to live in proximity to jobs, services, and entertainment. Such housing will be proximate to, and interconnected with, commercial development through pedestrian walkways provided by future development within the PCDP. - Ensure that all residential units are IOGated outside the jehR WaYRe Airpert 65 dBA Cnl�i nn�_ ise GGRte it and cafe and noise -sensitive uses (e.g., schools, churches, hospitals, public libraries) regardless of location, shall be designed to maintain the interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL or less and in compliance with Section 20.30.080.F (Residential Use Proximate to John Wayne Airport) of the Municipal Code. " - Protect future residents and other sensitive uses by prohibiting these uses from being developed on parcels that are wholly within the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area shown in Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan. Residential development shall be limited to parcels wholly or partially outside the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the sites wholly within such contour area are needed for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. Non-residential uses are encouraged on parcels located wholly within the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL contour area as shown in Figures N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan and outside of Safety Zone 3 of the AELUP." Amend Section II.A. (Permitted Uses) to read as follows: Table 1 lists the permitted uses for each planning area of the Planned Community. The uses identified within the table are not intended to be a comprehensive list, but rather major use 22-164 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 20 of 29 categories. All residential units and noise -sensitive uses, regardless of location, shall maintain the interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL or less, and shall be located on parcels wholly or partially outside the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA noise contour as shown in Figures N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan area and Safety Zone 3 of the AELUP. Residential development shall be limited to parcels wholly or partially outside the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the sites wholly within such contour area are needed for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. Non-residential uses are encouraged on parcels located wholly within the John Wayne Airport 65 dBA CNEL contour area. The Community Development Director may determine other uses not specifically listed herein are allowed or allowed pursuant to an MUP or a CUP, provided they are consistent with the purpose of the planning areas, are compatible with surrounding uses, and are not listed as a prohibited use. Amend Section II.B. (Prohibited Uses) to read as follows: The following uses shall be expressly prohibited from the PCDP: B. Prohibited Uses The following uses shall be expressly prohibited from the PCDP: 1. Any use not authorized by this PCDP unless the Community Development Director determines a particular use consistent with the purpose and intent of the PCDP, 2. Residential dwelling units within John Wayne Airport Safety Zone 3 (residential accessory uses, and amenities are allowed), 3. The following uses, if said structure within 250 feet of any residential dwelling unit: a. Handicraft Industry b. Industry, Small (less than 5,000 sq. ft.) c. Emergency Health Facilities/Urgent Care d. Ambulance Services e. Funeral Homes and Mortuaries f. Maintenance and Repair Services. 22-165 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 21 of 29 Land Use Element Figure LU11 — Statistical Areas J6, L4 22-166 2020-84 GP2014-004 PA2014-225 09/222/2020 Change land use designation from Airport Office and 2019-14 GP2015-004 2011-21 GP2007-009 RM 14 Fac Supporting Uses (AO) to Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) and add Anomaly No. 86 (329 dwelling units and 297,572 commercial sq ft) for 4341,4361, and 4501 Birch Street; 4320, 4340, 4360, 4400, 4500, 4520, 4540, 4570, 4600, and 4630 Campus Drive; and 4525, 4533, and 4647 MacArthur Boulevard. PA2015-210 02/12/2019 Change land use designation from General Commercial Office (CO-G) to Private Institutions (PI) and amend Anomaly No. 22 to allow 85,000 square feet for Residential Care Facility for the Elderly located at 101 Bayview place. PA2007-213 02/22/201 1 Increase the maximum allowable development limit by 11,544 square feet and create anomaly No. 2.1 for 4300 Von Karman. sRi opR\ 1FNANE J P �p 0 487.5 975 Feet I I I I I e00 BgwFW K'AY 0 J m la a 0 UNIVERSITY DRIVE CITY of NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN Figure LU 11 STATISTICAL AREAS J6, L4 Residential Neighborhoods Rs-D Single -Unit Residential Detached Rs -A Single -Unit Residential Attached RT Two -Unit Residential - Multiple -Unit Residential - Multiple -Unit Residential Detached Commercial Districts and Corridors cN Neighborhood Commercial cc Corridor Commercial - General Commercial - Visitor Serving Commercial -Recreational and Marine Commercial - Regional Commercial Commercial Office Districts co-c General Commercial Office co-M Medical Commercial Office co-R Regional Commercial Office Industrial Districts F—iG7 Industrial Airport Supporting Districts Ao Airport Office and Supporting Uses Mixed -Use Districts Mu-v Mixed Use Vertical Mu-H Mixed Use Horizontal Mu# Mixed Use Water Related Public, Semi -Public and Institutional PFJ Public Facilities Private Institutions - Parks and Recreation Fos] Open Space rs Tidelands and Submerged Lands *94. y City of Newport Beach pis Boundary 4 Statistical Area L4 Boundary Land Use Delineator Line • Refer to anomaly table i EW �Rr E I P Document Name: Land_Use_Airport_Area_Figure_LUI I_Amendment 22-167 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 22 of 29 EXHIBIT "G" Land Use Element Figure LU22 — Airport 22-168 86 • 3 9 �.• 10 • � ' . 4 • 11 " 5 6 11 • I 1 .�I 2 r . 14 NINE �Ip LAND USE POLICY OUnderlying Uses: Office, Hotel, Supporting Retail, © Airport -Supporting Businesses © Commercial and Office Residential Village: Housing and Mixed -Use (with Guidelines for Design and Development) Document Name: Land_Use_Airport_Area_Figure_LU22_Amendment CITY of NEWPORT BEACH GENERALPLAN FIGURE LU22 AIRPORT AREA QSub -Area Conceptual Q Development Plan Area Land Use Delineator Line �s Highway •Refer to anomaly table Feet 0 250 500 1,000 Source: City of Newport Beach and EIP Associates PROJECT NUMBER: 10579-01 ZE PoHr F M O o � � 22-169 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 23 of 29 EXHIBIT "H" Land Use Element Figure LU23 - Airport Area Residential Villages Illustrative Concept Diagram 22-170 ram+ cd—pv% PA-ya r RBI}Tpt Fr�k�r •flsr� Document Name: Land —Use _Airport _ Area_Figure_LU23_Amendment CITY of NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN Figure LU23 AIRPORT AREA RESIDENTIAL VILLAGES ILLUSTRATIVE CONCEPT DIAGRAM Legend OPPORTUNITY SITES PROPOSED OPEN SPACES IMPROVED RESIDENTIAL STREETS PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL STREET PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN WAYS CONCEPTUAL PLAN REQUIRED Source: ROMA Design Group PROJECT NUMBER: 10579-01 Date: 08/03/06 � SEW ART O u � i Ew <r�apH�P w s s o c� w x e s 22-171 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 24 of 29 EXHIBIT "I" Noise Element Figures N4 - Future Noise Contours 22-172 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 25 of 29 EXHIBIT "J" Noise Element Figure N5 - Future Noise Contours 22-174 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 26 of 29 EXHIBIT "K" CEQA - Findings of Consistency The California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (California Public Resources Code §§21000 et seq.); the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations §§15000 et seq.); and the rules, regulations, and procedures for implementing CEQA as set forth by the City of Newport Beach ("City") provide guidance regarding when additional environmental review is required. Pursuant to the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, Newport Beach is the Lead Agency charged with the responsibility of deciding whether to approve the Amendments to Newport Beach General Plan Land Use and Noise Elements, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60) (Amendments) to accommodate housing units identified by the certified 2021-2029 Sixth Cycle General Plan Housing Element. The provisions of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 are applicable to the Amendments. The Amendments are not subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 because the Amendments do not change the underlying land use or zoning designations of any specific parcels, including parcels within the Airport Area or within the updated noise contours; and would not result in new significant impacts or a substantial more adverse impact than addressed in John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report No. 617 (State Clearinghouse No. 2001111135) (EIR No. 617). The Amendments are also exempt because they fall within the scope of analysis contained within the previously certified EIR No. 617, prepared for the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement, to which the City is a party. CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 provides, in relevant part: (a) CEQA mandates that projects which are consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified shall not require additional environmental review, except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project -specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site. This streamlines the review of such projects and reduces the need to prepare repetitive environmental studies. (b) In approving a project meeting the requirements of this section, a public agency shall limit its examination of environmental effects to those which the agency determines, in an initial study or other analysis: (1) Are peculiar to the project or the parcel on which the project would be located, (2) Were not analyzed as significant effects in a prior EIR on the zoning action, general plan, or community plan, with which the project is consistent, (3) Are potentially significant off -site impacts and cumulative impacts which were not discussed in the prior EIR prepared for the general plan, community plan or zoning action, or 22-176 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 27 of 29 (4) Are previously identified significant effects which, as a result of substantial new information which was not known at the time the EIR was certified, are determined to have a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the prior EIR. (c) If an impact is not peculiar to the parcel or to the project, has been addressed as a significant effect in the prior EIR, or can be substantially mitigated by the imposition of uniformly applied development policies or standards, as contemplated by subdivision (e) below, then an additional EIR need not be prepared for the project solely on the basis of that impact. (d) This section shall apply only to projects which meet the following conditions: (1) The project is consistent with: (A) A community plan adopted as part of a general plan, (B) A zoning action which zoned or designated the parcel on which the project would be located to accommodate a particular density of development, or (C) A general plan of a local agency, and (2) An EIR was certified by the lead agency for the zoning action, the community plan, or the general plan. As part of its decision -making process, the City is required to review and consider whether the Amendments would create new significant impacts or significant impacts that would be substantially more severe than those disclosed in the John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report No. 617 (State Clearinghouse No. 2001111135) (EIR No. 617). Additional CEQA review is only triggered if the Amendments create new significant impacts or impacts that are more severe than those disclosed in EIR No. 617 such that major revisions to the EIR would be required. The Amendments provide for updated noise contours as established in EIR No. 617 and revisions to General Plan policies, Title 20 of Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC), Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community (PC-60) to allow for consistency between the certified 2021-2029 Sixth Cycle Housing Element and the Newport Beach General Plan and NBMC as it applies to future housing uses near John Wayne Airport. The Amendments are proposed to ensure consistency pursuant to the State Planning and Zoning Law and the City's compliance with its RHNA allocation. Residential and mixed -use (commercial and residential) buildings would be restricted from areas exposed to exterior noise levels of 65 dBA CNEL and higher, based on the dBA CNEL contour boundaries set forth in EIR No. 617 for inclusion as Figure N5 of the Noise Element of the General Plan, unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence that the sites wholly within such contour area are needed for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. The Amendments do not grant any development entitlements or authorize development. 22-177 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 28 of 29 The proposed policy changes and NBMC amendments would allow the City to implement housing policies which are in the Sixth Cycle Housing Element. The Sixth Cycle Housing Element was determined to be statutorily exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15262 because it does not provide development entitlements to any specific land use projects, nor does it make any changes to the General Plan land use map or modify land use designations, densities, or land use intensities. The policies and program changes are needed for the City's compliance with its RHNA allocation and would not cause a significant effect on the environment or that were previously analyzed adequately in the Newport Beach General Plan Update Program EIR (SCH No. 2006011119) or EIR No. 617. The Noise Chapter of EIR No. 617 explained how the dBA CNEL noise contours have reduced in size compared to the 1985 Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) Master Plan CNEL noise contours, in which the City's General Plan policies and maps are based on. The 1985 Master Plan noise contours are considerably larger than the existing noise contours presented previously. This is largely due to a quieter fleet of existing commercial aircraft and a dramatic reduction in the number of generation aviation operations. The noise contours in EIR No. 617 are based on more contemporary noise modeling programs, as the EIR explained that "one of the most important factors in generating accurate noise contours is the collection of accurate operational data". Airport noise contours generated in this noise study using the INM Version 7.Od which was released for use in May 2013, and is the state -of -art in airport noise modeling. As such, the City proposes to update the Noise Element to include these noise contours, which in part, modify where residential uses could occur outside of the 65 CNEL contour in the Airport Area. Based on these updated noise contours, certain Housing Opportunity Sites will now be outside of the 65 CNEL contour while others will be within the 65 CNEL contour. However, the Amendments will not result in development of greater intensity than is allowed under the 2006 General Plan and Newport Airport Village Planned Community, as amended. Residential uses can be allowed in the Airport Area on parcels that are wholly or partially outside the 65dBA CNEL contour as denoted in Figure N5 of the Noise Element. Figure N5 is largely derived from EIR No. 617. Residential uses may be approved in these areas provided interior living areas are protected from excessive noise by appropriate construction techniques that reduce the interior noise to 45 dBA CNEL, consistent with state law. Parcels that are wholly within the 65 dB CNEL contour shown in Figure N5 (e.g., those identified as experiencing noise levels above 65 dB CNEL) are unsuitable for residential development unless and until the City determines, based on substantial evidence, that the site(s) wholly within the 65-70 dB CNEL contours are needed for the City to satisfy its Sixth Cycle RHNA mandate. The changes would not allow for more development than assumed in the growth assumptions in the General Plan nor would it impact the City's RHNA obligations. To the extent new parcels are able to be developed in the future for residential uses, by nature of no longer being located within areas identified as experiencing 65 dB CNEL or greater, those parcels must be part of a specific proposed project for consideration and processing by the City for approval. Future housing development would be subject to compliance with the established regulatory framework, namely federal, State, regional, and local (including General Plan policies, NBMC standards, and Standard Conditions of Approval). While by -right housing projects may be 22-178 DocuSign Envelope ID: C58AD014-680B-45F9-896A-BDEE68157193 Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-015 Paae 29 of 29 exempt from CEQA, all future residential uses affected by the Amendments would continue to be subject to further development review, which can include technical supporting reports. No new information that was not known at the time the General Plan and EIR No. 617 were prepared is now available that demonstrates that the Amendments will result in a new or increased significant impact. The Amendments would not cause growth beyond that accommodated by the General Plan. The Amendments do not introduce new land use designations or otherwise alter general land use patterns or development standards. Therefore, the findings of previously certified EIR No. 617 are applicable to the Amendments. Implementation of the Amendments would not substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts, including but not limited to air emissions and greenhouse gas emissions. Although the noise contours would be updated, the requirements for compliance with noise standards would not change. In summary, the Amendments would not result in any new significant environmental effects that are substantially different from those identified in EIR No. 617 nor would it substantially increase the severity of significant effects previously identified in EIR No. 617. Therefore, based on the provisions of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, no additional CEQA documentation is required. 22-179 Attachment No. F Agency Comment Letters 22-180 DocuSign Envelope ID: OOD406E1-2E9F-4D91-A4A3-55E230ED583F /11" AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION ORANGE COUNTY FOR ORANGE COUNTY 3160 Airway Avenue • Costa Mesa, California 92626 - 949.252.5170 fax: 949.252.6012 October 11, 2023 Rosalinh 1 Ong City of Newport Beach Community Development Department 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Subject: Response to Notice of Intent to Overrule the Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County Determination on Housing Element Implementation Dear Ms. I -ng. We are in receipt of the City of Newport Beach (City) letter dated September 13. 2023. and City Council Resolution No. 2023-52 notifying the Airport Land I'se Commission (ALUC) for Orange County of the City's intent to overrule the ALIJC's inconsistency determination on the proposed Housing Element Implementation — Noise Related Amendments. In accordance with Section 21676 of the Public Utilities Code, the ALUC submits the following comments addressing the proposed overrule findings for the above -referenced project. These comments shall be included in the public record of a final decision to overrule the ALUC. Pease be advised that California Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 21678 states: "With respect to a publicly owned airport that a public agency does not operate, if the public agency pursuant to Section 21676, 21676.5, or 21677 overrules a commission's action or recommendation, the operator of the airport shall be immune from liability for damages to property or personal injury caused by or resulting directly or indirectly from the public agency's decision to overrule the commission's action or recommendation." Background On August 17, 2023, the ALUC for Orange County found the proposed Housing Element Implementation - Noise Related Amendments to be inconsistent with the Airport Environs I.and Use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne Airport (JWA) on a 4-0 vote. The inconsistent finding was based on AELUP Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.2, and 2.1.4. and PUC Sections 21674(a) and 21674(b). Pursuant to Section 1.2 of the AELUP for JWA, the purpose of the AELUP is to safeguard the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of the airport and to ensure the continued operation of the airport. Specifically, the AELUP seeks to protect the public from the adverse effects of aircraft noise to ensure that people and facilities are not concentrated in areas 22-181 DocuSign Envelope ID: OOD406E1-2E9F-4D91-A4A3-55E230ED583F Housing Clement Implementation Overrule Response October 11. 2023 Page 2 susceptible to aircraft accidents, and to ensure that no structures or activities adversely affect navigable airspace. Additionally, Section 2.1.4 of the AELUP for JWA and PUC Section 21674 charge the Commission to coordinate at the local level to ensure compatible land use planning. Therefore, because of the City's proposed amendment and potential residential uses, that would occur within Community Noise Equivalent Levels (CNEL) 60 and 65, and Safety Zones 4 and 6, which include exposure to significant risks, noise and aircraft overflight, the City's proposed actions are inconsistent with the AELUP. ALUC has the following additional comments regarding the findings and facts of support included in Resolution No. 2023-52. Response to Finding and Fact in Support A - Regarding Noise Standards: Pursuant to AELUP Section 2.1.1, "... aircraft noise emanating from airports may be incompatible with the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of an airport..." As noted in the City's discussion, the CNEL standards are set forth in the AELUP. As part of the review of the proposed Housing Element Implementation - Noise Related Amendments, it was noted that the "suitable" sites are identified within the JWA 65 dBA and 60 dBA CNEL noise contours. The ALUC believes that the proposed new locations for residential units would be highly affected by airport noise due to the close proximity to the airport (some within less than one mile from the runway end and others directly across the street from the airport), and that the past and current land use designation of Open Space and/or Commercial is the appropriate designation for this site. One of the proposed amendments to the Noise Element is to replace the existing noise contours which are currently consistent with the adopted AELUP for JWA, with more narrow noise contours which were included in 2014 Settlement Agreement EIR 617. Although a CEQA finding is not required for purposes of making a consistency determination, EIR 617 did not provide an analysis of the potentially significant impacts of placing future residential uses within the 65 dB CNEL contour, therefore, the City's reliance on FEIR 617 is misplaced and inconsistent with the AELUPfor JWA. The proposed Housing Element Implementation - Noise Related Amendments would allow residential uses which are not suitable and would subject the future residents to excessive noise regardless of which noise contours are utilized. The ALUC has historically found residential uses in the vicinity of JWA to be inconsistent with the AELUP for JWA. Response to Fact in Support B - Regarding Safety: Pursuant to AELUP Section 2.1.2, "[s]afety and compatibility zones depict which land uses are acceptable and which are unacceptable in various portions of airport environs. The purpose of these zones is to support the continued use and operation of an airport by establishing compatibility and safety standards to promote air navigational safety and to reduce potential safety hazards for persons living, working or recreating near JWA." 22-182 DocuSign Envelope ID: OOD406E1-2E9F-4D91-A4A3-55E230ED583F Housing Klement Implementation Overrule Response October 11, 2023 Page 3 The proposed housing sites in the Housing Element Update and subject to the Noise Related Amendments include property located in Safety Zone 4 Outer Approach/Departure Zone, and Safety Zone 6 Traffic Pattern Zone 6. Many of the sites located in Safety Zones 4 and 6 are also located in the 65 dB CNEL contour, According to the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, noise and overflight should be considered in Safety Zone 6 and residential uses should be limited to low density in Safety Zone 4. Flight tracks for the property were included in the ALUC staff report and are attached to this letter. There are few residential uses surrounding the proposed suitable sites, none as dense as the City's proposed sites. Considering the proposed densities, proximity to JWA and the number of flights over the property, the inclusion of these new dense sites in the proposed Housing Element Implementation - Noise Related Amendments is inappropriate. Response to Fact in Support C. - Regarding "Intent of the AELUP": By virtue of being clearly stated in AEL UP for JWA Sections 1.2 "Purpose and Scope" and 2.0 "Planning Guidelines," the ALUC understands the complex legal charge to protect public airports from encroachment by incompatible land use development, while simultaneously protecting the health, safety and welfare of citizens who work and live in the airport's environs. To this end, and as also statutorily required, ALUC proceedings are benefited by several members having expertise in aviation. Based upon careful consideration of all information provided, and input from ALUC members with expertise in aviation, the ALUC unanimously found the proposed Housing Element Implementation - Noise Related Amendments to be Inconsistent with the AELUP for JWA. We urge the City Council to take ALUC's concerns into consideration in its deliberations prior to deciding whether to overrule ALUC. In the event the City overrules ALUC's determinations, ALUC requests that individual projects within the airport influence area are submitted to ALUC for review. Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments. Sincerely, DocuSigned by: OD FA 3FFFB2438... Mar onin Vice Chairman Attachment: John Wayne Airport Flight Tracks for Housing Element Implementation - Noise Related Amendments cc: Members of Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County Members of Newport Beach City Council Jonathan Huff, Caltrans/Division of Aeronautics 22-183 JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT ORANGE COUNTY 1. a John Wayne Airport Access & Noise Office -V Mr .7 ?S 61 71 -AL -N JW R., H .(01 ' . qF J DA'o U I j 1,3 Reserves, IF Q� -lAT eP L v J 0 H N W A Y N F ' AIRPORT VIP -ORANGE vCUI`JTY John Wayne Airport Access & Noise Office T"dy 4PP, N JIT �� .1 W PA Ar Awe Ara. a" 0 " U 1. Q F5�,�, 4 n Air, ij_t 4/ NIff _ter 4j% L Z 4W 4 A hR- /J OA,)U I N/ MARSH ,U!J IN x � . � y'T—�FJ . t `.� J �f++c:� f1:� � ' ^.� � ' � t i; .t . ` alr r,f r... i. t Y , . ��j 'qA t4 'k-4 4;kV P" 4 •T" 8 V IV Soorck:.JohtftYay�je AkPoFt-06nqP-Covm6 JOHN WAYNE AMPORT 0k,- ORANGE COUNTY John Wayne Airport Access & Ncise Office YZ.' r + .'} Ir`f-•- ��� ifk r: i7 r 7kt i�♦� � � �r,�*' J� .i ��� �' _ mange: r] _. (�' r�4 w4', +�'I r1 xrary.', f r/ • x.� f +`y4iry 7 4P rrrrs' Irvine .r h,Ch n /:`�a k'd.L��: , .-�'' •�- rho' *] .� G .G'10� �� �s ky"•�Y II1f+!+.1nulNARSH ,'*� } x'- rimerR. I ,1 :5 I 5 i,*it�1T "-k•�#� }r ,. . ,. ,f v s•l* IV e`+ * x J J• 1 ,1,1nnLL �' i ... r - . -i - 1Rae�. �.,,., e14' �jeyv�at.]-�+�V ' ]Yn%14 .� J' - 9} , '•; '„ \V2'S}j5y y>• :• .�i'r" _ �.' ,'? , y -_ - --- ,� y • � � i' - la a •� pl��;.'r�4j�. � �l lti `r �..�-�;-_ r� � '�' I � ti �. I f_1h fc ply f�•-~r _ ;"�A _ John AYpg[L.. SoUrc SEEN L.::}S,-e "R•� 1FICs J�•« LY . ' { fin: rtir. ry.,: r i.. r _. .a . . ' JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT r1 I,.4 ORANGE COUNTY 4f4 1��` MI•I '�. .�/;\ 14 1G l�•r4� f ill +Rr•r 1 _? _ -�( p+.I/iAV �� % �� f'�r ��•'R •� tj. API '1 \4' Il• ¢ ifrY 1 y + Ab i Y - '�-.'., r e.` w +III ❑c 'i(il[hc'I ��'�t:: m. ,. • mow' 'w��LL*• i�4• �'� �=��1 F I.I,' .. � �py.•� .,fir'' � r �,i m.' �f .r �,F' ( } ,1`, ►'I� Ch'Hpl r' ; Rr �vIlaril{' - V r Y :''.r.9f �' —. '.• J*�iwf3F �, of .r.j f`, Y� 1 , ;♦1Y � r ,-'sib 5. 07� i •r f f � i t} cx� �If-� I - ..• t � ���, +ice 3y ` ly �s\^. •"� � S.F" �t f ,[- F 'F j � S l~ r),r� � i r�. $ �`J;", !'�'�.J,3/,�•#� Y ter` { ,I John Wayne Airport Access & Noise Office .'� JOHN WAYNE _ AIRPORT Jahn Wayne Airport Access & Noise Office ORAN ;E COUNTY .. f a {=� •, f . a_' t a aF1 _ I'" `%lrr1'st : !.'_.1 (,4r`fir l \4f. j�j' • :• ! }I . f I.Id L.� IL r� y •i 1 'r�i�tii'G`�,;f�++` � > /. /f • /�«� 4 I �Y='- - r { � � N .<G J _ rN� N' i R. S'H x•' r .s`, !r� .earl �,. r f f, RA NCHO_.A_91 AL N'' 'fix. #."f H jy ff 1 ate. rvn, yam` + _ - - .} I Y E R S,I lea .t ti 14 f\ rr r Source: John Wayne Airpoul,County .' JOHN �VAYNE i- AIRPORT ORANGE COUNTY John Wayne Airport Access & Noise Office 4!" �eel �Gf� � �Vv Roamers' Irv�nc if f ..•R yaw /jApllllN.'��}_ rr ; RS M \\` \ AL dp —- SoLfrce: John Wayne Airport, Orange Coo" STATE OF CALIFORNIA—CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY Gavin Newsom, Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AERONAUTICS Program- M.S. #40 1 120 N STREET P. O. BOX 942874 SACRAMENTO, CA 94274-0001 PHONE (916) 654-4959 FAX (916) 653-9531 TTY 711 www.dot.ca.gov October 13, 2023 Ben Zdeba, AICP, Principal Planner City of Newport Beach Community Development Department 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660-3267 Dear Mr. Zdeba: Making Conservation a California Way of Life. Electronically Sent bzdeba@newportbeachca.gov The Aeronautics Program (Program) at the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) appreciates receiving the Notice of Intent dated September 13, 2023, from the City of Newport Beach (City), to overrule a determination of the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). The ALUC has reported that the Sixth Cycle Housing Element Update Project (Project) is inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport (JWA). The Notice of Intent concerns the City's Resolution (No.) 2023-52 (Resolution), and specific "Facts in Support" related to the AELUP. In advance of a public hearing on the Resolution to consider overruling the ALUC's determination, the Program is providing the following comments pursuant to California Public Utilities Code (PUC) section 21676. Please accept this updated response initially dated November 24, 2021. Facts in Support #1 -The Project is consistent with the noise standards of the AELUP. Citing AELUP section 3.2.3 for "residential uses to be developed with advanced insulation systems to bring the sound after attenuation to no more than 45 dB inside" overlooks a key provision of the section that is seen prior to quoting the conclusion of the section that says, "residential uses within the 65- 70 dBA CNEL noise contour are required to be 'indoor - oriented' to preclude noise impingement on outdoor living areas." The provision in between says, "All residential units are inconsistent in this area unless it can be shown conclusively that such units are sufficiently sound attenuated for present and projected noise exposures, which shall be the energy sum of all noise impacting the project, so as not to exceed an interior standard of 45 dB CNEL." No "conclusive" support is provided as part of Facts in Support # 1. Instead, the statement is made that the City's existing "General Plan Land Use Element Policy LU 6.15.3 and Noise Element Policy N 3.2 currently require that residential development in the Airport Area are to be located outside of the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour." A claim that follows says, "as part of the City's comprehensive update to the General Plan, these policies will be updated to reflect and allow the additional housing opportunity sites in the higher impact noise zones." The City's proposed overrule of the ALUC, then, is based on a claim yet to be proven, whereas the ALUC's determination of inconsistency is related to existing fact. The Program can only conclude that the Project does not satisfy requirements in PUC section 21670, as "Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated, and efficient transportation system to enhance California's economy and livability" 22-190 Mr. Ben Zdeba October 13, 2023 Page 2 claimed in the Notice of Intent for the purpose of public protection from hazards near airports. Facts in Support #2 - The proposed Project is consistent with the safety standards of the AELUP. This Fact in Support is deficient for not adequately citing the reference to Safety Zone 6 (Traffic Pattern Zone) of the AELUP. As used in the Notice of Intent, the statement that says, "risk factors associated with Safety Zone 6 generally include a low likelihood of accident occurrence," is drawn from the AELUP, but it overlooks the AELUP's reference to the 2002 California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (Handbook; published by the Program). It is Table 9B in the 2002 Handbook that refers to "a low likelihood of accident occurrence." Unfortunately, the AELUP does not account for the current Handbook of 2011. The City also does not account for it. The 2011 Handbook allows for low risk of accidents in the zone for an airport traffic pattern, but it goes further to quantify accident risk (Chapter 4, page 4-25). Owing to a relatively large area, the Handbook indicates 18-29 percent of accidents near a runway could occur in the traffic pattern zone (attributable also to lower and slower flight profiles for less time and altitude to recover from distress). The 2011 Handbook also allows for residential land use in the traffic pattern zone, but with the condition that says, "where ambient noise levels are low." By accounting for this discrepancy, the Program recommends that the City evaluate ambient noise levels in the JWA Safety Zone 6 before taking further action on the proposed ALUC overrule. It would be a prudent means for abiding by PUC section 21670 "to prevent new noise and safety problems." Facts in Support #3 - The proposed Project is consistent with the purpose and intent of the AELUP and will not result in incompatible land uses adjacent to JWA. Citing the City's intention related to the Project that says, "any development on the proposed housing opportunity sites will comply with the noise criteria and safety standards," contained in Sections 2 and 3 of the AELUP, is appreciated by the Program. Sections 2 and 3 of AELUP provide overall policies for planning and land use around JWA, including certain specific criteria. The points made in this letter concerning specific criteria should be considered for their value to ensure accurate compliance with PUC section 21670. Otherwise, the Program contends that any less effort compromises both the City's declared position in the Notice of Intent and the public's welfare. Sincerely, Originally signed by Jonathan Huff Associate Transportation Planner c: Lea U. Choum, Executive Officer, Orange County Airport Land Use Commission; ALUCinfo@ocair.com "Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated, and efficient transportation system to enhance California's economy and livability" 22-191 Mr. Ben Zdeba October 13, 2023 Page 2 bc: Lan Zhou, Deputy District Director, District 12; lan.zhou@dot.ca.gov "Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated, and efficient transportation system to enhance California's economy and livability" 22-192 %ZF JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT ORANGE COUNTY October 9, 2023 Rosalinh Ung, Principal Planner City of Newport Beach Community Development Department 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, California 92660 LuDgQnewportbeachca.ciov RE: Newport Beach Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments Dear Ms. Ung: This letter provides comments on behalf of the County of Orange (County), acting in its capacity as the owner and operator of John Wayne Airport, Orange County (SNA) (JWA or Airport), to the City of Newport Beach's (City) proposed noise -related amendments to its Land Use Element, Noise Element, Zoning Code, Newport Place Planned Community, and Newport Airport Village Planned Community (collectively, Housing Element Noise Update or Update). We understand that this Update is intended to accommodate the City's proposed residential sites located within the Airport's 60 and 65 decibel (dB) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) noise contours that were included in the Housing Element Update that was approved by the City in September 2022. The Airport has a number of serious concerns relating to this proposed Housing Element Noise Update including, but not limited to, land use, noise, safety and airspace compatibility issues, compliance with the 2006 Cooperative Agreement between the County and the City, and compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Guidelines) (Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.). Our concerns are addressed in detail below. Background As you know, the City recently submitted the Housing Element Noise Update to the County's Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for a consistency determination. In August 2023, the ALUC found the City's Update to be inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for JWA due to noise, safety and land use incompatibility issues. The City has indicated that it plans to overrule ALUC's most recent inconsistency determination and adopt the Housing Element Noise Update. Our understanding is that the ALUC will submit a separate comment letter relating to the AELUP overrule and the sufficiency of the City's findings for that overrule. Therefore, this comment letter will not address those important ALUC and findings issues. Rather, our comment letter focuses on the important land use, noise, safety and airspace compatibility issues relating to the City's Housing Element Noise Update, as well as issues relating to the 2006 Cooperative Agreement and the City's compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. Charlene V. Reynolds (949) 252-5171 3160 Airway Avenue Airport Director (949) 252-5178 FAX Costa Mesa, CA www,ocair.com 92626-4608 22-193 Rosalinh Ung, Principal Planner City of Newport Beach October 9, 2023 Page 2 Land Use, Noise, Overflight, and Safety Compatibility Issues The City's proposed Housing Element Noise Update identifies approximately twenty-eight (28) new sites for potential residential development within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour and twenty- three (23) new sites for potential residential development within the 60 dB CNEL noise contour. In addition, the 2021 Housing Element Update removed a policy that was included in previous Housing Elements prohibiting residential uses within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour, and the City is now proposing to revise or remove similar policies from the Housing Element Noise Update. Our understanding is that the City's proposal identifies sites that can achieve the City's assigned 2021 Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) for the 2021-2029 planning period. However, many of these sites are now located within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour, which was formerly prohibited by the City's own policies. Noise is one of the most basic land use compatibility concerns. Federal and state statutes and regulations establish the basis for ensuring land use compatibility in areas around airports. Specifically, both the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics (Caltrans) have adopted noise and land use compatibility standards for residential land uses, schools, and other noise sensitive uses. (See, e.g., 49 U.S.C. § 47502, Pub. Util. Code § 21669, Cal. Code Regs. § 5000 et seq.). These standards generally establish a maximum exterior noise level of 65 dB CNEL for private outdoor living areas and an interior noise level of 45 dB CNEL for residential and other sensitive land uses. As indicated in Section 5006 of the California Code of Regulations (Title 21, Division 2.5, Chapter 6): "The level of noise acceptable to a reasonable person residing in the vicinity of an airport is established as a community noise equivalent level (CNEL) value of 65 dB for purposes of these regulations. This criterion level has been chosen for reasonable persons residing in urban residential areas where houses are of typical California construction and may have windows partially open. It has been selected with reference to speech, sleep, and community reaction." Because the City's proposed Housing Element Noise Update could result in new residential development being exposed to excessive noise levels outside these standards, we request that the Housing Element Noise Update be revised to reflect only non-residential uses within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour to ensure compliance with these important state and federal noise standards. In addition to the FAA and Caltrans standards for noise compatibility, general plan guidelines relating to noise compatibility are provided in the California Government Code. (See, e.g., Cal. Gov. Code §65302.) These code provisions require noise contours to be used as a guide for establishing a pattern of land uses that minimizes the exposure of community residents to excessive noise. The Housing Element Noise Update, which potentially would expose residents to excessive noise impacts, is not consistent with these general plan guidelines. We therefore, also request that the City revise its Housing Element Noise Update to, at a minimum, locate any new residential development outside the 65 dB CNEL noise contour and, preferably, locate any new residential development outside the 60 dB CNEL noise contour in order to minimize the exposure of community residents to excessive noise. Adding new residential sites within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour would not only subject future residents to excessive aircraft noise due to the proximity of the Airport but would also increase 22-194 Rosalinh Ung, Principal Planner City of Newport Beach October 9, 2023 Page 3 the amount of incompatible land use within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour. If the City does not revise its Update to eliminate all residential sites within the 60 and 65 dB CNEL noise contours, specific noise mitigation requirements should be implemented for any future residences located within these noise contours, including appropriate avigation easement and sound attenuation as required under Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 21 §5037. These requirements could be accomplished through an overlay zone in the Housing Element Noise Update that notifies planners processing projects in the airport environs that avigation easements and appropriate sound attenuation requirements must be met. This type of overlay zone will minimize the risk to both the City and County relating to future sound attenuation requirements and/or noise litigation. The proposed residential sites also include properties that fall beneath the approach and transitional obstruction imaginary surfaces for JWA. Therefore, potential future residents would be exposed to significant aircraft overflight annoyance as approaching aircraft fly overhead. In the past, residential land uses located under aircraft approach corridors have generated a significant number of noise complaints from affected residents. Therefore, it is important that the City ensures that appropriate overflight notification requirements be put in place relating to these potential residential sites. Again, this type of notification requirement can be implemented through a Housing Element Noise Update overlay zone or through the CEQA process discussed further below. There are also safety concerns related to proposed residential sites which are located within the AELUP Safety Zones for JWA. The comment letter from the ALUC provides more specifics on this issue, but it is important to note that the proposed residential sites within the Airport environs have been identified in Safety Zone 6: Traffic Pattern Zone and Safety Zone 4: Outer Approach/Departure Zone. As provided in the AELUP's Basic Safety Compatibility Qualities Table (page 9-45), within Safety Zone 4, "[i]n undeveloped areas, limit residential uses to very low densities (if not deemed unacceptable because of noise); if alternative uses are impractical, allow higher densities as infill in urban areas." In this instance, locating residential uses within Safety Zone 4 would place future residents within close proximity to the Airport and locate residential development directly under a general aviation, low -altitude, primary flight corridor. It is important that the City recognize these safety issues in the context of the Housing Element Noise Update and make adjustments and modifications to eliminate, where possible, these safety concerns. Further, there are numerous flights over the proposed residential sites in the Airport environs, with a concentration of flights over the primary approach corridor and proposed sites east of the Airport within Safety Zone 6 and the transitional surface for JWA. The location and number of proposed new residential sites within Safety Zones 4 and 6, with some directly under the flight path of commercial and general aviation flights, again suggests that these new residential land uses would be incompatible with the operations at JWA and subject the future residents to not only excessive noise but also safety risks. In addition to the land use, noise, overflight, and safety compatibility issues identified above, many of the residential sites included in the Housing Element Noise Update are in the Approach Surface, Transitional Surface, and Horizontal Surface of the Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 77 Obstruction Imaginary Surfaces for JWA. (See, e.g., 49 U.S.C. § 44718, 49 V.S.C. § 46301.) Although no height increases are proposed at this time, and with approximate ground elevations of 46 to 53 feet, the City's existing maximum building heights for the sites would not penetrate the Obstruction Imaginary Surfaces, the City has indicated that proposals for changes 22-195 Rosalinh Ung, Principal Planner City of Newport Beach October 9, 2023 Page 4 to the existing height limits may be considered in the future. Therefore, it is important that the City is aware of this issue and the importance of compliance with the FAR Part 77 surfaces for JWA. Cooperative Agreement Between the City and County In addition to the land use, noise, safety, and airspace compatibility issues identified above, if the City moves forward with approving the Housing Element Noise Update which places new residential sites within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour, such actions will undermine the goals set forth in the Cooperative Agreement between the City and County of Orange, dated November 1, 2006. In that Agreement, the City and County agreed to "expand their longstanding efforts to promote compatibility between operations at John Wayne Airport ... and land uses within and in proximity to the City." Furthermore, the City agreed to become a "consistent" agency with respect to residential land uses within the airport vicinity and to preserve certain longstanding land use plans, such as the Santa Ana Heights Specific Area Plan (SAHSAP) that were designed to harmonize land uses in Santa Ana Heights with air carrier operations at JWA. The City agreed to retain this consistent agency status through the term of the Agreement provided that the AELUP CNEL contour is not expanded in comparison to that which is in the AELUP as of the effective date. Importantly, the noise contours that the City proposed to utilize for the ALUC Update consistency determination are smaller than those provided in the AELUP. In addition, the City agreed not to repeal/modify the SAHSAP without County consent. The proposed Housing Element Noise Update would require changes to the City Zoning Code, which in turn requires an amendment to the SAHSAP. Consistent with the 2006 Cooperative Agreement, the City is required to obtain County consent prior to any amendments to the SAHSAP. CEQA Compliance With respect to CEQA compliance, because the City's Housing Element Noise Update submittal allows new residential sites within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour, there is a significant land use and noise impact for purposes of CEQA. In addition, and as discussed in detail above, there are also significant safety, airspace protection, and related environmental issues that must be addressed in the CEQA context. The City has mistakenly indicated that the proposed Housing Element Noise Update is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Guidelines section 15183. (See City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Staff Report, dated August 3, 2023, Agenda Item No. 4, Housing Element Implementation, Noise -Related Amendments (PA2022-0201), pp. 1, 10-11; City of Newport Beach Resolution No. 2023-52, Section 6.) However, the referenced CEQA provision does not apply to projects otherwise consistent with a General Plan's development density parameters where it is "necessary to examine whether there are project -specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site." (Guidelines, §15183(a).) As described throughout this comment letter, the proposed Housing Element Noise Update would facilitate the future development of residential land uses in a geographic area that is subject to potentially significant aviation -related noise, airspace, overflight and safety environmental concerns. Guidelines section 15183 does not provide a CEQA compliance pathway that permits the City to abdicate its duty to evaluate, disclose and mitigate these "peculiar" environmental concerns that are unique to the airport environs. (Guidelines, §15183(b).) 22-196 Rosalinh Ung, Principal Planner City of Newport Beach October 9, 2023 Page 5 The City additionally has indicated that the proposed Housing Element Noise Update is not subject to further environmental review based on the erroneous premise that its impacts were fully analyzed in Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) 617, which was prepared for the amendments to the 1985 Settlement Agreement entered into by and between the County and the Orange County Board of Supervisors, the City of Newport Beach, Stop Polluting Our Newport, and the Airport Working Group of Orange County, Inc., (the Settlement Amendment) (see, Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 14-084 [September 30, 20141 and Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 14.088 [September 30, 2014]). (See City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Staff Report, dated August 3, 2023, Agenda Item No. 4, Housing Element Implementation, Noise - Related Amendments (PA2022-0201), pp. 1, 10-11; City of Newport Beach Resolution No. 2023- 52, Section 6.) FEIR 617, however, did not analyze the potentially significant environmental impacts of future residential land uses within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour. This is because, at the time that FEIR 617 was prepared, the City's policies did not allow residential land uses within the 65 dB contour and none were proposed. (See, e.g., FEIR 617, Table 4.5-10 [Goals and Policies Consistency Analysis], City of Newport Beach General Plan Policy 6.15.3: Airport Compatibility ["Require that ... residential development be located outside of the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour specified by the 1985 JWA Master Plan."].) Therefore, the City cannot rely on FEIR 617 for CEQA compliance because it does not analyze the potentially significant land use compatibility, noise, overflight, and safety impacts, among other impacts, of locating future residential development within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour. (See, e.g., CEQA Guidelines §§15006(f) and 15153 [permitting a lead agency to reuse a prior EIR for another project only when it "adequately addresses the proposed project" and where it can be demonstrated that "such projects are essentially the same in terms of environmental impact"]; see also CEQA Guidelines §15162 [providing that a subsequent EIR shall be prepared where "substantial changes" to the project are proposed which trigger the involvement of new significant environmental effects].) Also, and importantly, CEQA is the vehicle not only for the discussion and analysis of potentially significant impacts, but also for the imposition of appropriate mitigation, including, but not limited to, avigation easements and sound attenuation. (See, e.g., Guidelines §15002(a)(1)-(3).) The City must prepare and certify adequate CEQA analysis, including approval of adequate mitigation for significant environmental impacts, prior to considering approval and adoption of the Housing Element Noise Update. Due to the proposed policy amendments which now would allow residential uses within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour, CEQA compliance is required prior to approval of the Housing Element Noise Update. The City cannot wait for a future residential project proposal. CEQA prohibits this type of deferral and piecemealing of the analysis of impacts. (See, e.g., Guidelines §15004 [CEQA compliance "should be prepared as early as feasible in the planning process"]; Guidelines §15378 [the "project" is the "whole of an action" and includes activities "directly undertaken by any public agency including ... the adoption and amendment of local General Plans or elements thereof'].)' ' It is noted that, on June 27, 2023, the City published a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for preparation of a Program EIR relating to its proposed Housing Implementation Program. In the NOP's "Project Summary," the City explains that its Program EIR will "evaluate the potential environmental effects of the implementing actions associated with the 2021-2029 Housing Element," including the housing sites identified in the so-called `Airport Area" (see, e.g., Figure 2E therein) and corresponding revisions to the City's General Plan Land Use Element and Zoning Code. It is unclear how the City's proposed Housing Implementation Program relates to the City's proposed Housing Element Noise Update that is the subject of this comment letter. Absent additional explanation, it appears that the City is improperly piecemealing the CEQA review of the totality of the City's efforts to implement its 2021-2029 Housing Element. (The 22-197 Rosalinh Ung, Principal Planner City of Newport Beach October 9, 2023 Page 6 Conclusion In conclusion, the City's proposed Housing Element Noise Update has the potential to increase incompatible land use within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour, which could result in significant land use compatibility, noise, safety, and overflight impacts and additional encroachment of incompatible land uses within the airport environs. As indicated above, the City must comply with CEQA requirements to adequately analyze these potentially significant environmental impacts prior to considering approval of this Update. In addition, the City's proposed Housing Element Noise Update is inconsistent with the 2006 Cooperative Agreement entered into between the City and the County. Revisions are required to the Update to remove any residential uses within the 65 and 60 dB CNEL noise contours to ensure continued compliance with this important Agreement. We continue to appreciate our close relationship with the City and will make ourselves available to discuss the issues identified in this letter at your convenience. Our hope is that we can continue to work cooperatively to ensure land use compatibility surrounding the Airport. Sincerely, Charlene V. Rey olds Airport Director Cc: Frank Kim, County Executive Officer Lilly Simmering, Deputy County Executive Officer Leon Page, County Counsel Nicole Walsh, Senior Assistant County Counsel referenced NOP for the proposed Housing Implementation Program is available on the City's website at Notice of Preparation and�Scopino Meettnq 062723.odf inewportbeachca.covx.) 22-198