HomeMy WebLinkAboutFOUR SEASON HOTEL_DEIR_GPA 82-2Four Seasons
Hotel DEIR GPA 82=2
is
•
Lsa
a
DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOUR SEASONS HOTEL
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 82-2
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER 82-123103
•
•
PREPARED FOR
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
• 3300 NEWPORT BOULEVARD
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660-3884
(714) 640-2197
i0
PREPARED BY
• LSA, INC.
500 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 525
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660
(714) 640-6363
JUNE 6, 1983
•
•
Iv
ke
10
I!
1•
I�
ii
lsa
TABLE -OF -CONTENTS
SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ............................... vi
SUMMARYOF ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT...................................xvii
INTRODUCTION.............................................................
General Purpose .....................................................
Environmental Procedures ............................................
Previous Environmental Documentation ................................
Project Sponsors and Contact Persons ................................
PROJECTDESCRIPTION......................................................
Project Location .................................................... 3
Project Characteristics ............................................. 3
Proposed Actions .................................................... 3
DESCRIPTION OF LOCAL AND REGIONAL LAND USES RELATING TO THIS PROJECT ..... 17
Existing Land Uses .................................................. 17
Existing Land Use Plans ............................................. 17
Committed Projects .................................................. 26
Approved But Not Committed Projects ................................. 30
Proposed Projects ................................................... 30
Other Planning and Circulation Considerations 32
Hotel Planning in the Region ........................................ 32
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES .................. 36
Geology and Soils ........................ ....................... I... 37
Water Resources..................................................... 41
Cultural Resources .................................................. 44
Biological Resources.....................................9.......... 47
Cnrin_Frnnnmir TesuPs............................................... 49
Airport Considerations .............................................. 53
Aesthetic Issues ..................................... I ... ........... 58
Land Use............................................................ 66
Traffic and Circulation ....• ......................................... 70
Noise............................................................... 95
Air Quality......................................................... 102
Enerov.............................................................. 106
Community Services and Public Utilities 109
r•
1•
10
�•
I•
iii
Up
ALTERNATIVESTO THE PROPOSED PROJECT ..................................... 114
Introduction........................................................ 114
No Project.......................................................... 114
No Development...................................................... 114
Low -Rise Alternative ................................................ 115
Transit Terminal .................................................... 115
Larger Project ...................................................... 115
Reduced Project ..................................................... 116
Residential......................................................... 116
Office............................................................... 116
GPA80-3............................................................ 116
Pacific Plaza ....................................................... 117
GROWTH -INDUCING IMPACTS .................................................. 118
SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF
THEPROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED ............................................... 119
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES AND THE MAINTENANCE
AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY ........................ I....... 120
SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE STANDARD CITY POLICIES AND REQUIREMENTS ............ 121
SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE MITIGATION MEASURES ................................ 125
ORGANIZATIONSAND PERSONS CONTACTED ...................................... 127
PREPARERS OF AND CONTRIBUTORS TO THE REPORT .............................. 128 1
REFERENCES............................................................... 129
APPENDICES
Appendix A - Public Participation and Review
Appendix B - Paleontological Study
Appendix C - Biological Assessment
Appendix D - Traffic Analysis
Appendix E - Acoustical Analysis
Appendix F - Air Quality Analysis
Appendix G - Correspondence
V
I•
1•
1•
10
I•
r,
Ir
•
•
iv
lsa
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES
FIGURES
Figure 1 - Regional Location ............ I ................. I......... 5
Figure 2 - Vicinity Map ............................................. 6
Figure 3 - Aerial Photograph ........................................ 7
Figure 4 - Site Plan ................................................ 8
Figure 5 - Parcel Map ............................................ 9
Figure 6 - Lobby -Level Plan ......................................... 11
Figure 7 - Basement -Level Plan .................................... 12
Figure 8 - Typical Tower -Level Plan ................................. 13
Figure 9 - North & South Building Elevations ........................ 14
Figure 10 - West & East Building Elevations .......................... 15
Figure 11 - Building Section ......................................... 16
Figure 12 - Newport Center - Additional Allowable Development ........ 20
Figure 13 - Planning Context ...................... :.................. 22
Figure 14 - Zoning Map ............................................... 25
Figure 15 - Committed, Approved, and Proposed Projects ............... 28
Figure 16 - Existing, Approved, and Proposed Hotels in Vicinity ...... 33
Figure 17 - Grading Plan ............................................. 38
Figure 18 - Drainage Plan ............................................. 42
Figure 19 - Summer Solstice, 10 AM and 2 PM .......................... 60
Figure 20 - Winter Solstice, 2 PM and 4 PM ........................... 61
Figure 20A-, Typical Sections Illustrating Fence Design and Location .. 63
Figure 21 - Pedestrian Pathways ...................................... 69
Figure 22 - Existing Daily Volumes and ICU Values 71
Figure 23 - Directional Distribution ................................. 76
Figure 24 - Daily Project Traffic .................................... 77
Figure 25 - Circulation System Improvements 79
Figure 26 - Future Daily Traffic Volumes - Four Seasons .............. 90
TABLES
Table
A
- Project
Statistics ........................................
10
19
Table
B
- Newport
Center Development Summary, May 1983 .............
Table
C
- Summary
of Newport Center General Plan Amendments ........
21
Table
D
- CO Zoning Comparison .....................................
24
Table
E
- PC Zone
Status ...........................................
27
34
Table
F
- Major Hotels in the Region ...............................
Table
G
- Housing
Affordability Inventory ..........................
51
Table
H
- Airport
Operations .......................................
54
1•
10
I*
I•
I•
I�
C`.
lsa
TABLES (CONT'D)
Table
I
- Commercial Air Service Demand in 1995 Generated in
Orange County ............... I.............................
55
Table
J
- High -Rise Building Heights in Newport Center ..............
59
Table
K
- Comparison of Selected Four Seasons Hotels ................
72
Table
L
- Trip Generation Comparison Summary ......I .................
73
75
Table
M
- Trip Generation........,...I..............................
Table
N
- Committed Projects ........................................
78
85
Table
0
- Critical Intersection Identification ......................
Table
Table
P -
Q
ICU Summary ...............................................
- ICU Analysis - Bristol Street North and Jamboree Road .....
87
88
Table
R
- Field Parking Study Summary - Four Seasons Hotel ..........
91
Table
S
- Block 600 Parking Summary .................................
92
Table
T
- Roadway Noise Levels - Existing Conditions ................
96
Table
U
- Increase in Roadway Noise Levels Due to Project Traffic ...
98
Table
V
- CNEL Noise Levels for Current General Plan ................
99
Table
W
- CNEL Noise Levels for General Plan Plus Project ...........
100
Table
X
- Project -Related Energy Demand ................. I...........
107
I0
s
•
i
i
i
i
i
Potential Adverse Im
GENERAL SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Development of the project will
require grading of the site.
The proposed project structures
will be subject to groundshaking in
the event of an earthquake.
GEOLOGY AND SOILS (PAGES 37-40)
City Policy
Development of the site will be
subject to a grading permit which
shall include a plan for temporary
and permanent drainage facilities.
Prior to grading, an application
for haul routes will be approved by
the City. The plan shall include
haul routes, site access points,
and a watering and sweeping pro-
gram. '
Grading shall be conducted in
accordance with plans prepared by a
civil engineer and based on recom-
mendations of a soils engineer and
an engineering geologist.
All buildings shall conform to the
Uniform Building Code and the
City's seismic design standards.
Level of Significance
Mitigated to a level of insignifi-
cance.
Partially mitigated, to the extent
feasible. However, the project
will still be susceptible to the
regional hazards of groundshaking
as a result of seismic activity
along a regional fault.
•
•
l:
•
•
•
P4
GENERAL SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONT'D)
Level of Significance
Potential Adverse Impacts Mitigation Measures After Mitigation
Development of the proposed project
will act to incrementally increase
the amount of storm runoff from the
site.
Potential paleontological resources
may exist onsite and may be damaged
during construction. Although not
expected, there is the potential for
archaeological remains to be
uncovered during grading.
WATER RESOURCES (PAGES 41-43)
City Policy
An erosion, siltation, and dust
control plan may be required at the
City's discretion.
The velocity of concentrated runoff
from the project shall be evaluated
and erosive velocities controlled
through project design measures.
Prior to issuance of the grading
permit, the design engineer shall
review and certify that discharge
of surface runoff from the project
will not increase erosion down-
stream.
CULTURAL RESOURCES (PAGES 44-46)
City Policy
A qualified archaeologist and pale-
ontological monitor shall be pres-
ent during pregrade meetings and
during grading activities.
Partially mitigated, but signifi-
cant on a cumulative basis when
considered in conjunction with
past, present, and reasonably fore-
seeable projects in the city and
surrounding region.
Mitigated to a level of insignifi-
cance.
•
Potential Adverse In
GENERAL SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONT'D)
Level of Significance
is Mitigation Measures After Mitigation
CULTURAL RESOURCES (CONT'D)
In the event significant remains
are uncovered during excavation or
grading, all work shall stop in
that area until an appropriate
recovery program is completed.
Prior to issuance of grading per-
mits, the project applicant shall
waive provisions of AB 952.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES (PAGES 47-48)
Conversion of the partially unde-
veloped site will require the
removal of existing vegetation.
The proposed project will generate
an estimated need for 359 employ-
ees, a portion of whom will
increase the demand for housing in
the low to moderate -cost ranges.
The proposed project will contrib-
ute to the ongoing demand for air
transportation services at John
Wayne Airport.
No mitigation measures are proposed
and no City policies are applica-
ble.
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ISSUES (PAGES 49-52)
No mitigation measures are propos-
ed.
AIRPORT CONSIDERATIONS (PAGES 53-57)
No mitigation measures are propos-
ed, Airport congestion is a
regional concern whose resolution
is beyond the scope of any individ-
dal project.
No adverse impact.
Cumulatively significant when con-
sidered in conjunction with past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable
future projects.
Cumulatively significant when con-
sidered in conjunction with past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable
future projects.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
GENERAL SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONT'D
Level of Significance
Potential Adverse Impacts Mitigation Measures After Mitigation
AESTHETIC ISSUES (PAGES 58-65)
City Policy
The building and its emblem will be A landscape and irrigation plan for
a major new visual element in New- the project shall be prepared by a
port Center, licensed landscape architect. The
plan will be subject to approval by
the Planning Department and the
Parks, Beaches, and Recreation
Department.
The landscape plan shall include a
maintenance program which controls
the use of fertilizers and pesti-
cides.
The landscape plan shall place
emphasis on the use of drought -
resistant native vegetation and be
irrigated via a system designed to
avoid surface runoff and overwater-
ing.
The development shall be in sub-
stantial conformance with the
approved plot plan, floor plans,
elevations, and sections, except as
modified by these City policies and
Mitigation Measures #1-4.
Partially mitigated, but not to a
level of insignificance.
J.
x
•
•
r
s
a
s
n
i
i
GENERAL SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONT'D)
Level of Significance
Potential Adverse Impacts Mitigation Measures After Mitigation
AESTHETIC ISSUES (CONT'D)
City Policy (cont'd)
The project shall be designed to
eliminate light and glare spillage
onto adjacent properties.
Mitigation Measures
Signage and exterior lighting shall
be approved by the Planning and Pub-
lic Works Directors.
Al mechanical equipment, vents,
and other service equipment shall
be shielded or screened from view
by architectural features.
The Four Seasons emblem on the
facade of the building above ground
floor, if approved by the City,
shall not be lighted.
The perimeter wall fence will be
redesigned to the satisfaction of
the PI-anning Department. The upper
(second) wall should be moved back
10 to 15 feet to create an attrac-
tive slope area between the two
walls.
Z4
GENERAL SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONT'D)
Level of Significance
Potential Adverse Impacts Mitigation Measures After Mitigation
Existing pedestrian circulation in
Block 600 will be altered. Con-
struction of the hotel as proposed
will prohibit access through the
site to Fashion Island.
The proposed project will generate
additional ADT. The impact of
project -related traffic generation
on identified critical intersections
is considered minor, although the
project will cause two intersections
to have ICU values greater than .90
in 1987 (without any circulation
improvements).
LAND USE (PAGES 66-69)
A pedestrian circulation plan will
be submitted to the City Planning
and Public Works Departments for
review and approval prior to issu-
ance of a grading permit.
TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION (PAGES 70-94)
City Policy
Improvements to identified critical
intersections have been required of
previously approved projects or are
outside the jurisdiction of the City
of Newport Beach. The proposed
project will, however, be required
to contribute to, or provide full
improvements to identified critical
intersections, as appropriate.
The project shall be required to
contribute a sum equal to its "fair
share" of future circulation system
improvements as shown on the City's
Master Plan of Streets and Highways
and any other mitigation measures as
may be required.
Mitigated to a level of insignifi-
cance.
Partially mitigated, but cumula-
tively significant when considered
in conjunction with past, present,
and reasonably foreseeable future
projects.
x
J�
•
i
•
•
i
•
•
•
•
i
i
GENERAL SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONT'D
Level of Significance
Potential Adverse Impacts Mitigation Measures After Mitigation
Approximately 212 existing parking
spaces will be displaced by the
project. These spaces are current-
ly utilized by adjacent businesses.
TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION (CONT'D)
Mitigation Measures (cont'd)
The applicant shall replace 212
parking spaces serving the Wells
Fargo tower.
The project applicant shall enter
into a binding agreement to provide
315 parking spaces to the Four Sea-
sons Hotel in Block 600 of Newport
Center.
The project applicant shall provide
a bus shelter at the bus stop adja-
cent to the project site.
Parking for the project will not
include compact spaces.
NOISE (PAGES 95-101)
City Policy
Mitigated to a level of insignifi-
cance
Construction activity will generate An interior acoustical analysis Insignificant environmental impact.
short-term impacts at intermittent will be required prior to issuance
high noise levels. No residential of building permits to ensure atten-
areas are anticipated to be impact- uation to 45 CNEL interior levels.
ed by construction noise.
i i � • i • • • • • i
GENERAL SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONT'D)
Level of Significance
Potential Adverse Impacts Mitigation Measures After Mitigation
Noise levels on adjacent roadways
will not increase significantly, but
will contribute to cumulative noise
increases.
There will be an incremental
increase in mobile and stationary
source emissions and temporary
construction -related emissions.
NOISE (CONT'D)
City Policy (cont'd)
The project will be required to con-dASMPartially mitigated, but cumula-
tribute to sound wall funds as tively significant when considered
determined by the City. in conjunction with past, present,
and reasonably foreseeable future
Construction activities will be lim- projects.
ited to the hours of 7 a.m, to 7
p:m. Monday through Friday, and 8
a.m. to 5 p.m. on Saturday and Sun-
day..
Any mechanical equipment or emer-
gency generators will be screened
from view and sound -attenuated to
not exceed 55 'dBA at the property
line.
AIR QUALITY (PAGES 102-105)
Mitigation Measures
Parking areas shall be paved early
during construction.
Major grading will occur during the
non -rainy season.
Sediments will not be allowed to run
off onto surrounding roadways.
Partially mitigated; significant on
a cumulative basis. .
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
GENERAL SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONT'D)
Level of Significance
Potential Adverse Impacts Mitigation Measures After Mitigation
AIR QUALITY (CONT'D)
Mitigation Measures (cont'd)
Adequate dust suppressants (i.e.,
water and early revegetation) shall
be used.
The hotel shall provide courtesy
limousine service to the airport for
hotel guests.
Transit passes shall be provided to
interested hotel staff in a manner
approved by the Planning Department.
Solar -assisted water -heating systems
for rooms, spas, and pools shall be
used.
Openable windows shall be used to
allow cooling by normal breezes.
Decorative lighting shall be mini-
mized and low-wattage/high-lumen
lights shall be used. A lighting
plan shall be submitted for approval
by the Planning Department which
describes how energy conservation
has been incorporated into the
lighting scheme.
•
•
•
•
•
•
7
•
•
GENERAL SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONT-D)
Level of Significance
Potential Adverse Impacts Mitiqation Measures After Mitiqation
There will be an incremental
increase in energy consumption.
ENERGY (PAGES 106-108)
Mitigation Measures
The hotel shall provide courtesy
limousine service to the airport for
hotel guests.
Transit passes shall be provided to
interested hotel staff in a manner
approved by the Planning Department.
Solar -assisted water -heating systems
for rooms, spas, and pools shall be
used.
Openable windows shall be used to
allow cooling by normal breezes.
Decorative lighting shall be mini-
mized and low-wattage/high-lumen
lights shall be used. A lighting
plan shall be submitted for approval
by the Planning Department which
describes how energy conservation
has been incorporated into the
lighting scheme.
Partially mitigated; significant on
a cumulative basis.
x
0 • • -0 • • • • • •
•
GENERAL SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (CONT'D)
Level of Significance
Potential Adverse Impacts Mitigation Measures After Mitigation
COMMUNITY SERVICES AND UTILITIES (PAGES 109-113
No significant impacts are antici-
pated. The project will, however,
cumulatively affect the remaining
service capacities of public agen-
cies and utilities in conjunction
with ongoing growth in the sur-
rounding area.
City Policy
Fire Protection. The Fire Depart-
ment wi I I review design plans to
ensure adequate access to all struc-
tures, adequate emergency exits,
adequate fire flows, and adequate
fire suppression systems.
Police. A lighting plan for pedes-
trian walkways and parking areas
shall be submitted for City review.
Solid Waste. A program shall be
devised for sorting, pick-up, and
disposal of recyclable material from
other solid wastes.
Water and Wastewater. Prior to
project construction, the availabil-
ity of water and sewer capacity
shall be verified by the serving
agency. A landscape irrigation sys-
tem shall also be designed to mini-
mize water consumption.
Mitigation Measures
Twenty -four-hour security will be
provided on the project site by the
project applicant as approved by the
Ci ty.
Mitigated to a level of insignifi-
cance.
I•
I•
I•
1•
�0
I•
xvii
0
SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT
Description of Geology & Soils/
Alternative Alternative Water Resources
PROPOSED PROJECT 325-room hotel on 7 acres
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN 145 residential units,
- NO PROJECT 207,533 sq. ft. of office
NO DEVELOPMENT Vacant
LOW-RISE HOTEL
325-room, 10-story hotel
LARGER PROJECT
500-room hotel
REDUCED PROJECT
275 to 300-room hotel
RESIDENTIAL
450 units
OFFICE
Two towers totaling
450,000 sq. ft.
GPA 80-3
225,000 sq. ft. of office
(tower), 225,000 sq. ft.
of residential, and hotel/
residential structure total-
ing 300 hotel rooms and 100
residential units
PACIFIC PLAZA
22-story, 450,000 sq. ft.
office tower, 500-room hotel,
4 to 6-level multi -story
parking structure
Minor grading and an
incremental increase
in runoff
Similar to project
Continued minor ero-
sion
Similar to project
Similar to project
Similar to project
Similar to project
Similar to project
Similar to project
Similar to project
•
1•
1:
I•
IF,
I•
�4
C
[M
Cultural and
Alternative Biological Resources Socio-Economic Issues
PROPOSED PROJECT No significant effect Provides 359 jobs; adds to
regional demand for affordable
housing
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN No significant effect Provides housing and new jobs
- NO PROJECT
NO DEVELOPMENT
LOW-RISE HOTEL
LARGER PROJECT
REDUCED,PROJECT
RESIDENTIAL
OFFICE
GPA 80-3
PACIFIC PLAZA
No significant effect
No significant effect
No significant effect
No significant effect
No significant effect
No significant effect
No significant effect
No housing or jobs provided
Similar to project
Slightly greater effect than
project
Slightly lesser effect than
project
Housing provided
Greater effect than project
Provides housing and new jobs
Provides new jobs, greater
effect than project
I•
i*
U
I•
•
I•
•
I0
s
Xix
r
Alternative Airport Considerations Land Use
PROPOSED PROJECT Increased demand for Major new visual element
commercial air service in Newport Center
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN Similar to project Similar to project
- NO PROJECT
NO DEVELOPMENT
LOW-RISE HOTEL
LARGER PROJECT
REDUCED PROJECT
RESIDENTIAL
OFFICE
GPA 80-3
PACIFIC PLAZA
No increase in demand for
commercial air service
Similar to project
Similar to project
Similar to project
Similar to project
Similar to project
Similar to project
Similar to project
Site remains vacant
Less of a major visual
impact
Similar to or greater than
project
Less of a major visual
impact
Similar to project
Greater visual effect than
project
Greater visual effect than
project
Greater visual effect than
project
I�
[7
xx
`C7
•
Alternative
Traffic/Circulation
Noise/Air Quality/Energy
PROPOSED PROJECT
Generates
3,250 daily
Incremental increase in
trips
noise,
energy use, and air
•
quality
emissions related to
project
-related traffic
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
Generates
3,924 daily
Similar
to project
- NO PROJECT
trips
•
NO DEVELOPMENT
No increase in daily
No increase in noise, energy
traffic
use, or
air quality emis-
sions
LOW-RISE HOTEL
Same as project
Similar
to project
III •
LARGER PROJECT
Generates
between 5,000
Similar
to project
and 6,000
daily trips
REDUCED PROJECT
Generates
between 2,750
Similar
to project
and 3,000
daily trips
RESIDENTIAL
Generates
3,825 daily
Similar
to project
trips
OFFICE
Generates
5,850 daily
Similar
to project
trips
GPA 80-3
Generates
8,045 daily
Similar
to project
trips
PACIFIC PLAZA
Generates
11,850 daily
Similar
to project
trips
�•
i*
1•
1•
1*
I•
1•
�•
0:
�a
�6
xxi
lsa
Alternative Community Services & Public Utilities
PROPOSED PROJECT Slight increase in demand for public services
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN Similar to project
- NO PROJECT
NO DEVELOPMENT No effect on demand for public services; conditions
remain the same as at present
LOW-RISE HOTEL Similar to project
LARGER PROJECT Slightly greater effect than project
REDUCED PROJECT Slightly lesser effect than project
RESIDENTIAL Slightly greater effect than project
OFFICE Greater effect than project
GPA 80-3
Greater
effect
than
project
PACIFIC PLAZA
Greater
effect
than
project
�0
I•
[7
INTRODUCTION
0
GENERAL PURPOSE
This Environmental Impact Report (EIR) addresses potential environmental
impacts of a proposed General Plan Amendment (GPA 82-2, Four Seasons) to allow
development of a 325-room Four Seasons Hotel with other related facilities.
The project represents an addition of 325 hotel rooms to a block where cur-
rently none -is permitted by the General Plan. The material contained in this
EIR is intended to serve as an informational document for decisions to be made
by the City of Newport Beach regarding this proposed project.
The City of Newport Beach has the principal responsibility for the proj-
ect's approval and supervision. Consequently, the City is the lead agency for
preparation of this EIR.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROCEDURES
This EIR has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmen-
tal Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), as amended (Public Resources Code, Section
21000 et. seq.), and the State Guidelines for Implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (California Administrative code,
Section 15000 et seq.). This report also complies with the rules, regula-
tions, and procedures for implementation of the California Environmental Qual-
ity Act adopted by the City of Newport Beach.
PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION
An EIR was prepared and certified for the subject site in 1978 for the
Pacific Plaza Block 600 proposal. The Pacific Plaza project proposed con-
struction of a 22-story (326-foot) commercial financial office tower, a four
to six -level subterranean and above -ground parking structure, and a 12-story,
500-roam hotel. The EIR was certified as complete and adequate; however, the
project was denied by the Newport Beach City Council. The Pacific Plaza Final
EIR is incorporated by reference into this EIR for GPA 82-2.
In 1981 an EIR was prepared and certified for General Plan Amendment
(GPA) 80-3. GPA 80-3 consisted of a series of amendments for various parcels
within Newport Center. As part of GPA 80-3, a 450,000-square-foot office tow-
er and a 500-room hotel with related facilities were proposed for Block 600.
A GPA 80-3 was approved by the Newport Beach City Council in August 1981.
Development approved for the site was a 225,000 sq. ft. of office tower,
Is
[]
1•
C
I+
0
225,000 sq. ft. of residential, and a hotel/residential structure consisting
of 300 hotel rooms and 100 residential units. However, a citizens' referendum
aimed at rescinding that action subsequently qualified for the ballot. Prior
to City Council determination of whether to rescind approval of the amendment
or place the referendum on the ballot, the project proponents requested that
the City rescind its approval. In response, the City rescinded the General
Plan Amendment. The rescission of project approval also rescinded certifica-
tion of the Final EIR. However, in conjunction with approval of the Marriott
Hotel expansion (GPA 81-3), the GPA 80-3 Certified Final EIR was incorporated
by reference and made part of the official Certified Final EIR for GPA 81-3.
This EIR for GPA 82-2 incorporates by reference the Certified Final EIR for
GPA 81-3.
PROJECT SPONSORS AND CONTACT PERSONS
The lead agency in preparing this Environmental Impact Report is the City
of Newport Beach. The environmental consultant to the City is LSA, Inc. of
Newport Beach. The project sponsor for this project is the Four Seasons
Hotels, Ltd., represented by Urban Assist, Inc. of Costa Mesa. Preparers of
and contributors to this report are listed on Page 122. Key contact persons
are:
City of Newport Beach
LSA, Inc.
Four Seasons Hotel, Ltd.
Mr. Fred Talarico
Environmental Coordinator
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
P.O. Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92660-3884
(714) 640-2197
Ms. Annette M. Sanchez
Associate
LSA, Inc.
500 Newport Center Drive
Suite 525 -
Newport Beach, CA 92660
(714) 640-6363
Mr. Dave Neish
Urban Assist, Inc.
3151 Airway Avenue, Bldg. A-2
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
(714) 556-9890
',0
•
•
0
•
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PROJECT LOCATION
• The proposed 9.87-acre project site is located in the 600 block of New-
port Center Drive within Newport Center, Newport Beach, California. Newport
Center is situated in the southeast portion of the city overlooking Newport
Bay and the Pacific Ocean (Figure 1). Newport Center is bounded on the north
by San Joaquin Hills Road, on the south by East Coast Highway (State Route 1),
on the west by Jamboree Road, and on the east by MacArthur Boulevard (State
• Route 73) (Figure 2).
The project area consists of a 4.655-acre hotel site, a 2.36-acre offsite
parking lot for the hotel, and a 2.242-acre parking lot for the Wells Fargo
building which would require an existing parking lot displaced by the hotel
project. The project area is located at the intersection of Newport Center
• Drive and Santa Cruz Drive (Figure 3).
PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
The proposed project consists of an amendment to the General Plan to
allow construction of a 325-room, 19-story luxury hotel with related facili-
ties and parking. Figure 4 illustrates the proposed site plan. Figure 5
illustrates the proposed parcel map. Table A provides project statistics.
Figures 6, 7, and 8 illustrate the proposed floor plans for the lobby
level, basement level, and typical tower levels, respectively. Figures 9 and
10 illustrate building elevations from four vantage points. Figure 11 illu-
strates the building section of the proposed 19-story hotel tower.
Project implementation would require approval of a transfer of 212 park-
ing spaces currently used by the Wells Fargo tower from the existing surface
lot adjacent to the Four Seasons Hotel to a new lot between Santa Cruz Drive
and Center Drive next to the Wells Fargo tower. It will also displace an
• existing temporary building used by a savings and loan institution.
The project is scheduled for opening in 1986.
PROPOSED ACTIONS
• Implementation of the proposed project will require the following discre-
tionary approvals:
•
1•
IF
I•
I•
lsa
l.iGeneral Plan Amendment 82-2 (Four Seasons). Approval of a Gen-
eral Plan Amendment to a ow a -room hotel in Block 600 of
Newport Center, in accordance with General Plan Amendment proce-
dures as outlined in Article 6, Section 65350, of the California
j
Government Code and City Policy Q-1.
2. Certification of an Environmental Impact Report. Acceptance of
an environmental document as having been prepared in compliance
with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State
CEQA Guidelines, and City Policy K-3, and certification that the
1 data were considered in final decisions on the project.
3. f Traffic Phasing Ordinance. Acceptance of a traffic study pre-
pared pursuant to Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal
Code and City Policy S-1, and approval of the project based on
data contained therein for the ultimate purpose of issuance of
building and grading permits.
4. Parcel Map # . Approval of Parcel Map # (Figure 5) in
accor once with section 19.12.b40 of the City— s Subdivision Code
would create four parcels of land. Parcel 1 would be for park-
ing related to the Wells Fargo building. Parcel 2 would be for
offsite Four Seasons Hotel parking. Parcel 3 would be for the
hotel site. Parcel 4 would be for existing parking related to
existing office/commercial uses.
5. Site Plan Review. As required by the Newport Beach General
Plan, a detailed review of the proposed site plan must be con-
ducted to fully evaluate the GPA request and related applica-
tions. The site plan review will also determine the parking
requirements by demonstrated formula. This proposal also
includes modification to the Zoning Code to allow use of compact
car spaces and spaces which are not independently accessible.
Site plan review procedures are outlined in the Newport Beach
Municipal Code. Modification procedures are outlined in Chapter
20.81 of the Municipal Code.
6, Offsite Parking Agreement. Approval by the City Council (in
accor ance wi ection 20.300.35D of the City's Zoning Code of
an agreement between the Four Seasons Hotels, Ltd. and The
Irvine Company stating that The Irvine Company will provide not
less than 315 spaces to the Four Seasons Hotel, irrespective of
any future development in Block 600.
"a
•
• 5
1
Regional Location lsa
•
•
•
•
r
•
0
Los Angeles Co.
HE
• 1 w
39
73 m
' a
Project
. b
stQ
Site
Bernardino Co.
N 1
0 1 2® miles ...-
Orange County
5
Riverside Co.
Cleveland
1%. National
Forest
San Diego Co.
•
•
•
•
6
2
Vicinity Map lsa
1:0WER 0
Source: The Irvine Company
1y�
10818 1'.=2000'-0"
.`.,,
ENV►y r1i?r �--+�`f1�eA1?.. �r� 'F
Ni� V,
� 8 y. `�T;� rF #qi t �"� '•4''t _ r�1�! • - .a t1 J�vr `�
w ,; •
.li f ( ���� \` � �/.E r✓ 2'��, a ���� �Y ��} � �a..`�`:'.
J j t yak« .��1• �.ua'�t c ( `{ 1'�4� 21 R
,?,p r♦ Y Y 7 y �..
r l pj ��4t ty
--
#T ZIP
4
Site Plan lsa
•
•
7m
0
•
•
•
1�
Source. WVLK &Q
m
0 40' 80' 120'
•
Q
•
9
5
Parcel Map lsa
• /IN IOIIYIN Y/G/f /OI/
• P i RM. 2a"-14
i� � I.., -•. `Y�(+�YV I n i � I � _ //Yd.'...^a..w:��'v�.-.o."" .. •—
-d . r .., nR.re:J . sa w• T
(I _
- A'`�. \� I ?y?j •R49'Y>3Y�'F[2t..w. YA<+ � 1�
• � `,:14• � ,2 ram..
4 t "fr
IL.�•iu/r°xa/w rvnro ua,s NJR KR � *� � •'�•
• rAR^•.' m+l A nxmu v Ar unrvu rNcn
0 176'
emiensamMim
Parcel Size (Acres) Proposed -Use
• 1 2.242 Parking
2 2.360 Parking
3 4.666 Hotel
4 0.617 Parking
Total : 9.874
•
11
•
•
TABLE A
PROJECT STATISTICS
GUEST ROOMS
10
Lsa
Typical guest rooms 234 rooms
• Four Seasons rooms (mini -suites) 72 rooms
One -bedroom suites 7 rooms
Two -bedroom suites 9 rooms
Special suites 3 rooms
Total guest rooms 325 rooms
GROSS BUILDING AREA
Tower level (Floors 2-19) 247,140 sq. ft.
Ground level 60,455 sq. ft.
• Basement level 35,330 sq. ft.
Total gross building area 342,925 sq. ft.
GROUND -LEVEL FACILITIES
•
Retail
925 sq. ft.
Dining/lounge
7,475 sq. ft.
+60-seat lobby lounge
+40-seat cabana cafe and outdoor dining
+110-seat fine restaurant
•
Banquet rooms
6,000 sq. ft.
Meeting rooms
5,225 sq. ft.
SITE AREA
4.77 acres
NUMBER OF FLOORS
19 floors
BUILDING HEIGHT
21416-1/2"
BUILDING FOOTPRINT
60,455 sq. ft.
PARKING
•
Offsite
315 spaces
Onsite (valet)
75 spaces
0
I•
I.
6
Lobby -Level Plan lsa
I•
U
i•
I•
I•
I•
Cl
G
'Source: VVMTW
�`
0 30' 60'
S
I0
1•
U
1•
�•
I•
•
Y
7
Basement -Level
Source: WMMG
12
Plan Wa
IVII;\z
0 30, 60,
��
9
13
8
Typical Tower -Level Plan Lsa
•
IU
I•
I•
•
FLOORS 2-11
• source: V1MATW
•
FLOOR 19 FLOOR 19
�`
0 30' 60'
C,
•
11
•
•
•
•
•
14
9
North & South Building Elevations lsa
SOUTH ELEVATION
0 30, 60,
Source: VWAT&G
a
• 10
West & East Building Elevations lsa
•
•
•
•
•
Im
WEST ELEVATION
•
•
EAST ELEVATION
0 30' 60'
i
1•
1•
1•
1•
�•
U
I
U
I
I
10
1um
11
Building Section lsa
1•
1•
1•
I•
1•
la
C:
0
I•
17
DESCRIPTION OF LOCAL AND REGIONAL
EXISTING LAND USES
Lsa
The project site, located at the intersection of Newport Center Drive and
Santa Cruz Drive, is approximately 9.874 acres in size. Portions of the proj-
ect site are currently utilized for existing parking lots and a temporary
building leased by a financial institution. The remaining portion of the site
is undeveloped, although it was rough -graded during original grading for New-
port Center.
The Four Seasons Hotel site is located within Newport Center, which occu-
pies an area of about 530 acres in the southeastern portion of the city of
Newport Beach (Figure 3). To date, development in Newport Center, including
existing and committed projects, amounts to 4.2 million square feet. This
includes a regional shopping center, office buildings, the Marriott Hotel, the
Granville Apartments, the Irvine Coast Country Club, theaters, food/beverage
establishments, civic buildings, and the Sea Island condominiums.
Surrounding land uses include the Wells Fargo building and parking struc-
ture to the east, Fashion Island to the south across Newport Center Drive,
Pacific Mutual to the west, Civic Plaza to the northwest, and Big Canyon to
the north.
EXISTING LAND USE PLANS
General Plan
Land Use Element. The City's Land Use Element designates Newport Cen-
ter for a variety oT land uses, including administrative, professional, and
financial/commercial; retail and service commercial; governmental, education-
al, and institutional facilities; recreational and environmental open space;
and low, medium, and multiple -family residential. Suitable uses include busi-
ness and professional offices, retail commercial, restaurant, hotel, motel,
and commercial recreation.
In 1977 the City passed Resolution 9009 to regulate the amount of office
floor space that could be developed in Newport Center based on types and loca-
tion of uses. Two General Plan Amendments, GPA 78-2 and 79-1, reduced the
remaining development allocated to Newport Center. GPA 80-3, approved in 1981
and rescinded in 1982, would have increased the intensity of allowable land
use for six parcels within Newport Center. GPA 81-3 (Marriott Hotel) increas
I•
1•
1•
10
1•
I•
�0
�0
I•
I•
I•
W
Up
ed the allowable intensity of land use for Block 900. GPA 81-2 increased the
allowable intensity of land use for Block 400 from 300,000 sq. ft. to 380,000
sq. ft. of office. Table B summarizes all existing, approved, and additional
allowable development in Newport Center. Figure 12 illustrates the location
of additional allowable development. Table C provides a history in tabular
form of the various General Plan Amendment approvals affecting Newport Cen-
ter.
Although Tables B and C indicate that no additional development is
directly allocated to Block 600, certain types of development may be transfer-
red to the site from other areas of Newport Center. Specifically, up to 145
residential units or 207,533 square feet of additional -office can be transfer-
red to the site without a General Plan Amendment. Figure 13 summarizes the
project proposal and existing land use designations according to the existing
General Plan. Hotels are permitted in Newport Center subject to site plan
review and the limitations on total development set by the General Plan..
Parking for hotels shall be established by the Zoning Code or by a demonstrat-
ed formula approved by the Planning Commission in conjunction with the approv-
ed site plan review.
Circulation Element. The Circulation Element of the General Plan
designates Newport Center Drive, which is adjacent to the project site, and
all major thoroughfares bordering Newport Center (Jamboree Road, San Joaquin
Hills Road, MacArthur Boulevard, and Coast Highway) as major six -lane divided
roads. Newport Center Drive is fully improved at present. Santa Cruz Drive
Is designated as a primary four -lane divided road. It is currently improved
as a six -lane undivided road.
Unlike the Land Use Element, the Circulation Element has undergone very
few modifications since its adoption in 1974. Prior to 1974, the Coastal
Freeway was deleted from the State system. In 1974, with adoption of the Cir-
culation Element, the Coastal Freeway was officially deleted from the City's
Master Plan of Arterial Highways. Coast Highway was designated as a major
arterial (six -lane divided) for the majority of its length. However, Coast
Highway through Corona del Mar was designated as a primary arterial (four -lane
divided). Also, through Mariners Mile, Coast Highway was designated as a Pri-
mary Highway - Modified (four lanes divided). This designation permitted
parking restrictions during two one -hour peak periods daily, thereby providing
six travel lanes during the peak hours.
Since adoption, the extension of Irvine Avenue to Coast Highway was
deleted (1974); Coast Highway through Mariners Mile was redesignated to a reg-
ular major arterial (six lanes divided) (1975); the Avocado -MacArthur one-way
couplet was adopted (1975); portions of Back Bay Drive and San Joaquin Hills
11
•
•
l i
is
'TABLE B 19
P,NEWPORT CENTER DEVELOPMENT
b
1a .1 nq zo0roved B Rddltlonal
Location 7evf lovxnc ttmml teat, ]1ldwe4la Total
Block 0 Corcorate Plaza 254.026(01 101.150(0) 2410) 365.200(01
Block 100 gateway Plata 165,000(0) -0• • •0. 1651 000(0)
314m •00 Design Plaza 30,000 01 4- 0- .501000(OI
Black 700 W.000i01 -0. -0- 30.000(01
1.750(T) a. 650(T) 2.400(T)
Blois :00 9antal slue 300.000(0) .0. 20.000(0) 3801000(0)
81a= 600 300.000(01 -0• 23.$50(0) 3MISM(0)
Block $00 300.000(0) a. -0• 300.000(0)
314as 700/800 PaellIt %tual 333.098(0) 1.302(0) 4• 534.400(0)
•0• -0- 245(R) DOM
310001C) 3.000(C) -0- B: 00CI
31 ou$ 700f800 Civic Plaza 34.000(I) 10.000(I) 4,000(I) 4,000(1)
234,708(0) 4. ((( 4- 234,7061{(101
BIG" 900 Marriott/Granville 377(H) 273(H� 4• I�6111H)
10.000(0) -0- -0- 101000(0)
67(R) 4• -0• 57(e)
N"ort slllage/Avocaw/MacArthur -0• -0• 58,750(C) 501750(C)
4- -0• 58(R) 58(R)
Corporate Plus vast -a. a. 23,400(01 23, 400(O14
PCH/Frentage -0• 4- 57(R) 57(R)S
PCHNowneorat 4• -0-
Fashion Island 1.175,250 C) 4- 4- 1.175.250111
floatting -045iR) -0 1(R) 145(R) 145i0.i
Mluellameous
Ift"It.00,141 58.300(t) -0- -0• 58,100(I)
WI! course 18 Was
Awtomotive 5 acres
Towle I4 toorb
Total . 2,836.830(0) 102,452(0) 126,974(0 2 3,066,256(0
13B1,51�T58aT1 1,2537ii70T1 1.350 so ,750T)
48
112 e) 97(RI 505 R 6 70/i2i
92,100i 11 W. BOOT I) 4.000i 11
%00(I1
Leg"I 0 • Offlee/square fast H • Heat/roof
C e Coesorclal/square fast R • Residential/dwallin9 units
T w Thutar/SeAtt I • Iostltutl anal/square fast
Scams City of H*wMrt Beach. Planing Oeoa. went, May 1983.
lFor the PorWns of this chart. 'committed- Indicates that all aoprwals with the
escntlo of Wilding and gracing nrelts have boon Issued by Me City of Newport Such.
221,857 sq. ft. (0) of the additional allowable 128.974 sq. ft. (0) cannot be Construct•
ad twill such time as ulsting towrary structurn within Newport Center Are removed.
If Me toorary strutters m Black 600 Is rained, 2.773 sq. ft. w111 me removed.
Bible total is reduced by 655 sq, ft. of retail us will soon ties at uluing towel-
ry straiWw are reseed.
4Thlt site has a primary designation of retail sales (nasimm 57,337(C]) with an altar•
native designation of office. The total perwitt4d dnelaosent has bean reduced to 23,4W
sq. ft. because of Ms allocation of sq. ft. to office development approved an other
sit" within Newport Center.
Billions sites are designated for residential davelcomant at 4 du per bulldable acre.
Also, wits may be allocated from Of 4145 flanln9/transfer wits.
BAIT residential development .Ind Me attention of Block 800 (245(R]) and Sae Island
i32ERRin/ofb0uildoO n Wrat9 la acreage. The nmeers of milts w no Marc are based o
7mis total Is rnducto by w additional 21323 $4. ft. of roues use wall each time ss
cha u1stinqq 4vtmuilt rmaltim M -esnlm •s lava -s corrected ;total u1sti.9 :4vars
fmtage In funion plug is 1,177,573 sq. ft.).
•
• 12 20
Newport Center - Additional
Allowable Development ' lsa
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
r
1': approx. 1000'
�a
Big Canyon
Park Newport
Project
Site
San Jo a uln Hills Rd.
Block 700/800
Avocado/MacArthur
1,360 SF(T)
8,000SF(C)
1o,,000SF(I)
Block 600
Civic Plaza
Block 600
Block
wv'"u
S .
o
b 7p�00��0/y8y��0110
cc
I, IN
Al md4E!LR
m
K 13028F(0)#�
0
3,000SF(C)
4`
Fashion Island
Block 400
80,000SF(0)
Block 900
234(H)
Block 300
rr' .•�'.h::::tw
�_
Block 200
m,
:Sea :P6.
Island `: Irvine Coast
y : Block 100
17. Country Club
m
Newporter
87(R) !?e
! ;,,•
Corporate Plaza
a
Inn
ry+•
;..
101,1608F(0)
2.
�#
Corporate
12
1I
t
Plaza West
�
�• hf•a:eat �,• ,:.
Baywoodl
th,Apts.
Harbor
View Hills
PCH/Frontage •; ..•yy,,.1 .1 IDS'
Pa
olfio Coast Hwy.
PCH & Irvine
Jamboree Terrace LEGEND
iliil9P'"�;a'Ir Additional Allowable/Non-committed
Additional Allowable/Committed
(C) Commercial (R) Residential
(T) Theater Seats (0) Office
(H) Hotel Rooms (I) Institutional
H'i • � �•.•_ _ • NIIGFLitl n e _u r_, .._u_ _u_..._u_ I II, I R�� d..n Gnn�nd�
. Source: City of Newport Beach
Date: June ,1983
•
• ;TABLE C
1•
G
1•
I•
I•
SUMMARY OF NEWPORT CENTER
21
f
Qasoluticn
Silica
(19771
CPA 79.21
CPA 1942
VA 20-33
(aesCHded
19821
SPA e1.14
IPA AI-25
310" 0 - Corporate Plan
450.000(0)
365.200(o)
365.200(0)
365.200(0)
365.200(0)
365,200(01
Block 100 - 04traly Plus
165.000(0)
165.000(01
165,000(0)
1651000(0)
165.000(0)
165.0o(1(0)
aloof 200 - Onign Plan
L50,000(0)
150.000(0)
150.000(0)
1501000(0)
150,C00(0)
L50.000(0)
aloct 300
80,000f0)
d0.000(0)
30,000(0)
30,000(0)
30.000(0)
30.owfoi
1.750(T)
1.150(T)
2.400(T)
2.400(T)
2,400(T)
2.400(T)
aim 400 - 4•dlcal Pl Ace
300,000(0)
300.000(0)
300,000(0)
3001000(0)
300.000(0)
380.000(0)
Block $00
5601000(0)
560.000(0)
323,550(0)
3Z3.550(0)
323,550(0)
323.550(0)
Block 400
1.200,OM(0)
800.000(0)
800.000(0)
1.025.000(0)
800.000(0)
300.000(01
275,000(a)
300 H
100(R
Slons 700/000 - Pacific Mutual
540,000j(`0
540,00)(0)
534.400(0)
534.400(0)
534,400(0)
534.400(0)
•
8,01K)Rl
B.2Bu0ic){
B.2oua(ici
B,2auoSic)1i
8.2000(CI
9.2a00(ici
Bidets 700/B00 -Civic plus
41.370(T)
A31,
320, (T)
255,2�00(T
27�,706(1
1M(I'l
Z74:706;T{
a,aaa{c
8,000{C)
8.0001(1(c
0.000 C)
8.0oll CJ
a.ow C{
Sim 900
311(x)
377(H)
377(HI
5u(x)
611(x)
611 x
m,oao((5)
m,aao 0
10,000((0)
10.00a 0
67(R)
67(A)
67(0)
67(R{
67(0.)
61 R
Ntpart vlll49e/A1ocedO-
120,000(C)
58,750(C)
S0.750(C)
20.000(C)
58,750(C)
$8.750(C)
MacArthur
200,000 0)
mo.MI))
208.750(0)
100,000(0)
70(al
SefRl
s5(RI
Corporate Plus West
0
23,400(0)6
123.400(0)
23.400(0)6
23.400(0)6
PCX froat4ge/PCH Jamboree
334,601)(0)
334.600(0)
801000(0)
'
S71R)
571R)
57(R)
57(R)
-union Island
1.165.000(C)
1.175.250(C)
1.175.250(C)
1.175,50(C)
L175.Z50(C)
1.175,230(C)
lernR6rtsr Ayarmenn/Sn Island
226(R)
225(R)
L32(R)
132(R)
132(R)
132(R)
floating Rnldntt4l Units
145(R)
145(R)
145(R)
145(R)
Mlscallaee0us
Institutional - 58.100 sic• ft.
Golf - 18 halos
Automotive - 5 acres
Taints . 24 courts
4.299,600(((01)
01
2,956.256 01
1, 700.1(
0
2.956.350(0
3,066.25610)
i,35L0o0SU
3.250.000(G7
L255.aa5((c
1,211,2s0(C{
1.zs0,000{C)
1.250.000(C)
t,IW T
4,400(T)
], 750(T�
3,750((T)
7,750(T)
31750(T)
371 H
3"
377 N
8121X1
611 H
611 H)
I3,750,000
538((P
5381R
lice R
228,746JR
701 R
70t(RI
118.1001t
106.100(t)
106.100(1
45,000(1)
106, im 11
L06.L00(t)
Legaldt G • Office/squarerose x •Hotel/rams
C • COamm"ial/square fast R • Ruldntlat/dwll ln9 wits
T . Theater/nat4 ( • Institutl"Al/More fast
Sources City of Newport Sesch, Planning Department, May 1983.
19PA 78.2 wa aoprned wits land of totals only. land uses by individual blacks listed hero are estimates.
20PA 79.1 was Maraud wish Newport Canter land uee totals only and by Traffic Malysis Zones (TALs), land can by
blacks listed hen are estimates only based an Of TAZ land uses.
3flnAl action an BPA 30.3 IMIWM Me allocation of spmbtfic lam nos an six snaran blacks. These -.at&)$, by
black, are onto on this action In addition to estimates based on TAZs for Me remainder of wiffeated blocks.
415cigtes Of land use by blocks are based m WA 79.1 estimates In addition to Me aporord of 234 additional hotel
rows to Block 900 by adootlon of BRA 81-3.
59stimatee of land use by blocks an based on CPA 79.1 estimates In addition to CPA 81-3 and the aParoval of 80,000
square fast of Office In Block 400 by GPA 81.2.
6Thh site has a primary cool gnation of "tail sales (maximum S7,317(C]) with on Alternative dasignAtlm of Offin.
The total oaml Steel develcoment has been named to 23,400 se• ft. oaceuse of she allocation of Se. ft. to office
lnelopMnt Apposed M Other sites within Newport Center.
0
I•
[7
1•
1•
10
1•
22
13
Planning Context (sa
EXISTING LAND USE: Primarily vacant.
212-space parking lot.
Temporary building housing a financial institu-
tion
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN: Site is designated Administrative, Professional,
and Financial Commercial with residential uses
permitted. Although no development is specific-
ally allocated to the site, up to 145 residential
units and 207,533 square feet of office can be
transferred from other areas of Newport Center to
Block 600.
GPA 82-2: Add 325-room hotel with related facilities.
TOTAL PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: 325-room hotel with related facilities.
EXISTING ZONING: C-O-H. Proposed development is permitted.
•
•
23
LCO
Road were deleted as secondary arterials (1977); Superior Avenue was realigned
(1978); the Avocado/MacArthur couplet was extended northerly of San Joaquin
Hills Road (1979); and the portion of Canyon Crest Road within the city of
Newport Beach (about 450 feet in length) was deleted.
•
The need for transportation improvements as a result of the proposed
project is reviewed in the Traffic and Circulation section of this report.
Public Safety Element. The project site is not identified as having
any unique public safety hazards. Geologic and seismic concerns are discuss-
ed in the Geology and Soils section of this EIR.
•
Housin Element. The City's Housing Element identifies goals and
objec Ives or a eviating potential housing problems. Construction of the
Four Seasons Hotel would generate the need for additional employees. Discus-
sion of new employment generation and housing demand is contained in the
Socio-Economic Issues section of this report.
•
Noise Element. Noise sources within Newport Beach relate primarily
-to transportation systems. Potential noise impacts which could result from
the proposed project are examined in the Noise section of this report.
Conservation Element. The Conservation Element identifies signifi-
cant environmental resources within the community and proposes programs for
the protection of these resources. Air quality, water quality, and energy
impacts of the proposed project are discussed in this report.
Recreation and*,Open--Space -Element. The Recreation and Open Space
Elemen prove es a program for preservation, acquisition, development, and
• maintenance of recreational and open -space resources in the community. The
element designates a secondary bikeway on Newport Center Drive adjacent to the
project site. Discussion of the provision of this bikeway is contained in the
Traffic and Circulation section of this report.
F _
1
,,Zoning
I'•
Most of Newport Center is zoned either CO (Commercial Office) or Planned
Community (PC). The project site is zoned CO. Hotels are a permitted use
within this zoning designation. Table D compares the requirements of the CO
zone with the characteristics of the proposed project. Existing zoning in
Newport Center is illustrated in Figure 14. Because of the definitive nature
• of the General Plan within Newport Center, which allocates exact levels of
development to specific areas, the General Plan is more specific than zoning
applied to Newport Center.
•
• •-TABLE D 24
�'CO ZONING COMPARISON
Lsa
Requirement
CO Zone
Proposed Project
'Lot size
Hotels: Min. 300 sq.
639 sq. ft. lot
ft. lot area per
area per guest room
•
guest room
Setbacks:
Front
0
0
•
Side
25 ft. maximum
25 ft. maximum
Rear
0
0
Maximum allowable
3 x buildable area
1.12:1 FAR1
intensity of use
(3:1 FAR)
1.69:1 FAR2
•
Building height
375 ft. maximum
210 ft.
Parking
505 spaces total
390 spaces total
1/2 space per guest
room = 163 spaces
210 standard spaces (54%)
98 compact spaces (25%)
1 space per 40 sq. ft.
7 handicap spaces (2%)
of net public area for
75 valet spaces (19%)
restaurant = 187 spaces
i space per 5 persons
for banquet and meeting =
•
150 spaces
1 space per 250 sq. ft.
of retail = 4 spaces
Loading spaces
Loading spaces
•
required: 1
provided: 2
1Based on Parcels 2 and 3 (Figure 5, Page 9).
2Based on Parcel 3 only (Figure 5, Page 9).
•
•
•
25
14
Zoning Map lsa
P-C
0-8
LEGEND:
A-P Administrative, Professional
• CO High -Rise, Commercial
OS Open Space
P-C Planned Community
U Unclassified
P-C
ho scale
P-C
SUURGE: City of Newport ueac
10
[7
I•
1•
C
I9
�0
�•
�•
26
Up
Areas zoned CO are governed by regulations found in the Planning and Zon-
ing Code, Title 20, Chapters 20.30 and 20.34. Areas zoned PC are governed by
Title 20, Chapter 20.51, and by Planned Community texts adopted for specific
PC areas. Table E lists the status of PC areas within Newport Center.
Parking standards for commercial zones require one space per 30-50 square
feet of net public area in restaurant uses, and one space for each two guest
roams. These parking requirements can be modified by the City depending on
design characteristics of the proposed project and other factors, provided
surrounding uses are not adversely impacted. A further discussion of parking
features and requirements for the proposed project is contained in the Traffic
and Circulation section of this report.
COMMITTED PROJECTS
The City requires that all projects in excess of 10,000 square feet of
gross floor area comply with the Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO). Once a
project has received all necessary approvals, including TPO approval, it is
considered a "committed" project for purposes of projecting traffic generation
related to future development. Projects within Newport Beach which are com-
mitted, but not yet fully constructed and occupied, are listed below and shown
in Figure 15, Page 28. The traffic analysis contained in the Traffic and Cir-
culation section of this report is based upon consideration of the proposed
project as well as committed projects listed.
C7
I•
TABLE E 27
PC ZONE STATUS
Um
Area Adopted Amended
Corporate Plaza March 1975 'July 1978
June 1978
Civic Plaza
Block 800
Sea Island
PCH Frontage
Newport Vill
•
•
•
*x
•
28
15
Committed,
Approved,
and Proposed Projects
lsa
•
n
0�
CAMPUS DR
M
V
�9
M
—w
$ 24
9
•
55
H 4
3 13
10 2
73
•
B ISTOL ST.
�O
c
yG�
•
CD5
.
11
c.:�a'�
Ld
Z
m
> B.
a
y
,
73
D2 3
La
.;.O,p .::;.
6 16 018
•
W
�' :.
12
<
0
g
. y.
17
G
`
K-2
o
15 7 K-1
K-2
O
17th ST.
J
I IIGHW
•
Lu
aw
`23 E5
o r.',•.�cOAs'
ai
35
..•'
0
28
DE4
K-3 26
0 13 ��
:: • ::
E3
3i
2014 :;' .,•;:
-33..
27
.21 fi
E1 .,.;,•,
20
PACIFIC
g
-'Source: City. df Newport Beach
•
I
�P`.�OP
,.. ,
•
•
29
Lsa
•
Name
Use
Quantity
1.
Hoag Hospital
Hospital
268
beds
" 2.
Far West Savings & Loan
Office
17,000
sq. ft.
3.
Pacesetter Homes
Office
50,000
sq. ft.
•
4.
Aeronutronic Ford
Residential
300
units
5.
Back Bay Office
Office
69,720
sq. ft.
6.
Civic Plaza
Office
234,706
sq. ft.
Restaurant
8,000
sq. ft.
Theater
20,000
sq. ft.
Art Museum
10,000
sq. ft.
Library
14,000
sq. ft.
•
7.
Corporate Plaza
Office
140,176
sq. ft.
8.
Koll Center -Newport
Office
325,934
sq. ft.
Hotel
440
rooms
9.
Campus/MacArthur
Office
379,600
sq. ft.
10.
National Education Office
Office
72,000
sq. ft.
11.
North Ford
Industrial
295;000
sq. ft.
•
12.
Pacific Mutual Plaza
Office
245,000
sq. ft.
Restaurant
5,000
sq. ft.
13.
Newport Place
Office
215,038
sq. ft.
14.
Shokrian
Office
24,000
sq. ft.
15.
Sea Island
Residential
132
units
16.
Baywood Apartments
Residential
68
units
•
17.
Harbor Point Homes
Residential
21
units
18.
Seaview Lutheran Plaza
Residential
300
units
19.
Rudy Baron
Office
8,500
sq. ft.
Retail
7,500
sq. ft.
20.
441 Newport Boulevard
Office
11,000
sq. ft.
21.
Martha's Vineyard
Office
15,831
sq. ft.
•
Restaurant
2,920
sq. ft.
22.
3101 W. Coast Highway
Office
41,494
sq. ft.
23.
Coast Business Center
Office
37,000
sq. ft.
24.
Koll Center Newport
Office
7,650
sq. ft.
and No. 1 TPP
25.
Ford Aeronutronic
Industrial
420,000
sq. ft.
•
26.
1511 & 1252 Superior
Medical Office
25,000
sq. ft.
27.
GPA 81-1, Banning Ranch
Residential
406
units
Industrial
164,400
sq. ft.
Office
235,600
sq. ft.
28.
Hughes
Industrial
110,000
sq. ft.
29.
Park Lido
Medical Office
65,269
sq. ft.
•
30.
Heritage Bank
Office
36,888
sq. ft.
•
•
•
30
Lsa
•
31.
Flagship Convalescent
Hospital
68
beds
Hospital
32.
Big Canyon 10
Residential
10
units
33.
Balboa Marina Fun Zone
Commercial
16,165
sq. ft.
Office
26,320
sq. ft.
Restaurant
6,866
sq. ft.
•
34.
GPA 81-3, Marriott Hotel
Hotel
234
rooms
Expansion
35.
St. Andrews Church
Church
1,400
persons
cap.
Expansion
36.
Bayvi.ew Terrace
Commercial
10,787
sq. ft.
TOTAL
COMMITTED PROJECTS
Office
2,283,726
sq. ft.
Commercial,
Restaurants
57,238
sq. ft.
Industrial
989,400
sq. ft.
'Theater
20,000
sq. ft.
•
Art Museum
10,000
sq. ft.
Library
14,000
sq. ft.
Hospital
336
beds
Residential
1,237
units
Hotel
674
rooms.
I'•
Church
1,400
persons
cap.
:7
•
APPROVED BUT NOT COMMITTED PROJECTS
The following projects have received approval by the City Council, but
have not yet complied with the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. Consequently, they
are not considered committed projects.
Name
A. General Plan Amendment 81-2
(four separate sites)
PROPOSED PROJECTS
Use
Residential
Office/Industrial
Office (Block 400)
Quantity
230 d.u.
439,000 sq. ft.
80,000 sq. ft.
In addition to committed and approved but not committed projects, several
other projects and plans are in the planning process. These projects and
• plans require additional approvals by the City and/or other governmental agen-
cies. These projects are listed below and shown in Figure 15, Page 28. Sta-
tistics for Specific Area Plans indicate additional allowable development
based upon existing zoning.
U
•
•
•
•
B. PCH Frontage
C. GPA 82-1, North Ford
D. GPA 82-2
1. Belcourt (Area 8)
2. Four Seasons
3. Via Lido Bayfront
E. Specific Area Plans
(none currently in progress)
1. Central Balboa (6/82)
2. Cannery Village/
McFadden Square (2/77)
3. West Newport Study
Area (6/82)
4. Mariners Mile (1976)1
5. Corona del Mar (6/82)
F. Allred Condominiums
G. Newport Aquatic Center/
North Star Beach
H. Sheraton Hotel Expansion
I. 32nd Street Duplexes
J. Newport Dunes
K. Other GPA Requests
1. Coast Highway/MacArthur
2. Fifth Avenue Parcels
3. Heltzer
L. YMCA Expansion
TOTAL PROPOSED PROJECTS
31
Residential
Residential
Commercial
Office
Residential
Hotel
Residential
Commercial
Commercial
Industrial
Commercial
Industrial
Residential
Institutional
Commercial
Commercial
Residential
Residential
Recreational
Hotel
Residential
Hotel
Residential
Residential
Medical office
Recreational
Industrial
Office
Commercial
Residential
Hotel
Recreational
Institutional
Medical office
140 d.u.
668 d.u.
15,000 sq. ft.
333,171 sq. ft.
168 d.u.
325 rooms
9 d.u.
621,730 sq. ft.
2,840,076 sq. ft.
722,309 sq. ft.
2,915,140 sq. ft.
6,009,870 sq. ft.
164 d.u.
Undetermined
302,011 sq. ft.
1,283,933 sq. ft.
273 d.u.
50 d.u.
119 rooms
17 d.u.
250 rooms
105 d.u.
255 d.u.
Undetermined
45,000 sq. ft.
6,732,179 sq. ft.
333,171 sq. ft.
7,977,890 sq. ft.
1,849 d.u.
694 rooms
45,000 sq. ft.
Undetermined
Undetermined
Up
1Mariners Mile Specific Plan illustrated at .5 x buildable area; 1 x build-
able area permitted with specific uses.
C
•
•
C
Lsa
OTHER PLANNING AND
CIRCULATION RATIONS
Circulation and traffic considerations pertaining to the Four Seasons
proposal should also be evaluated in the context of other General Plan Amend-
ments, Specific Area Plans, and circulation system improvements which will
affect the circulation system of Newport Beach. General Plan Amendments under
Consideration at the present time, and Specific Area Plans which are scheduled
to be prepared by the City, are listed in the preceding section. Major circu-
lation improvements which are in various stages of completion and/or study are
listed and described in the Traffic and Circulation section of this report,
• and are summarized in Figure 24 and on Pages 68-78.
HOTEL PLANNING IN THE REGION
Figure 16 illustrates the location and size of all existing, approved,
and proposed hotels in the Newport Beach, Costa Mesa, Irvine, and Irvine Coast
• areas. Table F tabulates existing, approved, and proposed hotels in the Ana-
heim/Garden Grove/Orange, Buena Park, South Laguna/Laguna Niguel/Dana Point,
and Santa Ana areas.
•
•
•
•
•
16
Is 16
Is
is
Is
1•
1•
1•
�0
Is
Approved, and Proposed Major Hotels in Vicinity
0
Existing Hotels No. of Rooms
m *1 O o 1. South Coast Plaza Hotel 400
C 2. Holiday Inn 152
0 3. Airporter Inn 200
�- 4. Registry Hotel 293
18 '« 3 5. Sheraton Hotel 349
9 0 6. Newporter Inn 311
Q3 7. Marriott Hotel, Newport Center 377
((22 2082
1O ° -n >> >kU4 (f__7 droved Hotels —
20 0 U C �.8. Meridian, Koll Center Newport 440
,k rvine500
* 21 m ado°S 15 10. Main/Jamboreeii, Marriott 552
55 �k *k * 8 * 11. Marriott Hotel Expansion 234
13 5 12. Newport Dunes 250
24 Proposed Hotels 1976
0 73 13. Sheraton Hotel Expansion 119
Bristol St. 14. Orange County Fairgrounds 150
15. University Town Center 250
16. Irvine Coast 1750
17. Golden Triangle (not shown) 1200
18. Sakioka Property, South Plaza
y Town Center (two 300-room hotels) 600
1144 19. South Coast Drive/405 Freeway/
,Ic Z ;•'' Harbor Blvd. (not shown) 800
CD 20. Bear St./405 Freeway not available
yo36 o 21. Bristol (south of 405 Freeway) 495
o� 22. Beckman Property (two 500-room
hotels) 1000
:13 73 23. Four Seasons 325
p 24. Home Ranch (two 400-room hotels) 800
pp 7489
CL
CD
Al
06� 1.
Coast
Source: The City of Newport Beach
•
•
TABLE F 34
MAJOR HOTELS IN THE REGIONI
Lsa
Hotels
No. of Rooms
ANAHEIM/GARDEN GROVE/ORANGE
•
EXISTING
Anaheim
o� nestoga Inn
254
Disneyland Hotel
1,160
Grand Hotel
240
•
Holiday Inn
313
Howard Johnson's
320
Hyatt/Anaheim
300
Inn at the Park
500
Jolly Roger Inn Hotel
185
Marriott
1,046
•
Penny Sleeper Inn
205
Quality Inn
285
Ramada Inn
240
Sheraton
500
Garden Grove
•
onA e
Orange
oN ne
•
APPROVED
Anaheim
ilton
1,600
Regency
488
•
The Emerald Anaheim
500
Howard Johnson expansion
90
Oran9e-
Double Tree (under construction)
400
T
•
0
•
•
TABLE F (CONT'D)
35
MAJOR HOTELS IN THE REGIONI
Lsa
Hotels
No. of Rooms
PROPOSED
•
Hotel on Riviera Mobile Home Park
Site (Anaheim)
500
The Cove (Garden Grove)
400
BUENA PARK
90
EXISTING
•
Buena Park Hotel
320
Buena Park Quality Inn
198
Granada Royale Hometel
203
Holiday Inn.Plaza Hotel
245
966
•
APPROVED
None
SOUTH COASTAL ORANGE COUNTY (SOUTH LAGUNA, LAGUNA NIGUEL,
DANA POINT)
•
APPROVED
Treasure Island Timeshare
440
The Monarch on Laguna Beach
397
Lantern Bay (two hotels)
360
Dana Point Headlands
00
•
07
'
SANTA ANA
EXISTING
•
Granada Royale
270
Holiday Inn
200
PROPOSED
•
Fashion Square
1,200
1Major hotel defined as any hotel
over 150 units.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
C
CAL
ENVIRONMENTAL TING, IMPACTS,
AND MITI A SETN M A RE
F,
•
•
37
I-^
•
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Existing Conditions
. The Newport Center area is located in the western portion of the San Joa-
quin Hills, which form the southern boundary of the Orange County coastal
plain. The project site is located within Newport Center which is part of an
uplifted marine terrace of Pleistocene age. The marine terrace soils are com-
posed essentially of weakly cemented to loose sands and silty sands which in
parts of Newport Center reach a depth of as much as 50 feet. The upper one to
two feet of this material have weathered to form a moderately expansive, clay-
ey soil. The Pleistocene sediments are underlain by clay shales, clay silt -
stones, and sandstones of Miocene age, Monterey Formation.
The project site is covered with a layer of artificial fill 1 to 16 feet
in depth, which overlies a 6 to 41-foot veneer of Quaternary terrace deposits.
Underlying the Quaternary terrace deposts are Upper Pleistocene terrace depos-
its followed by a Tertiary sedimentary rock formation.
The topography of the Four Seasons project site is relatively flat.
Onsite elevations range from about 195 to 220 feet above sea level.
There are no evident faults on the site. The closest known active or
• potentially active fault is the Newport -Inglewood fault, approximately four
miles southwest of the project site. This fault was associated with the Long
Beach earthquake of 1933, and is responsible for recurring activity which pro-
duces earthquakes with Richter magnitude ranges of 4.0 to 4.5. The Pelican
Hill and Shady Lane faults, northwest of the project area, are generally con-
sidered inactive. Other major regional faults are the Whittier -Elsinore (25
• miles northwest), San Jacinto (46 miles northeast), San Fernando -Sierra Madre
(35 miles north), and San Andreas (55 miles northeast).
In the geologic seismic study prepared for the City of Newport Beach Gen-
eral Plan by Woodward -McNeill & Associates (Phase I, Geologic/Seismic Study,
1972, available at City of Newport Beach), four zones were used to describe
relative degrees of groundshaking, Zone 1 being least severe and Zone 4 most
severe. The entire project area is located within groundshaking Zone 2.
Impacts
Development of the project will require grading of the site. Onsite
• grading will balance. Cut and fill operations are estimated to include 31,000
cubic yards of cut and 31,000 cubic yards of fill. Due to the generally level
terrain on the site, the amount of grading is not considered to be significant
(Figure 17).
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
W?
17
Grading Plan lsa
-
...
N
IJ
�O/VK
<0
0 176'
07
C
1•
I•
1•
[7
�0
�0
I•
39
Lsa
Because there is no evidence of onsite faults, the probability of surface
rupture caused by fault movement is unlikely. The proposed project structures
will be subject to groundshaking in the event of an earthquake on a regional
fault. However, there are no apparent unique seismic hazards which would
restrict development. The possibility of liquefaction is very remote based on
soil and water conditions beneath the site as indicated in past investiga-
tions.
Existing City Policies and Requirements
The following measures will be required by existing City policies and
requirements.
A. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit to
be issued by the Building Department and reviewed by the Plan-
ning and Public Works Departments.
B. A grading plan, submitted to the City for approval, shall
include a complete plan for temporary and permanent drainage
facilities, to minimize any potential impacts from silt, debris,
and other water pollutants.
C. Prior to grading, an application for haul routes shall be sub-
mitted to and approved by the City's Traffic Engineer which
shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the
site, and a watering and sweeping program designed to minimize
impacts of haul oprations.
D. Grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by
a civil engineer and based on recommendations of a soils engi-
neer and an engineering geologist subsequent to completion of a
comprehensive soils and geologic investigation of the site.
Permanent reproducible copies of the proposed grading plans on
standard -size sheets shall be furnished to the Building Depart-
ment.
E. All buildings shall conform to the Uniform Building Code and the
City's seismic design standards.
Mitigation Measures
No further mitigation is required.
0
1•
1•
1•
I•
I•
C
I•
I•
I0
G
,M
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Lsa
Except for the regional hazard of potential groundshaking as a result of
seismic activity, all identified potential adverse impacts are mitigated to an
insignificant level with implementation of the previously discussed standard
City policies and requirements.
I0
•
41
Lsa
WATER RESOURCES
Existing Conditions
The proposed development is located within the area referred to as New-
port Center. The City of Newport Beach adopted a Master Plan of Drainage in
June 1962 for this area. This Master Plan was based on full development and
served as the basis for future drainage improvements. In 1966 portions of the
Master Plan were revised to reflect the development plan for Newport Center
(Quinton Engineers, Ltd., on file with the City of Newport Beach). During the
1970s, the backbone drainage systems were constructed and are currently in
operation.
The majority of the project site presently drains to Santa Cruz Drive,
out to San Joaquin Hills Road, and ultimately to a 48-inch reinforced concrete
pipe (RCP) under Jamboree Road. This system then continues down San Joaquin
Hills Road, eventually entering the Back Bay. A small portion of the site
will discharge to the master -planned drainage facilities located in Newport
Center Drive, which eventually outlet into Newport Harbor in the vicinity of
the Bahia Corinthian Yacht Club. Figure 18 illustrates the existing drainage
patterns of the project site.
Impacts
Development of the proposed project will result in increased impervious
surfaces which will incrementally increase the amount of storm runoff from the
site and decrease silt. It is estimated that the runoff increase would be
approximately 10-15% during severe storm events. Storm runoff will be inter-
cepted by onsite drainage systems and discharged into master -planned drainage
facilities. Since these drainage facilities have been planned for future
development, no adverse impacts relating to hydrology are anticipated.
Existing City Policies and Requirements
The following measures will be required by existing City of Newport Beach
'policies and requirements.
F. An erosion, siltation, and dust control plan, if desired by the
City of Newport Beach, shall be submitted and be subject to the
approval of the Building Department, and a copy shall be for-
warded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board,
Santa Ana Region, for review.
0
lilt i 1\ r------1 Rxmm .m+w
1��ii t� 1 II i Source: FJK Engineering
Drainage Areas &
Facilities ®`^
\\\ To San Joaquin Hills Road
To Newport Center Drive
❑0000 Storm Drains
18
Drainage Plan
i
0 75' 150'
lsa
I*
1•
I*
I*
I•
I•
43
Lsa
G. The velocity of concentrated runoff from the project shall be
evaluated and erosive velocities controlled as part of project
design.
H. Prior to issuance of the grading permit, the design engineer
shall review and state that the discharge of surface runoff from
the project will be performed in a manner to assure that
increased peak flows from the project will not increase erosion
Immediately downstream of the system. This shall be reviewed
and approved by the Planning and Building Departments.
Mitigation Measures
Since no adverse impacts have been identified, no mitigation measures
are required.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of the City's standard policies and requirements assures
that no adverse impacts related to hydrology will occur. Implementation of
these policies also partially mitigates the impacts of the project on water
quality. However, in conjunction with past, present, and reasonably foresee-
able projects, this project is considered part of a significant cumulative
impact on water quality in Newport Bay.
0
1•
I•
1•
G
I•
C
•
44
,-CULTURAL RESOURCES
Existing Conditions
Lsa
Archaeolo According to a report prepared by Archaeological Planning
Colla ora ive PC) in 1980, entitled Arch aeolo ical 1urve Report of Five
Development Parcels in Newport Center, arc aeo ogica si a survey recor s
indicate that the entire Block 600 of Newport Center had been previously sur-
veyed in 1973 by ARI (Reynolds and Associates 1973) and in 1977 by Westec Ser-
vices (City of Newport Beach 1973). Although both surveys indicated that
there were no observable cultural resources, the UCLA records search indicated
that CA-Ora-137 was recorded on Block 600 in 1965 by PCAS.
A walkover field survey of the site by APC in 1980 indicated that no
observable cultural resources remain on the property. Surface evidence sug-
gests that the original land surface at that location has been modified and it
appears that archaeological site CA-Ora-137 has been totally destroyed by
'development within Block 600 of Newport Center.
Paleontology. According to RMW Paleo Associates, Pleistocene -age
terrace e—d posits exist under the surficial alluvium. These deposits have pro-
duced Ice Age land animals, marine mammals, and invertebrate fossils. Late
Miocene Monterey Formation probably underlies the site at a depth of less than
20 feet, from which numerous marine vertebrate fossils have been collected.
Although no fossil localities have been recorded on the Four Seasons project
site, there is a moderate to high potential that significant fossils will be
discovered during site development.
History. No known historic resources exist on the project site.
Impacts
Archaeolo Because CA-Ora-137 has been destroyed by previous grad-
ing edification and no other archaeological resources have been
encountered onsite, no impacts are anticipated due to project construction.
Paleontology. No known paleontological resources exist onsite. How-
ever, there is a moderate to high potential that significant fossils may be
encountered during construction. Consequently, measures discussed under
"Existing City Policies and Requirements" will be necessary to ensure that any
resources uncovered during construction are properly handled to avoid poten-
tial adverse impacts.
•
History. No impacts are anticipated due to project development.
I•
I•
I•
I*
1•
[7
I•
I•
I•
[l
45
Lsa
Existing City Policies and Requirements
The following measures will be required by existing City policies and
requirements.
Archaeolo ical and Paleontological Resources. City Council Policies
K-5 and -6 outline the City's requirements with respect to archaeological and
paleontological resources. The following specific measures are recommended in
conformance with Policies K-5 and K-6.
I. A qualified archaeologist shall be present during pregrade meet-
ings to inform the developer and grading contractor of the
results of the APC study. In addition, an archaeologist shall
be present during grading activities to inspect the underlying
soil for cultural resources. If significant cultural resources
are uncovered, the archaeologist shall have the authority to
stop or temporarily divert construction activities for a period
of 48 hours to assess the significance of the finds.
J. In the event that significant archaeological remains are uncov-
ered during excavation and/or grading, all work shall stop in
that area of the subject property until an appropriate data
recovery program can be developed and .implemented. The cost of
such a program shall be the responsibility of the landowner
and/or developer.
K. A paleontological monitor shall be retained by the landowner
and/or developer to attend pregrade meetings and perform inspec-
tions during development. The paleontologist shall be allowed
to divert, direct, or halt grading in a specific area to allow
for salvage of exposed fossil materials.
L. Prior to issuance of any grading or demolition permits, the
applicant shall waive the provisions of AB 952 related to City
of Newport Beach responsibilities for mitigation of archaeologi-
cal impacts, in a manner acceptable to the City Attorney.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
I6
1•
1•
I•
I•
I•
10
1•
[l
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Adverse impacts to
known sites as a result
located during project
previously discussed are
level.
cultural resources are n
of project development.
development, the standard
expected to mitigate any
Ua
of anticipated to occur to
If cultural resources are
policies and requirements
impacts to an insignificant
I0
•
! 47
Lsa
.BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
In order to assess biological resources, a study was conducted by EDAW,
Inc. for LSA, Inc. in August 1980. This study discussed the potential for
biological resources on six separate sites within Newport Center comprising
• approximately 65 acres. The proposed Four Seasons Hotel site was one of the
sites assessed. Methodology used to prepare this study included a review of
previous documentation and aerial photography, and a field walkover conducted
on August 4, 1980. The following discussion summarizes that portion of the
biology study applicable to the Four Seasons Hotel site. The study appears in
Its entirety in Appendix C of this report.
•
,-Existing Conditions
The proposed Four Seasons Hotel site has been heavily disturbed and
altered from its native condition through dryland farming, grazing, grading;
.,and construction. At present, a portion of the project site is used for park-
ing and a temporary financial institution structure. As a result of these
land alterations, the natural ecological relationships are extremely distress-
ed and habitat diversity and productivity have been greatly reduced.
Most native vegetation has been replaced by either introduced grassland
and weeds or ornamental vegetation which adapts to highly and/or frequently
! disturbed conditions. The site is periodically mowed or disked for weed and
fire control.
The area is currently dominated by wild oats (Avena barbata), brome
grasses (Bromus rubens, B. diandrus, B. mollis), wild mustar7s rassica Beni-
culata, B. kaber , and bur clover (_edop 1 morpha). Additional plant
• spies commoner the area include telegraph weeds lHeterotheca rand_ iflora),
Australian saltbush (Atri lex semibaccata, sweet c over a i�lotus alba),
wild radish (Ra hheplanus sativus), and horseweed (Conyza canadensis). Approxi-
mately 70% of tant species found in the study area are non -native -
Previous losses and degradation of native vegetation have been accompa-
nied by a decline in the number and variety of wildlife species. Few species
were observed during the field walkover. Those which were sighted included
small mammals and birds tolerant of habitat alterations and typically found in
disturbed settings.
No rare, endangered, or threatened plant or animal species were observed,
• have been reported, or are expected to inhabit the project site, nor are any
regionally or locally significant or sensitive plant or wildlife habitat areas
present.
0
is
i•
i•
10
I•
�•
E7
I•
0
Impacts
Conversion of the partially undeveloped site to hotel use will require
removal of existing vegetation, resulting in the loss of associated wildlife
populations. However, due to the altered nature of the site, and since pres-
ent plant species and wildlife populations do not represent an important
resource, these impacts are not expected to be significant in a local or
regional context.
Existing City Policies and Requirements
There are no applicable existing City policies or requirements.
Mitigation Measures
Due to the lack of significant biological impacts associated with devel-
opment of Four Seasons Hotel, no mitigation measures are proposed.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
There are no significant adverse impacts on biological resources.
C7
1•
1•
I•
1•
I•
I•
I•
I•
I•
'0
:e
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ISSUES
Setting
IM
The City's Housing Element identifies goals and objectives for alleviat-
ing potential problems in providing housing for all income segments of the
community, and requires an assessment of housing impacts related to major pro-
posed commercial and industrial projects. This assessment must define the
number of jobs to be created by the proposed project and generally identify
where housing opportunities are expected to be located for new employment gen-
erated by projects.
In the case of the proposed Four Seasons Hotel, as outlined in the
Impacts section below, the majority of new jobs generated are anticipated to
fall into the low to moderate -income range. As a result, the housing analysis
must focus upon the existing conditions and problems of availability of low to
moderate -cost housing within a reasonable commuting distance of the proposed
Four Seasons Hotel.
The shortage of affordable housing near major employment centers is gen-
erally considered a countywide, if not a regional, problem. Within Newport
Beach, the majority of housing units (55% - 1982, City of Newport Beach) are
single-family detached units, over 95% of which are valued at $100,000 or
more. The city does, however, have a significant amount of rental housing
(45% of total housing units - 1980, Federal Census) which is available on a
year-round basis, with the median rental cost in 1980 being approximately $443
per month. It is probable that some increase in rental costs has occurred
since the 1980 census; however, no more recent data are available. The rental
vacancy rate in 1980 in Newport Beach, according to the 1980 Federal Census,
was approximately 7%, excluding seasonal units. By contrast, Orange County as
a whole had a rental vacancy rate of approximately 5% and a median rent of
$336 per month. This rental vacancy factor consists of all vacant units,
Including those not available for rent (i.e., second homes). According to the
City's 1981 rental vacancy study, which includes all rental units vacant and
available for rent, the rental vacancy factor is 3.97%.
Impacts
Although no projected income data are available for the Four Seasons
Hotel, the project is anticipated to generate an estimated need for 359
employees at full operation. The majority of these positions will be in food
and beverage service and housekeeping services, which are assumed to be jobs
of low to moderate income.
C
Is
1•
is
1•
I*
r
1•
I•
I•
50
Lsa
In order to estimate the potential need for affordable housing which may
be created by implementation of the proposed project, it is necessary to exam-
ine the distribution and commuting patterns of employees in hotel facilities
in the area. In the Environmental Impact Reports prepared for GPA 80-3 and
81-3, expansion of the Marriott Hotel was reviewed in terms of potential hous-
ing impacts. Based on information provided by the Marriott Hotel Corporation
regarding the place of residence of existing employees, it was estimated that
approximately 90% lived in Orange County, with the largest percentage residing
in Santa Ana (35%), followed by Costa Mesa (12%) and Newport Beach (11%).
Other Orange County communities housing a significant number of employees were
Irvine and Huntington Beach.
Utilizing these statistics on place of residence, it was estimated that
approximately 42% of Marriott Hotel employees lived within roughly a 10-mile
radius of Newport Center, and that approximately 86% lived within a 15-mile
radius. In GPAs 80-3 and 814 it was assumed that additional employees gener-
ated by the hotel's expansion would commute in similar proportions and pat-
terns.
These data represent the most current available for hotel operations in
Newport Center and can be considered reasonably applicable to the proposed
Four Seasons Hotel as well. The proposed Four Seasons Hotel is a somewhat
more luxurious hotel and, as a result, the salary ranges of future employees
may be slightly higher than those of other area hotels; however, the differen-
tial is not anticipated to be significant in terms of employees' ability to
locate suitable housing.
Housing characteristics in communities anticipated to attract the major-
ity of future employees as residents are illustrated in Table G. As illu-
strated, vacancy rates in rental units range from 3% to 7%, with median rents
ranging from $308 to $443 per month, according to the 1980 Federal Census. In
all communities examined, except the city of Santa Ana, however, the median
value of owner -occupied housing exceeds $100,000.
As a result, it is considered probable that the majority of new hotel
employees who do not already own housing will be renters. A portion of new
employees, however, can be anticipated to already be housed in the area at
present, either as owners or renters, thus decreasing the demand for addition-
al housing. Current labor market and unemployment conditions as well as com-
muting patterns also suggest that the local labor pool will generally serve to
fill positions created by the proposed project.
Orange County housing affordability criteria, which are part of the Coun-
ty's Inclusionary Housing Program, offer some general guidelines against which
0
1•
0
1•
I•
•
I•
I�
•
•
TABLE G 51
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY INVENTORY
Lsa
Santa
Huntington
Costa
Newport
Ana
Beach
Irvine
Mesa
Beach
% rental housing of
total units
46%
41%
26%
55%
45%
Rental vacancy rate
6%
4%
5%
3%
7%
Median monthly rent
$308
$364
$454
$341
$443
Median owner -occupied
housing value
$80,500
$120,400
$136,400
$108,400
$200,100
Source: 1980 Federal Census.
1•
I•
I•
1•
I•
I•
I0
52
Lsa
income and housing costs can be assessed. As of May 1983, $27,270 to $34,085
was defined as low to moderate income in Orange County. County criteria also
suggest that monthly housing costs for low/moderate-income families should not
exceed $570 per month for low-income families and $855 per month for moderate -
income families for newly constructed units. Older units which would largely
characterize areas surrounding the proposed project, in all probability, would
rent for somewhat lower prices in most cases.
Data presented in Table G suggest that vacancy rates and median rents in
communities expected to absorb the majority of new employees generated by the
Four Seasons Hotel are generally within an acceptable range, although the
actual supply of lower -cost rental housing is not known. It should be noted,
in addition, that Orange County affordability criteria are based on total fam-
ily income rather than on individual income. Consequently, what might consti-
tute low to moderate income on an individual basis would not necessarily apply
when the combined income of a family is considered.
Due to factors discussed above, the'need for additional low and moderate -
income housing due to new employment from the proposed Four Seasons Hotel can-
not be accurately estimated. The project will, however, cumulatively contrib-
ute to the need for affordable housing in Newport Beach and surrounding areas.
The resolution of affordable housing problems in the city is beyond the
scope of this project. The City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, and other
surrounding communities have established housing programs.
Existing City Policies and Requirements
There are no existing City policies and requirements related to socio-
economic issues directly applicable to this project.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are proposed.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
On a cumulative basis, this project, in concert with other past, present,
and reasonably foreseeable projects, will contribute to an increased demand
for affordable housing within Newport Beach and the surrounding area.
I•
IA
I•
I*
I•
Is
U
I•
1•
53
AIRPORT CONSIDERATIONS
Existing Conditions
[=T
John Wayne Airport, which is operated by the County of Orange, is the
principal general aviation facility in the county serving regional needs. The
airport, ranked second nationally in its level of commercial/general aviation
activity, provides direct service to major cities throughout the United
States. General aviation (privately owned) aircraft account for approximately
90% of the flight activity. At present, there is a two-year wait for tie -down
for general aviation aircraft.
Table H lists the number and breakdown of annual flights and air passen-
gers processed through John Wayne Airport for the past three years.
The airport is faced with several problems related to congestion of its
present facilities. Among them are traffic congestion during peak -hour condi-
tions on major arterials providing access to the airport, an acute shortage of
parking, and air safety concerns due to the high volume of air traffic. The
airport operates 41 commercial flights per day. The County of Orange has been
studying the improvement/expansion of John Wayne Airport for a number of
years. While the issue remains unresolved, the Board of Supervisors has
started a process leading to an expansion to 55 flights per day and toward an
ultimate total of 73 flights per day. In conjunction with a binding agreement
between the County of Orange and City of Newport Beach, the City has recently
(May 23, 1983) amended its Airport Policy to agree to a number of average
daily departures not to exceed 55 flights.
The County of Orange has recently (May 31, 1983) established a committee
to develop a joint powers agreement or similar mechanism to limit flights at
John Wayne Airport based on the ceiling of 55 flights per day.
The Southern California Association of Governments in a regional airport
site selection study, forecast future demand for air service for the region.
This forecast is based on regional population projections for the year 1995.
The study analyzed two airport service systems. One, called the E1 Toro
System, assumed continued operations at John Wayne Airport and full service
operations at an airport located at the E1 Toro Marine Corps Air Station. The
second, called the Camp Pendleton System, also assumed continued operations at
John Wayne Airport with full service operations at an airport located at Camp
Pendleton. Table I summarizes information related to estimated demand (served
and unserved) generated by Orange County itself.
I•
19
I*
1•
I•
•
I0
I•
TABLE H 54
AIRPORT OPERATIONS
Lsa
Number of Annual Flights
1980
1981
1982
General aviation
476,360
425,046
396,029
Commercial air carrier
27,900
28,850
29,655
Air taxi/commuter
18,922
13,926
16,429
Military
1,906
1,311
1,820
TOTAL
525,088
469,133
443,933
Number of commercial
air passengers
2,378,956
2,379,792
2,530,850
Source: Chris Edwards, John Wayne Airport.
1•
1•
I•
1•
'yF
TABLE I 55
COMMERCIAL AIR SERVICE DEMAND IN
1995 GENERATED rN ANGE COUNTY Lsa
Demand (Air Trips in Millions)
Airport serve nserve
John Wayne Airport 4.22 11.27-21.29
El Toro System 14.91 .54-10.6
Camp Pendleton System 12.69 12.77-12.82
Source: SCAG, Southern California Aviation Systems Study - Supplemental Tech-
nical Report, June 1982 (Tables IV-1 to IV-4).
1•
1•
I•
I•
C
I•
I0
I•
I•
56
Impacts
In order to estimate the number of hotel patrons that may wish to utilize
John Wayne Airport (and consequently may be considered as part of the SCAG-
forecast increase in demand for 1995), survey results conducted for the Marri-
ott Hotel (Newport Beach) are utilized. Although the Four Seasons Hotel, as
described in the Land Use section, is expected to differ from the Marriott
Hotel in amenities and clientele characteristics, the Marriott survey results
are the best and most recent airport use data available.
A survey of registered guests of the Marriott Hotel was undertaken in
August -December 1980 and again in 1982 in an effort to establish a profile of
hotel guests and air travel at John Wayne Airport.
In the 1980 survey, questionnaires returned by 466 overnight guests indi-
cated that 36% of all guests drove to the area and 60% arrived by air.
Thirty-six percent of all guests flew into Los Angeles International Airport
and then drove to Orange County. Twenty-three percent of all Marriott Hotel
guests utilized John Wayne Airport. The 1982 survey confirmed these percen-
tages.
Of the registered guests surveyed, roughly 73% were staying overnight for
business or conference purposes, with the majority staying one to two nights.
On the basis of operational statistics from various Four Seasons Hotels
across the country and estimated guest profiles, the Four Seasons management
estimates an average occupancy rate of 82% and approximately 1.3 guests per
room.
Applying these factors to the proposed project it is estimated that 80
hotel patrons per day may wish to utilize John Wayne Airport, potentially
resulting in 29,200 annual air passenger trips. Calculations are outlined
below.
. 325 rooms x 82% occupancy = 267 rooms
. 267 rooms x 1.3 occupants = 347 guests total
. 347 total guests x 23% utilizing John Wayne Airport = 80 guests
. 80 guests x 182.5 days (based on a 2-night stay) = 14,600 annual
guests utilizing John Wayne Airport
. 14,600 x 2 (1 flight in, 1 flight out) = 29,200 annual air passen-
ger trips
Under the SCAG scenario for John Wayne Airport only (Table I, Page 54),
approximately 29,200 annual air passenger trips represent 1.75% of the esti-
•
i•
1•
I•
I•
1•
I•
C
I0
57
0
mated increase in demand served at John Wayne Airport. They represent 0.7% of
total demand expected to be served at John Wayne Airport and 0.09-0.19% of
total demand (served and unserved) generated by Orange County.
Under the El Toro System and Camp Pendleton System, the 29,200 passenger
trips represent 0.20% and 0.23%, respectively, of demand served.
It is important to emphasize that these figures represent only an esti-
mate of the number of hotel patrons who may utilize John Wayne Airport. These
figures do not, however, necessarily represent new trips which would not be
generated if the proposed -project is not constructed. There are no known con-
clusive data which indicate that a hotel draws visitors to an area and is
therefore responsible for generating airline passengers. Rather, survey
information suggests that the hotel facilities in the Newport Beach/Irvine
area are utilized primarily by business people, and that such hotels are
selected mainly for their convenience to business appointments. Consequently,
it is expected that the majority of future patrons of the proposed project
would normally be staying at existing hotels or hotels proposed in other jur-
isdictions in the general area.
It is expected that some guests of the Four Seasons may arrive at John
Wayne Airport via private jet. However, this is not expected to be a signifi-
cant impact as business jet flights have been significantly reduced in number
over the past three years (by as much as 40-50%). Also, the County is working
on a program (General Aviation Noise Control Program) to limit business jets
at John Wayne Airport to the quieter models.
The project will cumulatively contribute to the increased demand for air-
port services.
Existing City Policies and Requirements
M. The City's Airport Policy has recently been amended to agree to
a number of average daily departures not to exceed 55 flights.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are proposed.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
On a cumulative basis, this project, in concert with other past, present,
and reasonably foreseeable projects, will contribute to an increased demand
for airport services.
is
1•
1•
I•
�•
I•
E
I�
M.
AESTHETIC ISSUES
Existing Conditions
lsa
The design elements of Newport Center, in which the Four Seasons site is
located, have been combined with physical features of the area to create a
distinct and highly visible regional landmark. The center has been developed
with a variety of low and high-rise structures exhibiting a myriad of shapes
and surface textures. Landscaped greenbelts are located along roadways, and
plazas are scattered throughout the area.
The study area currently is partially developed with a one-story tempo-
rary modular building housing a financial institution located at the corner
of Santa Cruz Drive and Newport Center Drive, and a parking lot adjacent to
Newport Center Drive across from the Wells Fargo building.
The heights and square footage of existing high-rise buildings immediate-
ly surrounding the site and elsewhere in the center are listed in Table J.
Impacts
Views From Surrounding Area. Although the visual effect of the propos-
ed hotel from a distance will be similar to that created by existing towers in
the immediate vicinity of Block 600, there are differences in the appearance
of the hotel. The hotel is rectangular in shape (about 83 feet by 213 feet)
whereas all towers in the vicinity are essentially square. On the hotel's
narrow side, it is narrower than all surrounding buildings by as much as
70-150 feet. On its long side, the hotel is wider by as much as 100 feet than
all surrounding buildings, except for the Block 700 Pacific Mutual building
which is about 25 feet wider. The hotel is shorter than the three towers on
Block 600 by 25-64 feet. It is taller than the twin Pacific Mutual towers
(Block 800) by about 89 feet. Minor view interruptions may occur in the
surrounding hillside communities and in the office buildings adjacent to the
site. Given the number of existing towers in the immediate vicinity of the
proposed hotel, this is not considered a significant alteration of existing
views, although the hotel tower will be a major new element in Newport Center.
Illustrations depicting the exterior of the proposed hotel are found in
Figures 9-11 of this report.
Shadow Effect. Figures 19 and 20 illustrate the potential of the
hotel to cast s a ows on adjacent properties. During summer solstice (longest
day of the year), the maximum shadow area is contained onsite. Maximum shadow
area during winter solstice (shortest day of the year) extends offsite, but
I0
•
• TABLE J
C
I•
I•
•
•
59
HIGH-RISE BUILDING HEIGHTS
T�AEpP�ATZ'ENTER-L Lsa
Building
Number of Stories
Net Square Feet
Height
Wells Fargo (Block 600)
16
277,935
248.5'
Avco (Block 600)
16
229,609
240.0'
Union Bank (Block 600)
18
275,810
278.5'
Pacific Mutual Towers (Block 800)
7
120,000
125.0'
Block 500 towers
9
100,000
145.0'
Marriott Hotel (existing)
9
262,0002
100.0'
Marriott Hotel (approved)
15
167,6802
152.0'
Four Seasons (proposed)
19
342,9252
214.5'
1The height of .office towers differs from hotel/residential towers as a
result of the difference between required floor -to -floor height. In a resi-
dential/hotel structure, the floor slab can be used as the ceiling for the
level below. In a typical office structure, which requires movable walls, a
cavity beneath the floor slab is required for all duct work (electrical, tel-
ephone, air conditioning, plumbing). In a hotel, all duct work is installed
within the walls. Consequently, floor heights are shorter in hotels than in
office towers.
2Number represents gross rather than net square footage. Net square footage
is generally considered to be 90-95% of gross square footage for an office
structure.
[l
A
•
•
40
•
60
19
Summer Solstice,10 AM and 2 PM* lsa
r�a .
�.• . 41 "
,p•.,-� q F'. f - '?"°'S.^'9t�ttia!ewa.•".M-.Aw ,. .. _b�xM:'m'..m+,a,'
arm " s ! � • } • x . ^,.. 'v e'� ' �.' ..:. ' a,„�j.:ry
a � Q 44 iiti � i x• S d „fts q« , A��it . !' 1 3 � }s
AM
fK
74 .�w�..+4•t.. 'A i` - L:.i¢aas
` .if�a,.«h . Fv i1 fi }Z* �,+ •si`y by � `v s `Ca .. _.... - ^ti' . _ ' 1'.`d`t.� .P:1.°`a *a.�
• f% .:yn '.•.`a qq
ow
43
• e..�...... o..1.Hs to n.....evimebly .Irma 99
r�
0
•
0
•
61
20
Winter Solstice, 2 PM and 4 PM * lsa
rf 7 �^IV J �t .; . S'3h. :� : " �r �m .'�q\''ti ,'�+....^��* 4 ��4 - _�;r� y. ; -�ii• -,sari'' "�P y •..
�{ +�,,C��7 ., 'd :"n '. V. -. It.,'.�w, /i ;t.''L�a�� I' S•" �l�r 't
«� yt ". Y �� � T `��� '`M ""�f `. `I?iy '1 . •9i''��O �.�—•"ati! �yy .��%`4l" � •+i _m . 1• Jwh ,�J;a '}Me. .. . Jy+14�� .}i �/ �Yb ' "• 'V
I � r �a'ti; •� �� _ Shadow• of w_.
- �r��«... '!."^rµ�,t..n*i�?�°'�'' w•,qe. -_' , ' .r ,.^:'��te!bl
+,, 5 �A� , r � dam. ,ZS:K ..:� ��� ����• � � 'r".-� rf � "�
'j'i, � �� . � lY �' ;,•fie ,4 )"'�."
I. j":. �Mn�,.,�„>F. U' ,•� �iyM Y `u. L: rY �k*•" M r' ;
♦(
, Y 4`r ,•r '�`� ti J
•�n
� I 1iJJ;Id� ;`,fa ��. • i���i, � � � _. ,• "'•' -iM hFi_'.�.4 Px d7x ,�. �Y��` ,� 'Lr� RJ
.' r '' �IC,1'�0., � i;Y: t } � �j� •'IH. , , I... .D^ "'"+.....,.."y,� 4 �' _ % ��a�Y' �'.""<v ..t "-•.., '
.q" .�5'1 r n.1 •+i�' rr P *,: I^. 'i i• C'['^- : 7ff
�} #t;ylil .0 ,'.J ,' J ..Iy;•Yfk..' f QQ'l'p*'+a',.^•`3� ��,,}.� . •w �a`� i i ^•�y
. itl �\t t � i..r. r �rt••'3° f{, '4 4.y r�C ,. '""" •
+;;fit 'r ,` i,. .�`:'• • r ' y'";is^i,4,a;"^};' i ti' fn..;� L ,�j.�
I .� x I .5 a\� .iiir`i:i '�'•.tl' A, ."r✓y� �{:k �,'91'�r��ja r .yN s `"^w�(t7,J
wS�:.�e' ra
Ninter Solstice is approximately December 22
1�
19
• 62
Lsa
•
does not encroach on any existing residential uses. It does encroach on
future planned low -density residential within the Big Canyon area. The hotel
does cast a shadow on the Wells Fargo building during winter solstice, but for
no more than two hours a day. Shadow impacts are therefore not considered
significant.
•
Signing and •Lightin -'Impacts. None of the towers surrounding the
site ex i i s wa -moun a signs above the ground floor. The most visible
wall -mounted sign in Newport Center is the lighted Marriott Hotel sign which
is 130 square feet in size and is visible at night from many areas of Newport
Beach.
• The Four Seasons Hotel is designed with the Four Seasons emblem embossed
in concrete on the facade between the 16th and 19th floors (Figure 10) to
serve as a building identification sign. According to criteria established in
the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code dealing with signs, this emblem is
not considered to be a sign and does not require a sign permit. This emblem
• is not proposed to be lighted or in color and will be visible at a distance
only, during daylight hours. Presently, the City of Newport Beach has no
restrictions on signs on high-rise buildings that would preclude the introduc-
tion of other such emblems/signs on other high-rise buildings in Newport Cen-
ter. Introduction of the Four Seasons emblem may be considered as a change in
the development design of high-rise structures in Newport Center. The present
• view of Newport Center without major building identification signs is in con-
trast to adjacent communities (i.e., Town Center, Costa Mesa) where such sign-
ing has occurred. Building occupancy rates in Newport Center high-rise struc-
tures would suggest that such identification signage is not necessary for a
successful operation. As previously mentioned, the Marriott Hotel has the
only wall -mounted sign on a high-rise structure in Newport Center. Due to the
expressed difference in operational characteristics of the two hotels, the
need for the building identification emblem may not seem justified and should
be considered during the project's public review. It is expected that the
emblem will be discernible from the surrounding major arterials on a relative-
ly clear day from up to two miles away.
• Fencing. Fencing for privacy and security is proposed along Newport
Center Dive between the proposed tennis courts and the edge of the hotel
building. The fence proposed is in proximity to the edge of the sidewalk
along Newport Center Drive. It will consist of a two -tiered terraced wall
effect which will essentially create a 9-foot barrier between the pedestrian
and the project (Figure 20A). This type of barrier is in sharp contrast to
• the remainder of Newport Center.
0
• 20A
Typical Sections Illustrating Fence Design and Location iIJSa
!
a�
F�
env ht �„o. n-n
i
i
• VWIA7&G
KEY MAP
•
• 64
Isa
•
Existing City Policies and Requirements
The following measures will be required in accordance with existing City
policy.
• N. A landscape and irrigation plan for the project shall be pre-
pared by a licensed landscape architect. The plan will be sub-
ject to approval by the Planning Department and the Parks,
Beaches, and Recreation Department,
0. The landscape plan shall include a maintenance program which
controls the use of fertilizers and pesticides.
P. The landscape plan shall place emphasis on the use of drought -
resistant native vegetation and be irrigated via a system
designed to avoid surface runoff and overwatering.
• Q, The development shall be in substantial conformance with the
approved plot plan, floor plans, elevations, and sections.
R. The project shall be designed to eliminate light and glare spil-
lage on adjacent properties.
• Mitigation_ Measures
In addition to standard City requirements, the following mitigation mea-
sures will be required to minimize potentially adverse impacts.
1. Signage and exterior lighting shall be approved by the Planning
• Department.
2. All mechanical equipment, vents, and other service equipment
shall be shielded or screened from view by architectural fea-
tures.
• 3. The Four Seasons emblem on the facade of the building above
ground floor, if permitted by the City, shall not be lighted.
4. The perimeter wall fence will be redesigned to the satisfaction
of the Planning Department. The upper (second) wall should be
moved back 10 to 15 feet to create an attractive slope area
• between the two walls.
0
i•
1•
I•
�0
I!
C
I♦
0
65
Level of Significance After Mitigation
0
The Four Seasons tower will combine with existing development within this
block of Newport Center to create a highly distinctive and visual regional
landmark. The proposed building identification emblem will be a major new
element in the Newport Center skyline. The policies and measures above miti-
gate this impact to the extent feasible; however, they do not reduce the
impact to a level of insignificance.
1•
1•
I•
1•
I•
I0
T.
LAND USE
Existing Conditions
lsa
Existing land uses and committed projects in the City of Newport Beach
are discussed in the section of this report entitled "Description of Local and
Regional Land Uses Relating to This Project." The majority of all sites sur-
rounding the project are developed (Figure 3, Page 7). This figure shows one
adjacent site under construction. This construction is now complete.
The relationship of the proposed project to all applicable elements of
the General Plan, the Local Coastal Program, and the Zoning code of the City
of Newport Beach is also described in the above -noted section. As noted, the
subject property is zoned CO (Commercial Office). Other portions of Newport
Center are zoned PC (Planned Community), which requires review of development
:plans by the City of Newport Beach, thus assuring overall compatibility of
planning with other projects.
There are presently three major hotels in Newport Beach. The Marriott
Hotel (377 existing guest rooms, 234 approved expansion) is located in Block
900 of Newport Center. The other two major hotels are the Sheraton Newport
(349 guest rooms) and the Newporter (319 guest rooms). The Sheraton is cur-
rently under review by the City for a proposed 119-room expansion. The 440-
room Meridian Hotel is currently under construction and the City has recently
reached agreement with the County of Orange on the 250-room hotel at the New-
port Dunes. Other existing hotels and approved and proposed hotel projects in
the surrounding area are identified in Figure 16, Page 32, and Table F, Page
33.
Impacts
Descri tion of the Four Seasons Hotel. The Four Seasons Hotel is
consi ere a re a ive y exclusive usiness hotel. A business hotel caters
primarily to business people traveling alone or with a companion. The main
emphasis in a business hotel is comfort and service. Traditionally, a busi-
ness hotel is in proximity to where the guests conduct their business and fea-
tures basic amenities such as restaurants, room service, and meeting rooms.
The Four Seasons Hotel caters primarily to a high -income clientele. Its hotel
rooms and restaurants will be considerably more expensive than any other hotel
in the vicinity. In 1983 the average room rates would be about $50 to $60
more per night than average rooms at the Marriott, Sheraton, or Westin South
Coast Plaza. The hotel places great emphasis on service and is expected to
have, a higher employee -to -room ratio _than any hotel in the area. A few exam-
ples of this service orientation are twice -daily maid service, 24-hour valet
i*
I•
1•
1•
1•
�0
[7
[7
67
Lsa
service, nightly shoe -shining service, and fresh flowers provided daily in
each room.
In comparison to other hotels, the Four Seasons will have smaller public
areas, indicating a greater desire to serve their guests with a quiet and pri-
vate atmosphere than to serve the general public with restaurant and enter-
tainment opportunities. Meeting rooms and banquet facilities are geared pri-
marily toward guest use, although the community will also be able to rent the
facilities.
Existing Land Uses
Construction of the Four Seasons Hotel will displace an area currently
,utilized by The Irvine Company as parking for the Wells Fargo building. Dis-
cussion of impacts to parking is found in the Traffic and Circulation section
of this report.
The Four Seasons site is surrounded primarily by existing development.
The proposed tower would be visible from surrounding areas, similar to other
existing high-rise structures within Newport Center. Nearby residential uses
(Big Canyon) will not be significantly impacted given that the Four Seasons
Hotel will become simply one of four towers clustered on Block 600, all three
existing towers exceeding the Four Seasons tower in height. Additionally, the
Wells Fargo tower and parking structure are located between the hotel and the
Big Canyon area. Other surrounding uses are office or retail commercial and
are considered compatible with the Four Seasons Hotel.
Land Use Plans
The proposed project requires a General Plan Amendment to allow for the
325-roam hotel as -the General Plan currently has no hotel development allocat-
ed for Block 600. However, the project is consistent with the General Plan
land use designation. Under the existing General Plan, up to 145 residential
units or 207,533 square feet of additional offices can be transferred to this
site without a General Plan Amendment from other areas of Newport Center. The
proposed project would not preclude the transfer and construction of these
residential and office uses to the remaining areas of Block 600.
Most of Newport Center is zoned either CO (Commercial Office) or PC
(Planned Community). Development in the CO zone is permitted without discre-
tionary site plan review, while development in the PC district requires review
and approval of a PC Development Plan. As a result, the Four Seasons Hotel
could be undertaken without benefit of a site plan review. However, due to
the nature of the project, the City has required a site plan review concurrent
with the General Plan Amendment.
I•
1•
1•
i0
U
I•
Ll
lsa
Pedestrian Access and Circulation
Currently, the site is used as a pedestrian way (via a dirt path) by ten-
ants of the Wells Fargo building to reach Fashion Island for shopping and eat-
ing opportunities. Once the hotel is built, access through the site will be
prohibited. Figure 21 illustrates pedestrian ways to, from, and around the
site. Hotel guests will exit and enter from the lobby and encircle the site
to gain access to Newport Center Drive and Fashion Island. Tenants from the
Wells Fargo building will now be required to walk along Center Drive adjacent
to the parking structure and then to Newport Center Drive.
The proposed pedestrian access and circulation system for the project is
reasonable in terms of the proposed use. However, the hotel will impact
existing pedestrian circulation to Newport Center. Also, the plan provides
only limited opportunities for pedestrian access from the hotel to Newport
Center.
Existing City Policies and -Requirements
S. As required by the General Plan, a detailed review of the pro-
posed site plan must be conducted to fully evaluate the GPA
request and related application.
Mitigation Measures
5. A pedestrian circulation plan will be submitted to the City
Planning and Public Works Departments for review and approval
prior to issuance of a grading permit.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
All potential impacts are mitigated to a level of insignificance.
r]
1•
1•
1•
10
1*
10
I•
1•
Is
10
21
Pedestrian Pathways lsa
mmmmmmmmm
Pedestrian Pathways
t,
�.l T
r s
��} u � S _ 5E•,
M� 4
j
"n
I
/O.j
Bland
i
A
0 40' 80' 120'
I•
I•
1•
I!
I•
1•
I•
I•
I•
1•
70
TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION
Lsa
Existing Conditions
This section is a summary of the traffic report completed by Weston Prin-
gle and Associates in April 1983.
The street system in the area around the site is fully developed. New-
port Center Drive is a six -lane facility with a raised median and turn lanes
at the intersections. Santa Cruz is a six -lane undivided road with special
turning lanes at principal intersections. The intersection of Newport Center
Drive and Santa Cruz Drive is controlled by STOP signs on all approaches.
Traffic signals currently exist at all major access points to the Newport Cen-
ter area.
External to Newport Center, streets, and roadways are in various stages
of development. East Coast Highway is basically a four -lane facility with
left -turn channelization at major intersections. Jamboree Road is a four and
six -lane facility with left -turn and additional lanes northerly of Santa Bar-
bara Drive.
Figure 22 illustrates existing (1982) daily traffic volumes on the prin-
cipal streets in the area. Also indicated in Figure 22 are the existing ICU
values for intersections that could be affected by the project.
Impacts
Project Traffic Characteristics.
Trip Generation. Since the Four Seasons Hotel is a unique type of
hotel, field studies were conducted of facilities similar to that proposed to
determine peak trip generation characteristics. Field studies were conducted
at the Four Seasons Inn on the Park in Houston and at the Mandalay Four Sea-
sons in Dallas. These studies included counts of traffic entering and exiting
the facilities between 3:30 and 6:00 p.m. These facilities are described in
the traffic report, Appendix D of this EIR. A statistical comparison of these
facilities is shown in Table K. Both the hotels analyzed and the proposed
project are very different in character from the existing hotels in the New-
port Beach area. General observations of these hotels indicate a lower level
of activity in the lobby and public areas than is typical of local hotels.
The results of the field studies are summarized in Table L. For compari-
son purposes, trip generation rates previously utilized for hotel traffic stu-
dies in Newport Beach are also included in Table L. Review of these data
•
•
•
•
•
I•
71
22
Existing Daily Volumes & ICU Values lsa
(:8134 DR 1.0665)
2j S T.
T rdi > n O?
-J N
0.2688 o �!F in A,
44 BRISTO CD8394) 5467)
L ST NORTH .7547)
42 BRISTOL ST
(.7413)
41.0175) cP
BONITA CYN'iklo
L E G E N D
44 = DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(IN THOUSANDS)
0.2688) = ICU VALUES
U
N
• w
a
O
w R>co
o
a
00.12
ai w m
ffi
>
37 a
48
g 5:
• (.7663
�9
C�0.9
.79 95)
6964
0 jc�(87,
8722
N 0
C`Q
�-
m
•
Sp,N
(.6117y
Q oar
COFST HW
rd
.6846)
Q'
a
p0
Iw_
7734) 41 Q
w
�
O
1 v
�
id
t
WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES
ice__
•
TABLE K
72
COMPARISON OF SELECTED
•
Location
of Four Seasons
Hotels
Houston
Dallas
Newport Beach
Characteristics
(Existing)
(Existing)
(Proposed)
•
Rooms
383
424
325
Lounge (seats)
280
326
+60
Cafe (seats)
125
130
+40
•
Fine dining (seats)
110
88
+110
Meeting/banquet (sq. ft.)
11,045
13,576
11,150
Parking
220
395
390
u
•
•
•
•
•
TABLE L
73
•
TRIP GENERATION
COMPARISON SUMMARY
Lsa
Houston
Dallas
Four Seasons
Four Seasons
Newport Beach
rips ate rips ate
ripT�t-
Rate3
•
3:30-6:00 P.M.
In
106 0.3 144 0.4
187 0.4
1.0
Out
96 0.3 114 0.3
150 0.4
0.6
4:30-5:30 P.M.
•
In
35 0.1 55 0.1
80 0.2
0.5
Out
43 0.1 45 0.1
62 0.1
0.3
1Based upon,383
rooms.
•
26ased upon 424
rooms.
3Rate used for Marriott Hotel traffic studies.
I
I•
0
i*
1•
I•
U1
1•
I•
U1
I*
I6
I6
74
Lsa
indicates that the trip generation rates found in Houston and Dallas are sig-
nificantly lower than those utilized in Newport Beach. The difference is
greater when the facilities of the study hotels are compared with those plan-
ned for the Newport Beach hotel, as indicated in Table K.
The study results were reviewed with the City Traffic Engineer and rates
established for use in this study. These rates are listed in Table M. By
combining these rates with the 325 planned rooms, estimates of project trip
generation were obtained and are listed in Table M. As indicated in Table M,
the project is estimated to generate 3,250 daily trip ends, with 195 occurring
during the p.m. peak hour and 425 during the 2.5-hour peak.
Trip Assignment. Previous studies of hotel developments in Newport
Beach utilized trip distribution patterns based upon various assumptions. For
the Four Seasons Hotel, field studies were conducted at the Newporter Inn
located on Jamboree Road adjacent to Newport Center to determine existing
travel patterns for hotel guests. Interviews were conducted during winter
weekday peak hours. The results of these interviews were summarized and
reviewed with the City Traffic Engineer. Figure 23 illustrates the direction-
al distribution of trips based upon the field studies and review by City
staff.
The distribution from Figure 23 was utilized to assign project traffic to
the street system. Daily project traffic is illustrated in Figure 24. The
distribution illustrated in Figure 23 was also utilized to assign project
traffic to the intersections utilized in the "External Traffic Analysis" sec-
tion below.
External Traffic Analysis. The impact of project -related traffic
must a assesse wi in a context of committed development and planned cir-
culation improvements. The latter falls into two categories: improvement
required of committed projects, and improvements necessary to complete the
master -planned circulation system. Table N lists committed development proj-
ects assumed for this analysis. Committed circulation improvements and other
improvements required to complete the circulation system are listed on Pages
80-82. Figure 25 illustrates the location of these improvements. These
improvements, listed as complete in the following lists, have been constructed
since completion of the 1982 traffic counts.
C
I•
I•
I*
1•
10
I+
I*
I•
I•
TABLE M 75
TRIP GENERATION
Lsa
Period
Ratel
Trip Ends2
Daily
10.00
3,250
P.M. Peak Hour
In
0.40
130
Out
0.20
65
2.5-Hour Peak
In
0.80
260
Out
0.05
165
lTrip ends per room.
2Based-upon 325 rooms.
I0
• 76
23
Directional Distribution
•
•
o
• F
• Q
5%
� zzI's
m 5 %
a'
li• m
WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES
15% 10%
O
oQ 10
eONITA CYN•RID
J��02 D
m i 35%
50%
�O
INT.
Q a
O W
O L
J
COAST HWY, p M
4ClF�C D:
glop S%
•
77
24
Daily Project Traffic' (In Thousands)
•
1.3
•
9
•
a
a ..
o
N
w
aR
J
m
a
a
N C�mj
o
p
•
0.1
��
1
0
w
v
0.2
a
m
C�
0.5
anyVT
Q U V�
ct
1.3 "0111TA CYN',O
1.3
SpN 1.6 �04QU�ry1.2 I.1
0.5 COAST
PACIFIC
\�OF
O,p
Distribution of traffic is based on existing circulation system.
WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES
I
k1k
1•
10 TABLE N
I*
1•
1•
1•
1•
r
C;
C
COMMITTED PROJECTS
Hughes
Hoag Hospital
Far West Savings and Loan
Pacesetter Homes
Aeronutronic Ford
Back Bay Office
Civic Plaza
Corporate Plaza
Koll Center Newport
Campus/MacArthur
National Education Office
North Ford
Pacific Mutual Plaza
Flagship Hospital
Big Canyon Site 10
St. Andrews Church
Newport Place
U9
0
Shokrian
Sea Island
Baywood Apartments
Harbor Point Homes
Seaview Lutheran Plaza
Rudy Baron
441 Newport Boulevard
Martha's Vineyard
Valdez-3101 W. Coast Highway
Coast Business Center
Ross Mollard
Heritage Bank
Banning
Park Lido
Marriott Hotel Expansion
Fun Zone
Bayview Terrace
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
79
25
Circulation System Improvements lsa
N
m
Source: City of Newport Beach
LEGEND
•—•— Committed Improvements
0*00 Remaining Improvements to Complete
Circulation Elements (Includes Improve-
ments Outside the City)
�c TPO Requirements
Proj
Site
0
1•
1•
1•
I•
1•
1•
1•
1•
1•
LIE
�,
Committed Circulation Improvements
Location Improvement Status
1. Pacific Coast Hwy. Addition of third eastbound Not yet constructed.
& MacArthur Blvd. through lane.
2. Pacific Coast Hwy. Addition of westbound through Complete.
& Jamboree Rd. and left -turn lanes.
3.
Pacific Coast Hwy.
Modification to provide one
Not yet constructed.
& Riverside Dr.
left -turn lane, one optional
through/right-turn lane, and
addition of right -turn lane on
Riverside Dr.
4.
Pacific Coast Hwy.
Addition of third westbound
Not yet constructed.
& Superior Ave.
through lane.
5.
Pacific Coast Hwy.
Addition of third westbound
Not yet constructed.
& Prospect Ave.
through lane.
6.
Pacific Coast Hwy.
Addition of third westbound
Not yet constructed.
& Orange St.
through lane.
7.
Jamboree Rd. &
Addition of third westbound
Complete.
Santa Barbara Dr,
right -turn lane and second
southbound left -turn lane.
8.
Jamboree Rd. & San
Addition of westbound optional
Complete.
Joaquin Hills Rd.
left-turn/through lane.
9.
Jamboree Rd. &
Addition of second southbound
Not yet constructed.
Ford Rd.
left -turn lane and an addi-
tional southbound through lane
10.
Jamboree Rd. &
Addition of third northbound
Complete.
East Bluff North
lane.
11.
Jamboree Rd. &
Addition of third northbound
Complete.
Bristol North
left -turn lane.
12.
Jamboree Rd. &
Addition of second westbound
Complete
MacArthur Blvd.
and eastbound left -turn lanes.
I•
•
• 81
lsa
•
13. Jamboree Rd. &
Addition of second
southbound
Complete.
Campus Dr.
left -turn lane and
westbound
right -turn lane.
14. MacArthur Blvd. &
Addition of westbound
right-
Not yet constructed.
• San Joaquin Hills
turn lane.
Rd.
15. MacArthur Blvd. &
Addition of second
southbound
Complete.
Ford Rd.
left -turn lane and
third north-
bound through lane.
•
16.
MacArthur Blvd. &
Addition of fourth northbound
Complete.
Campus Dr.
and southbound through lanes.
17.
Bristol North
&
Addition of southbound right-
Complete.
Birch St.
turn lane.
•
18.
Irvine Blvd. &
Addition of southbound right-
Complete.
University Dr.
turn lane.
19.
Avocado Ave.
Between Pacific Coast Hwy. &
Not yet constructed.
San Miguel Dr.
•
20.
San Miguel Dr.
Extension from Avocado Ave. to
Complete.
San Joaquin Hills Rd.
21.
Newport Blvd.
&
Addition of second northbound
Not yet constructed.
Hospital Rd.
left -turn lane to Newport Blvd.
•
22.
Pacific Coast
Hwy.
Creation of intersection.
Not yet constructed.
& Bluff Rd.
23.
Pacific Coast
Hwy.
Reconstruction of intersection.
Complete.
& Dover Dr.
•
24.
Pacific Coast
Hwy.
Reconstruction of intersection.
Complete.
& Bayside Dr.
25.
Bluff Rd.
Creation of new street from
Not yet constructed.
(Balboa Blvd.)
Pacific Coast Hwy. to 17th St.
•
26.
15th St.
Extension westerly to Bluff
Not yet constructed.
Rd. extended.
•
1•
1•
1•
I•
1•
1•
I•
1•
�0
19
Up
27. 17th St. Extension westerly to Bluff Not yet constructed.
Rd.
28, Pacific Coast Hwy. Addition of third eastbound and Not yet constructed.
westbound through lane from
westerly of Bluff Rd. extended
to easterly of Superior Ave.
The following circulation system improvements remain to be completed with-
in the City of Newport Beach and adjacent areas after committed improvements
and project -related improvements are constructed. Agencies responsible for
implementation of improvements are indicated in cases where circulation
improvements are not to be required of development projects. This list also
includes improvements where no 'project -related commitment has occurred, but
which may be required of future projects.
Other Planned Circulation Improvements
Improvement
1. Extension of Corona del Mar Freeway to
MacArthur Blvd.
2. Widening of Pacific Coast Hwy, from
Newport Blvd. to Santa Ana River except
for those improvements listed in #28 above.
3. Extension/construction of Costa Mesa Freeway
4. Widening of Irvine Ave. from Bristol St.
to Mesa Dr.
5. Widening of Pacific Coast Hwy. from Bayside
Dr. to MacArthur Blvd.
6. Widening and construction of 19th St. from
Brookhurst St. to Irvine Ave.
7. Extension of Bluff Rd. from 17th St. to
19th St.
8. Widening of Jamboree Blvd. from north of
MacArthur Blvd. to Campus Dr.
Jurisdiction/Responsibility
St ate
State
State
City of Newport Beach &
County of Orange
City of Newport Beach &
State of California
Cities of Huntington Beach,
Newport Beach, & Costa Mesa
& County of Orange
City of Newport Beach &
County of Orange
City of Irvine
I•
•
•
IE
Lsa
•
9.
Widening of MacArthur Blvd. from Ford Rd.
City
of
Irvine/State
to University Dr.
10.
17th St. from west of Whittier Ave. to east
City
of
Costa Mesa
of Newport Blvd.
•
11.
San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor
County of Orange
12.
Pelican Hill Road
County of Orange
13.
Completion of Irvine Ave. from University
City
of
Newport
Beach
•
Dr. to southerly of Santa Isabel
14.
Widening of Pacific Coast Hwy. from Dover
City
of
Newport
Beach/State
Dr. to Newport Blvd.
15.
Widening of Jamboree Rd. from Ford Rd. to
City
of
Newport
Beach
•
East Bluff Dr.
16.
Widening of Irvine Ave. in the vicinity
City
of
Newport
Beach
of 22nd St.
17.
Widening of Dover Dr. from Irvine Ave. to
City
of
Newport
Beach
•
Westcliff Dr.
18.
Widening of Dover Dr. from Westcliff Dr.
City
of
Newport
Beach
to Cliff Dr.
19.
Widening of 16th St. in the vicinity of
City
of
Newport
Beach
•
Dover Dr.
20.
Widening of Balboa Blvd. from 43rd St. to
City
of
Newport
Beach
32nd St.
21.
Widening of 15th St. from Monrovia Ave.
City
of
Newport
Beach
•
to Placentia Ave.
22.
32nd St. from Newport Blvd. to Lafayette St.
City
of
Newport
Beach
23.
Realign Superior Ave. between Pacific Coast
City
of
Newport
Beach
Hwy. & Hospital Rd.
•
24.
Widening of MacArthur Blvd. from Avocado/
City
of
Newport
Beach/State
MacArthur couplet to Ford Rd.
•
1•
Is
Is
I•
Is
Is
C'r,
Is
Is
Is
M.
25. San Joaquin Hills Rd. from Marguerite Ave. City of Newport Beach
to east city limits
26. Construction of MacArthur Blvd./Avocado State/City of Newport
couplet northerly of San Joaquin Hills Beach
Rd. to Pacific Coast Hwy.
27. Widening of Jamboree Rd. from Pacific Coast City of Newport Beach
Hwy. to San Joaquin Hills Rd.
Traffic Phasin Ordinance. This section of the study examines
the potentialex•erna ra is impacts of the Four Seasons hotel as required
by the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO). The criteria
include identifying critical intersections as defined by the TPO and analyzing
the project traffic impact upon these intersections. A total of 27 intersec-
tions were identified by the City Traffic Engineer for consideration of potenr
tial impact.
An intersection is defined as critical when project traffic exceeds 1%
of the existing plus committed plus regional growth traffic on any approach
during the 2.5-hour peak. Committed project traffic data were provided by the
City Traffic Engineer and regional growth traffic was calculated utilizing the
City's established formula. Projects included in the analysis as Committed
are listed in Table N. The "One Percent Analysis" sheets for each intersec-
tion are contained in Appendix D and summarized in Table 0. Based upon infor-
mation provided by the developer, it was assumed that the project would be
completed in 1986. In conformance with the TPO, the analysis was completed
for 1987 or one year aftr completion of the project.
Review of Table 0 indicates that 11 of the 27 intersections would be
defined as critical by the TPO. These intersections are'the following:
Bristol Street North/Jamboree Road
Bristol Street/Jamboree Road
Jamboree Road/Santa Barbara Drive
Jamboree Road/San Joaquin Hills Road
Jamboree Road/Ford Road
MacArthur Boulevard/Jamboree Road
MacArthur Boulevard/San Joaquin Hills Road
MacArthur Boulevard/Ford Road
MacArthur Boulevard/Campus Drive
San Joaquin Hills Road/Santa Cruz Drive
San Joaquin Hills Road/Santa Rosa Drive
I4P
Is
16
1•
U
C
C
C
I•
U
TABLE 0 85
CRITICAL INTERSECTION IDENTIFICATION
Lsa
Location
2.5-Hour
Percentages
NB
Bristol Street N. & Campus Drive
-
-
-
0.5
Bristol Street N. & Birch Street
-
-
0.7
Bristol Street N. & Jamboree Road
0.8
1.4
-
1.6
Bristol Street & Irvine Avenue
-
0.9
-
Bristol Street & Jamboree Road
0.9
2.2
1.6
-
Coast Highway & Orange Street
-
-
0.3
0.1
Coast Highway & Prospect Street
-
-
0.3
0.1
Coast Highway & Superior Avenue
0.6
-
0.2
0.3
Coast Highway & Riverside Avenue
-
-
0.4
0.3
Coast Highway & Dover Drive
-
0.7
0.5
0.3
Coast Highway & Bayside Drive
-
-
0.6
0.4
Coast Highway & Jamboree Road
-
0.5
0.7
-
Coast Highway & Newport Center Drive
-
-
-
-
Coast Highway & Avocado Avenue
-
-
Coast Highway & MacArthur Boulevard
-
0.3
-
0.4
Coast Highway & Goldenrod Avenue
-
-
0.2
0.5
Coast Highway & Marguerite Avenue
-
-
0.2
0.5
Jamboree Road & Santa Barbara Drive
1.5
0.4
-
0.4
Jamboree Road & San Joaquin Hills Road
0.5
2.1
-
8.0
Jamboree Road & Ford Road
1.1
2.3
-
Jamboree Road & MacArthur Boulevard
0.5
1.3
1.1
0.8
Jamboree Road & Campus Drive
0.3
0.8
-
MacArthur Boulevard & San Joaquin Hills Road
0.4
2.0
1.7
-
MacArthur Boulevard & Ford Road
IS
1.6
-
-
MacArthur Boulevard & Campus Drive
0.6
1.2
-
-
J
10
86
Lsa
The next step in the procedure was to analyze the critical intersections
to determine intersection capacity utilization (ICU) values. This analysis
includes existing, regional growth, and committed project traffic along with
project traffic. The ICU calculation sheets are contained in Appendix D and
summarized in Table P.
Review of Table P indicates that two intersections would have ICU values
greater than 0.90 in 1987 with the project and with no circulation improve-
ments. These intersections are Bristol Street North/Jamboree Road and Jambo-
ree Road/Ford Road. Additional analyses have been completed for these two
intersections and each intersection is discussed in the following paragraphs.
Bristol Street North/Jamboree Road. As indicated in Table P, the
intersection is projected o ave an ICU value of 0.9957 in 1987
without the project and an ICU value of 1.0067 with the project.
Completion of the extension of the Corona del Mar Freeway is antici-
pated prior to 1987. This project will modify the intersection so
that the current left turn to reach the freeway would be a right
turn to an on -ramp and northbound through traffic would not be stop-
ped. If we assume that 15% of the northbound left turns will remain
as trips with local destinations, an ICU analysis can be completed
for this future condition. This analysis is summarized in Table Q
and indicates an ICU value of 0.5633 with the freeway extension.
Jamboree Road/Ford Road. The projected ICU value for this intersec-
tion is 1.U395 in with the project and with no improvement to
the intersection. As a part of a previous project approval (Marri-
ott Hotel), improvement of this intersection was required. This
improvement consists of adding a third southbound through lane.
' With this improvement, the ICU value with the project would be
0.8294.
A summary of the recommended roadway improvements for the Four Seasons
Hotel is shown in Table P. Both of these improvements are currently shown on
the City's list of committed or planned circulation improvements. The exter-
nal analysis has indicated that all intersections would operate with an ICU
value of less than 0.90 with the project and previously required or planned
improvements. As indicated in Table P, all intersections requiring improve-
ment would require improvement with or without the Four Seasons project.
Review of Ultimate Circulation System' and-, Conditions. The City of
NewportBeachtraffic model was u i ize o ana yze urtimate traffic volumes
adjacent to the project site.
0
I•
I♦
I♦
I•
I•
I♦
TABLE P
ICU SUMMARY
RVA
JOT
Existing +
Existing + Regional +
Existing + Regional + Committed +
1982 ICU Regional + Committed Project with
Intersection T77Committed + Project Improvementsl
Bristol St. N./Jamboree Rd.
.7547
.9957
1.0067 .5633
Bristol St./Jamboree Rd.
.7413
.8304
.8429
Jamboree Rd./Santa Barbara Dr.
.6117
.7659
.7686
Jamboree Rd./San Joaquin
Hills Rd.
.5822
.7235
.7245
Jamboree Rd./Ford Rd.
.9512
1.0239
1.0395 .8294
MacArthur Blvd./Jamboree Rd.
.5467
.7122
.7180
MacArthur Blvd./San Joaquin
Hills Rd.
.7508
.8658
.8720
MacArthur Blvd./Ford Rd.
.6846
.8335
.8491
MacArthur Blvd./Campus Dr.
.8134
.8240
.8256
San Joaquin Hills Rd./
Santa Cruz Dr.
.3921
.4546
.4703
San Joaquin Hills Rd./
Santa Rosa Dr.
.5242
.5645
.5697
1Summary of recommended improvements:
Intersection
Bristol St. N. & Jamboree Rd.
Jamboree Rd. & Ford Rd.
System Improvement
Extension of Corona del Mar Free-
way (Route 73), CalTrans project.
Add southbound through lane. Re-
quired by previously approved
project.
I*
1•
I*
I•
I•
I•
I•
I•
1•
I*
TABLE Q 88
ICU ANALYSIS - BRISTOL STREET NORTH
W JAMBOREE ROAD Lsa
Movement
Lanes
Capacity
Volume
.V/C
Northbound
left turn
1
1,600
380
0.2375*
Northbound
through
2
NS
1,188
--
Northbound
right turn
1
NS
2,147
--
Southbound
through
3
3,800
1,084
0.2258*
Southbound
right turn
1
1,600
572
0.3575
Yellow time
0.1000*
ICU
0.6m
*Indicates critical movements.
1•
I•
1•
1•
1•
is
Ci
1•
m
0
Figure 26 illustrates ultimate daily capacity, existing daily volume,
General Plan daily volumes, and General Plan plus project daily volumes at
selected locations. These volumes are based upon buildout of the existing
General Plan, maximum development under existing zoning, and completion of the
circulation system. If changes occur in either land use or the circulation
system, the impacts could change. Within the accuracy of the model, the
increase due to the Four Seasons Hotel is insignificant and does not impact
the overall circulation system.
Onsite Circulation and Parking. The proposed development plan was
examinedwith respeche adequacy of the onsite circulation system. Prin-
cipal vehicular access to the site is planned from Center Drive easterly of
Santa Cruz Drive. A second vehicle access is proposed opposite the Wells
Fargo building and a service entrance is indicated on Santa Cruz Drive which
is restricted to right turns in and out. Onsite circulation between the prin-
cipal access, the valet parking, and general parking is planned.. No onsite
vehicle circulation is planned between the service access and other areas. A
turn -around area for service vehicles is planned within the building. Our
review of these plans did not identify any potential problems with traffic
operations or safety.
The plan provides a total of 390 off-street parking spaces (315 offsite
and 75 onsite). Of the total, 75 are in the valet area and 25% are compact
spaces. As part of the field studies of Four Seasons hotels in Houston and
Dallas, observations were made of parking demands at each facility. As
described previously, both hotels were heavily utilized at the time of these
studies. Review of Table R indicates that the maximum observed demand at
Houston was 0.43 vehicle per room at 1:00 p.m. and at Dallas was 0.55, also at
1:00 p.m. Since the proposed plans include a ratio of 1.20 parking spaces per
room, it is concluded that the planned parking supply would be more than ade-
quate. If the 0.55 space per room maximum is applied to the proposed hotel, a
total of 179 spaces would be required. This would indicate a surplus of 211
spaces in the proposed plan. It is suggested that the 25% compact stalls be
replaced with standard -size stalls, which would reduce the proposed number of
spaces from 390 to 369. It is possible that the number of spaces could be
reduced to 179.
Table S provides a breakdown of existing parking spaces within Block 600
and the number of spaces required by code. It also provides the project's
contribution to each category.
Since the major parking area is located directly opposite Wells Fargo
• building, employees of that building may try to park in the hotel area. In
order to mitigate this potential problem, some type of access control should
be provided at the entrance to the major parking area from Center Drive.
•
•
• 90
26
Future Daily Traffic Volumes- Four Seasons lsa
• LEGEND
CM
•
[M
•
CAPACITY
EXISTING VOL.
GENERAL PLAN
GENERAL PLAN
+PROJECT
IN THOUSANDS
Sr.
yJ T
U 2' m yQ�
(G
k4L
J/
TA C RO.
>
CZ
36.0 SpN y q�/M
•
a
N
10.0
N
o
25.6
U
a
a:w
W
�'
rn
a
go
w
0
0
4
54.0
a
O -
h
3
m
O
a
W
z
W
>
W
>
31.0 ¢)
46.7
0
49.5 Q
d�
CONS H
Y.
in
�p
w
PACIFIC
0
5436.0
�u�p
[L3
64;0 16.0
Epp
r�
34.6
30.0
Distribution
of traffic
based on
ultimate circulation
56.
56.1
'
system.
,
WESTON
PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES
13.9
t RD.
Q
Q
J,
Op
W
�
c�J
36.0
40.0
56.0
56.4
•
•
TABLE R
91
FIELD PARKING STUDY SUMMARY -
FOUR SEASONS HOTEL
Lsa
Houston
Dallas
Time
are a is es
a io
are a
is es Ratiot,2
9:00 a.m.
116
0.30
162
0.38
•
10:00
120
0.31
155
0.37
11:00
116
0.30
146
0.34
Noon
149
0.39
208
0.49
1:00 P.M.
165
0.43
233
0.55
2:00
-
-
128
0.30
3:00
130
0.34
121
0.29
•
4:00
123
0.32
122
0.29
5:00
141
0.37
123
0.29
6:00
157
0.41
153
0.36
1Based on the number of
parked vehicles
divided by
the total
number of hotel
+
rooms.
2Based upon 383 rooms.
3Based upon 424 rooms.
•
•
•
Is
la
1•
[7
I*
I*
1•
I•
TABLE S 92
BLOCK 600 PARKING SUMMARY
Lsa
Existing parking spaces: 2,800 Parking required by
Approved Pool Parking
Concept 2,648
Parking to be provided Parking required by
'by Four Seasons: 390 code for Four Seasons 505
Total 11901 3,153
'•
n
11
93
IM
•
Approximately 212 spaces currently utilized by Wells Fargo building ten-
ants will be displaced by this project. If these spaces are not replaced, the
Wells Fargo building will not have adequate parking. As part of the project,
a lot would be built across Center Drive from the existing lot to replace
these spaces. This would continue to provide adequate parking for the Wells
Fargo tower.
New ort Center Circulation.. The intersection of Santa Cruz Drive at
San Amen a rive en er Uriveand at Newport Center Drive was examined to
identify potential traffic impacts of the project. P.M. peak -hour traffic
counts were conducted at both locations and are summarized in Table 10 of
Appendix D. Future traffic from committed projects (Civic Plaza, Marriott,
and Pacific Mutual) and project traffic are also listed in Table 10 of Appen-
dix D. These volumes were utilized to determine the need for signalization or
other intersection improvements.
Traffic signal warrants have been adopted by the Federal Highway Admini-
stration and CalTrans. These warrants are based upon the eight highest hourly
volumes in a day. It can be assumed that the eighth highest hour is 60% of
the peak hour so that signal Warrants can also be expressed in. terms of peak -
hour traffic volumes. Analysis of these volumes indicates that traffic sig-
nals would not be warranted.
+ At present, Santa Cruz Drive is striped with three lanes in each direc-
tion and no left -turn lanes at San Clemente Drive. Review of the projected
left -turn volumes in Table 10 of Appendix D would indicate that separate left -
turn channelization should be provided. The result would be two through lanes
and a left -turn lane on Santa Cruz Drive. It is recommended that this modifi-
cation be completed as part of the Four Seasons Hotel development.
Transit. The Orange County Transit District (OCTD) currently pro-
videstransit service to the project area. Four local lines (Routes 1, 45,
57, and 71) and two express lines (Routes 204 and 206) provide service to the
project area from the bus stop facility in Fashion Island. OCTD plans to con-
struct a transit center at Avocado and San Miguel that would provide layover
space for buses and parking for express bus patrons.
The proposed project will create an increased demand for bus service.
According to OCTD, the proposed project will not adversely impact the level of
service currently provided and any additional ridership could be accommodated.
OCTD estimates that 2-6% of all trips made by hotel employees are likely to be
* transit trips.
0
I•
1•
I•
10
10
I•
G
1•
I•
I*
E,
0
OCTD has requested that a bus shelter be provided at the bus stop adja-
cent to the Four Seasons Hotel. However, as long as the City does not foresee
banning on -street bus stops in Newport Center, a bus turnout is not necessary.
Bicycle Paths. The project will not impact the secondary bikeways on
Newpo—R—Te—nfe-797ve and Santa Cruz Drive or the backbone bikeway along San
Joaquin Hills Road.
Standard City Policies and Requirements
T. The City of Newport Beach requires each project to provide for
all necessary roadway improvements. Several improvements have
been required of previously approved projects, but are not yet
constructed. Based on analysis contained in this report, the
proposed project will be required to contribute to or provide
full improvements to intersections identified in Table P, Page
85.
U. The project shall be required to contribute a sum equal to its
"fair share" of future circulation system improvements as shown
on the City's Master Plan of Streets and Highways and any other
mitigation measures as may be required. '
Mitigation Measures
6. The project applicant shall enter into a binding agreement to
provide adequate offsite parking spaces to the Four Seasons
Hotel within Block 600. Such spaces shall be within 300 feet of
the hotel. The terms of the parking agreement shall be in
effect for a period equal to the expected life of all structures
within Parcel 3 (Figure 5, Page 9).
7. As part of the project, the 212 parking spaces serving the Wells
Fargo tower which will be displaced by the hotel shall be
replaced.
8. The project applicant shall provide a bus shelter at the bus
stop adjacent to the project site.
9. Parking for the project will not include compact spaces.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
On a cumulative basis, this project, in concert with other past, present,
and reasonably foreseeable projects, will incrementally contribute to increas-
ed traffic volumes on the local circulation system.
I•
I*
li
I•
10
I•
I•
0
119
NOISE
Existing Conditions
M
A technical study of acoustical impacts is reproduced in Appendix E. The
discussion below summarizes from that report.
Primary noise sources in the vicinity of the project site are Newport
Center Drive and Santa Cruz Drive. John Wayne Airport, which is four miles
north of the site, is a secondary noise source.
Current updates of existing traffic volumes on surrounding roadways have
been utilized with the Federal Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model to esti-
mate existing roadway noise levels in terms of CNEL (Community Noise Equiva-
lent Level). CNEL is a 24-hour, time -weighted annual average noise level.
Time -weighted refers to the fact that noise which occurs during certain sensi-
tive time periods is penalized for occurring at those times. The evening time
period (7 p.m. to 10 p.m.) penalizes noises by 5 dB, while nighttime (10 p.m.
to 7 a.m.) noises are penalized by 10 dB. These time periods and penalties
were selected to reflect people's sensitivity to noise as a function of activ-
ity. The distances of existing CNEL contours for roadways in the vicinity of
the project site are illustrated in Table T. Based on these calculations, the
only roadway presently impacting the site is Santa Cruz Drive. The 65 CNEL
contour from Santa Cruz Drive extends approximately 20 feet past the roadway
edge.
The project site is exposed to some aircraft noise from commercial and
private jets and other general aviation operations originating from John Wayne
Airport. While jet aircraft do not overfly the site, some "sideline" noise
from jet departures is audible. Smaller aircraft may also overfly the site on
occasion. Existing CNEL noise contours for John Wayne Airport indicate that
the site is located 4,000 feet outside the 60 CNEL contour. Extrapolation of
contour data suggests that the project site experiences aircraft noise levels
in the range of 50 to 55 CNEL.
Impacts
Potential noise impacts are commonly divided into two groups: temporary
and long-term. Temporary impacts are usually associated with noise generated
by construction activities. Long-term impacts for this project may be associ-
ated with traffic noise increases on surrounding land uses due to the project,
and onsite noise impacts due to adjacent roadways.
r
•
••
TABLE T
96
ROADWAY NOISE LEVELS -
EXISTING COND111ONS
UM
Distance
to CNEL Contour
from Roadway
Centerline
(Feet)
Roadway Segment
60 CNEL
65 CNEL
IU CNEL
•
JAMBOREE ROAD
Pacific Coast Highway to San Joaquin
Hills
416
193
89
San Joaquin Hills to Ford
540
251
116
Northeast of Ford
468
217
101
MACARTHUR BOULEVARD
Pacific Coast Highway to San Joaquin
Hills
350
163
75
San Joaquin Hills to Ford
451
209
97
Northeast of Ford
541
251
116
SAN JOAQUIN HILLS ROAD
Jamboree to Santa Cruz
183
85
39
Santa Cruz to MacArthur
177
82
38
Southeast of MacArthur
183
85
39
•
PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY
Southeast of MacArthur
234
109
50
MacArthur to Jamboree
261
121
56
Northwest of Jamboree
341
158
73
•
NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE
•Entrance from Pacific Coast Highway
.158
73
34
East of Santa Cruz
73
34
SANTA CRUZ DRIVE
•
Newport Center to San Joaquin Hills
99
46
21
Source: Mestre Greve Associates, May
1983.
*Denotes that contour does not extend
past
roadway edge.
7
C
0
97
M
Construction Noise. Construction noise represents a short-term
impact on ambient noise evels. Although noise generated by various construc-
tion equipment can at times reach high levels, there are no adjacent existing
residential land uses that will be exposed to audible noise levels from con-
struction activities. Construction traffic, specifically truck traffic, asso-
ciated with construction activities can, however, be a nuisance along access
streets. If problems do arise, enforcement of the City of Newport Beach Noise
Ordinance limiting the hours of construction will minimize any potential noise
impacts. Trucks may queue in the morning while waiting for construction
activities to begin, but this is expected to occur along streets within New-
port Center and not adjacent to any noise -sensitive uses.
Project -Generated Impacts on- Surroundin Land Uses. The proposed
project: w1 r generateaciTIMoai2rail•ic, an as a result will contribute to
increased roadway noise levels. Project -related traffic volumes have been
modeled to determine the increase in roadway noise resulting from project
implementation. Increases calculated indicate only minor increases of less
than 1 dBA in all locations examined (Table U). In order for changes in com-
munity noise levels to be discernible, they must be of a magnitude of at least
2 or 3 dBA. Nearby land uses, consequently, are not anticipated to be impact-
ed by roadway noise increases due to the proposed project.
In addition to traffic, onsite mechanical equipment may produce undesir-
able noise impacts if not properly located and designed. Potential noise
impacts can also be minimized through acoustical shielding of equipment.
There are, however, no residential areas or other noise -sensitive land uses
adjacent to the proposed hotel. Newport Beach standards also commonly require
that noise levels from stationary equipment not exceed 55 dBA at the property
line.
• Onsite Noise Impacts. The noise analysis conducted by Mestre Greve
Associa es a so examine raffic volumes and associated CNEL contours on sur-
rounding roadways which would occur as a result of growth represented by
buildout of the General Plan, in addition to General Plan growth plus the pro-
posed project. These noise levels are illustrated in Tables V and W, respec-
tively. As can be concluded from these data, the most significant change in
CNEL contours is anticipated on Santa Cruz Drive.
The project site is, however, exposed to roadway noise from both Newport
Center Drive and Santa Cruz Drive. Noise analysis indicates that the worst -
case exposure for hotel rooms would be 66 CNEL due to both roadways. Thus, a
21 dBA building attenuation will be needed to meet interior noise level cri-
teria (45 dBA maximum). Normal building construction practices should achieve
the required attenuation. Most new hotel structures built under energy insu-
lation standards (with windows assumed closed) generally produce greater than
20-25 dBA attenuation.
0
•
! TABLE U 98
INCREASE IN ROADWAY NOISE LEVELS
Roadway Segment Increase in Noise Level (dBA)
JAMBOREE ROAD
! Pacific Coast Highway to San Joaquin Hills <.1
San Joaquin Hills to Ford <.1
Northeast of Ford <•1
MACARTHUR BOULEVARD
! Pacific Coast Highway to San Joaquin Hills <.1
San Joaquin Hills to Ford <.1
Northeast of Ford •1
SAN JOAQUIN HILLS ROAD
Jamboree to Santa Cruz
•2
Santa Cruz to MacArthur
•4
Southeast of MacArthur
<•1
PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY
Southeast of MacArthur
<•1
MacArthur to Jamboree
<•1
Northwest of Jamboree
<•1
NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE
Entrance from Pacific Coast Highway <.1
East of Santa Cruz •1
SANTA CRUZ DRIVE
Newport Center to San Joaquin Hills •5
0
!
0
•
TABLE V
CNEL NOISE LEVELS FOR
CURRENT GENERAL PLAN
Distance to CNEL Contour
m Roadway Centerline (Fe
70
JAMBOREE ROAD
Pacific Coast Highway to San Joaquin Hills
562
San Joaquin Hills to Ford
779
Northeast of Ford
678
MACARTHUR BOULEVARD
Pacific Coast Highway to San Joaquin Hills
316
San Joaquin Hills to Ford
552
Northeast of Ford
591
SAN JOAQUIN HILLS ROAD
Jamboree to Santa Cruz
229
Santa Cruz to MacArthur
143
Southeast of MacArthur
131
PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY
Southeast of MacArthur
187
MacArthur to Jamboree
320
Northwest of Jamboree '
383
NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE
Entrance from Pacific Coast Highway
263
East of Santa Cruz
93
SANTA CRUZ DRIVE
261
362
315
147
256
274
106
67
61
87
148
178
122
43
• Newport Center to San Joaquin Hills 189 88
Source: Mestre Greve Associates, May 1983.
121
168
146
68
119
127
49
31
28
40
69
83
57
20
41
I0
I*
16
I!
I!
Is
Is
1•
�0
0
TABLE W
CNEL NOISE LEVELS FOR GENERAL
PLAN PLUS PRQJ=
100
JAMBOREE ROAD
Pacific Coast Highway to San Joaquin Hills
San Joaquin Hills to Ford
Northeast of Ford
MACARTHUR BOULEVARD
Pacific Coast Highway to San Joaquin Hills
San Joaquin Hills to Ford
Northeast of Ford
SAN JOAQUIN HILLS ROAD
Jamboree to Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz to MacArthur
Southeast of MacArthur
PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY
Southeast of MacArthur
MacArthur to Jamboree
Northwest of Jamboree
NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE
Entrance from Pacific Coast Highway
East of Santa Cruz
SANTA CRUZ DRIVE
Newport Center to San Joaquin Hills
Source: Mestre Greve Associates, May
r
Distance to CNEL Contour
m Rnadwav Centerline (Feet
568
263
122
808
375
174
684
317
147
318
148
69
560
260
121
596
277
'128
237
110
51
152
70
33
132
61
28
188
87
40
320
148
69
A
A 101
U0
Other features of the proposed hotel are somewhat shielded from adjacent
roadway noise because the building is focused largely away from street and a
perimeter wall is planned along Santa Cruz Drive and Newport Center Drive (see
Figure 20A, Page 63). Outdoor recreational features such as tennis courts and
a swimming pool are not particularly noise -sensitive uses and are not likely
A to be significantly impacted by roadway noise. The proposed perimeter wall
will act to reduce noise to some degree; facilities are also located adjacent
to Newport Center, which is anticipated to experience lower noise levels than
Santa Cruz Drive (see Table W).
Existing City Policies and Requirements
V. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant
shall submit a detailed acoustical analysis of the proposed
structure to ensure that attenuation to the required interior 45
CNEL level is achieved.
A W. Prior to issuance of any building permit authorized by approval
of this project, the applicant shall deposit with the City
Finance Director a sum proportionate to the percentage of future
additional traffic related to the project area to be used for
construction of a wall on the westerly side of Jamboree Road
between East Bluff Drive and Ford Road and along the southerly
side of Pacific Coast Highway along Irvine Terrace and West
Newport.
X. All construction activities will be limited to the hours of 7
a.m. to 7 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on
Saturday and Sunday.
r Y. Any mechanical equipment and emergency power generators will be
screened from view and shall be sound -attenuated so as not to
exceed 55 dBA at the property line.
Mitigation Measures
No further mitigation is required.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
On a cumulative basis, the project will, in combination with other past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, contribute to increased noise
levels in the immediate area.
u
•
102
AIR QUALITY
lsa
An analysis of air quality was prepared for this EIR by Mr. Hans Giroux,
consulting meteorologist, in May 1983. The following discussion is a summary
of the analysis, which is included in Appendix F of this EIR.
0 Setting
Meteorological conditions of the area surrounding the project site are
discussed in Appendix F. In assessing the air quality impact of development -
related air pollutant emissions, the generation of new pollutants must be
examined with reference to existing Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS)
illustrated in Appendix F, Page 5. These standards are the levels of air
quality considered necessary to protect the public health and welfare.
Air quality of the project site can be compared to conditions in other
areas within the South Coast Air Basin. The South Coast Air Quality Manage-
ment District (SCAQMD) monitoring station nearest the site by which to judge
current levels of air quality is located in Costa Mesa. Compared to other
areas of Southern California, air quality at this station is considered very
good. Levels of pollutants taken from the station from 1977-81 are shown in
Appendix F, Table 2. Other short-term measurement programs in various areas
of Newport Beach and Costa Mesa have shown even lower readings of pollutants
than data shown at the AQMD station in Costa Mesa. These variations point out
•
that local air quality levels can vary significantly over a short distance.
From the combined data presented, unhealthful levels of air quality are shown
to be uncommon near the project site.
Since air quality trends of the South Coast Air BAsin have not appeared
to be improving to meet the 1987 standards, the Air Quality Management Plan
.
(AQMP) has been formulated to permit continued but regulated rapid growth,
while still achieving clean ai.r standards. In land development, requirements
for growth consistency with the AQMD are not based on any single project.
Instead, overall regional traffic generation is considered while planning, and
local regulatory agencies may amend their General Plans to accommodate chang-
ing conditions, so long as standards are met.
i
Impacts
The development of a luxury hotel, as with other past, present, and
future commercial growth in Newport Beach, impacts ambient air quality almost
exclusively by generating additional automobile traffic with its attendant air
41 pollutant emissions. With healthful baseline air quality levels and strong
ventilating sea breezes, the impact of those emissions will be felt primarily
0
C
1•
1•
1s
C
G
•
U
C:
103
M
in inland valleys rather than near the project site. The mobile nature of
these emissions cause them to be widely dispersed in space and time. Conse-
quently, a single small project does not, of itself, cause clean air standards
to be exceeded. Rather, the emissions from this project will mix with those
from thousands of other mobile sources to create regional photochemical smog.
Secondary sources of air emissions result from a variety of sources
including temporary construction activities, increased energy consumption,
traffic in and out of the area, and maintenance equipment. These sources are
typically of less magnitude than mobile sources and therefore will be consid-
ered as less significant impacts on air quality.
Construction Impacts. During construction, moderate volumes of dust
(about pounds of 8usteach day per acre) will be lofted from soil disturb-
ance during grading. Most of this dust will be blown across San Joaquin Hills
Road onto the Big Canyon area. Although dust has a large particle size and is
noticeable, it is filtered readily by human breathing passages and is chemi-
cally inert, and therefore poses more of a nuisance than an adverse health
impact. Also, some of the dust will be impeded by the existing structures
between the site and the Big Canyon area.
Equipment operations for the hotel project will generate large volumes of
construction emissions. However, these emissions are temporary, and the
mobile nature of the sources will not cause exposure to a single receptor for
very long. Any noticeable effects on the surrounding community will be occa-
sional nuisances, not considered to adversely impact air quality standards.
Operational Impacts. At full occupancy, the hotel project will gen-
erate T,7=717y ve is a trips. At average trip lengths of about six miles
for guests and ten miles for employees, the project will contribute about
20,000 vehicle miles traveled (VMT) to basinwide traffic. Daily vehicular
emissions from the project are expected to generate about 0.01% of projected
regional emissions (Appendix F, Page 9), by comparing the project's VMT con-
tribution to the total regional forecasts in the AQMP. Secondary sources
include electrical consumption of about 9 million KWH annually, and about 120
million cubic feet of natural gas burned in furnaces, water heaters, cooking
ranges, and other heat sources.
From a regional air quality planning perspective, the magnitude of the
project emissions is not as important as whether those emissions had been cor-
rectly anticipated in the regional AQMP. The AQMP, which is based on general
land use designations, currently assumes that commercial office development
will occur on the Four Seasons site. When compared to typical office trip
generation and •Newport Center office square footage per acre, the proposed
10
1•
I•
1•
I*
I*
C
�•
L
I0
104
0
project will generate less traffic, especially during the a.m. and p.m. com-
muting peak, than currently anticipated by the AQMP. Project -related emis-
sions, as part of the regional pattern of growth anticipated by the AQMP, can
thus be accommodated without any adverse regional air quality impacts not
already expected in -the air quality planning process.
While regional impacts are insignificant, the addition of 3,250 vehicle
trips on the street system around Newport Center may contribute to localized
levels of unhealthful air quality ("hot spots") near impacted roadways. To
test for this possibility, the CalTrans line source dispersion computer model
CALINE 3 was run at the Jamboree/San Joaquin Hills Road intersection, where
receptors in the Bayport Apartments or Big Canyon homes may be exposed to
high levels of roadway pollution. The project -related impact was shown to be
small, with an increase of 0.1 to 0.3 ppm directly attributable to hotel traf-
fic (Appendix F, Table 4). Thus, there appears to be little impact to micro -
scale air quality in populated residential'areas near Newport Center from the
proposed project.
With the primary project air quality impact resulting from vehicular
emissions beyond the control of project sponsors or local jurisdictions, lit-
tle can be done to reduce these emissions. Standard transportation system
management (TSM) measures such as carpools, transit, or bicycles are not very
effective in promoting VMT reductions among the clientele attracted to a
first-class hotel. Areas where nominal mitigation may be achieved include
construction dust, hotel employee travel, and energy use for pool heating or
air conditioning.
Existing City Policies and Requirements
There are no applicable policies or requirements.
Mitigation Measures
10. Parking areas shall be paved early during construction.
11. Major grading will occur during the non -rainy season.
12. Sediments will not be allowed to run off onto surrounding road-
ways.
13. Adequate dust suppressants (i.e., water and early revegetation)
shall be used.
14. The hotel shall provide courtesy limousine service to the air-
port for hotel guests.
I•
[7
I•
I•
I•
I6
I�
I•
I•
I•
f
105
Lsa
15. Transit passes shall be provided to interested hotel staff in a
manner approved by the Planning Department.
16. Solar -assisted water -heating systems for rooms, spas, and pools
shall be used.
17. Openable windows shall be used to allow cooling by normal
breezes.
18. Decorative lighting shall be minimized and low-wattage/high-
lumen lights shall be used. A lighting plan shall be submitted
for approval by the Planning Department which describes how
energy conservation has been incorporated into the lighting
scheme.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
On a cumulative basis, this project, in concert with other past, present,
and reasonably foreseeable projects, will contribute to an adverse impact on
regional air quality.
1•
1•
C
I0
C
I0
I•
I•
I•
106
ENERGY
Setting
0
Newport Beach enjoys a climate that significantly reduces energy demand
for lighting, heating, and air conditioning. Winters are mild with tempera-
tures rarely, if ever, below freezing. Summers are cool as the air tempera-
ture is only slightly above the ocean water temperature. The number of heat-
ing and cooling -degree days is a measure of naturally created energy demand
used by utility companies to represent the departure of the average daily tem-
perature from some comfortable reference point (usually 657). Those in New-
port Beach are among the lowest in California. The area experiences about
1,600 heating -degree days and 800 cooling -degree days.
Impacts
Initial project -related demand for non-renewable energy resources will be
generated during construction of the hotel complex. Energy will be expended
in the manufacture of building materials as well as in actual project con-
struction. This impact occurs only once and is therefore a short-term impact.
During normal hotel operations, energy resources will be expended for
electrical generation in fossil -fueled power plants for onsite combustion of
natural gas to provide heat, hot water, and cooking in the food service areas
and for transportation of guests and employees. Based on comparable energy
consumption data for large hotels, total project -related energy use is esti-
mated at 9 million KWH of electricity and 120 million cubic feet of natural
gas annually. Hotel employees and guests will drive 6.5 million miles annual-
ly on Orange County streets, requiring 300,000 gallons of gasoline. These
consumption estimates are based on existing energy utilization for older
hotels and do not take into account energy conservation measures required
either by local codes or the proposed non-residential building standards under
consideration by the California Energy Commission. They also do not take into
account the potential for energy conservation through solar -assisted water
heating which comprises a large fraction of the natural gas utilization esti-
mate.
Energy demand (electricity, gas, and gasoline) is usually expressed in
equivalent units so that KWH, cubic feet, and gallons can be compared to the
same standard. Table X shows the project -related energy demand expressed in
Btu (British thermal units) and fuel -oil equivalent (FOE) as a basis for com-
parison. At current oil prices, the raw fuel cost for the project is about $2
million with the delivered energy price perhaps twice that amount.
I•
I•
•
TABLE X
107
PROJECT -RELATED
ENERGY DEMAND
Lsa
Btu Equivalent
FOE Level
Source
Annual Utilization
(Billions of Btu)
(Barrels of Oil)
Electrical
•
consumption
9.05 million KWH
278
44,000
Natural gas
combustion
120 million cu. ft.
126
20,000
Gasoline
•
consumption
320,000 gallons
35
6,000
TOTAL
439
70,000
I•
I•
I•
I•
I•
1•
1•
I•
C
I•
I•
I•
I•
[7
W
lsa
Existing City Policies -and Requirements
There are no applicable policies or requirements.
Mitigation Measures
Only minimal mitigation can be achieved by reducing transportation -relat-
ed energy use. Mitigation Measures #14 and #15 (Pages 104 and 105) will
incrementally reduce the auto trips generated by the hotel and will thereby
slightly reduce transportation -related energy use. Mitigation Measures #16-18
(Page 105) will reduce onsite energy use.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
On a cumulative basis, this project, in concert with other past, present,
and reasonably foreseeable projects, will contribute to an increase in energy
use in the region.
I•
I•
I0
C
I•
I•
Iis
•
109
COMMUNITY SERVICES AND PUBLIC UTILITIES
The Four Seasons Hotel site will be served by
public agencies. These
vice levels and current
They include:
Electricity
Fi re
Gas
Police
Solid waste
Wastewater
Water
agencies were contacted for
or anticipated constraints
M
several public and quasi -
information regarding ser-
on the proposed project.
Southern California Edison Company
City of Newport Beach Fire Department
Southern California Gas Company
City of Newport Beach Police Department
County of Orange Waste Management Program
Orange County Sanitation District No. 5
City of Newport Beach Utilities Department
Appendix G of this report contains correspondence received from purveyors
of these services.
Setting
Electricity. The project site is within the service territory of the
Southern a i ornia Edison Company.
Fire. The City of Newport Beach Fire Department provides fire sup-
pression and emergency medical services to the project area from the Fashion
Island Station at 868 Santa Barbara Drive. Distance from the station to the
project site is approximately .5 mile. A supporting company would respond
from the Corona del Mar Station at 410 Marigold Avenue. Total initial staff
response to fire alarm fire assignments is 14 firefighters. Current Fire
Department equipment includes a 100-foot ladder that reaches a maximum of 95
feet when directly adjacent to a building. Consequently, it could reach to
the seventh floor of the hotel.
Gas. The Four Seasons Hotel project site is located within the ser-
vice Territory of the Southern California Gas Company.
Police. The City of Newport Beach Police Department provides police
service to the project area from its facility at 870 Santa Barbara Drive in
Newport Center. Distance from the facility to the project site is approxi-
mately .5 mile. Response times are 21.19 minutes to non -emergency calls, 4.34
minutes to alarm calls, and 3.4 minutes to emergency calls.
Solid Waste. The Waste Management Program of the County of Orange
General Services Agency states that the nearest facility to the project site
I0
•
•
110
r
• is the Coyote Canyon Landfill located off Bonita Canyon Drive in Irvine. Ser-
ving the communities of south-central Orange County, Coyote Canyon accepts
residential, commercial, and industrial refuse. No liquid or hazardous wastes
are accepted. The life expectancy of the Coyote Canyon Landfill has been
projected to 1986. The County is currently reviewing various options with
• regard to expanding the Coyote Canyon Landfill (which would extend its use
from 3 to 30 years) or developing a new disposal facility in Bee Canyon. The
City of Newport Beach is also pursuing and promoting development of alterna-
tive methods of waste disposal.
Wastewater. The project site is located within the service territory
• of Orang�ounfy Sanitation District No. 5. The Orange County Sanitation Dis-
trict operates and maintains the main sewer trunk lines that service the proj-
ect site. However, the local sewer lines which run from the project into the
main trunk lines are maintained by the City of Newport Beach Utilities Depart-
ment.
• The area has been planned for commercial development using a flow coeffi-
cient of 3,230 gallons per day per acre. The Orange County Sanitation Dis-
trict operates two treatment plants (Huntington Beach and Fountain Valley) for
the treatment and disposal of wastewater. Flows from the Four Seasons Hotel
site will be treated at one of these plants.
. Water. The City of Newport Beach 'Utilities Department presently pro-
vides--wa"fe-r service to the project area.
Impacts
Electricity. The Southern California Edison Company does not foresee
• any i icu ies providing service to the proposed project site at this time.
Fire. The City of Newport Beach Fire Department anticipates no dif-
ficulTy pproviding emergency medical and fire suppression services to the Four
Seasons Hotel site. The Department indicated that it will require sprinklers
in all rooms, smoke detectors in all rooms and hallways, two exits off each
floor, fire alarm pull boxes in all hotel corridors, and a fire command cen-
ter. Doors and walls will be designed to a one -hour fire rating. These meas-
ures are in accordance with fire protection requirements of the Uniform Build-
ing Code for high-rise structures and City codes.
Gas. The Southern California Gas Company does not anticipate diffi-
culties in providing service to the proposed project site. The ability to
• meet future demand is dependent on conditions of energy supply and policies of
the California Public Utilities Commission.
•
U
1•
Is
I•
C
I•
�0
I•
I•
[]
111
Lsa
Police. The Four Seasons Hotel is not expected to adversely impact
existin' g service levels. However, with an average occupancy rate of 84% and
an average of 1.3 persons per room, the city will realize a population
increase of 355 persons daily (Randy Nakashima, Officer, 1983). To maintain
the current ratio of sworn police officers to city population, the Police
Department has stated they would require .784 additional officer. However,
given the nature of the hotel operation and its clientele, there is no need to
increase police staffing to serve the hotel. No impact on police services is
expected.
Solid Waste. The Orange County Waste Management Program assesses
service e-an ased on a solid waste generation rate of 8.5 pounds per capita
per day. Based on this factor, the Waste Management Program of the County of
Orange General Services Agency does not expect the project to have any adverse
impacts on its ability to provide solid waste services to the proposed devel-
opment. The City of Newport Beach provides refuse pick-up service for all
residential uses. Commercial land uses must contract for their own pick-up
and disposal service.
Wastewater. Initial estimates of sewage flow for the proposed hotel
exceed the Sanitation District's master -planned flow estimates. The District
indicated that their facilities have available capacity for the proposed proj-
ect, but stated their concern that the cumulative impact of such large -density
increases will eventually overtax the District's facilites.
Water. The City Is Utilities Department assesses water service
demands Wised on a peak -hour consumption rate of 10 gallons per minute per
gross acre. Based upon this factor, the proposed project would generate a
demand for approximately 50 gallons per minute. Further, the Utilities
Department indicates that the site would be required to maintain a fire flow
of 6,000 gallons per minute. No adverse impacts to water service are antici-
pated for the proposed project.
Existing City Policies and -Requirements
The following measures will be required by existing City policies and
requirements.
Electricity/Gas. There are no applicable policies or requirements.
Fire.
Z. The Fire Department shall review design plans to ensure ade-
quate access to all structures and emergency exits for hotel
patrons.
'0
•
•
112
0
• AA. The provision of adequate fire flow shall be reviewed by the
Fire Department.
BB. Structures shall be equipped with fire suppression systems as
required by code.
• Police.
CC. A lighting plan shall be submitted for review by the Police
Department to ensure adequate lighting of pedestrian walkways
and parking areas.
• Solid Waste.
DD. A program shall be devised for the sorting and pickup or dis-
posal of recyclable material from other solid, waste.
• Water and Wastewater.
EE. Prior to construction of any project, the availability of water
and sewer shall be verified by the serving agency.
FF. A watering system shall be designed which minimizes water con-
sumption, such as drip irrigation or tensiometers.
GG. Public and private toilet facilities will be low -flush toilets
and low -flow faucets. Insulation will be required for hot
water lines in water recirculating systems. Any public flush
valve -operated water closets will have a three -gallon flush,
and drinking fountains will have self -closing valves.
•
Mitigation Measures
In addition to the preceding requirements, the following mitigation mea-
sures are included in the Four Seasons Hotel project design or are otherwise
required to minimize potentially adverse impacts.
•
Electricity.
No mitigation is required.
Fire.
•
No mitigation is required.
C�
[7
1•
1•
I*
1•
I•
I•
'0
113
M
Gas.
No mitigation is required.
Police.
19. Twenty -four-hour security will be provided by the project
applicant on the project site as approved by the City of New-
port Beach Police Department and Planning Department.
Solid Waste.
No mitigation is proposed.
Wastewater.
No mitigation is required.
Water.
No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
On a cumulative basis, this project, in concert with other past, present,
and reasonably foreseeable projects, will contribute to an increased demand
for public services.
Ll
114
Lsa
0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
INTRODUCTION
The following discussion evaluates alternatives to the proposed project.
To provide a comparative analysis of each alternative, a tabular format is
provided on Pages xvii-xxi of this document to permit a review of the range of
alternatives and their estimated respective impacts.
The following paragraphs provide a description of each alternative and a
discussion as to whether it has been rejected from further consideration. The
only alternative which is considered environmentally superior to the proposed
project is the no -development alternative. The intent of the section is to
evaluate alternatives which may be capable of eliminating or reducing to a
level of insignificance any significant adverse impacts associated with the
project.
NO PROJECT
The no -project alternative assumes use of the site for uses allowed under
the General Plan. Under the existing plan, up to 145 residential units and/or
207,533 square feet of office can be transferred to Block 600. This alterna-
tive should remain under consideration during the review process, but it is
not apparent that it is environmentally superior to the proposed project.
Also, this alternative could occur in Block 600 even if the proposed project
is approved.
NO DEVELOPMENT
The no -development alternative would retain the site in its existing con-
dition and assumes no future development of the site. This alternative would
avoid the project -related adverse impact associated with the visual environ-
ment. It would also eliminate the project's contribution to cumulative
impacts related to degradation of air resources; increased demand for airport
services, low-cost housing, and energy; and increased traffic and noise lev-
els. Consequently, this alternative would be environmentally superior to the
proposed project and should remain under consideration during the review pro-
cess. However, if this project is not constructed in Newport Beach at the
proposed location, it may be built in an adjacent community. This assumption
is based on the perceived unmet demand for this type of business hotel in
Orange County and the project applicant's dedicated efforts to locate a Four
Seasons Hotel in the area. If this were to occur, the hotel's contribution to
cumulative impacts would be virtually identical.
•
•
•
• LOW-RISE ALTERNATIVE
115
im
This alternative would assume construction of a 325-roam hotel identical
in operational characteristics to the Four Seasons, but constructed as a low-
rise (ten stories or less) hotel. This alternative would utilize twice the
• land area as the proposed project and would probably require a combination of
structured and surface parking to provide sufficient parking. This alterna-
tive would have substantially similar impacts and there is no reason to reject
it from further consideration at this time.
TRANSIT TERMINAL
• This alternative would include incorporating an OCTD transit terminal
within Block 600. The transit terminal was analyzed in GPA 80-3. It was
originally considered in conjunction with major office development to be
located within Block 600 which did not materialize. Consequently, the princi-
pal justification for a terminal is no longer valid. Construction of the pro-
posed project does not preclude this alternative although, depending on the
proximity of the facility to the hotel, it might be considered incompatible
with the hotel as proposed. It would not avoid any impacts associated with
the proposed project as it is considered an additional, not an alternative,
use for the site. This alternative may be considered for the remainder of
Block 600, although it is not actively under consideration at this time.
• LARGER PROJECT
This alternative would consist of a 500-room hotel. If the hotel was
identical to the Four Seasons in operating characteristics and amenities, it
could possibly add as many as nine additional floors to the proposed building,
which could be as much as 85 additional feet. Such a hotel could be as tall
• as 300 feet, which is 22 feet taller than the existing Union Bank building.
In addition, parking requirements would increase. Structured parking would be
needed to meet this increase.
A 500-room hotel of the Hyatt/Marriott variety, which typically has
smaller rooms and larger ancillary facilities, could probably be accommodated
• in 12-14 floors.
Adoption of a General Plan Amendment to allow 500 rooms on Block 600
would not preclude the project applicant from constructing the proposed 325-
room Four Seasons Hotel. This would simply allow 175 additional rooms within
Block 600 which, if allowed 'by the General Plan Amendment, could also be
• transferred to another site in Newport Center.
•
1•
1•
10
I•
I*
I•
IA
U
I•
I!
116
REDUCED PROJECT
Lsa
This project would consist of a smaller hotel (i.e., 275-300 rooms).
Such a facility could be housed in a building of 8-15 stories, depending on
the operating characteristics of the hotel. A 275 to 300-room Four Seasons
Hotel designed similarly to the proposed project would require 15-17 floors.
As demonstrated in the summary analysis on Pages xvii-xxi, the reduced project
alternative is not considered significantly superior from an environmental
perspective.
According to the project applicant, market demand studies demonstrate
that there is sufficient demand for the proposed 325-room hotel. As a result,
the project was designed to incorporate 325 rooms rather than a lesser num-
ber. This alternative has not been rejected and should remain under consider-
ation during the public review process.
RESIDENTIAL
The alternative would be comprised of one or two residential structures
on 10 acres comprised of 450 units (45 du/ac) totaling about 900,000 square
feet of residential. This alternative could occur elsewhere within Block 600
even if the proposed project were approved. However, if they were both to
occur, development would create a substantial amount of building mass. This
alternative has not been rejected and should remain under consideration during
the public review process.
OFFICE
This alternative would be comprised of two office towers totaling 450,000
square feet on the hotel site. This alternative could occur elsewhere within
Block 600 even if the proposed project were approved. This alternative has
not been rejected and should remain under consideration during the public
review process. If a total office concept were envisioned, this could be com-
prised of 725,000 square feet in three towers. Impacts related to traffic
would be great and would require substantial mitigation.
GPA 80-3
This alternative was previously approved and later rescinded by the City
Council. This would consist of a 225,000-square-foot office tower, 225,000
square feet of residential, and a hotel/residential structure consisting of
300 hotel rooms and 100 residential units. This alternative includes all
underdeveloped areas of Block 600. Approval of the proposed project would
preclude the mixed residential/hotel aspect of this alternative. This alter-
0
•
•
•
C
•
117
Lsa
native has not been rejected and should remain under consideration during the
public review process.
PACIFIC PLAZA
This alternative was previously analyzed and rejected by the City Coun-
cil. It would include a 22-story, 450,000-square-foot office tower, a 500-
room hotel, and a 4 to 6-level multi -story parking structure. This alterna-
tive includes other underdeveloped areas of Block 600 in addition to the Four
Seasons site. Construction of the proposed project would make this alterna-
tive difficult to implement. Based on the past denial of this project by
Council, it is rejected from further consideration.
•
[7
I!
C
I•
I0
I•
I0
0
118
0
GROWTH=INDUCING IMPACTS
The proposal to develop the 325-room Four Seasons Hotel is in respnse to
a demand for hotel accommodations in the area. Demand for these hotel accom-
modations is attributable primarily to business activities in surrounding
areas. Tourists drawn to the area by the Four Seasons location and amenities
may increase the demand for other visitor -serving facilities. To the extent
that the proposed Four Seasons may cumulatively increase demand for other
business and visitor -serving facilities and airport services, the project can
be considered to have a minor growth -inducing impact.
n
1•
[:
C
is
C
�•
I•
'•
119
SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT
The proposed project will have a significant visual effect in becoming a
new major visual element in Newport Center. On a cumulative basis, this proj-
ect and other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects will
contribute to degradation of air and water resources; increased demand for
airport services, low-cost housing, public services, and energy; and increased
noise and traffic generation.
I
L.
1•
1•
1•
I*
1•
I•
I!
I•
la
I0
120
Lsa
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM
ENHANCEMENT - ITY
Implementation of the project represents a long-term commitment of the
site to urban uses. Development would result in long-term impacts in contrib-
uting to degradation of local air and water quality, and will increase the
demand for local low-cost housing, public utilities and services, and energy
resources. The project will also contribute to increased noise levels and
traffic generation.
Short-term impacts of development during the construction phase include
localized increases in noise, dust, vehicular emissions associated with con-
struction vehicles, and an increased potential for localized erosion and down-
stream sedimentation.
The project will improve.employment opportunities in the city. There are
no significant natural resources onsite that would be lost as a result of
development. Development of the site is consistent with other urban uses in
Newport Center.
•
1•
1•
is
I•
C
�0
•
[:
121
Im
SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE STANDARD
A. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit to be issued
by the Building Department and reviewed by the Planning and Public Works
Departments.
B. A grading plan, submitted to the City for approval, shall include a com-
plete plan for temporary and permanent drainage facilities, to minimize
any potential impacts from silt, debris, and other water pollutants.
C. Prior to grading, an application for haul routes shall be submitted to and
approved by the City's Traffic Engineer which shall include a description
of haul routes, access points to the site, and a watering and sweeping
program designed to minimize impacts of haul oprations.
D. Grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a civil
engineer and based on recommendations of a soils engineer and an engineer-
ing geologist subsequent to completion of a comprehensive soils and geo-
logic investigation of the site. Permanent reproducible copies of the
proposed grading plans on standard -size sheets shall be furnished to the
Building Department.
E. All buildings shall conform to the Uniform Building Code and the City's
seismic design standards.
F. An erosion, siltation, 'and dust control plan, if desired by the City of
Newport Beach, shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the
Building Department, and a copy shall be forwarded to the California
Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region, for review.
G. The velocity of concentrated runoff from the project shall be evaluated
and erosive velocities controlled as part of project design.
H. 'Prior to issuance of the grading permit, the design engineer shall review
and state that the discharge of surface runoff from the project will be
performed in a manner to assure that increased peak flows from the project
will not increase erosion immediately downstream of the system. This
shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Building Departments.
I. A qualified archaeologist shall be present during pregrade meetings to
inform the developer and grading contractor of the results of the APC
study. In addition, an archaeologist shall 'be present during grading
C
1•
I•
Is
11
I•
I•
I•
I•
122
M
activities to inspect the underlying soil for cultural resources. If sig-
nificant cultural resources are uncovered, the archaeologist shal•1 have
the authority to stop or temporarily divert construction activities for a
period of 48 hours to assess the significance of the finds.
J. In the event that significant archaeological remains are uncovered during
excavation and/or grading, all work shall stop in that area of the subject
property until an appropriate data recovery program can be developed and
implemented. The cost of such a program shall be the responsibility of
the landowner and/or developer.
K. A paleontological monitor shall be retained by the landowner and/or devel-
oper to attend pregrade meetings and perform inspections during develop-
ment. The paleontologist shall be allowed to divert, direct, or halt
grading in a specific area to allow for salvage of exposed fossil materi-
als.
L. Prior to issuance of any grading or demolition permits, the applicant
shall waive the provisions of AB 952 related to City of Newport Beach
responsibilities for mitigation of archaeological impacts, in a manner
acceptable to the City Attorney.
M. The City's Airport Policy has recently been amended to agree to a number
of average daily departures not to exceed 55 flights.
N. A landscape and irrigation plan for the project shall be prepared by a
licensed landscape architect. The plan will be subject to approval by the
Planning Department and the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Department.
0. The landscape plan shall include a maintenance program which controls the
use of fertilizers and pesticides.
P. The landscape plan shall place emphasis on the use of drought -resistant
native vegetation and be irrigated via a system designed to avoid surface
runoff and overwatering.
Q. The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot
plan, floor plans, elevations, and sections.
R. The project shall be designed to eliminate light and glare spillage on
adjacent properties.
S. As required by the General Plan, .a detailed review of the proposed site
plan must be conducted to fully evaluate the GPA request and related
application.
El
I•
1•
I•
I•
I•
123
Lsa
T. The City of Newport Beach requires each project to provide for all neces-
sary roadway improvements. Several improvements have been required of
previously approved projects, but are not yet constructed. Based on
analysis contained in this report, the proposed project will be required
to contribute to or provide full improvements to intersections identified
in Table P, Page 85.
U. The project shall be required to contribute a sum equal to its "fair
share" of future circulation system improvements as shown on the City's
Master Plan of Streets and Highways and any other mitigation measures as
may be required.
V. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall sub-
mit a detailed acoustical analysis of the proposed structure to ensure
that attenuation to the required interior 45 CNEL level is achieved.
W. Prior to issuance of :any building permit authorized by approval of this
project, the applicant shall deposit with the City Finance Director a sum
proportionate to the percentage of future additional traffic related to
the project area to be used for construction of a wall on the westerly
side of Jamboree Road between East Bluff Drive and Ford Road and along
the southerly side of Pacific Coast Highway along Irvine Terrace and West
Newport.
X. All construction activities will be limited to the hours of 7 a.m. to 7
p.m. Monday through Friday, and 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday.
Y. Any mechanical equipment and emergency power generators will be screened
from view and shall be sound -attenuated so as not to exceed 55 dBA at the
property line.
Z. The Fire Department shall review design plans to ensure adequate access
to all structures and emergency exits for hotel patrons.
AA. The provision of adequate fire flow shall be reviewed by the Fire Depart-
ment.
BB. Structures shall be equipped with fire suppression systems as required by
code.
CC. A lighting plan shall be submitted for review by the Police Department to
ensure adequate lighting of pedestrian walkways and parking areas.
DD. A program shall be devised for the sorting and pickup or disposal of
recyclable material from other solid waste.
•
1•
1•
Is
I•
C
I•
•
0
124
EE. Prior to construction of any project, the availability of water and sewer
shall be verified by the serving agency.
FF. A watering system shall be designed which minimizes water consumption,
such as drip irrigation or tensiometers.
GG. Public and private toilet facilities will be low -flush toilets and low -
flow faucets. Insulation will be required for hot water lines in water
recirculating systems. Any public flush valve -operated water closets
will have a three -gallon flush, and drinking fountains will have self -
closing valves.
•
125
SUMMARY OF-APPLICABLE•MITIGATION MEASURES
Lsa
1.
Signage and exterior lighting shall be approved by the Planning Depart-
ment.
40
2.
All mechanical equipment, vents, and other service equipment shall be
shielded or screened from view by architectural features.
3.
The Four Seasons emblem on the facade of the building above ground floor,
if permitted by the City, shall not be lighted.
4.
The perimeter wall fence will be redesigned to the satisfaction of the
Planning Department. The upper (second) wall should be moved back 10 to
15 feet to create an attractive slope area between the two walls.
5.
A pedestrian circulation plan will be submitted to the City Planning and
Public Works Departments for review and approval prior to issuance of a
grading permit.
6.
The project applicant shall enter into a binding agreement to provide
adequate offsite parking spaces to the Four Seasons Hotel within Block
600. Such spaces shall be within 300 feet of the hotel. The terms of
the parking agreement shall be in effect for a period equal to the
expected life of all structures within Parcel 3 (Figure 5, Page 9).
7.
As part of the project, the- 212 parking spaces serving the Wells Fargo
tower which will be displaced by the hotel shall be replaced.
8.
The project applicant shall provide a bus shelter at the bus stop adja-
cent to the project site.
9.
Parking for the project will not include compact spaces.
10.
Parking areas shall be paved early during construction.
11.
Major grading will occur during the non -rainy season.
12.
Sediments will not be allowed to run off onto surrounding roadways.
13.
Adequate dust suppressants (i.e., water and early revegetation) shall be
used.
•
14.
The hotel shall provide courtesy limousine service to the airport for
hotel guests.
40
U
r
C:
U
I•
I•
I•
I•
I•
U
126
15. Transit passes shall be provided to interested hotel staff in a manner
approved by the Planning Department.
16. Solar -assisted water -heating systems for rooms, spas, and pools shall be
used.
17. Openable windows shall be used to allow cooling by normal breezes.
18. Decorative lighting shall be minimized and low-wattage/high-lumen lights
shall be used. A lighting plan shall be submitted for approval by the
Planning Department which describes how energy conservation has been
incorporated into the light scheme.
19. Twenty -four-hour security will be provided by the project applicant on
the project site as approved by the City of Newport Beach Police Depart-
ment and Planning Department.
I0
IM
1•
I•
10
I•
127
ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONTACTED
City of Newport Beach:
Planning Department
Fred Talarico
Robert Lenard
Pat Temple
Chris Gustin
Bill Ward
Public Works Department
Don Webb
Rich Edmonston
Police Department
Kent Stoddard
Fire Department
Thomas Dailey
John Wayne Airport
Chris Edwards
Steve Kozak
City of Santa Ana
Rita Darnell
City- of Orange
City of Garden Grove
AVCO Community Developers
Robert Montgomery
The Irvine Company
Steve Sandland
Urban Assist, Inc.
Dave Neish
Buchalter, Nemer, Fields, Chrystie & Younger
Bernie Schneider
Orange County Sanitation District #7
Thomas Dawes
Orange County Transit District
Dick Hsu
Whimberly, Whisenand, Allison, Tong, & Goo
Mike Chun
RBF, Inc.
Gail Pickart
The Newporter
Leah Marshall
I•
I•
I*
I*
L
1•
1•
U
I•
128
PREPARERS OF AND CONTRIBUTORS TO THE REPORT
PREPARERS
LSA, Inc.
CONTRIBUTORS
Hydrological analysis
Biological analysis
Paleontological analysis
Traffic analysis
Air quality analysis
Acoustics analysis
Annette Sanchez
L. Ashley Davis
R. Scott Ferguson
Beth Padon
Karlee Nevil
Marie Gilliam
Fred J. Kauppi,
FJK Engineering
Steven G. Nelson,
EDAW, Inc.
Rod Raschke,
RMW Paleo Associates
Weston Pringle,
Weston Pringle Associates
Is
10
is
Cl
�0
129
0
REFERENCES
Crommelin, Pringle, and Associates, 1976. Newport Center Traffic Study Phase
II. Prepared for the City of Newport FEE
Crandall, LeRoy and Associates, 1983, Consultation on Soil and Foundation
Conditions - Four Seasons Hotel.
LSA, Inc., 1981, Certified Final Environmental Impact Report - General Plan
Amendment 80-3. Newporteac .
LSA, Inc., 1983. Certified Final Envi
Expansion - G - oo s -an
- Marriott Hotel
Newport Beach, City of, 1973a. Land Use Element of the Newport Beach General
Plan. Newport Beach, CA.
Newport Beach, City of, 1973b. Recreation and Open Space Element of the
Newport Beach General Plan. Newport Beach, GA.
Newport Beach, City of, 1974a. Circulation Element of the Newport Beach
General Plan. Newport Beach, ZT.
Newport Beach, City of, 1974b. Conservation of Natural Resources Element of
the Newport Beach General Plan. Newport beach,.
Newport Beach, City of, 1975a. Public Safety Element of the Newport Beach
General Plan. Newport Beach, CA.
Newport Beach, City of, 1975b. Residential Growth Element of the _Newport
Beach General Plan. Newport 8-eacF C .
Newport Beach, City of, 1978. Final Environmental Impact Report - Pacific
Plaza - Volumes I and II. N-ewport beach,.
Phillips Brandt Reddick, Inc., 1982. Environmental Impact Report, City of
Newport Beach General Plan Amendment- NewportBeach,.
0