Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNORTH FORD PLANNED COMMUNITY_EIR 198411111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 *NEW FILE* North Ford Planned Community_EIR 1984 I I I I! r li II II T/9C /Vt 7hui?5 /3 :odd Screencheck EIR (Submitted August %9,1984) Draft EIR (Distributed ) Final EIR (Certified Complete ) SCREENCHECH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NORTH FORD PLANNED COMMUNITY TENTATIVE TRACT Prepared for: City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, California 92663-3884 Contact Person: Patricia L. Temple (714) 640-2197 Prepared by: Michael Brandman Associates, Inc. 3140 Red Hill Avenue, Suite 200 Costa Mesa, California 92626 (714)641-8042 August 1984 I I TABLE OF CONTENTS ISection Pain 1.0 Introduction...................................................I 1.1 Purpose of EIR............................................1 1.2 Effects found Not To Be Significant and Previous Environmental Studies..................................1 1.3 EIR Participants..........................................2 1.4 Summary of Impacts.......................................2 2.0 Project Description.............................................3 2.1 Project Location..........................................3 2.2 Project Characteristics....................................3 2.3 Project Phasing...........................................7 2.4 Proposed Actions.........................................7 2.5 Project History............................................8 3.0 Local and Regional Land Uses Relating to This Project.............11 3.1 Existing Land Use........................................11 3.2 Land Use Plans..........................................12 3.3 Committed Projects......................................17 3.4 Approved But Not Committed Projects ......................19 3.5 Proposed Projects........................................20 3.6 Circulation Considerations................................21 4.0 Existing Conditions, Impacts, City Policies and Requirements and Mitigation Measures ...................... 22 4.1 Landform/Geology/Soils...................................22 4.2 Hydrology...............................................29 4.3 Biological Resources ..................................... 35 4.4 Cultural Resources.......................................38 4.5 Aesthetics..............................................40 4.6 Traffic/Circulation...................................... 43 4.7 Air Quality..............................................47 4.8 Noise...................................................57 4.9 Public Services and Utilities...............................63 5.0 Alternatives..................................................77 5.No Project...........................................77 5.2 Lower Density ...... .. • 77 5.3 Site Plan or Design Modifications ...........................78 6.0 Significant Adverse Impacts Which Cannot be Avoided If Project is Implemented......................................79 7.0 Growth -Inducing and Cumulative Impacts .........................80 8.0 Organizations and Persons Consulted .............................82 9.0 References...................................................83 I I I TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Section Page 10.0 Appendices ...................................................84 A. Notice of preparation (NOP) and NOP Responses B. Planned Community District Regulations (amended) C. Geotechnical Report D. Drainage Report E. Flora and Fauna Species List F. Traffic Study G. Noise Study 1 h. List of City Policies/Requirements and Mitigation Measures I I I I I I I I I Ll I 71, LJ I LIST OF TABLES Number Page 1 Site Plan Statistical Summary ..................................... •.SS 2 Seismicity for Major Faults......................................24 3 Existing Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis (A.M. Peak Hour)...........................'...................43a 4 Existing Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis (P.M. Peak Hour)..............................................43b 5 Trip Generation Rates.........................................43c 6 Trip Generation...............................................43c 7 Future Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis A.M. Peak Hour)..............................................45a 8 Future Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis (P.M. Peak Hour)..............................................45b 9 1979-1983 Summary of Clean Air Standards Violations - Costa Mesa Air Quality Monitoring Station ........................49 10 Projected Mobile and Stationery Source Emissions ..................53 11 Emission Inventory Comparison(1987) .............................54 12 Ultimate Traffic Volumes and Speeds .............................58 13 Ultimate CNEL Noise Levels....................................59 11 iii I I IIIWW@73�� Following Number Page Number 1 Regional Location............................................3 2 Vicinity.....................................................3 3 Tentative Tract Map (oversized)................................3 4 Rough Grading Plan (oversized)................................3 5 Preliminary Site Plan (oversized) ...............................4 6 Tentative Tract Map; Single Family Detached (oversized) . .4 7 Preliminary Site Plan; Single Family Detached (not available *yet) ............................................4 8 Floor Plans - Apartments and Townhouses 9 (not available yet)......................5 Floor Plans - Detached Units (oversized) .......................• S 10 Building Elevations - Apartments and Townhouses (not available yet)............................................� 11 Building Elevations - Detached Units (oversized) .................. 5 12 Planning Areas.. .................,............................9 13 Aerial Photograph...........................................11 14 Committed, Approved and ProposedProjects....................17 15 Geology and Soils . • , 22 16 Cut and Fill Map............................................24 17 Existing Hydrology............................29 18 Post -Development Drainage Patterns (oversized) ................31 19 Preliminary Landscape Plan (oversized) ........................40 20 Cross-Sections(oversized)....................................41 21 Landscape Maintenence Plan (oversized)........................41 22 Project Daily Trips . ..44 23 Driveway Volumes (AM Peak Hour) ............................44 24 Driveway Volumes (PM Peak Hour) ...................... . .....44 25 Recommended Roadway Configuration - Camelback Street ...... , 44 26 Recommended Noise Barriers.................................59 I I iv I 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE OF EIR This document provides an assessment of the environmental impacts resulting from the development of a portion of the North Ford Planned Community in Newport Beach (see Exhibit 1). The applicant is requesting the approval of a tentative tract map and an amendment to the Planned Community (PC) District regulations. The analyses in this EIR have been prepared in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as amended; the State CEQA Guidelines, as amended; and the City of Newport Beach procedures pertaining to CEQA. This EIR constitutes a full-scale EIR in that all relevant topical areas have been addressed. 1.2 EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT AND PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES The city has determined that no effects from the project are considered insignificant and, therefore, no relevant issues will be focused out of this EIR. This EIR will use a combination -of previous analyses and supplemental analyses to address the relevant topical areas. The study area has been the subject of previous City of Newport Beach environmental studies over the last several years. Three of these studies include baseline data and analyses which are applicable to the proposed project. These EIRs are hereby incorporated per Section 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines, as amended, and are briefly described below. Copies of these EIRs are available for review at the City of Newport Beach Planning Department (see address below). Final EIR; North Ford Planned Community Tentative Tract No. 10019, prepared by LSA, Inc., November 1979. This full-scale, EIR addressed a 71.2-acre tentative tract map for commercial/industrial and commercial/retail uses within the North Ford parcel study area. This project was not approved and the EIR was not certified. Certified Final EIR; Early Action and InterimPlan, San Diego Creek Comprehensive Storm Water Sedimentation Control Plan, prepared by Culbertson, Adams & Associates, June 1982. This full-scale EIR addressed the construction of in -channel and in -bay basins for controlling sediment reaching the Upper Newport Bay. An area south of the San Diego Creek channel (and 1 t partially within the study area for the currently proposed project) was included in this EIR as a proposed disposal site (Site A) for excavated materials. Certified Final Focused EIR• North Ford/San Diego Creek Sites, General Plan Amendment 82-1, prepared by LSA, Inc., October 1983. The project addresseQ in this EIR was a GPA to redesignate uses allowed on the North Ford and San Diego Creek parcels. This EIR focused on land uses, aesthetics, traffic, noise, public services, and utilities. 1.3 EIR PARTICIPANTS The lead agency for the EIR is the City of Newport Beach, the project sponsor is The Irvine Company, and the environmental consultant to the City is Michael Brandman Associates, Inc. (MBA). Key contact persons are listed below: Lead Agency: Patricia L. Temple Environmental Coordinator City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard, P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, California 92663-3884 (714) 640-2197 Project Sponsor: Bernard Maniscalco Project Manager The Irvine Company 550 Newport Center Drive, P.O. Box I Newport Beach, California 92660-9959 (714)720-2722 Environmental Consultant: Beverly Bruesch Project Manager Michael Brandman Associates; Inc. 3140 Red Hill Avenue, Suite 200 Costa Mesa, California 92626 (714) 641-8042 1.4 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS The following pages include a summary of the impacts of the proposed project and recommended mitigation measures. In addition, the level of significance of each impact, after implementation of the city policies/requirements and recommended mitigation measures, is identified. (To be included in Draft EIR) I E I r 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION �. As shown in Exhibits 1 and 2, the North Ford site is located in the City of Newport Beach and is bordered by the Corona del Mar/San Joaquin Transportation Corridor (Route 73) easement on the east, Bison Avenue on the south, Camelback Street and Jamboree Road on the west, and University Drive Extension on the north. Exhibit 2 also shows the location of the South San Diego Creek site, which was included with the North Ford site in the recent General Plan Amendment (GPA) 82-1. This parcel is also included in the tentative map being filed for the North Ford site. 2.2 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS Tentative Tract Map NExhibit 3 is the proposed tentative map to be submitted for the North Ford Planned Community. As shown on the exhibit, the tract includes the 24.1-acre San Diego Creek parcel (No. 9) north of the extended University Drive. This parcel is included in the tentative tract and preliminary grading plans, however, to date no site planning or detailed engineering has been prepared for this future office site. Therefore, this parcel is not included in the study area addressed in this EIR and further environmental analysis must be prepared when site plans and engineering have been accomplished. The map_co3ters a total of 125.88 gross acres net acres excluding major street easements. Parcel 1 is proposed as a 12.00-acre park site, parcels 2-5, 7 and 8 (75.19 total acres) are 2ro2osed as a-0jx of multi lep family r and single-family residential units, parcel 6 (5.01 acres) is proposed as a comn)ercial_ site, and parcel 9 is the 24.1-acre "San Dino C-teek° pazeBl-w 2i_cja-is-proposed_as_an_.,, office site. Rough Grading Plan Exhibit 4 shows the rough grading plan for the proposed tract. As shown on the ' exhibit, the grading for preparation of the building areas will require 738,000 cubic yards of cut (adjusted for shrinkage) and 859,000 cubic yards of fill. Therefore, approximately 120,000 cubic yards of import would be required for the rough grading. 3 r LOS ANGELES COUNTY 1 SAN BERNARDINO mt COUNTY � r1 FULLERTON ,� • 3 Ices FW RIVERSIDE COUNTY d ANAHEIM s 0 I52 � ; a ORANGE ' Irvine o, Garde G ° Lake rope F qaa a � SANAA TUSTIN BEACH John Wayne \O'o Airport COSTA IRVINE �� •� HUNTINGTON MESA San Rd BEACH , ma r� 2 �Se ¢ Lake 1 t o Mission �t � Viejo l,co 4f of NEWPORT \ „ MVIEJON �s BEACH o c S' -J O I I PACIFIC OCEAN LAOUNA BEACH ° SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO SA SAN DIEGO CLEMENTE COUNTY 1 .. Regional Location- . MOO G�34a f�OO GAD 4GM4/�4�dG 4G�QC�4 City of Newport Beach Nth G 3 6 MILES EXHIBIT 1 r I 1 1 I i I 1 N u I 1 M r I 1 i 1 Vicinity MORUM FORD TEMMU MG City of Newport Beach IIIIc111 TRACT 00 MEMIMME ■■ 1111MMON EXHIBIT 2 I !J u I I I I 1J I I I I I TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (Please see oversized eabibits) r 1 I I 1 r A I I i 0 I L r I 1 ROUGH GRADING PLAN (Please see oversized exhibits) I Preliminary Site Plan The project site (exe udin _a cel 9) s designated by the General Plan to allow 888 residential units on 180 acres, 50,000 square feet of commercial/retail on 5 acres, and a 12-acre city park. The 12-acre park includes a 1-acre fire station reservation. As shown on the preliminary site plan (Exhibit 5), the applicant is proposing the development of the site with the maximum number of units allowed ' under the General Plan. As shown, the commercial site would be located at the southern tip of the site formed by Camelback Street) Bison Avenue, and the eastern project boundary. The city park would be located at the northeastern corner of the site formed by University Drive Extension and the eastern site boundary. Residential uses cover the balance of the site and are characterized by three different product types/densities. Table 1 presents the breakdown of dwelling units by product type/density. As shown on Exhibit 5, the higher density product types (15.55 d.u./acre) are proposed to be located in the eastern half of the site, the lower 1 _J L_J I density product types (6.6 d.u./acre) are proposed to go along Jamboree Road, and the middle density product (12.2 d.u./acre) types are to be located along Camelback Street. Detached Units Parcel Parcel 7, which includes all the single-family detached units, is being developed by the Bren Company, not The Irvine Company. A subsequent tentative tract map and site plan have been prepared for Parcel 7 as shown in Exhibits 6 and 7. As shown on the tentative map, the parcel will be subdivided into 176 lots, within•Lots A and B representing landscaped slope areas and Lot C to be developed as a recreation center. H I I I I I 11 11 I I I 1 1 I i 1 _r: 9 i r yU PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN (ILLUSTRATIVE) (Please see oversized exhibits) I 1 I I 1 G F I i 1 I I i EXHIBIT 7 PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN; SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED (NOT YET AVAILABLE) I I rl I I TABLE 1 SITE PLAN STATISTICAL SUMMARY Land Use Gross Acreage Units Density Residential ' Apartments Parcel 2 15.51 240 15.5 Parcel 3 12.54 194 15.5 ' Parcel 9_14142 15.5 Subtotal 37.19 576 ' Townhomes Parcel 6 11.16 136 12.2 ' Subtotal 11.16 136 ' Detached Units Parcel 7 26.84 176 6.6 Residential Total 75.19 888 ' Commercial/Retail Parcel 5 5.01 50,000 square feet City Park (Parcel 1) 12.00 Fire Station Res. (1.00) Major Roads 9.58 ' 101.78 Total Site Plan Area General Residential Unit Characteristics ' Exhibits 8 to it show the general unit characteristics of each product type. The 576 apartments include one- and two -bedroom stacked one-story units and two- and ' three -bedroom two-story units which will all be leased. The townhomes (136 units) will be two -and three -bedroom units which will be for sale. The 176 detached units will be one- or two -stories with the following characteristics: 5 r 1 I I17 u 7 u I I I I I I EXHIBIT 8 FLOOR PLANS - APARTMENTS & TOWNHOUSES (NOT YET AVAILABLE) r r 1 r r r rEXHIBIT 9 rFLOOR PLANS (BREN DEVELOPMENT) (Please see oversized exhibits) r r i r r r 1 . 1 r r r I F I I I I I I I EXHIBIT 10 BUILDING ELEVATIONS APARTMENTS AND TOWNHOUSES (NOT YET AVAILABLE) r I 1 1 I I 71 I w :n: BUILDING ELEVATIONS (SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED (Please see oversized exhibits) r Approximate No. Bedrooms/ Percentage of Units No. Bathrooms Square Footage 20% 2,2 968 25% 322-1/2 1,245 25% 3,2-1/2 1,365 ' 30% 312-1/2 4489 Commercial Center Uses ' No site plan for the proposed commercial center has been prepared as yet. However, the Planned Community District Regulations outline those uses which would be ' permitted in the commercial site: Retail sales and service of a convenience nature. ' - Restaurants, including outdoor, drive-in or takeout restaurants shall be subject to a use permit. - Fire, police or other similar state, county and municipal facilities. Service stations (subject to certain PC development standards). tThe PC regulations also provide development and design standards for the commercial uses (see Appendix B). ' Access and Parking ' Access to the site is proposed off Bison Avenue, Camelback Street, and the future ' University Drive extension. Access to the commercial site is proposed via driveways which come directly off Bison Avenue and Camelback Street. tAccess to the residential area will come off Camelback Street and the future University Drive extension via a series of local streets ("A", "B", and "C" Streets on I U the tentative tract map). The preliminary site plan also shows a series of narrower local streets which will provide access to the detached residential units. The proposed park (and fire station) will be accessed via a driveway at the eastern end of "C" Street. Parking within the development will be provided by a combination of garages, covered parking spaces, and uncovered parking spaces. Apartment units will have a minimum of 2.0 parking spaces each (including guest parking). C 11 ' Townhomes and detached units are proposed to have 2.5 spaces per unit (including ' guest parking). One space per unit will be covered. Planned Community District Regulations ' The North Ford Planned Community (PC) zoning has been developed to provide a tmethod whereby property may be classified and developed for light industrial uses, compatible with commercial activity, professional and business offices, residential units, park and fire station uses. The specifications of this district are intended to provide flexibility for both the land use and development standards in planned building groups. The PC District provides a statistical core which is consistent with the Newport Beach General Plan. The .proposed PC District Regulations amendment will add the standards for residential development (Area 5) to the PC text. See ' Appendix B for a copy of the amended text. 2.3 PROJECT PHASING The Irvine Company proposes to build the infrastructure for project in one phase, development units could be with ultimate build -out expected by 1990. The actual of phased over a number of years. 2.4 PROPOSED ACTIONS ' Implementation of the proposed project will require approval by the City Council of ' Newport Beach of the following actions: ' Certification of Environmental Impact Report The acceptance of an Environmental Impact Report as having been completed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and provisions of the City Council Policy K-3 (procedures and guidelines to implement the California ' Environmental Quality Act) and the certification that the data contained therein was considered in the final decisions on the project. I _J 7 H Amendment to the PC District Regulations Amend the North Ford/San Diego PC text to establish standards for Area 5. ' Tentative Tract Map ' Request to subdivide 125.88 acres of land into nine (9)lots. 2.5 PROJECT HISTORY ' In June 1968, the North Ford PC District was established and land uses designated for the site included light industrial and a small 3.2-acre commercial site. The original North Ford PC District included all the area between Jamboree Road and ' the proposed Corona del Mar/San Joaquin Hills Transportation corridor easement, north of Bison Avenue and South of the Jamboree Road -MacArthur Boulevard intersection. The area south of the originally proposed Eastbluff Drive extension is commonly referred to as the "North Ford parcel" and the areas immediately north ' and south of the San Diego Creek Channel are commonly referred to as the "San Diego Creek parcels." ' During 1970 and 1972, applications were filed' to redesignate the district's allowed uses. In 1973, prior -to the adoption of the amendments, an EIR was prepared and certified for zoning of the North Ford parcel (City of Newport Beach, 1973). In 1976, a PC amendment was approved for a portion of the site. This amendment expanded the allowable uses in Area 4 (between Camelback and the proposed Eastbluff Drive extension). A Negative Declaration was granted for this amendment ' based on the environmental documentation in the 1973 EIR. In November 1978, the Newport Beach City Council adopted a resolution which amended the PC District Regulations to require a traffic phasing plan for all ' additional development in excess of 30 percent of the additional allowable development. ' The first phase of development occurred in the triangle formed by Jamboree Road and Camelback Street. To date, a total of 129,260 square feet of development has 8 1 I I I I I E1 �I been constructed within this "Camelback Area" (Areas 1 and 2 of the North Ford PC Land Use Plan). In November 1979, Tentative Tract No. 10019 'was submitted for commercial and industrial uses on Areas 3 and 4 of the North Ford parcel (at that time the North Ford PC did not include the San Diego Creek parcel). An EIR was prepared, however, the project was not approved (City of Newport Beach, 1979). Environmental information from the 1979 EIR has been incorporated by reference into this EIR per Section 15150 of the amended CEQA Guidelines. Exhibit 12 illustrates the location of the study area addressed in this EIR. In December 1979, GPA 79-1 was adopted for 16 sites located within the city. This GPA altered the land uses on the North Ford parcel to allow local "Retail and Service Commercial" (not to exceed 28,500 square feet); "General Industry" (not to exceed 295,000 square feet); and "Medium Density Residential" (not to exceed 120 dwelling units). GPA 79-1 also altered the land uses on the south San Diego Creek parcel to allow "Governmental, Institutional, and Educational Facilities" with an alternate use of "General Industry." During 1982, the Early Action and Interim Plan of the San Diego Creek Comprehen- sive Stormwater Sedimentation Control Program was implemented. It included two debris basins in the San Diego Creek and an excavated basin in the Upper Newport Bay. The south San Diego Creek parcel was used as a disposal site for excavated material from these areas. An EIR was prepared and certified for the sedimentation control program and those portions applicable to the study area have been incorporated by reference into this EIR per Section 15150 of the amended CEQA Guidelines. Exhibit 12 shows the location of the study area addressed in this EIR. In October 1983, the city approved GPA 82-1 which redesignated the General Plan land uses on the North Ford parcel to allow the development of up to 888 residential units, 345,000 square feet of office/research and development uses, 50,000 square feet of retail commercial, and a 12-acre city park. The PC District Regulations and Land Use Plan were also amended to reflect these land use changes. 'J 9 V 4j t C L IS 10Lc9MF� ��'A Q � •� e , R 0 I Q CER I PL. �Jiwy •� 's i o s C/TR S PG sv l ._� IA. 0 Q Sr R BASSW 4e LEGEND ' T.T. NO. 10019 EIR (NOV. 1972) OPA 82-1 EIR (OCTOBER 1983) SEDIMENTATION CONTROL �� PROJECT AREA ADDRESSED PROGRAM EIR (1989) IN THIS. EIR Plannina Areas 1111.1`II NORTH FORD TENTATIVE TRACT mmmmmm - .. : - . No 1111mmomm EXHIBIT 12 I In addition, the GPA revised the alignment of the future extension of Eastbluff Drive. Instead of extending it southeasterly to the Bonita Canyon Road terminus at MacArthur Boulevard, it extends northeasterly to University Drive at MacArthur Boulevard. It is now referred to as the "University Drive Extension." This action increased the size of the North Ford parcel and decreased the size of the south San Diego Creek parcel by approximately 25 acres. The South San Diego Creek parcel was added back to the PC District at this time and the General Plan was amended to show administrative, professional, and financial commercial uses (north of the future University Drive Extension). The Local Coastal Program was amended to show the revised alignment and land use designations for that part of the study area in the Coastal Zone. An EIR was prepared and certified for GPA 82-1 which has been incorporated by reference per Section 15150 of the amended CEQA Guidelines. ExhibiO-shows the location of the study area addressed in this EIR. The proposed subdivision covers the undeveloped portion of the North Ford Planned Community south of the future University Drive Extension. This includes Areas 3, 5, and 6 of the existing North Ford PC Land Use Plan. I I I I I 10 I I 3.0 LOCAL AND REGIONAL LAND USES RELATING TO THIS PROJECT 3.1 EXISTING LAND USE IOnsite Land Uses The North Ford site is currently undeveloped open space which has been impacted by various earth -moving activities over the years. The part of the study area south of what was once proposed as the extension of Eastbluff Drive (the original North Ford parcel) has been surveyed and rough -graded. North of this area (part of the original south San Diego Creek parcel) has been used as a fill site for disposal of silt and sediment from Upper Newport Bay and San Diego Creek. This operation was part of the Early Action and Interim Plan of the San Diego Creek Comprehensive Storm Water Sedimentation Control Plan. Surrounding Land Uses Exhibit 12 presents the land uses surrounding the study area. Immediately east of the study area is Caltran's Route 73 easement and undeveloped open space in the City of Irvine. A borrow stockpile site is located in the hills above MacArthur Boulevard and Bonita Canyon Road. Further east of the borrow site is the University of California, Irvine campus. South of the site, across Bison Avenue is the Belcourt Hill Estates residential �+ development (300 units maximum) and the Ford Aeroneutronics facility (up 2,600,000 square feet of research/industrial at maximum build -out). Across Camelback Street, southwest of the site, there are a number of miscellaneous uses including a Pacific Bell facility, Southern California Edison facility, U.S. Post Office, The Irvine Company Property Management and Community Cabevision facilities, Temple Bat Yahm and Mariner's Church. West of the study area is the Eastbluff Village residential community, a low -density, single-family detached residential community totalling 456 dwelling units. I I I I Fj i II I I 1 I I i I u PhotographAerial m City of Newport Beach Nth 0 600 1000 FEET NORTH FORD TENTATIVE TRACT � � ■�■■�� EXHIBIT 13 I 1 3.2 LAND USE PLANS Land use plans which are applicable to the study area include the General Plan, Zoning Code, and Local Coastal Program. General Plan Land Use Element The Land Use Element designates the site to have ±79 acres of Multiple -Family Residential at a maximum of 888 dwelling units; ±5 acres of Retail and Service Commercial at a maximum of 50,000 square feet of neighborhood shopping center; and ±12 acres of Recreational and Environmental Open Space for active park use. Exhibit -L illustrates the location of these land uses within the site. In addition, a fire station is to be reserved somewhere within the site. At this time, the applicant is proposing the reservation be located within the 12-acre park site. Residential Growth Element r The Residential Growth Element designates the site to include ±79 acres of Multiple - Family Residential up to a maximum of 888 dwelling units. Recreation and Open Space Element The Open Space Plan designates a ±12-acre park within the site, located at the southwest corner of the future University Drive Extension and the freeway reservation property. This park is to be a neighborhood activity park and could include such facilities as a softball diamond, tennis courts, basketball courts, or open field play areas. In addition, GPA 82-1 amended the General Plan text to include the following policy relating to park development in the North Ford PC: That residential uses developed shall comply with the requirements of the park dedication ordinance through land dedication. The park site shall be parcelled and made accessible concurrent with approval of the first residential development. The city shall have the right to commence site improvements 12 concurrent with development of the first residential tract. If the entire park is not developed prior to occupancy of the first residential unit, a mechanism shall be established to inform all first and subsequent occupants and owners of the community park location and the intent to provide active recreational facilities with night -lighted fields (City Counsil Resolution 83-104). IThe city's Master Plan of Bikeways designates a backbone bikeway along the eastern boundary of the site (within the freeway easement, and secondary bikeways along Jamboree Road, Bison Avenue, and the extension of University Drive. ICirculation Element I The Circulation Element designates the future University Drive Extension and Bison Avenue as primary roads (four -lane divided); and MacArthur Boulevard and Jamboree Road as major roads (six -lane divided). The property immediately to the east of the site is part of Caltran's freeway reservation for the Corona del Mar/San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor. Noise Element The Noise Element (as amended by GPA 82-1) shows that portions of the site along Jamboree Road, University Drive, and the freeway will be within a 65 CNEL contour generated by traffic on these roadways. The site is not within the direct flight pattern of commercial aircraft operating out of John Wayne -Orange County Airport. However, it is exposed to sideline noise from these aircraft, along with noise from private jet and other general aviation overflights. Housing Element The city's Housing Element contains a number of program and performance objectives which relate to the North Ford development: Objective 3: To promote the development of an increased level of new housing production, consistent with sound planning and environmental standards. 13 Objective 4: To encourage, where feasible, mixed -use development that achieves a balance between residential and appropriate commercial/industrial activities. Objective 5: To achieve an appropriate balance between employment and housing. Objective 6: To encourage the housing industry to respond to the housing needs of the community as well as the demand for housing as perceived by the industry. MObjective 7: To promote and assist in the development of housing for low and moderate income households. Objective 10: To promote housing opportunities for all persons regardless of race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, or color. Objective 11: To provide for the development of a variety of housing types and products for all income levels of the community. In addition, GPA 82-1 amended the General Plan text to include the following policies/constraints relating to residential development in the North Ford PC: That a minimum of 222 of the permitted residential units be maintained as units affordable to families of low and moderate income. Eighty percent (178) of the units shall be affordable to families whose income does not exceed 100 percent of the Orange County median family income; 20 percent (44) of the units shall be affordable to families whose income does not exceed 80 percent of the Orange County median family income. These units shall be maintained as affordable for a period of ten (10) years from the date of original occupancy. Dependent on the availability of Mortgage Revenue Bond Financing and CDBG funds, the city will determine the mix of ownership and rental affordable housing units. These affordable housing units shall be developed prior to or concurrent with the other development in the North Ford area and the additional 295,000 square feet of office permitted in Koll Center Newport - Office Site "C" (City Council Resolution 83-104). J 14 Conservation of Natural Resources Element This element identifies the environmental resources (including air, water, cultural, and energy) within the community and proposes programs for protection for these �- resources. Public Safety Element Seismic Hazards - Most of the study area is located in an area designated for "stronger groundshaking potential" (Category 2) in the city's Seismic Elemenbt. The northeast corner of the site is in an area designated as having the "highest groundshaking risk" (Groundshaking - Category 4) and is unadvisable for critical facilities. In addition, this area is designated as having the "highest potential from liquefaction" (Ground Failure - Category 4). Expansive and Collapsible Soil Hazards -The site is designated as possibly having moderate to highly expansive soils (Category 2). Erosion Potential - The site is designated as having a slight erosion risk which is not considered significant. Flood Hazards - The northeast corner of the site is located in a flood hazard area Fire Hazards - The study area is in Category 2 for potential fire hazards. This category represents areas which are burned regularly and have fair access, good fire breaks, and are cleaned twice yearly. Zoning Code The study area is designated as a Planned Community (PC); a district which allows a project to include various types of land uses consistent with the General Plan through adoption of a development plan that sets forth land use relationships and standards for the project. A copy of the North Ford PC District Regulations is included in IAppendix 6-. I 15 I ILocal Coastal Program 1 The northeastern corner of the site is located in the coastal zone. It is designated for Recreational and Environmental Open Space and Multiple -Family Residential uses. Prior to development, the Coastal Commission must approve a permit to allow development of that portion of the site in the Coastal Zone. I 17 I I I 11 I P I ,I 11 I 11 I 3.3 COMMITTED PROJECTS The City requires that all projects in excess of 10 dwelling units or 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 committed, but not yet fully constructed and occupied, are listed below and shown in Exhibit A. Name Use Quantity 1. Hoag Hospital Hospital 268 beds 2. Pacesetter Homes Office 50,000 sq. ft. 3. Aeronutronic Ford Residential 300 units 4. 5. Back Bay Office Civic Plaza Office Office 692720 sq. ft. 152,894 sq. ft Restaurant 8,000 sq. ft. Theater 202000 sq. ft. Art Museum 10,000 sq. ft. Library 14,000 sq. ft. 6. Corporate Plaza Office 101,150 sq. ft. 7. Koll Center -Newport Office 3259934 sq. ft. Hotel 440 rooms 8. Campus/MacArthur Office 358,000 sq. ft. 9. National Education Office (Revised) Office 41,250 sq. ft. 10. Sheraton Hotel Expansion Hotel 119 rooms 11. Pacific Mutual Plaza Office 245,000 sq. ft. 12. Newport Place Ofice 194,411 sq. ft. 13. Shokrian Office 24,000 sq. ft. 14. Sea Island Residential 132 units 15. Baywood Apartments Residential 68 units 16. Harbor Point Homes Residential 21 units 17. Rudy Baron Office 8,500 sq. ft. Retail 7,500 sq. ft. 18. Martha's Vineyard Office 152831 sq. ft. Restaurant 2,920 sq. ft. 119. 3101 W. Coast Highway Office 419494 sq. ft. 20. Coast Business Center Office 37,000 sq. ft. 21. Koll Center Newport and No. 1 TPP Office 7,650 sq. ft. 22. Ford Aeronutronic Industrial 120,000 sq. ft. 23. 1511 do 1252 Superior Medical Office 25,000 sq. ft. 24. GPA 81-1, Banning Ranch Residential 406 units Industrial 164,400 sq. ft. Office 2352600 sq. ft. 25. Hughes Industrial 110,000 sq. ft. 26. Park Lido Medical Office 65,269 sq. ft. 27. Heritage Bank Office 36,888 sq. ft. 28. Flagship Convalescent Hospital Hospital 68 beds 17 Committed, Approved and Proposed Projects HDRUM FORD IREHUM E uaac u City of Newport Beach COMMITTED PROJECTS APPROVED AND PROPOSED PROJECTS N I`, IN O ME-MEME I Name 29. Big Canyon 10 30. Balboa Marina Fun Zone It i A I D I 31. GPA 81-3, Marriott Hotel Expansion 32. St. Andrews Church Expansion 33. YMCA (Expansion) 34. Allred Condos 35. Seashore Townehomes 36. Four Seasons Hotel 37. University Athletic Club 38. Block 400 Medical (GPA 81-2) 39. North Ford (GPA 82-1)/Project Site 40. MacArthur Court/Koll Center Newport "Block C" 41. Belcourt Area 8 (revised) 42. Carver Office 43. Corona del Mar Homes 44. Big Canyon Villa Apts. 45. 1400 Dove Street 46. '110 Quail Street 47. Superior Avenue Medical 48. Auer Office 49. Villa Point Apartments 50. Rosen Industries Redevelopment TOTAL COMMITTED PROJECTS Use Residential Commercial Office Restaurant Hotel Church Recreational Residential Residential Hotel Office Medical Office Residential Park Commercial Office Residential Office Residential Residential Office Office Medical Office Office Residential Restaurant Retail Office Boatyard Office Medical Office Commercial, Restaurants Industrial Theater Art Museum Library Hospital Residential Hotel Church Recreational Quantity 33 units 16,165 sq. ft. 26,320 sq. ft. 6,866 sq. ft. 234 rooms 1,400 persons cap. 45,000 sq. ft. 50 units 17 units 325 rooms 516 sq. ft. 802000 sq. ft. 888 units 12 acres 50,000 sq. ft. 295,000 sq. ft. 130 units 15,000 sq. ft. 40 units 80 units 16,154 sq. ft. 1,091 sq. ft. 43,470 sq. ft. 23,550 sq. ft. 154 units 7,828 sq. ft. 6,303 sq. ft. 302564 sq. ft. 72950 sq. ft. 2,3539467 sq. ft. 213,739 sq. ft. 124,319 sq. ft. 394,400 sq. ft. 20,000 sq. ft. 10,000 sq. ft. 142000 sq. ft. 336 beds 2,320 units 1,118 rooms 1,400 persons cap. 45,000 sq. ft. 18 3.4 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 (see Exhibit LI-). A. GPA 81-2 B. Newport Center Res. Residential office/Industrial Residential 143 units 4392000 sq. ft. 307 units 19 I 3.5 PROPOSED PROJECTS 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 agencies. These projects are listed below and shown in Exhibit1. Statistics for specific area plans indicate additional allowable development based upon existing zoning. C. 2600 W. Coast Highway Office 22,000 sq. ft. D. Art's Landing Redevelopment Restaurant 3,595 sq. ft. E. GPA 83-1(b) 68 1. Marguerite Avenue Parcel Residential units 2. Fifth Avenue Parcel Residential 84 units 3. Buck Gully Parcel Open Space F. GPA 83-1(d) Fifth Avenue/MacArthur Boulevard Residential 120 units (Senior) G. Specific Area Plans (none currently in progress) 1. Central Balboa (6/82) Commercial 621J30 sq. ft. 2. Cannery Village/ Commercial 2,840,076 sq. ft. McFadden Square (2/77) Industrial 722,309 sq. ft. 3. West Newport Study area (6/82) Commercial 22915,140 sq. ft. Industrial 6,009,870 sq. ft. Residential 164 units 4. Mariners Mile (1976) Commercial 302,011 sq. ft. 5. Corona del Mar (6/82) Commercial 122832933 sq. ft. Residential 273 units H. Newport Aquatic Center/ North Star Beach Recreational I. Newport Dunes Hotel 250 rooms J. Other GPA's Proposed 1. Newport Center Animal Hospital Office 1,500 sq. ft. 2. Irvine Coastal Area Sphere - of -Influence TOTAL PROPOSED PROJECTS Industrial 6,732479 sq. ft. 23,500 ft. Office sq. Commercial 71966,485 sq. ft. Residential 272 units Hotel 250 rooms I 20 II U P I 3.6 CIRCULATION CONSIDERATIONS Circulation and traffic considerations pertaining to the proposed project should also be evaluated in the context of other General Plan Amendments, 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 circulation improvements which are in various stages of completion and/or study and relevant to the proposed project are described in GPA 82-1 EIR which is incorporated by reference. 21 I 4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS IMPACTS CITY POLICIES AND REQUIREMENTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES 4.1 LANDFORM/GEOLOGY/SOILS The principle literature sources describing the physical features of the project site Include: the North Ford PC Tentative Tract No. 10019 EIR (City of Newport Beach, 1979), the Upper Newport Bay/Site 'A' Early Action and Interim Plan EIR (City of Newport Beach, 1981)2 a "Geotechnicai Review of the North Ford Area and Site All (Moore and Taber, 1983), and "North Ford Grading Study" (Moore and Taber, 1984). Copies of the last two documents are included in Appendix C for easy reference. The following discussion summarizes those sections within the above referenced documents applicable to the project area. 4.1.1 Existing Conditions Landform/Topography 1 The topography of the project site gently slopes in a north to northwest direction. ' Total relief within the boundaries of the project site is approximately 20 feet. Lowest elevations are recorded in the northwest corner of the site (10 feet above mean sea level), while the highest point is located near the southeast boundary (30 feet above mean sea level) at the Jamboree and Camelback intersection. The surface terrain of the project site has been disturbed in recent years. The portion of the site previously designated "Site All (see Exhibit /'. in Section 2.59 Project History) was used to dispose of sediment removed from Upper Newport Bay as part of the Early Action and Interim Control Plan. Prior to the placement of fill in this area a series of subdrains were constructed to conduct excess moisture from the fill material and reduce pore. pressure. This fill material was compacted to 90 percent relative compaction. Approximately five to seven feet of fill material was placed on this portion of the site. The portion of the site filled is shown on Exhibit The portion of the site previously designated as the "North Ford Site" was initially utilized as a borrow site to provide material used to construct foundations for the 22 I m m m m M AM s s r ■s � W m s an 06m m LEGEND APPROXIMATE AREA COMPACTED FILL APPROXIMATE AREA SURCHARGE FILL UPLIFTED. PRECONSOLIDATED MARINE SEDIMENTS COMPRESSIBLE RECENT ALLUVIAL DEPOSITS Geology and Soils MOWN FORD RDD 4C rErOWE IrRACU City of Newport Beach SOURCE: MOORE d TABER. SEPT. 1983 Mm EXHIBIT 15 I Newport Freeway. Upon completion of borrow activities, the site was rough -graded for development purposes, at which time several areas received fill dirt (see Exhibit ice). As shown on the exhibit, structural fill overlain by surcharge fill has been placed within the northwest corner of the North Ford area. Geology/Soils Geologically, the project site is an elevated marine terrace consisting primarily of silty sands underlain by massive, lightly, cemented sandstone. The sandstone formation exhibits a shallow to moderately northeasterly dip of between 10 and 25 degrees. Two distinct geologic formations with varying characteristics are present, however, within the site. The southern portion of the site is underlain by uplifted, preconsolidated marine sediments. An anticlinal fold with gentle sloping flanks appears to cut east -westerly through the southern corner of the study area, deforming both the terrace deposits and the underlying sandstone. No folding or faulting is present. The northern portion of the site is underlain by poorly consolidated sediments of recent (Holocene) age. Geologic Hazards and Constraints The project site lies within a potentially active seismic area. Six faults, both active and potentially active, are located within a 50-mile radius of the project site. ' However, according to current published data and field reconnaissance, there is no known fault located on or adjacent to the project site. The following table lists the six faults noted above, distance and direction from the site, and estimated effects upon the site in the event of an earthquake. ' Due to high groundwater and the loose granular nature of the deposits underlying the northern portion of the project site, a potential exists for soil liquefaction. Test borings on the site reveal that groundwater is situated between 10 and 20 feet. The soils underlying the southern portion of the site are comparatively dense, and thus Iliquefaction within this area is not considered to be a potential hazard. I 23 I ITABLE °1L SEISMICITY FOR MAJOR FAULTS Approximate Distance Maximum Credible Earthquake Fault Zone From Study Area (Richter Scale) Pelican Hills 0.9 miles S 5.8 Newport -Inglewood 4.4 miles SW 7.0 El Modenm 12.0 miles N 5.0 Norwalk 16.0 miles N 6.6 Whittier -Elsinore 18.0 miles NE 7.3 ' San Andreas 50.0 miles NE 8.3 1 4.1.2 Impacts 1 Landform/Topograph ' The existing topography of the site will be modified as a result of grading for building pads and roads. The proposed rough grading plan is shown on Exhibit 40 with the areas of cut and fill outlined. As shown, the rough graded elevations will range in height from 20 feet at the northeastern corner of the site to 125 feet at the southwestern corner. For the most part, the southwestern portion of the site will be cut while varying ' depths of structural fill are to be placed on the rest of the site. In general, fill depths will range from 5 to 10 feet except for limited areas where 20 to 30 feet of fill are anticipated. Cut slopes will range from 5 feet to 30 feet near the western corner of the site. Overall, the proposed grading plan will require approximately 8202000 cubic yards of cut and 859,000 cubic yards of fill. Due to the shrinkage characteristics of the soils onsite, approximately 120,000 cubic yards of fill have to be imported to balance the grading. As previously discussed, the surface terrain of the site has been previously disturbed ' as portions of the site have been used as both borrow and fill sites at different 24 �7 Z St.= _=o / F'd L L ' 4 e y V C iSa y /^ R�m>wear awW ar evao cv _.N. meal m�er •u ar �xaro cv n«. _seam cr. ,nivrr <r mo cr SITE •A' <y =o LY / Rqr `O• STREET -� rR' STREET � -5- b ReE I& SrREE7' I 11 - ..Vu.... e.=S.. .....nno. on VPEY/•PO IIFN�R -BUBDIVIGEP YR4-Sf-Gi THE IRVINE COMPANY a "> "' PSOMAS ; <W.E WN •.. S . E LL wM.. u6 „, 1 ►�� ASSOCIATES `"° ""' "" "' ""w"""'" """" I CUT AND FILL MAP ���T-� c.� ./,✓. S"e ann"a Sw.c o.a."; rna luww"owl wwwe" cwLlPowrylA .,ems,. annr I ..n 1 EXHIBIT 16 i times. For this reason, the proposed alterations to the existing landform are not 1 considered to be significant or adverse. Geology/Soils The primary environmental constraint associated with the geology and soils of the site is the compressibility of the soils on the northern portion of the site. The fine- grained compressible sediments underlying this portion of the site will undergo ' significant consolidation when subjected to stress increases due to imposed fill loads. The magnitude of the settlement is dependent on the fill load. These areas will require a delay between the time that fill is placed and construction commences in order for settlement to occur. ' The proposed fill placed adjacent to the existing levees or roadway embankments will cause some settlement beneath the levees of Jamboree Road . This settlement is not anticipated to be significant, however. The time for settlement to occur can be decreased by placing a surcharge fill above ' the proposed finish grade. It is estimated that the settlement of these areas could take up to six years to take place with no surcharge fill. Surcharge fills can reduce ' the settlement period substantially. For example, the use of a surcharge depth to fill depth ratio of 1.5/1 can reduce the time required for 90 percent primary compaction to approximately 3 months. A surcharge fill and settlement monitoring program has been proposed to mitigate this impact. ' Geologic Hazards and Constraints ' The site, as is most of southern California, is subject to groundshaking during an earthquake. The ground shaking potential of the site is considered similar to that expected in surrounding areas and ground shaking effects can be mitigated satisfactorily by conformance with the Uniform Building Code. There are no faults located on site and, therefore, the hazard from ground rupture is considered minimal. Saturated loose granular deposits underlying the northern portion of the site could be susceptible to liquefaction or cyclic mobility in the event of the maximum probable (100-year probable) earthquake along the Newport -Inglewood fault. The 25 corresponding probabilities of occurence are approximately 63 percent during an average 100-year period, or 39 percent during 50 years, or 22 percent during 25 years. Some differential settlement and ground lurching with corresponding distress to structures and utilities could be expected should liquefaction occur during ground shaking. However, it is not anticipated that structures designed and constructed in accordance with current codes would collaspe under these conditions. Consequently, the potential for injury or loss of life due to earthquake induced structural f allure is considered to be relatively low and the risks would be similar to those of building in other low-lying areas in Newport Beach. 4.1.3 City Policies and Requirements 1-A. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit to be ' approved by the Building and Planning Departments. ' 1-B. A grading plan shall include a complete plan for temporary and permanent drainage facilities, to minimize any potential impacts from ' silt, debris, and other water pollutants. 1-C. The grading permit shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, watering, and a sweeping program designed to minimize the impact of haul operations. 4.1.4 Mitigation Measures 1-1. To reduce settlement loads of the weight and bearing proposed, it is recommended by the soils engineer that the northern portion of the site be provided with an uncompacted surcharge fill placed above the final design grade and later removed. Specifies for the surcharging program are contained in the "North Ford Grading Study" (Moore and Taber, 1984) contained in Appendix C. ' 1-2. Settlement readings for the areas subject to significant consolidation ' and subject to the recommended surcharge fill program should be monitored and recorded as specified in the North Ford Grading Study. Additionally, similar monitoring of the adjoining Jamboree roadbed should also be included. 26 A 1-3. Prior to the start of grading, all vegetation and trash should be removed from cut and fill areas and the disposition approved by the soils 1 engineer. 1-4. Any abandoned utility lines or other underground structures should be ' removed, destroyed, or abandoned in compliance with specifications of the building official and recommendations of the soils engineer. Care ' should be taken during construction to monitor flow lies that may be critical. The existing subdrains in the northern part of the site should ' remain undisturbed. 1-5. Existing uncertified or uncompacted fills should be excavated and ' objectionable material removed. If approved by the soils engineer, the soil can be replaced as compacted fill. ' 1-6. The ground surface beneath all proposed fill areas should be stripped of loose or unsatisfactory soils or alluvium if it exceeds about 8 inches in depth. This condition exists in the drainage channel and areas of recent disposition of eroded sand. These soils may be used as compacted fill provided they are free of deleterious materials. The resulting surface should be approved by the soils engineer prior to processing the natural ground. ' 1-6. The resulting clean, natural ground surface should be scarified, brought to about optimum moisture content, and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction for a depth of 6 inches below the existing or stripped surface. ' 1-8. Where composite slopes (i.e., fill over cut) are to be constructed, the cut portion should be made first and approved by the soils engineer before .>: the fill is placed. 1-9. Where unbuttressed fill is to be placed on slopes steeper than 5:1, essentially level, equipment -width benches should first be cut into bedrock or other component material approved by the soils engineer and 27 [J i i 1 LJ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i r� L i 1 engineering geologist. This may require a key or toe bench at the toe of the fill. Where the fill is buttressed, as in the case of fill across a drainage channel, smaller benches or notches should be cut into competent material so that a good bond is provided. 1-10. Fill should consist of approved earth material free of trash or debris, roots, vegetation, or other deleterious matter. 1-11. Fill should be spread in thin lifts, brought to approximate moisture content, and compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum density. Maximum density will be determined by ASTM Test Method D1557-70. Fill in drainage channels over 3 feet in depth should be compacted to at least 93 percent of maximum density. 1-12. Fill slopes should be compacted to 90 percent of maximum density to the face of the slope. This can be achieved by (1) backrolling with a sheepsfoot every 3 feet as the fill is brought up, or (2) overfilling the slope and cutting back to the compacted fill core. 1-13. All trench backfills except for the bedding and 6 inches of cover should be compacted to 90 percent of maximum density. 1-14. The developer may want to consider implementing measures to reduce the risk of liquefaction in the northern area. Such measures include densifying loose granular soils with vibrating probes or dropping heavy weights from cranes. A more comprehensive geotechnical investigation would be required to evaluate possible treatment methods. 4.1.5 Level of Significance After Mitigation All landform and soils impacts will be mitigated to a level of insignificance. PM i 4.2 HYDROLOGY ' This section addresses the study area's existing and post -development hydrology. The primary source for this discussion is "Hydrology Study; North Ford Project" prepared ' by Psomas Associates in July 1984, which is summarized here and included in Appendix D. 4.2.1 Existing Conditions ' The hydrology study considered both the 125-acre North Ford study area and the 30- acre triangular parcel formed by Camelback, Bison, and Jamboree. This offsite area currently drains onto the study area and is therefore important to a complete hydrology evaluation. The offsite 30-acre drainage area is approximately 90 percent developed at present. The area drains onto the North Ford site through a 24-inch storm drain which runs under Camelback Street (see Exhibit 17). This system does not appear adequate as there is evidence of erosion below the curb and catch basin on the easterly side of Camelback Street at the present low point. The 25-year frequency runoff from this offsite area is 55.4 cubic feet per second (efs). The study area has experienced several levels of grading and there are five desilting basins in use on the site. A very small portion of the study area drains easterly into an existing 60-inch storm drain on the easterly site boundary which discharges into ' the Bonita Creek channel that drains into the San Diego Creek. Most of the study area drains northerly across the site and then directly into the San Diego Creek (see Exhibit 17). The San Diego Creek parcel is lower than the flood level of the San ' Diego Creek but is protected by a 10- to 15-foot high levy. The total 25-year frequency runoff presently attributed to the 125-acre site is 152.5 cis. Water Quality Runoff from the study area reaches the San Diego Creek channel to the north which drains westerly into the Upper Newport Bay. Water quality in the Upper Bay is ' influenced by both marine and fresh water imputs. Estuarine conditions exist within the Upper Bay the majority of the time. 29 = m m r m m i== m = = m m m i= m m • 92.0 OFS jL''E�GEEND �/ � SUBDRAINADE AREA BOUNDARIES r-�—� DIRECTION OF RUNOFF FLOW j STORM DRAINS - DESILTING BASINS SOURCE: PSOMAS d ASSOCIATES, AUG. 1984 Existing Hydrology -�- HORIM FORD RDD VEHIM WE 1MaCI City of Newport Beach N.& 0 285 s�0 FEET _ EXHIBIT 17 I I I L7 [1 The primary water quality problems in the bay are from high nutrient and pesticide levels in runoff, and erosion and sediment transport (from agriculture and urban construction activities). High bacterial counts have also been recorded in the bay. In its existing undeveloped condition, unvegetated areas are a significant source of sediment. The study area has a number of desilting basins which reduce the amount of sediment reaching the Upper Bay. However, it can be assumed that some percentage of the sediment and finer materials from the study area continue on to be deposited in the bay. In addition, the developed parcel between Camelback, Bison, and Jamboree which drains onto the study area is a source of urban pollutants such as oil, grease, heavy metals, fertilizers, and pesticides. The pollutants, while not insignificant quantities, add to the cumulative pollutant load in the Upper Bay. Sedimentation Control Plan In 19839 the City of Newport Beach, in conjunction with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), prepared and approved the "Newport Bay Watershed; San Diego Creek Comprehensive Stormwater Sedimentation Control Plan." This plan outlined a combination of land management practices and structural measures aimed at reducing the amount of sediment reaching the Upper Newport Bay. The land management practices included both agricultural and construction oriented measures which reduced the amount of sediment entering the runoff which enters San Diego Creek and ultimately the Upper Bay. Although agricultural control measures are not applicable in Newport Beach, construction -related sediment control measures are applicable and especially critical in areas draining directly into the San Diego Creek. The Sediment Control Plan recommends that all "cities in the watershed adopt water quality protection as a goal of their grading ordinances." In addition, the plan recommends that 'jurisdictions include sediment reduction as an objective in siting and building design approval" and that 'jurisdictions prohibit major landciearing 30 I n except immediately in advance of grading and construction." Structural measures to be implemented as part of the Sedimentation Control Plan include three additional sediment -trapping, in -channel basins in the San Diego Creek channel and possibly more silt -trapping, in -bay basins in the Upper Newport Bay. ' The City of Newport Beach is one of the agencies responsible for implementation of the Sedimentation Control Plan. Other agencies include the City of Irvine, County of Orange, and the State Department of Fish and Game. Landowners and developers, such as The Irvine Company, also play an important role in the implementation of ' the plan. 4.2.2 Impacts Drainage Characteristics ' Development of the proposed tract will result in an increase in impermeable surfaces ' (pavement and structures). In addition, development will alter the onsite drainage patterns, as shown in Exhibit 18. ' Runoff Volumes - After development of the residential units, the park site, and the 5-acre commercial site, the 25-year frequency runoff will be 243.1 efs. The increase ' in runoff is approximately 59 percent and due solely to surface improvements and not to any change in drainage areas. The increase in impermeable surfaces will also Ireduce the amount of water percolation. Drainage Improvements - An additional catch basin will be placed in Camelback Street at the low point, the existing 24-inch drain will be removed, and replaced with a 30-inch storm drain. This will drain the southerly 13 acres and connect into the Iexisting drain on the easterly property line. ' The central two-thirds of the site will drain into a new storm drain within "C" Street, flowing north and east to the cul-de-sac at the east property line where it will discharge into the existing channel along the easterly property line. Future University Drive extension will drain east from Jamboree to the easterly 31 I p IJ F 7 I 91 +: _iUJ - (Please see oversized exhibits) I L_J I property line where catch basins will be provided to discharge into the existing channel. The property north of the University Drive extension will drain north to the San Diego Creek Channel. ' According to the project engineer, interim desilting basins must be maintained on all undeveloped portions of the site to prevent silt from entering the storm drain system and the San Diego Creek Channel. Post -development conditions will not necessitate the retention of any of the desilting basins.l 11 Water Quality U I I I Construction of the proposed development will have both short- and long-term impacts on water quality in Upper Newport Bay. Short-term impacts to surface water quality (i.e., increased sedimentation) will occur during the grading and initial construction activities when project soils are disturbed and unprotected and thus more susceptible to erosion. Because the San Diego Creek Channel drains into the Upper Newport Bay during the construction phase. Upon completion of the project, sediment loads in runoff from the site will decrease from existing levels due to the increase in covered soil area. Incremental increases in urban water pollutants (i.e., oil, grease, heavy metals, fertilizers, pesticides, etc.) will add to the cumulative impacts on the quality of surface runoff reaching the Upper Bay. Sedimentation Control Plan As stated earlier, the City of Newport Beach is a responsible agency for implementation of the Sedimentation Control Plan. The city's grading ordinance includes a number of erosion control measures which significantly reduce construction -related sediment impacts. 1 Personal communication with Tom Chadwell, Project Engineer, Psomas and Associates, Inc., August 14, 1984. 32 11 In addition, landowners/developers such as The Irvine Company, are responsible for meeting the requirements of the grading ordinance and any other erosion control/sediment trapping measures which the city requires. 1 4.2.3 City Policies and Requirements Please see City Policies and Requirements Nos. 1-B through 1-C in Section 4.1.3. In addition, the following policies/requirements are applicable: be be 2-A. An erosion, siltation, and dust control plan shall submitted and subject to the approval of the Building Department. A copy shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 2-B. 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 t 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 report shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Building Departments. 2-C. Erosion control measures shall be implemented on any exposed slopes within 30 days after grading or as approved by the city's Grading Engineer. 2-D. Control of infiltration to the groundwater system for the project shall be provided as part of the project design. 2-E. A landscape and irrigation plan for the project shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. The landscape plan shall integrate and phase the installation of landscaping with the proposed construction schedule. I 33 U I 4.2.4 Level of Significance After Mitigation The increase in erosion and sedimentation from construction will be mitigated to a level of insignificance. Alteration of the drainage pattern and the increase in surface runoff will be mitigated to a level of insignifidance. The incremental increase in urban pollutants may be cumulatively significant. I 34 4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES This section has been summarized from the following literature sources: The North Ford PC Tentative Tract No. 10019 EIR (City of Newport Beach, 1979) and the Upper Newport Bay/Site 'A' Early Action and Interim Plan EIR (City of Newport Beach, 1981). 4.3.1 E:tisting Conditions Vegetation The study area can be divided into seven (7) plant associations including disced (unvegetated) fields, California Steppe grassland, introduced grassland and weeds, riparian woodland, swales, coastal sage scrub, and horticultural introductions. The only significant habitat mapped in the study area is Gray Coast eriogonum. No rare or endangered plant species are located on the site. A complete inventory of floral species identified is included in Appendix E and represents the findings of- the biological survey for the North Ford PC Tentative Tract No. 10019 (City of Newport Beach, 1979). r Disced or unvegetated areas cover a major portion of the project site. This particular association is subject to periodic discing as part of the city -required weed abatement program, and contains no significant vegetation. Upland areas such as the southwest corner of the site support a weedy grassland plant association interspersed with coastal sage scrub and riparian vegetation. The central area of the site is subject to significant moisture accumulation and thus contains riparian and wet field iswale associations. The coastal sage scrub community occurs as scattered specimens interspersed with grass and weeds on north -facing bluff slopes or arroyo banks. Horticultural associations (acacia with associated understory) adjacent to Camelback Street. The only significant botanical species is the Gray Coast eriogonum, Eriogonum cinereum, located aloang the central eastern edge of the site. Three or four individuals of this shrubby buckwheat were located in a soft chess and Australian salt bush grassland (City of Newport Beach, 1979). The location of this species was 35 I I U '1 f� considered of "great botanical interest" due to its occurrence approximately 40 miles south of its known range. It is neither a CNPS or California Fish and Game "rare" designated plant. Wildlife The resident wildlife of the study area includes substantial populations of rabbits, rodents, grassland birds, and raptors. In addition, various suburban birds, such as house finches and song sparrows, are known to frequent the horticultural trees lining Camelback Street. Please see Appendix E for a complete list of the faunal species observed or expected at the site (as determined for th North Ford PC Tentative Tract No. 10019 EIR, City of Newport Beach, 1979). Riparian woodlands and swales on the site are of the highest relative value as wildlife habitat, while grasslands and disced fields are of moderate value as foraging areas. No rare or endangered animal species have been observed on the site. Bonita Creek Bonita Creek runs along the eastern boundary of the site and drains into the San Diego Creek Channel. It is denoted on the Tustin USGS topographic map as being an "Intermittent stream." The California Department of Fish and Game is concerned about the preservation of riparian resources along Bonita Creek. 4.3.2 Impacts All of the existing vegetation on the site would be removed in conjunction with development of the proposed tract. The acacias along Camelback would also be removed and replaced by another horticultural species. No provisions are proposed to avoid or preserve species of the Gray Coast eriogonum. Data relative to its location, condition, and other pertinent characteristics have been documented to satisfy the needs of the appropriate scientific recordation. Development of the site would result in the removal or displacement of much of the wildlife currently utilizing the property. Avian and rodent species compatible with urban development and horticultural species would most likely remain. d� RM �J I I I I I 11 I 1.1 I I Development of the site will result in the disturbance of wildlife in Bonita Creek. Due to short-term construction activities and the long-term use of the site, much of the wildlife associated with this intermittent stream will leave or be displaced. The proposed project will also increase the amount of runoff entering this stream. As noted on the proposed drainage plan, the 25-year frequency runoff volume from the North Ford site into this stream will increase from 60.5 cfs to 220.8 cfs. Therefore, the project site's contribution to runoff in the creek will increase about 3-1/2 times over existing conditions. Increased runoff in the creek may increase the amount of riparian vegetation, in the stream bed. However, the long-term preservation of any riparian resources in this part of Bonita Creek is unlikely for at least two reasons: (1) storm drain improvements may one day be required in the creek to more effectively carry the runoff to the San Diego Creek Channel and (2) the proposed alignment of the future freeway runs directly adjacent to this area and will most likely result in further, more significant changes in the creek. 4.3.3 City Policies and Requirements 3-A. A landscape and irrigation plan for both project sites shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. The plan shall be subject to approval by the Planning Department and the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Department. 3-B The landscape plan shall include a maintenance program which controls the use of fertilizers and pesticides. 3-C 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. I 37 I 1 4.3.4 Mitigation Measures 3-1. The applicant must notify the Department of Fish and Game of changes affecting the Bonita Creek. This notification (with fee) and the subsequent agreement must be completed prior to the initiation of any changes and preferrably before completion of project design features. I I CJ 1- P I I i I I It t I I 4.4 CULTURAL AND SCIENTIFIC RESOURCES Information contained in this section is summarized from the North Ford PC Tentative Tract No. 10019 EIR (City of Newport Beach, 1979)for the "North Ford parcel" and from the Upper Newport Bay Early Action and Interim Plan CFEIR (City of Newport Beach, 1981) for the "San Diego Creek south parcel" or Site A disposal area." An archaeological resources survey conducted in 1972 by Archaeological Research, Inc. identified a single "archaeological site" located westerly of the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and Bonita Canyon Road. This site was never recorded with the UCLA Archaeological Survey and was, therefore, not given an official State Ora designation (City of Newport Beach, 1979). The northeast corner of the site (located in what is referred to as the "San Diego Creek south parcel" or "Site A") did not reveal any archaeological or paleontological resources at the time the EIR for this disposal site was prepared (City of Newport Beach, 1981). The EIR stated that the "filling of Site A may obscure resources," although this impact was not considered significant because resources were not evident in the area. The EIR acknowledged that these excavated materials could conatin artifact or fossil remains washed down the creek from other parts of the watershed. Grading operators to stabilize these materials have subsequently taken place. 4.4.2 Impacts Grading activities could uncover and disrupt significant subsurface archaeological resources. Grading activities could result in further disruption of paleontological resources in the area west of the Bonita Canyon Road -MacArthur Boulevard intersection. 4.4.3 City Policies and Requirements 4-A. A qualified archaeologist shall be present during pregrade meetings to 38 I Iinform the developer and grading contractor of the results of any archaeological surveys and studies completed. 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. 4-B. 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. 4-C. A paleontological monitor shall be retained by the landowner and/or developer to attend pregrade meetings and perform inspections 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. 4-D. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall waive the provisions of AB 952 related to City of Newport Beach responsibilities for the mitigation of archaeological impacts, in a manner acceptable to the City Attorney. 4.4.4 Mitigation Measures 1-1 li a - No further mitigation measures are required. 4.4.5 Level of Significance After Mitigation No significant impacts should remain. 39 I 4.5 AESTHETICS 4.5.1 Existing Conditions Views of the site are available from Jamboree Road, MacArthur Boulevard, and Bison Avenue. The study area is currently undeveloped open space which has been highly disturbed by grading. The northern portion of the site, in the area previously referred to as "Site A," has been a sediment disposal site for the Upper Newport Bay dredging operation. The dredged material has been compacted and is for the most part unvegetated. The balance of the site has also been subject to grading, however, is vegetated with a variety of grasses, weeds, coastal sage scrub, and riparian species. Views from the site are of the Eastbluff neighborhood to the west, Belcourt to the south, open space to the east across MacArthur, and open space up to the north up to the MacArthur -Jamboree intersection. Long-distance views are available to the north and include the office/commercial structures of Irvine in the foreground and the mountain vistas beyond. Views of the office/commercial buildings across Camelback and parts of Eastbluff across Jamboree are currently screened by a row of acacias. 4.5.2 Impacts Upon project development, the site will be altered from open space to urban and will affect views of the site from all surrounding arterials. Given the topography of the site in relation to the two immediate residential areas, long distance views from the residential structures should not be obstructed. Exhibits 10 and 11 provide front and rear elevations as prepared by the architect. The entire community is planned to be in a "Mediterranean" style with stucco walls in muted pastel colors and tile roofs. Grading and construction activities for the proposed community will be phased over several years and will eventually remove all onsite vegetation. As shown on the preliminary landscape plan (Exhibit 19), slopes along Camelback and Jamboree will be landscaped with a variety of trees, bushes and groundcover. These landscaped 40 I a p I EKH Brr 19 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN (Please see oversized exhibits) I I I I I I I I I Aareas should enhance the views from the residences and roads along these edges and also provide an open space feeling for both the residents and drivers. In addition, the preliminary landscape plan provides for landscaping along all the outer edges of the development, all interior public streets and at the entryways to the residential area from both Camelback and University Drive. These entryways will also have markers which identify the residential project and park area. Cross -sections shown in Exhibit 20 provide a conceptual idea of the views provided along the entryways (B and D) and at the eastern and western site boundaries (A and C). As shown in the cross -sections, a perimeter wall will provide separation between the residential areas and major arterials, and the residential areas and commercial center. Landscaping is also proposed between the wall and sidewalk. Maintenance of common area landscaping within the tract will be provided by the community associations and the city. As shown on Exhibit 21, the tract will be divided into five association zones. Each land use area is in a different zone and the 1 residential apartments area is separated into three zones by topography. Median landscaping on "A" and 'B" Streets and public park landscaping will be maintained by the city. 3.5.3 City Policies and Requirements 5-A. A landscape and irrigation plan for the project shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. The landscape plan shall integrate the installation of landscaping with the proposed construction schedule. 5-B. The landscape plan shall be subject to review by the Parks, Beaches,and Recreation Department and approval by the Planning Department. 5-C. The commercial and park sites should be designed to minimize light and glare spillage on adjacent residential properties. 5-D. Street trees shall be provided along public streets as required by the Public Works Department and the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Department. 41 ' u A I I I I D I I Ci I I I i I r Ij I EXHIM 21 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE PLAN 1 (Please see oversized exhibits) 11 r F1 I r 5-E. Landscaping shall be regularly maintained free of weeds and debris. All vegetation shall be regularly trimmed and kept in a healthy condition. 5-F. Signage and exterior lighting shall be approved by the Planning Department. 5-G. All mechanical equipment, vents, and other service equipment in the commercial area should be shielded or screened from view by architectural features. 4.5.4 Level of Significance After Mitigation The aesthetic impact due to the loss of open space could be perceived as an unavoidable adverse impact. 1 I I I I I .1 I II 4.6 TRAFFIC/CIRCULATION This section is a summary of the traffic study prepared for the project by Wes Pringle and Associates in August 1984. The study is included in its entirety in Appendix F 4.6.1 Existing Conditions The site is currently vacant and thereby generates no traffic. Camelback Street is a two-lane facility that connects Bison Avenue and Jamboree Road and provides access to the adjacent property. Its intersection with Bison Avenue is controlled by a stop sign and traffic is restricted to right turns in and out only at Jamboree Road. Bison Avenue provides an east -west street between Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard. There are three lanes provided in each direction with additional turning lanes at intersections on Bison Avenue. Both of the intersections on Bison Avenue at Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard are signalized. Eastbluff Drive east of Jamboree Road has not been constructed; however, the traffic signal and geometries at the Jamboree Road intersection do provide for the extension. A.M. and -P.M. peak hour traffic counts were completed at'.the Bison/Camelback intersection to quantify existing conditions. The results of these counts and the resulting Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) analyses are summarized in Tables and �, In addition, driveway volumes were counted on Camelback Street during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The results of these counts are included in the analysis of traffic operations on Camelback Street. 4.6.2 Impacts Trip Generation in order to examine the traffic impacts, the number of trips generated by the project have been estimated. Table S lists the trip generation rates utilized to estimate the project trip generation. By applying the rates in Table Ji to the proposed land uses, project trip estimates were obtained (see Table k). The project is estimated to generate 13,100 daily trip ends with 1,445 occurring during the p.m. peak hour. If 43 TABLE 3 EXISTING INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: BISON / CAMELBACK - BELCOURT N (AM PEAK HOUR) MOVEMENT EXISTING EXISTING EXISTING EXISTING LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NL 1 1600 8 0.01 NT 2 3200 13 0.01 NR 0 0 7 0.00 SL 1 1600 79 0.05 ST 1 1600 1 0.04 SR 0 0 69 0.00 EL 1 1600 133 0.08 ET 3 4800 131 0.03 ER 0 0 14 0.00 WL 2 3200 16 0.01 WT 3 4800 291 0.10 WR 0 0 185 0.00 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUMS = 0.06 EAST/WEST CRITICAL SUMS = 0.18 CLEARANCE = 0.10 ICU = 0.34 LOS = A N=NORTHBOUND,S=SOUTHBOUND,E=EASTBOUND,W=WESTBOUND L=LEFT,T=THROUGH,R=RIGHT, LOS=LEVEL OF SERVICE * DENOTES CRITICAL MOVEMENTS ICUNFAME 43a TABLE 4 EXISTING INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: BISON / CAMELBACK - BELCOURT N (PM PEAK HOUR) MOVEMENT EXISTING EXISTING EXISTING EXISTING LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NL 1 1600 7 0.01 NT 2 3200 5 0.01 NR 0 0 6 0.00 SL 1 1600 186 0.12 ST 1 1600 0 0.07 SR 0 0 105 0.00 EL 1 1600 161 0.10 ET 3 4800 438 0.09 ER 0 0 6 0.00 WL 2 3200 5 0.01 WT 3 4800 78 0.04 WR 0 0 134 0.00 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUMS = 0.13 EAST/WEST CRITICAL SUMS = 0.14 CLEARANCE = 0.10 ICU = 0.37 LOS = A N=NORTHBOUND,S=SOUTHBOUND,E=EASTBOUND,W=WESTBOUND L=LEFT,T=THROUGH,R=RIGHT, LOS=LEVEL OF SERVICE * DENOTES CRITICAL MOVEMENTS ICUNFPME 43b LAND USE Table 5 TRIP GENERATION RATES North Ford Residential & Commercial DESCRIPTOR Single Family Detached Residential DU Multi -Family Residential DU Commercial/Retail 1000 SF Park ACRE TRIP ENDS PER DESCRIPTOR Daily PM Peak Hour In Out 10.0 0.7 0.3 7.0 0.5 0.2 115.8 7.2 7.2 40 2.4 1.6 Table 6 TRIP GENERATION North Ford Residential & Commercial LAND USE UNITS Daily PM Peak Hour 3n u-t Single Family Detached Residential 176 DU 1800 125 55 Multi -Family Residential 712 DU 5000 355 140 Commercial/Retail 50,000 SF 5800 360 360 Park 12 ACRES 500 30 20 TOTAL 13,100 870 575 43c Trip Distribution and Assignment Geographic trip distribution patterns have been developed for the North Ford site in previous studies. Based upon these previous studies, trip distribution patterns were developed for the proposed uses and are illustrated on Figures Z. and A. in Appendix IF By applying the distribution percentages to the trip generation estimates in Table --, project traffic was assigned to the street system. Exhibit --20Z illustrates daily project traffic utilized in the analysis portion of this study. Site Access Access to the commercial site and residential areas is proposed on Camelback Street. Due to the existing development and related driveway on this street, potential traffic operational and safety problems exist. The post office driveways also generate relatively large traffic volumes. Traffic counts were conducted to 1 determine current driveway volumes during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Estimated project traffic based upon trip generation and distribution data were then added to the existing volumes to simulate conditions with the project. The results are I illustrated on Exhibits =3 and ay. These volumes include estimated volumes from the completion of the Belcourt residential development and Aeronutronic Ford expansion to the south of Bison Avenue. Utilizing the volumes from Exhibits =3 and 9N, a recommended plan for Camelback Street from Bison Avenue to the entrance of the North Ford residential site was developed. These recommendations are illustrated on Exhibit =sand include the lanes, dimensions, street widths, and traffic controls. This plan requires reversing the current traffic flow through the post office so that the northerly driveway is inbound and the southerly driveway is outbound. The proposed site plan and tentative tract map generally reflect these recommendations. Signalization Warrants for signalization based upon future daily traffic volumes have been developed by Caltrans and are listed in Table in Appendix A. Review of the projected volumes on Exhibit 2 with the warrants on this table indicate that signalization would be required at Bison Avenue and Camelback Street. Ultimately, 44 ■• M M s r m m no M r M" s #fit M M. ■li Mi r Z Z � j( z \� �rr � MgCARTyVR FRw� �� to CORONA DEL MAR I F� S e0�<4't, 1 W ((i III RO m - - 4 �l x PARK 2040 4010 1 1 1090 1 3`90 2340 2620 Q 1970 2750 2790 j K S . 3230 ��yy�� 3520 ��� 2740 � 2790 SOURCE: WEBTON PRINOLE 3 ASSOCIATES 490 3830 eF E`9sT 880 O�Rr 3 e< A- R 1340 y m Project Daily Trips NO SCALE MOWN FORD MHUMME 1MAC7 City of Newport Beach LUILI- EXHIBIT 22 POST OFFICI CALIFORNIASOUTHERN EDISON SUBSTATION FACI FIC BELL BISON AVE. ►M �� 40 O�h 1 168 ::�' "'�._ 215 196 -> �- 566 5 -� X,-- 30 AERONUTRONIC o� Mingo 1 FORD w NORTH FORD RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL / RETAIL 1 Driveway Volumes SOURCE: WESTON PRINGLE & ASSOCIATES AM Peak Hour (7:30-8:30) NO SCALE ' City of Newport Beach Nam. EXHIBIT 23 I I I I I J I I I I I I I r{� `._J I i-,'* OFFICE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSTATION PACT FIC BELL NORTH FORD RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL / RETAIL QIn N N BISON AVE. 341 �- 199 663 —> E-- 188 ' 20 � � 165 AERONUTRONIC 1`h N FORD I� %0 160 Driveway Volumes SOURCE: WESTON PRINGLE a ASSOCIATES, PM Peak Hour (4:30-5:30) NO SCALE HURITH FORD 4LEM4lQMG CTRACU City of Newport Beach EXHIBIT 24 NO PARKING ON EITHER SIDE OF STREET EXISTING SHOULD BE ABOUT 260' —140'----120, - <— N a J N n CAMELBACK EXISTING (44') STREET WIDTH 90' LEFT TURN LANE RANSITI TO POST OFFICE I o o B T m m M m r M r 00 v A <i C m Cn UD I I 1 1' 1 (A COMM'L D/W REMAINS RELOCATE "B" ST. Z SAME LOCATION TO LINE UP WITH POST OFFICE D/W Recommended Roadway Configuration HOO QUa FORD VEHIMMC IrRACI ' City of Newport Beach SOURCE: WESTON PRINGLE d ASSOCIATES NO SCALE Fj..h> lydudRr�.nArerfrs EXHIBIT 25 I signalization will also be required when Eastbluff Drive and University Drive are connected. Signalization is not recommended at the Camelback Street entrance to the North Ford residential area. IICU Analysis As a part of this study, ICU analyses were completed for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours at the Bison Avenue/Camelback Street intersection. The analysis included existing traffic, future traffic from Belcourt/Aeronutronic Ford and the project. These ICU analyses are summarized in Tables 7 and 8. ICU values are indicated for ' existing geometries and with those recommended on Exhibit 25. As indicated in the tables, the ICU values are less than 0.60 or are Level of Service A for all conditions. This indicates that no traffic operational problems would be expected. Internal Circulation The internal circulation shown on the tentative tract map shows "A" and "B" streets ' as being 54-feet curb -to -curb with a 10-foot median. An 8-foot bike lane is provided on each side of the street leaving one 14-foot travel lane in each direction. "C" Street is shown as being 48-feet curb -to -curb without a median and with the 8-foot bike lane on each side. Therefore, "C" Street provides a 16-foot travel lane in each direction. Given the daily traffic volumes shown in Exhibit 22, the spine of the ' internal circulation system ("A," "B" and "C" Streets) would be adequate for the proposed uses. The preliminary site plan shows the proposed local streets which serve the detached units portion of the project site. These streets will be designed to meet city standards for local residential streets. In general, these streets appear to be adequate to serve this portion of the project site. In addition, the cul-de-sacs do not Iappear to be of excessive length for emergency vehicle access. .� The tentative tract map (Exhibit 3) shows bike lanes on "A" and "C" Streets within the tract. "B" Street should also be designated for bike lanes to continue the system within the site. In addition, bike lanes should be shown along "D" Street (University Drive extension) since this street is designated as a "secondary bikeway" on the city's Master Plan of bikeways. 45 Table 7 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: BISON / CAMELBACK - BELCOURT N AM PEAK HOUR MOVEMENT EXISTING PROPOSED EXISTING PROPOSED VOLUME V/C V/C LANES LANES CAPACITY CAPACITY W/IMPR NL 1 1 1600 1600 8 0.01 0.01 NT 2 2 3200 3200 55 0.03 * 0.03 NR O 0 0 0 55 0.00 0.00 SL 1 2 1600 3200 179 0.11 * 0.06 ST 1 2 1600 3200 6 0.07 0.04 SR 0 0 0 0 109 0.00 0.00 EL 1 1 1600 1600 168 0.11 * 0.11 ET 3 3 4800 4800 196 0.04 0.04 ER 0 0 0 0 5 0.00 0.00 WL 2 2 3200 3200 30 0.01 0.01 WT 3 3 4800 4800 566 0.16 * 0.16 WR 0 0 0 0 215 0.00 0.00 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUMS = 0.14 0.09 EAST/WEST CRITICAL SUMS = 0.27 0.27 CLEARANCE = 0.10 0.10 ICU = 0.51 0.46 LOS = A A N=NORTHBOUND,S=SOUTHBOUND,E=EASTBOUND,W=WESTBOUND L=LEFT,T=THROUGH,R=RIGHT, LOS=LEVEL OF SERVICE * DENOTES CRITICAL MOVEMENTS ICUNFAM 45a Table 8 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: BISON / CAMELBACK - BELCOURT N PM PEAK HOUR MOVEMENT EXISTING PROPOSED EXISTING PROPOSED VOLUME V/C V/C LANES LANES CAPACITY CAPACITY W/IMPR NL 1 1 1600 1600 7 0.00 0.00 NT 2 2 3200 3200 75 0.03 * 0.03 NR 0 0 0 0 25 0.00 0.00 SL 1 2 1600 3200 286 0.18 * 0.09 ST 1 2 1600 3200 25 0.10 0.05 SR 0 0 0 0 130 0.00 0.00 EL 1 1 1600 1600 341 0.21 * 0.21 ET 3 3 4800 4800 663 0.14 0.14 ER 0 0 0 0 20 0.00 0.00 WL 2 2 3200 3200 165 0.05 0.05 WT 3 3 4800 4800 188 0.08 * 0.08 WR 0 0 0 0 199 0.00 • 0.00 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUMS = 0.21 0.12 EAST/WEST CRITICAL SUMS = 0.29 0.29 CLEARANCE = Q.10 0.10 ICU = 0.60 0.51 LOS = A A N=NORTHBOUND,S=SOUTHBOUND,E=EASTBOUND,W=WESTBOUND L=LEFT,T=THROUGH,R=RIGHT, LOS=LEVEL OF SERVICE * DENOTES CRITICAL MOVEMENTS ICUNFPM 45b I ' 4.6.3 City Policies and Requirements 4-A. Each project shall provide all necessary onsite roadway improvements. 4-B. 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. 4.6.4 Mitigation Measures The following measures are recommended to mitigate potential traffic impacts of the project: 6-1. Access locations, lanes, transitions, and overall street design for Camelback should conform to the recommendations of Exhibit. 6-2. Traffic flow in the existing post office lot should be reversed to achieve acceptable conditions. 6-3. Traffic signals will be warranted at the Bison/Camelback intersection and, when the Eastbluff-University connect is complete, at Eastbluff and the North Ford access. 6-4. Bike lanes should be shown on the tentative tract map where required. 6-5. Bike trails along the private roads and bike racks should be incorporated into the site design. 4.6.5 Level of Significance After Mitigation No significant traffic problems should remain. I W I I I L I i u C i C I I I1 4.7 AIR QUALITY 4.7.1 Existing Conditions Air pollutants are classified as primary or secondary based upon the manner in which they are formed. Primary pollutants are emitted directly from a source into the atmosphere. Examples of primary pollutants are carbon monoxide (CO), nitric oxide and nitrogen dioxide (NO and NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), particulates, and various non -methane hydrocarbons (NMHC). Secondary pollutants are created with the passage of time in the air mass by chemical and photochemical reactions (often involving primary pollutants). Examples of secondary pollutants are ozone (03), photochemical aerosols, and peroxyacetylnitrates (PAN). The air quality of the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB), in which the study area is located, is determined by both the primary pollutants added daily and the existing secondary pollutants. Secondary pollutants —specifically oxidants —represent the major air quality problem basinwide. Air quality in the study area is a function of the primary pollutants emitted locally, the existing regional ambient air quality, and the meteorological and topographical factors influencing the intrusion of pollutants into the area from pollutant sources outside the immediate area. Climate and Meteorology Climate combines with meteorologic and topographic conditions to affect local and regional air quality. The study area climate is typical of the southern California coastal region: warm, dry summers and short, mild winters. This pattern is interrupted infrequently by periods of extremely hot weather, winter storms, or Santa Ana winds. The average temperature in Newport Beach is approximately 600F, low temperatures can go into the 30s and highs occasionally reach over 1000F. Due to ocean influences, temperatures are milder along the coast than inland parts of the basin. Most of the annual rainfall occurs between November and April, averaging approximately 11 inches per year at the Newport Harbor. The prevailing daytime winds in Newport Beach are sea breezes from the southwest 47 I with relatively low velocities-5 to 10 miles per hour (mph). Nighttime winds drain ' the basin and flow from the northeast and east offshore at slightly lower speeds. The dispersion of air pollutants in the SoCAB is often hampered by the presence of a persistent temperature inversion in the layers of the atmosphere near the ground surface. The combination of low wind speeds and low inversions produce the greatest concentration of pollutants. In the winter, the greatest pollution problems are from carbon monoxide and oxides of nitrogen during the night and early morning hours. In the summer, the longer daylight hours and brighter sunshine combine to cause a reaction between hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen to form the typical photochemical smog. I r I i Ii Ambient Air Quality Ambient air quality is given in terms of state and federal standards adopted to protect public health with a margin of safety. In addition to ambient standards, California has adopted episode criteria for oxidants, carbon monoxide, sulfure dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, and particulate matter. The episode levels represent short-term exposures at which public health is actually threatened. In orange County, air quality data is collected primarily by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The District's Costa Mesa station, about one mile from the study area, collects data which is representative of local air quality. The 1979-1983 annual summary data from the SCAQMD station is Costa Mesa is included in Table 9. Pollutants which have regularly (5 to 43 percent of the days) exceed air quality standards at the Costa Mesa Station during this period include ozone and total suspended particulates. 48 TABLE 9 1979-1983 SUMMARY OF CLEAN AIR STANDARDS VIOLATIONS ' COSTA MESA AIR QUALITY MONITORING STATION ' Pollutant -Standard 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 Ozone ' 1 hr: 0.10 ppm (state) 26 20 28 25 41 1 hr 0.12 ppm (federal) 16 5 6 6 15 1 hr_ 0.20 ppm (state -State 1 episode) 1 3 — — — ' Maximum 1 hr (ppm) 0.21 0.16 0.20 0.18 0.25 Carbon Monoxide 1 hr' 35 ppm (feders�l) 0 0 0 0 0 1 hr' 20 ppm (state) — — — 1 0 8 hrs' 9 ppm (federal) 18 7 5 2 1 Maximum 1 hr (ppm) 21 17 15 21 14 Maximum 8 hr (ppm) 10.9 13.8 — — Nitrogen Dioxide 1 hr' 0.25 ppm (state) 4 2 2 0 1 Maximum 1 hr (ppm) 0.29 0.31 0.29 0.23 .027 Sulfur Dioxide ' 24 hr_0.05 ppm (state) 0 0 0 0 0 Maximum 24 hr (ppm) 0.018 0.020 — 0.04 Particulates 24 hr' 100 ug/m3 (state)/ # samples 26/61 6/20 NM NM NM Maximum 24 hr (ug/m) 225 125 NM NM NM Lead i mo_1.5 ug/m3 (state) 0 NM NM NM NM Maximum Concentration (ug/m3) 3.74 0.82 NM NM NM Sulfates 24 hrs' 25 ug/m3 (stne) Maximum 24 hr (ug/m) 0 24.2 0 13.5 NM NM NM NM NM NM — Means no data. NM Means not monitored. * This standard became effective December 12, 1982. 49 I ' Exposure to Maior Pollutant Sources The study area is exposed to air pollutants from mobile sources and from major stationary sources, such as power plants, upwind of the study area. The adjacent ' arterials and future San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor will be primary sources of mobile source emissions, especially carbon monoxide. ' Air Quality Management ' The State Lewis Air Quality Act (1976) and the Federal Clean Air Act Amendments (1977) require the development of a program to meet state and federal air quality ' standards in the SoCAB. The state has indicated a time frame of "at the earliest achievable date" and the federal government requires attainment of all primary national ambient air quality standards by 1982 with a possible extension of attainment deadlines to 1987 for carbon monoxide and photochemical oxidants. The ' SoCAB is designated a non -attainment area for oxidants, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, and total suspended particulates. In February 1979, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) adopted the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the South Coast Air Basin. The Air Resources Board adopted a revised version of the AQMP in May 1979. In January 1981, EPA approved with conditions the portions of the SoCAB State Implementation Plan (SIP) regarding particulate matter and nitrogen dioxides; however, the portions covering ozone and carbon monoxide were not approved for lack of legal authority to implement an ' inspection and maintenance (I/M) program. In April 1982, EPA approved submittals to remove conditions, but continued the ozone and carbon monoxide disapprovals. On September 10, 1982, Governor Brown signed Senate Bill 33 which required biennial I/M programs in non -attainment areas, such as the SoCAB. Full implementation of -, the I/M programs began in January 1984. The Draft 1982 Revision of the AQMP was adopted by SCAG and the SCAQMD on October 15, 1982. AQMP projections and mitigation measures are based on the SCAG-82A Growth Forecasts. The AQMP recommends control measures that when implemented will succeed in reducing primary air emission to the level of the state and federal air quality standards by 1987. The control measures rely heavily on 1M 50 P ' continued technical improvements to both stationary and mobile pollution control ' equipment and the implementation of transit, ride -share and congestion relief. Rules and Regulations - The SCAQMD has published a set of "Rules and Regulations" ' to reduce both stationary and mobile source pollutant emissions. This document outlines permits, fees, prohibitions, procedures for hearings, emergency measures, ' order for abatement, standards of performance for new stationary sources, and standards for additional specific air contaminants (Federal Register, Vol. 46, No. 13, January 13, 1981). Regulation IV, Prohibitions, of the "Rules and Regulations" relates to the emission of fugitive dust (Rule 403). Rule 403(s) mandates that "a person shall not cause or allow fugitive dust emissions from any transport, handling, construction, or storage activity, so that the presence of such dust remains visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source." Also, "a person shall take every reasonable precaution to minimize fugitive dust emissions from wrecking, excavation, grading, cleaning of land and solid waste disposal operations" (Rule 403(b)) and "...to prevent ' visible particulate matter from being deposited upon public roadways as a direct result of their operations" (Rule 403(d)). 1 4.7.2 Impacts The approval of the proposed project would allow development of residential, commercial, and park land uses on the project site, resulting in increased stationary - and mobile -source emissions in the basin. Stationary sources include emissions onsite from construction activities and natural gas combustion as well as emissions at the power plant associated with any electrical requirements for power, lighting, etc. Mobile source considerations include short-term construction activities and long- I1 1 term traffic generation. The following impact discussion is organized into two general categories for ease of presentation: short-term impacts (fugitive dust and construction equipment emissions) and long-term impacts (stationary and mobile sources). Short -Term Impacts The preparation of the study area for building construction will produce two types of 51 P I� I I �J I air contaminants: exhaust emissions from construction equipment and fugitive dust generated as a result of soil movement. These construction impacts could be expected during each phase of development. The emissions produced during grading and construction activities, although of short-term duration, could be troublesome to workers and adjacent developments, even though prescribed wetting procedures are followed. Exhaust Emissions From Construction Equipment - Exhaust emissions from construction activities include those associated with the transport of workers and machinery to the site as well as those produced on -site as the equipment is used. Fugitive Dust Emissions - Construction activities are a source of fugitive dust emissions that may have a substantial temporary impact on local air quality. Building and road construction are the prevalent construction categories with the highest emission potential. Emissions are associated with land clearing, ground excavation, grading operations, and construction of the structures. Dust emissions vary substantially from day to day, depending on the level of activity, the specific operations, and the prevailing weather. A large portion of the emissions results from equipment traffic over temporary roads at the site. The quantity of fugitive dust generated is proportional to the area of -land being worked and the level of construction activity. Emissions from heavy construction operations are directly proportional to the silt content of the soil (that is, particles smaller than 75 micrometers in diameter) and inversely proportional to the square of the soil moisture. Based upon field measurements of suspended dust emissions from apartment and shopping center construction projects, an approximate emission factor for construction operations is 1.2 tons of fugitive dust per acre of construction per month of activity (U.S. EPA, AP-42, 1977). Long -Term Impacts Long-term impacts are those associated with the permanent use of the facilities proposed. The air pollutants emitted can be projected for various years by multiplying the anticipated vehicular, electrical, and natural gas usage rates by the appropriate County of Orange emission factors.1 The project could be expected to I 52 I L E J 1 LI L� be built out in approximately five years. Therefore, the District's 1990 emission factors for mobile sources are used and the results are shown in Table 10. As shown, stationary source emissions generated as a result of the proposed project represent approximately 2 percent of total emission burden from all sources. In 1990, motor vehicle emissions will account for 98 percent of the total, although exhaust control technology or legislation, as well as more stringent stationary source emission control measures, may reduce the total. It should be noted that the bulk (79 percent) of the air pollutant emissions will be carbon monoxide issuing from motor vehicles. TABLE 10 PROJECTED MOBILE AND STATIONARY SOURCE EMISSIONS (Tons/Day) Primary Natural Gas Pollutant Combustion2 CO 0.0012 NMHC 0.0005 NOx 0.0062 Sox Negi. Part's Negl. Electricity 3 1990 4 Total All Sources Generation Vehicular 0.0017 1.4032 1.4061 0.0010 0.1020 0.1035 0.0167 0.1824 0.2053 0.0111 0.0237 0.0348 0.0014 0.0329 0.0343 To assess what this atmosphere loading implies in terms of its relative impact on air quality, the project -related emissions are compared to the projected emissions for the county and the local Source Receptor Area (SRA).5 Newport Beach lies within 2 Based on a natural gas usage rate of 124,600 cubic feet/day. 3 Based on an electricity usage rate of 15,900 kwh/day. 4 Based on 93,350 vehicle miles traveled. (Assumes 7 trips per day per unit and an average trip length of 10 miles for residential; 115.8 trips per 1,000 sq. ft. and an average trip length of 5 miles for commercial; and 40 trips per day per acre and an average trip length of 5 miles for park). 5 The District has broken down the regional emissions for the major pollutants into Source Receptor Areas for use in monitoring and planning purposes. 53 11 U I I I 1__l E SRA 18. Table 1 below provides a comparison of the District's projected 1987 emissions for Orange County, SRA 18 and the project -related emissions (using 1987 emission factors). Emissions for the SRA are only available for carbon monoxide, non -methane hydrocarbons, and oxides of nitrogen, therefore, these are the pollutants represented in the table. As seen from the table, the project emissions will represent 0.3 to 0.7 percent of the SRA's 1987 emissions and 0.05 to 0.12 percent of the county's 1987 emissions. The project's emissions appear insignificant compared to other more regional emissions shown in the table. However, the project's emissions will add to the cumulative emissions total for the region and vicinity. TABLE 11 EMISSION INVENTORY COMPARISON (1987) (Tons/Day) SRA #182 Pr2jeet3 ' Pollutant Orange Countyl CO 1,254.78 215.51 1.61 ' NMHC 212.15 38.60 0.11 NOx 173.98 38.17 0.21 I r, U Air Quality Management The 1982 AQMP is based on SCAG's 82-A Growth Forecasts which are based on local general plans. GPA 82-1 was not adopted until October 1983 and was not, therefore, included in the 82-A Growth Forecasts. The land uses allowed under GPA 82-1 would generate more trips and vehicle miles of travel than the land uses allowed under the previous General Plan. Therefore, development of the project could conflict with attainment of the goals of the AQMP. However, because the project would provide 1 Source: SCAQMD, Draft A MD, Draft Appendix V-C, August 1982. 2 Source: SCAQMD, Air Quality Handbook for EIRs, Revised December 1983. 3 Based on 1987 Emission Factors from EMFAC6C Model (Orange County EMA, June 1983). 54 housing in the vicinity of major employment centers in Newport Beach and Irvine, this impact could possibly be offset. The proposed project will be subject to SCAQMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive dust during the construction phases. ' 4.7.3 Mitigation Measures It is strongly recommended by the SCAQMD that the following measures be implemented to reduce the short-term (construction) impacts associated with the I F d I `I n project. 7-1. Controlling fugitive dust by regular watering, paving construction roads, or other dust palliative measures to meet District Rule 403. 7-2. Maintaining equipment engines in proper tune. 7-3. Phasing and scheduling construction activities to level emissions peaks. 7-4. Discontinuing construction during first and second stage smog alerts. It is also strongly recommended that the following measures be incorporated into the project to reduce long-term (operational) impacts associated with the project: 7-5. Provide for convenient access to transit stops. Orient project for transit convenience and accessibility. 7-6. Provide for easy pedestrian access. 7-7. Include transit improvements in the project design, such as bus shelters, benches and bus pockets in the streets. 7-8. Design bikeways, provide convenient bicycle storage facilities. 7-9. Require air filtration systems for buildings serving concentrations of sensitive receptors, expecially in projects located near freeways. 7-10. Require additional building energy conservation beyond that required by state regulation. 7-11. Encourage extensive landscaping. 55 L1 1 4.7.4 Level of Significance After Mitigation The project will add to the cumulative regional air quality problems, even though by itself it is not considered significant. 1 I I I I 11 0 11 t 1 4.8 NOISE This section addresses noise impacting the study area and is a summary of the noise barrier assessment prepared by Mestre-Greve Associates in June 1984. Please see Appendix F for a copy of the full report. 4.8.1 Existing Conditions ' The noise impacting the study area consists of vehicular traffic and aircraft flyovers. The major roadways impacting the project site are MacArthur Boulevard and Jamboree Road. Bison Road and Camelback Road also border the study area. John Wayne -Orange County Airport is located 2 miles north of the project site. In addition, the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor, which is planned to run along the eastern border of the site will be a source of traffic noise in the future. The City of Newport Beach requires that private outdoor residential areas not exceed a noise level of 65 CNEL, and that indoor residential noise levels do not exceed 45 CNEL.1 4.8.2 Impacts Construction Noise Construction noise will result upon implementation of the project. This represents a short-term impact on ambient noise levels. Noise generated by construction equipment and construction activities can reach high levels and comes under the control of the Environmental Protection Agency's Noise Control Program (Part 204 of Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations). The nearest existing residential areas that could be exposed to audible noise levels from construction activities are located south across'Bison Avenue (Belcourt) and west across Jamboree Road (Eastbluff). The greatest potential for noise impacts occurs during the grading phase. Enforcement of the city's noise ordinance should minimize these noise impacts. ' 1 Please see Appendix F for a description of "CNEL." 57 I _I Aircraft Noise Levels The study area is exposed to aircraft noise as a result of the operations at John t Wayne -Orange County Airport. This includes noise from commercial jets, private jets, and other general aviation aircraft operations. While jet aircraft do not overfly the site, sideline noise from departures is audible. Extrapolation of the contour data indicates that the site experiences aircraft noise levels in the range of 50 to 55 CNEL. Ultimate Traffic Noise Levels Ultimate traffic noise levels in the project vicinity were modeled using the Highway Traffic Noise Model published by the Federal Highway Administration ("FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model," FHWA-RD-77-108, December 1978). For the roadway analysis, worst -case assumptions about future motor vehicle traffic and noise levels have been made and were incorporated in the modeling effort, specifically, no reductions in motor vehicle noise have been assumed in spite of legislation requiring quieter vehicles at the time of manufacture. The ultimate traffic volumes for the surrounding arterials were used with the FHWA Model to estimate future noise levels in terms of CNEL (see Table 12). Traffic volumes for critical ramps servicing the future San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor area are also provided in the table. ITABLE 12 ULTIMATE TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND SPEEDSI ADT Speed Roadway Jamboree Road 64,700 55 Mae Arthur Boulevard 80,000 50 University Drive 28,000 50 San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor 1752000 55 Ramp 1 89000 55 Ramp 4 24,000 55 Ramp 5 15,000 55 Ramp 7 17,000 55 1 Source: Orange County EMA, Department of Transportation Planning. 58 I I The distance to the CNEL contours for the roadways in the vicinity of the project are given in Table —. These represent the distance from the centerline of the road t to the contour value shown. Note that the values given in Table — do not take into account the effect of any noise barriers or topography that may affect ambient noise levels. In many cases there is significant topographic or terrain effects which will Ireduce the noise levels below those levels presented in the table. TABLE — ULTIMATE CNEL NOISE LEVELS Distance to CNEL Contour From Centerline of Roadway (feet) Roadway 70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL Jamboree Road 146 315 679 168 363 782 Mac Arthur Boulevard 71 • 154 331 University Drive San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor 388 837 1,803 Ramp 1 36 78 168 Ramp 4 75 163 350 55 119 256 Ramp 5 60 129 278 Ramp 7 Noise Barrier Recommendations Based on a preliminary noise barrier analysis in thirteen locations, preliminary noise barrier recommendations have been determined and are discussed_ below by area. The recommendations are also presented graphically in Exhibit =. It should be emphasized that these barrier recommendations are preliminary and may change based on the final development site plan. The noise barrier heights presented represent the highest barrier height currently anticipated. The noise barrier analysis does include topographic effects and planned building setbacks. Noise barriers can be a masonry sound wall, a berm, or combination of a berm within Ia sound wall on top. Carports with solid rear walls can also be an integral part of the noise barrier. A noise barrier must be continuous with no holes or gaps. i 59 M t0 M an ii IM*" W am WK" W 4111111111 am W a*" am ow Recommended Noise Barriers MOWN FORD IrEH MI ME 1MACU City of Newport Beach SOURCE: MESTRE OREVE ASSOCIATES, JULY 1884 UtLIM 0 280 460 8 FEET EXHIBIT 26 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Jamboree Road - The proposed residential pad elevation is substantially lower than the roadway elevation along most of Jamboree Road. Near the intersection of Jamboree Road and University Drive the pad would become at grade with the roadway. In this area and continuing around the corner of University Drive a 6 foot noise barrier would be needed. The noise barrier would be located at the top of the slope. Second story balcony areas facing Jamboree Road would require additional shielding. This could be provided with glass shielding around the balcony areas. Jamboree Road is a major arterial roadway, and therefore balcony areas oriented towards this road are not recommended, although they could be designed to achieve the exterior noise standards. University Drive - A 6-foot noise barrier is recommended along University Drive. To provide adequate attenuation, it must wrap around the corners of both Jamboree Road and "A" Street as indicated in Exhibit 24 The noise barrier would be located at the top of the slope. Bison Avenue Camelback Street and Internal Streets - Noise barriers will not be needed along Bison Avenue and Camelback Street. In addition, noise barriers will not be required along any of the collector roadways internal to the project. _MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor - A noise barrier is indicated along the top of the slope along the transportation corridor area (see Exhibit 20). The barrier recommendations would accommodate MacArthur Boulevard with 'its existing alignment or the proposed alignment. The residential area near the southerly end of the site would need a noise barrier in the 8- to 10-foot height range. The noise barrier must wrap along the commercial/residential interface to prevent sound from flanking around the end of the noise barrier. As the exhibit indicates, as one moves north, the barrier height requirements are anticipated to be reduced to 6 feet. It should be noted that along much of this area the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor is in the depressed section relative to the proposed pads. This provides a significant noise reduction. The noise barrier recommendations are designed to protect ground floor areas. Balcony areas should not be oriented so that they have a direct line of sight with San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor or MacArthur Boulevard. In developing the site plan, carports, other buildings, and topography should be used to interrupt the line of sight between balcony areas and the corridor area. 60 I I Interior Noise Levels To comply with the interior noise standard, buildings would have to provide sufficient indoor and outdoor noise reduction to reduce the noise levels to 45 CNEL. The outdoor to indoor noise reduction characteristics of a building are determined by combining the transmission loss of each of the building elements which make up the building. Each building element has a characteristic transmission loss. For residential units the critical building elements are the roof, walls, windows, doors, attic configuration, and insulation. The total noise reduction achieved is dependent on the transmission loss of each element and the area of that element in relation to the total surface area of the room. Room absorption is the final factor used in determining the total noise reduction. The measures necessary to insure compliance with the City of Newport Beach indoor noise standard can only be developed in conjunction with the development of the site plan and architectural drawings. Indoor noise mitigation measures should be developed prior to obtaining building permits. 4.8.3 City Policies and Requirements 8-A. All construction activities will be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday. 8-B. Prior to occupancy of any unit, a qualified acoustical engineer shall be retained by the city at the applicant's expense to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that noise impacts do not exceed 65 CNEL for outside living areas and active recreation areas and 45 CNEL for interior living areas. 8-C. 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 Eastbluff Drive and Ford Road and along the 61 I southerly side of Pacific Coast Highway along Irvine Terrace and West Newport. 8-D. 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. 8-E. Any rooftop or other mechanical equipment shall be sound attenuated in such a manner as to achieve a maximum sound level of 55 dBA at the property line. 1 4.8.4 Mitigation Measures 8-1. The project applicant is proposing to construct the noise barriers required to meet the city standards for indoor and private outdoor residential areas 8-2. Prior to approval of final site plans, additional environmental documentation shall provide a more detailed noise barrier analysis based on final pad and roadway elevations. This study shall include specific Mitigation measures for reducing onsite impacts in the residential and park areas. 4.8.5 Level of Significance After Mitigation No significant noise impacts should remain. I I li 62 II I 1 4.9 PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTII.IM This section is based on the information contained in the GPA 82-1 CF EIR (City of Newport Beach, 1983) and supplemental data obtained via correspondence or contact with the relevant agencies or departments. 4.9.1 Fire Protection Existing Conditions The Newport Beach Fire Department provides fire protection and emergency medical services in Newport Beach. Total manpower available to respond to alarms in the study are vicinity is fourteen (14) men from two (2) stations: the Grange County Contract Fire Station #279 at John Wayne Airport (Campus at Dove) and the Fashion Island Station #3 at 868 Santa Barbara Drive (in Newport Center). The study area is currently at the outer limits for the Department's response distance and time. The Fire Department is currently pursuing the location of a new station in the study area to service the northeast portion of Newport Beach. The department is proposing the expansion of its facilities to better serve the general area, not as a direct result of the proposed project. Impacts The proposed development would increase the demand for fire protection services within the city. The proposed tract includes a 1-acre fire station reservation within the 12-acre city park area. The exact location of the station within the park will be decided by the developer and Fire Department prior to final tract map approval. City Policies and Requirements 9-A. Prior to issuance of building permits, the Fire Department shall review the proposed plans for non-residential uses and may require automatic fire sprinkler protection. 63 HI I II If II 9-B. Fire Department access shall be approved by the Fire Department. 9-C. All buildings on the project site shall be equipped with fire suppression systems approved by the Fire Department. 9-D. Non-residential portions of the proposed project shall incorporate an internal security system (security guards, alarms, access limits after hours) that shall be reviewed by the Police and Fire Departments and approved by the Planning Department. 9-E. All access to the buildings shall be approved by the Fire Department. 9-F. All onsite fire protection (hydrants and Fire Department connectors) shall be approved by the Fire Department and Public Works Department. 9-G. Fire vehicle access, including the proposed planter islands, shall be approved by the Fire Department. 9-H. The landscape plan shall place heavy emphasis on fire retardant vegetation. Mitigation Measures No further mitigation measures are required. Level of Significance After Mitigation No significant impacts should remain. 4.9.2 Police Services Existing Conditions The Newport Beach Police Department provides police services within the city. The police station is located at 870 Santa Barbara Drive approximately 1.6 miles fromthe 64 li I study area. Average response times to the general area are approximately: 21.19 minutes Nonemergency calls Alarm calls 4.34 minutes Emergency calls 3.40 minutes There are presently no plans for construction of a new facility or expansion of existing facilities. Impacts The Police Department estimates that to maintain the current ratio of sworn officers to population, staffing of the department would need to be increased by approximately four (4) officers.' No problems is serving the project area are expected. City Policies and Requirements See City Policy 9-D in previous section (Fire Protection). Mitigation Measures In addition, the following measures are recommended by Randy Nakashima of the Newport Beach Police Department (correspondence dated May 16, 1984): 9-1. If the proposed project's residential area contains gated communities, there must be allowances to permit access for public service personnel and equipment. 9-2. The proposed park and commercial areas should be well -lighted to deter crimes against persons and property. 1 Correspondence from Fancy Nakashima, Newport Beach Police Department, May 15, 1984. 65 1 9-3. Adequate traffic control should be maintained during the construction considerations: - Add a third northbound lane on Jamboree Boulevard fromBison to Eastbluff north. - Complete the extension of Eastbluff North from Jamboree Boulevard to MacArthur Boulevard. - Add a third southbound lane on MacArthur Boulevard from University to Bison. - Improve Camelback to four (4) lanes. - Limit access to Jamboree Boulevard to the intersection of Eastbluff North and Jamboree. It should be noted that the first three suggested improvements will be implemented as part of the proposed development. Camelback Street is designated on the MPSH as a two-lane roadway (although it will most likely be four -lanes adjacent to the commercial center). The last *measure is incorporated into the project design. Level of Significance After Mitigation No significant impacts should remain. &9.3 Schools Existing Conditions The study area is located within the boundaries of the Irvine Unified School District (IUSD). IUSD facilities serving this are include: Elementary Bonita Canyon (located in Turtle Rock) Vista Verde (located in University Park) Intermediate Rancho San Joaquin (located in University Park) 66 I ISecondary University High School (located in Turtle Rock) Another elementary school is planned to be located on the University of California, IIrvine campus in the future. Impacts The IUSD has stated that the proposed project would be difficult to serve due to its isolation from IUSD facilities and safety issues related to the bounding arterials and future freeway. The district is concerned about safe pedestrian and bicycle routes to the schools and also about school bus access and turnouts within the subdivision. In addition, it is possible that affordable units (below market rate) would not be required to pay for school bus transportation and could thus have an adverse monetary impact on the district (school bus transportation fees are based on an ability -to -pay schedule) 1 The project applicant is investigating the possibility of being served by the neighboring Newport -Mesa Unified School District (NMUSD). This could be achieved through a boundary change or an Interdistrict Attendance Agreement if agreed upon by the two districts. NMUSD recently closed its elementary school in the Eastbluff community and at this time it is not clear whether NMUSD could serve the. site. Resolution 83-104 which approved GPA 82-1 established the requirement, "That letters of service regarding water, sewer, and school services be executed prior to approval of a Tentative Tract Map" (p• 5). At the time of this writing, the Irvine Unified School District is obligated to serve the site and would be required to prepare the letter of service. However, the applicant may wait to obtain the letter of service until negotiations between the IUSD and the NMUSD are completed. If negotiations are not completed prior to tentative tract approval, the applicant would need to obtain a letter from IUSD or request that the city waive the condition until final tract approval. 1 Personal communication with Dave King, Irvine Unified School District, June 12, 1984. 67 U 1 City Policies and Requirements U II I Il 9-I. A letter of service regarding school services shall be executed prior to tentative tract map approval and shall be subject to approval by the Planning Department (please see discussion above): 9-J. Prior to approval of a tentative map, the project applicant shall prepare a pedestrian, bicycle, vehicular circulation plan to be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Public Works Departments. Mitigation Measures 9-4. School bus access should be considered in the design of the local (private) streets and should incorporate bus turn -outs where needed. 9-5. Pedestrian and bicycle routes to each IUSD or NMVSD facility serving the site should be separated from vehicular routes with physical barriers, adequate striping and/or other features. 9-6. The IUSD also suggests that Bonita Canyon Road be fully improved prior to development (occupancy) of the project. Level of Significance -After Mitigation Depending on the degree to which the access and safety issues are addressed, school service to the site could still be considered a significant impact. 4.9.4 Public Transportation Existing Conditions The Orange County Transit District (OCTD) provides public transit service to the general area via three (3) local lines: Routes 61, 65, and 71. These lines provide weekday service to MacArthur Boulevard and Jamboree Road (north of Eastbluff Drive north) at 30-minute intervals. Routes 65 and 71 also provide weekend and holiday service. OCTD plans to continue to operate in the area and may consider m I I increased service levels as development in the area proceeds and as ridership demand warrants. OCTD is also evaluating alternative fixed guideway (rapid) transit systems in Orange County. One altlernative alignment is located along MacArthur Boulevard, beginning at a rapid transit station that would be located at the southeast corner of University Drive and MacArthur Boulevard. Impacts The proposed project would increase the demand for public transit service in the area. This demand should be accommodated by the current levels of service. City Policies and Requirements No applicable city policies or requirements are established. Mitigation Measures 9-7. The applicant shall consult with OCTD regarding site plan design and shall incorporate transit and/or bus stops, bus shelters, and passenger waiting areas. This shall occur at the tentative tract map level. Level of Significance After Mitigation INo significant impacts should remain. I, t9.5 Solid Waste Disposal The City of Newport Beach collects refuse and transports it to the County of Orange Coyote Canyon Sanitary Landfill for final disposal. The county is currently reviewing options for continued use of the Coyote Canyon facility or development of a new facility is Bee Canyon. P 69 Impacts The county uses an average solid waste generation factor of 8.5 pounds per capita per day. Based on this factor, and assuming a population of 1,954, the project would generate approximately 16,600 pounds (8.3 tons) of solid waste per day. The proposed project would add to the cumulative demand for solid waste disposal facilities in Orange County. The county has anticipated this growing demand and is currently planning to expand its solid waste disposal facilities. The county does not foresee any problems in providing service to the site. ICity Policies and Requirements INo city policies or requirements are applicable. Mitigation Measures 9-8. The use of low -maintenance landscaping would be beneficial in saving water, energy, and the amount of trimmings generated. ILevel of Significance After Mitigation Solid waste disposal facilities would be cumulatively impacted, although by itself the project would not have a significant impact. 4.9.6 Library Services I- Existing Conditions The closest library facility is a nearby branch of the Newport Beach Public Library located at 856 San Clemente Drive. Other nearby branches are located in Corona del Mar and on Balboa Island. No expansion of library facilities is planned at this time. Impacts No adverse impacts to library services from the proposed project are expected. 70 I I! City Policies and Requirements No city policies or requirements are applicable. Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are required. Level of Significance After Mitigation significant impacts will result. rNo 4.9.7 Meetrie ty Existing Conditions The study area is within the service territory of the Southern California Electric Company (SCE). Impacts The proposed development would add to the cumulative demand for energy resources needed to serve the area. SCE expects to meet the projected electrical demands through the 1980s as long as no unforeseen outages to major sources occur. I. City Policies and Requirements 9-K. The project should be designed to conform to Title 24, Paragraph 6, Division T-20, Chapter 2, Subchapter 4, of the California Administrative Code dealing with energy requirements. 9-L. The project should investigate the use of alternative energy sources (i.e., solar) and, to the maximum extent economically feasible, incorporate the use of said in project designs. 71 I 11 li Mitigation Measures No further mitigation measures are suggested. Level of Significance After Mitigation Energy resources will be affected cumulatively, although, the project by itself will not have a significant impact. 4.9.8 Natural Gas Existing Conditions The study area is within the service territory of the Southern California Gas Company. An existing mains are located in Camelback, Bison, and Jamboree Road. Impacts The proposed project would add to the cumulative demand for energy resources needed to serve the area. The gas company has stated that gas service to the project could be provided without any significant impact on the environment. City Policies and Requirements See city policies 9-K and 9-L in the Electricity section above. - Mitigation Measures INo additional mitigation measures are required. IH I� Ii Level of Significance After Mitigation Energy resources will be affected cumulatively, although, the project by itself will not have a significant impact. 72 I1 I 1 4.9.9 Water MExisting Conditions The study area is within Water Improvement District No. 161 of the Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD). The City of Newport Beach Utilities Department could also serve the study area from existing mains adjacent to the site. Impacts Development of the proposed subdivision would result in consumption of water for domestic, commercial, and irrigation purposes. Based on the IRWD rate of 150 gallons per capita per day for residential uses (park and commercial uses included), the proposed project wold consume approximately 2932000 gallons per day. The proposed development represents an increased water demand for the study area and IRWD in general. Because IRWD is responsible for serving the site, the impact _ would be a reduced ability for IRWD to serve future or or would require that IRWD acquire additional water supplies. IRWD offers this comment to keep local agency staff and decision makers aware of water availability issues and not as 1 one adverse to the proposed project.1 City Policies and Requirements 9-M. Final design of the project shall provide for the incorporation of water - saving devices for project lavatories and other water -using facilities. 9-N. Letters of service regarding water shall be executed prior to approval of a tentative tract map. „ Mitigation Measures The following water conservation measures are required by law: 1 Correspondence from Ron E. Young, IRWD, May 17, 1984. 73 . II I 11 I I 9-9. Low -flush toilets (see Section 17921.3 of the Health and Safety Code). 9-10. Low -flow showers and faucets (California Code, Title 24, Part 6, Article 12 T20-1406F). 9-11. Insulation of hot water lines in water recirculating systems (California Energy Commission regulations). 9-12. In addition, the State Department of Water Resources recommends the following measures where applicable: • Supply line Pressure: recommend water pressure greater than 50 pounds per square inch (psi) be reduced to 50 psi or less by means of a pressure -reducing valve. • Flush valve operated water closets: recommend 3 gallons per flush. • Drinking fountains: recommended equipment with self -closing valves. • Pipe insulation: recommend all hot water lines in dwelling be insulated to provide hot water faster with less water waste and to keep hot pipes from heating cold water pipes. • Laundry facilities: recommend use of water -conserving models of washers. • Restaurants: recommend use of water -conserving models of dishwashers or retrofitting spray emitters. Exterior • Landscape with low water -consuming plants wherever feasible. • Minimize use of lawn by limiting it to lawn dependent uses, such as playing fields. 74 • Use mulch extensively in all landscaped areas. Mulch applied on top of soil will improve the water -holding capacity of the soil by reducing evaporation and soil compaction. • Preserve and protect existing trees and shrubs. Established plants are often adapted to low water conditions and their use saves water needed to establish replacement vegetation. M• Install efficient irrigation systems which minimize runoff and evaporation and maximize water which will reach the plant roots. Drip irrigation, soil few of moisture sensors, and automatic irrigation systems are a methods increasing irrigation efficiency. • Use pervious paving materials whenever feasible to reduce surface water runoff and aid in groundwater recharge. • Grading of slopes should minimize surface water runoff. • Encourage cluster development which can reduce the amount of land being converted to urban use. This will reduce the amount of impervious paving created and thereby aid in groundwater recharge. • Preserve existing natural drainage areas and encourage the incorporation of natural drainage systems in new developments. This would aid in groundwater recharge. II Level of Significance After Mitigation Water supplies will be affected on a cumulative basis, the project by itself will not have a significant affect. ' Yl U 75 J 1 4.9.10 Wastewater IExisting Conditions The study area is within Sewer Improvement District No. 261 of the IRWD. IRWD has a sewage lift station located near University Drive and MacArthur Boulevard. Impacts �. Development of the proposed subdivision would result in wastewater generation at the rate of about 80 gallons per capita per day for residential (park and commercial uses included). Therefore, the proposed project would generate approximately 156,320 gallons of wastewater per day. IRWD has a sewage lift station located near University Drive and MacArthur Boulevard which could serve the site. A collector sewer from the project site to the lift station would be necessary to serve the site. IRWD was recently requested to evaluate service to the Baywood development (directly across San Diego Creek from the study area). IRWD would want to coordinate service to these two projects so the collector sewer t the University Drive lift station could be sized appropriately. ICity Policies and Requirements 9-0. Letters of service regarding sewer shall be executed prior to approval of a tentative tract map. Mitigation Measures 9-13. Water conservation measures implemented will reduce sewage flows from the development. Level of Significance After Mitigation No significant impacts should remain after mitigation. I 7:3 ILI I 5.0 ALTERNATIVES Alternative development concepts are evaluated in this section, along with the "no project" alternative. Reasonable development alternatives include lower -density residential, and site plan or design modifications. I• 5.1 NO PROJECT M Under the no project alternative, the project site would remain undeveloped for an undetermined period of time. This would alleviate the environmental impacts associated with developing the site, as identified in this document. These impacts primarily include short-term construction impacts and long-term operational impacts on landform, traffic, air quality, noise, water quality, and aesthetics, the majority of which are mitigated to some degree. Due to the presence of the residential developments surrounding the project and the site's general plan designation for residential, commercial, and park uses, the no project alternative would probably only delay the development of the planned community uses on the site at some future date. This alternative was not selected since it does not meet the goals of the city's general plan designation for the site. A5.2 LOWER DENSTIR U This alternative would provide for residential development on the site at a density lower than that produced with the 888 units proposed. At a lower density, fewer units would be built and the project's contribution to impacts on traffic, air quality, noise, water quality and public services would be commensurately reduced. Direct impacts to the site, such as landform and aesthetics changes, would be similar to those associated with the proposed project. The major difference would probably be the amount of open space provided between buildings. The study area's general plan designates the site to have up to 888 units and requires that a minimum of 222 of the units be maintained as affordable to families of low and moderate income. Developing a project with fewer units without reducing the number of required affordable units would increase the percentage of affordable I 1- 77 I units in the development and could make the development economically infeasible for the developer. One way to mitigate this would be to reduce the number of required units commensurate with reduced number of total units and maintain a 25 percent affordable requirement. However, this would affectively reduce the number of 1 affordable units in the project and compromise the goals of the city and developer to provide a certain amount of "affordable housing" within the city. This may be considered a significant impact unless the affordable units were provided elsewhere in the city. 1 This alternative remains under consideration. 5.3 SITE PLAN OR DESIGN MODIFICATIONS I(To be developed prior to draft EIR) I u A 1 78 :r I I n I I It I[] `I 6.0 sIGNIncANT ADVERSE IMPACTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED As discussed in Section 4.0, ultimate implementation of the proposed project will result in significant adverse impacts to the environment. This section provides a summary of those adverse impacts which may be expected to remain after the implementation of the city policies/requirements and proposed mitigation measures. The degree of significance of each impact is dependent upon the extent to which mitigation measures are ultimately incorporated into the project. 1. Development of the project will significantly alter views of the site from the roads and surrounding areas. Following mitigation, this impact, which is a subjective interpretation, could still be perceived as significant by surrounding viewers. 2. An increase in urban water pollutants will result due to the increase in urban activities (i.e., use of motor vehicles, fertilizers, and pesticies). Although not significant by itself, it will contribute to cumulative water pollution problems in the Upper Newport Bay. 3. Air quality impacts related to increased traffic and urban activities will increase commensurately. Although not significant by itself, it contributes to cumulative regional air quality impacts. 4. Depending on the degree to which access and safety issues are addressed, school service to the site could still be considered a significant impact. 5. Energy and natural resources (i.e., natural gas, water, lumber) consumption related to construction and the long-term use of the proposed development will add to the cumulative demand for these resources. 79 Pi 7.0 GROWTH -INDUCING AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Approval of the proposed project would allow the development of residential, commercial, and park uses on site. The study area's conversion to these land uses have been anticipated by the city's general plan. IGROWTH -INDUCING IMPACTS The project represents the extension of existing urban development in the North Ford area. Much of the land immediately surrounding the site is presently developed with the exception of the San Diego Creek parcel to the north (in the same tentative tract) and the Caltrans property and City of Irvine land to the east. The development of the proposed residential uses will provide much of the necessary infrastructure (major roads and utilities lines) needed for development of the San Diego Creek parcel and will, therefore, influence the timing of the development of urban uses in this parcel. However, given that the parcel is designated for office ' uses and is a part of the same tract, the proposed project would not be- considered growth inducing. I a I I[] I/ The Caltrans property is designated for the development of the San Joaquin Transportation Corridor and the realignment of MacArthur Boulevard. The construction of this regional facility is in demand at the present time 'and is not dependent on nor induced by development of the North Ford area. The U.C.I. and other undeveloped properties to the east of the future freeway corridor are designated in the City of Irvine general plan as Institutional (general), Industrial (manufacturing and research) and Multi -Use. The upgrading of roads and utility services in the North Ford area could possibly influence the timing of development on these properties, however, given the separation provided by the future freeway corridor, other factors such as market conditions will most likely have a greater effect. The degree to which the proposed project will encourage or induce the development of these properties is probably negligable, given that growth inducements are already evident in the area. 11 Lli ICUMULATIVE IMPACTS I I LJ E I I I A N I I1 The ultimate development of the 888 units will result in a population of 1,980 persons, assuming an average of 2.23 persons per unit. In addition, it provides employment for approximately 111 persons at the commercial center (at 1 employee per 450 square feet) and some unknown number of persons for public park maintenance. This increase in population and employees will place an incremental demand on public services and utilities, i.e., police, fire protection, school, energy, water, wastewater treatment, and solid waste disposal services. Additionally, this project will result in incremental increases in vehicle trips with associated air quality and noise impacts. These impacts, although not considered significant in and of themselves, con city and the regior 8.0 ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONTACTED The following MBA personnel participated in the preparation of this EIR: Principal -In -Charge Thomas E. Smith, Jr., AICP Project Manager Beverly Bruesch Research and Analysis Tony Locacciato Graphics Lynn Buhlig Lori Scharnell Word Processing Charlene Kortgard Janette Redd The following consultants provided technical support for sections in this EIR: Civil Engineering/Hydrology John Stevenson Tom Chadwell Psomas do Associates 150-A Paularino Costa Mesa, California 92626 Geotechnical Study Jon Everett Moore & Taber 4530 E. La Palma Avenue Anaheim, California 92807 Traffic Study Wes Pringle, P.E. Weston Pringle do Associates 2651 Chapman Avenue Fullerton, California 92631 Noise Study Fred Greve, P.E. Mestre-Greve Associates 200 Newport Center Drive, Suite 213 Newport Beach, California 92660 Other individuals contacted during preparation of this EIR include: City of Newport Beach Patricia L. Temple Don Webb Sandra Genis Rich Edmonston The Irvine Company Bernard Maniscalco Dave Dmohowski Irvine Pacific Bruce Martin 82 I` 1 I i L1 r I 9.0 REFERENCES City of Newport Beach. Certified -Final City of Newport Beach. No. 10019, prepare City of Newport Beach. City of Newport Beach, City of Newport Beach, Subdivision Code. City of Newport Beach, Zoning Code. Mestre-Greve Associates. "Preliminary Noise Barrier Assessment for the North Ford Development," June 28, 1984. Moore and Taber. "Geotechnical Review -North Ford Area and Site A," September 21, 1983. Moore and Taber. "North Ford Grading Study," July 31, 1984. Psomas & Associates. "Hydrology Report, North Ford Project," July 1984. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Air Quality Data, (1979-1983). South Coast Air Quality Management District, Air Quality Management Plan, 1982. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Rules and Regulations. The Irvine Company. "North Ford/San Diego Creek Planned Community District Regulations," October 1983. United States Environmental Protection Weston Pringle and Associates. "North Ford Traffic Study," August 13, 1984. 83 10.0 APPENDICES A. Notice of Preparation (NOP) and NOP Responses B. North Ford Planned Communities District Regulations (Amended) C. Geotechnical Reports D. Hydrology Study E. Floral and Faunal Species List F. Traffic/Circulation Study G. Noise Study H. List of City Policies/Requirements and Mitigation Measures 84 I I ' APPENDIX A NOTICE OF PREPARATION (NOP) AND NOP I °f I NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A DRAFT EIR DATE May 3 1984 ' • , TO: Responsible Agencies and Interested Parties FROM: Planning Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 attn; Pat Temple PLEASE RETURN THIS NOTICE WITH YOUR AGENCY'S COMMENTS BY June 6, 1984 s PROJECT TITLE: North Ford Tentative Tract Map PROJECT LOCATION: See Attached Exhibit DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND MAJOR LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: iSee Attached Project Description W C7 4 • O 6 W J - PHONE: Pat Temple Environmental"Coordinator 640-2197 ' DESCRIBE SPECIFIC PERMIT AUTHORITY OF YOUR AGENCY RELATED TO THIS PROJECT: > , LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS: (Use additional pages as necessary) r, m- w J LC ' N Z O C. N W CONTACT PERSON: ' DATE MAILED BY LEAD AGENCY: May 4, 1984 'LE: PHONE: DATE RECEIVED BY FyATE RESPONSE RECEIVED RESPONSIBLE AGENCY: LEAD AGENCY: LOt •NUMS COUNTY 01YI0/I0/ COUNTY Land Use Residentliii Commercial Office t• Local Park Community Existing Cameiback/81son Development SOURCE: CFEIR, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GOA City Boundary e Future San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor o�=�oco' 1, LSA, INC. 1883. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project includes a preliminary site plan, tentative tract map, and amendment to the Planned Community District Regulations for the North Ford site in Newport Beach, California (see attached e)hibit). The project applicant, The ' Irvine Company, is proposing to develop the 96-acre site with 888 dwelling units and 5 recreation centers on 62.4 acres; 50,000 square feet of commercial/retail on a 5- acre parcel; and a 12-acre city park with a 1-acre fire station reservation. The balance of the acreage will include roads, major slope banks, and landscaped areas. The density of the dwelling units (d.u.) ranges from 8.5 to 17.83 d.u. per net buildable acre as itemized below: D.U. Density Acreage No. of 8.50 20.31 172 ' 14.20 9.71 138 17.83 32.41 578 ' 62.43 888 I! I PI r-, 9-J 91 1 The topical areas to be addressed in this full-scale EIR are listed below: • Geology/Soils • Hydrology/Drainage • Biological Resources • Cultural/Scientific Resources • Traffic/Circulation • Air Quality • Noise • Public Services and Utilities • Aesthetics • Land Uses and Land Use Plans 0 I NorA lord NOP t/57 I government,agency State of California Air Resources Board 1102 "Q" Street Sacramento, California 95814 Attn: Anne Geraghty State of California Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Sacramento, California 95814 ' Attn: Dan Conaty State of California ' Lands Commission 180713th Street Sacramento, California 95814 Attn: Ted Fukushima State of California r Caltrans - Planning 1120 "N" Street Sacramento, California 95814 Attn.- Mary Kelly State of California , Caitrans - District #7 P.O. Box 2304 Los Angeles, California 90012 ' Attn: Susan Brown State of California ' Department of Fish and Game 245 W. Broadway, Suite 350 Long Beach, California 00802 Attn: Fred A. Worthley, Jr. State of California Department of Water Resources 1416 Ninth Street Sacramento, California 95814 Attn: Ken Fellows State of California ' Water Resources Control Board 2014 "T" Street I Sacramento, California 95814 Attn: Jim Lee State of California ' Regional Water Quality Control Board, #8 6809 Indian Avenue, Suite 200 Riverside, California 92506 Attn: Joanne E.Schneider State of California Department of Housing & Community Development 921 loth Street, 5th Floor Sacramento, California 95814 Attn: Mary Ann Karrer State of California Department of Health Services ' 28 Civic Center. Plaza, Room 325 Santa Ana, California 92701 Attn: Franklin T. Hamamura State of California Division of Mines and Geology 1416 Ninth Street, Room 1326-2 Sacramento, California 95814 ' State of California Division of Mines and Geology 1416 Ninth Street, Room 1326-2 Sacramento, California 95814 State of California ' Department of Fish and Game 1416 Ninth Street Sacramento, California 95814 Attn: Richard Tharratt State of California ' Department of Boating and Waterways 1629 "S" Street Sacramento, California 95814 ' Attn: Barbara Kierbow State of California Coastal Commission 631 Howard Street, 4th Floor San Francisco, California 94105 Attn: Gary Holloway I D State of California Caltrans Division of Aeronutronics 1120 'IN" Street Sacramento, California 95814 ' Attn. Mark F. Mispagel State of California Department of health Services 2151 Berkeley Way Berkeley, California 94704 Attn: Jerome Lucas, Ph.D. State of California ' Department of Water Resources P.O. Box 8598 Los Angeles, California 90055 Attn. Robert Y. D. Chun State of California Native American Heritage Commission 1400 'tenth Street Sacramento, California 95814 Attn. Willie Pink State of California ' Office of Historic Preservation 1220 °K" Street Mall, 3rd Floor Sacramento, California 95814 , Attn: Nick del Cioppo State of California Coastal Commission 245 W. Broadway, Suite 380 Long Beach, California 90801-1450 County of Orange Environmental Management Agency/BAD P.O. Box 4048 Santa Ana, California 92702 Attn: Bill Olson , County of Orange Board of Supervisors 10 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, California 92702 Attn: Clerk of Board of Supervisors I I I i �l WJ I r [J E u I..J C u 1 City of Irvine Community Development Department 17200 Jamboree Road Irvine, California 92713 Attn: Ed Moore County of Orange General Services Agency 1300 South Grand Avenue Santa Ana, California 92705 Attn: Don Poer Southern California Association of Governments 600 So. Commonwealth Ave., Suite 1000 Los Angeles, California 90005 Attn: Mark Alpers Orange County Transit District 11222 Acacia Parkway Garden Grove, California 92642 Attn-. Dick Hsu County Sanitation Districts of Orange County 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, California 92708 Attn: Hilary Baker South Coast Air Quality Management District 9150 E. Flair Drive El Monte, California 91731 Attn: Brian Farris Newport -Mesa Unified School District P.O. Box 1368 Newport Beach, California 92663 Attn: Helen Dietz Southern California Gas Company P.O. Box 3334 Anaheim, California 92804-3334 Attn: D. M. Glover Southern California Edison Company 7333 Bolsa Avenue Westminster, California 92683 Attn: C. V. Wright I_ l I Pacific Bell ' 3939 East Coronado,ist Floor Anaheim, California 92807 Attn: L. C. Arthington City of Costa Mesa Development Services Department ' 77 Fair Drive Costa Mesa, California 92026 Attn: Fred Adjarian Newport Beach Public Library Newport Center Branch , 856 San Clemente Drive Newport Beach, California 92663 Attn: Judith M. Clark , Newport Beach Fire Department 475 32nd Street Newport Beach, California 92663 Attn: 11homas C. Dailey ' Newport Beach Police Department P.O. Box 7000 Newport Beach, California 92660 Attn: Randy Nakaskima U.S. Department the Army ' of Los Angeles District - Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 2711 Los Angeles, California 90053 Attn: Carl F. Enson Irvine Unified School District ' P.O. Box 19535 Irvine, California a 92713 Attn: David E. King Irvine Ranch Water District ' P.O. Box D-1 Irvine, California 92716-6025 Attn: Ron E. Young ' I I NONSTATUTORY ADVtSEMEfIT Pat Temple EFlle fto.� To: Frao: planning Department City of Newport Beach, C ]300 Newport gsBeach, CA ew0P !V9eacfi, CA 9266 PLEASE RETURN THIS NOTTCE WITH YOUR COMMENTS BY June 6� 19$4 uW t g W J PROJECT TITLE• North Ford Tentative Tract See Attached Exhibit Sae Attached project Description n DESCRIBE SPECIFIC PERMIT AUTHORITY OF YOUR AGENCY RELATED TO THIS PROJECT , C Y C� q 89 Y ��u LIST SPECIFIC I r W O 1J' � OIIl000q iW Vyg V!O w O�tl^ N Yyy ��C i GaF•� N Q V a /'- n .5 X CONTACT PERSON CONTACT PERSON CONCERNS: .(USE ADUTTIDNAL PAGES AS NECESSARY): TITLE CONCERNS TITLE PHURE PAGES AS NECESSARY): PHONE 0117E MAILED BY LEAD AGENCY DATE RECEIVED BY RESPON- SIBLE AGENCY WHERE APPLICABLE DATE RECEIVED BY INTERESTED PARTY May 4, 1984 DATE RESPONS_ RECEIVED BY LEAD AGENC` LOl AN09LIS COUNTY I lAN IIRXAR01N0 .�..��� COUNTY _ . RIY/RS102 COUNTY PACIFIC OCEAN r 1 r 1 FUTURE OUNii°O OFFI E SITE Land Use Raaidantidi ® Commercial Office local Park Existing E stbluff 3;a�.!; .•;':' "" Community _ 1 City Boundary r I r Existing �•^> Cameiback/Bison Development r.• Future San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor ' N SOURCE: CFEIR, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH OPA 82-1, LSA, INC. 1583. ' PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project includes a preliminary site plan, tentative tract map, and amendment to the Planned Community District Regulations for the North Ford site in Newport Beach, California (see attached exhibit). The project applicant, The ' Irvine Company, is proposing to develop the 96-acre site with 888 dwelling units and 5 recreation centers on 62A acres; 50,000 square feet of commercial/retail on a 5- acre parcel; and a 12-acre city park with a 1-acre fire station reservation. The balance of the acreage will include roads, major slope banks, and landscaped areas. ' The density of the dwelling units (d.u.) ranges from 8.5 to 17.83 d.u. per net buildable acre as itemized below: Density Acreage No. of D.U. 8.50 20.31 172 ' 14.20 9.71 138 17.83 32.41 578 ' 62.43 888 The topical areas to be addressed in this full-scale EIR are listed below: • Geology/Soils • Air Quality ,? • Hydrology/Drainage • Noise • Biological Resources • Public Services and Utilities • Cultural/Scientific Resources • Aesthetics • Traffic/Circulation • Land Uses and Land Use Plans r1 J 11 E C r'J Lurene Kalawaia Barbara J. North Robin M. Rankin , 808 Amigos Way 816E Amigos Way 2209 Vista Huerta Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Denise M. Dion TI & TR Co. TO IR-1923-00-2 Gary Schaumburg 527 Park Ave. 2906 Alta Vista Drive 2900 Alta Vista Drive Balboa Island, CA 92662 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 r Barok H, Yadegaran Jean E. Schwalbe William C. Green 2836 Alta Vista Dr. 2860 Alta Vista Dr. 2912 Alta Vista Dr. Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 ' J. McNichols R. England P. Collett 2854 Alta Vista Dr. 2918 Alta Vista Dr. 2848 Alta Vista Dr. Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 ' R. Erickson Mary B. Vadopalas M. Weinberg 2924 Alta Vista Dr. 2842 Alta Vista Dr. 2930 Alta Vista Dr. Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Michael Collins C. Bond James L. Webb 1400 N. Bristol St. 3038 Carob St. 821 Ceiba P1. �. Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Steven Williams P. Smith Jeanne C. Morrison 3044 Carob St, 812 Ceiba P1. 3061 Carob St. Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 , Kathie J. Hardesty Martin Hengst G. Gilmore ' 806 Ceiba P1. 3057 Carob St. 800 Ceiba P1. Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 W. MacGowan Title ins. & Trust United States Postal Srvc 3051 Carob St. TO IR-1923-00-2 1133 Camelback St. Newport Beach, CA 92660 2007 Vista Cajon Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 ' Irvine Industrial Complex Temple Bat Yahm J.M. Peters Co. 550 Newport Center Dr. 1011 Camelback St. 1601 Dove St., Ste. 190 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 I DianaD. Schmitz Mr. & Mrs. Charles O. White Ms. Kathy Kirrene 741 Amigos Way 7-D 2857 Alta Vista Drive 2632 Basswood Street Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Ms. Nancy Letcher Madalyn Seguin Diana Green ' 2844 Rounsevel Terrace Eastbluff Homeowners Assoc. IlVi Gravel Canal Laguna Beach, CA 92651 c/o Condominium Mgmt. Co. Balboa Island, CA 92662 2651 Saturn St. Brea, CA 92621 Gail Poor Mrs. Ginny McFarland Mrs. Petty Vaughen 353 Baywood Drive Eastbluff Apt. Owners, Assoc. 2815 Katalpa ' Newport Beach, CA 92660 835 Amigos Way Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 7 P J Eastbluff Homeowners Assoc Mr. E.H. Stone, President c/o Condominium Mgmt. Co. 2651 Saturn St. Brea, CA 92621 Carol Boice 2945 Catalpa St. Newport Beach, CA Newport Mesa Unified School Dist. 1857 Placentia Ave. Costa Mesa, CA 92625 Barbara Quist 2957 Catalpa St. 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 184 Irvine Unified Sch. Dist. P.O. Box AU 2941 Anton Ave. Irvine, CA 92664 Elizabeth Mead 851 Domingo, Apt. 27 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Dick Hogan Terry Haues R. Sublett ' 436 Vista Farads. 436 Cambridge Circle 1724 Port Abbey Place Newport Beach, CA 92660 Costa Mesa, CA 92627 Newport Beach, CA 92660 ' Margo Stuart Betty J. Metzger Robert A. Russell 440 Vista Grande 1300 Park Newport #401 4810 Park Newport #321 ' i Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 ' B.J. Boswell Joan Webb Firooz 16691 Robert Lane 65 Pergola 9942 Hot Springs Drive Huntington Beach, CA 92647 Irvine, CA 92715 Huntington Beach CA 92646 Mr. D. J. Gott Puente M. Clayton 953 Dahlia 2700 W. Coast Highway 26421 Fresno Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Ellen Lalu Jody Allione Lois Vining 16591 Tropez 126 Via Xanthe 2074 Tustin ' Huntington Beach, CA Newport Beach, CA 92663 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Roger Reed Ellen Austin Marilyn C. Avela-Gauld 524 Bluebird Canyon 510 Fernleaf 222 Promontory Drive W. ' Laguna Beach, CA 92651 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Terry . Haymond Ron Agino Jan Purcell 2520 Seaview P.OB. Box 328 4030 Park Newport Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Corona, CA 91720 Newport Beach, CA 92660 ' Dorra Swaringin Jan Knowlton Diana D. Schmitz ' 448 Vista Romo P.O. Box 9001 741 Amigos Way Newport Beach, CA 92660 Anaheim, CA 92802 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Cindi Hausheer 22502 Caminito Esteban Shelley Husen 29658 Orinada Rd. Ted Iwanake 21092 Shepherd Lane ' Laguna Hills, CA 92653 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 Huntington Beach CA 92646 , C. Hammon Shahnaz Helfer Gary Jennison 1814 Westclif£ Dr. Newport Beach, CA 92660 20172 Big Bend Huntington Beach, CA 92646 216 Grand Canal Balboa Island, CA 92662 ' Norm Aifore Eileen Jimenez Dennis Lynn , 972 Bayside Drive P.O. BOX 1168 25984 Via Lomas #1 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Placentia, CA 92610 Laguna Hilla, CA 92653 ' Sheryl L. Watson Jaqueline 0, Young Sandy Stein P.O. Box 152, Cote de Caza 21992 Teresa Drive 25102 Grissom ' Trabuco Canyon, CA 92678 Mission Viejo, CA 92692 Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Judy Jones Liane 5trother Gary Overstreet 26651 Saddleback 223 W. Cordoba 725 Domingo Dr., #9 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 San Clemente, CA 92672 Newport Beach, CA 92660 ' Anna Tyo Elizabeth Blek Diana L. Stone 20852 Sparkman 27916 Via Granados 2109 N. Eastside Ave. Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Mission Viejo, CA 92692 Santa Ana, CA 92701 Cynthia Tilton Leanette Wilson Ursula Smith ' 2344 Glenneyie St. 26511 Via Manoleta 24176 Juaneno Dr. Laguna Beach, CA 92651 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Mission Viejo, CA 92691 E.L. Finn William A. Moss Marcia J. Moss 27171 Soledad 835 Amigos Way, #16 835 Amigos way, #16 ' Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Gleah H. Powers Howard Kloppenburg M. B. Conrad 801 Amigos Way 777 Domingo Drive 791 Amigos Way Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 John H. White Chris Hill 813 Amigos Way 783 Amigos Way Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Joseph A. McNamara Mrs. Bene Kemper 800 Amigos Way 777B Domingo Dr. Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Margaret Masko Mrs. G. McFarland Amigos Way #lA 835 Amigos Way #14 '739 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport'Beach, CA 92660 Corinne Burton Bruce M. Williams 839 Amigos Way 871 Amigos Way ' Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 ' Toni Buckley Eleanor J. Guy 777 Domingo Dr. Apt. E 752 Amigos Way #4 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 M. C. Selvage C. W. Hogberg ' 740 Amigos Way, #1 835 Amigos Way, #5 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 ' J. A. McNamara Kris Kay 800 Amigos Way 841 Amigos Way ' Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Margaret Marks Enrique Serelle 739 Amigos Way 1220 Park Newport, #414 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Elizabeth Laurie JoAnn Berg 51A Orchid 20511 Apolena Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Balboa Island, CA 92662 ' Bette Atkinson I. Magnin & Co. 18082 Muir Woods JoAnn Crawler ' Fountain Valley, 92708 3333 Bristol St. Costa Mesa, CA 92626 ' Ralph A. Hippert Ms. D. M. Banner 863 Amigos Way 805 Amigos Way ' Newport Beach, CA 92660 Newport Beach, CA 92660 R. H. Bert 835 Amigos Way #5 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Mili Urban 740 Amigos Way #3 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Vera Wainwright 848 Amigos Way, Apt. H Newport Beach, CA 92660 Dee Carrasco 869 Amigos Way Newport Beach, CA 92660 Isabel R. Finnell 739 Amigos Way #lF Newport Beach, CA 92660 R. G. Powers 801 Amigos Way Newport Beach, CA 92660 Tamra Kay 841 Amigos Way Newport Beach, CA 92660 Donna M. Fenske 1840 Park Newport, #310 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Kevin Bossenmeyer 202k Coral Ave. Balboa Island, CA 92662 Scott Dowd 11 Flintridge Irvine, CA 92714 Moses Rodriguez, III 867 Amigos Way Newport Beach, CA 92660 Ruth Kahn Lucille Kuehn Connie Mumford 300 E Coast Hwy, 4239 1831 Seadrift 1840 Commodore Road Newport Beach, CA 92660 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Joan Petty Crystal C. Sims OASIS 1720 Kings Road Legal Aid Society Attn: Barney Lartz ' Newport Beach, CA 92660 2700 N Main, llth fl P.O. Box 829 Santa Ana, CA 92701 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 , Katerine R. Wolff Richard W. Petherbridge Tricia Harrigan O.C. Fair Housing Council 1722 North Broadway I Hampshire Circle 1525 E 17th Street Santa Ana, CA 92706 Newport Beach, CA 92610 ' Santa Ana, CA Jean Watt Jonathan Lehrer-Graiwer Eastbluff Apartment Asso ' SPON Western Center on Law & Poverty c/o Villageway Management P.O. Box 102 3535 West Sixth Street P,O. Box 4708 , Balboa Island, CA 92662 Los Angeles, CA 90020 Irvine, CA 92716 Eastbluff Homeowners Assoc Martha Durkee, President C/o David Redford & Assoc The Back Bay Associates 3822 Campus Drive, Suite 204 20311 Cypress Street Newport Beach, CA 92660 Santa Ana Heights, CA 92707 1 1 1 11 I I E 1 M M M M s M M M M W M M M M M� M M M Wool v a�aeu--art a me eawpe �p� K �„ OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH _ [�.o tea iBAw Si.FEi ogn>maa /m raaa OC�iS s+auwerro, a va.a a - a.c N olio as.ocr z - au. by ="rigo. m a.1uW4 nu 1eesly - O air e..omo. euaa ltm a tact o.cs. a eoa.ls a f®tp mw•s. 0 9u -lam aa..r, am a.m.• cult slerm•amt mm..1.m, a esna slemxlso ' DATE: Ha 9, 1984 r1e... n.sa. .us a aawt 0 miss. a a.a.e •tango rm.sn u1u 0 me atria. asr �. na owlet. cool, mu Y �a taut 4 se1ea..um, a.ana oleo. TO: Reviewing Agencies a.n aot.our nun. ala au CfuF90 o.as. a a1.1o:m n.r a..rla. 6 FROM: John B. Ohanian - ea rual a M am poor met ea..t Chief Deputy Director a m • a °use sae ue-=M MM4 RE: City of Newport Beach's NOP for North Ford Tentative Tract Map � o>ufa.ls 0 tole elw ay..s, r1. am ao.ss. K. �.a a,vr s� PA. ra a»m SCH 084050915 e.o...m, n suit as/aaaym es . a tan. sle)mrw. _ . Attached for your content is the City of Newport Beach's Notice of Preparation ersrlaa. ala.u. atsl.r - nqm a aussaea .uoaase..c tins. ao,e, sa.. a.es.a lmlte vauta. oo� 0 aaa ru of a draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for North Ford Tentative Traci Hap. �a ant = • n ea.m �� Responsible agencies oust transmit their concerns and comments an the 'eye scope and content of the EIR, focusing on specific information related to their aW sy�4 uns s east out maa a ea..s, am rtfior O�m, own statutory responsibility, within 30 days Qf receipt of -this a teat n 9ua commenting notice. We encourage co enting agencies to respond to this notice and express their concerns early in the environmental review process. _ Please direct comments to: i 0 o.ve• ao,.ue..srm .tle amm ague, ra l .sae stet 0 your m• a seta a una ae m �aa. Pat Temple - • City of Newport Beach j Q Div. a a.0 ua ow1w acerc e.m 3300 Newport Blvd. O Div, a ou air mewnsa. • r.•e. �. 0 Newport Beach, CA 92663 I OS.T. [ova a„omc.. Ylaaaa. mfitt a.a rra.ef.m, n sum aFeJaa7-0E6e eoe.ee tamtt .coo awaa. 0 r➢e• a H.► ra .ufi al.m aawe O uxo . Bo•N Imo coat as1..s, coo. mo with a copy to the Office of Planning and Research. Please refer to the SCH number noted above in all correspondence concerning this project, ma/ s n aula nel+.a-un a.eaa..m, a 9se1a s.eFaa-met If you have any questions about the review process, call Chris Goggin a.11rsaa. O � 11 Da.�.t W attlmltm. s.oumm, O VKn' Ja t >rQr - is aera.e at 916/445-0613. a mua mn 9ae1+ . nab AItachnents V`c .ua eloln aa..c. a...am-n 0 �( M1.� /ill tue nett sa<.c cc: Pat Temple saes r min molt �J ems sta r+iea S IYEO nECe :A a,.s eal6m,. aeea.nla...1s.. 0 plsro•.n IMDMt, 0 llz xmm saes �m. n wel+ f&A( 191984r sm/ma-mm 0 m CITYOF li SEACN, I r:,el nllly. mere, a Balm - NewpoRT CAM ,? YIt 9 taws. Iba lb O ru 916r�I1 oNaram3 $i Chad at TZNWfwtatlm O Ol�'1Lt r ��u mwm.ls.o of at mmw malai�W lS OmatrLt tt �s'�.a.ld. taam um meet J. ail. dnrpramlm Omanic 1�771+at 001101 t v ass mmuslooky taaayrarr oae Sun CL Janr tamer at N.Wo".tsm n OMaw. a Maw mn ma NKPOoftu Mail Ae1efir at TH'.mrrr o= f3. s�Ifmm se /p(: �J T�araMDNNmoAma n son mre hams TWO �' 0 otaet3ss a SWIZE!>e se[t minim sa a.la.ldlza, a son tlmnr. at n+ oaaarlr.c im1a mttwt alma». n matt mlasau Jdaatmttam t8 txtasrtrtim OD01mraw v3f.T[a , .mama, n emr awe a.ne. ne.lv[austoa Oalany33 aaat sa Deeme. n mum na/ar-ame nam r aa.—mm1 ams a. mrir, alCnat r•mm OM on cat m P. Ana, salami aasr ounwa. srjtmrdAM �twtdm., n om t�`itra a. >✓er. als>nsl llltasr on var/uaar •. bur. amlart Woman, o�> 1= OWN`asnsl Snell Mae a* aelrteh., rm. sa.mr aiIlms-eeeI PSA ram 10; n mere MIL oWool � r se n s mar aaer mare�a.a.1 sra .sa.eatadea an a Osw sNam, bane• sfeall P r I alarq.uir q mm m, sm>.ae, n mmam sacfaswu m=� e>.w1 seat aanaact x= au a.„—, n m VA. mr em, human, n sear nun Oatum save mtateva Anted mimed atrlat m at aver rmar rl s>< met ama.a. tt tuts mefat-arm lv( .weal eter @mtta tta4ot ma d v aces.ff Qa SA A A AL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD a+ SRNTA ANA REGION tam 1NnwNw wVENUe. tYltm 3m �`JR -/� RIVIIa om.a Ll"MXIwamW !HONK[ Mon Kam -ma g May 30, 1984 f4 � Ms. Pat Temple City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd Newport Beach, Ca 92663 HOP: North Ford Tentative Tract Han, SCHI 84050916 Dear Ms. Tomple: We have reviewed the Notice of Preparation (HOP) for this project. In response to the statutory concerns of this office, the Draft EIR should address the potential impacts of the project an surface and groundwater quality. In particular, all potential erosion and siltation .pacts should be assessed. Should the project be approved, an erosion -siltation control plan for all phases of construction must be submitted by the proponent for approval by the City of Newport Beach prior to the commencement Of any construction activities. If dewatering is necessary, and the discharge of the wastewater to receiving waters is proposed, an RPOES permit (Waste Discharge Requirements) must be obtained from this Board prior to initiating the discharge. The DEIR should also address wastewater treatment and disposal issues: these include the types and amounts of waste materials generated by the project, methods of waste treatment and disposal, and the impact of calculated project waste volume on the capacity of existing and proposed treatment and disposal facilities. We look forward to reveiw of the OEIR when it becomes available. If there are any questions concerning these cements, please contact this office. Sincerely, ,,�t ;lramwr. a 'AA"f� Joanne E. Schneider Environmental Specialist III cc: Chris GMIR - Office of Planning and Research JES:kyb MU OF ms M •f,aKT GFOIGE RWYIIAM. U.nv DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME 245 H. Broadway, Suite 350 to Long Beach, CA 90802 c- ( 213 ) 590-5113 May 25, 1984 spy 0,3S, 11 V �F Ms. Pat Temple, Environmental Coordinator City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Dear Ns. Temple: He have reviewed the Notice of Preparation of a Draft EIR for , the North Ford Tentative Tract Map. The project site consists of the 96-acre area located between the proposed University Drive, Jamboree Road, Bison Avenue, and Mac Arthur Boulevard. To enable our staff to adequately review and comment upon the project, we recommend the following information be included In the Draft EIRs i 1. A complete assessment of flora and fauna within the j project area. Particular emphasis should be placed upon i identifying rare, endangered, and locally unique species. 2. Documentation of the direct, indirect, and cumulative � impacts which would adversely affect biotic resources within and adjacent to the project site. In addition, we believe CEQA requires a discussion within the EIR of specific measures that the applicant proposes to implement. 3. An assessment of growth -inducement factors attributable to the project. Of particular concern to us is the impact of urban growth upon natural open space and biological resources, within and adjacent to the project site. 4. An assessment of how existing wildlife habitats within the project site can be preserved. Of specific concern to us is the preservation of riparian resources along Bonita Creek. S. An assessment of the potential impacts upon riparian and aquatic resources. He recommend that watercourses be retained in their natural state to provide habitat for wildlife. Any diversion of the natural flow or changes i in the channel, bed, or banks of any stream or lake must include notification to the Department of Fish and Game Ms. Temple -2- May 25, 1984 as called for in Section 1603 of the Fish and Game Code. This notification (with fee) and the subsequent agreement must be completed prior to initiating any such changes. He urge compliance with this code section prior to completion of the specific design since project features associated with streams or streambeds may require modifications. ' Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you have any questions, please contact Jack L. Spruill of our Environmental Services staff at (213) 590-5137. Sincerely, ��GHort�� Regional Manager Region 5 cc: Carl Wilcox oma of HISTORIC PRESERVATION DUAKIWIM OF PAMM AND MV"T10N DATE: ,5/14/04 rar oNlu am ms raauliono, cxpottfA fall/ REPLY 70: (916) 44S 6M UEI •Pat Temple. raviconmental Coordinator��+„Planning Department lCity of Newport peach- 3300 Newport paalevard 11Newport peach. G 92663 >REOEIR for North Ford Tentative Tract Nap Than4,you for o*.Mkyowrcommmnm Ow HOP dad the DEIRMaWi: (1) Dexnle a«km tatwwldeodfY hivak, ndNablkal, atdikcbral«almt odmNnseweMMlontdln the pole[ area. iPdsiwowW pefm[refoeobehwd.ONy Matttaacn6hdY bbeafkcld H dspo{eet o«dhcWmOfNd (2) 1daa*dm of Wmdfkd cvlani nforcn MA Yh u1tNm 6 s pplemtd by der (3) abdrdt« aimda wee med, hw hey wavaWiim! Mwl%eaed.Aat rartuflanwaeaexlNdaik .by. (4) Detaibe ad WWYU as pebely aPom" am/ alms Iwpm3x W Impertm& Cwlt«x tespwees Oft the der*"ot of drove rmnhed.FSecdma153F2ad 15126(a)of&eEiRGddelim, ThefmnshnddIse m Kowa On what extort dove 9.14dts Men maie one wema«s Woonma w be adanoly dhaW by the Pr**L (5) Dkcvs Free""alb"KimOat wmald mold MY admeedkcn w MegwAtin 04VA Meetesunes Impotent Famifatity whk ranee Ptatandm /et WAVa s In amblucune, land oven pimab7. Pete Pdky dmiomwta. m emulom law and WMN nsaca ma gums t dwaM be dadV erWd fn Me dskeaM dgMwimofxtem0.a (6) hopes rcxemhk midgum mnawe b miniaiw adaws NFse In the hnp«Wt **Hines of [bee m Baas k xrordars with Set m 15126 (c) of Ma EIR GP4r6na FamiRdty with amwt pemmil" ndnigws In atddkcawe, Wd ten pnmkf, P W, poky dendnPwnwt. P e lion hn and alord tesoa¢ maap«nt aA oldd be demt, eeMjm b tln dake ad ilhomioo of dtiPdm wm amass m Conform w tht mwi nomn of smn m 15126 (b). (e), (f) led (t) of de EIR GuddaNs If WPkabia AS wd of Me tkn sdtshS elfat, it k pasa9y "Auble w: 11) Cand k ant a 0. Rgimaai AtWdodfcal in/onmadmCtnles6W om Mt bad, of thk ktm For eaewt afdwmio,fioi mnRdaa (2) wReleofmondA Nasn«ablecu km dew fifty ysano(atewkm tlryappex (3) Cmsdt with hhmrical sodetkA mdwkfkal s«ktks, pnsnxhm ogpnlu inm. iawwdnatCwaMsfims« heeds, ramty «city pimon<dcpmanmes and ndetdoPnrne aSe«kts ap atwhom may hale ktarmation aboutcWamNfelearaln aPmtkWmpo(ectmeL (2) (4) Cemvlt With pwtWx culawd Or eMnk soups If Men is airy teasmWe P«dbWty Mx a nsv«ce of Nteretwd O,Ol t bt affected by Out pole[ Pkm arm, that if my!deal ai, , hoard orcammimian Btmobed In thoPm1m. mpllaoewfib Sedan 106 of an tfadmal fpsbrk hesnratinn AU of 1966, as minded, Is re9wi d. The DEIR brood bednftedwWert • .woLa x wlM dnm*AmnmaofthilAct tfVmhMmrytlwodl Plmwtnp pi hol del Cioo0n arthn Office senor-ty. De. Knot NAM Stale Mwak lh.setraNpn Offkf r ea StaQOadn(ews `{ I PORNATIONCLm"m Cou"'Flu N RMATIONCDITtirs cpalnfs W.p A.frwildww,rww*enw AYwMe,tdw4,Cewwf Crn. G.ledowl A.Cww.,CeaYNw saeW ,3 .5anewt Ile,thaen learYdew GMn Oe rK11wMN CwaifsamY ielar.matlaw CrW www SwwwrtNAe'bYNaat IIwlf,alee4tlw,IllNw Swry. aeSxriStavrawy Itww,L Wr,Sa Ftwrhn, dfmmweN AwdwMdep tMNrdefaeCYprxw.saaRawWa ReAwwt Nk,G%9Y Sw Wr,San DwAsra i+npMaerwvOwfe Atr AW YwwYw GASirs,Se.r;YNw Ana: IaMl9ftexw (9aD %tnif; AT55 N>Satf INti WMpf;ATsslW4% M.4YRKawn,Cw4w Mw.,cr.,tmw..aker, p.lwn Ltr4rarM>W Sr Dko fn.wbewweleN.madew Caw flnwRS=nal.Dwna.SLatl'w. swwth4awalle(rnadew Cam Tetww4TA4* Stanladndef, Ol« Sr Stw iM.eNn clow GUm ywDINm Gf3lU A. f Der t9ia1M5 f,ATss4S94314 Awm Fww1WMr 471413f9Ub:AT55f)6 M W.Iwd4Llehnew.Cawi AnNr,D Drtls,NsMe, hCraNA.Sdww.fariewer sw&mwie Iwewth Clwnalatlwxudw Cwm yher,Sewra,inw, saerwliw We.nNlr Gm 0.WwatNAwtYgwiaa' YeM Swfwwwf4w Cewetxa�.n ORIrWSte UwFwday.5anwwb 3U4drP Tbw e emalswN RNWa.Gft)TI Swvwwwe,Gi54tf Atx awaw Rwr A nrl TITIJHrJ9IiHs if IH4S4iSIT:Aiss Q34nT nr.LRykNyue,GwYwws AYnACalrrwxeMrA tsx fAW 1•aNe. Cwrdnam 1mw.Yeee, RFaWt rw;[w1/wYLiwnafwerw NwM.Sa nadw.ssabl+w. w Cwwrwde54w CaW►.SWwiwm T. w U Awd"Wrwadhai An>NdslRewwU ll4 Trkd.GfSate iklminNCwww:t Rl.wwfr Ater nr GCwa�a m.w,wL,Gft33i 13sp t4T•l%T:AH6IIIJ%S , AW: paid lah.mn ptlt tii)%f:ATSs4I1Iit) a.ia G..k,.Cerennr fwer.Rha.NwMa Cewd Sae Iw."w Vwtey w.lx VwwnpN. Car4hw Irmrtiw Swreakkwaiwn Cmm pwwowmwNsrWen(Aedweedwp Iwew41 Vaan rea.a[ahwww fiflpYasub feYwftgdayyy w...CA$ tlGwwe,G9 u !bt5m14h sNwn fxeNW.G9tm9 A. 4tewkAwf CotNs lawis Amor Ittal ISbtiU UIP lbI{UPntf INwaNWwweAwwaeetellrinw Rawtwl Sys ■ bR4avaLWirMCaaf4am Kwn.Tdwe W Swfan Cobv lm AgeM.prar.Vaw Swn CawY WomuYQ Unm Rrm°I°n ii t%I ParaNDMw I'^~awwe& talerwW.G 93MS thimwn MCNtwda.INArytnw (tN{l)S4)91w I95 ap11 tw Aw,dMCAW24 ATSS 725-1720 >ntRo9-R20x sun OF GUfdNA—wnYYST Aw 1UNVrATAnW AW DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION arlwcr r, Io lox am,. u>s Awuus soul (213) 620-5335 May 17, 1984 Notice of Preparation North Ford Tract EIR Ms. Pat Temple Planning Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 Dear Ms. Temple: We have reviewed the Notice of Preparation for the North Ford Tract EIR. Coltrane will be a Responsible Agency if access to Route 73 (MacArthur Boulevard) or other work i+ithin state right-of-way will be part of the project. Also with the State (CALTRANS) as a Responsible_Agency, circulation of the EIR to the State Clearinghouse would be required. We will be particularly interested in your study of traffic impacts of this project, and analysis of cumulative impacts of this and other developments, which should be included in the EIR. Provisions for alternatives to single -occupant automobiles should be encouraged. Possible strategies for encouraging the use of buses, carpool, vanpools, bicycles, or other transit services should be incorporated into your study and/or identified as mitigation measures. If traffic impacts are significant, mitiga- tion measures of the type identified here should be a condition for approval of this development. Alternatives which emphasize the need to conserve energy, reduce pollution and preserve open space should be investigated. Contact person for our agency will be Leonard Cornett (213) 620-4524. Very truly yours, ce � o• AECEIV ED W. S. BALLANTINE, Chief_ Marwrq Environmental Planning Branch pL5198ulrorDwpm"CM (fMAY CALIF. STAR Of CAUF A riEGOE pry///, K (,n.,,,, AIR RESOURCES BOARD nm o slam 10. M)S :YIS S,bM�D110. G 9atli May 21, 1984 ARB No. 840507 Pat Temple Planning Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Dear Ms. Temple: PA 23 91 p�CRyev 8Ql Rr CALIF NCH Your May 4, 1984, notice of preparation for the Irvine Company's North Ford Site, Newport Beach Draft Environmental Impact Report has been reviewed. Enclosed are our assessment guidelines which will assist you in the preparation of the air quality analysis for the ,proposed project and will provide the information useful to our review. For additional information, please contact Sydney Thornton of my staff at (916) 322-6076. S iii nn•4cleerr{-e� l y, ' Mne B. Geraghty, Ma ne, General Projects Section Technical Support Division Enclosure cc: Gay Muttersbach, South Coast AQMD Issue Date: flay 4. 1983 Revised: June 10. 1903 Revised: March 14, 1984 Report No. RP-83-002 Guidelines for Air Quality Impact Assessments: General Development and Transportation Projects byl Technical Support Division State of California Air Resources board 1102 Q Street Sacramento. Calfformia 95814 Guidelines for Air Quality Impact Assessmonts: General Development and Transportation Projects Table of Contents Page 1. INTRODUCTION 1 It. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING i III. IMPACT OF PROJECT PROPOSAL AND ALTERNATIVES 2 A. Short -Tens Faissions 2 8, -eT ss ons o 2 C. oca a e a ys s 3 D. i "T od r—na YTsTS— 3 E. nazar-&us roeaunnt Mal sis 3 F.Cumulative, cAnalysis 4 IT. CONFORMITY NITR AIR QUALITY PLAN 4 V. MITIGATION WASURES 5 A. General Transportation Ieasures S R�la—er-�sored r aon Measurs 6 C. �ran iP 6 D. Law use ellvelopacnnc ads G Figure 1 - California and National Air Quality Standards 7 Figure 2 - Cumulative Percentage of Hydrocarbon Emissions - 7 Mile Trip 9 REFERENCES 10 M M Mo ism no am N 'Ift M"KIM =w ow=* im M AIR RESOURCES BOARD Regional Programs Division May 1983 Guidelines for Air Quality Impact Assessments: General Development and Transportation Projects I. INTRODUCTION W"" fi W r W ", Noun - at the closest monitoring station countywide - basinwide E. Potential effects of existing air pollutants on sensitive receptors such as: Effective review of environmental impact reports (EIRS) may be the single most important factor in implementation of the policies established by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Division 13, Public Resources Code). The review process is the safeguard that provides for. independent evaluation by decision makers and the general public concerning environmental implications of proposed projects and for evaluating the feasibility of implementing measures to lessen these impacts. Pursuant to CEQA (Section 21082) the following guidelines have been developed which outline the recommended content for air quality impact assessments of general development and transportation projects. Some of the information suggested may be satisfied through incorporation by reference to other documents such as previous environmental documents. When incorporating by reference, a brief summary of the information most be provided in the EIR, and the incorporated reference most be available for public review. Despite projected reductions in motor vehicle emissions resulting from compliance with federal and state motor vehicle related standards and substantial controls an stationary sources, many areas of the state are not expected to attain some health based air quality standards in the near future. As such, the guidelines place special emphasis on discussion in EIRs of project/air quality plan consistency and on the development of detailed air quality impact mitigation elements. Information set forth here does not supersede more specific guidance developed by local air pollution control districts. 11. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING (Section toe CEQA Guidelines) Description of ambient air quality conditions prior to the proposed action. The description should provide sufficient information to permit independent evaluation by reviewers. The following information should be included in the discussion of the environmental setting: A. Airshed or basin in which the project is located B. Local climate and topography C. State and national air quality standards D. Summary of air quality trends for previous 3 yearsl including number of days federal and state air quality standards were exceeded The Technical Services Division of the ARB prepares annual summaries of air quality data for gaseous and particulate pollutants. This information is available upon request. See reference item 1. TSB 3/84 1. Schools (children) 2. Hospitals (patients) 3. Convalescent homes (elderly) 4. Agricultural areas (crop productivity) III. IMPACT OF PROJECT PROPOSAL AHD_ALTERNATIVES ec on e u UN nes All phases of a project and project alternatives must be considered when evaluating air quality impacts. Impact assessments should be calculated using 'worst case' meteorological conditions and the most current emission factors available. Pollutants of particular concern are identified in Figure 1. Several types of emission computations may be needed for the Air quality analysis. All results may be presented in units of tons per year, pounds per day, and concentrations as parts per million (ppm): The ARB E11FAC6C composite vehicle emission factors may be used in calculations where more specific regional factors are not available. (See reference item 2 for information on how to obtain composite emission factors.) A. Short -Term Emissions - Short-term emissions generated during the site prepare on an construction phase of a project include fugitive dust resulting from grading and materials handling, construction workers' vehicular traffic, and the exhaust from heavy-duty gasoline and diesel powered vehicles. Emission factor data for emissions.generated during construction activities can be found in EPA AP-42, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emissions Factors, Third Edition see re erence fi�3 . nee e appropriate emission factors have been determined, computations would be similar to computations shown below for long-term emission generation. B. Lon -Tenn Emisss - The long-term emissions associated with a pro ect nc u e iono the direct emissions generated by the operation of the project, and the indirect emissions induced by the project, due principally to the use of motor vehicles. If a project's completion date is anticipated to be 10 or more years in the future, an emission assessment should be done in 5 year increments to project completion. This assessment should identify and analyze emission sources (i.e., motor vehicles, power generation, project operations). Factors in vehicle usage to be considered are: 1. Number of vehicle trips associated with the project 2. Length of trips 3. Peak hour traffic count estimates '2- TSD 3/84 No 3. Identification of thmshold of adverse health impact 4. Control measures S. Emergency plans F. Cumulative Impacts -the impact on the ambient air environment c rewfiTh ulM the incrneatal impact of a proposed protect when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future development activities should be discussed. The State CEQA Guidelines (Section 15130) presents the following criteria for an adequate discussion of cnamlative impacts: 1. A list of projects in the vicinity of the proposed project producing related or cumulative impacts, including those projects outside the control of the agency. 2. A summary of the expected emvironeental effects to be produced by those projects with specific reference to additional information stating where that information is available, and 3. A reasonable analysis of the cumulative impact of the relevant projects. IV. CWORMTT WITH AIR gWL17Y PLAN A. Section 15125(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines and Sections 176 and 316 of the Federal Clean Air Act contain specific references on the need to evaluate any inconsistency between the proposed PAnagement Plan EAQMP] State? Impleementtation Plan [SIP]). ualInimy Instances a project/air quality plan conformity finding can be made by determining the following: 1. Is an Air Quality Plan being implemented in the area where the project is proposed? A local jurisdiction is considered to be implementing the A"ISIP if it: (a) haslied to implement the control measures in the AQMP/SIP designated for local government action or substitute measures with equivalent mission reductions; and (b) implements the control measures to which it has committed through ordinances, zoning or conditions of development. 2. is the proposal consistent with the growth assumptions of the applicable Air Quality Plan? Several of the state's metropolitan area 19M AQIPs do not demonstrate attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards IMAMS) as prescribed by the Clean Air Act. Consistency with growth forecasts of such plans is not in and of itself a satisfactory reason to allow project -related missions to go unmitigated if mitigation measures arc reasonably available. ME ISO 3184 3. Identification of threshold of adverse health impact 4. Control measures S. Emergency plans F. Cumulative Impacts - The impact on the ambient air environment whichresu rnm the incremental Impact of a proposed project when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future development activities should be discussed. The State CEQA Guidelines (Section 15130) presents the following criteria for an adequate discussion of cumulative impacts: 1. A list of projects in the vicinity of the proposed project producing related or cumulative impacts, including those projects outside the control of the agency, 2. A summary of the expected environmental effects to be produced by time projects with specific reference to additional Information stating where that information is available, and 3. A reasonable analysis of the cumulative impact of the relevant projects. Iv. CO;FOINJITY WITH AIR QMITY PLAN A. Section 15125(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines and Sections 176 and 316 of the Federal Clean Air Act contain specific references on the teed to evaluate any inconsistency between the proposed project and the applicable air quality plan (i.e.. Air Quality Management Plan EAQWI/State Implementation Plan ESIP]). In many instances a project/air duality plan conformity finding can be made by determining the following: 1. Is an Air Quality Plan being implemented in the area where the project is proposed? A local jurisdiction is considered to be implementing the AQiP/SIP If it: (a) has coamited to implement the control measures in the AQMP/SIP designated for local government action or substitute measures with equivalent mission reductions; and (b) Lmpimmts the control measures to which it has committed through ordinances, zoning or conditions of development. 2. Is the proposal consistent with the growth assumptions of the applicable Air Wily Plan? Several of the state's metropolitan area 1982 AQHPs do not demonstrate attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (MRS) as prescribed by the Clean Air Act. Consistency with growth forecasts of such plans is not in and of itself a satisfactory reason to alive project -related missions to go unmitigated if mitigation wasures arc reasonably available. -4- TSB 3/84 An Wo I i�-� so M am Me = am �, no MM M ;ow MA An � 3. Does the project contain in its design all reasonably available and feasible air quality control measures? The Federal Clean Air Act Section 110(5)B(ii) requires implementation of reasonably available Transportation Control Measures (TRIs) in metropolitan areas which cannot attain air quality standards by 1982, Many urban areas of the state do not project attainment of the standards by the current statutory deadline of 1987. Therefore, project -related TCHs are an increasingly important source of emission reductions and need to be analyzed in the EIR. V. MITIGATION MEASURES (Section c : State CEQA Guidelines) The EIR should identify all feasible motor vehicle trip reduction measures that can serve to mitigate project -related air quality impacts. There should be an assessment of the air quality benefits which could result from the implementation of mitigation measures. These should be stated in quantitative terms, including projected reduction in emissions, trips generated, vehicle miles travelled, total emissions and pollutant concentrations. The applicable Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) should be used as a reference for TCHs prescribed for implementation in the region. In addition, mitigation measures not adopted for regiomHde implementation may be reasonably available for specific projects. If the project's design Includes AQMP motor vehicle trip reduction measures, this should be noted in the EIR; similarly, AQMP measures rejected as infeasible should be noted and explained in relation to the project. The names of entities responsible for implementation of proposed TCHs and the timeframes for their implementation should also be included in the EIR. we recommend that project proponents contact public transit, ridesharing, bicycling, local public works, and other appropriate service providing organizations during early planning stages to ensure that needed facilities and services are available and will be appropriately incorporated into project design. The following listing of measures is intended to be a guide only and is not all-inclusive; other measures to mitigate adverse air quality impacts are available. The measures are related to land use and transportation planning and management. Their purpose is to reduce motor vehicle trips, thereby reducing emissions of automobile -related pollutants on both a regional and local scale. A. General Transportation Measures - applicable to all developments - Direct support to transit agencies for service and/or facilities - Parking management - Bicycle paths and on -street lanes - Safe and convenient pedestrian facilities - Minibus, jitney, or other para-transit services within and between trip attractions -5- TSD 3/84 8. Employer -Sponsored Transportation Measures (for job sites) enera asures ste a "e "a: Employer-sponsored ridesharing programs Employer -provided transit passes Carpool/vanpool preferential parking Employer subsidy to employees using carpool/vanpools Employer -charged parking fees for single occupant motor vehicles Onsite fuel for carpool/vanpool vehicles Modified work schedules (flextime) for meeting carpooling, vanpooling, or transit schedules ' Provision of employee services within walking distances, including banking, child care, food service, recreation, and other facilities Shuttle services for employees for shopping and meal trips and to passenger rail or bus loading points Secure bicycle parking facilities Showers and lockers for bicyclists (and joggers) Fleet management to reduce trips and improve vehicle maintenance Decreased parking requirements for implementation of any of the above C. Residential Projects 1 enera easures sted above and: - Provision for transit access in street design - Neighborhood shopping and other day-to-day personal service needs within residential projects, without additional parking for such service uses - Major open space and recreational facilities within residential projects - Vehicle pools for high density developments D. land Use Oevelo Heasures nera easures ent ste a ove and: - Nixed land use/balanced communities - Energy -efficient street lighting Optimum insulation standards Solar access siting Solar space heating/hot water systems/pool heating Energy -efficient built-in appliances -6- TSD 3/84 Figure I AMBIENT -AIR QUALITY STANDARDS Qyy+ l.w. v per.. Iwr rrr.tar..w •✓ I .+v A.wA W Iww SW.tY�I. MwMMUM Nw✓ i�c`WeY1 il.eri � tv.nw�nn jor 11r ern hpp�t r.rY 11w maw S..W...•.I tuNra. Srrraw _ ecar� PNrI tiWk PAIN p3r✓.Pt OitW pew rw.11r. WPIw.. p>r+a i tl..�Am++.rn ce5[re ...�__._� O.neA.n�- Mawae 3.wwt uaa... r+w�- rir tmw.• an.. xar awe l..e �.n lswr• IM amae� T�I+r 0 a V..iyt f.tv.rr. YW14 M1w.w wlm Mw AMID AF1E010I: rrr rwww..j_ ie..r Rti.w i w.w.w I.rw.. U..w.r pxMri Yarw.ww xwra 1rYMws S.iY. POpnptl3er MN1Y.( 341 -7- frrnr.+s ast r. AAn' 3 Iww• _._ Tan 3184 NOTE: 1. CadwN. [trdr6, otr. tMn u0ae es.wi, an alum *at .n n.t b O..4ukd r perdrL Tw u3w leerprid..bbrta .n .nt b b e ..d.L 1. Kmk W svAd .3k ptwl Yun ear.. ant t. Y.nd e.l a—W xrtr{ x &..a lwwtYdwww..11tt Y.r. Tim W.w Wndl.d YamNMwlwitfr-d o n t elby3 P .dro Y.r tdt. • etxY.s 1..n1Y waair epnoipad.n New Yw aw.dsd Y..aW b r Wa S Cenrnaatan ..p.wN hnNWNNwWhkwa perWt.rd Fyivaw.t aaiN iNYn N f.Ir.T.r. an lrrd ep... •owns I.rp.neee N >s'C r.d .nirrs P..sww N 7i0 ps N I..I.rMY. Meraa- WI.nn\Nai/OnitYu3bb r N 76'Cpmb NO ..4 Ii 11,0112nW. NNP.nMha IwwoN Y31. nw[ b t9w M Y.is. r edwWw N pi.em pr ewYNia AnY.•0a..ir.[PeoAe.Yd.id.abtl.o.wtw P1. faNl.Iden N Ib Ad Awrw Ferd to i+. qd, YaYnr IaWN x « twr dr Ynl N tM aY piq .trwdpwbwr - 4 Kwpol SON TI YwY N.l. iaairy ANi Fan3wn iS (N.rw.b i.T01 -e- wrwa•Y. riA an ad r nr«..1 tal.ry. ro ProMct dw puWe baldt Exe tzar nwt uuet 1.. aws vw., no Yw dun w y.rt alw WI awrl inOwnwtatlae ax {a PAJ by W En ainwwnblfnrcdanArnay (EPA) • Rrwtd 3xrwlrYitrewdl: Th.a .l www,w Mnwiry b form 0.. V d . 1.. kr.. " Irpn.. r xd mw .e...r .1 a N . ?"M L Ead.a[...e.wt] b...n•ida %.IrMr6 1I p'YWrMx. d WI ~ d leMd lft.n 0... apre..d by du EPA i. 11.I.....a m.dW x tnaitN iY W FPA An'�pp .iwn.ntlwd' Nn.awrbrt np bu..d btCW I...t."OW.MtINiik.nAlpntb.tYn..n.wdlpd' arl w.w[b.ge.W M W EPA l ►rl.aiq.wibTiry Y 6rYwd a. dw ln+r.t rrY41Y wi{IL k adaNM r turpwrd rr.a x Ywt blt al YN I.odaon drd., tut rot nwmrdy M eanlMut it At loorion Nwn tM tuw tlrnwb Inr WwY.I arYr txprW.d prdad... rrw re wd.rt N W rwl Ha W i apply awwlre 10. WaM.dxearw. TSD 3/8i Figure 2 HY%b-©caiRppo'N EmsocRIGNS - 7 Il'351.E ' RI-P 100. HOT SOAK CVLLL G 90 17%OF EMISSIONS O A m gQ 11 70 0 1985 AUTO WITH 60 CATAI.Y71C CONVERTER p 'U a 50 . _ Speed: 25 mph Temperature: So F AO O COLD START CYCLE - ' m 30 GOL OF EMISSIONS IN OI m LESS THAN 1 MILE c 20 al U M 30 fi 0 1 2 3 A 5 6 7 Miles from Origin This curve is derived from exhaust samples taken during the running of the 1975 Federal Test Procedure (FTP). Although originally derived from early model catalyst and non -catalyst equipped vehicles, it is representa. tive of never model catalyst equipped vehicles. Source: Percent of hydrocarbon emissions derived from ARR FBFAC6C emission factors. 9• e IS[) 3/84 REFERENCES Documents available from ARR may be requested from the following address: State Air Resources Board Public Intonation Office P.O. Box 2815 Sacramento, CA 95812 Information for securing other references is included in individual citations. 1. California Air Resources Board, California Air Duality Data: These reports contain monitored air quality data for all pollutants from monitoring sites throughout California. Available as quarterly reports or annual summaries. 2. California Air Resources Board, EMFAC6C Emission Factors'. California Statewide MIX of Vehicles 1 r 19111. to be revised. Contains current composite mobile emission factors based on EWAC6C. It is compiled in an easily usable format for CALIME 3 calculations of missions resulting from -=for vehicles at arty given speed and year. 3. EPA AP-42 Supplement go. it for Comoilatiom of Air Pollution Emission racmrs, Joins aoitron lincwmng smpptements 1-1i tmesearco triangle PaFTMorth Carolina, Emriromemtal Protection Agency, October 1980). pp. 3.2.74 through 3.2.7-5. Emission factors for heavy-duty gas and diesel powered vehicles and aircraft. Emission factors for heavy -dub diesel and gasoline -powered engines have been reprinted by Regional Programs Division of the Air Resources Board and are available without cost upon request to Regional Programs Division, 4. California Air Resources Board, URBEMIS fl A land Use Emissions Model (November 1902). URCEMIS 11 is a program which may be used to estimate the emissions which result from various land -use projects, such as employment sites, sboppfPg centers, cotManinium developments, and single-family home developments. URBEMIS el provides comparison of carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide, and total hydrocarbon missions as a function of the type of lan"se project befog considered, the type and number of vehicle trips associated with the land use project, and the vehicle miles travelled for the various ae Apple s of vehicle trips (�rreeference 16),Ior asta menualble to metho operate Both on arc available from the Air Resources Board. -10- ISO 3/84 S. California Department of Transportation, CALIME 3 - A versatile Dispersion Model for Predicting Alr Po u n eves ar uhways and a"fterial Ureets inovinneer J7 This publication contains documentation of the CALINE 3 Model and a description of the operating procedure. The publication also includes listIn9S of the model in FORTRAN and -BASIC languages as well as abbreviated versions for use an RP 67/97 and TI59 programmable calculators. Available for $10.60 from Caltrans Publication Unit, 6002 Folsom Blvd., Sacramento, CA 95819 or call (916) 445-3520. A computer -assisted version of this model is also available (see MI. 6. California Air Resources Board, Air Quality Project Evaluation Tools, ' 119031. This is a package of three recommended computer models which are designed to run on an Apple II ♦ micro computer. It is available from Ma for a price of f13.00. The package includes: URBEMIS 01 - estimates vehicle missions from various land uses CALINE 3 - estimates microscale impacts of vehicle emissions PIVOT POINT - estlmstes effectiveness of TCM mitigation measures 7. California Air Resources Board, A Proposed Program for Reducing Emissions of Toxic Air Contmminants in Caiifordia, (AYMI This report reviews past ARB efforts, identifies the role and actions of other agencies, and discusses a framework for a regulatory program for the control of toxic air contaminants. D. California Air Resources Board, •Examples of Transportation Control Measures•. report. (jume 1902). A list of transportation control measures fTCMs) that have been implemented in varions cities in the United States. with contact person or reference identified. Available from Regional Programs Division. 9. California Air Resources Board, •Attainment/ibnattafnnmt Classification Status; inforaml informational report, (December 1982). This informational report contains classification status by county. ambient air quality standards, EPA definitions, and Pups illustrating statewide classification status by pollutant. It is updated frequently and it is available without cost flow the Air Resources Board's Regional Programs Division. -)I- ISO 3/84 go MW} so W* t" " M low am"a so 1r) al�� so !low " s" a" as im. so on .am "I" go we 10. Urban Consortium Transportation Task Force, S!D Briefs, (Washington, D.C.: Public Technology, Inc., Quarterly Publica ion . Quarterly reports on progress in nationwide demonstration projects financed by Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UTMA) to test new alternative transportation services and management ideas. Contact person is identified for each project. Two volume looseleaf report available without cost from: Public Technology, Inc. 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20004 (202) 626-2400 11. Office of Environment and Safety, The Costs and Effectiveness of Trans ortation Control He sores nAchievingr ua t a s as ing on . C. . . epartmen aTransportation, ugus 981) This publication provides an assessment of the costs and effectiveness of a variety of transportation control measures. Many of these measures are applicable for mitigating project impacts; therefore, this publication may be a good guide for use in estimating costs and effectiveness of project mitigation measures. Copies may be obtained without cost from the Air Resources Board's Regional Programs Division. 12. Fortman-Mayo, Marda, Bicycling -and Air Duality Information Document (Washington, D.C.0 We oT Transp at on an ate, Environmental Protection Agency, September 1979) This publication provides a good overview of bicycling with comparisons to other TCHs. Suggested methodology should be modified to reflect evaporative emissions reductions in addition to reductions in running emissions. Reprints of modified methodology may be obtained without cost from the Air Resources Board's Regional Programs Division. Full report may be purchased from Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. 13. Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Local Government Guide to Project Mitigation and Other Improvement Measures for Air ua ty ra t J-UJ This document is intended as a guide for local government planners and other local officials in the San Francisco Bay Area. It concerns the actions that cities and counties can take both to mitigate air quality impacts of development projects they approve, and to improve air quality through non -project local actions. It is available from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 939 Ellis Street, San Francisco, CA 94109. (415) 771-6000 Attention: Irwin Hussen. RP-83-002 -12- ISO 3/04 WAVE of CAUKX — Al l A WIUN AGENCY GIMM IXVIV.U11" Ga.xmr DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SFRV(CES alai mmue" WAY mmEUY. a vuo. 415/540-2665 June 5, 1984 b BECE NEY �I'd, RE ?+l� �Ui EACYi Pat Temple Environmental Coordinator CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 SUBJECT: City of Newport Beach's NOP for North Ford TT Map - SCH 184050DIS The Department has reviewed the subject environmental document and offers the following comments. Enclosed for your information is a document prepared by the Noise Control Program entitled, "Guidelines for Noise Study Reports .. ", which provides some general guidelines as to what this office considers important in EIRs. Specifically, on -site noise levels due to aircraft from John Wayne Airport and traffic on nearby roads should be estimated. If you have any questions or need further information concerning these com- ments, please contact Dr. Jerome Lukas of the Noise Control Program, Office of Local Environmental Health Programs, at 2151 Berkeley Way, Room No. 613, Berkeley, CA 94704, 415/540-2665. Enclosure cc: END SCH Stuart E. Richardson, Jr., R.S., Chief Office of Local Environmental Health Programs J4)r me S. Lukas, U.D. fdnior Psychoacousticiad ' NOISE CONTROL PROGRAM I Gamellms for Not" S Itt � OV4 part of Eavinamnw Ca*wxk O1xe ofMww Cenas! C"On" Depnmal dHmkb Sfavkcs 2151 Rrkekr War 8rkft,C&VOnAm 94704 May 1912 brine compWnts about mvkopm=W mine am se froquenk the ON= of Noise Control recommend: tout ever papal wkb a po"M for beaming ewAmomewd poise kvek a which may be aSafed br midkg Of fotore noise sorcm abeoM bme a Noise Swdr Report This aeport moan hose Hoke kvds aaraktrd wltb the pmtea MaraScU peep* The krm- ssadW contained Is the Noise: Study Rcpa AmM be muse wbod In the Eavbopmenlal Isspal Rcpmt of EavimetmGW IwPld SWessmak aid kept m Me by the lord vf=7 foe mvkw by those with a spedlicImberm Im poke. Tbs atmchcd Is dnyGed to bdp loose wle pepre Noise Smdr Repak sd En*oam=W bnped Reports and mrkw of Eivirmmcad Impact Repa4. Because them re m assay del awt ccmbintlba ofmke watts sod receiver (people Iospacbd by nose soulao. k is VkhtoRr impossible m develop kWdtg= ttr ova as skaawaa Nevertbder, The g weiom Amid bdp m brkg souse con"cmr to the war coke Wm wdm is pxmepkd is earban- matd docummty NO MW a* 00Ow 4 00 go A M*so aw 06 it Sm Sm "A* s Mw B 1R. IV. Suggested Contents of a Noise Study Report A brief description of the project in terms of its effect on the none environment and a description of the existing noise environment and its impact upon the project (homes near a freeway, for example). Two scale maps — one showing the existing setting and the proposed project with adjacent Ind uses, secePlors, and noise sources identified, and the second map showing the future condThon (use a time span of no less than 10 yarn, unless the projeces life span is lea) with the Proposed project and proposed land taus, receptors, and noise source Identified. A detailed survey of the existing note environment. A The noise survey should encompass the proposed project area and must include any noise sensitive receptors, both near and far. The survey should establish the exist. ins ambient none level which may then be unit to evaluate compliance of the pro - pond Project with applicable noise standards. The standards should be local (city, county) but in their absence state or federal standards may be used The rationale for the selection of noise survey sites should be included in the repon. B The survey should cover the time periods when the noise environment may be affected by the proposed project. C The survey should encompass enough days to be representative of the existing 'nor. mal' noise environment Discussion of the similarity or dissimilarity of the noise environment during the survey period with that during other times of the year should be included D. For the time periods measured, the reported noise data should Include the L,v LI, Lim LA Lam and identification of typical noise levels emitted by existing seurm. If day -and night mwumments are made, report The La, also. La, is approximately equal to CNE14 either descriptor may be used. It is imperative that the descriptor conform to that used in the appropriate standard IL Summarize the present environment by providing a noise contour map showing lines of equal noise level in 5 till steps, "tending down to Lin, — 60. In quiet areas lower contours should be shown also. F. Identify the noise measurement equipment used in the survey by manufacturer, Type, and date of last calibration. A description of the future noise environment for each project alternative. The scope of the analysis and the mehim used will depend on the type of project, but u a minimum the following information must be provided: A. Discussion of the type of noise source and their proximity to potentially impacted areas & Operaflom/activity dais: L Avenge daily level of activity (traffic volume, flights per day. hours on per day, else). 2. Disinbution of activity over day and nighttime periods, days of the week, and seasonal variations. 3. Composition of noise source (% trucks, aircraft fleet mix, machinery type, etc.). 4. Frequency spectrum of samm (113 octave band data are preferable). 5. Any unuauai characteristics of the sources (Impulsiveness, tonality, etc.). C Method used to predict forme levels. 1. Reference to the prediction model used, if standard fez., FH WA-RD-77-108, etc.). 2. if corrections to a standard model are made or empirical modeling is used, state the procedure in detail. 3. Show typical levels ins., Lt. Llo etc) at the receptor. 4. Give any other data yielded by the model you used D. Contours of future levels should be Included (down to Lin, 55 where applicable), and superimposed over projected population (receptor) densities. V. impact A. Quantify anticipated changes In the noise environment by comparing ambient infor- mation with estimated source emissions. Evaluate the changes in light of applicable standards. & Discuss how this project relatae to the Noise Element of the applicable general plan. C Dixws the anticipated effects of lecressed miss levels (speech interference, sleep disturbance, disruption of wildlife habitat, eta). VI. Mitigation A. Discuss how adverse noise Impacts an be mitigated, suggesting alternative tech- niques for mitigation, their relative effectiveness, and feasibility of Implementation. Provide a table Rating the most and least effective techniques. For this able, effectiveness should be defined in lens of the number of people being exposed to noise at seine given level. & Responsibility for effectuating the mitigation measures should be assigned. C. Discuss my noise impacts that cannot be mdtigmed, and why mitigation is not fmi- his. ONC 5/82 ONC 5/82 Smsesarifstiea of Nava Sh* Ite/efts In ER►IesarteNW Imm"d Aepeth W Stalem eats laronm0 of included to the Envkonme@W ImpmTRetamt or Stakment should he a someway ay ar the naive atuaf• The foBowinebdatmsMoo esml he Tmcbnde: A. Uwe ahomine ahe ex Wn serene and the Rgamd,mica whk sditceet land ease and Wise saurwldcWMW. Peniomt dlwocceshook! be Waal. W Adgatpllm ofihe am, nobe eovitmmmL C The change in the Asia anbaeneelfar each projectautudvs. D. A dsomkamor Na WW604far the siwauadv E A dsamim or the comps D, or the project WNh the gpNcahle Nome Demme or the Mestai PUB ortab malappBcshie mkt Am atadrozs, F. A dKom iom of ddettk m measures. cMmb idsim tft the katima ad number or people aRacaW Wbm mkipNm Y sat iaaslbie. 0. Smemnemu or. (1) Where a abkin a OW or the NOW Study Repair from WYeh the hdonmedom Wm takes (or the Noise Stady Rgmt may beJaciwiedas an oppes- dr, and (2) the rme orwe amtdlaal who aeantctea the 2)oim story YN want aaducW by Ve author or We Eanhoom mud hoped RepwL .ti,:iwjlP, OEPARTMENTOF'NATER P.O. se. $vp LOSANDELES 400ss al 31104 City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Reach, CA 92663 Attention: Pat Temple Notice of Preparation of DLIR for North Pord Tentative Tract Map The Department of Water Resources' recommendatlonn on the subject document dated May 3, 1984, are attached. The recommendations are related to water conservation and flood damage prevention. Causiderstioo should also be given to a comprehensive program to use reclaimed water for irrigation purposes in order to free fresh water supplies for beneficial uses requiring high quality water. For further information, you way wish to contact John Pariewski at (213) 620-3951. Sincerely, m' Robert Y. D. Chief Planning Branch Southern District Attachments cc: Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse 1400 Tenth Street Sacramento, CA 95814 40 NO fti 00 00 00 I� WN W "A *0, " W Am W I� 00 60 me Department of Water Resources Recommendations for Water Conservation and Water Reclamation To reduce water demand, the following water conservation measures should be iwplemented: Required by Is 1. Low -flush toilets (see Section 17921.3 of the Health and Safety Code). 2. Low -flow showers and faucets (California Administrative Code, Title 24, Part 6, Article 1, T20-1406F). 3. Insulation of hot water lines in water recirculating systems (California Energy Commission regulations). Recomcxndatim:s to be iuplemented where applicable: Interior: u 1. Supply line pressure: recommend water pressure greater than 50 pounds per square inch (psi) be reduced to 50 psi or less by means of a pressure -reducing valve. 2. Flush valve operated water closets: recommend 3 gallons per flush. 3. Drinking fountains: recommend equipped with self -closing valves. 4. Pipe insulation: recommend all hot water lines in dwelling be insulated to provide hot water faster with less water waste and to keep hot pipes from heating cold water pipes. 5. Hotel rooms: recommend posting conservation reminders is rooms and rest rooms.* Recommend thermostatically -controlled mixing valve for bath/shover. 6. Laundry facilities: recommend use of water -conserving models of umbers. 7. Restaurants: recommend use of water -conserving models of dishwashers or retrofitting spray emitters. Recommend serving drinking water upon request only.* Exterior. 1. Landscape with low water -consuming plants wherever feasible: 2.' Minimize use of laws by limiting it to lawn dependent uses, such as playing fields. *The Department of Water Resources or local water district may aid in developing these materials. 3. Use mulch extensively in all landscaped areas. Mulch applied on top of soil will improve the water -holding capacity of the soil by reducing evaporation and soil compaction. 4. Preserve and protect existing trees and shrubs. Established plants are often adapted to low water conditions and their use saves water needed to establish replacement vegetation. 5. Install efficient irrigation systems which minimize runoff and evaporation and maximize the water which will reach the plant roots. Drip irrigation, soil moisture sensors and automatic irrigation systems are a few methods of increasing irrigation efficiency. 6. Use pervious paving material whenever feasible to reduce surface water runoff and aid in ground water recharge. 7. Grading of slopes should minimize surface water runoff. 8. Investigate the feasibility of utilizing reclaimed waste water, stored rainwater, or household grey water for irrigation. 9. Encourage cluster development which can reduce the amount of land being converted to urban use. This will reduce the amount of impervious paving created and thereby aid in ground water recharge. 10. Preserve existing natural drainage areas and encourage the incorporation of natural drainage systems in new developments. This would aid in ground water recharge. 11. Flood plains and aquifer recharge areas which are the best sites for ground water recharge should be preserved as open space. -2- Department of Water Resources Recorreadntions for Flood Damage prevention In flood -prone areas, flood damage prevention measures required to protect a proposed development should be based on the following guidelines 1. All building structures should be protected against a 100-Tear flood. It is the State's policy to conserve water. Any potential loss to ground water abould be mitigated. 2. In those areas not covered by a Flood Insurance Rate Nap or a Flood Boundary and Floodway Nap, issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the 100-year flood elevation and boundary should be slow on the Environmental Impact Report. 3. At least one route of ingress and egress to the development should be available during a 100-year flood. 6. The slope and foundation designs for all structures should be based on detailed soils and engineering studies, especially for all hillside developments. S. Ravegetatfon of the slopes should be dome as soon as possible. 6. The potential damage to the proposed development by mudflov should be assessed and mitigated am required. 7. Grading should be limited to dry wooths to mi.rmt=e problems associated with sediment transport during construction. ..+n war ruuwwn..wwu,ua we,w, o• - - _.. .... s -•• ....... DEPARTMENT OF BOATING AND WATERWAYS ua s rater tars.�wao.rauonaa ntu mwaman May 18, 1986C1,CrEIVED Ms. pat Te.ple gnvlronental Coordinatorplanning Department city of Newport Beach3300 Wevport B1W.",port Beach, Ca 92663 Dear Me. Tamplau Notice of preparation - North Ford Tentative Tract IN The Department of Boating Bad Waterways is rot a regulatory agency and therefore does wet issue permits of say kind. However. ve do review and Bay comment upon U.S. Corps of Engineer public notices for proposed projects which arc subject to that federal agency's Jurisdiction. We review and my comment on environmental documents which are submitted to us by the State Clearinghouse. For review purposes on both, environmental documtntj and Corps public entices, the Bepartamt's interests lie In the following areas: 1. potential for navigation hazards - to what extent %lot the proposed project affect safe navigation in California's waterways? 2. Beach erosion - to what extent might the proposed project affect the stability of coastal as well as inland beaches? 3. boating and boating facilities - to what extent night the proposed project affect existing or planned small craft harbors, launching facilities, sma other boating facilities? To what extent night recreational boating activities be affected? if you have further questions concerning our role in project review processes, please contact Barbara gierbow of our Environmental Unit at (916) 323-9483. M. state clearinghouse Sincerely, WILLIPH 11. IYERS Director as Im REVLY TO ANTE NT10N Of SPLPD-R DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY LOS ANGELES Cu$rfu CT. CORM Or W GINMAS •. O. sox all LOS wNGELE3. GL.1ONN1. Seems June 6, 1984 Mice Pat Temple Environmental Coordinator Planning Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 Dear Miss Temple: EDMAY 2R§ (. RECEIJ NOTICE OF PREPARPI, DATE: May 3, 1984 tl TO: Responsible Agencies and Interested c Parties RECEIVED �aftL 9 1984 C. [10➢5, This is in response to a letter from your office concerning a Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the North Ford Tentative Tract Map, The cited letter requested information as to the scope and content of the environmental information germane to our statutory responsibilities. Our specific responsibilities include, but are not limited to, Investigation, design, operation and maintenance of water resource projects, Including preparation of environmental guidelines In the fields of flood control, navigation and shore protection; also administration of laws and regulations for the protection and preservation against pollution of the waters of the United States. He believe that the forthcoming document should address environmental impacts pertinent to those of our responsibilities enumerated above. Please feel free to contact this office for any data that might assist you in preparation of the projected document. The contact person for this project is Mr. Sidney Levenson, telephone (213) 688-5510. We would be happy to review and comment an the proposed DEIR when it to issued. Sincerely, �1 Carl P. Eason Chief, Planning Division anning Department ity of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 attn; Pat Temple PLEASE RETURN THIS NOTICE WITH YOUR AGENCY`S COMMENTS`BY June 6, 1984 I PROJECT TITLE: North Ford Tentative Tract Map oa. PROJECT LOCATION: See Attached Exhibit �.� .,. f�9 DESCRIPTIOM OF PROJECT AND MAJOR LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: �• zSee Attached Project Description /.i �: I •'i. • PHONE: Pat Tam le Environmental Coordinator ' 640-2197 DESCRIBESPECIFIC PERMIT AUTHORITY OF YOUR AGENCY RELATED TO THIS PROJEfcT: evsmW ffNZA W jLii 'K-g w yyry jy. II t I)C>�ti a— L. LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS: (Use Jadditional pages as necessary) W "IhA1 Dvoai cJC •N '(LP 2.twE(nh¢a�. t3 0.V- CwW..,� {'� 11A 4 �UP. �� wD �3ira� �Q � LE�Ga.M¢e.+. a.n '1i-<• (wY•.-Gn. Owl ,Jmi �Ptt� 1fC � aa,, - N 2 O N � 1 W C �] OATE HAILED , llj 984 AGENCY: May 41984 DATE RECEIVED BY RESPONSIBLE AGENCY • ;i ovD- DATE RESPONSE RECEIVED BY LEAD AGENCY: DATE: June 6, 1984 TO: Ms. Pat Teeple Planning Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport boulevard Newport beach, California 92663 fRON: Metropolitan Clearinghouse SUBJECT: NORTH FORD TENTATIVE TRACT MAP OR-3200-IW Thank you for submitting the Notice to Prepare the environmental document for the referenced project for SCAG review. SCA6 staff does not have Comments at this time but looks forward to reviewing the environmental document when available. Sincerely, ✓l/,i' Milli IZ MET AL MRPHT Clearinghouse Official VM;WP10 JI ii.1 1384> f ITV M' wEWI`ul:tE•OL nTil�� s W 3 Laij ENYINGNNENTALMANAGENENT AGENCY FtA1anN0 YUPPAY aTOnN QIPECTOn• [YA mos[mr¢FISINn OIPfCTOPOP P4WNIN0 LOCATON ,2C1VMCFNnnetwtA Fo. wxcam 6ANTA.A."92Mn 6 MMLINQAMMM 10. EO%AOY sAwrw.wgewn.n.faw TFL[INONE: HIO W4tr NCL 4019 Jute 6. 19y nECF.Ykd n � b' 1 1'Ttm...l ti JiCi1j IS64.• i . City of Newport Beach N core,,, 'p Planning Department 1 4L1ol Pr:�. 3300 Newport Boulevard w Newport Reach, California 92663 ti �[ �% Attu. Pat Temple SU&MCr. Notice of Preparation. North Ford Development Draft SIR Dear Siva. The Environmental Management Agency has reviewed the Notice Of Preparation for the proposed tentative tract sap. Although it does not appear that the County will be a Responsible Agency for CEQA compliance on this project. the County is interested in reviewing the proposed Draft 111. The County Previously responded to the Notice of Preparation of the Draft Ell for the general plan amendment concerning this property and expressed the desire to review the Draft EIRI however* the document was not received by this office. the request that a copy of the certified Final Draft RIK for the CPA be transmitted to us along with three copies of the Draft RIR for this project. The following are comments and concerns which we believe need to be addressed in the Draft RIR. Circulation, We agree with the initial study. The project will significantly impact existing and future trawportation/circulation systems. The traffic analytic should include Intersection Capacity Utilisation at all key intersections for the existing and future circulation systems. Additionally, the projcct's relationship to the proposed San Joaquin Hill, Transportation Corridor (SJ=) should be completely discussed and appropriate mitigation measures should be Proposed. Air Quality/Noism The project will require mitigation from air quality and noise effects from the SJWIC and the surrounding arterial highways. The proposed project should also propose to develop and implement a buyer notification program �WP.. Page 2 for the future residents of the project which provide. adequate notice of the close proximity of the SJHTC. The air quality and noise analyzes should be sufficiently detailed to proposed specific mitigating measures for Inclusion in the proposed project. The noise analysis should assume no shielding an the SJHTC. Bikeways -The Master Plan of Countywide Bikeways shows three Class I (off -road) bike trails adjacent to the project site. along Jamboree Road, along MacArthur Boulevards and the Upper Newport Hay Trail along proposed University Drive. Recreation The County's Recreation Element contains three components. Two of them, the Master Plan of Regional Parke and the Master Plan of Riding and Hiking Trails should be addressed in the Draft EIR. The proposed project has the potential to degrade existing and proposed regional recreation facilities such as the Upper Newport Bay Regional Park and Newport Dunes In terms of noise and growth inducing Impacts which may affect future planning, design and development of said facilities. The SIR should also evaluate the project's potential impact to the quality of recreational experiences of users of the Santa Ana Heights Regional Trail. The Master Plan identifies the proposed Santa Ana Heights Riding and Hiking Trail through the project's study area. Resources Potential impacts to established open apace area. such as the San Diego Creek, San Joaquin Marsh and the Upper Newport Bay State Ecological Reserve in term. of viewshed intrusion, runoff management (i.e., weed killers, pesticides, siltation, etc.) need to be addressed in the Draft BIg. if you have any questions, please feel free to contact Henry Horones at 834-5550. Very truly yours, F. W. Olson, Manager Environmental Analysis Division HEM:am i1)1 fs O m Commmny Devebgnenl Deparlmenl City of bvme, 17200 Jamboree Road. P O. Box 19575. In ux!. Cahlorna 92713 (714) 660.360D May 18, 1984 Planning Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Attention: Pat Temple Dear Mr `3%S' ample: I SUBJECT: NORTH FORD TENTATIVE TRACT MAP; RESPONSE TO NOP The Community Development Department has received the notice of preparation of a draft EIR for the above stated project and would like to thank the City of Newport Beach for keeping us informed about projects which may have the potential to impact the City of Irvine. At this point, the City of Irvine would like to request that a copy of the DEIR be sent to the Environmental Services Section when the draft has been completed. Sincerely,EED/MOOM Senior Planner Environmental Services Section EH:mp RECEIVED Rammu,s Depauosnl t,1AY 2319841 CRY Of MONFOR7 SEAW. CA1G. � ;•IEWPt ii21 RF?.CH P0Ht-E DEPARTMENT � .ntaw='ixxt .i r!1 upi 1!l fitll t,nryv Rt C.IInRi Fti I: SS.. 1� 50.1 CYuel PnL. i� E E May 16, 1994 9x-Wat •Pat Temple J Planning Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR NORTH FORD TENTATIVE TRACT The proposed project is contained within our geographic reporting district 136. This district is bordered on the north by Bristol Street, on the south by Ford Road, on the east by MacArthur Blvd., and on the well by Eastbluff Drive. Con- tained within these boundaries are the Philco-Ford plant, the Belcourt townhome residential development, the Eastbluff residential development, the U.S. Post Office, and several large, multi -story commercial buildings. 1. The Newport Beach Police Department provides full police service to the i area of concern. I 2. Presently, no adverse impact is anticipated from the proposed project. 3. Construction of a new facility or expansion of the existing Department building and support units appears to be unnecessary. With the construction of 888 residential units at the project and a factor of 2.2 persons per { unit, the City will realize a population increase of 1.954. In order to maintain the current ratio of sworn police officers to City population, our staffing will need to be increased by 4.19 officers. 4. The Newport Beach Police Department is housed in a single facility located at 870 Santa Barbara Drive. The approximate distance from the police facility to the project is 1.6 miles. Average response times to calls in the general area are approximately: Nonemergency calls 21.19 minutes i Alarm calls 4.34 minutes Emeraenry calls 3.40 minutes S. Due to the size and nature of the proposed project, the following factors should be considered: Environmental impact Report for Borth Ford Tentative Tract Page 2 ° Suggested roadway improvements due to traffic considerations: - Add a 13 nib lane on Jamboree Blvd. from Bison to Eastbluff North - Add a t3 s/b lane on SR-73 (MacArthur Blvd.) from University to Bison. Complete elethe hxteDrive of toEastbiaflbrth from Jamboree Blvd. to SR-73. - Ipro - limit access to Jamboree Blvd. to the intersection of Easthluff North and Jamboree. ' If the proposed project's residential area contains gated communities, there most be allowances to permit access for public service personnel and equipment. ° Keep ppr he prupose* and cea�ercial/industrial areas well lighted to de againstpersons and property. • Maintain adequate traffic control during the construction phase of the Project. If there are additional questions, feel free to call me at 644-3668. Sincerely. Charles R. Gross Chief of Police ', I �ul!t it R ndy Nakashima. Officer Planning and Research 40 OWWO * N IW* ON! ow- low No *0 " so 1� SO 'ow " no 00 M W Am so IW Am ow 45 L' N f_J E;�l r W I= " fit aril " V QnE IIVI Iminmli IRIIJER.IIPII 119ER RiSTIIIIT PO BmO sIS801 Bne mAw.dmne eA 9211660)5d)14) M 1= May 17, 1984 0072YS/64 OR 3.10 PL 26 Ms. Pat Temple @ c%yam Enviro Nntal Coordinator Cityof Beach V, gOAy 3300 Newport Boulevard .6- Newport Beach, CA 92663 1 SUBJECT: NORTH FORD TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 6 Nr%1>4 DRAFT EIR NOTICE OF PREPARATION RESPONSE m v Dear Ms. Temple: The Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) is responsible for and able to provide water supply and wastewater collection services to the proposed Irvine Company project at North Ford. The entire site is within the IRWD service boundaries as well as IRWD's Water Improvement District No. 161 and Sewer Improvement District No. 261. Water may be served through a new on -site system connected to existing distribution pipelines located along MacArthur Boulevard. Plate A, IRWD's Ultimate Domestic Water System, is enclosed showing the approximate location of nearby pipelines. The proposed development may represent a greater level of urban development as compared to the currently existing general plan for this area. Any change to the existing General Plan represents an increased water demand for this area In particular and IRWD in general. Any additional water demand estimated for this proposed project would actually equate to only a small percentage of IRWO's total water demand; however, this impact is important. Since it is IRWD's responsibility to provide water service to such projects as approved by the various jurisdictional areas within our service area, a greater water demand means that IRWD will use its existing water supply capacity sooner. Hence, the impact is that IRWD will either be unable to serve some portion of future developments as contained to existing general plans or IRWD will need to acquire additional water supplies. IRWD offers this comment in order to keep the City's staff and decision -makers aware of water availability issues and not as one adverse to the proposed project. NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A DRAFT EIR Ms. ,Pat Temple Page 2 OR 3.10 PL 26 I90 has a sewage lift station located near University Drive and MacArthur Boulevard. A collector sewer aligned from the Project site to the lift station would be necessary. IRWO has recently been requested to investigate service to the Baywaod development project directly across San Diego Creek from the North Ford area. IRWO will want to coordinate these two projects se that the collector sewer to the University Drive lift station my be sl;ed appropriately. The Draft EIR should include estimates of future water demand - both domestic and Irrigation - and wastewater generation for the proposed project. Thank you for this opportunity to provide input to the Draft ELK. If you should require any additional information regarding water or sewer service. please contact Mr. Keith Levinger. Planning Section Read, at 714-866-1223. Sincerely, IRVINE WATER DISTRICT Rona E. Dire M of nee Ing and Planning Enclosure REY/SLN:ga DATE: May 3. 1984 TO Responsible Agencies and Interested FROM: Planning Department Parties City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 attn. Pat Temple PLEASE RETURN THIS NOTICE WITH YOUR AGENCY'S COMMENTS BY June S. 1984 PROJECT TITLE: North Ford Tentative Tract Map PROJECT LOCATION: See Attached Exhibit • DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND MAJOR LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: L�j� .: �'% `�; ••`J i Sec Attached Project Description �,c-, 1 t PHONE: i Pat T le EnWrorusental Coodi.ator ' 640-2197 DESCRIBE SPECIFIC PERMIT AUTHORITY OF YOUR AGENCY RELATED TO THIS PROJECT: } LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS: (Use additional pages as necessary) u .�.. I.$CI(oOL BifS AttEiS TO WatYl)sa 3'6iWis10A wrtw AofC4n7£ Phowlags AA- slors z. 6AF6 PEpis•Tast►Fa )( 6ytyct+6 li•+taE Tu fcMaaa. 'iica.iEs, M.rT£s 0 1 N faits sic SiA•Jdm 61 6tiM6+.TM.•( Suisocs tat VatnCPAd:t 1 T•+d nL Ratx # F.TwAd.. scM»a. •N ✓ate CA"P" may V""" m< OautTla { CYN.) RA.)c)to JIu+ TMmw.t IHLittMkOlitK iu ✓1wv.PAnar- i waiaLeaarr /dKt CONTACT PERSON: DAud: kw< TITLE.a'fM-yixc. PHONE. BG3—ImY DATE HAILED BY LEAD DATE RECEIVED BY DATE RESPONSE RECEtVEC AGENCY: May 4. 1984 RESPONSIBLE AGENCY: BY LEAD AGENCY: MkI )d,tgdt 711 7 a."W*ami�onso"" May 14, 1904 Pat Teeple Fhvixcvumntal Coordinator Planning Departaent (Sty of Newport Bead, 33DO Newport Blvd. Newport Bead,, CA 92663 Dear M. Tenple: Zds project was disused at length about one year ago and Newport- M?sa wishes to go on record as infonni:g the developers that this project area is not in the Newport -Mesa Unified School District. Sincerely, Helen Dietz Supervisor, Student Predictions RECEIVED mm m D-,d enr MAY 171984 ► CITY OF NEWPORFBEA CALIF asWom"*a NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A DRAFT EIR uara: nay a, n0v To. Responsible Agencies and Interested Parties FROM: Planning Deparboent _ City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 attn; Pat Temple PLEASE RETURN THIS NOTICE WITH YOUR AGENCY'S COMMENTS BY June 6, 1984 I PROJECT TITLE: North Ford Tentative Tract Map , -r_.- PROJECT LOCATION: See Attached Exhibit DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND MAJOR LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUESI-� I •cQ''A zSee Attached Project Description DESCRIBE SPECIFIC PERMIT AUTHORITY OF YOUR AGENCY RELATED TO THIS PROJECT: LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS: (Use additional pages as necessary) u c :lU_ 0:-ttuc.1,ecl '7P)JL5 [Litt... Nc,','c Fo✓ 60/4- 62.-1 k)n r)l, rbT c(-/ 5a,L 1),;-yL, r- CC779 (,vnimenis rel ,cu,L, -�kJ JCL,rLL. 6 W 6 DATE MAILED BY LEAD GATE RECEIVED BY "DAONSE RECEIVED AGENCY: ay47984RESPONSIBLE AGEIICY: GENCY: 1311111111 ORANOii rdwrWTY TRAIll 1X3TAICT July 27, 1913 Mr. Fred Tolarito Invlrommmi Coordinator planning Departemt City of Newport Seaeh 33DD Newport boulevard Newport Basch, CA 92663-3384 Dear Mr. Talarico: SUSJLClt My DEXL Qd Sl-I W1TI FO1D/tdN MW Cgff1 SODIN ARU (1aFffifD) we hove reviewed the revised proposed project an described in the Notice or'Preparation and have the following dents for your consideration In preparing the Draft tllr 1 As of Septsebtr it, 1983, tale local lines will provide servlee In the proposed project aces *s sheathed Is. the attAcbed nap and table. OCTD will coatinse to operate is tide areo and nay consider increased service Intel* an land devdopasot continues In the eras end as ridership dossed warrants. for tide rears, we are: requesting that the City assure that all Umrial roadwAy Inproven om in the project area be designed to accondam transit operation and has ,tope. In adtitim. bus sheltsre and passeater waiting areas $boom be provided concurrent with developant as these aites. OCTO staff is als11sl1a to rester ban stop and passenger =settle* and ands with the City god wit% the project dersloper. a OCID is currently ovalanriat alternative fir" guideway trnalt systau to Orange County. On Mae of the alternative slitmnto. along MacArthur Boulevard. OCTD Las Identified two possible sell transit stortoas/pork and rldas witua the vicinity of the proposed project arse. Theme atetleaw are located at the Intersection of coops, Drive and NscArtiec Boulevard and at Out Intersection of Oniver"ty Drive and Maedrt%wr Boulevard. 11=O A1ARRWAY.Rn en%mee.aARDtNnwYR CAUMNWM,reed. twnW I1fael,a:Ce Mr. Fred Tolarico July 27, 1983 Fate Two Should the tell alternative and its proposed alitanmt and *ratio= be mlectad, that* will be a potential for joint statloullaod we developsent at then project altos. We would appreciate your close coordination with OCTD to ensure cmpdtibie and appropriate land wee and soniot designations around tots* station loestion an that these opportunities will not be preclud". No would appreciate receiving a copy of the Draft RI1 when it becoses sreliahlo for public, review. If you require my further Soforutions plwe all ae or Christian Nasrd-Spasar at (714) 971-6419. Sincerely, 9felf`L.T. Lw Ievtromntal Coordinator STltdgtL dttaebsnts so off on, WO oil?- WO ion 4W ow no so so '.S W *W ow W* so W. �: r, rr rs �• � r s •i • ��yyy�f'�A•\ �1\ p4' �.�G,Q�• Y r ttlF1'-Ril ,t ,. nPgi. 1 i ( �: -f rl'.' g c 1 s .w.1.2 i ��.•�f•� '� 00.WOE C011NlY OIN$ION•PO80X ]JM. AN.,MIM. CLLIF GIDI !•� �^ ?:ay 10, 19b4 City ui dewpurt [$each 330V Newacrt Blvd. hew,•ort peach, CA 92663 AttI.: Pat Telnule buaject: Ava Llability of natural gas for north Ford Tentative Tract in Newport death Thin letter is not to be interpreted as a contractual commitment to terva the proposed project, but only as an information service. Its intent is to notify you that the southern California Gas Company has facilities in the area where the above -named project is proponed. Gas service to the project could be provided from an existing main as shown on the attached atlas sheet without any significant impact on th+ environment. The service would be in accordance with the Company's nolicies and extension rules on file with the California Public utilities. Commission at the time contractual arrangements are made. The availability of natural gar, service, as set forth in this letter, is based upon Present ,conditions of gas supply and regulatory uolirie,. As a public utility, the southern California Gas Company is ender the juri-dictLan of the California Public Utilities Commission. pe can also be affected by actions of gas supply or the condition under which service is available, gas service will be provided in accordance with revised conditions. hsrinlate•: of gas usage for non-residential projects are developed on an individual ba-A3 and are obtained frox our Market services staff by callino U714) 634-3173. ne have developed several programs Which dra available, upon request, to provide as.,istance in selecting the most effective applications of energy conservation techniques for a particular project. If you vo,ire farther information on any of our energy conservation programs, Uleaae contacL this oCtfce for aSCLatanca. VA/du attach. sincerely, w. L. Make 'technical Supervisor Iii.L.L1yLU JUL II h9w1 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS 1i4( f rl� OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA sv P. a BOX 0127. FOUNTAW VALLEY. CADFORNIA 92728-8127 10844 EWS AVENUE MWW OFF -RAMP. SAN DIEGO FREEWAY) July 2, 1984 City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 Attention: Pat Temple, Bnvironmental Coordinator/planning Department Subject: Notice of Draft RJR for the North Purd Tentative Tract Mp am racrcPMgurf w u cg9r m s4o•2910 962-3411 This project located east of Jamboree Road and south of University Drive is not within the County Sanitation Districts service area. The Notice should be sent to the Irvine Ranch Water District. f � r (�,: , • ter- l `-f/� ' T1lonas M. Dawes Deputy Chief Etgincer TMD/jm T1v.1010/Eon /Sl 71, 1 1 1 p. NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A DRAFT EIR w,a: nay a, ou, To: Responsible Agencies and interested Parties FROM: Planning Department. City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 82663 attnt Pat Teeple /97 • PLEASE RETURN THIS NOTICE WITH YOUR AMIN'S COflERTS BY June 6, 19M PROJECT TITLE: North Ford Tentative Tract Hap PROJECT LOCATION: See Attached -Exhibit nECEiv DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND MAJOR LOCAL EKV1 ONNEN ISSUES: otwunmt 9 E JUt: t 19p9 a. W Crrrar• See Attached Project Descr1pt17wt "GVA2R- ta Z cqu, to �. PHONE: Pat Temple -- - errlmnmental Coyds. 646-7197 DESCRIBE SPECIFIC PERMIT AUTHORITY OF YOUR AGENCY RELATED TO THIS PROJECT: LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS: (Use additional pages as necessary) The proposed north Ford Project Site is approximately three miles from a branch o library, the Newport Center facility. This distance is the standard we are now < using to provide branch libraries in a neighborhood, with the exception of the , Balboa Branch, which is six miles from the nearest branch library. With an estimated 1 980 , population (886 dwelling units x 2.23 persons per household) o and phased building over five years, the existing branch libraries should be able y to accmdate in increase in service without requiring a new branch library in or . t a near that Project. CONTACT PERSON:. Judith H. Clark TITLE, Library Director ROE: xz65 DATE FAILED BY LEAD + DATE RECEIVED BY ' r DATE RESPONSE RECEIVED AGENCY: May 4 19H RESPONSIBLE AGENCY: BY LEAD AGENCY: 11 mminro enrwror Pat Temple riW[ 7�1�q•m� �+1V_e§.19B4 North Ford Tentative Tract Map WOrr WATWSee Attached Exhibit x utate.a ateisc auetereten -nc9r.ai.E: es+s.•..[G...'�'o/— .?z-...o f•4 a•w.h i/.. ..rLr•Q8$ ` J�T..C✓, Jam•.... .�.�e J1t.a...<�±«:-i lt4aa _ wn x arnm mrmmm. 3mcxmxer wtmrxwuttetc may a 1964 „w' RC4{� [ �• 1 '� aw am s Tow 00 4W NW Ono 0 1W *W M Q0 �on I p I I APPENDIX B NORTH FORD PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS (AMENDED) FI I I A I I I I I P I TABLE OF CONTENTS page INTRODUCTION I SECTION I STATISTICAL ANALYSIS 2 SECTION D GENERAL NOTES 3 SECTION ID DEFINrrIONS 4 SECTION IV LIGHT INDUSTRY, AREA 1 S Subsection A Intent 8 Subsection B Permitted Uses 8 Subsection C Building Site Arm 7 Subsection Building Setbacks 7 Subsection E Site Coverage 8 Subsection F Building Height 8 Subsection G Signs 8 Subsection H Sign Standards 9 Subsection) Parking 10 Subsection J Landscaping 19 Subsection K Loading Areas 12 Subsection L Storage Areas 12 Subsection M Refuse Collection Areas 12 Subsection N Telephone and Electrical Service 12 Subsection O Sidewalks 13 Subsection P Nuisances 13 SECTION V LIGHT INDUSTRY, BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL, AND COMMERCIAL, AREA 2 14 Subsection A intent 14 Subsection B Permitted Uses 14 Subsection C Building Site Area 14 Subsection D Setbacks 15 Subsection E Site Coverage 15 Subsection F Building Height 15 Subsection G Signs 15 Subsection H Sign Standards 18 Subsection I Parking 17 Subsection J Landscaping 17 Subsection K Loading Areas 19 Subsection L Storage Areas 19 Subsection M Refuse Collection Areas 19 Subsection N Telephone and Electrical Service 19 Subsection O Sidewalks 19 Subsection P Nuisances 28 SECTION VI COMMERCIAL, AREA 3 21 Subsection A Intent 21 Subsection B Permitted Uses 21 Subsection C Building Site Area 21 Subsection D Setbacks 21 Subsection E Signs 22 Subsection F Building Height 23 Subsection G Sign Standards 23 (i) GRD138 SECTION VI (continued) page INTRODUCTION Subsection H Parking 23 Subsection I Landscaping 23 The North Ford PC (Planned Community) District of the City at Newport Beach Is a part Subsection 3 Leading Areas 25 of the Irvine Industrial Community originally developed In conjunction with the Irvine Subsection R Storage Areas 25 Such Southern Sector General land Use Plan which was approved by the Orange County Subsection L Refuse Collection Areas 25 ' Planning Commission and the Orange County Dowd of Supervisors. SubsectionM Telephone and Electrical Service 25 � Subsection N Pedestrian Access 25 i The purpose of this Planned Community District Is to provide a method whereby property SECTION YB SERVICE STATION DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 26 may be classified and developed for light Industrial uses, compatible commercial Subsection A Setbacks 26 activity, professional and business offices, residential wits, and park and fire station Subsection B Minimum Building Site Area 25 uses. It Is the purpose of this district to reserve a fire station site in this area the 12- Subsection C Signs 26 use, The specifications; of this district are intended to provide flexibility f—m-b—off Subsection D Sign Standards 27 the, use and development standards in planned building groups. This PC district also Subsection E Parking 2T provides a Statistical -core consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan upon Subsection F Landscaping 27 which detailed development plan may be prepared. Subsection O Screening 28 Subsection H Refuse Collection Areas 28 The provisions of this Ordina ee, notwithstandkgall applicable requirements of the City SECTION VIII OFFICE, AREA 4 29 of Newport Beach Zoning Code, shalt apply. SubneetlmA Intent 28 Subsection 8 Permitted Uses 29 { Por the resfdeaW} area (Area Rev 6) and Oe San Diego Creek South parcel (Area No. 4), Subseetime SECTION IX BuildiagNel;ht 28 this test -%Pill serve only as core PC text delineating 4he primary development RESIDENTIAL —AREAS 3o 4 ew"Ift nIs ea The pact** Land us . Prior to any further discretionary actions for this Subsection A intent 30 site, amendments to th6�ltr ct stall be required to establish specific intensity of Subsection B Permitted Uses 38 development and site design criteria including, but not Umited to, building setbacks, SECTION X SECTIONXI PARR, AREA.6 33li MUMS Deigntsi Parking requirements. grading, Iandscapkg, and street and circulation SIGNS rare GRD138 GRD136 M Mae*0 M M M r M M tit (New Page 2) (EXHIBIT -Aa) (GPA 82-1) (NEW LAND USE PLAN) SECTION 1. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS North Ford Approx. Additional Additional Gross Allowable Allowable Area Acres -Sq. Ft. DU's Light Industry -Office 1 16.7 -0- -0- Lightlndustry-Office- Commercial/Industrial 2 25.5 -0- -0- TOTAL 42.2 0 0 Approx. Additional Additional Gross Allowable Allowable Area Acres -Sq. Ft. DU's Commercial 3 5.0 50,000 -0- Office 4 22.0 Undetermined -0- Residential 5 79.0 -0- 888 Park and Fire station 6 12.0 -0- -0- TOTAL 118.0 50,000 888 The above statistics are based on gross acreage and do not account for buildable area. The analysis also indicates additional allowable development In the existing developed areas (Areas I and 2) and allowable development in the undeveloped areas (square feet or DU's) er GPA 82-1. Existing developed areas are assumed to be built out by Planned Commun tyi Amendment 514. In Areas 1 and 2, new development may replace existing development so long as no square feet are added. (it may be assumed that Areas 1 and 2 will be the subject of future PC District Amendments as redevelopment occurs.) -2- GRD138 i SECTION B. GENERAL NOTES 1. Grading outside an area submitted under the Planned Development Ordinance but within the Planned Community area will be permitted upon the securing of a grading permit. 2. Water within the planned Community area will be furnished by the City of Newport Beach Water Department. 3. Sewage disposal facilities within the Planned Community will be provided by Irvine Reach Water District, Sewer Improvement District No. 1. 4. The subject property is within the University Park Drainage Master Plan area. There are no drainage fees associated with the development of this property. The developer will provide the necessary flood protection facilities under the jurisdiction of the City of Newport Beach. S. Erosion control provisions shall be married out on all areas of the Planned Commu- nity in a manner meeting the approval of the Director of Planning. 6. Prior to the installation of the landscaping on the streets indicated, the developer or lessee shall provide for the continued maintenance, either by an agreement with the City Public Works Department or through a county service area. 7. Except as otherwise stated in this ordinance, the requirements of the Newport Beach Zoning Code shall apply. The contents of this supplemental text notwithstanding, no construction shall be proposed within the boundaries of the Planned Community district except that which shall comply with all provisions of Newport Beach's Uniform Building Code and the varlous mechanical codes related thereto. S. All landscaping along street rights -of -way shall be Installed in accordance with a landscape plan certified by a licensed landscape architect, subject to the review and approval of the Director of Parks, Beaches and Recreation. 9. All mechanical appurtenances on building roof tops and utility vaults shall be screened from view from adjacent public streets and buildings in a manner meeting the approval of the Director of Planning. 18, Prier to Abe 495uanee of grading permits on the neetherty sector of Area 4, the boundary, nature and extent of the arehaeelegieat site shall be established and protective steps shall be taken as warranted, 10. 11r Park dedication as required for residential uses shall be in accordance with the Park Dedication Ordinance. 11. 19: AB development In Areas 3, 4, Sand 6 and Block C of Koll Center Newport shall be subject to the approval of a development agreement between the City of Newport Beach and The Irvine Company. 12. 18: A site for a fire station shall be reserved within the 12-acre park in Area 6. GRD138 -3- SECTION M. DEFINITIONS Advertising Surface The total area of the face of the structure, excluding supports. Am of Elevation Total height and length of a buildingaaprojected to a vertical plane. ButhdimtSite Area The total land area of the lend described to the use or other permit. Buildable Acreage Buildable Acreage shall mean the more site area within the project boundary excluding streets, park dedication, areas with existing natural slopes greater than 2:1, and natural flood plains. Cluster Unit Develooment A combination or arrangement of attached or detached dwellings and their accessory structures on contiguous or related building sites where the yards and open spaces are combined into more desirable arrangements of open space and where the hndtvidualsites may have less area then the required minimum fa the district but the density of the overall development meets the required standard. Conventions) Subdivision Conventional Subdivision on a Planned Community Concept shall man a conventional subdivision of detached dwellings and their accessary structures on Individual tots where the lot size may be less than the required minimum for the district but where the density for the entire subdivision meets the required standards and where open space areas see provided for the enhancement and utilization of the overall development. Setbacks from Street Corners Setbacks from street corners shall be established as that point of Intersection of the required setback tines from access streets, prolonged to point of Intemette . Side and Front or Corner Lots For the purpose of this ordbance, the narrowest frontage of a lot faehg the street Is the front, and the longest frontage facing the hntessectirCstrett is the side, Irrespective of the direction in which structures face. Special Landscaped Streets and Areas Special landscaped streets are designated as such on the development pla=4 and further defined as the Corms del Mar Freeway; Jamboree Boulevard, Eastbluff Drivel University Drive and adjacent to the proposed park and Sin Diego Crack channel. zz ORD133 Streets -Dedicated and Private -in Nonresidential Areas Reference to all Streets or rights -of -way, within this ordinance shalt mean dedicated vebicular rightscFway. In the man, of private or noodedicated streets, a minimum setback from the right-of-way, line of said streets of ten IN) feet shall be required for all structures. Except for sidewalks or access drlves, this area shall be landscaped according to the setback area standards from dedicated streets contained herein. ORD138 -5- Ind OW an I" me WO OW MW No no 00 Off No MW � M I MW iM SECTION W. LIGHT INDUSTRY, AREA 1 A. Intent It is the Intent of this district to permit the location of light Industrial uses provided such was are confined within a building or buildings, or do not contribute excessive noise, dust, smoke, or vibration to the surrounding environment nor contain a high hazard potential due to the nature of the products, material or processes involved. Minor ancillary activities associated with the above permitted industrial uses may be located outside a structure provided screening requirements as set forth in this document are observed. Any activity which could be classified as retail commercial other than office uses shall be restricted to activities strictly accessory and/or supplementary to the industrial community. B. Permitted Uses The following uses and other uses which in the opinion of the Planning Director are compatible shall be permitted. 1. Uses primarily engaged in research activities including, but not limited to, research laboratories and facilities, developmental laboratories and facilities, and compatible light manufacturing similar to the following list of examples. Bio-Chemical Chemical Development Facilities for national welfare on land, sea and air Film and Photography Medical or Dental Metalurgy Pharmaceutical X-Ray 2. Manufacture, research assembly, testing and repair of components, devices, equipment and systems, parts and components such as, but not limited to, the following list of examples: Coils, tubes, semi -conductors Communication, navigation control, transmission and reception equipment, control equipment and systems, guidance equipment and systems Data processing equipment and systems Glass edging, beveling and slivering Graphics and art equipment Metering instruments Optical devices, equipment and systems Phonographs, audio units, radio equipment and television equipment Photographic equipment Radar, infra -red and ultra -violet equipment and systems Scientific and mechanical instruments Testing equipment -6- GRD138 3. Offices, limited as follows: Aran I - Administrative, professional and business offices 4. Industry regional or home offices which are limited to a single use and acces- sory to any of the above industrial developments. 5. Blueprinting, photostating, photo engraving, printing, publishing and bookbinding, provided that no on -site commercial service is associated with said uses. 6. Cafeteria, cafe, restaurant or auditorium associated with and incidental to any of the foregoing uses. 7. Service stations will be permitted subject to the development standards contained In this Ordinance, Section VR. 8. Agriculture, as a continuation of the existing lend use, and all necessary structures and appurtenances shall be permitted. C. Building Site Area One (1) acre minimum. D. Building Setbacks All setbacks shall be measured from the property line. For the purpose of this Ordinance, a streetside property line Is that line created by the ultimate right-of- way line of the frontage street. 1. Front Yard Setback Thirty (30) feet, except that unsupported roofs or sunscreens may project six (6) feet into the setback area. 2. Side Yard Setback Ten (10) feet, except that unsupported roofs or sunscreens may project three (3) feet Into the setback area. In the case of a corner lot, the streetside setbacks shall be thirty (30) feet, except that unsupported roofs and sunscreens may project six (6) feet Into the setback area. Interior lot lines for a corner lot shell be considered side lot lines. 3. Rear Yard Setback GRD138 No rear yard setback is required. -7- E. Site Coverage Maximum building coverage of 50 percent is allowed. Pakhngstructures shall not be calculated as building area; however, said structures shall be used only for the parking of company vehicles, employee's vehicles, or vehicles belonging to persons visiting the subject firm. P. Building Helght All buildings and appurtenant structures shall be limited to a maximum Might of fifty (So) fact. G. Si hg_s 1. IdentillationSign Ate* Only one (1) single -faced or doublrfackd sign shall be permitted par street frontage per site. No sign or combination of signs shall exceed one (1) square toot -in are& for each ego square feet of total site ores. However, no sign shell exceed 200 square feet in area per face. An additional twenty (20) square feet shall be allowed for each additional bu4neaa caul cted on the alte. This sign stall identify either the major tenant or the tame of the building complex. a. Identification Ground Sign AD Identification ground signs stall tat exceed four, (4) feet above grade In vertical helgbt. Also, such grand signs in excess of 150 square feet In ens (single face) shall not be created in the first twenty (10) feet, es measured from the property line of any atreetside setback area. Howaver, the above standards shall not apply to the Multi -Tenant Directory Sign, the Special. Purpose Sign, nor the sign listed in the Sign Appendix of this Orcknnee. b. Identification Wall Sign Identification Wall Signs shall not comprise more than 10 percent of the arm of the elevation upon which the sign is loafed. Sold signs shalt be fixture signs; signs painted directly on the surface of the wan shall not be permitted. In the Instance of a multiple tenemey bonding, each Individual tenant say have a wall sign over the- entrance to identify the tempt. Said sip shall give only the tame of the company andsholl be limited to ere R) foot in height. Additionally, one sigh W tenant say be affixed to the WAR which faces the parking pot of the Subject building. Said sign shall give only the name of the tenant and shallbe limited to four (4) Inch high letters. -6- GRD130 2. Multi Tenant Directory Sign One p) directory sign listing only the names of the on -site firms or businesses will be -allowed per site. Said sign shall be located even with or In beck of the required building setback line and shall be located In the parking area or on any access drive to the parking area. This sign shall be limited to a maximum height of four (4) fact and a length of eight (0) feet and may be double-faced. This sign shall be In addition to identification signs allowed by Subsection O, Paragraph I above. 3. Real Estate Slim Said sign shall not exceed a maximum area of thirty-two (32)square fat and shall be of a ground type sign. 4. Special Purpose Sign Signs wed to give directions to traffic or pedestrians or give instructions as to special conditions shall not exceed a total of six 5 man, and shell be permitted in addition the othersSquare is signs listed In this section. le raft) In p 5. Additlonal Signs Additional signs, as listed In the Sign Appendix of this Ordinance, shall be Permitted according to the criteria and performance standards contained In said appendix, H. Sign Standards 1. SIgw (to luelude all throe visible from the exterior of any building) may be lighted but m signs or any other coatrinnce shalt be devised er constructed so as to rotate, gyrate, blink er move In any animated fashion. 2. Signs shall be restricted to advertising only the persoub firm, company or corporation operating the we conducted on the site or the products produced or sold thereon. S. A wail sign with the (nd(vtdual letters applied directly shall be measured by a rectangle around the outside of the lettering and/or the plctorlal symbol and calculating the area enclosed bysucb line. An sips attached to thebundhgshall be Rwb mounted. I. Pa Adequate off-street parking doll be provided to accommodate all parking needs for the site. The Intent is to eliminate the need for any, street parking. Parking shall be provided for each building or development in accordance with the requirementswt forth below based on the proportion of each type of use to the total bulling site. Required off-street parking shall be provided on subject site or on a contiguous site Or within 330 feet of the subject site. Where parking is provided on other than the GRD13S _g. Im a*=0 IM OW am 1M M M M M site concerned, a recorded document shall be approved by the City Attorney and filed with the Planning Department and signed by the owners of the alternate site stipulating to the permanent reservation of use of the site for said parking. The following guide shall be used to determine parking requirements. Office One G) space for each 225 square feet of net floor area. The parking requirement may be lowered to one (1) space for each 250 square feet of net Door area upon review and approval of the modification committee. Manufacture, Research and Assembly Two (2) parking spaces for each three (3) employees, but In no event less than three (3) spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross Door area. Warehouse Two (2) parking spaces for each three (3) employees, but In no event less than one (I) space for each 1,000 square feet of gross Door area for the first 20,000 square feet; one (1) space for each 2,000 square feet of gross floor area for the second 20,000 square feet; one (1) space for each 4,000 square feet of gross Door area for areas in excess of the Initial 40,000 square feet of Door area of the building. The number of employees for parking purposes shall be determined by the largest number of employees present on the site at one time. In the event there Is more than one (1) shift, sufficient perking must be provided on -site to preclude the necessity for on -street parking. J. Landscaping As a portion of the total landscaping scheme, certain streets and areas have -been designated as "Special Landscaped Streets and Arem P Landscape treatment along the frontages of said streets requires special consideration and therefore Is referred to under separate sections in the following landscaping standards. Detailed landscaping and irrigation plans, prepared by a licensed landscape architect, licensed landscaping contractor, or architect shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of Parks, Reaches, and Recreation prior to the issuance of a building permit and installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. ' All landscaping referred to In this section shall be maintained In a neat and orderly fashion. 1. Front Yard Setback Arm a. General Statement Landscaping in these areas shall consist of an effective combination of street trees, trees, ground cover and shrubbery. b. Special Landscaped Streets and Areas (as shown on the Land Use Plan) The entire area between the curb and the building setback line shall be landscaped, except for any driveway in said area. -to- GRD138 c. Other Streets The entire area between the curb and a point ten (10) feet in back of the front property line shall be landscaped except for any driveway in said area. d. Intersections Landscaping, excepting trees, along all streets and boundaries shall be limited to a height of not more than two and one-half (2-1/2) feet within the triangle bounded by a line drawn between points thirty-five (35) feet distance from the intersection of the right-of-wsy lines prolonged. 2. Side and Rear Yard Setback Areas a. General Statement AU unpaved areas not utilized for parking and storage, or designated undeveloped areas, shall be landscaped utilizing ground cover and/or shrub and tree materials. b. Undeveloped Areas Undeveloped areas proposed for future expansion shall be maintained in a weed free condition but need not be landscaped. c. Screening Areas used for parking shall be landscaped In such a manner as to interrupt or screen said areas from view from areas streets, freeways, and adjacent properties. Plant materials used for this purpose shall consist of lineal or grouped messes of shrubs and/or trees. d. Intersections Landscaping, excepting trees, along all streets and boundaries shall be limited to a height of not more than two and one-half (2-1/2) feet within the triangle bounded by a line drawn between points thirty-five (35) feet distance from the Intersection of the right -of --way lines prolonged. 3. Parking Areas GRD138 Trees, equal in number of one (1) per each five (5) parking stalls, shall be provided in the perking area. -11- 4. Slope Ranks Ali slope banks greater than 5:1 car 6 feet In vertical Might and adjacent to public the plans right-of-way submitted to and approved by the Planning Dirreect�N accmrla::ce with N. Loading Area 1. No loadingslall M allowed which is visible from adjacent streets 2. On other than special landscaped Rreets, streetside loading at" be allowed provided the loading dock Is set Lack a minimum of seventy (70) feet from the street right-of-way line, or one tamdred ten (DO) feet from the street canter - Hasp whichever H gresta. Said loading area must be screened from view from adjacent streets. L. Storage Areas 1. Ali outdoor storage shell be Visually Screened from seem streets, freeways and adjacent property. Said scree aln shall form a complete opaque screen but aced not exceed eight (3) feet In Might. 2. Outdoor storage shall be meant to- include all company owned or operated motor vehicles, with the exception of passenger vehlelm 3. No storage stall be permitted between afrontage street and the building line. Y. Refuse Collection Aress 1. Ali outdoor rerun collection areas shalt be Wually screened from access streets, freeways and adjacent property by a complete opaque screen. 2. No refuse collection areas shall be permitted Mtwem a frontage street and the building lbw N. TelmMneand RlectricatService AR "on -site" electrical lines (excluding transmission Dan) Mod telephone Rees shalt be placed underground. Tramformc or terminal equipmmt 51011 be visually screened from view from streets and adjacent properties. O. Sidewalks The requiremmt for sidewsilm in the PC district may be waived by the Planning Director if it is demonstrated that such facilitin are not seeded. However, the City rate= the right to require installation of sldewalks, H to the future a need is established by the City. -12- GRDI36 P. Nuisances No portion of the property aball be used in such a manner as to create a nuisance to adjacent sites, such as but not limited to vibration, sound, eiectro-mecheniral disturbance and radiation, electro-magcatic disturbance, radiation, air or water ponutlaa, dust' emission of odorous, toile or noxious matter. GRD136 MM r m m m m m in i s W W M W M M W r M SECTION V. LIGHT INDUSTRY, BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL, AND COMMERCIAL, AREA 2 A. Intent It Is the Intent of this district to permit the location of a combination of light Industrial uses, business and professional office uses, and commercial -industrial uses engaged in the sales of products and services relating to and supporting the devel- opment plan, provided such uses are confined within a building or buildings, and do not contribute excess noise, dust, smoke, or vibration to the surrounding environ- ment nor contain a high hazard potential due to the nature of the products, material or processes Involved. Ancillary activities, i.e., vehicle and bulk storage, associated with the above permitted uses may be located outside a structure provided screening requirements as set forth in this document are observed. B. Permitted Uses The following uses and other uses which in the opinion of the Planning Director are compatible shall be permitted: 1. Commercial -Industrial Uses primarily engaged in commercial activities that involve some degree of mrsite production, assembly, repair, maintenance, etc., of the product sold or products related to the service tendered, such as, but not limited to, the following list of examples a. Appliance sales, rental, repair b. Furniture sales, rental, repair c. Locksmith d. Plumbing shop e. Carpet sales and cleaning I. Drapery sales and cleaning g. Home Improvement centers h. Equipment rental centers 1. Wholesale -retell food distributors J. Nursery and garden stores 2. Public and Quasi -Public Uses a. Post office b. Public and quasi-publlc utility business office and related service facilities m Utility substation d. Service and maintenance facilities C. Bullding Site Area Twenty thousand (20,000) square feet minimum. D. Setbacks -14- GRD138 All setbacks shall be measured from the property line. For the purpose of this Ordinance, a streetside property line is that line created by the ultimate right-of- way line of the frontage street. 1. Street Frontage Yard Setback Thirty (30) feet minimum, except that unsupported roofs or sunscreens may project six (6) feet into the setback area. 2. Interior Side Yard Setback Ten (10) feet, except that unsupported roofs and sunscreens may project three (3) feet Into the setback area. 3. Rear Yard Setback No minimum. E. Site Coverage Maximum building coverage of 50 percent Is allowed. Parking structures shall not be calculated as building area; however, said structures shall be used only for the parking of company vehicles, employee vehicles, or vehicles belonging to persons visiting the subject firm or utility. P. Building Height Ali buildings and appurtenant structures shall be limited to a maximum height of thirty-two '32)feet. G. signs 1. Sign Area- General Standard Only one (1) single or double-faced identification sign shall be permitted on the building per street frontage for each Individual business. No sign shall exceed an area equal to one and one-half (1-1/2) square feet of sign for each one (1) foot of lineal frontage of the building or store. However, no sign shall exceed 200 square feet in area per face. 2. WSUSIgn GRDI38 In no event shall an identification sign placed on a wall comprise more than 10 percent of the area of the elevation upon which the sign is located. Said signs shall be fixture signs. Signs painted directly on the surface of the wall shall not be permitted. -15- 3. GroundSign. An Identification ground sign shall not exceed for (4) feet above grade In vertical height. Also, ground signs In excess of 150 square feet In area (single face) shall not be erected in the first twenty (20) feet, as measured from the property line, of any streetside setback. However, the above standards $hall tat apply to the signs fisted In Section flit, Signs, of this Ordinance. 4. Multi-TenantDirectory Sign One (1) directory sign listing may the names or the on -site firms W taadne will be allowed per site. Sold sign shall be located even with or in hack of the - required building setback line and shall be located In the perking area W an any access drive to the perking area. This sign shell be limited to a maximum height of four (4) feet and a length of eight (8) fat and may be double-faced. This sign shall be in addition to Identification signs allowed by Subsection O, Paragraph 1 above. 5. Real Estate SIgn Said sign shall not exceed a maximum area of thirty-two (32) square fact and shall be on a grouts type sign, 6. Special Purpose Sign Signs used to give directions to traffic or pedestrians or give indNetiens an to e ram) agent and shalt be permitted in addition the other Signs listed In thiscial condions; shall Out exceed wtotal vf 31X (6) Square feet la seetioa. 7. Additional Signs Additional signs, as listed in the Sign Appendix of this Ordhenee, stall be permitted accordug to the criteria and performance standards contained in said appendix. H. Sign Standards L Signs (to include all these visible from the exterior of any building) limy be lighted but no Signs or any other contrivance shall be devised or caatrueted an as to rotate, gyrate, blink or move In any animated faddam 2. Business signs shall be restricted to advertising only the perr firm, company or corporation operating the use conducted an thedte or the products produced orsold thereon. 3. A wall sign with the Individual letters applied directly shall be measured by a rectangle around the outside of the lelterhig-arWor the pictorial symbol and calculating the area exiosed by such Itne. 4. AD signs attached to the Wilding shalt be Russ mounted on and parallel to the wall to which it is mounted. L Parking -16- GRD13a Adequate off-street parking shell be provided to accommodate all parking needs for the site. The intent is to eliminate the needfor any on -street parking. Parking shall be provided for each Wilding or development In accordance with the requirements set forth below based an the proportion of each type of use to the total building site. Required off-street parking shell be provided an the site of the useserved, or on a contiguous site or within 30D feet of the subject site. Where parking is provided on other than the site concerned, a recorded document shell be approved by the City Attorney and Died with the planning Department and signed by the owners of the alternate site stipulating to thepermanent reservation of use of the site for mid Parting. Office One G) space for each 225 square fat of net Door area. The parking requirement may be lowered to one (1) space for each 250 spare fat of net too area upon review and approval of the modification committee. Mamnfacture. Research and Assembl Two (2) perking $laces for each three (3) emplayees, but In m event less then three (3) spaces for each1,000 square feet of green floor area. i`fa75^I^, Two (2) parking spaces for each tires (3) employees, but lane event less than one i) spelt for each 1,000 square fact of gross floor area for the first 20,000 square fact of grass floor area far the second 20,000 square feet, one (1) space for each 4,000 square fee), of gross floor area for areas in excess of the initial 40,000 square feet of floor area of the building. The number of emplayees for parldng purposes den be determined by the largest number of employees present an the site at one time. In the event there Is more than one a) drift, sufficient parking most be provided orsite to preclude the necessity foranrstmet parkingat allbours of the day Including work shift overlaps. J. Landscaping As a portion of the total landscaping schema certain streets and areas have been designated as -Special Landscaped Streets and Areas.' Landscape treatment along the frontages of said streets requires gxcial consideration and therefore is referred to under separate sections In the following lendsceping standards. Detailed landscaping and Irrigation plans, prepared by a licensed landscape architect, licensed landscaping contractor, or architect shell be submitted to and approved by the Director of parka, Beaches, and Recreation prior to the issuance of a building permit and Installed prior to the Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. All landscaping referred to In this section shad be maintained in a neat and orderly fashion. 1. Street Frontage Setback Area GRD133 -t7- a. General Statement Landscaping In these arms; shall consist of an effective combination of street trees, trees, ground cover and shrubbery. b. Special Landscaped Streets and Areas The entire area between the curb and the building setback line shall be landscaped, except for any driveway In said area e. Other Streets The entire area between the curb and a point ten (10) feet In back of the front property line shall be landscaped except for any driveway in said area. it. intersections Landscaping, excepting trees, along all streets and boundaries shall be . limited to a height of not more then two and one-half (2-1/2) feet within the triangle bounded by a line drawn between points thirty-five (35) feet distance from the Intersection of the right-of-way tines prolonged. 2. Side and Rear Yard Setbacks a. General Statement All unpaved areas not utilized for parking and storage, or designated undeveloped areas, shall be landscaped utilizing ground cover and/or shrub and tree materials. b. Areas Subject to Suture Development Arens subject to future development shell be maintained In a weed free condition but need not be landscaped. c. Screening Areas used for parking shall be landscaped In such a manner as to Interrupt or screen said areas from view from access streets, freeways, and adjacent properties. Plant materials used for this purpose shall consist of Dnest or grouped masses of shrubs and/or trees. -18- GRD138 i i MIN M i M i M d. Intersections Landscaping, excepting trees, along all streets and boundaries shall be limited to a height of not more then two and one-half (2-1/2) feet within the triangle bounded by a line drawn between points thirty-five (35) feet distance from the Intersection of the right-of-way lines prolonged. 3. Parking Areas Trees, equal In number of one 0) per each five (5) parking stalls, shall be provided in the parking area. 4. Slope Banks All slope banks greater than 5.1 or 6 feet in vertical height and adjacent to public right-of-way shall be stabilized, planted and irrigated in accordance with the plans submitted to and approved by the Planning Director. R. Loading Areas 1. No loading shall be allowed which is visible from adjacent streets. 2. On -other than special landscaped streets, streetside loading shall be allowed provided the loading dock is set back a minimum of seventy (70) feet from the street right -of --way, line, or one hundred ten (110) feet from the street center- line, whichever Is greater. Said loading area must be screened from view from adjacent streets. L. Storage Areas 1. All outdoor storage shall be visually screened from access streets, freeways and adjacent property. Said screening shall form a complete opaque screen but need not exceed eight (9) feet In height. 2. Outdoor storage shell be meant to Include all company owned or operated motor vehicles, with the exception of passenger vehicles. 3. No storage shall be permitted between a frontage street and the building line. M. Refuse Collection Areas 1. AR outdoor refuse collection areas shall be visually screened from access streets, freeways and adjacent property by a complete opaque screen. 2. No refuse collection areas shall be permitted between a frontage street and the building line. N. Telephone and Electrical Service All aonsite" electrical lines (excluding transmission lines) and telephone Now shall be placed underground. Transformer or terminal equipment shall be visually screened from view from streets and adjacent properties. O. Sidewalks GRD138 -19- n The requirement for sidewalks In the PC (Plamed Community) district may be waived by the Planning Director If it is demonstrated that such facilities arc not needed. However, the City retairo the right to require Installation of sidewalks, It In the future a need Is established by the City. P. Hulsannes NO portion of the property shall be used In Mich a mamer as t0 create a nuhance, to Adjacent sites, such as but rot limited to vibration, sound, electro-mechanical disturbance and radiation, electro-magnetic disturbance, radiation, air or water pollution, bent, emission of odorous, toxic or noxious matter. ORD133 SECTION FI. COMMERCIAL, AREA 3 A. Intent The Intent of this district Is to allow the location of light general commercial activities engaged In the sale of products to the general public. Said activities $bell be contained within a building or buildings and shell not contribute excessive false, dust, smoke, or vibratlon to the surrounding environment, nor coataln a high hazard potential due to the nature of the products, material or processes Involved. B. Permitted Dan The following mass and other kites which In the opinion of the Planning Director are compatible sharibe permitted I. Retail sales and service of a convenirneenature. S. Restaurant; Including outdoor, drive-in or take-out restaurants shall be subject to the securing of a use permit In each pee. 3. PIM pellea and other sh nnarstate, county and municipal facilities. 4. Service stations subject to the development standards contained in this Ordlouae, Section YB. C. Buildingalta Area Two tha&a0d (5,000)square feet minimum. D. Setbacks Ali setbacks &hall be measured from the property Uue. For the pupae of this Ordf hide property Bne Is that that cleated by the adopted riot -or - way tag$ street 1. Street Frontage Yard Setback Thirty (M) feet, except that unsupported roots or smscrtens may Project six (6) feet into the setback stag. y, interior Side Yard Side yard setbacks will be required only *ban subject property abuts other then eammerdally smed property. A ten 00) foot setback Is required in such cases. Unsupported roors and mommeems may project three (3) feet into the setback arts. 3. Rear Yard Rae required. ORD139 -31- E. Size 1. Identification Sign Area - General Standard Only one 0) single or double-faced identification sign shall be permitted per street frontage for each Individual business. No sign shall exceed an area equal to one and one-half (I-V2) square feet of sign for each one (1) foot of lineal frontage of the building or store. However, no j sign shall exceed 200 square feet in area per face. a. Identification Ground Sign An identification ground sign shall not exceed tour (4) feet above grade In i vertical height. Also, ground signs In excess of I50 square feet In area (single face) shall not be erected In the first twenty (20) feet, as measured from the property line, of any streetside setback. However, the above standards shall not apply to the Multi -Tenant Directory sign or the allowed signs listed In the Sign Appendix of this Ordinance. b. Identification Wall Sign In no event shall an identification sign placed on a wall comprise more then 10 percent of the area of the elevation upon which the sign is located. Said signs shall be fixture signs. Signs painted directly on the surface of the wall shall not be permitted. 2. Restaurant Pole Sign One (1) identification pole sign per site will be allowed. H a pole sign is utilized, It shall be In lieu of other Identification signs allowed by E. 1. a. and b. above. Pale signs shall be limited to a maximum height of twenty (20) feet and a maximum area of fifty (50) square feet per face, double- faced. 3. Multi -Tenant Directory Sign One (1) directory sign listing only the name of the firms or businesses on a site shall be allowed. Said sign shall be limited to a maximum height of twenty (20) feet. Panels identifying each individual store shall be no larger than one (1) foot In height and five (5) feet in length. 4. Real Estate Sign Sold sign shall not exceed a maximum area of thirty-two (32) square feet and shell be of a ground type sign. 5. Special Purpose Sign Signs used to give directions to traffic or pedestrians or give Instructions as to special conditions shall not exceed a total of six (6) square feet (single face) In area and shall be permitted in addition to the other signs listed in this section. 6. Additional Signs -22- GRD138 r rya s r r r� ar s r Additional signs, as listed In the Sign Appendix of this Ordinance, shall be permitted according to the criteria and performance standards contained In said appendix. P. Building Height All building appurtenant structures shall be limited to a maximum height of thirty- two (32) feet. G. Sign Standards 1. Signs (to Include all those visible from the exterior of any building) may be lighted but no signs or any other contrivance shall be devised or constructed so as to rotate, gyrate, blink or move in any animated fashion. 2. Signs shall be restricted to advertising only the person, firm, company or corporation operating the use conducted on the site or the products produced or sold thereon. 3. A well sign with the individual letters applied directly shall be measured by a rectangle around the outside of the lettering and/or the pictorial symbol and calculating the area enclosed by such line. All signs attached to the building shall be Rush mounted. H. Parking 1. Restaurants Parking shall be in accordance with Section 20.38.030(d) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 2. Outdoor, Drive-in and Take -Out Restaurants Parking shall be In accordance with Section 20.53.060 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 3. Commercial One (1) space for each 250 square feet of gross Door area. One (1) loading space for each 10,000 square feet of gross Door area. 1. Landscaping Detailed landscaping and irrigation plans, prepared by a licensed landscape archi- tect, licensed landscaping contractor, or architect shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of Parks, Beaches, and Recreation prior to the issuance of a building permit and Installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. All landscaping referred to in this section shall be maintained in a neat and orderly fashion. 1. Front Yard Setback Area -23- GRDl38 a. Oeneralstatement Landscaping In these stalls shall consist of an effective combination of street trees, trees, ground cover and shrubbery. b. Soeciel Undvcaped Street The entire arcs between the curb and the buitding Setback line shall be land mped, exceptfor my driveway In said sm. m Other3treets The entire are, between the sash and a point ten (11) fast In tack of the front property line shall be landscaped except for any driveway in said area. 3. Side Yard and RearTard a. General Statement All unpaved areas not ulRixed for parking and storM shall be landscaped utilhir if ground cover and/or shrub and Im nesteriels. b. Undeveloped Aran Undeveloped areas proposed for future expansion shall be maintal ed in a weed fin condition but need not be landscaped. m Areas used for perking shell be somened from view or have the New interrupted by andsaping; and/or fencing from excess shcats, frowsy% and adjscest properties. _ Plant matertais used for screening- purposes shall consist of Roast or grouped comas of shrubs sndfor trees. d. Boundary Ares Boundary landscaping is required on all interior property Raes excluding sidewalk -and driveway areas. Said landscaping xheD be placed a]eg the entire length of these property Rees or for a distance of sufficient length to temmmodste the required tram. Teen, equal in number to one (1) tin twenty-f1m, (25)llneal fact of such property 3MU be the above Uses In xMUon to required g eotand xiwnh material_ e. Lrdaodeg-Ychice Seearatim All landscaped sms shall be sepamted from adjacent ventral- arms by a wall or curb, at lent six (3) Inches higher than the adjacent vehicular em. 3. Parkim Areas ORDl33 Trees, equal In number of one (1) per each five (5) perking stalls, shall be provided In the parking am. J. loading Areas Streetside loading on other than special landscaped stints shall be allowed provided the loading dock is Setback a minimum of Seventy (10) feet from the street right-of- way line, or one b xkvd ten (LID) feet from the street mterli m, whichever Is greater. Said loading area most be screened from view from adjacent streets. K. Storage Areas 1. AD outdoor storage shag be visually screened from access streets, freeways and sdlamut property. Said sementngsMD form a complete opaque screen but need not emceed eight (3) feet in Might. Z Outdoor storage shell be meant to include all company owned or operated motor vehicles, with the eseeptim of passeniper vehicles. 3. No stomp shell be permitted between a frontage stint and the building line. L. RefuSe Collection Atw I. All outdoor refuse collettlm areas Shan be visually screened from access stints, freeways and adjacent property. Said screening shall form a complete opaque versus. 't. No refroe coUmitm areas shall bepermittedbetween a tmtegestreet and the baUgling lim Y. Telephone and MeetricalService AR 00"te* electrical tames (excluding Usuandaalm lines) and telephone lines shag be placed uedergramd. Transformer or termini equipment shall be vhuaRy wome ed from view fear stints and adNeastpropertles. N. Pedestrial-Acees 11 other than a normal city pedestrial sidewalk system Is desired; the developer shag submlt ■ plan of pedestrian accesa to the Plemisg Department prier toted Issuance of building permits. Said plan wM detall consideration for pedestrian access to the subject properly and to adjacent properRm, and shall be binding on subsequent development of the property. The plan $ball show all interior walkways and all walkways In the public rightoFway, if such walkways arepropmed or necessary. ORD13s -35- M� W M M mow! M r M M! M man MAW M i i M i i i i i t i W i SECTION VR. SERVICE STATION DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Setbacks AB setbacks shall be measured from the property line. For the purpose of this Ordinance, a streetside property line is that line created by the adopted rlghbeh way line of the frontage street. 1. Front Yard and/or Streetside Setback Area a. Special Landscaped Streets Thirty (30) feet, except that unsupported roofs, sunscreens and canopy roofs may project six (6) feet into the setback area. Signs allowed by this Ordinance may be placed in the front yard setback area. b. Other Streets Ten (10) feet, including unsupported roofs, sunscreens and canopy roofs. Signs allowed by this Ordinance may be placed in the front yard setback area. 2. Interior Setbacks Twenty (20) feet from the side and rear lot lines unless the station is an Integral pert of a commercial complex, in which case said setback may be five (5) feet. Unsupported recta, sunscreens and canopy roofs may project three (3) feet into the setback area. B. Minimum Building Site Area A minimum building site area of 20,000 square feet Is required. C. signs 1. One (1) freestanding sign, limited to a maximum height of.seventeen 07) feet, shall be permitted. Sign face shall not exceed a maximum area of forty-five (45) square feet per face, double faced. 2. One 0) Identifying sign or symbol mounted on the building shall be permitted. Maximum area of the sign or symbol shall be eight (8) square feet. Maximum letter height shall be one (1) foot except for logos. 3. Real Eslale Sign Subject to the standards established in Subsection G.30 Section IV, of this Ordinance. 4. Special Purpose Sign Subject to the standards established in Subsection GA, Section IV, of this Ordinance. -26- GRD138 S. Additional Shins Additional signs, as listed in the Sign Appendix of this Ordinance, shall be permitted according to the criteria and performance standards contained in said appendix. D. Sign Standards The same sign standards as outlined in Subsection H, Section IV, of this Ordinance shall prevail for developments in this area. E. Parking A minimum of eight (8) parking spaces shall be provided on the site. Size of spaces, Isles widths, etc., shall conform to the provisions of the City of Newport Beach Zoning Code. P. Landscaping All landscaping referred to in this section shall be maintained in a neat and orderly fashion. 1. Front Yard and/or Streetside Setback Area a. GeneralSmtement Landscaping In these areas shall consist of an effective combination of street trees, trees, ground cover and shrubbery. b. Special Landscaped Streets and Areas The entire area between the curb and the building setback line shall be landscaped, except for any driveway parking area in said area. e. Other Streets The entire area between the curb and a point ten (10) feet in back of the front property tine shall be landscaped except for any access driveway in said area. 2. Interior Setbacks a. All unpaved areas not utilized for parking and storage shall be landscaped utilizing ground cover end/or shrub and tree materials. GRD138 b. Boundary Areas Boundary landscaping is required on all Interior property lines adjacent to properties zoned for other than commercial uses. Said landscaping shalt be placed along the entire length of these property lines or be of sufficient length to accommodate the number of required trees. Trees, equal, in number to one Q) tree per twenty-five (25) lineal feet of each property line, -27- shall be planted in to above -defined anal In addition to required ground cover and shrub materials. o. All landscaped areas Wall be separated from adjacent vehicular acres, by a wall or curb, at least six (6) inch= higher than the adjacent vehicular ores. d. Landscaping, excepting tress, along all streets and boundaries sall be limited to & height of sot more than three and one-half (3412) feet within twenty (20) faetof the point of Intervention of street and access driven. G. Sam A masonry wall or landscaping forming can opaque sevens shelf be installed along property lines which shut property zoned for imkrtelal erns. Said wall W land- scaping soli be six (6) feet In height. wall or landscaping d" be no higher than three (2) feet (except tress) within twenty (10) feet of my adopted street rightoE way line. where tare is a difference In elevation an opposite sides of the wall, the height dell he measured from the highestgade level adjacent to the wall. No sign or sign supports shall be permitted on any required screening. H. Refuse Collection Area Ali trash and refusexall be atoned within an area enclosed by a wail at -leant six (6) feet In height wall material$hall match exterior buffing materIaL GRDI3S SECTION VIIt. OFFICE, AREA S A. Intent It Is the Intent of this area to provide for the development of office -research and development facilities. Prior to to adoption eta tentative tact map for thb area, the Planned Community (PC) text shall be amended to Include- specific standards related to amount of development, building setbacks, grading, parking, on -site clredstion, site access, landscaping, the location of public facilities and other pertinent factors. This arcs, also Includes to reservation of sufficient area to provide for a future fire statim to serve this general sues of the city. R. Permitted Uses The following us=sall be permitted: 1. Administrative and professional offices 2. Research and development facRitf= S. Retail sales and service of aeonven epee nature d. Restaurant, subject to use Permit S. Institutional, finnehl and governmental facilities G. Parking Lots, structures and facilities GRD12g -20- M M M M s M M i M M M i i M i M M M (New Section IX) SECTION IX. RESIDENTIAL, AREA 5 It is the Intent of Area 5 to provide residential Musing and related community facilities. A. Uses Permitted 1. Cluster unit developments, as defined In Section M. Definitions. 2. Single family dwellings attached or detached. 3. Apartments. 4. Conventional subdivisions. S. Condominiums/fownhomes. 6. Temporary model complex and appurtenant uses. 7. Community recreational facilities. 8. Signs (as per City Code and as provided In Section YU of this Planned Community Text). B. Attached Residential Standards 1. Maximum Height Limits a. AU buildings shall be in accordance with 32/50 Height Limitation Zone. b. Chimneys and vents shall be permitted as set forth In Section 20.02.060 of the Municipal Code. 2. Setbacks The fallowing minimum setbacks shall apply to all structures (not to include • garden walls or fences) adjacent to streets. a. Setbacks from Streets Said setbacks shall be -measured from the back of sidewalk. Open parking shell be permitted in setback area. However, Planning Director may, upon submittal of a tentative subdivision map or preliminary site plan, review said map or plan In view of setbacks listed in this ordinance and/or sound planning principles and shell either approve, modify, disapprove the setbacks shown, or refer the matter to the Planning Commission for a determination. In the case of modification or disapproval the applicant may appeal to the Planning Commission for further consideration. GRD138 -36- Setback from Ultimate Street RI¢ht-of-Wav Line Jamboree Road 20' University Drive South 20' Collector Streets 15, b. Setbacks -Garages Garages with direct access to public streets may be setback either from five (5) to seven (7) feet average or a minimum average of twenty (20) feet measured from back of curb, or In the event that sidewalks are con- structed, from back of sidewalk. A minimum of eighteen (18) feet measured from back of curb, or in the event that sidewalks are con- structed, from back of sidewalk shell be permitted with roll -up or other type of garage doors approved by the City Traffic Engineer. Additional garage spaces In excess of two (2) spaces need not meet the above criteria. c. Setbacks from Other Property Lines and Structures L A minimum front yard setback of -five (5) feet shall be required. This setback shall be measured from the back of curb or in the event that sidewalks are constructed, from back of sidewalk. 2. All main residential structures on the same lot shall be a minimum of eight (8) feet apart. This shall be measured from face of finished wall to face of Unshed wall. d. Side Yard Setback Five (5) feet. The above standards shall be required unless one of the following conditions prevails: 1. Structures which abut a plaza, park, mall or other permanent open green space may abut the common property line and have openings onto same, provided the open spaces are not publicly owned. 2. Where there are no openings on a given side, that side may be placed on the property line and may abut a structure on an adjoining lot. 3. An attached or detached garage or carport may abut a side property line or another structure, provided no openings we located on the abutting surfaces. Dwellings may orient toward the streetside properly line or the opposite properly line in order to take advantage of view conditions. GRD138 -31- e. Rear Yard Setback Ten (10) feet. 3. Fenn. Hedges and Walls Farce shalt be limited to a maximum height of eight (a) feet, except within the front yard setback where fences, hedges sod walls shall be limited to three (3) feet. Wing woos, where an extension of a residential or aeee moey structure is to be constructed may be eight (8) fact In height. At street IntersecHow, no such apprwtanance &hall exceed two (2) feet In height measured hom curb height within the triangle bounded by the right-of-wsy lines and a csneetbg line drawn between points thirty (30) feet distant from the (ntersnHoo of the ���y lives prolonged. The aboveappliesexcept what enter attenuation Isre4. Architectural Features Architectural feabres, such as but net limited to carntces, esvcs, and wingwaos may extend two and one-half (2 112) feet into any front, side or resr yard setback. S. LWiinK Peking for residential uses shall be provided as follows: Apartments, stacked Hats — 2.9 simea/dweliiig ado Including guest parking. Towwames 24 elling unit, Including �te�, One space per dwelling unit shall be covered. S. Maximum Site AreetCoverare The maximum building site area permitted In thb PC District shall be fail coverage, )use required front, side and rear yards. C. Detached Residenthl Standards L Mia)mum Lot Size TM minimum lot size permitted shalt be 2,400 sgmM feet. 2. Maximum Building Height a. AD building shall be lnaetordsnce with the 32f50 Height Limitation Zone. b. Chimneys and vents *AU be permittedaz set forth In Section 29.02.060 of the Municipm Code. GRD130 -32- 3. Setbacks The following setbacks shall apply to all structures excluding garages with direct women; to streets, garden walls or fences. s. Prow Yard A minimum setback of ten (10) feet for the dwelling unit shall be maintained. This shmilbe meaPred from back of cab,or in the event that sidewalb are constructed, from backof sidewalk. b. Side Yard Side yard setbacks shall be a mioimum of five (5) feet. e. Rear Yard A minimum of ten 00) feet shall be maintained for the rear yards. d. Setbacim-G Gwges with ddirect gems to streets may be setback either from five (5) to e average w a minimum of twenty (20) feet measured from back of cab, or in the event that sidewalks are rnmtructed, from back of aidwWRW- A minimum of eighteen (14) feet measured from back of cmb, or )n the event that sidewalksare constructed from back otsidewalk, shall be permitted with roll -up err other type garage doors approved by the City TrafficEngineer. Additional garage spans In excessof two (2) spans need net meet the above create. 4. Faeex, Hedeva and Walla Fences shall be limited to a maximum height of eight (0) feet except within the be froet YOM setback where fences, hedges and walls shall be limited to three (3) fact. f ten Wing weted m�e an extension Of a residential or accessory structure is ekes eight (0) fact in helgbL At street Intersection, no meh appnrtenanee stall exceed two (2) feet in height measured from curb height within the bim9le bounded by the right-of-way Unes and a connecting line drawn between points thirty (34) feet distant from the )ntereactton of the tighhttC� aq Brea prolonged. Above applies except where miss attenuation is 5. Parking Parking for residential usesshall be 2.5 spans per dweHlrgunit, Including guest parking, with one(1)cevered StreetpwNdTovbsystsaeceptsbie. 0. Maximua Site Area Coverage The maximum buildig site Area permitted in this PC District shalt be full coverage, less re*&ed front, side aadreer yards, GRD139 -33- 1� M M! M i M, i M no M lim M 'i i M M i i 7. Architectural Features Architectural features, such as but not limited to cornices, eaves, and wing walls may extend two and one-half (21/2) feet Into any front, side or rear yard setback. ORD138 -34- SECTION X. PARK, AREAS It Is the Intent of this section to designate an area for a future public park and fire station site. The perk and fire station shell be located in approximately the location ssFown on the Land Use PTm-. GRD138 -83- -35- SECTION XL SIGNS The following material represents the sign program for the North Ford/San Diego Creek PC District. It Is an endeavor to both identify and provide for the primary functions of any sign program, and informing prospective buyers how and where to Purchase, that product. This material is act Intended as a substitute for detailed engineeHng knowledge, experience or judgment. It is Intended to provide a quick and graphic representation or Nose signs to be allowed on Irvine Property and under whatc nditicm said signssiall be !Sowed. It Includes such pertinent dots as Justification for a partitadar sign, where the sign maybe located, law lag It may be erected and fabrication specnesUons. It Is intended that the following alp criteria be utilized as a policy guidelines regulating signs on a uniform basis for all company properties. ' Mire type letters A, D and C shall be subject to a conditional us p"It. Sign type letters D, E, F and O stall be subject to the approval of thePLmhg Director. SIGN TYPE (A) FREEWAY "PLANNED COMMUNIIYe TRAVEL DIRECTIONAL SIGN: A sign consisting of panels which Inform the viewer of the tours or direction of travel In - order to arrive atThe frvia Company planned communities. t POLICYt Shell eons(stof one, two, three or four panels maximum, depending Won the S number of commkalUes requiring Ideality at that location. Each peel shall display the name of a planned community or significant regional land use and a direcUonst arrow. Itay be double faced if required. Signs shall be located prior to freeway off tamps. A. community !hen be Identified only on the signs located prior to the primary i acres road to the community from the freeway. Signs shall contain fo r paneis for aeathetie balance even though "me Welt may be blank. f.00ATIONt Only one sips structure shall appear before the entrance to an existing freeway off ramp. This sign &all be located no less Uses 660 fat and no more than 1226 fat from the point stwhich the apron starts to widen for the off ramp. t LONGEVIIYt Each *a panel shall have a time limit of 5 years from the date spedned in the text fora planned community request, subject to renewal by the ` appropriate pudic sgacylf new bomessre still for sale fn the community. - SIGN SURFACE AREA: 97.5 square feet per sips panel. Total sign arm e approximately 3" square fat. I -0U- ORD133 -]h GRD1ag -2r- M so i SIGN TYPE (B) HIGHWAY "PLANNED COMMUNITY" TRAVEL DIRECTIONAL SIGN: A sign consisting of panels which inform the viewer of the route or direction of travel in order to arrive at The Irvine Company planned communities. POLICY: The sign shall be limited to a maximum of four panels, depending upon the number of communities requiring identity at that location. Each panel shall display the name of a planned community or significant regional land use and a directional arrow, only. Each of the panels may be double faced if required. Signs shall be placed only on major and primary roads, and shall contain four panels for aesthetic balance even though some panels may be blank. LOCATION: Only one such sign structure shall exist within 1320 feet of a major Intersection in each direction. The sign may be on either the right or left hand side of the road. LONGEVITY: Each sign panel shall have a time limit of 5 years from the date specified In the text for a planned community request, subject to renewal by the appropriate public agency if new homes are still for sale In the community. SIGN SURFACE AREA: 36.6 Square feet per panel. Total sign area approximately 146.4 square feet. URD138 -38- SIGN TYPE (C) INTERSECTION DIRECTIONAL SIGN: A sign consisting of panels which inform the viewer of the mute or direction of travel in order to arrive at The Irvine Company planned communities. POLICY: Shall consist of one, two, three, four or five panels maximum depending upon the number of communities requiring Identity at a particular intersection. Each panel shall display the name of a planned community or significant regional land use and a directional arrow, only. Each of the panels may he double faced if required. LOCATION: Ideally suited for Intersections which require the motorist to make a complete atop, and where directional assistance is required for many communities. Such signs shell be within five miles of the communities they identify and shall be located along direct routes to a planned community. LONGEVITY: Each sign panel shall have a time limit of 5 years from the date specified in the text for a planned community request, subject to renewal by the appropriate public agency if new homes ere still for sale in the community. SIGN SURFACE AREA: 4-1/2 square feet per panel. Maximum total area 22.5 square feet. GRD138 -39- SIGN TYPE (D) REASSURANCE SIGN: A sign designed to reassure motorists of their direction of travel and distance to The Irvine Company planned esmmmlties and points of major Interest. POIdCY: Such signs shall be not more than five feet Is vwUcai height or harbmntel length exdusive of ground clearance and Wall out exceed a total aims of 15 squam feet May be double faced if required. LOCATION: Such sign shall be located only along dtreet routes to the Planned community Or significant regional land use. They shall be within five miles of the community Or land use they Identify, and they shall be at least one-half mile from any other roawance sign identifying theame planned community rregiond land Ise. LONGEVITY: Each sign rill tax a time limit of five yams, subject to renewal by the appropriate public agency It still srvingapuONc need. SIGN SURFACE AREA: 135 square feet. GRD120 -w I SIGN TYPE (:) TRACE SUBDIVISION IDENTIFICATION' AND COMMUNITY DIRECTION SIGN: A sign which taforms the viewer of the name of the planned community, he is apPNOSeft OW the direction of travel to enter that residential community and the names of the developar/s who see correctly building end/r marketing homes In that community. POLICYs Shall out exceed 120 square test In sign surface aces. May be used "an on - site (within the boundaries of the plannedcommimity) orao off-sttesigm Shall display only the names aed/r symbols of the developer/a who are currently building and/or marketing homes In that community or the name or names of the tract development within that community (maximum of 2) and the name of the planned community and a dttetiaselarrow,esnd tha name "Irving• Maybe double faced N required. LOCATION: To be located before critical Interval which Introduce the major matry/les to a Planned Reswential Community. LONGEVITY: Each aip3MU haves, time Undtoffiveyeassfrom thedateoftsuaol of the sign permit. subject to rens wel by the appropriate public agency if new homes Am am for sets in the community. SIGN SURFACE AREA: 120 square feel CRD133 -41- i ,00m M it m m r m m m w m m s m m m MR SIGN TYPE (F) COMMUNITY ENTRY SIGN: A sign which Identifies the entry to a development in The Irvine Company community in which homes are for sale. The sign Informs the viewer of the name of the community, the names of the developments in that community and the direction of travel to reach the model areas. POLICY: Wherever possible shall be used as on -site sign (within the boundaries of the community). Shan be double faced where required. LOCATION: At or near the mein entry/ies to the residential community. LONGEVITY: Each sign shall have a time limit of 5 years from the date specified in the text for the planned community. Subject to renewal by the appropriate public agency if new homes are still for sale In the community. SIGN SURFACE AREA- 160 square feet. GRD138 -a3- SIGN TYPE (G) FUTURE FACILITY SIGN: A sign which Informs the viewer, through symbol and verbal reinforcement, of the type of facility planned for a community. POLICY% The sign shall Identify facilities which are planned as part of a planned community and are to be constructed In the immediate future. General symbols, designed to Identify and not to advertise, will represent the same type of facilities in each of The Irvine Company communities. May be double faced if required. LOCATION% Always Installed on the site of the facility and oriented to the nearest street. One sign to be utilized for each street fronting on the site. LONGEVITY: From the Ume the site bas been zoned for the facility until construction and/or leasing Is completed. SIGN SURFACE AREA: 96 square feet maximum (including 4 "rider" panels). GRD138 -43- I ANENDMEMS 1. Amend North Ford P-C teat to include San Diego Creek South Pared dealgnated for office USE (Area /); designate Area 5 for residentlat uael increase square footage of permitted commercial the (Area 3} designate Area 8 for park use (Amendment 593, adopted October 31,1983). Z Amend North Fo"VSan Diego Crack PC teat to establish residential developmart standards for Area 5 (Amendment No.. adopted .1984). ORD338 =0 r F1 r pi I I [1 r r 1 1 1 I i CJ I I I GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS M M M i S S s MOORE S TABER coN[urnxo hu+mxccws wxoowLooihlrs ......! LA /.,LNA I1 V[NY[ . /.NAM[IN. CI1L1/OtMIA [[[O) . 171.1 n/.L,/1 September 21, 1983 Job No. 183-070 She Irvine Company 550 Newport Center Drive Newport Beads, California 92660-0015 Attention Mr. Michael Pittenger Geoteduniral Pevie+ - North Ford Area and Site A, Newport Beads, California As requested, we have revised our files concerning-geotechnical data which has been obtained at the subject sites. This letter presents ref- erences to those reports relevant to the sites and includes a brief dis- cussion of specific cenditicnu which say require consideration during development. The subject area apprises two adjacent areaswhichare identified at this time as Site A and the North Ford Area southerly of Eastbluff (as sham on the attached plan). The North Ford Area was initially a portion of the Irvine Coupany Botts Site (Jamboree Pit), and was used for a period of time as a borrow pit. Site A has been utilized to place soils genera- ted during the removals of sedimentation from Upper Newport Bay: Subse- quently, as planning progressed compacted fill and underground utility lines have been placed at various times within these auras. The approxi- mate locations of the fill areas are sham on the attached plan. Two distinct geologic units with widely varying engineering characteris- tics are present within the study area. The southern portion of the North Ford Area is underlain by uplifted, preconsolidatel marine sediments while the remaining, northerly portion of North Ford and Site A are underlain by compressible recent alluvial deposits. Consequently, for purposes of dis- cussion, the study area has been separated into two parts, as indicated on the attached plan. Area I encompasses the preconsolidated marine sediments while Area FI includes those portions of the site underlain by compressible recent alluvium. = M = = = M M the Irvine (bnpmy Page 2 Site History Site A (Nortlherl of Fast Bluff Drive) - The following reports provide gco in rustics concerning Site A: 1) Preliminary Soils and Settlement Investigation -proposed Commercial Development Northeast of Jauboree road and Eastbluff Drive, dated March 11, 1970 (Job No. 169-792). 2) Gartedunical Investigation -Early Action Plan Facilities, San Diego Crack Carprehensive Stonnweter Sedimentation Central Plan, dated July 10, 19BI (Job No. 181-001). 3) Future Development of Site A, Newport Beads, California dated July 17, 1982 (Job No. 182-34). 4) Progress deports, Compacted Fill Placement Site A (Job No. 282-238). In accordance with project plans, Site A was used as an area to dispose of the sedimentation removed Eras Upper Newport Bay. Prior to placement of fill within Site A, a system of subdrains was constructed as specified on project drawings. The approximate location of the subdrains are shown on the attached drawing. They were placed to provide a drainage path for excess water in the soils to reduce pore pressure. Materials imported to Site A were dried back to rear optimum moisture content and compacted to a mdnimrn of 901 relative compaction, except where stockpiled to ex- pedite completion of the required re ovals within Upper Newport Back Bay. The stockpiles were left in place about eight months. Femovals and co - pactim of the stockpiles materials are nearly,coupleted and at the con- clusion of this work all fill materials within Site A will have been com- pacted to a minimum of 90% relative compaction. Materials imported to the site have raised the elevation of Site A to approximately elevation 22 at the southerly and and elevation 14 at the northerly end. This resulted in about five to seven feet of fill being placed in the area. Settlement platforms were placed at five locations within Site A prior to fill place- ment in order to monitor the oonsolidation of the compressible underlying native sediments. It is our understanding that no readings have been obtained from these platforms and that two were destroyed during fill place- ment. At the completion of this grading, settlement monuments will be placed to check the effects of the recent grading. Sewer and storm drain lines exist within Site A. North Ford Area (Southerly of East Bluff Drive) - The following reports present 9eotedm caAnF5 ition concerning the North Ford Area; also identified as Tentative Tract 10019. Job No. 183-070 - Septenber 21, 1983 M as Irvine Coapany Page 3 1) Irvine Ompany Borrow Site, Approximately 100 Acres, Jamboree Real and MacArthur Boulevard. dated August 19. 1965 (Job No. 15-708). 2) Preliminary Soils Investigation-Narth Ford Industrial Area, dated August 8, INS (Job No. 18-640) 3) Addend= to Preliminary Soils Study -North Ford l dus- trial Area. dated August 28. 1968 (Job No. 18-640) 4) Soils Investigation -Sewer Urn. North lord Industrial Ara, dated October 7, 1968 (Job No. 18-672). 5) Rgort of Compacted F111-North Ford Industrial Area, dated January 14, 1969 (Job No. 28-170). 6) Preliminary Soils Sturdy -North lord Indastrial Area, Irvine Industrial Complex, dated April 14, 1977 (Job No. 177-03). 71 Wepmrt of CaTectted Fill -North Ford rndrstrial Area, 1000 Camalhv4, Portion of Tentative Tract 10019, dated July 21, 1981 (Job No. 280-256). a) Various letters/zeports addressing lots 7 and 8 of Tentative Tract 10019. a) Dated MY 20, 1981, revisal June 10, 1981 (Job No. 280-256). b) Dated June 10, 1981 (Join No. 260-256). 9) Gateway Newport Bsinness Park, Stoma Drain Aligoment (soils investigation), dated July 17, 1981 (Job No. 280-256). 10) Cotpoctiun lest teway brut =.sine es Pair, Storm Drain Alignment (Lines DAM and V). dated Nwmber 25. 1981 (Job No. 280-256). The North Ford Area, whim was initially used as a barrow -pit and mtse- goantly rough graded in varies locations to confim to than currant develapammut Plans. is Presently vacant land traversed in areas by exis- ting utility linen. Structural fill overlain by e.ur,a v.ge Fill has lass placed within the nand meat comer of the North. Ford Area. Job No. 183-070 - Septe ber 21, 1983 The Irvine Cry Page 4 General As indicated previcusly. the study era; has been separated into two parts. aWese areas am indicated on the attached Plan.as Area 1 (southerly portion of North lbrd Are+) and Aran I3 (Site A and northerly portion of North Ford Area). Area I Area I is underlain essentially by uplifted prewnsolidated marina sad, mats. Ompacted fills, ubeese shown on the attached drawing, have been Plaoxd at various locations arch times. Both the Preto soliditel marine sediments and the mvacted fills live adaguite stragth parameters to support moderately loaded structural improvements, i.e., ens and two- story concrete tilt -up or three-story woad frame structures. Gootechndcal review of final Plans 13Y the soils engireer, spplemarted with same, field review of surficial sill conditions, should Provide adequate information to present specific design recommendations for improvements within this area. This might entail. some 6ukhoe test pits at specific locations, particularly in the area of previously placed fills. Naavy column loads or um m&32 or sensitive, foundation systems may require n more extensive field investigation and analysis. fadsting 1.Sr1 slopes and see of the existing graded pads have been sub- jected to erosion, and remedial work will be required to restore these arts to that original configuration- Becomandatioxs careening remedial wrk and slope maintenance can best be presented wiuen final plain; and grades are )avewn. The I.Srl slopes are considered to be grossly stable, however. o two horizontal to cane, vertical s1cl+s are Worst acceptable in todrys envirer mart diners passible, trimming of the slopes back to firm undisturbed sells is the best method of repairing erosion gullies and uneven slopes. one soils uderlying Area I are eacpdered to be fairly fim or darse. aozefore, liquefaction within this area is not considered to be a Petrn- tial problem Area II Area U is underlain by toWpresible recent sediments which are subject to various amounts of lug -tam consolidation osier fin and structural loading. Compacted fi13s and s ncharge fill have been placed over lar- tions of this area as indicated on The attached drawing. Joe to. 183.070 - September 21, 1983 � ii M M i M M M M r I The Irvine Company Page 5 Previous reports delineated the areas where the underlying materials are sensitive to fill or structural loads. These areas will require a delay between the time that fill is placed and construction oaumences in order for settlement to occur. The time for settlement to occur can be decreased by placing a surcharge fill above the proposed finish grade. It is esti- mated that Area iI settlement could require about six years to take place with no surcharge fill. Surchrage fills can reduce the time for settle- ment to occur substantially, depending on the surcharge thickness. The referenced reports indicate that the southerly portions of Area II will require little or w surcharge. However, this nay not be the case if final fill depths differ from those used for analysis. For planning Purposes, it should be assured that Area 11 will require variable surcharge depths. The attached Site A letter of July 13, 1983 indicates the time frame and degree of settlement that could occur. A setback of about 50 feet must be maintained from finished structures and areas not yet sure arged. Landscape moercls in close proximity to structures could induce adverse settlement of foundations. Therefore, moods adjacent to structures should be avoided. The remmenial setback of handsca ,mourds from structures can be given after analysis of proposed mood configurations. Geotedmrcal review of project plans and site specific field investigations should be performed by the soils engineer in order to provide design recoa- mendations for =PzXnn ments within Area II. This wadi include an extern sive foundation investigation for any structures other than lightly loaded foundation, i.e., one- and boa story rood frame buildings on continuous reinforced footings. pre -stressed or post -tensioned design might be ccn- siderel. Saturated loose granular deposits underlying Area II could be susceptible to liquefaction or cyclic nobility in the event of the maximum probable (100-year probable) earthquake along the Newport -Inglewood fault. The corresponding probabilities of ocarerure are approximately 63 percent during an average 100-year period, or 39 percent during 50 years or 22 percent during 25 years. Sate differential settlement and ground lurching with corresponding distress to strictures and utilities could be expected should liquefaction occur during grand shaking. However, it is cot anticipated that structures designed and constricted in accordance with current codes would fail catastrophically under these conditions. Consequently, the potential for loss of life due to eartlyff 3oa induced structural failure is considered to be relatively low. There are move measures that can be taken to reduce the potential for lique- faction of saturated granular deposits. Such measures include densifying loose granular soils by vibrating probes or by dropping heavy weights from crams. However, these measures are generally very expensive (approximately $1.00 per square foot for treatment to depths of about 30 to 90 feet). tbre- over, a comprehensive geotechnical investigation world be required to evalu- ate possible treatment methods. Job No. 183-070 - September 21, 1983 The Irvine Gzapany Page 6 Utility Lines and Subdrains Utility lines are present within both Areas I awl II. The locations of these lines are hest presented by others. Care should be taken during construction to monitor flaw liens that may be critical. The existing S++drainc within Area II should ruin undisturbed. Fill placement and area settlement should not have an adverse effect on the subdrain system. Closure This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geo- tedaical practices and makes no other warranties, either expressed or igplied, as to the professional advice or data included in it. The report Is based on the project as described and the data obtained in the field or from referenced documents. This report has rot been prepared for use by parties or porjects other than those names or described above. SCORE 6 TABER 6'�46.,, /,t-l� Walt Christian viewed amen J. Weaver HC/JJW:te istered hull Fhgrncer 32316 Attachments: Plan Letter dated July 13, 1983 (Job W. 282-238) (6) Copies to Addressee Job No. 183-070 - September 21, 1983 MOORE W. TABER eoxauir,Mo cwo�MrrMs woo ocoieo,sta �S30 CAST M PAIMw wv[NVi w9AMrlw. ew lllO PMIw 9lOO7. 111.1 1111P��� i� July 31, 1984 Job No. 184-37 Mr. Bernard Maniscalco The Irvine Company 550 Newport Center Drive Irvine, California NORTH FORD GRADING STUDY NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA Introduction This letter presents our assessment of geotechnical conditions to be considered for the proposed grading of the North Ford property southerly of University Drive, between MacArthur Boulevard and Jamboree Road, in Newport Beach,. California. The proposed grading plans call for mass 4rading of the North Ford area to create relatively level building pads. For the most part, the southwestern portion of the property will be cut while varying depths of structural fill are to be placed on the rest of the site. In general, fill depths will range from 5 to 10 feet except for limited areas where 20 to 30 feet of fill is anticipated. Materials exported from upper Newport Bay as part of the Upper Newport Bay Sedimentation Program will also be placed on the site. We understand that initial grading operations will concentrate on the proposed roadways. We also understand that it is desired to construct the backbone utility systems within six months after the placement of structural and surcharge fills. In order to, meet this time requirement, surcharge depths will have to be varied across the site to ensure that sufficient primary settle- ment has occurred prior to construction. Scope The purpose of our study was to assess the geotechnical condi- tions to be considered for planning the development of the North Ford site. The study included client consultation, review of Mr. Bernard Maniscalco The Irvine Company Page 2 previous reports by Moore i Taber at or near the project site, engineering analyses, and the preparation of this report. All engineering analyses were based on data presented in the reports referenced below. Specifically, the scope of our study Included performance of the following tasks: 1. Review of Preliminar Soils and Settlement Investioat an, Proposed Commere 83 Deve loFmene No[theaet of inductee Road and Ea stbluft Drive Ne rt Beach California dated March 11, 1912 9 0, y Moore c Taber lJob No. 169-792). 2. Review of Preliminary Soils Study, North Ford Industr al Area, Iryinn Industrial Complex. New2grt Beach, California at" April 14, 197 , by Moore c Taber (Job No. 177-03). 3. Review of Geotechnical Znvesti ation - Edriy Action Plan Pacil ties, San Diego Creek Commrehens ve Stormwater bed mentation Control Plan dated Juiy 30, 1981, by Moore i Taber IJob No. 181-001). 4. Review previous Geotechnical Review reports for Site A and the North Ford Area by Moore c Taber dated June 17, 1982 and September 21, 2983 IJob Nos. 182-34 and 183-70, respectivelyl• 5. Determination of the magnitude and rate of settlement induced by placement of fill. 6. Evaluation of acceleration of settlement by surcharging. 7. Recommendations regarding monitoring procedures. 8. Evaluation of additional analyses that may be required at the time of development. 9. Evaluation of site preparation measures which may be required at the time of development. Soil Conditions The earth materials underlying the North Ford site have been described in detail in the referenced reports. However. It may be noted that the earth materials underlying the project site Job No. 184-37 - July 31, 1984 i■i■r m i m m m r m m m m m m s m m m m in MOORE S TABER eow■uinwo aa„ecns wwo aeotamss Mr- Bernard Maniscdic0 The Irvine Company Page 3 Page 9 consist of two distinct geologic units with widely varying engineering characteristics. The southern portion of the site consists of relatively dense marine terrace deposits underlain by massive, lightly cemented sandstone. The northerly portion of the North Ford site is underlain by poorly consolidated sediments of Holocene (Recent) age. These compressible sediments consist of interbedded layers of loose silty sand, clayey sand and sand, and very soft silty clay and sandy clay. Groundwater is situated approximately between elevations -10 and -20. Settlement The fine-grained compressible sediments underlying the northern portion of the North Ford area will undergo significant consoli- dation when subjected to stress increases due to imposed fill loads. The magnitude of the settlement is only dependent on the imposed fill load. The total settlement of native soils under variable depths of fill can be estimated from the curves pre- sented in Figure 1 on page 4. The curves depict a range of anticipated settlement which reflects the different fill depths and the variable soil conditions encountered during our previous field investigations. The most significant factor associated with the settlement of the native Compressible soils is the time for consolidation to occur. The time for consolidation is a function of the vertical perme- ability and length of drainage path to the nearest continuous sand layer which will transmit flow laterally. The exploratory borings indicated interbedded sand layers within the compressible fine-grained sediments. However, considering the general lenti- cular nature of estuarian sediments, the continuity of these sand layers may be questionable. Consequently, Figure 2 depicts a range of anticipated times to completion of primary settlement with the upper limit of each range being the critical case. rta that future ad radio operations not adverse) It is important p grading p affect roadway improvements. Therefore, if initial grading oper— ations are to be conducted along proposed roadways, structural fill placement should extend at least 50 feet outside roadway right-of-way limits. The proposed fill placed ad3acent to the existing levees or roadway embankments will cause some settlement beneath the levees or Jamboree Road. Level readings along the roadway during and after fill placement should provide data on the road settlement. Job No. 184-37 - July 31, 1984 I Figure 1: Settlement vs. Depth of Fill eeeE6e.........?Nunn N36ee a 6y .................................I.....::6661. :6 :9966666UNION 9666monolo666666696666666666:6399666I11 :66: : u:6;o m:6:mmu: ; ::: ■I■■■■■■I■I■. ........................ Soon no :: *own .:.::... 666666666969EE669�666666666696No .. IroN04ON ■■■■ I■■■I■o■II■II■IImmunrammi ■I■I ;; ti,rl :::::;::;:::::::::■■ _:::;:;:::::sae:;::°I:■66 �r �I000 ■I u■u■o■u■uuu ^ ••• NEAR■■■■■■I■IOII ■II■o■■Ioua■r■ra■u:II '� ■:I NEARKENNNNO■■p:: :::::::::::■ _ _ • reY:al■I::sYeilll:i::e�QQIQfl1■1■6INN..ull . :::::::::::■■Irk • ■■■RMAN;::: O\:: �:;:: :■ 11I ■ ■o■■I■IOuouu■a IOI■a■I■Ilrwol■YI■m no■�� a6� ■uo■u■u■u■■■II ■■■■■■■■■liu ra■vorumoYfY G :::::::;;:::::::::::::::::::�oCY:i:::i:eamM:YU ■ :: ■■■■■■■■t■■■■■■■■II■■■■■■■■I■■arlYlw■arlY■r■iouli ■ ■ ■ ■■ oll�':Mom 63■ gigc�o:a�i i6 ; :::::::::::ii;::�::;°caiunaiiicct�.�:GrGr6I6� ■: ■■■■■■II■■IoM■■■o'■■FO,e r■a r1YI w ra oY■Y■ry•a■■Ila� on; 6�II ■■I■■o■■Iluo■Ir■ ■■L■o■urlal lY■orell�■■� ipI■■ I■ ■■ QMUMIM OXEN A;:a::;;:'Ia;:i;:n il= GI11 loll :;:;:::::::::I■■66:�///�1[[[OeYY■�axm%�pi ;:■;a;�:rrr;; �i�HIM Iuouuuou YY I ra■■YUo.�o■ :�6:■:■ uuuuuuul II■II■OI■■■o■■n■Jr'■cY■■r■■oa9■oIo■ ■ '= p ■um■ou■■n .■q.C:cuoill:''mX..m;:::::616s�1 6iC 6�:6 u■uu■uuur Jq@@ = p�ppjj a:�iiW;::;r:;1010113 6:;6 ■ l 6[:: oeeeeeeeoeel=?�eEdeeE6�i 1111116�2411 6666669669691666666666116666�9;: '� �6 olu GriYlG :■■IUYU I; :a:a;■'::;;o;; ■ ■I■ : ■I■VGIO■rallr■6s•I mum ■ ■ ■ ■ ON eE�eS��e66�i6��6!l����i��6�666i��i���9�6� 5 10 15 20 Settlement (inches) Job No. 184-37 - July 31, 1984 25 Pace 5 x Nino OWN !�/•�. "OR ENHIO5 AN MIN 1 o3fd NOWUM ANHEMMMWA —QIVU 0 ��WM� 3uamol440S AAMTJd Pa741d=3 10 3uaoda,l 1-1 Mr. Bernard Haniscalco The Irvine Company Page 6 Due to the predominantly granular nature of soils within the southern portion of the project area, the magnitude of settlement in this area should be significantly less than indicated on the curve on page 4 and the rate of settlement much quicker than indicated on page 5. Monitoring The above analyses are based on theoretical calculations with the assumption of predicted drainage paths of soil moisture. How- ever, due to the lenticularity of the underlying compressible soil layers, obstruction to drainage may occur, thereby leading to a difference between the predicted and the actual rates of settlement. Thereforer it is advisable to measure the rate of settlement by the use of strategically located settlement plat- forms. It is recommended that at least fifteen 1151 platforms be installed at the approximate locations depicted on the attached site plan prior to the placement of any fill. The settlement plates should be installed on the processed original ground surface and an accurate elevation obtained on the plate. Accurate level readings should be made on the platforms at pre- determined intervals patterned in accordance with the 'Schedule of Level Readings' on page 7. In addition, a number of hubs can be placed at the final surface for supplemental settlement data. This rate data. in conjunction with the theoretical settlement calculations, will enable a better determination to be made of the total consolidation and its duration. Acceleration of Settlement - Surcharging The most common method to accelerate the anticipated settlement is the use of a surcharge fill. A surcharge fill consists of additional material which is placed on top of the permanent fill and later removed. It produces an additional load on the under- lying soil, which reduces the Lime necessary to achieve the necessary consolidation. The amount of consolidation obtained is a function of the weight of the surcharge and the time it remains In -place, as indicated by the curves on page S. The settlement should be measured with the use of settlement plates and the sur- charge removed when the rate of consolidation reaches equilibrium. If it is desired to commence construction within six months after the placement of structural and surcharge fills, we recommend that a surcharge/fill ratio of at leant 1.S:I be used in those areas. The portion of the project site which will require surcharging is depicted on the attached plan. Job No. 184-37 - July 11, 1984 i M M= m m m m= r m m m= i M M Mr. Bernard Maniscalco The Irvine Company SCHEDULE OF LEVEL READINGS Number of Days After Fill Placement Began Desired Accuracy ift) 2 0.01 4 0.01 8 0.01 10 0.01 15 0.01 22 0.005 33 0.005 49 0.005 74 0.005 150 0.005 200 0.005 260 0.005 330 0.005 410 0.005 Page 7 Mr. Bernard Maniscalco The Irvine Company Page 8 The southern portion of North Ford is underlain by predominantly granular material and will not require any surcharging. Conse- quently, if it is desirable to accelerate the anticipated settle- ment, it will be necessary to place surcharge only on the northern portion of the site, as shown on the attached plan. Supplemental Analyses at Time of Development Some additional field work and/or engineering analyses may be required at the time of development depending on the type of pro- posed development. We understand that the preliminary develop- ment concept envisions small, lightly loaded concrete tilt -up or wood -frame structures with no more than two above -grade stories. it is anticipated that only a brief letter -report will be required at the time of development if the fill is constructed at greater than 90% relative compaction and the development will consist of the presently planned lightly -loaded structures. The letter would present pertinent foundation design information based on data obtained during fill placement. A more detailed foundation study-, including additional field and laboratory test- ing, will probably be required if heavily loaded or large struc- tures are to be constructed on the site. Foundation and Site Preparation Considerations It is anticipated that conventional footing foundations may be utilized to support lightly loaded structures constructed on fill compacted to at least 90% relative compaction. Some minor surface preparation will probably be required prior to construc- tion. Heavily loaded or large structures may require special foundation measures, such as removal and replacement of materials below footings or piling. A detailed foundation study should be con- ducted for such structures. Soeclal Considerations When planning the proposed development, it must be kept in mind that the placement of any additional fill will induce further consolidation of underlying compressible native or fill soils. The time for completion of this settlement could take up to eight years unless surcharging is used to accelerate the settlement. Joo ,tr•. IU4-37 - .:uly 31, 1984 Job No. 184-37 - July 31, 1984 Mr. Bernard Maniscalco The Irvine Company page 9 Closure This report is based on the project as described and the informa- tion contained in our previously referenced reports at or near the project site. These reports were based on information - obtained from a few exploration borings at the locations indi- cated on the respective plans. Our findings are based on the results of the field, laboratory, and office investigations, com- bined with an interpolation and extrapolation of soil conditions between and beyond the borings. The results reflect our inter- pretation of the limited direct evidence obtained. Our firm should be notified of any pertinent change in the project or foundation plans. If conditions are found to differ from those described herein, it may require a revaluation of the recommenda- tions. Our recommendations for this site are, to a high degree, dependent upon proper quality control of fill placement. Con- sequently, our recommendations are made contingent upon the opportunity for Moore s Taber to observe grading operations and foundation excavations for this phase of construction. If parties other than Moore i Taber are engaged to provide such services, they most be notified that they will be required to assume complete responsibility for the gectechnical phase of the project by concurring with the recommendations in this report or providing alternate recommendations. This report has not been prepared for use by parties or projects other than those named or described above. It may not contain sufficient information for other parties or other purposes. .It has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotech- nical practices and makes no other warranties, either expressed or implied, as to the professional advice or data included in it. Mf1p0QyR"E�,L�•�'yT{�`aeER Jon N. Eve7,rV(ew'k"t�`^h'{Jl{— eViewe by James•Jt Nea e[ Geotechnical Engineer Registered Civil Engineer 32316 JHE/JJW:aid (61 Copies to Addressee Job No. 184-37 - July 3I, 1984 I e m: i B f g i i t 6` t en i + i � ,fir i°s1p.FAA S g !I G. ,• . .. v 3 } ja ��• •.s 7 1 _ J� . i L //E J1 � L 1 {i � � •9 is. � M� M M M M M M M M M M!!! M! i r APPENDIX D HYDROLOGY "UDY C I I I 11 M = M M ! M M = = M i HYDROLOGY REPORT NORTH -FORD PROJECT This Hydrology Study is based upon the "Orange County Flood Control District Hydrology Manual". Due to the size of the development, the 'uniform nature of the surface soils, the consistent rainfall patterns, and the run-off characteristics of the proposed development, the "rational method" was selected. Run-off coefficients were computed using the existing soil types, with development densities anticipating commercial development on the 5.19 acre parcel fronting on Bison, and moderately dense multi -family development on the remainder of the property. Rainfall intensities were based upon a flood with an expected recurrence interval of 25 years. This will provide adequate protection for the residential development in the event that drain inlets must be located in areas that do not have secondary surface over -flow along the path of the storm drain. The total area considered in this study includes the 125 acre North Ford site and an additional 30 acres bounded by Camelback, Bison Avenue and Jamboree Road. The development mix of the area is 35.5 acre commercial 84 acre multi -family residential, a 12 acre park site and 24 acre future office park. The existing North Ford site is undeveloped with a moderate growth of annual grasses. Some grading has taken place on the site and there are several de -silting basins in use. An existing 54" storm drain flows north along the easterly edge of the site and empties into a more or less natural channel, tributary to the San Diego Creek. The entire area drains easterly and northerly into the San Diego Creek. The northerly portion of the site is lower than the flood level of the Creek but is protected by a 10' to 15' high levy. The off -site 30 acre drainage area is approximately 90% developed at present. Development is generally commercial with a post office, Edison facility and office complex. The area presently drains onto the site through a 24" storm drain under Camelback Street. This system does not appear adequate as there is evidence of erosion below the curb and catch basin on the easterly side of Camelback Street at the present low point. Pageo2 gy Study Development of the North Ford site will include moving the access on Camelback approximately 200 feet north from the'lov point. An additional catch basin will be placed in the low point. the existing 24" drain will be removed, and replaced with a 30" atom drain. This will drain the soes utherly 13 metand connect into the existing drain on the easterly property line. _ The central two-thirds of the site will drain into a new atom drain within "C" Street, flowing north and east to the cul-de-sac at the east property line where it will discharge into the existing channel along the easterly property line. Future University drive will drain from Jamboree ant to the easterly property line where catch basins will be provided to discharge into the =Latins channel. The property north of University Drive will drain north to the pan Diego Creek Channel. Intern de -silting bantam must be maintained on all undeveloped portions of the site to prevent silt from entering the atom drain system and the San Diego Creek. The total 25 year frequency tun -off presently attributed to the study area fs 152.5 G.F.S.. After development of the residential units, the park site, and the 5 arm commercial site, the 25 year frequency run-off will be 243.1 C.F.S. The increase in rue -off In approximately 591 and due coley to surface improvements and not to any change In drainage area. Development of this site can progmsa in a manner that will minimize atom drain construction for each phase and reduce the siltation problem at the sue time. TC/jb 3g U. 5 & S. MAPS TUSTIN QUAD NEWPORT BEACH QUAD M M M M M M M v m 0 N Of PSOMAS & G.I.fMfat =A n.wo•t wo w.v.a CON'.. Ci©ASSOCWTES uwamare a la. ni na RATIONAL METHOD CALCULATION FORM PROJECT NOOTN FO" (i•R /00/9) U/ -- ��^.c aYcL pPMENi FREQUENCY Z5 v .I Sheol No. .L of _"Sheol Calculated hr Ti�=:__ 5a=/�d'4. Chocked by"""----'pf1'E-__ T ET REMARKSREMARKS �aaa�aaaaa�i�� . ©alm ���e��a��®i�/•��®arm®� �Ol PSOMAS & oa acMm m. Mwo,.e WO11/M'L3 CCdN1.EHGW1b \®ASSOpAlES wawcm wei..,nnn RATIONAL METHOD CALCULATION FORM PROJECT /✓ORTH X0•eD OW /o0i9) 1/1,. v AFn9 QCYCLOf1L1CA/T FREQUENCY 25 YR I-. 0 , Sheol Na? ct-Sheola Calculated by 7W.C. _: 5/3/ 64- by , DRAINAGE AREA Sall 8 Davolopmenl A Aaaa I In/k c AQ CF! i 0 CFS SECTION v FPS L FT. T MIN . ET REMARKS /-,4 8 :t/cvn F 4 2.47 .815 9.34 •34 33.7 •02 .04 /B" 24'a1 /0 .7 7m' 10'" /.2 $ 125 L • /ocn' N = /$' 3-A B- /3.06 B.ze 2.3 23 .81 .8/ 74.17 3 /3.7 /3.7 4•A B- " /?•/4 2.25 .B/ 21./2 •14 .04 24"d /5& 50o' &-T 4,Z 30"d /d.5 350' 0.4 5•4 A ' 16. 2.25 .80 30./9 7426 .03 42 "� /0.2 /• / /4 6 ,4 17.f4.2.6 .80 30.86 loi.4 .007 65a' i5 /4 450 15.0 PR /IF8/ F cov /-ff OFFJIIE B- pem- 3d.32 2/ 3555.4 2-6 B X.n Fig 2.03 2./5 .B/ 3.5 55.4 5. .O1S 5 3 , 30af 12 600 D.5 0. /5,5 3-B 8' M 5/ 2./o .84• 9.2 4-8 B- �r, rw 6.3 2./0 .91 /0.7 /G.3 68.1 966 /-0 A -MAW 12.51 1.4.Y -54 9.66 /5.o L ='000' N= /0' /-D -C^4lGtc0 25. 1.60 .5 21.37 22.37 /5.0 L' /ono io AL 24' /= I 11 11 i � 1 tiniatiwsc tumk m Nglh= C1 W++%••r+srsa=10 acres H I 40 z to \ • o c fll \ aD Gress Y > G Y Poor '4 Lo i3 ii P� ` 20 n .3 16 Te ls.5 I6 c E 15 t4 C.anolradd T` crowd) r �4 P3 19 20 n t- c 13 � A= — t2 IP _" c At .nor = 10 A"25 KEY E 9 L+EhTc-K�Tc a � a EXAMPLE• 30 F 7 (l) ts550. H=06-e K=Swop% Family . `w Development. Tc=IG.B=ipL 35 (7)L=550', H=0.7; x.Agrkultatet 40ZI G4elopmoet, Tes24.7sa%. 6 a Tcs Kt N 4 AC4 is !-A p`Fv.:r fY ✓-�Of r�rNr TIME OF CONCENTRATION NOMOGRAPH (AFTER KIRPICH) PLATE 0.1 so'coo �- Use Tc from scale giving 50.000 7-5 highest value. 40,000 2.0 10.0 30,000 1.5 GA 6.0 20,000 ro 4A 02 3:0 04 2.0 r r/ J 10.000 03 Y 0.4;• 1.0 V 8.000 09 __ _ 0•/ 6.000 o y: r 0.4 4,000 _ -- . _ /03 3,000 0-2 r = to Mit). = Nn J 7CLS 2.000 % 0.1 1.000 ' Example: L-7�2501L 800 H- 1301f. 7c+037ln. - 700 . KG let, Farmala . fit 9La`03e5 t H J I. -Miles H-Feel Tc-Hours /-C A••a /-D ! Ar- �i2 Inc t/cLbtW,-rV r 1 Retaenee: L Fos H Sr/eL A, USae.scsSGi TIME OF CONCENTRA Kirpich Nomograph I r■ 10 20 30 40 60 GO 100 = 200 300 400 _ 600 Goo LOCO 7.500 2,000 — 2.500 — 3000 4.000 5,000 F,gare II. Dole Aucxt Meg ae as O7 ms )2 01• O1 {lOntEEAii. D2[b$Ti'Y (111Clg5 !£i EIO!) ', 1. rn I. COHO svvrraL 4. S7DG(E Fltffi 2. WLEPLS TM= S. SCWM arcs srnx rtasr �r w.�cna 3. MA E Un i. iltL >asnuct ■reef Mfia COEFFICIENT OF RUNOFF CURVES e�ere E-se Ii m m = m i = m m m = m m i m m m m 11 u C, t FLOR j t H LI C F 'J I Habitat 2 3 4 LEGEND FLORAL INVENTORY barrens cismontane introduced grassland California steppe grassland coastal sage scrub disced areas horticultural introduction habitat riparian woodland wet field-swale FAUNAL INVENTORY grasslands or grassland - coastal sage scrub ecotone disced areas riparian and swale areas areas dominated by horticultural plantings Abundance D - dominant C - common 0 - occasional U - uncommon R - C.N.P.S. designated rare and endangered Abundance C - common F - frequent U - uncommon E - not seers but expected PLANTS B CIO CSQ CSS D Nl RW WS j ASTERACEAE - SUNFLOWER FAMILY continued m 1 Picris echoides - bristly oxtongue introduced - annual - weed 0 Sonchus 6 ear - prickly sow thistle introduced - herb - weed U Sonchus oleraceus - common sow thistle intro uce - annual - weed 0 0 0 U Stephan omeria exi9ua - small stephanomeria native - annual U 0 Stephanomeria vir9ata - tall stephanomeria native - annual 0 Xanthium strumarium - cocklebur native - annual weed C BRASSICACEAE - MUSTARD FAMILY Brassicanicul�ata , summer m Tntroducsd - biennial - weed C 0 LLee�-idi-gym nitidum - shining peppergrass native - annual U Lobularia maritima - sweet alyssum ntro uced—perennial - herb 0 0 Ra hanus sativus - wild radish introduces - biennial - weed C _Ra�ha, us r�a hani�strum - jointed chdrlock 0 oR ri a nasturtium- tium-a uaticum - water -cress native - perennial - herb 0 S�isymbrium trio - London -rocket introducer= annual - weed 0 C CACTACEAE - CACTUS FAMILY Opuntia littoralis - coastal prickly -pear native - perennial U � i l� r i• � � � i r � i Is s l� � � � � CHENOPODIACEAE - GOOSEFOO7 FAMILY Atriplex canescens - Foyr-winged salthush " native - shrub"f, U U Atriplex semibaccata - Australian saltbush introduced - perennial herb - weed U Bassia h�_ss�o ifolia - five -hooked bassia —intro uc�ed - annual - herb Chenopodium ambrosioides -Mexican-tea introduced - annual or pereenial - weed Cheno odium album - lamb's -quarters ntro ucen- annual - weed Salsola iberica - Russian thistle introduced_- annual - weed D CUCURBITACEAE - GOURD FAMILY Curcurbita foetidissima - calabazilla native - perennial - herb U CYPERACEAE - SEDGE FAMILY Cyperus sp. EUPHORBIACEAE -- SPURGE FAMILY Ereemoca_rpus setti er--weed - dove weed niat ve - annual - weed U FABACEAE - PEA FAMILY Acacia longifolia - golden wattle introduced - small tree lEscape from hydromulch along MacArthur Boulevard a 01 W► 0 U 0 C j i PLANTS FABACEAE < PER FAMILY continued Lotus sco arius - deeryeed 'mat vp - s rub Medicaao luulinnaa - black medick introduced annual - weed Melilotus albus - sweet -clover in uced = perennial - herb - weed Melilotus indicus- yellow sweet -clover introduced - perennial - herb - weed FRANKENIACEAE - FRANKENIA FAMILY Frankenia andifolia - alkali heath nat ve - perenn a - herb GERANIACEAE - GERANIUM FAMILY Erodium botrys - broad -lobed filaree introduced - weed - annual Erodium cicutarium - red -stemmed filaree introduced - annual - weed Erodium moschatum - white -stemmed filaree —intro uc� annual - weed LAMIACEAE - MINT FAMILY Marrubium v11 aa_re - horehound utro uced-- perennial - weed MALYACEAE - MALLOW FAMILY Maiva Parvtflora - cheeseweed —intro uced - annual - weed B CIG CSQ CSS D HI RW WS 0 U C' 0 C [ri T 0 0 C 0 C C 0 U C U U 0 Cd Mao M M M M m M M M M M' M M M M r m M PLANTS g - CIG�ti ,iCg�e MYOPORACEAE - MYOPORUM FAMILY MyopTum laetum - myoporum introduced , shrub MYRTACEAE - MYRTLE FAMILY . Letospermum laevigatum, Australian Tea Tree introduced - shrub ONAGRACEAE r EVENING -PRIMROSE FAMILY Epilobium andocaulon - northern willow -herb native - perennial - herb POACEAE - GRASS FAMILY - Avena barbata - slender wild oat introduced - annual - grass - weed D Bromus nallis - soft chess introduced - annual - grass - weed C D C Bromus rubens - red brome introduce - annual - grass - weed C D 0. Cortaderia atacamensis - pampas grass i— nnrced - perennial - large grass Distichlis s ip�cata - saltgrass native - perennial - grass 0 Elvmus condensatis - giant wild rye native - perennial - grass Lolium perenne - Italian ryegrass introduced - perennial - grass U Stipa ulp chra - purple stipa native - perennial grass 0 D IC C T D C 0 0 C 0 U U m PLANTS POLYGONACEAE - BUCKWHEAT FAMILY Chorizanthe staticoides, spp. CChhrysaca�ntha, grange County to -fish rugg ni g native - annual Eriogonum cinereum - gray coast eriogonum native - shrub Erigonum rg ache - slender wooly eriogonum native - annual Rumex cris us - curly dock intro uce - perennial - weed PRIMULACEAE - PRIMROSE FAMILY Ana�aliiis arvensis - scarlet pimpernel introduce—fc - annual RUBIACEAE - MADDER FAMILY Galium aPa-rine- goose grass ntdu roced- - annual SALICACEAE - WILLOW FAMILY Salixooddingii - black willow native - tree Salix lasiolepis - arroyo willow native -tree SOLANACEAE - NIGHTSHADE FAMILY Nicotiana slau-ca- - tree tobacco n duced - shrub or tree - weed Solanum nodiflorum - small -flowered nightshade or mock-blacE nightshade introduced - perennial - herb B CIG CSQ CSS D HI RW WS D(R) U U U U C U C U 0 U a 0 C 0 D 0 C 0 U U 0 C 0 0 ii TYPHACEAE - CAT=TAIL FAMILY - narrow -leaved cat -tail al - herb URTICACEAE - NETTLE FAMILY Urtica urens - dwarf nettle intr�ced - annual weed U AMPHIBIANS Abundance Habitat BUFONIDAE - TRUE TOADS Bufo boreas - Western toad E 4 HYLIDAE - TREEFROGS Hyla re ilia - pacific tr0efrog F 3 PLETHODONTIDAE - LUNGLESS SALAMANDERS Batrachoseps attenuatus - California slender salamander E 4 ANGUIDAE - ALLIGATOR LIZARDS Gerrhonotus multicarinatus- southern alligator lizard E 1,4 REPTILES COLUBRIDAE - COLUBRID SNAKES La roItis gtulus- - common kingsnake E 1,3 Pi�tuo his melanoieucus - gopher snake E 1,3 aTh mnophis s rta s - common garter snake E 1,3 IGUANIDAE - IGUANID LIZARDS Sceloporus occidentalis - western fence lizard E i MAMMALS CANIDAE - FOXES AND COYOTES Canis latrans - coyote U 1,3 U o-n c�nereoargenteus - gray fox E 3 M M 10 M I MAMMALS continued CERVIDAE - DEER Odocoileus hemionus - mule deer CRICETIDAE - RATS AND MICE Microtus californicus - California vole Perom scus californicus - California mouse Reithro ontonys mega otis - Western harvest mouse DIDELPHIDAE - OPOSSUMS Didelphis virginiana - Virginia opossum GEOMYIDAE - POCKET GOPHERS Thomomys bottae - Botta pocket gopher LEPORIDAE - HARES AND RABBITS Sylvilagus audubonii - Audubon cottontail MURIDAE - OLD WORLD RATS AND MICE Mus musculus - house mouse MUSTELIDAE - WEASELS, BADGERS, AND SKUNKS Abundance U 3 C 1,3 E 1,3 E 1,3 E 3 C 1,3,4 C 1,2,3,4 E 1,3,4 M�e hi�tis mephitis - striped skunk U 1,3 Mustela frenata - long-tailed weasel U 3 Taxidea taxus - badger E 1 MAMMALS continued Abundance Habitat PROCYONIDAE - RACCOONS Procyon iotor - raccoon E 3 SCIURIDAE - SQUIRRELS Spermophilus beecheyi- California ground squirrel C 1,2 ACCIPITRIDAE - HAWKS AND EAGLES Ac�cipiteerr striatus - sharp -shinned hawk Q 3 utB eo jama dens s - red-tailed hawk U 3 Circus c-aneus -marsh hawk U 3 Elanus ei ucurus - white-tailed kite E 1,2 ALAUDIDAE - LARKS Eremophila alpestris - horned lark E 13,2 ALCEDINIDAE - KINGFISHERS Megaceryle alc on - belted kingfisher E 3 BIRDS. CATHARTIDAE - AMERICAN VULTURES Cathartes aura - turkey vulture F 1,2 CHARADRIIDAE - PLOVERS Charadrius vociferus - killdeer E 1,2 .A: rr a - a :fi .. r rrri r r r r rr we MR r 1� r am � Mt rr m u Zenaida macroura - mourning dove CORVIDAE - JAYS, MAGPIES, AND CROWS Corvus brachyrhynchos - common crow Corvus corax - common raven CUCULIDAE - CUCKOOS AND ROADRUNNERS Geococcyx californianus - roadrunner FALCONIDAF - FALCONS Falco sparverius - American kestrel FRINGILLIDAE - GROSBEAKS, SPARROWS, AND FINCHES Car odacus mexicanus - house finch Me os iza i 53ia song sparrow Pip? o uscus - brown towhee Spinus saltria - lesser goldfinch Spinus tristis - American goldfinch Zonotrichi, leucophrys - white -crowned sparrow i t@143(7:f�3S.14"I1111M.12fI4.1�01Vp E�u�hag_u�s %n�oce� haa!us - Brewer's blackbird Sturnella negiecta - western meadowlark LANIIDAE - SHRIKES Lanius ludovicianus - loggerhead shrike C 1,2,4 E 1,2,4 0 1,2 E 1,2 E 1,2,3 C 1,3,4 C 1,3,4 U 1 E 1,3,4 E 1,3,4 E 1,3,4 C 2 C 1,2 0 1,3 BIRDS continued LARIDAE - GULLS AND TERNS Larus deiawarensis - ring -bitted gull MIMIDAE - MOCKINGBIRDS AND THRASHERS Mimus polyglottos - mockingbird MOTACILLIDAE - PIPITS AND WAGTAILS Anthus spinoletta - water pipit PARIDAE - TITMICE, VERDIN, AND PUSHTIT Psaltriparus minimus - bushtit PARULIDAE - WOOD WARBLERS Wiisonia usp ilia - Wilson's warbler PHASIANIDAE - QUAIL AND PHEASANTS Lophortyx caiifornicus - California quail PICIDAE - WOODPECKERS Colaptes auratus � common flicker PLOCEIDAE - WEAVER FINCHES Passer domesticus - house sparrow STRIGIDAE - TYPICAL OWLS S eot to cunicularia - burrowing owl Abundance Habitat C Flying Overhead E 4 C 2 0 4 E 3 U 3 U 3 0 1.3,4 E 1 MI r M N mom M ri M OR M tilt• »t M ,W � r s i BIRDS continued STURNIDAE - STARLINGS Sturnus vulgaris - starling TROCHILIDAE - HUPMINGBIRDS Cal to anna - Anna's hummingbird Selasphorus sasin - Allen's hummingbird TYRANNIDAE - FLYCATCHERS Sayornis nigricans - black phoebe Sa ornis saya - Say's phoebe Abundance Habitat 0 1,4 C 1,3 E 1,3 0 3 U 2 I I I I APPFMIX F TRAFFIC/CMCULATION STUDY I I I I I I I I I 1 I I M M s M M M r r M M r M M M M a weatox ?"Ce wd AaaodWa a TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING August 13, 1984 Ms. Beverly Bruesch Michael Brandman Associates 3140 Red Hill Avenue, Suite 20D Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Dear Ms. Bruesch: This letter summarizes our review of traffic factors related to the North Ford Residential and Commercial project in the City of Newport Beach. The study is based upon information provided by you, The Irvine Company, City Staff, previous studies and field studies by our staff. The project is located northerly of Bison Avenue and Camelback Street between Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard. Future Eastbluff Drive - University Drive provides the northerly boundary of the project. A five acre commercial site with 50.000 square feet of building area is proposed on the northeast corner of Bison Avenue and Camelback Street. The reminder of the site is proposed as residential except for a park in the northeast corner of the site. A -total of 176 single family detached residential units and 712 multi -family residential units are planned for the site. A spine road from Camelback Street to Eastbluff Drive serves as access for the residential areas. The site is illustrated on Figure 1. EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS The site is currently vacant and thereby generates no traffic. Camelback Street is a two lane facility that connects Bison Avenue and Jamboree Road and provides access to adjacent property. Its intersersection with Bison Avenue is controlled by a STOP sign and traffic is restricted to right turns in and out only at Jamboree Road. Bison Avenue provides an east -west street between 2651 EAST CHAPMAN AVENUE • SUITE 110 • FULLERTON. CAUFORNIA 92631 • (714) 871-2931 i3Nplq,i3 3nN3AV Y a a o t� u wF a ¢rn O UNIVERSITY —^SAN I DIEGO 1 -CREEK = l UNIVERSITY DR. H W Z i— i n Z O N -2- -J' Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard. There are three lanes provided in each direction with additional turning Tans at intersections on Bison Avenue. Both of the intersections on Bison Avenue at and Jamboree Road arc signalized. Eastblmff Drive east of Jamboree Road has not been constructed; however, the traffic signal and geometrics at the Jamboree Road intersection do provide for the extension. AN and PM peak hour traffic counts were completed at the Bison/Camelback intersection to quantify existing conditions. The results of these counts and the resulting Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) analyses are summarized in Tables 1 and Table 2. In addition, driveway volumes were canted on Camelback Street during the AM and PM peak hours. The results of these counts are included in the analysts of traffic operations on Camelback Street. TRIP GENERATION In order to examine the traffic factors, It is necessary to estimate the number of trips that would be generated. Table 3 lists the trip generation rates utilized To estimate the project trip generation. These rates have been utilized for similar land uses in previous studies in the City. By applying the rates in Table 3 to the proposed land uses, estimates were- obtained of project trip generation as indicated in Table 4. The project 1s estimated to generated 13,100 daily trip ends with 1.445 scenrrtirg during the PN peak hour. TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSTGMQT Geographic trip distribution patterns have ban developed for the North Ford site in previous studies. Based upon these previous studies, trip distribution patterns were developed for the proposed uses and arc Illustrated on Figures 2 and 3. By applying the distribution percentages from Figures 2 and 3 to the trip generation estimates in Table 4, project traffic was assigned to the street system. Figure 4 illustrates daily project traffic. These assignments were utilized to the analysis portion of this study. TABLE 1 EXISTING INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: BISON / CAMELBACK - BELCOURT N (AN PEAK MOOR) YMEtENT EXISTING EXISTING EXISTING EXISTING LANES CAPACITY VOLUME VIC NIL 1 1600 B 0.01 PIT 2 32DO 13 0.01 - NK 0 0 7 0.00 SL 1 1600 79 0.05 • ST 1 16M 1 0.04 sit 0 0 69 0.00 EL I 16W I33 0.00 ET 3 4800 132 0.03 NL 2 32M 16 0.01 Ur 3 4800 291 0.10 1R 0 0 Ie5 0.00 NORTR/SOUTH CRITICAL SUNS • 0.06 EAST/UEST CATTICAL SING • 0.18 CLEARANCE - 0.10 ICU - 0.34 LOS • A R-NORTRBORO.S•SOUi1RORI0.E•EKST60UIIO.Y-1IESTWM L-LEFT.T-TRROIIfdf.R-RIGBT. LOS-LEVEL OF SERVICE • DEVOTES CRITICAL NOYEPIDIS ICUNFAE M r M m M= e m s= M M M M M M M r TABLE 2 EXISTING INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: BISON / CANELBACK - BELCOURT N (PH PEAK HOUR) MOVEMENT EXISTING EXISTING EXISTING EXISTING LANES CAPACITY VOLUME V/C NL 1 1600 7 0.01 HT 2 3200 5 0.01 * MR 0 0 6 0.00 SL 1 1600 186 0.12 * ST 1 160D 0 0.07 SR 0 0 105 0.00 EL 1 1600 161 0.10 * ET 3 4800 438 0.09 ER 0 0 6 0.00 ML 2 3200 5 0.01 My 3 4800 78 0.04 + MR 0 0 134 0.00 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUNS - 0.13 EAST/WEST CRITICAL SUNS 0.14 CLEARANCE 0.10 ICU - 0.37 LOS - A N-NORTHBOUND,S-SOUTHBOUND,E-EASTBGUND,M•MESTBGUND L-LEFT,T-THROUGH,R-RIGHT, LOS-LEVEL OF SERVICE + DENOTES CRITICAL MOVEMENTS ICUNFPME H Table 3 TRIP GENERATION RATES North Ford Residential 6 Conaereibl LAND USE DESCRIPTOR TRIP ENDS PER DESCRIPTOR Daily 7n PA Peak�llour Single Family Detached Residential DU 10.0 0.7 0.3 Multi -Family Residential DO 7.0 0.5 0.2 Ccomerciai/Retail 1000 SF 115.8 7.2 7.2 Park ACRE 40 2.4 1.6 Table 4 TRIP GENERATION North Ford Residential 6 Caomercial LAND USE UNITS Daily PH Peak Hoer _ 7n�fui Single Family Detached Residential 176 OU 1800 125 55 Multi -Family Residential 712 DO 5000 355 140 Commercial/Retail 50,000 SF 580D 360 360 Park 12 ACRES 500 30 20 TOTAL 13,100 87D 575 0 g amnotr Z munch /Y001 111Ub0SSU ONO 119Nitld MOIS1M '11V13O / IVI083WW00 Nounsidislo '1vN Ilo3alo v '03iMaSN00 iM WOIO M NOLLV1OOdSNV81 SIIIH NInOWP NdS :310N S11OI)MSO ONU 17DNI0d HOIS1M Ndtld--M1N301S3O boy \yam_Woman -IVN01103810 P %01 M M M M M r M 6- TRAFFIC ANALYSIS The traffic analysis has included several considerations including site access, traffic control needs, internal circulation and other items. These analyses are described in this section of the report. Of all features, the site access was the most critical in this analysis. Access to the commercial site and residential areas is proposed on Camelback Street. Due to the existing development and related driveways on this street, potential traffic operational and safety problems exist. The Post Office driveways also generate relatively large traffic volumes. Traffic counts were conducted to determine current driveway volumes during the AN and PH peak hours. Estimated project traffic based upon trip generation and distribution data were then added to the existing volumes to simulate conditions with the project. The results are illustrated on Figures 5 and 6. These volumes include estimated volumes from the completion of the Belcourt residential development and Aeronutronic Ford expansion to the south of Bison Avenue. Utilizing the volumes from Figures 5 and 6 a recommended plan for Camelback Street from Bison Avenue to the entrance to the North Ford residential site was developed. These recommendations are illustrated on Figure 7. The recommended lanes, dimensions, street widths and traffic controls are included an Figure 7. This plan does require reversing the current traffic flow through the Post Office so that the northerly driveway is inbound and the southerly driveway is outbound. The current site development generally reflects these recommendations. The need for signalization as a result of the project was also examined. Warrants for signalization based upon future daily traffic volumes have been developed by CalTrans and are listed in Table 5. Review of the projected volumes on Figure 5 with the warrants of Table 5 indicates that signalization would be required at Bison Avenue and Camelback Street. Signalization will also ultimated be required at Eastbluff Drive and the North Ford access. This signalization will be required when Eastbluff Drive and University Drive are connected. Signalization is not recommended at the Camelback Street entrance to the North Ford residential area. 24 n POST $ _ g OFFICE 42 � Rim BISON AVE. 166 - 1- 2I6 s�q 30 AFRO► UTRONIC =22 0 FORD 1 ix 8 WJ m WESTON PRI14GLIE AND ASSOCIATES �1 NORTH FORD NORTH FORD POST OFFICE Trs� RESIDENTIAL ° �o RESIDENTIAL I) �—slj;lniwjii:v-lA pi SOUTHERN CAUFOCNIAEDISON o f SUBSTATION COMMERCIAL / RETAIL W Ono s "a R JS i� BISON AVE. 35 341 ` 199 160 + 663 _--• �— 1e6 20 165 �t� DRIVEWAY VOLUMES F� TRONIC Fs z'6°a DRIVEWAY VOLUMES AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR (7130 - 8-30 AM) (4,30 - 5,30 PM) J Flouns 5 WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES )FEOURs 6 POST OFFICE D/W FULL ACCESS POST OFFICE O/W F� �u J 4�^ � og e T-r.T fin LL O W SCE D/W O PACIFIC DELL Or U) F- W co a I tit I � 72 I 19 12 107 Id le'I ' I, �_/_� % TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND LIGHTING Traffic Manual tz15n Flpuw 41C TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS (Sam".. Estivat•d p. Avm.DaOy Tnifie —See N.te RELOCATE ��Bw ST. TO LINE UP WITH POST OFFICE D/W CDMM'L O/W REMAINS SAME LOCATION WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOfATES \- BISON PIOLER E 7 I URBAN_RURAL_ Minimum Re9.i.mnwt. NOTE 1. LeD tore movements from the major scut may be included with minor stare, volumes if a Separate .3'.1 ph... is t. ba provided I., the 6N-tom m.vaawt. 2. Ta b. used only for NEW INTERSECTIONS...the, leanriva whore act.el traffic volumes canon, be ...led. ystnc -8- -9- As a part of this study, ICU analyses were completed for the AM and PM peak hours at the Bison Avenue/Camelback street intersection. The analysis included existing traffic, future traffic from Belcourt/Aemnutronic Ford and the project. These ICU analyses are summarized in Tables 6 and 7. ICU values are Indicated for existing geametrics and with these recommended on Figure 7. As indicated the ICU values are less than 0.60 or are Level Service A for all conditions. This indicates no traffic operational problems. The internal street system proposed for the residential areas was also reviewed. Since the site plan does not include dimensions or grades, the review 1s general. Daily volume projections on Figure 5 indicate that a two lane spine road could accommodate the projected volumes. It 1s recommended that four lanes be provided at Camelback Street and Eastbluff Drive. The lout street system appears to have a 28 foet curb-to-wrb width. This is also adequate for the projected volumes provided on -suet parking 1s prohibited. no cul-de-saes appear to be excessive for emergency vehicle access. There are an, four way Intersections within the project. In summary, the imtem&l street system is adequate to serve the proposed uses. SE MAY This study has reviewed traffic factors related to the proposed North Ford Commercial and Residential development in the City of Newport Beach. The ability of the adjacent rands to acummodete the project has been examined along with site access and on -site circulation provisions. Based upon am initial review, Camelback Street and access to the site Aare been nodifted. With these modifications acceptable traffic cmditims are anticipated. On -site circulation was also reviewed and found to be acceptable based upon available information. In general, the proposed development was found to be acceptable with the recommended mitigation measures. Table 6 INTERSECTION CAPACITY- UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: BISON / CAIELSACK - 80-COWT N AN PEAK HOUR MYEIENT EXISTING PROPOSED EXISTING PROPOSED YDUINE Y/C Y/C LANES LANES CAPACITY CAPACITY V/INPR NL 1 1 16M 2600 B 0.01 0.01 NT 2 2 3200 3200 55 0.03 a 0.03 MR 0 0 0 0 55 0.00 0.00 SL 1 2 16M 3200 179 0.11 - 0.06 ST 1 2 1600 3200 6 0.07 0.04 SR 0 0 0 0 109 0.00 0.00 EL 1 1 16M 16M I68 0.21 0.11 ET 3 3 4600 4800 196 0.04 0.04 ER 0 0 0 0 5 0.00 0.00 RL 2 2 32W 3200 30 0.01 0.01 Nr 3 3 48M 49M SB6 0.16 • 0.16 UR 0 0 0 0 215 0.00 0.00 NOKTWSOITN CRITICAL SUMS - 0.14 0.09 EASUNFST CRITICAL SUMS - 0.27 0.27 CLEARANCE • 0.10 0.10 ION - 0.51 0.46 LOS - A A N-MMTH ORIO.S-SO THMMD.E-EASTBOOIO.N-0ESTBORR/ L LEFF.T-111ROU6N.R-RI HT. LOS-LEVEL OF SERVICE • DENOTES CRITICAL HOVERENTS ICURFAM M M M M = M -10- -11- Table 7 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: BISON / CAMELBACK - BELCOURT N PM PEAK HOUR MOVEMENT EXISTING PROPOSED EXISTING PROPOSED VOLUME V/C V/C LANES LANES CAPACITY CAPACITY W/IMPR NL 1 1 1600 1600 7 0.00 0.00 HT 2 2 32DO 3200 75 0.03 * 0.03 - MR 0 0 0 0 25 0.00 0.00 SL 1 2 1600 32DO 286 0.18 * 0.09 ST 1 2 1600 3200 25 0.10 0.05 SR 0 0 0 0 130 0.00 0.00 EL 1 1 1600 1600 341 0.21 • 0.21 ET 3 3 4800 4800 663 0.14 0.14 ER 0 0 0 0 20 0.00 0.00 RL 2 2 32DO 32GO 165 0.05 0.05 MF 3 3 4800 48DO IDS 0.08 ' 0.08 - MR 0 0 0 0 199 0.00 0.00 NORTH/SOUTH CRITICAL SUMS - 0.21 0.12 EAST/WEST CRITICAL SUMS - 0.29 0.29 CLEARANCE - 0.10 0.10 ICU - 0.60 0.51 LOS - A A N-NORTHBOUND.S-SOUTHBOUMD,E-EASTBOUND,W-WESTBOUND L-LEFT,T-THROUGH,R-RIGHT. LOS-LEVEL OF SERVICE ' DENOTES CRITICAL MOVEMENTS ICUNFPM The following are principal findings of the study. 1. Existing traffic conditions at Cameback Street and Bison Avenue are at Level of Service A during the AM and PH peak hour. 2. The project is estimated to generate 13,100 daily trip ends with 1.445 occurring during the PM peak hour. 3. Existing driveways and traffic volumes on Camelback Street require special design considerations for access to the North Ford Residential and Commercial areas. 4. Based upon accepted warrants, traffic signals will be required at Camelback/Bison and Eastbluff/North Ford access. S. ICU values at the Bison/Camelback Intersection are projected at Level of Service A with the North Ford and adjacent developments. 6. Based upon available information, the internal circulation system was found to be adequate with respect to traffic operations and safety. The following measures are recommended to mitigate potential traffic impacts of the project. 1. Access locations, lanes, transitions and overall street design for Camelback should conform to the recommendations of Figure 7. 2. Traffic flow in the existing Post Office lot should be reversed to achieve acceptable conditions. _12 1 3. Traffic signals will be warranted at the BisomlCamelback intersection and, when the Eastbluff - University connect is complete, at Eastbiuff and the North Ford access. 4. It is recommended that four lanes be provided on the North Ford access roads at Caaelback Street and Eastbluff Orin. We trust that this study will be of assistance to you in the preparation of an EIR for this project. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, NESM PRINGLE i�ASSOC�IATES Weston S. Pringle, P.E. Registered Professional Engineer State of California Numbers C16828 A 71555 YSP:bas ►a109 I APPENDIX G NOISE STUDY 11 i r 1 1 I I I i i i i M i i i i i 1ikLtiVtu Jul- r I -- PRELIMINARY NOISE BARRIER ASSESSMENT FOR THE NORTH FORD DEVELOPMENT CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Prepared for THE IRVINE COMPANY 550 Newport Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Prepared By Fred Greve, P.E. NESTRE GREVE ASSOCIATES 200 Newport Center Drive Suite 213 Newport Beach, CA 92660 (714) 760-0891 June 28, 1984 PRELIMINARY NOISE BARRIER ASSESSMENT FOR THE NORTH FORD nEVELOPMFNT CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 1.0 INTRODUCTION The noise impacting the North Ford project site consists of vehicular traffic and aircraft flyovers. The major roadways impacting the project site are McArthur Boulevard and Jamboree Road (Exhibit 1). Bison Road and Camelback Road also border the project site. John Wayne Airport (formerly Orange County Airport) is located 2 miles north of the project site. The purpose of this report is to identify preliminary noise barrier locations and heights based on the proposed grading plan and tentative tract ,map. Final barrier heights will be developed in coordination with site plan development. 2.0 NOISE CRITERIA Several rating scales have been developed for measurement of community noise. These account for: (1) the parameters of noise that have been shown to contribute to the effects of noise on man, (2) the variety of noises found in the emirorment, (3) the variations in noise levels that occur as a person moves through the environment, and (4) the variations associated with the time of day. ' The predominant rating scale now in use in California for land use compatibility assessment is the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). The CNEL scale is time -weighted annual average noise levels based on the A -weighted decibel. A -weighting is a frequency correction that correlates overall sound pressure levels with the frequency response of the human ear. CNEL is a 24-hour, time -weighted annual average noise level. Time -weighted refers to the fact that noise that occurs during certain sensitive time periods is penalized for occurring at these times. The evening time period (7 p.m. to 10 p.m.) penalizes noises by 5 dB, while nighttime (In p.m. to 7 a.m.) noises are penalized by 10 d8. These time periods and penalties were selected to reflect people's sensitivity to noise as a function of activity. The City of Newport Reach requires that private outdoor residential areas not exceed a noise level of 65 CNEL, and that indoor residential noise levels do not exceed 45 CNEL. The City has not established noise standards for office or industrial uses due to the relative insensitivity of noise for these land uses. 3.0 AIRCRAFT NOISE LEVELS The project site is exposed to aircraft noise as a result of the operations from John Wayne Airport. This includes noise from commercial jets, private jets and other general aviation aircraft operations. While jet aircraft do not overfly the site, sideline noise from departures are audible. -1- J* T Y Airport operators were contacted to determine the most appropriate projections of aircraft noise levels for use in determining aircraft noise X impacts at the site. The current plans for the airport would result in the LLl noise levels around the airport remaining the same or decreasing in future raircraft eimpactsngat ithecosite.s to determine existingreande future noise The existing CHEL noise contours for the John Wayne Airport indicate that the site is located 4000 feet outside the 60 CHEL contour. Extrapolation of the contour data indicates that the site experiences aircraft noise levels in the range of 50 to 55 CHEL. 4.0 THE HIGHWAY NOISE MDEL Ultimate traffic noise levels in the project vicinity were modeled. The highway noise levels were computed using the Highway Traffic Noise Model published by the Federal Highway Administration (vFHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model; FHWA-RD-77-108 December, 1978). The FHWA Model uses traffic volume, vehicle mix. vehicle speed, and roadway geometry to compute the *equivalent noise level.' A computer code has been written which computes equivalent noise levels for each of the time periods used in the calculation of CHEL Weighting these noise levels and summing them results in the CREL for the traffic projections used. CNEL contours are found by Iterating over many distances until the distances to the 60, 65, and 7n CHEL contours are found. For the roadway analysis, uorst-case assumptions about future motor vehicle traffic and noise levels have been made and were incorporated in the modeling effort, specifically, no reductions in motor vehicle noise have been assumed in spite of legislation requiring quieter vehicles at the time of manufacture. 5.0 ULTINATE TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS The ultimate traffic volumes for the surrounding arterials (Table 1) were used with the FHWA Model to estimate future noise levels in terms Of CHEL. Traffic volumes were obtained by the Hr. Nile Pittenger of The Irvine Company from the Orange County Environmental Management Agency, Department of Transportation Planning. Traffic volumes for critical ramps servicing the transportation corridor area arc also provided in Table 1. These ramps are indentified on Exhibit 2. r W O t 0 W C i ft -2- � M m M M M t M! M S M M i M M M M M M M M M M M M i ABLE 1 ULTIMATE TRAFFIC VOLUME AND SPEEDS ROADNAY ----------------------------------------- ADT SPEED JAMBOREE ROAD 64,700 55 MACARTHUR BOULEVARD 80.000 5O UNIVERSITY DRIVE 28,000 50 SAN JOAQUIN HILLS 175,000 55 TRANSPORT. CORRIDOR RAMP 1 8,000 55 RAMP 4 24.000 55 RAMP 5 15,000 55 RAW 7 17,000 55 •affic mix and time distribution utilized are presented in Table 2. were developed by the Orange County Environmental Managenent are considered typical for roadways throughout Orange County. The is are based on traffic data obtained at 31 sample intersections •oughout the County. A higher truck percentage of 3 percent median I percent heavy trucks were used for the transportation corridor. TABLE 2 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION (IN PERCENT) -------------------------------------------- TIME OF DAY _____________________ TYPE OF VEHICLE DAY EVENING NIGHT -------------------------------------------- Automobile 75.51 12.57 9.34 Medium truck 1.56 0.09 0.19 Heavy Truck 0.64 0.02 0.08 istances to the CNEL contours for the roadways in the vicinity of It are given in Table 3. These represent the distance from the of the road to the contour value shown. Note that the values given 3 do not take into account the effect of any noise barriers or that may affect ambient noise levels. In many cases there is topographic or terrain effects which will reduce the noise levels levels presented in Table 3. -3- TABLE 3 ULTIMATE CNEL NOISE LEVELS DISTANCE TO CHEL CONTOUR FROM CENTERLINE OF ROADWAY (FEET) ROADWAY 70 CREL 65 CNEL 60 CHEL JAMBOREE ROAD 146 315 679 MACARTHUR BOULEVARD 168 363 782 UNIVERSITY DRIVE 71 154 331 SAN JOAOUIM HILLS 388 837 1883 TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR RAMP 1 36 7R 16A RAMP 4 75 163 350 RAMP 5 55 119 256 RAMP 7 60 129 278 6.0 NOISE BARRIER RECOMMENDATIONS Thirteen locations were selected to determine preliminary noise barrier height and location recommendations. The barrier methodology described in the Federal Highway Administration 'Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model; and modified where appropriate for train noise was used for the barrier projections. A five foot observer height, as recomaended in the FHWA Model was utilized for observers (a total height of 14 feet above pad was used for second floor observers). The preliminary noise barrier recommendations are discussed below by area. The recommendations are also presented graphically in Exhibit 3. It should be emphasized that these barrier recommendations are preliminary and way change based on the developed site plan. The noise barrier heights presented represent the highest barrier height currently anticipated. The noise barrier analysis does include topographic effects and planned building setbacks. Jamboree.Road The proposed residential pad elevation is substantially lower than the roadway elevation along most of Jamboree Road. Near the intersection of Jamboree Road and University Drive the pad becomes at grade with the roadway. In this area and continuing around the corner of University skive a 6 foot noise barrier will be needed. The wise barrier would be located at top of slope. Second story balcony areas facing Jamboree Road would require additional shielding. This could be provided with glass shielding around the balcony areas. Jamboree Road is a major arterial roadway, and therefore balcony areas oriented towards this road are out recommended, although they could be designed to achieve the exterior wise standard. ae University Drive A six foot noise barrier is recommended along University Orive. It must wrap around the corners of both Jamboree Road and 'A' Street as indicated in Exhibit 3. The noise barrier would be located at top of slope. Bison Avenue and Camelback Street and Internal_ Streets Noise barriers will not be needed along Bison Avenue and Camelback Street. Noise barriers will also not be needed along any of the collector roadways internal to the project. MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor A noise barrier is indicated along the top of slope along the .transportation corridor area (refer to Exhibit 3). The barrier recommendations Nil 11 accoaodate MacArthur Boulevard with its existing alignment or the proposed alignment. The residential area near the southerly end of the site Will need a noise barrier in the 8 to 10 foot height range. The noise barrier most wrap along the commercial/residential interface to prevent sound from flanking around the end of the noise barrier. As the exhibit indicates, as one moves north the barrier height requirements are anticipated to be reduced to 6 feet. It should be noted that along much of this area the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor is in a depressed section relative to the proposed pads. This provides a significant wise reduction. The noise barrier recommendations are designed to protect ground floor areas. Balcony areas should not be oriented so that they have a direct line of sight with San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor or MacArthur Boulevard. In developing the site plan, carports, other buildings, and topography should be used to interrupt the line of sight between balcony areas and the corridor area. Noise barriers can be a masonry sound wall, a benw, or combination of a berm with a sound wall on top. Carports with solid rear walls can also be an integral part of the noise barrier, The noise barrier most be continuous with no holes or gaps. 7.0 INTERIOR NOISE LEVELS To comply with the interior noise standard the buildings must provide sufficient Indoor to outdoor wise reduction to reduce the noise levels to 45 CNEL. The outdoor to indoor noise reduction characteristics of a building are determined by combining the transmission loss of each of the building elements which make up the building. Each building element has a characteristic transmission loss. For residential units the critical hooding elements are the roof, wails, windows, doors, attic configuration and insulation. The total noise reduction achieved is dependent on the transmission loss of each element and the area of that element In relation to the total surface area of the roon. Moem absorption is the final factor used in determining the total wise reduction. The measures necessary to insure compliance with the City of Newport $each indoor noise standard can only be developed in conjunction with the _5_ M M M M M M M M= M i r= M = = M M M i M M M M M M M M M M M M i ! i M M M n Neb• mtm[nne usrwm Exhibit 3 - Noise Barriers tlgpM lgMlll development of the site plan and architectural drawings. Indoor noise mitigation measures should be developed prior to obtaining building permits. A -6- I u ' APPENDIX IT LIST OF CITY POLICIES/REQUIREMENTS AND ' MITIGATION MEASURES I �J I I