Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPA2008-040_IS_MARINA_PARK11111111 lill 11111111111111111111111111 lill III lill *NEW FILE* PA2008-040_IS_Marina_Park Initial Study for Marina Park Prepared for: City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 949.644.3208 Contact: Rosalinh Ung, Associate Planner Prepared by: Michael Brandman Associates 220 Commerce, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92602 714.509.4100 Contact: Michael E. Houlihan, AICP, Manager of Environmental Services A FWA hfdsoet Branamin Ass lxfo May 21, 2008 Marina Park - Initial Study Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................... I 1.1 Purpose.........................................................................................................................1 1.2 Project Location...........................................................................................................1 1.3 Site History...................................................................................................................2 1.4 Environmental Setting..................................................................................................2 1.5 Project Description.......................................................................................................2 1.6 Alternatives to the Proposed Action............................................................................. 9 1.7 Environmental Determination....................................................................................10 1.8 Intended Uses of this Document................................................................................10 Section 2 Environmental Checklist Form........................................................................................11 Section 3 Discussion of Environmental Evaluation.........................................................................23 Environmental Checklist Responses.......................................................................................23 I. Aesthetics...................................................................................................................23 II. Agricultural Resources...............................................................................................24 III. Air Quality .................................................................................................................. 24 IV. Biological Resources..................................................................................................26 V. Cultural Resources.....................................................................................................28 VI. Geology and Soils......................................................................................................29 VII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials.. VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality........ IX. Land Use and Planning.................................................................. X. Mineral Resources.......................................................................... XI. Noise............................................................................................... XII. Population and Housing................................................................. XIII. Public Services............................................................................... XIV. Recreation....................................................................................... XV. Transportation and Circulation....................................................... A. VI. Utilities and Servtce Systems.............................................................. XVII. Mandatory Findings of Significance................................................... ............................ 41 ....................... 42 ....................... 44 Section 4 References...........................................................................................................................45 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit1: Regional Location Map......................................................................................................... 3 Exhibit2: Local Vicinity Map................................................................................................................5 Exhibit3: Site Plan.................................................................................................................................7 Michael Brandman Associates /it H.Uicat(PN-IN)\0064\006400221IS\00640022 Initial Study -Marina Park.doc Marina Park - initial SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE Introduction The purpose of this Initial Study (IS) is to identify the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed Marina Park. This IS has been prepared in conformance with the State CEQA Guidelines (Guidelines) that implement the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's Implementation Procedures for CEQA. The City of Newport Beach has primary responsibility for approval or denial of the proposed project. Accordingly, pursuant to Section 15367 of the Guidelines, the City is the lead agency in the preparation of a project -level Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The City Council of Newport Beach will deliberate the certification of the EIR and approval or denial of the project. Because the City has determined that an EIR is required for this project, this IS is organized in a manner that: Identifies potentially significant impacts that require analysis in the forthcoming project -level EIR; • Identifies environmental factors that are less than significant or have no impact and therefore will only be described briefly in the EIR; and • Provides sufficient information to public agencies and other interested parties in formulation of a meaningful written response to the Notice of Preparation in accordance with Section 15082(b) of the Guidelines. This document is organized into the following sections: Section I - Introduction. Describes the project location and its environmental setting, a list of project design features, a detailed project description, a list of project objectives, identification of alternatives proposed for evaluation in the EIR, and intended uses of the EIR. Section 2 - Environmental Checklist. Provides an environmental checklist that identifies the level of impact associated with each environmental issue. Section 3 - Discussion of Environmental Evaluation. Provides a narrative discussion of each environmental issue contained in the environmental checklist. Section 4 - Reference Sources. Provides a list of references used in the preparation of this document. 1.2 PROJECT LOCATION The project is located in the southwestern portion of the City of Newport Beach in Orange County, California as shown on Exhibit 1. The project site encompasses approximately 10 acres and is located along north side West Balboa Boulevard to Newport Bay between 15th Street and 18ei/19'h Streets (approximately 10 acres) as shown in Exhibit 2. Major arterial access is provided along West Balboa Boulevard with secondary access along 15°i Street and I8d' Street. Regional freeway access to Michael Brandman Associates n:W l¢nt(PN-1M10064100640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Manna Park.doc Introduction Marina Park the site is provided by the Costa Mesa Freeway (SR 55) and the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor (SR 73). 1.3 SITE HISTORY Historically, the approximately 10-acre project site has been comprised of the Marina Park mobile home park, a public beach and Las Arenas Park. The Marina Park mobile home park is an approximately 45-year old facility with approximately 15 full-time residents and 42 part-time tenants. Las Arenas Park consists of a metered public parking lot with 21 stalls, a City of Newport Beach Balboa Community Center, the Neva B. Thomas Girl Scout House, four public tennis courts, a children's play area, and the public beach located in front of the mobile home park and existing residents between the American Legion marina and 19°i street. The existing public restroom on the public beach at 19d' street is also part of the project site. 1.4 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The existing site encompasses 10 acres and is built-up in nature with residential (i.e., mobile homes) community service (e.g., community center, public tennis courts, beach access, etc.), and surface parking lot uses. The 10-acre site is bordered on the east by an asphalt parking lot, the American Legion Post 291, residential and commercial uses, and 15'h Street, to the south by West Balboa Boulevard and residential uses, and to the west byl8th Street, a hotel and residential uses, and 19'h Street along the public beach. 1.5 PROJECT DESCRIPTION This IS evaluates the development of the proposed Marina Park on an approximate 10-acre site situated along West Balboa Boulevard between 15a' Street and 19d' Street as shown in Exhibit 3. The project includes a public park and beach, a public short-term visiting vessel marina, the Balboa/Sailing Center which includes a restaurant and tennis courts. The project provides a "Window on the Bay" from Balboa Boulevard. The public park will provide for passive and active areas. The passive area will include an open lawn area and a water feature. The active areas will include a children's play area and a half -court basketball court. The public short-term visiting vessel marina is proposed to accommodate visiting vessels for up to 30 days. Utility hook-ups are proposed to be available for the marina. Bathrooms and laundry areas are proposed adjacent to the marina. The Balboa/Sailing Center will include rooms for educational classes as well as community events. A restaurant will be located on top of the Balboa/Sailing center and will include areas for marina rentals as well as room for sailing classes. There are two tennis courts proposed on the eastern portion of the site adjacent to 15"' Street. In addition, an existing bathroom on the public beach adjacent to 19d' Street is proposed to be renovated or reconstructed but the size of the bathroom facility would remain the same. The implementation of the Marina Park will require removal of the existing mobile home park and existing community facilities. These existing facilities include the Balboa Community Center, Neva B. Thomas Girl Scout House, a children's play area, four tennis courts, and one basketball court. Primary access to the project will be via West Balboa Boulevard at 17a' Street and secondary access will be via a controlled exittentrance off of 15'h Street. Public access to the beach will be provided by walkways within the proposed park as well as an access provided along the western side of the proposed marina. Furthermore, 18°i and 19d' Streets will still provide access to the public beach. 2 Michael Brandman Associates N:1Chent(PN.JM10064100640022%lS\00640022 Initial Study -Mama Park doc 72 Los Angeles County_ IA HAHW ?ate • �. 90 142 0 •tea. 0 • YOFBAUNDA \% t---I ` FULLERION 57 �90 � '•� 606 91 91 ANAHRM 6 • \' 406 Uos Lv •39 55 e AL. SIANTON GV0EN RQVE ORANGE• 22 • •S11N 261 ` I_ soNTAANA CLEVEL. ND 1 HU" GION 406 55 6 `\ _ NATI'O#AL "- 241 WSfAME51 IFUNE I FOREST 133 NF?AfORfEFACN COFONADELMAR LAGUNA • ' G� • • - HILLS MISSONMED $ • r. • p I_As LACUNA LAGUNA waUELa 74 BEACH 5 SkN• I% JJAN i �� •-- CA NO DANA FONT rCounty zl� SANOUSAW1E 0 NNNN 5 2.5 0 5 Exhibit 1 00N0 SCALE IN MILES Regional Location Map Michael BnnJman Assodatcs 00640022. 0512008 1 1 reglonal.al MARINA PARK • ISINOP i__� tt't" t-r�lol �',''; :cs\ "�,y q �����,��A'•i�1 � r�j fv 04,; F7. C'Ipr y/ y ,.., { c' r�j•.�: �i,a.� �1y4� t"tyJ 11•t -G"i'` ri"7 t' m a , �'� ' t``�" ->> Project Location -• a M•, >. ? \ ^,' F^V8A AV TMr n�r�ar �av AVIVIM r_,s..------- r �^ 16s0 � P BOA BLQp OCY aLti` v EAN' A Rp� or Source:Thomas Guide Digital Edition, 2003. ifit A`-'��i I�wzgoo Izao o znao ExhLocal Vicinity lMap bit 2 SCALE IN FEET Michael 2-05120081 gj c 008A0022.05rz000 � 2 local cdr MARINA PARK I IS/NOP Slle GAMVIlPn IIJl,1 _'_ xonoswe lan Marina Park • Initial Study Introduction The project proposes the following discretionary approvals: City of Newport Beach • Coastal Harbor Activities Permit and/or Harbor Permit • Use Permit • Parcel Map • Demolition Permits • Modification Permit Responsible Agencies Responsible agencies for the project have discretionary authority over the following: California Coastal Commission ......................... Coastal Development Permit Regional Water Quality Control Board ............. Section 401 Certification General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit California Department of Fish and Game.......... Section 1602 Agreement Other Agencies Other required permits include the following: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers .......................... Section 404 Permit Section 10 Permit National Marine Fisheries Service ..................... Essential Fish Habitat 1.6 ALTERNATIVES TO THE.PROPOSED ACTION The EIR will analyze a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed project. Each alternative will be described and analyzed to determine if it can reasonably attain the identified objectives of the proposed project. The analysis will focus on whether the alternatives are capable of eliminating or reducing to a level of insignificance any significant adverse environmental impact of the proposed project. A comparison of the alternatives will also be provided in tabular format. The EIR could analyze the following alternatives including, but not limited to: Alternative 1- No Project/No Development Alternative. This mandatory alternative evaluates the potential impacts of not approving the proposed project. Alternative 1 assumes continuation of existing uses remaining on the project site. • Alternative 2 - Reduced Marina Alternative. This alternative evaluates the potential impacts of reducing the size of the marina as well as the number of vessel ships. • Alternative 3 - No Marina Alternative. This alternative evaluates the potential impacts of eliminating the marina but implementing the Sailing Center docks. Michael Brandman Associates 9 H:\Climt(PNJN)\0064\00640022\IS100640022 Initial Study -Manna Park.dm Introduction Marina Park • Initial Study 1.7 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Through the preparation of this IS, the City has determined that the proposed project may have a significant impact on the environment and that a project -level EIR (Guidelines' Section 15161) will be prepared in compliance with Section 15120 of the Guidelines. The preliminary scope and content of the EIR have been determined based on the results of this IS and information obtained the City. The scope and content will be further evaluated based on input received from public agencies and interested members of the public during the 30-day Notice of Preparation (NOP) comment period. 1.7.1 Effects Not Found To Be Significant The City has determined that the potential effects to the environment in the following environmental issue categories are less than significant or of no impact and, therefore, will only be described briefly in the EIR, in accordance with Section 15128 of the Guidelines. These issues are: • Agricultural Resources • Mineral Resources • Population and Housing • Recreation 1.7.2 Effects Found To Be Potentially Significant Through the preparation of this IS, the City has determined that the proposed project has the potential to result in potentially significant impacts on the environment. The EIR prepared for the proposed project will analyze all impacts associated with the following environmental issues: • Aesthetics • Air Quality • Biological Resources • Cultural Resources • Geology and Soils • Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Hydrology and Water Quality • Land Use and Planning • Noise • Public Services • Transportation/Traffic • Utilities/Service Systems 1.8 INTENDED USES OF THIS DOCUMENT This IS document has been prepared to determine the appropriate scope and level of detail required in completing the environmental analysis for the proposed project. This document will also serve as a basis for soliciting comments and input from public agencies and interested members of the public regarding the proposed project, following the distribution of the NOP of the EIR. The NOP will be circulated for a total of 30 days, during which written comments regarding the forthcoming EIR for the proposed project are invited to be sent to: City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 Attn: Rosalinh Ung, Associate Planner 10 Michael Brandman Associates Micheal(PN-JN)\0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Sludy-Marina Park.doc Marina Park - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Form SECTION 2 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 11 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than No Environmental Issues Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated I. Aesthetics - Wouldtheproject: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic ® El❑ ❑ vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, ❑ El Elincluding, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic building within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual ❑ ❑ ® ❑ character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or ® ❑ ❑ Elglare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the areal II. Agriculture Resources -'In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agficultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, El El❑ or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the CaliforniaResources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural ❑ ❑ Eluse, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing ❑ El Elenvironment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? III. Air Quality -Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district maybe relied upon to make the following determinations. -T Wouldtheproject: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of ® "7 ❑ ❑ the applicable air quality plan? Environmental Checklist Form Marina Park- Initial Study Potentially Potentially SIgniFlcant Less Tham No Emilronmehtal'ISSUSs Significant Impact Unless Mitigation SIgnlOcant Impact Impact , Incorporated b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute ® ❑ ❑ ❑ substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net ® ❑ ❑ ❑ increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial ® ❑ ❑ ❑ pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a ® ❑ ❑ ❑ substantial number of people? IV, Biological Resources - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either ® ❑ ❑ ❑ directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any ® ❑ ❑ ❑ riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on ® ❑ ❑ ❑ federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other :means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of ® ❑ ❑ ❑ any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? 12 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Clmnl(PNdN)\0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Marina Park doc Marina Park - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Form Environmental Checklist Form Marina Park - Initial Study Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than No Environmental Issues Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is ® ❑ ❑ ❑ unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately ❑ ❑ ❑ supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? VH. Hazards and hazardous Materials - Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or ❑ ❑ ❑ the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or ® ❑ ❑ ❑ the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle ® ❑ ❑ ❑ hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a ® ❑ ❑ ❑ list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land ❑ ❑ ❑ use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 14 Michael Brandman Associates HAClient (PNJN)\0064\00640022US\00640022 Initial Study -Marina Park doe Marina Park - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Form Potentially Environmental issues Potentially Significant Significant Unless Less Than Significant No Impact Impact -Mitigation Impact Incorporated f) For a project within the vicinity of a private ❑ ❑ ❑ airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically ❑ ❑ ❑ interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant ❑ ❑ ❑ risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VIII Hydrology and Water Quality -Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste ® ❑ ❑ ❑ discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies ❑ ❑ ❑ or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage ® ❑ ❑ ❑ pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off - site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage ® ❑ ❑ ❑ pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off -site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which ® ❑ ❑ ❑ would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Michael Brandman Associates 15 H9Clieut (PN-11,I)\006410064002=00640022 Initial Study -Manna Park.doc Environmental Checklist Form Marina Park - Initial Study Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than No Environmental Issues Significant Impact Unless, Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated f) Otherwise substantially degrade water ® ❑ ❑ 0 quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood ❑ ❑ ❑ hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area ❑ ❑ ❑ structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant ❑ ❑ ❑ risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ® ❑ ❑ ❑ k) Result in significant alteration of receiving ® ❑ ❑ ❑ water quality during or following construction? 1) Result in a potential for discharge of ® ❑ ❑ ❑ stormwater pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas? m) Result in the potential for discharge of ® ❑ ❑ ❑ stormwater to affect the beneficial uses of the receiving waters? n) Create the potential for significant changes ® ❑ ❑ ❑ in the flow velocity or volume of stormwater runoff to cause environmental harm? o) Create significant increases in erosion of the ® ❑ ❑ ❑ project site or surrounding areas? IM Land Use and Planning - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, ® ❑ ❑ ❑ policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Michael Brandman Associates HACLent(PN-JN)\0064\00640D22\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Mama Park doc Marina Park - Initial Study Environmental Checklist Form Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than No Environmental Issues Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated c) Conflict with any applicable habitat ❑ ❑ ❑ conservation plan or natural communities conservation plan? X. Mineral Resources - Would fire project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known ❑ ❑ ❑ mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- ❑ ❑ ❑ 21 important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Xi. Noise - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of ® ❑ ❑ ❑ noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of ® ❑ ❑ ❑ excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient ® ❑ ❑ ❑ noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase ® ❑ ❑ ❑ in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land ❑ ❑ ❑ z use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private ❑ ❑ ❑ airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Michael Bhandman Associates li-\Client(PN-JM\0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Marna Park.doe Environmental Checklist Form Marina Park - Initial Study Potentially 'potentially Significant Less Than No Environmental Issues significant Impact unless Mitigation significant Impact Impact Incorporated X.H. Population and Housing - Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an ❑ ❑ ® ❑ area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing ❑ ❑ ® ❑ housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people ❑ ❑ ® ❑ necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XHI. Public Services -Would the project result insubstantial adversephysical impacts associated• with the provision of new or.physicaliy altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: i) Fire Protection? ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ii) Police Protection? ® ❑ ❑ ❑ iii) Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ iv) Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ v) Other public facilities? ® ❑ ❑ ❑ XIV. Recreation: a) Would the project increase the use of ❑ ❑ ❑ existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational ❑ ❑ ® ❑ facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 18 Michael Brandman Associates HAClicnl(PN-JM\0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Marina Park.doc Marina Park -Initial Study Environmental Checklist Form Potentially Environmental issues Potentially Slgniflcant Significant Unless Less Than Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated XV. Transportation/Troffic - Would the project; a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is ® ❑ ❑ ❑ substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, ® ❑ ❑ ❑ a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, ❑ ❑ ❑ including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a ❑ ❑ ❑ design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ❑ g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or ❑ ❑ ❑ programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? XVI. Utilities and Service Systems - Would'the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements ® ❑ ❑ ❑ of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new ® ❑ ❑ ❑ water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new ® ❑ ❑ ❑ storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Michael Brandman Associates 19 HAClient(PN-JN)\0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Manna Park doe Environmental Checkilst Form Marina Park - Initlal Study Environmental Issues Potentially 'Significant Impact Potentially Signifcant Unless Mitigation Incorporated less Than Significant Impact No Impact d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded ® ❑ ❑ ❑ entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected ® ❑ ❑ ❑ demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the ® ❑ ❑ ❑ project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? ® ❑ ❑ ❑ h) Would the project include a new or retrofitted stormwater treatment control Best Management Practice (BMP), (e.g., water quality treatment basin, constructed treatment wetland), the operation of which could result in significant environmental effects (e.g., increased vectors and odors)? ® ❑ ❑ ❑ XV11 Mandatory Findings of Significance: a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal ® ❑ ❑ ❑ community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) ® ❑ ❑ ❑ 20 Marina Park • Initial Study Environmental Checklist Form Potentially Potentially Significant Lass Than No Environmental issues Significant Unless Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated c) Does the project have environmental effects, ® ❑ ❑ ❑ which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Environmental Factors Potentially Affected: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact' as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Environmental Factors That Could Result in a Potentially Significant Impact The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by the project, involving at least one impact that is a "potentially significant impact' as indicated by the preceding checklist and supported by evidence provided in Section 3. ® Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources ® Air Quality ® Biological Resources ® Cultural Resources ® Geology/Soils ® Hazards & Hazardous Materials ® Hydrology/Water Quality ® Land Use/Planning ❑ Mineral Resources ® Noise ❑ Population/Housing ® Public Services ® Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Recreation ® Mandatory Findings of Significance Michael Brandman Associates HAChent(PN-JM\0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Manna Park.doe ® Transportation/Traffic 27 Environmental Checklist Form Marina Park - Initial Study Environmental Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation (To be completed by the Lead Agency.): ❑ I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment, and a Negative Declaration will be prepared. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A Mitigated Negative Declaration will be prepared. ® I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an Environmental Impact Report is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated"`impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measure based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An Environmental Impact Report is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Sign,'&(�&uL�� Date May 21, 2008 22 Michael Brandman Associates H.Wlient(PN-JI4)10064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Manna Park.doc Marina Park -Initial Study Discussion of Environmental Evaluation SECTION 3 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST RESPONSES The following Initial Study Environmental Checklist responses discuss and briefly analyze the potential impacts resulting from the proposed project. AESTHETICS Existing Conditions Presently, the project site is developed with a mobile home park, and Las Arenas Park, which includes a metered 21-stall parking lot, Balboa Community Center/Girl Scouts House, four public tennis courts, a children's play area, and a public restroom. The site is adjacent to Newport Bay, which fronts the property's northern perimeter. Minimal vegetation is present onsite, with the exception of some non-native, ornamental landscaping and a row of palm trees that line the boardwalk adjacent to the public beach situated along the beach front portion of the project. Site topography is relatively flat with little or no variation. Environmental Checklist Responses a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. Potentially Significant Impact. View corridors to Newport Bay from public rights - of -way adjoining the project site are obstructed by existing improvements on the site. Development consistent with the proposed project would provide enhanced views from public rights -of -way (i.e., Balboa Boulevard) to the bay. The proposed marina will extend within 100-feet of Balboa Boulevard which will create a dramatic visual element on the streetscape. Furthermore, the project includes structures with greater heights compared to the existing onsite structures. A visual evaluation will be conducted and impacts on the view corridors will be evaluated. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? No Impact. The proposed project is not located within the viewshed area of any State scenic highway. Therefore, no scenic resources within a state scenic highway would be visually affected with the development of the proposed project. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Less Than Significant Impact. The transformation of the project site from its current land uses to the proposed public park facilities will change the overall visual character of the site and its surroundings. Currently, views of the Newport Bay from Balboa Boulevard are obstructed by various uses at Las Arenas Park and the mobile home park. With the implementation of the proposed project, views of Newport Bay will be enhanced in many areas and provide the public with a "Window on the Bay" from Balboa Boulevard. Michael Brandman Associates 23 NXIienl(PN-II)10064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Marina Park.doe Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Marina Park - Initial Study d) Create a new source ofsubstantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Potentially Significant Impact. Presently, the project site is developed with urban uses that contribute to nighttime illumination within the project area. Existing lighting sources include security lighting at Las Arenas Park and residential lighting from the mobile home park and traffic. With the proposed project, nighttime illumination from residential uses will be eliminated. However, additional security lighting within the project along with the intericy and exterior lighting from the Balboa/Sailing Center may increase light and glare at night. The potential impact of nighttime lighting will be analyzed in the EIR. II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES Existing Conditions The project site and surrounding areas are highly developed with urban uses. There are no agricultural lands within the vicinity of the proposed project. Environmental Checklist Responses a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which due to their location or nature, could result in conversion ofFarinland, to non-agricultural use? No Impact (a - c). The project site and the surrounding area are not zoned for agricultural uses, are not currently in agricultural use or subject to a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, the proposed project does not involve any significant changes to the environment that will result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. No impacts will occur and no mitigation is required. III. AIR QUALITY Existing Conditions Regional Setting The project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which is the jurisdictional responsibility of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and to a lesser extent the California Air Resources Board (CARB). Like most of Southern California, the climate within the project area is strongly influenced by the strength and location of a semi -permanent, subtropical high-pressure cell that is located over the Pacific Ocean. pq Michael Brandman Associates H.\Client(PN-1N)k0064%00640022US\00640022 Initial Study -Marina Park.doe Marina Park - Initial Study Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Locally, the wind speeds are considered to be very low, which result in a limited capacity to horizontally disperse air contaminants. The dominant daily wind pattern is an onshore 8 to 12 miles per hour (mph) daytime breeze and an offshore 3 to 5 mph nighttime breeze. The typical wind -flow pattern only fluctuates occasionally during winter storms or when Santa Ana winds occur. During the summer, pollutant accumulation is intensified due to the high temperatures and increased sunlight, which results in ozone formation and inversions, which do not allow for the dispersal of air contaminants. During,the winter, ground inversions are severe, especially on cold and clear mornings. The SCAB is currently in nonattainment of criteria pollutants. The basin is designated as nonattainment for the state and national PM2.5 standard. The basin is designated as nonattainment for the state and serious nonattainment for the national PM10 standard. Furthermore, the basin is in nonattainment for the state ozone 1-hour standard and is in severe nonattainment for the national 8- hour ozone standard. Local Setting Overall, Orange County retains a higher level of air quality than the rest of the SCAB, with the exception of when the area experiences Santa Ana winds. Generally, on -site conditions do not contribute to air pollution; however, on -site soil stockpiling may potentially contribute to airborne dust during high winds if no precautions are exercised. Environmental Checklist Responses a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation ofan applicable air quality plan. Potentially Significant Impact. The emissions associated with construction and operation of the proposed project may obstruct the implementation of the applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan (AQAP). As for short-term impacts, fugitive particulate emissions are expected to occur during construction. Fugitive construction emissions have the potential to cause a significant impact on air quality. Actual emissions would depend on the level of activity and duration and the type of dust control measures being used. The short-term project -level and cumulative effects of this project on air quality and its compliance with the AQAP will require further review in the EIR. As for long term air quality impacts, such as vehicle emissions, an air quality analysis will be prepared for the proposed project. The project -level and cumulative effects of the project on air quality and its compliance with the AQAP will be further evaluated in the EIR. b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? Potentially Significant Impact. The emissions associated with construction and operation of the proposed project may obstruct the implementation of the applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan (AQAP). As for short-term impacts, fugitive particulate emissions are expected to occur during construction. Fugitive construction emissions have the potential to cause a significant impact on air quality. Actual emissions would depend on the level of activity and duration and the type of dust control measures being used. The short-term project -level and cumulative effects of this Michael Brandman Associates 25 HdChent(PNJN)\0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Sludy-Mama Park doc Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Marina Park -Initial Study project on air quality .and its compliance with the AQAP will require further review in the EIR. As for long term air quality impacts, such as vehicle emissions, an air quality analysis will be prepared for the proposed project. The project -level and cumulative effects of the project on air quality and its compliance with the AQAP will be further evaluated in the EIR. c) Result in cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutantfor which the project region is in non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Potentially Significant Impact. The SCAB is designated as being in nonattainment by both federal and state standards for PM2.5, PM10, and ozone. The SCAB is designated as being in attainment for all other federal and state emissions standards for criteria pollutants. The project will increase the level of pollutants (ROG, NOx, and particulates), and the increase may be cumulatively considerable. The cumulative air quality effects will be further evaluated in the EIR. d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Potentially Significant Impact. Construction and operation of the project site has the potential to generate significant air quality impacts. Project implementation will result in the generation of air pollutants during both short-term and long-term. There are residential land uses located to the south and west of the proposed project. Moreover, the project encompasses a public beach. There is the potential for sensitive receptors to be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations, especially during the short-term construction period. Further analysis will be provided in the EIR. e) Create an objectionable odor affecting a substantial number ofpeople? Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed marina and restaurant may have the potential for creating odors in the long-term. In addition, construction activities will involve the use of diesel -operated machinery. The use of diesel may produce odors that may affect adjacent residents. Potential odor effects will be further evaluated in the EIR. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Existing Conditions The project site itself is located within a highly developed area of the City of Newport Beach and currently supports urbanized uses, including a 57-space mobile home park and associated parking, a metered 21-stall surface parking lot, and Las Arenas Park, which includes the Balboa Community Center/Girl Scouts House, a children's play area and four public tennis courts. Little vegetation is present onsite, with the exception of some non-native, ornamental landscaping and a row of palm trees that line the boardwalk adjacent to the public beach located along the north portion of the site. However, the project site is directly adjacent to Newport Bay, which supports fish nursery habitat or marine resources (plants, invertebrates, fishes, marine mammals, seabirds, federally listed and State - listed marine associated species and sensitive habitats). ya Michael Brandman Associates Micheal(PN-J1)10064\00640022US%00640022 Initial Study -Mama Park.doc Marina Park- Initial Study Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Environmental Checklist Responses a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department ofFish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc) through the direct removal, felling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Potentially Significant Impact (a-c). The proposed project will result in the development of a new marina and public facilities. Fish nursery habitats and marine resources (plants, invertebrates, fishes, marine mammals, seabirds, federally listed and State -listed marine associated species and sensitive habitats) will be affected as a result of dredging the portion of the marina proposed in Newport Bay. The EIR will include the preparation of a Marine Resources Assessment (MRA). The MRA will include a review of available marine biological data for the local area and a site survey. Potential impacts to marine biological resources and the surrounding marine environment will be analyzed and where impacts are identified, mitigation measures will be recommended as appropriate. d) Interfere substantially with the movement ofany native resident or migratoryfesh or wildlife species with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Potentially Significant Impact. The project site is located in a highly urban area and the site itself is developed with a mobile home park and community service type land uses. There are no migratory corridors within the project area. However, there may be habitat that would support nursery sites for native resident or migratory fish. Therefore, significant impacts related to wildlife movement may occur. The Marine Resources Assessment will address these impacts and provide mitigation measures, as appropriate. e) Conf ict with any local policies -or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact. There are no locally protected biological resources on the project site. Therefore impacts to these resources are not anticipated as a result of the proposed project and no mitigation measures are required. J) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? No Impact. The project site is not located within the Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP). The NCCP has been developed to protect diversity of Michael Brandman Associates 27 HACliun(PN-JN)\0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Sludy-Marina Park.doc Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Marina Park - Initial Study natural wildlife within Orange County. The proposed project will not conflict with the NCCP. Implementation of the proposed project will not result in impacts and no mitigation measures are required. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Existing Conditions The project site is highly developed with urban uses including a 57-space mobile home park and Las Arenas Park, which includes a metered 21-stall parking lot, the Balboa Community Center/Girl Scouts House, four public tennis courts, and a children's play area. MBA conducted a cultural resources record search for the project site at the South Central Coastal Information Center which is located at the California State University, Fullerton and reviewed the 1992 Ad Hoc Historic Preservation Advisory Committee Historic Resource Inventory (HRI) for the City of Newport Beach. The record search and HRI indicated there are no known cultural resources located on or directly adjacent to the project site. Therefore, the prehistoric and historic sensitivity of the area is considered to be low. The project site also contains the geologic Topanga Formation and Pleistocene terraces, which have potential for high paleontologic sensitivity. Environmental Checklist Responses a) Cause a substantial change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section §15604.5? Potentially Significant Impact. It is unknown if historical resources are located on the project site. Therefore, potential historical resources impacts will be further evaluated in the EIR. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? Potentially Significant Impact. Based on the record search, no known cultural resources are located on or directly adjacent to the project site. There is a potential for unknown cultural resources; therefore, these effects will be further evaluated in the EIR. c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site, or unique geologic feature? Potentially Significant Impact. Based on the project site containing the geologic Topanga Formation and Pleistocene terraces, there is a potential for paleontological resources to be affected. Therefore, these potential impacts to paleontological resources will be further evaluated in the EIR d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outsideformal cemeteries? Less Than Significant Impact. No remains are known to be present on site. The project site has been previously graded. In the event that unknown remains are discovered on the project site, the proposed project will be in compliance with the State Health and Safety Code 7050.5, as required and cited below: ya Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client(PN-JN)\0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Manna Park.doc Marina Park .Initial Study Discussion of Environmental Evaluation If human remains are encountered, the state Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the county coroner has made a determination of the origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code 5097.98. The county coroner must be notified immediately of the find. If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the coroner is required to notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the owner of the land or his/her authorized representative, the descendant may inspect the site of the discovery. The descendant shall complete the inspection within 24 hours of notification of the NAHC. The MLD may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Existing Conditions Southern California is a seismically active area. The five major fault zones within the project area that are considered to be active are: the San Andreas fault; the San Jacinto fault; the Sierra Madre/Cucamonga/San Fernando fault system; the Whittier/Elsinore fault system; and the Newport - Inglewood fault. All of these faults are capable of generating earthquakes up to a magnitude of 7.0. The City of Newport Beach, including the project site, is located along the southwesterly edge of the Los Angeles basin. The underlying geology of the project site consists of sandstone and siltstone of the Topanga formation and terraced deposits. The project site is not located within a currently designated Aliquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault zone. The primary seismic hazard affecting the project will be groundshaking from a regional seismic event (earthquake) along a known active fault in the Southern California area. Groundshaking is the primary cause of structural damage during an earthquake. The duration and frequency of ground shaking will vary depending on the distance to the epicenter, the depth of shock, and magnitude of the earthquake. The nearest active fault is the Newport -Inglewood Fault. Environmental Checklist Responses a) Expose people or structures to potential adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving. Rupture of known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Map issued by the State Geologistfor the area of based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is not located within a currently designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Therefore, the potential for fault rupture on the site is considered less than significant. A geotechnical report addressing this issue will be prepared for the project, which will be summarized in the EIR and included in its entirety as an appendix to the document. Michael Brandman Associates 29 H.Thenl(PN.JN)\0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Marina Park.doo Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Marina Park • Initial Study 11) Strong Seismic Shaking? Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project is likely to be exposed to strong seismic shaking during its lifetime. The severity of the groundshaking will depend upon the distance to the epicenter, the depth of shock, and the magnitude of the earthquake. A geotechnical report addressing this issue of strong seismic shaking will be prepared for the proposedproject, which will be summarized in the EIR and included in its entirety as.an appendix to the document. As appropriate, mitigation measures will be recommended. ifi) Seismic related ground failure, including liquefaction? Potentially Significant Impact. According to the City of Newport Beach the project site is located in an area that is susceptible to liquefaction. However, the General Plan does not identify the project site as an area unacceptable for development. Engineering design standards, including adherence to the Uniform Building Code, as required, generally can reduce project related liquefaction impacts. A geotechnical report, addressing seismic related ground failure, will be prepared for the,proposed project, which will be summarized in the EIR and included in its entirety as an appendix to the document. Mitigation measures will be recommended, as appropriate. iv) Landslides? No Impact. The project site is relatively flat and there is minimal topographic variation throughout the development envelope. The potential for landslides is considered to be low. Therefore, no impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are required. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less Than Significant Impact. The project site will require excavation and dredging for the proposed marina. The proposed project will be implemented in accordance with the provisions of the City Excavation and Grading Code, as well as the Development Project Guidance requirements of Chapter 14.36 of the Municipal Code to safeguard against soil erosion and loss of topsoil. Furthermore, the proposed project will implement Best Management Practices (i.e., use of sand bags, hydroseeding of graded pads, installation of landscaping after completion of grading, etc.) during construction activities. Therefore, impacts related to soil erosion would be less than significant. c) Be located oil a geologic unit or soil that is unstable or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on or offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life orproperty. Potentially Significant Impact (c and d). The site is located in an area that is considered to be susceptible to liquefaction, Additionally, due to the site's proximity to Newport Bay, there is the potential of the lateral spreading of soils towards the water which can create a risk to property. A geotechnical report, which will address 30 Michael Brandman Associates Ii.\Client(PN.JN)k0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Ldlml Sludy-Madna Park.doo Marina Park -Initial Study Discussion of Environmental Evaluation unstable and expansive soils, will be prepared for the proposed project and be summarized in the EIR. The report will be included in its entirety as an appendix to the document. As appropriate, mitigation measures will be recommended. e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use ofseptic tanks or alternative wasted disposal systems where sewers are not availablefor the disposal of waste water? No Impact. The project site will not utilize septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems. Therefore, no impacts to soils from alternative wastewater disposal systems will result from the proposed project and no mitigation measures are required. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Existing Conditions The project site is developed with a mobile home park, the Balboa Community Center/Girl Scouts facility, four tennis courts, and a children's play area. Such land uses are not typical generators of hazardous wastes or materials. Environmental Checklist Responses a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. No Impact. The proposed project will not utilize or dispose of any hazardous materials of reportable quantities in its typical operations. Substances for landscaping, such as fertilizers and pesticides, will be subject to all applicable regulations. No impacts will occur and no mitigation measures are required. b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Potentially Significant Impact. Project construction consists of extensive excavation for the marina. The remaining areas will involve limited grading and trenching. These construction activities involve typical construction methods and equipment onsite for a relatively limited and short duration. Construction equipment will include diesel and gasoline powered engines. A very small (incalculable) risk is present from gasoline or diesel tank rupture. However, compliance with construction site safety regulations limits the risk of upset to less than significant levels. Also, because of the limited and short duration of these activities, there is minimal risk of spillage. In addition, operation of the proposed marina may result in a potential health hazard if a spill from a vessel into the bay occurs. This potential will be further evaluated in the EIR. Michael Brandman Associates N:\Chent(PN-JN)\0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Marina Park.don 31 Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Marina Park -Initial Study c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing orproposed school? Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project is located within one -quarter mile of Newport Elementary School. An inventory of materials to be used in construction or operation of the project will be developed. Any material identified as inherently hazardous or hazardous as a result of the quantity to be handled on the project site will be identified and appropriate mitigation measures defined. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Potentially Significant Impact. Past or present uses either onsite or within the surrounding area also have the potential to result in hazardous materials impacts through the release and/or migration of toxic substances. Moreover, project implementation will require the removal of onsite structures, which depending on date of construction may contain lead or asbestos materials. A regulatory database review will be conducted for the proposed project, results of the database review will be summarized in the EIR and the review results will be included in their entirety as an appendix to the document. Mitigation measures will be recommended, as appropriate. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport orpublic use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard forpeople residing or working in the project area? J) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard forpeople residing or working in the project area? No Impact (e-f). The proposed project is not located within an airport land use plan, within two miles of a public or public use airport, or private airstrip. Therefore, no impacts related to this issue will result from the proposed project and no mitigation measures are required. g) Impair implementation of orphysically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No Impact. Access to the peninsula is primarily obtained via Newport and Balboa Boulevards, and the project site is situated on Balboa Boulevard. The proposed project will not constrict access or result in modifications to Balboa or Newport Boulevards. The proposed project will not alter emergency access to surrounding uses and onsite emergency access will be provided via the onsite circulation system. The onsite circulation system has been designed to accommodate emergency vehicles (i.e., turning radii, etc). Therefore, no impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are required. 32 Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client(PN-dN)\0064\00640022\IS\006400221nitial Study -Marina Patk.dW Marina Park -Initial Study Discussion of Environmental Evaluation h) Expose people or structures to a significant loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands. No Impact. The proposed project is located in a highly urbanized area and is surrounded primarily by residential development and Newport Bay. The vicinity of the project site is considered to have a low fire hazard. Fire risk is dependent upon the moisture level in the plants and the presence of incendiary sources. Although fire is a risk for any kind of structure, the proposed project would not be at any greater risk than other uses adjacent to the site. Project design will include emergency fire access routes and the proposed structures will be reviewed by the Newport Beach Fire Department to ensure that the design meets the Fire Department standards including building materials, sprinklers, internal fire walls, access for emergency vehicles, etc. Therefore, the proposed project will not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. No impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are required. Vill. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Existing Conditions The proposed project is located on the Balboa Peninsula, which separates the Pacific Ocean from Newport Bay. Newport Bay is comprised of the upper and lower bays. Upper Newport Bay is an estuary that receives drainage from a 150 square mile area of Orange County and Lower Newport Bay is the recreational and commercial harbor, known as Newport Harbor. The project site is relatively flat, generally rectangular in shape and approximately 10 acres in size. The site is primarily built-up in nature with areas of ornamental vegetation. Environmental Checklist Responses a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off -site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of the existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? k) Result in significant alteration ofreceiving water quality during or following construction? 1) Result in a potential for discharge ofstorn:waterpollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including Michael Brandman Associates 33 11-Thent(PNJN)\0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Manna Park doe Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Marina Park - Initial Study washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling a• storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas? ni) Result in the potential for discharge ofstormwater• to affect the beneficial uses of the receiving waters? n) Create the potential for significant changes in the flow velocity or volume of stormwater runoff to cause environmental harm? o) Create significant increases in erosion of the project site or surrounding areas? Potentially Significant Impact (a, c, d-f, and k-o). Implementation of the proposed project will alter the existing drainage pattern of the site. In the short-term, construction activities may result in siltation and erosion as well as potential fuel oil spills, which could result in a decrease in water quality and an increase in turbidity and sedimentation as it relates to the amount of pollution flowing to Newport Bay and the ocean. The project site is under the jurisdictional responsibility of the Santa Ana Region of the California Water Quality Control Board, a state agency, which regulates discharges into the State's waters. As part of its oversight, the state ensures the project is implemented in accordance with federal water quality requirements during grading and construction. More specifically, the Federal Clean Water Act (Section 402[p]) requires discharges of stormwater associated with industrial and construction activity to be regulated by National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits. NPDES compliance requires implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) for water quality control. Potential water quality impacts will be further evaluated in the EIR. b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or- a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate ofpre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses orplanned uses for which permits have been granted)? No Impact. The project site is developed with urban uses and there are very few permeable surfaces onsite. Conversely, project design incorporates permeable parking lots and a landscape scheme that may result in increasing the amount of rainfall that will infiltrate into the ground and, thus, result in a decrease in stormwater runoff. The proposed project includes substantially more permeable uses than the existing uses. However, the project site is not considered a groundwater recharge area. The project would not require the pumping of groundwater, therefore, the project would not result in a depletion of groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. g) Place housing within a 100 year flood hazard as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100yearflood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flow. Expose people or strictures to a significant risk of loss, injury or• death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure ofa levee a• dam? 34 Michael Brandman Associates 119ehcat(PN-JN)\0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Manna Park doc Marina Park - Initial Study Discussion of Environmental Evaluation No Impact (g-I). According to the Flood Insurance Rate Maps, the project site is not located within a 100-year flood zone or within a dam inundation area. Therefore, impacts resulting from flooding are not anticipated and will create no flooding impacts. J Inundation byseiche, tsunami, ormudflow? Potentially Significant Impact. Given the generally flat topography of the project site and the surrounding area, and the distance from the mouth of a canyon stream, the project is not subject to mudflow. A tsunami is a series of waves that are created in a body of water. Given that the project site is located adjacent to Newport Bay and near the Pacific Ocean, there is a potential for a tsunami. The last tsunami that hit Newport Beach was in 1934. The City has prepared a Tsunami Plan to help the City staff and residents to effectively respond to a tsunami warning. A further discussion of potential tsunami impacts will be provided in the EIR. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING Existing Conditions Presently, the project site is developed with a mobile home park, a public beach, Los Arenas Park and a metered 21-stall parking lot, the Balboa Community Center/Girl Scouts house, four public tennis courts, and a children's play area. A public beach is located to the north of the project site. Primarily residential uses and some commercial uses, including a hotel and American Legion, surround the project site. Environmental Checklist Responses a) Physically divide an established community? No Impact. The proposed project will not physically divide an established community. Project implementation will not result in any barriers that would preclude travel throughout the project area. There are residential land uses directly south of West Balboa Boulevard and west of 18a' Street. The proposed project will significantly enhance horizontal and lateral public access to the beach; thus, no impact related to this issue will result from the proposed project and no mitigation measures are required. b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Potentially Significant Impact. The project site is currently designated as Recreational Parks and zoned as Planned Community District. The proposed project is also located within the coastal zone and as such is subject to the California Coastal Act. An evaluation of the project's compatibility with existing land uses and environmental plans and policies in the City's General Plan and other applicable Michael Brandmau Associates 35 N:\Client(PNJN)\0064\00640D22\]S\006400221mtial Study -Manna Park.dac Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Marina Park -Initial Study regional plans and policies will be included in the EIR. Mitigation measures will be recommended, as appropriate. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? No Impact. The proposed project is not located in an area that is designated within a habitat conservation plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP). Therefore, project implementation will not conflict with the existing NCCP or any other applicable habitat conservation plans. No impact will occur and no mitigation measures are required. X. MINERAL RESOURCES Existing Conditions The proposed project is not utilized for mineral extraction, nor has it been identified by the California Division of Mines and Geology as an important mineral resource zone. Environmental Checklist Responses a) Result in the loss of availability ofa known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? No Impact. The City of Newport Beach's General Plan does not identify any known minerals on the project site or within the surrounding area. The project will not result in the loss of a known mineral resource that would be of state, regional, or local value. Therefore, no mineral resource impacts are expected to occur and no mitigation measures are required. b) Result in the loss of availability ofa locally -important mineral, resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No Impact. The project site is not delineated as a locally -important resource recovery site in the City's General Plan. Therefore, no impacts in relation to locally important mineral resources will result from the implementation of the proposed project and no mitigation measures are required. XI. NOISE Existing Conditions The noise environment within the project area is dominated primarily by vehicle traffic and community activity. Within the project area, there is noise sensitive residential land uses to the south and west and across the Bay to the north on Lido Isle. The City of Newport Beach has established a maximum permissible interior noise level of 45 dBA for noise sensitive land uses. Sensitive land uses typically include residences, parks, churches, schools and hospitals. Traffic along West Balboa Boulevard generates the majority of the ambient noise in the project area. Occasional aircraft overflight and motorcycle drive-bys generate relatively high noise levels, but are not the major noise events in the project area. 36 Michael Brandman Associates H.\Client(PN.JM\0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Manna Park doc Marina Park - Initial Study Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Environmental Checklist Responses a) Exposure ofpersons to or generation ofnoise levels in excess ofstandards established in the local General Plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure ofpersons to or generation of excessive goundbourne vibration or groundbourne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) Asubstantial temporary orperiodic increase in ambient noise levels in theproject vicinity above levels existing without the project? Potentially Significant Impact (a-d). Sensitive receptors within the project area include the residential land uses to the south, west, and north of the project site. The proposed project will contribute to the ambient noise environment in both the short- term and long-term, which may impact sensitive receptors. In the short-term, typical construction activities such as the operation of bulldozers, front loaders, scrapers, pumps, generators, compressors, etc., will elevate noise levels on the project site and the surrounding areas. In the long-term, project -related vehicular traffic and boat traffic within the marina will contribute to the ambient noise environment. Community noise standards relevant to this project are contained in the City Noise Element and Noise Ordinance. A noise evaluation will be prepared to address potential noise impacts. The noise impacts associated with the project's vehicular traffic on adjacent land uses will be assessed in terms of the Community Noise Equivalent Level (based upon 24 hours of measurement) noise scale for the without -project and with -project conditions. Areas that will experience a significant noise increase will be identified. Noise associated with the utilization of the proposed recreational facilities and the potential impact on nearby sensitive uses will be evaluated. Noise levels generated by stationary sources will also be assessed for compatibility with the proposed land uses. Noise levels from stationary sources that potentially impact noise sensitive land uses will be estimated. The City's Noise Ordinance standards will be used to assess impacts. Based upon identification of cumulative noise impacts, the cumulative -plus project noise impacts in the area including mobile as well as any stationary sources of noise, will be evaluated. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan, or where Stich a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or a public use airport, would the project expose people residing or worldng in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The proposed project is not located within an area that is regulated by an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public or public use airport. Therefore, impacts due to aircraft noise would not occur and no mitigation measures are required. Michael Brandman Associates nflchcnt (PNJM\0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Marina Park.doc BYA Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Marina Park - Initial Study n Forprojects within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The project site is not located with the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, there are no impacts related to this issue and no mitigation measures are required. XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING Existing Conditions The Marina Park mobile home park is comprised of 57 mobile homes each situated on a pad, which is rented by the owner ofthe respective mobile home. Twenty-seven percent of the tenants of the Marina Park mobile home park identify the park as their primary residences. The remaining seventy- three percent of tenants identify their units as vacation homes. There are residential neighborhoods located directly to the south and west of the proposed project. Environmental Checklist Responses 38 a) Induce substantial population growth in an area either directly (for example by proposing new homes or businesses) or indirectly (for example through the extension of roads or other infrastructure). Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will generate employment associated with the public facilities; however, this increase is expected to be nominal compared to the approximate 48,000-person labor force within the City of Newport Beach. Due to the minor amount of employees being generated by the proposed project, it is not anticipated that such employment will directly or indirectly induce substantial population growth in the project area, which would require new housing or extension of roads or other infrastructure. Therefore, no significant population growth impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are required. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers ofpeople, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Less Than Significant Impact (b-c). The proposed project will result in displacing the tenants of the 57 mobile homes. Seventy-three percent of the mobile home park's tenants are not year-round residents of Newport Beach and utilize their units as vacation homes. According to the City of Newport Beach, mobile homes comprise approximately three percent of the City's housing stock and, currently, there are ten mobile home parks located within the City. In addition, the City of Newport Beach currently has a housing supply of approximately 37,000 units of which approximately four percent are vacant (1,480 units). Although not considered substantial, as defined by CEQA, any displacement of existing housing or people resulting from the proposed project could be adequately served by the existing housing supply within the City. The mobile homes are not considered "affordable housing" for purposes of the City's Housing Element requirements because there are no covenants requiring the spaces to be affordable and no restriction on the incomes Michael Brandman Associates HAChenl(PN-IN)\0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Marina Park.dac Marina Park - Initial Study Discussion of Environmental Evaluation of households occupying them. Consequently, implementation of the proposed project is not considered to result in the displacement of a substantial number of existing housing necessitating the construction of replacement housing. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES Existing Conditions The project site is developed primarily with residential and community service -type land uses. Currently, the site requires fire and police services and to a lesser degree schools and park services. • Fire Services. The City of Newport Beach Fire Department currently serves the project site. The Fire Department provides emergency fire protection, non -emergency service calls, paramedic services, and inspection services. The Fire Department operates eight fire stations throughout the City. • Police Services. The City of Newport Beach Police Department serves the project site. Crimes reported within the project area are generally larceny and burglary. • School Services. The public school district serving the project site is the Newport -Mesa Unified School District, which operates four elementaryschools, one intermediate school, and one high school. • Park Services. Currently, the City owns and maintains 309 acres of parkland. Environmental Checklist Responses Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new orphysically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction ofwhich could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: i) Fire protection? ii) Police protection? v) Other public facilities? Potentially Significant Impact (1,1i and v). The proposed project will replace and enhance the existing onsite recreational facilities (Balboa Community Center/Girl Scouts House, tennis courts, children's play area). The project will lessen intensification on the site which may result in a decreasing demand for police and fire services. If traffic increases in the area, it is likely there will be an increase in traffic related accidents and emergencies, which will require the response of the police and/or the fire department. However, a decrease in development may result in a decrease in theft, burglaries, and other such crimes that require police services. Potential impacts on public services will be further addressed in the EIR and, as applicable, mitigation measures will be recommended. Michael Brandman Associates 39 n-\Client (PN-rM\0064\00640022US\00640022 Initial Study -Manna Park.doc Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Marina Park -Initial Study iii) Schools? iv) Parks? No Impact (iii and iv). The project includes no permanent housing and will not result in population increase in the area that would create a demand for additional schools or parks. In addition, the proposed project includes a park with public facilities, therefore, the project would increase the amount of park acreage on the project site. XIV. RECREATION Existing Conditions Presently, the City owns and maintains 309 acres of parkland, in addition to community centers, schoolrecreation land, gymnasiums, senior centers, and picnic areas. Las Arenas Park, which includes the Balboa Community Center/Girl Scouts House, public tennis courts, and a children's play area is located onsite. Environmental Checklist Responses a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? No Impact. The proposed project will not result in a resident population increase in the project area and is intended to be a recreational facility; thus it will not result in an increased demand for recreational services and no mitigation measures will be required b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction of or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will include new and expanded versions of all of the existing recreation facilities now found within the existing site. This includes an expanded beach area and facilities, the Girl Scout House, play areas and open grass areas. Also included is a public short-term visiting vessel marina, a public dock and public Sailing Center, and improved public launch areas. Furthermore, the proposed project will include the new Balboa Center that provides space for the Sailing Center boats, class rooms for boating and other related programs. Environmental impacts associated with the development of these new recreational facilities, such as hydrology, traffic, etc., will be addressed within the EIR. If appropriate, mitigation measures will be recommended. 40 Michael Brandman Associates HX[nait(PNJN)\0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Marina Park.doc Marina Park - Initial Study Discussion of Environmental Evaluation XV. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION Existing Conditions Upper and lower Newport Bay divides the City and creates barriers which result in lengthy circuitous vehicular traffic movements. The proposed project is located on the Balboa Peninsula. The site is bordered by West Balboa Boulevard to the south, 18"' and 19"' Street to the West and 15"' Street to the East. Access to the site is currently provided from West Balboa Boulevard. Environmental Checklist Responses a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? Potentially Significant Impact. Existing traffic generated by the project site is primarily attributed to the mobile home park; however, since only twenty-seven percent, of the tenants are full time residents of the park, traffic generation fluctuates seasonally. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project may increase the existing traffic load on nearby roadways. A traffic and parking study will be prepared for the project that will involve an estimation of the net new trips generated by the project considering a credit will be applied for the existing uses and the relocation of the mobile homes. Also, a detailed Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) will be prepared as part of the EIR to evaluate the effects on the local street network and the ability of the roadway system to accommodate traffic generated by the proposed project. This study will conform to City Charter Section 423 and the Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) analysis procedures specified by the City and be summarized in the EIR. b) Exceed either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Potentially Significant Impact. Implementation of the proposed project may result in an increase in traffic and has potential to exceed the level of service standards for the project area's circulation system. A traffic and parking study will be prepared for the project that will involve an estimation of the net new trips generated by the project considering a credit will be applied for the existing uses and the relocation of the mobile homes. Potential traffic impacts will be evaluated in the EIR. c) Result in a change of air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? No Impact. Due to the nature of the proposed project, there will be no impacts to air traffic patterns that causes an increase in air traffic levels or a change in location that will result in substantial safety risks. Therefore, there would be no air traffic impacts associated with the project. Michael Brandman Associates 41 N:\Client(PN.JM\0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Marina Park doe rn of Environmental Evaluation Marina Park -Initial d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves o)- dangerous intersection) or incompatible uses (farm equipment)? No Impact. Primary access to the project site will be via West Balboa Boulevard at 17'h street. Controlled secondary access will be provided via 15a' Street. The project will not result in the construction of new roadways or the alteration of the existing off -site circulation system. It is not anticipated that traffic hazards will occur as a result of project implementation. e) Result in inadequate emergency access? No Impact. The proposed project will not alter emergency access to surrounding uses and onsite emergency access will be provided via the onsite circulation system. The onsite circulation system has been designed to accommodate emergency vehicles (i.e., turning radii, etc). Therefore, the proposed project will result in no impacts related to emergency access. J) Result in inadequate parking capacity? No Impact. The proposed project will result in the construction of an approximately 97 space parking lot immediately adjacent to the Balboa/Sailing Center and a smaller lot providing 26 spaces to the east. An additional parking lot is provided on the west side of the park adjacent to 18°i Street which provides 24 spaces and will serve the Girl Scout House, the play areas, and the park in general. Parking will be evaluated in the EIR as well as an evaluation of the use ofthe parking facilities by non -users. A means to control any such "poaching" into the park's parking facilities will be developed. g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? No Impact. No conflicts with any adopted alternative transportation policies, plans or programs are anticipated. Therefore, no impacts would result from project implementation and no mitigation measures are required. XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Existing Conditions The existing development requires electrical, natural gas, water, wastewater, solid waste, and communication services. 42 • Electrical and natural gas services within the project site and surrounding area are provided by SCE and The Gas Company, both of which have various transmission and distribution systems located throughout the project area. • Water services are provided by both the City of Newport Beach, which maintains the storm drain systems within the project area and the Irvine Ranch Water District, which provides water supply and wastewater services to the site. Michael Brandman Associates H:\Client (PNJM\006A00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Manna Park doc Marina Park -Initial Study Discussion of Environmental Evaluation • Solid Waste collection services within the project area are provided by the City of Newport Beach (Barrel service for residents and businesses) or private collection companies. Solid waste collected within the City is disposed of at the Frank R. Bowerman Canyon Landfill, located on Sand Canyon Road in the City of Irvine and operated by the County of Orange. • SBC Communications and Cox Cable provide telephone and cable service to the project site, respectively. Environmental Checklist Responses a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatmentfacilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existingfacilities, the construction ofwhich could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to theprovider's existing commitments ,) Be served by a landfill with sufiicientpermitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? h) Would the project include a new or retrofitted stormwater treatment control Best Management Practice (BMP), (e.g., water quality treatment basin, constructed treatment wetland), the operation ofwhich could result in significant environmental effects (e.g., increased vectors and odors)? Potentially Significant Impact (a - h). The proposed public facilities may result in increasing the demand placed upon utility and service systems, especially the Balboa/Sailing Center. The proposed project may require additional extensions and hookups to existing infrastructure. It is anticipated that water, sewer, electric, natural gas, and solid waster services will be needed to serve the project. Potential utility and service systems.impacts will be further evaluated in the EIR. Michael Brandman Associates n:\Clicnt(PNJN)\0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Manna Pmk.doc 43 Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Marina Park - Initial Study XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the majorperiods of California history or prehistoty? Potentially Significant Impact. The project could potentially result in significant impacts to biological and cultural resources. These issues are considered potentially significant and will be further evaluated in the EIR. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects ofpastprojects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects ofprobable future projects)? Potentially Significant Impact. The project site is located in a highly developed urban environment and is considered an in -fill parcel. An assessment of cumulative impacts including other current and probable future projects will be included in the EIR, as required by CEQA. c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Significant Impact. Increases in traffic and air pollutant emissions may have effects on persons within the vicinity of the project site. The EIR will assess the level of these effects generated by the proposed project as it relates to any features that would directly or indirectly expose human beings to adverse effects. qq Michael Brandman Associates HSClicnt(PN-IN)\0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Marina Park.doc Marina Park - Initial Study References SECTION 4 REFERENCES The following enumerated documents are available at the offices of the City of Newport Beach, Planning Department, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92660. 1. Final Program EIR - City of Newport Beach General Plan. 2. General Plan, including all its elements, City of Newport Beach. 3. Final EIR - Marina Park Resort and Community Plan, 2004. 4. Title 20, Zoning Code of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 5. City Excavation and Grading Code, Newport Beach Municipal Code. 6. Chapter 10.28, Community Noise Ordinance of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 7. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Air Quality Management Plan, 1997. 8. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Air Quality Management Plan EIR, 1997. 9. Coastal Land Use Plan, City of Newport Beach Michael Brandman Associates 45 HAClient(PN-JN)\0064\00640022\IS\00640022 Initial Study -Manna Park doe HAMILTON BIOLOGICAL October 15, 2009 Rick Ware, President/Senior Marine Biologist Coastal Resources Management, Inc. PMB 327, 3334 East Coast Highway Corona del Mar, CA 92625 SUBJECT: CEQA EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF MARINA PARK SAND DISPOSAL 'PROJECT ON BIRDS Dear Rick, At your request, this letter report provides a CEQA-level evaluation of the potential ef- fects of implementing the proposed Marina Park Sand Disposal project on biologically "sensitive" bird species. It is my understanding that this letter report will be used as part of a supplemental EIR that you are preparing fof the City of Newport Beach to cover only the sand disposal .aspect of the Marina Park renovation project; the rest of the project's effects were addressed in a previous EIR, No. 2008051096, completed in early 2009. This report describes the general bird resources known or potentially present along the shoreline, and any species listed as threatened or endangered by state or federal governments, as well as California Species of Special Concern and any other species of local or regional interest. PROJECT OVERVIEW The Marina Park project site, currently a trailer park and public beach, is located in Newport Beach, on the bay (north) side of West Balboa Boulevard between 1511, and 19th Streets (Figures 1-3). This report evaluates the potential effects of replacing sand from the project site with imported fill, and using (a) trucks to move some of the sand to two onshore beach disposal sites located near Newport Pier and at China Cove in Newport Bay, and (b) barges to move the rest of the sand to one or two near -shore beach reple- nishment areas within approximately 100 meters of the shoreline (see Figure 2). METHODS I conducted two mornings of reconnaissance surveys, on 30 September 2009 and 12 Oc- tober 2009, covering the Marina Park project site and the two onshore areas proposed for sand disposal. I spent a total of approximately two hours at the Marina Park site, three hours at the Newport Pier sand deposition site, and one hour at the China Cove sand deposition site. Weather was good on both mornings, with temperatures between 61 and 74' F, light to moderate winds, and good visibility. I recorded all bird species seen at each site and evaluated the potential for sensitive bird species to occur at these sites. I inspected all trees and other vegetation for potential heron or egret nests, and 316 Monrovia Avenue '--✓1 Long Beach, CA 90803 —r' 562477-2181 —✓ Fax 562433.5292 HAMILTON BIOLOGICAL inspected the ground for the whitewash that typically accumulates beneath nest or roost sites. 316 Monrovia Avenue ✓ Long Beach, CA 90803 —w-� 562.477.2181 Y Fax 562.433.5292 IRO WOOOIn ■ Y�„r•, VA i e .p IrOYP;eu.i �" = a � •tA � , Ong -Bon hOa�don 4 �� - ©"? to ar.,;t Westminaler+ "- 'MunUngton'Bonch Costa Mo*za H J Nowpon�Boach� O i Merina, Park Protect Site yyyyy , Afa.�!nl (..1r Ynn �'\• Mom• �yty /y,. Newport Laguna Beach-' 1Fa f a w� Near-shore Send Disposal Site B CEQA Review of Potential Effects of Marina Park San Disposal on Sensitive Birds Hamilton Biological, Inc. October 15, 2009 Page 4 of 14 Figure 2. Project Vicinity. On 5 October 2009 I inquired with local birder Peter Knapp about known locations of winter roosts of the federally listed Western Snowy Plover (Charadrius alexandrinus nivo- sus) in Newport Beach. On 12 October 2009 I checked the location that he described as the only consistent Snowy Plover roost on the Balboa Peninsula, located between E and F Streets, approximately two miles south of the Marina Park project site. On that date, I spent approximately 30 minutes checking the local area for roosting and foraging plov- ers. As part of preparing this report, I reviewed a report dated 12 October 2009 from the California Natural Diversity Data Base covering the Newport Beach, Seal Beach, Los Alamitos, Anaheim, Orange, Tustin, and Laguna Beach U.S.G.S. topograpluc quadran- gles. I also reviewed the current DEIR for the Marina Park project, dated 26 February 2009, prepared for the City of Newport Beach by Michael Brandman Associates. CEQA Review of Potential Effects of Marina Park San Disposal on Sensitive Birds Hamilton Biological, Inc. October 15, 2009 Page 5 of 14 SETTING Marina Park Project Site The Marina Park project site, shown in Figure 3, consists of a trailer park, public beach, and limited areas of turf and landscaping. The potential biological effects of project im- plementation upon the project site itself have already been evaluated in the existing EIR, prepared in early 2009. My surveys of the project site confirmed the adequacy and accuracy of the existing biological study of this parcel and did not reveal any potential heron nesting or roosting sites, or any other potential biological constraints not pre - Figure 3. Marina Park project site, outlined in yellow. Exhibit 5.3-1 in the existing DEIR for this project provides a current Plant Communities Map for this parcel. Newport Pier Sand Disposal Site This proposed sand disposal site is located between the base of Newport Pier and the southern terminus of 19at Street (Figure 4). The site consists of open, sandy beach'that is heavily used by beachgoers on weekends. just north of the pier is a fish cleaning area that routinely attracts large numbers of gulls and some Brown Pelicans (Pelecanus occi- dentalis). On the morning of 30 September 2009, a flock of gulls at the proposed sand disposal site included 80 Heermann's (Lanus heermanni), 75 Western (L. occidentalis), and 14 California Gulls (L. californicus). On 12 October 2009 I observed seven Brown Peli- cans, 55 Heermanri s Gulls, 165 Western Gulls, 40 California Gulls, two Ring -billed Gulls (Lanus delaevarensis) , seven Royal Terns (Thalasseus maximus), and four Elegant CEQA Review of Potential Effects of Marina Park San Disposal on Sensitive Birds Hamilton Biological, Inc. October 15, 2009 Page 6 of 14 Terns (Tlialasseus elegans). Various common shorebird species forage in the intratidal zone at this location, including the Willet (Catoptrophorus semipalmatus), Marbled God - wit (Limosa fedoa), and Sanderling (Calidris albs). Otherwise, bird use of this area will generally be limited to such highly adaptable species as the Rock Pigeon (Columba livia), American Crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), and European Starling (Sturnus vulgaris). Figure 4. Proposed sand disposal site at Newport Pier. As shown in this aerial, this location receives con- siderable human use, at least during some days. China Cove Sand Disposal Site This proposed sand disposal site occupies a limited area of approximately 0.3 acre at the southern terminus of Fernleaf Street, where it intersects with Cove Street, in Corona del Mar (Figure 5). CEQA Review of Potential Effects of Marina Park San Disposal on Sensitive Birds Hamilton Biological, Inc. October 15, 2009 Page 7 of 14 Figure 5. The small China Cove sand disposal site in Corona del Mar. CEQA Review of Potential Effects of Marina Park San Disposal on Sensitive Birds Hamilton Biological, Inc. October 15, 2009 Page 8 of 14 The China Cove site is a small, sandy beach surrounded by existing residences. The on- ly terrestrial plants present are Highway Iceplant (Carpobrotus edulis) and Washington Fan Palm (Washingtonia filifera), both non-native invasive species. On 12 October I saw a Western Gull and a Spotted Sandpiper (Actitis macularia) at this site, and it is likely that other common bird species such as the Willet and Marbled Godwit forage or roost here on occasion. The site is too small and close to residences to provide habitat for any bird species that is not highly adapted to conspicuous human presence. Near -shore Sand Disposal Sites A and B As shown previously, in Figure 3, proposed near -shore sand disposal site A is located in open water between 40th and 52nd Streets and proposed site B is located between 16f Street and 611, Street. These near -shore waters provide potential foraging habitat for li- mited numbers of such common species as the Surf Scoter (Melanitta perspicillata), West- ern Grebe (Aechmophorus occidentalis), and Double -crested Cormorant (Phalacrocorax au- ritus). Various gulls are also often seen roosting in such areas, just past the breakers. The jetties adjacent to the northerly Site A provide foraging and roosting habitat for birds of the rocky shore, including the Black Oystercatcher (Haematopus bachmani), Black Turn - stone (Arenaria melanocephala), and Surfbird (Aphriza virgata). SENSITIVE BIRD SPECIES This section discusses bird species that occur or potentially occur in areas that could be affected by the proposed project that are endangered or rare, as those terms are used in CEQA and its Guidelines, or that are of current local, regional, or state concern. Legal protection for sensitive species varies widely, from the relatively comprehensive protec- tion extended to listed threatened/endangered species to no legal status at present. The California Department of Fish & Game (CDFG) publishes quarterly its lists of "Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens" and "Special Animals." The Special Plants list incorporates continually updated information from the California Native Plant So- ciety (CNPS), an independent organization that maintains an online inventory of taxa that its botanists regard as rare, declining, or insufficiently known. In addition, recently published findings and preliminary results of ongoing research provide a basis for con- sideration of species that are candidates for state and/or federal listing. Table A lists each sensitive bird species known to occur on the project site or adjacent areas, or that could potentially occur there. Species accounts following the table discuss the range and conservation status of all taxa included in Table A. Additional sensitive wildlife species could conceivably occur on the project site, but such occurrences would be exceptional or limited to the passage of migrants. CEQA Review of Potential Effects of Marina Park San Disposal on Sensitive Birds Inc. October 15, 2009 Table A Special Status Bird Species With Potential To Occur in the Marina Park Project Area Hamilton Biological, Page 9 of 14 USFWS CDFG Scientific Name - Common Name Status Status Habitat Potential to Occur FE Does not nest in local area; non- _ Pelemnus occidentalis cn6 minis California Brown Pelican delistin g CE breeders roostin estuaries and on beaches and breakwaters, and forage Known to forage and rests in the project area. proposed) in bays and near -shore waters. Nests on islands with expanses of Nests at Upper Newport Bay; likely to forage occa- Ryvchops niger Black Skimmer — SSC baze ground; in winter, tommonl sionally in project area. Slimmers forage on small fish and possibly cir stacens in ponds, estuaries, roosts on beaches well above the tide line or on mud flats in estuaries. bays, and in the nearshore waters, usually within a few miles of nesting sites. Nests at Upper Newport Bay and at the mouth of Stenniln nntillnnnu browni California Least Tern Nests on sparsely vegetated flat sub- the Santa Ana River, moderate potential to forage occasionally in project area. Lei stTems forage on strates, forages in nearby waters. small fish in ponds, estuaries, bays, and in the near - shore waters, usually within 5 miles of nesting sites. No potential for breeding in the project area; low potential for occurrence by non -breeders. The near - Nests on sandy beaches and shores. est nesting location is at the mouth of the Santa Ana Clmmdriiis nlexnndrnnis nivosiis Western Snowy Plover FT SSC Non -breeders forage and roost on River. Repeated surveys by local Snowy Plover monitors have identified only one regular winter sandy beaches and shores, typically using the same areas year after year, roost on the Newport Peninsula, 20 miles southeast of Newport Pier, on the beach between E and F streets, where 62 plovers were present on 5 October 2009 (Peter Knapp pers. comm.). FE- Federal Endangered; Fr- Federal Threatened California Department of Fish and Game CE - California Endangered SSC - Species of Special Concern, an administrative designation given to vertebrate species that appear to be vulnerable to extinction because of declining populations, limited ranges, and/or continuing threats. Some species may be lust starting to decline, while others may have already reached the point where they meet the criteria for listing as a threat- ened or endangered species. CEQA Review of Potential Effects of Marina Park San Disposal on Sensitive Birds October 15, 2009 Page 10 of 14 California Brown Pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis californicus) The California Brown Pelican breeds from the Channel Islands south along Pacific coast of Mexico as far south as Nayarit; also breeds at the Salton Sea. Non -breeders range from southern British Columbia south along Pacific coast to Colima, Mexico. The feder- al government and State of California listed this large seabird as endangered due to sharp population declines resulting from organochlorine pesticide pollution during the 1960s and 1970s. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposed delisting the brown peli- can in 2008, and if this decision is carried forward the species' populations will be moni- tored for a decade, from 2010 to 2020, under a post-delisting monitoring plan. The spe- cies continues to be listed as endangered by the State. California Brown Pelicans do not breed in Orange County, but non -breeders occur commonly in estuaries and on beaches and breakwaters; they typically forage in bays and near -shore waters. Brown Pelicans occur regularly in lower Newport Bay, on the beach at Newport Pier, and in the near -shore waters off Balboa Peninsula, including areas that would be affected by the proposed project. Black Skimmer (Rynchops niger) The Black Skimmer is a California Species of Special Concern, an administrative desig- nation given to vertebrate species that appear to be vulnerable to extinction because of declining populations, limited ranges, and/or continuing threats. Some species may be just starting to decline, while others may have already reached the point where they meet the criteria for listing as a threatened or endangered species. The species is wide- spread along the coasts of the Americas, and in the West it breeds primarily in coastal southern California and the Salton Sea. The species also breeds very locally in Mexico, from Baja California south to Colima. The winter range extends south to El Salvador and Nicaragua. The greatest threat to the long-term viability of the breeding population is thought to be the apparent shortage of suitable open nesting habitat and its continued loss as a result of erosion or vegetation growth on small islets. The Black Skimmer is a year-round resident on the coast of Orange County, breeding on islands at Upper Newport Bay, Bolsa Chica, and the Seal Beach National Wildlife Re- fuge. The species forages mainly at dawn, dusk, and at night, and foraging skimmers could potentially forage in the near -shore waters proposed as sand disposal sites, but would be unlikely to do so regularly or intensively. California Least Tern (Sternula antillarum hrowm) This small tern, listed as endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the State of California, breeds on sandy beaches and other barren habitats along the Pacific coast from Monterey County south to southern Baja California. The birds prey upon small fish in ponds, bays, and near -shore waters, typically within five miles of their nesting colonies. California Least Terns typically are present in southern California from mid - April through August; they winter on the Pacific coast of southern Mexico. Declines in CEQA Review of Potential Effects of Marina Park San Disposal on Sensitive Birds October 15, 2009 Page 11 of 14 populations of this species have been related to loss of suitable nesting habitat because of human recreational uses, and the concentration of their remaining colonies in small areas, rather than scattered widely as in historical times, has made them vulnerable to predation by a variety of predators. The California Least Tern colonies closest to the project area are located at the mouth of the Santa Ana River, approximately 1.3 miles northwest of the proposed Near -shore Sand Disposal site A, and on a man-made island near the head of Upper Newport Bay, approximately 4.0 miles northeast of the project area. Birds from these colonies could potentially forage in the near -shore waters proposed as sand disposal sites, but would be unlikely to do so regularly or intensively. Western Snowy Plover (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus) This Pacific coast population of this small shorebird is federally listed as threatened, and it is also a California Species of Special Concern. The current Pacific coast breeding population extends from Washington south to southern Baja California Sur. These birds winter mainly in along the coast from southern Washington to Central America. West- ern Snowy Plovers nest on beaches, many of which have been subjected to habitat de- gradation caused by human disturbance, urban development, introduced Beachgrass (Ammophila arenaria), and expanding predator populations. Frequent mechanical raking to remove garbage, kelp, and other debris makes beaches unsuitable for nesting and probably harms food resources for wintering plovers by eliminating substrates support- ing flies and other invertebrates important in the birds' diets. Humans and dogs also disturb roosting birds on heavily used recreational beaches, but effects of such distur- bance have not been quantified. The Western Snowy Plover is a year-round resident of Orange County beaches, al- though it is found only locally during both breeding and non -breeding periods. There is an influx of birds from outside of the county during the fall and winter months, typical- ly from other coastal areas in southern California. The nearest consistent nesting loca- tion for the western snowy plover is at the mouth of the Santa Ana River, approximate- ly 2.4 miles northwest of the proposed sand disposal site at the base of the Newport Pier. The only consistent Snowy Plover winter roosting site on the Balboa Peninsula is located in the vicinity of E and F Streets, approximately 2.0 miles southeast of Newport Pier (Peter Knapp pers. comm.); see Figure 6 on the next page. In 2009, a Snowy Plover nest at this location produced three young (Peter Knapp pers. comm.). Mr. Knapp rec- orded 62 snowy plovers at this location on 5 October 2009. I found only 18 there on 12 October 2009, but this was at mid -day, when most of the birds were out foraging on the local beach rather than roosting in a large group. The Snowy Plover is unlikely to occur in any areas proposed for project impacts except as a rare transient. CEQA Review of Potential Effects of Marina Park San Disposal on Sensitive Birds October 15, 2009 Page 12 of 14 Figure 6. The only consistent roosting location for the Western Snowy Plover known on the Balboa Penin- sula is in the vicinity of E and F Streets, approximately two miles southeast of the areas that would be affected by proposed sand removal and sand disposal activities. In 2009 one plover nest was also found in this area. IMPACTS Thresholds of Significance Consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, an impact is considered signifi- cant (before considering offsetting mitigation measures) if the lead agency determines that project implementation would result in one or more of the following: • Substantial adverse effects, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as being a candidate, sensitive, or special -status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by CDFG or USFWS; • Substantial adverse effects on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural com- munity identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by CDFG or USFWS; • Substantial adverse effects on federally protegted aquatic resources as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act through direct removal, filling, hydrological in- terruption, or other means; • Substantial interference with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or interference with the use of native wildlife nursery sites; • A conflict with any local policy or ordinance protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance; or • A conflict with the provisions of an adopted HCP, NCCP, or other approved local, regional, or state HCP. CEQA Review of Potential Effects of Marina Park San Disposal on Sensitive Bads October 15, 2009 Page 13 of 14 Anticipated Effects of Proposed Sand Disposal Actions The proposed project involves (a) trucking sand from the proposed Marina Park site to existing beaches near the base of the Newport Pier and at China Cove, and (b) barging sand from the proposed Marina Park site to one or two near -shore sand disposal sites. The proposed onshore sand disposal sites are heavily impacted by human activities in the existing condition and do not provide nesting habitat for birds of any kind. Califor- nia Brown Pelicans occur commonly at the Newport Pier sand disposal site, but this adaptable species routinely interacts with humans in this area and would not be signifi- cantly impacted by the proposed actions. The federally threatened Western Snowy Plover is known to roost on open, sandy beaches, including some beaches on the Balboa Peninsula that are used by moderate numbers of people; it is possible that this species could occur as a non -breeder at the Newport Pier sand disposal site. There was a recent case in which a vehicle ran over and killed a non -breeding Western Snowy Plover on a southern California beach, and the resource agencies have expressed concern that any sick plovers may be unable to move out of the way of heavy equipment working on a beach. If sand disposal actions were to result in death, injury, or harassment of one or more roosting Western Snowy Plovers this would constitute a potential violation of the federal Endangered Species Act, a potentially significant impact. Recommended Mitiga- tion Measure No.1 addresses this potential project effect. The near -shore disposal sites could possibly serve as foraging habitat for small numbers of California Brown Pelicans, Black Skimmers, or California Least Terns, but these sites are not known or expected to be of particular value to these or other foraging seabird species. Furthermore, only a small number of barge -loads would be needed to dispose of the sand at the near -shore sites, so any adverse effects that might occur, such as a temporary increase in turbidity, would have no significant impacts to foraging pelicans, skimmers, terns, or other bird species. MITIGATION The original DEIR for the Marina Park project identified several mitigation measures that will be required to address potential adverse effects that could result from aspects of project implementation previously addressed. This report recommends the addition of one more mitigation measure to ensure against any potentially significant effects re- sulting from the proposed sand deposition activities. Recommended Measure No. 1: Monitoring of Sand Deposition at Newport Pier To ensure against any potential adverse effects upon the federally threatened Western Snowy Plover, a qualified biological monitor shall inspect the sand deposition site at Newport Pier immediately before sand is disposed of at this site and throughout the pe- riod when sand is being deposited on the beach. The monitor shall have experience sur- veying for Snowy Plovers and shall be approved by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service CEQA Review of Potential Effects of Manna Park San Disposal on Sensitive Birds October 15, 2009 Page 14 of 14 prior to conducting this work. The monitor shall have the authority to immediately stop work if any Snowy Plovers that may be present show signs of stress or disturbance as a result of the sand disposal work. Work shall only resume with the monitor's approval. Implementation of this recommended mitigation measure would ensure that sand dis- posal actions would not entail any potentially significant impacts upon the Western Snowy Plover. LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION With implementation of the recommended mitigation measure, the proposed sand dis- posal actions would result in no potentially significant impacts upon any bird species. CONCLUSION Thank you for the opportunity to provide this CEQA analysis. If you have any ques- tions or wish to discuss any issues, please call me at 562-477-2181; you may send e-mail to robb@hamiltonbiologicalcom. Sincerely, Robert A. Hamilton President, Hamilton Biological, Inc. http:/ /hamiltonbiological.com RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT August 6, 2008 OCT 15 2008 Rosalinh Ling, Associate Planner CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Planning Department Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 Subject: Biological Resource Study Letter Report for the Marina i Newport Beach, Orange County, CA Dear Ms. Ung: At the request of the City of Newport Beach, Michael E conducted a biological resources study to document tl acre Marina Park property, hereafter referred to as p� of Newport Beach, Orange County, California. This rer existing conditions. The information contained herein from which subsequent evaluations can be made of p associated with future projects, based upon environm including the Clean Water Act (CWA), the Federal.Ends California Endangered Species Act (CESA), C Arnia E and the California Coastal Act (CCA) the Central`Goast Communities Conservation Plan and Habitat Con�serv� be noted that this docume t o ly pro ides an ass�ssn does not include a project sp ific imIpct`fnalysiA habitat. � ( Summary 'g conditions within the 10 or site, located in the City des a desa,�iption of �4ide a baseline 4dl gicalresourceimpacts c�esand regulations pec`esAct (ESA),the -ntal Quality Act (CEQA), pfan'(NCCP/�CP),. It should of the terrestrial habitat and assessment of the marine The existing land sueoQt a site'inojhdes residential development (i.e. mobile homes), com�nunjty service facilitlei)� e. publi��ark, community center, girl scout house), and paved�pa?king lots. The existtnj,developmapt does not provide suitable habitat for any sensitive s���clles and is not considered a Wildlife movement corridor. A public beach def nes theltorthern property bIul dary and is comprised of highly disturbed beach sand. The adjacent I� �po\rt Harbor represents potentially suitable nursery habitatfor marine life, which is addr� a ssepafatt ly in the Marine Biological Impact Assessment. Vegetation on the sde�s entill y ornamental including nor, -native trees and shrubs that provide potential nesting:babitat for migratory birds. A nesting bird survey is required prior to removal of vegetation on the site to reduce the potential for nest failure during the nesting season. Newport Harbor is a Traditionally Navigable Water and is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and the City of Newport Beach Coastal Land Use Program (CLUP). s M. ®11IN 4, &Tithael Brandlnao Associates Bakersfield 661.3342755 Fresno 559.497.0310 Irvine 714.508.4100 Pakn Springs 760,322.8847 Sacramento 916.447.1100 San Bernardino 909.884.2255 San Ramon 925.830.2733 a Site LocationENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES • PLANNING • NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT w v.bxandman.com Rosalinh Ung August 6, 2008 Page 2 The project site encompasses approximately 10 acres, and is located in the southwestern portion of the City of Newport Beach in Orange County, California as shown on Exhibit 1. It can be found on the Newport Beach, California, United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-mmute topographic quadrangle map, Section 33 of Township 6 South, Range 10 West (Exhibit 2). The site is specifically located north of West Balboa Boulevard, south of Newport Harbor east of 19th Street and west of 15t^ Street as shown in - Exhibits 3. Methodology Prior to the field visit, MBA reviewed available literature and maps to evaluate the potential for sensitive biological resources to occur in the vicinity of the project site. This included a review of topographic maps, aerial photography, and sensitive species databases. A list of sensitive plant and wildlife species recorded in the vicinity of the site was completed from the California Department of Fish and Game's (CDFG) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and California Native Plant Society Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI). Additional review included literature detailing the habitat requirements of sensitive plant and wildlife species that potentially occur in the project area. Subsequently, a reconnaissance -level field survey was conducted. The primary objective of the survey is to document existing site conditions and determine the potential presence of sensitive species that require a significance analysis pursuant to CEQA including but not limited to species formally listed as threatened and/or endangered under the ESA and CESA, California Species of Special Concern, designated as Fully Protected by CDFG; given a status of 1A,1B, or 2 by the CNPS, or designated as sensitive by City, County, or other regional planning documents. Special attention was focused on the potential suitability of the site for light-footed clapper rail (Rallus longirostris levlpes), California least tern (Sternula antlllarum brown!), coastal California gnatcatcher (Polloptila callfornica californica), western snowy plover (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus), southern tarplant (Centromadla parryl ssp. Australis), Coulter's saltbush (Atriplex coulten), Davidson's saltscale (Atriplex serenana var. davidsonii), estuaryseablite (Suaeda esteroa), and mud nama (Nama stenocarpum). Each of these sensitive species of animals and plants are known to occur in the region and thus must be assessed regarding their potential presence. The reconnaissance -level field survey was conducted on July 10, 2008, between 11:00 and 14:00. Weather conditions during the field survey included temperatures rangingfrom 70 to 75 degrees Fahrenheit, with an 80%cloud cover and winds between 2 and 10 miles per hour. Environmental Setting The existing site encompasses 10 acres and includes 1) a Community Center, 2) Girl Scout House 3) Las Arenas community park including a children's play area, four tennis courts, and a public beach; and 4) a 57-space mobile home park with an associated parking lot. Surrounding land uses include the Newport Harbor to the north, residential housing to the east, West Balboa Boulevard to the south, and residential and commercial uses to the west. The proposed project entails the development of a resort hotel, marina, and public use beach. Topographic Features Topographically, the project site is located on the coast at the southern end of Newport Harbor. The site is relatively flat except where the public beach slopes to the water. The project site has an elevation range of 5 to 8 feet above sea level. Plant Communities/Land use Rosalinh Ung August 6, 2008 Page 3 The plant communities and land uses on the site include ornamental landscaping, turf, disturbed/developed areas and sandy beach; no sensitive plant communities or suitable habitat for sensitive plants are present on the site. Vegetation on the site is exclusively ornamental landscaping between structures and in and around public use areas (Exhibit 4). Table 1 below provides a summary of the plant community and land use acreages. Representative photos of the communities can be found in Exhibit 5a - 5c. Table 1: Plant Community/Land Use Acreages Plant Community Approximate Area (acres) Ornamental 0.7 Turf 0.4 Disturbed/Developed 7.6 Sandy Beach 1.3 Total 10 ORNAMENTAL (0.7 ACRE) Several individual specimens of white bottlebrush (Callistemon salignus), weeping fig (Ficus benjamina), Peruvian pepper (Schinus molle) and ornamental palm trees are scattered throughout the property for landscaping purposes. A hedge of ornamental shrubs is also present between the public beach and the mobile home park, and a line of ornamental palm trees lines the sidewalk that borders the public beach. These individual trees and landscaped areas of ornamental vegetation are not associated with any native vegetation and provide only limited habitat value, primarily as cover and perching areas for birds and common terrestrial wildlife that are normally found in and associated with developed areas. The scattered ornamental landscaping covers a total of approximately 0.7-acre of non-native vegetation. TURF (0.4 ACRE) Turf includes any form of grass lawn and comprises approximately 0.4-acre of the property. By definition, turf includes areas that are covered with grass, regularly mowed, and artificially irrigated. A long strip of turf extends between the sidewalk and the tennis courts along West Balboa Boulevard, and several patches of turf are scattered between the mobile homes. DISTURBED/DEVELOPED (7.6 ACRES) Disturbed/developed land use includes any form of human disturbance, especially in cases of permanent impacts to natural communities, and comprises approximately 7.6 acres of the property. By definition, disturbed areas include dirt roads, off -highway use, pavement, concrete, buildings and structures, bridges, agricultural activities, and permanent flood control measures. Disturbed/developed areas on the site Include roads, a 56-space mobile home park and associated parking, a metered 21-stall surface parking lot, and Las Arenas Park, which includes the Balboa Community Center, Girl Scouts House, a children's play area, and four public tennis courts. Rosalinh Ung August 6, 2008 Page 4 SANDY BEACH (1.3 ACRES) Sandy beach habitat includes any unvegetated coastal area comprised exclusively of sand, and covers approximately 1.3 acres of the property. By definition, this area includes the sandy shore adjacent to Newport Harbor that is subject to wave action. The strand of beach is approximately 60 feet wide and runs along the northern portion of the property for approximately 1,400 linear feet. Wildlife The plant communities discussed above provide marginally suitable foraging habitat for a few local terrestrial wildlife species, all of which are urban -adapted, and no sensitive wildlife or suitable habitat for sensitive wildlife are present on the site. Invertebrates observed within the project site include sand fleas (insects in the family Ceratopogonidae), beached moon jellies (Aurelio aurita), and sand crabs (Emerita talpolda). The project site contains shallow marine habitat that provides potentially suitable habitat for several marine fish. The Marine Biological Impact Assessment will include a detailed description of marine invertebrate and fish species on site. No amphibian or reptile species were observed during the field survey, and none are expected to occur due to lack of suitable habitat. The ornamental trees and shrubs on the project site provide suitable foraging and perching habitat for passerine birds, and the stretch of calm beach provides suitable foraging habitat for shore birds. Birds observed on site are urban -adapted and include house sparrow (Passerdomesticus), house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), snowy egret (Egretta thula), brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis), and gull -billed tern (Sterna nllotica). No mammals were observed during the field survey, however, feral dogs and cats, and opossums can be expected to occur on the site. Special Status Species The following federally or state listed species are reported to occur within the vicinity of the site and were evaluated for their potential to occur on -site: light-footed clapper rail (Rallus longirostris levipes), California least tern (Sternula antillarum brown!), coastal California gnatcatcher (Polloptila californica californica), western snowy plover (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus), southern tarplant (Centromadia parry! ssp. Australis), Coulter's saltbush (Atriplex coulterq, Davidson's saltscale (Atriplex serenana var. davidsonir), estuary seablite (Suaeda esteroa), mud name (Name stenocarpum), chaparral sand -verbena (Abronia vlllosa var. aurita). No federally or state listed species are present on the site, and no suitable habitat for any federally or state listed species is present on the site, therefore, no further action is required pursuant to the ESA or the CESA. The Marine Biological Impact Impact Assessment evaluates potential effects on the California Least Tern from construction of the proposed marina. Additionally, no species or habitat protected under the Orange County Coastal -Central NCCP/HCP are present on the site, therefore, no further action is required pursuant to the NCCP/HCP. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project will not have significant impacts on any special status or sensitive plant communities, special status or sensitive plants, or special status or sensitive species. Nesting Birds The project site contains several ornamental trees and shrubs that provide marginally suitable nesting habitat for migratory birds. Therefore, pursuant to the MBTA and CFG Code, removal of any trees, shrubs, or any other potential nesting habitat shall be conducted outside the avian nesting season unless surveys are conducted to determine the absence of nesting birds. The nesting season generally extends from early Rosalinh Ung August 6, 2008 Page 5 February through August, but can vary slightly from year to year based upon seasonal weather conditions. Any activity that may potentially cause a nest failure, requires a biological monitor, therefore, a pre - construction nesting bird survey will be required prior to any vegetation removal or ground disturbance activities to determine if nesting activity occurs onslte. If active nests are observed, construction activity must be prohibited within a buffer around the nest, as determined by a biologist, until the nestlings have fledged. Construction activity may encroach within the designated buffer at the discretion of the biological monitor. Once the nestlings have fledged, construction activity may proceed. Wildlife Movement Corridors The project site does not provide wildlife movement corridors. Opossums, and feral cats and dogs can be expected to travel though the site and surrounding developed areas, but the site does not provide narrow connectivity between large areas of open space on a local or regional scale; therefore, implementation of the project will not have significant impacts on wildlife corridors. The portion of the site included in Newport Harbor, may provide suitable nursery habitat for fish and marine resources, which will be addressed in the Marine Biological Impact Assessment. Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands Based upon MBA'sjurisdictional assessment during the field survey, the project site overlaps with Newport Harbor, a traditionally navigable water that is considered jurisdictional by regulatory agencies. A Delineation of Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands is required in order to document potential impacts to any waters or wetlands that may require a permit. Based upon this assessment for the project site, the shallow marine habitat within Newport Harbor that overlaps with the project site boundary falls under the jurisdiction of the USACE pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act, RWQCB pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA, and the City of Newport Beach CLUP pursuant to the CCA. CONCLUSION Pursuant to CEQA, no significant impacts to terrestrial biological resources on site will occur as a result of the proposed project. Findings regarding impacts to marine biological resources are discussed in the Marine Biological Impact Assessment prepared by Coastal Resources Management, Inc. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 714-508-4100. Sincerely, Diana Lloyd, Regulatory Specialist/Biologist Michael Brandman Associates 220 Commerce, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92602 Enc: Exhibit 1- Regional Exhibit 2 - Vicinity topographic base Exhibit 3 - Vicinity aerial base Exhibit 4 - Vegetation/Land Use Map Exhibit 5 - Site Photographs Rosallnh Ung August 6,2008 Page 6 B.\0064-Marina Park EIR\Nalural Resoureos\00640022_BloRosourcasLaller Jac UCLbbb