Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT AND OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT
111111111111111111111111 Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement Pi 1 i 1 1 i CIRCULATION IMROVEN04T AND OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA DRAFT PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT STATE CLEARINGHOUSE # 91041017 PREPARED FOR: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH P.O. BOX 1768 3300 NEWPORT BOULEVARD NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92659-1768 19 9 DI-090)1131A ASB PLANNING, INC. AND STA PLANNING, INC. 500 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 300 NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 JUNE 19 1992 1 11 L_! i I r TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................. x Introduction ........................................... x ProjectEnvironmental Summary ............................. x General Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures ........... xvii Summary of Alternatives ................................ xxiii II. INTRODUCTION ...................................... 1 GeneralPurpose ....................................... EnvironmentalProcedures ................................. MajorIssues .......................................... Areasof Concern ....................................... TechnicalStudies ....................................... EIR Format and Organization .............................. Project Sponsors and Contact Persons ........................ ' III. PROJECT 1 3 4 4 F1 ProjectLocation ....................................... 8 Project Characteristics 8 Pronosed Actions ....................................... 30 Potential Future Discretionary Actions ........................ 32 Project Objectives 33 Lead, Responsible and Trustee Agencies ...................... 36 IV. REGIONAL, SUBREGIONAL, AND LOCAL SETTING .......... 39 Introduction.......................................... 39 Regional Setting ....................................... 39 Subre Local etti Setting ...................................... 41 Local Setting . 46 V. EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS, IMPACTS, MITIGATION MEASURES, AND LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE ................ 48 LandUse ............ ................................ 48 Aesthetics/Light and Glare 88 Transportation/Circulation................................ 136 AirQuality .......................................... 182 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTD.) Noise................................................ 196 Biological Resources ..................................... 236 , EarthResources ........................................ 271 WaterResources ........................................ 292 ' Housing ............... . . 302 CulturalResources ....................................... 310 Archaeological Resources ............................ 310 Paleontological Resources ............................ 325 Public Services and Utilities ................................ 332 VI. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT ............. 364 Introduction............................................ 364 ' Alternatives Under Consideration ............................ 384 Alternatives Considered But Rejected from Further Consideration ... 399 Other Considerations ..................................... 412 VII. LONG-TERM IMPLICATIONS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT .. 413 Short -Term Use versus Long -Term Productivity ................. 413 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes .................. 414 Growth -Inducing Impacts of the Proposed Project ............... 414 VIII. SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION IX, ENVIRONMENTAL SUMMARIES ......................... 416 ' Inventory of Impacts Found to Be Insignificant .................. 416 Impacts Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance .................. 418 Significant Unavoidable Impacts ............................. 420 Inventory of Recommended Mitigation Measures ................ 421 X. REPORT PREPARATION RESOURCES .................... 440 Preparers and Contributors to the•Report ..................... 440 , Persons and Organizations Consulted during Preparation of ThisReport ............................................ 441 Definitions ............................................. 442 SourcesConsulted ....................................... 446 iii i IAPPENDICES - Volume II (Bound Under Separate Cover) 1 Appendix A - Public Participation and Review Appendix B - Traffic Report Appendix C - Air Report 1 Appendix D - Noise Report Appendix E - Biology Report Appendix F - Geology Report Appendix G - Cultural Resources Report Appendix H - Planned Community Texts 1 [J i I I I 1 I I 1 I 1. iv I LEI I Ij I I I I I Pi I I I I I I LIST OF EXHIBPPS Exhibit 1 Regional Location ................................... 9 Exhibit 2 Subregional Location ................................ 10 Exhibit 3 Local Vicinity and Project Sites ........................ 11 Exhibit 4 USGS Map ....................................... 12 Exhibit 5 San Diego Creek South - PC Text Map .................. 20 Exhibit 6 San Diego Creek North - PC Text Map .................. 21 Exhibit 7 Jamboree/MacArthur - PC Text Map .................... 23 Exhibit 8 Upper Castaways - PC Text Map ....................... 24 Exhibit 9 Bay View Landing - PC Text Map ....................... 26 Exhibit 10 Newporter North/Newporter Knoll - PC Text Map .......... 27 Exhibit 11 Block 800 - PC Text Map ............................ 29 Exhibit 12 Freeway Reservation - PC Text Map .................... 31 Exhibit 13 Approved and Proposed Projects ....................... 40 Exhibit 14 Existing Surrounding Land Use/General Plan - San Diego Creek South ............................. 49 Exhibit 15 Existing Surrounding Land Use/General Plan - San Diego Creek North ............................. 52 Exhibit 16 Existing Surrounding Land Use/General Plan - Jamboree/MacArthur .............................. 54 Exhibit 17 Existing Surrounding Land Use/General Plan - Upper Castaways 56 Exhibit 18 Existing Surrounding Land Use/General Plan - Bay View Landing 58 Exhibit 19 Existing Surrounding Land Use/General Plan - Newporter North/Newporter Knoll .............................. 60 Exhibit 20 Existing Surrounding Land Use/General Plan - Newporter Resort 62 Exhibit 21 Existing Surrounding Land Use/General Plan - Block 800 :.... 64 Exhibit 22 Existing Surrounding Land Use/General Plan - Corporate Plaza West .............................. 66 Exhibit 23 Existing Surrounding Land Use/General Plan -Freeway Reservation ............................... 68 Exhibit 24 Sight Plane Ordinance - Corporate Plaza West ............. 83 Exhibit 25 Site Photo Index ................................... 89 Exhibit 26 Site Photos - San Diego Creek South .................... 90 Exhibit 27 Site Photos - San Diego Creek North .................... 92 Exhibit 28 Site Photos - Jamboree/MacArthur ..................... 94 Exhibit 29 Site Photos - Upper Castaways (A) ..................... 95 Exhibit 30 Site Photos - Upper Castaways (B) ..................... 96 Exhibit 31 Site Photos - Upper Castaways (C) ..................... 97 Exhibit 32 Site Photos - Bay View Landing (A) .................... 99 Exhibit 33 Site Photos - Bay View Landing (B) ..................... 100 Exhibit 34 Site Photos - Newporter North/Newporter Knoll (A) ........ 102 Exhibit 35 Site Photos - Newporter North/Newporter Knoll (B) ........ 103 u II Li LIST OF EX MrrS (CONT'D) Exhibit 36 Site Photos - Block 800/Corporate Plaza West ............. 106 , Exhibit 37 Site Photos - Freeway Reservation (A) ................... 108 Exhibit 38 Site Photos - Freeway Reservation (B) ................... 109 Exhibit 39 Site Photos - San Diego Creek South .................... 112 Exhibit 40 Site Photos - Newporter North/Newporter Knoll ........... 121 Exhibit 41 Site Photos - Newporter North/Newporter Knoll ........... 122 Exhibit 42 Site Photos - Newporter North/Newporter Knoll ........... 123 Exhibit 43 Site Photos - Freeway Reservation ...................... 130 Exhibit 44 Site Photos - Freeway Reservation ...................... 131 Exhibit 45 Existing ADT Volumes (1990) and Midblock Lanes ......... 137 Exhibit 46 1995 Circulation System .............................. 140 Exhibit 47 2000 Circulation System .............................. 143 Exhibit 48 2010 Circulation System .............................. 147 Exhibit 49 2010 ADT Volumes (000's) with and without Project ........ 154 Exhibit 50 Examples of Typical Noise Levels ...................... 197 Exhibit 51 Typical Outdoor Noise Levels ......................... 198 Exhibit 52 California Land Use Compatibility Studies ................ 200 Exhibit 53 Noise Measurement Sites 1 and 2 Facing the Freeway Reservation Development ..................... 207 Exhibit 54 Noise Measurement Sites 3, 4 and 5 Facing the Freeway Reservation Development ..................... 208 Exhibit 55 Helicopter Noise Measurement Sites 1 and 2 .............. 211 Exhibit 56 Helicopter Flight Track 1 ............................ 212 Exhibit 57 Helicopter Flight Track 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213 Exhibit 58 Biological Resources Proposed Development Areas - San Diego Creek South .............................. 244 Exhibit 59 Biological Resources Proposed Development Areas - San Diego Creek North .............................. 246 Exhibit 60 Biological Resources Proposed Development Areas - Jamboree/MacArthur................................ 247 Exhibit 61 Biological Resources Proposed Development Areas - UpperCastaways ................................... 248 Exhibit 62 Biological Resources Proposed Development Areas - Bay View Landing .................................. 249 Exhibit 63 Biological Resources Proposed Development Areas - Newporter North/Newporter Knoll ...................... 250 Exhibit 64 Biological Resources Proposed Development Areas - ' Block800........................................ 254 Exhibit 65 Biological Resources Proposed Development Areas - Corporate Plaza West ............................... 255 , Exhibit 66 Biological Resources Proposed Development Areas - FreewayReservation ................................ 256 vi , LIST OF EXHIBITS (CONTD.) ' Exhibit 67 California Gnatcatcher Survey Findings - Bay View Landing ... 261 Exhibit 68 California Gnatcatcher Survey Findings - Newporter North/Newporter Knoll . 264 Exhibit 69 Fire Station Locations • . • . • • ............... • ....... 334 Exhibit 70 Newport Mesa Unified School District School Locations ...... 344 vii F LIST OF TABLES ' Table A Project Characteristics - Circulation Improvement and OpenSpace Agreement .............................. 15 Table B Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement FrontageImprovements .............................. 17 Table C Building Heights in Newport Center ..................... 128 Table D Existing ICU Summary (1990) 138 Table E 1995 Circulation System Improvements (Committed) ........ 141 Table F Anticipated Circulation System Improvements: 1995 to 2000 .. 144 Table G 2010 Circulation System Improvements . 148 Table H Trip Generation Summary ............................ 151 Table I Citywide Land Use and Trip Generation Summary .......... 153 Table J 1995 ICU Summary ................................. 155 Table K 1995 Project Impacts ................................ 157 ' Table L Table M 1995 Intersection Improvements ........................ 2000 ICU Summary 158 160 Table N 2000 Project Impacts ................................ 162 Table O 2000 Intersection Improvements (Uncommitted) . 163 Table P 2010 ICU Summary ................................. 165 Table Q 2010 Project Impacts ................................ 168 Table R MacArthur Boulevard Widening Impacts ................. 169 ' Table S 1995 Top ICU Summary (Project Impact of 1 Percent or More) 173 Table T 2000 Top ICU Summary (Project Impact of 1 Percent or More) 177 Table U Net Benefit to Circulation System Due to the Project (Year 2000) ....................................... 178 Table V Initial List of Circulation Improvements .................. 180 Table W Air Quality 1985-1990 El Toro Marine Station 186 Table X ............. Air Quality 1985-1990 Costa Mesa Station ................ 187 Table Y Emissions from the Combustion of Natural Gas ............ 190 Table Z. Emissions Generated by Electrical Use .................. 190 Table AA Comparison of Emissions . 192 Table BB Existing Noise Levels ................................ 202 Table CC Ambient Noise Measurements for Residences Facing the Proposed Freeway Reservation Site ............................. 209 Table DD Existing Helicopter Noise Levels at the Proposed Newporter North Site (Sites 1 and 2) ............................ 214 Table EE Future Increase in Traffic Noise (dB) 216 Table FF Future Noise Levels ................................ 222 Table GG Plant Communities Existing On -site ..................... 237 Table HH Regional Active Faults - Seismic Parameters .............. 272 Table II Existing Geological Constraints Pertaining to ' Proposed Project Sites ........... I ................... 274 viii I , LIST OF TABLES (CONT'D) , Table JJ Potential Significant Adverse Impact by Site ............... 279 Table KK New Housing Units by Income Category 1989-1994 ......... 304 Table LL Jobs/Housing Ratio Surrounding Project Sites ............. 305 Table MM City of Newport Beach Fire Department Stations to Serve the Project Sites 333 ................................... Table NN Existing Water Services to the Project Sites ............... 336 , Table 00 CSDOC Trunk Lines ............. I ................... 339 Table PP Recreation and Open Space Inventory, City of Newport Beach . 340 Table QQ Newport -Mesa Unified School District Current Enrollment andCapacity .......... ....... ................ 345 Table RR Anticipated Water Usage for Proposed Residential Developments..................................... 349 Table SS CSDOC Generation Rates for Residential Development ..... 351 Table TT Existing, Projected Need, and Proposed Recreation andOpen Space ................................... 353 Table UU Student Generation Rates ............................ 355 Table W Summary of Alternatives ............................. 365 Table WW Comparison of Alternatives Under Consideration , with Project Objectives .. ..... .. ................. 367 Table XX Summary of Alternatives - Comparison of Environmental Impacts368 Table YY No Project/No Agreement - Development Under the Existing GeneralPlan ...................................... 388 Table ZZ Land Use - Reduced Development/No Agreement .......... 392 Table AAA Land Use Assumptions Transfer of Development ' toNewport Center ................................. 403 1 H I I ix I I 1 n 7 u i 1 �I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION This Program Environmental Impact Report analyzes the potential significant environmental impacts resulting from implementing the Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement (Agreement). The project assembles eleven (11) sites located in the City of Newport Beach, in Orange County, California. Ten of the eleven project sites are located east of Newport Bay and generally along Jamboree Road, MacArthur Boulevard, Coast Highway, and within Newport Center in west -central Orange County. The program EIR is to be used in considering the following requested actions: • Vest entitlement for eleven sites consistent with the existing General Plan and in conformance with provisions of the TIaffic Phasing Ordinance through adoption of the Agreement. • Establish amount and location of open space dedication through adoption of the Agreement. • Establish the commitment and timing for certain circulation improvements and funding through adoption of the agreement. • Determine compliance with the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance and require the payment of the City of Newport Beach Fair Share Fee Ordinance. • Amend the Land Use Plan for the City of Newport Beach Local Coastal Program for the sites which are within the Coastal Zone to provide a greater level of detail regarding the designated land uses for each site consistent with existing General Plan designations and P.C. Texts. • Provide "approval in concept" for an application for a Master Coastal Development Permit (MCDP) for all of the sites within the coastal zone with a provision that site specific development will require individual coastal development permits subsequent to the approval of a Master Coastal Development Permit. PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL SUMMARY This Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) evaluated the project's potential and cumulative impacts regarding land use, aesthetics/light and glare, transportation/circulation, air quality, noise, biology, earth resources, water resources, housing, cultural resources, and x public services/utilities. The General Summary section of this EIR provides a summary of potential impacts, mitigation measures, and levels of significance. Land Use , The proposed development on each site will not conflict with the City of Newport Beach ' General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. All proposed development is consistent with the existing General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, The rezone of San Diego Creek North and ' Jamboree/MacArthur from Unclassified (U) to Planned Community (PC) will allow for the adoption of the PC District Regulations in conformance with the General Plan. No Project - specific or cumulative impacts associated with General Plan and Zoning will occur. ' The proposed development is considered to be infill development due to the location of the various sites and the existing uses adjacent to each site. The proposed development will not , disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of the City of Newport Beach. No project - specific or cumulative level impacts will occur. According to the California Department of Conservation - Orange County Important r Farmland Map (State Farmland Map) dated July, 1988, no prime agricultural lands are located in the City of Newport Beach. No agricultural land will be impacted with the proposed development. No project -specific or cumulative level impacts will occur. Aesthetics ' Proposed uses on all sites are not expected to obstruct public views of a unique natural feature or unique vistas. The alteration of on -site unique visual features will not occur on ' the San Diego Creek South, San Diego Creek North, Jamboree/MacArthur, Newporter Knoll, Block 800, Corporate Plaza West, and Freeway Reservation sites. The alteration of on -site unique visual features on the Upper Castaways and Newporter North sites will be , partially mitigated, but remain a significant adverse impact. The loss of significant open space will not occur on the San Diego Creek South, San Diego Creek North, Jamboree/MacArthur, Bay View Landing, Newporter Knoll, Block 800, Corporate Plaza ' West, and Freeway Reservation sites. The loss of significant open space on the Upper Castaways and Newporter North sites will be partially mitigated, but remain a significant adverse impact. The introduction of structures of landscaping will not be offensive in any ' of the project sites. On a cumulative basis, the proposed project sites surrounding the Bay, including Upper ' Castaways and Newporter North will result in the loss of open space in the City of Newport Beach. This impact is a significant adverse and unavoidable impact. On the Upper Castaways and Newporter North sites, bluff top visual impacts are considered significant. , Impacts from new sources of light and glare will not be significant. Increases in light and glare will not differ in character, design and intensity, or theme from surrounding properties for all the project sites. xi ' 1 Increases in light and glare will not differ in character, design and intensity, or theme from surrounding properties for any of the project sites. The introduction of intrusive sources of ' light and glare onto adjacent properties will not occur on all project sites. City Standards and Guidelines will be complied with for each site. ' On a cumulative basis, impacts from new sources of light and glare are considered insignificant. ' Transportation/Circulation The proposed project and past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects will ' impact traffic and circulation as analyzed in the years 1995, 2000, and 2010 in the City of Newport Beach. The impact that will occur is an increase in daily and peak hour traffic ' volumes. The proposed project will have a minor impact on the circulation system in adjacent communities. The proposed project will have a cumulative impact on adopted circulation plans and policies in the community. Finally, site access will impact immediately adjacent streets. Based upon City's criteria: Impacts on daily traffic volumes in the City of Newport Beach are considered to be ' insignificant. Traffic impacts on the adjacent cities of Costa Mesa, Irvine, and Huntington Beach are considered to be insignificant. No mitigation is necessary. No significant project -specific impacts related to the City of Newport Beach Circulation Element were identified. Additionally, the project as proposed meets the requirements of the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) and the Congestion Management Program. ' The proposed project and past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects will impact peak hour traffic volumes. Mitigation measures have been proposed to reduce or ' eliminate project -specific impacts in the years 1995, 2000, and 2010. Based upon City of Newport Beach criteria and flexibility permitted under the TPO and mitigation measures, project -specific impacts were not found to be significant. However, the analyses did find that ' the project would add measurable traffic to several intersections in the airport area which are already identified as tending to exceed the City's ICU criteria with or without the project. This additional traffic in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably ' foreseeable future projects is considered a significant cumulative adverse impact. Air Quality ' Short-term, project -specific impacts resulting from vehicular emissions, stationary emissions, and construction activities are mitigated to a level of insignificance. ' Emissions from short-term construction will contribute to a significant cumulative impact when considered in conjunction with all other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects. ' xii r Total emissions generated by the project, in conjunction with emissions generated by all other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, incrementally contributes to a significant cumulative adverse impact on regional air quality. This impact is partially , mitigated and remains significant. Noise The proposed project will not result in off -site traffic noise impacts. All short-term construction impacts will be mitigated to a level of insignificance. Roadways surrounding the Bay View landing, San Diego Creek North, , Jamboree/MacArthur, Corporate Plaza West, and Block 800 sites will not cause an exceedance of acceptable noise standards. , Onsite noise impacts which exceed acceptable noise levels affecting proposed residential development on the San Diego Creek South, Upper Castaways, Newporter North, Block 800, and Freeway Reservation sites will be mitigated to a level of insignificance. On a cumulative basis, the project will not result in significant cumulative noise impacts. Bioloav No impacts to biological resources were identified for the Newporter Resort, Block 800, or ' Corporate Plaza West sites. No significant impacts to sensitive species, including aphanisma, southern tarplant, red -shouldered hawk, light-footed clapper rail, and California black rail, were identified. r Mitigation measures provided for the possible loss of wetland habitat on San Diego Creek South, San Diego Creek North, Jamboree/MacArthur, Upper Castaways, Newporter North) ' and Freeway Reservation sites will be reduced to a level of insignificance. The loss of upland habitat on the Newporter North site is an unavoidable adverse project r impact. The introduction of light and glare on the San Diego Creek South site and its impact on r wildlife movement along Bonita Creek and San Diego Creek is mitigated to a level of insignificance. ' The potential impact on California gnatcatcher habitat from developing commercial uses on the lower portion of Bay View Landing is mitigated to a level of insignificance. Impacts to , California gnatcatchers habitat at Bay View Landing and Newporter North resulting from possible bluff stabilization and remediation for erosion control is partially mitigated, but remains a significant adverse impact. r X.11' r ' On an incremental level, the overall reduction in the general botanical and wildlife resources of the area through habitat loss will result in a significant cumulative impact. Development ' of the sites will result in cumulative biological impacts. Impacts to development sites will cumulatively impact wetlands, and the amount of terrestrial habitat available to resident wildlife species, resulting in significant cumulative impacts. The project will result in the overall reduction in the general botanical and wildlife resources of the area through habitat loss, the fragmentation of habitats, interruption of wildlife movement and a reduction of genetic exchange among wildlife populations in the area. These are considered significant ' adverse and unavoidable impacts. Earth Resources ' Project -specific impacts related to faulting and seismicity are mitigated to a level of insignificance. No impacts associated with liquefaction are anticipated on the ' Jamboree/MacArthur, Newporter Knoll, Block 800, Corporate Plaza West, and Freeway Reservation sites. The potential for liquefaction has been identified for the San Diego Creek South, San Diego Creek North, Bay View Landing, Upper Castaways, Newporter ' North, and Newporter Resort sites. Mitigation measures will reduce project -specific impacts on these sites to a level of insignificance. Impacts related to erosion on the Upper ' Castaways, Bay View Landing, Newporter North, and Newporter Knoll sites are reduced to a level of insignificance. Project -specific impacts related to bluff and slope stability on the Upper Castaways, Bay View Landing, Newporter North, and Newporter Knoll sites are ' reduced to a level of insignificance. Impacts related to compressible/collapsible soil conditions on all of the eleven (11) sites are mitigated to a level of insignificance. Impacts related to expansive/corrosive soil conditions on all of the eleven (11) sites are mitigated to a level of insignificance. Project -specific impacts associated with near surface groundwater potential are mitigated to a level of insignificance. ' On a cumulative basis, project related impacts to faulting/seismicity, collapsible soil, expansive/corrosive soil, and near surface groundwater potential are considered insignificant. ' Water Resources No adverse impacts from flooding to surface water or groundwater basins are expected. ' Short-term impacts from construction related sediment erosion will be mitigated to a level of insignificance. Impacts to drainage patterns due to the inadequacy of drainage systems will be mitigated to a level of insignificance. No significant cumulative impacts due to increased storm runoff from increases in impervious surface; increased risk of flooding; water supplies; or the currents, flow, or direction of the Upper Lower Newport Bay will result. A short-term cumulative impact on the water quality in Newport Bay will result from an increase in sediment runoff. An incremental long-term cumulative impact to water quality in the Newport Bay due to increased urban pollutants will result. This impact can be partially mitigated, but remains ' xiv 21 a significant adverse and unavoidable impact, Housing No substantial change in population characteristics is anticipated. No significant adverse impacts to the City's Housing or the City's jobs/housing balance are anticipated. No significant adverse impacts to the City's housing stock are anticipated. The proposed project will not cause a need for additional housing; no impacts are anticipated. No impacts to the City's jobs/housing balance are anticipated. No significant cumulative impacts are anticipated. Cultural Resources - Archaeological Resources The proposed project is not anticipated to result in significant archaeological impacts in the San Diego Creek South, San Diego Creek North, Jamboree/MacArthur, and Newporter Resort sites. The proposed project is expected to result in significant archaeological impacts on the Upper Castaways, Bay View Landing, Newporter North, Newporter Knoll, Block 800, Corporate Plaza West and Freeway Reservation sites. Implementation of standard City policies and requirements and recommended mitigation measures will mitigate these impacts to a level of insignificance. Because the extent of the potential loss of archaeological resources is unknown at this time, the incremental loss in conjunction with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects may result in a significant cumulative impact on archaeological resources. Implementation of the existing City policies and requirements and recommended mitigation measures, will mitigate any potential cumulative impacts to a level of insignificance. Cultural Resources -,Paleontological Resources The proposed project will not result in significant impacts to paleontological resources on the Newporter Resort and San Diego Creek South sites. Implementation of City policies and requirements and recommended mitigation measures including a requirement to protect cliff faces of sites along Upper Newport Bay, will mitigate project -specific and cumulative impacts to paleontological resources to a level of insignificance. The proposed project along with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects will result in a cumulative loss in paleontological resources. This impact is mitigated to a level of insignificance. xv I 0 r 1 I� 7 L Public Services/Utilities ' Project -specific impacts identified for electricity, natural gas, library services, parks and recreation, telephone services, and waste disposal are considered insignificant. Project - specific impacts identified for school system services, water, wastewater, and law enforcement are reduced to a level of insignificance with implementation of the appropriate City policies and requirements and the proposed mitigation measures. Until a new fire station is constructed and operational; serving North Newport Beach, a significant impact ' to fire services will occur on the Freeway Reservation and San Diego Creek South sites. On a cumulative basis, this project in conjunction with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects, will create an increased demand for: fire protection; law enforcement; school system services; electricity; natural gas; telephone; library, and solid waste disposal. These impacts contribute to an incremental cumulative impact on their type of public service and/or utility and are considered insignificant. J 1 I I H xvi M M M M M M W M i!= M M = = M= M GENERAL SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Resource Description of Impact Scope Mitigation Measures Level of Significance Land Use No significant impacts identified. Aesthetics/Light The proposed project will result in the Project -Specific. Refer to Mitigation Significant impact which is and Glare alteration of the natural coastal bluffs Measure 1. partially mitigated and due to stabilization for public areas on remains an unavoidable the Upper Castaways, Bay View significant adverse impact. Landing, and Newporter North sites. The proposed project will result in the Project -Specific. Cannot be mitigated. Significant impact that loss of significant vacant/open space cannot be mitigated and areas providing visual relief on the remains an unavoidable Upper Castaways and Newporter North significant adverse impact. sites. The proposed project in conjunction Cumulative None proposed. Significant impact that with other past, present, and reasonably cannot be mitigated and foreseeable future projects will result in remains an unavoidable the loss of vacant/open space areas significant adverse impact. providing visual relief due to development of sites surrounding the Bay. This loss is a significant impact. Transportation/ The proposed project, in conjunction Cumulative and Project- Refer to Mitigation Mitigated to a level of Circulation with all past, present, and reasonably Specific Measures 1 and 2. insignificance. foreseeable future projects, will impact peak hour traffic volumes. The proposed project will add Cumulative Refer to Mitigation Significant impact which is measurable traffic congestion to several Measures 1 and 2. partially mitigated and intersections in the airport area in remains an unavoidable conjunction with other past, present, and significant adverse impact. reasonably foreseeable future projects. Air Ouality The proposed project will result in Project -Specific. Refer to Mitigation Mitigated to a level of significant short-term construction- Measures 4-6. insignificance. related impacts. %vii L- GENERAL SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Resource Description of Impact Scope Mitigation Measures Leyd of Significance Air Ouality (Cont d) The proposed project will result in Project -Specific. emissions from mobile (vehicular) sources, combustion of natural gas, and the generation of electrical energy. The proposed project, in conjunction Cumulative with otherpast, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projectemissions, will contribute to art impact on regional air quality. Noise The proposed project will result in Project Specific significant short-term noise impacts due to grading and construction activities. The proposed project will exceed Project -Specific. acceptable noise Ievels onsite affecting residential development on the San Diego Creek South, Upper Castaways, Newporter North, Block 800, and Freeway Reservation sites. Biology The proposed project will result in the Project -Specific possible loss of weds d habitat on San Diego Creek South, San Diego Creek North, Jamboree/MacArthur, Upper Castaways, Newporter North, and Freeway Reservation sites. Refer to Mitigation Mitigated to a level of Measures 7-11. insignificance. Refer to Mitigation Significant impact whichis Measures 7-11. partially mitigated and remains an unavoidable significant adverse impact None proposed. Mitigated to a level of insignificance by existing City policies and requirements. Refer to Mitigation Mitigated to a level of Measures 12-14. insignificance. Refer to Mitigation Mitigated to a level of Measures 15-17,19 21, 23. insignificance. The proposed project will result in the Project Specific. Refer to Mitigation Mitigated to a level of introduction of light and glare on the Measure 22. insignificance. San Diego Creek South site which will impact wildlife movement along Bonita Creek and San Diego Creek. aviii i M M M M M M= M M M M M M M M M M M GENERAL SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Resource Description of Impact Scope Mitigation Measures Level of Significance Biolo¢v (Cont'd) The proposed project will impact Project -Specific Refer to Mitigation Significant impact which is Califonda gnatcatcher habitat on the Measures 24, 25. partially mitigated and Newporter North site due to bluff remains an unavoidable stabilization and remediation related to significant adverse impact erosion control. The proposed project will impact Project -Specific. Refer to Mitigation Significant impact which is California gnatcatcher habitat on the Measures 24, 25. partially mitigated and Bay View Landing site due to bluff remains an unavoidable stabilization and remediation and significant adverse impact. grading related to development of open space uses. The proposed project will result in the Project -Specific. Cannot be mitigated Cannot be mitigated and loss of upland habitat (introduced annual remains an unavoidable grassland) on the Newporter North site significant adverse impact. which could potentially result in the elimination of coyotes from all or a portion of Upper Newport Bay. The proposed project will result in an Cumulative. Cannot be mitigated. Cannot be mitigated and overall reduction in the general botanical remains an unavoidable and wildlife resources of the area significant adverse impact. through habitat loss, the fragmentation of habitats, interruption of wildlife movement, and a reduction of genetic exchange among wildlife populations in the area. Earth Resources The proposed project will result in Project -Specific. Refer to Mitigation Mitigated to a level of impacts related to faulting and Measures 26-29. insignificance. seismicity. M GENERAL SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Resource Description of Impact Scope Mitigation Measures Level of Siguiticance Earth Resources The proposed project will result in Project -Specific. Refer to Mitigation Mitigated to a level of Conti impacts related to liquefaction on the Measure 30. insignificance. San Diego Creek North, San Diego Creek Smith, Upper Castaways, Bay View Landing, Newporter North, and Newporter Resort sites. The proposed project will result in Project -Specific. Refer to Mitigation Mitigated to a level of impacts related to erosion on each of the Measures 31-35. insignificance. eleven (11) sites. The proposed project will result m Project -Specific Refer to Mitigation Mitigated to a level of impacts associated with bluff and slope Measures 36-40. insignificance. stability on all of the eleven (11) sites. The proposed project will result in Project -Specific. Refer to Mitigation Mitigated to a level of impacts related to compressible/ Measure 41. insignificance. collapsible soil conditions on all the eleven (11) sites. The proposed project will result m Project -Specific. Refer to Mitigation Mitigated to a level of impacts related to expansive/ corrosive Measure 42. insignificance. soil conditions on all of the eleven (11) sites. The proposed project will result in Pmject-Specific. Refer to Mitigation Mitigated to a level of impacts associated with near surface Measure 43. insignificance. groundwater potential on the Upper Castaways, NewporterNorth, Bay View Landing, Newporter Knoll, Newporter Resort, Corporate Plaza West, Block 800, and Freeway Reservation sites. � S M = = = M M M M M M= M M M M M GENERAL SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Resource Description of Impact Scope Mitigation Measures Level of Significance Water Resources The proposed project will result in Project -Specific. short-term impacts to water quality from construction -related sediment erosion. The proposed project will result in Project -Specific. impacts on an already inadequate drainage system due to increased drainage. The proposed project, in conjunction Cumulative. with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, will have a short-term impact on the water quality in Newport Bay due to sediment from construction. The proposed project, in conjunction Cumulative. with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, will have an incremental long-term impact to water quality in the Newport Bay due to increased urban pollutants. Housing No significant impacts identified. Cultural Resources Archaeology The proposed project could result in the Project -Specific. potential unearthing of unlmown archaeological resources on any of the eleven (11) sites. xxi Refer to Mitigation Mitigated to a level of Measures 44-49. insignificance. Refer to Mitigation Mitigated to a level of Measure 50. insignificance. Refer to Mitigation Mitigated to a level of Measures 44-49. insignificance. Refer to Mitigation Significant impact which is Measures 44-49. partially mitigated and remains an unavoidable significant adverse impact Refer to Mitigation Mitigated to a level of Measures 51-53. insignificance. GENERAL SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION Resource Description of Impact Scope Mitigation Measures Level of Signi}iance Cultural Resources The proposed project is expected to Aoject-Specific. Refer to Mitigation Mitigated to a level of Archaeology (Coni4) result in impacts to archaeological Measures 54-66. insignificance. resources on the sites of Upper Castaways, Bay View Landing, Newporter North, Newporter Knoll, Block 8W, Corporate Plaza West, and Freeway Reservation. The proposed project, in conjunction Cumulative. Refer to Mitigation Mitigated to a level of with otter past, present, and reasonably Measures 51-66. insignificance. future projects, may result in an impact on archaeological resources. Paleontology The proposed project will result in Project -Specific Refer to Mitigation Mitigated to a level of impacts to paleontological resources. and Cumulative. Measures 67-70. insignificance. Public Services and The proposed project will result in Project Specific Refer to Mitigation Mitigated to a level of Utilities impacts to school system services, Measures 71-73. insignificance water, law enforcement and wastewater. The proposed project will result in any Project -Specific. Cannot be mitigated. Significant impact that impact to fire protection services. cannot be mitigated and remains as unavoidable significant adverse impact Source: STA Planning, Inc. M M SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES Alternative Feasible Meets Project Under Further Environmentally Objectives' Consideration Superior I. No Project/No Development Alternative Yes No Yes' No 2. No Project/No Agreement - Development Under Yes Partially Yes' No Existing General Plan 3. Reduced Development - No Agreement Yes Partially Yes No 4. Partial Transfer of Residential Development Yes Partially Yes No from Newporter North to Newporter Center (No Agreement) 5a. Design Alternative Additional Active Paris on Yes Partially Yes Yes Bay View Landing 5b. Design Alternative Transfer of Active Park from Yes Partially Yes No Castaways to Bay View Landing 5c. Design Alternative Senior Housing on Bay Yes Partially Yes No View Landing 6. Alternative Agreement Provisions No N/A No N/A 7a. Intensification of Residential Development on No N/A No N/A Castaways 7b. Transfer of Development to Newport Center No N/A No N/A 7c. Additional Lighted Active Parks on Bayview No N/A No N/A Landing and Active Park on Newport Village 7d. Alternative Site Access - Castaways No N/A No N/A 7e. Alternative Site Access - Newporter North No N/A No N/A 7f. Additional Site Access - Castaways No N/A No N/A Source: ASB Planning, Inc. and STA Planning, Inc. 'See Table W W for a detailed comparison of alternatives under consideration with project objectives. 'CEQA requires that the No Project Alternative remain under consideration throughout the environmental review in decision making process. N/A = Alternatives which are not technically feasible and not under further consideration were not evaluated as to whether they meet the project objectives or are environmentally superior to the project. Il i 10YM_s •) � GENERAL PURPOSE This Program Environmental Impact Report (Program EIR) addresses the potential significant environmental impacts resulting from implementation of the proposed Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement (Agreement). The Program EIR is to be used in considering the approval of the Draft Agreement and related discretionary actions as outlined below: ' • Vest entitlement for eleven sites consistent with the existing General Plan and in conformance with provision of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance through adoption of the Agreement. ' • Establish amount and location of open space dedications through adoption of the Agreement. ' • Establish and/or amend Planned Community Texts for site zoned PC consistent with the vested entitlement and in conformance with provisions of ' the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. • Determine compliance with the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing ' Ordinance and require the payment of Fair Share Fees established by the City of Newport Beach Fair Share Fee Ordinance. ' • Amend the Land Use Plan for the City of Newport Beach Local Coastal Program for the sites which are within the Coastal Zone to provide a greater level of detail regarding the designated land uses for each site consistent with ' the proposed Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement and proposed P.C. Texts. • Provide "approval in concept" for an applicaton for a Master Coastal Development Permit (MCDP) for all of the sites within the coastal zone with a provision that site specific development will require individual coastal ' development permits subsequent to the approval of the Master Coastal Development Permit. ' These requested actions are discussed in greater detail in the Project Description referenced in Section III of this Program EIR. The following paragraphs briefly describe the origins, intent and contents of the Circulation Improvements and Open Space Agreement. Greater detail is also provided in the Project Description Section. ' The City of Newport Beach City Council established an ad hoc committee of three city council members to work with the Irvine Company (TIC) to develop a draft Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement. This draft Agreement will be considered by the t tCity Council. The ini tent of the ad hoc committee and TIC was to package the significant remaining land owned by TIC in the city of Newport Beach into a single development application covered by the draft Agreement. ' The Agreement, as currently drafted, would vest entitlement for 11 sites consistent with or less than the existing General Plan entitlements. The draft Agreement also identifies 140 t acres of open space which TIC would dedicate in fee. The dedication of 140 acres of open space would exceed General Plan and Park Dedication ordinance requirements by 69.5 acres. ' Through the Agreement, TIC would also commit to the following actions related to circulation system improvements and funding: ' 1) Fund early payment of Fair Share Fees. The amount of Fair Share Fees would be established by the City of Newport Beach Fair Share Ordinance ' based on the amount of entitlement vested under the Agreement. 2) To construct or post security for frontage improvements related to the 11 sites ' covered by the Agreement. 3) To advance additional funds for circulation improvements of benefit to the ' City. The Advance would be interest free. The Advance would be repaid by the City over a period of 20 years from 50% of Fair Share fees received from non -TIC development. Any outstanding balance on the advance would be ' forgiven after 20 years form the effective date of the Agreement. The draft Agreement establishes the Irvine Company's total funding commitment at $20.6 , million for the three (3) categories described above. TIC would also commit to making best efforts to secure permits and construct improvements ' to MacArthur Boulevard within the City of Irvine between Ford Road and the future alignment of the, San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor. The total funding commitment for this improvement would be $500,000. ' The City of Newport Beach has the principal authority to approve the project and is the Lead Agency for preparation and certification of this Program EIR. The material contained , in this Program EIR is intended to serve as an informational document for decisions to be made by the City and responsible agencies regarding the proposed project. State CEQA Guidelines require a brief statement describing the intended uses of an EIR. ' This is a Program EIR as defined in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15168. The Program EIR is intended to be used in the evaluation and consideration of the Agreement, adoption ' of and amendments to PC Texts and compliance with the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. It is also anticipated that future approvals related to this project will be able to utilize the ' information set forth in this report. 2 1 I n I This Program EIR discusses the direct and indirect impacts of the proposed project as well as cumulative impacts associated with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects. The Program EIR analyzes the impacts of development of the project as proposed as well as alternatives to the project. This analysis will allow the Lead Agency to review the full range of impacts associated with approval of the project. ENVIRONMENTAL PROCEDURES This Program EIR has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), as amended (Public Resources Code, Section 21000, et. seq.) and the State Guidelines (CEQA Guidelines) for implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (California Administrative Code Section 15000 et. seq.). This report complies with the rules, regulations, and procedures for implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act adopted by the City of Newport Beach. Environmental procedures that have been completed to date include: the preparation of an Initial Study and distribution of a Notice of Preparation on March 29, 1991 and a public scoping meeting on April 10, 1991. As a result of these initial environmental procedures it was determined that a Program EIR should be prepared. According to CEQA Guidelines, a Program EIR is one which may be prepared on a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project and are related either: geographically; as part of a chain ' of actions; in connection with rules to govern the conduct of a program; or, as individual activities carried out under the same authorizing authority and having similar environmental effects which may be mitigated in similar ways. The advantages of a Program EIR are that it can: provide an occasion for more exhaustive consideration of effects and alternatives than would be normally practical, ensure ' consideration of cumulative impacts, avoid duplicative reconsideration of basic policy considerations, allow the lead agency to consider broad policy alternatives and program wide mitigation measures, and allow a reduction of paperwork. I I 1 A Program EIR may be used to simplify the task of preparing environmental documents on later parts of the program by: providing the basis in an initial study for the determination of significant effects from later activity, incorporating by reference to deal with regional influences, or focusing an EIR prepared for a subsequent project in order to discuss only new effects which had not been considered before. MAJOR ISSUES The major issues of the project were identified by the Lead Agency in the March 1991 Initial Study. This Program EIR addresses the following issues: 3 E , Land Use Aesthetics/Light and Glare Transportation/Circulation ' Air Quality Noise Biological Resources ' Earth Resources Water Resources Housing ' Cultural Resources Public Services and Utilities TECHNICAL STUDIES The following technical studies were prepared for this report: ' Transportation/Circulation Austin -Foust Associates Air Quality Mestre Greve Associates Noise Mestre Greve Associates , Biological Resources S. Nelson, Consulting Biologist ' Geological Resources Zeiser Geotechnical Cultural Resources RMW Paleo Associates These studies are summarized in the appropriate environmental issue section. Each technical study is included in its entirety in this Program EIR in the Appendices. , AREAS OF CONCERN ' Areas of concern regarding the environmental impact of the proposed project have been expressed by representatives of local jurisdictions and residents in the project vicinity in ' response to the Notice of Preparation and during the noticed Scoping Meeting. The following indicates these areas of concern and where the issue is addressed in this Program EIR. ' 1. Compatibility with surrounding land uses in the project vicinity (Land Use Section.) 2. Project and cumulative impacts on the air quality in the project vicinity (Air Quality ' Section.) 4 1 I t3. Project and cumulative impacts on local and regional traffic and circulation conditions (Regional, Subregional, and Local Setting and Transportation Settings.) ' 4. Effects of the proposed project on biological resources in the project vicinity (Biological Resources Section). ' 5. Cumulative impacts on visual aesthetics in the project vicinity (Aesthetics Section.) ' 6. Range of alternatives to the proposed project (Alternatives section.) EIR FORMAT AND ORGANIZATION This report is organized to facilitate a basic understanding of the existing setting and ' environmental implications of development of the proposed project and to identify associated mitigation measures. ' The Executive Summary presents a summary of the project and the issues which surround it. The section includes a General Summary of Impacts, Recommended Mitigation Measures, and a Summary of Alternatives. ' The Introduction discusses the environmental procedures, major issues, technical studies, areas of concern, document format and organization, and project sponsors and contact persons. The Project Description includes a description of the project location and vicinity, identifies project objectives, and describes the project, including entitlement proposed to guide the siting of future development. The Regional, Subregional, and Local Setting section provides a general understanding of the local, subregional, and regional setting in which the project will occur. This section defines the scope of the cumulative impacts analysis. ' The Environmental Conditions, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures section presents the project's effects on the physical environment as mandated by CEQA as well as other project ' effects and mitigation measures. Each environmental issue evaluated, such as aesthetics/light and glare, noise, air quality, etc. is examined individually and cumulatively. Impacts, Mitigation Measures; and Level of Significance are identified in each case both on an ' individual and cumulative basis. Long -Term Implications of the proposed project include discussions on growth -inducing ' impacts; the relationship between short-term uses and long-term productivity; and irrever- sible environmental changes. Alternatives to the proposed project examines a reasonable range of alternatives to the ' proposed project, and compares the environmental effect of the proposed project with the effects of each alternative. The alternatives examined include: Alternatives Under Consideration ' • No Project/No Development ' • No Project/No Agreement -Development under Existing General Plan • Reduced Development - No Agreement • Partial Transfer of Residential Development from Newporter North to ' Newport Center (No Agreement) • Design Alternative A - With Agreement: Additional Active Park on Bay View Landing • Design .Alternative B - With Agreement: Transfer of Active Park from ' Castaways to Bay View Landing • Design Alternative C - With Agreement: Senior Housing on Bay View ' Landing Alternatives Considered But Reiected From Further Consideration • Alternative Agreement Provisions ' • Intensification of Residential Development on Castaways • Transfer of Development to Newport Center ' • Additional Lighted Active Park on Bay View Landing and Active Park on Newport Village ' • Alternative Site Access on Upper Castaways ' • Additional Site Access on Upper Castaways • Alternative Site Access on Newporter North t The Environmental Summaries include: Impacts Found Not to Be Significant, Impacts Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance, Significant Unavoidable Impacts, and Mitigation ' Measures. Report Preparation Resources lists preparers and contributors to the report, organizations ' and persons consulted, and sources consulted during preparation of the Program EIR. 6 ' I I I H Appendices are provided in Volume II of this report which include public participation and review and the technical reports for transportation/circulation, air quality, noise, biology, earth resources, and cultural resources. PROJECT SPONSORS AND CONTACT PERSONS The bead Agency for preparation of the Program EIR is the City of Newport Beach. The project applicant for this project is The Irvine Company (TIC). The environmental consultant to the City is the collaborative of ASB Planning, Inc. ASB and STA Planning, Inc. (STA) of Maple Valley, Washington and Newport Beach, California, respectively. Preparers of, and contributors to this report are listed in the Report Preparation Resources section of this document. Key contact persons are as follows: Lead Agency City of Newport Beach Ms. Patricia Temple Advance Planning Manag6r 3300 Newport Boulevard P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, California 92659-1768 (714) 644-3225 Project Applicant: The Irvine Company Mr. Tom Redwitz Vice President Land Development 550 Newport Center Drive, Suite 700 Newport Beach, California 92660 (714) 720-2332 Environmental Consultants: ASB Planning, Inc. Ms. Annette Sanchez Baesel Principal 23419 SE 217th Place P.O. Box 785 Maple Valley, Washington 98038 (206) 432-2921 STA Planning, Inc. Ms. Sheri Provost Project Director 500 Newport Center Drive, Suite 300 Newport Beach, California 92660 (714) 640-1700 1 ' PROJECT LOCATION I IJ III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement assembles eleven (11) sites owned by The Irvine Company into a single development application. The Agreement also includes frontage circulation improvements related to the eight sites which are proposed for residential, commercial, or office uses. The eleven sites and frontage improvements are located in the City of Newport Beach, Orange county, California. Ten (10) of the eleven (11) sites are located east of Newport Bay and generally along Jamboree -Road, MacArthur Boulevard, Coast Highway and within Newport Center. These sites include San Diego Creek South, San Diego Creek North, Jamboree/MacArthur, Bay View Landing, Newporter North, Newporter Knoll, Newporter Resort, Block 800, Corporate Plaza West, and Freeway Reservation East. One site, Upper Castaways, is located west of Newport Bay along Dover Drive. The Agreement also includes improvements to MacArthur Boulevard between Ford Road and the future alignment of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor within the City of Irvine. The local vicinity is defined as the corporate boundaries of the City of Newport Beach and its sphere of influence. A detailed description of the regional, subregional, and local vicinities is included in the Regional, Subregion], and Local Setting section of this EIR. The project is presented in its regional, subregional, and local perspectives in Exhibits 1, 2, and 3. The location of the project sites are identified on the United States Geological Survey (USGS) map in Exhibit 4 of this document. The location of the specific sites are also identified on Exhibit 3 - Local Setting. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS The City of Newport Beach City Council established an ad hoc committee comprised of three city council members to work with the Irvine Company (TIC) to develop a draft Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement. This draft Agreement will be considered by the City Council. The intent of the ad hoc committee and TIC was to package the significant remaining land owned by TIC in the City of Newport Beach into a single development application covered by the draft Agreement. The Agreement, if approved as currently drafted, would vest entitlement for 11 sites consistent with the existing General Plan. The draft Agreement also identifies 140 acres of open space which TIC would dedicate in fee. The dedication of 140 acres of open space would exceed General Plan and Park Dedication Ordinance requirements by 69.5 acres. 0 I M M M M M M M! M M M M M M M r M= M Ventura VENTURA LANCASTER Los Angeles • PASADENA • COVINA • •CULVER CITY SANTA NICA DOWNEY .) F • ANA SAN PIMRO"wo n HUNTINGTON BEAC 4 NEWPORT BEACI LAGUNA SAN San Bernardino *SAN BERNARDINO • ONTARI — RIVERSIDE *CORONA BANNING M '% PALM SPRINGS SANTA Riverside • INDIO 0 --••—..—..—..—..—.. San Diego County Imperial source: s i A rianning, inc. REGIONAL LOCATION .' ��-, smi.,. PIANNING, INC CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT EIR r��1■� City of Newport. Beach E9 no scals 1 ' s Garden Grove Fwy (22) s f SANTA AAA ' FOUNTAIN yyl �A- VALLEY ZHS ��� `�/ UNTINGTON! BEACH RVIN � Ste.\ •���,� f E qy % COSTA si ( MESA r � f� 1. s� � ° �• NEWPORT BEACH { orb I Toro N� rfido Alt n ent sA Source: STA Planning, Inc. SUBREGIONAL LOCATION MI SMinc. CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & PIANNING INC: ' "alOPEN SPACE AGREEMENT EIR no scale ' City of Newport Beach 2 "• gill 'll:l tl�e„mu ••a �I TE•1 K .� r �,'� •[J �� �p n i�'.I. j.:11� IN-il'YiE,�_-7••.ti•N o� wn 41 , "t, a1gg1 �'q f N _ .� � W?v '`•f J•11 W + • n IJJJ. , II p FU g ;• ` .�r•I _...,.z : 16 1 is tT4 •+�Stoma•` `ir' ` • , n/0� P fir, �5%♦ ♦•�, �', 4 ..'>� op 11 fit__-_ Fna St" Res V ° 'u �I a. _ __ yyy AYNE •, % Cn ••w NOv R p j -1 . I FAIRVILW �. y,• �(5 R Q C N7Y INGRGUN DS :f' ISanla An{ o / •°E / ;�• "s"�jl, -� ITE HOSPITAL V'Nt �1 tQ.• % 1. 11 w 7u Qrtrv¢ .�/ C\.� 1 ,rounNr club . - / ��_ - a yr `i �1 p , � t.J �. 11• •R ' IR1 a. c gP, ai O6B yvt-as. .i - .. 6P��� '• ,n 4� /^�ii^ +I i i'T• © 7r •'��•o ��Ir=.�� 1 •.._/ •,� Ir I r%'� a�i° rii•�oo 1 1)s^ �o .1110 / 7 11o.b $'_.. If' & mall Y d ee s �� ,� �` .0P4V' ♦ ,I X � J�\WN • jl �,� • I '�Tralier,Y` 0v 7 •h ° �/ a '°h" `�•I 1 1' 1 DUCK PONDS ��• de b • a �lGnoppin Park 7 • [[gyem •" . / ',// _ I + n O01 4 \ v 0 \ N '�^ ilm 0'.I COI ` a 1 aYanuN . I •S,h I �• ¢ Pi k• -� R a S A P @ s L sy' ecf•'.''' N+, , .q.. '.13.. ♦ M `�� a r, /' I'/, c•.. :h ) I1/ I/e�O .rc 7 I V, Z./cn re �1 ^��� l� vp•`"'1'{'.d / I Jjl• !&h aar 1 n� •\ ti" pis •'u i._Ih \ -jh N11 i 1\al t: ! a ` O •i',• " Y f i ' I i ', nitq(L Q• Sall I` 'S 1• s Tuiler , I1 i, •ti \ IE aporalors •,` I � � ,m ` 1 ,� ,/�� dAf � ♦ b-, is - S {P/),1 Jll Y. P �� E�CH \Lv e �-r��;i'Ifd�U1YlI'h; i�a:•'^'t, - �6 .. (. a I' ,Wain d J � TanF c :� � & b �+`.i` . f•{(�; 19 ')''.an• �°� l' ,. - pc''yx.^ 1� N�"j .rn V7': ' II• Cis PK ♦ :''s f` ,Ili"52 W�`: �,i1 -r 1 "�� —sa'ZDN - � `�� } oe -({ {1h5ri( ''n ,�•; / , r // l say �.' .>\ ,�.; ,,'�'�'-,�`'y�"i' f[•I �t, ` �Sy P�i 1 . �.r Y' ;ii�l)�^' 77 _ c e � 7/ I I '�` f •!nr ' Ifr._®dq / l � i M*�11' jjII. • UL1 r�r 1�(1�� � JiP AP 9 Y''fbys "4, Y /f3 Fl _. • �'._0 •/i _ / % /. lrr. 1 _.`'(!M1 i•�',1 '' 0 _Oa�� :\ A�• S E/ I �•� r„ r a¢ •. ".F fi" rrq(;/:��.,. �. 4./r •'. •-�_:,1 w •o%; ' M P•0 s 114 ti ♦e" 1 oe � l�'� kl`urvin I LLf• ' .r . c "�,. tiiG"•t •ey 7C��len s.l�. �,;` 1 �.Iti � r�"- /` n m1 • 5 > `Par \ "1,(Q "19,i( � 11y; 4 �W I l �Illage ( rw ,l A: ll VIS ro`♦,/("�1''N ., Wit- sr7uwnv I ♦9 / • lerx v �. /`^v�Ai rfn � tl ti 0v 018'1,.�s L •:177 ¢II f/ �i �` �i� i � i '• � ` ''�� ,�e cb r � `! , 'll P 4 G - '� :°or � � t , ' � wos ���y`� s L=9eb 1N r .� a r a _, `_' \ +I ? 'T y'\@' • �! 4e�_'rso-. � „•(� 125, -- aF i i °e' _ ,; ( / i 7!,/i, � ' `1 F7•r !.� •." (73) / l ♦lNailiyr7` �o ( �, ^'���1, .j ' I � h � � k, �• W�}� +41 • •_t i •iY'.Jl�ry� I �T"K� ` _ '1. ch r{• �" , eo ., n,V•..r OI` I 1 V e• ..�M '� R J •••••-+6•:'l\ 8 , , 1� i•'- - 71AT�y I1...= nT6 - -ts\�� -' dl g, 1 %� tN F•¢rr♦ A i,fl+Y,j 1,")Eli' •I /• l/Ke \ �` YL I v '7vb o ) itr,., = _ f „1n, 7 / " �, - 'Coi$iY ( )a ys/. `:\�-/ M Nt (��; FN , ,• , T. alYrlx J� , •••� _ dap "••. ,'( .f �4 a� �bial�I�'^i �fll/ I• , ) .ier ��r��j /�: +At �ST S,� am ar ,�4 ':..�I �'" '� �.•� �'t'"-``., v [.. hP, , y%II �.. r w.d/il 4�3•i�. 1 ; I , L. 1� Kam`. 11A�s`^u� ♦P%% L `,•'tt:ty,' 0•f `61'•`P ,, "6 - •v 4',4 �`' y 0 "•,.,, IfF�( - � , C.� .BN t eues/sln - IRVIr(• ' � 1'� ♦ L;;;; ' 1 •• �atlRNn(1'' , V �$ L,phl. HarbodC e�, �•�-�T�in COUNT �f :p►¢ •" _ .n,,{{ '\•,•-al ] ,�' l LlYnlo�� '•a _ _ S�I t150. Linrr�s\ //�!/ .( �`4r' n•>� u'4ae 5 :, 1�\ �+ 9' 1'1pn1Tl, ��' ®33 ooLighl a"i ^r Q�6 ` 1 ao r• `' sx, 'O� _ ___ s 0 • Y. 1 ( �d /. !UC Aree l� •has Arenrs s.w 'N�W 34 °L,¢hl v/Q Collins 1. `yu l__ B°�4 -LUW to, e15Y r ��. 1� %£pe• s 'D!•�/k-_. ...,•/p c. �I•�.- .i %�£j%�//j'!.L>_�'f ParNr = 4 1' - f $ r11 Pu esYL °.h . 5 �� BN. ".11ly.,ric-� `•,. a b :eve �?• i ..pe 'a I 1 d s' , 1 C 1$ 'e lv' . Imo,( a. , ` e `>'' ♦y�Y &� �� a a�) a°h•:(: t::/o"" ;i A .,•8alboaLami°� I I ., /. - .. •ga(d'p. yn�'n .r.. /�,a•b 8� Y, h'rWCh a r� $�. wa t'E Pfn.rµLnI. 36 l• ":F'Q "- P$,k4.4 ice' ,, iunnni muf_. ar A - SAN DIEGO CREEK,SOUTH >' CO_`01 del - B .- SAN' DIEGO CREEK -NOR T H - — --- - --- - -- - - I C - JAMBOREE/MACARTHUR C +fight D - UPPER CASTAWAYS " Llghl E - BAY VIEW LANDING 558 F - NEWPORTER NORTH G - NEWPORTER KNOLL H - NEWPORTER RESORT I -BLOCK 800 J - CORPORATE PLAZA WEST K -'FREEWAY RESERVATION Arch / LZci '1> �Z � Of,�?;t���•. 1 e fF �q ...,• °f•aa e ' r c e9 1 /,J��• a � In ~e li •1 Pelican Point",. ola Source: USGS Quad Maps -Newport rseacn, Laguna oeacn ana I usull USGS MAP PUNNING. INC CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT no scale City of Newport Beach 4 I ' Through the Agreement, TIC would also commit to the following actions related to circulation system improvements and funding: 1) Fund early payment of Fair Share Fees. The amount of Fair Share Fees would be established by the City of Newport Beach Fair Share Fee Ordinance based on the amount of entitlement vested under the Agreement. 2) Construct or post acceptable security for frontage improvements related to ' the 11 sites covered by the Agreement. 3) Advance additional funds for circulation improvements of benefit to the City. ' The advance would be interest free. The advance would be repaid by the City over a period of 20 years from 50% of Fair Share fees received from non -TIC development pursuant to the existing Fair Share Fee Ordinance. Any outstanding balance on the advance would be forgiven after 20 years from the effective date of the Agreement. The draft Agreement establishes the Irvine Company's total funding commitment at $20.6 million for the three (3) categories described above. ' TIC would also commit to making best efforts to secure permits and construct improvements to MacArthur Boulevard within the City of Irvine between Ford Road and the future alignment of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor. The total funding commitment for this improvement would be $500,000. The project as addressed in this Program EIR is the adoption and implementation of the proposed Agreement and approval of the following actions which are addressed by this Program EIR. ' • Vest entitlement for eleven sites consistent with the existing General Plan and in conformance with provisions of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance through ' adoption of the Agreement. • Establish amount and location of open space dedications through adoption of the Agreement. ' • Establish the commitment and timing for certain circulation improvements and funding through adoption of the Agreement. • Establish and/or amend Planned Community Texts for the sites zoned PC ' consistent with the vested entitlement and in conformance with provisions of the Traffic Planning Ordinance. " 13 • Amend the Land Use Plan for the City of Newport Beach Local Coastal r Program for the sites which are within the Coastal Zone to provide a greater level of detail regarding the designated land uses for each site consistent with ' the proposed Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement and proposed P.C. Texts. • Provide "approval in concept for an application for a Master Coastal ' Development Permit (MCDP) for all of the sites within the Coastal Zone with a provision that site specific development will require individual coastal , development permits subsequent to the approval of the Master Coastal Development Permit. • Determine compliance with the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing ' Ordinance and require the payment of Fair Share Fees established by the City of Newport Beach Fair Share Fee Ordinance. ' The following subsections describe the basic components of the Agreement including: the proposed level and type of entitlement to be allowed under the Agreement and proposed ' Planned Community Texts; the amount and location of dedicated open space; and, the extent of committed circulation improvements and funding. Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement The draft Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement consists of three key components: Vesting of General Plan Entitlement, Open Space Dedication, and Circulation Improvements/Funding(I?O compliance. Vesting of General Plan Entitlement. The draft Agreement establishes permitted uses and the density or intensity of development for the 11 sites included within the project. All proposed land uses and densities or intensities are consistent with or less than the adopted , Land Use Element of the City of Newport Beach General Plan. The Agreement requires that permitted uses, density or intensity of uses, and maximum height and size of proposed buildings shall be as defined in Planned Community Development Texts. Table A identifies ' the proposed land uses and density or intensity of development for each site. The Land Use Section of this Program EIR summarizes the permitted uses and development standards for each site as set forth in proposed Planned Community District Regulations. ' Open Space Dedication. The draft Agreement requires the dedication of land in fee simple to the City of Newport Beach for open space, parks, or public facilities. The amount and ' location of land to be dedicated shall be in accordance with areas identified for such uses on the Planned District Regulations for each parcel. Table A identifies the allocation of ' open space acreage within the 11 sites. Dedication of land for open space, park, or public facilities will exceed the requirements established by the General Plan and Park Dedication Ordinance. The dedications required by the Agreement represent 69.5 acres more land than ' would be required under the Current General Plan and Park Dedication Ordinance. 14 1 TAWAM M M = M M PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS -CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT AND OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT Entitlement Open Space' Property Gross Acres General Plan Proposed Development Area` General Plan' Proposed San Diego Creek South 21.0 Residential - 300 D.U. Residential - 300 18.6 3.4 2.4 D.U. San Diego Creek North 14.7 Office - 112,000 S.F. Open Space/Public 0 0 14.7 Facilities Jamboree/MacArthur 4.7 Office - 50,000 S.F. Open Space/Recre- 0 0 4.7 ation Upper Castaways 56.6 Residential - 151 D.U. Residential - 151 26.0 19.5 30.6 D.U. Bay View Landing 16.1 Restaurant - 10,000 Restaurant - 10,000 5.0 11.1 11.1 S.F. OR Health Club - S.F. OR Health 40,000 S.F. and Club - 40,000 S.F. Open Space and Open Space Newporter North 77.2 Residential - 212 D.U. Residential - 212 30.0 21.2 47.2 D.U. Newporter Kno112 12.0 Open Space Open Space 0 12.0 12.0 Newporter Resort _ 3 Additional Hotel Additional Hotel _ 3 0 0 Units - 68 rooms Units - 68 rooms Block 800 6.4 Residential - 245 D.U. Residential - 245 6.4 2.8 0 D.U. Corporate Plaza West 12.14 Additional Office - Additional 9.0 0 0 94,000 S.F. Office - 94,000 S.F. Freeway Reservation 28.3 Residential - 76 D.U. Residential - 48 11.0 .5 17.3 D.U. TOTAL ACREAGE 246.0 106 70.5 140.0 Source: City of Newport Beach GP = General Plan SF = Square Feet The Irvine Company - Irvine Pacific PDO = Park Dedication Ordinance DU = Dwelling Units ' Required under the General Plan and/or Park Dedication Ordinance. 2 Newporter Knoll site is located within the boundary of the Newporter North site but the overall gross acres reflect individual sites. 3 Development of Hotel Rooms to occur on existing site. 4 The entire Corporate Plaza West site is 12.1 acres of which 3.1 acres is already developed (office and landscape). Includes some areas for roadway purposes. 15 Circulation Improvements/FundinglTPO Compliance. The draft Agreement establishes the terms of responsibility for constricting or providing funding for circulation improvements. According to the draft Agreement, The Irvine Company shall assist in the funding of ' circulation system improvements as follows. 1. TIC would prepay in one lump sum the Fair Share Fees established by the City of ' Newport Beach Fair Share Fee Ordinance and based on the level of development entitlement vested by the Agreement. Without this requirement, the City of Newport Beach would normally receive the Fair Share Fees incrementally as building permits , for each of the development sites were issued. 2. Construct or provide acceptable security for completion of the frontage improvements ' listed in Table B in conjunction with development provided for in the Agreement. Dedication of necessary right-of-way for frontage improvements shall be made prior , to or when the frontage improvements are constructed. 3. TIC would make available additional funds to the City for use in funding or , constructing other circulation system improvements of benefit to the City which are consistent with the Circulation Element of the City's General Plan. The amount of the advance would be equal to $20.6 million less the cost of Fair Share Fees and ' Frontage Improvements listed on Table B. The advance would be interest free. The advance would be repaid by the City from 50 percent of Fair Share Fees collected pursuant to the existing Fair Share Fee Ordinance from other development in the , City. The City's repayment obligation on the advance would be forgiven 20 years from the effective date of the final Agreement. 4. TIC would use its best efforts to obtain all construction permits necessary for , widening MacArthur Boulevard (State Route 73) between Ford Road and the future alignment of the San Joaquin Transportation Corridor to a minimum of six travel , lanes and a minimum of three northbound travel lanes. These improvements would be consistent with the widening of MacArthur Boulevard as proposed'by the City of Newport Beach in association with Caltrans, the City of Irvine, the Transportation , Corridor Agency, and University of California, Irvine from Coast Highway (State Route-1) to existing State Route 73 ramps. The proposal for the MacArthur Boulevard widening is currently in the environmental review process. Direct project- related costs to comply with this obligation shall not exceed $500,000.00. The City will consider the following criteria in deciding which circulation system ' improvements will be funded with proceeds from the advance: a. Feasible improvements to intersections impacted by traffic generated by ' development permitted by this Agreement. 16 1 F u TABLE B CIRCULATION IMTROVEMENT AND OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS No. Property Frontage Improvements to Be Constructed or Bonded for with Project Development ' 1. San Diego Creek South 2. San Diego Creek North 3. Jamboree/MacArthur 4. Upper Castaways ' 5. Bay View Landing 6. Newporter North 1 F 1 7. Block 800 8. Corporate Plaza West 9. Freeway Reservation 10. Newporter Knoll 11. Newporter Resort 12. Other Projects Jamboree Road/University Drive frontage and intersections improvements. None None Provide R.W. and grade for ultimate width of Dover along property frontage. None Construct frontage improvements along Jam- boree at access to property. Install traffic signal at Santa Cruz/San Cle- mente intersection. None Construct 1/2 section of MacArthur to ulti- mate width along frontage of developed por- tion of property. None None A. Construct 1/2 section of MacArthur to ultimate width along frontage of TIC owned property at Newport Village. B. Construct 1/2 section of MacArthur to ultimate width along frontage of Big Can- yon Area 16 (presently bonded for). Source: Draft Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement - Development Agreement 3/92. 17 Pi Projects which would improve circulation at intersections which do not meet service level standards identified in Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code; and, Circulation improvements identified in the Congestion Management Program or then current Growth Management Plan, which are related to traffic generated by development authorized in this Agreement. Planned Community District Regulations (PC Texts) The applicant is requesting the adoptions of PC texts, or amendments to existing PC Texts, for most sites within the project. Adoption of PC Texts is requested for: San Diego Creek North Jamboree/MacArthur Upper Castaways Bay View Landing Newporter North/Newporter Knolls Corporate Plaza West PC Text amendments are requested for: San Diego Creek South (North Ford PC Text) Freeway Reservation (Harbor View Hills PC Text) Block 800 (Block 800 PC Text) Of the 11 sites, eight are zoned Planned Community (PC). Three sites are designated Unclassified (U); these include San Diego Creek North, Jamboree/MacArthur and Newporter Resort. The San Diego Creek North and Jamboree/MacArthur sites will be reclassified to Planned Community (PC) as part of this action. The following text describes the proposed amendments or adoptions. The San Diego Creek South site is bordered on the north by San Diego Creek, on the ea by Bonita Creek, on the south by University Drive, and on the west by Jamboree Road. main route of the future alignment of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation e Route 73) will pass to the east of the site. A future freeway access ra )oree Road to State Route 73 will begin on the western edge of the site. 1Newporter Knoll is included in the Newporter North PC Text. J H H Li San Diego Creek South is a 21 acre site. The City of Newport Beach General Plan designates the development of this site for a maximum of 300 multi -family residential units. The zoning proposed for this site is an amendment to the existing North Ford Planned Community Text. The Irvine Company is proposing development of 300 multi -family residential units on 18.6 acres and open space on 2.4 acres. The affordable housing goals of the City of Newport Beach Housing Element shall be met for this site and requirements may be satisfied off -site. A PC Text map of the site is provided in Exhibit 5. San Diego Creek North The San Diego Creek North site is bordered on the north and east by State Route 73 ramps, on the south by San Diego Creek Channel, and on the north and west by Jamboree Road. The future route of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor will pass to the east of the site. A future northbound freeway access ramp from Jamboree road to State Route 73 will extend across the western portion of the site. San Diego Creek North is a 14.7 acre site divided into two areas by the future Bay View Drive extension/University Drive North designated by the General Plan through the center of the site. The City; of Newport Beach General Plan designates development of this site for 112,000 square feet of office space and reservation of 2.5 acres for a fire station. The Irvine Company proposes dedicating the site for open space and public facility uses which would result in eliminating office use entitlement as designated in the General Plan. The site is zoned Unclassified (U). No PC Text exists for the site. The Irvine Company proposes redistricting the site from an Unclassified (U) zone to a Planned Community (PC) district and adopting a PC Text. A PC Text map for the site is shown on Exhibit 6. The uses proposed to be permitted in the lower southern portion of the site (Area 1) consist of preservation, restoration, and creation of habitat and wetland areas and ecological and agricultural research. Area 1 is located between the future alignment of Bay View Drive and the San Diego Creek Channel. The uses proposed to be permitted in the upper northern portion of the site (Area 2) consist of. active/passive public recreation such as hiking, biking, scenic outlooks and picnicking; biotic gardens; ecological and agricultural research; transportation corridors, appurtenant facilities, arterial highways and vehicular access; utilities and water tanks; fuel modification zones; drainage and flood control facilities; a park and ride facility; a fire station; and any grading necessary for these permitted uses. Jamboree/MacArthur The Jamboree/MacArthur site is bounded by MacArthur Boulevard on the east, a State Route 73 ramp on the south and southwest, and Jamboree Road to the north and northwest. 19 i I I 1 u I F1 RESIDENTIAL r OPEN SPACE SAN DIEGO CREEK SOUTH PC TEXT MAP CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT City of Newport Beach 4*4 tjource: van SpecK Associates ffAinc, PLANNING. I,(:. n no scale 5 u fi ;�C„[ L:,.G�.,es;::`:q:�;::t`;. •',,;; ,,;;, ,,;;•;, �„- MCP yyy •tti'� :^-'('tC�vl � il, O �,j� [•j: :• i.,: iE �a,K: , iY:.r:t+;tw; �"'t ir,'•� .;?i; rd4t��' s`,^' � �, -p i O ,{ � .':jsr._nC`7 �'�tiRT;°,..y4sl•_iaA"'`,) i :na�q V� r[S ". V 5i: •.i"r}'(2s` � `}i� '+:��.1y 'i2Y ?' �• •.i.7J. , Q 7Q' %iki:`,hatiil,•�y2�5`^Y•�, ,�,',;i+:`_F!',r`�1�<<:':ta; AD '9% q�, 7,j� a4`.�.ii��``'..�z��F,a�il�'`'.`�Rc' '.J:•s,:'w;f;;f�y�f .p V��w � �?;, .�p'4h '^�ni.i�i+.4r�j �'r:,}?,.:• =��}^r2va . �•n`•�::'TSj�:ii � V IN ,.I'5 R4% 1Y i1,• �yr�'•r:_,5�::;itP..yo:±i:;•,..`•r`Y'°y4 yyi'%`.r�.N2,SC{:.+% :. J� liyyC.•i_••. O �V• }-. �1';f .Ff:Y:`•:��r�=1:fi'riin r G%•-f �.f +fit �("Y� \�N�r 14: ' SAN DIEGO CREEK CHANNEL i;•s OPEN SPACE/PUBLIC FACILITIES >ti NATURAL OPEN SPACE ' Source: Vail Speck Associates ' SAN DIEGO CREEK NORTH T Mina PC TEXT MAP LA NNIN6, INC. ' CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & IM%m" OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT ?9no scale ' City of Newport Beach 6 n n n 1 CI, 5 The Jamboree/MacArthur site is designated in the City of Newport Beach General Plan for development of 50,000 square feet of office space on a total of 4.7 acres. The Irvine Company proposes to dedicate the site in fee to the City of Newport Beach for open space and limited public facilities which would eliminate the office entitlement. No PC Text exists for the site. The site is presently zoned Unclassified (U). The zoning action proposed for this site is redistricting to PC District and adopting a PC Text. The proposed permitted uses include preservation, restoration, and creation of habitat and wetland areas; ecological research; transportation corridors; appurtenant facilities; arterial highways and vehicular access; fuel modification zones; drainage and flood control facilities; an off -site directional sign; and any grading necessary for these permitted uses. Exhibit 7 represents the PC Text Map for the site. Upper Castaways The Upper Castaways site is bordered to the north and northeast by the Dover Shores residential community, to the east and southeast by Upper Newport Bay, to the southwest by the bluff separating the Upper and Lower Castaways sites, and to the west by Dover Drive. ' The City of Newport Beach General Plan designates this 56.6 acre site for the development of 151 residential dwelling units. Development is prohibited on the coastal bluff. A total ' of 19.5 acres of the site are designated for open space/park use. The Irvine Company is proposing development of 151 residential dwelling units on 26.0 acres. A total of 30.6 acres of open space is proposed with a minimum of 11.5 acres allocated for a view park and ' approximately 4.8 acres for an active park. The affordable housing goals of the City of Newport Beach Housing Element shall be met for this site and requirements may be satisfied off -site. j n The proposed zoning action for this site is the adoption of a Planned Community Text for Upper Castaways. The permitted uses allowed under this zoning are townhouses, condominiums, single-family detached units, model homes and sales offices, and recreation uses ancillary to residential uses. A PC Text map is provided in Exhibit 8. The City's Circulation Element shows that Dover Drive will be widened into the site from Cliff Drive to Westcliff Drive to provide for a six -lane divided facility. It is anticipated that the Agreement will require completion of grading for the widening of Dover Drive as a fronting, improvement. Bay View Landing The Bay View Landing site is bounded by Back Bay Drive to the northeast, Jamboree Road to the east, Coast Highway to the south, and Newport Dunes Aquatic Park to the west. 22 �I D I 91 IL �e��yz) l?u,:1 �,r•.i .,•:f,;•fxn`., tD �Q. K'nq ,'o A `F'ad.' y�'L 3i`-� cK? _ it^",S>�Y.�.1.: .,•, Y:. Q �Q " <g . 4•}'`•�'" I� ` '•'f'''=E,T;'w;ti'�_ ti; "�r�f?.. ' :; ' •ram ;; • :•=.:i; dv!+'C•,i:�t•`'G rvxY ".+'k••iy ll""�.;. A ",`.C�: Vi • �!/� ''A���r _ �''".��h��x'r' ,��'�:'rit�c f.t �;i',;i�� % I -' �'+tl,,• /� !yu /, i ,'+i,S. 31ti;i.:;.'�.s,4=�"i',? $:::CIiW':a �O � 3" � •{( .i;:+fi >i� Ji�'`�:.,�.ai3�. �Jrry �{4 ^� ?•�A-'�,?Si{~:.`. �ty''',r'.� s 't a: .:;wc=�`'�yL;' Yw. ,egryr..n'.-fw`•'t:• tti; V'�ry .�C `' "etv_i�trpr�A4uq�}i.,'4w L�ypi:`'`.,•$ir-": _3•+ly/.,;;:io M1:l ji:u;� '9 �i�' ii�n `r ii �r �JS_ (Sl:Mlf .Sw'Ee,�jj •S':� ,'$J�;i6:: f`. ' t.;`.� �. n':3 - ,;"n'7en�:i�,:!?r✓1S- °: �T'.. r:7 ry.1-.. �O 9 y O L�n :i��F, .a�; �. /' L%h �II f"..•F!ii i-t �! • ri,. ft -'S _i,.[,L,..;Yr.rC�•J;�^•r_.^a�, "-f /r`r��:.�n.:f f•: p� V• �';.>, eY'{+ (Cfer, i p. "''4,f•>, ��G' .�!t�rr•(C,r r^ �C• "rG:. +y ,'�. F %`�.. ,�[: .^a:n n rS'a+1 r,•ryy..el`�i �r`t•..�n SAN DIEGO CREEK CHANNEL ` OPEN SPACE/PUBLIC FACILITIES NATURAL OPEN SPACE JAMBOREE/MACARTHUR PC TEXT MAP CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT City of Newport Beach Source: van JpeCK HSSOGIGltlS 1 ij spin 111ANNNG. IN('- F9no scale 7 OPEN SPACE ® EXISTING CHURCH ACTIVE PARK UPPER CASTAWAYS PC TEXT MAP CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT City of Newport Beach source: van speCK HSSooiaces FI--Srminc. YLANNN ,. INU ?9 no scale H ' The City of Newport Beach General Plan designates the lower 5.0 acres of this 16.1 acre site for the development of a maximum of either 10,000 square feet for restaurant use or 40,000 ' square feet for health club use and open space on the upper 11.1 acres. The zoning action proposed for this site is the adoption of a Planned Community Text. Either use is subject to a use permit. A portion of this site is also designated by the City's Circulation Element ' as a potential interchange at Jamboree Road and Coast Highway. A PC Text map is provided in Exhibit 9. ' The Irvine Company is proposing 11.1 acres of open space on the upper level and 5.0 acres of development area on the lower level. Development on the lower level will consist of either 10,000 square feet for restaurant use or 40,000 square feet for health club use. Newporter North and Newporter Knoll LEI I The Newporter Knoll site is located within the boundary of the Newporter North site. The Newporter Knoll site is located in the southwest portion of the site. It is immediately west of the John Wayne Gulch, the major physical feature which defines the two parcels. The total acreage of the parcel is 89.2 acres with 77.2 acres identified as Newporter North and 12.0 acres identified as Newporter Knoll. The Newporter North site is bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road to the north, Jamboree Road to the east, the John Wayne Tennis Club and John Wayne Gulch to the south, and Upper Newport Bay and Back Bay Drive to the north and west. The City of Newport Beach General Plan designates the Newporter North site for the development of 212 residential dwelling units. The zoning action proposed for this site is the adoption of a Planned Community Text for Newporter North/Newporter Knoll sites. This text will allow for development of a maximum of 212 units on 30.0 net acres. The uses allowed under this text are townhomes, condominiums, apartments, single-family detached units, model homes and sales offices, and recreational uses ancillary to residential uses. Bluff and natural areas consisting of 47.2 acres will be preserved as open space including a minimum 4.0 acre view park. The affordable housing goals of the City of Newport Beach Housing Element shall be met for this site and requirements may be satisfied off -site. A PC Text map for the site is shown in Exhibit 10. The Newporter Knoll site is 12.0 acres. The City of Newport Beach General Plan designates this site for Open Space. The zoning is PC. The site will be included in the Newporter North/Newporter Knoll PC Text. This text will allow for passive open space. The Irvine Company is proposing 12.0 acres of open space for the Newporter Knoll site. 25 11 OAST y1Gy RESTAURANT/HEALTH CLUB OPEN SPACE/PARK Y �O F SOUfCa: Vail opuun na-wno.vw BAY VIEW LANDING ' �7 � �AinC PCTEXT MAP PLANNING. INC. CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & no scale OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT 9 City of Newport Beach 1 ' � a OG � o � [; o CK SAY BA r'.'r r;• ;4�tiEr` trc.0 JOAQUIN _ti. t .C�:( :i(`it "•r'ttr .^.r �r�a �-�pC � QFr i�C�'+ Nj•ty r. }cr�,*irt'.,Xrcric:2'{ni•�:.G. r�;r: r. ..`�t;�Fc'- �i fi�� �, .tP". , t�;:-r�<.y �4.. ff•Sc',. iL �. .rric4'�C,Lt.tr. r'} �., /� �K+�V(. ;(�•C Lc<. tCK{�.X J ter• i'f.; (.; !'^Y': _l �'! t.rxr+ rT _r�tGi�{•{ C'i%?grt.�l.x,.iic . a.f'.: f. CP e..•..�r. i �•t 7r l.tt.C�, rr� f ,S:c. l•:I><t��.r Y•od. tr a.t�•!rt'',rrfrj �. S �. t.' L ' f;r C: NEWPORTER I;J_ia'-rr{:l:ii��iic:.:..Y•::�iiE'iEiii:'iiiiEi:i:.•'" �..::::�::�i:i�EiEEiiiEEiiiEiii��'�:•.� F.JSr%ri;r,urr i•i'?i•�.^::n�Mn•,� � . KNOLL "�t ................. .......... iEEi?iEiiriiF.iii:i 90 S . � SG ' UPI,, ��•n... �pMgo SqN IRESIDENTIAL OC PARK Z I OE ';•S�,j; OPEN SPACE/NATURAL AREAS to ,ygE4► DR. Q� QO ISource: Vail Speck Associates NEWPORTER NORTH PC TEXT MAP '' -�' $�l�hnc. CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT no scale City of Newport Beach F9 10 Newporter Resort ' The Newporter Resort site is bounded to the northeast by the Newporter North and Newporter Knoll project sites, to the east by Jamboree Road, and to the south and west by Back Bay Drive. The Newporter Resort site is 23.90 acres. ' The City of Newport Beach General Plan designates the Newporter Resort site for an ' additional development of 68 hotel rooms. The zoning is U-Unclassified which allows for uses consistent with the General Plan subject to review and approval of a Use Permit. The Irvine Company is proposing entitlement of an additional 68 hotel rooms. When developed, these rooms would be added to the existing Newporter Resort and constructed within the boundaries of the existing property. There are a maximum of 479 hotel rooms allowed on this site by the City of Newport Beach General Plan. No open space component is proposed for this site. Block 800 The Block 800 site is bounded by San Clemente Drive to the north, existing office buildings on Block 800, Newport Center Drive to the south and east, and Santa Barbara Drive to the west. The City of Newport Beach General Plan designates the 6.4 acre site on Block 800 for development of 245 multi -family residential dwelling units. The Irvine Company is proposing development of 245 multi -family residential units or a seniors oriented multi -family residential project on the 6.4 acre site. Seniors oriented residential may also include assisted living and skilled nursing areas ancillary to seniors residential use. The zoning action proposed is the adoption of an amendment to the PC Text for Block 800. Permitted uses allowed under this text are apartments, condominiums, recreational facilities, and uses appurtenant to residential or seniors project designations referenced above. A PC Text Map for the site is included as Exhibit 11. ' There is no open space component proposed for this site. The affordable housing goals of the City of Newport Beach Housing Element shall be met for this site and requirements may be satisfied off -site. Corporate Plaza West The Corporate Plaza West site is bounded by the Balboa Bay Tennis Club to the north, Newport Center Drive to the east, Pacific Coast Highway to the southwest, and is adjacent to Club House Drive to the west. ' The City of Newport Beach General Plan designates this site for an additional 94,000 square feet of office on the remaining 9.0 acres of the site. The Corporate Plaza West site is a 12.1 acre site. There are 21,000 square feet of existing office space and landscaping on 3.1 acres. 28 r sqy �o �QG y�l Q SAN CLEIyE N 90 av a: do MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DR. FASHION ISLAND 1 _AN BLOCK 800 PC TEXT MAP CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT City of Newport Beach 0,9 Oource: van apecn MwuuiaLaa ., WAinC, ruNNIN6. me F9 no scale 11 I ' The zoning action proposed is the adoption of a PC Text for Corporate Plaza West. Permitted uses allowed under this text are: retail sales and convenience service; administra- tive and professional office (excluding medical); restaurant, including outdoor, drive-in/take- out (which are subject to a use permit); institutional, financial, and governmental facilities; civic, cultural, commercial recreational and recreational facilities, parking lots, structures and ' facilities; and drive up tellers (per approval of City Traffic Engineer). Under the Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement, The Irvine Company is proposing an additional 94,000 square feet of office space. No open space component is proposed for this site. ' Freeway Reservation The Freeway Reservation site is bordered by Ford Road to the north, the existing Harbor ' View residential area to the east, Baywood Apartments to the south, and MacArthur Boulevard to the west. The Freeway Reservation site is a 28.3 acre site with a City of Newport Beach General Plan designation for development of 76 residential dwelling units. The Irvine Company is proposing development of 48 residential units on approximately 11.0 acres. The residential ' units will be split between two development areas. An open space area of 17.3 acres is also proposed. The affordable housing goals of the City of Newport Beach Housing Element shall be met for this site and requirements may be satisfied off -site. 1 I 11 II 1 The zoning action proposed is an amendment to the Harbor View Hills PC Text for Freeway Reservation. Permitted uses allowed under this amended text are: single family dwellings, detached; conventional subdivisions on a Planned Community Concept; cluster developments (per use permit); parks, playgrounds, accessory buildings; structures and uses where related and incidental to a permitted use. A PC Text Map is provided in Exhibit 12. PROPOSED ACTIONS 1. Certification of the Program Environmental Impact Report (Program EIR). The applicant is requesting acceptance of an environmental document as having been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach CEQA Guidelines, and certification that the data was considered in final decisions on the project and that the Program EIR is adequate and complete. I � � I @ \ � z§ �o k " PORT s o qIqAR#U ; m IWARGATe % .FURT . , WEST BOURNE PL �& w\�PORT aHLEYPL g a *fie i k� \ ( o ` £ �c � RESIDENTIAL . � OPEN SPACE » � < a_Ce: a.Z)@a _mcieies FREEWAY RESERVATION' PC TEXT MAP CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT ~ © m� City dNewport Beach 22 I I 1 I I 1 2. Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement. The applicant is requesting approval of a proposed development agreement pursuant to Government Code Sections 65864-65869.5. The principal components involved in the agreement are 1) Entitlement 2) Open Space Dedication and 3) Circulation Improvements/Funding. 3. Planned Community (PC) Text. The applicant is requesting the adoption of PC Texts, or amendments to the existing PC Texts, for most sites within the project. Adoption of PC Texts is requested for San Diego Creek North, Jamboree/MacArthur, Upper Castaways, Bay View Landing, Newporter North and Corporate Plaza West sites. Amendments to existing PC Texts are requested for San Diego Creek South (North Ford PC Text) Freeway Reservation (Harbor View Hills PC Text) and Block 800. 4. Traffic Phasing Ordinance. The applicant is seeking to achieve compliance with the Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO). Compliance with the TPO is a requirement of the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code. 5. Congestion Management. The applicant is seeking a finding of consistency with the Congestion Management Program Ordinance. 6. Rezone. The applicant is requesting a rezone from Unclassified (U) to Planned Community (PC) on the San Diego Creek North and Jamboree/MacArthur sites. 7. Local Coastal Program. Amend the Land Use Plan for the City of Newport Beach Local Coastal Program for the sites which are within the Coastal Zone to provide a greater level of detail regarding the designated land uses for each site. 8. Master Coastal Development Permit. Approve in concept an application for a Master Coastal Development Permit (MCDP) for all of the sites within the coastal zone with a provision that site specific development will require individual coastal development permits subsequent to the approval of the Master Coastal Development Permit. POTENTIAL FUTURE DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS Implementation of the Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement may potentially require additional discretionary actions as individual projects seek approval. these actions which this Program EIR may not necessarily address in detail, may include, but are not limited to, the following: • Conditional Use Permits • Coastal Development Permits (California Coastal Commission) for Individual Parcels • Site Plan Review 32 �j • NPDFS Permits (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Permit, Regional Water Quality Control Board) Subdivision Map Review ' • Grading Permits 0 404 Permits (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) • 1601 or 1603 Permits (California Department of Fish and Game) , PROJECT OBJECTIVES ' City Objectives The City of Newport Beach has several means which it uses to fund park land acquisition , and circulation improvements. These procedures often rely on the development of land in the City. In determining to pursue the possibility of the Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement with The Irvine Company, the City Council saw the possibility of implementation of General Plan Circulation Improvement goals in advance of the build -out of land uses allowed by the General Plan. In addition, the City Council saw the possibility of acquiring open space above the General Plan requirements and in advance of when it could otherwise be acquired. The specific objectives of the City of Newport Beach are: , 1. To achieve the dedication of significant public open space consistent with the goals of the General Plan at no financial cost to the City. , 2. To the greatest extent feasible, to achieve the dedication of important and meaningful public open space in excess of the minimum requirements of the General Plan. 3. To identify and achieve dedication of all or a portion of one or more sites appropriate for passive and active recreational purposes. , 4. To achieve dedication for preservation of environmentally sensitive areas. , 5. To identify and achieve dedication of all or a portion of certain sites appropriate for the provision of necessary public facilities such as streets and highways, utility easements, a fire station, and similar facilities which may be identified in the future. ' 6. To alter entitlement whenever possible in ways which will improve the jobs/housing balance in the City. , 7. To approve residential development with sufficient density to provide for a maximum amount of affordable housing in the community. 8. To provide appropriate housing for all economic segments of the community. , 33 ' I ' 9. To maintain and improve the City's financial ability to provide a full range of services to its constituents and to expand and improve those services when desirable. 10. To maximize public access to important public open spaces and resources so that residents and visitors may enjoy the benefits of living in or visiting a unique coastal ' community consistent with the provisions of the Coastal Act of 1976 and the City's Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan. 11. To provide a mechanism for the early funding and construction of significant components of the City's Master Plan of Streets and Highways. This mechanism includes: a. Early payment of Fair Share Fees by the Irvine Company for their remaining development on the subject sites. b. A commitment by The Irvine Company to construct all required frontage improvements related to the approved entitlement. C. An advance of funds by The Irvine Company to allow the City to construct important circulation system improvements as quickly as possible. d. To make available funds in order to place the City in a superior position to obtain outside matching funds for improvements. The Irvine Company Objectives The general objectives of The Irvine Company are: 1. Establish a program of open space dedications in exchange for vested ' approval to, allow development of certain properties. 2. Satisfy the requirements of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance by providing significant funding for needed circulation system improvements under the terms of an Agreement that create a net benefit to the City. ' 3. Obtain approval of a plan for each of the parcels under a comprehensive planning program that is consistent with the General Plan and allows for a fiscally sound project. 4. Create a balanced community offering a range of housing opportunities in a varietyof locations. 5. Vest land use entitlements and zoning for 956 residential units and 202,000 ' square feet of non-residential uses on the significant remaining undeveloped parcels of land in the City owned by The Irvine Company by obtaining 34 7 L approval of an Agreement to allow construction of the projects under the terms of the Agreement. The specific objectives of The Irvine Company are: ' 1. Castaways: , Vest approval of a community plan that preserves significant areas of the site , for public open space including a view park along the bluff and an active park adjacent to Dover Drive and maintains a minimum development area of 26 acres for 151 residential units. This entitlement will allow for an economically ' viable development of the site. 2. Bay View Landing: , Vest approval to build a 10,000 square foot restaurant or 40,000 square foot health club on the lower portion of the site. Offer to dedicate the upper portion of the site to the City as open space in order to preserve and possibly enhance public views to the Bay. This entitlement will allow for an economi- cally viable development of the site. , 3. Newport North: Vest approval of a community plan that preserves areas of the site for public ' open space including a view park along the bluff and natural habitat areas and maintain a minimum development area of 30 acres for 212 residential units. ' This entitlement will allow for an economically viable development of the site. 4. San Die¢.o Creek North and Jamboree/MacArthur: Dedicate these sites to the City for open space and public facility purposes and give up office entitlement in order to provide substantial public benefits ' in exchange for vesting rights to develop other sites. 5. San Diego Creek South: Vest approval of a community plan for 300 residential units on 18.6 acres. This entitlement will allow for an economically viable development of the site. 6. Freeway Reservation East: Vest approval of a community plan for a total of 48 residential units in two areas on the site totaling 11 acres. Dedicate the remaining area to the City for open space. This entitlement will allow for a economically viable , development of the site. 35 , fJ 7. Block 800: Vest approval of a community plan for development of 245 residential units that allows for an economically viable project. ' 8. Corporate Plaza West: Vest approval of a community plan for development of an additional 94,000 ' square feet of office use. This entitlement will allow for an economically viable development of the site. 9. Newporter Knoll: Dedicate site for open space as a part of an agreement to vest entitlement on ' other sites. 10. N w orter Resort: Vest approval to build an additional 68 hotel rooms on -site. This entitlement will allow for an economically viable addition to the existing land use of the ' site. ' LEAD, RESPONSIBLE, AND TRUSTEE AGENCIES Lead A¢encx ' City of Newport Beach ' Ms. Patricia Temple Advance Planning Manager 3300 Newport Boulevard P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, California 92659-1765 (714) 644-3225 Responsible and Trustee Agencies ' California Department of Transportation Mr. Bob Joseph District 12 Advanced Planning 501 Pullman Street Santa Ana, CA 92705 (714) 724-2255 I 36 California Coastal Commission State Department of Fish and Game Department of Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service South Coast Air Quality Management District Mr. Gary Hollaway ' South Coast District Office 245 N. Broadway, Suite 380 ' P.O. Box 1450 Long Beach, CA 90801-1450 (213) 590-5071 , Mr. Fred Worthley, Jr. 45 W.Broadway , Long Beach, CA 90802 (213)590-5132 Ms. Brooks Harper 2400 Avila Road ' Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 (714) 643-4270 ' Mr. Brian Farris 9150 E. Flair Drive El Monte, CA 91731 , (818) 572-6200 County of Orange Sanitation District Mr. Chuck Winsor , 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 92708 962-2411 , (714) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers University of California, Irvine 9M Ms. Laura Tschudi , Chief of Environmental Design Section P.O. Box 2711 Los Angeles, CA 90053-2325 ' (213) 894-5421 Mr. Richard Demedian ' Director, Environmental Planning Office of Facilities Planning 360 Berkeley Place , Irvine, CA 92715 (714) 856-7677 I I Transportation Corridor Agencies I I I i Mr. Steve Letterly Manager 345 Clinton Street Costa Mesa, CA 92626 (714) 557-3298 u IV. REGIONAL, SUBREGIONAL, AND LOCAL SETTING ' INTRODUCTION ' There are two main purposes of this section. The first is to provide a basis fora general understanding of the regional, subregional, and local setting in which the project will occur. The second is to provide information regarding the assumptions about future development and past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects that were used in the cumulative impact analyses contained in this Program EIR. In general, the cumulative impact analyses area includes all of Newport Beach and portions of Irvine, Costa Mesa, Huntington Beach, and some unincorporated County areas. The ' traffic study prepared for this Program EIR and other directly related technical studies (e.g. air quality and noise) were based on traffic forecast data produced by the Newport Beach Traffic Analysis Model (NBTAM). This is a sub -area model derived from the Orange ' County Traffic Analysis Model (OCTAM). Originally developed in 1988 for the General Plan traffic forecasting, the model was updated in 1991 to reflect the County's latest set of distribution patterns (OCTAM-II) and to include the latest set of land use assumptions prepared by the City of Newport Beach and adjacent jurisdictions within the study area. More specific information regarding the assumptions in the NBTAM can be found in the model description and validation report available for review at the City of Newport Beach ' Planning Department during regular business hours. The land use assumptions contained in the NBTAM are broken down into land use categories by numerous traffic analysis zones. For the purpose of providing more general information on the assumptions regarding future development, the following subsections contain both a description of the ongoing long range planning programs being conducted by ' the City of Newport Beach and other jurisdictions within the study area and a description of more specific approved and proposed projects within these jurisdictions. The general location of these projects are depicted on Exhibit 13. All projects discussed below have been assumed within the land use assumptions for the NBTAM. REGIONAL SETTING ' Throughout this report, the regional setting for the project is described as the six county Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) area. Exhibit 1 in the Project ' Description section depicts the SCAG area. This area includes the Counties of Riverside, San Bernardino, Los Angeles, Ventura, Imperial and Orange. ' The SCAG area has historically been a rapidly growing region both in terms of population and employment. SCAG is the State's largest Council of Governments (COG) in terms of population. The SCAG region had a population of approximately 14.6 million by 1990 ' census projections. Population is expected to increase by 4.35 million by the year 2005 to a total population of 18.95 million. (California Department of Finance, 1991) 39 LOS ALAMITOS SEAL BEACH 14 WESTMINSTER --' 13 12 F' HUNTINGTON �. BEACH 15 1 PACIFIC OCEAN GARDEN GROVE den Grove FOUNTAIN VALLEY 0 LIST OF PROJECTS 1. Costa Mesa General Plan Update' 2. Triangle Square 3. General Plan Amendment 16' 4. Planning Area 23 5. Irvine Business Center 6. San Joaquin Marsh Master Plan' 7. Kaiser Permanents Medical Center 8. Village 38 g_ Vlliage 12 -- — — - -- 10. UCI Main Campus 11. UCI North Campus 12. Huntington Beach General Plan Update' 13. McDonnell Douglas 1 ��2 0 COSTA ')�// MESA A, 25 SANTA ANA 22 26 2 ORANGE / 8 0/ 9-6 IRVINE" 0-10 CH l OF c? F- 18 1 14. Bolsa Chica 15. Holly-Seacliff 16. Waterfront Development 17. Newport (Irvine) Coast 18. San Joaquin Hills 19. Santa Ana Rivermouth Local Coastal Program 20. Upper Newport Bay Regional Park - General Development Plan 21. San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor 2z Ford Road Realignment__-__ 23. MacArthur Boulevard Widening 24. Hoag Hospital 25. Castaways Marina 26. Library Exchange ' Projects of a Regional Nature which cannot be identified to a Specific Location. APPROVED AND PROPOSED PROJECTS 1 CIRCULATOIN IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT EIR City of Newport Beach 7 �I 'J LAGUNA BEACH I LAGUNA HILLS LAGUNA NIGUEL Qln r1amnuyp nn.. M!, sr—A— PLANNINL.INC F9 no scale 13 I I I 1 1 1 I The project is located in west -central Orange County along the Southern California coast. Orange County has experienced rapid growth in recent years. The County's estimated 1990 population was 2,410,556. The County of Orange is south of Los Angeles County and north of San Diego County. The major arterials surrounding the project are the San Diego (405) Freeway to the North; Coast Highway to the south; State Route 73 to the east; and the Newport (55) Freeway to the west. SUBREGIONAL SETTING The subregional setting for the purposes of this EIR includes the cities of Irvine, Costa Mesa, Huntington Beach, Newport Beach and unincorporated areas of the County of Orange. Exhibit 2 in the Project Description illustrates the subregional area. This area has experienced rapid growth and development over the past several years. In order to assess cumulative project impacts, land use assumptions related to growth and development have been made related to this area. The assumptions were made by contacting the Planning Agencies of the identified jurisdiction and requesting information related to existing and reasonably, foreseeable future developments. City of Costa Mesa The City of Costa Mesa lies immediately adjacent to the City of Newport Beach's northeastern border. Costa Mesa has a population of approximately 97,437 (Source: City of Costa Mesa). General Plan Update. The City of Costa Mesa is in the process of updating its General Plan. The General Plan Update was comprehensive with updates of all seven mandatory elements and additional City -required elements including: Air Quality, Hydrology, Biological Resources, Open Space, Geology, Cultural Resources, Noise, Coastal Resources, Housing, Public Facilities and Services, Waste Management, Transportation, and Land Use. The updated 1990 General Plan will guide the future development within the City throughout the 1990's. The 1990 General Plan supersedes the previous 1981 General Plan. Triangle Square. The Triangle Square redevelopment is located at 1870 Harbor Boulevard and 1875 Newport Boulevard. Currently under construction, the multi -use commercial center development will contain approximately 185,000 square feet on three levels with a variety of proposed uses including a market, bank, cinemas, restaurants, and retail shops. City of Irvine The City of Irvine lies immediately adjacent to the City of Newport Beach's northern boundary. Irvine's population is approximately 111,418 (Source: City of Irvine). 41 FI General Plan Amendment 16. This amendment, adopted in 1989, revised the Land Use, , Conservation and Open Space, Circulation, Housing and Noise Elements. This project is intended to comply with the directives of Initiative Resolution 88-1 and to implement the ' provisions of the MOU between the City and The Irvine Company. The resolution contains the following references to specific development transfer opportunities: 1. Development potential in the upper Lomas de Santiago Hills reaches of the ' Santiago Hills (Lomas Ridge) shall be shifted to areas in the northern foothills and flatlands; and ' 2. Development potential in Quail Hill (Village 16), portions of Villages 12 and 17, portions of Shady and Bommer Canyons (Village 22) and portions of the ' San Joaquin Marsh Area (Village 19) shall be shifted to Villages 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 25, 26, and 33. Planning Area 23. Planning Area 23 consists of 986 rental condominium units on 25 acres located near the comer of Michelson and Carlson Drives in the City of Irvine. The overall density is approximately 40 units to the acre. The project will consist of seven (7) residential , buildings with associated recreational amenities, landscaping, and infrastructure. The project floorplans include studios, one -bedrooms and two -bedrooms. Planned amenities include swimming pools, spas, tennis courts, a basketball court, recreation, fitness and meeting ' facilities, and a small convenience store. The project is currently in the City processing stage, with no anticipated construction start date at this time. The Irvine Business Complex (IBC). The IBC consists of numerous developments of mixed ' uses including office, retail, hotel and residential. According to the General Plan of the City ' of Irvine, IBC will ultimately contain approximately 48.25 million square feet of business and industrial ,uses. The business and industrial subcategory is characterized by offices and industry with support commercial, mixed with high density housing (25 to 40 dwelling units ' per acre). A total of 3,571 dwelling units are proposed in IBC with a density of 39.7 dwelling units per acre on approximately 90 acres. San Joaquin Marsh Agreement and Master Plan. This project involves the dedication of ' 85 acres of The Irvine Company lands to the University of California Natural Reserve System, the construction of over $2 million in improvements and providing an endowment of over $500,000 to maintain the marsh. The Irvine Company is working with the City of ,. Irvine, University of California, California Coastal Conservancy and other organizations in developing a San Joaquin March Master Plan. The Master Plan will cover the entire marsh , including an additional dedication of over 150 acres which The Irvine Company will be making under the City of Irvine Open Space Agreement. This last dedication will result in an approximate 450 acre publicly owned wildlife habitat area. ' Kaiser Permanente Medical Center. The Kaiser project is located in Planning Area 131n the Irvine Science Complex in the City of Irvine. The project site encompasses ' 42 , n U I approximately 43 acres and is bounded by the San Diego Freeway to the south, Sand Canyon Avenue on the west, Alton Parkway on the north, and vacant land and the Western State University College of Law on the east. The proposed 1.3 million square feet medical complex will include a 416 bed hospital, 460,000 square feet of medical office, and 50,000 square feet of administrative office space. The EIR is currently under preparation. Village 38. The Village 38 project is located in the western portion of the City of Irvine and encompasses approximately 482 acres with a maximum of 3,850 dwelling units. It is bounded by Barranca Parkway, Culver Drive, Irvine Center Drive, Harvard Avenue, and Peters Canyon Wash. The project involved a zone change to reclassify the site from Development Reserve to Residential and related districts to allow construction of 3,850 dwelling units. Village 12. The Village 12 project is bounded by Jeffrey Road, the I-405 Freeway, Sand Canyon Avenue, and I-5 Freeway. This project will require a zone change from "Development Reserve" to commercial, general industrial, open space, mixed use, institutional, and residential uses. Planning Area 26. A preliminary project site located within Planning Area 26 located approximately 600 feet north of the Ford Road/San Miguel Drive intersection is proposed for institutional/church uses. Currently the site is zoned as Development Reserve - medium high density. The tentative parcel map encompasses 16 acres. No specific plans for any institutional type has been proposed. University of California. Irvine The University of California, Irvine (UCI) is located in the southern portion of the City of Irvine near the northern border of Newport Beach. UCI is a separate entity governed by the University of California Board of Regents. The UCI Long Range Development Plan (LRDP) was approved August 15, 1989. Main Campus The LRDP provides for the continued expansion of the 1,489 acre campus. The current 1990 campus population is projected at a 25,742. This population includes 8,842 faculty/staff members and a projected 1991 student population of 16,900. Buildout of the LRDP will enable the campus to expand its enrollment to accommodate 26,050 students, and 7,984 faculty/staff by the horizon year 2005/6, resulting in a total campus population of 34;034. The plan provides for expansion of nine land use categories: academic areas, housing, research and development, mixed -use, support commercial ancillary services, recreation and open space, parking and roadways. 43 II 1 North Campus ' The North Campus is a component of the University of California, Irvine LRDP. The 118- ' acre North Campus is physically separated from the main campus by the San Joaquin Freshwater Marsh Reserve. Consistent with the UCI Long Range Development Plan, the campus proposes to construct commercial, research and development, and residential ' facilities on approximately 49.5 undeveloped acres of the North Campus. Proposed uses would consist of development totalling approximately one million square feet including 420,000 square feet of office and support retail space, 230,000 square feet of research and ' development space and approximately 300 multi -family rental units. City of Huntington Beach 1 The City of Huntington Beach lies immediately adjacent to the City of Costa Mesa's northwestern border. The City of Newport Beach borders Huntington Beach along the coast ' with the Santa Ana River channel serving as the boundary. Huntington Beach's population is projected at 181,519 according to preliminary 1990 Census estimates. ' General Plan Update. The City of Huntington Beach is in the process of updating .its General Plan. The City Council approved funding for this update on April 15, 1991. The , General Plan Update is comprehensive with updates of all seven mandatory elements and additional optional elements including: Growth Management, Urban Design, Recreation, Historic and Cultural Resources, Economic Development, Land Use, Open Space, ' Circulation, Conservation, Noise, Safety/Seismic, Housing, and Coastal: The update of the General Plan is expected to take approximately 18 to 24 months and will include approximately four community workshops and the establishment of a General Plan Advisory ' Committee. McDonnell Douglas. The McDonnell Douglas project site is located in the northern portion , of Huntington Beach. The site is bounded by Able Lane to the west, a U.S. Navy Railroad easement and the Springdale Water Reservoir to the north, Springdale Street to the east, and Bolsa Avenue to the south. The proposed project encompasses 62 acres and is , requesting to amend the land use designation and zoning on the site and does not constitute any development at this time. The conceptual, development plan includes a total of 1,307 multi -family residential units and 109,000 square feet of general retail uses. ' Bolsa Chica. The Bolsa Chica site is a 1,635 acre unincorporated area owned primarily by the Koll Co. (Signal Bolsa Corp.). Other owners include Fieldstone, Ocean View School District, Metropolitan Water District, Huntington Beach Co., D.E. Goodell, State of California and the City of Huntington Beach. The City of Huntington Beach and the County of Orange are jointly processing a Land Use Plan, Specific Plan and Environmental Impact , Report for the area. These are expected to be completed in 1992. Following adoption of the plans, the area will be annexed to the City of Huntington Beach. It is proposed to 44 1 r JI ' include 412 acres of residential uses (5,700 maximum dwelling units), 1,105 acres"of wetland restoration, 60 acres of parkland, and 67 acres of roadways and flood control channels. Holly-Seacliff. Holly-Seacliff is a 760 acre area generally bounded by Ellis Avenue to the north, Huntington and Main Streets to the east, Yorktown and Clay Avenues to the South ' and the Edwards Street bluffs to the west. Proposed uses include Estate Residential, Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Medium High Density Residential, Mixed Development, Commercial, Industrial and Open Space. Ultimately, up to 4,410 residential ' units may be constructed in the area over the next 10 to 15 years pending project approval. Waterfront Development. A six phase Waterfront development will be located on the inland side of Pacific Coast Highway between Huntington Street and Beach Boulevard. The completed Hilton Hotel is the first phase of the Waterfront Development with 296 guest ' rooms and additional amenities. Final buildout of the remaining proposed portion of the project will include a total of four hotels, a tennis and health center, a retail shopping plaza and approximately 875 residential units. Further development is pending project approval. ' County of Orange Portions of unincorporated Orange County lie to the north, west, south, and east of the City of Newport Beach. The southeast area was known as The Irvine Coast and is now referred to as the Newport Coast and San Joaquin Hills Planned Communities. To the north is Santa Ana Heights and to the west is the Santa Ana Rivermouth area. Other Orange unincorporated areas within the subregional area include John Wayne Airport. John Wayne Airport is an airport of subregional and countywide significance primarily serving commercial airlines and general aviation. Newport (Irvine) Coast. The Newport (Irvine) Coast encompasses the portion of unincorporated Orange County along the Pacific Coast between Newport Beach and Laguna Beach. Approved development includes 2,600 dwelling units, two golf courses and four hotel sites with 2,500 units. Portions of the 9,000 acre site are currently under development. A ' large portion of the site is committed for dedication to the County of Orange. San Joaquin Hills. The San Joaquin Hills area lies adjacent to the (Newport) Irvine Coast project area. It is outside of the coastal zone and is generally located southwest of the City of Newport Beach and the San Joaquin Reservoir. The 372 acre project area includes an estimated total of 2,420 dwelling units, 109 acres of recreational uses, 10 acres in reserve for ' a school site, and 18 acres of support commercial uses. General Plan and Zoning have been approved for the site. No specific site plan approvals have occurred at the time of this writing. ' Santa Ana Rivermouth Local Coastal Program (LCP). The Santa Ana Rivermouth LCP Study Area encompasses 594.2 acres adjacent to the City of Newport Beach to the ' northwest. Of the total acreage, 53.9 are within incorporated City of Newport Beach. 45 P Proposed uses within the LCP Study Area include residential (232.9 acres), commercial (13.6 , acres), school (14.0 acres), and open space (496.7 acres). The LCP has not been certified at this time nor has a specific site plan been developed for the area. ' Upper Newport Bay Regional Park - General Development Plan. The County of Orange has prepared a Draft Resource Management Plan and General Development Plan for the , recently acquired Upper Newport Bay Regional Park. The Draft Plan identifies recreational and educational facilities focusing on an interpretive center, parking lot, and various trails along with various habitat restoration projects. ' Transportation Projects San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor. The proposed San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor project involves constructing the SR-73 Freeway from 1-5 Freeway in the City of San Juan Capistrano to its existing terminus at Jamboree Road. Portions of the project are ' located within the cities of Newport Beach, Irvine, Laguna Beach, Laguna Niguel, Mission Viejo, San Juan Capistrano, and unincorporated areas of Orange County, California. Ramp improvements in the existing SR-73 will be constructed between Birch Street and Jamboree ' Road as part of this project also. Ford Road Realignment. The Ford Road realignment and extension is proposed through ' largely undeveloped land located north and east of the intersection of existing Ford Road and MacArthurBoulevard. The proposed project is located south of the, proposed extension ' of Bison Avenue, existing Newport Coast Drive and the proposed San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor, and west of the existing Newport Coast Drive and Coyote Canyon landfill access road. The proposed project will realign Ford Road from its current location along the City of Newport Beach/City of Irvine boundary, to entirely within the City of Irvine. The proposed Ford Road would be extended to the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor thereby providing a link to MacArthur Boulevard to the west. The ' realigned Ford Road is proposed as a four -lane divided primary arterial highway. MacArthur Boulevard Widening. The preferred alternative for the proposed widening , consists of two related roadway improvements. The first consists of widening MacArthur Boulevard to six lanes between Coast Highway and Ford Road, and to eight lanes between Ford Road and the proposed San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor (SJHTC). The , existing six lane road would be realigned east of its present alignment between the SJHTC on -ramp and the San Diego Creek Bridge. LOCAL SETTING ' City of Newport Beach , The local setting is defined as the corporate boundaries of the City of Newport Beach, illustrated in Exhibit 3 in the Project Description of this document. The project area , 46 1 I 1 J includes eleven (il) ;sites within the City of Newport Beach which are also depicted on Exhibit 3. The following are projects within the City of Newport Beach in the local setting of the proposed project. Hoag Hospital. The Expansion of Hoag Hospital is provided for in the Hoag Hospital Master Plan. Proposed actions are designed to accomplish long-term objectives of facility growth. New square footage proposed as a part of the Master Plan totals 790,438 square feet bringing the hospital campus total to 1,343,238 square feet. Castaways Marina. The Castaways Marina, also referred to as "Lower Castaways", is located immediately north of the Coast Highway Bridge at the intersection of Dover Drive and Coast Highway. This site is immediately adjacent to the Upper Castaways project site. The ' site was approved for marina development, containing 71 boat slips. Construction will require extensive dredging and disposal of dredge materials. I I i I Library Exchange. The City of Newport Beach recently approved the Library Land Exchange Agreement project. The project consisted of several actions involving a total of 45 acres on three separate sites within Newport Center. The objective of the project was to transfer existing development rights among the affected sites in order to accommodate planned construction of a new 65,000 square foot public library on a site located on Avocado Drive in the area referred to as Newport Village. Under the Exchange Agreement, the old library site, located in Civic Plaza on San Clemente Drive will convert to office use. The office uses will be at a higher intensity than previously permitted. Additionally, development rights formerly assigned to the new library site in Newport Village will be transferred to other locations within Corporate Plaza and Civic Plaza. 47 ' LAND USE INTRODUCTION ' The following analysis is based on surveys of existing land uses at and near each parcel; projections of future development. in the project vicinity; and a review of applicable plans, policies, and regulations. The proposed project has been evaluated to identify potential conflicts and inconsistencies with existing or future land uses and adopted plans, policies, and regulations. This project does not involve an amendment to the City's General Plan or Local Coastal Plan (LCP). The designations are the same as General Plan designations for A those sites within the Coastal Zone. A list of terms and definitions that should be referenced to is provided in the Report Preparation Resources section of this document. EXISTING CONDITIONS San Diego Creek South Existing Land Use ' The San Diego Creek South site is a vacant 21 acre site. The majority of this site has been graded and filled with dredge spoils from the Upper Newport Bay Restoration project. ' Currently there is a surcharge operation underway on the San Diego Creek South site which has approval from the City of Newport Beach and the California Coastal Commission. A large mound of dirt has been placed on the northern half of the property to compress the underlying soils. Once this is complete, this mound will be moved to the southern half of the site to compress the soil in that area. This operation is being done to prepare the site for development. The site is bordered on the north by San Diego Creek and the vacant San Diego Creek North site; on the east by Bonita Creek and recreation/open space; on the south by ' University Drive, multi -family and single-family dwellings, and park; and on the west by Jamboree Road and the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. I L I Uses surrounding the site consist of an active park and residential uses across University Drive, the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve across Jamboree Road, and single-family residences in the East Bluff Community southwest of the site across Jamboree Road and the San Diego Creek to the north. Existing on -site and adjacent land uses of the area are shown in Exhibit 14. W. AP & FC - Administrative, Profesc,ional and Financial commercial A- SFD - Single Family Detached MFR - Multi -Family Residential R & EOS - Recreational & Enviro mental Open Space LW - Water w 'Y ........... . . ..... ..... JAMBOREE ROAD VACANT SFD MIZI T, 6 f MFR AP & "VACANT FC 000 00 4, R & EOS VACANT* R S'EOS lug 7 It rk R & EP ik ID r11311 lull ER L L Tom a) 0 a) ��� CL 3: 0 >1 D Z 0 C. a w z Ui 0 < w 0 U) U_ Crj (L) GY z Z Gs w U U CL 0 z 1 z__ f w 0 Z LLJ > 0 0 cc Cr. CL 2 cc z 0 z < _j x w F ' Existing General Plan and Zoning Code ' The City of Newport Beach Land Use Element designates the San Diego Creek South site for Multi -Family Residential development with a maximum of 300 units. Existing General Plan designations for the site and surrounding areas are shown in Exhibit 14. The City of Newport Beach Land Use Element indicates surrounding land uses as Recreational and Environmental Open Space to the east, southeast and south; Single-family Detached to the south; Water to the west; and Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial to the north across San Diego Creek. ' The Recreation and Open Space Element designates the San Diego Creek bed and right-of- way as an environmentally sensitive area. This area lies to the north of the site and a small portion of the right-of-way is within the San Diego Creek South site. The site is zoned Planned Community (PC). The existing PC text designates this site for professional and business office uses consistent with the provisions of the General Plan. Rezoning through PC Text amendment is required to establish General Plan - Zoning consistency. Surrounding zoning includes Unclassified (U) to the north and Planned Community (PC) to the'east and south. IOther Plans This site lies within the Coastal Zone as established by the Coastal Act of 1976. The Local Coastal Plan (LCP) of the City of Newport Beach designates this site as Multi -Family Residential. The Orange County Transportation Corridor Agency has adopted an alignment of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor (State Route 73) in conformance with the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways. The main route of the corridor will pass to the east of the site. In addition, a freeway access ramp from Jamboree Road (Jamboree Flyover) to State Route 73 will begin adjacent to the west side of the site. San Diego Creek North Existing Land Use ' The San Diego Creek North site is a vacant 14.7 acre site. This site is bordered on the ' north and east by State Route 73 ramps, on the south by the San Diego Creek Channel and the vacant San Diego Creek South site, and on the north and west by Jamboree Road, existing office buildings and the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. 1 50 1 Land uses surrounding the site include office, hotel, and commercial to the north, freeway ' ramps to the east, and the Upper Newport Bay to the west. Existing on -site and adjacent land uses of the area is shown in Exhibit 15. , Existing General Plan and Zoning The San Diego Creek North site is designated by the City of Newport Beach Land Use Element to be developed with 112,000 square feet of Administrative, Professional and Financial Commercial. A Fire Station reservation of 2.5 acres is also designated on the site. The City of Newport Beach Land Use Element indicates surrounding land uses as: Administrative, Professional and Financial Commercial to the northwest; Water to the west; ' Multi -Family Residential and Recreation and Environmental Open Space to the south. Existing General Plan and designations for on -site and surrounding areas are shown in , Exhibit 15. The Circulation Element designates the proposed extension of Bay View (University) Drive North through the center of the site. The Recreation and Open Space Element designates the San Diego Creek bed and right-of- way, which is located south of this site, as an environmentally sensitive area. This area lies to the south of the site and a small portion of the right-of-way is within the San Diego Creek North site. This site is zoned Unclassified (U). Surrounding zoning includes Unclassified (U) to the north and Planned Community (PC) to the south. Other Plans This site lies within the Coastal Zone as established by the Coastal Act of 1976. The Local " Coastal Plan (LCP) of the City of Newport Beach designates this site as Administrative, Professional and Financial Commercial. The Orange County Transportation Corridors Agency has adopted an alignment of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor (State Route 73) in conformance with the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways. The route of the corridor will pass to the east ' of the site. In addition, a freeway access ramp from Jamboree Road (Jamboree Flyover) to State Route 73 wall extend across the western portion of the site. 51 1 u "r. s l , " 4 •; . Ji• I+ i A. r ��•.«�. _� �re� y •E'J � !'1 i �• �"nv,`s••��+N'�% � tea• a `a*56 �' ` PL AP & FC - Administrative, Professional and Financial Commercial SFD - Single Family Detached SFA - Single Family Attached MFR - Multi -Family Residential R & SC - Retail & Service Commercial R & EOS - Recreational & Environmental Open Space W - Water W �pN � w R EOS W 5 UJI <� SFA SFD _. BAYVIEW P1rgCE AP&FC r� AP & FC �PCP���uR Z U a U cc n 0. w J z Q w OC 2 W w Z Dwc W U¢ C < o ) cis Z w CL .j C) n ?: ZObi CO z Q� z wec p Z C w+ C 0U O or cc N CL � N o Z N U W I ' Jamboree/MacArthur Existing Land Use The Jamboree/MacArthur site is a vacant 4.7 acre site. This site is bounded on the east by MacArthur Boulevard and existing office uses, on the south and southwest by SR 73 ramps and vacant land, and on the north and northwest by Jamboree Road and existing retail, commercial, and office uses. ' Adjacent land uses include commercial office to the north and east, and vacant land to the ' southwest. Existing on -site and adjacent land uses are shown in Exhibit 16. Existing General Plan and Zoning Code The Jamboree/MacArthur site is designated for Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial development under the City of Newport Beach Land Use Element. The Floor Area Ratio (FAR) designated for the site is 0.25 for a total allowable development of 50,000 square feet. The City of Newport Beach Land Use Element indicates surrounding land uses as Retail and '- Service Commercial and Administrative, Professional and Financial Commercial to the northwest; Administrative Professional and Financial Commercial to the north, east, and southeast; and Recreational and Environmental Open Space to the south. Existing General Plan designations for the site and surrounding areas are shown in Exhibit 16. This site is zoned Unclassified. Surrounding zoning includes Planned Community (PC) to the north and west and Unclassified (U) to the south. The City of Irvine boundary is to the east. Other Plans This site lies within the Coastal Zone as established by the Coastal Act of 1976. The Local Coastal Plan (LCP) of the City of Newport Beach designates this site as Administrative, Professional and Financial Commercial. The Orange County'Transportation Corridors Agency has adopted an alignment of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor (State Route 73) in conformance with the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways. The route of the corridor passes to the west of the site. Construction of the corridor will include removal of the existing loop ramp on the west of the site. 11 53 I �w ,A 'alJ• tit -+�"i °^z'�' � i Q-'��y� :.• { d`;, t mow:' .a � ,� R& "R t��.t �l !♦ •' 7. hSX1f:t 'Y Ala w Y1 1 d .t v ,t� AP & FC - Administrative, Professional and Financial Commercial R & SC - Retail & Service Commercial R & EOS - Recreational & Environmental Open Space AP & FC 1 - MIMM74k R&SC \Qo e9Z ���• j r o<s �0o AP &FC A AP & FC P & FC 9� yG G IX - R&EOS I GENERAL PLAN, O z o a j Ir n IL W Z Q w w w w wcr w 7 w U L 0.. t CSS a C/)� G v zm Z co w J U a dC6aa) Z zZ o C Z A 2 w M 0 0U O Cr Ii C G Z o j LZ i N li U w Upper Castaways The Upper Castaways site is a 56.6 acre vacant site. This site is bordered on the north and northeast by existing residential uses, on the southeast by Upper Newport Bay and existing marine uses, on the south by the bluff separating Upper and Lower Castaways sites and Coast Highway, and on the west by Dover Drive with existing offices and single-family residences across Dover. ' Surrounding land uses include commercial and single-family homes to the north, the Bay to the east and southeast, the vacant property Lower Castaways site to the south; and existing offices and single-family residences across Dover Drive to the west. Existing on -site and adjacent land uses of the area are shown in Exhibit 17. Existing General Plan and Zoning ' The bluff areas of this site are designated for Recreational and Environmental Open Space with the balance of the site designated by the City of Newport Beach Land Use Element for Single-family Detached development. A maximum of 151 dwelling units are allowed on the site. The designation of Single-family Detached represents an anticipated development type, and is not intended to limit development to only that type. This area may be developed with `• any of the residential product types within the established dwelling unit limit. The City of Newport Beach Land Use Element indicates surrounding land uses as: Recreational and Environmental Open Space to the east; Single-family Attached to the north; and Single-family Detached to the northeast; Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial; Government, Educational and Institutional Facilities to the west and northwest; Single-family Detached .to the northeast and southwest; and Recreational and Marine Commercial and Water to the east and southeast. Existing General Plan designations for the site and surrounding areas are shown in Exhibit 17. The bluff areas of this site are designated by the City of Newport Beach General Plan for ' Recreational and Environmental Open Space. This site has been designated by the Recreation and Open Space Element of the General Plan for a 10.0 acre view park. 1 The Circulation Element designates the section of Dover Drive between Cliff Drive and Westcliff Drive as a major arterial which will ultimately require widening to six lanes. Dover Drive runs along the west boundary of the Upper Castaways site. The site is zoned Planned Community (PC). No PC Text has been adopted for this site. The surrounding zoning for the site consists of Planned Community (PC) to the north and south and Single-family Residential (R-1) and Commercial (C-1) to the west. L' 55 ,,. 4 Y` M. w l f, 40 S FA AP & FC-iAdministrative, Professional and Financial Commercial SFD - Single Family Detached SFA - Single Family Attached MFR - Multi -Family Residential F - R & SC -Retail & Service Commercial MFR AP & ._ R & MC - � ecreational & Marine Commercial F`+ = `_ ; fa , GE & IF - Povernment, Educational & Institutional Facilities W - Wateri SFD F &� AP FC GE & IF SFD I SFD o 7��.V MC R & MCI C HIGHWAY R&MC SFD L MFR EAI r N 0 U y 0 c OW V 7.7. N Z U 7 a °n a w J w a W w z Ir 0 Q 'N' W W U ui Q o m Z co o_ a N O Q, M 06 C7 V I— z j Z w o Z CL CL w.� >> pU O z z 1— U X U W GENERAL PLAN ' Other Plans This site lies in the Coastal Zone as established by the Coastal Act of 1976. The Local Coastal Plan (LCP) of the City of Newport Beach designates this site as Single-family Detached. As with the provisions of the General Plan the designation of Single-family ' Detached is only an assumed product type based on the density established, and is not a limitation on product type. The LCP designates that a public bikeway/walkway is to be provided in the bluff top setback area with access from Dover Drive and/or Westcliff Drive. Bay View Landine ' Existing Land Use The Bay View Landing site is a 16.1 acre vacant site. This site is bounded on the northeast by Back Bay Drive and the Newporter Resort, on the east by Jamboree Road and single and multi -family residences, on the south by Coast Highway and multi -family residences (Promotory Point), and on the west by the Newport Dunes recreational area. Adjacent land uses include a mobile home park to the west, hotel/commercial use to the north, single-family residential attached and service commercial to the east, and Coast Highway and multi -family residential to the south. Existing on -site and adjacent land uses are shown in Exhibit 18. Existing General Plan and Zoning ' The City of Newport Beach Land Use Element designates the lower elevation of the Bay View Landing site (SA acres) as Retail and Service Commercial for the development of either 10,000 square feet for restaurant use or 40,000 square feet for health club use. The ' upper elevation (11.1 acres) of the site is designated by the Land Use Element as Recreation and Open Space. ' The City of Newport Beach Land Use Element indicates surrounding land uses as Retail and Service Commercial to the north; Multi -Family Residential and Single-family attached to the east and northwest; Multi -Family Residential to the east and south; Single-family Detached ' to the southeast; and Recreational and Environmental Open Space to the west. Existing on - site and adjacent uses are shown in Exhibit 18. A portion of this site is designated by the City of Newport Beach Circulation Element as having the potential to be utilized for an interchange between Jamboree Road and Pacific Coast Highway. Results of the most recent Newport Beach Traffic Analysis Model ' (NBTAM) for the buildout year 2010 shows that the intersection will operate within a desired level of service without construction of an interchange. 1 57 II L.r C- TP.1�\N OND v, wf SFD MFR MFR SFD - Single Family 'Detached SFA - Single Family attached MFR - Multi -Family Residential R & SC - Retail & SeNice Commercial R & EOS - Recreational & Environmental Open Space W - Water A &SC �eo9, R&CAP l'F"0 ! m�G� R & SC R & EOS. i SFA co N cC U co C c Z `= J cc O n A f.t. w r Z Q w WIII w Z Ir W 0 w W U C U "0 C Z � m Z w p L Q �306�: Z� zZ Z cv w mO U O ict 'w Z O V i L? r WU GENERAL This site has been designated by the Recreation and Open Space Element as requiring a "mini -park" on the upland (higher elevation) part of the property. This park requirement is approximately 1.0 acre. The existing zoning is Planned Community (PC). No PC Text has been adopted for this site. ' Surrounding zoning for the site is Unclassified (U) to the north, Planned Community (PC) to the east, south, and west, and Single-family Residential (R-1) to the south. Other Plans No other plans have been identified which are considered relevant to this site. ' Newporter North and Newporter Knoll Existing Land Use The totalacreage of this parcel is 89.2 acres. The Newporter North site is vacant and contains a total of 77.2 acres. The Newporter Knoll site consists of 12.0 acres of vacant ' land. The Newporter North site is bounded by the Upper Newport Bay, San Joaquin Hills Road, Jamboree Road, and John Wayne Gulch. 1 II Surrounding land uses include San Joaquin Hills Road and multi -family residential to the north; Jamboree Road, existing office space and a golf course to the east; the service commercial and hotel uses to the south; and Back Bay Drive and Upper Newport Bay to the north and west. Existing on -site and adjacent land uses are shown in Exhibit 19. The Newporter Knoll site is located within the boundaries of the Newporter North site. This site is located in the southwest portions of the Newporter North site, immediately west of John Wayne Gulch. Existing General Plan and Zoning Code The City of Newport Beach Land Use Element designates the Newporter North site for the development of 212 Single-family Attached Residential dwelling units. The Land Use Element of the City of Newport Beach designates the Newporter Knoll site for Recreational and Environmental Open Space for passive open space use. The City of Newport Beach Land Use Element indicates surrounding land uses to the Newporter North and Newporter Knoll sites as Multi -Family Residential to the north; Retail and Service Commercial, Government, Educational, and Institutional Facilities, Administrative Professional and Financial Commercial, and Recreational and Environmental Open Space to the east; and Retail and Service Commercial to the south. The waters of the Upper Newport Bay are to the west. Existing General Plan designations for these sites and surrounding areas are shown in Exhibit 19. 59 II S ono &A y R&SC �. MFR 0 a MFR .,. �.Y?'.A••.r.�'if}Fs��i'!j`''�!Fr.?.�ytny�r'•-Ar`f 4,t�'?3fi}E-41 ;�F! `�'..."',����•j'++`g',t r�-:� ilso65`!�'i r. 'ffi_'7 Y t • ,' '� SCf n t� � {' S 't{cTj ..tu.W.tS( .ff. W e'qY AP & FC W MFR I� GE&IF, W SANi,A BgRBgR GE & IF -.., q.__ DRIVE_ AP & FC :r s @ R & EQS SFA SF �I '} Viz: r; ''9*1-._; ,,srt=,; d3�", K �r i-,•�i AP & FC - Administrative, Professional -_ s,. # .tip,>4. r 'ri• :� �' and Financial Commercial .. �"ayw �4; •_: SFA - Single Family Attached =_ ,t:x',• MFR - Mufti -Family Residential - �, ,,, s ;. ;<-- ;. <� {+• .R & SC -Retail &Service Commercial R & EOS - Recreation & Environmental Open Space ' GE & IF - Government, Educational & ►�,c0.glM4\,M, pkvIf c Institutional Facilities `�•:' W - Water Ira N ca U fN 0 Ora a W a � w a W C w Z is Y ( \ W W U� L C ¢ U a � a) p 3 z m Z d W i J Z O cc) Z O Z z Z W O Z �. w ��. O � o �U IM CCa tL Z 0 ~ Z � U W GENERAL PLAN: The Newporter North site has been designated by the Recreation and Open Space Element for a view park/neighborhood park of approximately 4.0 acres. The Newporter Knoll site has been designated by the Recreation and Open Space Element for Open Space. The existing zoning for the Newporter North and Newporter Knoll sites is Planned Community (PC). No PC Text has been adopted for these sites. Surrounding zoning for these site include Planned Community (PC) to the north and east; Administrative/Professional (AP), and Unclassified (U) to the east and south. No zoning is designated to the west. ' Other Plans l_J [1 In 1 I 1I �J II Both the Newporter North and Newporter Knoll sites lie within the Coastal Zone as established by the Coastal Act of 1976. The Local Coastal Plan (LCP) of the City of Newport Beach designates the Newporter North site as Single-family Attached Residential. A public bikeway/walkway is identified for the Newporter North site in the LCP. Newporter Knoll is designated for Recreation and Environmental Open Space. Newporter Resort Existing Land Use The Newporter Resort site currently contains a hotel and golf course. This site is located on the northwesterly corner of Jamboree Road and Back Bay Drive. The site is bounded to the north by the vacant Newporter North and Newporter Knoll sites; to the east by Jamboree Road and multi -family residences; to the south by Back Bay Drive and the vacant Bay View Landing site; and to the west by Newport Dunes recreational area and the Upper Newport Bay. Adjacent land uses include vacant land to the north; Newport Dunes recreation area and other marine uses to the west; the service commercial to the northeast; single-family attached residential to the east; and vacant land to the south. Existing on -site and adjacent land uses are shown in Exhibit 20. Existing General Plan and Zoning The Newporter Resort site is designated by the Land Use Element for Retail and Service Commercial. Hotel and support facilities are allowed on this site, with a maximum of 479 hotel rooms. 61 II v — 1s7s �L5LTip,, IOILtij c y%a1aE1 , j 3j 'F t'irl4, fii�=�r�;r �.'i! frtint4F3ri t. r., V 101 r, y h 4 ' R 1 �g`a,!•y'�`,���:�f1''tF!Ci;dsi '*-^'•rtSOilfP�k#[I r :f�dl±Sft t._j,� � �r P.•...:._. ... t,IlFrrtt '�riTTrf d`• � a ,. �- � _ R i• Pwr�.2pr.�.�s i7. r.. `l� /^�,r �J�.,� . �� �• __-erg• lit/ !1!' yid P Ikk t !ne'ei J. 746 i SFA - Single Family Attached l' R & SC - Retail & Selrice Commercial r {; R & EOS - Recreational-& Environmental 4 i c- 6 • R & EOS I���gckie4 s F R&SC I !~ JAW. Jq� e09 FF9 0 140 Z JEr a W J w Q M W w, Z fr Q u.! U p O � p d zm a i J O 00 06 F— Z Z p p, �: z LU 2 Z d w 0 �Z oU O oc 2 CO) O_ q < Z -i N x U W GENERALAN The City of Newport Beach Land Use Element indicates surrounding land use designations as: Single-family Attached Residential to the east; Recreation and Environmental Open ' Space to the west; Retail and Service Commercial to the south; and Recreational and Environmental Open Space to the north and west. Existing General Plan designations for the site and surrounding uses are shown in Exhibit 20. The zoning for this site is Unclassified (U). A PC Text is not required. Existing and future uses are subject to the review and approval of a use permit and must be consistent with the use allowed by the General Plan. Surrounding zoning for the site includes Planned Community (PC) to the north, east, and ' south. Other Plans ' This site lies within the Coastal Zone as established by the Coastal Act of 1976. The Local ' Coastal Plan (LCP) of the City of Newport Beach designates this site as Retail and Service Commercial. ' Block 800 Existing Land Use ' The Block 800 site consists of 6.45 acres of vacant land. This site is bordered by San Clemente Drive and the existing Newport Center Library and Newport Art Museum to the ' north; Santa Maria Drive and existing Block 700 office buildings to the east; Block 800 office buildings and parking structure to the south; and Santa Barbara Drive and the existing golf course to the west. Existing on -site and adjacent land uses are shown in .Exhibit 21. ' Existing General Plan and Zoning ' The City of Newport Beach Land Use Element designates Block 800 for development of Multi -Family Residential dwelling units with a maximum of 245 units. ' The Land Use Element indicates surrounding land uses as Administrative, Professional and Financial Commercial to the north, east and south; and Recreation and Environmental Open Space to the west. Existing General Plan designations for the site and surrounding areas are ' shown in Exhibit 21. The existing zoning for this site is Planned Community (PC). The site is included within the ' area covered by the Block 800 PC Text. No use or development standards are identified. ' 63 i_J AP & FG - Administrative, Prof, MFR - Mufti -Family Residential { R & EOS - Recreational and E 1 GE & IF - Governmental- Frli it R & EQS SANTA BARBARA IVE and Financial Commercial anal Open Space nd Institutional Facilities f :i at"• rr„„�;�-_ � ;:;�� � .� {,�: �!�.�-��•' . ,�.3' MFR ` FJC A GE IF U A� c .AGE IF .t•: , ,•I •s RARY MARIA • . .rY bDR1,VE;, SANTA MARIA DRIVE . ;';,,.., . .+vim �r. ^• �1/°1^'+:LL�+tr i � iiY � .'.-' i �J .J`"nr .• . Cif' '''�h. 'ie ex ..%'� i1t 1q. J� �' ,a.: .•'•:�" r -'! AP & FC Vy, a h �� a ��IN i ' pia 7 ,K g' .^-t.:- A. %o \ 'a : t hrL6 �"�. 6•IG �'* q1g�' �W jJtA•p7 �,i( 1R_ 2'A Z Q J w IL J z Q w W W w Z W cr Q c� � LU W U CO) CL U) 05 O m Z C IZ C Q 00 O o 06 m RJR V 0 z z Z 00 W o Z >. .._' O U p cc t2 � oc N O Z —I N U W Surrounding zoning includes Planned Community (PC) to the north, east and south; and Open Space (OS) to the west. Other Plans ' No other plans have been identified which are considered relevant to this site. Corporate Plaza West ' Existing Land Use ' The Corporate Plaza West site is a 12.1 acre site. Nine acres are vacant, with the existing office building at the intersection of Granville Drive and Newport Center Drive and the ' landscape entry statement at the intersection of Coast Highway and Newport Center Drive comprising the remaining 3.1 acres. This site is bounded by Newport Center Drive, Coast Highway, Newport Beach Country Club, and the Balboa Bay Tennis Club. ' Surrounding land uses include the service commercial and multi -family residential to the north; office to the east and southeast; and single-family residential detached to the south ' and west. Existing on -site and adjacent land uses are shown in Exhibit 22. Existing General Plan and Zoning Code ' This site is designated by the City of Newport Beach Land Use Element for Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial uses. The maximum amount of development allowed on the site is 115,000 square feet. A total of 21,000 square feet is currently existing. The City of Newport Beach General Plan designates this site for an additional 94,000 square ' feet of office on the remaining 9.0 acres of the 12.1 acre site. The City of Newport Beach General Plan designates surrounding land uses as ' Administrative, Professional, -and Financial Commercial to the south and southeast; Recreation and Environmental Open Space to the north and west; Multi -Family Residential to the east; and Single-family Residential detached to the west. The existing General Plan ' designations for the site and surrounding areas are shown in Exhibit 22. The existing zoning for this site is Planned Community (PC). A PC Text has been adopted ' for this site as part of the Library Exchange Agreement. Surrounding zoning includes Open Space (OS) to the north and west, Planned Community (PC) to the west and east; Single -Family Residential (R-1) to the west; and Open Space (OS) to the north and west. 65 1 V 7 .ysa« AP & FC - Administrative, Professional and Financial SFD - Single Family Detached MFR - Mufti -Family Residential R & EOS - Recreation & Environmental Open Space SFD sm SFD A GOP FLAP&FC ,yF N FAO 9T CENTER DRNE AP & FC GENERAL P B t R ,& EOS MFR o� AP&FC C5 N N m U Co O C 4 0� a W H J Z Q w W w Z W U a.+ N W N Q� �3 CI) as °' a 2 0 L 0 J °' as 3t Z .ai H ) a Z i O W 0 Z M a am w > >, a, U T O O OC V OC � z O 'NCR v Z H CO) U W I ' Other Plans ' This site lies within the Coastal Zone as established by the Coastal Act of 1976. The Local Coastal Plan (LCP) of the City of Newport Beach designates this site as permitted office uses under the Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial designation. tFreeway Reservation ' Existing Land Use The Freeway Reservation site is a 28.3 acre vacant site. The site is located on MacArthur ' Boulevard between the Upper Big Canyon Nature Park and Ford Road. This site is bordered by Ford Road and existing Pacific Bell uses to the north; the Harbor View residential area to the east; Baywood Apartments to the south; and MacArthur boulevard 1 and Big Canyon residences and a golf course to the west. Existing on -site and adjacent land uses are shown in Exhibit 23. ' Adjacent land uses -consist of Ford Road and office to the north; single-family residential detached to the east; multi -family residential to the south; and MacArthur Boulevard, single- family residential detached and a golf course to the west. Existing General Plan and Zoning ' The City of Newport Beach Land Use Element designates this site for development of Single-family Attached Residential uses with a maximum of 76 dwelling units. The Land Use Element designates surrounding land uses as Single-family Detached to the west and east; Multi -Family Residential to the northwest; and Recreational and Environmental Open, Space to the west and south. The existing General Plan designations ' of the site and surrounding area are shown in Exhibit 23. The Circulation Element designates MacArthur Boulevard between San Joaquin Hills Road and Ford Road as a major arterial to be widened to six lanes. The Circulation Element also designates Ford Road between MacArthur Boulevard and the San Joaquin Hills ' Transportation Corridor to be constructed as a Primary Arterial and relocated northerly to its current alignment. This site is zoned Planned Community (PC). The site is included in the existing Harbor View Hills PC Text although specific site designations and development standards have not yet been established for the site. ' Surrounding zoning for this site includes Planned Community (PC) to the north, east, south, and west. 1 ' I� 67 1 ` , 1 t' '1Gf „� -• Y J� A 0 SFD 1 SFA r �P I SFD - Single Family Detached SFA - Single Family Attached MFR - Multi -Family RYsidentiai \tj�\S -Recreational &Environmental Open Space 1 SFA Q 0 SFD SFD L Co a N U � Co U U 0) O LU U C n Ka CL fq 4 'Loll1= J Z a _ n IL w J z Q w w w Z w O Q C w u) CU CU p i Z m Z d (WL L a O a _I F-- Z Z W O 0 3 w T OU O u. i M a_ N O_ 0 < Q w U GENERAL PLAN I ' Other Plans The realignment of Ford Road between MacArthur Boulevard and the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor is proposed directly north of this site. The proposed widening of MacArthur Boulevard to six lanes will occur along the western border of the site. The ' Orange County Transportation Corridor Agency has adopted an alignment of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor (State Route 73) in conformance with the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways. The corridor route is located north of the Freeway Reservation site. IMPACTS According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines a project will normally have a significant effect on the environment in the area of land use if it will: ' • Conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community where it is located; • Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community; or • Convert prime agricultural land to non-agricultural use or impact the agricultural productivity of prime agricultural land. ! These criteria have project -specific definitions associated with them. The first criterion relies on consistency with the adopted General Plan, Zoning, and Local Coastal Plan of the City of Newport Beach. The second criterion relies on compatibility of the proposed project with adjacent land uses. The third criterion relies on the determination of soils on the project site and potential classification of Types I or II in the City of Newport Beach. According ' to the California Department of Conservation - Orange County Important Farmland Map (State Farmland Map) dated July, 1988, no prime agricultural lands are located in the City of Newport Beach. None of the proposed development associated with this project will impact prime agricultural land. San Diego Creek South Proposed Land Uses ' The 21.0 acre San Diego Creek South site will be developed with 300 multi -family residential units on approximately 18.6 gross acres with passive open space provided on 2.4 gross acres. Proposed uses are in conformance with the existing General Plan and Zoning designations. It is the intent of this area to provide multi -family residential housing and related community facilities. h I 11` I Consistency with General Plan and Zoning The proposed land uses are in conformance with the existing City of Newport Beach General Plan and Zoning designations. The Districting Maps of the City of Newport Beach define the zoning for this site as PC. The permitted uses set forth in the proposed PC Text are in conformance with the General Plan. The amendment also establishes specific development standards for this site. The total number of units is established as 300 multi -family on 18.6, acres with 2.4 acres of open space. The PC Text provides for multi -family residential housing and related community facilities. The uses permitted are as follows. • Apartments • Condominiums • Townhomes • Temporary model complex and appurtenant uses • Community Recreational Facilities • Signs • One Architectural Tower The following is a summary of primary development standards. All buildings shall comply with the height restrictions established by the City for this area. The maximum height of all buildings shall be thirty-five (35) feet measured in accordance with the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code and determined from the grade approved in the site plan review and subdivision approval. Project edges adjacent to University Avenue and Jamboree Road shall be enhanced with landscaped berms and undulating walls. Varying building setbacks are encouraged to create soft project edges. Ip order to reduce the perception of building mass along perimeter roadways, three story building elements shall be setback a minimum of 5' and average 15' in addition to the required setback. Where three story buildings do occur, one and two story elements should be incorporated into the building composition in order to reduce bulk and mass. The following minimum setbacks shall apply to all structures (not to include garden walls or fences) adjacent to streets. Setbacks shall be measured from the property line. Street Jamboree Road/SR 73 Access Ramp University Drive South Private Streets and Drives Collector Streets Setback from Ultimate Right -of -Way Line 25' 20' 5' 15' d I I L 11 i I I 70 1 I ' . A minimum setback of five (5) feet is required from all other property lines. ' Fences shall be limited to a maximum height of eight (8) feet, except within street setback areas where fences, hedges and walls shall be limited to three (3) feet. ' The proposed development for this site is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan and the intent and purpose of the Zoning ordinance. No conflicts with the adopted plans and goals of the City of Newport Beach will occur. No impacts associated ' with surrounding General Plan and Zoning designations will occur. Compatibility with Existing Land Uses No land use incompatibilities are anticipated as a result of this development. Single and multi -family residences exist across University Drive from the site. No land use impacts from the proposed project on these uses are expected due to the similarity of uses and the distance between the proposed project and existing residences. The development area would be separated from surrounding residential uses by the width of University Drive, the setbacks of existing development, and the 20 foot plus setbacks proposed for the San Diego Creek site. Potential incompatibilities with open space areas surrounding the site are expected to be insignificant, if they occur. The Upper Newport Back Bay Ecological Reserve is buffered by its location 100 feet across Jamboree Road from the proposed project site. Land use impacts to Bonita Creek and San Diego Creek are also anticipated to be insignificant. The proposed open space area for this site as shown in the PC Text in the Project Description of this document creates a buffer between the proposed development and these sensitive land uses in addition to'the required setbacks. Consistency with Other Plans The site is identified in the Local Coastal Plan (LCP) of the City of Newport Beach. The plan designates the site for these proposed uses. Development of Multi -Family uses and passive open space are consistent with the Local Coastal Plan. No conflicts with the LCP have been identified. This site will not conflict with the LCP. The Orange County Transportation Corridor Agency has adopted an alignment of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor (State Route 73) in conformance with the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways. The corridor will pass to the east of the site and a northbound access ramp from Jamboree Road to SR-73 will begin adjacent to the west side of the site. These proposed roadways have been considered in the planning of this site and will not be impacted by the proposed development. I ' 71 1 San Diego Creek North ' Proposed Land Uses I The 14.7 acre San Diego Creek North site will be used for open space and public facilities. The site is proposed to remain as 14.7 acres of open space with allowable uses also including a Fire Station and a Park and Ride Facility. The intent of this area is to provide open space and public facility areas with selected permitted uses. Consistency with General Plan and Zoning , The proposed open space and public facility uses are consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan. The zoning for the site is Unclassified (U). The site will be rezoned from Unclassified (U) to Planned Community (PC). The PC District .Regulation for this site will bring zoning in conformance with the General Plan. Permitted uses of the site according to the San Diego Creek North PC Text are as follows. Permitted uses within the Natural Open Space area (Area 1): • Preservation and restoration of existing habitat and wetlands. • Habitat and wetland creation and enhancement. • Ecological and agricultural research. Permitted uses within the Open Space/Public Facilities area (Area 2): • Preservation and restoration of existing habitat and wetlands. • Passive and active public recreation facilities, such as hiking, biking, scenic outlooks, picnicking, and equestrian trails. • Biotic gardens. • Other uses that the Planning Commission finds compatible with the natural amenities of the parcel. • Transportation corridors, appurtenant facilities, arterial highways, and vehicular access to other permitted uses. • Utilities and water tanks. • Fuel modifications zones. • Park and ride facility. • Fire station. • Drainage and flood control facilities. • Any grading necessary for the permitted uses. • Off -site directional sign. • Enhanced landscaped comer. 72 1 The extension of Bay View (University) Drive, identified in the City of Newport Beach Circulation Element is a permitted use within Area 2 of the proposed PC Text. The road would run through the center of the site. This roadway would be constructed to a width of ' four lanes. The proposed extension of Bay View (University) Drive as allowed in the PC Text is consistent with the City of Newport Beach Circulation Element. No conflict is identified. The proposed land uses are within the intent and purpose of the City of Newport Beach General Plan and Zoning Code. These uses implement the General Plan by providing for a fire station and other uses within the intent of the land use designation. No impacts associated with the surrounding General Plan and Zoning designations will occur. Compatibility with Existing Land Uses ' The proposed public facility and open space uses are compatible with existing open space, commercial and transit -related uses surrounding the site. No impacts are anticipated. No impacts related to compatibility of land uses are anticipated to occur to the adjacent San Diego Creek. Consistency with Other Plans and Zoning A portion of the site has been identified as the future location of a northbound access ramp which is part of the adopted alignment of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor (State Route 73). The flyover would extend across the western portion of the site. These proposed roadways have been considered in the planning of this site and will not be impacted by development of public facility and open space uses on -site. The approval of ' the Development Agreement and adoption of PC Text will not preclude construction of the facility. No conflicts are expected. .Iamboree/MacArthur Proposed Land Uses The Jamboree/MacArthur site is proposed to remain as 4.7 acres of open space. It is the intent of the project for this area to provide primarily open space with other selected ' permitted uses. Consistency with General Plan and Zoning The proposed land uses are in conformance with the existing City of Newport Beach General Plan. The zoning for the site is Unclassified (U). The site will be rezoned from Unclassified (U) to Planned Community (PC). The PC District Regulation for this site will bring zoning into conformance with the General Plan. Permitted uses include open space, transportation, and utilities. 73 I I Proposed land uses are in compliance with the zoning established by the Jamboree/ MacArthur PC Text, as well as with the Administrative, Professional and Financial _ Commercial land use designations of the Newport Beach General Plan. No impacts are anticipated. The site.is designated in the General Plan for the development of-50,000 square , feet of office space. The Irvine Company is proposing to dedicate the site in fee to the City of Newport Beach for open space and recreation purposes which would eliminate the office entitlement. ' The proposed land uses are within the intent and purpose of the City of Newport Beach General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. No impacts associated with the surrounding General Plan and Zoning designations will occur. The PC Text for this site establishes specific standards for the site. The PC Text lists the following as permitted uses. • Preservation and restoration of existing habitat and wetlands. ' • Passive public recreation uses. • Biotic gardens. • Other uses that the Planning Commission finds compatible with the natural amenities of the parcel. • Transportation corridors, appurtenant facilities, arterial highways, and vehicular access to other permitted uses. • Utilities and water tanks. • Fuel modifications zones. • Drainage and flood control facilities. • Any grading necessary for the permitted uses. • Off site directional sign. ' • Enhanced landscaped comer. Compatibility with Existing Land Uses 1 The use of this site for open space and recreation is compatible with the surrounding office, commercial, retail and vacant uses. If the site is developed with recreation, transportation and utility uses permitted, no impact to surrounding land use would occur. Roadways surround the Jamboree/MacArthur site on all three sides. The site is isolated ' from the San Diego Creek Trail system and the Upper Newport Bay and Ecological Reserve. The site has limited access and is not customarily used by the general public for open space or recreational purposes. Consistency with Other Plans A portion of the site has been identified for the adopted alignment of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor (State Route 73) to be constructed to the west of the site. This roadway has been considered in the planning of this site and will not be impacted by the proposed development. No conflict is anticipated. 74 ' Upper Castaways Proposed Land Uses ' The 56.6 acre Upper Castaways site will be developed with 151 residential dwelling units on 26.0 acres. A view park is proposed on 11.5 acres with open space and the future Dover Drive right-of-way on 14.3 acres. An active park is proposed on 4.8 acres. It is the intent of this area to permit development for residential dwellings and associated uses as well as parks and environmental open space. The creation of the view park is intended to be passive in nature, characterized by low intensity usage such as hiking, bicycling, and informal recreation. The view park will be a natural setting with unobtrusive additions and minimal lighting. Nighttime lighting of the active park and recreation areas will be prohibited. Security lighting is possible. The public access will be provided along the eastern edge of the site with a large portion of the park in the southern portion of the site. The creation of the active park is intended for daytime use with recreation fields for soccer, baseball, etc. Nighttime lighting with the exception of low level security lighting is prohibited by the PC Text for the Upper Castaways site. The active park is proposed to be located in, the northwest portion of the site. Consistency with General Plan and Zoning The proposed land uses are consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan. The Newport Beach Districting Maps define the zoning for the site. The PC District Regulations for this site establish specific standards for this site. The total number of units is established as 151 single-family on 26.0 acres with a view park on 11.5 acres, open space and future Dover Drive right-of-way on 14.3 acres, and an active park on 4.8 acres. The PC District Regulations allows for the following uses. • Townhouses • Condominiums • Single-family detached ' • Model homes and sales offices • Recreation uses According to the PC District Regulations, the residential development area shall not exceed 26.0 acres allowing for 151 dwelling units. The maximum height of all buildings shall be 32 feet measured in accordance with the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code and ' determined from the grade approved in the site plan review and subdivision approval. Setbacks shall apply to all structures adjacent to major streets. Setbacks from major streets, specifically Dover Drive, shall be a minimum of 35 feet to the property line. 1 75 J Additionally, the property line setback from the edge of a bluff shall be located no closer ' to the edge of the bluff than ,the point at which the top of the bluff is intersected by a line drawn from the solid toe of the bluff at an angle of 26.6 degrees to the horizontal. A , property line cannot be located closer than forty (40) feet from the edge of the bluff. Development consistent with these standards would be in conformance with the City of Newport Beach Bluff Top Set Back Ordinance. ' The 11.5 acres of open space provided on -site fulfills the requirement of approximately 10.0 acres of view park in the Recreation and Open Space Element of the General Plan. The proposed development for the site is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. No, impacts associated with the General Plan or Zoning will occur. No impacts associated with the surrounding General Plan and Zoning designation will occur. Compatibility with Existing Land Uses The proposed uses are compatible with surrounding uses of residential, commercial and open space. Commercial uses exist from the site along Dover Drive.. No land use impacts from the proposed project to these uses are considered insignificant. The proposed project is also compatible with residential uses across Dover Drive. These uses are not anticipated to be impacted by the proposed project. Consistency with Other Plans The site is identified in the Local Coastal Plan (LCP) of the City of Newport Beach. The ' plan designates the site for Single-family Detached uses. This proposed use is the assumed project type under the provisions of the General Plan. The proposed development of Single- family Detached uses for this site will not in conflict with the LCP. The PC Text identifies development standards which are in conformance with the City of Newport Beach Bluff Top Setback Ordinance. Bay View Landing Proposed Land Uses The 16.1 acre Bay View Landing site will be developed with either 10,000 square feet of ' restaurant use or 40,000 square feet of health club use on the lower elevation of the site (5.0 acres). Open space is planned on the upper elevation which consists of 11.1 acres. 76 ' ' Consistency with General Plan and Zoning ' The proposed land uses are consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan and Zoning designations. ' A portion of the site is designated by the Circulation Element as having the potential to be utilized for an interchange between Jamboree Road and Pacific Coast Highway. The development of this interchange is not anticipated to occur by buildout of the circulation ' system in 2010 as indicated in the City of Newport Beach Traffic Model. Construction of the interchange is expected to occur well after the year 2010. The proposed development on this site will not prevent this interchange from being constructed if deemed necessary. No conflict is identified. The Recreation and Open Space Element designates the upper elevation of the site'for a ' "mini -park." The project proposes to develop a 11.1 acre open space area/view park. The open space/view park to be provided on -site would fulfill the requirement of approximately 1.0 acres in the Recreation and Open Space Element of the General Plan. No conflicts with the Recreation and Open Space Element will occur as a result of the proposed project. ' The Planned Community District Regulations define the zoning for the site as Planned Community (PC). The PC District Regulations for this site establishes specific standards for this site. Restaurant or health club development standards shall be determined in subsequent environmental documentation, subject to review and approval by the City of Newport Beach. No impacts associated with the General Plan or Zoning will occur. No impacts associated with the surrounding General Plan or Zoning designation will occur. Compatibility with ESdsting Land Uses 1 Land use incompatibilities are not anticipated to occur with the implementation of the proposes project. Residential uses exist across Jamboree Road, an eight lane divided road. Consequently, land use impacts to these residences are considered insignificant. Development on Bay View Landing proposed development similar to that of the adjacent Newporter Resort. No impacts are anticipated to occur. ' Consistency with Other Plans The site is identified in the Local Coastal Plan (LCP) of the City of Newport Beach. The plan designates the site for restaurant or health club and open space uses. The proposed development of restaurant or health club and open space uses for this site will not conflict with the LCP. i 77 Newporter North and Newporter Knoll ' Proposed Land Uses , The 77.2 acre Newporter North site will be developed with 212 single-family dwelling units on approximately 30.00 acres. A view park will be provided on 4.0 acres and open space, natural areas, and future right-of-way on 43.2 acres. It is the intent of this area to permit the development of residential dwellings and associated uses as well as parks and environmental open space. , No development is proposed for the Newporter Knoll site. Consistency with General Plan and Zoning The proposed land uses are consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan. The Newport Beach District Maps define the zoning for the site. The PC District Text proposed will establish specific standards for this site. The PC Text provides for the following uses for the Newporter North site: • Townhomes ' • Condominiums • Apartments • Single-family detached residential units • Model homes and sales offices • Recreational uses ancillary to residential uses The PC Text provides the following uses for the Newporter Knoll site: • Preservation and restoration of existing habitat and wetlands. , • Habitat and wetland creation and enhancement. The residential development area shall not exceed 30 acres, allowing development of a maximum of 212 dwelling units. The maximum height of all buildings shall not exceed thirty- five (35) feet measured in accordance with the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code and determined from the grade approved in the site review and subdivision approval. The following minimum setbacks shall apply to all structures adjacent to streets. These setbacks shall be measured from property line to ultimate right-of-way. ' Setback from Ultimate Street Right -of -Wad , Jamboree Road 35' San Joaquin Hills 35' 1 78 1 1 I I I I I LJ I n 'u A property line setback from the edge of a bluff shall be located no closer to the edge of the bluff than the point at which the top of the bluff is intersected by a line drawn from the solid toe of the bluff at an angle of 26.6 degrees to the horizontal. A property line shall not 'be located closer than forty (40) feet from the edge of a bluff. This is in compliance with the City's Bluff Top Setback Ordinance. No impacts associated with bluff top setbacks will occur. The proposed development for this site is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan and zoning. No impacts associated with the General Plan or zoning will occur. The proposed project is consistent with the surrounding General Plan and zoning designations. No impacts will occur. The open space/view park provided on -site fulfills the requirement of approximately 4.0 acres in the Recreation and Open Space Element of the General Plan. The proposed use for the Newporter Knoll site for open space is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan. The proposed open space designation is not in conflict with the adjacent uses of the Newporter Resort Golf Course or proposed uses on the Newporter North site. The zoning is Planned Community (PC) and this designation is consistent with the proposed open space use. The City's Recreation and Open Space Element designates the Newporter Knoll and portions of the Newporter North sites for recreational and environmental open space (Please see Exhibit 10, Project Description). The Element also identifies a view park on the Newporter North site. Compatibility with Existing Land Uses Land use incompatibilities are not anticipated to occur. The proposed uses on the Newporter North site are compatible with the adjacent uses of multi -family residential across San Joaquin Hills Road. The sensitive natural area on the site including the bluff tops will have a buffer between the development and the preserved areas. This buffer alleviates any incompatibility between these uses. There are existing commercial and retail uses across Jamboree Road which are not •anticipated to be impacted by the difference in land uses due to the distance between the uses. Land use compatibility impacts on surrounding open space, recreation and resort uses are not anticipated to occur with retention of the Newporter Knoll site as open space. There are no impacts expected to occur in conjunction with the proposed uses for the Newporter North site. Consistency with Other Plans The Newporter North and Newporter Knoll sites are both located within the Coastal Zone identified by the City of Newport Beach Local Coastal Plan (LCP). The development proposed on the Newporter North site is consistent with the LCP designation for Single- 79 IJ Family attached residential. The Newporter Knoll site will remain as open space as ' designated in the LCP. No conflict with the LCP will occur as a result of this project. The PC Text identified development standards which are in conformance with the City of ' Newport Beach Bluff Top Setback Ordinance. Newporter Resort Proposed Land Uses 1 Development of the proposed project will add 68 hotel rooms to the existing resort hotel which currently has 479 hotel rooms. No open space component is proposed for this site. 1 Consistency with General Plan and Zoning This proposed addition of hotel room is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General ' Plan and Zoning designations. The site is developed with the existing Newporter Resort complex. No vacant land exists on -site. Because the site is already developed and does not contain vacant land, no significant adverse impacts related to open space will occur. Compatibility with Existing Land Uses • I The addition of 68 hotel rooms is compatible with the surrounding uses in the resort, and surrounding uses of condominiums and single-family homes across Jamboree. No impacts are anticipated. Consistency with Other Plans The Newporter Resort site is designated for Retail,and Service Commercial uses in the City of Newport Beach Local Coastal Plan (LCP). The proposed addition of 68 hotel rooms is consistent with the LCP. No conflict with the LCP will occur as a result of this project. Block 800 1 Proposed Land Uses The 6.45 acre Block 800 site will be developed with 245 multi -family dwelling units on the 1 6.45 acres. No open space component is proposed for this site. It is the intent of this area to provide for the development of multi -family residential or seniors oriented multi -family , residential uses. Senior oriented residential uses may also include assisted living and skilled nursing uses ancillary to seniors residential use. i 80 1 1 ' Consistency with General Plan and Zoning Code The proposed land uses of multi -family housing or senior oriented multi -family residential uses are consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan and Zoning designations. ' The City's Recreation and Open Space Element does not identify recreation or open space designations on this site. The site is located within Newport Center surrounded primarily by office, hotel and institutional uses and a private golf course located to the west across Santa Barbara Drive. In its current state, the site does not provide open space or recreational amenities. The site is zoned PC. The Planned Community (PC) District Regulations proposed will define the uses of the site. The PC District Regulations proposed for this site will establish specific standards for this site. The PC District Regulations provides for multi -family residential housing an the following related community facilities. • Apartments ' • Condominiums • Recreation Facilities ancillary to residential uses. • Senior oriented multi -family residential uses. ' • Assisted living and skilled nursing uses ancillary to seniors residential uses. • Retail sales and services of a convenience nature ancillary to the operation ' and use of seniors residential facilities. • Parking lots, structures and facilities. ' The number of dwelling units allowed for standard multi -family residential use shall not exceed 245 units. The allowable number of dwelling units for a seniors oriented residential use shall be based on a traffic study submitted for review and approval by the City of ' Newport Beach. All buildings shall be. limited to a maximum of 200 feet above approved pad elevation. Detailed landscaping and irrigation plans, prepared by a licenses landscape architect or architect, shall be reviewed by the Director of Parks, Beaches and Recreation. All ' landscaping referred to in this paragraph shall be maintained in a neat and orderly fashion. Streetside loading shall be visually screened from view from access streets and adjacent ' property. Said screening shall form a complete opaque screen. All outdoor refuse collection areas shall be visually screened from access streets and ' adjacent property. Said screening shall form a complete opaque screen. No refuse collection area shall be permitted between a frontage street and the building line. IN Compatibility with Existing Land Uses ' Landuse incompatibilities are not anticipated. The surrounding existing uses are urban, high ' intensity uses. Commercial offices and hotel uses surround the site. The proposed project is anticipated as infill to complete the planned mixed -use development in the vicinity. Consistency with Other Plans No other plans relevant to this site have been identified. Corporate Plaza West Proposed Land Uses The 12.1 acre Corporate Plaza West site will be developed with an additional 94,000 square ' feet of office space on 9.0 acres. Currently, a 21,000 square foot office building exists along with the landscaped entry to Newport Center from Coast Highway. No open space component is proposed. It is the intent of this area to provide commercial activity, ' professional and business offices. Consistency with General Plan and Zoning Code , The proposed land uses are consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan and Zoning designations. The zoning for this site is Planned Community (PC). The adopted PC District Regulations for this site have been amended to bring the zoning in conformance with the General Plan. The amendment also establishes more specific standards for this site. The intent of the Corporate Plaza West PC District Regulations is to permit the location of a combination of business and professional office uses and light general commercial uses. Permitted uses allowed for this site consist of the following: 0 Retail sales and service of a convenience nature • Administrative and professional offices (excluding medical) • Restaurants (subject to City approval) • Institutional, financial and governmental facilities ' • Civic, cultural, commercial recreational and recreational facilities • Parking lots, structures and facilities • Drive -up teller units (subject to City approval) ' The height of all buildings and appurtenant structures shall' conform to the extension of the ' sight plane established by Ordinance 1596 for Corporate Plaza. This sight plane is illustrated in Exhibit 24. 82 1 r 1 I 1 L d I iJ L� L! ______ EAST COAST HIGHWAY Note: View plan corridors are measured above sea level elevation and are shown here for reference purposes only. Building heights shall be measured pursuant to the Civic Center View Plan Ordinance. aource: M01-aranc, vasquez ot rarmers, mc. SIGHT PLANE ORDINANCE CORPORATE PLAZA WEST CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT EIR City of Newport Beach �M-1 SMin.. PLANNING INC F: no scale 24 The proposed development for this site is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan. No impact associated with the General Plan or Zoning will occur. The ' proposed development is consistent with the surrounding General Plan and Zoning designations. No impacts will occur. ' Compatibility with Existing Land Uses Surrounding land uses are similar to the proposed project. Office use exist across Newport Center Drive. Single-family residences exist across Coast Highway. Land use impacts from the proposed uses on surrounding uses are considered insignificant due to the distance between the proposed uses and the existing uses. Consistency with Other Plans F IJ The site is identified in the Local Coastal Plan (LCP) of the City of Newport Beach. The plan designates the site for Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial uses. This proposed development is the assumed project type under the provisions of the General Plan. The proposed development of office use on this site will not conflict with the LCP. Freeway Reservation Proposed Land Uses The 28.3 acre Freeway Reservation site will be developed with 48 low -medium density single-family dwellings on 11.0 acres with 17.3 acres reserved for open space and right-of- way. Consistency with General Plan and Zoning The proposed residential uses are consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan. The widening of MacArthur Boulevard and the improvement of Ford Road as identified by the City of Newport Beach Circulation Element will occur to the north and west of the Freeway Reservation site. The proposed development will not conflict with the Circulation Element. No impact is identified. The City's Recreation and Open Space Element does not identify recreation or open space designations on this site. The site is located between MacArthur Boulevard and existing residential development in the Harbor View Planned Community. The property is a long, relatively linear strip of property running from Upper Big Canyon Nature Park -to Ford Road. In its current state, the site does not provide open space or recreation amenities. There are limited views from the site of adjacent land uses and Newport Center. 01 11 The site is zoned PC. The Planned Community (PC) District Regulations define the uses ' of the site. The PC District Regulations for this site establishes specific standards for this site. The PC Text provides for the following uses. ' • Single-family dwellings, detached. • Conventional subdivisions and conventional subdivisions on a Planned Community concept. ' • Cluster developments, subject to the approval of a Use Permit. • Parks and playgrounds. • Accessory buildings, structures and uses where related and incidental to a permitted use. , A minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet shall be provided for each dwelling unit in Areas 16 and 17. , All buildings shall comply with the height restrictions established by the City for this area. The maximum height of all buildings shall be thirty-two (32) feet, and shall be measured in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. ' The following setbacks shall apply to all structures (not to include garden walls or fences) adjacent to dedicated vehicular rights -of -way. Said setbacks are to be measured from the , ultimate right-of-way line. Setback from Ultimate , Street .Desi ng ation Right -of -Way Line Major 15' , Local Collector 5' Local Street 5' , There shall be a minimum side yard setback of five (5) feet. There shall be a minimum rear yard setback of twenty (20) feet. Limited to a maximum height of eight (8) feet, except for the area within five (5), feet of the front property line, where they shall be limited to three (3) feet. Wing walls, where an , extension of a residential or accessory structure may be eight feet (8') in height. Open trellis and beam construction shall be permitted to attach the garage or carport to the dwelling and may also extent from the dwelling to within three (3) feet of the side or rear ' property line. In side yards, the maximum height shall be eight (8) feet. For aggregate building coverage the maximum shall be 60 percent of any lot. 85 ' d I Compatibility with Existing Land Uses Land use incompatibilities are not anticipated. Surrounding land uses of residential are similar to uses being proposed. ' Consistency with Other Plans The realignment of Ford Road will occur directly north of this site. The widening of ' MacArthur Boulevard will occur along the western border of this site. The proposed alignment of the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor is located north of this site. The proposed roadways have been considered in the planning of this site and will not be impacted by the proposed development. ' CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Implementation of the proposed project in conjunction with other past, present and ' reasonably foreseeable future project will convert vacant land to urban uses. Such conversion is consistent with the existing General Plan, compatible with adjacent land uses, and is considered infill development. Consequently, the proposed project, in conjunction ' with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects will not have a cumulative land use impact. ' According to the State Farmland Map, no -impact to the loss of prime agricultural land will occur as a result of the proposed project. The project does not contribute to this cumulative impact that is occurring with the implementation of projects in the regional area. ' EXISTING CITY POLICIES AND REQUIREMENTS ' A. The proposed project shall be developed in accordance with the Newport Beach General Plan. B. Development of the site shall not be allowed to encroach into the areas required for yard setbacks as established by the California Coastal Commission and/or the City of Newport Beach, whichever is greater. C. Portions of the project located within the Coastal Zone and will require State Coastal Commission approval, in addition to all necessary City approvals and other approvals previously mentioned. D. Development on the Upper Castaways and Newporter North sites shall occur in ' conformance with the City's Bluff Top Set Back Ordinance. ' E. Development on the Corporate Plaza West site shall occur in conformance with the Sight Plane Ordinance. L M. MITIGATION MEASURES ' No additional Mitigation Measures are proposed other than those design features , incorporated into the project as proposed by the project applicant. LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE ' The proposed development on each site will not conflict with the City of Newport Beach General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. All proposed development is consistent with the existing General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The rezone of San Diego Creek North and Jamboree/MacArthur from Unclassified (U) to Planned Community (PC) will allow for the adoption of the PC District Regulations in conformance with the General Plan. No Project - specific or cumulative impacts associated with General Plan and Zoning will occur. The proposed development is considered to be infill development due to the location of the ' various sites and the existing uses adjacent to each site. The proposed development will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of the City of Newport Beach. No project- , specific or cumulative level impacts will occur. According to the California Department of Conservation - Orange County Important ' Farmland Map (State Farmland Map) dated July, 1988, no prime agricultural lands are located in the City of Newport Beach. No agricultural land will be impacted with the proposed development. No project -specific or cumulative level impacts will occur. , I 87 1 I ' AESTHETICS/LIGHT AND GLARE INTRODUCTION ' Measuring the level of potential impacts to an amenity resource such as aesthetic visual quality is a subjective process. Impacts to visual resources are difficult to quantify in physical or economic terms. CEQA, Appendix G, defines a significant visual impact as one which ' has a substantial and demonstrable negative aesthetic effect. Criteria have been established for this project based on identified CEQA standards. These project -specific criteria are ' identified in the introduction to the impacts analysis in this section and are further discussed on a site -by -site basis. EXISTING CONDITIONS San Diego Creek South ' Visual Character ' The San Diego Creek South site is currently vacant. There are no dominant visual resources present on -site. The site has been graded and filled with dredge spoils from the Upper Newport Bay Restoration project. Subsequent filling surcharge piles for the purpose of site ' compaction have been established on -site, -creating two flat levels. The grading and filling operation has created two flat levels. The site is primarily barren with some sparse outcroppings of grasses and scrub and landscaping on fill slopes along Jamboree Road. ' Along the northern portion of the site is the San Diego Creek and adjacent vegetation. This vegetation along San Diego Creek extends into the San Diego Creek South site. Bonita Creek and associated vegetation are located on the northeastern boundary of the project ' site. The site is visible from Bonita Creek Park which is at a higher elevation across University Drive. Also to the south of the site, some upper levels of the Newport North residential complex, which are next to the park, may have views of the site. Portions of the site are visible from the public areas around Upper Newport Back Bay to the west and along the ' creek trail to the north. Exhibit 25 is a site photo index indicating direction of view in which site photos were taken for each of the project sites. Exhibit 26 illustrates site photos of the San Diego Creek South site. Views From Site ' This site has a view across the upper reaches of the Upper Newport Bay. Other views from the site include the Saddleback Mountain, Newport North Apartments, Newport North ' Villas, and Bonita Creek Park across University Drive; MacArthur Boulevard/State Route 73 (SR 73) ramps; the vacant San Diego Creek North site across San Diego Creek; and existing office and hotel buildings across Jamboree Road. ' 88 ,1 Source: SWA Group SITE PHOTOS M1 sminc PIAKKIRG. INC CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT EIR I��J City of Newport Beach 26 I� ' Light and Glare There are no existing sources of light and glare on the San Diego Creek South site. Across University Drive, the Bonita Creek baseball field lights are visible at dusk and night. Street lights along Jamboree Road, University Drive and the MacArthur Boulevard (State Route 73) ramps are additional sources of existing light and glare. San Diego Creek North Visual Character ' The San Diego Creek North site is vacant. The site slopes downward to San Diego Creek. Portions of the site have been graded and/or filled as a result of construction, utility lines, flood control facilities, road improvements, and the Upper Newport Bay Restoration project. There is a variety of vegetation present on this site. A cluster of trees and plant life exists on the upper portion of the site. Located on the southern edge of the site, is the San Diego Creek and it's associated vegetation. The vegetation exists as wetlands adjacent to, and associated with, the creek and is a part of this site. There are some mounds of debris scattered on the upper portion of the site. LI 1 The site is visible from hotel and commercial/office buildings across Jamboree Road to the northwest. Although a vacant lot separates the SR 73 ramps from the site to the east, there are views of the parcel from the ramp. Views of the site also exist from the vacant San Diego Creek trail to the south and from public areas in and around Upper Newport Back Bay to the west. The lower southwest portion of the site is at grade and visible from Jamboree Road. Exhibit 27 illustrates site photos of the San Diego Creek North site. Views From Site This site has far reaching views of Upper Newport Bay and the surrounding area including views of the San Joaquin Hills. Other views from the site include the San Diego Creek South site, San Diego Creek, existing hotel and office/professional buildings, and the State Route 73 ramps. Light and Glare There are no existing sources of light and glare on the San Diego Creek North site. Exhibit 27 illustrates a site photo of the site. The overhead lights on the adjacent SR 73 ramps and Jamboree Road are visible from this site at night. The Bonita Creek Park baseball field lights are visible at dusk and night from the San Diego Creek North site. 91 zz 3 San Diego Creek North VIEW LOOKING NORTH FROM JAMBOREE ROAD ACROSS SAN DIEGO CREEK. A+ San Diego Creek North VIEW LOOKING SOUTHWEST FROM THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE SITE TOWARDS JAMBOREE ROAD AND THE UPPER NEWPORT BAY. i SITE PHOTOS 1 Sminc. PLANNING. ING CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE, AGREEMENT EIR I �� City of Newport Beach _ I 27 Jamboree/MacArthur ' Visual Character The Jamboree/MacArthur site is vacant. The site slopes gently throughout with a variety of vegetation present. The site has vegetation surrounding a pond area located in the center of the property. There are views of the site from the offices across Jamboree Road to the east and MacArthur Boulevard to the west. There are also views from adjacent roadways including Jamboree Road to the east, MacArthur Boulevard to the west and State Route 73 ramps to the northwest. Exhibit"28 illustrates a site photo of the Jamboree/MacArthur site. ' Views From Site E 1 There are very limited views from the site. Because the elevation of the Jamboree/MacArthur site is below that of surrounding roadways, views from the site are almost entirely blocked. Views are limited to adjacent land uses which include commercial office. Light and Glare There are no existing sources 28 illustrates a site photo of t Boulevard, and adjacent State night. Uaner Castaways Visual Character of light and glare on the Jamboree/MacArthur site. Exhibit he site. The street lights from Jamboree Road, MacArthur Route 73 are visible from the Jamboree/MacArthur site at The Upper Castaways site is vacant. The Newport Harbor Lutheran Church is adjacent to the western portion of the Upper Castaways site at the end of 16th Street. The site is fairly flat with a bluff that runs along the Upper Newport Bay and turns west to meet Dover Drive. This natural bluff is a major topographical feature in Newport Beach. There are well-worn dirt trails, especially along the bluff edge. In addition to the bluff, a slope occurs which runs along Dover Drive up from Coast Highway to 16th Street. There is a dirt "road" up the side of the bluff face which is used as an unauthorized biking and hiking trail. This slope is highly visible from Dover Drive and adjacent residences. A small wetlands area is located along Dover Drive. Large clusters of trees exist in several areas throughout the site. The site is visible from Dover Drive (which borders the site). Portions of the site is visible from residences along Dover Drive to the west, West Coast Highway to the south, and across the Bay from the Newporter North, Newporter Knoll, and Newporter Resort sites to the east. Portions of Sea Island Condominiums and Newport Center across the Bay to the east also have distant views of the Upper Castaways site. Exhibits 29 through 31 illustrate site photos of this site. 93 1 • � ELR' .e :/LLq'y�l�y 'r. ..l.t_,.�.�f�. ��z�.. 'l, r:.✓ . �.. r .F • \":, ,.. .�" ,q/ }may _ _ - .. 't � s•1 '' '?c Yltf< A� � art yr r ��'; y � i aw .- •:.`. t.} 1a /t., �..� ; • .. � ri�4y -. 3 � .tx "g i *. }�.�j�x � 37'_ � �5 i ' ..D\..t s 4w ^.•�,�z r � ,'�" -a . - t i . '4n�)',. rF x . _ . /I`, , _, �, < �a:.. _.. � .. .'t :SFZ\.n'.Ft<.S. � �x`ai'i\ '�i^i41 . �. A. ���i��.*a.1�1Yjy�)�? ����'�[:.. ti'��`�Si \I •%i^}�. Y`� ' y�W�"�JF�Rtt4<s: ?�!.�"4, v upper castaways VIEW FROM (PATIO OF PRIVATE HOME) ACROSS DOVER DRIVE LOOKING EAST WITH THE EXISTING CHURCH IN THE CORNER OF THE PHOTO. -==-� jrANY I - JIME - , _ .. �s� /� � �,.y.� �.p1 I "F � - �r _ t _ �v^..:.n �++, 1 _.' t t��t'Y✓�£ -- - y I Source: SWA Group SITE PHOTOS I :'_�.7_I $1'l�,in . PLANNING, ING CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT EIR "m6mm, City of Newport Beach 29- aAle - - - - - - - - - - A, A u�+l�. r�+4 e� . =vL •4�-='c�s'�y -AIM �a ' Views From Site The dominant views from the site are from the bluff areas. The scenic view from the bluff is one of the most expansive in the City of Newport Beach. From the top of the bluff, views of Newport Beach may be seen extending from Harbor Ridge to Newport Center, Promontory Point, the Bay, the Balboa Peninsula, and the Pacific Ocean. Exhibits 29 through 31 illustrate site photos depicting some of the views described. ' Light and Glare There are currently no sources of light and glare on the project site. The adjacent church 1 and its parking lot and street lights on Dover Drive, Westcliff Drive, 16th Street, Cliff Drive, and Coast Highway are existing light and glare sources in the vicinity. ' Bay View Landing ' Visual Character The Bay View Landing site is vacant. This site can be characterized as a relatively flat bluff ' top with steep slopes descending to a flat area below. Along Coast Highway the upper portion of the site varies in elevation. Along Jamboree Road, the road descends sharply to the north while the top portion of the site remains level with the Coast Highway grade. The upper elevation of the site is predominantly barren of vegetation along Coast Highway. A variety of vegetation covers the hillsides dividing the two areas. Views of the upper ' elevation of the site occur from Coast Highway and Promontory Point Apartments to the south; and Villa Point and Sea Island Condominiums to the east. Views of the lower elevation of the site occur from the Newporter Resort and Back Bay Drive to the north, Coast Highway to the south; and Jamboree Road to the east. Exhibits 32 and 33 illustrate site photos of the Bay View Landing site. Views From Site The lower elevation of the site has views limited to adjacent land uses including the Newporter Resort and Newport Dunes recreational area. There is a filtered view of Upper Newport Bay from the lower elevation of this site. Views from the upper elevation of the site stretch from Upper Newport Back Bay across Coast Highway. The bluff areas across the Bay can be seen at a distance. Views of adjacent uses including residential, hotel and tennis club, and the recreation areas, are visible from the upper elevation of the site. I 98 I x Mn St - ■ 14 Bay View Landing VIEW FROM THE INTERSECTION OF COAST HIGHWAY AND JAMBOREE ROAD LOOKING NORTHWEST ACROSS THE SITE. SITE PHOTOS CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT EIR City of Newport Beach �Source: SS�WA Group ce 33 Light and Glare - There are no sources of light and glare on -site. The street lights from Jamboree Road, Coast Highway, the tennis court and parking lot lights at the Newporter Resort, and lights from the John Wayne Tennis Club are visible from the upper and lower portions of the Bay View Landing site. Newporter North and Newporter Knoll Visual Character The Newporter North site is vacant. The site is primarily flat with the exception of bluffs and slopes along the edges of the site and the John Wayne Gulch. Along the western edge of the site are bluff faces extending down to Back Bay Drive adjacent to Upper Newport Back Bay. John Wayne Gulch exists in the south central portion of the site. The .Gulch slopes down to the south from the Newporter North site and back up to the Newporter Knoll site. The gulch is highly vegetated. Views of the site exist from the upper floors of Park Newport Apartments across San ' Joaquin Hills Road to the north, the highrise buildings in Newport Center to the east, homes across the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve to the west, and the Sea Island Condominiums to the south across Jamboree Road. Along Back Bay Drive to the south are ' views of the site looking up John Wayne Gulch. The Newporter Knoll site is a vacant, rounded knoll which slopes to the south, west, and north. The site is primarily bare of vegetation and is visible from the golf course of the Newporter Resort to the south, Back Bay Drive to the south, highrise buildings in Newport Center to the east, homes across the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve to the west, and the Sea Island Condominiums to the east across Jamboree Road. Exhibits 34 and 35 illustrate site photos of the Newporter North and Newporter Knoll sites. ' Views From Site The Newporter North site has extensive views due to the relatively large size of the site and its location adjacent to, and above, Upper Newport Bay. From the project site, existing views to the north are of the Upper Newport Bay and Ecological Reserve, the Dover Shores residential area, Park Newport Apartments, and the bluffs along the Upper Newport Bay including those on the Upper Castaways site. To the south, views across the site include the Newport Beach Country Club golf course, Jamboree Road, and the Sea Island Condominiums. To the east, views include land uses in Newport Center, especially the office towers and the Four Seasons Hotel, and in the distance, the Spyglass Hill residential area. 101 U 16 Newporter North/Newporter Knoll VIEW LOOKING WEST FROM JAMBOREE ROAD DOWN JOHN WAYNE GULCH TO THE NEWPORTER NEWPORTER KNOLL SITE BEYOND THE GULCH. SITE TO THE RIGHT AND THE Source: SWA Group SITE PHOTOS ! '_f`�_I Srpl,inc. PLANNING'. I\G CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT EIR City of Newport Beach 34 1 17 Newporter North/Newporter Knoll VIEW LOOKING EAST FROM THE UPPER CASTAWAYS SITE ACROSS UPPER NEWPORT BAY TO THE BLUFFS OF THE NEWPORTER NORTH'SITE. 18 Newporter North/Newporter Knoll VIEW LOOKING SOUTH FROM THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE SITE ACROSS UPPER NEWPORT BAY TO TFiE BLUFFS OF THE UPPER CASTAWAYS SITE. i SITE PHOTOS CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT EIR City of Newport Beach Source: SWA Group _I' . $minc PIANNING IN(: �J 35 I The dominant view of the Newporter Knoll is a view of Upper Newport Bay and the Ecological Reserve. Other views from the site include portions of the Newporter Resort, residences across the bay, and a view out to the horizon across Newport Bay and Coast Highway. ' Light and Glare There are no existing sources of light and glare on the Newporter North and Knoll sites. Street lights on Jamboree Road and San Joaquin Hills Road, as well as lights from the existing businesses within Newport Center, and street lights from the Park Newport Apartments, reflect onto the Newporter North site at night. Street lights from Jamboree Road and lights from the Newporter Resort are sources of light in the evening that reflect onto the Newporter Knoll site. Newporter Resort LJ I 1 I u Visual Character The Newporter Resort is developed with an existing hotel, golf course, landscaped grounds, and parking areas. The site is slightly hilly and at grade immediately adjacent to Jamboree Road and Back Bay Drive. Views of the site exist from the Bay View Landing site to the south, -Newporter North and Knoll sites to the north, Back Bay Drive to the south, and Jamboree Road to the east. To the west, across the Upper Newport Bay, the Newporter Resort site can be seen from the Castaways site and the Dover Shores residential area. Views From Site The site has a view of Upper Newport Bay and the adjacent sites. Views exist across Upper Newport Bay, the Newporter North and Knoll sites (and John Wayne Gulch), and to the Newport Dunes Recreational area. Light and Glare Jamboree Road street lights and light from adjacent tennis courts are the only forms of off - site light and glare currently affecting the site. Light and glare exist in the evening hours in the form of recreation uses (i.e. tennis and golf), and street and parking lot lighting for security purposes. IBlock 800 I Visual Character The Block 800 site is vacant, primarily flat and sparsely vegetated with annual weeds. Existing structures in Block 800 include the Pacific Plaza office buildings, the Pacific Mutual 104 J t - I Building, and an integrated parking structure. The area proposed for development is at ' grade and immediately adjacent to the existing development in Block 800. The site is visible from the existing library and art museum, the adjacent office buildings in Block 800, from ' the top of the adjacent parking structure to the south, and from the upper floors of the Four Seasons and Marriott Hotels to the west and south. Exhibit 36 illustrates a site photo for the Block 800 site. ' Views From Site The Block 800 site has extensive views due to its raised elevation. From the proposed project site, there are views of immediately adjacent uses including the Pacific Mutual Building, Pacific Plaza, Newport Center branch library, Newport Beach Country Club Golf Course, and the Newport Harbor Art Museum. There are expansive views of the Pacific Ocean, Upper Newport Bay, and all uses to the west across Upper Newport Bay. , Light and Glare Light and glare exists from outdoor lighting on walkways and in and around parking facilities , located on surrounding sites. Street lighting from San Clemente Drive and Santa Barbara Drive are sources of off -site light and glare to the Block 800 site. ' Corporate Plaza West Visual Character , Corporate Plaza West is a flat site. The majority of the site is vacant with the exception of the existing office building on the northwest corner of the site and the landscaped entrance to Newport Center at the corner of Coast Highway and Newport Center Drive. Common roadside weeds and turf grasses cover the majority of the site. The site is visible from Club House Drive to the west, Coast Highway to the south, Newport Center Drive to the east, and the Newport Beach Country Club to the north. Exhibit 36 illustrates a site photo of the Corporate Plaza West site. I Views From Site Views from the site are limited to adjacent land uses which include the Newport Beach , Country Club, the Balboa Bay Club Racquet Club, Corporate Plaza East, and the Irvine Terrace residential development. The site has views of Newport Center. The Civic Center , sight plane crosses the site. The relatively flat topography of the site confines the vistas. Some of the described views are illustrated in Exhibit 36. P L' 105 , r 1 I I G Light and Glare There are existing light and glare sources that currently affect the Corporate Plaza West site. The existing building on the site produces light and glare from the windows, walkways and parking facilities. Street lighting from Club House Drive and Coast Highway are sources of light and glare that affect the Corporate Plaza West site. Freeway Reservation Visual Character The Freeway Reservation Site is vacant. The topography varies across the site from north to south. Throughout the site, there are several gullies and rises. The site follows MacArthur Boulevard and slopes toward a depression in the middle of the site where the majority of on -site vegetation exists. The balance of vegetation on -site supports ruderal vegetation. The site is visible from MacArthur Boulevard to the west, from the second floors of the residential dwellings of Harbor View to the east and Baywood Apartments to the south. Views from Big Canyon residences, Big Canyon Golf Course, and Ford Road which are west and; north of the site, have partial views which are blocked by dense vegetation including trees and bushes. Exhibits 37 and 38 illustrate site photos of the Freeway Reservation site. Views From Site Views are limited to adjacent land uses which include Big Canyon Residential dwellings and portion of the golf course, and Harbor View and Baywood residential dwellings. Light and Glare There are no existing sources of light and glare generated on this site. Street lights on Ford Road and MacArthur Boulevard, and residential lights from adjacent homes and apartments are the existing light and glare sources in the area. IMPACTS According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant visual impact is one which has a substantial and demonstrable negative aesthetic effect. In addition, the City of Newport Beach desires to, analyze the impacts related to aesthetics which result from implementation of the project. Neither CEQA nor the City of Newport Beach Environmental Guidelines contain definitive and objective guidance for evaluating the significance of any aesthetic impact beyond the consideration of whether a project has a demonstrable and substantial negative aesthetic effect. 107 L 1 i-reeway Reservation VIEW LOOKING NORTH FROM MACARTHUR BOULEVARD UP THE CENTRAL PORTION OF THE SITE. v�-� - :4'sa-_ ',.r: - - - - - :.6:s=_� - _�.'f"=._'':i._==`S'?,:-�_',-^=..•G,e..s>.'='.�'^` _- -` _ate-`.-,'�'�,.-�`-� _,Ft-.i"��'-.:•nc.„a.,va=r" =a EN'4 ' _ _- _-J __ _ ` _ - e __-r_`_'_-k - -T-s�.:� - - - �=� _ - • t' __."ems-_ _ - -_ _ '_' - `�_.,,. - �.t-- �-�'-, _ - ..}.-,F=` _ �yj,=.d±t`s J�s•�-�'-e-5 '� =�3 s _ _3.s Ss-���..v'= :.��. _ _ +� '-� .� �.e� _ _ �__ .�," __ �_¢.`a`� t - , � --, - __: ���:"-•-��`'-_�.=__��-'M��i __ ice'#._:.-e.�.- _ __ _ ' r__T.: ss.i;4 «�-�knc �i,���pd'M _� ��ffr.':'._ .vf. �,- yL' _- f -_ '�"'r1;� f s Y; r• __�__� e _<,�_�`"a _ -_-e_ �a=a.-''4 '-:T.-�•_�"" _ .•�.' __ ___ _ _ - __ _ _ __ _�:�__ �. -ti`vl _ "'Y�` _ yt_Y'ie?:= � w` St� �`_'ts_"�- l•. �.. �-a.�'XF-r.; ;., "_44_ '_xi_ _ -•�.'i _"-`-`; r=•.�.---�"�.n•. .�.e�f�'i .''Eec-�v_.^�=.: �?"�a;` ��,r, _-x-a.;�a:' _.�t_..��_._'_'•'''.�a4__�_=_��`.`+.asi _ _ __ _ _: - {" _ _ _ -� �: f�--_ - _ - _ �n°a..s - �_ Y��-7"`�,63,, �� - _ ='t- - _� _ ems,_- ^}j-i~�""._.�"-y.°br+' �,i'et=�_Y.:' ���__-r«�•�'_-.� _ _ r' <#� Ru `•R. - _ _-wo--=� __ _ _ _ �xa _ _ � _ _. _r.y ,1s.: «.'-4�- _ ��_ =. `�3�_ ��c:.;:`_ `•k:-- _ .��-tea "'tea ,-..e, __-s•��a.- _y __ - .-#-- -i4; �«_�''"_�� _>,_�s.�`=_ '^-s�zc%_.�_. -' fir:: "._..�-�'.-_ - _ _4-v _ �_=� b�'t-V .�� j -_ _'�a`=s. '`�?'��• :. t alr-�'L%1-,•� - .�ci - 4: 'AY=zs- !. =0:� _ �_ru'.`1��e:'<v'�-`y +_ i'._�_ '�2"_'4`iW - --A �::- t' - - __ - - - .n+._a.•c: --__ '.'��,=:-- :�'; .`err^A.. ,�i,�_r?��:'Y iT.es r'sry:'-�"h-, fi.`__F: E^_u. -1_'a ���____ •.'.ea-y'a� .ems... -?a - ` �_ --_ _ _ _ __ t_ rv� Ar•Y3.. - ; Y'a't -' - `- - �aw�. _ gi-;-- "_ � �=::.sa �t'-�' �`"3.. � y, e �•�,•.;ana,..,�.== _ y �.''3 ��c4 "f'-" e`er &', ;.-x,`-�_,-�• r _. e'�� X� --r�'3-.�n'�++-`ar"3�� -.- ; - �-,`� .-...... .•za- -•r._� ter_-�?al�- .`-.�.v,=.���„�:`-rt=r'g� ... ems. k�x�_:: `--�'�`"'---�_�•:"'-+=-`-- ...f�.ek._^^-,...- �. _.. �Y Sa.: a �:.a;.:_:..1 u�ta;-33mi��.`S�,.m-eaa3..'S^3�=-�. 22 Freeway Reservation VIEW FROM THE EXTREME NORTH PORTION OF THE SITE LOOKING SOUTH ALONG MACARTHUR BOULEVARD. Source: SWA Group SITE PHOTOS IM-1 Mina I PL4\KI\Q 11G CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT EIR ' City of Newport Beach _ 37 23 Freeway Reservation VIEW LOOKING NORTH OF THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE SITE FROM ACROSS MACARTHUR BOULEVARD. I SITE PHOTOS CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT EIR City of Newport Beach Source: SWA Group 11— RA' Smina "=%OJ 38 ' For the purposes of this EIR, the City of Newport Beach has prepared an additional set of factors to be used in analyzing the aesthetic effects of the project. The City recognizes that since no adopted standards for the analysis exist at the state or local levels, establishing these factors and weighing them in the following analysis is an inherently subjective process. These factors were formulated and evaluated based on knowledge and local concern and public opinion regarding aesthetic resources that benefit the local community, review of the City's Open Space/Recreation Element, and experience in planning analysis in the local community. Factors Used in the Evaluation of Aesthetic Impacts • Will the proposed project obstruct public views of a unique natural feature? (These features could include Upper and Lower Newport Bay, Saddleback Mountain, the Pacific Ocean, etc.); ' by • Will the proposed project obstruct public views of unique vistas created the combination of manmade and natural features? (such as Lower Newport Bay ' and the Pavilion); • Will the proposed project alter on -site unique visual features? (Unique visual features are defined as the major topographic relief of a site such as bluffs, canyons, etc); 7 [- L • Will the proposed project introduce a structure or landscape element into the community that would be considered offensive by a majority of the citizens of the community area? • Is the site located adjacent -to or directly related to Upper Newport Bay and the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve? Is the site visible from portions of Upper Newport Bay frequently used by the public (e.g. Back Bay Drive and trails)? • Is the site adjacent to and visible from a major arterial as identified in the City's Circulation Element? Is the site adjacent to and visible from a heavily used public recreational facility? If adjacent to a major arterial or heavily used public recreational facility, is the site part of a visual corridor and/or does it provide significant visual relief? For the purpose of this report public views are considered to be from public buildings, existing and future open space and recreational areas as defined by the Recreation and Open Space Element, major arterial roadways as defined by the Circulation Element, and public plazas or features of a similar nature. The following identifies factors used in the evaluation of Light and Glare Impacts. 110 1 Factors Used in the Evaluation of Light and Glare Impacts ' • Will the proposed project increase light and glare which differs in character, ' design and intensity, or theme from surrounding properties? • Will the proposed project introduce intrusive sources of light and glare onto , adjacent properties? Implementation of the proposed project will alter the aesthetics of each site. The degree , to which alteration will occur and aesthetic and light and glare impacts are discussed on the following pages. ' San Diego Creek South Aesthetics The factors used in evaluating the significance of aesthetic impacts are outlined in the , introductory paragraphs of this impact section. The following analysis determines whether the site contains significant aesthetic resources which will be lost to development as a result of project implementation and whether this loss is considered a significant adverse impact. The majority of the San Diego Creek South site is proposed to be developed with Multi - Family use not to exceed 35 feet in height. The northern edge of the site along San Diego ' Creek and the eastern edge adjacent to Bonita Creek will remain in open space, undisturbed and in its current condition. Portions of the site are visible from the public view areas around Upper Newport Back Bay ,• to the west and along the creek trails to the north. The development proposed on this site will not obstruct public views of Saddleback Mountain or Upper Newport Bay. This is , illustrated in Exhibit 39. The site is not identified as part of any important visual corridor as viewed from Jamboree Road (a major arterial) or the San Diego Creek system. The San Diego Creek South site does not have any unique visual features such as major , topographic relief such as bluffs or canyons. Previous grading and fill operations has created two flat levels. The site is primarily barren. The proposed development will not alter any ' on -site unique visual features. The proposed development will not introduce a structure or landscape element into the community that would be anticipated to be offensive by a majority of citizens of the community. The development standards established in the PC Text should result in a project of a similar quality and nature as other multi -family developments in the surrounding , area and the City of Newport Beach. Z4 San Diego Creek South VIEW LOOKING NORTHEAST FROM JAMBOREE ROAD JUST SOUTH OF THE JAMBOREE ROAD AND UNIVERSITY AVENUE INTERSECTION. i i Source: SWA Group SITE PHOTOS 'M!, STAinc. CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT EIR City of Newport Beach ❑ ! 39 I 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 A small portion of the site is identified by the City's Recreation and Open Space Element as an Environmentally Sensitive Area (See Exhibit 5, Project Description). This area is not within the 18.6 acre development area and will be preserved as part of the dedicated passive open space. A major recreational facility, the San Diego Creek Trail, is along the northern edge of the site. The trail is a popular trail used for hiking, running, and biking. The trail itself will not be directly impacted by the project. The small portions of the trail which encroach slightly into the project site are within the area to be dedicated for passive open space. In addition to being adjacent to and visible from a major recreational facility, the site is also adjacent to and visible from a major arterial (Jamboree Road). Views of and across the site from Jamboree Road (and the nearby San Diego Creek North site) are illustrated in Exhibit 39. Development of the site will not obstruct public views of any unique vistas or natural features. The site is not identified as part of any important visual corridor as viewed from either Jamboree Road or San Diego Creek South. With the exception of the edge of the property along San Diego Creek and the portion of the site containing the Bonita Creek freshwater marsh habitat, the site has been significantly disturbed and does not exhibit natural topography or vegetation. As -a result, most of the site in its current state is not particularly attractive and does not provide an important visual amenity or significant visual relief to passing motorists or trail users. Based on this evaluation, it is determined that implementing the project will not result in a significant adverse aesthetic impact on the San Diego Creek South site. Light and Glare The proposed development will introduce new light and glare onto a vacant site. This increase in light and glare will not differ in character, design and intensity, or theme from surrounding properties based on lighting standards contained in the PC Text. The introduction of these new light sources will not increase intrusive light and glare onto adjacent properties due to the nature of permitted uses having lower intensity of lighting than adjacent uses. Existing and future land uses are not anticipated to produce intrusive sources of light and glare on the site. The proposed San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor (SJHTC) will be a new source of light and glare to the area which may affect portions of the site. Design of the facility and required mitigation measures of the SJHTC will mitigate significant adverse impacts on this site. The proposed corridor is not anticipated to be an intrusive source of illumination on the San Diego Creek South site. The mitigation provided will reduce any intrusive sources of light and glare from the San Diego Creek South site. This introduction of light and glare is not a significant impact. 113 1 San Diego Creek North 1 Aesthetics ' The factors used in evaluating the significance of aesthetic impacts are outlined in the introductory paragraphs of this impact section. The following analysis determines whether ' the site contains significant aesthetic resources which will be lost to development as a result of project implementation and whether this loss is considered a significant adverse impact. No development is proposed for the San Diego Creek North site. The lower southern ' portion of the site (Area 1) is being dedicated in fee to the City of Newport Beach and will be designated for preservation, restoration, and creation of habitat and wetland areas and ' ecological and agricultural research. The upper northern portion of the site (Area 2) will be designated for a mix of open space and public facilities uses. ' The uses that could be developed on the San Diego Creek North site such as a Fire Station, the extension of Bay View (University Drive), and a Park and Ride Facility will not alter , public views of any unique natural features such as the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. The site is not identified as part of any important visual corridor as viewed from Jamboree Road or the San Diego -Creek trail system. ' The proposed development that could occur on this site will not obstruct public views of any unique vistas or on -site visual features. No unique vistas or on -site visual features were , identified. The San Diego Creek North site is anticipated to remain as predominantly open space. If ' the allowed uses are developed on this site, the entire site will not be developed. The loss of vacant land that could occur on the site will not be significant as identified in the Land Use section. The San Diego Creek Trail runs along the southern edge of the site. This area ' will be preserved as open space. The permitted uses allowed on this site will not introduce a structure or landscape element , into the community that would be considered offensive by a majority of citizens of the community. The development standards established in the PC Text should result in a project of a similar quality and nature as other multi -family products in the surrounding area , and the City of Newport Beach. A major recreational facility, the San Diego Creek Trail runs along the southern -edge of the site. The trail is a popular trail used for hiking, running, and biking. The trail itself will not be impacted by the project. The small portion of the trail which may encroach slightly into the San Diego Creek North site is within the area to be dedicated for passive open space. ' The site is visible from the San Diego Creek trail system and from a major arterial (Jamboree Road). Views of and across the site from Jamboree Road are illustrated in ' 114 1 Exhibit 27 in the Existing Conditions section. Development of open space and public facility uses on the site will not obstruct public views of any unique vistas or natural features. Public ' facility uses which may be developed within Area 2 as a result of the project would generally be low -intensity uses in the sense that any structures would be low profile (e.g. park and ride facilities, roads, and a fire station). The site is not identified as part of any important visual ' corridor as viewed from either Jamboree Road or the San Diego Creek trail system. Portions of the site have been disturbed in the past. Many parts of the site do not exhibit natural topography or vegetation (Please refer to the Existing Conditions for a more detailed ' discussion). As a result of these conditions, the site does not provide an important visual amenity or significant visual relief to passing motorists or trail users. Based on this evaluation, it is determined that implementing the project will not result in a significant adverse aesthetic impact on the San Diego Creek North site. ' Light and Glare The site is not anticipated to increase light and glare. If the permitted uses are developed, ' the new light and glare introduced onto the site will not differ in character, design and intensity, or theme from surrounding properties based on lighting standards contained in the PC Text. The introduction of this light and glare will not be intrusive onto adjacent properties due to the nature of permitted uses having lower intensity of lighting than adjacent uses. ' Existing and future land uses are not anticipated to produce intrusive sources of light and glare on the site. The proposed San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor (SJHTC) will ' be a new source of light and glare to the area which may affect portions of the site. Design of the facility and required mitigation measures of the SJHTC will mitigate significant adverse impacts on this site. Jamboree/MacArthur L n 11 Aesthetics The factors used in evaluating the significance of aesthetic impacts are outlined in the introductory paragraphs of this impact section. The following analysis determines whether the site contains significant aesthetic resources which will be lost to development as a result of project implementation and whether this loss is considered a significant adverse impact. No development is proposed for the Jamboree/MacArthur site. This entire site is being dedicated to the City for open space and limited public facilities. Permitted uses for the site include ecological habitat areas and limited public facilities uses would be allowed primarily associated with possible improvements to adjacent roadways and existing drainage facilities. The development of permitted public facilities on this site will create a minor loss of vacant land although permitted uses. 115 11 The site is to remain as primarily open space. The development of permitted uses will not ' obstruct public views of a unique natural feature like the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. Exhibit 28 in the Existing Conditions section depicts the site. ' Permitted uses on this site will not manmade and/or natural features. N o The alteration of on -site unique visual features will not occur with development of permitted uses. The site has a freshwater marsh located in the center of the property. This marsh area will be preserved by implementation of the project. No unique on -site visual features were identified. The loss of vacant land on this site is not considered to be a significant loss of open space. The site has limited access and is not customarily used by the general public for open space or recreational purposes. The site is visible from two major arterials (Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard). Views of and across the site from Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard are discussed and photographically illustrated in Exhibit 28. Use of the site as open space and development of limited public facility uses on the site will not obstruct public views of any unique vistas or natural features. The site is not identified as part of any important visual corridor from either roadway. The permitted uses allowed on this site will not introduce a structure or landscape element into the community that would be considered offensive by a majority of citizens of the community. Based on this evaluation, it is determined that implementing the project will not result in a significant adverse aesthetic impact on the Jamboree/MacArthur site. Light and Glare The development of permitted uses on this site will not introduce light and glare on the site. The permitted uses will not increase light and glare which differs in character, design and intensity, or theme from surrounding properties based on lighting standards contained in the PC Text. The permitted uses will not introduce intrusive sources of light and glare onto adjacent properties due to the nature of permitted uses and the distance of adjacent uses. Existing and future land uses are not anticipated to produce intrusive sources of light and glare on the site. 116 I i r I [1 tUpper Castaways ' Aesthetics The factors used in evaluating the significance of aesthetic impacts are outlined in the introductory paragraphs of this impact section. The following analysis determines whether the site contains significant aesthetic resources which will be lost to development as a result of project implementation and whether this loss is considered a significant adverse impact. 1 Development is proposed for residential units on approximately 46 percent of the site. The remainder of the site is proposed for open space and an active park, view park, and trail and ' open space uses. The proposed project will impact the visual character of the site by alteration of on -site ' unique features. Minor alterations of unique on -site visual features will occur. Bluff stabilization is expected to be required. The stabilization of the bluffs will not occur as a result of the proposed residential development but as a safety requirement for the trail system and view park areas. The prominent natural coastal bluffs along the edge of the property are a major topographical feature in Newport Beach. The bluffs along this site are ' undergoing continuous erosion from natural processes. The bluff stabilization could change the visual appearance of the bluffs in some areas. No specific bluff stabilization plans have been prepared. Due to the general level of information provided at this time, the areas of ' the bluffs which could change in character cannot be identified. It is possible that such changes would create a significant adverse impact on the aesthetics of the bluff. The PC text identifies the entire. area containing natural coastal bluffs as open space. Residential ' development will be clustered on the northern end of the project away from the more visually prominent southern bluff top. Pursuant to the City's Bluff Top Setback policies, the development will be setback from the bluff top at least a minimum of 40 feet to property line and 60 feet to any structure. The location of the residential development and implementation of development standards ' proposed as part of the PC Text would reduce the impact the proposed residential uses will have on the visual character of the site. This reduces but does not eliminate the change which will occur in the lower portion of the Upper Newport Bay visual corridor. There will t still be a change in visual character resulting from residential development replacing vacant property in the northern half of the site. This change will be primarily visible from Coast Highway. It will be less obvious to recreational users in Upper Newport Bay because their ' viewpoint is substantially lower in elevation. Much of the residential development which will . occur away from the bluff edge will not be visible to recreational users in Upper Newport Bay. The site is adjacent to Upper Newport Bay but not to the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. The site provides significant visual relief to the area due to its visibility from ' several areas of the City. The Upper Castaways site is visible to recreational users of both ' 117 1 Upper and Lower Newport Bay. The site is also visible to motorists, pedestrians, and bikers on Coast Highway. The site is part of an identifiable visual corridor which extends the length of Upper Newport Bay from Coast Highway to Jamboree Road. Within Newport Beach, the site is one of two major vacant parcels remaining on the western side of Upper Newport Bay. Along with the Coast Highway Bridge, the site serves as an entry marker to the more natural setting of Upper Newport Bay (as compared with the man-made environment of Lower Newport Bay). The proposed development on this site will not have a significant impact on the visual character of the community by introducing structures or landscaping that would be considered offensive by the majority of the community. The development standards established in the PC Text will result in a project of a similar quality and nature as other similar residential products in the surrounding area and the City of Newport Beach. The aesthetic impact of the project, related to its visual character, is substantially reduced by the design and location of uses, development standards proposed in the PC Text, and existing City policies and requirements. The impact is not reduced to a level of insignificance. Because of the visual prominence of the site, development of a portion of the site with residential uses and bluff stabilization activities is expected to result in a significant adverse impact on aesthetics as related to its unique on -site visual features and visual character. The proposed project will not have a significant impact on views from the site. The location of the proposed development on this site will not obstruct public views of a unique natural feature such as the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve or the bluffs across the Bay. The public views from this site will be increased through providing a public trail system and passive view park. An active park will'be provided along Dover Drive just north of 16th Street. Although public use of the site is not permitted by the property owner, the site is customarily used by many members of the general public for open space and recreational purposes. From use patterns present on the ground, it is apparent that the public regularly uses much of the site. The most heavily used portions are the man-made trails along the top of the bluffs and the southern section of the property. These areas are proposed to be part of the view park. Based on this evaluation, it is determined that implementing the project will result in a significant adverse aesthetic impact. Light and Glare Implementation of the proposed project will introduce on and off the project site new sources of light and glare. The introduction of light and glare on this site will not differ in character, design and intensity, or theme from surrounding properties based on lighting standards contained in the PC Text. With the implementation of existing City policies and requirements, the introduction of light and glare will not be intrusive onto adjacent 118 properties due to the nature of proposed uses. Additionally, surrounding uses are not immediately adjacent to this site. ' Bay View Landin¢ ' Aesthetics The factors used in evaluating the significance of aesthetic impacts are outlined in the ' introductory paragraphs of this impact section. The following analysis determines whether the site contains significant aesthetic resources which will be lost to development as a result of project implementation and whether this loss is considered a significant adverse impact. Development of the lower elevation of this site is proposed for either a restaurant or a health club. The upper elevation of the site is proposed to be retained as passive open space use as a mini -park. The proposed development on this site will not obstruct public views of any unique natural features such as Upper Newport Bay. The proposed view park on the upper elevation of the site will provide public views of Upper Newport Bay to pedestrian and bicyclists. The ' lower elevation of the site is proposed for development which will not obstruct public views. No public views were identified for this portion of the site. ' The proposed development will create a loss of open space. This loss of open space is not considered to be significant. The site is currently unimproved. Much of the site has been disturbed in the past and no longer exhibits natural topography or vegetation. Neither the ' upper or lower elevations of the site in their current state provide desirable visual amenities. Neither section of the site appear to be customarily used by the general public. 1 I LI I I The proposed development on this site will not introduce structures or landscaping into the community that would be considered offensive. The development standards established in the PC Text should result in a project of a similar quality and nature as other multi -family products in the surrounding area and the City of Newport Beach. A part of the higher (southern) portion of the site is identified by the City's Recreation and Open Space Element as a mini -park (See Exhibit 9, Project Description). The mini -park is designated within the 11.1 acres to be designated and dedicated for park uses as part of the project. The City intends to develop a view park within the 11.1 acres providing expansive views of the Upper Newport Bay to pedestrians and bicyclists. If feasible, the design of the park may also include lower of the overall site elevation to provide a view of Upper Newport Bay to motorists on Coast Highway and Jamboree Road. Based on this evaluation, it is determined that implementing the project will not result in a significant adverse aesthetic impact. ' 119 7 Light and Glare ' The proposed development on the lower elevation of the site will introduce new light and glare on the site. This increase in light and glare will not differ in character, design and ' intensity or theme from surrounding properties based on lighting standards contained in the PC Text. The introduction of intrusive sources of light and glare onto adjacent properties ' will not occur due to the nature of the proposed uses and the distance of adjacent uses. No lights, other than security lighting, are proposed on the open space area on the upper elevation. t Newporter North and Newporter Knoll Aesthetics The factors used in evaluating the significance of aesthetic impacts are outlined in the ' introductory paragraphs of this impact section. The following analysis determines whether the site contains significant aesthetic resources which will be lost to development as a result of project implementation and whether this loss is considered a significant adverse impact. The proposed development for the Newporter North site includes developing a portion of ' the site for residential uses and reserving the remainder for the preservation of bluff areas, open space, and a view park. The Newporter Knoll site is proposed to remain in open space. No development is designated for this area. Views of the sites are illustrated in Exhibits 40 through 42. The proposed project will impact the visual character of the site by alteration of unique on- , site features. The alteration of unique on -site visual features such as bluffs will occur. The prominent natural coastal bluffs along the edge of the property are a major topographical feature in Newport Beach. The stabilization of the Bluffs will not occur as a result of'the proposed residential development but as a safety requirement for the open space and view park areas. The bluffs along this site are undergoing continuous erosion from natural processes. The bluff stabilization could change the visual appearance of the bluffs in some areas. No specific bluff stabilization plans have been prepared. Due to the general level of information provided at this time, the areas of the bluffs which could change in character cannot be identified. It is possible that such changes would create a significant adverse impact on the aesthetics of the bluff. The PC Text identifies the entire area containing natural coastal bluffs as open space. Pursuant to the City's Bluff Top Setback policies; the development will be setback from the bluff top at least a minimum of 40 feet to property line and 60 feet to any structure. FJ I I I II I I � �fr !-��':��. _J ` 1. ' •• • .--.�:.`"--.,�•--- cam. �i i C I 25 Newporter North/Newporter Knoll VIEW LOOKING SOUTH ACROSS SITE FROM THE JAMBOREE ROAD AND SAN JOAQUIN HILLS ROAD INTERSECTION. _ �ryy�(,,�(f �.4..T�,-2.X`L'•x '4.,: y�:��. . �i• Y.+•n�a� _ R �A = ' � 1 ��f �.[� "' �'.T.Ir}e�T ..—y...'l..i _ tw h wr'^P'.a'++t � 1.}} „�" _ y Y� 26 Newporter North/Newporter Knoli VIEW LOOKING SOUTHWEST ACROSS THE SITE FROM JAMBOREE ROAD. ffA inc, SITE PHOTOS CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT EIR PIANNIMI. ING City of'Newport Beach ❑ 40 �L Y t •1 � �• r.Y� _ M T � ` F t ' 11 � 1 r-yK '� -it: �'' : -'€^ Vias=..�.�.. .-:r,��"--"��s� Tci�ria•.ar'�:.a��..'�-iG,�� s Win- � - � _' ._ 1' r r Ps : a .,L `•:_ -- y��v-=chi-"2'r � -• -c - � • 114 • • • • • • • • • - • - • i • - - • • • • 1 _ SITE PHOTOS ! '=��-� STAinc. ri A., .c CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT EIR I��■I City of Newport Beach 41 III RON III NOW III WINNER •rter North/Newporter KnollVIEW LOOKINGFROM • SITE PHOTOS CIRCULATION IMPROVf-MENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT EIR City of Newport Beach Source: SWA Group I -A, Mina PI NI\G, INC. 42 I The sites are adjacent to Upper Newport Bay and the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. The sites are visible to recreational users of Upper Newport Bay. The sites are also visible to motorists, pedestrians, and bikers on Jamboree Road. These sites are part of an identifiable visual corridor which extends the length of Upper Newport Bay from Coast Highway to Jamboree Road. The prominent natural coastal bluffs along the edge of the property are part of a major topographical feature in Newport Beach. Limited views of the tops of the bluffs in Upper Newport Bay can be seen from Jamboree Road. Views across the sites to the Pacific Ocean occur only along the lower half of the sites. Views of these ' distant features are limited by the topography and the speed of motorists on Jamboree Road. These sites provide one of the few open visual opportunities along the predominantly developed Jamboree Road. Within Newport Beach, there is limited vacant land remaining ' on the eastern bluff tops of the Upper Newport Bay. These sites comprise the majority of the remaining vacant land. The sites provide significant visual relief to the area. The loss of vacant land providing significant visual relief is a significant adverse impact. The proposed development on the Newporter North site will not introduce structures or landscaping into the community that would be considered offensive. The development standards established in the PC Text should result in a project of a similar quality and nature as other single-family products in the surrounding area and the City of Newport Beach. The PC Text identifies the entire area containing the natural coastal bluffs, the Newporter Knoll property, John Wayne Gulch, all on -site wetlands, and other areas around the perimeter of the site as open space/natural area. A long, linear view park will be located on the Newporter North site on the western edge of the proposed residential development providing expansive views of Upper Newport Bay. Residential development will be clustered in the central and northern portions of the Newporter North project site. Pursuant to the City's Bluff Top Setback policies, the development will be setback from the bluff top at least a minimum of 40 feet to property line and 60 feet to any structure. In addition, the design of the development area was modified by the applicant to "pull back" development from Jamboree Road to avoid blocking views of the ocean from Jamboree Road. The location of the residential development and open space uses with implementation of development standards proposed as part of the PC Text would reduce the impact the proposed residential uses will have on the visual character of the site. This reduces but does not eliminate the change which will occur in the Upper Newport Bay visual corridor and along Jamboree Road. There will still be a change in visual character resulting from residential development replacing vacant property in the northern and central portions of the site. This change will be primarily visible from Jamboree Road and to a lesser extent portions of Upper Newport Bay. It will be less obvious to recreational users in Upper Newport Bay because their viewpoint is substantially lower in elevation. Much of the residential development will occur away from the bluff edge and will not be visible to recreational users in Upper Newport Bay. Views of the edge of residential development from Back Bay Drive up through the John Wayne Gulch area are expected. ' 124 r I The aesthetic impact of the project is substantially reduced by the design and location of , uses and development standards proposed in the PO Text. The impact is not reduced to a level of insignificance. Because of the visual prominence of these sites, this impact is considered a significant adverse impact. I The proposed project will not have a significant impact on views from the site. The location of the proposed development on the Newporter North site will not obstruct public views of a unique natural feature such as Upper Newport Bay andthe Ecological Reserve, and the bluffs across the Bay along the residential areas of Dover Shores. Public views on this site will be increased through providing public open space and a passive view park. The proposed development of this park and open space area will increase public views by ' allowing public access to the site. Improved access provided with this development will encourage greater use of the area by the .local community. The view park w411 provide the local community with views of Upper Newport Bay and the Ecological Reserve, the bluffs across the bay, and, on the horizon, very distant views of the Balboa Peninsula and the harbor. Currently, these sites do not experience heavy use by the general public for recreational and open space uses. Based on this evaluation, it is determined that implementing the project will result in a significant adverse impact on the Newporter North site. Light and Glare The proposed development on the Newporter North site will introduce new sources of light and glare onto the site. This light and glare will not differ in character, design and intensity, or theme from surrounding uses based on lighting standards contained in the PC Text. The introduction of light and glare onto the site will not impact the existing wetlands or gulch �- areas due to the nature of the proposed uses and the distance of adjacent uses. The introduction of intrusive sources of light and glare onto adjacent properties or onto biological sensitive areas will not occur. This impact is not considered significant. Newporter Resort Aesthetics The factors used in evaluating the significance of aesthetic impacts are outlined in the introductory paragraphs to this impact section. The following analysis determines whether the site contains significant aesthetic resources which will be lost to development as a result of project implementation and whether this loss is a significant adverse impact. The development proposed for the Newporter'Resort site is the addition of 68 hotel rooms to the existing resort facility. 125 I 1 The proposed expansion on this site will not obstruct public views of a unique natural feature or unique vista due to the existing condition of the site. The proposed expansion will not alter any on -site unique visual features because the site is currently developed. The site is developed with the existing Newporter Resort complex. No vacant land exists on -site. Because the site is already developed and does not contain vacant land, no significant adverse impacts related to open space will occur. The proposed development will not introduce a structure or landscape element into the community considered to be offensive. The proposed expansion is anticipated to continue the established architectural style that exists on the resort property. Based on the evaluation of this site, it is determined that implementing the project will not result in a significant adverse aesthetic impacts on the Newport Resort site. Light and Glare The proposed expansion will introduce additional light and glare onto the site that already has existing light and glare sources. The increase in light and glare will not differ in character, design and intensity or theme from the site. Block 800 Aesthetics The factors used in evaluating the significance of aesthetic impacts are outlined in the introductory paragraphs to this impact section. The following analysis determines whether the site contains significant aesthetic resources which will be lost to development as a result of project implementation and whether this loss is considered a significant adverse impact. Proposed development on this site will consist of multi -family residential or senior -oriented multi -family residential. The development has the potential to be as high as 14-18 stories. There is no open space component proposed for this site. The proposed development on this site will not obstruct public views of a unique natural feature or unique vista. No public views of unique visual features or vistas were identified on this site. The site is not visually prominent or part of a visual corridor. The proposed development will not alter any unique on -site visual features. No unique visual features were identified. The site is not adjacent to either a major public recreational facility or a major arterial. It is not visually prominent or part of a visual corridor. The site is not adjacent to or directly 126 i_ I ' related to Upper Newport Bay or the Ecological Reserve. This site does not provide visual relief to the area. The proposed development will not introduce a structure or landscape element into the community that is anticipated to be considered offensive. The development standards established in the PC Text should result in a project of a similar quality and nature as other multi -family products and building height and intensity of surrounding structures in the area. The surrounding Newport Center mid -rise and high-rise buildings vary in height. The Pacific Mutual Towers on Block 800 is seven (7) stories and the Four Seasons Hotel is nineteen (19) stories. Table C illustrates the various buildings in Newport Center and their height. Based on the evaluation of this site, it is determined that implementation of the proposed project will not result in a significant adverse aesthetic impact on the Block 800 site. Light and Glare The proposed development will introduce new sources of light and glare onto the site. The increase in light and glare will not differ in character, design and intensity, or theme from surrounding properties based on lighting standards contained in the PC Text. The introduction of intrusive sources of light and glare onto adjacent properties will not be significant due to the nature of uses proposed. Corporate Plaza West Aesthetics The factors used in evaluating the significance of aesthetic impacts are outlined in the introductory paragraphs to this impact section. The following analysis determines whether the site contains significant aesthetic resources which will be lost to development as a result of project implementation and whether this loss is considered a significant adverse impact. Development for the Corporate Plaza West site is proposed as office space. No open space component is proposed for this site. The proposed development for this site will not obstruct public views of unique natural features, or unique vistas. The site is not visually prominent or part of a visual corridor. The proposed development will not alter any unique visual features. The Corporate Plaza West site does not provide visual relief for the community. There is little to no customary use of the site by the public for recreational or open space uses. I 127 , r ' TABLE C BUILDING HEIGHTS IN NEWPORT CENTER Building No. of Stories Height (in feet) Wells Fargo (Block 600) 16 248.5 Avco (Block 600) 16 240.0 Union Bank (Block 600) 18 278.5 Pacific Mutual Towers (Block 800) 7 125.0 Block 500 Towers 9 15 145.0 152.0 Marriott Hotel Four Seasons 19 214.5 Source: Four Season's EIR (GPA 82-2), City of Newport Beach 128 The proposed development will not introduce structures or landscaping into the community ' which are offensive. The development standards established in the PC Text should result in a project of a similar nature and quality as other office products in the surrounding area and in the City of Newport Beach. The City's Recreation and Open Space Element does not identify recreation or open space designations on this site. The site is located on the perimeter of Newport Center on Coast Highway. In its current state, the site does not provide open space or recreational amenities. There are no significant or unique view opportunities from the site. There is no little to no customary use of the site by the public for recreational or open space uses. The site is not adjacent to a major public recreational facility. The site or directly related to Upper Newport Bay or the Ecological Reserve. major arterial. It is not visually prominent or part of a visual corridor. is not adjacent to It is adjacent to a Based on the evaluation of this site, it is determined that implementing of the project will not result in a significant adverse aesthetic impact on the Corporate Plaza West site. Light and Glare The proposed development will introduce new sources of light and glare onto the site. This increase in light and glare will not differ in character, design and intensity, or theme from existing on -site and adjacent uses based on lighting standards contained in the PC Text. The introduction of intrusive sources of light and glare onto adjacent properties will not occur due to the nature of the proposed uses and the distance of adjacent uses. Freeway Reservation Aesthetics The factors used in evaluating the significance of aesthetic impacts are outlined in the introductory paragraphs to this impact section. The following analysis determines whether the site contains significant aesthetic resources which will be lost to development as a result of project implementation and whether this loss is considered a significant adverse impact. Proposed development on the Freeway Reservation site includes residential uses on the north and south portions of the site and open space throughout the middle portion of the site. The proposed development on this site will not obstruct public views of a unique natural feature or unique vistas. No unique features or vistas were identified. No public views exist across the site. There are limited views from the site of adjacent land uses and Newport Center. The site does not have distant views of the ocean or horizon areas. Views from the site are depicted in Exhibits 43 and 44. 129 'Y �L i .Ir •"� G- iyV Iy -! i .1 *3c t-reeway meservation VIEW LOOKING SOUTHWEST FROM THE WESTERN BORDER OF THE SITE. 44 Freeway Reservation VIEW LOOKING NORTH ACROSS MACARTHUR BOULEVARD FROM THE EASTERN EDGE OF THE SITE. u, VAN SITE PHOTOS �inC. r_snr,. nc CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT EIR City of Newport Beach I 44 L The proposed development will not alter any on -site unique visual features. The site does not have any on -site unique visual features. The site is not adjacent to a major public recreational facility. The site is not adjacent to or directly related to Upper Newport Bay or the Ecological Reserve. It is adjacent to a major arterial, MacArthur Boulevard. The site is part of a narrow band of vacant and/or landscaped property that lies on either side of MacArthur Boulevard beginning generally at San Joaquin Hills Road and ending at Ford Road. This forms a rather limited visual ' corridor lining this stretch of MacArthur Boulevard. There is little to no customary use of the site by the general public for recreational or open space uses. The proposed widening of MacArthur Boulevard will result in the loss of open space along the western border of the site. MacArthur Boulevard is proposed to be widened to six lanes along the western boundary of the Freeway Reservation site. This loss of open space due to the widening of MacArthur Boulevard will decrease the site's size. This decrease in site size will change the visual appearance of the site. The loss of open space and change of appearance of the site due to the widening of MacArthur Boulevard is not a project -specific impact. The widening of MacArthur Boulevard is partially funded by this project. Refer to Table B in the Project Description. ' The proposed development will not introduce structures of landscaping into the community which are offensive. The development standards established in the PC Text should result in a project of a similar nature and quality as other single-family products in the surrounding area and in the City of Newport Beach. ' Based on the evaluation of this site, it is determined that implementing the project will not result in a significant aesthetic impact in the Freeway Reservation site. Light and Glare The proposed• development will introduce new sources of light and glare onto the site. This increase in light and glare will not differ in character, design and intensity, or theme from ' surrounding properties based on lighting standards contained in the PC Text. The introduction of intrusive sources of light and glare onto adjacent properties will not occur due to the nature of the proposed uses and the distant and location of adjacent uses. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement project sites, along with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, are anticipated to convert vacant sites to urban uses. For purposes of the aesthetic/light and glare cumulative analysis, the sites have been divided into non -Bay sites (sites which do not surround Upper Newport Back Bay) and Bay sites (those sites adjacent to Upper Newport Back Bay). 132 I The non -Bay sites include Jamboree/MacArthur, Bay View Landing, Block 800, Corporate Plaza West and Freeway Reservation. Development on these sites is not anticipated to change the visual character of the City of Newport Beach. Their development as an incremental contribution to an overall change in the City of Newport Beach aesthetic character is considered insignificant. The Bay sites include the development of portions of the San Diego Creek South, Upper .� Castaways, and Newporter North sites. The remaining Bay sites of San Diego Creek North and Newporter Knoll do not have development proposed at this time. The Newporter Resort site e)dsts as a hotel with amenities and no change to the overall visual character is anticipated. The proposed development of portions of the Bay sites will incrementally contribute to ongoing change to the visual character of the Upper Newport Bay from a natural setting to a man made environment. This incremental contribution to ongoing change, in conjunction with past and other approved development, is considered a significant unavoidable impact. The development of the project sites will contribute to cumulative light and glare in the City of Newport Beach. The majority of the sites are introducing new light sources. Their contribution will be limited and relatively disbursed through the City. The project sites will comply with all City Standard Policies and Recommendations related to light and glare. ; Along with all other cumulative projects, this light and glare impact is considered insignificant. EXISTING CITY POLICIES AND REQUIREMENTS A. The architectural character and landscape design established within each eidsting ' Planned Community (PC) shall be maintained. B. A landscape and irrigation plan for each project shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. The landscape plan shall integrate and phase the installation of landscaping with the proposed construction schedule. (Prior to the occupancy of any structure, the licensed landscape architect shall certify to the Planning Department that the landscaping has been installed in accordance with the prepared plan). C. The landscape plan shall be subject to the review of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department and approval of the Planning Department. D. Street trees shall be provided along the public streets as required by the Public Works Department and the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department. 11 E. Any construction on a site shall be done in accordance with the height restriction for the area. 133 1� F. Any lighting system shall be designed, directed, and maintained in such a manner as to conceal the light source and to minimize light spillage and glare to the adjacent 1 residential uses. Lighting systems plans shall be prepared and signed by a Licensed Electrical Engineer, with a letter from the Engineer stating that, in his opinion, this requirement has been met. Exterior lighting shall be approved by the Planning Department and the Public Works Department. G. The applicant shall provide energy -conserving street and parking lot lighting and minimize decorative or non-functional lighting in a manner acceptable to the Planning Director. H. Signage and exterior lighting shall be of similar design theme throughout each project site and shall be approved by the Planning Department and Public Works ' Department. I. The Corporate Plaza West site shall be subject to adherence to the City of Newport Beach Sight Plane Ordinance. J. The Newporter North, Newporter Knoll, and Upper Castaways sites shall be subject to the City of Newport Beach Bluff Top Setback Ordinance. MITIGATION MEASURES 1. In conjunction with site plan review, the project proponent shall prepare a detailed temporary grading and landscape plan for the bluff top setback area for the purpose of minimizing bluff erosion. If graded slopes from a development area extend into the bluff top setback area, as proposed by the PC Text, the project proponent shall prepare detailed final grading and landscape plans for the bluff top setback area. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department, Planning Department, Public Works Department, and Building Department. LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE Aesthetics No proposed uses on any of the sites are expected to obstruct public views of a unique natural feature. The obstruction of public views of unique vistas are not expected to occur on any of the Isites. 134 I II San Creek South, r The alteration of on -site unique visual features will not occur on the Diego San Diego Creek North, Jamboree/MacArthur, Newporter North, Newporter Knoll, Block 800, Corporate Plaza West, or Freeway Reservation sites. The alteration of on -site unique visual features of the natural coastal bluffs due to stabilization for public areas will occur on the Upper Castaways, Bay View Landing, and Newporter North sites. This alteration of on -site visual features will be partly mitigated and is considered a significant adverse impact. The loss of significant vacant/open space areas providing visual relief will not occur on the San Diego Creek South, San Diego Creek North, Jamboree/MacArthur, Bay View Landing, Newporter Knoll, Corporate Plaza West, Freeway Reservation, or Block'800 sites. The loss of significant vacant/open space areas providing visual relief will occur on the Upper Castaways and Newporter North sites. This loss is partially mitigated and is ' considered a significant adverse impact. The introduction of structures or landscaping will not be offensive to the community on any of the project sites. Along with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, development of the proposed project sites surrounding the Bay, including Upper Castaways and Newporter North will result in the loss of vacant/open space areas. The loss of vacant/open space on portions of the Bay sites will incrementally contribute to ongoing change to the visual character of the upper Newport Bay. No feasible mitigation was identified. This impact is an unavoidable significant adverse impact. On the Upper Castaways and Newporter North sites, bluff top visual impacts are considered significant. Mitigation is proposed to mitigate this impact to the extent feasible. This impact is a significant adverse impact. Light and Glare Impacts from new sources of light and glare will not be significant. Based on lighting standards contained in PC Text the proposed development will create light and glare consistent in character, design, and intensity or theme with surrounding uses. Intrusive sources of light and glare will not occur on all proposed sites. Existing City policies and requirements will be complied with for each site. In conjunction with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, impacts from new sources of light and glare are considered insignificant. These project sites will not cause significant cumulative light and glare impacts. In conjunction with past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects, impacts related to off -site light and glare are ' considered insignificant. 135 I i TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION The following section discusses existing traffic and circulation conditions, potential significant impacts, mitigation measures, and the level of significance of project -specific and cumulative impacts. The section is a summary of the Newport Beach Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement Traffic Study, April 23, 1992, prepared by Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. The entire study is provided in Appendix B. EXISTING CONDITIONS The existing conditions for the arterial highway system within the area are discussed below for the base year 1990. Table III-1 of Appendix B lists the citywide land use and trip generation summaries for the year 1990. Circulation System - 1990 ( Exhibit 45 illustrates the existing average daily traffic (ADT) volumes and the number of midblock.lanes in the study area circulation system. The arterial volumes are from 1990 Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) traffic counts collected by the City of Newport Beach. The existing arterial conditions (number of lane) are also from 1990, a time frame which was prior to the opening of Newport Coast Drive and the San Joaquin Hill Road extension. The highest volumes occur along the City's major thoroughfares: MacArthur Boulevard, Jamboree Road, Coast Highway, and Newport Boulevard. ' Peak hour intersection capacity utilization (ICU) values for area intersections are summarized in Table D. An intersection location map and individual ICU summaries for each intersection are provided in Appendix B. The City of Newport Beach Circulation Element, Traffic Phasing Ordinance, and Policy S-1 establish that an ICU of .90 (Level of Service "D") is the maximum level of service (LOS) desirable for an intersection, and at 1.00 the theoretical absolute capacity of the intersection has been reached. Based on existing (1990) traffic counts, the ICU results indicate existing capacity problems occur' in the AM peak hour at six intersections and in the PM peak hour at five intersections. Several of these deficiencies occur along the Bristol Street corridor, and individual locations on Irvine Avenue, MacArthur Boulevard and Coast Highway also show deficiencies. Circulation System - 1995 The anticipated 1995 arterial network includes several improvements to the assumed circulation system which existed when traffic counts were taken in 1990. The network is illustrated in Exhibit 46. The assumed 1995 circulation improvements are summarized in Table E. The assumed network includes new roadways and several intersection and link 136 r m s m m m! m i m m m� m m m= m W g 0 0 LEGEND Pzr JY XX Existing ADT Volumes (OOOs) 1 414 ,� ? nd YY Midblock Lanes e + i 17 _ I � o S 4 Nam_ I P.Ni � .. �" 65 ' 2g 1 P -N 6 3 u o� Note: Newport Coast Drive was open for traffic in J 11 2 November 1990. BAM BAY P P i • 9 t ''ww m r i 8 P •V S / 2]N0 2+N 20 15 P 6 'e tfi J 12 6 a t5 14a 7 4 sum P LIE: Q 20 1 M 42 34 4+ 4 6 a P P 66 g1 s Hiaxn 6 8 u 4 ♦> 4 r ` 144 er.YlO NLWM A9 55 BAY 6+� �RT ems^ PACIFIC OCEAN ouwul3: rtu�un-ruust r�ssocla[es, mc. EXISTING ADT VOLUMES (1990) & MIDBLOCK LANES] Sj'AinC. PLANNING. ING CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT City of Newport Beach "0 scat 45 M� M M alp M M M M M+ M M= M M Ml r M BACK BAY LEGEND -�- New Roadways (1995-2000) New Intersections Widen Roadway O Intersection Improvements JJ NCIfAORi HJAY I Toll Facility I PACIFIC OCEAN Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. 2000 CIRCULATION SYSTEM � smi"' PLANNING. INC. CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT �1J City of Newport Beach F] no scale 47 I TABLE D EXISTING ICU SUMMARY (1990) INTERSECTION AM PM 1. Placentia & Superior .58 .62 ' 2. Superior & CH .68 .65 3. Newport & Hospital .54 .67 5. Newport & Via Lido .56 .53 ' 6. Newport & 32nd .52 .61 7. Riverside & CH .82 .90 ' 8. Tustin & CH 9. MacArthur & Campus .67 .62 .58 .78 10. MacArthur & Birch .42 .41 11. Von Karman & Campus.:. .50 .57 12. MacArthur & Von Karman" .34 .46 13. Jamboree & Campus .74 .60 14. Jamboree & Birch' 15. Campus & Bristol N .53 .59 .47 .87 16. Birch & Bristol N .61 .76 17. Campus & Bristol S .82 .60 18. Birch & Bristol S .81 .56 19. Irvine & Mesa .98 1.04 20. Irvine & University .96 .84 ' 21. Irvine & Santiago/22nd .88 .86 22. Irvine & Highland/20th .74 .76 ' 23. Irvine & Dover/19th .79 .73 24. Irvine & Westcliff/17th .79 .97 25. Dover & Westcliff .45 .45 26. Dover & 16th*• .47 .54 27. DoverBayshore & CH •68 •68 28. Bayside & CH 29. MacArthur & Jamboree .83 .48 .73 .59 30. Jamboree & Bristol N .65 .72 32. Jamboree & Bristol S .87 .76 34. Jamboree & University .70 .69 35. Jamboree & Bison .58 .54 36. MacArthur & Bonita Canyon 1.10 .99 37. MacArthur & Bison 1.00 .74 38. Jamboree & Ford .56 .57 ' Continued. ' 138 I TABLE D (CONP'D) EXISTING ICU SUMMARY (1990) AM PM 39. MacArthur & Ford .87 .74 40. Jamboree & SJH Rd .52 .48 41. Jamboree & Santa Barbara .47 56 42. Jamboree & CH .72 .64 43. Santa Cruz & SJH Rd .30 .37 44. Santa Rosa & SJH Rd .29 .42 45. MacArthur & SJH Rd .67 .80 46. MacArthur & San Miguel .73 .86 47. Newport Center & CH .47 .42 48. Avocado & CH .53 .68 49. MacArthur & CH .53 .68 50. San Miguel & SJH Rd* .50 .43 51. Goldenrod & CH .91 .82 52. Marguerite & SJH Rd* .54 .68 53. Marguerite & CH .85 .95 54. Poppy & CH .90 .93 Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Notes: 1. Level of Service Ranges: .00 - .60 A .61 - .70 B .71 - .80 C .81- .90 D .91 - 1.00 E Above 1.00 F 2. See Intersection Location Map of Appendix B. 3. All traffic counts are from 1990 TPO counts collected by the City•of Newport Beach unless noted below: ' 1989 TPO Count •• 1988 TPO Count '•• 1987 TPO Count 4. All counts were taken prior to the opening of Newport Coast Drive and the San Joaquin Hills Road extension. SJH Rd = San Joaquin Hills Road CH = Coast Highway ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization , TPO = Traffic Phasing Ordinance 139 r LEGEND New Roadways New Intersections Widen Roadway — O Intersection Improvements — SR-55 ALIGNMENT IS DIAGRAMATIC ONLY BACK HAY 1995 CIRCULATION SYSTEM CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT City of Newport Beach \ MJ J. Note: Newport Coast Drive was open for traffic III November 1091. The base year for this anal s assumed 1890 traff o oonditfons. PACIFIC OCEAN awl�t:: nusun-ruu�t rissuclates, nn:. 'I_T., Mina PIANNING. INC. F "M%Ml� no some 46 TABLE E 1995 CIRCULATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ' (Committed) ' LOCATION IMPROVEMENT NEW LINKS Newport Coast (MacArthur to CH) San Joaquin Hills (Spyglass Hill to Newport Coast) Bison (Newport Coast to California) NEW INTERSECTIONS tNewport Coast & CH Spyglass Hill & San Joaquin Hills Rd Newport Coast & San Joaquin Hills Rd Bison & Newport Coast Bonita Cyn & Newport Coast LINK IMPROVEMENTS Newport (CH to 32nd St) Widen from 4 to 5 lanes CH (Newport to Western Study Area Boundary) Widen from 4 to 6 lanes ' CH (adjacent to Newport Coast) Widen from 4 to 6 lanes MacArthur (Bison to Newport Coast) Widen from 6 to 7 lanes Campus (Carlson to University) Widen from 2 to 4 lanes ' Birch/Mesa (Bristol S to Irvine) Widen from 2 to 4 lanes Irvine (University to Bristol) Widen from 4 to 6 lanes INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS Newport Blvd & Via Lido Third NBT MacArthur & Campus Fourth SBT, Third EBT, Second WBL, Third WBT MacArthur & Newport Coast Third NBT, Separate NBR, Second SBL, Second WBL MacArthur & Bison Third NBT Jamboree & Santa Barbara Separate NBL, Dual EBL, Separate EBT & EBR Avocado & CH Irvine & University Third EBT, Third WBT Third NBT, Third SBT Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Notes: 1. Improvements listed here are committed as of early 1991, the base time period for this analysis. Some improvements such as Newport Coast Drive have been completed by the time this report was published. 2. Some improvements to MacArthur Boulevard will be completed in conjunction with the implementation of this project. The benefits of these improvements in relation to the project are discussed in Appendix B in Chapter VII. ' Left CH = Coast Highway EBT = Eastbound Through NBL = North Bound NBT = Northbound Through SBL = South Bound Leh SBT = Southbound Through WBL = West Bound Left NBR = Northbound Right WBT = West Bound Left 1 141 I improvements (widenings). Improvements listed in the table include all those within the Newport Beach Traffic Area Model (NBTAM) study area, both within and outside of the City of Newport Beach. The improvements within the City are assumed to be constructed ' as part of city improvements programs such as the Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) and the Fair Share Fee Program. One of the improvements assumed by 1995 is Newport Coast Drive which opened for traffic ' in November 1991. Newport Coast Drive is a six -lane major arterial between Coast Highway and San Joaquin Hills Road and a four -lane primary from San Joaquin Hills Road to MacArthur Boulevard. Other new roadway improvements include the extension of San Joaquin Hills Road to Newport Coast Drive, which opened for traffic in November 1991 and ' a two-lane temporary access road which have been constructed on the University of California, Irvine campus between Newport Coast Drive and California. It is also important to note that the 1995 base case analysis assumes implementation of land use modifications (new development and redevelopment projects) by the appropriate jurisdiction both within Newport Beach and in the surrounding jurisdictions. Assumed Circulation System - 2000 The arterial network assumed for the year 2000 is illustrated on Exhibit 47. The network t includes several additions to the assumed 1995 circulation system including new roadways and intersections and improvements to existing intersections and links. All of the assumed , 2000 circulation improvements are summarized in Table F. Improvements listed in the table include all those in the NBTAM study area, both within and outside of the City of Newport Beach that are included in each jurisdiction lists of anticipated capital improvements for the year 2000. One component of the year 2000 circulation system is the assumed construction of the San Joaquin Transportation Corridor (SJHTC) as a six -lane "toll' facility. Other major improvements include the extension of Bison Avenue as four -lane primary facility between MacArthur Boulevard and the SJHTC and the construction of Sand Canyon Avenue as a four -lane divided arterial north of the SJHTC to future Michelson Drive in the City of Irvine. The realignment of Ford Road as a four -lane primary facility between MacArthur Boulevard and the SJHTC is also assumed in the year 2000 network. , Other assumed improvements include widening of MacArthur Boulevard between Newport Coast Drive and Coast Highway from four/six lanes to six/eight lanes. The funding for the widening is assumed to be provided by the financial assistance provided by the proposed Development Agreement for this project. On the western side of the City, two additions are assumed: the construction of Bluff Road between 19th Street and Coast Highway and the extension of 15th Street to Coast Highway. 142 1. J SR-55 ALIGNMENT IS DIAGRAMA7IC ONLY � H= sky �,\� �4' ,, M nt No —Toll Fndllty—I N"PORT HAY�. ate" PACIFIC LEGEND OCEAN New Roadways (2000-2010) New Intersections QIntersection Improvements JOUICe: AUStin-FOUSt ASSOCIa IeS, inc. 2010 CIRCULATION SYSTEM ,,, owns DLELina PLANNING. INU CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT ^=m City of Newport. Beach ® no scale 48 I TABLE F ANTICIPATED CIRCULATION SYSTEM IlVIPROVEMENTS - 1995 to 2000 iLOCATION u I I I fI I I NEW LINKS SJHTC (Entire Length/Poll Facility) Sand Canyon (Michelson to SJHTC) Bison (MacArthur to SJHTC) University Dr North (Jamboree to California) California (University to Jamboree) Bluff (19th St to CH) 15th St (Monrovia to CH) Ford Road (Realigned Roadway) 19th St (Brookhurst to Bluff Rd) SR-55/SR-73 Ramps , NEW INTERSECTIONS Jamboree & Bay View 15th St & CH Bluff & CH Bison & SJHTC EB Ramps Bison & SJHTC WB Ramps Ford & SJHTC EB Ramps Ford & SJHTC WB Ramps Newport Coast & SJHTC EB Ramps Sand Cyn & SJHTC WB Ramps LINK IMPROVEMENTS CH (Newport to Dover) Dover (CH to Westcliff St) 17th St (Irvine to Orange) 17th St (Pomona to Bluff) 19th St (Irvine to Orange) Del Mar (Irvine to Newport) Placentia (Wilson to 16th St) Fairview (Fair to Newport) Bonita Canyon (SJHTC to Turtlerock) Redhill (Bristol to Northern Study Area boundary) SR-73 (Jamboree to Western Study Area boundary) Bristol (Redhill to Western Study Area boundary) MacArthur (Birch to Von Karman) Baker (Redhill to SR-55) Culver (Campus to UCI Access) Continued. 144 IMPROVEMENT Widen from 5 to 6 lanes Widen from 4 to 6 lanes Widen from 4 to 6 lanes Widen from 2 to 4 lanes Widen from 2 to 4 lanes Widen from 2 to 4 lanes Widen from 4 to 6 lanes Widen from 4 to 6 lanes Widen from 2 to 4lanes Widen from 4 to 6 lanes Widen from 6 to 10 lanes Widen from 4 to 6 lanes Widen from 6 to 8 lanes Widen from 4 to 6 lanes Widen from 2 to 4 lanes I I TABLE F (CONT'D) CIRCULATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS - 199S to 2000 , LOCATION IMPROVEMENT University (Campus to MacArthur) Widen from 4 to 6 lanes Irvine (Bristol to University) Widen from 4 to 6 lanes , Birch (Bristol S to Bristol N) Widen bridge MacArthur (University to Ford) Widen from 6 to 8 lanes MacArthur (Ford to San Miguel) Widen from 4 to 6 lanes 19th Street over Santa Ana River Construct bridge INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS MacArthur & Ford Second WBL, Free WBR MacArthur & Bison Conversion to four-way intersection MacArthur & SJH Road Third SBT, Separate WBR MacArthur & San Miguel Third NBT, Third SBT, Second , WBL Jamboree & University Fourth NBT, Fourth SBT Riverside & CH Second EBL Tustin & CH Third EBT Birch & Bristol S Second SBL, Separate EBR , Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Note: Some improvements to MacArthur Boulevard will be completed in conjunction with the Implementation of this project. The benefits of these improvements in relation to the project are discussed in Appendix B Chapter VII. ' SJHTC = San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor CH = Coast Highway , SR = State Route EB = East Bound WB = West Bound , UCI = University California at Irvine S = South N = North I 145 ' I ' It is also important to note that the 2000 base case analysis assumes implementation of land use modifications (new development and redevelopment projects) by the appropriate ' jurisdictions both within Newport Beach and in the surrounding jurisdictions. Assumed Circulation Improvements - 2010 ' The long-range arterial network (2010) assumes buildout of the General Plan Circulation Elements for the Cities of Newport Beach, Irvine, and Costa Mesa and the remainder of the County of Orange as indicated on the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways ' (MPAH). The 2010 network is illustrated on Exhibit 48. All of the assumed 2010 circulation improvements are summarized in Table G. Improvements listed in the table ' include all those with the NBTAM study area, both within and outside the City of Newport Beach. Major improvements assumed by 2010 buildout, including adding two High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes to the SJHTC and conversion of the "toll" facility to a "non -toll" roadway. Also by 2010 it is assumed that: Sand Canyon Avenue has been constructed as a ' two-lane commuter arterial between Coast Highway and the SJHTC; San Joaquin Hills Road has been extended as a four -lane primary from Newport Coast Drive to Sand Canyon Avenue; and, the Costa Mesa Freeway (SR-55) has been extended to 17th Street. ' The southward extension of Culver Drive to the SJHTC has been assumed in the 2010 base case as it is included in the County's Master Plan of Arterial Highways. The extension is not ' part of the City of Irvine's Circulation Element. Circulation Plans ' Circulation Element ' The City first adopted its Circulation Element which included the Master Plan of Arterial Highways in 1973. In 1988 the City revised and updated the overall General Plan (87-1) including the Circulation Element. The result of the process was adoption of a Revised Circulation Element and Master Plan of Arterial Highways that is closely correlated with the Land Use Element representing the best possible balance between roadway size and traffic ' service levels. Only 7 of the 57 critical intersections were identified as tending to exceed their theoretical absolute capacity if the General Plan is built out and growth occurs as projected in surrounding jurisdictions. Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) Analysis ' The City of Newport Beach originally adopted a traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) in 1978 to monitor development and traffic conditions in the City. The intent of the ordinance was to ensure that development projects would be required to make circulation improvements ' to offset impacts caused by increased traffic volumes. Though the TPO has been amended to address issues not originally anticipated and to further refine criteria the intent of the 146 ILOCATION TABLE G 2010 CIRCULATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS Ili, IQ119111 Nil INZYf NEW LINKS Sand Canyon (SJHTC to CH) ' San Joaquin Hills (Newport Coast to Sand Canyon) Culver (Bonita Canyon to SJHTC) SR-55 (17th St to 19th St) NEW INTERSECTIONS Newport Coast & SJHTC WB Ramps Sand Cyn & SJHTC EB Ramps LINK MODIFICATION I SJHTC INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS Newport & Hospital DoverBayshore & CH Jamboree & Bison San Miguel & SJH Rd Culver & Bonita Canyon Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Conversion from Toll to Free facility Second EBL Fourth EBT, Fourth WBT Fourth NBT Second WBL Conversion from a three-way to four-way intersection ' Note: Some improvements to MacArthur Boulevard will be completed in ,conjunction with the implementation of this project. The benefits of these improvements in relation to the project are discussed in Appendix B, Chapter VII. LJI I EB = East Bound EBL = East Bound Left EBR = East Bound Right EBT = East Bound Through NBL = North Bound Left NBR = North Bound Right NBT = North Bound Through CH = Coast Highway SBL = South Bound Left SBT = South Bound Through SJH Rd = San Joaquin Hills Road SJHTC = San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor ST = South Through WB = West Bound WBL = West Bound Left WBR = West Bound Right WBT = West Bound Through N = North S = South ordinance has remained the same. The TPO requires that large scale development project phased over a period longer than 60 months must provide major improvements early in the development phasing program (within 60 months) to satisfy either the "non worsening" or ' "net benefit" criteria. The "net benefit" criteria is described below. Policy S-1 was adopted (and subsequently amended) by the City Council. This policy outlines the TPO's administrative implementation procedures. These procedures are described in the traffic ' study in Appendix B. Under the TPO a project can be approved under the following conditions: ' • Project traffic amounts to less than a one percent increase in total traffic on ' any approach at affected intersections for the entire AM and PM peak period. • If traffic amounts to more than an one percent increase, the project traffic would not cause an ICU to exceed .90 or cause the worsening of an existing ' ICU which exceeds .90 during the AM or PM peak hour. • If the project causes an ICU to exceed, a traffic system improvement must be , provided that results in a lowering of the ICU to be .90 or less during the AM or PM peak hour. If the project causes a worsening of an existing ICU which , already exceeds .90, a traffic system improvement must be provided that results in lowering the ICU level to the original or "without project" ICU level. • If there are no traffic system improvements which are feasible to reduce the projected ICUs as required, major improvements can be implemented which improve conditions at other intersections in the City resulting in an overall ' "net benefit" to the circulation system. • If the project cannot meet any of these criteria, the project must have a 4/5th ' vote of,,the City Council to exempt the project. The City Council must find that the overall project benefitsoutweigh the negative traffic impacts. IMPACTS ' The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) defines a significant adverse impact ' related to traffic and circulation as an impact which is substantial in relation to the load and capacity of the street system. Additionally, the City of Newport Beach has adopted standards to evaluate the significance of traffic and circulation system impacts. The ' Circulation Element, Traffic Phasing Ordinance, and Policy S-1 establish that an ICU of .90 (Level of Service "D") is the maximum level of service (LOS) desirable for an intersection and that at 1.00 the theoretical absolute capacity of the intersection has been reached. ' Additionally, for the purpose of this report the City of Newport Beach has established that a project impact is considered significant if it causes an ICU of .90 or less to reach .91 or t 149 ' UI J greater, or if it causes a one percent (1%) or more increase to the ICU value at an intersection that already exceeds .90 (LOS "D") without the project. The proposed project and past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects will impact traffic and circulation in the City of Newport Beach. Traffic impacts will occur in ' both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, as well as, an overall increase in daily traffic volumes. The proposed project will impact the circulation system in adjacent communities. Circulation system changes in adjacent communities could modify project impacts or create new project impacts. The proposed project will impact adopted circulation plans and policies in the community. Additionally, access to sites will impact immediately adjacent streets. The significance of these impacts related to the above criteria is discussed in the ' following pages. Alternatives that could reduce or eliminate these impacts are discussed in the Alternatives section of this report. Methodology Traffic forecast data used in the traffic analysis was produced by the Newport Beach Traffic Analysis Model (NBTAM). This is a sub -area model derived from the Orange County Traffic Analysis Model (OCTAM) which is used for a variety of transportation planning ' applications in the City of Newport Beach. Originally developed in 1988 for General Plan traffic forecasting, the model was updated in 1991 to portray the County's latest set of distribution patterns (OCFAM-II), and to portray the latest set of land use assumptions ' prepared by the City of Newport Beach and adjacent jurisdictions. Specific traffic model information such as trip generation rates are provided in Appendix B. Development of this model also included a validation process whereby the model was run for the existing time frame (1990) to test its ability to replicate actual volume within an acceptable range. The study area used in the traffic analysis includes all of the City of Newport Beach and ' portions of the surrounding Cities of Irvine and Costa Mesa, plus some unincorporated County areas. Within this study area, a set of 68 intersections were analyzed to determine the impacts of the proposed project. Trip Generation Assumptions Table H summarizes the proposed land use and resulting trip generation for development of the proposed project sites. They are listed by the NBTAM traffic analysis zones in which each site is located. Project trip generation is assumed to be "worst -case" since allowances ' were not made for any trip reduction that may occur as a result of implementing Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs in the City. ' As shown in Table H, total project trip generation is projected to be 10,777 average daily vehicle trips, with 1,000 trips occurring in the AM Peak Hour and 1,209 trips occurring in the PM Peak Hour. 150 I TABLE H TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY ' AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ' Land Use Units In Out Total In Out Total ADT Res (SFD) 48 DU 9 33 42 33 19 52 528 ' Res (SFA) 608 DU 121 382 503 382 244 626 5,664 Apartment 300 DU 60 120 180 120 90 210 1,950 ' Resort Hotel 68 ROOM 41 20 61 27 27 54 714 Restaurant 10 TSF 6 1 7 35 16 51 669 ' General 94 TSF 179 28 207 56 160, 216 1,222 Office , Active Park 5 ACRE 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 Grand Total 416 584 1,000 653 556 11209 10,777 , Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Note: Only those uses which generate traffic are given on this table (i.e., open space and view parks are not ' shown here). Res = Residential , SFD = Single Family Detached SFA = Single Family Attached DU = Dwelling Unit ' TSF = Thousand Square Feet 151 , J ' Table I lists citywide land use and trip generation for 1990 (existing), 1995, 2000, and 2010 (buildout of the General Plan). The project trip generation of 10,777 average daily trips is about one percent of the total citywide trip generation for the year 2010 (buildout of the General Plan) and about one and half (1.5) percent of the existing (1990) citywide trip generation. It is about 7 percent of the total remaining trip generation projected to occur ' in the City by buildout of the General Plan. Land Use and Circulation Improvements Phasing With the exception of the Newporter Resort Hotel expansion (68 additional rooms) and the restaurant or health club and view park at Bay View Landing, the entire project is assumed to be built by 1995 for the purpose of this analysis. The hotel expansion and restaurant or health club and view park are assumed to be complete by 2000. The traffic analysis assumed construction of all related frontage improvements at the time the related property is developed. 1995 - Circulation System Impacts Average Daily Traffic Volumes ' Exhibit 49 provides the "with project" and "without project" Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes for 1995. Volume increases due to the project are minor with no locations showing increases of more than 2,000 vehicles per day (VPD). Increases of 1,000 to 2,000 VPD are ' projected to, occur along Jamboree Road, Coast Highway, MacArthur Boulevard, Dover Drive, Irvine Avenue, University Drive and 17th Street. The resulting impacts on capacity is discussed in the following section concentrating on peak hour volumes at key intersections ' in the study area. Peak Hour Capacity Impacts Table J summarizes the peak hour intersection capacity utilization (ICU) values for 1995 conditions. The largest project contribution to the overall ICU values (up, to 0.05) occurs ' at the intersections in the vicinity of Newport Center and at the Jamboree Road/University Drive intersection. Project contributions to the remaining intersections are .03 or less. Based on the significance criteria discussed at the beginning of this impact section significant adverse impacts will occur at the six intersections indicated in Table K. Table K provides a summary of the ICUs for impacted intersections identifying the project's ' contribution to the overall ICU. The largest of the significant adverse impacts occurs at Jamboree Road and University Drive in the PM peak hour where the ICU increased by .05 (from .88 without the project to .93 with the project). A set of potential improvements has been determined which would relieve these deficiencies ' which would mitigate the project's impact on the six intersections. These improvements are summarized in Table L along with the resulting reduced ICU values. These improvements 1 152 TABLE I CITYWIDE LAND USE AND TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY Existing Unit 1990 1995 2000 20102 LAND USE Residentiall DU 34,782 37,077 37,978 39,027 Commercial TSF 4,041 4,302 4,648 52391 Office TSF 10,859 12,114 12,498 13,375 Industrial/R&D TSF 2,524 2,710 2,893 31260 DAILY TRIP GENERATION Residential Trips 314,555 332,073 339,206 347,987 Commercial Trips 1872809 196,542 214,602 251,290 Office Trips 165,438 182,730 1892076 203,053 Industrial/R&D Trips 19,527 21,269 22,775 25,784 Other Trips 89,363 100,173 106,425 114,532 TOTAL 776,692 832,787 872,084 942,646 lData given in this table is aggregated according to four basic land use categories for comparative purposes and reflects only those uses in the City of Newport Beach. Land use data is actually compiled according to 54 detailed categories (i.e., Residential Low Density, Residential High Density, District Commercial) for NBTAM purposes and is given in Appendix A of Appendix B. 22010 data is for the General Plan. Notes: DU = Dwelling Unit TSF = Thousand Square Feet R&D = Research and Development 153 EA 25 `1J N M1 Je �g� 65Ot SR-55 ALIGNMENT IS OIAGRAMAMC ONLY ,i ro u \ > 1146 Je m 47 33 '�7 33 10 19 % ^O o 1 NTl 1 7- 011s 505 \ m� V 47r N tss 35 JJJ IrJr \99 ?JJ 155 _ l 155 .. 1.417 m .i 1 19 19 23 13 23 161 wn73 u u 2] ,5 J iBAY S 10 5 r 1 mo5 ma � � 10 in � Si' 12 19 Ji 1 16 16 JJ g u iri' t7 P V,y \S 16U N 11 8 NN p+ ♦ 14 �m 13 13 Vm r ,1114 R 7M ! 42 39 22 u m a; 41 't9 � �'" 53 et 4 s N N walru.Y 36 3 32 6 imi„ ♦ 7 2D 1. le@ ♦ \� f NE11POlif Pp� 76 HlY 57 57 \ F " PACIFIC T.F:GEND n �,.° OCEAN 52 49 n XX With Project 52 YY No Project SouFce: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. 2010 ADT VOLUMES (0001S) WITH & WITHOUT PROJECT !�-PER Minc. PLANNING. INC CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT "w%milliill City of Newport Beach no scale 49 TABLE J 1995 ICU SUMMARY INTERSECTION NO PROJECT AM PM WITH PROJECT AM PM DIFFERENCE AM PM 1. Placentia & Superior .66 .75 .66 .75 ---- ---- 2. Superior & CH .67 .72 .67 .72 --- ---- 3. Newport & Hospital .66 1.07 - .66 1.08 --- .01 4. Newport SB Ramp & Newport .39 .65 .39 .65 ---- ---- 5. Newport & Via Lido .51 .71 .51 .70 ---- --- 6. Newport & 32nd .65 .77 .65 .77 ---- ---- 7. Riverside & CH .92 1.03 .93 1.03 .01 ---- 8. Tustin & CH .74 .64 .75 .65 .01 .01 9. MacArthur & Campus .65 .85 .65 .87 ---- .02 10. MacArthur & Birch .53 .44 .54 .44 .01 ---- 11. Von Karman & Campus .60 .70 .60 .71 .01 12. MacArthur & Von Karman .36 .51 .37 .51 .01 ---- 13. Jamboree & Campus 1.01 .80 1.01 .80 ---- --- 14. Jamboree & Birch .60 .67 .60 .68 ---- .01 15. Campus & Bristol N .71 .92 .71 .92 ---- --- 16. Birch & Bristol N .69 .92 .69 .92 17. Campus & Bristol S .83 .68 .83 .69 ---- .01 18. Birch & Bristol S .88 .98 .89 .89 .01 .01 19. Irvine & Mesa 1.07 1.10 1.07 1.11 ---- .01 20. Irvine & University .73 .57 .73 .59 ---- .02 21. Irvine & Santiago/22nd .84 .88 .85 .89 .01 .01 22. Irvine & Highland/20th .68 .73 .69 .75 .01 .02 23. Irvine & Dover/19th .75 .75 .77 .77 .02 .02 24. Irvine & Westcliff/17th .81 .91 .81 .92 ---- .01 25. Dover & Westcliff .52 .45 .53 .47 .01 .02 26. Dover & 16th .54 .59 .54 .59 .02 ---- 27. DoverBayshore & CH .80 .84 .80 .85 ---- .01 28. Bayside & CH .80 .77 .80 .78 ---- .01 29. MacArthur & Jamboree .56 .67 .57 .67 .01 ---- 30. Jamboree & Bristol N 1.07 1.03 1.08 1.04 .01 .01 32. Jamboree & Bristol S .81 .82 .83 .83 .02 .01 33. Jamboree & Bay View .37 .58 .38 .60 .01 .02 34. Jamboree & University .74 .88 .77 .93 .03 .05 35. Jamboree & Bison .65 .64 .67 .66 .02 .02 36. MacArthur & Newport Coast .66 .86 .66 .87 ---- .01 continued. 155 TABLE J (COWD) ' 1995 ICU SUMMARY , INTERSECTION NO PROJECT AM PM WITH PROJECT AM PM DIFFERENCE AM PM ' 37. MacArthur & Bison .59 .59 .60 .59 .01 38. Jamboree & Ford .59 .69 .62 .71 .03 .02 , 39. MacArthur & Ford .77 .70 .78 .70 .01 ---- 40. Jamboree & SJH Rd 41.Jamboree & Santa Barbara .66 .60 .63 .65 .69 .64 .61 .66 .03 .01 .01 .01 ' 42. Jamboree & CH .76 .64 .78 .67 .02 .03 43. Santa Cruz & SJH Rd .36 .43 .36 A3 -•-- --- ' 44. Santa Rosa & SJH Rd .32 .40 .32 .43 ---- .03 45. MacArthur & SJH Rd .59 .72 .61 .73 .02 .01 46. MacArthur & San Miguel .70 .83 .71 .84 .01 .01 ' 47. Newport Center & CH .38 .38 .39 .38 .01 --- 48. Avocado & CH .63 .58 .63 .60 ---- .02 49. MacArthur & CH .52 .60 .52 .60 ---- ---- , 50. San Miguel & SJH Rd .48 .44 .48 .44 51. Goldenrod & CH .77 .69 .77 .70 •--- .01 52. Marguerite & SJH Rd .44 .39 .44 .40 --- .01 ' 53. Marguerite & CH .77 .76 .78 .77 .01 .01 54. Poppy & CH .63 .64 .63 .64 ---• --- 58. Newport Coast & CH .40 .68 .40 .68 59. Spyglass Hill & SJH Rd .30 .21 .32 .22 .02 .01 60. San Miguel & Spyglass Hill .15 .17 .15 .18 -•-- .01 64. Culver Dr & Bonita Cyn .22 .37 .22 .37 --- ---- , 65. Newport Coast & SJH Rd .48 .62 .48 .63 -•-- .01 , Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Notes: 1. Level of Service Ranges: .00 • .60 A .61 • .70 B .71 • .80 C .81 - .90 D .91 - 1.00 E Above 1.00 F ' 2. See Intersection Location Map in Appendix B. , ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization N = North CH = Coast Highway S = South SB = South Bound SJH Rd = San Joaquin Hills Road ' 156 , TABLE K 1995 PROJECT IMPACTS INTERSECTION WITHOUT PROJECT WITH PROJECT PROJECT CONTRIBUTION 3. Newport & Hospital (PM) 1.07 1.08 .01 7. Riverside & CH (AM) .92 .93 .01 19. Irvine & Mesa (PM) 1.10 1.11 .01 24. Irvine & Westcliff/17th (PM) .91 .92 .01 30. Jamboree & Bristol N (AM) 1.07 1.08 .01 (PM) 1.03 1.04 .01 34. Jamboree & University (PM) .88 .93 .05 Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. CH = Coast Highway 157 TABLE L 1995 INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS »-- ICUs --- - COM14IITfED WITH INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT AM PM RkWOCr IDAFROVII1 AM ENIS PM IMPACTED BY PROJECT 3. Newport & Hospital Restripe EBT to shared thru/right, .66 1.08 .66 .88 Second NBL 7. Riverside & CH Additional southbound shared thru/right .93 1.03 .88 .89 19. Irvine & Mesa Third NBT & Third SBT 1.07 1.11 .82 .89 24. Irvine & Westcliff/17th Second EBL .81 .92 .65 .80 30. Jamboree & Bristol N Restripe NB approach from 1 left & 4 thrus to 2 lefts & 3 thrus 1.08 1.04 .64 .68 34. Jamboree & University Fourth NBT .77 .93 .70 .83 NOT IMPACTED BY PROJECT 13. Jamboree & Campus Restripe WB approach from 1 left & 2 thrus to 1.5 lefts & 1.5 thrus 1.01 .80 .87 .77 15. Campus & Bristol N None .71 .92 .71 .92• 16. Birch & Bristol N None .69 .92 .69 .92• Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Note: No improvements are feasible for intersections with an asterisk or they continue to operate at an unacceptable service level after improvements are implemented. EBL = East Bound Left NBT = North Bound Through EBT = East Bound Through CH = Coast Highway EBT = East Bound Through SBL = South Bound Left ICU's = Intersection Capacity Utilizations SBT = South Bound Through NB = North Bound WB = West Bound 158 ' are traffic improvements which are assumed by the existing General Plan and Circulation Element to be constructed. Assuming that projected growth in the surrounding area occurs as projected, these improvements would need to be constructed by 1995 to achieve acceptable levels of service and to avoid significant impacts related to the project. Table L also lists traffic improvements for three intersections which will operate with capacity deficiencies in 1995, but which are not adversely impacted by project traffic. These intersections can be improved ' to operate at acceptable levels of service with the exception of the PM peak hour for Campus/Bristol (North) and the PM peak hour for Birch at Bristol (North). 2000 - Circulation System Impacts Average Daily Traffic Volumes Traffic volume increases due to the project are minor with no locations showing increases t of more than 3,000 vehicles per day (VPD). An increase of 3,000 vehicles per day are projected to occur along Jamboree Road. Increases of up to 2000 VPD will occur along ` Coast Highway and University Drive. Increases up to 1,000 VPD will occur along portions of Coast Highway, Ford Road, Dover Drive, and portions of University Drive. The resulting impacts on capacity is discussed in the following section concentrating on peak hour volumes at key intersections in the study area. Peak Hour Capacity Impacts Table M summarizes the peak hour intersection capacity utilization (ICU) values for year 2000 conditions. The largest project contribution to the overall ICU values (up to .05) occurs at the intersections adjacent to Newport Center. Project contributions to the remaining intersections are .03 or less. Based on the significance criteria discussed at the beginning of this impact section significant impacts will occur at the eight intersections indicated in Table N. Table N provides a summary of ICUs for these intersection identifying the project's contribution to the overall ICU. The largest of the significant adverse impacts occurs at the intersection of Jamboree Road with Bison Avenue and University Drive. A set of potential improvements has been determined which could relieve deficiencies at some of the eight intersections. These improvements are summarized in Table O along with the resulting reduced ICU values. These improvements are traffic improvements which are expected to be constructed but in a later time frame. They are improvements which are assumed with General Plan buildout by the year 2010. r� M159 I TABLE M ' 2000 ICU SUMMARY NO PROJECT WITH PROJECT DIFFERENCE INTERSECTION AM PM AM PM AM PM ' 1. Placentia & Superior .54 .59 .54 .59 2. Superior & CH .79 .75 .79 .76 -- .01 3. Newport & Hospital .76 .89 .77 .89 .01 ---- 4. Newport SB Ramp & Newport .46 .68 .46 .68 ---- ---- 5. Newport & Via Lido .58 .72 .58 .72 ---- ---- ' 6. Newport & 32nd .69 .80 .69 .80 - ---- 7. Riverside & CH .93 .98 .95 .99 .02 .01 S. Tustin & CH .57 .62 .58 .63 .01 .01 9. MacArthur & Campus .64 1.11 .66 1.12 .02 .01 10. MacArthur & Birch .65 .53 .65 .53 ---- ---- 11. Von Korman & Campus .80 .81 .80 .81 ---- --- 12. MacArthur & Von Korman .50 .56 .51 .57 .01 .01 13. Jamboree & Campus .92 .74 .92 .74 ---- ---- ' 14. Jamboree & Birch .53 .58 .54 .58 .01 ---- 15. Campus & Bristol N .78 1.05 .79 1.05 .01 ---- 16. Birch & Bristol N .73 1.04 .73 1.04 --- 17. Campus & Bristol S .93 .97 .93 .97 ---- -- 18. Birch & Bristol S .62 .90 .62 .90 ---- .01 19. Irvine & Mesa .69 1.00 .70 1.00 .01 --- 20. Irvine & University .70 .89 .71 .89 .01 ---- 21. Irvine & Santiago/22nd .80 .83 .81 .83 .01 --- 22. Irvine & HighlandROth .67 .75 .68 .76 .01 .01 23. Irvine & Dover/19th .77 .86 .79 .87 .02 .01 24. Irvine & Westcliff/17th .62 .83 .63 .85 .01 .02 25. Dover & Westcliff .51 .42 .53 .44 .02 .02 26. Dover & 16th .57 .58 .59 .58 .02 ---- 27. DoverBayshore & CH .96 .89 .97 .90 .01 .01 28. Bayside & CH .95 .84 .96 .84 .01 ---- 29. MacArthur & Jamboree .78 1.04 .80 1.04 .02 --- 30. Jamboree & Bristol N' .85 .81 .87 .82 .02 .01 32. Jamboree & Bristol S .70 .89 .72 .90 .02 .01 33. Jamboree & Bay View .39 .86 .41 .89 .02 .03 34. Jamboree & University .70 .94 .72 97 .02 .03 35. Jamboree & Bison .94 .89 .97 .92 .03 .03 37. MacArthur & Bison .95 .94 .95 .95 --- .01 38. Jamboree & Ford .73 .82 .75 .84 .02 .02 39. MacArthur & Ford .78 .94 .79 .95 .01 .01 40. Jamboree & SJH Rd .68 .65 .72 .68 .04 .03 41. Jamboree & Santa Barbara .66 .72 .67 .74 .01 .02 , 42. Jamboree & CH .82 .83 .84 .84 .02 .01 continued. 160 I TABLE M (CONT'D) F L� I 2000 ICU SUMMARY INTERSECTION NO PROJECT AM PM WITH PROJECT AM PM DIFFERENCE AM PM . 43. Santa Cruz & SJH Rd .39 .44 .39 .44 ---- 44. Santa Rosa & SJH Rd .30 .44 .31 .44 .01 ---- 45. MacArthur & SJH Rd .55 .88 .55 .88 46. MacArthur & San Miguel .72 .73 .73 .73 .01 ---- 47. Newport Center & CH .50 .40 .50 .40 ---- ---- 48. Avocado & CH .53 .63 .54 .64 ---- .01 49. MacArthur & CH .53 .63 .53 .63 50. San Miguel & SJH Rd .61 .68 .61 .70 ---- .02 51. Goldenrod & CH .83 .73 .83 .74 ---- .01 52. Marguerite & SJH Rd .59 .48 .59 .49 ---- .01 53. Marguerite & CH .84 .77 .85 .77 .01 ---- 54. Poppy & CH .65 .65 .65 .66 ---- .01 55. 15th & CH .69 .88 .69 .89 ---- .01 56. Bluff & CH .80 .80 .81 .80 .01 ---- 57. Newport WB Ramp & CH .75 .79 .76 .80 .01 .01 58. Newport Coast & CH .49 .70 .50 .70 .01 ---- 59. Spyglass Hill & SJH Rd .58 .51 .58 .51 ---- ---- 60. San Miguel & Spyglass Hill .27 .24 .27 .24 ---- ---- 63. Coyote Cyn & Bonita Cyn .77 .78 .78 .78 :01 ---- 64. Culver Dr & Bonita Cyn .58 .67 .58 .67 ---- ---- 65. Newport Coast & SJH Rd .63 .77 .64 .77 .01 ---- 66. Bison & SJHTC EB Ramps .62 .40 .62 .40 ---- ---- 67. Bison & SJHTC WB Ramps .47 .31 .47 .32 ---- .01 68. Ford & SJHTC EB Ramps .38 .49 .38 .50 ---- .01 69. Ford & SJHTC WB Ramps .49 .57 .50 .57 .01 ---- 71. Newport Coast & SJHTC EB .30 .59 .30 .59 ---- ---- 73. Newport Coast & SJHTC WB .51 .40 .51 .40 ---- ---- Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Notes: 1. Level of Service Ranges: .00 - .60 A .61 - .70 B .71 - .80 C .81 - .90 D .91 - 1.00 E Above 1.00 F 2. See Intersection Location Map in Appendix B. EB = East Bound ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization CH = Coast Highway N = North S = South SB = South Bound SJH Rd = San Joaquin Hills Road SJHTC = San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor WB = West Bound 161 TABLE N 2000 PROJECT IMPACTS 7. Riverside & CH (AM) (PM) 9. MacArthur & Campus (PM) 27. DoverBayshore & CH (AM) 28, Bayside & CH (AM) 34. Jamboree & University (PM) 35. Jamboree & Bison (AM) (PM) 37. MacArthur & Bison (PM) 39. MacArthur & Ford (PM) Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. CH = Coast Highway S = South WITHOUT PROJECT WITH PROJECT PROJECT CONTRIBUTION .93 .95 .02 .98 .99 .01 1.11 1.12 .01 .96 .97 .01 .95 .96 .01 .94 .97 .03 .94 497 .03 .89 .92 .03 .94 .95 .01 .94 .95 .01 162 "a M I= No � go TABLE O 2000 INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS NO PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS AM PM IMPACTED BY PROJECT ICUs --------------------. WITH PROJECT AM PM 7. Riverside & CH Third EBT .95 .99 .68 .79 9. MacArthur & Campus None .66 1.12 .66 1.12* 27. DoverBayshore & CH None Feasible by 2000 .97 .90 .97* .90 28. Bayside & CH Fourth EBT .96 .94 .77 .83 34. Jamboree & University None .72 .97 .72 .97* 35. Jamboree & Bison None .97 .92 .97* 92* 37. MacArthur & Bison Second NBL & Fourth NBT .95 .95 .77 .94 39. MacArthur & Ford Fourth NBT .79 .95 .66 .84 NOT IMPACTED BY PROJECT 13. Jamboree & Campus Conversion of WB shared left(thru to thru .92 .74 .82 .78 15. Campus & Bristol N None .79 1.05 .79 1.05* 16. Birch & Bristol N Second NBL, Second SBT .73 1.04 .73 .96* 19. Itvine & Mesa Second EBT .70 1.00 .70 .98 29. MacArthur & Jamboree None .80 1.04 .80 1.04* Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. *Note: No improvements are feasible for intersections with an asterisk or they continue to operate at an unacceptable service level after improvements are implemented. SBT = South Bound Through NBL = North Bound Left SJH Rd = San Joaquin Hills Road WBT = West Bound Through CH = Coast Highway EBT = East Bound Through NBT = North Bound Through ICU's = 163 I Four of the eight intersections can be improved to acceptable levels of service if the identified intersection improvements are constructed by the year 2000. Furthermore, the improvements create additional capacity in excess of the amount of capacity used by the project resulting in an overall net benefit to the system as discussed later in this section. Four of the eight intersections impacted by the project are still shown to operate at unacceptable levels of service in 2000. Maintenance of adequate levels of service at these intersections could be achieved through programs such as the City's Traffic Phasing , Ordinance (TPO) and Growth Management programs which monitor traffic and circulation needs within a* short-range time frame (5 - 10 years) and ensure that necessary improvements will be implemented. The funding mechanisms available as part of the subject Development Agreement will also assist the City in funding necessary improvements in a timely manner. Furthermore, it is important to note that the traffic projections discussed in this analysis do not reflect the potential reductions in peak hour trip generation that could be expected as a result of implementing the City's recently adopted Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Ordinance. It is also possible, in the area primarily impacted by work -oriented trips, that implementation of the region -wide trip reduction programs will further reduce projected ICUs. 2010 - Circulation System Improvements - Long -Range Analysis Average Daily Traffic Volumes Traffic volume increases due to the project are minor with no locations showing an increase of more than 2,000 vehicles per day. Increases of up to 2,000 vehicles per day are projected to occur along Jamboree Road and 17th Street and the section of Dover Drive between 16th and 17th Streets. Increases of up to 1,000 VPD will occur along Irvine Avenue, MacArthur Boulevard, San Joaquin Hills Road, Dover Drive and the section of Coast Highway east and west of Jamboree Road. The sections of Coast Highway through Corona del Mar and Mariner's Mile show no measurable increase in traffic volumes. The resulting impacts on capacity is discussed in the following section concentrating on peak hour volumes at key intersections in the study area. Peak Hour Capacity Impacts Table P summarizes the peak hour intersection capacity utilization (ICU) values for year 2010 conditions. The largest project contribution to the overall ICU values (up to .03) occurs at the intersection of Jamboree Road and Ford Road. The project contributes .02 to the intersection of Jamboree Road and Bayview Drive. Project contributions to the remaining intersections are .01 or less. 164 i i I TABLE P 2000 ICU SUMMARY DIFFERENCE NO PROJECT WITH PROJECT x 100 INTERSECTION AM PM AM PM AM PM ' 1. Placentia & Superior .603 .628 .603 .628 ---- ---- 2. Superior & CH .849 .777 .860 .780 1.1 0.3 3. Newport & Hospital .790 .957 .791 .958 0.1 0.1 4. Newport SB Ramp & Newport .523 .696 .523 .698 0.0 0.2 5. Newport & Via Lido .650 .745 .652 .747 0.2 0.2 6. Newport & 32nd .745 .811 .747 .813 0.2 0.2 7. Riverside & CH .660 .745 .673 .872 1.3 1.3 8. Tustin & CH .554 .635 .567 .646 1.3 1.1 9. MacArthur & Campus .793 1.034 .797 1.035 0.4 0.1 10. MacArthur &'Birch .868 .835 .872 .836 0.4 0.1 11. Von Karman & Campus .696 .896 .697 .897 0.1 0.1 12. MacArthur & Von Karman .566 .625 .571 .631 0.5 0.3 13. Jamboree & Campus .762 .921 .767 .924 0.5 0.3 14. Jamboree & Birch .761 .785 .769 .792 0.8 0.7 15. Campus & Bristol N .851 1.139 .856 1.140 0.5 0.1 16. Birch & Bristol N .780 .959 .782 .960 0.2 0.1 17. Campus & Bristol S .963 1.073 .970 1.080 0.7 0.7 18. Birch & Bristol S .613 .943 .620 .950 0.7 0.7 19. Irvine & Mesa 1.134 1.290 1.142 1.294 0.8 0.4 20. Irvine & University .718 1.265 .730 1.270 1.2 0.5 21. Irvine & Santiago/22nd .638 .667 .650 .672 1.2 0.5 22. Irvine & Highland/20th .494 .581 .506 .588 1.2 0.7 23. Irvine & Dover/19th .611 .606 .625 .609 1.4 0.3 24. Irvine & Westcliff/17th .607 .863 .616 .878 0.9 1.5 25. Dover & Westcliff .485 .441 .494 .463 0.9 2.2 26. Dover & 16th .559 .625 .580 .647 2.1 2.2 27. Dover/Bayshore & CH .776 .797 .795 .810 1.9 1.3 28. Bayside & CH .883 .853 .900 .870 1.7 1.7 29. MacArthur & Jamboree .849 1.173 .863 1.180 1.4 0.7 30. Jamboree & Bristol N 1.025 1.046 1.034 1.058 0.9 1.2 32. Jamboree & Bristol S .785 1.199 .800 1.210 1.5 1.1 33. Jamboree & Bay View .831 .950 .839 .972 0.8 2.2 34. Jamboree & University .672 .824 .678 .853 0.6 2.9 35. Jamboree & Bison .630 .824 .650 .850 2.0 2.6 37. MacArthur & Bison .608 .773 .616 .781 0.8 0.8 38.Jamboree & Ford .801 .912 .824 .944 2.3 3.2 39. MacArthur & Ford .573 .824 .580 .838 0.7 1.4 40. Jamboree & SJH Rd .765 .784 .784 817 1.9 3.3 41. Jamboree & Santa Barbara .627 .748 .643 ' .780 1.6 3.2 Continued. 165 n TABLE P (CONT'D) 2000 ICU SUMMARY DIFFERENCE NO PROJECT WITH PROJECT x 100 INTERSECTION AM PM AM PM AM PM 42. Jamboree & CH .802 .843 .880 .860 7.8 1.7 43. Santa Cruz & SJH Rd .372 .418 .392 .420 2.0 0.2 44. Santa Rosa & SJH Rd .305 .441 .307 .447 0.2 0.6 45. MacArthur & SJH Rd .534 .773 .540 .780 0.6 0.7 46. MacArthur & San Miguel .758 .736 .768 .748 1.0 1.2 47. Newport Center & CH .549 .412 .553 .415 0.4 0.5 48. Avocado & CH .563 .703 .570 .710 0.7 0.7 49. MacArthur & CH .529 .517 .532 .521 0.3 0.4 50. San Miguel & SJH Rd 51. Goldenrod & CH .523 .751 .542 .683 .534 .756 .552 .688 1.1 0.5 1.0 0.5 �^ 52. Marguerite & SJH Rd .555 .463 .563 .472 0.8 0.9 53. Marguerite & CH .763 .737 .769 .741 0.6 0.4 54. Poppy & CH .573 .606 .578 .609 0.5 0.3 55. 15th & CH .628 .882 .630 .890 0.2 0.8 56. Bluff & CH .741 .804 .754 .813 1.3 0.9 57, Newport WB Ramp & CH 58. Newport Coast & CH .807 .508 .819 .650 .820 .510 .830 .650 1.3 0.2 1.1 0.0 59. Spyglass Hill & SJH Rd .663 .514 .670 .520 0.7 0.6 60. San Miguel & Spyglass Hill .150 .154 .150 .156 0.0 0.2 63. GabrIelino Cyn & Bonita Cyn .851 .802 .856 .8W 0.5 0.7 64. Culver Dr & Bonita Cyn ..631 .662 .633 .668 0.2 0.6 65. Newport Coast & SJH Rd .746 .688 .750 .690 0.4 0.2 66. Bison & SJHTC EB• Ramps .617 .652 .622 .655 0.5 0.3 67. Bison & SJHTC WB Ramps .504 .549 .506 .553 0.2 0.4 68. Ford & SJHTC EB Ramps .380 .732 .384 .741 0.4 0.9 69. Ford & SJHTC WB Ramps .668 .653 .675 .663 0.7 1.0 71. Newport Coast & SJHTC EB .483 .731 .483 .732 0.0 0.1 73. Newport Coast & SJHTC WB .517 .513 .517 .515 0.0 0.2 74. Sand Cyn & SJHTC EB Ramps .609 .668 .619 .669 1.0 0.1 75. Sand Cyn & SJHTC WB Ramps .664 .565 .672 .569 0.8 0.4 Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization CH = Coast Highway SB = South Bound N = North S = South SJH Rd = San Joaquin Hills Road EB = East Bound WB = West Bound SJHTC = San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor 166 H I Based on the significance criteria discussed at the beginning of this impact section significant impacts will occur at the four intersections indicated in Table Q. All but one of these intersections are located near the Jamboree Road/SR-73 grade separation. As shown in Table P, these intersections will be deficient without the project. In analyzing the impact of the proposed project on the 2010 circulation system, the project includes removal of 162,000 square feet of office entitlement from two sites (Jamboree/MacArthur and San Diego Creek North) near this area. The proposed project has less of an impact on the area than if the development assumed in the buildout of the General Plan occurred. However, N the impacts of the project on the 2010 circulation system are considered significant on a cumulative basis based upon City of Newport Beach criteria. Maintenance of adequate levels of service at these intersections could be achieved through programs such as the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) and Growth Management programs which monitor traffic and circulation needs within a short-range time frame (5 - 10 years) and ensure that necessary improvements will be implemented. The funding mechanisms available as part of the subject Development Agreement will also assist the City in funding necessary improvements in a timely manner. Furthermore, it is important to note that the traffic projects discussed in this analysis do not reflect the potential reductions in peak hour trip generation that could be expected as a result of implementing the City's recently adopted Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Ordinance. It is also possible, in the area primarily impacted by work -oriented trips, that implementation of the region -wide trip reduction programs will further reduce projected ICUs. ' A portion of the widening of MacArthur Boulevard from Coast Highway to Newport Coast Drive is considered a frontage improvement for the project. Widening of MacArthur Boulevard will be completed in conjunction with the project. To identify the long range effects of the widening, the 2010 ICUs for intersections along MacArthur Boulevard were analyzed with and without the widening project. The results are summarized in Table R. With implementation of the MacArthur Boulevard widening, all of the intersections operate at acceptable levels of service. Furthermore, in general the improvements were found to significantly improve conditions along MacArthur Boulevard with the most improvements occurring at its intersections with Bison Avenue, Ford Road, and San Miguel Drive, where the peak hour ICUs are reduced up to .30. 2010 Impacts on Adjacent Communities The proposed project will impact traffic and circulation in the adjacent communities of Costa Mesa, Irvine, and Huntington Beach. The significance of these impacts is discussed below. 167 I TABLE Q 2010 PROJECT IMPACTS WITHOUT WITH PROJECT INTERSECTION PROJECT PROJECT CONTRIBUTION 30. Jamboree & Bristol N (PM) 1.046 1.058 .012 32. Jamboree & Bristol S (PM) 1.199 1.210 .011 33. Jamboree & Bay View (PM) .950 .972 .022 38. Jamboree & Ford (PM) .912 .944 .032 Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. M TABLE R MACARTHUR BOULEVARD WIDENING IMPACTS INTERSECTION NO wrm ICU WIDENING WIDENING REDUCTION AM PM AM PM AM PM 37. MacArthur & Bison .83 .87 .62 .78 .21 .09 39. MacArthur & Ford .89 1.01 .59 .83 .30 .18 45. MacArthur & SJH Rd .66 .84 .54 .78 .12 .06 46. MacArthur & San Miguel .96 1.04 .77 .75 .19 .29 49. MacArthur & CH .54 .52 .54 .52 --- --- Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. SJH Rd = San Joaquin Hills Road CH = Coast Highway ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization u 169 II Costa Mesa I The 2010 daily traffic volumes indicate that traffic volume increases due to the project on the City of Costa Mesa street system would be minimal. The largest increases associated with the project to the project would occur on 17th Street west of Irvine Avenue and on Irvine Avenue north of 17th Street. This increase would primarily result from residential and recreational development on the Upper Castaways site. The increase on these two road segments would be less than 1,000 vehicles per day. The project's contribution to the projected daily volumes would be less than five percent. No measurable traffic volume increase is expected to occur on 16th Street or other roadways in the City of Costa Mesa. The measurable increases in peak hour traffic occur in the same locations as daily volumes. Of the project sites, the Upper Castaways project site would be the largest contributor to peak hour traffic volumes in the City of Costa Mesa, generating approximately 130 AM peak hour trips and 160 PM peak hour trips. The only measurable impact affecting an intersection projected to be at capacity would be at the intersection of Orange and 17th where the project contribution would be about one (1) percent. Traffic volumes on 16th Street associated with the project would be less than 30 peak hour trips. These project trips are interacting with locations within the City of Costa Mesa or beyond as trips come to or from the project sites. They are accounted for in the General Plan traffic volume projections for the City of Costa Mesa's General Plan. Since the proposed development on the Castaways site is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan, the related traffic volumes have already been accounted for in long-range traffic studies conducted by both cities. The daily and peak hour traffic volume impacts of the proposed project are not considered significant in the City of Costa Mesa. Irvine The increase in 2010 daily traffic volumes associated with the project in the City of Irvine will be nominal. The largest increase would occur on University Drive east of MacArthur Boulevard where an increase of up to 1,000 vehicles per day assdciated with the project could occur. The project contribution to daily traffic volumes would be less than four (4) percent. No measurable traffic volume increase is expected to occur on other roadways within the City of Irvine. Increased in peak hour traffic due to the project would be similar, occurring primarily on University Drive. The project's contribution to the ICU values on University Drive at California and Campus Drive would be less than one percent. These project trips are interacting. with locations within the City of Irvine or beyond as trips are generated to or from the project sites. The proposed development is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan. The related traffic volumes have already been accounted for in long-range traffic studies conducted by both cities. The daily and peak hour 170 I- i traffic volumes impacts of the proposed project are not considered significant in the City of Irvine. Huntington Beach The traffic volume contributions of the proposed project are not measurable on roadways in the City of Huntington Beach. No project specific traffic impacts are anticipated in the City of Huntington Beach. Special Circulation System Issues Circulation system changes in adjacent communities could modify the impacts or create new project impacts. Two analyses of the 2010 circulation system were conducted to evaluate these potential impacts. One was to identify how the deletion of Culver Drive from the Master Plan of Arterial Highways between Bonita Canyon Road and Newport Center Drive at the SJHTC could effect the results of the traffic study. The other analysis examined how deleting San Joaquin Hills Road from the Master Plan of Arterial Highways, between Newport Coast Drive and Sand Canyon Avenue would effect the results of the traffic study. City of Irvine - Culver Drive Deletion The extension of Culver Drive as an arterial from Bonita Canyon Drive to Newport Coast Drive at the SJHTC is not included in the City of Irvine's Circulation Element although it is designated on the County's Master Plan of Arterial Highways. The major change due to deleting this arterial from the 2010 circulation system network, is a diversion of trips from the deleted link to the SJHTC between Newport Coast Drive and Ford Road and to Bonita Canyon Drive north of the SJHTC. A revised peak hour traffic analysis assuming this deletion was accomplished (Appendix B). Traffic generated by the project is not projected to use this section of Culver Drive. Deletion of this link from the planned circulation system does not change the findings of the traffic study relative to the proposed project. No project related impacts are anticipated. San Joaquin Hills Road Deletion Deletion of San Joaquin Hills Road between Newport Coast Drive and the SJHTC from the Master Plan of Arterial Highways affects accessibility to and from the SJHTC. It largely results in a diversion of trips to Newport Coast Drive north of San Joaquin Hills Road. Volumes on the remaining segment of San Joaquin Hills Road are reduced by around 4,000 vehicles per day with minor increases on Ford Road and San Miguel Drive. A revised peak hour traffic analysis assuming this deletion was accomplished (Appendix B). Traffic generated by the project is not projected to use this section of San Joaquin Hills Road. Deletion of this link from the planned circulation system does not change the findings 171 '1I, of the traffic study relative to the proposed project. No project related impacts are anticipated. Circulation Plans Circulation Element The project proposes no amendments to the Master Plan of Arterial Highways and is in compliance with (actually proposing less intensity of land use than is allowed on the subject parcels) the Land Use portion of the General Plan. Furthermore, the project complies with Circulation Element relative to the implementation of roadway improvements through its proposal to not only implement frontage improvements through its proposal to not only implement frontage improvements and pay the Fair Share Fees, but to advance the payment of funds to the City to implement important Circulation System improvements. Therefore, the proposed project is deemed to be in compliance with the Circulation Element of the General Plan and, in fact provides additional benefits by 1) reducing the originally anticipated levels of land use (elimination of uses on San Diego Creek North and Jamboree/MacArthur) in an area having several intersections identified in the General Plan as projected to exceed capacity; and 2) advancing the payment of Fair Share Fees and loaning an additional increment of money for roadway improvements in order to provide a better implementation program than called for in the Circulation Element. Traffic Phasing Ordinance A TPO analysis was conducted for this project for the years 1995 and 2000. Assumptions regarding the circulation system network, phasing of land uses, and trip generation are the same as those outlined earlier in the section except in the case of the Net Benefit Analysis. The full analysis is contained in Appendix B. The conclusions of the analysis are summarized in the following paragraphs. 1995 TPO Analysis Table S summarizes the ICU values for each affected- intersection for: 1995 - without the project; 1995 - with the project; and, 1995 - with the project and with potential circulation system improvements. The 1995 analysis addresses that portion of the project that is assumed to be builtby 1995. (See Land Use and Circulation Improvement Phasing above). The data indicate that of the 51 intersections affected by the project, eight will operate with peak hour deficiencies with or without the inclusion of traffic generated by the project. Five (5) of these intersections will experience an increase in ICU values due to the project. Project traffic will cause the ICU value at one additional intersection to increase over .90. 172 r amtft"ago go vftfirTMWS�1=00 4WIM maim M am 1995 TPO ICU SUMMARY (PROJECT IMPACT OF 1 PERCENT OR MORE) EXISTING 1995 NO PROJECT 1995 WITH PROJECT 1995 WITH PROJECT & DRROVEMENTS INTERSECTION AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM IMPROVEMENT 2. Superior & CH .68 .65 .67 .72 .67 .72 - - None required. 3. Newport & Hospital .54 .67 .66 1.07 .66 1.08 .66 .88 Restripe EBT to shared thru/right, Second NBL 7. Riverside & CH .82 .90 .92 1.03 .93 1.03 .88 .89 Additional southbound shared thru/right. 8. Tustin & CH .67 .58 .74 .64 .75 .65 - - None required. 9. MacArthur & Campus .62 .78 .65 .85 .65 .87 - -- None required. 10. MacArthur & Birch .42 Al .53 .44 .54 .44 - - None required. 11. Von Karman & Campus .50 .57 .60 .70 .60 .71 - - None required. •12. MacArthur & Von .34 .46 36 .51 37 .51 - - None required. Karman 13. Jamboree & Campus .74 .60 1.01 .80 1.01 .80 .87 .77 Restripe WB approach from 1 Left & 2 thrus to 15 Lefts & 15 thrus. 14. Jamboree & Birch 53 .47 .60 .67 .60 .68 - - None required. 15. Campus & Bristol N .80 .99 .71 .92 .71 .92 .71 .92 None feasible by 1995. 17. Campus & Bristol S .82 .60 .83 .68 .83 .69 - - None required. 18. Birch & Bristol S .81 .56 .88 .88 .89 .89 - - None required. 19. Irvine & Mesa .98 1.04 1.07 1.10 1.07 1.11 .82 .89 Third NET & Thad SBT 20. Irvine & University .96 .84 .73 .57 .73 59 - - None required. 21. Irvine & Santiago22nd .88 .86 .84 .88 .85 .89 -- - None required. 22. Irvine & Highland20th .74 .76 .68 .73 .69 .75 - - None required. 23. Irvine & Dover/19th .79 .73 .75 .75 .77 .77 - - None required. Continued: 173 TABLE S (CONrD) 1995 TOP ICU SUMMARY (PROJECT IMPACT OF 1 PERCENT OR MORE) INTERSECTION AM EXISTING PM 1995 NO PROJECT AM PM 1995 VffM PROJECr AM PM 1995 WTTH PROJECT' & IMPROVfWNTS AM PM IMPROVEMENT 24. Irvine & Westcliff/17th .79 .97 .81 .91 .81 .92 .65 .80 Second EBL 25. Dover & Westcliif AS .45 52 .45 53 .47 - - None required. 26. Dover & 16th .47 54 54 .59 56 59 - - None required. 27. Dover/Bayshore & CH .68 .68 .80 .84 SO .85 - - None required. 28. Bayside & CH .83 .73 .80 .77 .80 .78 - - None required. 29. MacArthur & Jamboree .48 59 56 .67 57 .67 - - None required. 30. Jamboree & Bristol N .65 .72 1.07 1.03 1.08 1.04 .64 .68 Restripe NB approach from 1 Left & 4 thrus to 2 lefts and 3 thrus. 32- Jamboree & Bristol S S7 .76 .81 .82 .83 .83 - - None required 33. Jamboree & Bay View - - 37 58 38 .60 - - None required 34. Jamboree & University .70 .69 .74 .88 .77 .93 .70 .83 Fourth NBT 35. Jamboree & Bison 58 54 .65 .64 .67 .66 - - None required 36. MacArthur & Newport 1.10 .99 .66 .86 .66 .87 - - None required Coast 37. MacArthur & Bison 1.00 .74 59 59 .60 .59 - - None required. 38, Jamboree & Ford 56 57 59 .69 .62 .71 - - None required. 39. MacArthur & Ford .87 .74 .77 .70 .78 .70 - - None required 40. Jamboree & SJH Rd 52 .48 .66 .60 .69 .61 - - None required 41. Jamboree & Santa .47 56 .63 .65 .64 .66 - - None required Barbara 42. Jamboree & CH .72 64 .76 .64 .78 .67 - - None required. 43. Santa Cruz & SJH Rd 30 37 36 .43 36 .43 - - None required Continued: 174 No' An, 00, *a,r a if r so 1995 TOP ICU SUMMARY (PROJECT IMPACT OF 1 PERCENT OR MORE) EXISTING 1995 NO PROJECT' 1995 WITH PROJECT' 1995 WrM PROJECT' &IMPROVEMENTS B41F SECHON AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM IMPROWMENr 44. Santa Rosa & SJH Rd .29 .42 .32 .40 32 .43 - - None required. 45. MacArthur & SJH Rd .67 .80 .59 .72 .61 .73 - - None required. 46. MacArthur & San Miguel .73 .86 .70 .83 .71 .84 - - None required. 48. Avocado & CH .53 .68 .63 .58 .63 .60 - - None required. 49. MacArthur & CH .53 .68 .52 .60 .52 .60 - - None required. 50. San Miguel & SJH Rd .50 .43 .48 .44 .48 .44 - - None required. 51. Goldenrod & CH .91 .82 .77 .69 .77 .70 - - None required. 52. Marguerite & SJH Rd .54 .68 .44 .39 .44 .40 - --- None required. 53. Marguerite & CH .85 .95 .77 .76 .78 .77 -- - None required 54. Poppy & CH .90 .93 .63 .64 .63 .64 - -- None required 58. Newport Coast & CH --- --- AO .68 .40 .68 - --- None required 59. Spyglass Hill & SJH Rd -- - 30 21 32 .22 - - None required 60. San Miguel & Spyglass --- - .15 .17 .15 .18 - - None required. Hill 65. Newport Coast & SJH - - .48 .62 .48 .63 - - None required. Rd Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Note: Columns 3 through 6 assume committed improvements for the 1995 circulation system described in the teed. Columns 7 and 8 assume potential improvements that could be implemented to mitigate project impacts and improve level of service. 175 I Of these seven deficient intersections which are associated with this project under TPO criteria, each can be improved to an acceptable level of service with circulation improvements. These improvements are also listed on Table S. ' 2000 TPO Analysis Table T summarizes the ICU values for each affected intersection for: 2000 - without the project; 2000 - with the project; and, 2000 - with the project and with potential circulation system improvements. The 2600 analysis addresses that portion of the project that is assumed to be built after 1995 and by the year 2000 (The entire project is expected to be complete by the year 2000). The data indicates that only one intersection is affected by buildout of the remaining portions of the project. Beyond this intersection project traffic disperses and is well below the one percent threshold. This intersection, Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara, will operate at an acceptable level of service with and without project traffic. No improvements are required by the TPO. TPO Net Benefit Analysis Table U summarizes the results of the net benefit analysis. The analysis addressed all intersections within the study area having an ICU of .90 or more with project -related traffic. The following explains the content of the table: Column 1- No Project, No Improvements - This column shows future ICU values which assume that no construction of the project or related improvements had occurred. Data given here differs from the Year-2000 "No Project" data given in the previous chapter since it portrays a total "No Project" condition for Year-2000. (The difference being that the "No Project" data for Year-2000 in the previous chapter included the portion of the project assumed to be completed by 1995.) Column 2 - Project Impact - The total project contribution to the ICU values at individual intersections. Column 3 - With Project, No Improvements - Future ICU values with construction of �l the project, but assuming that no improvements related to the project are constructed (Column 1 plus Column 2). 1 Column 4 - With Project, With Improvements - Future ICU values considering impacts from construction of the project also including construction of the improvements -related to the project (as further described in the discussion of Column 6). 176 I I sip aw i am" M UK 7o in MR M M M TABLE T 2000 TOP ICU SUMMARY (PROJECT IMPACT OF 1 PERCENT OR MORE) MUSTING 2000 NO PROJECT 2000 WPIII PROJECT 2000 WTIYI PROJECT & BAPROVEMENTS INTERSECTION AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM BKPROVEMENT 41. Jamboree & Santa Barbara .47 .56 .66 .72 .67 .74 — — None required. Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Notes: 1. The "2000 No -Project" includes the first phase of project development anticipated to be constructed by 1995. The "20W with -project" includes the remaining uses to be constructed between 1995 and 2000. 2. Columns 2 through 6 assume committed improvements for the 1995 circulation system described in the text. Columns 7 and 8 assume potential improvements that could be implemented to mitigate project impacts and improve level of service. 177 TABLE U NET BENEFIT TO CIRCULATION SYSTEM DUE TO THE PROJECT (YEAR 2000) INTERSECTION 1. NO PROJECT NO IWROV1?MEN1S AM PM 2. PROJECT- IMPACT AM PM & WITH 4. W IH PROTECT PROJECT NO WITH IWROVFAEN'1S 1WROVEMENTS AM PM AM PM S. ICU NET CHANGE AM PM & PROJECT IWROVEMBNIS 7. Riverside & CH .99 1.13 .02 .01 1.01 1.14 .90 .88 .09 .25 Separate SBR 9. MacArthur & Campus .64 1.11 .02 .01 .66 1.12 .66 1.12 -.02 -.01 No Direct Improvements. 13. Jamboree & Campus .92 .74 .00 .00 .92 .74 .92 .74 .00 .00 No Direct Improvements. 15. Campus & Bristol N .78 1.05 .01 .00 .79 1.05 .79 1.05 -.01 .00 No Direct Improvements. 16. Birch & Bristol N .73 1.04 -00 .00 .73 1.04 .73 1.04 .00 .00 No Direct Improvements. 17. Campus & Bristol S .93 .97 .00 .00 .93 .97 .93 .97 .00 .00 No Direct Improvements. 18. Birch & Bristol S .62 .92 .OD .01 .72 .93 .62 .93 .00 -.01 No Direct Improvements. 19. Irvine & Mesa .69 1.00 .01 .00 .70 1.00 .70 1.00 -.01 .00 No Direct Improvements. 20. Irvine & University .70 .89 .01 .00 .71 .89 .71 .89 -.01 .00 No Direct Improvements. 24. Irvine & WestdiK/17th .82 .93 .01 .01 .83 .94 .63 .85 .19 .08 Second EBL. 27. Dover & Bayshore/CH .96 .89 .01 .01 97 .90 97 .90 -.01 -.01 No Direct Improvements. 28. Bayside & CH .95 .84 .01 .00 .96 .84 .96 .84 -.01 .00 No Direct Improvements. 29. MacArthur & Jamboree .78 IN .02 .00 .80 1.04 .80 1.04 -.02 .00 No Direct Improvements. 34. Jamboree & University .88 1.27 .03 .05 .91 132 .72 .97 .16 30 Second SBL, Fourth NBT. 35. Jamboree & Bison .94 .89 .03 .03 .97 .92 .97 .92 03 03 No Direct Improvements. 37. MacArthur & Bison .95 .94 .00 .01 .95 .95 .77 .84 .18 .10 Second NBL, Fourth NBT. 39. MacArthur & Ford 1.03 1.01 .01 .01 1.04 1.02 .66 .84 37 .17 Fourth NBT, Fourth SBT, Second WBL 45. MacArthur & SJH Rd .79 .94 .00 .00 .79 .94 55 .88 .24 .06 Third SBT, Separate WBR 46. MacArthur & San .94 1.04 .01 .00 .95 1.04 .73 .73 .21 31 Third NBT Third SBT, Miguel Second WILL Total ICU reduction to the Circulation System with the project (Net Benefit) 132 1.21 Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization N = North SJH Rd = San Joaquin Hills Road SBL = South Bound Left SBT = South Bound Through CH = Coast Highway S = South EBL = East Bound Left NBT = North Bound Through WBT = West Bound Through 178 a so 00""a '3 *mu"N AWSM"M Im 1W D i m Column 5 - ICU Net Change - The change in the future ICU at individual intersections as the result of considering construction of both the project and the potential improvements given in the table. This data represents the difference between the "No Project, No Improvements" data and the "With Project, With Improvements" data (Column 1 minus Column 4). Column 6 - Project Improvements - A listing of the possible circulation improvements that could be expected to be implemented given the level of financial assistance required of the project under terms of the Development Agreement, and which were used here in the net benefit ICU calculations. For Column 5, a positive "ICU net change" indicates that the project with implementation of the circulation improvements allowed for by the level of funding required in the Development Agreement has provided intersection capacity which exceeds the amount used by the project. A negative change indicates that the project has used capacity that is not replaced to the pre -project level. Overall, the circulation improvements used in this example result in a cumulative net benefit to the circulation system. There is a total ICU reduction of 1.32 in the AM peak hour and 1.21 in the PM peak hour. Congestion Management Compliance (CMP) The proposed project was analyzed in relation to the Congestion Management Program (CMP), administered by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). The CMP is a requirement for recurring gas tax revenues available to local jurisdictions since the passage of Proposition 111 in June 1990. The complete analysis is contained in Appendix B. The analysis concluded that the additional trips generated by the project will not cause any link or intersection designated on the CMP system to exceed the accepted level of service. Furthermore, on those segments of the CMP system within Newport Beach that already do or are projected to exceed the acceptable level of service, the amount of project traffic was not significant enough to be considered impactive under CMP criteria. Also project traffic will not impact the portions of the CMP system outside Newport Beach. MITIGATION MEASURES 2. The City shall prepare a circulation improvement monitoring program to direct expenditures of funds received under the Development Agreement to make improvements and to monitor .the status of those improvements. The list of improvements to be implemented shall initially be based on those identified on Table V, with prioritization established based on technical need and ability to implement them in a timely manner. Flexibility to add or delete projects on the list should be 179 I TABLE V INITIAL LIST OF CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENTS Intersection Riverside and Coast Highway Irvine and Westcliff/17th Jamboree and University MacArthur and Ford MacArthur and San Joaquin Hills Road MacArthur and San Miguel Source: Austin -Foust Associates Improvement Separate Southbound Right Turn Lane Second Eastbound Left Turn Lane Second Southbound Left Turn Lane Fourth Northbound Thru Lane Fourth Southbound Thru Lane Third Southbound Thru Lane Third Northbound Thru Lane Third Southbound Thru Lane Second Westbound Left Turn Lane Ell J maintained to respond to actual changes in traffic volumes and the ability of the City to accomplish improvements so long as the projected Net Benefit to the circulation I system is maintained. Thereafter, a review of the improvements' priority and implementation status shall be done in conjunction with the City's annual Congestion Management Program and Growth Management Program analysis and the annual review of the Development Agreement. 3. The applicant or successor in interest shall construct or post bond for all frontage improvements identified in the Development Agreement and listed in Table B of the Program EIR. LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE Project -Specific and Cumulative The proposed project and past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects will impact traffic and circulation as analyzed in the years 1995, 2000, and 2010 in the City of Newport Beach. The impact that will occur is an increase in daily and peak hour traffic volumes. The proposed project will have a minor impact on the circulation system in adjacent communities. The proposed project will have a cumulative impact on adopted circulation plans and policies in the community. Finally, site access will impact immediately adjacent streets. Based upon City's criteria: Impacts on daily traffic volumes in the City of Newport Beach are considered to be insignificant. Traffic impacts on the adjacent cities of Costa Mesa, Irvine, and Huntington Beach are considered to be insignificant. No mitigation is necessary. ' No significant project -specific impacts related to the City of Newport Beach Circulation Element were identified. Additionally, the project as proposed meets the requirements of the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) and the Congestion Management Program. IJ ,I The proposed project and past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects will impact peak hour traffic volumes. Mitigation measures have been proposed to reduce or eliminate project -specific impacts in the years 1995, 2000, and 2010. Based upon City, of Newport Beach criteria and flexibility permitted under the TPO and mitigation measures, project -specific impacts were not found to be significant. However, the analyses did find that the project would add measurable traffic to several intersections in the airport area which are already identified as tending to exceed the City's ICU criteria with or without the project. This additional traffic in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects is considered a significant cumulative adverse impact. 181 IN I I AIR QUALITY IEXISTING CONDITIONS The following description of existing air quality is a summary of a report prepared by the Air quality engineering firm Mestre Greve Associates. The complete report is included in Appendix C of Volume II of this document. Climate The project site is located in the South Coast Air Basin of California, a 6,600-square-mile area encompassing Orange County and non -desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. The South Coast Air Basin has the worst air pollution problem in the nation. The climate around the project area, as with all of Southern California, is controlled largely by the strength and position of the subtropical high pressure cell over the Pacific Ocean. It maintains moderate temperatures and comfortable humidities, and limits precipitation to I a few storms during the winter "wet" season. Temperatures are normally mild with rare extremes above 100 degrees Fahrenheit or below freezing. The annual mean temperature in and around the Southern California area is approximately 62 degrees Fahrenheit. Winds in the project area are almost always driven by the dominant land/sea breeze circulation system. Regional wind pattems are dominated by daytime on -shore sea breezes. At night the wind generally slows and reverses direction, flowing towards the sea. Wind direction is altered by local canyons, with wind tending to flow parallel to the canyons. The frequency of calm winds (less than two miles per hour) is less than ten percent. There is little stagnation in the project vicinity, especially during busy daytime traffic hours. Southern California has frequent temperature inversions which inhibit the dispersion of pollutants. Inversions may be either ground based or elevated. Ground based inversions, sometimes referred to as radiation inversions, are most severe during clear cold early winter mornings. Under conditions of a ground based inversion, very little mixing or turbulence occurs. High concentrations of primary pollutants may occur near major roadways. Elevated inversions can be generated by a variety of meteorological phenomena. Elevated inversions act as a lid or upper boundary and restrict vertical mixing. Below the elevated inversion dispersion is not restricted. Mixing heights for elevated inversions are lower in the summer and more persistent. This low summer inversion puts a lid over the South Coast Air Basin and is responsible for the high levels of ozone observed during summer months in the air basin. 182 I Air Quality Management I The proposed project is located in the South Coast Air Basin. Air quality management in Newport Beach is the responsibility of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB). The SCAQMD sets and enforces regulations for stationary sources in the basin. The CARB is charged with controlling motor vehicle emissions. In 1987 Senate Bill 151 became law. It gave the SCAQMD significantly increased authority. The law instructs the SCAQMD to develop new transportation control measures and to develop rules for indirect sources. Indirect sources are shopping centers, stadiums, and facilities which attract a large number of vehicles. The SCAQMD is also required to develop further programs and regulations that will increase ride sharing and limit heavy-duty truck traffic on freeways during rush hours. The SCAQMD, in coordination with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), has developed an Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the South Coast Air Basin. The South Coast Air Basin has been designated as a non -attainment area for ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide and suspended particulates. Attainment of all federal and state ozone and particulate matter (PMta) health standards as adopted by the District Board is to occur no later than December 31, 2007. For nitrogen dioxide and carbon monoxide, the deadlines are December 31, 1996, and December 31, 1997, respectively. The Draft 1991 AQMP consists of three plans; the Growth Management Plan, Regional Mobility Plan, and Air Quality Management Plan. The fact that the Draft 1991 AQMP contains a section called the Air Quality Management Plan is, perhaps, a cause for confusion. This is, however, the manner in which SCAG and SCAQMD have chosen to present the 1991 AQMP. The Air Quality Management Plan, as incorporated in the 1991 AQMP, contains transportation, land use, and energy conservation measures. The Growth Management Plan aims at local governments directing the locations of some future housing and future employment to bring about a more beneficial balance of jobs and shelter within subregional areas. No existing housing or employment would be affected. The plan would affect only 4.2 percent of new homes and 9.5 percent of new jobs. Development of job opportunities in San Bernardino, Riverside, and Ventura Counties would be encouraged. Housing opportunities are encouraged for the Los Angeles Central Business District, the vicinity of Los Angeles International Airport, and Orange County. The Draft 1991 AQMP was adopted locally on July 121991. Approval by the California Air Resources Board (GARB) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) is pending. Once this occurs it will be included in the State Implementation Plan (SIP). It will then serve as the framework for all future air pollution control efforts in the South Coast Air Basin. The Draft 1991 AQMP supersedes the 1989 AQMP revision that was adopted locally by the SCAQMD on March 17, 1989 and by GARB ,in August 1989. 183 I I The SCAQMD is authorized to implement the first stage (Tier I) of the plan involving 67 of the plan's 123 rules. The state and the SCAQMD are proceeding with rule making that will accomplish the bulk of emission reductions expected in Tier I. The AQMP has been submitted to the U.S. EPA. In developing the 1991 AQMP, all the potential control measures that could be available by ■ the year 2007 were identified and, to the extent possible, their emission reductions were quantified. These control measures were categorized into three tiers, based upon their ' readiness for implementation. Tier I of the AQMP identifies currently available control technology that can be put into use in the near future. These types of technology mostly apply to stationary sources and will be required by the SCAQMD. Also contained in Tier I are motor vehicle emissions standards that will be administered by the CARB. Programs that will require reduced emissions from sources that are under Federal jurisdiction are also accommodated in the AQMP's Tier I. Transportation and land use controls and energy conservation measures are also included to the extent that technology is available to accomplish the emissions reduction targets: Tier I control measures are expected to be implemented by 1993 except for facility construction which may continue up to 2007. The proposed Tier II control strategy is composed mostly of extensions or more stringent application of Tier I control measures. It will be necessary, according to the AQMP, to develop "regulatory intervention" to force the development of emissions reducing technology in order for the Tier II goals to be met. Achievement of Tier III goals is dependent upon "aggressive expansion of Tier II research and development efforts." These goals are not expected to be achieved for many years as they will rely upon substantial technological breakthroughs. California Clean Air Act The California Clean Air Act (CCAA 1988) requires all local air pollution control districts in the State to submit a revised air quality strategy to the CARB. The key goal of the act is to reduce the sources of air pollution that contribute to smog. The CCAA requires that all areas that fail to meet clean air standards must reduce pollutant emissions by five percent each year, or if this attainment level is not feasible, then emissions must be reduced by the best available control technology so as to meet Federal and State standards as soon as practical. Ambient Air Oualitv Standards Ambient air quality standards (AAQS) are the levels of air quality considered safe, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect public health and welfare. National AAQS were established in 1971 for six pollutants with states retaining the option to add other pollutants, 184 I I require more stringent compliance, or to include different exposure periods. Because California had established AAQS before the federal action and because of unique air quality problems introduced by the restrictive dispersion meteorology, there is considerable difference between state and national clean air standards. Monitored Air Ouality I Existing levels of ambient air quality and historical trends and projections in the project area , are documented from measurements made by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and by the California Air Resources Board (CARS). All project sites are located in the SCAQMD's Source 'Receptor Area 18. There is no monitoring station located in this receptor area. The nearest air monitoring stations operated by the SCAQMD are in El Toro and Costa Mesa. The data collected at these stations are considered to be representative of the air quality experienced in the vicinity of the project sites. Air quality data for 1985 through 1990 for the El Toro station is provided in Table W. Air quality data from the Costa Mesa station is provided in Table X. The air quality data indicate that ozone is the air pollutant of primary concern in the project I! area. Ozone is a secondary pollutant; it is not directly emitted. Ozone is the result of the chemical reactions of other pollutants, most importantly hydrocarbons and nitrogen dioxide, in the presence of bright sunlight. Pollutants emitted from upwind cities react during transport downwind to produce the oxidant concentrations experienced in the project area. All areas of the South Coast Air Basin contribute to the ozone levels experienced at El Toro, with the more significant areas being those directly upwind. Particulates levels in the area are due to natural sources, grading operations and motor vehicles. The California State standard for total.suspended particulates has been redefined to particles less than 10 micro -meters aerodynamic diameter (PMto). Particulate data indicates that particulates exceeded the State and Federal standards much of the time each year. Carbon monoxide standards have not been exceeded in the last six years. Levels of these pollutants are attributable primarily to automobile traffic. Nitrogen dioxide is not monitored at the El Toro station. IMPACTS According to Appendix G of CEQA, a project will have a significant effect if criteria air pollutant emission levels would cause violations of any ambient air quality standard, contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation, or expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. 185 I III TABLE W AIR QUALITY 1985 - 1990 EL TORO MARINE STATION Pollutant California Standard National Standard Year Maximum Level Days State Standard Exceeded Days Federal Standard Exceeded Ozone 0.1 ppm for 1 0.12 ppm 1990 .19 32 11 hr. for 1 hr. 1989 .23 30 7 1988 .21 41 18 1987 .20 36 16 1986 .23 38 12 1985 .28 61 30 PM10 50 ug/m3 for 150 ug/m3 1990 88 16 (29.1%) 0 (0%) 24 hr. for 24 hr. 1989 88 20(33%) 0 (0%) 1988 97 11 (18%) 0 (0%) 1987 107 15(2517.) 0 (0%) 1986 109 5 (8%) 0 (0%) 1985 100 22 (37%) 0 (0%) CO 35 ppm for 1 20 ppm for 1990 9 0 0 hour 1 hour 1989 9 0 0 1988 10 0 0 1987 8 0 0 1986 7 0 0 1985 10 0 0 CO 9 ppm for 8 9 ppm for 8 1990 5.6 0 0 hours hours 1989 5.1 0 0 1998 5.1 0 0 1987 6.3 0 0 1986 N.R. 0 0 1985 N.R. 0 0 Sulfates 25 ug1m3 for 1990 13.4 0 NA 24 hours 1989 16.5 0 NA 1988 16.2 0 NA 1987 14.3 0 NA 1986 14.9 0 NA 1985 21.2 0 NA Source: Mestre Greve Associates. NOTES: 1. SO2 and NO2 were not monitored at the El Toro Station. Other stations that do monitor S02 and NO2 are too far away to be an accurate indicator of levels in this area. 2. PM10 data is not monitored 365 days a year. It is sampled approximately once every three days. The percentage in the parentheses is the percent of days monitored that the standard was exceeded. 3. The 1990 data presented for sulfates is incomplete. Sulfate monitoring at this station has been discontinued. 4. N.R. - Not Reported. , TABLE X AIR QUALITY 1985-1990 COSTA MESA STATION Pollutant California National Year Maximum Days State Days Standard Standard Level Standard Federal Exceeded Standard Exceeded Ozone 0.1 ppm for 0.12 ppm 1990 .15 12 3 1 hr. for 1 hr. 1989 .11 1988 .15 2 15 0 2 , 1987 .16 23 2 1986 .17 24 10 CO 35 ppm for 20 ppm 1990 13 0 0 1 hr. for 1 hr. 1989 16 0 0 1988 16 0 0 1987 12 0 0 1986 15 0 0 CO 9 ppm for 9 ppm for 1990 10.7 5 4 8 hrs. 8 hrs. 1989 12.7 8 5 1988 11.6 3 2 1987 8.4 0 0 1986 N.R. 3 3 NO2 .25 ppm AAM of 1990 .22 0 0 for 1 hr. 0.0534 1989 .22 0 0 ppm 1988 .26 1987 .19 1 0 0 0 1986 .20 0 0 Source: Mestre Greve Associates. NOTES: 1. PM10 and sulfates are not monitored at the Costa Mesa station. 2. The 1989 data for all pollutants at the Costa Mesa station is incomplete and may not be representative. 3. State and Federal standards for SOx have not been exceeded for the last five years at the Costa Mesa station. 4. NO2 Federal standard is In terms of Annual Arithmetic Mean (AAM). Maximum concentration for this pollutant is reported above in terms of a one hour level as applies to the State standard. 5. N.R. - Not Reported. 187 I ' For the purposes of this EIR, actions that violate federal standards, for criteria pollutants (i.e. primary standards designed to safe -guard the health of people considered to be sensitive receptors while outdoors) and secondary standards designed to safeguard human welfare, or state standards developed by CARB or SCAQMD are considered significant adverse impacts. The proposed project will impact air quality through increased vehicular (mobile source) emissions. Mobile source impacts occur basically on two scales of motion. Regionally, movement of goods and materials, employee commuting and office business activities will add to basinwide trip generation and increase vehicle miles traveled (VMT) within the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Locally, project traffic will be added to the local roadway system. ' The proposed project will also impact air quality through temporary emissions of dusts and fumes during project construction, increased fossil -fuel combustion in power plants and heaters, boilers, stoves and other energy consuming devices, evaporative emissions at gas stations or from paints, thinners or solvents used in construction and maintenance or light industrial uses, increased air travel from business travelers, dust from tire wear and re- suspended roadway dust, etc. Construction Impacts The proposed project will impact air quality during construction. This is considered a project specific short -,term impact at individual sites, that will occur over an estimated 10 year timeframe. Fugitive dust, and to a lesser extent combustion pollutants from heavy equipment, are the primary project construction air quality impacts. Equipment and vehicles generate particulate matter (dust) during clearing, earthmoving, grading and other site preparation activities. Wind erosion also produces "fugitive" dust when earth surfaces are left exposed due to construction activities. A temporary increase in dustfall will be incurred with construction activities, and create an increase in total suspended particulates (TSP), near the project site. Construction activities for large development projects are estimated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors") to add 1.2 tons of fugitive dust per acre of soil disturbed per month of activity. This value depends w on soil moisture content, silt content, wind speed, and other factors. The completion date,of the project is currently unspecified, but completion will probably occur in 10 years. The amount of land within the project that will be subject to grading activity is 160 acres. This quantity of land, if graded all at once, typically takes approximately six months to grade. However, different portions of the project will be graded at different times over the 10 period. The above factors result in an estimate of 576 tons 188 r I of particulate emissions released during grading of the project sites. Averaged over the 10 year construction phase of the project, this results in an average of 0.16 tons per day of particulate matter released due to grading. Calculations estimate that during peak periods of grading, the fugitive dust emissions could reach 3.16 tons per day. Because the project will require a cumulative period of six months to grade, this is the daily emission rate that would exist if the entire project were graded in a single, continuous six month period. This is a small amount compared to the 87 tons per day of particulate matter currently released in Orange County. These impacts due to grading will be very localized. The material Will be inert silicates, rather than the complex organic particulate matter released from combustion sources which are more harmful to health. Dust generated by such activities usually becomes more of a ' local nuisance than a serious health problem. In some cases, grading may be adjacent to existing residential development (e.g. Upper Castaways, Freeway Reservation). In these ' locations, grading activities could cause short-term nuisance impacts to local residents which may be perceived as significant by some individuals. Heavy-duty equipment emissions are to difficult to quantify because of day-to-day variability in construction activities and equipment Used. A diesel powered grader is the most common equipment used for grading operations. For this type of project 10 pieces of heavy equipment may be expected to operate at one time. The emission rates that were used in this report for construction equipment were obtained from the SCAQMD Air Quality Handbook. If all of the equipment operated for eight hours per day the following emissions would result; 72 pounds per day of carbon monoxide, 190 pounds per day of nitrogen oxides, 15 pounds per day of hydrocarbons, 23 pounds per day of sulfur oxides, and approximately 18 pounds per day of particulate matter. The emissions generated by construction equipment are minor, Tong -Term Reaional Air Quality The main source of regional emissions generated by the project will be from motor vehicles. Other emissions will be generated from the combustion of natural gas for'space heating and the generation of electricity. Emissions will also be generated by the use of natural gas and oil for the generation of electricity off -site. Stationary Source Impacts The proposed project will impact air quality by the addition of emissions generated on -site by the combustion of natural gas for space and water heating. Emissions factors were obtained from the 1987 South Coast Air Quality Management District's Air Quality Handbook. Projections of emissions are presented in Table Y and calculations are provided in Appendix C of Volume II of this report. I 189 1 r TABLE Y EMISSIONS FROM THE COMBUSTION OF NATURAL GAS Pollutant Emissions (Lbs./Day) Carbon Monoxide 3.79 Nitrogen Oxides 16.15 Sulfur Oxides 0.00 Particulates 0.03 Total Hydrocarbons 1.00 Reactive Hydrocarbons 1.00 Source: Mestre Greve Associates. TABLE Z EMISSIONS GENERATED BY ELECTRICAL USAGE Pollutant Emissions (Lbs./Day) Carbon Monoxide 4.28 Nitrogen Oxides 24.60 Sulfur Oxides 2.57 Particulates 0.86 Total Hydrocarbons 0.21 Reactive Hydrocarbons 0.21 Source: Mestre Greve Associates. 190 The proposed project will impact air quality by the addition of off -site emissions will be , generated due to electrical consumption. Projections of emissions generated for production of electricity are presented in Table Z and calculations are presented in Appendix C of Volume II of this report. Vehicular Impacts The proposed project will impact air quality through increased vehicular emissions from mobile sources. Mobile source emissions will be generated from the office employees, retail customers, and site residents. The project will generate 88,080 vehicle miles traveled daily. Project trip generation is assumed to be "worst -case" for the proposed levels of development since allowances were not made for any trip reduction that may occur as a result of , implementation of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs in the City. Estimates were made of the vehicular emissions that would be generated by the project. Emission factors are based on the EMFAC7C Program developed by CARB. Project generated traffic will add approximately .58 tons of carbon monoxide (CO), 0.11 tons of nitrogen oxides (NO,), 0.02 tons of sulfur oxides, .03 tons of particulates (PMto), 0.05 tons of total hydrocarbons, and 0.04 tons of reactive hydrocarbons per day. The project represents a substantial new source of automotive emissions. An average vehicle speed of 25 miles per hour was assumed for the projections. The output for emissions estimates are , provided in Appendix C. Total Regional Emissions , The main source of emissions generated by the proposed project will be from motor vehicles. Other emissions will be generated by the combustion of natural gas for space heating, the generation of electricity, and various uses that are not yet defined or quantified. Emissions generated by the project are compared to emissions for Orange County in Table AA. The total emissions generated by the project are presented in the first line in Table AA. Orange County emissions are for the year 2010 and were derived from baseline emissions provided by SCAQMD. Emissions reductions due to mitigation strategies contained in the 1991 AQMP were then applied to the baseline assumptions. Increases in all pollutants when compared to Orange County emissions will be less than 0.6 percent. No significant changes in the regional or sub -regional air quality are expected with implementation of the proposed project. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Short-term construction related emissions are negligible and highly localized. These emissions will not contribute to a significant cumulative impact when considered in conjunction with all other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects. 191 7 L = m an= w m m M M M w w A! M M= M M TABLE AA COMPARISON OF Containment CO NOa SOa Part. TOG ROG Emissions Per Day Project Emissions (Lb/Day) 1174.13 261.14 ' 50.65 54.58 105.40 93.98 Orange Co. (Ton/Day) 299.91 66.63 4.62 145.6 58.55 35.81 1987 Receptor #18 (Ton/Day) 215.51 38.17 N/A N/A N/A 38.60 Project Emissions as a Percent of Regional Emissions Percent of County Emissions 0.20% 0.20% 0.55% 0.02% 0.09% 0.13% Percent of Receptor Area 18 6.27% 0.34% N/A N/A N/A 0.12% Source: Mestre Greve Associates N/A = Not Available. Data is not provided by the SCAQMD. 192 LJ The project's long-term regional emissions will incrementally contribute to pollutant levels in the SCAQMD. On a project -only basis this incremental increase is considered insignificant. In conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future , projects, the project will incrementally contribute a significant cumulative adverse impact on regional air quality. EXISTING CITY POLICIES AND REQUIREMENTS A. In compliance with existing City policies and SCAQMD Rule 403, fugitive dust emissions during grading and construction shall be minimized by watering the site for dust control, containing excavated soil on -site until it is hauled away, and periodically washing adjacent streets to remove accumulative materials. This requirement shall be made a condition of all grading permits related to the project. B. All development shall be implemented pursuant to the provisions of the City of Newport Beach Transportation Demand Management Ordinance which promotes use of alternate transportation modes. MITIGATION MEASURES 4. All grading related to the project shall be conducted in accordance with SCAQMD , Rule 403. This mitigation measure shall be made a condition of all grading permits related to the project. 5. After clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations while construction activities are being conducted, fugitive dust emission shall be controlled using the following procedures: • Graded sections of the project that will not be further disturbed or worked on for long periods of time (three months or more) shall be seeded and watered, or covered with plastic sheeting to retard`wind erosion. • Graded, sections of the project which are undergoing further disturbance or construction activities shall be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. These mitigation measures shall be made a condition of all grading permits related to the project. 6. During grading and construction activities, the applicant shall further control fugitive dust emissions using the following measures: ' • On -site vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour. Entrances to all on -site roads shall be posted with a sign indicating the 193 maximum speed limits on all unpaved roads. • All areas with vehicle traffic shall be periodically watered. • Streets adjacent to the project site shall be swept as needed to remove silt which may have accumulative from construction activities so as to prevent ' accumulations of excessive amounts of dust. ' These mitigation measures shall be made a condition of all grading permits related to the project. 7. Office and commercial development on the Corporate Plaza West and Bay View Landing site shall also participate in the Centerride program currently in operation in the Newport Center area. Evidence of intent to participate shall be provided to the City of Newport Beach Building Department prior to issuance of occupancy permit. 8. Pursuant to the intent of the City of Newport Beach Transportation Demand Ordinance, bicycle racks shall be provided for all multi -family residential, office, commercial, active and passive parks, and other public facilities. The design, siting and quantity of bicycle racks shall be determined at site plane review or subdivision map approval whichever is more appropriate. 9. Construction of related frontage improvements shall include bus turnouts and shelters if determined to be necessary and desirable by the Orange County Transit District and/or the City of Newport Beach. Prior to final design and construction of any frontage improvements, the City of Newport Beach shall contact the Orange County Transit District to determine if any bus turnouts or shelters will be required. 10. All development shall include street and security lighting (in parking lots and pedestrian walkway areas) which is energy conserving. A lighting plan shall be submitted for all development which demonstrates compliance with this measure. L The plan shall be reviewed by the Planning Department and approved by the Department of Public Works. �L 11. Residential, commercial and office development shall be landscaped with an emphasis on drought resistant plant species which will shade buildings and reduce water and energy consumption during the summer. A landscape plan shall be submitted for all development which demonstrates compliance with this measure. The plan shall be reviewed by the Planning Department and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of an occupancy permit. 194 I LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE I Protect -Specific 1 All short-term impacts resulting from construction activities will be mitigated to a level of insignificance. , Emissions resulting from mobile (vehicular) sources, combustion of natural gas, and the ' generation of electric energy will be mitigated to a level of insignificance. Cumulative Short-term construction related emissions are negligible and highly localized. These emissions will contribute to a significant cumulative impact when considered in conjunction with all other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects. The total emissions generated by the project in conjunction with emissions generated by all , other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future project incrementally contributes to a significant cumulative adverse impact on regional air quality. Mitigation provided can partially mitigate this impact but not completely to a level of insignificance. I 195 1 J [J I I I f-' I� Ji I F 1 I I I i I IJ i NOISE EXISTING CONDITIONS The following description of the existing noise environment is a summary of a report prepared by Mestre Greve Associates. The complete report is included in Appendix D of this document (Volume II). Noise Criteria Community noise levels are measured in several ways. The "A -weighted decibel" (dBA) is a frequency correction that correlates overall sound pressure levels with the frequency response of the human ear. Exhibit 50 provides examples of various noises and their typical A -weighted noise level. The "equivalent noise level" (Leq) is the average noise level on an energy basis for any specified time period. The Leq for one hour is the energy average noise lever during the hour, specifically, the average noise based on the energy content (acoustic energy) of the sound. It can be thought of as the level of a continuous noise which has the same energy content as the fluctuating noise level. The equivalent noise level has the units of dBA, therefore, a sound measured for one hour may be expressed as a one hour Leq of 57 dBA. Several rating scales have been developed for measurement of community noise. These account for: 1) the parameters of noise that have been shown to contribute to the effects of noise on man, 2) the variety of noises found in the environment, 3) the variations in noise levels that occur as a person moves through the environment, and 4) the variations associated with the time of day. The predominant rating scale now in use in California for land use compatibility assessment is the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). The CNEL scale represents a time weighted 24 hour average noise level based on the A -weighted decibel. Time weighted refers to the fact that noise that occurs during certain sensitive time periods is penalized for occurring at these times. The evening time period (7 p.m. to 10 p.m.) penalizes noises by 5 dBA, while night time (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.) noises are penalized by 10 dBA. These time periods and penalties were selected to reflect people's increased sensitivity to noise during these time periods. A CNEL noise level may be reported as a "CNEL of 60 dBA," "60 dBA CNEL," or simply "60 CNEL." Typical noise levels in terms of the CNEL scale for different types of communities are presented in Exhibit 51. The criteria used to assess the acceptability of community noise levels varies with the municipality. The City of Newport Beach uses 65 CNEL as the critical criterion for assessing the compatibility of residential land uses with noise sources. The City of Newport Beach recommends that the exterior living areas (yards and patios) for new residential land uses 196 1 n r-1 L I F I �J J 1 I SOUND LEVELS AND LOUDNESS OF ILLUSTRATIVE NOISES IN INDOOR AND OUTDOOR ENVIRONMENTS (A -Scale Weighted Sound Levels) "(A) OVER-ALL LEVEL COMMUNITY HOME OR LOUDNESS Sound Pressure (Outdoor) INDUSTRY Human Judgement Level of Different Sound Approx. 0.000E Level Mkrobars 130 Uncomfortably Military let Aircraft Take -Off With After4 umer From Oxygen Torch 120 dB(A) 32 Times Aircraft Carrier @ 50 Ft. (130) as Loud • 120 Loud Tmbo•Fan Aircraft @ Take Off Power @ 200 Pt. (90) Riveting Machine (110) 110dB(A) 16 Times 110 Rode-N-Roll.Band as Loud • _ (108.114) 100 Very let Flyover @ 1000 Ft. (103) Boeing 707, DC-8 @ 6090 100 dB(A) 8 Times Ft. Before Landing (106) as Loud 90 Loud Power Mower (96) Newspaper Press (97) 90 dB(A) 4 Times as Boeing 737, DC-9 @ 6080 Ft Before Lauding (97) Loud Motorcycle @25 Ii (90) 80 Car Wash @20 Ft. (89) Food Blender (89) 80 dB(A) 2 Times as Prop. Airplane Flyover @ 1000 Ft. (88) Milling Machine (85) lend Diesel Truck, 40 MPH @ 50 Pt. (84) Garbage Disposal (90) Diesel Tram, 45 MPH @100 Pt. (83) 70 Moderately Load High Urban Ambient Sound (80) Living Room Music 70dB(A) Passenger Cu. 65 MPH @ 25 Pt. (77) (76) Freeway @ 50 Ft. From, Pavement Edge, 10:00 AM TV -Audio, Vacuum Q6ror-6) Cleaner 60 Air Conditioning Unit @ 100 Pt. (60) Cash Register @ 10 Ft. 60 dB(A) U2 (65-70) as Loud Electric Typewriter @ 10 Ft. (64) Dishwasher (Rinse) @ 10 Ft. (60) Conversation (60) 50 Quiet large Tnndotmets @ 100 Ft. (50) 50 dB(A)1/4 as loud 40 Bird Calls (40) 40 dB(A)1/8 Lower Limit Urban Ambient Sound (40) as Loud Just Audible (dB[A) Scale Interrupted) 10 Threshold of Hearing SOURCE: Reproduced from Melville C. Brandt and R. DaleBeland, OutdoorNoise in theMenotwlitan Environment. Published by the City of Los Angeles, 1970, p.2. EXAMPLES OF TYPICAL NOISE LEVELS CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT City of Newport Beach Source: Mestre Greve Associates PLANNING. INC. "M%M111111i 11 50 m CNEL OUTDOOR LOCATION �— APARTMENT NEXT TO FREEWAY 3/4 MILE FROM TOUCHDOWN AT MAJOR AIRPORT 80f— DOWNTOWN WITH SOME CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY URBAN HIGH DENSITY APARTMENT 70 URBAN ROW HOUSING ON MAJOR AVENUE 60 -- OLD URBAN RESIDENTIAL AREA 50~— WOODED RESIDENTIAL .4 AGRICULTURAL CROP LAND 40�_ RURAL RESIDENTIAL WILDERNESS AMBIENT 30 Source: Mestre Greve Associates TYPICAL OUTDOOR NOISE LEVELS IMP, smi... CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & PLANNING. INC. OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT City of Newport Beach 51 I do not exceed 65 CNEL. In addition, for multi -family residential projects, the California Noise Insulation Standard (California Administrative Code, Title 25, Chapter 1, Subchapter 1, Article 4) requires that the indoor noise levels in multi -family residential development do not exceed a 45 CNEL. The City of Newport Beach indoor noise standards are consistent with the state standards. The City of Newport Beach requires that both single family and ' multi -family developments achieve an indoor noise standard of 45 CNEL. Commercial uses are also included as part of the project. The California Department of ' Health Services has published guidelines which are summarized in Exhibit 52. The guidelines rate compatibility in terms of "normally acceptable, conditionally acceptable, normally unacceptable, and clearly unacceptable." The guidelines are used to assess the ' compatibility of the proposed project with the noise environment. The City of Newport Beach does not have any indoor noise standards for commercial or office land uses. The County of Orange Noise Element interior noise standards are therefore, recommended. A 55 CNEL interior noise standard can be applied to the commercial retail areas and 50 CNEL for general offices (45 CNEL for private offices.) The Noise Element of the City of Newport Beach General Plan establishes outdoor and indoor noise standards for residential areas. The outdoor noise standard for exterior living areas (yards and patios) for residential land uses is 65 CNEL, and the indoor standard is 45 CNEL. ' Existing Traffic Noise Levels The traffic noise levels in terms of CNEL were computed using the Highway Noise Model ' published by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model, "FHWA-RD-77-108, December, 1978). The FHWA Model uses traffic volume, vehicle mix, vehicle speed, and roadway geometry to compute the "equivalent noise level'. A computer code has been written which computes equivalent noise levels for each time period used in the calculation of CNEL. Weighting these noise levels and summing them results in the CNEL for the traffic projections used. CNEL contours are found by iterating over many distances until the distances to the 60, 65, and 70 CNEL contours are found. For the roadway analysis, worst -case assumptions about future motor vehicle traffic and noise levels have been made and were incorporated in the modeling effort, specifically, no. reductions in motor vehicle noise have been assumed in spite of legislation requiring quieter vehicles at the time of manufacture. ' Existing traffic volumes and speeds were used with the FHWA Model to estimate existing noise levels in terms of CNEL. Traffic volumes were obtained from the traffic analysis for the proposed project conducted by Austin -Foust Associates and are given in Appendix B. Standard traffic mix distributions were used for the arterial roadways, and are based on traffic data obtained at 31 sample intersections located throughout Orange County. 199 I 1 1 J 1 1 1 [1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 Land Use Category Community Noise Exposure � Ldn or CNEL, dB 55 60 65 70 75 80 Residential - Low Density Single Family, Duplex, Mobile Homes Residential - Multiple Family Transient Lodging -Motels, Hotels Schools, Libraries, Churches Hospitals, Nursing Homes "0 "'v Auditoriums, Concert Hails, Amphitheatres Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator Sports MEE Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks Golf Courses, Riding Stables Water Recreation. Cemeteries ; x. „-; ;•;„, , Office Buildings, Business Commercial and Residential Industrial, Manufacturing Utilities Agriculture F-7771 Normally Acceptable Specified Land Use is Satisfactory, Based Upon the Assumption that Any Buildings Involved are of Normal Conventional Construction, Without Any Special'Noise Insulation Requirements. ® Conditionally Acceptable New Construction or Development Should be Undertaken Only After a Detailed Analysis of the Noise Reduction Requirement is Made and Needed Noise Insulation Features Included in the Design. Conventional Construction. but with Closed Windows and Fresh Air Supply Systems or Air Conditioning, Will Notmally Suffice. Normally Unacceptable New Construction or Development Should Generally be Discouraged. If New Construction or Development Does Proceed, a Detailed Analysis of the Noise Reduction Requirements Must be Made and Needed Noise Insulation Features Included in the Design ® Clearly Unacceptable New Construction or Development Should Generally not be Undertaken. Source: Mestre Greve Associates CALIFORNIA LAND USE COMPATIBILITY 1� STUDIES Min.. PLANKING. INC. CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & "Intl✓ OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT City of Newport Beach 11 52 tThe distances to the CNEL contours for the roadways in the vicinity of the project site are shown in Table BB. These represent the distance from the centerline of the road to the ' contour value shown. Note that the values given in Table BB do not take into account the effect of any noise barriers or topography that may affect ambient noise levels. The data in Table BB indicate that areas along a number of major roadways in the project vicinity currently experience traffic noise levels greater than 70 CNEL. Areas along Jamboree Road, Macarthur Boulevard, Newport Boulevard, Irvine Boulevard, State Route ' 73, and the Coast Highway are currently exposed to noise levels exceeding 70 CNEL at roadway right-of-way. In addition, existing noise levels along Bristol Street, University Drive, San Joaquin Hills Drive, Dover Drive and Campus Drive currently exceed 70 CNEL at roadway right-of-way. Other roadways in the project vicinity have low levels of traffic and correspondingly low levels of noise. ' Measured Traffic Noise Levels Noise measurements were conducted at two sites on Newport Hills Drive West for this analysis. The sites are located near MacArthur Boulevard between Ford Road and San Joaquin Hills Road as shown in Exhibit 53. The two sites were chosen to represent a number of existing homes which will likely experience a long-term noise reduction due to the Freeway Reservation Development. Ambient noise levels at these existing homes mainly reflect traffic noise from MacArthur Boulevard. In addition to these sites, three sites were ' measured as part of a previous study of the Freeway Reservation North site. These sites are shown in Exhibit 54. These measurements are detailed in "Noise Assessment for the Freeway Reservation Development North Site," (Mestre Greve Associates, December, 1991). The ambient noise measurement were conducted using a B&K 2231 precision sound level meter. Ambient noise was measured for 10 minutes at both Site 1 and Site 2 on Newport Hills Drive West during early morning rush-hour on September 12, 1991. Ambient noise was measured for two 10 minute periods at sites 3 through 5 on Freeway Reservation North site during the afternoon on November 25, 1991. The results are presented in Table CC in the form of L-percentile.(L%) levels. The L-percentile level is the noise level exceeded for that percent of the measurement period. The L50 is the noise level exceeded 50 percent of the time. The results indicate that the homes adjacent to the Freeway Reservation site currently experience Leq's ranging from 54.4 to 63.0. At Site 2 line -of -sight to MacArthur was broken ' for almost the entire length by the intervening berm. The measurement results include the noise shielding from this berm. Site 1 had direct line -of -sight to MacArthur Boulevard and Ford Road but was further set back than Site 2 resulting in lower noise levels. Sites 3, 4, LEI F— L and 5 are distanced.farther away from MacArthur Boulevard and the relative distances from the roadway are the cause for the reduced noise levels at the farther distances. 201 F] TABLE BB ' EXISTING NOISE LEVELS , ROADWAY LINK DISTANCE TO CNEL CONTOUR FROM CENTERLINE OF ROADWAY 07im, 1 70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL Newport Boulevard ' Bristol to Birch 129 278 598 Birch St. to Del Mar 129 278 598 Del Mar to Wilson 116 250 540 Wilson to 22nd St. 112 241 520 ' 22nd to 19th St. 110 236 509 19th to 17th St. 101 217 467 17th St. to Hospital 90 194 418 ' Hospital to CH 76 164 352 CH to Balboa 86 186 400 Superior Avenue ' 17th to Placentia RW 103 222 Placentia to CH RW 94 202 Balboa Boulevard ' CH to Newport Blvd. RW RW 102 East of Newport Boulevard RW 67 144 Irvine Boulevard ' SR 73 to Birch 69 149 321 Birch to Del Mar Ave. 70 152 327 Del Mar Ave. to 22nd St. 70 152 327 ' 22nd St. to 191h St. 72 155 334 19th St. S. of 17th St. 62 133 288 38 82 176 , Jamboree Road Dupont to Campus 98 211 455 Campus to Birch St. 86 185 400 ' Birch to California 80 172 371 California to MacArthur 80 172 371 MacArthur to Bristol 88 190 409 Bristol to Unk #1 137 294 634 ' Unk #1 to University 137 294 634 University to Bison 123 266 572 Bison to Ford 123 266 572 , Ford to San Joaquin Hills 132 284 612 San Joaquin Hills to Santa Barbara 109 235 507 Santa Barbara to CH 104 223 481 , Continued. ' 202 ' ' ' TABLE BB (Cont) EXISTING NOISE LEVELS ROADWAY LINK DISTANCE TO CNEL CONTOUR FROM CENTERLINE OF ROADWAY (FFET) 70 CNEL 6S CNEL 60 CNEL ' MacArthur Boulevard North of Campus 72 155 334 Campus to Birch 59 127 274 ' Birch to Von Karmon RW 103 222 Von Karmon to Jamboree 53 114 245 Jamboree to Unk #1 66 143 309 Unk #1 to University 156 335 722 ' S. of University 154 332 715 N. of University 154 332 715 ' Bison to Ford Ford to San Joaquin Hills 146 132 315 284 679 612 San Joaquin Hills to San Miguel 106 227 490 San Miguel to CH 96 207 446 ' Placentia Victoria to 19th Street RW 105 225 19th Street to 17th St. RW 94 202 ' 17th Street. to 15th St. RW 82 176 Victoria t West of Bluff Bluff to Placentia RW RW 96 85 208 183 22nd Street ' Newport Blvd. to Irvine RW RW 89 19th Street Bluff to Placentia RW 68 147 Placantia to Harbor RW 75 162 Newport to Orange St. RW RW 96 Orange St. to Irvine RW RW 60 Dover Drive East of Irvine RW 52 111 N. of 17th Street RW 69 149 ' 17th Street to CH 52 113 243 17th Street Bluff to Placentia RW RW 60 Placentia to Newport Blvd. RW RW 82 ' Newport Blvd. to Irvine Blvd. RW 80 172 Irvine Blvd. to Dover RW 58 125 Continued. 203 TABLE BB (Cont) EXISTING NOISE LEVELS , ROADWAY LINK DISTANCE TO CNEL CONTOUR ' FROM CENTERLINE OF ROADWAY (FEET) , 70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL State Route 73 Newport Blvd. to Irvine 256 551 1187 ' Irvine to Jamboree 192 413 891 Coast Highway ' Bluff to Superior 85 183 395 Superior to Newport Blvd. 57 123 264 East of Newport Blvd. 80 172 372 West of Newport Blvd. 74 160 344 , Dover to Bayside 92 199 428 Bayside to Jamboree 99 214 462 Jamboree to Newport Center 84 180 389 , Newport Center to MacArthur 54 116 249 MacArthur to Marguerite 59 126 272 Marguerite to Newport Coast 116 251 540 Newport Coast to San Canyon 109 235 507 , Bayside CH to Jamboree RW 56 120 , Del Mar Avenue Newport Blvd. to Santa Ana RW RW 85 Santa Ana to Irvine Blvd, RW RW 85 ' Santa Ana Bristol to Birch RW 56 120 Birch to Delmar RW RW 102 Orange S. of 17th St. RW RW 96 , Campus Dr. SR73 to MacArthur 60 130 281 MacArthur to Von Karmon RW 88 189 Von Karmon to Jamboree RW 69 149 ' Jamboree to University 55 118 254 East of University 53 114 245 Birch Street , Newport Blvd. to Santa Ana RW RW 89 Santa Ana to Irvine Irvine to Bristol RW RW RW 52 89 ill ' Bristol to MacArthur RW 82 176 MacArthur to Von Karmon RW 55 119 Von Karmon to Jamboree RW 55 119 ' Continued. 204 ' ' TABLE BB (Cont.) EXISTING NOISE LEVELS ROADWAY LINK DISTANCE TO CNEL CONTOUR FROM CENTERLINE OF ROADWAY ' (FEET) 70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL Von Karmon Avenue ' Dupont to Campus RW 96 206 Campus to Birch RW 80 172 Birch to MacArthur Bristol Street (eastbound) RW 67 145 Santa Ana to Irvine 66 143 308 Irvine to Jamboree 63 137 294 ' Bristol Street (westbound) Santa Ana to Campus 66 143 308 ' Campus to Jamboree 44 96 206 Bristol Street Newport Blvd. to Santa Ana 57 124 267 ' University Drive MacArthur to California 85 184 396 California to Campus 75 162 350 ' East of Campus 59 127 273 Eastbluff Drive S. of Jamboree RW 62 135 N. of Jamboree RW 62 135 Ford Road t Jamboree to MacArthur MacArthur to San Miguel RW RW 74 90 160 194 Bonita Canyon Road ' SJHTC to Unk #2 Unk #2 to Newport Coast RW RW 69 69 148 148 East of Newport Coast RW RW 93 California Avenue ' Jamboree to University RW 74 160 Bison Road Jamboree to MacArthur RW 76 163 San Joaquin Hills Road Jamboree to Santa Cruz 69 148 319 Santa Cruz to Santa Rosa 57 122 264 ' Santa Rosa to MacArthur 57 122 264 MacArthur to San Miguel 52 ill 240 ' San Miguel to Marguerite RW 105 227 ' Continued. 205 11 TABLE BB (Cont.) ' EXISTING NOISE LEVELS ' ROADWAY LINK DISTANCE TO CNEL CONTOUR FROM C , RIME, OF ROADWAY ' 70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL San Miguel Road , Newport Center Dr. to MacArthur RW 100 215 MacArthur to San Joaquin Hills RW 63 136 San Joaquin Hills to Spyglass Hill RW 69 148 Spyglass Hill to Bonita Canyon RW 69 148 ' Marguerite South of San Joaquin Hills Road RW 58 125 North of Coast Highway RW RW 68 , Santa Cruz San Joaquin Hills to Newport Center RW 67 145 Santa Barbara Drive Jamboree to Newport Center RW 76 163 Newport Center Drive , Newport Center to Newport Center RW 107 230 Source: Mestre Greve Associates. Notes: RW = Contour falls on right of way. 206 C I • I i I 2 _ 7-7 Site �� a _ •..........� _ _ �i• ` ->_ --•� ;\ �•�I ,za� u.� - J+ �=";r,,:="=•ram, �_•"°=eS�1d.>n,YsS � _ � �i. �. >�..✓vr/ r .- l µY .�• Y ,....a i � \ '�'.-r^"p- m _�, .. .. �_'^��r_ I M �\. D � (/I yid 'f \ i. 1 �.YYY LRf [ta. .•l�i t i d-- G 'i Dj'` D�-• ..\,r 1/_ �I \i '� :�s �� ��> � . _. •-;�?;t,i���..��-"- . �_--.._��^�� ,,\ y^' _ z. /Site 1� •L��� , , pd f• ,. �e� 1u ono' w:""'^i v�'sd ��-�—nr-.4s��:\ .\` -"y.•E /}, , I ����L�f r ��.� �� ✓, i •yF�%�Mti� �....'. ..: 1 l _i _ \• `r.� `�� �,�Z,a%'�.a� •� �` -a NOISE e' frr �% �.�t'I�e ��'_' •y C Ake,... ".l �'z��;�\. :O.•^a �.', � �.vr��a.'•�d� Mrp, � \ •, r Snuma• lulactrri (�rava Accnoiaiac = NOISE MEASUREMENT SITES 1 & 2 FACING THE FREEWAY ,, j -srm nc RESERVATION DEVELOPMENT PLANNING.ING CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT City of Newport Beach no scale 53 •..v,T`•l`� Aped � I PROJECT SITE ::. "•^ ':' � "` eke"x., ..� 3� STY:.<:'S :• 'c•`:::, ,.�y `•� ,%Y .';±;:: TT.•,f t t� aourca: masue Ult;VU rWs6luatoo NOISE MEASUREMENT SITES 3,4 & 5 FACING FREEWAY RESERVATION ITIM, ffAinc, DEVELOPMENT Pu""' CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & nonoscale OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT 54 City of Newport Beach TABLE CC AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENTS FOR RESIDENCES FACING THE PROPOSED FREEWAY RESERVATION SITE SITE STARTING END L PERCENTILE TIME TIME LL7 L8.3 L25 L50 L90 Leq Measured for Current Report 1 8:35 a.m. 8:45 a.m. 66.0 58.2 57.1 54.7 50.0 57.1 2 9:05 a.m. 9:15 a.m. 71.4 63.4 56.2 51.5 47.4 60.5 SITE STARTING TIME END TIME L PERCENTILE Lmax L10 L50 L90 L99 Leq Measured for Previous Report (measurement date. 11125191) 3 3:10 p.m. 3:40 p.m. 69.7 65.6 63.0 52.9 46.3 63.0 4 3:50 p.m. 4:20 p.m. 67.8 63.2 60.3 54.8 49.9 60.4 5 2:30 p.m. 3:00 p.m. 70.9 54.7 52.1 48.7 46.4 54.4 Source: Mestre Greve Associates. Existing Helicopter Noise Levels Helicopter noise measurements were conducted at two sites for the proposed Newporter North residential site as shown in Exhibit 55. The Newporter North development site is located just across from the Newport Beach Police Station Helipad. Existing noise due to police helicopter arrivals and departures were measured at Sites 1 and Ton July 17, 1991 in the mid -afternoon. These results along with the flight schedule data were used to determine existing CNEL levels at Sites 1 and 2. These levels were then compared to the measured ambient noise levels for these sites. Noise levels were measured for five helicopter arrivals and five departures. The SEL (single -event noise exposure level) as well as the Lmax (maximum noise level) and the Leq were measured at Site 1 and 2 for each flight event. The SEL is representative of the total acoustical energy for a given noise event such as helicopter departure (takeoff). The results, including average SEL data, are shown in Appendix D. In addition, the results reflect helicopter operations for Flight -track 1 which is used in prevailing on -shore wind conditions. For non -prevailing wind conditions, such as Santa Ana wind conditions, Flight -track 2 is used (off -shore wind conditions). Exhibits 56 and 57 show Flight -track 1 and Flight -track 2 relative to the Newporter North site and the Newport Police Helipad. The existing flight schedule data was combined with the measured average SEL data to determine the existing helicopter CNEL levels at Site 1 and 2. According to the Newport Beach Police Department the number of arrivals/departures per shift increases in the summer time. Helicopter flights occur year-round in two shifts per day. The first shift occurs from 11 a.m. to 7 p.m. and the second shift occurs from 7 p.m. to 3 a.m. A typical summer day will include 2 departure/arrivals per shift, but July 4th has historically been the busiest with five landings/takeoffs per shift. This operations data was used with the average SEL data to determine the CNEL levels at Site 1 and 2 as shown in Table DD and Appendix D. The results show that CNEL levels at Site 1 and 2 are well below the City's 65 CNEL exterior standard for worse case conditions for arrivals and departures. In addition, these helicopter noise levels are also well below the measures "non -helicopter" ambient noise levels of 45.4 CNEL for Site 2 and 64.2 CNEL for Site 1. Helicopter noise levels at Site 1 are insignificant compared to Jamboree noise levels. Therefore the results indicate that helicopter noise for the Newporter North site is well below the City's exterior noise standards and insignificant compared to existing ambient noise levels. It should also be noted that noise measurements at Site 1 were also conducted for the police helicopter sitting on the pad in "ready mode" (ready for take -off). The resulting noise level at Site 1 was measured at 62.3 Leq. However, this noise was masked by the ambient noise level of 62.9 Leq due to Jamboree Road traffic. Therefore, the results show that the helicopter noise levels, with the helicopter on the pad in "ready mode," are below the City's 65 CNEL exterior standard for the Newporter North site and are also not significant compared to the measured ambient noise levels. 210 .. i /- "'i ' ; ' 1, r ; .. •� �' / : _ `-.` �, . "� �/, / - � / � �-� � :laG• �0:.•v:I v. jf i - --S ea e_: ` \ 1 � --. a:pe :- . i '� i ./ //!/ \ o��%o ::3A- —\ _. :-'rs soy- � r �a \'1• �` `t i�.�t�/L • �. i . � �` >`S+4E?mL9ol �o w,� V//Ar `b ///•� /!t\\.�1T��S��Y•,,.,w`.Y_J✓�a"/�T'_...:�L`.. ',a \'a i•\`•, ••. \�.�\\'``-•'_-i o_: .�Sa t • i ':�� • / Q' / j�/-//. �, .. 11 \� ` . .>.'p .. y(t - ' yam, � L .ACFFS Aviiawt ' .a �. .: �1�^� Q C �.-� -��f _a .• {�`.`/O ACAE! \\'•\i� \\.�: Aj : / �_•/ 7ra� //�r �i" / J �' \\\\\+ter='-'u"e �e'�..`_y_ :\� •. \_\. •\,\ �,.`\�\�,�,.`��.11 I \ \.'• .. .�/._ ._PA /�:.-7 /;. :•�l�i�:i .�; Site. �i .. - TAT-,��•u.:J':NG G. •:G SE�aCI1 -\ '-_ ��`�1��\`, \'.v i."�•\ \` I-�"+����Ia. I: • •` V RORTION Of•. 9LU �ra \ ; "� •-�:. =OF' IRVINE'S SUBOJt ' IN r/.68. /`%"/� v 89- k 14�/��S�1�t .`.'NAREA .� \����••,<�L ..• . . �� \'. 3''�I I i i i i i -y'; ACRES a •�l4 t= a _ " - �:�:",� REA li % 7 } + ! ! I I '/ -T r T vj c i o 12\1\�L\�� •\�_ /_= lk DEVELOPMENT AREA =: _��NIN� ---�=� -lvk��\ \tea• _ ._ . .. /% / - - ♦ / T'E\,t\ ' • \�•` - a //''/j��V �pl/ 1• i_'3.»� .I(i •` _ 'v �. NATUR3SL LIREAII/., °,r•: J r ; ' %r �;/� i'jk r _ :2.4 AC. t� ;.I ,i • Site � jj I t 4r P./�+ •1 AW ? % \✓ // 1 / i r ' \� `I �. - /i "ai.�--_•�'_: ' I DG.vEG Cw .-'J.:<-ESL �/ 1. ^ a z .] r _ � � � I � \ \'\ ' \`�\\� % L 6.r6G - .. ti - � �����\�����\����'Z�� ' . 'ram\--�a►�\'l\.:C�.���\�\����\'������' ' x' �-1�-�: - " _c a .;,, ' 7'e.;Y a-.�-w -wr Eear.. e�„�'• \\ _ "` � _� _ s..,.E.3. c� E __ i \ `` ::\' G ' • aa: +� � l:. J- _ _ \ 1 .7 �La mca<e •.:<• a .n `,,:' r�T.a%" LaV.OS-q/.9i3•fL43fAPo w.va. V \ ' --�.1 •` '�:���a\� .� ter. Y.d-o' __�'_ - \ _ . a z>: ` `_"_��,-__LDT �F'r APENSPACE _r_ .l� . 0 AG,�. T_ 3 >O of - — _ eF!j:'iA _ee">.>. - •ems-� .'-'•�3d,^.:.. `- '1,. ... _-_.__r_ - -'_. ����-�s• - -i- +I •- �'-"�-1= =i= �_a•ZV2+z��•c.p..e _ „___�____._z_- ++.•'.�.�z+r -����ti %-,:- r..ei.ee" -_-ems __�- __ D _ _. -•l- _ 6 / 1••---_•________ _________ 1• +T� —1� .._�_ ;Tc _ -'a•ar T .v,co— - ��' ��� rs E--. - poA _ - • • ". _ i K. • ` t r : j j.. _ _ _ i - f'->_-..� -,�£ r;• _�_' I: _I •ir- - �.._ 1 I - __ _-___ _ JAMHD •.�^i ��t"a., '.i .> : N-.. �- 1 r .. _- \• - ' L� F _----�•, V " Lw ..c•J:SS3 /Lw ,-,d/3>PVL'•t�n/• �:;,; ;� 1" ' Nei ort Beach Police Helipad * •=..w_ i .. <'a-i --�:'-:_ . --� � i�\"• •. � � S J_C<:..i,/ PC P�LGvE:Ir -, !, .i : l_ 1� 1 Sources: Mestre Greve Associates HELICOPTER NOISE MEASUREMENT SITES 1 & 2 I ►$minc. YIANNING. ING CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT ® "=6t� City of Newport Beach no scale 55 �J v ♦ 1 /J SAH JOApUIH HILLS gpAp Newport Beach Police Helipad n OC w u A LO SEA ISLAND U CIO civic P ZA C ,Sf7l N,�O 00, MUTUAL AZA F goo e))Z ao0 Q MA M F"7 0 P s ION ISLA \ 1 1 Source: Mestre Greve Associates HELICOPTER FLIGHT TRACK 1 ' �7 � s rLallnc PLANNING. INC CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT EIR no scale City of Newport Beach n 56 SAN JOAOIAN )ILLS AOAO 660 W l A o CIVIC PLAZA �9 n 7 I B c �, FOUR SE4 C95 e',o oP�Je °9•6f !i C EC ONS �S9'/O �M,yNt6 t Newport Beach \ )y� Police Helipad p v' 7000 D aQ _ M o PACIFIC MUTUAL Q '9e PLAZA F IS • 9� ago , BOO ASHION ISLJ h 0,9 v A MAR$IOTT HI 0 o P 900 0 SEA Is O U tT 0 0. 3 W o 0 tRVINE COAST COUNTRY CLUB Source: Mestre Greve Associates HELICOPTER FLIGHT TRACK 2 I.-M, sr —A- c PLANNI%OJNC CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT EIR no scale City of Newport Beach 57 TABLE DD EXISTING HELICOPTER NOISE LEVELS AT THE PROPOSED NEWPORTER NORTH SITE (SITES 1 AND 2) TYPICAL SUMMER DAY WORST CASE (July 4th) OPERATION (CNEL) (CNEL) Site 1 Arrival 46.5 50.4 Departure 46.8 50.8 Site 2 Arrival 29.9 33.8 Departure 34.9 38.8 Source: Mestre Greve Associates. i i .1 214 I IMPACTS According to Appendix G of CEQA Guidelines, a project will .normally have a significant effect on the environment if it will result in a substantial increase of ambient noise levels adjacent to the project. The potential for significant impact also exists where the community noise standards are violated. Potential noise impacts are commonly divided into short-term/temporary and long-term impacts. Short-term impacts are generally associated with noise generated by construction activities. Long-term impacts are divided into impacts on surrounding land uses generated by the project and those impacts which occur at the project site due to additional traffic. Short -Term Impacts Construction noise will occur as a result of the development of the proposed project. Construction noise represents a short-term impact on ambient noise levels. Noise generated by construction equipment including trucks, graders, bulldozers, concrete mixers, and portable generators can reach high levels. Grading activities typically represent one of the highest potential for noise impacts, however, most of the grading should occur away from existing residential land uses. In some areas grading will occur adjacent to developed areas. This will result in a significant short-term project -specific impact. Long -Term Impacts Off -site Traffic Noise Impacts ' Development of the residential and commercial sites associated with the proposed project will generate traffic and as a result may alter projected noise levels in the surrounding areas. t To assess the impact of the proposed project on land uses adjacent to streets that will serve the project sites, the change in roadway noise along these streets was determined. Due to future development which has already been approved, there will be an increase in traffic in the surrounding area with or without the proposed project. The change in noise was calculated for these roads and is presented in Table EE. Column 1 contrasts existing traffic , noise levels with noise levels as a result of future buildout of the project. Column 2 compares future buildout noise levels with the project to future buildout noise levels without the project. In community noise assessment changes, noise levels greater than 3 dBA are often identified as significant, while changes less than 1 dBA will not be discernible to local residents. In the range of 1 to 3 dBA residents who are very sensitive to noise may perceive a slight change. No scientific evidence is available to support the use of 3 dBA as the significance threshold. In laboratory testing situations humans are able to detect noise level changes of slightly less 215 1 I I ` TABLE EE ' FUTURE INCREASE IN TRAFFIC NOISE (dB) ROADWAY LINK FUTURE INCREASE FUTURE INCREASE OVER EXISTING (dB) DUE TO THE PROJECT (dB) Newport Boulevard Bristol to Birch -3.2 0.0 Birch St. to Del Mar -0.5 0.0 Del Mar to Wilson -1.1 0.0 Wilson to 22nd St. -0.5 0.0 22nd to 19th St. -2.3 0.0 19th to 17th St. ' -0.8 0.0 17th St. to Hospital 1.8 0.0 Hospital to CH 2.0 0.0 CH to Balboa 1.6 0.0 Superior Avenue 17th to Placentia 1.7 0.0 Placentia to CH -0.9 0.0 Balboa Boulevard ' CH to Newport Blvd. 0.3 0.0 East of Newport Boulevard 1.4 0.0 Irvine Boulevard SR 73 to Birch -0.7 0.0 Birch to Del Mar Ave. 0.1 0.1 Del Mar Ave. to 22nd St. -0.5 0.0 1� 22nd St. to 19th St. -1.0 0.2 19th St. to 17th St. -0.7 0.0 S. of 17th St. 0.0 0.0 Jamboree Road Dupont to Campus 1.9 0.0 Campus to Birch St. 2.1 0.1 Birch to California 2.7 0.0 California to MacArthur 1.9 0.1 MacArthur to Bristol 2.1 0.1 Bristol to Unk #1 Unk #1 to University -0.5 1.5 0.1 0.1 University to Bison 1.3 0.1 Bison to Ford 1.4 0.1 r Ford to San Joaquin Hills 1.1 0.1 San Joaquin Hills to Santa Barbara 1.4 0.2 Santa Barbara to CH 1.1 0.1 Continued. 216 TABLE EE (ConlVd.) I T4'UTURE INCREASE IN TRAFFIC NOISE (dB) ROADWAY LINK FUTURE INCREASE OVER EXISTING (dB) FUTURE INCREASE DUE TO THE PROJECT (dB) MacArthur Boulevard North of Campus 1.8 0.0 Campus to Birch 2.3 0.1 Birch to Von Karmon 2.7 0.1 Von Karmon to Jamboree 2.6 0.1 , Jamboree to Unk #1 2.7 0.0 Unk #1 to University -1.2 0.0 S. of University -1.0 0.0 N. of University -0.7 0.0 N Bison to Ford 0.0 0.1 Ford to San Joaquin Hills 0.5 0.0 San Joaquin Hills to San Miguel .0.1 0.0 San Miguel to Cr -0.6 0.0 Placentia Victoria to 19th Street .0.7 0.0 19th Street to 17th St. -0.2 0.0 17th Street. to 15th St. -0.2 0.0 Victoria , West of Bluff 1.7 0.0 Bluff to Placentia 22nd Street -1.6 0.0 '1 Newport Blvd. to Irvine 0.5 0.0 19th Street Bluff to Placentia 3.1 0.0 Placentia to Harbor 2.3 0.0 Newport to Orange St. 2.0 0.0 Orange St. to Irvine 3.4 0.0 Dover Drive Past of Irvine i 0.0 0.5 , N. of 17th Street -1.0 0.4 17th Street to 15th 0.3 0.3 15th Street to CH 0.9 0.1 17th Street Bluff to Placentia 7.5 0:0 Placentia to Newport Blvd, 4.8 0.0 Newport Blvd. to Irvine Blvd. 2.2 0.1 Irvine Blvd. to Dover 2.0 0.4 Continued. 217 II TABLE EE (Cont'd.) FUTURE INCREASE IN TRAFFIC NOISE (dB) ROADWAY LINK FUTURE INCREASE OVER EXISTING (dB) FUTURE INCREASE DUE TO THE PROJECT (dB) State Route 73 Newport Blvd. to Irvine 3.4 0.0 Irvine to Jamboree 5.0 0.0 Coast Highway Bluff to Superior 1.0 0.0 Superior to Newport Blvd. 1.9 0.0 East of Newport Blvd. 1.4 0.0 West of Newport Blvd. 0.8 0.0 Dover to Bayside 0.8 0.1 Bayside to Jamboree 1.4 0.1 Jamboree to Newport Center 0.9 0.1 Newport Center to MacArthur 0.6 0.1 MacArthur to Marguerite -0.6 0.0 Marguerite to Newport Coast -1.4 0.0 Newport Coast to San Canyon -0.5 0.0 Bayside CH to Jamboree -1.0 0.0 Del Mar Avenue Newport Blvd. to Santa Ana 5.8 0.0 Santa Ana to Irvine Blvd. 3.4 0.0 Santa Ana Bristol to Birch 0.8 0.3 , Santa Ana to Irvine Blvd. -2.0 0.0 Orange S. of 17th St. -3.0 0.0 Campus Dr. SR73 to MacArthur 1.5 0.0 MacArthur to Von Karmon 1.8 0.0 Von Karmon to Jamboree 2.5 0.0 Jamboree to University 2.4 0.1 East of University 3.3 0.0 Continued. 218 It TABLE EE (Contd.) FUTURE INCREASE IN TRAFFIC NOISE (dB) ROADWAY Birch Street Newport Blvd. to Santa Ana Santa Ana to Irvine Irvine to Bristol Bristol to MacArthur MacArthur to Von Karmon Von Karmon to Jamboree Von Karmon Avenue Dupont to Campus Campus to Birch Birch to MacArthur Bristol Street (eastbound) Santa Ana to Irvine Irvine to Jamboree Bristol Street (westbound) Santa Ana to Campus Campus to Jamboree Bristol Street Newport Blvd. to Santa Ana University Drive MacArthur to California California to Campus Fast of Campus Eastbluff Drive S. of Jamboree N. of Jamboree Ford Road Jamboree to MacArthur MacArthur to San Miguel Bonita Canyon Road SJHTC to Unk #2 Unk #2 to Newport Coast Fast of Newport Coast California Avenue Jamboree to University Continued. 219 FUTUREINCREASE OVER EXISTING (dB) FUTURE INCREASE DUE TO THE PROJECT (dB) 2.8 0.0 , 2.2 0.0 3.7 0.0 1.2 0.0 ' 1.5 0.0 1.1 0.0 1.5 0.0 1.6 0.0 018 0.0 .8 0.0 0.8 0.0 , 1.8 2.9 3.4 -0.5 1.7 0.8 1.0 0.3 1.9 3.2 5.3 3.8 6.8 0.5 tW I tt t Wt I 1 TABLE EE (Cont'd.) I I I I 11 I II 11 If li FUTURE INCREASE IN TRAFFIC NOISE (dB) ROADWAY LINK FUTURE INCREASE FUTURE INCREASE OVER EXISTING (dB) DUE TO THE PROJECT (dB) Bison Road Jamboree to MacArthur 3.5 0.0 San Joaquin Hills Road Jamboree to Santa Cruz 0.0 0.2 Santa Cruz to Santa Rosa -1.0 0.4 Santa Rosa to MacArthur 0.3 0.0 MacArthur to San Miguel 0.0 0.0 San Miguel to Marguerite 1.5 0.0 San Miguel Road Newport Center Dr. to MacArthur 0.0 0.0 MacArthur to San Joaquin Hills 2.7 0.0 San Joaquin Hills to Spyglass Hill 0.5 0.0 Spyglass Hill to Bonita Canyon 1.4 0.0 Marguerite ' South of San Joaquin Hills Road -6.0 0.0 North of Coast Highway -4.8 0.0 Santa Cruz San Joaquin Hills to Newport Center 0.8 0.4 Santa Barbara Drive Jamboree to Newport Center 0.7 0.3 Newport Center Drive Newport Center to Newport Center -1.5 0.0 Source: Mestre Greve Associates. 220 I1 I than 1 dBA. However, in a community noise situation the noise exposure is over a long time ' period, and changes in noise levels occur over years, rather than the immediate comparison made in a laboratory situation. Therefore, the level at which changes in community noise ' levels become discernible is likely to be some value greater than 1 dBA, and 3 dBA appears to be appropriate for most people. The data in Column 1 of Table FF indicate that future noise levels from projects in the area will increase substantially (greater than 3 dBA) over existing noise levels for sensitive land , uses for a number of streets in the vicinity of the project. These increases are due to the project and other projects planned in the area. The substantial increases are generally due to the relatively low amount of traffic currently in the area. A maximum change of 7.5 dB exists along 17th Street between Bluff and Placentia, which will result in noise levels greater than 65 CNEL at the roadway right-of-way. Other roadways which will experience future noise increases greater than 3 dB include 19th Street, Orange Avenue, Victoria Street, Newport Boulevard, State Route 73, Del Mar Avenue, Campus Drive, Birch Street, Bristol Street, Ford Road, Bonita Canyon, Bison Road and Marguerite. Those roadways that have noise increases greater than 3 dB and future noise levels greater than 65 CNEL are considered significant impacts if existing residential developments are adjacent to the roadways. Such roadways include Del Mar Avenue, Birch Street, State Route 73, 19th Street, Victoria, Ford Road, Bonita Canyon Road, and Bison Road. For planned residential , areas that are not yet developed, roadway noise can be mitigated by the developer at the time of construction. A number of existing homes along MacArthur Boulevard will experience a decrease in noise due to the development of the Freeway Reservation site. The residential units proposed for this site will provide a barrier effect resulting in decreased traffic noise at a number of ' existing homes along MacArthur. The results indicate that two story residential units constructed in Lot 2 could reduce traffic noise levels at a number of existing homes by 3 to 5 dB depending on the orientation and elevation of the proposed residences. Existing homes facing the proposed site currently experience noise reduction provided by the berm in Lot 1. However, two story units constructed in Lot 1 could provide up to 3 dB of noise reduction for some existing homes near the southern and northern end, of Lot 1. Proper site design techniques in terms of building orientation and pad elevation can result in significant noise reductions for a number of existing homes facing the proposed residential sites. Part of the proposed land use in the Upper Castaways site calls for a community park that will potentially include a non -lighted sports field. Noise impacts from typical use of the sports field are anticipated to be small as no public address system is planned for the field. Refereed sports, where whistles are frequently blown, present the largest potential for noise _ related problems to arise at this type of facility. This data is based upon measurement data collected by Mestre Greve Associates. At this time, there are no specific plans available for the park and thus specific potential noise levels are not projectable. It is not likely,' however, l LJ 221 TABLE FF FUTURE NOISE LEVELS ROADWAY LINK DISTANCE TO CNEL CONTOUR FROM CENTERLINE OF ROADWAY (FEET) 70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL State Route 55 SR 73 to Fair Dr. 415 895 1928 Fair Dr. to Wilson 359 773 1665 Wilson to Victoria 312 673 1450 Victoria to 19th 279 601 1296 19th to 17th 279 601 1296 Newport Boulevard Bristol to Birch 79 169 365 Birch St. to Del Mar 119 257 555 Del Mar to Wilson 117 252 542 Wilson to 22nd St. 122 264 568 22nd to 19th St. 92 198 426 19th to 17th St. 105 227 489 17th to Hospital 142 306 569 Hospital to CH 122 264 568 CH to Balboa 130 281 605 Superior Avenue 17th to Placentia 62 133 288 Placentia to CH RW 82 176 Balboa Boulevard CH to Newport Blvd. RW RW 106 East of Newport Boulevard RW 83 178 Irvine Boulevard SR 73 to Birch 62 133 288 Birch to Del Mar Ave. 72 155 334 Del Mar Ave. to 22nd St. 65 140 301 22nd St. to 19th St. 62 133 298 19th St. to 17th St. 56 120 259 S. of 17th St. RW 82 176 Continued 222 I TABLE FF (ConVd.) FUTURE NOISE LEVELS ROADWAY LINK DISTANCE TO CNEL CONTOUR FROM CENTERLINE OF ROADWAY (FEET) 70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL , Jamboree Road Dupont to Campus 132 284 612 Campus to Birch St. 118 254 548 Birch to California 122 262 564 ' California to MacArthur 107 231 498 MacArthur to Bristol 122 262 564 Bristol to Unk #1 127 273 598 Unk #1 to University 173 373 905 University to Bison 151 325 701 Bison to Ford 152 329 708 Ford to San Joaquin Hills 156 335 722 San Joaquin Hills to Santa Barbara 135 291 .627 Santa Barbara to CH 123 266 572 , MacArthur Boulevard North of Campus 95 204 440 Campus to Birch 84 180 389 Birch to Von Karmon 72 155 334 Von Karmon to Jamboree 79 169 365 Jamboree to Unk #1 100 215 464 Unk #1 to University 128 277 596 ' S. of University 132 284 612 N. of University 138 298 642 Bison to Ford 146 315 679 Ford to San Joaquin Hills 141 305 657 San Joaquin Hills to San Miguel 104 223 481 San Miguel to CH 88 190 409 ' Newport Coast Road N. of Bonita Canyon 63 135 291 Bonita Cnyn, to SJHTC 65 139 300 SJHTC to San Joaquin Hills 115 249 536 S. of San Joaquin Hills 89 191 411 N. of CH 79 170 366 San Canyon Road N. of SJHTC RW 90 194 SJHTC to San Joaquin Hills 57 122 264 S. of San Joaquin Hills RW 50 108 Continued. 223 I 1 TABLE FF (Contd.) FUTURE NOISE LEVELS ROADWAY LINK DISTANCE TO CNEL CONTOUR FROM CENTERLINE OF ROADWAY (FEET) 70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL Bluff Victoria to 19th St. 19th to 17th St. 17th to 15th St. Placentia Victoria to 19th Street 19th Street to 17th St. 17th Street. to 15th St. Hospital Road Superior to Newport Blvd. Victoria West of Bluff Bluff to Placentia 22nd Street Newport Blvd. to Irvine 19th Street W. of Bluff ` Bluff to Placentia Placantia to Harbor Newport to Orange St. Orange St. to Irvine Dover Drive East of Irvine N. of 17th Street 17th Street to 15th 15th Street to CH 17th Street Bluff to Placentia Placentia to Newport Blvd. Newport Blvd. to Irvine Blvd. Irvine Blvd. to Dover Continued. 224 RW 84 181 RW 98 212 RW 61 131 RW 94 202 RW 91 196 RW 79 170 RW 55 118 58 125 270 RW 66 142 RW RW 96 RW 84 181 51 110 237 RW 106 229 RW 61 131 RW RW 102 RW 52 111 RW 59 127 55 118 254 60 130 280 RW 88 190 RW 80 172 52 112 241 RW 80 172 r TABLE FF , (Cont'd.) FUTURE NOISE LEVELS ROADWAY LINK DISTANCE TO CNEL CONTOUR FROM CENTERLINE OF ROADWAY (FEEI) - 70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL' 15th Street CH to Bluff RW RW 102 Bluff to Placentia RW 66 142 Newport to Irvine RW RW 68 Irvine to Dover RW RW 75 State Route 73 W. of Newport Boulevard 311 670 1443 Newport Blvd. to Irvine 429 924 1990 Irvine to Jamboree 414 892 1922 Jamboree to Bison 383 824 1776 , Bison to Bonita Canyon 387 833 1796 Bonita Canyon to Newport Center 373 803 1731 Newport Coast to San Canyon 341 735 1583 ' Fast of San Canyon 350 754 1624 Coast Highway West of 15th Street 94 202 434 15th to Bluff Street 90 194 418 Bluff to Superior 99 214 462 Superior to Newport Blvd. 76 164' 353 Fast of Newport Blvd. 99 214 461 West of Newport Blvd. 84 181 389 Dover to Bayside 104 223 481 Bayside to Jamboree 123 264 569 Jamboree to Newport Center 96 207 446 Newport Center to MacArthur 59 126 272 MacArthur to Marguerite 54 116 249 , Marguerite to Newport Coast 94 203 437 Newport Coast to Sand Canyon 102 219 473 Bayside CH to Jamboree RW RW 102 Del Mar Avenue Newport Blvd. to Santa Ana RW 96 208 Santa Ana to Irvine Blvd. RW 66 142 Santa Ana Bristol to Birch RW 63 136 , Santa Ana to Irvine Blvd. RW RW 75 Continued. 225 I TABLE FF (Contd.) FUTURE NOISE LEVELS ROADWAY LINK DISTANCE TO CNEL CONTOUR FROM CENTERLINE OF ROADWAY (FEET) 70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL Orange S. of 17th St. Campus Dr. SR73 to MacArthur MacArthur to Von Karmon Von Karmon to Jamboree Jamboree to University East of University Birch Street Newport Blvd. to Santa Ana Santa Ana to Irvine Irvine to Bristol Bristol to MacArthur MacArthur to Von Karmon Von Karmon to Jamboree Von Karmon Avenue Dupont to Campus Campus to Birch Birch to MacArthur Bristol Street (eastbound) Santa Ana to Irvine Irvine to Jamboree Bristol Street (westbound) Santa Ana to Campus Campus to Jamboree Bristol Street Newport Blvd. to Santa Ana University Drive Jamboree to MacArthur MacArthur to California California to Campus East of Campus Continued. 226 RW RW 60 76 164 352 53 115 248 RW 102 220 79 170 366 87 188 404 RW 63 136 RW 58 125 RW 91 196 RW 99 214 RW 69 149 RW 66 142 56 120 259 RW 103 222 RW 76 163 87 188 406 72 155 334 87 188 406 69 149 321 97 209 451 70 151 325 79 170 366 98 211 455 66 143 308 TABLE FF (Contd.) ' FUTURE NOISE LEVELS ROADWAY LINK DISTANCE TO CNEL CONTOUR FROM CENTERLINE OF ROADWAY , (FEET) 70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL Eastbluff Drive S. of Jamboree RW '73 156 N. of Jamboree RW 66 142 ' Ford Road Jamboree to MacArthur RW 100 215 ` MacArthur to San Miguel 68 147 317 San Miguel to SJHTC 74 159 342 Bonita Canyon Road SJHTC to Unk #2 72 155 333 Unk #2 to Newport Coast 57 122 264 East of Newport Coast 57 122 264 California Avenue , Jamboree to University RW 80 172 University to Bison RW 86 186 Bison to Unk #2 RW 63 136 East of Unk #2 RW 80 172 Bison Road Jamboree to MacArthur 60 130 281 MacArthur to SJHTC 68 146 314 SJHTC to California 62 133 288 San Joaquin Hills Road Jamboree to Santa Cruz 69 148 319 Santa Cruz to Santa Rosa RW 105 227 Santa Rosa to MacArthur 59 128 275 MacArthur to San Miguel 52 ill 240 San Miguel to Marguerite 62 133 287 Marguerite to Spyglass Hill 73 158 340 Fast of Spyglass Hill 64 138 298 , West of Newport Coast Road 86 185 400 Newport Coast to San Canyon 66 143 309 San Miguel Road Newport Center Dr. to MacArthur RW 100 215 MacArthur to San Joaquin Hills RW 95 205 San Joaquin Hills to Spyglass Hill RW 74 160 ' Spyglass Hill to Bonita Canyon RW 85 183 Continued. 227 L I ' TABLE FF (Contd.) IFUTURE NOISE LEVELS ' ROADWAY LINK DISTANCE TO CNEL CONTOUR FROM CENTERLINE OF ROADWAY (FEET) 70 CNEL 65 CNEL 60 CNEL Spyglass Hill San Miguel to San Joaquin Hills RW RW RW Marguerite South of San Joaquin Hills Road RW RW RW North of Coast Highway RW RW RW Santa Cruz San Joaquin Hills to Newport Center RW 76 163 Santa Barbara Drive Jamboree to Newport Center RW 84 181 Newport Center Drive Newport Center to Newport Center RW 84 181 Jamboree to Newport Center 327 704 1517 Newport Center Drive Newport Center to Newport Center 327 704 1517 Source: Mestre Greve Associates Notes: RW - Contour falls on right-of-way 228 1. that this type of facility would cause the City's noise ordinance to be violated at any time , regardless of the way the park is ultimately designed. The future noise increases due solely to the project are identified in Column 2 and are all less than 3 dB. The proposed project will not create project -specific off -site impacts from the increased traffic generated by the proposed development. Off -site traffic noise impacts ' are considered less than significant. On -site Traffic Noise Impacts , Traffic volumes reported in the traffic study were used with the FHWA Highway Traffic ' Noise Model to project future unmitigated noise levels for all of the roadways. The modeling results are reported in the form of distances to the 60, 65, and 70 CNEL contours. These projections do not take into account any barriers to topography that may reduce noise levels. Future traffic noise take into account any barriers or topography that may reduce noise levels. Future traffic noise levels impacting the project site were presented in Table FF. The data are also presented graphically for each of the development sites in Exhibits 7 through 15 contained in Appendix D. These exhibits show the 60, 65, and 70 CNEL future traffic noise contours. The data in Table FF depict future traffic noise contours for the residential developments , associated with the project. The results indicate that residential areas will experience worst case future noise levels in excess of 65 CNEL along Dover Drive. Exterior mitigation , measures will be required along Dover Drive for exterior living areas to achieve a 65 CNEL. According to the California Land Use Compatibility guidelines (Exhibit 52) residential land uses inside the 65 to 70 CNEL zone are "conditionally acceptable," new construction or ' development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirement is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning, will normally suffice. This site also includes an active park which will experience traffic noise greater than 65 CNEL. According to the California Land Use Compatibility guidelines (Exhibit 52) neighborhood. park land uses inside the 65 to 70 CNEL zone are "normally acceptable" based on the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements. Open space land uses are not addressed in the Compatibility guidelines. The residential areas will experience traffic noise levels in excess of 65 CNEL. Exterior mitigation measures will be required along Jamboree Road for exterior livingareas to achieve a 65 CNEL. According to the California Land Use Compatibility guidelines (Exhibit 52) residential land uses inside the 65 to 70 CNEL zone are "conditionally acceptable," new construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed, analysis of the noise ' reduction requirement is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air 229 1 conditions, will normally suffice.' Open space areas are not subject to state or local noise standards. The proposed Newporter Resort project is located just south of Newporter North and will include hotel land uses. The results show that these hotel rooms will experience future noise ' levels just greater than 60 CNEL. According to the California Land Use Compatibility guidelines (Exhibit 52) hotel land uses inside the 60 to 65 CNEL zone are "normally acceptable" based on the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional ' construction, without any special noise insulation requirements. The future traffic noise contours for the Block 800 multi -family residential site show that this site will experience future noise levels in excess of 65 CNEL. Exterior mitigation measures will be required along Santa Barbara Drive for exterior living areas to achieve a 65 CNEL. ' According to the California Land Use Compatibility guidelines (Exhibit 52) residential land uses inside the 65 to 70 CNEL zone are "conditionally acceptable," new construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirement is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditions, will normally suffice. ' The future traffic noise contours for the San Diego Creek South site show that the areas facing Jamboree Road will experience noise levels greater than 70 CNEL. According to the ' City's Noise Assessment Guidelines, this condition is "normally unacceptable," new construction or development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Homes which will face University Drive will experience traffic noise levels in excess of 65 CNEL. According to the California Land Use Compatibility guidelines (Exhibit 52) residential land uses inside the 65 ' to 70 CNEL zone are "conditionally acceptable," new construction of development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirement is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditions, will normally suffice. Exterior mitigation measures will be required along Jamboree Road and University Drive for exterior living area to achieve a 65 CNEL. Also impacting the San Diego Creek South site is the ' proposed San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor. The preliminary freeway plans show that the freeway is to be constructed approximately 600 feet from the edge of the site and will be elevated approximately 30 feet above the grade of the site. A preliminary analysis ' of the noise levels on the site due to the freeway indicates that noise levels will be below 67 Leq (67 Leq is the design guideline that Caltrans employs to determine the necessity for the construction of noise barriers). If noise levels do exceed Caltrans criteria for noise, it is ' incumbent upon Caltrans to construct suitable noise mitigation for the residential areas adjacent to the freeway. r-I Ll n 230 11 In addition to the freeway itself, freeway access ramps are a potential source of traffic noise ' and may cause noise related problems on the proposed residential property. The specific ramp that poses the most significant potential problem is the ramp known as the "Jamboree ' flyover." This ramp runs from northbound Jamboree Road to northbound SR-73. The ramp is the cause of some concern because it begins on the west side of Jamboree Road approximately 400 feet south of the San Diego Creek (which places it directly adjacent to ' the San Diego Creek South site). A preliminary noise analysis shows, however, that the ramp will have no significant impact upon noise levels within the San Diego Creek South site. ' The future traffic noise contours for the Freeway Reservation site show the two residential areas associated with this development will experience traffic noise levels up to 70 CNEL. , Exterior mitigation measures will be required along MacArthur Boulevard and Ford Road for exterior living areas to achieve a 65 CNEL. According to the California Land Use Compatibility guidelines (Exhibit 52) residential land uses inside the 65 to 70 CNEL zone are 'conditionally acceptable," new construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirement is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning will normally suffice. The Bay View Landing commercial site is proposed for use either as a restaurant or a health , club. The results show that areas along Jamboree Road and Coast Highway will experience traffic noise levels in excess of 70 CNEL. According to the California Land Use Compatibility guidelines (Exhibit 52) commercial land uses experiencing noise levels in excess of 70 CNEL are "conditionally acceptable," new construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirement is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning, will normally suffice. Therefore the restaurant (or health club) will likely achieve a 55 CNEL interior without ' building upgrades. The San Diego Creek North open space site results show that areas in Lot "A" and Lot "B" along Jamboree Road, State Route 73 and along the proposed re -aligned University Drive will experience traffic noise levels greater than 70 CNEL. However, open space land uses are not addressed in the Compatibility guidelines and are not subject to local noise standards. Open space areas along Jamboree Road, MacArthur Boulevard and the proposed State Route 73 will experience noise levels in excess of 75 CNEL. Open space areas are not subject to state or local noise standards. Future traffic noise contours for the Corporate Plaza West commercial office site show the , site will experience traffic noise levels up to 70 CNEL due to Coast Highway. According to the California Land Use Compatibility guidelines (Exhibit 52) office building land uses inside 231 ' I r 11 I n 1 the 65 to 70 CNEL zone are "conditionally acceptable," new construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirement is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems br air conditioning, will normally suffice. Buildings using standard construction techniques typically achieve at least 20 dB outdoor to indoor noise reduction with 25 dB to 28 dB being typical for office buildings. The offices along Coast Highway will require up to 25 dB of noise reduction. Therefore, the commercial offices will likely achieve a 45 CNEL interior without building upgrades. Acoustical barriers will be required on residential sites where residential uses encroach within the 65 CNEL impact zone. Noise barriers may be a solid masonry wall, a berm or a combination berm/wall. Noise barrier heights were calculated for sample locations for each of the above mentioned residential sites. Noise barriers for the Upper Castaways site may range from 5 to 7 feet high for the northern portion of the site along Dover Drive inside the 65 CNEL contour. For the Newporter North site, sound walls required along Jamboree Road may range from 6 to 9 feet in height. Residential areas along Santa Barbara Drive within the Block 800 site may require a 4 to 6 foot high sound barrier to achieve a 65 CNEL exterior. For the Freeway Reservation site, residential areas may require sound barriers ranging from 7 to 9 feet along MacArthur Boulevard and from 6 to 8 feet along Ford Road. For the San Diego Creek South site, residential areas will require barrier heights rangit}g from 6 to 7 feet along University Drive and from 8 to 10 feet along Jamboree Road. The above noise barrier heights projected may be reduced considerably through site design such as setbacks from the roadways, grade separations, and exterior living area orientation. On -site Future Helicopter Noise Levels Future Newport Beach Police helicopter noise levels are not expected to change from the existing noise levels discussed previously. Therefore, noise levels at the Newport North site shown in Table FF will also apply for future conditions. The existing noise levels are based on existing operations schedules, aircraft type, and flight track parameters which are not expected to change in the future. The Newport Beach Police Station currently operates two helicopters with similar engine type. These are the Hughes 500-D and the MD 500-E. Both aircraft have similar engines and use a five -blade tail rotor which is quieter. No impacts are anticipated. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Table EE identifies the increases in noise levels that are expected to occur along roadways in the City of Newport Beach as a result of future development in the City and region (including the proposed project). Table EE also identifies the project's contribution to any noise increase. As shown in Table EE, the proposed project does not contribute any 232 I measurable noise increase on those roadways segments which are projected to experience , significant noise increases. (an increase of 3 dB or greater). Consequently, the project is not considered to contribute to a significant cumulative adverse impact related to noise on ' roadways within the City of Newport Beach. EXISTING CITY POLICIES AND REQUIREMENTS ' A. Any roof top or other mechanical equipment shall be sound attenuated in such a manner as to achieve a maximum sound level of 55 dBA at the property line. ' B. Any mechanical equipment and emergency power generators shall be screened from view and noise associated with said installations shall be sound attenuated so as not , to exceed 55 dBA at the property line. The latter shall be based upon the recommendations of a licensed engineer practicing in acoustics and be approved by , the Planning Department. C. Pursuant to the City of Newport Beach Noise Ordinance Section 10.28.040, construction adjacent to existing residential development shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. Monday through Friday" and 8:00 a.m. through 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. Construction shall not be allowed outside of these hours Monday through , Saturday and at any time on Sundays and federal holidays. Verification of this shall be provided to the City's Advance Planning Manager. D. Prior to the issuance of building permits for each of the planned units, an acoustical engineering study shall be performed based on actual pad, property, roadway grades, building locations, and orientations to assure that the exterior building shells of each structure will be sufficient to reduce existing and future noise levels to an acceptable intensity. MITIGATION MEASURES , 12. The applicant shall ensure that all residential lots and dwellings are sound attenuated , against present and projected noise, which shall be the sum of all noise impacting the project, so as not to exceed an exterior standard of 65 dB CNEL in outdoor living areas and an interior standard of 45 dB CNEL in all habitable rooms. Evidence shall be prepared under the supervision of a City certified acoustical consultant which demonstrates that these standards will be satisfied in a manner consistent with applicable zoning regulations shall be submitted as follows: ' A. Prior to the recordation of a final tract/parcel map or prior to the issuance of Grading Permits, at the sole discretion of the City, an Acoustical Analysis ' Report shall be submitted to the City's Advance Planning Manager for approval. The report shall describe in detail the exterior noise environment ' and preliminary mitigation measures. Acoustical design features to achieve 233 1 interior noise standards may be included in the report in which case it may also satisfy "B" below. B. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, an acoustical analysis report describing the acoustical design features of the structures required to satisfy the exterior and interior noise standards shall be submitted to the Advance Planning Manager for approval along with satisfactory evidence which indicates that the sound attenuation measures specified in the approved acoustical report(s) have been incorporated into the design of the project. C. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, all freestanding acoustical barriers must be shown on the projects plot plan illustrating height, location and construction in a manner meeting the approval of the City's Advance Planning Manager. ' D. Prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Use and Occupancy, field testing in accordance with Title 25 regulations may be required by the Planning Director to verify compliance with STC and HC design standards. ' 13. All non-residential structures shall be sound attenuated against the combined impact of all present and projected noise from exterior noise sources to meet the interior noise criteria as specified in the Noise Element. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, evidence shall be prepared under the supervision of a City certified acoustical consultant that these standards will be ' satisfied and shall be submitted to the Manager, Advance Planning in the form of an Acoustical Analysis Report describing in detail the exterior noise environment and the acoustical design features required to achieve the interior noise standard and which indicate that the sound attenuation measures specified have been incorporated into the design of the project. ' 14. All freestanding acoustical barriers shall be a berm, wall or combination berm and wall. Walls shall not contain holes or gaps. Walls shall be constructed of materials suitable to meet sound attenuation standards. Final acoustical barrier heights and ' locations shall be determined when final grading plans are developed showing lot locations, house/building setbacks and precise pad elevation. ' LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE Project -Specific All short-term impacts resulting from construction activities will be mitigated to a level of insignificance. 234 Off -site noise impacts due to traffic generated by the proposed development are not a , significant impact. On -site noise impacts will exceed acceptable noise levels effecting the proposed residential development on the San Diego Creek South, Upper Castaways, Newporter North, Block 800, and Freeway Reservation sites. Mitigation measures have been provided which will reduce ' these impacts to a level of insignificance. On -site noise impacts effecting the proposed non- residential uses will not occur. The roadways surrounding the Bay View Landing, San Diego Creek North, Jamboree/MacArthur, Corporate Plaza West, and Block 800 sites will not ' cause an exceedance of acceptable noise standards. Cumulative u The proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable ' future projects, will not result in significant cumulative noise impacts. I I F i 235 ' IJ J EXISTING CONDITIONS BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES General Conditions The project area lies within the Newport Beach/Costa Mesa coastal subregion of Orange ' County. Landforms in the subregion typically consist of low rolling hills extending to the ocean where they tend to end abruptly in coastal bluffs which drop to rocky or sandy coastline areas. This pattern is broken by the mouth of San Diego Creek which forms an extensive back bay area protected from the ocean by the Balboa Peninsula. ' Elevations within the project area range from sea level to approximately 200 feet above sea level. Within this range, a wide variety of topography exists, including steep bluffs, relatively level bluff tops and gently rolling hillsides. 11 All sites have been disturbed to varying degrees in the past. Level of disturbances range from urban development to grazing and dryland farming. Not all portions of all sites have been disturbed and native vegetation and habitats do remain in some areas. Despite past agricultural uses and residential, marina, and commercial development, several prominent natural features remain. The most prominent of the natural features is the Upper Newport Bay. Remaining areas of natural biological resources exist as small enclaves within localized canyons, drainages, and hillsides. They are scattered throughout the project area. Several of the project sites are either in proximity, or adjacent to, the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. The Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve is a significant regional resource. It includes habitat for several rare and endangered, and sensitive plant and wildlife species. Other sensitive resources on -site include various plant communities and habitats. Three plant communities are considered to be sensitive, primarily due to the limited distribution within Southern California and their importance to wildlife. These are freshwater marsh, saltmarsh and coastal sage scrub. Plant Communities Five distinct plant communities are found within the project boundaries. These are coastal sage scrub, freshwater marsh, saltmarsh, introduced annual grassland and ruderal. A complete listing of plant species is provided in Appendix E. Table GG provides an existing inventory of plant communities found on -site. 236 TABLE GG PLANT COMMUNITIES EXISTING On -site Project Site Coastal Sage Scrub Freshwater Marsh Saltmarsh Introduced Annual Grass Ruderal San Diego Creek South • • San Diego Creek North • • Jamboree/MacArthur • Upper Castaways • • • • Bay View Landing • • • Newport North • • • Newporter Knoll • • Newporter Resort • Block 800 Corporate Plaza West • Freeway Reservation • • Source: Steve Nelson u 237 I 1 Coastal Sage Scrub This community is dominated by a mixture of woody and succulent plants. Coastal sage scrub occurs at localized sites along the California coast from Point Conception south to Point Loma. In general, it is considered a sensitive habitat due to its association with several plant and wildlife species which are listed or are eligible for listing on State or Federal rare or endangered species lists, including the California gnatcatcher. Freshwater Marsh Freshwater Marsh is a plant community which occasionally exists along the coast and in coastal valleys near river mouths and around the margins of ponds lakes and springs. It is dominated by perennial herbaceous monocots which typically grow to six feet in height. It may also support other taller, woody dicots. Saltmarsh The saltmarsh plant community occurs in bays, lagoons and estuaries along the coast. Characteristically, it extends from the upper intertidal zone to above the mean high tide zone. The soils are saturated with seawater, except at the uppermost regions. It is dominated by woody, semi -succulent perennials and grasses growing one to two feet in height. Introduced Annual Grassland This plant community is a "naturalized" form of vegetation resulting from the artificial clearing of native vegetation and habitats through grazing, dryland farming and other means. Characteristically, this community is dominated by annual grasses and herbs that grow one to three feet high. Growth and flowering occurs in the spring following winter rainfall, at which time plants die and persist as seeds over the summer and fall. Consequently, live vegetation is lacking over the latter periods. ' Ruderal ' Ruderal plant communities are those which result from frequent and intensive disturbances. Usually, all native vegetation is removed and replaced by annual grasses and forbs. In contrast to introduced annual grassland, ruderal vegetation is sparse and areas of bare ' ground are common. Other Noteworthy Vegetation 1 Generally, the only other vegetation on the sites consists of non-native, ornamental species. Of note, there are two small stands of mature eucalyptus trees (Eucalyptus sp.) in the northwest corner and northeast corner. of the Castaways site. These trees do not in 238 1 11 themselves represent a distinct woodland community; however, they can provide roosting and nesting sites for birds. Wildlife , The project boundaries support a wide diversity of vegetation. These result in variety of ' wildlife habitat types. The following discussion addresses brushland (coastal sage scrub), wetland (freshwater marsh and salt marsh), and grassland (introduced annual grassland and ruderal) wildlife groups. An inventory of species, along with their presence, status and ' habitat preference is presented in Appendix E of the DEIR. The list provides a compilation of species observed during previous studies and expected to occur based on habitat requirements. ' Brushland Habitats Brushland habitats on -site include coastal sage scrub in its coastal bluff form. It is expected that brushland on -site provides habitat for a number of species of wildlife. Amphibians are generally absent due to the relatively dry habitat conditions. Several reptiles are expected ' here. Those most commonly observed in this type of habitat, include gopher snake (Pltuoohis melanoleucus), western fence lizard (Sceloponts occidentalis) and side -blotched lizard (Utastansburiana). ' Numerous bird species reside in this habitat or include it as part of their foraging area. Bird species commonly encountered are wrentit (Chamaea fasciata), scrub jay Aphelocoma ' coerulescens), greater 'roadrunner (Geococcvx callfondanus), house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), California towhee (kilo fuscus), rufous -sided towhee (Ptpilo ervthrorphthalmus), , northern mockingbird (Mimes polvelottos), white -crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrvs), loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), bushtit (Psaltriparus minimus), yellow -tamped warbler (Dendroica coronata), Anna's hummingbird (Calypte anna) and Says Phoebe ' (Savomis saya). Most of these are small songbirds. Also present, are wide ranging birds of prey which use open brushland for foraging habitat. These species include red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicetuis) and American kestrele (Falco sparvedus). Several mammals also inhabit brushland habitats. Included among these are coyote (Canis latrans), deer mouse (Peromyscuc maniculatus), Pacific kangaroo rat (Dipodomysgilir), desert cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonfi), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis) and California ' ground squirrel ( permophilus beeche,yi). Wetland Habitats ' Wetland habitats, including freshwater marsh and saltmarsh, serve as the entire habitat or ' critical component of the habitat for a great variety of wildlife. Within freshwater marsh, amphibian species include Pacific slender salamander (Batra- choseps pacil7cus) and Pacific tree frog (Hula regilla). Reptiles include southern alligator , 239 1 ' P I 1 I E lizard (Gerrhonotus muldcarinatus) and common garter snake (Thamnophis sirtahs). Many bird species are specialized for this habitat and some are found nowhere else. These include black -crowned night heron (Nycticorax nvcicorax), Virginia rail (Rallus limicola), soya (Porzana caroling), belted kingfisher (Ceryle alcyon), marsh wren (Cistothonts palusttir), song sparrow (Melospiza melodia) and red -winged blackbird ( selaius phoeniceus). The areas of open water commonly associated with this habitat are equally critical for several species of water birds and water fowl, including mallard (Anas plaOEh ny chos), pintail (Anas acuta), ruddy duck (Oxyura iamaicensis) and American coot (Fulica americana). Due to the wetland conditions associated with these habitats, mammals are found only at the outer margins. These include Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana) and raccoon (Procyon lotor). Many other species of amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals are also expected in this habitat. Salt marsh is equally valuable to many species. Within the project area, this habitat is represented by a narrow strip within the Upper Castaways site only. Species expected here are restricted to birds only, including several species of gulls, terns, water fowl and shorebirds. Amphibians, reptiles and mammals are not expected at this location. Grassland Habitats Grasslands on -site include the introduced annual grassland. Ruderal grassland is also considered here. Large open expanses of grassland usually support a limited abundance and diversity of wildlife. While this is usually the case for large grassland areas, it is not expected to hold true for the study area where grassland habitats are relatively small. Instead, the grasslands on -site intermix with other habitat types, resulting in an "ecotone" where increased wildlife diversity follows increased habitat diversity. Wildlife from adjacent habitats are expected to utilize the grassland in addition to those species which are residents of grassland habitats. With the exception of western toad (Rub boreas), amphibians are expected to be generally absent. Several reptiles are expected, including racer (Coluber constrictor), gopher snake (Pltuophis ' memlanoleucus), side -blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana) and western whiptail (Cnemidophorus dgzk). ' Mammals are represented by such species as coyote (Canis latrans), deer mouse (Perom sy cuc maniculatus), western harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys megalods), botta pocket gopher ' (Thomomys bottae), California ground squirrel (&p nnophilus beech evi) and broad -handed mole (Scapanus latimanus). A number of birds are either full time grassland inhabitants or depend upon this habitat as a forage resource area. Among the full time inhabitants are mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), homed ]ark (Eremophila alpestris), lark sparrow (Chondestesgrammacus), vesper sparrow (Po oecetesgramineus), western meadowlark (Stumella ne Ig ecta) and western kingbird ' 240 J' (Tbrannus verticalis). Those species which forage in grassland are wide-ranging birds of prey, ' including resident species and winter migrants. These include red-tailed hawk (Buteoe jamaicencis), turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), American kestrel (Falco sparverius), great- ' horned owl (Bubo vimginianus), black -shouldered' kite (Elanus caerulus), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus) and barn owl (7yto alba). Sensitive Resources ' Sensitive Vegetation and Habitats ' Of the various plan communities and habitats found in the project area, three are considered ' to be sensitive, primarily due to the limited distribution in southern California and their importance to wildlife. These are freshwater marsh, saltmarsh and coastal sage scrub. Freshwater marsh: This habitat is very limited in its distribution and critical to many wildlife , species. It is also part of the critical habitat for a number of sensitive wildlife species, including the light-footed clapper tail (Rallus longirostris levives) and California black rail ' (Laterallus jamaicensis) which are rare and endangered species. Where this habitat occurs in association with larger, off -site complexes of marsh and , riparian habitat, it may also serve as a portion of a wildlife movement corridor. Typically, the wildlife use these areas to move due to the cover and foraging habitat they provide. Such is the case for the freshwater marsh within the San Diego Creek South, San Diego ' Creek North and Newporter Knoll sites. Salt Marsh: This habitat is highly limited in its distribution and is now found at only a few , locations in southern California. It is vital to many wildlife species, including the light-footed clapper rail, California black rail, Belding's savannah sparrow (Easserculus sandwichensis belding) and least tern (Sterna antilarium brown), all of which are rare or endangered. Salt ' marsh bird's beak (Cordvlanthus maritimus var. maridmus), and endangered plant species, also occurs in salt marsh habitats. Coastal Sage Scrub: This habitat has become the recent focus of concern for many wildlife ' habitat conservation groups, due to widespread loss to development in Southern California. In addition to supporting a number of more common wildlife species, many areas of Coastal ' Sage Scrub including those found at Newporter North and Bay View Landing, are habitat for the California gnatcatcher, which is a candidate species for USFWS endangered status (see additional discussion under Sensitive Wildlife Species). ' LJ 241 1 P ' Plant Communities SOUTHERN TARPLANT A 1988 survey, by Michael Brandman Associates, of the proposed Castaways Marina site and Upper Castaways site recorded the presence of southern tarplant (Hemizonia australis), a CNPS List 3 species. The CNPS classification indicates that more information on its status is necessary to support its listing as rare by CNPS standards. The species has no official ' status with the CDFG or USFWS. It is believed that this plant has been extirpated from much of its former range, where it is found in grasslands near the coast, often along trails. In the study area, the plant was recorded near the eastern bluffs of the Upper Castaways ' site in 1988, growing beside and established trail. The southern tarplant was not observed during a subsequent 1989 survey, nor was it observed during this survey. It is possible that it has been removed due to discing operations for fire control after 1988. ' APHANISMA ' Aphanisma (Aphanisma blitoids) is a USFWS Category 2 Candidate. It is a small inconspicuous plant that occurs on bluffs in coastal sage scrub or along the coastal strand. It may occur on the steep bluffs of the Upper Castaways and Newporter North sites above Newport Bay. It has not been observed in the area. Sensitive Wildlife Species ' LIGHT-FOOTED CLAPPER RAIL ' The light-footed clapper rail (Rallus longirostris levipes) is a USFWS endangered and CDFG endangered species. It is found from Santa Barbara to Baja California, where it inhabits coastal salt marsh, brackish and freshwater marsh habitats. Habitat loss is considered to be the major cause for decline. It was not observed on any of the sites, but is expected in the freshwater marsh at John Wayne Gulch within the Newporter North site. ' CALIFORNIA BLACK RAIL The California Black'rail (Laterallus jamaicensis columiculus) is a CDFG rare species. it is ' known from a number of coastal and inland areas where is inhabits coastal salt marshes, brackish marshes and freshwater marshes, including Upper Newport Bay. Habitat loss is the primary reason for its rare status. It was not observed, but may inhabit the freshwater ' marsh within John Wayne Gulch within the Newporter North site. SNOWY PLOVER ' The snowy plover (Charadrius alexandrfnus) is a USFWS Category 2 Candidate and a CDFG Species of Special Concern. It nests on beaches and sand flats that are isolated from human disturbance and predation. The snowy plover has declined because suitable nesting 242 sites have been lost to development and recreation, and feral cats and dogs have been ' introduced into its habitat. This species may occur in the study area during migration, but it is not likely to nest there due to the level of disturbance and other human activities. ' RED -SHOULDERED HAWK The red -shouldered hawk (Buteo linealus) is listed as a sensitive species by the National ' Audubon Society and is considered locally sensitive by some, but not all, biologists. A red - shouldered hawk was observed roosting in the eucalyptus trees on Upper Castaways by , Michael Brandman Associates (1989) and was reported to possibly nest there. It was not observed during this study. CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER ' The California gnatcatcher (PoHo ptila califomica) is a USFWS Category 2 Candidate. It occupies coastal sage scrub habitat dominated by California sagebrush, and its numbers have ' declined dramatically because of habitat loss and fragmentation associated with regional development. Its former range extended from Ventura County south into Baja California, ' but is now absent from Ventura and most of Los Angeles Counties. Previously, California gnatcatchers have been found in coastal sage scrub at other locations in the Upper Newport Bay (March 1990). More recently, Pacific Southwest Biological Services, Inc. (1991) found a pair of California gnatcatchers in coastal sage scrub within the boundaries of the newly formed Upper Newport Bay Regional Park (formerly referred to as the Westbay site). A detailed gnatcatcher survey was conducted for this EIR in March 1991. It is contained in , Appendix E. California gnatcatchers were found to inhabit coastal sage scrub within Newporter North and Bay View Landing. At Newporter North, a total of four pairs and two lone males were observed. On Bay View Landing, one lone male was observed. No ' gnatcatchers were observed on Upper Castaways, The coastal sage scrub on Upper Castaways has dominant species of California encelia, prickly pear cactus, and bladderpod. California sagebrush is almost absent. Due to the steepness of the bluff faces, bare ground is common. Further, iceplant is found in large patches throughout the habitat on Upper Castaways. These characteristics are not favorable for supporting gnatcatchers. ' Specific Sites San Diego Creek South This 21.0 acre site has been entirely graded and the majority of the site now supports ruderal vegetation. The northern portion of the site is adjacent to San Diego Creek. Some ' freshwater marsh vegetation dominated by cattail (7, plia latifolia), bulrush (Scirpus sp. ), and arroyo willow (Salix lasfoleois) exists along the edge of the creek. Another small area of freshwater marsh (1.45 acres) is located on the eastern edge of the site along Bonita Creek , and consists of the same vegetation. Exhibit 58 depicts biological resources on the site. 243 1 /, VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES ® FRESHWATER MARSH RUDERAL •.v rJ DEVELOPMENT AREA The developmem area dames the portion of the site Identified for multi- family residential uses in the proposed PC Text. Grading related to develop- mem of this use could extend beyond the developmemboundary. Gradingwil also occur for road Improvements out- side of areas designated for develop- ment. source: sreven Nelson BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREAS —Sjpj,i�c SAN DIEGO CREEK SOUTH PLANNING, INC CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & !MM{.MIj OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT no scale City of Newport Beach 11 58 I ' San Diego Creek North ' This 14.7 acre site has previously been graded and is dominated by ruderal vegetation. A small area located in the southeastern corner of the site supports freshwater marsh (0.72 acres). The freshwater marsh vegetation is dominated by cattail (7yplia latifolia), bulrush (Scipus sp.), and arroyo willow (Sa1ix lasiolepis). Exhibit 59 depicts biological resources on the site. H 1 Jamboree/MacArthur This site supports freshwater marsh over essentially the 4.7 acre site. The freshwater marsh vegetation is dominated by cattail (Tplia latifolia), bulrush (Scirpus sp.), and arroyo willow (Salix lasioleois). The site contains a man-made freshwater pond due to past grading activities. The pond is located near the center of the site with only small peripheral areas between the pond and surrounding slopes not containing freshwater marsh. Exhibit 60 depicts biological resources on the site. Upper Castaways The 56.6 acre site supports introduced annual grassland over the majority of the site. Portions of the site contain freshwater marsh, saltmarsh, and coastal sage scrub. The area also includes two small strands of eucalyptus trees. Freshwater marsh occurs in the central portion of the site along the western edge adjacent to Dover Drive. Coastal sage scrub is limited to the steep bluff faces overlooking the Bay. The coastal sage scrub occurring on -site is characteristic of the community, consisting of low, often prostrate plants, one to three feet high. The steepness of the bluff faces often results in open vegetative cover where bare ground is common. Dominant plant species at this location consist of California sagebrush, California encelia (Encilia califomica) and California buckwheat (Erlogonum fasciculatum). Also found are occasional sugarbush (Rhos ovata) and bladder pod. In addition, iceplant (Mesembj3 anthemum sp.) is also common. Upper Castaways is the only site of the 11 project sites, which contains saltwater marsh where it occurs as a thin, patchy strip along the mud flat at the base of the coastal bluff. Exhibit 61 depicts on -site biological resources. Southern tarplant, a sensitive plant species (CLAPS list 3 species) was recorded near the eastern bluffs of the Upper Castaways site in 1988. The species has no official status with the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) or United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). It is believed that this plant has been extirpated from much of its former range, where it is found in.grasslands near the coast, often along trails. In the study area, the plant was recorded growing near an established trail. The southern tarplant was not observed during a subsequent 1989 survey, nor was it observed during this survey. It is possible that it has been removed due to discing operations for fire control after 1988. 245 1;J '•':'•71: i77;: i77;::'lilt{�:;7'�iiJl?t :'f i�;;7�•: �•: i•'t 'ff�:i•77J:•i•::Y%:•"�!,':i:77::: •7 i•:'{7:f: i'::::., ;: ti7;.:5.;: 'ii Jo ::i:y 7'ft:i•.•7,;r$y'irr:}r:'y'''' .:ti,};: i rc' .vr:,f,:.7 :•:�� i.:7. } .: i:• : •i'.: v:: L•:.:'rr: •: {: J•:}i�?��,`•'�+`•:7`{}.. ''rreii:•fi7i ��?:. }{fJ.i:777:......i7.7i.;� •:.: i.;?ir}'• 7+ffl.•7)�$ :lr :: .c iy77};7iii::� ..9n.��.r.{i?firtNi7 �• t))•{�,{ �{rtlt,::.: 'i:,•. •::i •�.,io ., i•.: L•; •: i•:.:.7; •: •7' t���i�;7f:�:Z7.t :,}i}{iy:•::. ,p,f:r:.: i77:•7q:7�:3:•�J:y: •; :�•f.••7 ;i7::f .:... !:J t.:Q :::::N�����..�.: ••:7::7:.::: ::::.: .�• ti': ail 7::.•,;, 7 ;7'A!. .w7•{•:17.7f+:�b7;$7;:�j7;7: :,J,:•:"r'�Y.''' r !`.;;: 7r ;i:'}iv,�i�i A. :':>:'i• :• �7:177}J •y :J it;•*'••�: �lJ �:{::77 ::•: H,•o7;7tii;7:;7•i: �:{' �::: i': i':i:7:.}� :ill:?.•,{J;: .,y::J,•K ;�• � 'i�r^7• r::f�::iv::.?.7Ji?Ci;i ' ?>� .i'��ii•!,.•.f e,..'•l�..•iM'.•'••;;7 {?{�.? ; il•'i`i}7{?'?:?::.� ii{iLit�i :fir �aJ�.i�+i;7y 7t��;•7, i�i•,J�r �{:t i7fi��I' •?:7i:..... :•:.::{ Z ;?r re r.. �•. 't;,r;:irr �•'N•f �•S'. N4:17 it � .!• ... �dha,•7:.:. i•::,.• . ..: r '"':'•''''.... .?f{7 ,i:•7a ?: KKyS•.1{'r"'''. 7:: {'Mi:7:Jl: 7ti;J. 'tom` narEF y.: ..dJ,•tti7 +'•.77�' .71Ji4•Y:a VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES RUDERAL ® FRESHWATER MARSH NOTE: The proposed PC Text does not specifi- C* identify a development area for the ska Graft Is expected to occur for various location of the as with possible ' dewlopnwra of Sayview (University) Ddw a park and ride lot, a fire station, and Cttw uses permitted by the PC c � u o 1n . N 4 I 4Y.y y :M .- Source: Steven Nelsoi BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREAS ,� • Sminc SAN DIEGO CREEK NORTH PIANNIN(', INC CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT no scale City of Newport Beach 59 EXISTING LANDSCAPE_ I;ORNFR VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES ® FRESHWATER MARSH !UC ARTBC64 BLYB. NOTE: The proposed PCText does not identdy �. a development area Open space uses will be permitted on the site. Only Rmit- ed grading could be expected or assmlF ated with habitat restoration; landscap- ing. Any improvements to drainage or transportation tachities could also require grading on the site. ouurce: ateven nelson BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREAS UAinc JAMBOREE/MACARTH U R PIANN,NG.INC- CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT no scale City of Newport Beach 60 I I I I 11 I I •I I I .. �_ .cam- -_ -P � t. �+i ..\•. r1v�..- _�./ NOTE: Indicates areas proposed for development by the applicant, NOT extent of grading. Grading will occur for roads, open space uses, trails, bluff restoration, etc. outside of areas designated for development Development area denotes the portion of the site Identified for development of residential uses in the proposed PC Text. Grading related to development of residential uses could extend beyond the development area boundary. Grad- ing could also occur for roads, open space uses, trails, and bluff restoration, outside of areas designated for develop. ment. VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES ® FRESHWATER MARSH INTRODUCED ANNUAL GRASSLAND !�,��„ ;`, COASTAL SAGE SCRUB EM SALT MARSH DEVELOPMENT AREA Source: Steven Nelson PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREAS Ito! o MxinC BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES PLANNING INC, UPPER CASTAWAYS CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT no scale City of Newport Beach E 61 L �. .■t � � l■r try: � � � 1■�r �s �r a■u � �. r r u. i NOTE: Development area denotesthe portion of the she identified for development of commercial uses in the proposed PC Text. Grading related to development of. commercial uses could extend beyond the area boundary. Grading could also occur for roads, open space uses, trails, 'and bluff restoration, outside of areas designated for development VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES INTRODUCED ANNUAL GRASSLAND COASTAL SAGE SCRUB RUDERAL DEVELOPMENT AREA �w i 'v ;;s• :-r :'' ......... t +., .o . ar �f •T .i • 0 ,n• ti .�vo Puclt a. ••'s g:;>.}}:fiir:•' •�i•. •' ••e •n ;'�L ;�.:•: Sit �.� • r:;•• X+i X-2%' _]=.ems=•="_.+C. '•tiA •.••��_. - r, r.3 , COAST • � �-._•fir Rrnrrr•-a• Rtavan Nalen BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREAS 't grLalinc BAYVIEW LANDING uina•iaa CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & Mo OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT no scale City of Newport Beach 62 m No 1-0 m 111m om Will 1W am me 4m AW mm m m I� L uwu..•• •• �t• .� I I` i.=\ 'I`.1"�I���ILS'V\:rl: JZ, .... f. NOTE: Developmeraarea denotestheportion of the site Identified for developnlerR of residential uses In the proposed p0 ' Text. Grading related to development of residential uses could extend beyond the development area boundary. Grad. 41, Ing could also occur for roads, open space uses, trails, and bluff restoration, outside of areas designated for develop- . t'. .t. .•i;•i'I'xj�0.�l�.wC}l�Ii�•��'y.>v-r�.�1@�`��{J,I ��{y� ' ..�• .;; �.f..'Li (f7tl� ;;; •1•�- ��,-k, ��� i��/�/�/'v •.�iY .l� ]I �r � '11:x :+.��• 'Fa�l lalta a:,•'•:•:•:•.•:•:.•.'.'.':' '>�+ ��'• '•�� \;�i�-[$1����, "5aij l.� +• . '•:+t1:.', '''''•''''''''.'''.'.•..'..'.•.'.'..•.•.;.•.'.'.•.. ..wy:'.'..''''''''....;.'.'.• VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES ;_ :; '•:•. _ INTRODUCED ANNUAL;,[; pSSLAND•; I Y` '� - .. -- A - ------- COASTAL -- 7pp" P -� _ '• =r--J T b fin: ;,. (�i-�y -•- _ . _;" SAGE SCRUB 11 fi �I I( ® FRESHWATER MARSH ORNAMENTAL DEVELOPMENT AREA c„Il...o. ere,.., r.x..x..... BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREAS latt%j_I, sminc. NEWPORTER NORTH/NEWPORTER KNOLL ,.NI,(.. INC. CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & �o■i OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT no scale City of Newport Beach 63 I Aphanisma, a USFWS category 2 candidate is a small inconspicuous plant that occurs in coastal sage scrub and may occur on the steep bluffs on -site. It was not observed. The red -shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus) is listed as a sensitive species by the National Audubon Society and is considered locally sensitive by some, but not all, biologists. A red - shouldered hawk was observed roosting in the eucalyptus trees on Upper Castaways by Michael Brandman Associates (1989) and was reported to possibly nest there. It was not observed during this study. A gnatcatcher survey conducted in March 1991 did not identify any gnatcatchers on -site. The characteristics and conditions of coastal sage scrub habitat on -site are not favorable for supporting California gnatcatchers. Please see additional discussion under Sensitive Wildlife Species and in Appendix E. IBay View Landing This 16.1 acre site supports relatively poorly developed localized coastal sage scrub, introduced annual grassland and Rderal habitats. Exhibit 62 depicts on -site biological resources. Bay View Landing supports a relatively small and poorly developed coastal sage scrub community on the moderate to steep slopes and bluff faces between the bluff and bay shoreline. California sagebrush (Artemisia califomica) is dominant at this location. Areas between these plants typically supported introduced grasses and forbs, including ripgutgrass (Bromus diandms), wild oat (Avena barbata) and short -pod mustard (Brassica geniculata). Bladder pod (Cleome isomeris) is also common. This habitat supports one single male California gnatcatcher. �! Introduced annual grassland is the dominant vegetative feature of the upland bluff face over the western half of the site. Ruderal vegetation is found throughout the lower level portion of the site adjacent to Back Bay Drive and Jamboree Road. Newporter North Most of the Newporter North site is a fairly level bluff top. The majority of the site supports introduced annual grassland over the level bluff tops. Exhibit 63 depicts on -site biological resources. Localized coastal sage scrub occurs on the steep slopes of the bluffs facing the Bay. The localized coastal sage scrub occurring on -site is characteristic of the community, consisting of low, often prostrate plants, one to three feet high. The steepness of the bluff faces often results in open vegetative cover where bare ground is common. Dominant plant species at this site consist of California sagebrush, California encelia (Encelia califomica) and California buckwheat (E . gonum fasciculatum). Also found are occasional sugarbush (Rhus oyata) and bladder pod. A dominant geographic feature on -site is the John Wayne Gulch which supports a relatively large (6.8 acre) area of freshwater marsh. The freshwater marsh is dominated by cattail 251 i (Tipha la folia), bulrush (&Lrpus sp.) and arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis). A slope facing San Joaquin Hills Drive contains ornamental vegetation of little biological significance. Aphanisma, a USFWS Category 2 candidate, is a small inconspicuous plant that may occur on the steep bluffs on -site. It was not observed during the present survey. The light footed clapper rail is a USFWS endangered and CDFG endangered species. It was not observed on any of the sites. It is expected in the freshwater marsh at John Wayne Gulch. The California black rail is a CDFG rare species. It was not observed but may inhabit the freshwater marsh within John Wayne Gulch. The California gnatcatcher is a USFWS Category 2 candidate. The coastal sage scrub contained on -site supports four gnatcatcher pairs and two lone male gnatcatchers. At the time of the field investigations, raptorial birds, including red-tailed hawk, turkey vulture and American kestrel, were observed foraging over the area. In addition, barn swallows were foraging here. Also observed were numerous coyote scats and a large burrow. The skull and several bones of a bottae pocket gopher were scattered at the entrance of this burrow, indicating the presence of a medium to large predator, assumed to be possibly coyote. Based on these observations, it is believed that the Newporter North site is used as habitat by a number of terrestrial wildlife who -also use the Ecological Reserve. Newporter Knoll This 12 acre site is dominated by introduced annual grassland. Biological resources on -site are represented on Exhibit 63. Similar to other sites, the introduced annual grassland occurring on -site occurs over relatively level topography. The NewporterKnoll site contains some localized coastal sage scrub which is limited to steep bluff faces overlooking Upper Newport Bay. The coastal sage scrub consists of low, often prostrate plants, one to three feet high. The steepness of the bluff face often results in an open vegetative cover where bare ground is common. Dominant plant species at these locations consist of California sagebrush, California encella (Encelia califotnica) and California buckwheat (Etiogonum Lasciculatum). Also found are occasional sugarbush (Rhus ovata) and bladder pod. No gnatcatchers have been observed in this habitat. Newporter Resort The Newporter Resort contains an existing hotel and golf course. This site has been disturbed and no significant biological resources remain. 252 t. I 1I I I tI I I I 11 1 Black 800 Block 800 is a 6.4 acre site which has been previously graded and now supports ruderal vegetation. Barren ground is evident over portions of the site. Exhibit 64 depicts on -site biological resources. Corporate Plaza West This 12.1 acre site has previously been entirely graded. 3.1 acres have been developed for an office building and entry way landscaped with ornamental trees, shrubs and turf grass. The remainder of the site supports ruderal habitat. Exhibit 65 depicts on -site biological ' resources. Freeway Reservation This 28.25 acre site contains a small area of freshwater marsh (0.56 acres). The freshwater marsh vegetation on -site is dominated solely by cattail and bulrushes which is part of an established drainage course. The rest of the site supports ruderal vegetation. Exhibit 66 depicts on -site biological resources. IMPACTS According to Appendix G of CEQA, and for the purposes of this EIR, significant effects on rare or endangered plants or animals; or the habitat of such species; the loss of wetlands or other significant plant communities; as well as substantial interference with resident or migratory fish or wildlife species; are considered to be significant adverse impacts. Direct impacts to vegetation and wildlife are expected to occur as the result of several causal factors originating with the construction of the project as proposed. These causal factors can be generally described as the removal or alteration of physical habitats through earthwork. Plant communities and habitats, as described in the previous section, are assemblages of plant and animal species occurring in the same physical habitat. They occur together in an orderly, predictable manner and have a very close and complex set of interrelationships. As a consequence, first order impacts resulting from causal factors will in turn, result in second order impacts, which will in turn, result in third order impacts, and so on. Typically, the degree to which this chain -like reaction proceeds toward the complete breakdown and loss of community stability and integrity, will depend on the severity and magnitude of the causal factor. I ' 253 I p i NOTE: Development area denotesthe portion of the site Identified for muRl famliy residen- tial uses In the proposed PC Text. No grading beyond these limits is expected. r/ti`\"`-:.S:c_ ! . •F,t{ +.-+,r•-�_ \ .ter• VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES RUDERAL — DEVELOPMENT AREA Source: Steven Nelsf BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES OF S Minc PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREAS PIANNIN4.INC: BLOCK 800 no scale CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT City of Newport Beach F9 64 M. S. ftm m am m ON No m m m m a m i m Ift m as NOTE: Development area denotes the portion of the she-IdenhTied for office/commercial uses In the proposed PC Text. No grad - kV beyond these Umfts Is expected. i DEVELOPMENT AREA VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES \ Z! RUDERAL :: r:`; .';;: :::S::i ;;• . a ORNAMENTAL .•:;;::: ::::::.....:.:.::.:...:..... . uwoo• 1•vm Y IY)19Y[- n{n¢Yln m m i1 f11>� EAST 6Y I JeaelYY• ?'•??}::::•:1:7•?}j}::y� �.•:,•?:ti•?:;?}✓•:G::::;}••i�••}yam:}�{}?{::{:::}:•:?}�;I• Lit\ — I..vwyrn-n �Lnfr C 0 A S T r H I G H W A Y BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREAS I N CORPORATE PLAZA WEST �' zinc• CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & "m%mm,11111 OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT no scale City of Newport Beach I ?1.65 m w m� W" mum R m m m» m� w" M" VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES RUDERAL FRESHWATER MARSH DEVELOPMENT AREA NOTE. Development area denotes the portion of the site Identified for development of residential uses in the proposed Pc Text. Grading related to development of residential uses could extend beyond the development area boundary. Grad- ing could also ocan for roads, open sPke uses, trails, and outside of areas designated for development BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREAS^ FREEWAY RESERVATION �1. �'�linc. 1'IANRINf:. fNG CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & �J OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT no scale City of Newport Beach IN]-- 66 I tConstruction activities will result in the removal of physical habitats through cut, fill and other grading activities necessary for roads, building pads, utilities, fuel modification and flood control. In general, the highly varied terrain within the project site will require these activities to a marked degree, and their first order impacts will be the direct loss of vegetation, the destruction of less mobile wildlife forms and erosion -siltation hazards. In and of itself, the significance of vegetation loss will depend on the diversity and availability of plant communities and associations affected. From the standpoint of biological diversity, the loss of plant communities, such as freshwater marsh, salt marsh and coastal sage scrub, will have an inherently greater significance than the loss of more common communities, such as introduced annual grassland. The same will generally be true for the ' loss, of less mobile wildlife forms since they are highly habitat dependent, and their abundance and diversity are directly related to those of their habitat. The significance of erosion -siltation hazards will depend on the types of communities "downstream". Siltation of streambeds, drainage courses and tide flats, which results from erosion, will bury and destroy wetland habitats. This will have the same effect as the direct removal of habitat and is assessed in the same manner. Should wetland habitats be present, the significance of this hazard would almost always be high. The impacts of vegetation loss through direct removal or excessive siltation will in turn, have potentially significant adverse effects on wildlife. As vegetation is removed or otherwise destroyed, the associated wildlife will either be destroyed (as mentioned above for less mobile forms), or will be displaced to adjacent habitat areas where they will crowd and disrupt local populations. Although increased competition and predation will act rapidly to return population numbers to habitat carrying capacity levels, displaced and/or local wildlife will be lost. The effect will be increased in magnitude and duration if this impact occurs in the spring when most wildlife are reproducing and their ability to successfully relocate is greatly hindered by their totally dependent young. In such cases, the young and breeding adults can be lost. Other factors which determine the relative significance of habitats include the relative importance of habitats lost to local and regional wildlife populations, abundance and diversity of wildlife these habitats support, the availability of these habitats and the habitat dependency of the associated wildlife. For example, the loss of habitats serving as concentrated breeding grounds or which are within major wildlife movement corridors, are more significant than habitats which do not serve these functions. Similarly, habitats which are highly restricted in distribution are of high significance and are very sensitive to loss. Cumulative impacts resulting from buildout of the proposed project are discussed under the cumulative impacts heading. The following discusses impacts on a site -by -site basis. 257 I I Specific Sites 1 San Diego Creek South This 21.0 acre site has been entirely graded and now supports ruderal vegetation. The majority of the site (18.6 acres) is proposed for residential development. Due to lack of biological significance, loss of ruderal vegetation is considered insignificant. A small portion of the site outside of the development area includes wetlands along Bonita Creek and San Diego,Creek. The site is proposed for open space. If grading were to occur in this area of residential use or public facilities impacts to the wetland habitat would be a significant adverse impact. Since this wetland is' also part of a wildlife movement corridor, adverse impacts may also result from light and glare affecting its use by wildlife which are generally secretive in their habits. If significant, bright lights and glare could prevent some wildlife from using the corridors along Bonita Creek (on -site) and San Diego Creek (adjacent to the site). San Diego Creek North This 14.7 acre site is dominated by ruderal vegetation. Due to the lack of biological significance, the loss of ruderal vegetation is considered insignificant. A small portion of the site (0.72 acres) supports freshwater marsh. The site is divided into two areas. Area 1 is ' intended to be that portion of the site between the future alignment of Bay View Way and San Diego Creek. This area is proposed for habitat preservation, restoration and enhancement. Approximately one-third (0.24 acres) of existing freshwater marsh is found in Area 1 and would be preserved and enhanced with the proposed project. Area 2 is the balance of the site, including the future alignment of Bay View Way. This area is proposed for public facilities, including the alignment of Bay View Way, a fire station, a park and ride lot, a freeway ramp and passive recreation facilities. This area supports ruderal habitat lacking native vegetation of low value to wildlife, no significant adverse impacts are identified. The expected loss of approximately .48 acres of existing freshwater marsh from the extension of Bay View Way will be compensated for in Area 1. No significant adverse impact is identified since no net loss of freshwater marsh will occur. Jamboree/MacArthur This 4.7 acre site supports freshwater marsh over essentially its entire area. It is proposed ' for open space -dedicated in fee. Given these passive uses, it is anticipated that no significant adverse impacts will result. Any recreation use beyond passive nature observation and study may have significant adverse effects, depending on the level of development and intensity , of use. _ 258 I ' Upuer Castaways This 56.6 acre site is proposed for residential, open space and active park uses. Sensitive resources found here are freshwater marsh, localized areas of coastal sage scrub and salt marsh, all of which are within the 15.0 acre area proposed for open'space. This open space is proposed for passive uses, including a viewpark. Depending on the layout and facilities to be a part of the viewpark, as well as possible bluff face stabilization/remediation work, coastal sage scrub and freshwater marsh could be directly lost to construction and land use. The Development Agreement calls for the reservation of right-of-way for the future widening of Dover Drive. When constructed in the future, the widening would displace the 0.8 acre freshwater marsh. The loss of freshwater marsh on -site is considered a significant adverse impact. No impacts are anticipated to the saltwater marsh on -site due to its location at the base of the bluffs. Impacts to coastal sage scrub are not directly anticipated from development of residential and open space use due to the habitat being restricted to steep bluff faces which are not feasible for improvement and public use. However, stabilization of the slope required as mitigation to this project could impact coastal sage scrub at the base of the bluffs. This would be a significant adverse impact. I The proposed residential development and active park areas, totaling 31.6 acres, are entirely within introduced annual grassland, which possesses low biological sensitivity. A 40-foot development setback from the bluff face is proposed. No direct significant impacts will result from the proposed development of these uses. Sensitive plant species expected to occur, or previously identified on -site, include the southern tarplant and aphanisma. Neither species was observed on -site. No impacts from loss of sensitive plant species are anticipated. The red -shouldered hawk was observed roosting in eucalyptus trees by Michael Brandman Associates (1989). It was not observed during this study. No impacts to this sensitive wildlife species are anticipated. ICoastal sage scrub on -site offers marginal habitat for California gnatcatcher. The gnatcatcher was not observed on -site during the gnatcatcher survey and is not expected due to the characteristics, condition, and location of the marginal habitat. (Please refer to the discussion under Sensitive Resources.) No impacts to the California gnatcatcher are anticipated. Bay View Landing ' The 16.1 acre Bay View site supports relatively homogenous, open localized coastal sage scrub, introduced annual grassland, and ruderal vegetation. The majority of the site (11.1) acres is proposed for open space and includes all the coastal sage scrub and introduced annual grassland and portions of the ruderal vegetation. A restaurant or health club is proposed for the remaining 5.0 acres which supports ruderal vegetation. One male California gnatcatcher was observed in a portion of the coastal sage scrub onsite (Exhibit 67). No 259 LJ females were observed. However, the male displayed territorial behavior and vocalization which Indicate , breeding behavior. Therefore, due to the sensitive status of the species, any disturbance to its coastal sage scrub habitat is considered a significant adverse impact. Development of the commercial uses on the lower portion of the site will Impact only ruderal vegetation. An earlier version of the project (which was analyzed in the biological evaluation conducted for this Program EIR) included a development area which impacted a small portion of the coastal sage scrub habitat which is habitat for one male California gnatcatcher. In response to identifying a male California gnatcatcher onsite, the applicant has modified the development area identified in the proposed P.C. Text to avoid all coastal sage scrub habitat. Consequently, development of the commercial uses on the Bay View Landing site will not disturb or destroy any California gnatcatcher babitat. This modification to the project will avoid significant adverse impacts on the California gnatcatcher. Open space uses on the majority of the site (11.1 acres) will primarily impact vegetation and habitat of low biological sensitivity. However, bluff stabilization/remediation work related to the development of open space uses and erosion control could impact an as yet unknown amount of poorly developed coastal sage scrub. Also, grading related to development of a view park within this open space area could be substantial if the grade of the site Is modified to expand views of Upper Newport Bay to park users and motorists on Coast Highway. This grading could also impact an as yet unknown amount of coastal sage scrub. The lone male California gnatcatcher Identified onsite inhabits a portion of the,onsite coastal sage scrub. Depending in the extent and location of bluff stabilization/remediation and grading in the open space areas, these activities could cause a significant adverse impact on the California gnatcatcher and Its habitat. Newoorter North , This is a 77.2 acre site encompassing freshwater marsh, introduced'annual grassland and localized coastal sage scrub. The majority of this site is proposed for open space, including 36.5 acres of open space encompassing coastal sage scrub and introduced annual grassland, and 10.7 acres of natural area, which encompass the majority of freshwater marsh on -site. The 'remaining 30.0 acres Is proposed for residential uses. Impacts to coastal sage scrub from the proposed open space uses are not anticipated due to the habitat being ' restricted to any steep bluff faces which are not feasible for improvement and public use. However, these same bluff faces may be affected over a limited area by bluff face stabilization/remediation work Depending on the extent of this stabilization, this could be a potentially significant adverse impact. Freshwater marsh occurs on several locations on -site. With the exception of a very small area of freshwater marsh at Jamboree Road across from Santa Barbara Drive, all freshwater marsh on -site is proposed as a natural area. Natural area uses are interpreted to mean no site improvements other than nature observation and study uses. Included within the natural area is John Wayne Gulch. As proposed, the development area is setback from this wetland area by a distance of at least 250 feet Potentially, site disturbances due to grading for the development area could reach closer to the wetland. A minimum 100 foot setback is.proposed as the boundary for any site disturbance. No significant adverse impacts to'the freshwater marsh at John Wayne Gulch are expected. The only wetlands habitat not contained within the natural area Is approximately .25 acres and lies within proposed open space and development areas near Jamboree Road. About 0.1 acres of the .25 will be impacted by construction of the access road to the development The remainder of the wetland area is proposed for preservation. Public use Improvements could result in a significant adverse impact to these wetlands. The , potential loss of wetland habitat due to public use improvements Is considered a project specific impact. Mitigation measures have been proposed to lessen the severity of this project specific impact 260 1 I NOTE: Development area denotes the portion of CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER: .. the site identified for development of ::;: � "•`� '"�� �� commercial uses in proposed the rc PC MALE OBSERVED ??'rF''• ' `' Text. Gradingrelated to development of. !•l ' . / is commercial uses could extend beyond APPROXIMATE TERRITORY :�:;�+!•'??4"!•:•`•"•:' ':•- -�.:.;`'- ,� ! yy, • X' • ' the area boundary. Grading could also - .•.•'>filp}, �' ' T.,%;: ••r• �^.r. ,� occur for roads, open space uses, trams, Yy. y ' "'r::::; 1 `� :• and bluff restoration, outside of areas �•!' designated fardevelopmem. •;^:.,;y�?:::::?=::y.:;�{.;-•;c ••,•, X. �:•ii:''\':};F":•'!: r••r• . , ^.E-�% ;'%+a .s.•r VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES /Jio . ....., �_t.`rr.���`� ;, ;r •� •' �'' INTRODUCED ANNUAL GRASSLAND `• ' ''/'' '`'''' ?' ; s=%�:''=`-` v COASTAL SAGE SCRUB ' :::.::?•:.......... .. •: :. 4.•.'•:' ?: t ,,•7 ••{•:v:!'�`�'�,::::•::::;:sir:•::::: };:Sid::,{• :,•�+" `gam .•.f.. S:•:v.;.;{: •a:•::4:C�••�' •:• RUDERAL �< f=\. .......... ..... ;•:i?: a:?•i'.vr' {S Y� `•pi :•.v'r.::?�Jy y:;:�:�A�:�:'y: Yy��' :�;:fY„`i % f'•v!•w3G::ri: ��%•�:'•• ',Y.•' . % � :: yh��ra-•'C�j r_I Yi�r•Y,� li-.1„�Y�•• l�{?�•:•:ay.'h•.•:. �.•.•1.:: rJ a.• , -� X�d�l _al_L i-j ,��i .'Jf:1N••:�Vf:l:•':;:•:•' '7/���'�, /J �� •_••• - I JJ/5' 4i Gn 1. _. �r _ - DEVELOPMENT AREA -- - - CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER SURVEY FINDINGS BAYVIEW LANDING CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT City of Newport Beach Source: Steven Nelson Pl,%NNING. INC no scale 67 Sensitive plant species which could occur on -site include Aphanisma, a small inconspicuous plant. It was not observed during the present study. No impacts to this sensitive species are anticipated. Despite its status as an altered native habitat, the introduced annual grassland on the Newporter North site appears to be a viable upland habitat associated with the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. At the time of the field investigations, raptorial birds, including red-tailed hawk, turkey vulture and American kestrel, were observed foraging over the area. In addition, barn swallows were foraging here. Also observed were numerous coyote scats and a large burrow. The skull and several bones of a bottae pocket gopher were scattered at the entrance of this burrow, indicating the presence of a medium to large predator, possibly coyote or gray fox. Based on these observations, it is believed that the Newporter North site is used as habitat by a number of terrestrial wildlife who also use the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve (Reserve). Owing to the limited amount of terrestrial habitats in the Reserve, populations of several of these species would not be capable of relocating if displaced by development, and they would be lost. Although no species observed or expected to be impacted are rare or endangered, some species factor in important predator -prey relationships and food chains associated with the Reserve. The loss of upland habitat at Newporter North would result in substantial interference with resident wildlife species. The loss of upland habitat on the Newporter North site is considered a significant adverse impact. In their review of the Initial Study for the project, Sea and Sage Audubon commented that such upland habitats actively used by coyotes for denning and/or hunting, and that coyotes are apparently critical in controlling "mesopredator" (e.g. introduced red fox, feral cats, opossums) populations [Kossack, 1991]. This population control is important -ecologically because mesopredators feed on birds and their eggs, including the endangered light-footed clapper rail and several other marsh bird species. It follows that the loss of upland habitat could potentially result in the elimination of coyotes from all or a portion of Upper Newport Bay, thereby upsetting this ecological balance. LSA Associates, Inc. (1991) agrees that there is apparently a relationship between coyotes, mesopredators and sensitive bird breeding success, and states that the loss of coyotes and subsequent increase in smaller predators has caused severe declines in clapper rail populations at the Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge and San Francisco 'Bay National Wildlife Refuge, as well as a number of other locations. However, they made no findings as to whether or not such a relationship existed at Upper Newport Bay. In its report, LSA specifically addressed the issue of the importance of the Newporter North site to maintenance of existing coyote populations. Using previous work by Zembal (1990), as well as its own studies, LSA determined that there are more than 450 acres of undeveloped upland habitat around the bay. LSA states that this area is not sufficient in itself to support a reproducing coyote population, but it does represent a significant foraging area. According to LSA, the Newporter North site contains a complex of three coyote dens, used by what ' is likely to be the only family group at the bay, consisting of at least two pups in 1990. The 1 262 11 I adult male was captured and equipped with a radio collar in early June 1990 by Zembal. , This animal was then tracked on a daily basis through September 1990. Based on the radiotelemetry data collected, it was determined that this coyote made the heaviest use of lower Big Canyon, including parts of the Ecological Reserve and the golf course. It also traveled into the San Joaquin Hills area. The proposed development on the Newporter North site would eliminate some 30 acres, or only about 7 percent of the total upland habitat around the bay. LSA stated that it is not possible to conclude that this loss would clearly eliminate coyotes from the bay or that it would disrupt movement corridors necessary to allow coyotes access to the bay. Coyotes possess a great ability to adapt to urban and suburban environments and could adapt to the Newporter North site development without a significant loss or disruption of movement patterns. On the other hand, the Newporter North site was found to contain an active den complex for a coyote family group. According to conceptual grading plans, the den is not directly impacted and destroyed. Proposed development comes sufficiently close ' to the den location so as to have a high likelihood that it would be abandoned. Further, assuming this group would have to relocate its denning area, it cannot be determined where and with what success this relocation would take place. If unsuccessful, the ability of this group (believed to be the only one at the bay) to reproduce and remain viable could be in jeopardy. If relocation occurs completely outside of the bay area, such as by way of existing movement corridors into the San Joaquin Hills, it is possible that this group could no longer play an effective rode in mesopredator control within the bay. Based on these possibilities, the loss of upland habitat from the Newporter North site is considered a significant adverse impact. M' The light footed clapper rail is a USFWS endangered and CDFG endangered species. It , was not observed on -site. It is expected in the freshwater marsh at John Wayne Gulch. The California black rail is a CDFG rare species. It was not observed on -site but may inhabit the freshwater marsh at John Wayne Gulch. John Wayne Gulch lies in a proposed natural area and no direct impacts to these species habitats are expected. The development area's related grading does not encroach on the on -site coastal sage scrub which serves .as habitat for the California gnatcatcher (four pairs and two single males). Refer to Exhibit 68. However, bluff stabilization/remediation work related to improving public safety along the bluffs could adversely impact gnatcatcher habitat. The extent of this impact is unknown at this time due to the lack of grading plans. Further environmental evaluation will be necessary at that time specific stabilization plans are proposed by the City. Based on the limited information available at this time, it is determined that impacts to coastal sage scrub habitat due to bluff stabilization would be a significant adverse impact on the California gnatcatcher. I 263 1 11 L— 1 CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER: - S PAIR OBSERVED MALE OBSERVED aZ .• ::::::::: ::,:•. #ON1APPROXIMATE TERRITORY " Aw tt! t VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES ='`' : s — t - NOTE: Development area denotesthepodicrlaf the site identified for development of residential uses in the proposed PC Text. Grading related to development of residential uses could extend beyond the development area boundary. Grad- ing could also occur for roads, open space uses, trails, and bluff restoration, outside of areas designated for develop. ment. INTRODUCED ANNUALda SLAN • - :..: -- . __ -_ _ . :} COASTAL SAGE SCRUB ® FRESHWATER MARSH ORNAMENTAL AREA CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER SURVEY FINDINGS NEWPORTER NORTHMEWPORTER KNOLL CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT & OPEN SPACE AGREEMENT City of Newport Beach ...,...w. v.c•cu I�cwuu -M— Linc. PLANNING. ING 11 no scale 68 I ' Newporter Knoll This 12.0 acre site is proposed for passive open space. Introduced annual grassland dominates the site. As discussed above, for the introduced annual grassland habitat at the Newporter North site, the introduced annual grassland on the Newporter Knoll site appears to be an important upland habitat associated with the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. Depending on the level of facility development, substantial interference with resident wildlife species could occur. However at this time limited access and facilities are anticipated. Use of the.area will probably be limited to a small trail system. The amount of area disturbed will be small and the increase in use of the area is not substantial. Consequently, no significant impacts would be expected. Coastal sage scrub on -site offers marginal habitat for California gnatcatcher. Impacts to coastal sage scrub are not anticipated due to the habitat being restricted to steep bluff faces which are not feasible for improvement and public use. The gnatcatcher was not observed on -site and is not likely. No impacts to the California gnatcatcher are anticipated. Newporter Resort This project site is largely developed and contains only ruderal vegetation. The site is proposed for an addition of 68 hotel units. Further development of the Newporter Resort will not result in significant adverse impacts. Block 800 This entire 6.4 acre site is proposed to be developed with residential uses. The proposed development site in Block 800 has been completely disturbed by prior grading activities. The area now supports ruderal vegetation. As a result of the on -site ruderal habitat conditions, wildlife values are extremely low. Due to the low biological sensitivity, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated to result from the proposed development. Corporate Plaza West The entire 9.0 acre site is proposed to be developed with office uses. The Corporate Plaza West site has been completely disturbed by prior grading activities. A portion of the site has been landscaped with ornamental trees, shrubs and turf grass. The area now supports ruderal vegetation. As a result of the on -site ruderal habitat conditions, wildlife values are extremely low. Due to the low biological sensitivity, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated to result from the proposed development. ' Freeway Reservation This 28.3 acre site is proposed for residential uses on 11.0 acres. The majority of the site supports ruderal vegetation. Due to the • low biological sensitivity, no significant adverse 1 265 I I impacts are anticipated as a result of loss of ruderal habitat. A small area of freshwater marsh (.56 acres) is proposed to be included as open space. Details on the open space uses are not known at this time. At this time the potential loss of wetland habitat is considered a project specific impact. Coastal sage scrub, saltwater marsh, and introduced annual grassland do not exist on -site. No impacts to these habitats are anticipated. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Impacts to these sites will cumulatively impact wetlands, and the amount of terrestrial habitat available to resident wildlife species, resulting in significant cumulative impacts. The project will result in the overall reduction in the general botanical and wildlife resources of the area through habitat loss, the further fragmentation of habitats, interruption of wildlife movement and a reduction of genetic exchange among wildlife populations in the area. These are considered significant unavoidable impacts. EXISTING CM POLICIES AND REQUIREMENTS None applicable. MITIGATION MEASURES 15. Pursuant to Section 1601-1603 of the State of California Fish and Game Code, the California Department of Fish and Game shall be notified of any alterations to streambed habitats. The applicant or any successors in interest shall be responsible for notifying the Department of Fish and Game regarding any grading related to residential development and associated improvements on the San Diego Creek South, Upper Castaways, Newporter North, and Freeway Reservation sites which would alter ' streambed habitats. The applicant or any successor in interest shall notify the Department of Fish and Game and obtain any necessary permit prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Copies of proper notification and necessary permits shalbe provided to the City of Newport Beach prior to issuance of a grading permit. The City of Newport Beach shall be responsible for notifying the Department of Fish and Game regarding any grading related to any public improvements (e.g. trails, recreational facilities, roads, drainage facilities, etc.) in areas designated for open space, public facilities, and/or parks which would alter streambed habitats. The City of Newport Beach shall notify the Department of Fish and Game and obtain any necessary permits prior to commencement of any grading which could alter the streambed habitat. The permits issued by the Department of Fish and Game pursuant to Sections 1601-1603 may require additional mitigation measures deemed necessary by the Department. 266 1 I I 16. Wetland delineation studies in accordance and conjunction with the California Department of Fish and Game and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permitting processes shall be performed for any wetland which will be impacted by grading and construction activities. The applicant or any successor in interest shall be responsible for conducting the wetland delineation studies for wetlands impacted by residential development or associated improvements on the Newporter North and Upper Castaways sites. If residential development or associated improvements on the San Diego Creek South or Freeway Reservation sites encroach into the wetland, the applicant or any successor in interest shall be responsible for conducting the wetland delineation study. The City of Newport Beach shall be responsible for conducting the wetland delineation studies for wetlands impacted by any public improvements/facilities in areas designated for open space, public facilities, and/or parks which will encroach into wetlands. The studies shall occur at the time specific site plans and grading plans are available and prior to issuance of any grading permits or commencement of grading activities in areas containing wetland habitat. 17. Public use and related facility development for areas proposed for natural open space and passive park uses within the Upper Castaways, Newporter North, Newporter Knoll, Bay View Landing, Freeway Reservation, and Jamboree/MacArthur sites shall ' be designed to be sensitive to existing biological resources. To this end, facility plans and public uses for these areas shall be prepared in consultation with a qualified biologist who shall determine that such plans and uses do not adversely impact sensitive resources identified on these sites (e.g. wetlands, coastal sage scrub, etc.). If necessary, additional environmental documentation shall be prepared at the time facility plans are prepared to determine if significant adverse impacts beyond those anticipated in this Program EIR will occur. If new significant adverse impacts are identified, additional mitigation measures shall be adopted. 18. Grading, earthmoving, and any related construction activities related to residential development and associated improvements on the Upper Castaways, San Diego Creek South,, Bay View Landing, and Newporter North sites shall be restricted as follows: Upper Castaways and Newporter North - No grading (except that necessary for trail establishment and improvements, erosion control or bluff stabilization), stockpiling of soil or operation of equipment shall take place within the bluff top setback area established by the Bluff Top setback Ordinance. San Diego Creek South - No grading, stockpiling of soils, or operation of equipment shall encroach into the area of Bonita Creek beyond the existing 15 foot elevation contour. Newporter I North - No grading, stockpiling of soils or operation of equipment shall take place below the existing 60 foot elevation contour surrounding the John Wayne Gulch freshwater marsh. Bay View Landing - no grading, stockpiling of soil or operation ' of equipment related to development of commercial uses on the lower portion of the site shall encroach into the southern hillside above the 25-foot contour. 267 I 19. Prior to grading and/or constructing any public facility on the San Diego Creek North site which will encroach into the on -site freshwater marsh, the City of Newport Beach (or other public agency responsible for development of the public facility) shall , approve and begin implementation of a plan which shall offset the loss of wetlands. This plan shall reflect all mitigation requirements of any State or Federal agency having jurisdiction over the affected wetlands. Offsets shall be achieved by either creating a new freshwater marsh on -site or enhancing and expanding an existing freshwater marsh in or near the San Diego Creek and Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. 20. Prior to grading and/or construction any residential development or associated improvement on the Upper Castaways site which will encroach into the on -site freshwater marsh, the applicant or successor in interest shall prepare and begin implementation of a plan which shall offset the loss of wetlands. This plan shall reflect all mitigation requirements of any State or Federal agency having jurisdiction over the affected wetlands. Offsets shall be achieved by either creating a new freshwater marsh on -site or enhancing and expanding an existing freshwater marsh in or near the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. A copy of the plan and all related permits shall be presented to the City of Newport Beach prior to issuance of a grading permit. 21. Prior to grading and/or constructing any residential development or associated improvement on the Newporter North site which will encroach into the on -site freshwater marsh, the applicant or successor in interest shall prepare and begin implementation of a plan which shall offset the loss of wetlands. This plan shall reflect all mitigation requirements of any State or Federal agency having jurisdiction over the affected wetlands. Offsets shall be achieved by either creating a new freshwater marsh on -site or enhancing and expanding an existing freshwater marsh in or near the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. A copy of the plan and all related permits shall be presented to the City of Newport Beach prior to issuance of a grading permit. 22. Development on the San Diego Creek South site shall be designed so as to reduce ' the amount of light and glare which could potentially spill over into the wetland habitats of Bonita Creek and San Diego Creek. This can be achieved by a variety of means including a combination of sensitive siting of lighted buildings; use of lighting systems which conceal the light source and minimize light spillage and glare; screening walls/berms; and dense landscaping along the edge of the development. Any landscaped edge screening shall include non-invasive trees and shrubs. The plant palette for the screening vegetation shall consist of dense, evergreen species which, when mixed, achieve canopy and understory of elements to provide as much ' screening as possible. The site plan and landscape plan for this edge shall be prepared in consultation with a City -approved, qualified biologist. The site plan and 268 1 I I I I I I LJ U landscape plan shall be approved by the City Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits. 23. Prior to commencing grading, all wetlands habitat in areas intended for preservation shall be temporarily fenced. This measure shall pertain only when grading, stock- piling, or other construction activities are proposed within 100 feet of the boundaries of the wetland area. A plan identifying the wetland area and the location of the fencing shall be submitted to the City of Newport Beach prior to issuance of any grading permit. 24. This measure shall apply to the Newporter North, Newporter Knoll, Bay View Landing, Upper Castaways, San Diego Creek South and San Diego Creek North sites. Revegetation of cut and fill slopes, bluff stabilization/remediation areas, fuel modification zones and other graded areas adjacent to existing sensitive habitat areas (e.g. at the edge of development residential, public facilities, or recreational areas) shall be accomplished with plant palettes with an emphasis on native species. Steeper slopes (greater than 2:1) shall be revegetated with a mixture of coastal sage scrub species including California sage brush which now dominates coastal sage scrub used by California gnatcatchers. Portions of more level areas shall be revegetated with species of native perennial grasses in an attempt to establish native grassland. An expert in landscape revegetation, who is knowledgeable and qualified in native plant mixtures shall provide consultation into the preparation of landscape plans to ensure that this measure is complied with. Landscape plans shall be approved by the City Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits for private development or commencement of grading for public facilities and public recreational uses. 25. All non -emergency ' grading related to bluff stabilization/remediation on the Newporter North and Bay View Landing sites shall occur during the non -breeding season for the California gnatcatcher. The non -breeding season is from August 1 to January 31. Mitigation measures are contained in the Earth Resources and Water Resources sections of this Program EIR pertaining potential erosion and sedimentation impacts. These measures also mitigate any potential impacts to sensitive biological habitat resulting from erosion or sedimentation. LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE Proiect•Specitic No impacts to biological resources were identified for Newporter Resort, Block 800, or Corporate Plaza West project sites. 269 I No significant impacts to sensitive plant species including aphanisma and the southern ' tarplant were identified. No significant impacts to sensitive wildlife species including the red - shouldered hawk, light-footed clapper rail, and the California black rail were identified. Mitigation measures have been provided to mitigate the possible loss of wetland habitat on San Diego Creek South, San Diego Creek North, Jamboree/MacArthur, Upper Castaways, Newporter North, and Freeway Reservation sites. These impacts are mitigated to a level of insignificance. The loss of upland habitat (introduced annual grassland) on the Newporter North, site could potentially result in the elimination of coyotes from all or a portion of Upper Newport Bay. This elimination could significantly disrupt key predator -prey relationships in Upper Newport ' Bay. This loss of upland habitat is considered an unavoidable adverse project impact. The introduction of light and glare on the San Diego Creek South site and its impact on ' wildlife movement along Bonita Creek and San Diego Creek is mitigated to a level of insignificance. Any potential impacts to California gnatcatcher habitat from development of commercial uses on the lower portion of Bay View Landing have been avoided by the applicant's revision of the development area boundary to avoid any coastal sage scrub and restrictions ' placed by mitigation on grading and, related activities outside the development area boundary. Impact to California gnatcatcher habitat on Bay View Landing resulting from possible bluff stabilization/remediation and grading related to erosion control and development of open ' space uses is partially mitigated, but not to a level of insignificance. The remaining impact is considered significant and adverse. Impact to California gnatcatcher habitat on Newporter North resulting from possible bluff , stabilization/remediation related to erosion control is partially mitigated, but not to a level of insignificance. The remaining impact is considered significant and adverse. , Cumulative On an incremental level, the overallreduction in the general botanical and wildlife resources , of the area through habitat loss will result in a significant cumulative impact. Development of the sites will result in cumulative biological impacts. Impacts to development sites will cumulatively impact wetlands, and the amount of terrestrial habitat available to resident wildlife species, resulting in significant cumulative impacts. The project will result in the overall reduction in the general botanical and wildlife resources of the area through habitat ' loss, the fragmentation of habitats, interruption of wildlife movement and a reduction of genetic exchange among wildlife populations in the area. These are considered significant adverse and unavoidable impacts. 270 1 1] 1 EARTH RESOURCES 1 INTRODUCTION 1 The following describes the geological constraints in the project area based upon the review and research conducted by Zeiser Geotechnical, Inc. The study was based on a review of available published and unpublished geologic/geotechnical information with supplemental ' air photo analysis and a brief reconnaissance. The report prepared by Zeiser Geotechnical, is included in Appendix F. The existing conditions section is divided into sites, discussing existing geological constraints of each site. The impacts section is broken down by geological 1 constraints. Each geological constraint is discussed, and the sites affected by these constraints are then discussed. 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS Regional Seismic Conditions 1 The potential for severe damage and loss of life resulting from earthquake activity exists within the City of Newport Beach as it does throughout Southern California. Seismic hazards can be attributed to ground shaking generated from seismic events generated on any of the regional active faults shown on Table HH. The five major fault zones in the regional area. considered to be active are: the San Andreas; San Jacinto; Sierra Madre/Cucamonga San Fernando System; the Whittier -Elsinore System; and, the Newport Inglewood. These faults are all capable of generating earthquakes of up to 7.0 in magnitude. There are no Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones in the City. 1 The Newport -Inglewood fault does not run under the project sites, yet is the closest to the sites of the five regional faults. The Newport -Inglewood Fault Zone is a series of northwest - trending, vertically -dipping faults extending from the southern edge of the Santa Monica Mountains southeastward to the offshore area near Newport Beach. From north to south the fault segments are: Charnock Fault; Overland Avenue Fault; Inglewood Fault; Potrero Fault; Avalon -Compton Fault; Cherry Hill Fault; and, Seal Beach Fault. No active faults are known to cross any of the sites. The mapped trace of the potentially active Pelican Hills Fault crosses the Freeway Reservation East site. Additionally, a possible fault zone has been identified within the Bay View Landing site. This un-named fault zone may contain or show Quaternary Terrace deposits. Offsets of Quaternary deposits would indicate the fault, would also be potentially active. 1 Sites with loose, sandy or silty deposits and shallow groundwater are most likely to be affected by liquefaction during an earthquake. An artificial increase in groundwater could' ' increase the potential for liquefaction on the Upper Castaways, Newporter North and possibly Newporter Resort sites. I 271 1 TABLE HH REGIONAL ACTIVE FAULTS SEISMIC PARAMETERS Known Active Nearest Fault- Moment Moment Estimated Maximum Probable Earthquake (Standard Design) Moment Peak Repeatable Duration of Fault Zone to -Sites Distance Magnitude, Magnitude, Recurrence Magnitude (B) Horizontal High Ground Strong Shaking (Kilometers) Historical Maximum Interval (F) Ground Acceleration (Seconds) (3) Earthquake (A) Credible (Years) (C) Acceleration (1) (B) Earthquake (Frac.of (Caltrans Design) Gravity) (H) San Andreas 50 7.9(1857) 8.2 (K) M8 = 100-300 8.1 0.07 0.07 16 MEAN ='132 6.0(1948) (K) San Jacinto 45 7.1(1940) 7.5 (B) M6 = 4-11 7.0 0.04 0.04 10 M7 = 40-100 6.5(1968) Sierra Madre/ 35 6.6(1971) 7.5 (B) (L) (0) M7 = 5000 (L) 7.0 0.06 0.06 22 Cucamonga/ (0) San Fernando (0) System Whittier- 19 5.5(1938) 7.5 (B) M6 = 20-90 6.7 0.10 0.065 20 Elsinore M7 = 200-900 System 6.0+ (1910) (D) Newport- 2 6.2(1933) 7.0 (B) (M) M7 > 300 (K) 6.7 0.43 0.28 22 Inglewood 4.6(1989) Source: Zeiser Geotechnical, Inc. 1991 A. Ziony & Yerkes, 1985; Wenousky, 1986 G. Mark, 1977 K. Sieb, 1981; Sieh etal1989 LEGEND.- B. Muaichin & Jones, 1989 H. Joyner & Fumal, 1985; Krinitzsky L Crook et al, 1978 Frac. = Fraction C. Lamar & others, 1973 et al, 1988; Mualchin & Jones, 1989 M. Bryant,1988 M = Magnitude D. Ziony & Jones, 1989 I. Ploessel & Slosson, 1974; N. Weber, 1977 E. Greensfelder, 1974 J. Bolt, 1973 O. Morton & Yerkes, 1985 F. Evernden & Thomson, 1985 272 ow m m m r .ram m m Additionally, areas not naturally susceptible to liquefaction may become susceptible in the event groundwater is artificially elevated as a result of over irrigation or other means. The likelihood of liquefaction occurring depends on many factors, including differences in the compaction of soil layers, nature of the soil, depth of the deposits, and depth of the water table. Liquefaction occurring as a result of a seismic event would result in a localized area of subsidence. Liquefaction of soil may cause severe damage to structures supported on shallow foundations. ' San Diego Creek South Existing topography on the vacant site ranges between elevations of 18 and 32 feet. ' Drainage, originally toward the north, has been diverted to the northeast by the placement of artificial fill. I I LJ I 1 1 Natural deposits mapped as alluvium/colluvium (unconsolidated sand and silt) have been covered by varying depths of artificial fill generated by the Upper Newport Back Bay dredging operations during the 1980s. Earlier artificial fill may have been placed on the site in association with the construction of the salt evaporators and duck ponds which previously existed near the site. Table II lists the principal existing geotechnical constraints for the San Diego Creek South site. San Diego Creek North Elevations on the site range between 4 and 40 feet and 13 to 55 feet in the south and north portions, respectively. Drainage is to the southwest to a low area adjacent to San Diego Creek. Natural deposits of alluvium/colluvium (unconsolidated sand and silt) exist on -site. Artificial fill has been placed on the San Diego Creek North site in the past, possibly in association with dredging operations or the construction of the salt evaporators and duck ponds. These uses previously existed in the vicinity of the site. Table II lists the principal existing geotechnical constraints for the San Diego Creek North site. .Iamboree/MacArthur Marine Terrace deposits and Nonmarine Terrace deposits exist on the Jamboree/MacArthur site, consisting generally of sandy materials. No faults have been mapped within the limits of the property. Table II lists the principal existing geotechnical constraints for the Jamboree/MacArthur site. 273 TABLE II EXISTING GEOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS PERTAINING TO PROPOSED PROJECT SITES Faulting/ Liquefaction Erosion Bluff/Slope Compressible/ Expansive and Near Surface Seismicity Instability Collapsible Corrosive Soil Groundwater Soil San Diego • • • • • • Creek South San Diego • • • _ • • Creek North Jamboree/ • • • • • • MacArthur Upper • • • • • • • Castaways Bay View • • • • • • • Landing Newporter • • • • • • • North Newporter • • • • • • Knoll Newporter • • • • • • Resort Block 800 • • • • • Corporate Plaza • • • • • West Freeway • • • • • Reservation East ounce: Geiser Cieotectimcai, Inc. 274 t• i � � r � � � '' � � � � � � it r � i� IUpper Castaways The site is generally flat, and steep bluffs exist along the east edge of the property adjacent to the Upper Newport Bay. Several moderately deep erosion channels exist within the bluff face. A steep gully opens toward the southwest in the southern portion of the property. The site is underlain by sandy Marine Terrace deposits which are in turn underlain by thin - bedded siltstone of the Monterey Formation to the north and Capistrano Formation to the south. Several generations of artificial fill exist on the site, and groundwater exists near the contact between bedrock and overlying terrace deposits. No active or potentially active faults cross the site. Table H lists the principal existing geotechnical constraints for the ' Upper Castaways site. Bay View Landing The site is moderately flat and slopes gradually to the north from an elevation of 70 feet to an elevation of 14 feet in the northern corner. An old abandoned road (Old Bay Drive) has been incised through the middle of the site running from the upper to the lower area. Moderately steep to near vertical bluffs up to 60 feet high are present along the southern half of the northwest edge of the property. A bike trail runs along the base of the bluff. A, gasoline filling station has been removed from the southeast comer of the property at the corner of Coast Highway. and Jamboree Road. A residence has been removed from the lower northern portion. The Bay View Landing site is underlain by Marine and Nonmarine Terrace deposits, which are in turn, underlain by interbedded siltstones and sandstones of the Monterey Formation. Artificial Fill is scattered throughout the site. Several landslides exist along the bluff face. ' Several minor faults are exposed in the bedrock of the bluff face. No known significant faults exist within the limits of the site. Faults exposed in the bluff face do not offset quaternary terrace deposits, though one "Possible Fault Zone", obscured by heavy deposits of colluvium and detritus, "may show offset of the terrace/bedrock contact" (Leighton and ' Associates, 1990) which would suggest the fault, if present, could be potentially active. P I Table II lists the principal existing geotechnical constraints for the Bay View Landing site. Newporter North The site is a generally flat bluff top with moderately steep bluffs descending northwest down to Back Bay Drive and Upper Newport Bay from an approximate elevation of 110 feet. Topography has been altered on the site by the construction of a desilting basin in the middle portion of the site, a large 2.5:1 to 3:1 (horizontal:vertical units) cut slope adjacent to San Joaquin Hills Road, a minor cut slope near Jamboree Drive, and minor cut and fill grading in the vicinity of the desilting basin. 275 The site is underlain with deposits of sandy alluvium and colluvium and sandy Marine ' Terrace deposits. Bedrock underlying the surficial deposits of the Monterey Formation consisting of interbedded siltstone, claystone and sandstone exists on the site. Shallow ' groundwater has been reported on the site. Possible petroleum contamination has been reported during previous subsurface investigations on the eastern edge of the site near San Joaquin Hills Road. No landslides have been reported. Review of air photos suggest ancient landslides may be present in the vicinity of the bluffs. No active or potentially active faults cross the site. Table II lists the principal existing geotechnical constraints for the Newporter North site. ' Newporter Knoll The site consists of a rounded knoll with a maximum elevation of approximately 75 feet. ' The Knoll drains to the south, west and north. Moderately steep bluffs descend northwest toward Upper Newport Bay. , The Newporter Knoll site is underlain with deposits of sandy alluvium, silty and sandy ' deposits of colluvium and sandy Marine Terrace deposits. Underlying bedrock consists of siltstone, claystone and sandstone of the Monterey Formation. Ancient landslides may be present in the vicinity of the bluffs. No active or potentially active faults are known to cross ' the site. Table II lists the principal existing geotechnical constraints for the Newporter Knoll site. Newporter Resort The site is underlain with deposits of sandy Marine Terrace deposits, which in turn, are underlain with siltstone, claystone and sandstone of the Monterey Formation. No active or potentially active faults cross the site. Table II lists the principal geotechnical constraints for the Newporter Resort site. Block 800 Though the site is generally flat, there are graded slopes ranging in gradient from 1:1 to 2:1 , with heights ranging from 0 to approximately 20 feet, adjacent to San Clemente Drive and Santa Barbara Drive. Elevations range from 185 to 160, descending gently toward the , northwest. The site was previously graded during the late 1960s and early 1970s. Bedrock, underlying the site, exists as Monterey Formation which consists of interbedded , siltstone, claystone and sandstone. Surficial deposits of sandy Marine Terrace deposits have been mapped overlying the bedrock, though these deposits were probably reworked during prior grading. ' 276 1 11 H 7 LJ 1 Though reports of rough grading were unavailable for this study, it is likely that there are areas which have been artificially filled within the site. There are no faults mapped within the site. Table H lists the principal existing geotechnical constraints for the Block 800 site. Corporate Plaza West The site is essentially flat and approximately level with the adjacent road grades. A landscaped area exists in the southeast corner of the site, and an existing building occupies the northern comer. The site was graded during the late 1960's and early 1970's. Bedrock, underlying the site, exists as Monterey Formation which consists of interbedded siltstone, claystone and sandstone. Surficial deposits of sandy Marine Terrace deposits have been mapped overlying the bedrock, though these deposits were probably, reworked during prior grading. It is likely that there are areas which have been artificially filled within the site. There are no faults mapped within the site, and the site is not within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. Table II lists the principal existing geotechnical constraints for the Corporate Plaza West site. Freeway Reservation Table II lists the principal existing geological constraints for the Freeway Reservation site. Elevations on the site range between 179 and 235 feet. Portions of the site have been affected by previous grading associated with the development of adjacent residential area and improvements to MacArthur Boulevard. A desilting basin exists in the northern portion of the site adjacent to MacArthur Boulevard. The northwest extension of the Pelican Hills Fault crosses the Freeway Reservation East site. As a result of faulting, several bedrock formations are present within the site, including the Monterey Formation and the Paularino and Los Trancos Members of the Topanga Formation. The Monterey Formation consists of interbedded siltstone, claystone, and sandstone. The Paularino Member and Los Trancos Member of the Topanga Formation consist ,of marine sandstone, siltstone and shales. The Pelican Hill Fault is not considered to be "Active" under the definitions of the Alquist- Priolo Special Studies Zone Act. An "Active" fault under the Alquist-Priolo Act is one that shows evidence of surface rupture within the last 11,000 years. A "Potentially Active" fault is defined as a fault showing evidence of surface rupture during Quaternary time (within the last 2 million years, but not in the last 11,000 years). Previous field investigations of the fault (referenced in Appendix F) indicate that there have been offsets of late Pleistocene deposits off the project site. The Pelican Hills Fault, therefore, may be considered "Potentially Active" according to the Alquist-Priolo definitions. Although it is currently not zoned for special investigation, it is possible that in the future the fault could be zoned for special investigation in accordance with the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act. 277 n �I I IMPACTS ' According to Appendix Gof the CEQA Guidelines, a project will normally have a significant , effect on the environment if it will: • Cause substantial flooding, erosion, or siltation; ' • Expose people or structures to major geologic hazards; For purposes of this EIR, major (i.e., significant) geological hazards are considered geologic , conditions that cannot be overcome by design using reasonable construction and/or maintenance practices. Table JJ indicates project specific geotechnical impacts by site. The following discusses each ' project specific impact on an issue by issue basis. Faultin¢ and Seismicity ' The eleven (11) proposed sites are located within approximately 2.5 miles of one another. Zeiser Geotechnical has indicated that based on the maximum probable earthquake magnitudes and distances to the sites from the faults, the most significant seismic event likely to affect any of the sites would be an earthquake of magnitude 6.7 in the active Newport- ' Inglewood Fault Zone. An earthquake of magnitude 6.7 is capable of generating a peak horizontal ground acceleration of 0.43g and a repeatable high ground acceleration of 0.28g. The unit "g" refers to the force of gravity per unit mass at any given point. ' Significant ground shaking from local earthquakes can be expected during the life of the project. During an earthquake, ground shaking,due to horizontal ground accelerations could ' cause damage ranging from slight non-structural cracking and facing failures to major structural damage in inadequately designed buildings. These seismic hazards are considered a significant adverse impact. ' Liquefaction Potential Liquefaction is the phenomenon in which generally cohesionless saturated soils (silts and ' sands) become fluid during an earthquake. Vibration of saturated silts and sands during an earthquake causes densification of the deposit and an increase in pore pressure (water between the grains) resulting in a loss of shear strength and failure of the overlying ground. The potential for liquefaction has been identified for the San Diego Creek South, San Diego ' Creek North, Jamboree/MacArthur, Bay View Landing, Upper Castaways, Newport North, and possibly Newporter Resort sites. Proposed development of residential and commercial ' uses or public facilities on all but one of the sites could result in a significant adverse impact related to liquefaction. No development or major public facilities are proposed on the Jamboree/MacArthur site. No impacts on the site are expected. ' 278 1 TABLE JJ POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT BY SITE Faulting/ Liquefaction Erosion Potential Bluif/Slope Compressible/ Expansive and Near Surface Seismicity Potential Instability Collapsible Soil Corrosive Soil Groundwater Potential Potential Potential Potential San Diego Creek • • • • ♦ • South San Diego Creek • • • • • North Jamboree/ MacArthur Upper Castaways • • • • • • • Bay View • • • • 0 0 Landing Newporter North • • • • • • • Newporter Knoll Newporter • • • • • • Resort Block 800 • • • • • Corporate Plaza • • • • • West Freeway • • • Reservation East Source: Zeiser Geotechnical, Inc. 1991. Note: Please refer to the text for specific information regarding each site. • = Impact 279 I Erosion Potential ' The potential for naturally occurring erosion exists to varying degrees on each of the eleven ' (11) sites. The majority of the sites are underlain with various thicknesses of unconsolidated and highly erodible sandy terrace and/or colluvial deposits. Additionally, the steep bluffs present on several sites are known to be undergoing continuous erosion from natural ' processes. The sites most severely effected by naturally occurring erosion include the Upper Castaways, Bay View Landing, Newporter North, and Newporter Knoll sites. Steep bluffs present on the sites of Upper Castaways, Bay View Landing, Newporter North, and Newporter Knoll, are undergoing continuous erosion from natural processes. These steep bluffs expose highly weathered bedrock capped with erodible Terrace deposits. ' Increased erosion potential will be of concern primarily during grading of roadways and building pads prior to the installation of soil stabilizing landscaping. Excluding naturally , occurring erosion, the process of constructing cuts and/or fills for roadways, slopes, or building pads, will expose the project sites to an increase in erosion potential, especially during rain storms. ' Excess irrigation prior to development of landscaping on finished graded surfaces could also , increase erosion. The potential for increased erosion will be highest where fill or cut slopes are built in the sandy, cohesionless soils associated with Terrace deposits or colluvium deposits. ' Large areas removed of vegetation during or after grading will be exposed to surface disturbance and erosion if left without stabilizing vegetation. Sediment influx into Upper Newport Bay could be significantly increased if erosion control measurements are not utilized on -site adjacent to the bay. Areas left un-vegetated may be subject to wind erosion, Graded areas, where runoff from ungraded up -slope areas converge, could be subject to ' increased erosion. Naturally occurring erosion of the steep bluffs on the Newporter North, Newporter Knoll Bay View Landing and Upper Castaways sites will continue in the future ' and may be accelerated if irrigation or runoff is not properly controlled. These impacts are considered significant. Bluff and Slope Instability Potential , Bluff and slope instability can be the result of adverse geologic conditions such as existing ' bedding, joints, faults, ancient landslides or other inherent zones of rock weakness that can become problematic as a result of continuing erosion, addition of groundwater or surface water, loading the top of bluffs/slopes with fill or structures, or from excavation during ' development. 280 , I The Upper Castaways, Bay View Landing, Newporter North and Newporter Knoll sites contain high, moderately steep to near -vertical bluffs adjacent to Upper Newport Bay. Landslides have been reported in the bluffs on the Newporter North and Upper Castaways sites and may be present in the bluffs at other sites as well. Location of future artificial cut or fill slopes, if any, is unknown at this time for any of the eleven (11) project sites. Bluffs or slopes perceived as stable may become unstable as the result of groundwater fluctuations or irrigation. Man made slopes (cut and fill slopes) may become unstable if they are not properly constructed and maintained. Cuts necessary for the development of the proposed building areas and roads may remove support from marginally stable natural slopes by removing the supporting soil/bedrock mass at the toe area. Removal of toe support may cause gross instability to develop along existing joints, bedding, faults or ancient landslide slip surfaces. The additional weight of artificial fill over marginally stable rock or soil at the top of slopes or bluffs may result in gross instability of underlying natural materials. ' Future cut slopes may be potentially unstable. Future cut slope stability will be affected by slope location, height, gradient, and orientation relative to site specific bedrock/soil conditions. Corrective grading (buttressing, slope stabilization, or excavations for retaining walls) on slopes identified as unstable or marginally stable could cause slope failures during construction. This will be dependent upon site specific conditions and the nature of the excavations that are being advanced. Excessive irrigation practices can result in slope failure on natural and man made slopes as a result of excessive hydrostatic pressure. These impacts are considered significant. Compressible/Collapsible Soil Potential Differential settlement of compressible soils can cause severe damage to foundations of structures due to non -homogeneous subsurface conditions. Recompaction of these compressible soils during grading can result in shrinkage by approximately five to fifteen percent. ' Mitigation for compressible/collapsible soil conditions can be achieved by several methods including: removal and recompaction of identified compressible/collapsible zones, fill ' surcharging and settlement monitoring, compaction grouting, foundation design which utilizes deep piles, or other methods as recommended by the project geotechnical consultant. The potential for compressible/collapsible soil exists on all the sites. Compressible/ collapsible soil may occur in both natural deposits and/or artificial fills which may be present. Structures founded on undetected collapsible soils could experience distress if the soils are 1 281 subjected to increased loading and/or moisture content. These impacts are considered , significant. Expansive/Corrosive Soil Potential ' Because geologic conditions vary widely, it is difficult to generalize about expansive soil ' potential. Grading operations required to bring construction sites to design grade can result in the presence of both expansive and nonexpansive soils on a single lot unless selective grading procedures (use of a single soil type or a well mixed blend of two or more soil types , near finished pad elevation) are utilized. Expansive soils compacted to a higher degree of compaction than natural uncompacted conditions will have a tendency to expand with the addition of irrigation or runoff water. If compacted expansive soils are allowed to dry out, , shrinkage would occur which could also affect structures and flatwork. Repetitive wetting and drying of expansive soils on a compacted slope would tend to cause surficial instability of the slopeface through repetitive expansion and contraction with subsequent reduction of ' in -place density. The proposed project is expected to result in significant impacts related to expansive and , corrosive soil conditions on all eleven (11) project sites. The potential for expansive and corrosive soil's exists on all of the eleven (11) project sites, and may occur in both natural deposits and/or artificial fills which may be present. Improperly designed structures founded on expansive soils or structures founded on undetected expansive soils could experience distress if the soils are subjected to increased moisture content. Mitigation for expansive soils could include: specialized foundation design (such as post- ' tensioned slabs), removal and replacement of expansive soils, presaturation of footing, and slab subgrade soils prior to foundation construction, or other appropriate methods as ' determined by the project geotechnical consultant. Special cement is usually recommended by the geotechnical consultant for foundation elements or concrete placed on contact with corrosive soils. Cathodic protection or specialized coatings shall be recommended for metals ' in contact with corrosive soils. Corrosive soils can attack concrete and metal foundations, footing, slabs, utility conduit and other improvement elements which come into contact with the soil. These impacts are considered significant. , Near Surface Groundwater Potential Perched or shallow near -surface groundwater has been reported or is anticipated on several ' of the eleven (11) CIOSA sites. Shallow groundwater exists on the low lying San Diego Creek South, San Diego Creek North, Jamboree MacArthur and the lower portion of the ' Bay View Landing sites. Shallow groundwater perched at the contact between Terrace deposits and less permeable bedrock has been reported at the Upper Castaways, and Newporter North sites, and may be present at the upper portion of the Bay View Landing ' site and the Newporter Knoll, Newporter Resort, Corporate Plaza West, Block 800 and 282 1 I I I 1 u Freeway Reservation sites. Localized perched water or subsurface seepage may be encountered at any of the project sites. Shallow groundwater can adversely affect structures through soil saturation and moisture penetration inside subterranean portions of buildings, if any. Future development will result in an artificial rise in groundwater, especially on -sites constructed on sandy terrace deposits which overlay less permeable bedrock (such as the Upper Castaways, Bay View Landing and Newporter North sites). Mitigation measures for natural near -surface groundwater and artificially induced groundwater may include vapor barriers incorporated into foundation design, subdrains, impermeable soil caps on finished grade, subsurface barriers such as cut-off walls or interceptor drains, or other appropriate measures as determined by the project geotechnical consultant. Excess irrigation could cause rapid artificial rise in the local water table. Permanent increases in groundwater levels could adversely affect property through persistent near surface water and/or soil saturation, moisture penetration into the interior of buildings and slope/bluff instability. Possible dewatering activities during or after construction could result in ground subsidence to a site and adjacent properties. These impacts are considered significant. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS No cumulative impacts pertaining to faulting/seismicity, liquefaction, bluff slope instability, compressible/collapsible soil, expansive/corrosive soil, and near surface groundwater potential have been identified. EXISTING CITY POLICIES AND REQUIREMENTS A. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant or successor in interest shall demonstrate to the City of Newport Beach Building Department that all facilities will be'designed and constructed as specified in the City adopted version of the Uniform Building Code. B. Development of each site shall be subject to a grading permit to be approved by the Building and Planning Departments. The application for grading permit shall be accompanied by a grading plan and specifications and supporting data consisting of solid engineering and engineering geology reports of other reports required by the building official. C. That a grading plan shall include a complete plan for temporary and permanent drainage facilities, to minimize any potential impacts from silt, debris, and other water pollutants. ►� D. The grading plan shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, ' watering, and sweeping program designed to minimize impact of haul operations. E. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan shall be submitted prior to issuance of ' grading permits and be subject to the approval of the Building Department and a copy shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. ' F. The velocity of concentrated run-off from each project site shall be evaluated and erosive velocities controlled as part of the project design. ' G. Grading operations and drainage requirements shall meet the standards set forth mi the City's Building Code (Appendix Chapter 70 - Excavation and Grading, Sections ' 7001 -7019) and the Building Department's General Grading,Specifications. H. That grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a Civil , Engineer and based on recommendations of a soil engineer and an engineering geologist subsequent to the completion of a comprehensive soil and geologic investigation of the site. The soils investigation shall include a detailed slope stability analysis. Permanent reproducible copies of the "Approved as Built" grading plans on standard size sheets shall be furnished to the Building Department. ' I. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, the design engineer shall review and state that the discharge of surface runoff from the project will be performed in a manner , to assure that increased peak flows from the project will not increase erosion immediately downstream of the system. This report shall be reviewed and approved by the Building Department and Public Works Department. ' J. That erosion control measures shall be done on any exposed slopes within thirty days after grading, or as approved by the City Grading Engineer. ' K. Fugitive dust emissions during construction shall be minimized by watering the site for dust control, containing excavated soil on -site until it is hauled away, and , periodically washing adjacent streets to remove accumulated materials. L. That prior to the issuance of any building permits a specific soils and foundation , study shall be prepared and approved by the Building Department. MITIGATION MEASURES , Faulting and Seismicity ' 26. Buildings four stories in height or higher shall be designed in accordance with requirements for seismic zone 4 as outlined in Chapter 23 of the Uniform Building ' Code and/or with the benefit of a site specific seismic ground response spectrum 284 ' 1 i� I E I study which would be prepared by the project geotechnical consultant and structural engineer to allow matching of building period with site period. The structural plans and/or ground response study shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Building Department prior to issuance of a building permit. 27. Buildings less than four stories in height shall be designed by a Structural Engineer in accordance with UBC Chapter 23 requirements for Seismic Zone 4. Non -critical structures shall be designed to withstand strong ground shaking that may accompany a maximum probable earthquake along the Newport -Inglewood Fault. Critical structures (i.e., hospitals, fire/police facilities, schools, etc.) shall be designed to withstand strong ground shaking associated with a maximum credible earthquake on the Newport -Inglewood Fault. Structural plans, including seismic design calculations/parameters, shall be approved by the City Building Department prior to issuance of building permits. 28. Habitable buildings shall not be placed adjacent to (above or below) slopes or bluffs where seismic induced slope or bluff failure could occur. Though the City has established a Bluff Setback Criteria for development on the top -of -bluff (Development Policy D.2.b.1 of the Newport Beach General Plan, January 21, 1991, and Newport Municipal Code section 20.151.080), the City minimum setbacks may not necessarily be adequate from a geotechnical viewpoint concerning bluff/slope instability during an earthquake. Areas potentially prone to such failures shall be identified and further evaluated by the project Geotechnical Consultant during the Tentative Tract Map review and Grading Plan review stage. The evaluation shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Building Department prior to the issuance of grading permits. Grading and building plans shall reflect the recommendations of the evaluation to the satisfaction of the Building Department. 29. In accordance with the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act, a Registered Geologist shall further evaluate and make recommendations regarding the potential for ground surface rupture effecting proposed development on -sites where "Potentially Active Faults" have been identified (Bay View Landing and Freeway Reservation sites) or on any other of the sites where Potentially Active Faults are identified in the future. The study shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City Building Department and shall be prepared prior to approval of a tentative tract map or grading permit whichever comes first. Grading and building plans shall reflect the recommendations of the study to the satisfaction of the Building Department. ' Liquefaction 1 30. Sites where the potential for liquefaction has been identified, or any other site where the potential for liquefaction may be encountered during subsequent investigations, shall be further evaluated by a geotechnical consultant. The evaluation shall include subsurface investigation with standard penetration testing or other appropriate means of analysis for liquefaction potential. The project geotechnical consultant shall 285 U u provide a statement concerning the potential for liquefaction and its possible impact ' on proposed development. If necessary, the geotechnical consultant shall provide mitigation measures which could include mechanical densification of liquefiable layers, dewatering, fill surcharging or other, appropriate measures. The Geotechnical ' Consultant's report shall be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and a Registered Civil Engineer and shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Building Department prior to issuance of Grading Permit. Grading and building plans shall ' reflect the recommendations of the study to the satisfaction of the Building Department. ' Erosion 31. Any necessary diversion devices, catchment devices, or velocity reducers shall be ' incorporated into the grading plan and approved by the City Grading Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Berms or other catchment devices shall be incorporated into the grading plans to divert sheet flow runoff away from areas which , have been stripped of natural vegetation. Velocity reducers shall be incorporated into the design, especially where drainage devices exit to natural ground. , 32. All fill slopes shall be properly compacted during grading in conformance with the City Grading Code and verified by the project Geotechnical Consultant. Slopes shall ' be planted with vegetation upon completion of grading. Conformance with this measure shall be verified by the City Grading Engineer prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. ' 33. Berms and brow ditches shall be constructed to the satisfaction and approval of the City Grading Engineer. Water shall not be allowed to drain over any manufactured ' slope face. Top -of -slope soil berms shall be incorporated into grading plans to prevent surface runoff from draining over future fill slopes. Brow ditches shall be incorporated into grading plans to divert surficial runoff from ungraded natural areas ' around future cut slopes. The design of berms and brow ditches shall be approved by the City Grading Engineer prior to issuance of grading .permits. 34. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, appropriate artificial substances shall be recommended by the project landscape architect and approved by the City Grading Engineer for use in reducing surface erosion until permanent landscaping is well ' established. Upon completion of grading, stripped areas shall be covered with artificial substances approved by the City Grading Engineer. , 35. Drainage of both surface and subsurface water over or toward the bluffs on the Upper Castaways and Newporter North sites shall be minimized. Though some drainage of rainwater over the bluff face cannot be avoided, drainage control devices ' shall be designed to direct excess water from site improvements away from the bluff face. Irrigation shall be controlled to prevent excessive infiltration into the subsurface. The project Civil Engineer shall design,grading plans to minimize surface ' 286 1 I runoff over 'the bluff faces. The project Geotechnical Consultant shall provide recommendations to minimize subsurface water migration toward the bluff faces prior ' to approval of Tentative Tract maps or site plans. All design criteria for the control of surficial and subsurface water shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer. ' Bluff and S19ne Instability ' 36. The project geotechnical consultant shall review the tentative tract map and grading plan for each site and prepare a report addressing all salient geotechnical issues related to bluff and slope stability of any existing bluff or slopes. These reports shall ' include: 1) detailed analysis of field data including surface and subsurface geological mapping; 2) laboratory testing results; 3) stability analysis of existing bluffs and proposed slopes as illustrated on the tentative tract map or rough grading plan; 4) conclusions; 5) recommendations for mitigation of any identified unstable bluffs or slopes and/or for additional investigation. These reports shall be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and a Registered Civil Engineer and shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. ' 37. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Project geotechnical consultant and/or civil engineer shall make written recommendations for manufactured slope ' stabilization including, but not limited to, buttressing, rock bolting, grouting, slope gradient laybacks, or retaining walls. All necessary recommendations shall be included in the grading plan to the satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer. 38. Though the City has established a Bluff Setback Criteria for development on the top - of -bluff (Development Policy D.2.b.1 of the Newport Beach General Plan, January 21,1991, and Newport Beach Municipal Code section 20.151.080), the City minimum setbacks may not necessarily be adequate from a geotechnical viewpoint concerning bluff/slope instability. Prior to issuance of grading permits, appropriate safe bluff top ' setback recommendations shall be determined by the project Geotechnical Consultant based on the evaluation required by Mitigation Measure 28 (page 285) to the satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer. ' 39. During grading a geotechnical consultant shall be monitor grading operations to ensure that recommendations for slope instability mitigation are implemented. Additionally, the'geotechnical consultant shall evaluate slopes as they are graded ' through geologic mapping and analysis to ensure that no unanticipated conditions are present. Slope stability mitigation recommendations may require modification during ' grading. Compliance with this measure shall be verified by the Building Department. 40. Prior to issuance of building permits, the geotechnical consultant shall prepare a ' Rough Grading Report and As -Graded Geotechnical Map for each graded site at the completion of grading of that site. The Report shall summarize and document 287 H compliance with all mitigation measures. The Rough Grading Report shall include ' a statement regarding the adequacy of the manufactured slopes for their intended use and a statement regarding the adequacy of the recommended bluff setbacks. The ' report shall be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and a Registered Civil Engineer and shall be approved by the City Grading Engineer. Compressible/Collapsible Soil 41. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, written recommendations for the mitigation ' of compressible/collapsible soil potential for each site shall be provided by the geotechnical consultant. Foundation recommendations shall be included. Recommendations shall be incorporated as conditions of approval for the site -specific ' tentative tract maps and grading plans to the satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer. Recommendations shall be based on surface and subsurface mapping, laboratory testing and analysis. Mitigation, if necessary, couldinclude: removal and ' recompaction of identified compressible/collapsible zones, fill surcharging and settlement monitoring, compaction grouting, or foundation design which utilizes deep piles, or other recommended measures. The geotechnical consultant's site -specific reports shall be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and Registered Civil Engineer, and shall be approved by the City Grading Engineer. Expansive/Corrosive Soil 42. Written recommendations for the mitigation of expansive and corrosive soil potential ' for each site, shall be provided by the project corrosion consultant, geotechnical consultant and/or Civil engineer. Foundation recommendations shall be included. Recommendations shall be based on surface and subsurface mapping, laboratory ' testing and analysis and shall be incorporated into final building plans prior to issuance of building permits. The geotechnical consultant's site -specific reports shall be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and Registered City Engineer, and ' shall be approved by the City Grading Engineer. Near Surface Groundwater ' 43. The project geotechnical consultant and/or civil engineer shall prepare written site- ' specific reviews of the tentative tract maps and grading plans addressing all salient geotechnical issues, including groundwater. These reports shall provide findings, conclusions and recommendations regarding near -surface groundwater and the , potential for artificially induced groundwater as a result of future development, and the effects groundwater may have on existing or future bluffs, slopes and structures. The reports shall also address the potential for ground subsidence on the sites and , properties adjacent to the sites if dewatering is recommended. The geotechnical consultant and/or civil engineer's reports shall be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and Registered Civil Engineer and shall be completed to the satisfaction , of the City Grading Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. 288 1 ' LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE ' Project -Specific Project -specific impacts associated with faulting and seismicity are considered a significant ' adverse impact. City Policies and Requirements and Mitigation Measures identified by site on the following page will reduce project -specific impacts related to faulting and seismicity to a level of insignificance. No impacts associated with liquefaction are anticipated on the Jamboree/MacArthur, Newporter Knoll, Block 800, Corporate Plaza West, and Freeway Reservation sites. The potential forliquefaction has been identified for the San Diego Creek South, San Diego Creek North, Bay View Landing, Upper Castaways, Newporter North, and possibly ' Newporter Resort sites. On these sites impacts related to liquefaction are considered a significant geological impact. Mitigation measures will reduce project -specific impacts to a level of insignificance. Impacts related to erosion are considered a significant geological impact. The sites most ' severely effected by naturally occurring erosion are the Upper Castaways, Bay View Landing, Newporter North, and Newporter Knoll sites. Short-term erosion occurring as a result of grading activities could occur on all sites proposed for development. Mitigation measures will reduce project -specific impacts to a level of insignificance. Impacts associated with bluff and slope stability are considered a significant geological impact. The Upper Castaways, Bay View Landing, Newporter North, and Newporter Knoll sites contain high, moderately steep to near -vertical bluffs adjacent to Upper Newport Bay. Mitigation measures have been provided for project -specific impacts related to bluff and slope stability which will reduce impacts to a level of insignificance. ' The potential for compressible/collapsible soil exists on all of the eleven (11) project sites. ' Mitigation measures will reduce project -specific impacts to a level of insignificance. Project -specific impacts related to expansive and corrosive soil conditions will result on all ' eleven (11) project sites. Mitigation will reduce project -specific impacts to a level of insignificance. Shallow groundwater exists on the San Diego Creek South, San Diego Creek North, Jamboree/MacArthur, and the lower portion of the Bay View Landing sites. Shallow groundwater perched at the contact between Terrace deposits and less permeable bedrock I was reported at the Upper Castaways, and Newporter North sites, and may be present at the upper portion of the Bay View Landing site and the Newport Knoll, Newporter Resort, Corporate Plaza West, Block 800, and Freeway Reservation sites. Mitigation will reduce ' project -specific impacts to a level of insignificance. 1 289 I I SUMMARY OF CITY POLICIES AND REQUIREMENTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Project Site City Policies Mitigation Measures San Diego Creek South A-J 26-34, 41-43 San Diego Creek North A-J 26-34, 41-43 Jamboree/MacArthur None Required None Required Upper Castaways A-J 26-43 Bay View Landing A-J 26-43 Newporter North A J 26-43 Newporter Knoll None Required None Required Newporter Resort A-J 26-34, 41-43 Block 800 A-J 26-29, 31-342 41-43 Corporate Plaza West A-J 26-29, 31-34, 41-43 Freeway Reservation A-J 26-29, 31-34, 41-43 290 11 II I I 1 1 1 i ' Cumulative Impacts to all sites along with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects r related to faulting/seismicity, collapsible soil, expansive/corrosive soil, and near surface groundwater potential are considered insignificant. 1 I 11 I r r r 291 r WATER RESOURCES EXISTING CONDITIONS Water Ouality The principal pollutants currently affecting the water quality in Newport Bay are siltation (from erosion within the watershed, agricultural uses, and urban construction activities); high nutrient levels of runoff (primarily from agricultural fertilization); and potential effects from high levels of pesticides (from irrigation runoff). The majority of the sites drain directly or indirectly (through storm drains) into Upper Newport Bay. ' The City of Newport Beach is a participating member in the "Comprehensive Sedimentation Control Plan - Newport Bay Watershed, Phase III 208 Plan Amendment" (1983). This plan proposed a seven part program for sediment control in all areas draining into Upper Newport Bay which includes the parcels under review in this EIR. This 208 Plan involved the City of Newport Beach and the project proponent, The Irvine Company, in every phase of the implementation program. Between the time of the adoption of the plan and the present, each component of the 208 plan for protecting Upper Newport Bay has been implemented. In April 1984, an In -Bay Sediment Control Agreement was signed and in September 1985 an In -Channel (San Diego Creek) Sediment Control Agreement was signed. An "early action plan" and Units I and II of the in -Bay basins were completed by the end of 1986 at a cost of over $10 million, a significant portion of which was funded by the City of Newport Beach and The Irvine Company. tThe 1986 Newport Beach EIR for the Upper Newport Bay Enhancement/Sediment Management Project summarized the environmental benefits of the program for Upper Newport Bay as follows: i 1. Increase the tidal prism by approximately 236 acre feet. 2. Improve tidal flushing and circulation. 3. Help to stabilize the salt marches by facilitating the passage of sediment laden flood flows below the elevation of the marsh plain. 4. Encourage tidal scour and wind -wave action to maintain lower intertidal elevations above the Narrows. 5. Expand subtidal habitat by approximately 40 acres. 6. Localize sediment deposition within the Upper Bay to facilitate removal. 292 i 7. Facilitate maintenance dredging by providing equipment access. ' 8. Protect Newport Harbor from sedimentation by arresting and localizing sediment infill in the Upper Newport Bay. 9. Improve water quality in Newport Harbor by introducing greater tidal flushing , in the Upper Newport Bay. Surface and Groundwater Existing surface waters in the vicinity, and within the project site, include San Diego and Bonita Creeks, and Upper and Lower Newport Bay. None of the sites are located over a usable groundwater basin. The Orange County Coastal Plain Groundwater Basin does supply water needs to the project area through the Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD). Withdrawals from the basin are made at the Dyer Road Wellfield. Storm Drainage , The City of Newport Beach maintains a storm drain system for all or a portion of the areas of Block 800, Corporate Plaza West, Newporter North, Newporter Resort, Bay View Landing and Upper Castaways. The City also maintains a storm drain system adjacent to the sites of San Diego Creek North and San Diego Creek South, as well as the storm drain system that crosses the Freeway Reservation East site. The Irvine Company maintains the existing desilting basin for the Freeway Reservation East area. Flooding I All 11 project sites are outside of the 100-year flood plain as identified by the Army Corps of Engineers. All it sites are outside areas identified as areas subject to seismically -induced tsunamis and seiches by the City's Public Safety Element. All eleven (11) project sites are outside of the 100 year flood plain as identified by the Army Corps of Engineers. As all sites are outside of the flood plain, development on the sites will not impact the course or flow of flood waters and will not expose people or their property to water related hazards. No impacts from flooding are expected. All Sites All eleven (11) project sites drain to Newport Bay. Ten of eleven sites drain to Upper Newport Bay. Corporate Plaza West and the upper portion of the Bay View Landing site drain to Lower Newport Bay. 293 11 IJ 1 Individual Sites San Diego Creek South The majority of the site has been graded and/or filled. The eastern edge of the site contains a portion of unimproved Bonita Creek which is a natural watercourse that flows from the San Joaquin Hills into San Diego Creek at the northeast corner of the San Diego Creek South site. San Diego Creek flows adjacent to (but not within) the north side of the project ' site. Across Jamboree Road from the site are the upper reaches of Newport Back Bay. San Diego Creek North The site is undeveloped and contains no natural or manmade waterways. San Diego Creek flows adjacent to (but not within) the south side of the project. Across Jamboree Road from the site are the upper reaches of Newport Back Bay. Jamboree/MacArthur The center of the site contains a freshwater pond created by drainage improvements constructed with the State Route 73 ramps. Upper Castaways No natural surface waterways exist on the project site. On -site drainage patterns are generally toward the west, but follow no particular course. Some drainage occurs over the bluff edge directly into the Bay. This drainage has created several erosion gullies. An off - site drainage system is in place in Dover Drive which drains a large area and currently is at capacity. Bay View Landing The upper portion of the Bay View Landing site drains to Lower Newport Bay from East Coast Highway and Jamboree Road. The lower portion of the site drains across the Newport Dunes property to Upper Newport Bay. rNewporter North The Newporter North site drains generally east to west toward Back Bay Drive. The northern portion of the site drains to an improved retarding basin, through a series of interim improvements across the site, and ultimately to Upper Newport Bay. A portion of the site sheet flows over the bluff edge and down to Back Bay Drive. The southern portion of the site drains to the southwest, through John Wayne Gulch, and ultimately to Upper Newport Bay. 1 294 I Newporter Knoll I The Newporter Knoll' site drains generally west toward Back Bay Drive. The southern portion of the site drains to the southeast, into John Wayne Gulch, and ultimately to Upper Newport Bay. Newporter Resort This developed site contains an improved drainage system which conveys runoff to the ' Upper Newport Bay. Block 800 The Block 800 site drains to San Clemente Drive and Santa Barbara Drive, where it enters ' the master planned drainage system, and flows to a 484nch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) under Jamboree Road. This system continues across the Newporter North site to an improved desilting basin, through a series of interim improvements across the site, and ultimately to Upper Newport Bay. Corporate Plaza West I I The existing drainage pattern on the Corporate Plaza West site flows towards East Coast Highway. The drainage enters a 72-inch reinforced concrete pipe culvert under East Coast Highway and ultimately outlets into the Lower Newport Bay in the vicinity of the Bahia Corinthian Yacht Club. Freeway Reservation M A portion of the south end of the site contains a desilting basin to aid in water flow through the existing drainage under MacArthur Boulevard. Surface runoff from this narrow site generally drains to, and flows under, MacArthur Boulevard through a reinforced concrete pipe through Big Canyon to Upper Newport Bay. IMPACTS According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines a project will normally have a significant effect on the environment if it will: • substantially degrade water quality; • substantially degrade or deplete ground water resources; 0 interfere substantially with ground water recharge; • cause substantial flooding, erosion or siltation. 295 1 • For the purposes of this EIR, the potential for significant adverse effects would occur if the project would cause, or expose people and property hto, substantial flooding and/or substantial degradation of water quality (i.e. if water quality standards set by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) would be violated). Development of the :proposed project will result in impacts to water resources. The sites will be developed for a variety of urban uses. The significance of project specific water resource impacts is considered below on an issue by issue basis. Water Ouality Grading on the sites could cause a temporary increase in construction related sediment erosion. Grading on the San Diego Creek South site could impact the water quality of Bonita Creek, San Diego Creek, and Upper Newport Bay. Any grading on the San Diego Creek North site associated with open space or public facility uses could effect San Diego Creek and Upper Newport Bay. rAlthough limited or no grading is anticipated on the Jamboree/MacArthur site, even minor grading at the Jamboree/MacArthur site could impact the water quality of the small freshwater pond on -site and to a lesser extent Upper Newport Bay. The eight remaining sites with the exception of the Newporter Knoll site which is planned to remain as passive open space, may impact Upper or Lower Newport Bay due to construction related sediment erosion as a result of grading activities. Increased erosion due to grading activities is considered a short-term construction related impact and with mitigation measures can be mitigated to a level of insignificance. The conversion of presently vacant land to urban uses on some sites may result in minor impacts to water quality associated with surface runoff containing oil, metals or other substances commonly found on such surfaces as roads, pavement, sidewalks„rooftops, or landscaped areas. Surface and Groundwater Impacts caused by any changes in the amount, or flow, of surface waters, including San ' Diego and Bonita Creek, and the Newport Bay, will be incrementally small and impacts are considered insignificant. None of the sites are located over a usable groundwater basin. The Orange County Coastal Plain Groundwater Basin however, does supply water needs to the project site through the Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD). Withdrawals from the Basin are made at the Dyer Road Wellfield. The project will not directly discharge or withdraw from the basin. Any change in the amount of withdrawal from the basin will be incremental as a course of ' supplying water to the project. 1 296 ;I �J A complete discussion of water supply is provided in the Public Services and Utilities section of this EIR. ■ Drainaee Patterns ■ All sites have been previously graded to some extent. Consequently, natural drainage patterns have already been modified on these sites. Additional grading is not expected to create substantial changes in existing drainage patterns. Although the Jamboree/MacArthur site will be designated for open space/recreation uses some minor grading may be required. This is not expected to result in substantial changes to existing drainage patterns. It is also assumed that minor grading will not need to extend into the freshwater pond located in the center of the site. Grading that will occur on the Freeway Reservation site for development of the proposed residential dwellings and passive open space is not expected to create substantial changes in existing drainage patterns. Development of any of the sites will result in increases in surface runoff due to an. increase in impervious surfaces. It is estimated that runoff could increase by about 10 percent to 15 percent during severe storm events. With the exception of Corporate Plaza West and the upper portion of the Bay View Landing site, all sites drain into Upper Newport Bay. Corporate Plaza West and the upper portion of Bay View Landing drain to Lower Newport , Bay. Storm runoff would be intercepted by off -site drainage systems and discharged into Newport Bay. ' Development of the sites will increase surface runoff due to an increase in impervious surfaces. Runoff is expected to almost double for those areas which are developed with structures and impervious surfaces such as roads, sidewalks, etc. Storm runoff will be intercepted by off -site drainage systems and discharged into either Upper or Lower Newport Bay (depending on the site). Existing storm drain facilities do not have adequate capacity to handle increased runoff from the Newporter North, Newporter Resort, Corporate Plaza West, and Upper Castaways development. This increased demand on storm drain facilities will require expansions and upgrades to existing infrastructures. The existing underground on -site storm drain system on the Newporter Resort site handles only low nuisance flows. The system may need to be upgraded to prevent flooding of the existing parking lot. Implementation of the proposed project will result in an increased demand on storm drain facilities and will require expansions and upgrades to existing infrastructures. Existing storm drain facilities do not have adequate capacity to handle the increased runoff resulting from development on the Newporter North, Corporate Plaza West and Upper Castaways sites and additional development on the Newporter Resort site. The existing underground on -site storm drain system for the Newporter Resort development handles only low nuisance flows. 297 1 u The system may need to be upgraded to prevent flooding of the existing Newporter Resort parking lot. ' In order to determine what level of system improvements is required, the developer will be responsible for the provision of a hydrology and hydraulic study. Any necessary upgrades ' to the existing storm drain systems determined through the study also will be the responsibility of the developer. This hydraulic study shall be provided at a time of subsequent environmental documentation. Mitigation related to controlling drainage runoff has been provided which will reduce any potential impacts to a level of insignificance. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS This project in association with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects will have a short-term impact on the water quality in Newport Bay as a result of an increase in sediment runoff. The long-term impacts of the project and cumulative projects on water quality include an increase in urban pollutants to the Newport Bay from such pollutants as oil, .grease and heavy metal from asphalt and roads, and pesticides and fertilizers from landscaped areas. The project will have no cumulative impacts related to an increase in storm runoff due to the increase in impervious surfaces. As none of the sites are located in 100 year flood plain flooding impacts are not anticipated. The minor incremental increase in runoff will not contribute to, or cause, a hazardous flooding condition on any of the eleven sites. On a cumulative level, none of the sites are located over a usable groundwater basin and none will directly discharge or withdraw from such a basin, therefore, no such basins will be impacted. Finally, as the amount of sediment that is likely to enter on -site, adjacent and local stream, creeks, and bays is incrementally minimal, there will be no impact to the currents, flow or Idirection of these bodies of water on a cumulative basis. EXISTING CITY POLICIES AND REQUIREMENTS A. Prior to issuance of any grading permit, an erosion, siltation and dust control plan, shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the Building Department and a copy shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. B. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, the design engineer shall review and state that the discharge of surface runoff from development of any site will be performed in a manner to assure that increased peak flows from the site will not increase erosion immediately downstream of the system. As part of this review, the velocity of concentrated run-off from the project shall be evaluated and erosive velocities 298 Di controlled as part of the final project design. This report shall be reviewed by the ' Planning Department and approved by the Building Department. C. Erosion control measures contained in the erosion siltation and dust control plan shall be implemented on any exposed slopes within thirty days after grading, or as otherwise directed by the City Grading Engineer. ' D. Any existing on -site drainage facilities shall be improved as required or updated concurrent with grading and development to the satisfaction of the Public Works and Building Departments. Improvement plans shall be approved by the Public Works Department prior to issuance of a grading permit. E. Any modification of existing on -site drainage systems or extensions of culverts for contributory drainage from surrounding areas shall be studied during project design. Necessary improvements shall be installed in conformance with local ordinances and accepted engineering practices and in a manner acceptable to the Public Works Department and Building Department. Improvement plans shall be approved by the Public Works Department prior to issuance of a grading permit. MITIGATION MEASURES Water Quality 44. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall provide to the Building and Public Works Departments haul route plans that include a description of haul routes, access points to the sites and watering and sweeping program designed .to minimize impacts of the haul operation. These plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. Copies of the plans shall be submitted to the City's Planning Department. 45. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall incorporate the following erosion control methods into grading plans and operations to the satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer and Building Department. a. An approved material such as straw, wood chips, plastic or similar materials shall be used to stabilize graded areas prior to revegetation or construction. b. Air -borne and vehicle -borne sediment shall be controlled during construction by: the regular sprinkling of exposed soils; and the moistening of vehicles loads. C. As approved material such as rip rap (a ground cover of large, loose, angular stones) shall be used to stabilize any slopes with seepage problems to protect the top soils in areas of concentrated runoff. 299 ' d. During the period of construction activity, existing vegetation which will be retained on -site shall be protected from traffic by the use of fences. If ' appropriate, buffer strips or vegetative filter strips, such as tall stands of grass, can be used as an alternative and/or supplementary method to protect against sediment buildup. 46. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project geotechnical consultant and/or civil engineer shall develop a plan for the diversion of stormwater away from any ' exposed slopes during grading and construction activities. The plan shall include the use of temporary right-of-way diversions (i.e., berms or swales) located at disturbed areas or graded right-of-ways. The plan will be approved by the City Engineer and Building Departments and implemented during grading and construction activities. 47. The applicant shall provide a temporary gravel entrance located at every construction site entrance. The location of this entrance shall be incorporated into grading plans prior to the issuance of grading permits. To reduce or eliminate mud and sediment carried by vehicles or runoff onto public rights -of -way, the gravel shall cover the entire width of the entrance, and its length shall be no less than fifty feet. The entrance plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and Grading Engineer concurrent with review and approval of grading plans. 48. The applicant shall construct filter berms or other approved devise for the temporary gravel entrance. The berms shall consist of a ridge of gravel placed across graded right-of-ways to decrease and filter runoff levels while permitting construction traffic to continue. The location of berms shall be incorporated into grading plans prior to the issuance of grading permits. The plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Grading Engineer. 49. During grading and construction, the applicant shall provide a temporary sediment basin located at the point of greatest runoff from any construction area. The location of this basin shall be incorporated into grading plans. It shall consist of an embankment of compacted soils across a drainage. The basin shall not be located in an area where its failure would lead to a loss of life or the loss of service of public utilities or roads. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Grading Engineer. Drainage Patterns 50. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the master plans of water, sewer and storm drain facilities shall be approved by the City Engineer. Any systems shown to be ' required by the review shall be the responsibility of the developer, unless otherwise provided for through an agreement with the property owner or serving Agency. 300 I I LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE Project -Specific ' All project sites are outside the 100-year flood plain. No adverse impacts from flooding are expected. No mitigation is necessary. The project sites are not located over a useable groundwater basin, nor will they directly discharge into or withdraw from a groundwater basin. No impacts to groundwater basins , are expected. No mitigation is necessary. Impacts to surface waters are considered insignificant. No mitigation is necessary. Short-term impacts from construction related sediment erosion may adversely impact water , quality. Short-term impacts to water quality from construction related sediment will be mitigated to a level of insignificance with the implementation of existing City policies and requirements and Mitigation Measures. Impacts to drainage patterns and inadequacy of drainage systems will be mitigated to a level of insignificance with implementation of existing City policies and requirements and Mitigation Measures. Cumulative , This project along with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects will not result in significant cumulative impacts due to increased storm runoff from increases in impervious surfaces; increased risk of flooding; water supplies; or the currents, flow, or direction of the Upper or Lower Newport Bay. This project in association with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects will have a short-term impact on the water quality in Newport Bay as a result of an increase in sediment runoff. This project along with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects will result in an incremental long-term impact to water quality in the Newport Bay due to increased urban pollutants. This impact can be partially mitigated, but remains a significant adverse and unavoidable impact. Examples of urban pollutants which will affect Newport Bay include oil, grease and heavy metal from asphalt and roads, and pesticides and fertilizers from landscaped areas. M 301 1 I HOUSING ' EXISTING CONDITIONS Population The population of the City of Newport Beach was estimated at 66,643 for the year 19901. A projection to the year 1995 estimates that population within the City will be 76,5002. The City of Newport Beach Housing Element of the General Plan assumes that household size is expected to stabilize at 2.2 persons per household by the year 2000. If household size remains constant, the population in the year 2000 is projected to be 78,2002. The City of Newport Beach's employment population was 72,476 in 1987. Employment is projected to reach 85,3553 by the year 2000. ' Housing Stock ' The most recent inventory of the City's housing stock estimates that there are a total of 34,648 units within the City as of January 1, 1989. Of these, single-family detached homes comprise the highest percentage with 15,212 estimated units. Multi -family units are the second largest type of housing in the City with 8,108 units. Additionally, there are an estimated 6,170 duplex to fourplex units, 4,327 single family attached units and 831 mobile home units within the City of Newport Beach. Between 1970 and 1980, a total of 8,919 housing units were added to the housing stock of Newport Beach, an average of 892 units per year. Since 1980, the rate of increase to the housing stock has slowed significantly. From 1980 to 1989, a total of 3,642 units were added to the City's supply, an average of 404 units per year. Housing Need and Affordability The State of California requires regional councils of governments to establish growth policies in order to address existing and future housing needs. The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) has been compiled by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for Orange County. The City of Newport Beach has also adopted SCAG's 1988 RHNA data into the City's General Plan Housing Element. In 1988 SCAG calculated that 14 percent of all households within the City paid more than 30 percent of their income for housing. According to these, SCAG estimates 2,625 very low-income households and 1,806 low-income households within Newport Beach pay more than 30 percent of their income for housing. 1City of Newport Beach, Department of Finance, 1990 census (April 1, 1990). 2City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Element. 3Southern California Association of Governments. 302 According to the City of Newport Beach's Housing Element, new residential development ' shall, where feasible, allocate at least 20 percent of the annual production to housing that is affordable to low income households. The Land Use Element states that the City has a ' duty to provide housing for all economic segments of the community. A majority of the City's low and moderate income housing stock is in the form of multi -family rental units. The City's quantified goal as identified in the Housing Element is illustrated in Table KIC ' Jobs/Housina Balance The concept of jobs/housing balance is based on the premise that a reduction in commute ' distances and travel time can be achieved by providing sufficient jobs within close proximity to residential developments, thereby creating a balance of employment and housing demands. A reduction in commute distances and travel time are also desired to reduce air pollutant emissions, thereby improving regional air quality. SCAG's 1989 Growth Management Plan (GMP) establishes performance goals for balancing ' jobs and housing for each subregional planning area in the six county SCAG region. SCAG ' considers an overall subregion balanced if its jobs/housing ratio was 1.27 in 1984 and achieves 1.22 in 2010. These "balance markers" represent regional averages for the SCAG area. Job rich subregions would have ratios greater than the balance markers, while housing rich subregions would have ratios less than the balance markers. The Southeast Orange subregion had a jobs/housing ratio of 1.45 in 1984 and is projected to have a 1.45 ratio in 2010 according to SCAG. SCAG has established a ratio of 1.44 as a performance goal for the Southeast Orange subregion. This performance goal means that growth in this subregion through the year 2010 should occur in an overall ratio of 1.44 jobs added per housing unit added. Attainment of subregional performance goals will ensure regional consistency with the GMP. Table LL summarizes data related to job/housing balance. IMPACTS According to Appendix G of CEQA, a substantial growth in, or concentration of, population is considered a significant impact. Population growth may result in physical impacts due to concentrated growth in identified areas. Housing demand is a socioeconomic effect of population growth which may result in physical impacts due to the construction of new housing. ,For purposes of this EIR substantial population and/or housing increase, inconsistency with the General Plan Housing Element, inconsistency with Land Use policies, or inconsistency with the goals or policies of the Southern California Association of Governments Regional Housing Needs Assessment, is considered a significant adverse impact. F1 cl 303 NEW HOUSING UNITS BY INCOME CATEGORY 1989-1994 Very Low Lower Moderate Upper Total San Diego Creek South 30 30 240 0 300 Freeway Reservation 8 8 60 0 76 Newporter North 22 21 0 169 212 Newport Center, Block 24 25 0 196 245 800 Villa Point Remnant 9 9 72 0 90 Castaways 15 16 0 120 151 CalTrans West 22 23 0 107 152 Newport Ranch 27 27 100 118 272 Vacant Site Subtotal: 157 159 472 710 1,498 Subtotal Percentage: 10.5% 10.6% 31.5% 47.4% 100% Infill/Intensification/CDBG 40 0 50 285 375 Density Bonus 75 125 0 0 200* Demolition Replacement: 0 0 125 250 375 TOTAL 272 284 647 1,245 22448 PERCENT 11.1% 11.691, 26.4% 50.9% 100% Source: City of Newport Beach Housing Element Notes: Could increase based on above projects using density bonus of 25% or less. 304 FABLE LL JOBS/HOUSING RATIO SURROUNDING PROJECT SITE 1984 1988 2010 City of Newport Beach N/A 1.85' 2.14 Southeast Orange Subsection 1.45 N/A 1.45 Source: SCAG 1989 Growth Management Plan 'Ail numbers indicate the ratio of jobs to a single household 305 IPopulation ' The San Diego Creek South, Upper Castaways, Newporter North, Block 800 and Freeway Reservation East sites will provide housing and increase the City's resident population. A population increase of approximately 2,103 persons at an assumed rate of 2.2 persons per household4 is expected (956 dwelling units are proposed). This change in population represents a 3 percent increase over the existing 1990 census projection of 66,643 persons. Corporate Plaza West, Bay View Landing and the additional 68 hotel units proposed for ' Newporter Resort will provide jobs and increase the City's daytime employment population. An increase of 603 employees is anticipated to be added to the City's projected year 2000 daytime employment population which, is 85,355 according to SCAG. The projection of employment opportunities was based upon a rate of four employees per 1,000 square feet for office uses, two employees per 1,000 square feet6 for restaurant/health club uses, and .39 employees per room6 for hotel uses. ' No uses which will generate an increase in residents or employees are proposed for the San Diego Creek North, Jamboree/MacArthur, or Newporter Knoll sites. Consequently no effects on population are expected from use of these sites as open space and/or public facilities. No substantial change in population characteristics is anticipated from the residential or commercial uses proposed. Population increase will be minimal (3%),and distributed over a period of five to ten years. Assuming buildout at ten year increments, population increases are equal to only .3 percent a year. No significant adverse impacts to the City's population are anticipated. ' Housing Stock I I r LJ I ,1 I The San Diego Creek South, Upper Castaways, Newporter North, Block 800 and Freeway Reservation East sites will provide housing and increase the City's housing stock by adding 956 dwelling units. These additional dwelling units will include the 20 percent allocation of affordable housing for these sites. The increase in dwelling units will occur over a ten year period. On average approximately 96 dwelling units would be added each year to the City of Newport Beach's housing stock. On an annual basis this project represents 24 percent of the current annual average of 404 additional units a year. A 2.8 percent increase over total existing dwelling units would occur with project buildout. 4City of Newport Beach General Plan, 1989. 5State of California, Office of Planning Research, Economic Practices Manual. 6City of Newport Beach Planning Department. r The project will not significantly alter the location, distribution, and density of the City of Newport Beach's housing stock. Development of residential units is considered "infill" and will occur primarily adjacent to existing residential uses. All development is consistent with , the General Plan. Densities proposed are equally consistent with surrounding uses. The Block 800 site proposes residential uses at a higher density than other proposed residential development in the project. Block 800 is located within Newport Center and is consistent ' with other existing residential development (Sea Island, Villa Point) within Newport Center. No substantial change to the City's housing stock is anticipated from the residential uses proposed. Residential development on these sites is expected to fulfill rather than create a demand for additional housing. No significant adverse impacts to the City's Housing stock are anticipated. Housing Need and Affordability The 956 dwelling units proposed will include compliance with the provisions of the City of , Newport Beach Housing Element. Based on the provisions of the element, 20 percent would represent 191 units. These units will be located either on one site or distributed among several sites. The affordable housing allocation is consistent with Program 2 of the City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Element which states, "...where feasible, at least 20% of the annual production to housing be made affordable to low income , households." No residential uses are proposed for the San Diego Creek North, Jamboree/MacArthur, or , Newporter Knoll sites. These sites are proposed as open space and utilities. There will be no demand for additional housing created by the San Diego Creek North, Jamboree/ MacArthur, or Newporter Knoll sites. , The Corporate Plaza West, Newporter Resort, and Bay View Landing sites will provide jobs (with an increase of 603 employees) and will incrementally increase the demand for housing. This demand for housing could be met by the residential units production proposed by the project. The following discussion on the jobs/housing balance offers an examination of the housing need generated by those employment inducing sites. Since the project will meet the affordable housing goal, and not cause a need for additional housing, no adverse impacts are anticipated. Jobs/Housing Balance r Sites proposed for commercial office, and hotel uses will generate new employment. Office and commercial uses are expected to provide an additional 603 jobs. Sites generating new employment include Bay View Landing, Newporter Resort, and Corporate Plaza West. Employment generating development is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan designations. This incremental increase in employment may increase demand for the housing in the region. The project will also provide 956 new dwelling units. 307 1 7 E ' The project's jobs/housing ratio is approximately .61. This ratio was calculated by comparing the proposed number of dwelling units to the number of jobs that would be generated by ' the office and commercial uses proposed. This results in the ratio of 603 (jobs): 956 (d.u.$) or .61. The ratio means that for each dwelling unit provided there is a corresponding .61 jobs created. Jobs/Housing ratios have been targeted in the SCAG 1989 Growth Management Plan for the year 2010 as 2.14 for the City of Newport Beach and 1.45 for the Southeast Orange County Subsection. SCAG considers a subregion balanced if its jobs/housing ratio was 1.27 in 1984 and achieves 1.22 in 2010. The current SCAG goal for the City of Newport Beach is a job/housing balance of 2.14. Using SCAG's goal we can calculate that a project that provides 603 jobs would at a minimum need to provide 281 dwelling units to meet this goal. The project as proposed exceeds this minimum requirement by 675 dwelling units. As a result, the project could incrementally reduce the overall City's jobs/housing ratio, assisting in achieving SCAG's goal of 1.22 in 2010. No adverse impacts to the City's jobs/housing balance are anticipated. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The proposed project in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects is not anticipated to create a substantial change in population, employment, or housing characteristics. On a cumulative level, this project will create additional housing, employment, and increase population. The increase in housing will satisfy a need for housing within the City of Newport Beach as identified in the City's Housing Element and I adjacent jurisdictions. Increases in employment and population will be incremental. No significant cumulative impacts are anticipated. ' EXISTING CITY POLICIES AND REQUIREMENTS A. The goals and objectives of the City's Housing Element with regard to affordable housing shall be satisfied for the project. MITIGATION MEASURES rNo mitigation measures are necessary. ILEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE Project -Specific No substantial change in population characteristics is anticipated. The proposed project will not have a significant population impact. 1 308 lJ I The proposed project will not significantly alter the location, distribution, and density of the ' City of Newport Beach's housing stock. No significant adverse impacts to the City's Housing stock are anticipated. ' The proposed project will meet the affordable housing goal, and not cause a need for additional housing, no impacts are anticipated. ' The proposed project will incrementally reduce the City's jobs/housing ratio. This is not considered an adverse impact. No impacts to the City's jobs/housing balance are anticipated. ' Cumulative On a cumulative level the proposed project will create additional housing, employment opportunities and increase population. The increase in housing will satisfy a need for ' housing within the City and adjacent jurisdictions. Population and employment increases will be incremental. No significant cumulative impacts are anticipated. II u I I LJ I I r I t 309 1 11 P P u L ,' CULTURAL RESOURCES ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES INTRODUCTION Archaeology is the scientific study of historic or prehistoric peoples and their cultures by analysis of their artifacts, inscription, monuments, and other such remains. The following describes the archaeological resources in the project area based upon the survey and research conducted by RN1W Paleo Associates. This technical report is included in this EIR as Appendix G. The archaeological portion of the study included literature research and an examination of the surface of the parcels. The archaeological sensitivity of each site is evaluated. In the following section, the existing conditions and possible resources within each site are discussed independently. EXISTING CONDITIONS San Diego Creek South According to the literature review, no archaeological sites have been recorded on the San Diego Creek South parcel. 1 The entire surface of the parcel has been filled and/or graded which removed the site's top soil. Small amounts of shell, that appeared to have been dredged from the bay, are visible along the eastern edge of the parcel. Asphalt, concrete and other trash also are evident on ' the San Diego Creek South site. No evidence of historic or prehistoric sites was seen during the survey conducted for this EIR. I I 1-1 I San Diego Creek North Two archaeological sites have been recorded on the San Diego Creek North parcel. CA-Ora-57 and CA-Ora-77 are indistinguishable because of their close proximity. They are referred to as CA-Ora-57/77 throughout this report. Remnants of CA-Ora-57/77 were evident during the survey along the eastern and southern bluff areas. Large quantities of marine shell including Chione. Pecten. Polinices and Ostrea were identified. Lithic artifacts noted include a felsite knife, a mano fragment, and chert, quartzite and quartz tool making debris. A light shell scatter extends from the bluff area in a westerly direction for about 75 meters. Dirt roads crisscross the midden area. The site is currently eroding down the face of the bluff. This area has been highly disturbed by construction of roads and utilities and the San Joaquin Gun Club, which previously occupied the property. CA-Ora-57/77 was excavated by Winterbourne and the WPA (Works Projects Administration) crew in 1938. During the 310 C� excavation Winterbourne recovered three prehistoric burials, a steatite arrow straightener, , a perforated cowry shell, a shell bracelet, limpet (shell) rings, olivella (shell) beads, a knife, manor, pestles, awls, a rubbing stone, projectile points including triangular concave base, leaf and shouldered stemmed, hammerstones and a cogstone fragment (Anonymous 1938, ' Eberhart 1949). Based primarily on the artifacts collected by Winterbourne and the WPA, this site is considered to have been an important hub for the regional ' subsistence-settlement(s) of its era (de Banos and Koerper 1990:5-20). In 1967, the site was said to have been destroyed, but remains of the midden and artifacts were found during a subsequent survey in 1985. In 1985, 35 two meter surface scrapes produced one mano, two chert cores, six flakes and approximately 1500 shell fragments. A test excavation, consisting of ten sub -surface units, was completed in 1989. As a result of the excavation, it was determined that the remaining portions of the site appear to have little research value (de ' Barros and Koerper 1990). Jamboree/MacArthur According to the literature review, no archaeological sites have been recorded within the Jamboree/MacArthur site. It is possible that a portion of CA-Ora-57/77 which exists on the San Diego Creek North site may have extended into the Jamboree/MacArthur area. The area has been severely disturbed by the construction of the surrounding roads and freeway ramps. No evidence of historic or prehistoric sites was found during the survey conducted for this EIR. Upper Castaways The literature review identified four archaeological sites that have been recorded on the , Upper Castaways site. The four sites are CA-Ora-48, CA-Ora-49, CA-Ora-186, and CA Ora-187. CA-Ora-48 was originally described as a very old site based on the disintegrating condition , of the shell found there (Briggs 1949). In 1972, a series of 14 backhoe trenches were dug as a subsurface test of the site. This test phase found the site to be highly disturbed and indicated that further research was not warranted. The 1972 investigations also reported that dredged residue from channel deepening operations had been dumped on the Castaways parcel in the early 1960's (Archaeological Research Inc. 1972) which may have disturbed the condition of the site. In 1990, 22 postholes and a one meter square excavation unit were dug to test a portion of the site area being considered for a haul road (Bissell 1990). A large quantity of shell, but no prehistoric lithic artifactual material was collected. ' CA-Ora-49 was originally reported as a shell mound located at the bottom of a bluff (Briggs 1949). During a survey in 1989, a midden one meter in depth and containing three distinct layers of charcoal was reported. The survey indicated that the majority of the site had been destroyed but a portion of the site still remained (Becker 1989). 311 1 L' U CA-Ora-186 was almost completely destroyed by the construction of the "Old Landing", later used as a country club and still later as the Castaways Restaurant. The site was said to contain shell, chert and quartz flakes and a broken knife (Hafner, Smith and McKinney 1965). During a 1989 survey, midden material and historic trash, consisting of concrete and old glass, was seen eroding down the bluff towards the bay (Becker 1989). CA-Ora-187 was recorded as a large site prior to disturbance of the area. CA-Ora-187 is described in the same location as CA-Ora-48, although the site locality map at UCLA shows the site in a different location. Becker in his 1989 survey reported midden material in that general location but stated that no distinct site was found (Becker 1989:19). ' The survey conducted by RMW for this EIR verified that all three sites have been severely disturbed. CA-Ora-48 has been disturbed by a portion of an old road that cuts through the site, a bicycle course that has been constructed by digging holes and building berms and by ' the dumping of dirt and dredge materials in the western portion of the site. Shell, consisting of Ostrea. Pecten. M ilus Chione, Olivella. Turretella and marine snails, was seen on the site. No prehistoric lithic artifacts were noted. CA-Ora-49 has been almost completely destroyed by erosion. An area approximately one by five meters square, containing Pecten, Ostrea and M_, tom, was observed. No prehistoric lithic artifacts were noted. CA-Ora-186, possibly contains both a prehistoric and historic component. The prehistoric component has been impacted by the historic structures which have been destroyed. Marine shell, a bifacial mano, chert debitage, brick fragments, historic amethyst glass and building materials are present in the site area. Bay View Landing ' The literature review revealed that two archaeological sites have been recorded on the Bay View Landing site. The two sites are CA-Ora-66 and CA-Ora-1098. CA-Ora-66 was first recorded as a prehistoric camp site (Nelson 1949). When surveyed in 1985, shell was found including Chione. Pecten and Ostrea. CA-Ora-1098 was recorded as a dense shell scatter that included Chione, Pecten and Ostrea (Breece and Harrison 1985). I The survey conducted by RMW for this EIR identified an area containing marine shell exists along Coast Highway, extending from the western section of the parcel east, approximately 20 meters and about 8 meters toward the north. The shell consists of Pecten and Chione and is located in the area in which CA-Ora-66 had been previously recorded. The site has been disturbed by the construction of Coast Highway. Marine shell was observed in the flat area near Back Bay Drive, in the recorded location of CA-Ora-1098. In a third location, a sparse shell scatter, containing Pecten and Chione, was observed on top of the knoll. This area has been severely disturbed by the previous grading and dumping of various kinds of debris. 312 Newporter North The literature review identified five sites that have been recorded on the parcel. The five ' sites are CA-Ora-51, CA-Ora-52, CA-Ora-64, CA-Ora-100 and CA-0ra-518. CA-Ora-51 was originally recorded as a shell midden. It has been partially destroyed (Chase ' 1965). No subsurface test excavations have been conducted at this site. A surface collection and subsequent radiocarbon testing of the collected shell dated occupation to 560 A.D. The site was described as a shell midden that represented the transition period between the ' Encinitas II and Shoshonean traditions (Archaeological Research Inc.1977). (Please refer to the discussion of cultural setting in Appendix G). The RMW survey conducted for the EIR encountered extremely dense vegetation in the area of CA-Ora-51. A few Chione and , Pecten shell fragments were visible near the edge of the bluffs. CA Ora-52 was originally described as a shell mound (Briggs 1949) and later as a shell , midden containing Pecten and Ostrea (Chace 1965). CA-Ora-52 was again surveyed in 1976 and a bifacial mano was seen in the Back Bay Drive road cut. The depth of the midden is estimated at 50 centimeters (Cottrell and Warren 1976). The RMW survey conducted for , the EIR observed marine shell was observed eroding down the knoll, in the area of CA-Ora-52. The shell consisted of Chione, Pecten, and Ostrea. CA-Ora-64 is one of the most important, nearly intact, prehistoric sites in Orange County. It was initially recorded by Nels Nelson in 1912. In the 1970s, a California State University, Fullerton, field class under the supervision of C. Drover excavated six subsurface units. Subsequent classes from Cypress College, Golden West College and California State University, Long Beach accomplished a partial surface collection and excavated 44 subsurface units. Further surface collecting was conducted and six additional subsurface ' units were excavated by Archaeological Research Inc. under the supervision of Glenn DeGarmo (Drover, Koerper and Langenwalter II 1983). In 1989, the.site was further tested by LSA to delineate site boundaries (Rosenthal 1989). CA-Ora-64 is a multiple component ' habitation site occupied as early as 8,000 years ago. The site consists of two.components of the Milling Stone Period and contains a possibly earlier San Dieguito Tradition component i (Drover, Koerper and Langenwalter II 1983). The RMW survey conducted for this EIR identified a few fragments of Pecten and Chione in the dense grass over CA-Ora-64. CA-Ora-100 is Pecten. Chione M ilus , recorded as a shell mound containing and on a terrace overlooking the bay (Chace 1965). Radiocarbon dates from marine shell collected on the site, place occupation at 520 A.D., a transition period between the Encinitas II and , the Shoshonean Traditions (Archaeological Research Inc. 1977). Limited test excavation undertaken by LSA, also determined that occupation was occurring in the 6th century (Rosenthal 1989). The RMW survey, observed shell along the top of the bluff extending ' from the edge approximately 20 meters south and east. A diorite metate fragment, a quartz projectile point base, a felsite hammerstone and approximately 15 felsite and chert flakes 313 11 F E were also seen in that area. The artifactual material probably represents CA-Ora-100 since CA-Ora-52 is recorded down slope near Back Bay Drive. ' CA-Ora-518 is recorded as a shell midden at the base of the bluffs below CA-Ora-64 (Cottrell 1976). The site was surface collected and marine shell radiocarbon dated to 1225 ' A.D., placing site occupation during the Shoshonean Tradition. No evidence of the site was seen during the RMW survey. ' Some small shell fragments are visible near San Joaquin Hills Road. It is difficult to ascertain if that shell is a result of bay dredging or the remnants of a midden deposit. ' Newporter Knoll The literature review identified two sites that were previously recorded on the property. ' These sites are CA-Ora-50 and CA-Ora-99 locus A and B. CA-Ora-50 was recorded a shell mound (Briggs 1949) that had been partially destroyed by the construction of Palisades Road (Chace 1965). CA-Ora-50 is described in the records as being located on a slope extending from Palisades Road (Back Bay Drive) northeast. A large portion of this site was probably destroyed by construction of the Newporter Resort golf course (Chace 1965). A later survey stated that a portion of the site extended approximately 70 feet from the Newporter Resort Golf Course south toward Back Bay Drive, and a portion of the site could exist under the road (Cottrell and Warren 1976). No identifiable midden or artifactual materiaf was ' observed in the area during the RMW survey. Shell viewed near the road could have resulted from dredging of the bay. It is possible that a small site could be hidden by the dense vegetation present during this survey. This site has not been studied. ' CA-Ora-99 is described in the records as shell refuse overlooking the bay. The southern one-third of the site was graded for the Newporter Resort and Golf Course (Chace 1965). An excavation was undertaken on CA-Ora-99 Locus B by a field class from Orange College, under the direction of Theo Mabry, in 1973. Among the artifacts collected were manos, hammerstones, scrapers, utilized flakes, debitage and shell. Radiocarbon dating has placed occupation at CA-Ora-99a at approximately 2000 B.C. and at CA-Ora-99b at 100-226 A.D.. Both CA-Ora-99a and CA-Ora-99b are believed to have been shell gathering/processing camps (ARI 1977). ' The RMW survey identified a large quantity of shell, primarily Chione and Pecten, along the cliff overlooking Back Bay Drive and the John Wayne Gulch. Small amounts of Ostrea and ' turban shells are also present. Two scrapers, one chert the other chalcedony, are seen along with chert, quartz and felsite prehistoric tool making debris. The shell is eroding down slope towards Back Bay Drive and the John Wayne Gulch. The shell appears to extend along the ' entire cliff overlooking Back Bay Drive. This was difficult to specifically ascertain because of dense growth in that area. It is possible the shell observed along the west facing cliff represents in -place prehistoric midden material from a midden located on top of the knoll. The steepness of the cliff and heavy vegetation, including cactus, along the cliff face, make 314 a conclusive determination impossible. Based on descriptions of CA-Ora-99A and B, it ' appears that this material is part of CA-Ora-99. Newporter Resort ' No sites have been recorded for the Newporter Resort Site. The study area was examined ' by RMW. The entire parcel has been developed and includes the Newporter Resort Hotel, Golf Course, associated buildings, parking lots and landscaped grounds. No artifactual material was seen during the RMW survey. ' Block 800 The literature review performed by RMW Paleo Associates identified that one archaeological site has been recorded for the Block 800 site. CA-Ora-136, a shell midden, was excavated by the Pacific Coast Archaeological Society in , 1964 (Chace 1965). The site was described as a large prehistoric habitation area before ' being partially destroyed by construction of a golf course. Among the artifacts listed were mano and metate fragments, hammerstones, a quartz biface, flakes and core tool fragments (Douglas 1980). ' The RMW survey observed that the top of the knoll appears to have been graded. The northeast portion of the parcel has been impacted by the adjacent construction and by an ' asphalt surface. Recent trash, consisting of concrete chunks, brick and metal fragments, is also present in the northeast section of the site. The southern and western sections of the Block 800 site contain shell, primarily Pecten and , Chione and a small amount of turban shell. Artifacts consisting of the mid -section of a chert projectile point, felsite and chert scrapers, a chert core and felsite and chert tool making , debris were also found during the RMW survey. Approximately 40 lithic artifacts were noted during this survey. These artifacts and shell probably represent a remnant of CA-Ora-136. The original archaeological site was far more extensive and probably extended across and beyond Santa Barbara and San Clemente Drives, prior to development in those areas. Corporate Plaza West t No archaeological sites have been recorded for this parcel. The entire Corporate Plaza West site appears to have been disced in the past. Trash, including asphalt and concrete chunks are piled and scattered in various areas on the site. Three small shell scatters were found during the RMW survey conducted for this EIR, in the northeast quarter of the parcel. Shell, including Pecten. Chione and Ostrea is visible along the east edge of the Balboa Bay Club parking lot. The shell could possibly have , 315 C LI U 7 11 J J 7 J I r resulted from fill used in constructing the parking lot or it could be the remnants of an unrecorded archaeological site. During an earlier survey (Douglas 1980) shell was observed near the parking lot and between the parking lot and west Coast Highway. At that time it was suggested that the shell represented an extension of CA-Ora-70, which had been recorded south of west Coast Highway. Freeway Reservation One prehistoric site, CA-Ora-216, was previously recorded within the northeast section of the Freeway Reservation study area. The site was described as containing a thin midden with Pecten. Chione and lithic flakes (Chace 1966). The Freeway Reservation site was surveyed by RMW Paleo for this EIR..The northern sector of the property, near Ford Road and MacArthur Boulevard, was found to be highly disturbed by past construction. This area contains piles of concrete rubble and remnants of asphalt paving that might have been a parking lot. To the south, chain link fencing surrounds a flood control drainage system. The eastern edge of the parcel has been disturbed by activities related to previous nearby home construction. A major portion of the northeast section contains dense vegetation. Almost the entire surface of the parcel has been disturbed by plowing. Efforts to relocate the CA-Ora-216 site were unsuccessful. A major portion of CA-Ora-216 was probably situated in the area now occupied by homes.(Harbor View). The field near the homes contains dense vegetation, which limited visibility. However, no remnants of the site were visible in rodent backdirt or other exposed surfaces. A small amount of Pecten and Chione and one ltammerstone were seen about 15 meters to the southwest in an area of relatively sparse vegetation. Because this field has been subjected to plowing, these items could have been transported from the original site location. _kTfgC According to CEQA Appendix K, activities which disrupt or adversely affect 'important" prehistoric or historic archaeological sites are considered significant adverse impacts. An "important" archaeological resource is defined as one which: • is associated with an event or person of: recognized significance in California or American history, or recognized archaeological importance in prehistory; 0 can provide information which is both of demonstrable public interest and useful in addressing scientifically consequential and reasonable or archaeological research questions; • has a special or particular quality such as oldest, best example, largest, or last surviving example of its kind; 316 11 n • is at least 100 years old and possesses substantial stratigraphic integrity; or , • involves important research questions that historical research has shown can be ans}vered only with archaeological methods. ' San Diego Creek South Implementation of the proposed project is not expected to result in significant adverse impacts to known archaeological resources. No archaeological sites have been recorded on the parcel. No evidence of historic or prehistoric sites were seen during the current survey. , Almost the entire surface of the parcel has been graded and/or tilled. There is a remote possibility that archaeological material could be unearthed during ground , disturbing activities. If such materials were destroyed, this could result in a significant adverse impacts. , San Diego Creek North Because of previous severe disturbance to CA-Ora-57/77, the remaining portions of the site , appear to have little archaeological research value (de Barros and Koerper 1990). Implementation of the proposed project is not expected to result in significant adverse ' impacts to CA-Ora-57/77. There is a possibility that unknown archaeological material could be unearthed during ground disturbing activity associated with construction of public facilities on -site. If such materials were destroyed, this could result in significant adverse impacts. , Jamboree/MacArthur Implementation of the proposed project is not expected to result in significant adverse ' impacts to archaeological resources. The Jamboree/MacArthur site has been severely disturbed by construction of the adjacent roads. No archaeological sites have been identified ' on the site. However, CA-Ora-57/77 is located to the west on the San Diego Creek North site. It is possible a subsurface component -could extend onto the Jamboree/MacArthur site. The Jamboree/MacArthur site is proposed to remain as passive open space. Limited to no grading is expected. No impacts are expected. Upper Castawals I Ca-Ora-48 will be impacted by development of residential uses proposed for the site. This site has been severely disturbed and does not warrant further scientific investigation. Impacts to this site are not considered significant. Ca-Ora-49 and CA-Ora-186 may be impacted by grading related to development of trail ' systems and a view park. Although Ca -Ora 49 and CA-Ora-186 have been severely disturbed, the sites may still contain prehistoric and historic components that could be 317 ' P adversely impacted by development of open space uses on the site. This could be a significant adverse impact. ' There is a possibility that unknown archaeological material could be unearthed during ground disturbing activity associated with residential development and construction' and use of park and open space uses. If these materials are destroyed, this could result in a significant adverse impact. Bay View Landing Ca-Ora-1098 will be adversely impacted by development of the restaurant or health club ' proposed for the site. This would be a significant adverse impact. Ca-Ora-66 and shell identified on the bluff may be impacted by development of view park ' and passive open space uses. Although CA-Ora-66 has been disturbed by the widening of Coast Highway, and the area where shell was identified on the bluff has been severely disturbed by historic grading and trash dumping, the sites may still contain prehistoric and ' historic components that could be adversely impacted by development and open space uses on the site. This could be a significant adverse impact. Development of a view park would also impact an area containing a sparse shell scatter. It is unknown if this scatter represents a significant cultural resource. There is a possibility that unknown archaeological resources could be unearthed during ground disturbing activity ' associated with the restaurant or health club development, and construction and use of a view park and open space. If these materials are destroyed, this could result in a significant adverse impact. Newporter North ' Ca-Ora-64, one of the most important, nearly intact sites remaining in Orange County, and CA-Ora-100 will be directly impacted by the development of residential uses proposed for the site. These impacts would be significant. CA-Ora-51 and CA-Ora-518 could be directly or indirectly impacted by the implementation of passive open space uses on the project site. Increased use of the area by open space users could also increase the rate of degradation experienced at the sites. ' CA-Ora-52 is not expected to be impacted as a result of the proposed residential uses and open space uses on the project site. Development or grading will not occur on the bluff. At the bottom of the.bluff, the topography is too steep for development. Although there ' is a remote possibility that changes in drainage patterns resulting from development on top of the bluff above could have adverse impacts on the site. C 318 There is also a possibility that unknown important archaeological resources could be ' unearthed during ground disturbing activity related to bluff stabilization. If important resources are destroyed, this could result in significant adverse impacts. , Newporter Knoll CA-Ora-50, CA-Ora-99a and CA-Ora-99b may be directly impacted by development of trail ' systems and other passive recreational uses. Increased use of the area by open space users may also increase the rate of degradation experienced at the sites. Although both CA Ora- ' 50 and CA-Ora-99 were adversely affected by construction of the Newporter Resort and Golf Course, the sites still may contain prehistoric and historic components that could be adversely impacted by use of open space uses on the site. , The possibility that unknown important archaeological material could be unearthed during ground disturbing activity conducted on the project site is extremely remote. Limited , grading is anticipated to occur on the project site, however any grading conducted could uncover important archaeological material. If these materials are -destroyed, this could result in significant adverse impacts. , Newporter Resort The proposed project is not expected to result in significant impacts to archaeological ' resources. No archaeological sites have been previously recorded as existing on the , Newporter Resort site. The entire site has been developed. There is a remote possibility that archaeological material could be unearthed during grading/ ' ground disturbing activities necessary to construct additional hotel rooms. This could result in significant adverse impacts. Block 800 ' Development of residential uses on Block 800 will impact one prehistoric site, CA-Ora-136. , These impacts could be significant. Corporate Plaza West ' Implementation of the proposed project is expected to result in significant impacts to archaeological resources on the Corporate Plaza West site. Construction of office uses ' would impact a surface scatter of shell which is possibly an extension of CA-Ora-70, which was recorded across Coast Highway from the site. These impacts could be significant. Freeway Reservation ' CA-Ora-216 may be impacted by development of residential uses and open space uses ' proposed for the site. This impact could be significant. 319 1 L I I r LJ P U 1 There is also a possibility that unknown important archaeological material could be unearthed during ground disturbing activity associated with residential development and construction and use of open space uses. This could result in significant adverse impacts. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The incremental loss of cultural resources attributable to this project in conjunction with past, present, and reasonable future projects will result in a significant cumulative impact related to archaeological resources. EXISTING CITY POLICIES AND REQUIREMENTS All Project Sites City Council Policy K-5 outlines the City's requirements with respect to archaeological resources. The following specific measures are recommended in conformance with Policy K-5. A. A qualified archaeologist shall be present during pregrade meetings to inform the project sponsor and grading contractor of the results of any previous studies. In addition, an archaeologist shall be present during grading activities to inspect the underlying soil for cultural resources. If significant cultural resources are uncovered, the archaeologist shall have the authority to stop or temporarily divert construction activities for a period of 48 hours to assess the significance of the find. B. In the event that significant archaeological remains are uncovered during excavation and/or grading, all work shall stop in that area of subject property until an appropriate data recovery program can be developed and implemented. The cost of such a program shall be the responsibility of the project sponsor. C. Prior to issuance of any grading or demolition permits, the applicant shall waive the provisions of AB 952 related to City of Newport Beach responsibilities for the mitigation of archaeological impacts in a manner acceptable to the City Attorney. MITIGATION MEASURES All Project Sites 51. All sites shall be mitigated pursuant to Council Policy K-5. Where further testing or salvage is required, the applicant shall select a City -approved qualified archaeologist to excavate a sample of the site. All testing and salvage shall be conducted prior to issuance of grading permits or use of an area for recreational purposes. A written report summarizing the findings of the testing and data recovery program shall be 320 I submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of the completed' data recovery ' program. 52. The applicant shall donate all archaeological material, historic, or prehistoric, recovered during the project, to a local institution which has the proper facilities for curation, display and study by qualified scholars. All material shall be transferred to , the approved facility after laboratory analysis and a report have been completed. The appropriate local institution shall be approved by the Planning Department based on a recommendation from the qualified archaeologist. , 53. Any excavation of a site located within the Coastal zone of more than two surface meters of dirt shall require a coastal development permit prior to commencing the ' excavation. All provisions of the California Coastal Commission guidelines shall be complied with. Upper Castaways ' 54. Prior to any grading related to development of the bluff trail system, open space uses ' or bluff stabilization which could impact CA-Ora-49 and CA-Ora-186 on the Upper Castaways site, the sites shall be subjected to test excavations by a City approved ' archaeologist (experienced in both historic and pre -historic archaeology) to determine site integrity, extent and significance. The methodology of the test excavation shall reflect the recommendations contained in the Cultural Resources report prepared for ' this Program EIR. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and recommendations and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing test excavations. ' Bay View Landine 55. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, CA-Ora-1098 shall be surface collected and , subjected to test excavations by a City approved archaeologist to determine site integrity, extent and significance. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and ' submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing test excavations. 56. Prior to grading for the new park, the project sponsor shall retain a City approved , archaeologist to conduct a surface collection and subsurface test excavation of CA- Ora-66 to determine site extent, integrity and significance. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and Submitted to the Planning Department within 90 ' days of completing test excavations. 57. Prior to grading for the view park, the project sponsor shall retain a City approved ' archaeologist to place a test unit on top of the knoll on the Bay View Landing site in the area containing shell scatter, to determine if the shell is representative of a subsurface archaeological deposit. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings ' 321 ' U J and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing the test excavation. ' Newporter North ' 58. Prior to the use or development of the open space areas for passive recreational uses, CA-Ora-51 and CA-Ora-518 on the Newporter North site shall be surface collected and subjected to test excavations to determine site extent and significance. A report ' shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing test excavations. 59. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall conduct a surface collection of the eastern extension of CA-Ora-100 which would be impacted by grading and/or development of residential uses. The surface collection shall be ' conducted by a city approved archaeologist. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings of the surface collection and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing the surface collection. ' 60. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant conduct a data recovery of program CA-Ora-64 on the Newporter North site. The program shall be conducted by a City approved archaeologist. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing the data recovery program. 61. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for residential development or any bluff ' stabilization, a qualified archaeologist shall review grading and drainage plans to determine if there are any indirect or direct impacts to CA-Ora-51, 52 and 518. If impacts are identified, test excavations shall be conducted to determine site extent, ' integrity and significance. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing test excavations. Newporter Knoll 62. Prior to any grading or use of the site, the City shall conduct a surface collection of ' archaeological material present on the top of the hill of the Newporter Knoll, with test units placed on the hill to determine site significance and boundaries. One unit shall be placed in the recorded area of CA-Ora-50 to determine if a portion of the ' site still exists. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings'and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing surface collection test excavation. ' Block 800 63. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit a qualified City approved archaeologist shall ' conduct a surface collection of CA-Ora-136 on the Block 800 site and subject the site �I 322 to test excavations to determine site extent and significance. A test unit shall also be ' placed in the northern portions of the parcel to determine if a sub -surface midden is under the asphalt and trash. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and ' submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing test excavations. Corporate Plaza West - , 64. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a City approved qualified archaeologist shall dig post holes in the areas containing surface shellon the Corporate Plaza West ' site to determine if the shell represents sub -surface archaeological deposits. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing sub -surface testing. ' 65. Prior to the issuance of grading permit, the surface near the southern section of the , property shall be examined by a City approved qualified archaeologist after removal of brush and prior to any ground disturbance. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing ' the surface examination. Freeway Reservation ' 66. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the northern development area (Lot 2), a City approved qualified archaeologist shall examine the surface of areas previously ' identified as CA-Ora-216. The examination shall be conducted after removal of brush but prior to grading. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing the surface , examination. LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE ' Project -Specific The proposed project is not anticipated to result in significant impacts to potential ' archaeological resources on the sites of San Diego Creek South, San Diego Creek North, Jamboree/ MacArthur, and Newporter Resort sites. There is however, the potential for , archaeological resources to be unearthed during impacts to these sites. Implementation of standard City policies and requirements and recommended mitigation measures will mitigate these impacts to a level of insignificance. ' The proposed project is expected to result in significant impacts to archaeological resources on the sites of Upper Castaways, Bay View Landing, Newporter North, Newporter Knoll, , Block 800, Corporate Plaza West, and Freeway Reservation. Implementation of standard city policies and requirements and recommended mitigation measures will mitigate potential project -specific impacts to a level of insignificance. ' 323 ' I Cumulative ' Because the extent of the potential loss of archaeological resources is unknown at this time, the incremental loss iin conjunction with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects may result in a significant cumulative impact on archaeological resources. However, implementation of the existing City policies and requirements and recommended mitigation measures, will mitigate any potential cumulative impacts to a level of insignificance. 7 H C' I� 324 k ' CULTURAL RESOURCES PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES INTRODUCTION Paleontology is the science of the forms of life existing in former geologic periods as ' represented by fossil animals and plants. The following describes the paleontological resources in the project area based upon the survey and research conducted by RMW Paleo Associates. The purpose of the research is to assess the known and potential paleontological ' resources within the study area. Pertinent geological and paleontological literature was reviewed for information on the paleontological resources within and near the various sites that make up the study area. A reconnaissance of the sites was performed during this study. ' The RMW report in its entirety is included as Appendix G. The paleontological sensitivity of each site is evaluated. In the following section, the existing conditions and possible resources within each site are discussed. ' EXISTING CONDITIONS ' Description of Geologic Formations in the Project Area The Capistrano Formation is exposed in the Upper Castaways site. The Capistrano ' Formation was deposited in a very deep marine environment. The Capistrano Formation is known to contain numerous remains of marine vertebrate fossils throughout the region where it is exposed. 'Within the Upper Castaways site, fragmentary mammal bones were located in this formation during the current study. The Monterey Formation is exposed in several of the sites, such as Freeway Reservation, ' Newporter North, Newporter Knoll and Bay View Landing. The Monterey Formation was deposited in a deep sea that covered the region 10 to 15 million years ago. Fossil vertebrates and invertebrates are well known to occur in this formation throughout Orange ' County. Quaternary age terrace deposits are also exposed in several of the sites, such as Jamboree/ ' MacArthur, San Diego Creek North, Freeway Reservation, Block 800, Corporate Plaza West, Newporter North, Newporter Knoll, Bay View Landing, and Upper Castaways. The deposits were deposited along the margins of a retreating sea, approximately 100,000 years ' ago. Fossils of both land and sea animals have been collected from similar deposits in the vicinity of the sites. Fossils include a variety of Ice Age land animals including horses, elephants, bison, antelopes, and Dire wolves. Numerous invertebrates were also collected from the exposures near Dover Shores. ' In the Santa Ana Mountains the Topanga Formation has produced one of the largest assemblages of Middle Miocene age marine vertebrates in North America. There are two 1 325 0" small exposures of the Topanga Formation in the Freeway Reservation site; one just south , of Ford Road and the second where the middle fork of Big Canyon crosses the site. The oldest rock unit in this site is the 15 million year old Paularino Member of the Topanga ' Formation. Fossil invertebrates have been collected from this unit in the San Joaquin Hills. Vertebrate fossils are known from other members of this formation in the San Joaquin Hills and Santa Ana Mountains. I The Capistrano Formation is exposed in the Upper Castaways site. The Capistrano Formation was deposited in a very deep marine environment. The Capistrano Formation ' is known to contain numerous remains of marine vertebrate fossils throughout the region where it is exposed. Within the Upper Castaways site, fragmentary mammal bones were located in this formation during the current study. ' San Diezo Creek South ' Much of the site is covered with fill produced by dredging of the Upper Newport Bay in the 1980s. Quaternary alluvial deposits are also present on the site. The Quaternary alluvial , deposits are typically too young to contain fossil remains. Older deposits containing fossils are frequently found buried within these deposits. No fossils were observed on the site by RMW Paleo Associates. ' San Diego Creek North No fossils were observedon the site. Quaternary terrace deposits are exposed in the area ' north of the proposed Bay View Drive. The closest recorded fossil occurrence was across Jamboree at the Bay View development. ' Quaternary alluvial deposits are exposed in the area south of Bay View Drive. The alluvial deposits are typically too young to contain significant fossils. Older deposits containing ' fossils are frequently found buried within these alluvial deposits. Jamboree/MacArthur I Quaternary age terrace deposits are exposed within the site. The closest occurrence of fossils was across Jamboree Road at the Bay View development. During the paleontological , study no fossils were observed on the site. Upper Castaways , Quaternary age terrace deposits are exposed on the Castaways site. Known fossil invertebrates are present within the site at two locations within the terrace deposits exposed , on the cliff face above Upper Newport Bay. 326 1 11 I LJ n n I I U I I I I I u n LJ n F Siltstones of the Capistrano Formation underlie the terrace deposits. The Capistrano Formation was deposited in a very deep marine environment. The Capistrano Formation is known to contain numerous remains of marine vertebrate fossils throughout the region where it is exposed. Fragmentary mammal bones were located in this formation during the survey. Bay View Landing Quaternary age terrace deposits are exposed in the Bay View Landing site. Fossils of both land and sea animals have been collected from these deposits at the Bay View Landing site. Fossils from the site include a horse jaw and several types of invertebrates. The widening of Jamboree Road destroyed this fossil site. Fossil shells were observed in two horizons in the terrace deposits in the road cut along Jamboree Road and as loose or float materials along the base of the cliffs facing the Newport Dunes Resort. No fossils were observed on the site during this study. The Monterey Formation is exposed along the cliffs next to Newport Dunes, the north facing slope in the middle of the site, and in the north end of road cut along Jamboree Road. In the past, fossil whale remains were found in similar exposures of the Monterey Formation on the cliff face along the western boundary of the nearby Newporter North site. Newporter North - Newporter Knoll Quaternary age terrace deposits are exposed on both sites. The closest fossil occurrence in similar deposits is at the corner of East Coast Highway and Jamboree Road. A horse jaw and invertebrates were collected previously at the Bay View Landing site. No fossils were observed during grading monitoring on the Newporter North site, nor during this study. According to the RMW Paleo Associates study, the terrace deposits in the area appear to be relatively thin. Deep excavations could encounter the Monterey Formation. The Monterey Formation is exposed along Newport Bay, Jamboree Road, and on the slopes between Newporter North and Newporter Knoll. Fossil whale remains were found from exposures of the Monterey Formation on the cliff face along the western boundary of the site. Newporter Resort Quaternary age alluvial deposits are exposed on the Newporter Resort site. This alluvium was deposited by recent erosion and runoff action at the site. The deposits are typically less than 10,000 years old. The alluvium is too young to contain significant fossils. The Monterey Formation may also be present underlying the site. Fossil whale remains were found in exposures of the Monterey Formation on the cliff face along the western boundary of the Newporter North site, north of the Newporter Resort site. 327 Block 800 ' Quaternary age terrace deposits are exposed in Block 800. The closest fossil occurrence was , at the Four Seasons Uotel site in Block 600, where petrified wood fragments were collected. The fossil wood was apparently eroded from the underlying Monterey Formation and then redeposited with the terrace deposits. No fossils were observed at the Block 800 site. ' The Monterey Formation is not exposed on the Block 800 site. Due to the uncertainty of the terrace deposits thickness, deep excavations could encounter the Monterey Formation. Fossil wood and fossil whale remains have been in exposures of the Monterey Formation in the Big Canyon area, north of the site. Other sites in Fashion Island have encountered the Monterey Formation subsequent to deep excavations. Corporate Plaza West Quaternary age terrace deposits are exposed in the Corporate Plaza West area. Fossils of both land and sea animals have been collected from these deposits in the immediate vicinity of the site as discussed under the Block 800 discussion. The closest fossil occurrence recorded was at the Four Seasons Hotel site as mentioned under the Block 800 discussion. No fossils were observed on the Corporate Plaza West site. Monterey Formation is not exposed on the site. Due to the uncertainty of the terrace deposit's thickness, deep excavations could encounter the Monterey Formation. This has been the case at other sites in Fashion Island. Fossil wood and fossil whale remains were found from exposures of the Monterey Formation in the Big Canyon area, north of the site. Freeway Reservation Quaternary age terrace deposits, Late Miocene age marine deposits of the Monterey Formation, and Middle Miocene age marine deposits of the Topanga Formation are exposed' within the Freeway Reservation site. These rock units are known fossil producers in the Newport Beach area. No fossils were observed in these rocks. The 15 million year old Paularino Member of the Topanga Formation is the oldest rock unit on the site. The rock unit was deposited in a rapidly subsiding marine basin. Fossil invertebrates have been collected from this unit in the San Joaquin Hills. Vertebrate fossils are known from other members of this formation in the San Joaquin Hills and Santa Ana Mountains. The Topanga Formation in the Santa Ana Mountains has produced one of the ' largest assemblages of Middle Miocene age marine vertebrates in North America. Two small exposures of the Topanga Formation exist on the site; one just south of Ford Road and the other located in the southern portion of the Freeway Reservation East site. , The Monterey Formation is exposed in nearby Big Canyon. Fossil wood end fossil whale remains were found in the Monterey Formation in Big Canyon. Quaternary age terrace 328 1 n I I I I I I I deposits are exposed over most of the site. Fossils of both land and sea animals have been collected from theses deposits in the immediate vicinity of this site. The closest fossil occurrence is north of the site near Bonita Canyon. IMPACTS According ' to Appendix K of CEQA, activities which disrupt or adversely affect paleontological sites are considered significant adverse impacts. Paleontological resources are largely a buried resource. There is no way to accurately predict what fossils are present within a site, or their individual significance to the scientific community before they are discovered. The City of Newport Beach considers for the purpose of impact assessments all impacts to paleontological resources to be significant. Paleontological potential is based on the past production of fossils within and near the study area. Moderate or high potential for the future discovery of significant fossils exists for all the sites with the exception of the San Diego Creek South and the Newporter Resort sites. The sites are considered to have at least a moderate paleontological potential, since all the rock units have produced fossils in the study area. Fossils are known to exist on the sites of Bay View Landing, Newporter North, and Castaways. Consequently, these sites are considered to have a high potential for the future discovery of significant fossils. Grading operations associated with development are expected to unearth fossils on all sites except on San Diego Creek South and the Newporter Resort. Grading on all sites except San Diego Creek South and Newporter Resort may result in the destruction of fossils. This would be a significant adverse impact. Grading associated with bluff stabilization on Upper Castaways, Newporter North, and Bay View Landing will be a significant adverse impact. If the bluffs along Newport Bay needs to be altered for bluff stabilization purposes, detailed measured sections and samples will be made before and after alteration. Samples will be prepared and analyzed as part of these efforts. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Implementation of the proposed Circulation Improvement Open Space Agreement will contribute to a cumulative loss of paleontological resources in the regional, subregional, and local areas of the project. EXISTING CITY POLICIES AND REQUIREMENTS The City of Newport Beach City Council Policy K-6 outlines the City's requirements with respect to paleontological resources. The following specific measures are recommended in conformance with Policy K-6. The measures apply to all sites except San Diego Creek South and Newporter Resort. 1 329 II A. A qualified paleontological monitor shall be retained by the landowner, developer, ' and/or project sponsor to attend pregrade meetings and perform inspections during development. The paleontologist shall be allowed to divert, direct, or halt grading ' in a specific area to allow for salvage of exposed fossil materials. B. Paleontological resources within the coastal zone shall be investigated in accordance ' with acceptable scientific procedures and in compliance with any applicable requirements of the California Coastal Commission. Appropriate mitigation measures shall be adopted on a case -by -case basis in accordance with regular City policy. MITIGATION MEASURES Except where specifically indicated, the following mitigation measures apply to all the sites except San Diego Creek South and Newporter Resort. 67. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a collection plan shall be .prepared and implemented by a City approved, qualified paleontological monitor for known exposed fossil localities on Bay View Landing, Newporter North, and Upper Castaways. Because of the small nature of some fossils present in these rock units, matrix samples shall be collected for processing through fine mesh screens. The collection plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. 68. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall make provisions for the preparation and curation of all fossils possibly recovered from the sites during grading. This shall be done in a manner approved by the City's Planning Department. 69. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall identify a repository approved by the City's Planning Department which shall receive all fossils collected from the sites. 70. Cliff faces along Upper Newport Bay that have served as a reference section for micro -paleontological studies should be protected from alteration. If bluffs along Newport Bay need to be altered for bluff stabilization purposes, detailed measured sections and samples shall be made before and after alteration. Samples shall be prepared and analyzed as part of these efforts. The City of Newport Beach shall be responsible for retaining a qualified paleontologist to conduct the comparative study and sampling. A report shall be submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days. I 330 1 ' LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE ' Project.Smecitic The proposed project will not result in significant impacts to paleontological resources on the Newporter Resort and San Diego Creek South sites. Proiect-Specific and Cumulative ' Implementation of City policies and requirements and recommended mitigation measures, including a requirement to protect cliff faces of sites along Upper Newport Bay, will mitigate project -specific and cumulative impacts to paleontological resources to a level of insignificance. ' The proposed project along with other past, present, and reasonable foreseeable future projects will result in a cumulative loss in paleontological resources. This impact is mitigated to a level of insignificance. 331 E PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES EXISTING CONDITIONS During the preparation of this EIR, public agencies and utilities which serve the project site areas were contacted to determine the impacts of the Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement project. The following section summarizes correspondence with those agencies. Appendix A of Volume II of this EIR contains correspondence from the applicable agencies. Fire Protection The City of Newport Beach Fire Department currently serves the eleven (11) project sites. Ten (10) of the eleven (11) project areas are presently vacant, with the exception of the Newporter Resort site, which has, been built upon. The Fire Department provides emergency fire protection, non -emergency service calls, emergency medical paramedics, fire inspections, and fire hydrant inspections. Stations #3, #4, and #6 serve the sites, with Fire Station #3 serving the majority of the sites (nine of 11). Station #3 is located at 868 Santa Barbara on the corner of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara Drive. Station #3 currently houses one three -person fire engine, one four -person truck company, one two -person paramedic unit, and one Battalion Chief with driver. Station #4 is located at 323 Marine Avenue on Balboa Island. Station #6 is located at 1348 Irvine Avenue. Stations #4 and #6 each house three fire-fighters and one three - person fire engine. Table MM lists the stations that would serve the project sites, distance and response times. Exhibit 68 depicts fire station locations. Up until July 1, 1991, the Newport Beach Fire Department had contracted with the Orange County Fire Department for emergency services in the northern portion of the City of Newport Beach. This contract will not be renewed by the City of Newport Beach. As a result, Fire Stations #3 and #6 have been required to accept emergency responses and other non -emergency work such as fire inspections and hydrant inspections in this area of the City, originally handled by the Orange County Fire Department. Law Enforcement The City of Newport Beach Police Department provides all levels of law enforcement to the project sites. Current service to the proposed sites is minimal because most of the land is undeveloped. 332 E I I r iJ I 1 1I I I I F I TABLE AM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH FIRE DEPARTMENT STATIONS TO SERVE THE PROJECT SITES Location Station Distance Response Jamboree/MacArthur 3 3.0 mi. 8.0 min. San Diego Creek North 3 2.5 mi. 7.0 min. San Diego Creek South 3 2.3 mi. 6.5 min. Upper Castaways 6 1.2 mi. 4.0 min. Block 800 3 0.2 mi. 2.5 min. Corporate Plaza West 3 1.3 mi. 5.0 min. Freeway Reservation East 3 2.0 mi. 6.0 min. Newporter Knoll 3 0.7 mi. 3.5 min. Newporter North 3 0.5 mi. 2.5 min. Bay View Landing 4 0.8 mi. 4.0 min. Newporter Resort 3 1.0 mi. 4.0 min. Source: City of Newport Beach Fire Department 333 I The City of Newport Beach currently maintains a basic eight -unit patrol plan in which one police unit (patrol car) is assigned to a specific area, or beat. The City of Newport Beach is divided into eight beats. Police units respond to calls from mobile field locations. This eight -unit patrol plan does not include foot patrol officers, officers on motorcycles, or additional officers necessary as a result of beach activities. The Police Department also uses two helicopters. The Police Department for Newport Beach is located at 870 Santa Barbara Drive in Newport Center. The station generally operates on a priority response system of five to ten minutes. The majority of calls are handled under five minutes. Water The City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Ranch Water District have the authority to provide water to the project sites. Table NN lists which sites are within the boundaries of either the City of Newport Beach or the Irvine Ranch Water District. City of Newport Beach Water service will be available to the sites listed in Table NN from the City of Newport Beach. The City also operates and maintains a)dsting water facilities adjacent to San Diego Creek North and San Diego Creek South. The City of Newport Beach purchases water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD). The City of Newport Beach currently receives 100 percent of its water resources from MWD. The water originates from northern California and the �. Colorado River, and flows through the Diemer Filtration Plant in Yorba Linda. The water then travels through MAID lines into City of Newport Beach lines. The current level of service is adequate to meet the existing demand. Although the City of Newport Beach is in the process of developing groundwater and reclaimed water programs, these are not anticipated to be in effect for at least four to five years. MWD has placed a mandatory 20 percent cutback restriction of water on the City of Newport Beach, which in turn has placed similar restrictions on City of Newport Beach water consumers. Irvine Ranch Water District The Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) has secured its current and projected potable water supplies from two primary sources. The first source is MWD, which imports water from northern California and the Colorado River System and treats it to potable standards at the Diemer Filtration Plant in Yorba Linda. For non -portable uses, the Diemer Plant is bypassed and the water is delivered untreated. The Orange County Coastal Plain Groundwater Basin (the Dyer Road Wellfield (DRWF)) including the Irvine Sub -basin is the 335 L+ TABLE NN EXISTING WATER SERVICE TO THE PROJECT SITES City of Newport Beach Irvine Ranch Water District 0 Block 800 • Jamboree/MacArthur • Corporate Plaza West • San Diego Creek North • Newporter North • San Diego Creek South • Newporter Knoll • NeWporter Resort • Bay View Landing • Freeway Reservation East • Upper Castaways Source: STA Planning, Inc. 336 FJ second source of potable water. The water quality from DRWF is at a level that exceeds potable water quality standards. It does not currently require treatment. Because of sour ' taste and odor problems, DRWF water is currently chlorinated through a temporary chlorination facility. IRWD has taken steps toward reducing water usage in order to deal with the current drought situation that Southern California is experiencing. IRWD has plans to adopt a higher percentage of groundwater and reclaimed water usage in the near future. Additionally, as of July 1, 1991, IRWD has implemented an ascending block rate structure. This fee structure will in effect charge high water users additional dollars. The proposed Jamboree/MacArthur, Sari Diego Creek North, and San Diego Creek South sites are located within the IRWD service area. Although IRWD facilities are located near these proposed sites, no active lines exist that serve the presently vacant properties. ' Wastewater City of Newport Beach The City of Newport Beach has the authority to provide sanitary sewer service to all eleven (11) sites, with the exception of a small triangular portion of the San Diego Creek South site fronting University Drive. Irvine Ranch Water District The IRWD has the authority to provide sanitary sewer service to a small triangular portion of the San Diego Creek South site fronting University Drive. Existing sewer facilities include two lateral stubs entering the property off of an eight -inch vitrified clay pipeline (VCP) in University Drive. Sewer lines are sized to accommodate a commercial water consumption factor of 2,000 gallons/acre/day. County Sanitation Districts of Orange County District No. 5 of the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County (CSDOC) is the regional collector agency that maintains sewering jurisdiction over all sites with the exception of a portion of San Diego Creek South. The CSDOC lines collect from local lines that dump into the regional lines. In this case, CSDOC collects sewer and drainage materials from the City of Newport Beach lines to dispose of the waste. County trunk lines are identified at the following locations: Dover Drive; Balboa Boulevard; Bayside Drive; Back Bay Drive; Jamboree Road; West Coast Highway; Big Canyon; and, East Coast Highway. The sewage materials are fed through the trunks to treatment plants located in the Cities of Huntington Beach and Fountain Valley. The materials receive primary and secondary treatment and then are deposited into the Pacific Ocean. 1 337 I I The majority of existing trunk sewer lines are adequate. The County Sanitation District of j Orange County has utilized surveys of existing conditions and projections from the City of Newport Beach Master Plan of Utilities of 1989 which is based on the 1988 General Plan, 1 to determine which trunk lines will need upgrading. Although presently Bayside Drive is not deficient, this trunk line has recently been awarded funds for future improvements. Big Canyon and Dover Drive trunk lines have been found to be structurally deficient. These lines are not deficient because of approved land uses exceeding projections but rather because the structural integrity of the line is deteriorating and will require improvement. No plans/funds are currently provided for the upgrading of these two trunk lines. Table 00 , describes which trunk lines serve the project sites. Waste Disposal The City of Newport Beach currently maintains 16 haulers in order to provide waste disposal pick-up for single-family residential areas. Large commercial and apartment complexes in general, privately contract with Dewey's Rubbish Services and Western Ways. Any project that requires waste disposal bin service is also privately contracted. The City of Newport Beach utilizes the Bee Canyon Landfill, which is operated by the County of Orange. This Class III landfill opened in March 1990 and has an expected life of 20+ years until it reaches capacity. A Class III landfill accepts non -hazardous solid waste including dewatered sludge and acceptable incinerator residue. Refuse also is taken to a Materials Recovery Facility (MRF), located in the City of Stanton, where newspapers, metals, paper, glass, and plastics are separated for recycling. Parks and Recreation Recreational and park facilities in the project area are provided by the City of Newport Park, Beaches, and Recreation Department. The City provides a variety of recreation programs, activities, and leagues for adults and children. The City of Newport Beach maintains several developed parks sites. The City of Newport Beach is divided into 12 recreation and open space service areas. The proposed project sites are contained within service areas 3, 7, 9, and 11. San Diego Creek North, San Diego Creek South, and Jamboree/MacArthur are contained within Service Area 1. The Upper Castaways site is within Service Area 3. Bay View Landing, Newporter North, Newporter Knoll, Newporter Resort, Block 800, and Corporate Plaza West sites are within Service Area 9, and the Freeway Reservation East site is within Service Area 11. Table PP depicts a recreation and open space inventory of Service Areas 3, 7, and 11. According to the City of Newport Beach Recreation and Open Space Element of the General Plan, adopted February 11, 1985, Service Area 9 does not contain existing public recreation and open space areas. All parks within this area are privately owned. 338 1 I I i i I j I I fJ !J i If M TABLE 00 COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY TRUNK LINES Site Trunk Line Block 800 Jamboree Road Upper Castaways Dover Drive Newporter North Jamboree Road Newporter Knoll Jamboree Road Newporter Resort Jamboree Road Bay View Landing Back Bay Drive Corporate Plaza West East Coast Highway Freeway Reservation East Big Canyon Source: County Sanitation Districts of Orange County; 1991 339 1 r TABLE PP RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE INVENTORY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ' Facilities Recreation/Open Space Service Area Designation Size Cliff Drive 3 VP 4.2 ac. (includes only usable area) Community building , Picnic Restrooms Beaches Ensign Schooll 3 SC 7,73 ac. Volleyball Basketball Field Sports Ensign View 3 VP 1.73 ac. Picnic Benches Turf Galaxy Park 3 VP .95 as Benches Kings Road View Park 3 VP .4 ac. --- Mariners Elementaryl 3 Sc 61.24 ac. Basketball Mariners Park 3 NP 7.36 as Field Sports Community Building Playground Volleyball Tennis Picnic Newport Harbor High 3 SC 22.63 ac. Handball Tennis School' Volleyball Basketball Field Sports Swimming Newport Heights 3 SC 5.22 as Volleyball Elementaryl Basketball Field Sports North Star Beach 3 PB 11AS as Aquatics Center Westbay Park 3 NP 6.07 as Not improved Continued. MP = Mini Park VP =View Park NP = Neighborhood, Park CP = Community Park PB = Public Beach SC = School ac. = Acre 340 TABLE PP (ConVd.) ' RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE INVENTORY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH I IJ I I I II L� li II II I I[ Recreation/Open Space Service Area Designation Size Facilities Westcliff 3 VP 3.01 ac. Benches Corona del Mar High 7 SC 20.0 ac. Tennis Schooll Volleyball Basketball Swimming Field Sports Eastbluff Elementaryl 7 SC 7.5 as Volleyball Field Sports Eastbluff Park 7 NP 13.87 ac. Field Sports Picnic Anderson Elementaryl 11 SC 3.44 ac. Field Sports Volleyball Basketball Buffalo Hills 11 NP 12.9 ac. Benches Picnic Playground CYC 11 NP 3.13 ac. Tennis Basketball Picnic Field Sports Harbor View Elementaryl 11 SC 14.0 ac. Field Sports Lincoln Schooll 11 SC 17.0 ac. Volleyball Basketball Field Sports Nature Park 11 NP 7.75 ac. Walkways Oasis 11 NP 5.97 ac. Picnic Community Building San Miguel 11 PN 7.32 ac. Picnic Basketball Field Sports Continued. MP = Mini Park VP = View Park NP = Neighborhood Park PB = Public Beach CP = Community Park SC = School ac. = Acre 341 TABLE PP (Contd.) RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE INVENTORY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Recreatlon/Open Space Service Area Designation Size Facilities SJ Hills 11 Np 4.06 ac. Tennis Lawn bowling Spyglass Hills Park 11 MP 1.0 ac. Playground Spyglass Hills Reservoir Park 11 MP .96 ac. Playground Source: City of Newport Beach, Recreation and Open Space Element, 1985. lIncludes open space/play areas only, not entire site. MP = Mini Park VP = View Park ac. = Acre NP = Neighborhood Park PB = Public Beach CYC = CommunityYouth Center CP = Community Park SC = School 342 ' School System ' The project areas are within the boundaries of the Newport -Mesa Unified School District. The District presently has one kindergarten center, five elementary schools, one junior high school, one combined junior and senior high school, and one senior high school that serve ' the project sites. The locations of these schools are within the City of Newport Beach and are shown in Exhibit 70. Table QQ provides statistical data on the District's existing enrollment and capacity. Natural Gas The project sites are currently within the boundaries of Southern California Gas Company. The Southern California Gas Company has facilities in the area where the development which is part of the Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement is proposed. Electricity The proposed project is currently within the boundaries of the Southern California Edison Company. Currently, electrical transmission lines are not overloaded. Library The project sites are served by the Newport Center Library and three other branches of the Newport Beach public library system. The Newport Center Library is located at 856 San Clemente Drive. It provides Business and General Reference; circulation collections in all formats (book, audio, video); children's programs and programming; and adult literacy classes and programs. The library circulates over 1,000,000 items annually and answers over 220,000 reference ' questions. It is also estimated that over 800,000 people use the four library facilities during one year. ITelephone The project sites are within Pacific Bell's jurisdiction for telephone use. Although the project sites are within Pacific Bell's franchise area, telephone facilities have not been placed to serve this area. Existing facilities are located in several areas adjacent to the sites. These facilities utilize copper wire technology for transmission and are mostly located underground. A 2,400 pair aerial cable currently runs through the Freeway Reservation site and a conduit structure exists on the westside of Jamboree Road, between Camelback Road and Coast Highway, as well as on MacArthur Boulevard from Ford Road approaching San Joaquin Hills Boulevard. 1 343 I I I u 11 11 TABLE QQ NEWPORT-MESA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT CURRENT ENROLLMENT AND CAPACITY School Enrollment Capacity Mariners Elementary School 593 660 Newport Heights Elementary School 527 548 Eastbluff Kindergarten Center 221 224 Lincoln Elementary School (not open until 9/92) 756 Anderson Elementary School 421 476 Harbor View Elementary School 778 756 Ensign Intermediate School 728 857 Newport Harbor High School 1,186 2,703 Corona del Mar High School 1,476 2,774 Source: Newport -Mesa Unified School District; April 1991 345 IMPACTS r According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a project will normally have a significant , effect on the environment if it will: • Breach published national, state, or local standards relating to solid waste or litter control; _. • Use fuel, water, or energy in a wasteful manner; • Extend a sewer trunk line with capacity to serve new development; and • Interfere with emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans. Additionally,'for purposes of this EIR, expansion of existing facilities due to project demand r. constitutes a significant impact when the provider anticipates great difficulty in providing increased service. All public services and utilities have been analyzed to assess capacity impacts associated with the proposed project. The proposed project will result in an increase in demand for fire protection, law enforcement, water, wastewater, waste disposal, parks and recreation, school system, natural gas, electricity, library, and telephone services. The significance of these potential impacts is described below and on the following pages. Fire Protection The proposed project will result in increased demand for fire protection and emergency medical services in the City of Newport Beach. The Fire Department has indicated that a new facility, equipment, and staff is required now even without approval and implementation of the proposed project. Fire Station #3 will be additionally adversely impacted due to the additional workload required if the project is implemented. Prior to July 1, 1991, ,the Newport Beach Fire Department had contracted with the Orange County Fire Department for emergency services in the northern portion of the City of Newport Beach. This contract will not be renewed due to lack of City of Newport Beach funds. As a result, Fire Stations #3 and #6 have been required to accept emergency responses and other non -emergency work such as fire inspections and hydrant inspections in this area of the City, originally handled by the Orange County Fire Department. According to Mr. Ray Brown, City of Newport Beach Fire Marshal, a five-minute emergency response time is adequate. Most of the proposed project sites are within acceptable emergency response times from the nearest fire station. As shown on Table MM, the sites of Jamboree/MacArthur, San Diego Creek North, San Diego Creek South and Freeway , Reservation East do not meet the adequate emergency response time limit. 346 ' I The Jamboree/MacArthur and San Diego Creek North sites are proposed to remain open space, while Freeway Reservation East and San Diego Creek South are proposed for ' residential development. Fire Station #3 presently covers the largest area in the City. Any additional workload resulting from development proposed on the Freeway Reservation East and San Diego Creek South sites would not be acceptable at Fire Station #3's present ' staffing and workload. Due to the present workload, the proposed' Freeway Reservation East and San Diego Creek South sites will inevitably encounter problems in obtaining Station #3 for emergencies until a new fire station is constructed. The City of Newport Beach Fire Marshal has indicated that the northern portion of the City of Newport Beach is in need of the additional fire station. According to the Newport Beach Fire Department, the location of this additional Fire Station should be near the comer of Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard or at the San Diego Creek North property ' location at Bay View Drive and Jamboree Road. Implementation of the proposed project will result in the ability to house a Fire Department on the San Diego Creek North site. The project proponent is proposing permanent open space/public facilities uses on this site, allowing the construction of a fire station on the site. Due to the dedication of land for a fire station, it is anticipated that no impacts to the fire department will result from the proposed project once the station is constructed and operational. Until it is operational, a significant impact could occur from development of uses on Freeway Reservation and San Diego Creek South Sites. Law Enforcement Services The proposed project will increase the demand for law enforcement services. Police Department concerns include a lack of sufficient staff to immediately serve the project sites. The project will result in 956 additional residential units, 124,000 square feet of commercial office space, and a 10,000 square -foot restaurant or 40,000 square -foot health club, along with areas of active and passive open space. Based on previous experience, the Newport Beach Police Department predicts that this will result in an addition of approximately one- half of one beat in order to adequately service the sites. t Water City of Newport Beach Implementation of the proposed project will result in increased water demand and will create a need for the expansion of facilities and the extension of waterlines. According to Mr. Dick Hoffstadt, Subdivision Engineer at the City of Newport Beach, the proposed project is not anticipated to adversely impact the level of service provided to the areas of I Block 800; Corporate Plaza West, Newporter North, Newporter Knoll, Newporter Resort, Bay View Landing, Freeway Reservation East, and Upper -Castaways. 347 I r Water generation rates utilized for residential units by the City of Newport Beach vary r anywhere from 324 gallons/day/connection to 1,080 gallons/day/connection. Table RR indicates site -specific generation rates utilized by the City of Newport Beach in determining ' water usage resulting from the proposed project. Development of the four proposed residential sites within the City of Newport Beach service area will result in a generated water usage rate of 357,926 gallons per day. , The City does not maintain typical generation rates for commercial and hotel unit development. The sites of Corporate Plaza West, Newporter Resort, and Bay View Landing proposing this type of development will be analyzed on a case -by -case basis. The IRWD utilizes generation rates of 2,200 gallons/acre/day for commercial development and 3,500 gallons/acre/day for hotel development. In utilizing the IRWD,generation rates for hotel and commercial, the proposed Corporate Plaza West, Newporter Resort and Bay View Landing development will result in a total of 36,264 gallons per day. The grand total for water ' consumption resulting from the proposed residential, commercial and hotel developments is 394,190 gallons per day. The Newporter Knoll site is proposed to remain as open space. This site will not result in significant impacts to water usage. The City does not anticipate a need for additional staff as a result of the project and does not see a problem in serving the project sites. The developer shall be required to provide a master plan of utilities for the on -site development concurrent with approval of a tentative map. The master plan shall determine any necessary expansion of facilities and/or any modifications, upgrades or extensions to the existing water systems resulting from this project. All necessary expansions of facilities and/or upgrades or extensions of existing water systems shall be the responsibility of the developer. Irvine Ranch Water DIstrict ' Implementation of the proposed project will result in increased water demand and will create a need for the expansion,of facilities and the extension of waterlines. The IRWD has stated that they do.not anticipate any difficulties serving the sites. Residential development consisting of 300 dwelling units is proposed for the San Diego Creek South site. Jamboree/MacArthur and San Diego Creek North sites are proposed to remain as open space sites. Domestic and reclaimed water serving the San Diego Creek South site would necessitate the extension of facilities southwesterly along University Drive from the MacArthur Boulevard overpass. Additionally, the existing eight -inch reclaimed water pipeline along MacArthur Boulevard must be extended along Jamboree Road from the ■ MacArthur Boulevard intersection in order to serve the San Diego Creek North site. r r 348 i TABLE RR ANTICIPATED WATER USAGE FOR PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS Sites Proposed Dwelling Units Generation Rate (Gallons/Day/Unit) Expected Water Usage (Gallons/Day) Upper Castaways 151 510 77,010 Freeway Reservation 76 636 48,336 East Block 800 245 508 124,460 Newporter North 212 510 108,120 Total Water Usage 357,926 g.d. Source: City of Newport Beach; 1991 349 r, Although the Irvine Ranch Water District has indicated that it does not foresee any ' significant impacts, the feasibility to serve the.sites from existing IRWD facilities must be analyzed in a future subarea Master Plan of Utilities. The project proponent would be responsible for financing any necessary construction of domestic water and sanitary sewer pipelines of size ten -inches and smaller, and reclaimed water pipelines of size four -inches and smaller. Wastewater City of Newport Beach Implementation of the proposed project will result in an increased demand on sewer facilities and may require expansions and upgrades to existing infrastructures. The City of Newport Beach has indicated that a Master Plan of Utilities for any on -site development will be required prior to issuance of grading permits in order to more specifically determine project -specific impacts. The Master Plan of Utilities will be the responsibility of the developer and will be prepared at the time site plans and grading plans are known. Irvine Ranch Water District Sewer lines are sized to accommodate a commercial water consumption factor of 2,000 gallons/acre/day. The sewage generation factor utilized by IRWD is 110 gallons of sewage/ drainage materials per person per day. According to the City of Newport Beach Housing Element, 2.2 persons can be predicted per medium density residential unit. Development of San Diego Creek South can expect the generation of 660 persons. This results in approximately 72,600 gallons of sewage/drainage materials a day. , IRWD presently does not foresee a capacity problem servicing the sites. A sub -area Master Plan of Utilities will be necessary for verification. This subarea Master Plan of Utilities shall be utilized in the determination of actual project -specific impacts caused to sewage lines and will be completed at a time of subsequent environmental documentation accompanying site and/or grading plans. County Sanitation Districts of Orange County Implementation of the proposed project will result in an increased demand for sewer services to the project, sites. Table SS depicts generation rates utilized by County Sanitation Districts of Orange County. Table 00 shows which trunk lines serve the proposed sites. , The level of development anticipated from implementation of the project is consistent with the 1988 General Plan and 1989 Master Plan of Utilities. In fact total development will be slightly less than anticipated by the County Sanitation District because 162,000 square feet ' of office and 32 residential units envisioned by the General Plan will not receive vested entitlement by this Agreement and will not be developed. Consequently, the Sanitation District does not anticipate the need to improve any of their trunk lines as a result of the increased development resulting from project implementation. 350 I II II TABLE SS COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT OF ORANGE COUNTY GENERATION RATES FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS Residential (dwelling units/acre) Rate (gallons/day/acre) 1-3 1,000 4-7 1,615 8-16 3,880 17-25 5.880 L� CUMULATIVE IWACTS ' The proposed project in conjunction with other past, present and reasonable foreseeable , future developments will have an incremental cumulative impact on fire protection, law enforcement, school system services, waste disposal, parks and recreation, electricity, natural gas, library, water, and telephone services. These incremental impacts are considered , insignificant. Wastewater , Development of Freeway Reservation and Upper Castaways sites will increase the amount of wastewater using trunk lines which are deteriorating and considered structurally deficient. This incremental increase of wastewater could exacerbate any problems experienced on the lines. Waste Disposal Although refuse collection is provided in some of the adjacent areas, refuse collection for commercial areas will need to be contracted with a private contractor. According to Mr. Roger Lilly, Refuse Supervisor at the City of Newport Beach, an average single-family unit , can expect to create an average of 30-40 pounds of waste per week. Implementation of the proposed project will not adversely impact the Bee Canyon landfill or the abilities to provide refuse collection services to the project sites. The City of Newport Beach foresees no problem in servicing the proposed project sites. Parks and Recreation Implementation of the proposed project will not result in impacts to Parks and Recreation. According to the Newport Beach General Plan and Park Dedication Ordinance, 70.4 acres is required of development vested by the Circulation Improvement Open Space Agreement. As shown on Table 'IT, the project is proposing a total of 140.0 acres of Recreation and open space. Table A in the Project Description Section provides a breakdown of required , open space by site. The 140.0 acres exceeds the required amount by 69.6 acres. Of the 140 acres to be dedicated to the City about 12 acres may be used for road improvements. If this were to occur it would slightly reduce the overall benefit. Open space would total 128 acres , which would exceed General Plan and Park Dedication Ordinance requirement by 57.6 acres. In either case the proposed project will provide sufficient open space to offset any anticipated increase in demand for parks and open space. School System A Community Facility District (CFD) has been developed which involves land to be ' developed by The Irvine Company. The areas owned by The Irvine Company that are covered by this proposed project are known as "infill" areas. These "infill" areas are included 352 ' I M M � M M M Ml M M M M M M a s M= M M TABLE TT EXISTING, PROJECTED NEED, AND PROPOSED AND OPEN SPACE Recreation and Opens General Plan Project Proposed Space -Existing Requirement for Recreation and Project Sites Open Space Service Area 3 76.99 acres 19.5 30.6 (Upper Castaways) Service Area 7 41.37 acres 3.4 21.8 (San Diego Creek North, San Diego Creek South, Jamboree/MacArthur) Service Area 9 0 acres 47.1 70.3 (Bay View Landing, Newporter North, (all parks supplied are Newporter Knoll, Newporter Resort, Block 800, private) Corporate Plaza West) Service Area 11 77.53 acres .5 17.3 (Freeway Reservation) TOTAL ACREAGE 195.89 70A 140.0 Source: City of Newport Beach The Irvine Company - Irvine Pacific Notes: rCity of Newport Beach Recreation and Open Space Element, 1985. 353 r in the CFD. The Irvine Company has entered into an agreement with the Newport -Mesa , Unified School District to contribute one million dollars upon implementation of the Circulation Improvements and Open Space Agreement in association with these infill sites. ' As a result, the Newport -Mesa Unified School District expects to have the necessary funds to enlarge facilities or to reopen schools as needed in order to provide educational services to the students generated by the proposed project. ' The proposed project will generate a number of school aged children anticipated to attend public schools in the Newport -Mesa Unified School District. The Newport -Mesa Unified A School District projects student enrollment from new development based on the generation rates shown in Table UU. Utilizing the student generation rates in Table UU, implementation of the proposed agreement will result in a total projected K 12 student increase of 484 students. The sites of Newporter North, San Diego Creek South, Upper Castaways, Block 800, and Freeway Reservation East are proposing residential development. The following discussion is a breakdown of the schools that will serve these sites, and the projected number of students generated from the proposed development. Andersen Elementary School , Students generated from the San Diego Creek South site and the Freeway Reservation site will be in the Andersen Elementary School area of attendance. Student generation rates to , determine service demand for the elementary school are as follows: Student Generation. Figure x Number of proposed units = Service Demand K-6.18 x 348 units = 62.6 An estimated 63 elementary -aged students can be expected from buildout of the proposed San Diego Creek South and Freeway Reservation sites. Existing capacity for Andersen Elementary School is 476 students. Current enrollment is 421 students. Implementation of ' the proposed San Diego Creek South and Freeway Reservation East developments results in approximately 63 additional students, which would put the school over capacity by 8 students. Due to the CFD and the small percentage of students over capacity, this is not , considered a significant impact. Eastbluff Kindergarten Center I Students from the sites of Newporter North, Block 800, San Diego Creek South, and Freeway Reservation will attend Eastbluff Kindergarten Center until June, 1992. ' 354 1 r� r r r r �r �r r �r. �r ■r +� r� r� r� r r TABLE UU STUDENT GENERATION RATES PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED SCHOOLS GENERATION PROJECT PROJECT EXISTING PROJECT AND CURRENT RATE DWELLING ENROLLMENT ENROLLMENT EXISTING CAPACITY UNITS ENROLLMENT Eastbluff/Andersen .18 348 63 421 484 476 Elementary School Eastbluff/Harbor View .18 457 82 778 860 756 Elementary Lincoln Elementary .18 — — not open until 9/92 — 756 School Mariners Elementary .18 151 141 593 607 660 School Newport Heights .18 151 141 527 541 548 Elementary School Ensign Intermediate .05 151 8 728 736 857 School Corona del Mar High .14 805 113 1,476 1,589 2,774 School Newport Harbor High .09 151 14 1,186 1,200 2,703 School Source: Newport -Mesa Unified School District, 1991. Notes: 1Students generated from Upper Castaways site have been split between Mariners Elementary and Newport Heights Elementary School. 355 r Eastbluff Kindergarten Center will accommodate only kindergarten students generated from , the proposed sites. Students generated from the Block 800 and Newporter North sites will attend Harbor View Elementary for grades 1 through 6. Students generated from the San , Diego Creek South and Freeway Reservation East sites will attend Andersen Elementary for grades 1 through 6. Beginning September, 1992, Andersen Elementary School and Harbor View Elementary , School will be accommodating kindergarten students. Lincoln Elementary School is also anticipated to be open beginning September, 1992. No impacts are anticipated. N Harbor View Elementary Students generated from the Block 800 and Newport North sites will attend Harbor View Elementary School. Student generation rates to determine service demand for the elementary schools are as follows: Student Generation Figures x number proposed units = Service Demand K-6 .18 x 457 units = 82.3 Approximately 82 elementary -aged students can be expected from buildout of the proposed Block 800 and Newporter North sites. Existing capacity for Harbor View Elementary is 756 students. Existing enrollment for Harbor View Elementary is 778 students. The school is ' currently over capacity. However, the Lincoln Elementary School will be opened beginning in September 1992. The Block 800 and Newporter North sites are not anticipated to be built prior to June, 1993. Implementation of the proposed project will not result in significant impacts to the Harbor View Elementary School. Lincoln Elementary School Beginning September, 1992, Lincoln Elementary school will open as a K 6 school. Student capacity is expected to be 756 students. The elementary -aged students generated from the , sites of Block 800, Newporter North, San Diego Creek South, and Freeway Reservation will attend Lincoln Elementary School beginning in September 1992. The school has been designed to serve the buildout of these sites. No capacity impact is anticipated. ' Mariners Elementary School and Newport Heights Elementary Students generated from the Upper Castaways site will attend either Mariners Elementary School or Newport Heights Elementary School. Student generation rates to determine service demand for the elementary schools are as follows: ' Student Generation Figure x number proposed units = service demand 356 ' J K-6.18 x 151 units = 27.2 ' Approximately 27 elementary -aged students can be expected from buildout of the proposed Upper Castaways site. Existing capacity for Mariners Elementary school is 660 students, and 548 students for Newport Heights Elementary School. Existing enrollment for Mariners Elementary is 593 and 527 for Newport Heights. Implementation of the proposed Upper Castaways development results in approximately 27 additional students, which would not significantly impact either elementary school. Ensign Intermediate Intermediate school -aged students generated from the Upper Castaways site will attend Ensign Intermediate School. Student generation rates to determine service demand for the intermediate school are as follows: ' Student Generation Figure x number proposed units = Service Demand ' 7-8 .05 x 151 units = 7.6 I I r I I An estimated eight intermediate school -aged students can be expected from buildout of the proposed Upper Castaways development. Existing capacity for Ensign Intermediate is 857 students. Current enrollment is 728 students. Implementation of the proposed project results in approximately eight additional students which would not significantly impact the intermediate school. Corona del Mar High School Students generated from Block 800, Newporter North, San Diego Creek South, and Freeway Reservation shall attend Corona del Mar High School. Student generation rates to determine service demand for grades 7-12 are as follows: Student Generation Figure x number proposed units = Service Demand 7-12 .14 x 805 units = 112.7 Approximately 113 students can be expected to be generated by implementation of the proposed project. Existing capacity for Corona del Mar high school is 2,774 students. Current enrollment is 1,476 students. Implementation of the proposed project results in approximately 113 additional students, which would not significantly impact the high school. 357 I Newport Harbor High School , High school -age students generated from the Upper Castaways site will attend Newport , Harbor High School. Student generation rates to determine service demand for high school are as follows: Student Generation l:igures x number proposed units = Service Demand , 9-12.09 x 151 units = 13.6 , Approximately 14 high school aged students can be expected to be generated by the proposed project. Existing capacity for Newport Harbor High School is 2,703 students. Current enrollment is 1,186 students. Implementation of the proposed project will result in approximately 14 additional students, which would not significantly impact Newport Harbor High. Natural Gas The proposed project will increase demand for natural gas to the proposed site. The , Southern California Gas Company has indicated that they have facilities in the area where the project sites are proposed. Gas service to the project site can be served from an existing , main without a significant impact. Electricity ' The proposed project will increase demand for electricity on the proposed sites. Implementation of the proposed project, future development, and increased use may require possible extensions of facilities, however, Southern California Edison does not anticipate problems serving the eleven project sites. No impacts are anticipated. Library Services The proposed project will increase demand on the Newport Beach Public Library. ' Representatives from the Newport Beach Public Library have indicated that additional population from any of the proposed projects would have an adverse effect on the Library ' Department's service from the current facilities. A new Central Library facility is planned with an estimated completion date of June, 1993. , Environmental documentation for the proposed Central Library facility was recently approved in January 1992. The new Central Library facility will serve as a central resource for the entire system, providing primary services to the three City branch libraries. , Completion of the proposed project sites is not anticipated to occur before June 1993. Representatives from the Newport Beach Public Library have indicated that when the new library is opened, the proposed project most likely will not adversely impact the level and ' quality of service available to the entire population base. The new Central Library facility 358 1 r to be located on 1000 Avocado and will consist of 52,000 square feet on a four acre site. The proposed project will not adversely impact the library's level and quality available to ' serve the entire population base with implementation of the new library. Telephone The proposed project will result in a demand for telephone services to the project sites. Implementation of the Circulation Improvement Open Space Agreement will create a need ' for additional facilities. Relocation of the telephone lines located through the Freeway Reservation East site may also be required at the cost of the developer. Timing of the development and need for facilities will determine funding needs and authorization. No impacts to telephone service are anticipated. EXISTING CITY POLICIES AND REQUIREMENTS ' Fire Protection ' A. All landscape plans shall place heavy emphasis on fire -retardant vegetation. B. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Fire Department shall review and approve the proposed plans and may require automatic fire sprinkler protection. Fire Department standards/5.12 A requirements shall be adhered to. All on -site fire ' protection (hydrants and Fire Department connections) shall be approved by the Fire Department and Public Works Department prior to issuance of building permits. C. Any cul-de-sac, building address, and street name shall comply with City Standards and shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to issuance of occupancy permits. D. Fire Department access to all sites shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to issuance of building permits. E. On -site water mains and fire hydrants locations are to be approved by the Fire and Public Works Departments prior to issuance of building permits. ' Water G. Prior to issuance of building permits, final design of the project shall provide for the incorporation of water -saving devices for project lavatories and other water -using facilities to the satisfaction of the City Building Department. The project sponsor ' shall also comply with any other City adopted water conservation policies. 359 I r, L H. Where feasible, reclaimed water shall be utilized for non -contact purposes such as , irrigation. A determination of available and feasibility shall be made by the City prior to issuance of building permits. ' Wastewater I. Prior to issuance of occupancy permits for any building, the applicant shall provide ' written verification from Orange County Sanitation District No. 5 and City of Newport Beach Utility Department that adequate sewer capacity is available to serve ' the project. I If required by the Public Works Department, a study shall be prepared prior to ' issuance of any building permits showing that adequate sewer facilities are available. Any modifications to the existing facilities shown to be required as a result of the project by the study shall be the responsibility of the developer unless current district ' or City policies dictate otherwise. Waste Disposal , L. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a program for the sorting of recyclable material from other solid wastes shall be developed and approved by the Planning , Department for commercial development which will not be served by the City of Newport Beach. ' Natural Gas/Electricity, M. The project shall be designed to conform to Title 24, Paragraph 6, Division T-20, Chapter 2, Sub -chapter 4 of the California Administrative Code dealing with energy requirements. Law Enforcement There are no applicable City Policies and Requirements. r Parks and Recreation There are no applicable City Policies and Requirements. School System There are no applicable City Policies and Requirements. i 360 1 J 11 I �j Library There are no applicable City Policies and Requirements. Telephone There are no applicable City Policies and Requirements. MITIGATION MEASURES Fire Protection No mitigation measures are proposed. Law Enforcement 71. The project proponent shall work in conjunction with the City of Newport Beach Police Department to ensure that crime prevention features are included in building design and construction. The City of Newport Beach Police Department shall review all site plans and access plans. Water 72. Prior to issuance of grading permits for the development sites, the applicant shall be responsible for preparation of a Master Plan of Utilities. The Master Plan of Utilities will determine any necessary expansion of facilities and/or any modifications, upgrades or extensions to the existing water systems resulting from this project. All necessary expansions of facilities and/or upgrades or extensions of existing water systems needed as a result of the project will be the responsibility of the developer, unless current district or City policies dictate otherwise. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Wastewater 73. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the developer will provide a Master Plan of Utilities facilities for the on -site development in order to determine the exact necessary modifications or extensions to the existing sewer systems, if needed. All necessary expansions of facilities and/or upgrades or extensions of existing water systems needed as a result of the project will be the responsibility of the developer, unless current district or City policies dictate otherwise. The Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. 361 �I I Water Disposal , No additional mitigation measures are necessary. Natural Gas/Electricity No additional mitigation measures are necessary. Parks and Recreation ' No additional mitigation measures are necessary. School System No additional mitigation measures are necessary. ' Library, No mitigation measures are necessary. Telephone , No mitigation measures are necessary. , LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE Project -Specific ' Project -specific impacts identified for electricity, natural gas, library services, parks and , recreation, telephone services, and waste disposal are considered insignificant. Implementation of the appropriate existing City policies and requirements and mitigation measures will reduce project -specific impacts to school system, water, law enforcement and , wastewater associated with the proposed project to a level of insignificance. Project -specific impacts identified for fire protection cannot be mitigated and remain significant. Until a new fire station is constructed and operational, serving North Newport Beach, a significant impact to fire services will occur in the Freeway Reservation and San ' Diego Creek South sites. Cumulative ' The project, in conjunction with other past, present* and reasonably foreseeable future , projects, will create an increased demand for: fire protection; law enforcement; school 362 1 I 1 1 system services; water; electricity; natural gas; telephone; library; and, solid waste disposal. I VI. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT INTRODUCTION ' The State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126 (d) requires that an EIR, 'Describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which could reasonably attain the basic objectives of the project and evaluate the comparative merits of ' the alternatives." Section 15126 (d)(1) states, "The discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives capable of eliminating any significant adverse environmental effects or reducing them to a level of insignificance, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly." As stated in Section 15126 (d)(4), "The range of alternatives required in an EIR is governed by the "rule of reason" that ' requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. The key issue is whether the selection and discussion of alternatives fosters informed decision making and informed public participation." ' Pursuant to the guidelines, a range of alternatives are considered and evaluated in this EIR. These alternatives were developed in the course of project planning and environmental ' review. Several alternatives are based on comments received from interested persons and organizations in response to the Notice of Preparation. The discussion in this section provides: ' 1. A description of alternatives considered; 2. An analysis of whether the alternatives are feasible (as defined by the CEQA Guidelines in Section 15364), meet the objectives of the project and remain under consideration (summarized in Table VV and WW); and, 3. A comparison of impacts between the alternatives under consideration and the proposed project. The comparison is primarily summarized in the Summary of Alternatives Table in the Project Summaries. The focus of this comparison is to determine if feasible alternatives are capable of eliminating or reducing the significant environmental effects of the project to a level of insignificance. 4. A description of the impacts of the alternative that are not project related impacts. The impacts specific to the alternative are summarized on Table ' XX. 5. A statement indicating why the alternative has been rejected from consideration, if appropriate. I L 364 J TABLE W SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES Alternative Feasible Meets Project Under Further Environmentally Objectives' Consideration Superior 1. No Project/No Development Alternative Yes No Yes2 No 2. No Pro ect/No Agreement - Development Yes Partially Yes2 No Under Fidsting General Plan , 3. Reduced Development - No Agreement Yes Partially Yes No 4. Partial Transfer of Residential Yes Partially Yes No Development from Newporter North to Newporter Center (No Agreement) 5a. Design Alternative Additional Active Park Yes Partially Yes Yes on Bay View Landing 5b. Design Alternative Transfer of Active Yes Partially Yes No Park from Castaways to Bay View Landing 5c. Design Alternative Senior Housing on Yes Partially Yes No Bay View Landing 6. Alternative Agreement Provisions No N/A No N/A 7a. Intensification of Residential No N/A No N/A Development on Castaways 7b. Transfer of Development to Newport No N/A No N/A Center 7c. Additional Highlighted Active Parks on No N/A No N/A Bayview, Landing and Active Park on Newnort Villaee Site Continued 365 M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M i M TABLE W (Cont'd.) SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES Alternative Feasible Meets Project Under Further Objectivest Consideration 7d. Alternative Site Access - Castaways No N/A No 7e. Alternative Site Access - Newporter No N/A No Environmentally Superior N/A N/A North 7f. Additional Site Access - Castaways No N/A No N/A Source: ASB Planning, Inc, and STA Planning, Inc. lSee Table WW for a detailed comparison of alternatives under consideration with project objectives. 2CEQA requires that the No Project Alternative remain under consideration throughout the environmental review in decision making process. N/A = Alternatives which are not technically feasible and not under further consideration were not evaluated as to whether they meet the project objectives or are environmentally superior to the project. 366 TABLE W W COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES UNDER CONSIDERATION WITH. PROJECT OBJECTIVES NAME OF CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH OBJECTIVES THE IRVINB COMPANY TIIE IRVINE COMPANY SPECIFIC OBIECIIVES ALTERNATIVE GENERAL OBH?CIIVES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 8 9 10 11 1 2 3 1 4 1 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 6 7 8 9 10 No Project/No C P C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C Development Altematm No Pmjcct/No Agreement - P C P P C C N N P P C C C C N C C C C C C C C C C C Development Under Brisling Geneml Plan Reduced Development - P N P P P C C C C P C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C No Agreement Partial Transfer of Residential P N P P C I N N N C P C C C C N C C C C C C C C C C C Development - No Agreement Design Alternative Additional N N N N N N N N N N N N N N I N N N C I N N N N N N N N Active Park Design Aitemattve Transfer of N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N C N N N N N N N N Active Park Design Altematiw Senior N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N C `N N N N N N N N Housing on Bay View Landing N annme. ne an MNK, Inc. C = Conflicts with Objective P = Partially Conflicts with Objective N = No Conflict with ObjecthK T91 it TABLE XX SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT '-" NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT NO PROJECT/ NO AGREEMENT - DEVELOPMENT UNDER EXISTING GENERAL PLAN REDUCED DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT PARTIAL TRANSFER OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT DES. ALTERNATIVE ADDITIONAL ACTIVE PARK DES. ALTERNATIVE TRANSFER OF ACTIVE PARK DES.ALTERNATIVE SENIOR HOUSING ON BAYVIEIV LANDING Iand UM No significant ad- No significant ad- No significant ad- No significant ad- No significant ad- No significant ad- No significant ad- Nosignifiantadverse verse impacts The verse impact. All verse impacts. verse Impacts. verse impacts. Trans. verse impacts. verse impacts. impacts. Residential proposed project B parcels would remain fer of residential to use onBayvicwLand- consistent with exist- vacant and unused Block 600 would ing would require a Ing General Plan. require a General General Plan Amend. Plan Amendment menL AesdW Bluff stabilization This alternative as- Impacts would be the Impacts would be the Impacts would be the Impacts would be the Impacts would be the Impacts would be the Ltaht and Glare required for public sumes no public use same as the projees. same as the projeWs. same as the project's same as the projecVs. same as the projecVs. same as the projects. open space and park of the sites. Conx- uses will alter por- quently bluff stabiii- tions of the natural zation would be on. coastal bluffs on necessary and related Upper Castaways and significant adverse Newporter North Impacts would be sites This Impact Is avoided partially mitigated but remains an un- avoidable significant adverse impact. M= M = = M� M M= M M i= M TABLE XX (Cont'd.) SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ENVIRONMENTAL PROPOSED NO PROJECT/ NO PROJECT/ REDUCED PARTIAL DES. ALTERNATIVE DES. ALTERNATIVE DES.ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROJECT NO DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT- DEVELOPMENT TRANSFER OF ADDITIONAL TRANSFER OF SENIOR HOUSING • DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT RESIDENTIAL ACTIVE PARK ACTIVE PARK ON BAYVIEW UNDER EXISTING DEVELOPMENT LANDING GENERAL PLAN NO AGREEMENT Aesthetl The project will The impacts of the This alternative This alternative This alternative Impacts would be the Impacts would be the Impacts would be the cause the loss of would be would provide con- would provide a would provide a same as the project. same as the project. same as the project. Light and Glare Cont'd.l vacant land on Upper project avoided. siderably less public greater amount of greater amount of Castaways and New- open space on Upper open space than the open space on the porter North that Castaways and New- project. The impact Newporter North provides significant porter North. This would be reduced but site. The impact visual relief to recre- alternative would not avoided. would be reduced but atlonal users of Up. have a greater impact not avoided. per Newport Bay and than the proposed the general public on project• adjacent major art- erials. The proposed project The impacts of the The impacts would The impacts would The impacts would The impacts would The impacts would The impacts would be will result in new project would be be similar to the be similar to the be similar to the be similar to the be similar to the similar to the pro. sources of light and avoided. projects. projects. project's. projects. projects. jects. glare. Thesignificant adverse impact is mitigated to a level of insignificance. F.NVIRONhffiVTAL PROPOSED ISSUE PROJECT Light and Glare (Cant'd) The proposed project in conjunction with other past, present and reasonably fore - amble future pro- jects, contributes to a last of vaunUopen space areas around Upper Newport Bay which provide visual re1kL This loss is considered a signill- ant adverse camula- tive impact. The proposed project will generate 10,777 daily trips and I,000 A.M. and 1,209 P.M. peak hour trips. NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT This alternative would avoid this Impact. Elimination and/or delay of transporta- tion improvement funding could delay or eliminate cfrcula- ffon improvements needed forbothetist- TABLE XX (Cont'd.) SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS NO PROJECT/ REDUCED PARTIAL DES. ALTERNATIVE DES. ALTERNATIVE NO AGREEMENT - DEVELOPMENT TRANSFER OF ADDITIONAL TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT RESIDENTIAL. ACTIVE PARK ACTIVE PARK UNDER EXISTING DEVELOPbfl= GENERAL PLAN NO AGREEMENT This alternative would have a greater adverse impact than the project. TnUic generation would be about 20 percent higher than the projezts. Im- pactswould be grat- er than the projects particularly on inter - This alternative would have a lesser adverse Impact than the project but Its impact would still be considered sigaiR- ant Traffic generation would be about 30 percent less than the projeces. This reduo- tion lessens but does not avoid impacts of the proposed project This alternative would have a lesser adverse impact than the project but its Impact would still be considered signiU- ant Traffic generation and impactswould be the same as the pro- jeces. Also, as am suit of delayed trans- portation funding, there could be delays This alternative would have a lesser adverse impact than the project but its impact would still be considered signifi- ant Traffic generation and impacts would be the -same as the pro - Jews. This alternative would have a lesser adverse impact than the project but its Impact would still be considered signiR- ant Traffic generation and impacts would be the same as the pro - lows. DFS.ALTERNATIVE SENIOR DOUSING ON BAYVIEW LANDING Impacts would be the same as the project Traffic generation would be slightly higher than the pro- jeas (by a percent). This Is not a signifi- cant difference from the project Impacts M M M M M M =I M i M m! m m• m r m� m TABLE XX (Contd.) SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ENVIRONMENTAL PROPOSED NO PROJECT/ NO PROJECT/ REDUCED PARTIAL DES. ALTERNATIVE DES. ALTERNATIVE DES.ALTERNATR'F. ISSUE PROJECT NO DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT - DEVELOPMENT TRANSFER OF ADDITIONAL TRANSFER OF SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT RESIDENTIAL ACTIVE PARK ACTIVE PARK ON BAYVIEW UNDER EXISTING DEVELOPMENT LANDING GENERAL PLAN NO AGREEMENT ing and projected sections already iden. Also, as a result of or elimination of would be virtually the conditions. The tifted as deficient delayed transporta- important improve- same. reduction in assumed even without devel- tion funding, there ments which could development is not opmeat on the pro- could be delays or adversely effect trans - sufficient to offset ject sites. Also, as a elimination of impor- portation conditions the effects of delayed result of reduced or tant improvements causing undesirable or eliminated circula- delay transportation which could adversely levels of service. tion system improvo- improvement funding, effect transportation ments. there could be delays conditions causing in or elimination of undesirable levels of - important improve. service. ments causing unde- sirable levels of ser- vices. . Air Ouslity The proposed project No impacL Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be will result in signify- similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro. cant short -tern con- feces. jeces. ject's. ject's. ject's. jeces. struction impacts that can be mitigated to a level of imignifi- cance. 371 TABLE XX (Contd.) SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ENVIRONMENI•AL ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT NO PROJECT/ NO AGREEMENT - DEVELOPMENT UNDER EXISTING GENERAL PLAN REDUCED DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT PARTIAL TRANSFER OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT DES. ALTERNATIVE ADDITIONAL ACTIVE PARK DES ALTERNATIVE TRANSFER OF ACTIVE PARK DES.ALTERNATTVE SENIOR HOUSING ON BAYVIEW LANDING Air Quality The proposed pro- No impact. Impacts would be Impacts would be less Impacts would be impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be (Cant'd.) ject, in conjunction similar to the pro- than the project's but similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro - with other past, pres- jeees. not completely avoid- ject's. jecrs. Jews. jest's. ent, and reasonably ed. foreseeable future • projects, will contnb- ' ore Increased emis- sions related to ve- hicular emissions, combustion of natu- ral gas, and genera- tion of electricity. This impact on long- term regional emfs- slons is partially mitigated, but is still considered signiB- canL Noise The proposed project No impacts. Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be will result in signifi- similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro - cant short-term noise jeers. jeers. jest's. jest's. jecPs. jest's. TABLE XX (Cont'd.) SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ENVIRONMENTAL PROPOSED NO PROJECT/ ISSUE PROJECT NO DEVELOPMENT NO PROJECT/ NO AGREEMENT- DEVELOPMENT UNDER EXISTING GENERALPLAN REDUCED DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT PARTIAL TRANSFER OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT DES. ALTERNATIVE ADDITIONAL ACTIVE PARK DES. ALTERNATIVE TRANSFER OF ACTIVE PARK DES.ALTERNATIVE SENIOR DOUSING ON BAYVIEW LANDING impacts due to grad- ing and construction activities. This im- pact can be mitigated to alevel ofinsignifi- ance. Bio_� The project could No impacts. Impacts would be Impacts would be less Impacts would be the Impacts would be the Impacts would be the Impacts would be the result in impacts to greater than the pro- than the projects. same as the projects. same as the projects. same as the project's. same as the project's wetland habitat on ject's because less San Diego Creek land would be placed South, San Diego in open space. This Creek North, Jambo- could potentially ree/MacArthur, Up- affect a larger wet. per Castaways, New- land area and less porter North, and land would be avail - Freeway Reservation able for mitigation sites. This impact lands. can be mitigated to a level of insignill- cance. TABLE XX (Coned.) SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ENVIRONMENTAL PROPOSED NO PROJECT/ NO PROJECT/ REDUCED PARTIAL DES. ALTERNATIVE DES. ALTERNATIVE DES.ALTERNATIVE ADDITIONAL TRANSFER OF SENIOR HOUSING Dim PROJECT NO DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT - ' DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT TRANSFER OF NO AGREEMENTRESIDENTIAL ACTIVE PARK ACINEPARK ON BAYVIEW UNDER EXISTING DEVELOPMENT LANDING GENERALTLAN NO AGREEMENT ploloff The project would No impact Impart would the be Impactswouldbelest than the but Impacts would be lest Impacts would be the hnpactswould be the Impacts would be the than the proje Ws but same m the projects. same as the projects. same as the projcWs. (Coned) result in the loss of upland habitat on same as or greater than the project8 be- project's would not be cons- would not be com- Newporter North came lessland would pletely avoided pletely avoided which could came a be placed In open dismption of key spate predator -prey rela- tionsmps. This effect Is considered asipdf- cant adverse impact and cannot be com- pletely mitigated- TABLE XX (Coned.) SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ENVIRONMENTAL PROPOSED NO PROJECT/ NO PROJECT/ REDUCED PARTIAL DES. ALTERNATIVE DES. ALTERNATIVE DES.ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROJECT NO DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT - DEVELOPMENT TRANSFER OF ADDITIONAL TRANSFER OF SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT RESIDENTIAL ACTIVE PARK ACTIVE PARK ON BAYVIEW UNDER EXISTING DEVELOPMENT LANDING GENERAL PLAN NO AGREEMENT Him Bluff stabilization No impacts. (Coned.) and grading required for erosion control public open space and park uses may impact known habitat for the California gnatatcher on Bay View Landing and Newporter North sites. The project will re- No impacts. sult in increased light and glare on the San Diego Creek South site which will impact wildlife movement along Bonita and San Diego Creeks. This impact an be miti- Impact would be the Impact would be the Impact would be the Impact would be the Impact would be the Impact would be the same as the projects. same as the projects. same as the projects. same as the projects. same as the projects. same as the projects. impacts would be the Impacts could be the Impacts would be the Impacts would be the Impacts would be the Impacts would be the same as the projects. same as or less than same as the projects. same as the projects. same as the projects. same as the projects. the project's depend- ing on -site design. TABLE XX (Cont'd.) SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ENVIRONMENTAL PROPOSED ISSUE PROJECT NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT NO PROJECT/ NO AGREEMENT - DEVELOPMENT UNDER EXISTING GENERAL PLAN REDUCED DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT PARTIAL TRANSFER OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT DES. ALTERNATIVE ADDITIONAL ACTIVE PARK DES.ALTERNATIVE TRANSFER OF ACTIVEPARK DES.ALTERNATIVE SENIOR HOUSING ON RAYVIEW LANDING gated to a level of Insignificance. RB The project will re- No impacts. Impacts would be the Impacts -would be the same as the Impacts would be the same as the projects. Impacts would be the same as the projects. Impacts would be the sameas the projects. Impacts would be the same as the projects. (Caned.) movevalueblecoastal same as the projects. project& - sage scrub habitat from bluffs on Upper Castaways,Newporw North and Rayview Landingas a result of bluff stabilization. This impact an be reduced to a level of insignificamm On a cumulative No Impacts. Impacts would be the Impacts would be less Impacts would be the Impacts would be the Impacts would be the Impacts would be the basis, the project will same as the projects. than the projeet's but same as the projects. same as the projects. same as the projects. same as the project's. contribute to an not completely avoid - overall reduction in ed. general botanical and wildlife resource of the arm through �1 r ` Ili SMI M&IMM 's 00 mom� r M M M M M ON M W M M s M M M i ate► M M M W M M TABLE XX (Contd.) SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ENVIRONMENTAL PROPOSED NO PROJECT/ ISSUE PROJECT NO DEVELOPMENT NO PROJECT/ NO AGREEMENT- DEVELOPMENT UNDER EXISTING GENERAL PLAN REDUCED DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT PARTIAL TRANSFER OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT DES. ALTERNATIVE ADDITIONAL ACTIVE PARK DES. ALTERNATIVE TRANSFER OF ACTIVE PARK DES.ALTERNATIVE SENIOR HOUSING ON BAYVIEW ]LANDING habitat loss, the frag- mental ion of habitats, interruption of wild. life movement, and a reduction of genetic exchange between wildlife populations in the area. Earth Resources The project will re- No impacts. Impacts would be the Impacts would be the Impacts would be the Impacts would be the Impacts would be the Impacts would be the sult in impacts relat. same as the project's. same as the projects. same as the projects. same as the projects. same as the projects. same as the projects. ed to faulting and seismicity, liquefac- tion, erosion, bluff/ slope stability, com- pressible/collapsible soils,expansive/corro- sive soils, and near surface groundwater. All impacts can be mitigated to a level • of insignificance. TABLE XX (Contd.) SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ENVIRONMENTAL PROPOSED NO PROJECT/ NO PROJECT/ REDUCED PARTIAL DES. ALTERNATIVE DES. ALTERNATIVE DFS.ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROJECT NO DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT- DEVELOPMENT TRANSFER OF ADDMONAL TRANSFER OF SENIOR HOUSING • DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT RESIDENTIAL ACTIVE PARK ACTIVE PARK ON BAYVIEW " UNDER EXISTING DEVELOPMENT LANDING GENERAL PLAN NO AGREEMENT Water Resources The proposed project No impacts. Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be will result in short- similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pm - term water quality ject's. jeers- ject's- ject's- ject's- ject's. impacts to water quality from con• struction related sedimentand erosion. This impact can be mitigated to a level of insiga ficance. The proposed project No impacts. Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be win result -in impacts similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro- onalreadyinadequate jecc& jeers. jeers. jec& ject's. ject's. drainage system. This impact an be , mitigated to a level of insignificance, The proposed pro- No new impact. Any Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be Jett, in conjunction naturally occurring similar to the pro- similar to the pro• similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro - with other past, pra. jeers. feces. ject's. jeers. jeers. jeers. w rMOft o`W-0 it e r go ,M M IM M M r MA� M TABLE XX (Cont'd.) SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE ^ PROPOSED PROJECT NO PROJEC I NO DEVELOPMENT ' NO PROJECT/ NO AGREEMENT- DEVELOPMENT UNDER EXISTING GENERALPLAN REDUCED DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT - PARTIAL TRANSFER OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT DES. ALTERNATIVE ADDITIONAL ACTIVE PARK DES. ALTERNATIVE TRANSFER OF ACTIVE PARK DES.ALTERNATIVE SENIOR HOUSING ON BAYVIEW LANDING ent, and reasonably erosion would contin. foreseeable future ue to occur. projects, will contrib- ute to a short-term impact on water quality resulting from construction related sediment. This im- pact can be mitigated to a level of insigniB- canco. Water Resources The proposed pro- No impact. Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be Cont'd. jest, in conjunction similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro- similar to the pro - with past, present, jest'& jest's. jest's. jest's. jest's. jest's. and reasonably fore- seeable future pro- jects, will incremen- tally contribute to long-term impact to water quality in New - part Bay due to in- TABLE XX (Coned.) SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ENVIRONMENTAL PROPOSED NO PROJECT/ NO PROJECT/ REDUCED PARTIAL DES. ALTERNATIVE DES. ALTERNATIVE DES.ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROJECT NO DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT- DEVELOPMENT TRANSFER OF ADDITIONAL TRANSFER OF SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT RESIDENTIAL ACTIVE PARK ACTIVE PARK ON BAYVInV UNDER EXISTING DEVELOPMENT LANDING - GENERAL PLAN NO AGREEMENT creased urban pollut- ants This cumulative impact cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance. Housl No significant ad- The loss of 956 po- No significant ad- Thealtcmativewould impacts would be the Impacts would be the Impactswouldbethe Impacts would be the verse impact. The tential housing units verse impacts. Im. result in substantially same as the pmject's. same m the projects. same m the project'& same as the projects. proposed project will could adversely affect proves jobsihousing fewer housing units incrementally im- the City's jobs/hous- balance but not to as than provided by the prove the City's jobs/ ing balance and the great an anent as -the project which could housing balance. ability of the City to project. adversely affect the meet its housing City's efforts to im. goals. prove jobs/ housing ' balanceandto meet its housing goals. Cultural Resource The proposed project No Impact Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be Impacts would be the Impacts would be the Impacts would be the will result in impacts similar or slightly similar orslightly less -similar or slightly less same as the projeWs. same as the projects. same asthe project's- to archaeological and greater as a result of depending on -site depending on -site paleological resouro- greater areas identi- design and proposed design. es. These impacts r r M M r W M M W M a M s M M= W TABLE XX (Confd.) SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ENVIRONMENTAL PROPOSED NO PROJECT/ NO PROJECT/ REDUCED PARTIAL DES. ALTERNATIVE DES. ALTERNATIVE DES.ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROJECT NO DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT - DEVELOPMENT TRANSFER OF ADDITIONAL TRANSFER OF SENIOR DOUSING DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT RESIDENTIAL ACTIVE PARK ACTIVE PARK ON BAYVIEW UNDER EXISTING DEVELOPMENT LANDING GENERAL PLAN NO AGREEMENT can be mitigated to a fled for development uses in open space level of insignifi. versus open space. areas. canoe. Public Servicev The proposed project No impacts related to Impacts would be Impacts would be the Impacts would be the Impacts would be the Impacts would be the Impacts would be the and Utilities will result in impacts increased demand for similar to the pro- same as the projects. same as the projects. same as the project's. same as the projects. same as the projects. to a variety of public publicservices. How- posed project with services and utilities. ever, the alternative the exception of With the exception of could result In fewer impacts to fire servic- fire protection, all areas dedicated for es which would be impacts can be miti. public use of open greater as the alter. gated to a level of space which could native would include insignificance. A adversely affect recce- developing the San short-term significant ationalopportunities. Diego Creek North adverse impact relat- site for office uses as ed to fire protection opposed todedicating services on San Die- the site to the City go Creek South and for use as open space Freeway preservation and"public facilities will occur until -such including a new fire time as a fire station station -site. Also, is actually construct- substantially less land 381 TABLE XX (Cont d.) SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ENVIRONMENTAL PROPOSED NO -PROJECT/ NO PROJECI7 REDUCED PARTIAL DES. ALTERNATME DES. ALTERNATIVE DES.ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROJECT NO DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT- DEVELOPMENT TRANSFER OF ADDITIONAL TRANSFER OF SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT NO AGREEMENT RESIDENTIAL ACTIVE PARK ACTIVE PARK ON BAYVIEW UNDER EXISTING DEVELOPMENT LANDING GENERAL PLAN NO AGREEMENT ed on San Diego would be dedicated Creek Nonh for park. recreational and open space pur- posm r■ir ■r M MAN M ,r r r I ' The following alternatives are discussed in this section: IAlternatives Under Consideration ' 1. No Project/No Development 2. No Project/No Agreement - Development Under the Eadsting General Plan Development 3. Reduced ' 4. Partial Transfer of Residential Development from Newporter North to Newport Center. (No Agreement) 5. Design Alternatives/With Agreement A. Additional Active Park on Bay View Landing B. Transfer of Active Park from Castaways to Bay View Landing C. 'Senior Housing on Bay View Landing Alternatives Considered But Rejected from Further Consideration 6. Alternative Agreement Provisions 7. Design Alternatives A. Intensification of Residential Development on Castaways Parcel B. Transfer of All Development to Newport Center C. Additional Lighted Active Park on Bay View Landing and Active Park on Newport Village site. D. Alternative Site Access - Castaways E. Additional Site Access - Castaways F. Alternative Site Access - Newporter North I 11 WN u ALTERNATIVES UNDER CONSIDERATION 1. No Proiect/No Development Alternative I Description of the Alternative An evaluation of a No Project alternative is required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15126(d)(2). This alternative assumes that neither the proposed project nor any of the alternatives that allow development would be implemented. This alternative assumes that no residential, commercial or office development or park, open space and public facilities improvements would occur on the project sites. Essentially, the No Project alternative would maintain existing conditions and/or uses on the project sites. 1 Under this alternative, the applicant and the City of Newport Beach would not enter into the Agreement. Vesting of General Plan entitlement for the project sites would not occur. Dedication of open space would not occur. Construction and/or funding of circulation improvements would not occur. Adoption of Planned Community Texts consistent with vested entitlement would not occur. This would also include those PC Texts which would establish only open space and public facilities uses on all or portions of certain sites. Assessment of the Alternative i Without implementation of the Agreement and development on the subject sites, there would be no early payment of fair share fees or provision of an interest -free advance for use in constructing necessary circulation system improvements of benefit to the City. This would place a burden on the City of Newport Beach to identify and obtain alternative funding for the necessary traffic/circulation improvements identified in the City's adopted Circulation Element. Many of 'these necessary improvements are needed now or will be in the near future regardless of whether development occurs on the project sites. Loss of the large advance would limit the City's ability to obtain matching funds which are expected to be , available through local, state, or federal transportation improvement programs. Assuming that no development occurs on these sites, there will be a loss of fair share fees which were anticipated with the level of development entitled through the General Plan. This could result in an overall increase in fair share fees for other development occurring in the City to make up the shortfall in funds. The overall reduction and/or delay in fundingcould delay or eliminate circulation system improvements which are needed to accommodate both existing and projected traffic conditions. This could cause undesirable levels of service on local roadways. The reduction in assumed development associated with this alternative would not be sufficient to offset the effects of delayed or eliminated circulation system �. improvements. The effect of this loss of funding would conflict with the City of Newport Beach Project Objective 12 and The Irvine Company General Objective 2. 1 Without implementation of the Agreement and development on the subject sites, there would be no dedication of open space for public use or preservation and no enhancement , 384 ' I ' of natural habitat areas. This would increase the burden on the City of Newport Beach, resource agencies, and conservation groups to provide alternative funding for permanent ' acquisition of open space for active and passive park uses and preservation and enhancement of natural habitat areas. No funding resources have been identified to acquire the number of acres that would be dedicated as part of the Agreement. Use of any funds which might become available for acquisition purposes could also reduce the amount of funds available for improvements and maintenance on both existing and planned active and passive parks. This alternative would be in conflict with City of Newport Beach Project Objectives 1-5 and The Irvine Company General Objective 1. Without implementation of the Agreement and vesting of entitlement, the applicant would not dedicate in fee the land which could be used for a fire station site on the San Diego Creek North site. This would increase the cost to the City of acquiring and constructing a new fire station which is needed as a result of the lack of City funds to continue its existing contract with Orange County Fire Department for providing emergency services in the northern portions of the City. Since the increased funds may be difficult to obtain, siting of the station would probably also be delayed. This would be in conflict with City of Newport ' Beach Project Objectives 5 and 9. This alternative would result in 956 residential units not being built. The location, type, and ' amount of the proposed housing are consistent with the City's Land Use Element of the General Plan. The loss of these units could adversely effect the jobs/housing balance in the City. This would be inconsistent with City of Newport Beach Project Objective 6 and The Irvine Company General Objective 4. The No Project alternative would not allow development and associated mitigation which would improve existing drainage conditions above the bluffs on the Newporter North and Upper Castaways sites. Without improved drainage, the coastal bluffs will continue to erode causing the bluffs to recede and water quality in the bay to degrade. This alternative could also result in the elimination of all economic use of all the project sites with the exception of the Newporter Resort site. As a result, the City of Newport Beach could ultimately be required to purchase the properties from the applicant at fair market value. The value of the properties and the timeframe in which the properties would have to be purchased would determine whether the City has the financial resources and desire to implement this alternative. This alternative would avoid any significant adverse impacts of the proposed project related to development of the individual sites and related improvements. Please refer to the Summary of Alternatives Table in the Project Summaries for a comparison of the alternative ' to the proposed project. Unavoidable significant adverse impacts which would be avoidable include: ' 385 I i • Visual impacts associated with the loss of open space on Upper Castaways 1 and Newporter North. • Visual,impacts associated' with alterations of portions of the bluffs along Newporter North and Upper Castaways. Alterations would occur with bluff stabilization necessary for public use of open space and parklands. ' • Potential impacts to California Gnatcatcher habitat resulting from bluff stabilization necessary for public use of open space and parklands. 1 • Loss of upland (introduced grassland) habitat on the Newporter North site which could cause a disruption of'key predator -prey relationships. • Cumulative impacts associated with traffic, air quality, water quality, biologi cal resources, archaeological resources, and aesthetics. As discussed more fully above under Assessment of the Alternative, the major impacts of ' the alternative would be: • the loss and/or delay in funding for needed circulation system improvement ' identified in the City's Circulation Element which could cause undesirable - levels of service on local roadways. • the loss of commitment to dedicate substantial acreage which would be use d for open space, parks, and public facilities in excess of General Plan/PDO requirements. Use of public funds to acquire all or even a portion of these lands could reduce the amount of funds available for existing and planned active and passive parks. Relying on City funding could also delay the acquisition of some or all of the property for public use. • an adverse effect on the City's jobs/housing balance goals. • increased cost and delay to the City in obtaining a site for a new fire station needed to serve existing development in the City. • continued erosion of bluffs on Newporter North and Upper Castaways. Status of the Alternative , The No Project/No Development Agreement alternative may or may not be feasible depending on the ability of the City of Newport Beach to purchase sites for which all economic use would be eliminated. As required by CEQA, the No -Project alternative will remain under consideration throughout the decision making process. As discussed above, the alternative would avoid certain unavoidable adverse impacts of the project. But the 386 ' -1 ' alternative would also cause significant adverse impacts. Consequently, the alternative is not considered environmentally superior to the proposed project. Table WW compares the ' alternative to the project objectives. As demonstrated by the table, the alternative would conflict or partially conflict with all 12 of the City of Newport Beach Project Objectives and all 15 of the Irvine Company Project Objectives. 2. No Project/No Agreement - Development Under the Existing General Plan ' Description of the Alternative Under this alternative, the proposed Agreement would not be approved and implemented ' and development for each site would be pursued separately pursuant to the existing City of Newport Beach General Plan. Without the Agreement vesting of General Plan entitlement and adoption of Planned Community Texts consistent with General Plan entitlement would not occur at this time, but in piecemeal fashion. Dedication of open space in excess of General Plan and Park Dedication Ordinance requirements would occur. The City would ' lose the applicant's commitment to an early payment of fair share fees or to provide of an interest -free advance for use in constructing necessary circulation system improvements of benefit to the City and consistent with the City's Circulation Element. ' For purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that the sites would develop as currently designated in the General Plan. Please refer to Table YY for the land use assumptions for this alternative. With the exception of three sites, land use entitlements are assumed to be the same for this alternative and the proposed project. The three exceptions are the San Diego Creek North, Jamboree/MacArthur and Freeway Reservation sites. The existing General Plan provides for 162,000 s.f. of office uses on the San Diego Creek North and Jamboree/MacArthur sites. ' This alternative assumes development of those uses on the two sites. Even if office development was not preferred on the two sites, it is reasonable to assume that the square footage for office uses could be transferred to other locations in the City pursuant to existing policies in the City General Plan. The proposed project would provide open space and open space/public facilities uses on these two sites. Under the agreement, any possible future entitlement for developing the 162,000 s.f. of office uses on the two sites or in any other location would be given up by The Irvine Company. This alternative assumes 76 residential units on the Freeway Reservation site which is consistent with the existing General Plan. The proposed project proposed only 48 units with The Irvine Company giving up entitlement ' for 28 residential units. ' 387 I I TABLE YY LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS NO PROJECT/NO AGREEMENT - DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE EXISTING GENERAL PLAN Gross Acres Land Use Amount of Open Space San Diego Creek South 21.0 Residential - 300 d.u. 3.4 San Diego Creek North 14.7 Office - 112,000 s.f. 0 Jamboree/MacArthur 4.7 Office - 50,000 s.f. 0 Upper Castaways 56.6 Residential 151 d.u. 11.7 Bay View Landing 16.1 Restaurant - 10,000 s.f. 11.1 or Health Club 40,000 s.f. Newporter North 77.2 Residential- 212 d.u. 6.4 Newporter Knoll 12.0 Open Space 12.0 Newporter Resort Hotal - 68 additional 0.0 units Block 800 6.4 Residential 245 d.u. 2:8 Corporate Plaza West 9.0 Office - 94,000 s.f. 0.9 Freeway Reservation 28.3 Residential - 76 d.u. 246.0 48.3 Source: City of Newport Beach General Plan, 1988 d.u. = dwelling units s.E = square feet 11 11 1 388 ' Assessment of the Alternative ' As discussed above, this alternative allows for a greater amount of total development than the proposed project. Specifically, the alternative would result in a greater amount of office development. Traffic, generation would be about 20 percent greater than the proposed ' project, particularly in the AM and PM peak hours. Traffic at the intersections in the areas surrounding the sites would be somewhat higher. In the vicinity of the Jamboree/MacArthur and San Diego Creek North sites, this would result in increased traffic volumes at ' intersections which have already been identified as deficient even without development on the two sites. Impacts to these intersections would be greater with implementation of this alternative than with implementation of the proposed project. These intersections are: Jamboree and Bristol North (PM Peak Hour) Jamboree and Bristol South (PM Peak Hour) Jamboree and Bay View (PM Peak Hour) Jamboree and Ford (PM Peak Hour) Please refer to the traffic/circulation section of this Program EIR for a discussion of these intersections. Further, development under this alternative would proceed individually through the development permitting and Traffic Phasing Ordinance process. Fair Share Fees would not be paid for in a lump sum package amount prior to any development on any of the sites. Instead fees would be paid for at the time of each individual parcel map. No interest -free advance would be available to the City of Newport Beach for circulation system ' improvements of benefit to the City and consistent with the Circulation Element. By eliminating a mechanism for obtaining fair share fees in a single lump sum and a source of interest free funds, the City would lose the ability to leverage these funds through matching fund program expected to be available for transportation system improvements. As a result of reduced and delayed funding, there could be significant delay in or elimination of important circulation system improvements needed by existing and future development in the City and region as a whole. As a result, the alternative could have an additional effect on levels of service in the City creating an adverse impact on the circulation system. Development under this alternative would result in less open space being dedicated to the City for open space and parks/recreation uses. As depicted in Table PP in the Public Services and Utilities,Section, the total amount of acreage required by the General Plan and ' Park Dedication Ordinance for development under the existing General Plan is considerably less than the 140 acres proposed under the proposed project. The General Plan and Park Dedication Ordinance requires 70.5 acres of open space. The amount of land which would ' be dedicated could actually be even lower than the 70.5 acres, because the City has the option to request in -lieu fees under the Park Dedication Ordinance. Based on previous City action in approving development in the area, it is assumed that in -lieu fees would be ' requested in full or in part for Block 800, Freeway Reservation, and San Diego Creek South. ' 389 I I Additional land would have to be acquired via development exactions or through purchase by the City. The City has not identified any source of funds for acquiring additional lands for parks and open space on the project sites beyond what would be required by the General , Plan and PDO. The alternative would' also fail to provide a mechanism for early dedication of open space in advance of development. This would delay the ability of the City of Newport Beach to , provide additional active and passive park and recreational opportunities to its existing and future population. ' Overall, the effect of this alternative would be to reduce the extent to which the City of Newport Beach can provide for acquisition and improvement of active and passive park and - open space uses. This would increase the burden on the City of Newport Beach, resource agencies, and conservation groups to provide alternative funding for permanent acquisition of open space.for active and passive park uses and preservation and enhancement of natural habitat areas. It is not clear that there are sufficient funding resources available to acquire the additional number of acres that would equal the number of acres to be dedicated as part of the Agreement. Use of such funds for acquisition purposes could also reduce the amount of funds available for improvements and maintenance on both existing and planned active and passive parks. ' The alternative would help improve the jobs/housing balance in the City of Newport Beach. The increment of improvement would not be as great as the proposed project, because the alternative provides a higher ratio of jobs to housing in an already job rich area. A higher , ratio of jobs is provided because the alternative contains 162,000 s.f of office uses which is not included in the proposed project. , The Summary of Alternatives Table in the Project Summaries provides a comparison of the potential significant adverse impacts .of the alternatives under consideration and the proposed project. The No Project/Development Under the Ladsting General Plan would not avoid any unavoidable significant adverse impacts of the proposed project. The impacts of this alternative as compared to the proposed project and other feasible , alternatives are contained on the Summary of Alternatives Table in the Project Summaries. The following summary discusses the most important issues related to the alternative. As stated above, the alternative will not avoid any of the unavoidable adverse impacts of the proposed project. The alternative will increase the extent of those impacts. Loss of significant open space will be greater in particular on the Newporter North and Upper Castaways sites, A greater area of upland (introduced grassland) habitat will be lost on the Newporter North site adversely affecting important predator -prey relationships in and around the Upper Newport Bay. The alternative will generate 15 percent more traffic while , reducing the amount and availability of funding for circulation improvements. Additional impacts include a significant adverse impact on wetlands on the Jamboree/MacArthur site which would occur with construction of office development. , 390 1 11 ' Status of the Alternative ' This alternative is technically feasible. This alternative should remain under consideration during the review process. Based on the analysis contained in this document, this alternative is not considered to be environmentally superior to the proposed project. 1 Ll I �I I I I I 1 P Table W W compares the alternative to the project objectives. As demonstrated by the table, the alternative would conflict or partially conflict with 10 of the 12 City of Newport Beach Project Objectives and 14 of the 15 Irvine Company Project Objectives. 3. Reduced Development - No Agreement The concept for this alternative originated from comments received from SPON and Dr. Jan Vandersloot in response to the Notice of Preparation for this EIR. Description of the Alternative This alternative assumes the same type of land uses and level of development as contained in the proposed project for the following sites: Jamboree/MacArthur, San Diego Creek North, Freeway Reservation, Block 800, Corporate Plaza West, and Newporter Resort. Assumed land uses and level of development differ from the proposed project for Bay View Landing, Castaways, Newporter North, and San Diego Creek South as described in the following paragraphs and summarized in Table ZZ. The land uses for the four sites as suggested by this alternative do not meet the specific objectives of the project applicant. The proposed land use concepts are not acceptable to the project applicant. Consequently, it is assumed that a development agreement such as the Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement would not be possible. This alternative assumes that development of the project sites occurs without benefit of the Agreement similar to the No Project/No Agreement - Development Under Existing General Plan Alternative. Bay View Landing: 12 acre view park and 5 acre active park. Castaways: 100 units of multi -family residential clustered on 15 acres adjacent to Dover Drive. 10-acre active park. 200 foot open space setback along the bluff. Open space on remainder of parcel with view park facilities. Newporter North: 120 residential units on 20 acres. Establishing a development area which completely avoids willow wetland area and setback above the 105 foot contour which parallels John Wayne Gulch. Complete avoidance of willow wetland area would require relocation of entrance and interior roadways. Open Space would also be provided in a 100-200 foot setback area from the bluff. 391 1 TABLE ZZ LAND USE REDUCED DEVELOPMENT -NO AGREEMENT Gross Acres Land Use Amount of Open Space (ac.) San Diego Creek South 21.0 Residential - 100 d.u. 13.0 San Diego Creek North 14.7 Open Space Public 14.7 Facilities Jamboree/MacArthur 4.7 Open Space 4.7 Upper Castaways 56.6 Residential' 100 d.u. 36.6 Bay View Landing 16.1 Open Space/Parks 16.1 Newporter North 77.2 Residential - 120 d.u. 57.2 Newporter Knoll 12.0 Open Space 12.0 Newporter Resort Hotel - 68 additional 0 units Block 800 6.4 Residential 245 d.u. 0 Corporate Plaza West 9.0 Office - 94,000 s.f. 0 Freeway Reservation 28.3 Residential - 76 d.u. 17.3 246.0 ac. 171.6 ac. Source: d.u. = dwelling units s.f. = square feet ac = acres 392 7 1 II u 11 11 11 11 AI 11 71 L t� I 11 11 A I I 7 L I I San Diego Creek South: 100 multi -family residential units on 8 acres. Remainder of the site would be used for unimproved open space, recreational staging area, and creek trail. Assessment of the Alternative Without an Agreement, development under this alternative would proceed individually through the development permitting and Traffic Phasing Ordinance process. Fair Share Fees would not be paid for in a lump sum package amount prior to any development on any of the sites. Instead fees would be paid for at the time of each individual building permit. In addition, the reduction in residential units and commercial uses would also reduce the amount of fair share fees paid by about one-third. Further, no interest -free advance would be available to the City of Newport Beach for circulation system improvements of benefit to the City and consistent with the Circulation Element. By eliminating a mechanism for obtaining fair share fees in a single lump sum and a source of interest free funds, the City would lose the ability to leverage these funds through matching fund program expected to be available for transportation system improvements. As a result of reduced and delayed funding, there could be significant delay in or elimination of important circulation system improvements needed by existing and future development in the City and region as a whole. As a result, the alternative could have an indirect significant adverse impact on the circulation system. The alternative would result in a greater amount of open space than the proposed project. The alternative would provide 171.6 acres of open space contrasting with the 140.0 acres of open space provided by the proposed project. However, the alternative would fail to provide a mechanism for early dedication of open space in advance of development. This would delay the ability of the City of Newport Beach to provide additional active and passive parks and recreational opportunities to its existing and future populations. ' The primary mechanism in providing the additional open space is a reduction in the number of housing units to be provided and reduced development areas. The alternative would ' result in 641 housing units, contrasted with 956 units to be provided by the proposed project. This would be a reduction of 33 percent. The reduction of housing units could adversely effect the ability of the City to meet its housing goals and would conflict with the City's project objectives #6, 7 and 8. The reduction would also adversely effect the ability of the City to improve its jobs/housing balance. This would be inconsistent with The Irvine Company General Objective 4. ' The increased amount of open space on the San Diego Creek South, Newporter North/Upper Castaways, and Bay View Landing sites would not completely avoid any ' significant adverse impacts resulting from the proposed project. Depending on the location of increased open space on Newporter North, the additional 10- ' acres of open space could lessen impacts related to loss of grassland habitat and impacts to 393 Ca-Ora-64. However, since one intent of the alternative is to completely avoid the small on- ' site wetlands, it is possible that concentrating on preservation of these resources could result in a design which impacts a similar extent of grassland area and CA-ORA-64. ' Also, as discussed in the following subsection, Alternative Withdrawn from Further Consideration, it is not feasible to design an entrance which avoids all impacts to the small ' wetlands within Newporter North. Under the proposed project, the wetlands are primarily impacted by the access road which would enter the site at the existing signalized intersection of Santa Barbara Drive and Jamboree Road. The proposed project designed the boundaries of the development area to avoid the wetlands as much as possible. Only the proposed access road encroaches on the wetlands. According to the project applicant, there is no other feasible location for an access road serving the entire development area that would completely avoid the wetlands (Please also see Alternative 7f - Alternative Access - Newporter North). Impacts to the on -site wetlands would not be completely avoided by this alternative because the same entrance would be used. , The impacts of this alternative as compared to the proposed project and other feasible alternatives are contained on The Summary of Alternatives Table in Project Summaries. The following summary discusses the most important issues related to the alternative. As stated above, the alternative will not completely avoid the unavoidable adverse impacts of the proposed project. However, it will lessen the extent of some of the impacts. Less open space will be lost to development. The alternative will generate 30 percent less traffic. It may possibly impact slightly less upland (introduced grassland) habitat on the Newporter ' North site. The alternative will also reduce the amount and availability of funding for circulation , improvements. It will provide less housing which would adversely effect the ability of the City to meet its housing goals and to improve its jobs/housing balance. Status of the Alternative , This alternative is technically feasible. This alternative will remain under consideration. Based on the analysis contained in this document, this alternative is considered environmentally superior to the proposed project. Table W W compares the alternative to the project objectives. As demonstrated by the table, ' the alternative would conflict or partially conflict with 10 of the 13 City of Newport Beach Project Objectives and all of the 15 Irvine Company Project Objectives. 394 4. Partial Transfer of Development from NMorter North to Newport Center (No Agreement) Description of the Alternative ' This alternative assumes that 92 of the 212 units from Newporter North would be transferred to either Block 600 or Block 800 within Newport Center. Transfer of residential uses to Block 600 would require a General Plan Amendment because it is designated for ' office uses. Newporter North would retain 120 units on 20 acres with the remaining land in open space. If the residential units were transferred to Block 600, a 3-4 story multi -family product would be expected. If transferred to Block 800, the units would be added to the 245-unit multi -family product identified in the General Plan for the site. All other uses on all other sites for the project would remain the same as proposed. ' Assessment of the Alternative ' As a result of market and economic factors, the applicant does not find this alternative acceptable. The Irvine Company does not believe a residential product on Block 600 is feasible or marketable. The Irvine Company also does not believe a multi -family residential product exceeding 245-units on Block 800 is a feasible alternative. High rise structures are difficult and risky to market primarily because with a single tower structure there is no ability to phase construction and availability. The Irvine Company does not believe there will be a sufficient market to bring on 338 residential units in a high rise structure all at once. The Irvine Company typically phases its residential products. Because the applicant does not find this alternative acceptable, it is assumed that the Agreement would not occur. Consequently, ' this alternative assumes development without the draft Agreement. The primary intent of this alternative is to avoid any impacts to the small wetlands on the ' Newporter North site. The proposed project has already been designed so as to minimize impacts to the wetlands. Mitigation proposed in this EIR will mitigate this impacts to a level of insignificance. This alternative would result in a smaller development area (reduced by ' 10 acres). This would slightly reduce impacts to the introduced grassland habitat. The reduction in development area will still not completely avoid the wetlands, because the entrance road still must cross the wetlands to connect the development area with its access point. Consideration of other access points demonstrates that this is the only feasible access point to the site (Please refer to alternative access discussions under Alternative Rejected from Further Consideration). ' As discussed above, the reduction in development area could result in a reduced impact to the upland (introduced grassland) habitat found on the Newporter North site. This would ' lessen but not avoid the significant adverse impact of the project on this biological resource. The reduced development area could also slightly reduce the area of impact to Ora-Ca-64. Adverse impacts would be reduced but not eliminated. ' 395 I Total trip generation for this alternative is the same as the proposed project. Construction ' of 92 dwelling units would generate about 74 AM peak hour trips, 92 PM peak hour trips, and 791 daily trips. Compared to the traffic volumes on the adjacent roadways, this ' reduction from one site and the addition to another in such close proximity to one another is considered to be of little significance. There will be no significant difference between the alternative and proposed project related to direct impacts on traffic and circulation. ' Without an Agreement, development under this alternative would proceed individually through the development permitting and Traffic Phasing Ordinance process. Fair Share t Fees would not be paid for in a lump sum package amount prior to any development on any of the sites. Instead fees would be paid for at the time of each individual building permit. Further, no interest -free advance would be available to the City of Newport Beach for , circulation system improvements of benefit to the City and consistent with the Circulation element. By eliminating a mechanism for obtaining fair share fees in a single lump sum and a source of interest free funds, the City would lose the ability to leverage these funds ' through matching fund program expected to be available for transportation system improvements. As a result of reduced and delayed' funding, there would be significant delay ' in or elimination of important circulation system improvements needed by existing and future development in the City and region as a whole. As a result, the alternative could have an indirect significant adverse impact on the circulation system. Status of the Alternative The alternative is technically feasible. This alternative will remain under consideration. Based on the analysis contained in this document, this alternative is not considered to be environmentally superior to the proposed project. , Table W W compares'the alternative to the project objectives. As demonstrated by the table, the alternative would conflict or partially conflict with 10 of the 12 City of Newport Beach , project objectives and 14 0£ the 15 Irvine Company objectives. I Sa. Design Alternative A - With Agreement: Additional Active Park on Bay View Landing ' Description of the Alternative This alternative assumes that the Agreement is approved and implemented. The alternative assumes that all proposed entitlements are the same for all sites with the exception of entitlement for Bay View Landing. The alternative assumes that the commercial uses allowed ' under the existing General Plan are transferred to Fashion Island in the form of 30,000 s.f. of retail uses. Replacing the commercial uses on the lower portion of the Bay View Landing site would be a 5 acre active park with playing fields (non -lighted) and related facilities. ' 396 II ' Assessment of the Alternative This alternative would not avoid or lessen any significant adverse impacts of the proposed project. This alternative would not result in any additional adverse impacts. Total traffic generated by this project would increase less than one percent over the proposed project. ' The alternative would provide additional active park and recreational facilities of benefit to the City. ' Status of the Alternative L I I 5 I This alternative is technically feasible. This alternative should remain under consideration during the review process. Based on the analysis contained in this document, the alternative is considered to be environmentally superior to the proposed project based solely on the provision of increased park uses. The alternative would not conflict with the City of Newport Beach Project Objectives, The Irvine Company General Objectives, or The Irvine Company Specific Objectives 1 and 3 - 10. The alternative would conflict with The Irvine Company Specific Objective 2. 5b. Design Alternative B - With Agreement: Transfer of Active Park from Uuuer Castaways to Bay View Landing Description of the Alternative This alternative assumes that the Agreement is approved and implemented. The alternative assumes that all proposed entitlements and open space assumptions are the same for all sites with the exception of entitlement/open space assumptions for the Bay View Landing and Upper Castaways sites. The alternative assumes that the commercial uses allowed under the existing General Plan are eliminated and are replaced on the lower portion of the Bay View Landing site with the 5 acre active park transferred from the Upper Castaways site. In exchange, the development area for the residential uses on the Upper Castaways site would increase by 5 acres (into the area designated for active park under the proposed project) allowing for a slightly lower density residential product. The number of residential units on the Upper Castaways site would remain the same as for the proposed project. Assessment of the Alternative This alternative would not avoid any significant adverse impacts of the proposed project. Traffic volumes would decrease slightly (669 average daily trips; 7 AM peak hour trips; 51 PM peak hour trips). Compared to the total trips related to the project total volumes on adjacent roadways this decrease is insignificant. Projections for future supply and demand of park and recreational facilities contained in the Open Space and Recreation Element demonstrate that the need for future parks is slightly higher in the service area served by Upper Castaways than the area served by the Bay View Landing site. Transfer of the 397 I Upper Castaways park to Bay View Landing would have an adverse effect on the provision of recreational opportunities to communities on the west side of the Bay. No other adverse impacts by the transfer have been identified. Status of the Alternative This alternative is technically feasible. The alternative would not conflict with The City of Newport Beach Project Objectives, The Irvine Company General Objectives, or the Irvine Company Specific Objectives 1 and 3 - 10. The alternative would conflict with The Irvine Company Specific Objective 2. This alternative should remain under consideration during the review process. Based on the analysis contained in this document, the alternative is not considered to be environmentally superior to the proposed project. Se. Design Alternative C - With Agreement: Senior Housing on Bay View Landing Description of the Alternative This alternative assumes that the Agreement is approved and implemented. The alternative assumes that all proposed entitlements are the same for all sites with the exception of entitlement for Bay View Landing. The alternative assumes that the commercial uses allowed by the General Plan on Bay View Landing would be transferred to Fashion Island in the form of 30,000 square feet of retail uses. Replacing entitlement for commercial uses on Bay View Landing would be 120 affordable senior housing units. Assessment of Alternative This alternative would not avoid or lessen any significant adverse impacts of the proposed project. This alternative would not result in any additional significant adverse impacts. Total traffic generation would be about four percent higher than what would result from the project. Given traffic characteristics of senior housing, the A.M. and P.M. peak hours would experience less than,a 4 percent increase over the proposed project. This is considered a minor difference with the proposed project. This alternative would provide additional affordable senior housing units of benefit to the City in meeting City senior housing goals. Provision of residential uses on the Bay View Landing site would require a General Plan Amendment of the Land Use Element. Status of the Alternative This alternative is technically feasible. This alternative should remain under consideration during the review process. Based on the analysis contained in this document, the alternative is not considered to be environmentally superior to the project. Impacts of the alternative are substantially similar to the proposed project. This alternative does not conflict with any 1 t 1 I I ' of the City of Newport Beach objectives. The alternative would conflict with only one Irvine Company objective, Objective Number 2. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUTREJECTED FROM FURTHER CONSIDERATION ' The following alternatives have been considered and found to be infeasible. They have been rejected from further environmental evaluation and consideration. Consequently, no analysis of project objectives or environmental impacts is warranted. 6. Alternative Agreement Provisions - Use of Funds for Open Space Acquisition ' Description of the Alternative The concept for this alternative originated from several letters received in response to the ' Notice of Preparation. These letters included comments from Dr. Jan Vandersloot, Lars Hansen, Newport Conservancy, West Newport Beach Association, and Louise Greeley. Under this alternative, the alternative agreement would allow entitlement for the 11.sites ' exactly as provided under the proposed project (Table A). The alternative agreement would require frontage improvement and early payment of fair share fees based on the allowed ' entitlement. The basic difference in the alternative agreement would be that the approximate $10 million dollars interest -free loan to be offered by The Irvine Company would be used for the purchase of open space, not for additional circulation system improvements of benefit to the City. The monies could be used to purchase property included in the Agreement (e.g. portions of Castaways, Newporter North) or other properties within the City of Newport Beach. This alternative assumes that The Irvine ' Company's total monetary commitment would not exceed the 20.6 million dollars established in the proposed Agreement. Assessment of the Alternative The City could experience difficulty in paying back the advance as Park Dedication fees are ' not expected to be sufficient over the 20 year payback period. Building excise taxes could be used to supplement the repayment. Use of either or both of the two funding sources would divert funds needed for improving and maintaining existing park and recreational ' facilities, as well as, libraries and fire protection services (services for which building excise taxes are used). This could significantly effect existing and projected service levels and possibly require increased assessments or taxes to generate sufficient revenue to cover the shortfall. Essentially, this alternative entails a decision by the City of Newport Beach to pay for acquisition of open space with public monies which would otherwise be used to support other city services. ' Based on appraisals conducted in 1991 for the Irvine Company, The Irvine Company estimates that the approximate 10 million dollars would probably only purchase between 7 - 10 acres of land (source: The Irvine Company) if used to purchase open space from one of ' 399 the entitlement sites fronting or near the Upper Newport Bay (e.g Castaways, Newporter North, Bay View Landing, and San Diego Creek North or South). With the exception of Bay View Landing, the purchasing power of these funds would not be sufficient to purchase the entire proposed development area from any one individual site. Consequently, none of the adverse impacts of the proposed project related to development of residential and office/commercial uses would be entirely avoided. Use of the advance for park/open space acquisition would substantially reduce the amount of funds which the City could use to obtain matching funds for circulation system improvements which are expected to be available through local, state, or federal transportation improvements programs. This reduction in funding could delay or eluninate circulation system improvements which are needed to accommodate both existing and projected traffic conditions. This could cause undesirable levels of service on local roadways. The reduction in funding would also eliminate or substantially reduce the overall net benefit of the project on the City's circulation system. Without being able to demonstrate a net benefit of the project, the approval of the Development Agreement would not meet the requirements of the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance. Consequently, approval of the Agreement by City Council could be difficult or impossible to obtain because approval would require a 4/5ths vote of the City Council. The result of this would be piecemeal development of individual parcels similar to the alternative titled "No Project/No.Agreement - Development under Existing General Plan. Without approval of the Agreement, no advance would be available for open space acquisition. Consequently, this alternative is not considered feasible. Status of the Alternative This alternative is not feasible. Consequently, it will not remain under consideration during the review process. 7a. Design Alternative - Intensification of Residential Development on Castaways Parcel Description of the Alternative This alternative concept.developed from comments received at the Scoping Session for'the Environmental Impact Report. The suggestion was made to intensify residential uses on the Upper Castaways site beyond that proposed in the project. The purpose of the intensification would be to make the project more financially lucrative for the developer thus enabling the City to exact more funding commitments for transportation improvements along 17th Street in Newport Beach and Costa Mesa. 400 n LJ LI u n L F L n L IAssessment of the Alternative This alternative would require a General Plan Amendment to allow more than 212 units on the Castaways site. Intensification of the site would either result in a higher density residential uses than considered appropriate for the site or would require a larger site area encroaching into valuable open space and recreational areas. An intensification of the site would result in increased units and a corresponding increase in fair share fees. In order for the increase in fair share fees to be meaningful in terms of making major improvements to t 17th Street, intensification of the site would have to be in the magnitude of 500 to 1;000 units. This amount of intensification is considered incompatible with the City's General Plan Land Use Element's Goals and Policies for the site and the surrounding area. It is believed that such an intensification would be unacceptable to the surrounding community in Newport Beach and Costa Mesa. Further, the proposed Development Agreement already provides sufficient incentives for the developer to provide funding commitments in excess of findings commitments that would be received under a "No Agreement" scenario. A portion of these funds may be spent on ' improvements on 17th Street, in particular the intersection of 17th Street and Irvine Boulevard (please refer to the Transportation/Circulation section). ' Status of the Alternative This alternative is not feasible. Consequently, it will not remain under consideration during the review process. 7b. Transfer of all Development to Newport Center ' ,Description of the Alternative ' The concept for this alternative originated from comments received from SPON and Dr. Jan Vandersloot in response to the Notice of Preparation. This alternative would assume that a modified version of the Agreement would be approved and implemented. Under this alternative, General Plan entitlements on the Upper Castaways, Newporter North, San Diego Creek South, and Bay View Landing sites would be transferred to Newport Center. ' This would involve the transfer of 663 residential units to an unspecified location(s) in Newport Center. Including the residential units proposed on Block 800, this would result in a total of 908 residential units being allocated to Newport Center. Transfer of residential ' uses to any site which is currently designated for non-residential uses would require a General Plan Amendment. ' The commercial uses on Bay View Landing would be converted to 30,000 square feet of retail uses and transferred to Fashion Island. General Plan entitlement for Freeway Reservation (76 residential units), Corporate Plaza West (124,000 s.f of office) and Block ' 800 (245 residential units) would remain unchanged. San Diego Creek North and F 401 J Jamboree/MacArthur would provide open space and public facility uses just as proposed ' under the project. The Upper Castaways, Newporter North, San Diego Creek South, and Bay View Landing ' sites would then be used for open space and active/passive park uses in conjunction with open space uses on Newporter Knoll, San Diego Creek North, Jamboree/MacArthur, and ' portions of Freeway Reservation. The alternative would result in a total of 219.60 acres of open space and active/passive park uses. Virtually, all undeveloped lands remaining around the perimeter of the Upper Newport Back Bay would remain in open space. ' Please refer to Table AAA for a tabular summary of land use assumptions. 402 M M TABLE AAA LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT TO NEWPORT CENTER Gross Acres Land Use Amount of Open Space San Diego Creek South 21 Open Space and Park and Ride Lot 21.0 San Diego Creek North 14.7 Open Space Public Facilities 14.7 Jamboree/MacArthur 4.7 Open Space 4.7 Upper Castaways 56.6 Open Space and Park 56.6 Bay View Landing 16.1 Open Space and Parks 16.1 Newporter North 77.2 Open Space and Park 77.2 Newporter Knoll 12.0 Open Space 12.0 Newporter Resort 68 Hotel Units 0.0 Block 800 6.4 Residential 245 d.u. 0 Corporate Plaza West 9.0 Office - 94,000 s.f. 0 Freeway Reservation 28.3 Residential - 76 d.u. 17.3 Newport Center --- Residential - 663 d.u. 0 Fashion Island --- Retail - 30,000 s.f.1 0 Source: City of Newport Beach Notes: IIn addition to existing retail in Fashion Island. d.u. = dwelling units s.f. = square feet 403 219.60 In recent planning history (since 1980), the City's General Plan has never reflected such a , substantial intensification of residential uses in Newport Center. Existing residential units include the Granville Apartments (67 units) located in Block 900, Sea Island Condominiums ' (132 units) and Villa Point apartments (228 dwelling units) located on West Coast Highway and Jamboree Road. Additional residential uses allocated by the General Plan are limited to the 245 units of multi family residential on Block 800 which are included as part of the , proposed project and this alternative. The total number of residential units allocated by the General Plan is 672 units. An increase of 663 units in Newport Center would about double the number of units currently anticipated by the City of Newport Beach General Plan to a ' total of 1335 units. In 1980, another comprehensive generalplan amendment was considered and approved by ' the City of Newport Beach City Council. The Council approval was rescinded by subsequent action of the City Council. This amendment also did not consider an intensification of residential uses in Newport Center. The Council approved an addition of about 215 units ' (225,000 square feet of residential and 100 units of residential) of multi -family residential on Block 600 and the retention of 57 residential units on what is now known as the Villa Point , site. This would have been in addition to the Granville Apartments, Sea Island, and Block 800 residential uses. In total, the General Plan allocation for Newport Center as a whole would have allowed about 716 residential units. Neither Planning Commission nor staff , recommendations included allocations of other additional residential uses. In 1985, a comprehensive general plan amendment was considered and approved by the City , of Newport Beach City Council. The Newport Center general plan amendment was later overturned by passage of a local initiative. Neither what was originally requested by the applicant nor what was ultimately approved by the City Council contemplated an increase , in residential uses over the existing general plan. The amendment would have actually decreased the number of residential units in Newport Center by eliminating the 245 multi- family units on Block 800. , In 1988, the City of Newport Beach undertook a comprehensive update of the General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements. The update process included extensive public ' participation including the General Plan Outreach Program (described more fully in the adopted Land Use Element). The proposed project is consistent with the Land Use Element adopted at the end of the process. The General Plan update process for the , Newport Center area resulted in the reduction of residential uses by converting Newport Village to office uses, library, and art museum. Availability of appropriate sites within Newport Center for an additional 663 residential units ' is limited. If the assumption is made that substantial redevelopment of Newport Center is not contemplated by either the landowners or the existing General ,Plan, then few sites which ' are under the control of the applicant are physically available for construction of multi -family residential. These sites would be Block 800 and portions of Block 600, and Corporate Plaza 404 , P F C C Pi J West. The total available acreage on these three sites would total only about 20 acres. Construction of the 904 residential units on all 20 acres would result in an overall density of about 45 dwelling units/acre. However the Corporate Plaza West site is constrained by the Civic Center Sight Plane Ordinance. Residential structures would be limited to 2 and 3 stories. This would probably result in a density around 15 du/acres at a maximum or about 135 units. This would leave about 11 acres to support 773 residential dwelling units at a density of 70 units per acre. This would be substantially in excess of any density ever contemplated by the existing General Plan for Newport Center. Such a density would result in high rise residential structures which would be out of character for the area and possibly incompatible with adjacent uses (e.g. Block 600). Further, the project applicant does not believe that there is a sufficient market for such dense, urban residential development and that the transfer of residential uses to Newport Center is not economically viable as an alternative to the project. Status of Alternative This alternative is not technically feasible. It will not remain under consideration. 7c. Design Alternative - Additional Parks on Bay View Landing (with Field Lights) and Newport Village Sites Description of the Alternative This alternative concept is based on comments received from Mr. Allan Beek in response to the Notice of Preparation. The alternative of providing an additional park on the lower portion of the Bay View Landing is contained in the section above. Assessment of the Alternative The concept of lighting the park in that location is not considered feasible given the location of residential uses in the immediate vicinity of the site. These uses include Sea Island, Villa Point, ,and Promontory Point. The provision of a park on the Newport Village is not considered further for several reasons. First, Newport Village is not a site covered by the proposed Agreement. Second, height restrictions on the areas of Newport Village not already contemplated for development would virtually prohibit construction of any active park facilities (e.g backstops, bleachers, restrooms, landscaping). Status of the Alternative This alternative is not technically feasible, consequently, it will not remain under consideration during the review process. 1 7d. Design Alternative - Alternate Site Access on Castaways The proposed access for the Upper Castaways site utilizes the east leg of the 16th Street intersection with Dover Drive. The intersection is already signalized and in all cases analyzed the traffic study projects a level of service well within the City's Level of Service Standards as it does not exceed a "B" level of service. However, during the Notice of Preparation review period and the scoping meetings held on this project, concerns were raised by several citizens about the potential increases in traffic volumes along 16th Street and it was specifically requested that alternative means of accessing the site be examined in the EIR. To address that request, two alternative plans where the site access location was changed were developed and have been evaluated. These alternatives would involve relocating the proposed single access point to one of two locations: 1) mid -block on Dover Drive between 16th Street and Westcliff or 2) as a fourth leg at the Westcliff/Dover Drive intersection. (Consideration of an additional access point in additional to the access proposed at 16th Street is considered in Design Alternative 7e - Additional Site Access on Castaways). Assessment of the Alternative The Traffic Study for this Program EIR (which is contained in Appendix B) evaluated the feasibility of the single -access alternatives. The following summarizes the evaluation. MID -BLOCK ACCESS There are a number of constraints which significantly limit the ability to safely and effectively locate a single full -access point on Dover Drive somewhere between Westcliff and 16th Street.. A single mid -block access point will require use of a break in the existing center median along Dover Drive between 16th Street and Westcliff. There are several limitations on where a median break serving the Upper Castaways site can be located. The most significant physical constraint to locating a midblock full access is the required length of back-to-back left -turn pockets that must be provided between the midblock access point and the signalized intersection at Westcliff. From a traffic engineering standpoint, 500 feet is considered the minimum distance between the two intersections. This 500 feet would be comprised of: two 150-foot left -turn lanes; a 90-foot reverse curve transition; and, the width of the driveway and intersection. Another important consideration is the relationship of such an access to an existing right - turn -only driveway on the west side of Dover Drive (opposite from the Upper Castaways site) and the free right -turn acceleration/ merging lane from eastbound Westcliff onto southbound Dover Drive. These two geometric features significantly restrict the location of a potential break in the center median. For example, placing a median break/single-access M n 1 1 LI, C ' point too close to the existing right -turn -only driveway (but not directly across from it) would create potentially unsafe conflicts with that driveway, since motorists entering/existing the 1 existing driveway would be tempted to use the new median opening. One further consideration is the proposed location of the active park on Upper Castaways ' along Dover Drive. It is not desired to have the access for residential uses to run across the park. Such an alignment would severely limit recreational use of the site. This limits site access to the northern edge of the proposed park. Based on these constraints,, the only possible location for a full -access driveway would be at the existing median opening opposite an existing driveway on the east side of Dover Drive ' (Please see Figure IV-3 in Appendix B). However, based on the technical evaluation, this access point is considered undesirable (and therefore infeasible) for several reasons. First, the location is on the inside of a convex -shaped curve. This type of curvature creates a problem with visibility for any driveway situated on the inside of the curve (in this case on the west side of Dover Drive). A vehicle exiting the site needs a minimum sight distance of 550 feet to the south to safely enter the northbound Dover Drive traffic stream. In order to achieve this all landscaping and park equipment would have to be restricted to below 30 ' inches within the sight plane. This could restrict potential uses and aesthetic treatment along portions of the northern and western edges of the proposed park, but mainly results in an impaired sight distance that could lead to safety problems. ' Second, additional conflicts would be created with existing vehicular movements in and out of the existing driveway on the east side of Dover Drive (opposite from the Upper Castaways site). Currently, that access is a three-way tee -intersection. As such, only three conflicting moves exist. When a fourth leg is introduced, the number of intersection turning movements increases substantially (to as many as 16 depending on design). ' Third, the ability of a motorist to exit the existing driveway will significantly degrade. Under existing conditions a driver exiting the existing driveway needs only to find a gap in the north ' and southbound traffic. Since this is a private driveway (with low traffic volumes), the conflicts between vehicles simultaneously entering and existing are minimal as discussed in the previous paragraph. When the new fourth leg is introduced, a motorist existing the ' driveway via a left -turn would be faced with also finding a gap in the newly created southbound left -turn lane (from southbound Dover Drive into the Upper Castaways site). This could cause a substantial delay for users of the existing driveway because all left -turns from Dover Drive into the Upper Castaways would have right-of-way over the existing left - turns from the existing driveway on the east side of Dover Drive. Finally, it isn't clear that locating the access at mid -block would significantly reduce project trips on 16th Street. In order to use 16th Street, westbound project traffic would simply make a right -turn onto 16th Street after making their left -turn across Dover Drive. 407 Eastbound traffic would make left -turn at the signalized intersection at 16th Street/ Dover ' Drive and then make a right -turn into the midblock access point. Another important factor in consideration of this alternative access point is the policy direction of the City's Public Works Department. The City's overall circulation goal is to provide an efficient and safe operation of the City's roadway system while providing safe access to and from that system. To accomplish that goal, one of the City's policies is, where feasible, to minimize the number of direct project access points to the arterial highway system. Clearly, this:altemative, where an additional access point is proposed on Dover as , opposed to limiting the project's access to the use of the existing 16th Street intersection with Dover, is not consistent with the Public Works Department's policy direction. In summary, this alternative has significant undesirable operational and safety side effects and, is inconsistent with Public Work's policy directions. This alternative is considered ' technically infeasible. ACCESS AT WESTCLIFF DRIVEMOVER DRIVE INTERSECTION This alternative would locate the project driveway opposite Westcliff Drive at its intersection with Dover Drive. This intersection currently operates as a signalized three-way tee- , intersection. Construction of a fourth leg to provide access to the Upper Castaways site would require the acquisition of at least one single-family dwelling on the east side of Dover Drive (Please refer to Appendix B for an illustration of minimum geometric requirements). Even with the acquisition of the existing house to allow for minimum geometric design, .a design speed of only 25 miles per hour would be achieved for project traffic passing through the intersection. Since it is anticipated that motorists will routinely exceed 25 miles per hour, unsafe conditions could exist. Signs warning of the advancing curve with advisory speeds would be warranted. However, even with signing, unsafe conditions could remain , raising a question of liability for both the project developer and the City of Newport Beach. Another factor related to public safety is the addition of a fourth leg to a tee -intersection t would increase the accident potential by increasing the number of conflicts from three to as many as 16. Another undeniable effect of this alternative would be the increase in vehicular delay at the ' intersection of Dover Drive and Westcliff. The current tee -intersection is signalized with a simple and efficient three phase signal operation. Since Westcliff has a free -right turn lane onto southbound Dover Drive, the signal operates quite efficiently with virtually no delay. The only time northbound traffic is required to stop is to accommodate pedestrian crossings of Dover Drive or for eastbound left -turns from Westcliff. If a fourth leg is added, the delay to all existing movements will be increased substantially since the number of signal phases is doubled from three to six. Northbound traffic will notice the most change since under existing conditions it rarely has to stop. Both northbound and southbound Dover Drive , 408 ' I ' traffic will encounter frequent and regular red lights. Full capacity of the intersection will not be reached, but a significant and noticeable increase in intersection delay will occur. ' Status of the Alternative t When comparing the substantial driver safety concerns and significant public delays resulting from this alternative with the lack of any significant impacts to 16th Street resulting from the project, this alternative is considered infeasible. 7e. Design Alternative - Additional Access Upper Castaways ' Description of the Alternative This alternative would provide a right-in/right-out access point to the Castaways site in t addition to the primary full access point to be located off 16th Street with the intent of minimizing the potential impact of associated traffic on 16th Street westerly of Dover Drive. ' Assessment of the Alternative A raised median is located along Dover Drive between 16th Street and Westcliff/17th Street. It has one opening about midblock which serves an existing private driveway on the west side of Dover Drive. A right-in/right-out only intersection could be located on the east side of Dover Drive serving the site at the north end of the proposed active park. The median would serve to restrict the driveway to right -turn movements only. However, the close proximity of the existing median opening would likely introduce a number of U-turns for south bound traffic on Dover Drive wishing to enter the site at that location. This would create unsafe traffic conditions. The U-turns would either have to be ' prohibited (introducing a potential law enforcement problem) or the median would have to be reconstructed to provide for either a southbound left -turn pocket at the project driveway or a U-turn pocket at the existing median opening. Providing a southbound left -turn pocket ' would eliminate a substantial portion of existing landscaping in the median. Construction of a "U turn" pocket would create a minor conflict with existing traffic exiting the private driveway served by the median opening. Another problem concerns sight distance. The location of the driveway is on the inside of a convex -shaped curve. This type of curvature creates a problem with visibility for any driveway situated on the inside of the curve (in this case on the west side of Dover Drive). A vehicle existing the site needs a minimum site distance of 550 feet to the south to safely In order to achieve this all landscaping and park equipment would have to be restricted to below 30 inches within the sight plane. This could restrict potential uses and aesthetic treatment along portions of the northern and western edges of the proposed park but mainly results in any impaired sight distance that could lead to safety problems. 409 .1 Status of Alternative ' The technical analysis did not project that this alternative would significantly reduce the amount of traffic that might use 16th Street which, as previously discussed, was not ' considered to result in significant impacts anyway. This, therefore, in combination with the resultant side effects of public safety and operational impacts to Dover Drive and the alternative's inconsistency with the Public Works Department's policy direction regarding arterial access results in the determination that this alternative is considered technically infeasible. 7f. Desien Alternative - Alternate Site Access Newporter North ' Description of the Alternative The proposed access for the Newporter North site woul&add a fourth leg to the existing Tee ' intersection of Santa Barbara with Jamboree Road. The intersection is already signalized and in all cases analyzed the Level of Service is projected to be well within the City's Level of Service Standards. However, during the Notice of Preparation review period and at the , scoping meeting, concerns were raised as to whether the access point could be relocated to eliminate its potential impacts on the existing on -site wetlands. To address that concern, an alternative access plan was identified where the access point would be relocated to a point approximately 1,000 'feet southerly of the Santa Barbara intersection with Jamboree. Assessment of the Alternative The alternative access would feature an access point via a new intersection with Jamboree Road. It would be located about 1,000 feet south of the existing Santa Barbara intersection and about 1;000 feet north of an existing private driveway on the east side of Jamboree Road. The access had been primarily analyzed as a right in/right out only access due to sight limitations, but this location could also be modified to allow construction of a new median , opening allowing for left -turn movements in and out of the project to provide full access and to avoid potential U-turn problems elsewhere. Although a precise location for the intersection has not been determined there is about a 600-700 foot "window of opportunity" which is centered on a point about 1,000 feet south of the Santa Barbara Drive intersection. Virtually the entire "window of opportunity" is located on the inside of a convex curve on Jamboree Road. This would create a horizontal sight distance restriction. Although, this limitation alone does not make such a driveway entirely infeasible, it does pose a constraint as driveways on the inside of convex curve should be avoided where possible. The larger physical problem that exists in this area is the limited vehicular sight distance that results from locating the proposed alternative access relative to the significant hill that Jamboree Road traverses south of the site. The ' combination of that hill, which limits the vision of northbound traffic and the high speeds on Jamboree results in an inability to meet the stopping distance line of sight criteria. This 410 I ' problem makes providing full access at this location unavoidable from a safety standpoint, even with signalization. ' Another consideration for an alternate entrance is the safety associated with the type of control provided. With the planned access opposite Santa Barbara Drive, the entrance will ' be signalized and would simply involve enhancement of the existing signalization. Any alternate access would either be limited to right -turn -only movements or possibly provide full access (i.e., inclusion of left -turns) but without the aid of a signal since minimum signal warrants would not be satisfied for an entrance which served only this residential development. Comparing the safety associated with full access via a signal versus an alternative with no signal and insufficient vertical sight distance indicates the signalized ' access is likely to experience few accidents and with less severity for those which may occur. Similarly, comparison of the accident potential of a right -turn -only access with a signalized full access driveway suggests that the accident rate at the right -turn -only driveway may be less than for the full access. However, when the fact that a substantial increase in U-turns will occur at nearby median openings across a high-speed, high -volume road is considered, the total accident picture even for a right -turn -only driveway is expected to be worse than for use of the existing signalized entrance. I I ,11 Therefore since the alternate entrance is limited to right -turn movements only, then a situation is created whereby half the entering/exiting traffic would do so via a U-turn on Jamboree Road. The most convenient location for a northbound U-turn is the existing signal at Santa Barbara Drive. However, since no left -turn lane or signal phase exists for north bound traffic, the median and signal will have to be modified to accommodate the U- turns generated by the project. Furthermore, no convenient median break exists south of the alternate access and either a new U-turn pocket must be created along Jamboree Road or the U-turns will occur at Back Bay Drive or Coast Highway. Both are undesirable location for southbound U-turns to take place. Since it would be tremendously unsafe to create a location for uncontrolled U turns on the high-speed/high-volume major arterial highway that Jamboree is, this approach would result in accommodating them at the Santa Barbara and Back Bay Drive signalized intersections. However, the addition of U-turns is not an efficient approach to maximizing the efficient operation of signalized intersections along a major arterial and would result in significant additional vehicular delay to the driving public using these intersections. As discussed in the Alternative Access discussion for the Upper Castaways site another important factor in consideration of this alternative access point is the policy direction of the City's Public Works Department. The City's overall circulation goal is to provide an efficient and safe operation of the City's roadway system while providing safe access to and from that system. To accomplish that goal one of the City's policies is, where feasible, to minimize the number of direct project access points to the arterial highway system. Clearly, this alternative, where the additional access point to Jamboree would result in the less efficient 411 U operation of adjacent traffic signals along this major arterial highway is not consistent with ' the policy directions of the Public Works Department. Status of the Alternative In summary, when considering the significant undesirable impacts of the safety and ' operational impacts on Jamboree and its inconsistency with policy directions of the Public Works Department, the alternative is considered technically infeasible. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS Request for Consideration of Alternative Circulation Improvements 1 A number of comments were received from public citizens during the NOP comment period which requested that a number of different "alternative circulation improvements" both within and outside the City of Newport Beach be evaluated as alternatives to the project. Given the characteristics of the project and the proposed provisions of the draft Agreement, it is not possible to consider "alternative circulation improvements" as alternatives to the project. With the exception of normal frontage improvements consistent with the City Circulation Element which are specified in the Development Agreement, no specific set of circulation improvements will be committed to as a result of project approval. Approval of the Development Agreement does not commit the City to any particular set of improvements with which to use the fair share fees and interest -free advance. Many of the suggested "alternatives" such as the deletion of Dover Drive improvements would be more appropriately considered in conjunction with a review of the overall Circulation Element. Such a review was just completed in, 1988 with extensive public participation and environmental review. I i 11 I I I 412 1 I ' VII. LONG TERM IMPLICATIONS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONGTERM PRODUCTIVITY ' The present use of 10 of the 11 sites is vacant, undeveloped land, with the exception of the Newporter Resort, which exists as a hotel and golf course. Implementation of the project represents a long-term commitment of portions of the sites to residential, commercial and open space uses. The opportunity for development of the sites has been planned for residential, office, hotel, restaurant or health club, and open space. Long-term impacts of the proposed project, which adversely affect the state of the environment, include a decrease in open space areas (resulting in a long-term alteration of aesthetic resources); increased demand for local and regional roadway capacity; increased demand on infrastructure and facilities to provide community services and public utilities; increased ambient noise levels resulting from increased traffic and other urban uses; and increased emissions into the air basin. Implementation of mitigation measures have been proposed to control these potential long-term impacts. Short-term impacts of the proposed Circulation Improvement Open Space Agreement project include localized increases in noise, dust and vehicular emissions associated with construction vehicles utilized during project proposed circulation improvements and development, and an increased potential for localized erosion and downstream sedimentation. Implementation of the recommended mitigation measures identified for each of these impacts will adequately control these potential short-term impacts. The proposed project represents urban infill. Infill sites represent undeveloped "islands" which are surrounded by development. Urban infill is a reflection of the growth which has occurred in the City of Newport Beach and adjacent communities. As such, it is a logical extension of the development of land uses located on other properties, except as noted in the remainder of this section. The project proponent indicates that the proposed project represents appropriate and timely land uses for the sites because they are in compliance with the City of Newport Beach General Plan. Short-term benefits resulting from the project include provision of construction -related employment during buildout. Long-term project benefits include the provision of tax revenues to the City; the provision of advance monies for circulation improvement; additional commercial facilities within the community; housing in close proximity to major employment and shopping centers; and additional employment opportunities within the community. Receipt of the necessary approvals of the project as proposed is the first step towards development of the sites. Specific approvals necessary for project implementation are listed 1 413 r in the Project Description section of this EIR. Further environmental documentation will ' be required for specific sites to determine site plan impacts, as this is a Program EIR. SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES WHICH WOULD BE INVOLVED IF THE PROPOSED ACTION SHOULD IT BE IMPLEMENTED Approval of the requested project approvals will allow for construction of the project. This ' development will commit future generations to similar uses of the site. Development of residences and offices, an expansion of a hotel, the installation of utilities, road improvements, and other types of improvements similar to those associated with an urban area will be made. Reverting the sites to be developed to a less intense urban use, or open space use after construction, is highly infeasible because of the large capital commitment. Several irreversible commitments of limited resources would result from implementation of the proposed project. These resources include, but ate not limited to, the following: lumber and other related forest products; sand, gravel, and concrete; asphalt; petrochemical construction materials; steel, copper, lead, and other metals; and, water consumption. The proposed project will involve an irreversible commitment of labor and capital investment and an increased demand for social and public maintenance services. The project will also result in an irreversible commitment of finite energy resources (e.g., on and natural). GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS I There are several considerations regarding the potential of the project to induce growth on surrounding properties in the area. The first is whether or not circulation improvements will j increase the likelihood of adjacent properties to develop sooner than expected and/or at a higher density than would be possible without construction of the proposed project. , As mentioned previously, development of the sites is considered an "infill" project by the City of Newport Beach. The project sites basically exist as open space surrounded by existing residential and commercial uses. The project sites do not lie adjacent to any other undeveloped land. Circulation improvements required by the proposed project would not encourage development of nearby properties since they are already developed. Implementation of the project would be growth -inducing in the form of a localized population increase. The increase in population will cause an increased demand for utilities and community services. No adverse impacts are anticipated. There will be less development under the proposed project than is currently authorized by the General Plan. According to the General Plan, the sites of San Diego Creek North and Jamboree/MacArthur are to be developed as office space. The project proposes that these two sites be dedicated as open space. Additionally, the General Plan and Park Dedication 414 1 11 r L Ordinance require only 83.6 acres be used for recreation and open space. The total acreage of land to remain in recreation and open space as a result of this project is 140.0 acres. I I F] I �l I fl 1 I I I 1 IX. ENVIRONMENTAL SUMMARIES The following summarizes the proposed project's relationship to impacts found not to be significant, impacts mitigated to a level of insignificance, significant unavoidable impacts, ' existing City policies and requirements, and mitigation measures. INVENTORY OF IMPACTS FOUND TO BE INSIGNIFICANT ' This summary briefly describes those effects which were determined to be insignificant for all eleven (11) project sites prior to the preparation of the environmental document. 1. The proposed project will not create changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet, or lake. 2. The proposed project will not create any objectionable odors. 3. The proposed project will not alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or result in any change in climate, either locally or regionally. 4. The proposed project will not alter the direction or rate of flow of ground waters. 5. The proposed project will not change the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations. 6. The proposed project will not substantially reduce the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies. 7. The proposed project will not expose people or property to water -related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves. 8. The proposed project will not reduce in acreage any agricultural crop. 9. The proposed project will not result in a substantial alteration of the planned land use of an area. 10. The proposed project will not alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of the area.. 11. The proposed project will not increase the rate of use of any natural resources. 416 �J 12. The proposed project will not substantially deplete any non-renewable natural ' resource. ' 13. The proposed project will not involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions. , 14. The proposed project will not interfere with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan. 15. The proposed project will not result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard. 16. The proposed project will not result in the exposure of people to potential health hazards. 17. The proposed project will not result in the alteration to waterborne, rail or air traffic. 18. The proposed project will not create a significant need for additional maintenance of public facilities. 19. The proposed project will not have an effect upon or result in the need for other governmental services. 20. The proposed project will not result in the use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy. 21. The proposed project will not substantially increase the demand upon existing sources or energy, or require the development of new sources of energy. 22. The proposedproject will not result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities. 23. The proposed project will not result in an adverse physical or aesthetic effect on a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object. 24. The proposed project does not have the potential to cause a physical change that would affect unique ethnic cultural values. 25. The proposed project will not restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area. r 417 IMPACTS MITIGATED TO A LEVEL OF INSIGNIFICANCE ' Impacts associated with the following environmental issues will be mitigated to a level of insignificance upon implementation of applicable standard City policies and requirements and recommended mitigation measures. Transportation/Circulation ' 1. The proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, will not impact peak hour traffic volumes after mitigation. Air Quality 2. The proposed project will not result in significant short-term construction -related impacts after mitigation. 3. The proposed project will not result in significant emissions from mobile (vehicular) sources, combustion of natural gas, on the generation of electric energy after mitigation. ! 4. The proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, will not result in significant short-term construction - related emissions after mitigation. Noise 5. The proposed project will not result in significant short-term noise impacts due to construction and grading activities after mitigation. 6. The proposed project will not exceed acceptable noise levels on -site affecting residential development on the San Diego Creek South, Upper Castaways, Newporter. North, Block 800, and Freeway Reservation sites after mitigation. Biological Resources 7. The proposed project will not result in the significant loss of wetland habitat on the San Diego Creek South, San Diego Creek North, Jamboree/MacArthur, Upper Castaways, Newporter North, and Freeway Reservation sites after mitigation. 8. The proposed project will not result in the significant introduction of light and glare on the San Diego Creek South site which would impact wildlife movement along Bonita Creek and San Diego Creek after mitigation. 418 i 9. The proposed project will not significantly impact the California gnatcatcher habitat on the lower portion of the Bay View Landing site. Earth Resources 10. The proposed project will not result in impacts related to faulting and seismicity after mitigation. 11. The proposed project will not result in impacts related to liquefaction on the San Diego Creek North, San Diego Creek South, Upper Castaways, Bay View Landing, , Newporter North, and Newporter Resort sites after mitigation. 12. The proposed project will not result in impacts related to erosion on any of the eleven (11) sites after mitigation. 13. The proposed project will not result in impacts associated with bluff and slope stability on any of the eleven (11) sites after mitigation. 14. The proposed project will not result in impacts related to compressible/collapsible-soil conditions on any of the eleven (11) sites after mitigation. 15. The proposed project will not result in impacts related to expansive/corrosive soil conditions on any of the eleven (11) sites after mitigation. 16. The proposed project will not result in impacts associated with near surface groundwater potential in the Upper Castaways, Newporter North, Bay View Landing, Newporter Knoll, Newporter Resort, Corporate Plaza West, Block 800, and Freeway Reservation sites after mitigation. Water Resources 17. The proposed project will not result in significant short-term impacts to water quality from construction -related sediment erosion after mitigation. 18. The proposed project will not result in significant impacts due to increased drainage on an already inadequate system after mitigation. 19. The proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, will not have a significant short-term impact on the water quality in Newport Bay due to sediment from construction after mitigation. 419 11 ` Cultural Resources Archaeology 20. The proposed project will not result in significant impacts to unknown archaeological Lresources on any of the eleven (11) sites after mitigation. 21. The proposed project will not result in significant impacts to archaeological resources in the Upper Castaways, Bay View Landing, Newporter North, Newporter Knoll, Block 800, Corporate Plaza West, and Freeway Reservation sites after mitigation. Paleontology 22. The proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects will not result in significant impacts to paleontological resources after mitigation. Public Services and Utilities 23. The proposed project will not result in impacts to school system services, water, law enforcement, or wastewater after mitigation. SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS Impacts associated with the following environmental issues will be mitigated to the extent feasible by the implementation of the applicable standard City policies and requirements and recommended mitigation measures. However, the following issues cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance. Aesthetics/Light and Glare 1. The proposed project will result in the alteration of the natural coastal bluffs due to stabilization for public areas on the Upper Castaways, Bay View Landing, and Newporter North sites. 2. The proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, will result in the loss of vacant/open space areas providing visual relief due to development of sites surrounding Newport Bay. This loss is a significant impact. J 420 I r Transportation/Circulation I 3. The proposed project will add measurable traffic congestion to several intersections ' in the airport area in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects. Air Quality 4. The proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably , foreseeable future project emissions, will contribute to a impact on regional air quality. Bioloev , 5. The proposed project will impact California gnatcatcher habitat in the Bay View Landing and Newporter North sites due to bluff stabilization and remediation and grading related to erosion control and development of open space uses. 6. The proposed project will result in the loss of upland habitat (introduced annual grassland) on the Newporter North site which could potentially result in the elimination of coyotes from all or a portion of the Upper Newport Bay. Water Resources 7. The proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects,, will have an incremental long-term impact on water quality in Newport Bay due to increased urban pollutants. Public Services and Utilities 8. The proposed project will result in an impact on fire protection services. INVENTORY OF RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES , Land Use None necessary. Aestbetics/Llght and Glare 1. In conjunction with site plan review, the project proponent shall prepare a detailed temporary grading and landscape plan for the bluff top setback area for the purpose of minimizing bluff erosion. If graded slopes from a development area extend, into the bluff top setback area, as proposed by the PC Text, the project proponent shall prepare detailed final grading and landscape plans for the bluff top setback area. 421 1 11 The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department, Planning Department, Public Works Department, and Building Department. Transportation/Circulation 2. The City shall prepare a circulation improvement monitoring program to direct expenditures of funds received under the Development Agreement to make improvements and to monitor the status of those improvements. The list of improvements to be implemented shall initially be based on those identified on Table V, with prioritization established based on technical need and ability to implement them in a timely manner. Flexibility to add or delete projects on the list should be maintained to respond to actual changes in traffic volumes and the ability of the City to accomplish improvements so long as the projected Net Benefit to the circulation system is maintained. Thereafter, a review of the improvements' priority and implementation status shall be done in conjunction with the City's annual Congestion Management Program and Growth Management Program analysis and the annual review of the Development Agreement. 3. The applicant or successor in interest shall construct or post bond for all frontage improvements identified in the Development Agreement and listed in Table B of the Program E1R. rAir Ouality 4. All grading related to the project shall be conducted in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. This mitigation measure shall be made a condition of all grading permits related to the project. 5. After clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation operations while construction activities are being conducted, fugitive dust emission shall be controlled using the ' following procedures: • Graded sections of the project that will not be further disturbed or worked on for long periods of time (three months or more) shall be seeded and watered or covered with plastic sheeting to retard wind erosion. • Graded sections of the project which are undergoing further disturbance or construction activities shall be sufficiently watered to prevent excessive amounts of dust. ' These mitigation measures shall be made a condition of all grading permits related to the project. ' 422 6. During grading and construction activities, the applicant shall further control fugitive dust emissions using the following measures: • On -site vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour, Entrances to all on -site roads shall be posted with a sign indicating the maximum speed limits on all unpaved roads. • All areas with vehicle traffic shall be periodically watered. • Streets adjacent to the project site shall be swept as needed to remove silt which may have accumulative from construction activities so as to prevent accumulations of excessive amounts of dust. These mitigation measures shall be made a condition of all grading permits related to the project. 7. Office and commercial development on the Corporate Plaza West and Bay View Landing site shall also participate in the Centerride program currently in operation in the Newport Center area. Evidence of intent to participate shall be provided to the City of Newport Beach Building Department prior to issuance of occupancy permit. 8. Bicycle racks shall be required in accordance with the City of Newport Beach Transportation Demand Ordinance. 9. Construction of related frontage improvements shall include bus turnouts and shelters if determined to be necessary and desirable by the Orange County Transit District and/or the City of Newport Beach. Prior to final design and construction of any frontage improvements, the City of Newport Beach shall contact the Orange County Transit District to determine if any bus turnouts or shelters will be required. 10. All development shall include street and security lighting (in parking lots and pedestrian walkway areas) which is energy conserving. A lighting plan shall be submitted for all development which demonstrates compliance with this measure. The plan shall be reviewed by the Planning Department and approved by the Department of Public Works. 11. Residential, commercial and office development shall be landscaped with an emphasis on drought resistant plant species which will shade buildings and reduce water and energy consumption during the summer. A landscape plan shall be submitted for all development which demonstrates compliance with this measure. The plan shall be reviewed by the Planning Department and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of an occupancy permit. 423 IL L /J r r 1 I I 1 Noise 12. The applicant shall ensure that all residential lots and dwellings are sound attenuated against present and projected noise, which shall be the sum of all noise impacting the project, so as not to exceed an exterior standard of 65 dB CNEL in outdoor living ' areas and an interior standard of 45 dB CNEL in all habitable rooms. Evidence shall be prepared under the supervision of a City certified acoustical consultant which demonstrates that these standards will be satisfied in a manner consistent with ' applicable zoning regulations shall be submitted as follows: A. Prior to the recordation of a final tract/parcel map or prior to the issuance of ' Grading Permits, at the sole discretion of the City, an Acoustical Analysis Report shall be submitted to the City's Advance Planning Manager for approval. The report shall describe in detail the exterior noise environment and preliminary mitigation measures. Acoustical design features to achieve interior noise standards may be included in the report in which case it may also satisfy "B" below. B. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, an acoustical analysis report 1 describing the acoustical design features of the structures required to satisfy the exterior and interior noise standards shall be submitted to the Advance Planning Manager for approval along with satisfactory evidence which ' indicates that the sound attenuation measures specified in the approved acoustical report(s) have been incorporated into the design of the project. C. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, all freestanding acoustical barriers must be shown on the projects plot plan illustrating height, location and construction in a manner meeting the approval of the City's Advance Planning Manager. ' D. Prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Use and Occupancy, field testing in accordance with Title 25 regulations may be required by the Planning Director to verify compliance with STC and IIC design standards. ' 13. All non-residential structures shall be sound attenuated against the combined impact of all present and projected noise from exterior noise sources to meet the interior noise criteria as specified in the Noise Element. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, evidence shall be prepared under the supervision of a 'City certified acoustical consultant that these standards will be satisfied and shall be submitted to the Manager, Advance Planning in the form of an Acoustical Analysis Report describing in detail the exterior noise environment and the acoustical design features required to achieve the interior noise standard and 424 I I which indicate that the sound attenuation measures specified have been incorporated , into the design of the project. 14. All freestanding acoustical barriers shall be a berm, wall or combination berm and wall. Walls shall not contain holes or gaps. Walls shall be constructed of slumpstone or other masonry material. Final acoustical barrier heights and locations shall be , determined when final grading plans are developed showing lot locations, house/building setbacks and precise pad elevation. Biological Resources 15. Pursuant to Section 1601-1603 of the State of California Fish and Game Code, the California Department of Fish and Game shall be notified of any alterations to streambed habitats. The applicant or.any successors in interest shall be responsible for notifying the Department of Fish and Game regarding any grading related to residential development and associated improvements on the San Diego Creek South, Upper Castaways, Newporter North, and Freeway Reservation sites which would alter streambed habitats. The applicant or any successor in interest shall notify the ' Department of Fish and Game and obtain any necessary permit prior to the issuance of a grading permit.. Copies of proper notification and necessary permits shall be provided to the City of Newport Beach prior to issuance of a grading permit. The ' City of Newport Beach shall be responsible for notifying the Department of Fish and Game regarding any grading related to any public improvements (e.g. trails, recreational facilities, roads, drainage facilities, etc.) in areas designated for open space, public facilities, and/or parks which would alter streambed habitats. The City of Newport Beach shall notify the Department of Fish and Game and obtain any necessary permits prior to commencement of any grading which could alter the streambed habitat. The permits issued by the Department of Fish and Game pursuant to Sections 1601-1603 may require additional mitigation measures deemed necessary by the Department. 16. Wetland delineation studies in accordance and conjunction with the California Department of Fish and Game and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permitting processes shall be performed for any wetland which will be impacted by grading and construction activities. The applicant or any successor in interest shall be responsible for conducting the wetland delineation studies for wetlands impacted by residential development or associated improvements on the Newporter North and Upper Castaways sites. If residential development or associated improvements on the San Diego Creek South or Freeway Reservation sites encroach into the Bonita Creek wetland, the applicant or any successor in interest shall be responsible for conducting the wetland delineation study. The City of Newport Beach shall be responsible for conducting the wetland delineation studies for wetlands impacted by any public improvements/facilities in areas designated for open space, public facilities, and/or parks which will encroach into wetlands. The studies shall occur at the time specific 425 I I I I I I I site plans and grading plans are available and prior to issuance of any grading permits or commencement of grading activities in areas containing wetland habitat. 17. Public use and related facility development for areas proposed for natural open space and passive park uses within the Upper Castaways, Newporter North, Newporter Knoll, Bay View Landing, Freeway Reservation, and Jamboree/MacArthur sites shall be designed to be sensitive to existing biological resources. To this end, facility plans and public uses for these areas shall be prepared in consultation with a qualified biologist who shall determine that such plans and uses do not adversely impact sensitive resources identified on these sites (e.g. wetlands, coastal sage scrub, etc.). If necessary, additional environmental documentation shall be prepared at the time facility plans are prepared to determine if significant adverse impacts beyond those anticipated in this Program EIR will occur. If new significant adverse impacts are identified, additional mitigation measures shall be adopted. 18. Grading, earthmoving, and any related construction activities related to residential development and associated improvements on the Upper Castaways, San Diego Creek South, Bay View Landing, and Newporter North sites shall be restricted as follows: Upper Castaways and Newporter North - No grading (except that necessary for trail establishment and improvements, erosion control or bluff stabilization), stockpiling of soil or operation of equipment shall take place within the bluff top setback area established by the Bluff Top setback Ordinance. San Diego Creek South - No grading, stockpiling of soils, or operation of equipment shall encroach into the area of Bonita Creek beyond the existing 15 foot elevation contour. Newporter North - No grading, stockpiling of soils or operation of equipment shall take place below the existing 60 foot elevation contour surrounding the John Wayne Gulch freshwater marsh. Bay View Landing - no grading, stockpiling of soil or operation of equipment shall encroach into the hillside above the 25-foot contour of the lower. development area. 19. Prior to grading and/or constructing any public facility on the San Diego Creek North site which will encroach into the on -site freshwater marsh, the City of Newport Beach (or other public 'agency responsible for development of the public facility) shall approve and begin implementation of a plan which shall offset the loss of wetlands. This plan shall reflect all mitigation requirements of any State or Federal agency having jurisdiction over the affected wetlands. Offsets shall be achieved by either creating a new freshwater marsh on -site or enhancing and expanding an existing freshwater marsh in or near the San Diego Creek and Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. 20. Prior to grading and%r construction any residential development or associated improvement on the Upper Castaways site which will encroach into the on -site freshwater marsh, the applicant or successor in interest shall prepare and begin implementation of a plan which shall offset the loss of wetlands. This plan shall 426 reflect all mitigation requirements of any State or Federal agency having jurisdiction ' over the affected wetlands. Offsets shall be achieved by either creating a new freshwater marsh on -site or enhancing and expanding an existing freshwater marsh in or near the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. A copy of the plan and all ' related permits shall be presented to the City of Newport Beach prior to issuance of a grading permit. ' 21. Prior to grading and/or constructing any residential development or associated improvement on the Newporter North site which will encroach into the on -site freshwater marsh, the applicant or successor in interest shall prepare and begin implementation of a plan which shall. offset the loss of wetlands. This plan shall reflect all mitigation requirements of any State or Federal agency having jurisdiction ' over the affected wetlands. Offsets shall be achieved by either creating a new freshwater marsh on -site or enhancing and expanding an existing freshwater marsh in or near the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve. A copy of the plan and all related permits shall be presented to the City of Newport Beach prior to issuance of a grading permit. 22. Development on the San Diego Creek South site shall be designed so as to reduce the amount of light and glare which could potentially spill over into the wetland habitats of Bonita Creek and San Diego Creek. This can be achieved by a variety ' of means including a combination of sensitive siting of lighted buildings; use of lighting systems which conceal the light source and minimise light spillage and glare; screening walls/berms; and .dense landscaping along the edge of the development. ; Any landscaped edge screening shall include non-invasive trees and shrubs. The plant palette for the screening vegetation shall consist of dense, evergreen species which, when mixed, achieve canopy and understory of elements to provide as much screening as possible. The site plan and landscape plan for this edge shall be prepared in consultation with a City -approved, qualified biologist. The site plan and landscape plan shall be approved by the City Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits. 23. Prior to commencing grading, all wetlands habitat in areas intended for preservation ' shall be temporarily fenced. This measure shall pertain only when grading, stock- piling, or other construction activities are proposed within 100 feet of the boundaries of the wetland area. A plan identifying the wetland area and the location of the ' fencing shall be submitted to the City of Newport Beach prior to issuance of any grading permit. 24. This measure shall apply to the Newporter North, Newporter Knoll, Bay View Landing, Upper Castaways, San Diego Creek South and San Diego 'Creek North sites. Revegetation of cut and fill slopes, bluff stabilization/remediation areas, fuel modification zones and other graded areas adjacent to existing sensitive habitat areas (e.g. at the edge of development residential, public facilities, or recreational areas) 427 11 J I 11 LJ IJ J QI I shall be accomplished with plant palettes containing predominantly native species. Steeper slopes (greater than 2:1) shall be revegetated with a mixture of coastal sage scrub species including California sage brush which now dominates coastal sage scrub used by California gnatcatchers. Portions of more level areas shall be revegetated with species of native perennial grasses in an attempt to establish native grassland. An expert in landscape revegetation, who is knowledgeable and qualified in native plant mixtures shall provide consultation into the preparation of landscape plans to ensure that this measure is complied with. Landscape plans shall be approved by the City Planning Department prior to issuance of building permits for private development or commencement of grading for public facilities and public recreational uses. 25. All non -emergency grading related to bluff stabilization/remediation on the Newporter North and Bay View Landing sites shall occur during the non -breeding season for the California gnatcatcher. The non -breeding season is from August 1 to January 31. Earth Resources Faulting and Seismicity 26. Buildings four stories in height or higher shall be designed in accordance with requirements for seismic zone 4 as outlined in Chapter 23 of the Uniform Building Code and/or with the benefit of a site specific seismic ground response spectrum study which would be prepared by the project geotechnical consultant and structural engineer to allow matching of building period with site period. The structural plans and/or ground response study shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Building Department prior to issuance of a building permit. 27. Buildings less than four stories in height shall be designed by a Structural Engineer in accordancewith UBC Chapter 23 requirements for Seismic Zone 4. Non -critical structures shall be designed to withstand strong ground shaking that may accompany a maximum probable earthquake along the Newport -Inglewood Fault. Critical structures (i.e., hospitals, fire/police facilities, schools, etc.) shall be designed to withstand strong ground shaking associated with a maximum credible earthquake on the Newport -Inglewood Fault. Structural plans, including seismic design calculations/parameters, shall be approved by the City Building Department prior to issuance of building permits. 28. Habitable buildings shall not be placed adjacent to (above or below) slopes or bluffs where seismic induced slope or bluff failure could occur. Though the City has established a Bluff Setback Criteria for development on the top -of -bluff (Development Policy D.2.b.1 of the Newport Beach General Plan, January 21,1991, and Newport Municipal Code section 20.151.080), the City minimum setbacks may WJ r not necessarily be adequate from a geotechnical viewpoint concerning bluff/slope instability during an earthquake. Areas potentially prone to such failures shall be identified and further evaluated by the project Geotechnical Consultant during the ' Tentative Tract Map review and Grading Plan review stage. The evaluation shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Building Department prior to the issuance of grading permits. Grading and building plans shall reflect,the recommendations of the evaluation to the satisfaction of the Building Department. 29. In accordance with the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act, a Registered Geologist shall further evaluate and make recommendations regarding the potential for ground surface rupture effecting proposed development on -sites where "Potentially Active Faults" have been identified (Bay View Landing and Freeway Reservation sites) or on any other of the sites where Potentially Active Faults are identified in the future. The study shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City Building Department and shall be prepared prior to approval of a tentative tract map or grading permit whichever comes first. Grading and building plans shall reflect the recommendations of the study to the satisfaction of the Building Department. Liquefaction 30. Sites where the potential for liquefaction has been identified, or any other site where the potential for liquefaction may be encountered during subsequent investigations, shall be further evaluated by a geotechnical consultant. The evaluation shall include subsurface investigation with standard penetration testing or other appropriate means of analysis for liquefaction potential. The project geotechnical consultant shall provide a statement concerning the potential for liquefaction and its possible impact on proposed development. If necessary, the geotechnical consultant shall provide mitigation measures which could include mechanical densification of liquefiable layers, dewatering, fill surcharging or other appropriate measures. The Geotechnicai Consultant's report shall be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and a Registered Civil Engineer and shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Building Department prior to issuance of Grading Permit. Grading and building plans shall reflect the recommendations of the study to the satisfaction of the Building Department. Erosion r 31. Any necessary, diversion devices, catchment devices, or velocity reducers shall be incorporated into the grading plan and approved by the City Grading Engineer prior r to issuance of grading permits. Berms or other catchment devices shall be incorporated into the grading plans to divert sheet flow runoff away from areas which have been stripped of natural vegetation. Velocity reducers shall be incorporated into the design, especially where drainage devices exit to natural ground. 429 11 32. All fill slopes shall be properly compacted during grading in conformance with the City Grading Code and verified by the project Geotechnical Consultant. Slopes shall ' be planted with vegetation upon completion of grading. Conformance with this measure shall be verified by the City Grading Engineer prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. 33. Berms and brow ditches shall be constructed to the satisfaction and approval of the City Grading Engineer. Water shall not be allowed to drain over any manufactured ' slope face. Top -of -slope soil berms shall be incorporated into grading plans to prevent surface runoff from draining over future fill slopes. Brow ditches shall be incorporated into grading plans to divert surficial runoff from ungraded natural areas ' around future cut slopes. The design of berms and brow ditches shall be approved by the City Grading Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. 34. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, appropriate artificial substances shall be recommended by the project landscape architect and approved by the City Grading Engineer for use in reducing surface erosion until permanent landscaping is well established. Upon completion of grading, stripped areas shall be covered with artificial substances approved by the City Grading Engineer. ' 35. Drainage of both surface and subsurface water over or toward the bluffs on the Upper Castaways and Newporter North sites shall be minimized. Though some drainage of rainwater over the bluff face cannot be avoided, drainage control devices shall be designed to direct excess water from site improvements away from the bluff face. Irrigation shall be controlled to prevent excessive infiltration into the subsurface. The project Civil Engineer shall design grading plans to minimize surface ' runoff over the bluff faces. The project Geotechnical Consultant shall provide recommendations to minimize subsurface water migration toward the bluff faces prior to approval of Tentative Tract maps or site plans. All design criteria for the control of surficial and subsurface water shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City �1 Grading Engineer. ' Bluff and Slope Instability 36. The project geotechnical consultant shall review the tentative tract map and grading ' plan for each site and prepare a report addressing all salient geotechnical issues related to bluff and slope stability of any existing bluff or slopes. These reports shall include: 1) detailed analysis of field data including surface and subsurface geological mapping; 2) laboratory testing results; 3) stability analysis of existing bluffs and • proposed slopes as illustrated on the tentative tract map or rough grading plan; 4) conclusions; 5) recommendations for mitigation of any identified unstable bluffs or slopes and/or for additional investigation. These reports shall be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and a Registered Civil Engineer and shall be ' completed to the satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. 430 I 37. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Project geotechnical consultant and/or ' civil engineer shall make written recommendations for manufactured slope stabilization including, but not limited to, buttressing, rock bolting, grouting, slope ' gradient laybacks, or retaining walls. All necessary recommendations shall be included in the grading plan to the satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer. 38. Though the City has established a Bluff Setback Criteria for development on the top - of -bluff (Development' Policy D.2.b.1 of the Newport Beach General Plan, January 21,1991, and Newport Beach Municipal Code section 20.151.080), the City minimum , setbacks may not necessarily be adequate from a geotechnical viewpoint concerning bluff/slope instability. Prior to issuance of grading permits, appropriate safe bluff top setback recommendations shallbe determined by the project Geotechnical Consultant ' based on the evaluation required by Mitigation Measure 3 to the satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer. 39. During grading a geotechnical consultant shall be monitor grading operations to ensure that recommendations for slope instability mitigation are implemented. Additionally, the geotechnical consultant shall evaluate slopes as they are graded through geologic mapping and analysis to ensure that no unanticipated conditions are present. Slope stability mitigation recommendations may require modification during grading. Compliance with this measure shall be verified by the Building Department. 40. Prior to issuance of building permits, the geotechnical consultant shall prepare a Rough Grading Report and As -Graded GeotechnicalMap for each graded site at the , completion of grading of that site. The Report shall summarize and document compliance with all mitigation measures. The Rough Grading Report shall include a statement regarding the adequacy of the manufactured slopes for their intended use and a statement regarding the adequacy of the recommended bluff setbacks. The report shall be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and a Registered Civil Engineer and Shall be approved by the City Grading Engineer. Compressible/Collapsible Soil 41. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, written recommendations for the mitigation of compressible/collapsible soil' potential for each site shall be provided by the geotechnical 'consultant. Foundation recommendations shall be included. Recommendations shall be incorporated as conditions of approval for the site -specific tentative tract maps and grading plans to the satisfaction of the City Grading , Engineer. Recommendations shall be based on surface and subsurface mapping, laboratory testing and analysis. Mitigation, if necessary, could include: removal and recompaction of identified compressible/collapsible zones, fill surcharging and ' settlement monitoring, compaction grouting, or foundation design which utilizes deep piles, or other recommended measures. The geotechnical consultant's site -specific reports shall be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and Registered Civil , Engineer, and.shall be approved by the City Grading Engineer. 431 1 ' Expansive/Corrosive Soil 42. Written recommendations for the mitigation of expansive and corrosive soil potential for each site, shall be provided by the project corrosion consultant, geotechnical consultant and/or Civil engineer. Foundation recommendations shall be included. ' Recommendations shall be based on surface and subsurface mapping, laboratory testing and analysis and shall be incorporated into final building plans prior to issuance of building permits. The geotechnical consultant's site -specific reports shall be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and Registered City Engineer, and shall be approved by the City Grading Engineer. Near Surface Groundwater 43. The project geotechnical consultant and/or civil engineer shall prepare written site - specific reviews of the tentative tract maps and grading plans addressing all salient geotechnical issues, including groundwater. These reports shall provide findings, conclusions and recommendations regarding near -surface groundwater and the ' potential for artificially induced groundwater as a result of future development, and the effects groundwater may have on existing or future bluffs, slopes and structures. ' The reports shall also address the potential for ground subsidence on the sites and properties adjacent to the sites if dewatering is recommended. The geotechnical consultant and/or civil engineer's reports shall be signed by a Certified Engineering Geologist and Registered Civil Engineer and shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. ' Water Resources Water Quality 44. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall provide to the Building and Public Works Departments haul route plans that include a description of haul ' routes, access points to the sites and watering and sweeping program designed to minimise impacts of the haul operation. These plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. Copies of the plans shall be submitted to the ' City's Planning Department. 45. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall incorporate the following erosion control methods into grading plans and operations to the satisfaction of the City Grading Engineer and Building Department. ' a. An approved material such as straw, wood chips, plastic or similar materials shall be used to stabilize graded areas prior to revegetation or construction. ' 432 b. Air -borne and vehicle -borne sediment shall be controlled during construction ' by: the regular sprinkling of exposed soils; and the moistening of vehicles loads. C. As approved material such as rip rap (a ground cover of large, loose, angular stones) shall be used to stabilize any slopes with seepage problems to protect the top soils in areas of concentrated runoff. d. During the period of construction activity, existing vegetation which will be retained on -site shall he protected from traffic by the use of fences. Tf appropriate, buffer strips or vegetative filter strips, such as tall stands of grass, can be used as an alternative and/or supplementary method to protect against ' sediment buildup. 46. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project geotechnical consultant and/or civil engineer shall develop a plan for the diversion of stormwater away from any exposed slopes during grading and construction activities. The plan shall include the use of temporary right-of-way diversions (i.e., berms or swales) located at disturbed areas or graded right-of-ways. The plan will be approved by the City Engineer and Building Departments and implemented during grading and construction activities. 47. The applicant shall provide a temporary gravel entrance located at every construction , site entrance. -The location of this entrance shall be incorporated into grading plans prior to the issuance of grading permits. To reduce or eliminate mud and sediment carried by vehicles or runoff onto public rights -of -way, the gravel shall cover the entire width of the entrance, and its length shall be no less than fifty feet. The ' entrance plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and Grading Engineer concurrent with review and approval of grading plans. 48. The applicant shall construct filter berms -or other approved devise for the temporary gravel entrance. The berms shall consist of a ridge of gravel placed across graded right-of-ways to decrease and filter runoff levels while permitting construction traffic ' to continue. The location of berms shall be incorporated into grading plans prior to the issuance of grading permits. The plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Grading Engineer. 49. During grading and construction, the applicant shall provide a temporary sediment basin located at the point of greatest runoff from any construction area. The location of this basin shall be incorporated into grading plans. It shall consist of an embankment of compacted soils across a drainage. The basin shall not be located in an area where its failure would lead to a loss of life or the loss of service of public , utilities or roads. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Grading Engineer. 433 Drainage Patterns ' 50. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the master plans of water, sewer and storm drain facilities shall be approved by the City Engineer. Any systems shown to be required by the review shall be the responsibility of the developer, unless otherwise provided for through an agreement with the property owner or serving Agency. Housin 1 No mitigation measures are necessary. Cultural Resources Archaeology ALL PROJECT SITES ' 51. All sites shall be mitigated pursuant to Council Policy K-5. Where further testing or salvage is required, the applicant shall select a City -approved qualified archaeologist to excavate a sample of the site. All testing and salvage shall be conducted prior to ' issuance of grading permits or use of an area for recreational purposes. A written report summarizing the findings of the testing and data recovery program shall be submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of the completed data recovery program. ' 52. The applicant shall donate all archaeological material, historic, or prehistoric, recovered during the project, to a local institution which has the proper facilities for curation, display and study by qualified scholars. All material shall be transferred to the approved facility after laboratory analysis and a report have been completed. The appropriate local institution shall be approved by the Planning Department based on a recommendation from the qualified archaeologist. i 53. Any excavation of a site located within the Coastal zone of more than two surface meters of dirt shall require a coastal development permit prior to commencing the ' excavation. All provisions of the California Coastal Commission guidelines shall be complied with. UPPER CASTAWAYS 54. Prior to any grading related to development of the bluff trail system, open space uses or bluff stabilization which could impact CA-Ora-49 and CA-Ora-186 on the Upper Castaways site, the sites shall be subjected to test excavations by a City approved archaeologist (experienced in both historic and pre -historic archaeology) to determine site integrity, extent and significance. The methodology of the test excavation shall ' 434 reflect the recommendations contained in the Cultural Resources report prepared for r this Program EIR. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and recommendations and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of ' completing test excavations. BAY VIEW LANDING ' 55. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, CA-Ora-1098 shall be surface collected and subjected to test excavations by a City approved archaeologist to determine site ' integrity, extent and significance. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing test excavations. 56. Prior to grading for the new park, the project sponsor shall retain a City approved r' archaeologist to conduct a surface collection and subsurface test excavation of CA Ora-66 to determine site extent, integrity and significance. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing test excavations. 57. Prior to grading for the view park, the project sponsor shall retain a City approved archaeologist to place a test unit on top of the knoll on the Bay View Landing site in the area containing shell scatter, to determine if the shell is representative of a subsurface archaeological deposit. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings, and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing the test excavation. NEWPORTER NORTH 58. Prior to the use or development of the open space areas for passive recreational uses, ' CA-Ora-51 and CA-Ora-518 on the Newporter North site shall be surface collected and subjected to test excavations to determine site extent and significance. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning, Department within 90 days of completing test excavations. 59. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall conduct a surface ' collection of the eastern extension of CA-0ra-100 which would be impacted by ' grading and/or development of residential uses. The surface collection shall be conducted by a city approved archaeologist. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings of the surface collection and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing the surface collection. 60. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant conduct a data recovery of program CA Ora-64 on the Newporter North site. The program shall be conducted by a City approved archaeologist. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings 435 ' 1 1J I I I and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing the data recovery program. 61. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for residential development or any bluff stabilization, a qualified archaeologist shall review grading and drainage plans to determine if there are any indirect or direct impacts to CA-Ora-51, 52 and 518. If impacts are identified, test excavations shall be conducted to determine site extent, integrity and significance. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing test excavations. NEWPORTER KNOLL 62. Prior to any grading or use of the site, the City shall conduct a surface collection of archaeological material present on the top of the hill of the Newporter Knoll, with test units placed on the hill to determine site significance and boundaries. One unit shall be placed in the recorded area of CA-Ora-50 to determine if a portion of the site still exists. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing surface collection test excavation. � 63. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit a qualified City approved archaeologist shall conduct a surface collection of CA-Ora-136 on the Block 800 site and subject the site to test excavations to determine site extent and significance. A test unit shall also be placed in the northern portions of the parcel to determine if a sub -surface midden is under the asphalt and trash. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing test excavations. CORPORATE PLAZA WEST 64. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a City approved qualified archaeologist shall dig post holes in the areas containing surface shell on the Corporate Plaza West site to determine if the shell represents sub -surface archaeological deposits. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing sub -surface testing. 65. Prior to the issuance of grading permit, the surface near the southern section of the property shall be examined by a City approved qualified archaeologist after removal of brush and prior to any ground disturbance. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing the surface examination. 436 11 E FREEWAY RESERVATION ' 66. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the northern development area (Lot 2), a ' City approved qualified archaeologist shall examine the surface of areas previously identified as CA-Ora-216. The examination shall be conducted after removal of brush but prior to grading. A report shall be prepared detailing all findings and ' submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days of completing the surface examination. Paleontology , 67. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a collection plan shall be prepared and ' implemented by a City approved, qualified paleontological monitor for known exposed fossil localities on Bay View Landing, Newporter North, and Upper Castaways. Because of the small nature of some fossils present in these rock units, matrix samples shall be collected for processing through fine mesh screens. The collection plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. 68. Prior to the issuance of .grading permits, the applicant shall make provisions for the preparation and curation of all fossils possibly recovered from the sites during grading. This shall be done in a manner approved by the City's Planning , Department. 69. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall identify a repository , approved by the City's Planning Department which shall receive all fossils collected from the sites. 70. 'Cliff faces along Upper Newport Bay that have served as a reference section for , micro -paleontological studies should be protected from alteration. If bluffs along Newport Bay need to be altered for bluff stabilization purposes, detailed measured sections and samples shall be made before and after alteration. Samples shall be prepared and analyzed as part of these efforts. The City of Newport Beach shall be , responsible for retaining a qualified paleontologist .to conduct the comparative study and sampling. A report shall be submitted to the Planning Department within 90 days. ' Public Services and Utilities Fire Protection No mitigation measures are proposed. ' 437 I ' Law Enforcement ' 71. The project proponent shall work in conjunction with the City of Newport Beach Police Department to ensure that crime prevention features are included in building design and construction. The City of Newport Beach Police Department shall review all site plans and access plans. Water ' 72. Prior to issuance of grading permits for the development sites, the applicant shall be responsible for preparation of a Master Plan of Utilities. The Master Plan of ' Utilities will determine any necessary expansion of facilities and/or any modifications, upgrades or extensions to the existing water systems resulting from this project. All necessary expansions of facilities and/or upgrades or extensions of existing water ' systems needed as a result of the project will be the responsibility of the developer, unless current district or City policies dictate otherwise. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. ' Wastewater ' 73. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the developer will provide a Master Plan of Utilities facilities for the on -site development in order to determine the exact ' necessary modifications or extensions to the existing sewer systems, if needed. All necessary expansions of facilities and/or upgrades or extensions of existing water systems needed as a result of the project will be the responsibility of the developer, ' unless current district or City policies dictate otherwise. The Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. ' Water Disposal No additional mitigation measures are necessary. iNatural Gas/Electricity No additional mitigation measures are necessary. Parks and Recreation iNo additional mitigation measures are necessary. School System No additional mitigation measures are necessary. 438 I Library No mitigation measures are necessary. Telephone No mitigation measures are necessary. 597 L X. REPORT PREPARATION RESOURCES PREPARERS AND CONTRIBUTORS TO TEE REPORT Preparers ASB Planning, Inc. STA Planning, Inc. 1 1 ' Contributors F Fred Talarico Jayna Miller Debbie Pollart Sheri Provost Jaime Maldonado Kelly Woodyard Michael Years Sally Salavea Laurie Bohannon Kyle van Hoften Transportation/Circulation Air Quality/Noise Biological Resources Earth Resources Cultural Resources M Annette Sanchez Baesel Richard Flint Anna Pehoushek Tamara Ward Steve Lippman Dianne Stevens Rhonda Christenson Amy Gretencort Karen Mikkelsen Dianne Mello Deborah Mejia Mimi Rebagliati Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. - Terry Austin - Denise Gemma Mestre Greve Associates, Inc. - Fred Greve - Martin Beal - William Bloomer Steve G. Nelson Zeiser Geotechnical, Inc. - Dennis Hannan - Jules Darras RMW Paleo Associates - Diana Weir - Ronald Bissell - Joan C. Brown PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED DURING THE PREPARATION OF THE REPORT City of Newnort Beach Advance Planning Manager Patricia Temple Traffic Engineer Rich Edmonston City Engineer Don Webb Parks & Recreation Jack Brooks Police Department Lt. Tim Newman Fire Department Ray Brown, Fire Marshall Utilities Department Dick Hoffstadt Public Library La Donna Kienitz General Services Department Dave Niederhaus, Director Other Agencies and Oreanizations County Sanitation District No. 5 Charles F. Winsor Newport -Mesa Unified School District Irvine Ranch Water District Pacific Bell Southern California Gas Co. Southern California Edison Co. County of Orange City of Huntington Beach Transportation Corridor Agencies 441 Tom Dawes Dale C. Woolley, Director Gregory D. Heiertz John McAlpine Angie Wenners R. B. Harris C. H. Cartwright Kari Rigoni Julie Osugi Steve Letterly SCAG Irvine Company - Irvine Pacific City of Irvine 442 Paul Hatanaka Tom Redwitz Mike Ericson Sat Tamarabuchi Steve Weiss Peter Hersh I DEFINITIONS I Ambient Standards - ' Adopted standards pertaining to outdoor conditions such as air quality and noise. Community Plan - A specialized plan that addresses a particular region or community within the overall planning area. A focussed planning policy document that is part of the general plan, and is adopted in the same manner as a general plan amendment. Compatibility - t The ability of projects, land use, etc, to exist together in close proximity without conflict. Compliance - A willingness to follow or consent to a jurisdiction's guidelines, regulations or restrictions. , Development Agreement - ' A long-term contract between a developer and local government that secures the developer's , vested rights. The intent of the Development Agreement is to provide security for both sides. Specifically the Agreement defines a development agreement, in accordance with State (Government Code Section 65864 et seq.) and local law (Chapter 15.45) which , authorize binding agreements that; (i) encourage investment in, and commitment to, comprehensive planning and public facilities financing; (ii) strengthen the public planning process and encourage private implementation of the local general plan; (iii) provide , certainty in the approval of projects in order to avoid waste of time and resources; and (iv) reduce the economic costs of development by providing assurance to the property owners that it may proceed with its projects in accordance with existing policies, rules, and ' regulations. Entitlement - ' A given right to develop an area of land or piece of property. Fair -Share Fee Ordinance - ' Chapter 15.88 of City Municipal Code requires contribution of funds for- completion of ' Master Plan of Streets and Highways for all new development. 443 1 ' Housing Element - ' A State mandated element of the General Plan consisting of an identification and analysis of existing and projected housing, needs and a statement of goals, policies, quantified objectives, and schedules programs for the preservation, improvement, and development of housing within a city. Land Use Element - A State mandated element of the General Plan which designates the proposed general distribution and location and extent of the uses of the land for housing, business, industry, ' open space, including agriculture, natural resources, recreation, and enjoyment of scenic beauty, education, public buildings and grounds, solid and liquid waste disposal facilities and other categories of public and private uses of land. ' Lead Agency - ' The public agency which has the principal responsibility of for carrying out or approving a project which may have a significant effect upon the environment. Level of Significance - ' The degree to which a proposed action has a substantial or potentially substantial, adverse change in the physical conditions within the area are affected by the project. ' Local Coastal Plan (LCP) - A land use plan designed to incorporate State coastal policies, as defined by the California ' Coastal Commission, into local planning efforts. Upon certification of the LCP by the Coastal Commission, development permit authority is generally returned to the city or county in question. ' Mitigation - A measure which will avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects of a proposed project (Public Resources Code 21002). Municipal Code - A set of guidelines that regulate development and other actions within a community. 444 r I Open Space - I Land within an urbanized area which is usually devoted to conservation or outdoor ' recreation. Open space need not be "natural". Park - I An area of land belonging to the government preserved in its natural state and accessible to the public, Park Dedication Ordinance - Chapter 19.50 of City Municipal Code sets forth requirements for park dedication in new , residential subdivisions. Planned Community Regulations (PC) Text - ' Regulations which provide for the classification and development of parcels of land as , coordinated, comprehensive projects so as to take advantage of the superior environment which can result from large-scale community planning. In the City of Newport Beach ' Zoning Ordinance, the "PC" designation "(p)rovides for development of land uses as coordinated comprehensive projects." Program EIR - , An EIR which is prepared on a series of actions that can be characterized as one large ' project and are related. Recreation and Open Space Element - ' An optional element of the General Plan that addresses the existing parks, playgrounds, fields, bicycle paths and any other recreational opportunities found within the jurisdiction. , Responsible Agency - A public agency, other than the lead agency which has a responsibility for carrying out or ' approving a project. Specific Plan - ' A general plan implementation tool that is not part of the general plan. A hybrid policy statement that is often used to address a single project such as urban infill or a planned community. Its emphasis is on concrete standards and development criteria to supplement those of the General Plan. ' 445 'J I 1 C' Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) - Chapter 15.40 of City Municipal Code which sets forth requirements relative to the assessment of intersection impacts for new development. Transportation/Circulation Element - A State mandated element of the General Plan that consists of the general location and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, and other local public utilities and facilities, all correlated with the land uses element of the plan. Trustee Agency - A state agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affect by a project which are held in trust for the people of the State of California. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Category 2 Candidate - Species for which existing information indicates it may warrant listing as threatened or endangered, but for which substantial biological information to support a listing is lacking. Vacant - Land that is unused and unoccupied, yet may hold potential for development. Vesting - To create an irrevocable entitlement to a privilege or right to develop an area of land or piece of property. Zoning - A method of regulating land use by dividing the community into districts or zones and specifying the uses which are to be permitted and or prohibited within each district. 446 SOURCES CONSULTED I Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. October 20, 1984. Traffic Report, The Irvine Company ' Undeveloped Parcels, Newport Beach, CA. The Butler/Roach Group, Inc., August 1988. General Plan Update, City of Newport Beach ' (GPA 87-1). Draft Environmental Impact Report, SCN 88051825. The Butler/Roach Group, Inc., October 1988. General Plan Update (GPA 87-1), Final ' Environmental Impact Report. City of Newport Beach. Caltrans, Federal Highway Administration and Corridor Agencies, July, 1990, ' Chambers Group, Inc. June 1990. Final Test Investigation Report and Request for ' Determination of Eligibility for 23 sites along the SJHTC. Converse Consultants, August 1982. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation - Proposed ' Castaways Commercial Site. Newoort Beach. California. GeoSoils, Inc., February 4, 1991. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Newporter North , tlevA1nnmPnt Arwa r4u of Wpa tmnrt Linonl, rnlifnrnia GeoSoils, Inc., June 6, 1989. Addition] Geotechnical Information Lot 10, Tract 12309 Bay ' Pointe Condominiums. City of Newport Beach, California. GeoSoils, Inc., February 13, 1989. Geotechnical Investigation Lot 10, Tract 12309 Bay t Ibid. Technical Report No. 4. Noise Impact Study. Ibid. Technical Report _No. 2, Hvdroloeical Technical Studies. Ibid. Technical Report No. 5, Biological Technical Studies. Ibid. Comments on May 1. 1990, Pre Draft. Ibid. Technical Report No. 3. Air Quality Study. Leighton and Associates, August 1982. and Associates, May 25, 1990. Geotechnical Investigation and Site Plan Review 447 I LSA, Inc., November 1981. Final EIR GPA 80-3 City of Newport Beach, CA, Book 2: ' LSA, Inc., November 1981. Final EIR GPA 80-3 City of Newport Beach, CA, Book 3. LSA, Inc., November 1981. Final EIR GPA 80-3 Cijy of Newport Beach CA, Book 1. LSA, Inc., September 1983. Draft Focused Environmental Impact Report, North Ford/San Diejzo Creek Sites Newport Beach CA, GPA 82-1 SCN 83032505. 1 LSA, Inc., February 1983. Draft EIR Castaways Planned Communiz Newport Beach, CA, Vol. II Appendices. 1 LSA, Inc., October 1983. Final Focused Environmental Impact Report, North Ford/San Diego Creek Sites GPA 82-1, SCN 83032505 Vol I. LSA, Inc., February 1983. Draft EIR Castaways Planned CommuniZ Newport Beach, CA, Vol. I. ' LSA, Inc., August 1990. San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor Draft Environmental 1 Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration and San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor Aeenm Orange County, California. 1 LSA, Inc., October 1991. Hoag Hospital Master Plan Draft EIR, City of Newport Beach, California. Marie E. Gilliam Associates, AICP, Urban Planning, July 1985. Initial Study for The Newporter Inn Expansion Cit of f New ort Beach California. ' Marie E. Gilliam Associates, AICP, Urban Planning, March 1991. Initial Study for the Library Exchange Agreement City of Newport Beach California. Michael Brandman Associates, August 1991. Castaways Marina Draft Environmental Impact Report Cijy of Newport Beach California. ' City of Newport Beach, General Plan Review, ^October 1983. Undeveloped Parcels of the City of Newport Beach, Prepared October 1980. Undeveloped Parcels, City of Newer Beach. City of Newport Beach, January 1983. Draft EIS Pacific Coast Highway Improvement Project, Newport Beach, CA, SCN 8-121179. ' 448 Ll City of Newport Beach, Final EIS/Response to Comments, Pacific Coast Highway City of Newport Beach, March 27, 1991. Newport Center - Library Exchange. ' City of Newport Beach, December 1984. Final Environmental Impact Statement, Pacific Coast Highway Improvement Project, Newport Beach, CA, SCN 80121179. 11 City of Newport Beach Planning Department, October 1988. Land Use Element. City of Newport Beach General Plan, Resolution No 88-100 City of Newport Beach Planning Department, July 1989. Housing Element (includes Vacant �! Parcels Inventorv), Citv of Newoort Beach General Plan, Resolution No. 89-80. City of Newport Beach Planning Department, October 1974. Noise Element, City of r` Newport Beach, General Plan, Resolution No 83-66. 1 City of Newport Beach Planning Department, March 1975. Public Safety Element, City of Newoort Beach -General Plan, Resolution No. 908. City of Newport Beach Planning Department, January 1974. Conservation of Natural RPBnilrrP.c R1PmPnt City of T-Jpwnnrt RPnrh rPnPrn1 Plnn RPenhitinn Nn 521-7d City of Newport Beach Planning Department, October 1988. Circulation Element, Citv Newport Beach General Plan, Resolution No. 88-101. Phillips Brandt Reddick and STA, Inc., Phillips Brandt Reddick and STA, Inc., 1984. Draft EIR, Bay View Planner 1984. The Planning Center, February 1985. Recreation and Open Space Element, City of Newport Beach General Plan, Resolution No 85-7, Reynolds and Associates, Environmental Impact Evaluation, North Ford Road, City of Newport Beach, CA. RMW Paleo Associates -Frances Goveau, August 3, 1989. Paleontologic Resource Assessment -Castaways Marina Project, Newport Bay, California. RMW Paleo Associates -Ronald Bissell, May 9, 1990. Test Excavation of a portion of CA- ORA 48, Newport Beach, California, mul I I I RMW Paleo Associates -Ronald Bissell and Kenneth Becker, August 16, 1989. Cultural Resources Reconnaissance of the Proposed Castaways Marina Newport Beach, California. RMW Paleo Associates -Rodney Reischke, July 8, 1991. Paleontological Assessment, Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement EIR. RMW Paleo Associates -John C. Brown, July 29, 1991. Archaeological Resources, STA, Inc., July 1986. Final EIR Newport Center and Peripheral Sites Newport Beach, CA, GPA 85-1 Bl Vol VI Response to Comments SCN 85061211. STA, Inc., July 1986. Final EIR Newport Center and Peripheral Sites Newport Beach, CA, GPA 85-1 (B), Vol. III SCN 85061211. STA, Inc., July 1986. Final EIR Newport Center and Peripheral Sites Newport Beach, CA, STA, Inc., July 1986. Final EIR Newport Center and Peripheral Sites Newport Beach, CA, GPA 85-1 (B), Vol. I SCN 85061211. STA, Inc., July 1986. STA, Inc,, July 1986. Final EIR Newport Center and Peripheral Sites Newport Beach, CA, GPA 85-1 (B), Vol. V SCN 85061211. STA, Inc., July 1986. Final EIR Newport Center and Peripheral Sites Newport Beach, CA, GPA 85-1 (B), Vol. II. i Vail Speck Taylor, Inc., December 1989. Newport Beach Land Management Resource Inventory. Westec Services, Inc., Prepared March 1975. Environmental Impact Report Evaluation, Castawgys Point, Newport Beach, CA. Zeiser Geotechnical, Inc., June 1991. Geotechnical Constraints and Possible Mitigation tion Measures for The Circulation Improvement and Open Space A eement CIOSAI, Environmental Impact Report.