Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutProspect Street between Pacific Coast Highway and Seashore DriveCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (714) 640-2281 March 10, 1981 Clerk of the Board of Supervisors P. 0. Box 687 Santa Ana, California 92702 Subject: Prospect Street Between Pacific Coast Highway and Seashore Drive. Dear Sir: Enclosed is a notice of determination for the subject project. A negative declaration has been prepared and is on file in our Planning Department. If you have any questions, please call me at (714) 640-2128. Very truly yours, Irwin Miller Administrative Assistant IM:jo cc: Planning Department --Fred Talarico City Ilall • 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663 IF • • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PROSPECT STREET BETWEEN PACIFIC COAST •HIGHWAY AND SEASHORE DRIVE 1980-81 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW --NOTICE OF DETERMINATION A preliminary environmental review of the proposed project for Prospect Street between Pacific Coast Highway and Seashore Drive, has been performed. The review was conducted in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, the State "Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970," and the City's "Policies and Procedures for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act." ' The environmental statement has been reviewed and was approved by the City's Environmental Affairs Committee. As a result of the preliminary review, it has been determined that: 1. The project is approved. 2. The project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 3. An environmental impact report has not been prepared. A negative declaration has been prepared and is attached hereto. c J. fG✓7'LYL1 enjamin B. Nolan Public Works Director IM:jo Att. February 24, 1981 TO: ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE FROM: Public Works Department SUBJECT: PROSPECT STREET BETWEEN PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY AND SEASHORE DRIVE Attached for the Committee's review and comment are drafts of the notice of determination, the E.I.R. negative declaration, and the environmental fact sheet for the subject improvements. The Public Works Department will supply the Committee with any additional information which may be required to make findings and recommendations in this matter. Irwin Miller Administrative Assistant IM:jo Att. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PROSPECT STREET BETWEEN PACIFIC COAST HIGIMAY AND SEASHORE DRIVE 1980-81 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW --NOTICE OF DETERMINATION A preliminary environmental review of the proposed project for Prospect Street between Pacific Coast Highway and Seashore Drive, has been performed., The review was conducted in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, the State "Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970." and the City's "Policies and Procedures for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act." The environmental statement has been reviewed and was approved by the City's Environmental Affairs Committee. As a result of the preliminary review, it has been determined that: 1. The project is approved. 2. The project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 3. An environmental impact report has not been prepared. A negative declaration has been prepared and is attached hereto. Benjamin B. Nolan Public Works Director IM:jo Att. PROSPECT STREET BETWEEN PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY AND SEASHORE DRIVE (C-2150) NEGATIVE DECLARATION BY CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 1. PROJECT LOCATION: This project is located between Pacific Coast Highway and Seashore Drive, providing the connecting link between two existing segments of Prospect Street. 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Interfering portions of curb, gutter and sidewalk along the south side of Pacific Coast Highway and the north side of Seashore Drive will be removed to permit construction of the 83-foot-long by 38-foot-wide Prospect Street connection. The connection includes (1) grading and compaction of native sand to receive aggregate base and asphaltic concrete pavement, (2) 10-foot-wide sidewalks to join existing Pacific Coast Highway and Seashore Drive sidewalks, (3) 4 wheelchair access ramps, (4) 227 linear feet curb and gutter, (5) relocation of one street light, and (6) relocation of 2 traffic signals. 3. PROJECT GOALS: Completion of the project will permit Seashore Drive to return to two-way operation between Prospect Street and Orange Street, thereby relieving the oceanfront alley congestion which has occurred since Seashore Drive became a one-way street. The project will also provide a second direct access to West Newport Beach (for beach users) and to Pacific Coast Highway (for West Newport Beach residents). 4. EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT: There will be no significant long-term irreversi- ble or irretrievable effects on the environment. There will be minimal, acceptable short-term disturbances of the environment during construction. 5. BASIS FOR NEGATIVE DECLARATION: This project is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Newport Beach and could not have a significant effect an the environment. 6. INITIAL STUDY: The City of Newport Beach Public Works Department has pre- pared this Negative Declaration and its Initial Study in accordance with Article 7, Chapter 3, Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970. Copies of the Initial Study may be obtained from said department during normal business hours, Z Benjamin B. Nolan Public Works Director LD:jd PROSPECT STREET BETWEEN PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY AND SEASHORE DRIVE (C-2150) INITIAL STUDY by CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT A. CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN This project is in accord with the General Plan of the City of Newport Beach, in particular the "Circulation Element." B. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM An Environmental Checklist Form (Appendix I --attached) has been completed as a portion of this study. The following statements, referenced to specific questions presented in the checklist, explain all "yes" responses: 1.b. The proposed street construction will include grading and compaction of native sand in advance of the placement of roadway base and pave- ment material. 1.c. The present ground surface within the project limits is ungraded native sand. The proposed surface will include street pavement with 2 sidewalks. 2.b. Street pavement and sidewalks will result in a nominal increase of surface water runoff within the project limits. 14.d. The proposed street will result in altered patterns of circulation and movement of people. That portion of Seashore Drive between Prospect Street and Orange Street will return to two-way operation, thereby relieving much of the oceanfront alley congestion which has occurred since Seashore Drive became a one-way street. 2/11/81 Nib APPENDIX I Iv✓1 `., .%r t, . G'/ i�.r�fi� t ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM (To be completed by Lead Agency) Il I. BACKGROUND / / 1. Name of Proponent CV aT A/eai orf 5eac11 , a2. Address and Phone N er of Pro onent: Dapparr4rvewt .. 6/lc //10 ,4 3100 edsar�'`' .p/Bd4� 140- zZS/ 3. Date of Checklist Submitted Fedraar /D} /91/ 4. Agency Requiring Checklist Cf of Iea.i br 'ach' 5. Name of Proposal, if applicable' 6e7izve40n Pacok Coast their an .Seas Qtr'^ jir/ve II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets.) YES MAYBE NO 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, com- paction or overcovering of the soil? X c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? X d. The destruction, covering or modification of Any unique geologic or physical features? e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? f. 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? YES MAYBE NO g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? )( Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? 3. Water. Will the proposal result ir:: a. Changes in currents, or thc course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? L. Changes in absorption rates, drainage pattersn, or the rate ana amount of surface water runoff? X X X x c. Alterations Lo the course or flow of flood waters? X d. Change in the amount of surface wat•_r in any water Cody? c . Discharge into -surface waters, or in an:; alteration of surface ,rater quality, including hut not limited to termperature, dissolved oxygen or Luh ;,idity? f. A lttrati,!r: of Lhc direction or rate of flow of ground waters? L. Change in thc quantity of ground .raters, either th•rouga direct additions or Tithdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer b;t cuts or e:.c:avations? X h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies?, i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: 13 YES MAYBE NO X a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)?' b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? �( c. Introduction of new species of- plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of new species of animals Into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? X i d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? X • 2,97 YES MAYBE NO 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise X levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 7. Light and Glare.. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? 8. Land Use. Will .the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposalresult in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? 10. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal 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? 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, diotribution, density, or growth rate of the human popu- lation of an area? 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or craate a demand for additional housing? Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial addi- tional vehicular movement? X X • h. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? ' c. Substantial•impact upon existing transportation systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? • e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? ' f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or' pedestrians? Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered govern- mental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? A%, b. Police -protection? - • X c. Schools? X YES t•:AYBE NO X d. Parks or other recreational 'facilities? e. Maintenance of public facili- ties,'including roads? f. Other governrr ,,tal services? 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amount; of fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? X Co. 16 YES MAYBE NO 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? X b. Communications systems? �( c. Water? X d. Sewer or septic tanks? �( e. Storm water drainage? X f. Solid waste and disposal? �( 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 1' Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 20. Archeological/Historical. Will the proposal result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, rtrncturo, object or building? X x X •�. • 7. 17 YES_ MAYBE NO 21. Mandatory Findings of Significance. (a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or •animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California hietory or prehistory? b. Does the project have the poten- tial to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environ- mental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) d. Does the project have environ- mental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 1