HomeMy WebLinkAboutRiverside Avenue crossing Pacific Coast HighwayCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
RIVERSIDE AVENUE RELIEF STORM DRAIN, PHASE 2
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW --NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
A preliminary environmental review of the project for construction of
the Riverside Avenue relief storm drain, Phase 2, 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,
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
AIM:jd
8/22/85
it has been determined that:
RIVERSIDE AVENUE RELIEF STORM DRAIN, PHASE 2
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
BY
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
1. PROJECT LOCATION: The proposed storm drain alignment is located approxi-
mately 400 feet westerly of Riverside Avenue, crossing the 2800 block of
Pacific Coast Highway from property line to property line, in the City of
Newport Beach.
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A storm drain catch basin will be built on the south
side of Pacific Coast Highway. Reinforced concrete pipe or box -shaped con-
duit, approximately 3-feet interior dimension, will be placed across Pacific
Coast Highway to connect into the catch basin, thence into an existing storm
drain pipe which passes through the basement of the adjacent Dominis building.
3. PROJECT GOALS: The project is needed to relieve the flooding which occurs
in the vicinity of Riverside Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway. The highway
must occasionally be closed because of the flooding. The general public and
businesses in the area are the beneficiaries of the construction because of
reduced travel times, and less inconvenience and damage to private property.
4. EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT: There will be no significant long-term irrever-
sible or irretrievable effects on the environment. There will be minimal,
acceptable short-term disturbances caused by construction activity.
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 on the environment.
6. INITIAL STUDY: The Public Works Department of the City of
prepared the Negative Declaration and its Initial Study in
Article 7, Chapter 3, Guidelines for Implementation of the
Environmental Quality Act of 1970. Copies of the Initial
obtained from the Public Works Department during normal bu
YOZ
Benjamin B. Nolan
Public Works Director
LRD:jd
8/20/85
Newport Beach has
accordance with
California
Study may be
siness hours.
RIVERSIDE AVENUE RELIEF STORM DRAIN, PHASE 2
INITIAL STUDY
BY
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
A. CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN
This project is in conformance with the General Plan of the City of Newport
Beach; in particular, the "Conservation of Natural Resources Element."
B. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
An Environmental Checklist Form (copy attached) has been completed as a por-
tion of this study. The following statements, referenced to questions pre-
sented on the checklist, explain all "yes" and "maybe" answers:
1.b. Reinforced concrete pipe or box -shaped conduit will be placed in a
trench crossing Pacific Coast Highway; hence, the displacement and
possible difference in recompactlion of soil in the vicinity of the
conduit trench.
3.b. The storm drain construction will result in a faster rate of sur-
face runoff from a completely developed commercial area.
3.c. Flood waters will flow toward Newport Bay through a newly
installed storm drain pipe which is approximately 400 feet away
from the location of the present outlet to the bay. The capacity
of both outlets should be adequate to eliminate future flooding of
the commercial area.
14.b. Completion of the proposal will result in lesser need for police
manpower to close Pacific Coast Highway to vehicles and to reroute
traffic during flood conditions.
14.e. Completion of the proposal will result in lesser need for street
cleanup personnel subsequent to each flood. Conversely, the pro-
posed storm drain will occasionally need to be cleaned of debris
and silt buildup.
8/16/85
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
w,
I. Background
1. Name of Proponent ay ei Nm'jcvr'f 8sark , 4:4 •
2: Address and Phone Number of of Proponent Milk [darks D ,
• 7706 Newport Oct ) NMpart ;eatk 1. CA gz40
c »> 644.7311
3. Date of Checklist Submission-prebrea7 ZO; ?9M
4. Agency Requiring Checklist CiU c( Arwper`t Wrack •
5. Title of Project p4'er gkJs Averrtr4 geld Sian Oraur, Phase
II. Environmental Impacts
•(Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets.)
Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or, in
changes in geologic substructures?
b. • Disruptions, displacements,
compaction'or overcovering of the
soil?
c. Change in topography or•ground
surface relief features?
d. The destruction, covering or,
modification of any unique geologic
or physical features?
e. Any increase in wind or watererosion
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
•
•ES. MAYBE NO
g.
g. Exposure of people or property to
geological hazards such as earth-
quakes, landslides, mudslides, ground.
failure, or similar hazards?
2. Air. Will the. proposal result in:
it
a. Substantial air emissions or
deterioration of ambient air quality? fe
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' in:
a. Changes in currents, or the course or.
direction of water movements, ih either
marine or fresh waters?
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of
surface runoff?
c. Alterations to the course of flow of
flood waters?
d. Change in the amount of surface water.
in any water body?
e. Discharge into surface waters or in
any alteration of surface water
quality, including but not limited
to temperature, dissolved oxygen or
turbidity?
f. • Alteration of the direction or rate
.of flow of ground waters?
Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either throughdirect addi-
tions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts
or excavations?
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:
a. Change in the diversity of species,
or number of any species of plants
(including trees, shrubs, grass,
crops; 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,
or insects)?-
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?
.d. Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
6. Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise 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?
YES MAYBE NO '
K
a�.
9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
a. Increase in the rate of use of any
natural resources?
b. Substantial depletion of any non-
renewable 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, distribution, density, or growth
rate of the human population of an area?
12. Housing. Will the proposal affect
existing housing, or create a demand
for additional housing?
13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the(
proposal result in:
a. Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement? !t
YES MAYBE NO
x
x
b 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 hazardous to
motor vehicles, bicyclists or .
pedestrians?
14. Public Services. Will the proposal•have an
effect upon, or result in a need for new or
altered governmental services in any of the
following areas:.
erg , 41
•4111
YES ' MAYBE NO
a. Fire protection? $
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks•or other recreational facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
f. Other governmental services?
15. Energy. Will the proposal -result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or
energy?
b. Substantial increase in demand upon
existing sources of energy, or require
the development of new sources of
energy?
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a
need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Communications systems?
c. Water? -
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
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?
K
x
'0 . .1,
YES MAYBE NO
19. 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, structure, object or building?
• 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 history or prehistory?
b. Does the project have the potential to
achieve short-term, to the disadvantage
of long-term, environmental 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 cumu-
latively 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 environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
1t