Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.0_North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment_PA2012-020CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT July 5, 2012 Agenda Item 3 SUBJECT: North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment (PA2012 -020) • Transfer Development Intensity No. TD2012 -002 • PC Development Plan Amendment No. PD2012 -001 • Amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002 • Traffic Study No. TS2012 -004 • Affordable Housing Implementation Plan Amendment • Water Supply Assessment SITE Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800 and portions of Blocks 100, LOCATION: 400, 500 and San Joquin Plaza of Newport Center APPLICANT: The Irvine Company PLANNER: Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner (949) 644 -3209, jmurillo @newportbeachca.gov PROJECT SUMMARY Amendment of the North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC) Development Plan increasing the residential development allocation from 430 units to a total of 524 units (increase of 94 units) and allocating the units to the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area of the NNCPC. Project implementation also requires a transfer of development intensity, a development agreement amendment, a traffic study, an affordable housing implementation plan amendment, and a water supply assessment. RECOMMENDED ACTION 1) Conduct a public hearing; and 2) Adopt draft resolution (Attachment No. PC1) recommending the City Council adopt Addendum No. 2 to the Program Environmental Impact Report (SCH No 2006011119) for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update and the Water Supply Assessment prepared for the project; and 3) Adopt the draft resolutions (Attachment Nos. PC2 through PC6) recommending the City Council approve Transfer of Development Intensity No. TD2012 -002, Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2012 -001, Amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, Traffic Study No. TS2012 -004, and the proposed Amendment of the Affordable Housing Implementation Plan. North Newport Center PC Amendment July 5, 2012 Page 2 04/16/2012 North Newport Center PC Amendment July 5, 2012 Page 3 GENERAL PLAN ZONING cam (ice Pcro •,�y ..�^ J�,.-.�.. :r4 J PR GV PC 4] U CV MOMl1 ` /'PG VC 3 LO M'.... Lfl 31 � 0. .0 V XOW HOU\ H % rr,` �I VI LOCATION GENERAL PLAN ZONING CURRENT USE Regional Commercial (CR); Mixed Use Horizontal 3 (MU- Regional shopping center; hotel, ON -SITE H3); Medical Commercial Office (CO -M) Regional North Newport Center PC business and professional , R Open Commercial (C (PC-56) offices, , and multiple -unit Space (OS); Multiple -Unit residential Residential RM Single Unit Residential NORTH Attached (RS -A); Single Unit Residential Detached Big Canyon Planned Single -unit residential and (RS -D); Multiple Unit Community (PC -8) multiple -unit residential Residential RM Medical Commercial Office Regional Business and professional SOUTH Office (CO -M); Multiple Commercial (OR); Multi- offices, and multiple -unit Unit Residential (RM) Unit Residential (RM) residential EAST E3edeiocaol Hrizontal 3 (MU- Commercial Block 500 Planned Community (PC-46); Business, medical and -M) Block 400 Planned professional offices Community PC -28 General Commercial Office Regional (CG); Public Facilities (PF); Private Institutional Commercial (OR); Land Rover Planned Service station; automobile (PF); Regional Community (PC -20); dealership; Fire Station No. 3; museuum; m; business and WEST Commercial Office (CO- Government, Public Professional office; hotel; golf R); Visitor Serving Facilities (PF); Santa course and country club Commercial (CV); Barbara Residential (PC- Multiple Unit Residential 54); Newport Beach RM Countr Club PC -47 04/16/2012 North Newport Center PC Amendment July 5, 2012 Page 4 INTRODUCTION Project Setting The NNCPC is located in the Newport Center Statistical Area (Statistical Area L1 of the General Plan), a regional center of business and commerce that includes major retail, professional office, entertainment, recreation, and residential. The NNCPC primarily comprises the northern portions of the Statistical Area and consists of seven sub -areas that include Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800 and portions of Blocks 100, 400, 500, and San Joaquin Plaza. The subject portion of San Joaquin Plaza (approximately 23 acres) is currently developed with a complex of low -rise business and professional offices, a parking structure, and surface parking. The proposed transfer of development intensity involves the Newport Beach Marriott Hotel (General Plan Anomaly Site 43) that is also located within the Newport Center Statistical Area, more specifically at the southwestern corner of Santa Barbara Drive and Newport Center Drive. See Vicinity Map on Page 2 for NNCPC boundaries and location of San Joaquin Plaza and the Newport Beach Marriott Hotel. Project Description The applicant is requesting to amend the NNCPC Development Plan, which is the zoning document that establishes land uses, development standards, and procedures for development within seven sub -areas of the Newport Center area. The primary intent of this request is to increase the residential development allocation within the NNCPC from 430 dwelling units to a total of 524 dwelling units (increase of 94 units) and to allocate the units to the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area. Of the 94 units, 15 of the units are currently allowed by the General Plan, but are unassigned to any specific property within Newport Center; the remaining 79 units would result from the conversion and transfer of un -built non - residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms) to multi - family development intensity (79 multi - family units). No specific development is proposed at this time; rather, the allocation of the 524 total residential units to San Joaquin Plaza will support future development. The project consists of the following applications that are necessary to implement the applicant's request: 1. Transfer of Development Intensity- The General Plan currently allows a maximum development of 611 hotel rooms at the Newport Beach Marriot Hotel site (Anomaly No. 43); however, the hotel is only developed with a total of 532 rooms. Therefore, the applicant is requesting to convert the non - residential development intensity associated with the un -built 79 hotel rooms to residential development intensity for 79 multi - family residential units. The development intensity would then be transferred from Anomaly No. 43 to the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area of the NNCPC; 04/1612012 North Newport Center PC Amendment July 5, 2012 Page 5 2. Planned Community Development Plan Amendment- The NNCPC Development Plan is proposed to be amended to increase the allowable residential development intensity by a total of 94 units and to allocate the 94 units plus the 430 residential units currently allocated to Blocks 500, 600, and San Joaquin Plaza portions of the NNCPC solely to San Joaquin Plaza; 3. Development Agreement Amendment- The existing Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement (Development Agreement) between the City and the Irvine Company is proposed to be amended to vest the increased residential development intensity within NNCPC and to establish public benefit contributions to the City; 4. Traffic Study- Traffic study for 94 units pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance (traffic study for 430 residential units was previously approved); 5. Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP)- The existing AHIP approved for the NNCPC specifying how the Irvine Company will address the City's affordable housing goals is proposed to be amended to account for the increased residential development intensity; and 6. Water Supply Assessment (WSA)- The preparation of a water supply assessment pursuant to Senate Bill 610 (Costa) (California Public Resources Code Section 21151.9 and Water Code Section 10910 et seq.), to demonstrate that adequate water supplies are and will be available to meet the water demand associated with anticipated residential development of San Joaquin Plaza. Background On July 25, 2006, the City adopted the comprehensive update to the General Plan. The updated General Plan contains several policies that allow for the introduction of new residential opportunities, new retail square footage, hotel units and expanded office development into the Newport Center Statistical Area. Specifically, the General Plan established a development intensity of 450 residential units that could be developed within any of the sub -areas within Newport Center with the MU -H3 (Mixed -Use Horizontal) General Plan land use designation, which includes Blocks 500, Block 600, San Joaquin Plaza, and portions of the Newport Beach Country Club. On December 18, 2007, the City Council adopted the NNCPC Development Plan and Design Regulations. The NNCPC establishes development allocations for each sub- area. Of the 450 residential units that could be developed in Newport Center, the NNCPC was assigned 430 units, which were allocated to Blocks 500, 600, or San Joaquin Plaza. In conjunction with the adoption of the NNCPC, a traffic study, an AHIP, and a development agreement were also approved. The development agreement ( "Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement') specifies circulation improvements, dedication of street right -of -way and open space, and the contribution of public benefit fees for which the applicant will be responsible. The agreement also 04/16/2012 North Newport Center PC Amendment July 5, 2012 Page 6 vests the applicant's right to develop the 430 residential units in Blocks 500 or 600 or San Joaquin Plaza. At the time of the original adoption of the NNCPC in 2007, the NNCPC boundaries only included Fashion Island, Block 600 and portions of Block 500 and San Joaquin Plaza. On November 24, 2009, the City Council approved the first amendment to the NNCPC, incorporating Irvine Company owned portions of properties located in Blocks 100, 400, and 800. On May 24, 2011, the City Council approved the second amendment to the NNCPC, incorporating the remaining of Block 800. The properties added to the NNCPC with these two subsequent amendments are not subject to the terms of the original development agreement. DISCUSSION General Plan The sub -areas of the NNCPC include General Plan land use designations of Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -1­13), Regional Commercial Office (CO -R), Medical Commercial Office (CO -M), Regional Commercial (CR); Multiple -Unit Residential (RM), and Open Space (OS). No changes to the General Plan land use designations are proposed and the only changes in development intensity are associated with the proposed transfer of development intensity. The subject 94 residential units, plus the 430 residential units currently allocated to Blocks 500, 600, and San Joaquin Plaza portions of the NNCPC, are proposed to be solely allocated to the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area. San Joaquin Plaza is designated MU -H3, which is intended to provide for the horizontal intermixing of regional commercial office, hotel, single - family and multi - family residential and ancillary commercial uses within Newport Center. Future development of the site with up to 524 residential units would be consistent with this designation. As previously mentioned, the General Plan establishes a maximum development limit of 450 residential units that can be assigned to any of the sub -areas of Newport Center designated MU -H3. A total of 430 residential units have been previously assigned to the NNCPC and five units have been assigned to the Newport Beach Country Club site. Therefore, the assignment of the remaining 15 residential units to the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area of the NNCPC is consistent with the General Plan. To maintain consistency with the development limits established under the General Plan, the applicant is requesting to convert the development intensity associated with 79 un -built hotel rooms currently assigned to General Plan Anomaly Site No. 43 (Newport Beach Marriot Hotel) to 79 residential units and transfer the development intensity to the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area. The proposed transfer is permissible in accordance with General Plan Land Use Policies LU 4.3(d) and LU 6.14.3. Please refer to the Transfer of Development Intensity section of this report for detailed information. 04/1612012 North Newport Center PC Amendment July 5, 2012 Page 7 The project is consistent with the following goals and policies of the General Plan: LU 3.3 Opportunities for Change Provide opportunities for improved development and enhanced environments for residents in the following districts and corridors... Fashion Island /Newport Center. expanded retail uses and hotel rooms and development of residential in proximity to jobs and services, while limiting increases in office development. LU 5.3.4 District Integrating Residential and Nonresidential Uses Require that sufficient acreage be developed for an individual use located in the district containing a mix of residential and nonresidential uses to prevent fragmentation and ensure each use's viability, quality, and compatibility with adjoining uses. LU 6.14.2 Newport Center Provide the opportunity for limited residential, hotel, and office development in accordance with the limits specified by Tables LU1 and LU2. H 2.3 Approve, wherever feasible and appropriate, mixed residential development and commercial use developments those improve the balance between housing and jobs. HP 2.2.1 Require a proportion of affordable housing in new residential developments or levy an in -lieu fee. The City's goal over the five year planning period is for an average of 15 percent of all new housing units to be affordable to very low -, low -, or moderate - income households.... The intent of the policies and goals above is to create a viable mixed -use district that integrates new commercial and residential uses seamlessly with existing commercial, office, entertainment, and residential uses that are supported by a more pedestrian friendly environment. Although the project would decrease the hotel development intensity anticipated in Newport Center under the General Plan, the conversion to the residential units enhances the opportunity for future residential development in Newport Center and furthers the City's goal of providing opportunities for residents to reside near jobs, commerce, recreation and entertainment activities. The project applicant also responds to the City's affordable housing goals through an AHIP that includes provisions for restricting rental costs for existing units located at The Bays, a nearby apartment complex owned and operated by the applicant (see AHIP section of this report for details). In summary, the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, provided the transfer of development intensity is approved. 04/16/2012 North Newport Center PC Amendment July 5, 2012 Page 8 Transfer of Development Intensity The applicant is requesting to convert the development intensity associated with 79 un- built hotel rooms currently assigned to General Plan Anomaly Site No. 43 (Newport Beach Marriot Hotel) to 79 multi - family residential units and transfer the development intensity to the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area. The Newport Beach Marriott Hotel site is currently developed with 532 rooms, resulting in 79 un -built hotel rooms remaining from the maximum 611 hotel room development limit established under the General Plan. General Plan Land Use Policy LU4.3 lists a number of criteria for transfer of development intensity. In particular, transfer of development intensity in the Newport Center Statistical Area is governed by Policy LU6.14.3: LU 6.14.3 Transfers of Development Rights Development rights may be transferred within Newport Center, subject to the approval of the City with the finding that the transfer is consistent with the General Plan and that the transfer will not result in any adverse traffic impacts. The applicant's request to convert and transfer the nonresidential development intensity is consistent with the General Plan in that it relocates un -built development intensity within Newport Center, while maintaining the balance of uses envisioned by the General Plan for Newport Center. The Newport Beach Marriott Hotel site has a General Plan Land Use designation of Visitor Serving Commercial (CV) and the reduction of allowable development intensity by 79 hotel units would not result in any physical changes at the site nor would it result in a change in land use. The hotel would continue operating with 532 rooms and serve visitors to the City consistent with the intent of the General Plan's CV land use designation. The San Joaquin Plaza sub -area of NNCPC is designated MU -H3 (Mixed Use Horizontal), which allows residential uses. Both the General Plan and the NNCPC Development Plan identify the San Joaquin Plaza for potential development with multi - family residential uses. Therefore, the proposed conversion and transfer of development intensity can be found consistent with the General Plan. A trip generation analysis was prepared by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (Attachment No. PC7), to compare the trip generation of the un -built 79 hotel rooms and the proposed 79 multi - family residential units to ensure the proposed conversion would not result in a net increase of development intensity. The analysis concludes that 79 residential units would generate 17 fewer AM peak hour vehicle trips, 17 fewer PM peak hour vehicle trips, and 315 fewer daily vehicle trips than 79 hotel rooms. The development intensity associated with the un -built hotel units would be transferred to the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area and would be unavailable for future use by the Newport Beach Marriot Hotel or future user of the Anomaly Site No. 43 should the project be approved. The net balance of trips resulting from the conversion could be used by the applicant to off -set future increases in traffic associated with other projects in the NNCPC if needed. 04/16/2012 North Newport Center PC Amendment July 5, 2012 Page 9 Also, as discussed in more detail within the Traffic Study section of this report, a traffic analysis was prepared pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance to analyze the potential traffic impacts that may be associated with the development of the 94 residential units. This traffic analysis also takes into account the cumulative traffic associated with the currently assigned 430 residential units allowed in NNCPC. The results of the traffic study conclude that the project would not result in a significant impact to any study intersection or require any traffic improvements. In summary, staff believes the proposed transfer of development intensity is consistent with the General Plan, including General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3, and will not result in adverse traffic impacts in Newport Center or surrounding roadways. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan Amendment The applicant is proposing to amend the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the maximum allowable residential development intensity from 430 dwelling units to a total of 524 dwelling units (increase of 94 units) and to allocate the units to the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area. In addition, the applicant is proposing a number of minor revisions to the PC Development Plan. The complete NNCPC Development Plan is included as Attachment No. PC8 with all revisions illustrated in Underline /Strikeout format. All other provisions of the Development Plan remain unchanged. In summary, the revisions are as follows: 1. Revising Table 2 (Development Limits) in Section II.B to reflect the increase in residential development intensity from 430 units to 524 units. 2. Revising Table 2 to reflect the current development limits for Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza, consistent with the most recent Transfer of Development Rights (TD2011 -001) approved by the City Council on November 8, 2011 (Resolution No. 2011 -102). 3. Revising Table 2 to eliminate a footnote (previous Footnote "C ") that allowed the residential units to be developed in Block 500, Block 600, or San Joaquin Plaza. As a result, residential units will solely be allocated to San Joaquin Plaza. 4. Revising a reference in Section II.6.1 of "the 1,700 seat movie theater" to read 1,700 movie theater seats ", so as to accurately refer to allowed development intensity. 5. Revising Section LB (Relationship to Municipal Code) clarifying that Blocks 500, 600, San Joaquin Plaza, and Fashion Island are subject to the version of the Municipal Code in effect on December 18, 2007, consistent with the terms of the original Development Agreement adopted for the NNCPC. Also Blocks 100, 400, and 800 that were added to the NNCPC after its original adoption are proposed 04116/2012 North Newport Center PC Amendment July 5, 2012 Page 10 to be subject to the version of the Municipal Code in effect on June 5, 2012, consistent with the terms of the proposed Development Agreement Amendment. Development Agreement The project requires the preparation of a development agreement pursuant to General Plan Policy 6.14.8 and Chapter 15.45 of the Municipal Code. General Plan Policy LU 6.14.8 reads as follows: LU 6.14.8 Development Agreements Require the execution of Development Agreements for residential and mixed -use development projects that use the residential 450 units identified in Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations). Development Agreements shall define the improvements and benefits to be contributed by the developer in exchange for the City's commitment for the number, density, and location of the housing units. Municipal Code Section 15.45.020 also requires a development agreement for this project because it is required by General Plan Policy LU 6.14.8 and requires a Planned Community Development Plan amendment that increases development intensity greater than 50 residential units. An existing development agreement (formally titled "Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement') between the applicant and the City was executed in conjunction with the original adoption of the NNCPC Development Plan in 2007 and included the vesting of rights to develop 75,000 sq. ft. of retail space, 205,161 square feet of office space (through the transfer of development rights) and 430 residential uses in North Newport Center for 20 years. Public benefit contributions to the City included circulation improvements, dedication of property, payment of in -lieu park fees totaling $11,199,999 (regardless if residential units are developed as for -sale or rental units) and the payment of Public Benefit Fees totaling $27,090,000. A copy of the existing development agreement (DA2007 -002) is available for review online at: http:// www. newr)ortbeachca .00v /developmentagreements. The original City Council ad -hoc appointed committee (Council Members Rosansky and Selich) that negotiated the terms of the original development agreement also negotiated the terms of the proposed development agreement amendment. The draft development agreement amendment is included as Attachment No. PC 9 and includes the mandatory elements for consideration. Major provisions of the amended agreement are outlined below, with reference to the relevant sections of the amended agreement. 1. Vesting of rights to develop the additional 94 residential units (Section 3). 2. Extending the term of the development agreement to 20 years from the effective date of the amendment (Section 12). 04/16/2012 North Newport Center PC Amendment July 5, 2012 Page 11 3. Provisions for affordable housing pursuant to the proposed AHIP Amendment (Section 4). 4. Payment of Public Benefit Fee for Parks in the amount $26,046.71 for each of the 94 units and shall be payable in full to the City by July 2013 (Section 7). 5. Payment of Public Benefit Fee in the amount of $63,000 for each of the 94 units, for a total of $5,922,000, which may be used for any municipal purpose (Section 6). 6. Reimbursement of up to $200,000 for costs associated with plans, specifications, permits, and /or construction of the Bayside Drive Walkway Connection, a future connection from an existing public access walkway to the Marine Avenue Bridge. The payment would be payable within 90 days after receipt of written notice from the City that it has awarded a construction contract for the project. 7. Limiting future amendments to the Municipal Code pertaining to development of Block 800 and portions of Block 100 and 400 of the NNCPC, which were properties added to the NNCPC subsequent to the execution of the original development agreement. These blocks would be subject to the Municipal Code in effect as of June 5, 2012 (Section 2.2). The City Council ad -hoc committee and staff believe that the proposed development agreement satisfies the requirements of the General Plan policy for Newport Center development agreements. It specifies public benefit contributions for which the applicant will be responsible. The agreement also vests the applicant's right to build the subject 94 residential units, in addition to the original 430 residential units, in San Joaquin Plaza. Municipal Code Section 15.45.050 provides that the Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on a development agreement, but does not provide guidance regarding the Commission's review or recommendation responsibility. Staff recommends that the Commission consider whether the proposed Agreement meets the requirements of the General Plan and the Municipal Code, and whether the public benefits, taken as a whole, are appropriate benefits to support the development rights vested by the agreement. Traffic Study- Traffic Phasing Ordinance Municipal Code Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance, or TPO) requires that a traffic study be prepared and findings be made before building permits may be approved if a proposed project will generate in excess of 300 average daily trips (ADT). Although no specific development project is proposed at this time, development of the 94 residential units was assumed to be completed in 2015 and is forecasted to generate 393 additional trips per day, including 32 additional a.m. peak hour trips and 36 p.m. 04/16/2012 North Newport Center PC Amendment July 5, 2012 Page 12 peak hour trips. It should be noted that the 430 residential units currently allocated and vested within the NNCPC were previously analyzed and approved under Traffic Study No. TS2007 -001 and added to the approved projects list. Traffic associated with projects on the approved projects list has been included in the cumulative traffic impact analysis included in the subject traffic study for this project. Pursuant to Section 15.04.030.A, the Planning Commission must make the following findings in order to approve the project: That a traffic study for the project has been prepared in compliance with this chapter and Appendix A: 2. That, based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the traffic study, one of the findings for approval in subsection (B) can be made: 15.40.030.8.1 Construction of the proiect will be completed within 60 months of proiect approval; and 15.40.030. B.1(a) The project will neither cause nor make an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted intersection. 3. That the project proponent has agreed to make or fund the improvements, or make the contributions, that are necessary to make the findings for approval and to comply with all conditions of approval. A traffic study, entitled "North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis" and dated May 2012, was prepared by Stantec Consulting, Inc., under the supervision of the City Traffic Engineer pursuant to the TPO and its implementing guidelines (Attachment No. PC10). A total of 20 primary intersections in the City were evaluated. The traffic study indicates that the project will increase traffic on 12 of the 20 study intersections by one percent (1 %) or more during peak hour periods one year after the completion of the project, and therefore, these 12 intersections required further Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) analysis. Utilizing the ICU analysis specified by the TPO, the traffic study determined that the 12 primary intersections identified will continue to operate at satisfactory levels of service as defined by the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. Since implementation of the proposed project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted primary intersection within the City, no improvements are necessary. Therefore, staff believes that a recommendation for approval of the traffic study can be forwarded to the City Council and that the traffic study has been prepared in compliance with the TPO. 04/16/2012 North Newport Center PC Amendment July 5, 2012 Page 13 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan Amendment Housing Element Program 2.2.1 includes a goal that an average of 15% of all new units be affordable to very low -, low -, or moderate - income households. Also, an Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) is required to be prepared for projects with more than 50 residential units to specify how the project will meet the City's goal. The existing North Newport Center Planned Community AHIP was adopted in 2007, in conjunction with the adoption of the NNCPC Development Plan, which addresses affordable housing requirements associated with the 430 residential units currently allocated to NNCPC. At that time, two options for providing affordable housing were specified. The first option was to develop an affordable housing development with up to 14 units on a vacant property (1691 San Miguel Dr.) formerly owned by the applicant; however, that site has since been sold to another developer who is in the process of constructing four new single - family residences on the site and this option is no longer feasible. The second option is to record affordability covenants with a term of 30 years on existing apartment units (The Bays at 1 Baywood Dr.) located nearby along San Joaquin Hills Road. The applicant is proposing to amend the AHIP to address the requested 94 unit increase in residential development intensity (Attachment No. PC11). The amended AHIP proposes to restrict rental costs on additional units within The Bays apartment complex consistent with the provisions of the existing AHIP. The number of affordable units and income levels would be based on the percentages shown in tables below: 524 Units: Number of Affordable Units and Income Levels Income Category Percentage Required Total Amount Very Low 10% 52 units Low 15% 79 units Moderate 20% 105 units The AHIP indicates that the affordable units will be provided incrementally, with one - third of the requirement provided with each 100 market rate units constructed. This schedule will result in meeting the entire affordable requirement before all of the market rate units are built. Staff finds this to be an acceptable solution for this project. The off -site location of The Bays is within walking distance to Newport Center and provides a housing opportunity for moderate- and lower- income employees of the area. The proposed AHIP satisfies the affordable housing goal of the Housing Element. It should be noted that the requirements of Chapter 19.54 of the Municipal Code (Inclusionary Housing) would not apply should the residential units be developed as rentals; however, compliance with the AHIP would still be required as a public benefit under the proposed development agreement amendment. 04/1612012 North Newport Center PC Amendment July 5, 2012 Page 14 Water Supply Assessment California Senate Bill 610 (SB610), adopted in 2001, requires that a Water Supply Assessment (WSA) be prepared for proposed projects of more than 500 residential dwelling units evaluating water supplies that will be available to the project over a 20 year period. The evaluation needs to address water supply availability during a normal year as well as during single -dry year and multiple -dry year events. The WSA must consider existing demands as well as reasonably foreseeable planned future water demands and must use information contained in adopted Urban Water Management Plans as required by the State Urban Water Management Act. The NNCPC Development Plan currently allows for 430 residential units; however, should the requested transfer of development intensity and amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan be approved, an additional 94 units would be permitted in NNCPC, bring the maximum number of permitted residential units to 524 units. Therefore, pursuant to the requirements of SB610, a WSA for the project was prepared by T& B Planning in conjunction with the City's Municipal Operation Department (Attachment No. PC12). The City provides water service to the project site, and as the water provider, the City Council serves as the lead agency with the authority to approve the WSA. City approval of the WSA would certify that the document has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of SB610 and the information and findings contained in the WSA are reasonable and may be incorporated into the environmental documentation for the project as required by CEQA. The City's water supply comes from three sources: 1) imported water from Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan) as wholesaled to the City by the Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC); 2) local groundwater pumped from the Lower Santa Ana Groundwater Basin by wells owned and operated by the City and managed by the Orange County Water District (OCWD); and 3) recycled water wholesaled by OCWD through its Green Acres Project. The analysis and conclusions of the WSA are based on the City's 2010 Urban Water Management Plan, Metropolitan's 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan, MWDOC's 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan, and OCWD's Groundwater Management Plan 2009 Update. Information contained within the four documents concludes that there is sufficient water supply capacity to serve the respective service area through 2035, including projected water demand in the City associated with the build out of the City's General Plan. Furthermore, the WSA concludes that adequate and reliable water supplies are and will be available to serve the proposed project for the next 20 years. Airport Environs Land Use Plan North Newport Center is located within the Planning Area for John Wayne Airport in the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP). The Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) has found the City of Newport Beach to be a consistent agency with the AELUP. ALUC 04/16/2012 North Newport Center PC Amendment July 5, 2012 Page 15 has also previously reviewed and found the NNCPC Development Plan to be consistent with the AELUP. However, the AELUP requires that zone changes for consistent agencies be referred to the ALUC for a determination prior to City action. The proposed amendments to the NNCPC will be forwarded to the ALUC, and a hearing will be scheduled prior to the City Council meeting if the Planning Commission recommends approval of the project. Since the proposed amendments primarily involve a conversion and reallocation of development intensity and do not change development standards, staff does not foresee any consistency issues. Alternatives 1. The Planning Commission may recommend approval of a modified project to the City Council; or 2. If the Planning Commission believes that there are insufficient facts to support the findings for approval, the Planning Commission may deny the application and provide facts in support of denial to be included in the attached draft resolution for denial (Attachment No. PC 13). Environmental Review An Addendum (Addendum No. 2) to the Program Environmental Impact Report (SCH No 2006011119) certified on July 25, 2006 has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code § §21000, et seq., and the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations § §15000, et seq. The Addendum was prepared by T &B Planning and is included as Attachment No. PC14. The purpose of the Addendum is to analyze the potential differences between the impacts evaluated in the General Plan Program EIR and those that would be associated with the proposed project. State CEQA Guidelines allow for the updating and use of a previously certified EIR for projects that have changed or are different from the previous project or conditions analyzed in the certified EIR. In cases where changes or additions occur with no new significant environmental impacts, an Addendum to a previously certified EIR may be prepared (CEQA Guidelines §15164). The 2006 General Plan allocated a certain amount of development intensity to the Newport Center Statistical Area. In 2007, the applicant proposed to vest a portion of that development intensity through the approval of a zoning amendment resulting in the City adopting the NNCPC. In compliance with CEQA, the City prepared and approved Addendum No. 1 to the General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR. The proposed project is within the scope of the previously certified program EIR considering Addendum No. 1 and Addendum No. 2. The potential impacts associated with the proposed changes would either be the same or less than the anticipated levels as described in the certified General Plan EIR, including Addendum No. 1. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances 04/16/2012 North Newport Center PC Amendment July 5, 2012 Page 16 under which future development projects subject to the 2006 General Plan and NNCPC Development Plan would be undertaken. Copies of the previously prepared General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR, Addendum No. 1 and Addendum No. 2 to the General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR, and supporting documents are available for review online at: http:// www. newportbeachca .gov /GeneralPlanEIR. Public Notice Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the NNCPC boundaries and posted at various locations within the NNCPC boundaries, including San Joaquin Plaza, a minimum of 10 days in advance of this hearing consistent with the Municipal Code. Additionally, the item appeared upon the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website. Summary Staff believes that the proposed amendment to the NNCPC and transfer of development intensity are consistent with the overall development intensity projected for Newport Center by the 2006 General Plan. The increased residential development intensity enhances the opportunity for future residential development in Newport Center and furthers the City's goal of providing opportunities for residents to reside near jobs, commerce, recreation and entertainment activities. Public benefit contributions will be provided to the City through the proposed amendment to the development agreement, including provisions for affordable housing as specified in the proposed AHIP. Potential traffic impacts associated with the project have been reviewed and determined that the project would not result in a significant impact to any study intersection or require any traffic improvements in the area or surrounding road ways. Additionally, a water supply assessment has been prepared and determined that adequate and reliable water supplies are and will be available to serve the proposed project. Therefore, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the project and related requests to the City Council. Prepared by: Submitted by: 7s. `MuLe- � vn-� aime Murillo, Associate Planner Br n a WisnesIC, NCP, Deputy Director 04/16/2012 North Newport Center PC Amendment July 5, 2012 Page 17 ATTACHMENTS PC 1 Draft resolution recommending adoption of Addendum No. 2 to the General Plan 2006 Update Program EIR and the Water Supply Assessment PC 2 Draft resolution recommending approval of TD2012 -002 PC 3 Draft resolution recommending approval of PD2012 -001 PC 4 Draft resolution recommending approval of an Amendment to DA2007 -002 PC 5 Draft resolution recommending approval of TS2012 -004 PC 6 Draft resolution recommending approval of the NNCPC Amended Affordable Housing Implementation Plan PC 7 Trip Generation Analysis PC 8 NNCPC Development Plan Revisions PC 9 Development Agreement Amendment PC 10 Traffic Study PC 11 Amended Affordable Housing Implementation Plan PC 12 Water Supply Assessment PC 13 Addendum No. 2 to General Plan 2006 Update Program EIR PC 14 Draft resolution of denial FAUsers\PLN \Shared \PA's \PAs - 2012 \PA2012 - 020 \PC \PA2012 -020 PC report.docx 04/16/2012 Attachment No. PC 1 Draft resolution recommending adoption of Addendum No. 2 to Program EIR for 2006 General Plan Update and Water Supply Assessment RESOLUTION NO. 2012- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING APPROVAL THE SECOND NORTH NEWPORT CENTER ADDENDUM (ADDENDUM NO. 2) TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN 2006 UPDATE (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2006011119) AND WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT FOR NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY AMENDMENT PROJECT WHEREAS, the Irvine Company wishes to implement the General Plan 2006 Update with the implementation of the North Newport Center Planned Community, which consists of seven sub -areas that include Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800 and portions of Blocks 100, 400, 500, and San Joaquin Plaza of the Newport Center Statistical Area. WHEREAS, in that regard, the Irvine Company has applied to the City of Newport Beach for approval of the following project (the 'Project'): 1. Transfer of Development Intensity (TD2012 -002)- Conversion of un -built non- residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms assigned to General Plan Anomaly Site No. 43) to multi - family residential development intensity (79 multi- family units) and transfer of the converted development intensity into the North Newport Center Planned Community ( NNCPC); 2. Planned Community Development Plan Amendment (PD2012 -001)- Amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the allowable residential development intensity by a total of 94 units and to allocate the 94 units plus the 430 residential units currently allocated to Blocks 500, 600, and San Joaquin Plaza of the NNCPC solely to San Joaquin Plaza. Of the 94 units, 79 units result from the conversion and transfer of development intensity, and the remaining 15 units are currently unassigned by the General Plan within the MU -H3 portions of the Newport Center Statistical Area L1; 3. Amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002- Amending the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City and the Irvine Company to vest the revised development intensities and allocations within NNCPC and to establish public benefit contributions to the City; 4. Traffic Study (TS2012 -004)- Traffic study for 94 units pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance; 5. Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP)- Amendment to an AHIP specifying how the Project will meet the City's affordable housing goal; and 6. Water Supply Assessment (WSA)- Evaluation of water supply availability for the Project. SDA847681.1 WHEREAS, on July 25, 2006, the City Council certified the adequacy and completeness of the EIR for the General Plan 2006 Update (EIR No. 2006011119) by adopting Resolution No 2006 -75. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15168, the City prepared the EIR for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update as a program EIR (the "Program EIR "). WHEREAS, on December 11, 2007, the City Council certified the adequacy and completeness of the Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update ( "Addendum No. 1 ") by adopting Resolution No. 2007 -79. WHEREAS, the City of Newport Beach has prepared a second Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update ( "Addendum No. 2 "). WHEREAS, the Community Development Department has determined that the Addendum No. 2 complies with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA °). WHEREAS, consistent with the requirements of California Senate Bill 610, adopted in 2011, the City of Newport Beach has prepared a Water Supply Assessment ( "WSA ") for the Project. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 5, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time the Planning Commission considered the Project, the Program EIR, Addendum No. 1, and Addendum No. 2, and the WSA. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting, including the evidence and arguments submitted by the City staff, the Irvine Company, and all interested parties. WHEREAS, after thoroughly considering the Program EIR, Addendum No. 1, Addendum No. 2, the WSA, and the public testimony and written submissions, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, the Planning Commission finds the following facts, findings, and reasons to support certifying the Addendum No. 2: 1. The Project is consistent with and implements the General Plan Update. 2. The Program EIR, which is conclusively presumed to be valid pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21167.2, reviews the existing conditions of the City and Newport Center; analyzes potential environmental impacts from implementation of the General Plan Update in Newport Center; identifies policies from the General Plan Update that serve to reduce and minimize impacts from implementation of the General Plan Update in Newport Center; and identifies additional mitigations measures, if necessary to reduce potentially significant impacts from implementation of the General Plan Update in Newport Center. SD \847681.1 3. The Project does not increase development intensities or associated impacts beyond the levels considered in the Program EIR. 4. Since the Program EIR's certification in 2006, no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the General Plan Update has been implemented for the Project. 5. Since the Program EIR's certification in 2006, no substantial changes to the environmental setting of the General Plan Update have occurred. 6. Since the Program EIR's certification in 2006, no new information of substantial importance has become available that was not known and that could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at that time of certification. Thus, no new information indicates that: (A) The Project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Program EIR; (B) Significant effects from the Project will be substantially more severe than identified in the Program EIR; (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project, but the City declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the Program EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the City declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternative. 7. Since no substantial changes to the circumstances or environmental setting have occurred, and since no new information relating to significant effects, mitigation measures, or alternatives has become available, the Project does not require additional environmental review, consistent with CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15168. 8. Based on these findings, the Program EIR, Addendum No. 1, and the Addendum No. 2, the Planning Commission has determined that the Project falls within the scope of the Program EIR, and that the Program EIR therefore applies to the Project, consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15168. 9. Based on these findings, the Program EIR, Addendum No. 1, and the Addendum No. 2, the Planning Commission has determined that no subsequent EIR or supplemental EIR is required or appropriate under Public Resources Code section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines sections 15162; 15163, and 15164. The SDA847681.1 Addendum No.2 therefore satisfies CEQA's environmental review requirements for the Project. 10. The Addendum No. 2, which the City prepared to evaluate whether the Project would cause any new or potentially more severe significant adverse effects on the environment, specifically analyzed, in addition to several other potential impacts, potential impacts related to aesthetics, climate change, and traffic. The analysis and conclusions for potential traffic impacts were based on, and relied upon, the traffic study entitled North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis, which, together with the Addendum No. 2, provide the substantial evidence upon which the Planning Commission has based its findings. 11. Based on the facts and analysis contained in the Addendum No. 2, the Planning Commission finds that the Project will not have, when compared to the Program EIR, any new or more severe adverse environmental impacts, including, without limitation, no new or more severe significant adverse impacts related to aesthetics, climate change, or traffic. 12. The Planning Commission also makes the following, more specific finding: The Addendum No.2 specifically analyzes the Project's potential impacts on traffic and circulation, based on the traffic study entitled North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis, attached to the Addendum No. 2. Based on the facts and analysis contained in the Addendum and the traffic study, the Planning Commission finds that the Project will not have any new or more severe significant traffic or circulation impacts. 13. The Project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of 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 rare or endangered plants or animals, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 14. The Project does not have the potential to disadvantage long -term environmental goals in order to achieve short-term environmental goals, as documented in the Addendum No. 2, which identified no new or more severe significant adverse effects on the environment. 15. The Project will not result in any new or more severe significant impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable, when viewed in connection with planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity. 16. The Project will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, in that no new or more severe SDA847681.1 significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health or public services. 17. These factual findings are based on the Program EIR, Addendum No. 1, the Addendum No. 2, and all documents referred in or attached to it, including without limitation the traffic studies, the submissions of the applicant, the records and files of the City's Community Development Department related to the Project, and any other documents referred to or relied upon by the Planning Commission during its consideration of the Project on July 5, 2012. 18. The Planning Commission has considered the Program EIR and the Addendum No.2, and has concluded that the Addendum No. 2 reflects the independent judgment of the City. 19. The City has on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect set forth in California Code Regulations, Title 14, Section 753.5(d). 20. The WSA evaluates whether the total projected water supplies, determined to be available by the city or county for the project during normal, single dry, and multiple dry water years during a 20 -year projection, will meet the projected water demand associated with the Project, in addition to existing and planned future uses, including agricultural and manufacturing uses. 21. The WSA identifies all existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts relevant to the water supply for the Project and describes the quantities of water received in prior years by the existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts. 22. Based on the facts and analysis contained in the WSA, the Planning Commission finds that adequate and reliable water supplies are and will be available to serve the proposed project for the next 20 years. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby finds that the preceding recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission for the Addendum No.2 and WSA. 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends certification of the Addendum No. 2 to the City Council for the reasons set forth in this resolution and as stated in the Addendum No. 2 on file in the Community Development Department. 3. The Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of the WSA to the City Council for the reasons set forth in this resolution and as stated in the WSA on file in the Community Development Department. SDA847681.1 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 51h DAY OF JULY, 2012. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN ABSENT: BY: Michael Toerge, Chairman BY: Fred Ameri, Secretary SDA847681.1 Addendum No. 2 (To be attached upon approval) SD 847681 .1 Attachment No. PC 2 Draft resolution recommending approval of TD2012 -002 RESOLUTION NO. 2012- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY (TD2012 -002) FOR NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY AMENDMENT PROJECT WHEREAS, the Irvine Company has applied to the City of Newport Beach for an amendment to the North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC) Development Plan to allow future development in NNCPC, which consists of seven sub -areas that include Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800 and portions of Blocks 100, 400, 500, and San Joaquin Plaza of the Newport Center Statistical Area ('Property "). WHEREAS, as part of its application, the Irvine Company requests approval of the amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, entitled Amendment to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement Between City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company LLC Concerning Addition of Properties and Residential Units to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement (Portions of Newport Center Blocks 100, 400 and 800 and San Joaquin Plaza). WHEREAS, as part of its application, the Irvine Company also requests approval of the transfer of development intensity (TD2012 -002), an amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, and an amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan (PD2012 -001) to increase the residential development allocation within the NNCPC from 430 dwelling units to a total of 524 dwelling units (increase of 94 units) and to allocate the units to San Joaquin Plaza . Of the 94 units, 15 of the units are currently allowed by the General Plan, but are unassigned to any specific property; the remaining 79 units would result from the conversion of un -built non - residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms assigned to General Plan Anomaly Site No. 43) to multi - family development intensity (79 multi - family units) and transfer of the converted development intensity into the NNCPC. WHEREAS, General Plan Land Use Policy LU4.3 lists a number of criteria for transfer of development intensity. In particular, transfer of development intensity in the Newport Center Statistical Area is governed by Policy LU6.14.3 WHEREAS, General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3 permits development intensity to be transferred within Newport Center, subject to the approval of the City with the finding that the transfer is consistent with the General Plan and that the transfer will not result in any adverse traffic impacts. WHEREAS, a traffic study entitled North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis (Stantec Consulting Services Inc., May, 2012) was prepared for the application and supports the transfer of development intensity in compliance with General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3. SD \$47835.1 WHEREAS, the traffic study found that consistent with General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3, the transfer of development intensity will not result in any adverse traffic impacts. WHEREAS, a trip generation analysis was prepared by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (dated May 16, 2012) to compare the trip generation of the un -built 79 hotel rooms and the proposed 79 multi - family residential units to ensure the proposed conversion would not result in a net increase of development intensity. The analysis concludes that 79 residential units would generate 17 fewer AM peak hour vehicle trips, 17 fewer PM peak hour vehicle trips, and 315 fewer daily vehicle trips than the 79 hotel rooms, demonstrating that the transfer of development intensity will not result in greater intensity than development allowed without the transfer. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 5, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time the Planning Commission considered all project - related applications, including Transfer of Development Intensity No. TD2012 -002, the amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, as well as the traffic study and trip generation comparison. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting, including the evidence and arguments submitted by the City staff, the Irvine Company, and all interested parties. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that: (1) Consistent with General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3, the transfer of development intensity is consistent with the General Plan in that it relocates un -built development intensity within Newport Center, maintaining the balance of uses set forth in the General Plan for Newport Center. The Newport Beach Marriott Hotel site (Anomaly Site No. 43) has a General Plan Land Use designation of Visitor Serving Commercial (CV) and the reduction of allowable development intensity by 79 hotel units would not result in any physical changes at the site nor would it result in a change in land use. The hotel would continue operating with 532 rooms and serve visitors to the City consistent with the intent of the General Plan's CV land use designation. The San Joaquin Plaza is within the NNCPC and is designated MU -H3 (Mixed Use Horizontal), which allows residential uses. Both the General Plan and the NNCPC Development Plan identify the San Joaquin Plaza for potential development with multi - family residential uses. Therefore, the proposed conversion and transfer of development intensity can be found consistent with the General Plan. (2) Consistent with General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3, the transfer of development intensity will not result in any adverse traffic impacts, as documented in the traffic study. 2 SD \$47835.1 (3) Consistent with General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3, the transfer of development intensity will not result in greater intensity than that which is allowed without the transfer, as documented in the trip generation comparison. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach recommends that the City Council approve Transfer of Development Intensity TD.2012 -002, based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record including the traffic and trip generation studies. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 51h DAY OF JULY, 2012. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: BY: Michael Toerge, Chairman MN Fred Ameri, Secretary 3 SD \$47835.1 4 SD \$47835.1 Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis (To be attached upon adoption) SD \$47835.1 Amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002 (To be attached upon adoption) M SD \$47835.1 Attachment No. PC 3 Draft resolution recommending approval of PD2012 -001 RESOLUTION NO. 2012- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN WHEREAS, the Irvine Company has filed an application with respect to its property located in North Newport Center Planned Community ( NNCPC) and consisting of seven sub -areas that include Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800 and portions of Blocks 100, 400, 500, and San Joaquin Plaza of the Newport Center Statistical Area ( "Property "). WHEREAS, as part of its application, the Irvine Company seeks approval of amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan (Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2012 -001) to increase the allowable residential development intensity by a total of 94 units and to allocate the 94 units plus the 430 residential units currently allocated to Blocks 500, 600, and San Joaquin Plaza of the NNCPC solely to San Joaquin Plaza. WHEREAS, the Property will be governed by the NNCPC Development Plan, which includes the North Newport Center Design Regulations and sets forth land uses, development standards, and procedures. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 5, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time the Planning Commission considered all project - related applications, including the amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting, including the evidence and arguments submitted by the City staff, the Irvine Company, and all interested parties. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information in the amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan and in the full administrative record, including the North Newport Center Design Regulations, before taking any action approving the amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that: (1) The amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan provides suitable and adequate standards including those relating to uses, development limits, building height limits, setbacks, parking, landscaping, screening, signs, lighting, and noise control. SD \$47834.1 (2) The amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan is consistent with the General Plan and Municipal Code section 20.56.050(C), which mandates the requirements of a Planned Community Development Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2012 -001, which includes the North Newport Center Design Regulations, as provided in Exhibit "A." PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 5th DAY OF JULY, 2012. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN ABSENT: BY: Michael Toerge, Chairman BY: Fred Ameri, Secretary SD 847834.1 EXHIBIT "A" Amendment to North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan (To be attached upon adoption) SDA847834.1 Attachment No. PC 4 Draft resolution recommending approval of an Amendment to DA2007 -002 RESOLUTION NO. 2012- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. DA2007 -002 WHEREAS, the Irvine Company has filed an application with respect to its property located in North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC) Development Plan to allow future development in NNCPC, which consists of seven sub -areas that include Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800 and portions of Blocks 100, 400, 500, and San Joaquin Plaza of the Newport Center Statistical Area ( "Property "). As part of the application, the Irvine Company requests approval of an amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, entitled Amendment to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement Between City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company LLC Concerning Addition of Properties and Residential Units to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement (Portions of Newport Center Blocks 100, 400 and 800 and San Joaquin Plaza), to allow future development on the Property (the "Amendment "). WHEREAS, the Amendment was prepared and is attached as Exhibit "A." WHEREAS, during the term of the Amendment, and subject to any approvals required under the development regulations applicable to the Property, as specified in the Amendment, the Irvine Company shall have a vested right to develop the following entitlements on the Property: Development Limits (A) A. Square footage indicated in Table 2 may not reflect current development limits because of the transfer of development rights provision described in Sections II.0 and IV.0 herein. Transfers may result in increased or decreased development limits, so long as the transfers are consistent with the General Plan and do not result in greater intensity than allowed in the Newport Center statistical area. A transfer of development rights must be approved by the City Council and is recorded on the City's Tracking Development Rights table for North Newport Center Planned Community. B. Hotel rooms are permitted in Fashion Island through the transfer of development rights. C. The maximum development for Block 100 may not exceed 121,114 square feet. Transfers of development rights shall be permitted, provided the maximum development limit of 121,114 square feet is not exceeded. Transfers have resulted in no remaining intensity in Block 100. D. Per City Council action on 11/8/12 via resolution 2011 -102, the maximum permitted office /commercial development for Block 500 is 599,659 sq. ft., Block 600 is 1,340,609 sq. ft. and for San Joaquin Plaza is 95,550 sq. ft. SD \$47676.1 San Fashion Block Joaquin Land Use Island 100 Block 400 Block 500 Block 600 Block 800 Plaza Total Regional 1,619,525 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,619,525 sq.. Commercial sq. ft. ft. Movie 1,700 seats 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,700 seats Theater (27,500 (27,500 sq. sq. ft.) ft.) Hotel (B) 0 0 0 295 0 0 295 Residential 0 0 0 0 0 245 524 769 Office/ 0 - 0 -sq.. 91,727 sq. 286,166 2,413,711 sq. Commercial ft. ft. 599,659 1,340,609 95,550 sq. ft. (C) sq. ft. (D) sq. ft. (D) ft. (D) A. Square footage indicated in Table 2 may not reflect current development limits because of the transfer of development rights provision described in Sections II.0 and IV.0 herein. Transfers may result in increased or decreased development limits, so long as the transfers are consistent with the General Plan and do not result in greater intensity than allowed in the Newport Center statistical area. A transfer of development rights must be approved by the City Council and is recorded on the City's Tracking Development Rights table for North Newport Center Planned Community. B. Hotel rooms are permitted in Fashion Island through the transfer of development rights. C. The maximum development for Block 100 may not exceed 121,114 square feet. Transfers of development rights shall be permitted, provided the maximum development limit of 121,114 square feet is not exceeded. Transfers have resulted in no remaining intensity in Block 100. D. Per City Council action on 11/8/12 via resolution 2011 -102, the maximum permitted office /commercial development for Block 500 is 599,659 sq. ft., Block 600 is 1,340,609 sq. ft. and for San Joaquin Plaza is 95,550 sq. ft. SD \$47676.1 WHEREAS, during the term of the Amendment, and subject to any approvals required under the development regulations applicable to the Property, as specified in the Amendment, the Irvine Company shall also have a vested right to develop 94 additional residential units within San Joaquin Plaza, of which 15 currently are not assigned to a specific property within Newport Center and 79 currently are assigned to Anomaly Site No. 43 as un -built hotel rooms. Such 79 hotel rooms shall be converted to 79 residential units and transferred from Anomaly Site No. 43 into the NNCPC and allocated to San Joaquin Plaza subsequent to conversion. WHEREAS, consistent with General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3, the transfer of development intensity is consistent with the General Plan and will not result in any adverse traffic impacts. WHEREAS, The Irvine Company has agreed to provide public benefits as consideration for the Development Agreement, including the following: 1. Provisions for affordable housing pursuant to the proposed NNCPC Amended Affordable Housing Implementation Plan. 2. Payment of Public Benefit Fee for Parks in the amount $26,046.71 for each of the 94 units and shall be payable in full to the City by July 2013. 3. Payment of Public Benefit Fee in the amount of $63,000 for each of the 94 units, for a total of $5,922,000, which may be used for any municipal purpose. 4. Reimbursement of up to $200,000 for costs associated with plans, specifications, permits, and /or construction of the Bayside Drive Walkway Connection, a future connection from an existing public access walkway to the Marine Avenue Bridge. The payment would be payable within 90 days after receipt of written notice from the City that it has awarded a construction contract for the project. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 5, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time the Planning Commission considered all project - related applications, including the amendment to Development Agreement No.2007 -002. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting, including the evidence and arguments submitted by the City staff, the Irvine Company, and all interested parties. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information in the Amendment and in the full administrative record, before taking any action approving the Amendment. WHEREAS, in recognition of the significant public benefits that the Amendment provides, the Planning Commission finds that: 2 SD \$47676.1 (1) The Amendment is entered into pursuant to, and constitutes a present exercise of, the City's police power. (2) The Amendment is in the best interests of the health, safety, and general welfare of the City, its residents, and the public. (3) The Amendment is consistent with the General Plan as of the date of this Ordinance. (4) The Amendment ensures that zoning implementation and utilization of the building entitlements applicable to the Property are consistent with the General Plan's standards for land use, housing, circulation, open space, noise, safety, and conservation, and with the General Plan's goals of improving and providing transportation infrastructure, parks, public services, open space, water resources, and environmental resources. (5) Existing utility capacity, circulation infrastructure, and other public services already exist to support development consistent with the development regulations applicable to the Property. (6) The Amendment is consistent with Municipal Code section 15.45.020(A)(2), which requires a development agreement for projects that include a Planned Community Development Plan Amendment and include development of 50 or more residential units. (7) The Amendment is consistent with General Plan Policy LU 6.14.8, which applies to Newport Center and requires the execution of development agreements for residential projects and mixed -use development projects with a residential component. (8) The Amendment is consistent with provisions of state law (California Government Code sections 65864 - 65869.5) and local law (Municipal Code chapter 15.45) that 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 they may proceed with projects consistent with existing policies, rules, and regulations. More specifically, the Amendment is consistent and has been approved consistent with provisions of California Government Code sections 65867 and 65868 and Municipal Code chapter 15.45. (9) The Amendment is consistent with the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2006011119), the Addendum No.1 to the Final 3 SD \$47676.1 Environmental Impact Report for General Plan 2006 Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2006011119), and Addendum No.2 to the Final Environmental Impact Report for General Plan 2006 Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2006011119), all of which analyze the environmental effects of the proposed development of the Property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve the Amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002 as provided in Exhibit "A." PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 5`h DAY OF JULY, 2012. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: BY: MIN Michael Toerge, Chairman Fred Ameri, Secretary 4 SD \$47676.1 Amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002 (To be attached upon adoption) SD 847070.1 Attachment No. PC 5 Draft resolution recommending approval of TS2012 -004 RESOLUTION NO. 2012- A RESOLUTION OF PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC STUDY NO. TS2012 -004 REGARDING NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT WHEREAS, the Irvine Company has applied to the City of Newport Beach for the an amendment to the North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC) Development Plan to allow future development in NNCPC, which consists of seven sub- areas that include Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800 and portions of Blocks 100, 400, 500, and San Joaquin Plaza ('Property "). WHEREAS, as part of its application, the Irvine Company requests approval of the amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, entitled Amendment to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement Between City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company LLC Concerning Addition of Properties and Residential Units to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement (Portions of Newport Center Blocks 100, 400 and 800 and San Joaquin Plaza). WHEREAS, as part of its application, the Irvine Company also requests approval of the transfer of development intensity (TD2012 -002), an amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, and an amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan (PD2012 -001) to increase the residential development allocation within the NNCPC from 430 dwelling units to a total of 524 dwelling units (increase of 94 units) and to allocate the units to the San Joaquin Plaza. Of the 94 units, 15 of the units are currently allowed by the General Plan, but are unassigned to any specific property; the remaining 79 units would result from the conversion of un -built non - residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms assigned to General Plan Anomaly Site No. 43) to multi - family development intensity (79 multi - family units) and transfer of the converted development intensity into the NNCPC. WHEREAS, General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3 permits development intensity to be transferred within Newport Center, subject to the approval of the City with the finding that the transfer is consistent with the General Plan and that the transfer will not result in any adverse traffic impacts. WHEREAS, Municipal Code Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance, or TPO) requires that a traffic study be prepared and findings be made before building permits may be approved if a proposed project will generate in excess of 300 average daily trips (ADT). WHEREAS, a traffic study (TS2012 -004), entitled North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis (Stantec Consulting Services Inc., May 2012), was prepared under the supervision of the City Traffic Engineer pursuant to the Chapter SD \847837.2 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) and its implementing guidelines. Although no specific development project is proposed at this time, development of the 94 residential units was assumed to be completed in 2015 and is forecasted to generate 393 additional trips per day, including 32 additional a.m. peak hour trips and 36 p.m. peak hour trips. It should be noted that the 430 residential units currently allocated and vested within the NNCPC were previously analyzed and approved under Traffic Study No. TS2007 -001 and added to the approved projects list. Traffic associated with projects on the approved projects list has been included in the cumulative traffic impact analysis included in the subject traffic study for this project. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 5, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time the Planning Commission considered all project - related applications, including the proposed traffic study. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting, including the evidence and arguments submitted by the City staff, the Irvine Company, and all interested parties. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds (1) The traffic study, entitled North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis (Stantec Consulting Services Inc., May 2012), was prepared under the supervision of the City Traffic Engineer pursuant to the Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) and its implementing guidelines. (2) The traffic study indicates that the project will increase traffic at 12 of the 20 study intersections by one percent (1 %) or more during peak hour periods one year after the completion of the project and, therefore, these 12 intersections require further Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) analysis. (3) Utilizing the ICU analysis specified by the TPO, the traffic study determined that the 12 primary intersections identified will continue to operate at satisfactory levels of service as defined by the Traffic Phasing Ordinance, and no improvements are required. (4) Based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the traffic study, the implementation of the proposed project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted primary intersection within the City of Newport Beach. (5) Since implementation of the proposed project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted primary intersection within the City of Newport Beach, no improvements or mitigation are necessary. 2 SD \847837.2 (6) The traffic study supports the finding that the proposed transfer of development intensity will have no direct or cumulative adverse impact on the study intersections, and no mitigation is required. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends approval of Traffic Study No. TS2012 -004 based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 5th DAY OF JULY, 2012. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: BY: Michael Toerge, Chairman fflu Fred Ameri, Secretary 3 SD 847837.2 North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis (To be attached upon approval) 4 SD 847837.2 Attachment No. PC 6 Draft resolution recommending approval of the NNCPC Amended AHIP RESOLUTION NO. 2012- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMEDING THE APPROVAL OF THE NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY AMENDED AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN WHEREAS, the Irvine Company has applied to the City of Newport Beach an amendment to the North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC) Development Plan to allow future development in NNCPC, which consists of seven sub -areas that include Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800 and portions of Blocks 100, 400, Block 500, and San Joaquin Plaza ( "Property'). WHEREAS, as part of its application, the Irvine Company requests approval of an amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, entitled Amendment to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement Between City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company LLC Concerning Addition of Properties and Residential Units to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement (Portions of Newport Center Blocks 100, 400 and 800 and San Joaquin Plaza). WHEREAS, as part of its application, the Irvine Company also requests approval of an amendment to the NNCPC Affordable Housing Implementation Plan ( "AHIP "). WHEREAS, the amended 2012 AHIP was prepared in accordance with General Plan Housing Policies H2.1 and H2.2 and General Plan Housing Programs 2.1.2, 2.2.1,and 2.2.6. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 5, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time the Planning Commission considered all project - related applications, including the amended 2012 AHIP. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting, including the evidence and arguments submitted by the City staff, the Irvine Company, and all interested parties. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information in the amended 2012 AHIP and in the full administrative record, before taking any action approving the amended 2012 AHIP. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that: The amended 2012 AHIP satisfies any obligation of the Irvine Company to the City under General Plan Housing Policies H2.1 and H2.2 and General Plan Housing Programs 2.1.2, 2.2.1, and 2.2.6 with respect to the SD \$47836.1 development of the Property pursuant to and during the term of the amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends that the City Council approve the amended 2012 AHIP. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 5t' DAY OF JULY, 2012. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: BY: Michael Toerge, Chairman fflu Fred Ameri, Secretary Brenda Wisneski, AICP, Zoning Administrator SD \847836.1 North Newport Center Planned Community Amended Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (To be attached upon approval) SD 847830.1 SD \$47836.1 Attachment No. PC 7 Trip Generation Analysis Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 19 Technology Drive Suite 200 Irvine CA 92618 -2334 Tel: (949) 923-6000 Fax: (949) 923-6121 May 16, 2012 City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Reference: San Joaquin Plaza - Trip Generation Comparison Attention: David Keely Dear Mr. Keely: The proposed San Joaquin Plaza development consists of a total of 524 dwelling units (DU). Of these 524 residential units, 430 DU are currently unbuilt but entitled on the site and 15 DU are unbuilt within Newport Center area. The remaining 79 DU are being converted from unbuilt hotel rooms from another site in Newport Center. This letter summarizes a trip generation comparison of the unbuilt 79 hotel rooms and the proposed 79 DU. Trip generation rates for the hotel rooms and the residential units are based on Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, Eighth Edition. Table 1 summarizes the trip rates and resulting trip generation. As this table indicates, 79 DU would generate 17 fewer AM peak hour trips, 17 fewer PM peak hour trips, and 315 fewer daily trips than 79 hotel rooms. The conversion of 79 hotel rooms to 79 residential units would have less impact on the surrounding circulation system during the AM peak hour, PM peak hour, and daily than 79 hotel rooms. Sincerely, STANTECCONSULTING SERVICES INC Cathy Lawrence, P.E. Transportation Engineer Tel: (949) 923 -6064 Cathy. Lawrence @stantec.com cal v: @0731active @07 3006780 \sanJnaquin_plazy _tptAteponVet_sanjcaquinplaza_ tfips_051612.d= Statttec May 16, 2012 David Keely Page 2 of 2 Reference: San Joaquin Plaza - Trip Generation Comparison Table 1 Trip Generation Comparison Trip Rates Hotel ITE 310 Rm 34 .22 .56 .31 .28 .59 8.17 Residential ITE 232 DU .06 .28 .34 .24 .14 .38 4.18 Trip Generation Hotel 79 Rm 27 17 44 25 22 47 645 Residential 79 DU 5 22 27 19 11 30 330 Source: Trip Generation Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers Attachment No. PC 8 NNCPC Development Plan Revisions North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan Land Uses, Development Standards Et Procedures Adopted December 18, 2007, Ordinance No. 2007 -20 (PA 2007 -151) Amended November 24, 2009, Ordinance No. 2009 -28 (PA 2009 -111) Amended May 24, 2011, Ordinance No. 2011 -16 (PA 2011 -017) Amended . 2012, Ordinance No. 2012- (PA 2012- [this page intentionally blank] Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Contents 1. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan .................................................. ............................... 1 A. Sub -Area Purpose .............................................................................................. ............................... l B. Relationship to Municipal Code ........................................................................ .............................10 C. Relationship to North Newport Center Design Regulations ............................. .............................10 11. Land Use and Development Regulations ........................................................... ............................... I 1 A. Permitted Uses ................................................................................................. ............................... 11 B. Development Limits .......................................................................................... .............................12 C. Transfer of Development Rights ....................................................................... .............................13 III. Site Development Standards .............................................................................. ............................... 15 A. Permitted Height of Structures .......................................................................... .............................15 B. Setback Requirements ....................................................................................... .............................16 C. Parking Requirements ....................................................................................... .............................18 D. Landscaping .................................................................................................... ............................... 19 E. Lighting ............................................................................................................. .............................19 F. Signs .................................................................................................................. .............................19 G. Residential Compatibility .................................................................................. .............................24 H. Residential Open Space Requirements .............................................................. .............................24 IV. Planned Community Development Plan Administration ................................... ............................... 25 A. Process for New Structures ............................................................................... .............................25 B. Process for New Signs ....................................................................................... .............................26 C. Transfer of Development Rights ....................................................................... .............................26 V. Definitions ............................................................................................................ .............................29 Appendix A — Design Regulations North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 4Q6/11 615/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures [this page intentionally blank] North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan The North Newport Center Planned Community district is comprised of seven sub -areas that include Fashion Island, Block 600 and Block 800 and portions of Block 100, Block 400, Block 500, and San Joaquin Plaza. The sub -areas that comprise North Newport Center shall be governed by the North Newport Center Planned Community ( "PC ") Development Plan set forth herein, which includes land uses, development standards, and administration. The City of Newport Beach Municipal Code allows a Planned Community Development Plan to address land use designations and regulations in Planned Communities. The North Newport Center PC Development Plan serves as the controlling zoning ordinance for the sub -areas identified in the Planned Community Development Plan and is authorized and intended to implement the provisions of the Newport Beach General Plan. A. Sub -Area Purpose Newport Center is a regional center comprised of major retail, professional office, entertainment, recreation, and residential development within the City of Newport Beach. The North Newport Center site comprises approximately 169 acres along San Joaquin Hills Road and Newport Center Drive. The seven sub -areas that make up the site including Fashion Island (75 acres), Block 100 (10 acres), Block 400 (4 acres), Block 500 (15 acres and a 0.4 -acre open space area at the corner of MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Road), Block 600 (25 acres), Block 800 (17 acres), and San Joaquin Plaza (23 acres) are shown on Figure 1 and are described below. The General Plan identifies the goal of creating a successful Mixed -Use district that integrates economic and commercial centers serving the needs of Newport Beach residents and the sub - region, with expanded opportunities for residential development. Fashion Island is the primary retail hub within Newport Center and is developed with retail, dining, and commercial entertainment uses. Permitted uses for Fashion Island include uses in support of the existing retail, dining, and commercial entertainment uses. Fashion Island is intended to be a vibrant regional retail and entertainment center and a day /evening destination with a wide variety of uses that will serve visitors, residents, and employees of the area. Figure 2, Fashion Island Sub -Area, shows the boundary of Fashion Island. The Commercial Office blocks include Block 100 (Figure 3), Block 400 (Figure 4) and a portion of Block 800 also referred to as Pacific Financial Plaza. Block 100 is generally comprised of administrative and professional offices that serve local and regional markets. Other uses permitted in the block include limited accessory retail, financial, service and entertainment uses. Block 400 is generally comprised of commercial office, with medical related offices and retail use. The Pacific Financial Plaza portion of Block 800 is generally comprised of commercial office and restaurant uses. The Mixed -Use blocks include Block 500 (Figure 5), Block 600 (Figure 6), and San Joaquin Plaza (Figure 7). The Mixed -Use blocks are generally composed of administrative, professional, and financial office uses. Block 600 contains hotel and related ancillary uses. This Development Plan allows for the diversification of land uses in order to encourage new and original uses consistent with the Mixed -Use concept as established in the General Plan. Permitted uses for the Mixed -Use blocks include offices, light general commercial, hotel, residential and other mixed uses in accordance with the General Plan MU -H3 land use designation. The residential portion of Block 800 (Figure 8) allows for multi - family residential or senior citizen housing uses. While not categorized as a mixed -use area, Block 800 contains two distinct uses which are not interchangeable. The northern portion of Block 800 is designated for residential use and the southern portion is commercial office. The boundaries of the Mixed -Use blocks included in this Development Plan are shown in Figure 5, Block 500 Sub -Area, Figure 6, Block 600 Sub -Area, and Figure 7, San Joaquin Plaza Sub -Area, respectively. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan O aaa xanui., MI.— /.;.: N TA CRUZ M. C4 400 81.k eoo i fas,,,on IvL,nO BIn�N Feyiowl Cen, e, 500 100 �p � S7 4 1000 0 1 0 JP ,r e �e � oo FP 4P ,O ❑North Newport Center Planned Community Figure 1 — North Newport Center Planned Community North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 N N� rd 65 ^b ara i Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan i ■ Planned Community C)\, Not included in Planned Community Sa 7 2J/ UlDr 0 HN Figure 2 — Fashion Island Sub -Area North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 3 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 1 c Q) U �I 0 CIL 3 ,z Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan 2 °//\v� ® Planned Community ❑ Not included in Planned Community 0 Figure 3 — Block 100 Sub Area North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 4/26/11 6/5/12 Q) Q Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan Sa\ �QO � © Planned Community ❑ Not included in Planned Community Figure 4 — Block 400 Sub Area North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 5 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 1 Ne� /c \o Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan San ,n — Joaquin Hill S Rd Planned Community ❑ Not included in Planned Community North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 m v'. HN Figure 5 — Block 500 Sub -Area Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan ■ Planned Community ❑ Not included in Planned Community h Figure 6 — Block 600 Sub -Area North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 7 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 1 11, a� 0 Q3 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan San Joaquin Hills Rd ❑ Planned Community Not included in Planned Community O ON Figure 7 — San Joaquin Plaza Sub -Area North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 8 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan San Clemente Drive I, R 'i 4 M V�s JW �Q ❑ Planned Community ❑ Not included in Planned Community R = Residential CO = Commercial Office Figure 8 - Block 800 Sub -Area North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 9 4/26/11 6/5/12 1 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan B. Relationship to Municipal Code Whenever the development regulations of this plan conflict with the regulations of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, the regulations contained herein shall prevail. The Municipal Code shall regulate this development whenever regulations are not provided within these district regulations. All words and phrases used in this North Newport Center PC Development Plan shall have the same meaning and definition as used in the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code unless defined differently in Section V— Definitions. The Municipal Code referred to herein for Blocks 500, 600, San Joaquin Plaza, and Fashion Island is the version of the Code in effect on December 18, 2007 and specifically includes Title 15 of the Municipal Code (Buildings and Construction), Title 19 of the Municipal Code (Subdivisions) and Title 20 of the Municipal Code (Planning and Zoning) but specifically excluding all other sections of the Municipal Code including Title 5 of the Municipal Code (Business Licenses and Regulations). The Municipal Code referred to herein for Blocks 100, 400 and 800 is the version of the Code in effect on June 5, 2012 and specifically includes Title 15 of the Municipal Code (Buildings and Construction), Title 19 of the Municipal Code (Subdivisions) and Title 20 of the Municipal Code (Planning and Zoning) but specifically excluding all other sections of the Municipal Code including Title 5 of the Municipal Code (Business Licenses and Regulations). C. Relationship to North Newport Center Design Regulations Development in North Newport Center shall be regulated by both the Development Plan and the Design Regulations, which is provided as Appendix A. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 10 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section II. Land Use and Development Regulations II. Land Use and Development Regulations A. Permitted Uses 1. General Permitted uses are those uses set forth in this Section for each sub -area as shown on Table 1. The uses identified within the table are not comprehensive but rather major use categories. Specific uses are permitted consistent with the definitions provided in Section V of this Development Plan. Uses determined to be accessory or ancillary to permitted uses, or residential support uses to permitted uses are also permitted. The Planning Director may determine other uses not specifically listed herein, provided they are consistent with the Commercial Office, Regional Commercial, Mixed -Use, and Residential General Plan districts, the purpose of this Planned Community Development Plan, and the purpose of the sub -area in which the property is located. Table 1 - North Newport Center Land Use Regulation Table Uses Fashion Island Block 100 Block 400 Block 500 Block 600 Block 600 San Joaquin Plaza Commercial Office Residential Banks/Savings and Loans P P P P P P P - With drive through services MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP Business, Government and Professional P P P P P P - Emergency Healthcare P' P P P P P - Management and Leasing Offices P P P P P P P - Office, Medical and Dental P P P P P P - Public Safety Facilities P MUP MUP P P MUP — P Commercial Recreation and Entertainment P UP UP MUP MUP UP MUP Cultural and Institutional UP UP UP P P UP — P Day Care P P' P' P P P' P Day Spas MUP MUP2 MUP2 MUP MUP MUPz MUP Eating and Drinking Establishments P* MUP MUP P ** P ** MUP i - Bars /Cocktail Lounges MUP UP UP UP UP UP UP Personal Improvement MUP MUP MUP P P MUP P - Health /Fitness Clubs MUP MUP MUP P P MUP P+ P Personal Services P P' P' P P P' P P Residential — P P P P Retail Sales P Pt Pt P P Pi P+ P - Animal a nd Services SReles MP U P MP U P MP Up UP il - Medicata P * * P ^' P ^^ P Visitor Accommodations UP UP UP UP UP UP UP P = Permitted UP = Use Permit MUP= Minor use Permit Issued by the Planning Director 1 = Permitted as Accessory/Ancillary Use 2 = In accordance with Chapter 20.87 of the Municipal Code *= A Minor Use Permit Issued by the Planning Director is required for the sale of alcohol =A Use Permit is required for the Sale of Alcohol += Intended for Residential Support Use + += Accessory and ancillary medical retail, including those in freestanding structures, shall remain subordinate to principal uses - -= Not Permitted North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 11 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 1 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section II. Land Use and Development Regulations 2. Open Space Corners The passive landscape areas on the following corners shall be limited to landscaping, and permitted signage. San Joaquin Hills Road and Avocado, Avocado and San Nicolas Drive (northwest and southwest comers), Avocado and San Miguel (northwest), San Joaquin Hills Road and Santa Rosa Drive (southwest and southeast), San Joaquin Hills Road and Santa Cruz Drive (southwest and southeast corners), San Joaquin Hills Road and Jamboree Road and San Joaquin Hills Road and MacArthur Boulevard. 3. Special Events The general regional Mixed -Use nature of North Newport Center results in a variety of special events and temporary uses throughout the year. Special community events, such as parades, trade shows, car shows, pageants, community concerts, outdoor displays, recreation/entertainment events and temporary structures are permitted within the North Newport Center Planned Community consistent with the following provisions: a. If the event takes place on private property within Fashion Island the event is not regulated so long as it does not displace required parking. Such events must comply with the City's Municipal Code related to noise control and other pertinent standards. b. If the event takes place anywhere else within North Newport Center or the public right - of -way, such events are permitted as long as they comply with the Municipal Code. B. Development Limits The development limits in this Development Plan are consistent with those established by the General Plan and are identified in Table 2 below. Development limits may be modified through the approval of a Transfer of Development Rights. Carts, kiosks, temporary and support uses are permitted and are not counted towards square footage development limits. Table 2 — Development Limits (A) A. Square footage indicated in Table 2 may not reflect current development limits because of the transfer of development rights provision described in Sections II.0 and IV.0 herein. Transfers may result in increased or decreased development limits, so long as the transfers are consistent with the General Plan and do not result in greater intensity than allowed in the Newport Center statistical area. A transfer of development rights must be approved by the City Council and is recorded on the City's Tracking Development Rights table for North Newport Center Planned Community. B. Hotel rooms are permitted in Fashion Island through the transfer of development rights. DC.The maximum development for Block 100 may not exceed 121,114 square feet. Transfers of development rights shall be permitted, provided the maximum development limit of 121,114 square feel is not exceeded. Transfers have resulted in no remaining intensity in Block 100. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 12 426/11 6/5/12 Fashion San Joaquin Land Use Island Block 100 Block 400 Block 500 Block 600 Block 800 Plaza Total Regional 1,619,525 sq. 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,619,525 sq. ft. Commercial ft. Movie 1,700 seats 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,700 seats Theater (27,500 sq. ft.) (27,500 sq. ft.) Hotel (B) 0 0 0 295 0 0 295 Residential 0 0 0 430(10 P0 245 5240 673769 Office/ 0 -0 -sq. ft. 91,727 sq. ft. 34694 1;367,873 286,166 337,264 2,413,711 sq. ft. Commercial (139 599 659 sq. ft. 1.340.609 sq. 95 550 sq. ft. LD1 ft.JDI LD1 A. Square footage indicated in Table 2 may not reflect current development limits because of the transfer of development rights provision described in Sections II.0 and IV.0 herein. Transfers may result in increased or decreased development limits, so long as the transfers are consistent with the General Plan and do not result in greater intensity than allowed in the Newport Center statistical area. A transfer of development rights must be approved by the City Council and is recorded on the City's Tracking Development Rights table for North Newport Center Planned Community. B. Hotel rooms are permitted in Fashion Island through the transfer of development rights. DC.The maximum development for Block 100 may not exceed 121,114 square feet. Transfers of development rights shall be permitted, provided the maximum development limit of 121,114 square feel is not exceeded. Transfers have resulted in no remaining intensity in Block 100. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 12 426/11 6/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section II. Land Use and Development Regulations D. Per City Council action on 1118/11 via resolution 2011 -102, the maximum permitted office /commercial development for Block 500 is 599.659 sq. ft., Block 600 is 1,340,609 sq. ft. and for San Joaquin Plaza is 95,550 sq. ft. 1. Fashion Island The total gross floor area for Fashion Island is 1,619,525 square feet plus thhe -1,700 seat movie theater seats. The movie theater building area is equivalent to and may be converted to 27,500 square feet of retail development. The conversion of the movie theater to retail space shall not require any additional parking. The gross floor area for Regional Commercial development is the total horizontal floor area of all floors of a building within the exterior walls thereof, measured in square feet, exclusive of common areas such as, but not limited to: covered malls and walkways, carts, kiosks, open or roofed patio areas (defined by planters, awnings, shade structures, fences or rails), covered entries, covered parking, driveways or loading areas. 2. Mixed -Use Sub -Areas The Mixed -Use blocks include Block 500, Block 600 and San Joaquin Plaza. Up to 4524 residential units and 295 hotel rooms are permitted within the Mixed -Use blocks. Residential and hotel uses are measured on a per unit basis. The gross floor area for all other permitted uses is the total enclosed area of all floors of a building measured to the outside face of the structural members in exterior walls, including halls, stairways, elevator shafts at each floor level, service and mechanical equipment rooms and basement or attic areas having a height of more than seven feet. Excluded are covered porches, walkways and loading docks, service tunnels, and mechanical shafts. Mechanical spaces on roofs, which are inaccessible to tenants, are not counted as square footage. Development limits for residential uses are based on unit counts, and are not within square footage limits. Support uses are not included in the square footage development limits and shall not require parking. 3. Commercial Office Blocks The maximum development limit for the commercial office blocks is specified in Table 2 above. The gross floor area for all permitted uses is the total enclosed area of all floors of a building measured to the outside face of the structural members in exterior walls, including halls, stairways, elevator shafts at each floor level, service and mechanical equipment rooms and basement or attic areas having a height of more than seven feet. Excluded are covered porches, walkways and loading docks, service tunnels, and mechanical shafts. Mechanical spaces on roofs, which are inaccessible to tenants, are not counted as square footage. Support uses are not included in the square footage development limits and shall not require parking. 4. Block 800 Residential The maximum number of dwelling units for multi - family residential use shall not exceed 245. C. Transfer of Development Rights The transfer of development rights among sub -areas of this Planned Community and to /from other areas in the Newport Center/Fashion Island District identified in the General Plan is allowed in accordance with the General Plan. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 13 426/11 6/5/12 1 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section II. Land Use and Development Regulations Development rights may be transferred through a change in location of use(s) and/or a conversion of non - residential use to any other non - residential use allowed by the General Plan and this Planned Community Development Plan or applicable zoning at the receiving site(s). Residential use may be relocated, but may not be converted to or from another use. The transfer of development rights shall be approved, as specified in Section IV.0 below, if the transfer will not result in any adverse traffic impacts and will not result in greater intensity than development allowed without the transfer. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 14 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards M. Site Development Standards The following site development standards shall apply to the North Newport Center Planned Community. A. Permitted Height of Structures 1. Standards for Allowable Heights Allowable heights are determined by sub -area. All building heights are measured at finished grade. Fashion Island: The maximum heights of structures within Fashion Island are depicted in Table 3, Fashion Island Height Limits. Table 3 — Fashion Island Height Limits Building Type Height Major Buildings 125' Mall Buildings 75' Parking Structures 55' Periphery Buildings 40' Block 100: The maximum height of all structures shall be 50 feet as measured from finished grade. Blocks 400, 500, and 600: The maximum height of all structures shall be 295 feet as measured from finished grade. Block 800: The maximum height of all structures within the residential portion shall be 200 feet as measured from finished grade. The maximum height of all structures within the commercial office portion shall be 125 feet as measured from finished grade. San Joaquin Plaza: The maximum height of all structures in San Joaquin Plaza shall be 65 feet as measured from finished grade. 2. Standards for Buildings Over 200 Feet in Height a. Aviation Compatibility Prior to issuance of building permits, the project applicant must demonstrate that the following conditions have been satisfied. New development shall be required to comply with the following conditions related to the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport: For development of structures that exceed 200 feet in height above ground level at a development site, applicants shall file a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) (FAA Form 7460 -1). Following the FAA's Aeronautical Study of the project, projects must comply with conditions of approval imposed or recommended by the FAA. Subsequent to the FAA findings, the North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 15 4Q6/1 -1 t 6/5/12 1 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards City shall refer the project to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) of Orange County for consistency analysis. 2. No buildings within the North Newport Center Planned Community area shall penetrate the FAA Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77 imaginary obstruction surface for John Wayne Airport. 3. Applicants shall file a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration with the FAA (Form 7460 -1) for any construction cranes that exceed 200 feet in height above ground level. b. Shade Standards Prior to issuance of a building permit for a structure over 200 feet in height that has the potential to shade residential areas north of San Joaquin Hills Road, a shade study shall be prepared by the applicant and submitted to the City. The shade study shall demonstrate that the new development will not add shade to the designated residential areas beyond existing conditions for more than three hours between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Pacific Standard Time, or for more than four hours between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time. The shade study shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Planning Director and the Planning Director shall determine conformance with the standards identified herein as part of the plan review process. C. Rooftop Appurtenances Rooftop appurtenances are permitted and may exceed the maximum building height up to 20 feet. Rooftop appurtenances shall demonstrate compliance with conditions related to the AELUP for the John Wayne Airport, consistent with Section III(A)(2)(a). Rooftop appurtenances must be screened from view; the height of rooftop appurtenances shall not exceed the height of the screening. Supports for window washing equipment are permitted, and are not required to be screened from view. No setbacks are required. The Planning Director shall notify the Planning Commission and City Council if rooftop appurtenances above the height limit are approved, consistent with Section IV(A)(3). d. Architectural Features Architectural features are permitted and may exceed the maximum building height up to 20 feet. Such features must be an extension of the architectural style of the building in terms of materials, design and color. Architectural features shall demonstrate compliance with conditions related to the AELUP for the John Wayne Airport, consistent with Section IlI(A)(2)(a). The Planning Director shall notify the Planning Commission and City Council if architectural features above the height limit are approved, consistent with Section IV (A)(3). B. Setback Requirements Setbacks for the seven sub -areas are listed below. Setbacks for surface parking must be screened using hedges, landscaping or other similar methods. Setbacks are the minimum distance from the property line to building, parking structure, or parking lot, unless otherwise specified. This is not intended to apply to interior lot lines or property lines. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 16 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards Fashion Island Newport Center Drive: 10 feet; may be reduced to 0 feet by the Planning Director through the plan review process. Block 100 Newport Center Drive: 15 feet Anacapa Drive: 15 feet Farallon Drive: 15 feet Block 400 Newport Center Drive: 15 feet San Nicolas Drive: 15 feet Block 500 Newport Center Drive: 15 feet Santa Rosa: 15 feet San Joaquin Hills: 15 feet San Nicolas: 15 feet Block 600 Newport Center Drive: 15 feet Santa Cruz: 15 feet San Simeon: 15 feet — setbacks for parking structure access points may be reduced by the Planning Director through the plan review process San Joaquin Hills: 15 feet — setbacks for parking structure access points may be reduced by the Planning Director through the plan review process Santa Rosa: 15 feet Center Drive (e /w): 0 feet Center Drive (n/s): 0 feet Block 800 Newport Center Drive: 15 feet Commercial office buildings shall be set back 15 feet from Block 800 residential Commercial office parking lots and parking structures shall be set back 5 feet from Block 800 residential Santa Barbara Drive: 15 feet San Clemente Drive: 15 feet Santa Maria Road: 0 feet San Joaquin Plaza San Joaquin Hills: 15 feet Santa Cruz: 15 feet San Clemente: 15 feet Santa Barbara: 15 feet North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 17 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 1 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards C. Parking Requirements 1. General Standards Parking requirements are based on gross floor area (as defined in the Development Limits for Fashion Island) for regional commercial uses, net floor area for office /commercial uses, and unit counts for hotel rooms and residential units. Kiosks for retail sales, covered or uncovered, shall not be included in the calculation of required parking. Accessory, ancillary, and support uses for hotel and residential developments shall not be included in the calculation of required parking. Kiosks and sundry shops serving tenants, including accessory, ancillary and support uses less than 5 percent of the gross floor area, are not counted as square footage and do not require parking. Parking management or engineering offices located in parking structures are counted as square footage and require parking. Parking requirements for North Newport Center are shown below on Table 4, North Newport Center Parking Requirements. Table 4 - North Newport Center Parking Requirements Land Use Parking Requirement Regional Commercial 3 spaces per 1,000 square feet' Movie Theater 3 spaces per 1,000 square feet Office 1 space per 375 square feet Medical Office Municipal Code Hotel Municipal Code Residential 2 spaces per unit includes 1 covered; plus 0.5 spaces per unit up to 50 units, then 0.25 spaces per unit thereafter for guest parking Other Municipal Code For office uses in San Joaquin Plaza, a parking management plan shall be required to utilize the parking ratios identified in Table 4 to demonstrate provision of adequate parking. If a parking management plan is not prepared for office uses in San Joaquin Plaza, parking shall be provided per the Municipal Code. Parking for Block 100, Block 400, and Block 800 Commercial Office shall be provided per the Municipal Code. Parking for Block 800 Residential shall be provided at 2 parking spaces per unit including 1 covered; plus 0.5 spaces per unit for guest parking. 2. Valet Parking Valet parking and satellite parking with shuttle service that involves use of the public right -of -way shall require approval by the City Traffic Engineer. 3. Parking Management Plan Parking management plans may be prepared if the applicant wishes to deviate from the parking standards identified above. Parking management plans may address issues such as modified parking requirements based upon complimentary peak hour demand of uses, off peak shared parking between sub - areas, drop off and I The parking requirement during the peak seasonal period is 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet per an existing parking management plan. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 18 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards valet services on private property, and tandem parking. The parking management plan shall take into account properties that are not part of the Planned Community district, but that are served by parking located within the district, and shall ensure that no detrimental effects to the existing parking for such properties occur. Parking management plans shall be prepared by an independent traffic engineer at the applicant's expense. Parking management plans shall be approved by the City Traffic Engineer prior to the issuance of building permits. D. Landscaping Landscaping shall be installed subject to the following standards and maintained in a healthy, weed - free condition, free of litter and so as not to interfere with traffic safety Surface Parking Lot Landscaping: Parking lots shall be landscaped at a minimum of 1 tree per 5 parking spaces. The minimum size of trees shall be 24 -inch box. 2. Water Conservation: Satellite linked irrigation controllers or appropriate best manage- ment practices shall be incorporated into landscape design for new construction. E. Lighting Parking lots and walkways accessing building and parking areas shall be illuminated with a minimum maintained 0.5 foot - candle average on the driving or walking surface during the hours of operation and one hour thereafter. If the applicant wishes to deviate from this lighting standard, a lighting plan may be prepared by the applicant and submitted to the Planning Director for review and approval. Indirect, decorative halo banding along the top of buildings is permitted. F. Signs 1. General Sign Standards All permanent and temporary signs in North Newport Center that are visible from public right -of- ways and public property shall be consistent with the provisions of these sign standards, unless otherwise approved by the Planning Director. All permanent and temporary signs that are not visible from public right -of -ways are not limited in quantity, size, location, or design. Sign illumination is permitted for all sign types. Wall signs that are visible from public right -of -ways must consist of individual fabricated letters; or routed -out letters in an opaque background. Enclosed "box" or "can" signs are not permitted, unless they are logos. All commercial uses are permitted to place at each entry an incidental sign located at or below eye level to be visible to pedestrians, and shall not exceed six square feet. In addition to other signs permitted in this section, signs used to give direction to vehicular or pedestrian traffic are permitted. Directional signs oriented to vehicular or pedestrian traffic within internal drives or walkways of a development block are not regulated. Directional signs oriented to vehicular or pedestrian traffic in the public right of way are regulated as follows. Sign content shall not be limited. Signs shall be subject to the review of the City Traffic Engineer to ensure adequate sight distance in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. Directional signs are limited North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 19 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 1 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards to a maximum of 10 square feet in size but are not limited in quantity, location, or design. Temporary signs that are intended to be displayed for 60 days or less are permitted for purposes related to special events, holiday activities, and store openings. Detailed standards for temporary signs are contained below. A comprehensive sign program may be prepared if the applicant wishes to deviate from the sign standards identified herein. Comprehensive sign programs shall be submitted for review and consideration in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. Sign programs in place prior to this writing including the Island Hotel and Leasing Sign Programs shall remain in place. 2. Restricted Sign Types Signs visible from public right -of -ways are subject to the following restrictions: a. No rotating, flashing, blinking, or signing with animation shall be permitted on a permanent basis. b. No signs shall be permitted which imitate or resemble official traffic signs or signals. C. No wind signs or audible signs are permitted. Animated signs visible from public streets are not allowed unless otherwise permitted by the Municipal Code. 3. Sign Standards for Fashion Island In addition to the general sign standards identified above, specific sign standards for Fashion Island are provided in Table 6, Fashion Island Sign Standards below. Table 6 — Fashion Island Sign Standards North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 20 426/11 6/5/12 Maximum Letter/ Sign Type Location Maximum Number Maximum Sign Size Logo Height Shopping Center Each vehicle entry drive location 2 per entry drive (one 100 square feet 9 feet Identification Sign on each side) 10 feet high Major Tenant Sign Exterior walls or parapets of 1 sign per building Determined by name 10 feet buildings elevation (maximum 4 of tenant; letter /logo signs for each major height not to exceed tenant) 10 feet Freestanding Exterior walls or parapets of 1 sign per building Determined by name 3 feet Commercial buildings elevation (maximum 4 of tenant; letter /logo signs for each building height not to exceed 3 or structure) feet Monument 1 per building 50 square feet 4.5 feet 5 feet high Tenant Sign Exterior elevations of shopping 1 sign per tenant, per 1 square foot per each 10 feet center and parking structures building elevation lineal foot of storefront facing Newport Center Drive (not to exceed 100 square feet) Theater Signs Facing Newport Center Drive 1 300 square feet Theater name: (exterior wall or parapet of 20 feet high 5 feet building which theater occupies, Each show title: free standing, or on adjacent 3 feet high parking structure) 15 feet wide North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 20 426/11 6/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards 4. Sign Standards for Mixed -Use and Commercial Office Blocks In addition to the general sign standards identified above, specific sign standards for the Mixed -Use blocks, Block 100, Block 400, and Block 800 are provided in Table 7 below. Primary building address numbers shall be visible from the street (and/or pedestrian walkways in the case of necessity), and be located on the building so that they are visible from adjacent frontage roads and designated parking areas, except for the buildings at 500 and 550 Newport Center Drive, which have their primary address numbers on the cubes along Newport Center Drive. Secondary address signs may be located where appropriate for on -site orientation and safety. All address signs shall have a consistent color, design, and material for any given building. A single letter style is recommended. Table 7 — Sign Standards for Blocks 100, 400, 500, 600, 800 and San Joaquin Plaza Maximum Letter/ Type Location Maximum Number Maximum Sign Size Logo Height —Sign Store Address Each entry to store 1 per store entry 6 square feet 12 inches Entry Marker Signs To be approved by Planning 7 signs 36 square feet (with 2- 2 feet Santa Rosa Drive Director 15 feet high foot overhang) sign located at at San Joaquin Hills Road (1 per corner) 15 feet high 4. Sign Standards for Mixed -Use and Commercial Office Blocks In addition to the general sign standards identified above, specific sign standards for the Mixed -Use blocks, Block 100, Block 400, and Block 800 are provided in Table 7 below. Primary building address numbers shall be visible from the street (and/or pedestrian walkways in the case of necessity), and be located on the building so that they are visible from adjacent frontage roads and designated parking areas, except for the buildings at 500 and 550 Newport Center Drive, which have their primary address numbers on the cubes along Newport Center Drive. Secondary address signs may be located where appropriate for on -site orientation and safety. All address signs shall have a consistent color, design, and material for any given building. A single letter style is recommended. Table 7 — Sign Standards for Blocks 100, 400, 500, 600, 800 and San Joaquin Plaza North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 21 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 1 Maximum Sign Maximum Sign Letter /Logo Type Description Location Maximum Number Size Height A Large cube or blade Santa Rosa Drive 2 15 feet high 24 inches sign located at at San Joaquin Hills Road (1 per corner) 15 feet wide Santa Cruz Drive 2 15 feet high 24 inches entries to Newport Center at San Joaquin Hills Road (1 per corner) 15 feet wide Block 500: 1 15 feet high 24 inches at San Joaquin Hills Road I Avocado 15 feet wide Block 500: 1 15 feet high 24 inches at San Nicolas / Avocado 15 feet wide MacArthur Boulevard 1 15 feet high 24 inches at San Joaquin Hills Road 15 feet wide San Joaquin Plaza: 1 15 feet high 24 inches at Jamboree / San Joaquin Hills Road 15 feet wide B Small cube located San Nicolas Drive 2 5 feet high 5 inches along Newport at Newport Center Drive (1 per corner) 5 feet wide Newport Center Drive 2 5 feet high 5 inches Center Drive and Santa Rosa (1 per corner) 5 feet wide Block 600: 5 5 feet high 5 inches Along Newport Center Drive 5 feet wide Block 800: 1 5 feet high 5 inches Newport Center Drive and 5 feet wide Santa Maria Road C Other Freestanding Block 100 1 per frontage 5 feet high 10 inches Signs 10 feet wide Block 400: Avocado at San Miguel 2 5 feet high 13 inches Along San Nicolas 1 6 feet wide Between 500 and 550 Newport Center 1 4 feet high 18 inches Drive 12 feet wide North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 21 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 1 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 22 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 Maximum Sign Maximum Sign Letter /Logo Type Description Location Maximum Number Size Height Block 600: 2 7 feet high 18 inches Along Santa Cruz Drive 22 feet wide Block 800: 1 5 feet high 14/24 inches Along Santa Barbara Drive 25 feet wide 1 3.5 feet high 20 inches 10 feet wide Santa Cruz Drive 1 15 feet high 24 inches at Newport Center Drive 15 feet wide San Joaquin Plaza: 1 each 6 feet high 5112 inches for Along San Joaquin Hills Road; Santa (3 signs along 12 feet wide Tenant ID; Cruz Drive; San Clemente Drive) 18 inches for San Clemente Drive Project ID San Clemente Drive 1 5 feet high 18 inches at Santa Cruz Drive 12 feet wide San Clemente Drive 1 5 feet high 18 inches at Santa Barbara 16 feet wide D Block 400: 1 Determined by 18 inches Signs mounted on landscape facing Newport Center Drive name of tenant; walls (includes ground mounted signs in front of landscaping and landscape walls) letter /logo height not to exceed 18 inches Block 500: facing Newport Center Drive 4 Determined by name of tenant; 26 inches letter /logo height not to exceed 26 inches Block 600: 2 facing San Joaquin Determined by 18 inches facing streets Hills; name of tenant; 5 facing Newport letter /logo height Center Drive; not to exceed 18 1 facing Santa Rosa inches Block B00: 2 Determined by 36 inches at San Clemente project entry name of tenant; letter /logo height not to exceed 36 inches Block B00: 1 Determined by Winches at San Clemente / Santa Barbara name of tenant; letter /logo height not to exceed 36 inches Block 800 1 Determined by 40 inches Along Newport Center Drive name of tenant; letter /logo height not to exceed 40 Inches North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 22 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards 5. Temporary Signs The following standards are intended to produce consistent sign design for temporary signs within Newport Center. Temporary signs are to identify a future site or project; or a facility under develop- ment or offered for lease. Temporary signs that are visible from public right -of -ways and identify new construction or remodeling may be displayed for the duration of the construction period beyond the 60 -day limit. Signs mounted on a construction fence are allowed during construction and may be rigid or fabric. The top of the sign must be no greater than 20 feet above grade. Maximum Number: One (1) temporary sign is permitted on a site for each frontage street, up to two (2) signs per building, but not at the same comer of the building. Type: Single- or double -faced ground signs or wall signs. Location: if ground signs, they may be parallel or perpendicular to the roadway. If wall signs, they must be located below the sill of second floor windows. Design: Rectangular shape; rigid, permanent material; not fabric. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 23 426/14 6/5/12 1 Maximum Sign Maximum Sign Letter /Logo Type Description Location Maximum Number Size Height E Building Sign On building elevation, awning or 2 per Primary Tenant Determined by Primary parking structure 1 per Secondary name of tenant; Tenant- Tenant letter /logo height 24 inches 3 for restaurants not to exceed: Secondary Primary 24 inches, Tenant- Secondary 16 16 inches inches Restaurant: Restaurant: 40 40 inches inches high F Building Address On building elevation 1 each 24 inches high 24 inches (additional address signs may be located where appropriate for on -site orientation) G Freestanding Santa Rosa Drive at Newport Center 1 each 8 feet high 18 inches Building Address Drive; San Nicolas Drive at Newport 6 feet wide Center Drive; Santa Cruz at Newport Center Drive; San Joaquin Hills Road 2 28 inches H Advisory Signs Parking Lots and As appropriate for 6 feet high As required by Entries to Parking Lots safety and orientation Fire Department or Building Code for safety purposes I Drive Through Drive Throughs 1 per tenant per 8 feet wide 15 inches Signs elevation, up to 2 on walls of structure J Apartment Leasing Block 800 1 per frontage 5 feet high by 3 24 inches Signs feet wide panel on post K Office Leasing Blocks 100, 400, 500, 600, 800 and 1 per frontage 4.5 feet high by 5 7 inches Signs San Joaquin Plaza feet wide 5. Temporary Signs The following standards are intended to produce consistent sign design for temporary signs within Newport Center. Temporary signs are to identify a future site or project; or a facility under develop- ment or offered for lease. Temporary signs that are visible from public right -of -ways and identify new construction or remodeling may be displayed for the duration of the construction period beyond the 60 -day limit. Signs mounted on a construction fence are allowed during construction and may be rigid or fabric. The top of the sign must be no greater than 20 feet above grade. Maximum Number: One (1) temporary sign is permitted on a site for each frontage street, up to two (2) signs per building, but not at the same comer of the building. Type: Single- or double -faced ground signs or wall signs. Location: if ground signs, they may be parallel or perpendicular to the roadway. If wall signs, they must be located below the sill of second floor windows. Design: Rectangular shape; rigid, permanent material; not fabric. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 23 426/14 6/5/12 1 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards Mounting Technique: Flush with building; entirely on glass or entirely on a wall surface; not overlapping glass or wall surface. Duration: Signs may exist from the time of lease or sale of the parcel until the construction and/or leasing of the facility is complete. G. Residential Compatibility In keeping with the purpose of Fashion Island and the Mixed -Use sub - areas, permitted uses in North Newport Center include uses and events that have the potential to generate noise. Due to the day /evening use of Fashion Island in particular, noise generating activities, lighting, odors from restaurants, and similar occurrences are produced and take place during all hours of operation. Such uses and events are required to comply with the City's Municipal Code regulating these uses. Disclosures shall be made to prospective buyers /tenants of residential developments that there is an expectation for noise levels higher than in typical suburban residential areas as part of the Mixed -Use concept within North Newport Center. Additionally, the disclosure shall indicate that there is an expectation for lighting, odors and similar occurrences in a Mixed -Use setting as compared to suburban residential areas. H. Residential Open Space Requirements The following open space standards shall apply to residential development projects: 1. Common Outdoor Open Space Each project shall provide common outdoor open space either at grade, podium level, or roof level. Common outdoor open space areas shall have a minimum dimension of 30 feet and may contain active and/or passive areas and a combination of hardscape and landscape features, but a minimum of 10 percent of the common outdoor open space must be landscaped. All common outdoor open space must be accessible to all residents. Projects shall provide a minimum of 5 percent common outdoor open space based on the residential lot area. 2. Common Indoor Space Each project shall provide at least one community room of at least 500 square feet for use by all residents of the project. The area should be located adjacent to, and accessible from, common outdoor open space. This area may contain active or passive recreational facilities or meeting space, and must be accessible through a common corridor. 3. Private Open Space At least 50 percent of all dwelling units shall provide private open space, on a balcony, patio, or roof terrace, with a minimum area of 30 square feet each and an average horizontal dimension of 6 feet. Balconies should be proportionately distributed throughout the project in relationship to floor levels and sizes of units. For any project 8 acres or larger, open space shall be provided in accordance with the General Plan. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 24 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section IV. Planned Community Development Plan Administration IV. Planned Community Development Plan Administration A. Process for New Structures 1. Purpose and Intent The purpose of the Plan Review process is to provide for review of development proposals for new structures within the North Newport Center Planned Community district. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, all development proposals shall be subject to a Plan Review by the Planning Director for review to determine compliance with the Planned Community Development Plan and North Newport Center Design Regulations. Signs, tenant improvements, carts, kiosks, temporary structures and uses are exempt from this provision. 2. Submittal Contents Each Plan Review submittal or amendment thereof shall contain sufficient details for a thorough review of the relationships between uses on the site and on adjacent sites consistent with the Development Plan and the Design Regulations. At the discretion of the Planning Director, the requirements for submittal of a Plan Review may be altered from those set forth below when the Director determines that other information will be sufficient to allow a thorough review of the project by the approving authority. Submittals for Plan Review shall include plans that contain the following elements in addition to the City's submittal requirements for plan check: a. Existing Conditions including adjacent structures and proposed improvements b. Floor Plans C. Elevations that clearly demonstrate the architectural theme of each face of all structures, including walls and signs, illustrating the following: 1) All exterior materials 2) All exterior colors 3) Building heights d. Parking management plan (where applicable) e. Preliminary Landscape Plan, illustrating: 1) General location of all plant materials, by common and botanical names 2) Size of plant materials 3) Irrigation concept f Lighting Plan, including: locations, fixture height, lighting fixture product type and technical specification g. Permitted and proposed floor area, number of hotel rooms, theater seats, and/or residential units h. Statement of consistency with the General Plan, Planned Community Development Plan and Design Regulations i. Any additional background and supporting information, studies or materials that the Planning Director deems necessary for a clear representation of the projects j. Shade analysis if required k. Open Space Plans for residential projects North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 25 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 1 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section IV. Planned Community Development Plan Administration 3. Review and Action Submittals shall be reviewed by the Planning Director, and the Planning Director shall approve the project if he /she makes the following findings: a. The proposed use and/or development is consistent with the General Plan. b. The proposed use and/or development is consistent with the North Newport Center PC Development Plan and Design Regulations. The Planning Director shall notify the Planning Commission and City Council if deviations from the height limit are approved. The Planning Director action is the final action unless appealed in accordance with the Municipal Code. B. Process for New Signs Applications for new signs shall follow the process identified in the Municipal Code. Submittal shall be reviewed for consistency with the Development Plan and Design Regulations. C. Transfer of Development Rights The following procedure shall be used for the transfer of development rights. The project applicant shall submit an application to the Planning Director, which identifies the quantity of entitlement (floor area, hotel rooms, theater seats) to be relocated, and the sending and receiving sites. If the requested transfer includes the conversion of non - residential uses, the application shall also identify the quantity of entitlement, by use category, before and after the transfer. 2. The City Traffic Engineer shall perform a traffic analysis to determine the total number of PM peak hour trips that would be generated by development allowed with and without the transfer. Trip generation rates shall be based on standard trip generation values in the current version of ITE's "Trip Generation," unless the Traffic Engineer determines that other rates are more valid for the uses involved in the transfer. 3. Depending on the location of the sending and receiving sites, the Traffic Engineer may determine that a more detailed traffic analysis is required to determine whether adverse traffic impacts will result from the transfer. This analysis shall demonstrate whether allowed development, with and without the transfer, would either cause or make worse an unsatisfactory level of service at any primary intersections for which there is no feasible mitigation. This analysis shall be consistent with the definitions and procedures contained in the Traffic Phasing Ordinance of the Municipal Code, except that "unsatisfactory level of service" shall be as specified in the General Plan. 4. If the transfer request involves the conversion of uses, the Planning Director shall perform a land use intensity analysis to determine the floor area that could be developed with and without the transfer. For purposes of this analysis, theater use shall be allocated 16.1765 square feet per seat. Hotel use shall be allocated the number of square feet per room at which it is included in the General Plan. When the General Plan does not specify intensity for hotel rooms, it shall be as determined by the Planning Director. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 26 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section IV. Planned Community Development Plan Administration 5. Applications for transfer of development rights shall be considered by the City Council as a ministerial action. The City Council shall approve a transfer of development rights if it finds that the transfer will result in no more trips and no greater intensity of land use than the development allowed without the transfer. In addition, if the traffic study in Subsection c. is required, the City Council shall approve the transfer if it results in no greater traffic impact than the development allowed without the transfer. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 27 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 1 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section IV. Planned Community Development Plan Administration [this page intentionally blank] North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 28 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section V. Definitions V. Definitions All words and phrases used in this North Newport Center PC shall have the same meaning and definition as used in the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code unless defined differently in this section. Architectural Features: A visually prominent or formally significant element of a building which expressed its architectural language and style in a complementary fashion. Architectural features should be logical extensions of the massing, details, materials and color of the building which complement and celebrate its overall aesthetic character. Advisory Sign: Any sign that contains directional or safety information; does not contain advertisements. Audible Signs: Any sign that uses equipment to communicate a message with sound or music. Banks /Savings & Loans: Establishments that provide a full range of retail banking and mortgage loan services to individuals and businesses. Includes only those institutions engaged in the on -site circulation of cash money. Also includes businesses offering check - cashing services. Drive - through or drive -up service included. Bars and Cocktail Lounges: Establishments engaged in selling or serving alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises or establishments having any of the following characteristics: Licensed as a "public premises" by the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. Provides an area for serving alcoholic beverages that is operated during hours not corresponding to regular meal service hours. Food products sold or served incidentally to the sale or service of alcoholic beverages shall not be deemed as constituting regular food service. Building Elevation: The exterior wall surface formed by one (1) side of the building. Building Height: Building height is measured from the corresponding point on the roof to the exterior finished grade. If the building is on a sloping surface, the height measurement is taken from the building entrance. Exceptions include but are not limited to below grade parking structure entrances, motor courts, and retaining walls. See Graphic 1 on page 34. Business, Government and Professional: Offices of firms, individuals or organizations that provide professional, executive, management or administrative services (e.g., architectural, engineering, government, insurance, investment, legal, planning). Includes administrative, clerical or public contact offices of a government agency, including incidental storage and maintenance of vehicles. Support retail and service uses also allowed. Carts and Kiosks: Carts and kiosks are small, freestanding structures used for retail sales and services. Generally mobile in terms of ease of relocation, the structures can be seasonal, temporary or for a more permanent use. Commercial, Recreation and Entertainment: Establishments providing participant or spectator recreation or entertainment, either indoors or outdoors, for a fee or admission charge. Illustrative examples of these uses include: North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 29 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 1 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section V. Definitions arcades or electronic games centers having three or more coin - operated game machines bowling alleys billiard parlors cinemas ice /roller skating rinks live entertainment pool rooms tennis /racquetball courts theaters Cultural Institutions: Public or private institutions that display or preserve objects of community, or cultural interest in one or more of the arts or sciences. Day Care: Non - medical care and supervision of children or adults on a less than 24 hour basis, including nursery schools, preschools, and day care centers. Day Spas: Establishments that specialize in the full complement of body care including, but not limited to, body wraps, facials, pedicures, make -up, hairstyling, nutrition, exercise, water treatments and massage which is open primarily during normal daytime business hours and without provisions for overnight accommodations. Department Store: A store selling a wide variety of goods or services arranged in several departments. Eating and Drinking Establishments: Establishments engaged in serving prepared food or beverages for consumption on or off the premises. Emergency Health Care: Establishments that provide emergency medical service with no provision for continuing care on an inpatient basis. Entry Marker Sign: Sign used to provide information on activities and events, as well as advertise stores and shops within a shopping center. Eye Level: The height of 5 feet measured from grade. Freestanding Commercial: Any building with a commercial use which is separated from other commercial uses by parking and/or streets. Internal Pedestrian Street: Any walkway, path, plaza, arcade or corridor, either covered or open to the sky, which is primarily for use by people on foot and is not adjacent to the frontage road or common parking areas. Major Building: A mall building over 50,000 square feet. Major Tenant: A store or restaurant having a minimum of 10,000 square feet of floor space, which is located within or between other commercial buildings. Mall Building: Retail buildings where stores front a pedestrian walkway, which may be enclosed or open. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 30 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section V. Definitions Medical Retail: Sales of medical goods or services that are retail oriented. Illustrative examples of these uses include: eye exam, eyeglass /contact lens sales skin treatments body scanning dental enhancement treatments Minor Use Permit: Use permit issued by the Planning Director. Monument Sign: Any sign that is supported by its own structure and is not part of or attached to any building. Parking Structure: Structures containing more than one story principally dedicated to parking. Parking structures may contain accessory, ancillary and resident support uses. Periphery Building: Building located along the ring of Fashion Island adjacent to Newport Center Drive. Personal Improvement: Includes those services that are personal and that promote the health and well -being of an individual. Personal Services: Establishments that provide recurring services of a personal nature. Illustrative examples of these uses include: barber and beauty shops clothing rental shops dry cleaning pick up store with limited equipment dry cleaning with no on -site equipment home electronics and small appliance repair postal services locksmiths self - service laundries shoe repair shops tailors and seamstresses tanning salons printing & duplicating travel agencies /services nail salon Podium Level:A superposed terrace conforming to a building's plan, a continuous pedestal; a level of vertical segregation linking separate areas. Primary Tenant: The largest tenant of a building. Project Identification Sign: A free - standing (single or double faced) monument sign containing the project name. Public Safety Facilities: Police, fire, paramedic and emergency service facilities. Regional Commercial Gross Floor Area: Refer to Section II.B.1 above. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 31 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 1 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section V. Definitions Residential: An area within a structure on a parcel that contains separate or independent living facilities for one or more persons, with area or equipment for sleeping, sanitation or food preparation. Retail Sales: Stores and shops which sell various lines of merchandise for profit. This includes the sales of non - durable and durable goods to customers. Illustrative examples of these stores and lines of merchandise include: antiques appliances artists supplies automotive accessories (no installation) animal sales and services bakeries bicycles books cameras and photographic supplies carpeting and floor covering clothing and accessories convenience markets /stores department stores drug and discount stores dry goods electronic equipment (including automotive installation) food and beverages gift shops handcrafted items hardware hobby materials jewelry real estate information center luggage and leather goods medical supplies and equipment musical instruments, parts and accessories office supplies paint and wallpaper pharmacies shoe stores specialty shops sporting goods and equipment supermarkets tobacco toys and games Rooftop Appurtenance: Rooftop appurtenances include, but are not limited to, mechanical equipment, stairwell and elevator shaft housing, antennae, window washing equipment, and wireless communication facilities. See Graphic 1 on page 34. Secondary Tenant: A small tenant; not the primary tenant of an office building. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 32 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section V. Definitions Senior Citizen Housing: A residential development for senior citizens (i.e., persons 55 years of age or older) that has at least 35 dwelling units and conforms to Civil Code 51.3(b)(4). Service Tunnels: A corridor limited to access for building supply and maintenance personnel and equipment including horizontal and vertical tunnels and shafts, and freight elevators, not intended for customer circulation or access, and not for use as storage or office space. Sign: Any media, including their structure and component parts which are used or intended to be used out -of -doors to communicate information to the public. Sign Area: The area enclosed by a rectangle drawn around the working, numbers or images composing the sign. Sign Face: The physical plane and/or surface upon which the working or images are applied. Sign Letter: The individual symbols of the alphabet used in forming the words of a message. Shopping Center Identification Sign: A monument sign identifying a shopping center. Support Uses: Uses within residential developments, offices and hotels, and parking structures designed, oriented, and intended to primarily serve building occupants. This includes uses such as dry cleaners, coffee vendors, and sundry shops. Such uses must be consistent with the pertinent regulations in Table 1. Tenant Sign: Any permanent sign of an establishment that is located on or attached to the storefront elevation, a covered walkway, or an awning for the purpose of communicating the name of the tenant. Temporary Sign: Any sign, banner, pennant, valance, or advertising display constructed of cloth, canvas, plywood, light fabric, cardboard, wallboard or other light materials, with or without frames, intended to be displayed for a limited period of time. Theater Sign: Any permanent sign used to communicate to the public the name of a theater and the show(s) or movie(s) that are offered. Vehicle Entry: Any intersection points along the public right -of -way that provide access for automobiles. Visitor Accommodations: Establishments offering lodging rooms, including bed and breakfasts, inns, hotel, and motels. Incidental support facilities are included within these uses. Wind Sign: A series of similar banners or objects of plastic or other light material more than 2 inches in diameter which are fastened together at intervals by wire, rope, cord, string or by any other means, designed to move and attract attention upon being subjected to pressure by wind or breeze. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 33 4Q6/1 -1 6/5/12 1 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section V. Definitions MECHANICAL PENTHOUSE ELEVATOR OVERUN kRAPET SPACE M NOTE: In no instance shall any part of the building, including rooftop appurtenances or architectural features, penetrate the FAA (Part 77) imaginary obstruction surface for John Wayne Airport. Graphic 1, Example of Building Height and Rooftop Appurtenances North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 34 4126/11 6/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations NORTH NEWPORT CENTER DESIGN REGULATIONS North Newport Center Design Regulations 4/26/11 6/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations [this page intentionally blank] North Newport Center Design Regulations 4Q6/1 -1 615/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................... ............................... 1 A. Purpose of Design Regulations ......................................................................... ............................... 1 B. Newport Center Design Framework .................................................................. ............................... 1 C. North Newport Center ........................................................................................ ..............................4 H. Design Regulations .............................................................................................. ............................... 7 Usingthese Regulations .............................................................................................. ............................... 7 A. Building Location and Massing ........................................................................ ............................... 7 1. Site Planning Elements ........................................................................... ............................... 7 2. Building Envelope .................................................................................. ............................... 9 3. Building Character and Style .................................................................. ............................... 9 4. Building Materials and Colors .............................................................. ............................... 12 5. Parking Structures ................................................................................... .............................12 B. Landscape .......................................................................................................... .............................13 1. Overall Landscape ................................................................................. ............................... 13 2. Perimeter and Street Landscape ............................................................ ............................... 14 3. Parking Lot Landscape ............................................................................ .............................15 4. Internal Landscape ................................................................................ ............................... 16 C. Circulation ......................................................................................................... .............................16 1. Streets and Pedestrian Activity ............................................................... .............................16 2. Service and Emergency ........................................................................... .............................20 3. Parking Lots ............................................................................................ .............................21 D. Orientation and Identity .................................................................................... .............................22 1. Gateways and Entrances ....................................................................... ............................... 22 2. View Corridors ........................................................................................ .............................23 3. Landmarks ............................................................................................... .............................24 4. Signage .................................................................................................... .............................25 5. Lighting ................................................................................................... .............................36 North Newport Center Design Regulations 4Q6/11 615/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations [this page intentionally blank] North Newport Center Design Regulations 4/26/11 6/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations I. Introduction A. Purpose of Design Regulations The Design Regulations expand upon the regulations set forth in the Planned Community Development Plan. The Design Regulations are intended to be used for reference by the City of Newport Beach as part of the plan review process. It is recognized that North Newport Center will be built and redeveloped over time and that not all regulations may be achieved nor are applicable for any given project. All new commercial and residential development shall be subject to the North Newport Center Design Regulations. Review for compliance of projects under this section shall occur through the plan review process, as defined in the Development Plan, prior to building permit issuance. B. Newport Center Design Framework Newport Center is a 600 -acre master planned area. Development within Newport Center began in the 1960s and generally has followed the following guiding principles: 1. Strong physical urban design framework which provides structure and character yet allows flexibility 2. Synergistic mix of land uses, market driven to insure economic vitality 3. Balanced and dispersed auto access 4. Organized in "blocks" and districts to break down scale and provide identity 5. Pedestrian Orientation 6. Building massing that responds to topography, with taller buildings located along San Joaquin Hills Road 7. Unifying architectural and landscape character Aerial view of bluff (circa 1960) North Newport Center Design Regulations 1 4Q6/1- 16/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations Early Newport Center Planning Diagrams and Sketches (circa 1960) The design regulations provide standards that govern future development so that, to the extent feasible, the initial design framework is carried forward and the design and development policies from the Land Use Element of the General Plan are implemented. North Newport Center Design Regulations 4/26/116/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations General Plan Policies Newport Center The following policies from the Land Use Element are for Newport Center as a whole. Development within North Newport Center should contribute toward the policies whenever possible. • Development Scale: Reinforce the original design concept for Newport Center by concentrating the greatest building mass and height in the northeasterly section along San Joaquin Hills Road, where the natural topography is highest and progressively scaling down building mass and height to follow the lower elevations toward the southwesterly edge along East Coast Highway. • Urban Form: Encourage that some new development be located and designed to orient to the inner side of Newport Center Drive, establishing physical and visual continuity that diminishes the dominance of surface parking lots and encourages pedestrian activity. • Pedestrian Connectivity and Amenity: Encourage that pedestrian access and uses within the district be improved with additional walkways and streetscape amenities concurrent with the development of expanded and new uses. • Fashion Island Architecture and Streetscape: Encourage that new development in Fashion Island complement and be of equivalent or higher design quality than existing buildings. Reinforce the existing promenades by encouraging retail expansion that enhances the storefront visibility to the promenades and provides an enjoyable retail and pedestrian experience. Additionally, new buildings shall be located on axes connecting Newport Center Drive with existing building to provide visual and physical connectivity with adjoining uses, where practical. Mixed -Use District and Neighborhood The following policies from the Land Use Element are City -wide in orientation. Development within North Newport Center should contribute toward the policies whenever possible. • Mixed -Use Buildings: Require that Mixed -Use buildings be designed to convey a high level of architectural and landscape quality and ensure compatibility among their uses in consideration of the following principles: - Design and incorporation of building materials and features to avoid conflicts among uses, such as noise, vibration, lighting, odors, and similar impacts - Visual and physical integration of residential and non - residential uses - Architectural treatment of building elevation and modulation of their massing - Separate and well- defined entries for residential units and non - residential businesses - Design of parking areas and facilities for architectural consistency and integration among uses - Incorporation of extensive landscape appropriate to its location; urbanized streetscapes, for example, would require less landscape along the street North Newport Center Design Regulations 3 4Q6/1- 16/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations frontages but integrate landscape into interior courtyards and common open spaces • Mixed -Use Building Location and Size of Non- Residential Uses: Require that 100 percent of the ground floor street frontage of Mixed -Use buildings be occupied by retail and other compatible non - residential uses, unless specified otherwise by policies for a district or corridor. • Parcels Integrating Residential and Non - Residential Uses: Require that properties developed with a mix of residential and non - residential uses be designed to achieve high levels of architectural quality in accordance with policies related to the character and quality of multi- family residential and the architecture and site design of commercial districts, be planned to assure compatibility among the uses, and provide adequate circulation and parking. Residential uses should be seamlessly integrated with non - residential uses through architecture, pedestrian walkways, and landscape. They should not be completely isolated by walls or other design elements. • Districts Integrating Residential and Non - Residential Uses: Require that sufficient acreage be developed for an individual use located in a district containing a mix of residential and non- residential uses to prevent fragmentation and assure each use's viability, quality, and compatibility with adjoining uses. Aerial of Newport Center — 2007 C. North Newport Center North Newport Center consists of properties on the higher elevations of Newport Center between San Joaquin Hills Road and the Newport Center ring road (Blocks 400, 500, 600 and 800 and San Joaquin Plaza), as well as the core of Newport Center, Fashion Island, and Block 100. North Newport Center Design Regulations 4 4/26/116/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations To the northeast is San Joaquin Hills Road, a wide boulevard on the ridge that forms the upper edge of Newport Center. To the south and southeast are office buildings, movie theaters, restaurants, service retail, the Newport Transportation Center, the Newport Beach Central Library, and Corona del Mar Plaza, a community retail center. Adjacent uses within Newport Center are office buildings, an apartment community, a resort hotel, art museum, police station, fire station, auto dealership, service station, and the Newport Beach County Club. North Newport Center is a mixed -use district that features an open -air regional shopping center, Fashion Island; a resort hotel; and a variety of office buildings that help form the skyline of Newport Beach; connected by a network of tree -lined streets and sidewalks, within a master planned environment featuring a consistent landscape. North Newport Center Design Regulations 5 4Q6/1- 16/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations [this page intentionally blank] North Newport Center Design Regulations 4/26/116/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations II. Design Regulations Using these Regulations These regulations are intended to be used in conjunction with other applicable codes, documents, and ordinances to assess compliance of proposed projects. Each category of regulations begins with the intent, which describes the overall character that is envisioned and what objectives are necessary to attain the desired effect. A. Building Location and Massing Intent The intent of the building massing and location standards is to ensure that new development has an appropriate scale, is related to its use and location, and is properly integrated with adjoining land uses and features. 1. Site Planning Elements a. New commercial and residential buildings should respect the existing urban form, which generally consists of buildings that are organized orthogonally to create pedestrian - friendly courtyards and promenades that visually link the buildings into clusters, as seen in the diagrams below. Pedestrian promenade at Fashion Island Pedestrian courtyard at 550 Newport Center Drive Building interface at San Joaquin Plaza North Newport Center Design Regulations 7 4Q6/1- 16/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations b. In Mixed -Use sub - areas, the development of a complex of buildings is preferable to a single large structure because the varied massing provides visual interest and a human scale. Additionally, the spaces created between the various buildings provide opportunities for pedestrian plazas, courtyards and other outdoor gathering areas. C. New buildings should be oriented to and have features which reinforce and enhance the existing pedestrian experience. Mixed -Use sub -areas should emphasize pedestrian orientation by utilizing features such as plazas, courtyards, interior walkways, trellises, seating, fountains, and other similar elements. d. New retail buildings should be located to enhance tenant visibility and identity, while maintaining compatible relationships with adjacent structures and street frontages. e. New buildings should be arranged to provide convenient access to entrances and efficient on -site circulation for vehicles and pedestrians. Projects should develop a comprehensive open space network that uses plazas and other open space elements to connect uses. Open space areas and the paths that link them should facilitate the integration of adjacent land uses on the site. f New buildings with a strong street presence are encouraged in Fashion Island. g. Residential development shall provide common outdoor open space areas for residents. These areas should be configured and designed so as to address privacy for residential uses while also providing linkages to the public open space components of the project. h. Planning and developing shared facilities such as driveways, parking areas, pedestrian plazas and walkways, with adjoining properties, including those outside of the North Newport Center Development Plan, is strongly encouraged. Example of resident open space Example of office courtyard North Newport Center Design Regulations 8 4/26/116/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations 2. Building Envelope a. New buildings should respect the existing development scale, which generally consists of high -rise buildings (10+ stories) clustered along the northerly section at the highest point in Newport Center. Mid -rise office buildings (5 -10 stories), low - rise office buildings, and retail development are generally located at lower elevations towards Pacific Coast Highway. 3. Building Character and Style a. The character and style of new buildings located in Fashion Island should be compatible with the classically inspired architecture of the existing buildings in Fashion Island. The character and style of new commercial and residential buildings located in the mixed -use sub -areas should be compatible with the existing contemporary architecture or the classically inspired architecture of the existing buildings. b. New buildings within Fashion Island should continue and enhance the existing pedestrian experience by promoting storefront visibility. C. New buildings should reflect a timeless architecture with straightforward geometry, a unified composition, the expression of floor levels and structure, and solid parapets. Trendy, short - lived, idiosyncratic architectural styles are not appropriate; although retail storefronts may reflect the design theme of the merchant. d. The top of all roof - mounted equipment and communications devices should be below the building parapet or equipment screens in a manner that hides them from the street. The height of rooftop appurtenances shall not exceed the height of the screening. e. Ground level equipment, refuse collection areas, storage tanks and infrastructure equipment should be screened from public right -of -ways views with dense landscaping and /or walls of materials and finishes compatible with adjacent buildings. f. Above grade equipment, including backflow preventers at domestic water meters, irrigation controllers, and cable television pedestals should not be visible from public right -of -ways, when feasible. g. Chain link fencing is not allowed, except to screen construction areas. h. Avoid long, continuous blank walls, by incorporating a variety of materials and design treatments and/or modulating and articulating elevations to promote visual interest. i. Architectural features should accomplish the architectural goal of extending the design elements of the building. j. New buildings on sites with sloping surfaces should be encouraged to utilize the existing terrain. Entrances to motor courts and parking structures are not included in the measurement of building height. North Newport Center Design Regulations 9 4Q6/1- 16/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations Example of appropriate high -rise architecture Example of straight forward geometry and expression of floor levels Examples of classically inspired architecture Example of appropriate low -rise form Example of retail storefront visibility to pedestrians North Newport Center Design Regulations 10 4/26/116/5/12 Aii I20' Example of architectural feature Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations Example of architectural feature MECHANICAL PENTHOUSE Example of building height measurement on sloping terrain North Newport Center Design Regulations 11 4Q6/1- 16/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations 4. Building Materials and Colors a. Colors, materials, and finishes should be coordinated on all exterior elevations to achieve continuity of design. Stripes and patterns are not appropriate; although retail storefronts may reflect the design theme of the merchant. b. Clay tile, concrete tile, metal, and fabric are acceptable materials for low- and mid - rise roofs. C. Stone, metal, exterior plaster, exterior insulated finishing systems (EIFS), brick, concrete, wood, and glass are acceptable materials for building walls. d. Stone, metal, exterior plaster, exterior insulated finishing systems (EIFS), brick, concrete, wood, and glass are acceptable materials for railings. e. Service door and mechanical screen colors should be the same as, or compatible to, the adjacent wall colors. Example of appropriate retail finishes 5. Parking Structures Example of appropriate low -rise finishes a. The architecture of new parking structures should be compatible, complementary, and secondary to principal buildings. b. The design of new parking structures in Fashion Island shall incorporate elements (including landscaping) to soften their visual impact. C. New parking structures in Fashion Island shall be located and designed in a manner that is compatible with the existing pedestrian scale and open feeling of Newport Center Drive. d. Simple, regular forms are encouraged. e. Views of parked vehicles should be screened. f The visual appearance of sloping floors should be minimized. g. Interiors should be designed to promote a safe vehicular and pedestrian experience. It. Vehicular entries for non - residential parking structures should be obvious and inviting. North Newport Center Design Regulations 12 4/26/116/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations i. Vehicular entries to exclusively residential structures should be incorporated into the structure so as to minimize the street presence of the parking structure entrance and to avoid interrupting the continuity of the street facing building elevations. Block 600 parking structure demonstrating rectangular form and vines to soften visual impact B. Landscape Intent West parking structure at Fashion Island demonstrating rectangular form and varied landscape to soften visual impact The intent of the landscape standards is to ensure that new commercial and residential development preserves and enhances the existing landscape character of North Newport Center. 1. Overall Landscape a. New development should promote an evergreen plant palette that is appropriate in the Mediterranean climate of Southern California. Plant materials should be of a native or drought- tolerant species where appropriate and provide variety, while being consistent with the existing landscape pattern and architectural design of the building. b. Landscape and site design will incorporate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to address low -flow runoff and storm water runoff. Landscaped areas within the project will be provided and used to treat runoff from impervious surfaces and roof drains prior to being discharged into the storm drain system. C. The landscape palette should consist of two distinct groups of plant materials: - Accent planting, including palms, cypress, and color accents - Background planting, including evergreen canopy trees and shrubs d. The overall landscape should be dominated by background planting with accent planting in key areas corresponding to the land use and development intensity. North Newport Center Design Regulations 13 4Q6/1- 116/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations e. Planting should be organized in layers of plant size and variety such as flowering, cascading, or climbing plants. Contrasts in color and texture should be used to enhance the layering of plants. Example of appropriate landscape variety complementing the building form Example of layering principles Example of vertical and horizontal plant forms 2. Perimeter and Street Landscape a. The landscape on the perimeter of sub -areas and along streets of new commercial and residential development should complement the street tree pattern, enhance the pedestrian experience, screen parked vehicles, and soften the view of parking structures. b. Existing trees along public streets should be preserved, and new trees should be installed to fill in gaps. C. Evergreen hedges should be used to screen the lower portions of parked cars. d. Evergreen planting should be used to screen parking structures. North Newport Center Design Regulations 14 4/26/116/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations Newport Center Drive landscape variety San Nicolas landscape showing screening of parked cars San Joaquin Hills Road landscape 3. Parking Lot Landscape Landscape adjacent to 888 San Clemente parking structure a. New surface parking lots should have evergreen canopy trees to provide shade. b. A uniform evergreen tree type should be used for parking lot fields, with a different uniform evergreen tree type used to highlight the major parking aisles. C. Evergreen hedges should be used to screen parked cars. North Newport Center Design Regulations 15 4Q6/1- 16/5/12 4. Internal Landscape Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations screen parked cars a. New courtyards and promenades should continue the existing pedestrian experience by promoting visual continuity, shade and an evergreen landscape. b. Trees should be installed to shade appropriate walkways and cause an interesting and varied pedestrian experience. Example of trees adding variety to pedestrian experience C. Circulation Intent Example of landscaping creating strong visual continuity The intent of the circulation criteria is to ensure that new commercial and residential development enhances existing circulation patterns by maintaining existing, upgrading existing and providing new street and walkway connections. 1. Streets and Pedestrian Activity a. New development should preserve and enhance the existing attractive street scene, promote safe and convenient driving practices, and encourage street level pedestrian activity. North Newport Center Design Regulations 16 4/26/116/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations b. All buildings should be publicly accessible via a path or walkway from a public sidewalk. C. The crescent walk linking Block 400, Block 500 and Block 600 along Newport Center Drive and pedestrian connections to /in Fashion Island should be preserved and enhanced where feasible. Connections from the crescent walk into courtyards, plazas, and other gathering areas in Block 400, Block 500 and Block 600 should be provided where possible. d. Each sub -area should demonstrate an internal pedestrian network of walks and paseos that connect to the larger Newport Center pedestrian system. e. Strong pedestrian connectivity, reinforced by protected walkways and landscaping, should occur between Newport Center Drive and the retail core of Fashion Island. f Amenities such as benches, plazas and other pedestrian- oriented facilities should be provided at pedestrian destinations. g. To promote the vitality of the public street scene, pedestrian bridges and tunnels which remove pedestrians from the street level are not allowed. h. New benches, street trees, directional signs, trash receptacles, and exterior lighting are encouraged in the public right -of -ways to reinforce pedestrian activity. i. Enhanced paving in crosswalks to highlight pedestrian pathways is allowed if it is compatible with the character of the existing development. Pedestrian walkway from Newport Center Drive to Fashion Island Example of pedestrian connectivity to the street (between 500 and 550 Newport Center Drive) Example of pedestrian amenities Example of the crescent walk design framework North Newport Center Design Regulations 17 4Q6/1- 16/5/12 Pedestrian amenity in Fashion Island Example of a strong pedestrian pathway Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations Storefront interface with pedestrians Fashion Island paseo North Newport Center Design Regulations 18 4/26/116/5/12 N 0 m m N d X N O. O. Q 4� kk •• J� i �1 wt ��'� j ' 1' ,(ij,,f +� 'v r S •' y, . c + nA r '` � M • t �� f kt IT, _f; ,- tlp`r °••' •.' `� �v� rte} �' �.+ `�, A � i s I p • 4 Ir� y�µ \ y m t C (6 _N C O L N t6 LL _O c O U N c c O U c m ; N N a I c O U _ U L i I i] C U N m N O m C N d U C N O a� d� z L r O Z Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations 2. Service and Emergency a. New commercial and residential development should promote efficient circulation for service and emergency vehicles. b. Major loading docks should be located away from front doors and from residential areas to separate service traffic from other traffic. C. Loading bays should be designed to minimize their visual prominence and any interference with pedestrian and vehicular flows. d. Turf -block may be used in landscape areas where fire access is necessary. e. Truncated domes should be a contrasting color, other than yellow, and should be coordinated with the paving material unless otherwise required by federal or state standards. Fashion Island loading dock Fashion Island loading dock North Newport Center Design Regulations 20 4/26/11 6/5/12 3. Parking Lots Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations a. Parking areas should not create a separation between adjacent land uses and buildings. b. Parking lots at new development should promote efficient circulation for vehicles and pedestrians. C. Convenient, well marked and attractive pedestrian access should be provided from parking lots to buildings. d. The use of permeable surfaces is encouraged. 680 Newport Center Drive demonstrating flow from parking to building Newport Center Drive parking lot Well- defined walkway from Newport Center Drive into Fashion Island at San Nicolas North Newport Center Design Regulations 21 4Q6/1 -1 t 615/12 1 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations D. Orientation and Identity Intent The intent of the standards for orientation, identity, and safety is to ensure that new commercial and residential development promotes wayfmding for residents and visitors, strengthens North Newport Center's sense of place, and produces a safe environment. 1. Gateways and Entrances a. New development should respect existing entries and, if entry modifications are required, should integrate with the existing vehicular and pedestrian circulation system. b. Key landscape elements at the "landscape corners" should be retained. San Joaquin Hills Road and Jamboree Road San Joaquin Hills Road and MacArthur North Newport Center Design Regulations 22 4/26/11 6/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations 2. View Corridors a. New development should preserve views of major retail tenants in Fashion Island from Newport Center Drive. b. New development should capture views of the ocean from windows and decks at new restaurants, offices, and residences, where feasible. Fashion Island major tenant visibility Fashion Island major tenant visibility Balconies at 888 San Clemente featuring ocean views North Newport Center Design Regulations 23 4Q6/1 -1 615/12 1 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations 3. Landmarks a. As appropriate, major new development may be positioned and designed to serve as a landmark within North Newport Center. b. Landmark elements may be included in building design to distinguish individual buildings and enhance wayfmding. Wind chime as a landmark at Macy's Palms as a landmark at the southern entry into Fashion Island North Newport Center Design Regulations 24 4/26/11 6/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations 4. Signage a. New development should have signs that promote identity and wayfinding. b. Signs should be designed to clearly communicate their messages. C. Signs should be designed to complement the architecture and landscape. d. Identification signs should be designed to convey the image of the project or business. e. Wayfinding signs should be unified within each sub -area. f Simplicity and legibility are encouraged. g. Ample blank space around sign copy is encouraged. h. Animated signs visible from public streets are not allowed unless otherwise permitted by the Municipal Code. i. Signs may be internally - illuminated, halo - illuminated, externally illuminated, or non - illuminated. j. Sign types A -K and their corresponding locations are shown on the following pages. Project identification sign Business identification sign North Newport Center Design Regulations 25 4Q6/1 -1 615/12 1 0 O) O) N d C O a Q VJ f3 m L Q d 3 U L J Q C m 00 _3 m iv E N L L L L L U U U �a d (n J VJ 3: iv E ry L L r OI OI L L � O d L L L U U r N N m O to J y 3 m N E L Ol L O• � L L U O C_ th N Q c � m W D N !n J N N N a a a 3 x N E N E N E ry L N L L N L L r O) OI O) OI Ol L L -L L L L L L L L L t L U U U go U U M t 0 A N N � � N w Q N O Q N O rnz mrn� E p�mz E (nJ fA (n J U) Jfn N a c m O c m N c m 0 O W O O N d .0 y � i OIL O C Y L V X O W tt1Z N c O m K c m N O N C U N 0 Z ZZ <wOf O Z N 0 m C N ❑ X C N D_ Q d 3 U ,E VJ MI W VJ � W e N "1 I x x E 3 E E oEr � L OI iN m t t L N L L U x U C 1n l(1 N N N N � d N x E m � (nJ Z N O t N m .L L N O N L L U 4s IN Ol �] N iLAIc C d fn )f) y J a x 30E o Er L a N mL .am L N N L L (LJ e U C O c '- iUNN N A i d EzE m D n J Z d % m E p E, L a N mr t L N L L U U C O C O inNN N N m d E m 3 t/lJZ d x E oEr L m O mt L C N L L U U C O C in NN N W m i d O D M O J Z X � � E Er orE mt N ?Q, iN �U N I N n � M � N O O r E 1� NPAJZ N X � X N 3 m E oEt r m N mt t L N L L U e U C O c'- i N O N N N � E m o (�JZ x X. E oEr L m iN mt s L N L L U o c_ iN t[1 N N i E� E rn � fnJ Z N N N a C 0 c m In c m o° O O 0 N U N °O r m C; O (n O � O O Z C Y L U � W M Z N N O 6 M a N o� d N U N O.� L ZZ CpfN O Z IV0I L Fn C ice+ ^N W L LL V VJ d 9 e.3 E 1 L L in W o � L L t N b no 0 L U U e C C U in rnmg N 4IJ d d O O d d x 3 3 t0 d dE 3E 3 3E t -o o a� E �L ( (V m 4 4L E 3 3L l0 �r i d K "O O d K EL d L X X d L L d dL " "d L U L C L U W U U L \{ m L c YYY555 L N L N L N L N L L L L U U ❑ S C V - C U C U C �' W C C m � (O a U U �+ U U a O. Cad ccd4 -. Ccd Cad CCd Q .0- _W Ol (. W m� ._ W W N _W m T W fn J { (/1 l7 J I[1 N (7 J W f7 J , 4a (/I IV0I L Fn C ice+ ^N W L LL V VJ d 9 e.3 E 1 L L in W o � L L t N b no 0 L U U e C C U in rnmg N 4IJ VV V� <dr� mdr O Il4 M .. U d U � U 'Ln o V 01 01 Of Ol z : W m � E m Orn M4 w Wf/1 �cn Wf/1J no L ♦, Z� Ld �L U LW U L L f W U d _.'✓`i� m d O 3 E zo L L L N ' d Lm L O U C r C'- N W �p E W T mm Z d 3 O L r O r L t N W d L (Lj � c n U i C � d W W � W f/1 J V U d rnw� Nl/1J 9 X 3 m � m � L L N W d L V C_ ?o O M (1 ` d W W Nl/1J 9_ X 3 E O W L L N W d L (Lj c Vo v� U C c d W W � (A f7 J N O d C 04 O d C d U N n� L �L O Z d d O O d d x 3 3 t0 d dE 3E 3 3E t -o a� E �L ( (V m 4 4L E 3 3L nm � �r i in WL m mo L L L y EL d L L L d L L d dL " "d L U L C L U W U U L C L U C W U f W U d _.'✓`i� m d O 3 E zo L L L N ' d Lm L O U C r C'- N W �p E W T mm Z d 3 O L r O r L t N W d L (Lj � c n U i C � d W W � W f/1 J V U d rnw� Nl/1J 9 X 3 m � m � L L N W d L V C_ ?o O M (1 ` d W W Nl/1J 9_ X 3 E O W L L N W d L (Lj c Vo v� U C c d W W � (A f7 J N O d C 04 O d C d U N n� L �L O Z 0 m m N ❑ X N d d Q I� C C Q v to C C C L LL U C V/ Ifilm Ei s x m a N L L N m N L (tj C N' in N V N m m a `m 0 W O O � O � o � �mU Near O of `TC O. ino'v� m� p Z y � L ACC X ) O W ¢] (q 2 N c 0 rn m c N N d C N U N n� z � L ; 0 CpfN O Z N X � �. w L L E o L E L L OI L OI L x W Y � N � IA d m x E E L C E L L L L 6l O) O OI OI C L L Ul J L L � N N L d L d d L L Q I O O� O � h o 'U') f N J N to Cl - to A Q f6 V M c m J C m x X � �. w L L E . L E L L OI L OI L L W Y � N � IA d N d L C L C � E O Ul J N� N O] L d C r O Do c E O N(1 c 9 C 0 u m D L _a L N d M v a W . 0 � C � O1 tll � 0 O n O m a N N a c Q m c N V) a c N °o W O O O � N N U N O r in O � C—Z - 0 W m z L O) L N L 0 a M � N C � Ol N J z w �. w L L F i 2 Q L E L F o c c W Y � N � LL N_ y C d E 0 N O c o� N N d C N U N O.� Z � L ; 0 CpfN O Z N C O N C O) N N ❑ X N d d Q U) W W v/ C m7 J N N O d U C lC C N N al C L C om 3 r Q N C N � U C C fn M Uf N C C d OI ar � N f4� X d w m � c � c O �p Yl o � c m T E O y d N N N d t L C U U � c � N � C Z m (n J cn L Q C W LL W d �0 m 0 T d 9 N ds C U o l O N ILL N C C N mm= N n 3 M N C O O� d d U N O.� 0 ZZ CpfN O Z C O O) N C O) N N ❑ X N d O. Q N L Q m C C R W y d L LL 1 0 C a N 3 E EL L O � mt L L y L L U e U C N N N m c c m E mmz V/ t� J z Z N O 3E EL � mL L L N �L U a U C O c '- _� of N N N N � � N c m E m 3 f%1 u/5 Z � m N a Q 0 c m U c m 0 O W 0 c°o o m .0 yob O O_I � O N O m w� Z C Y L O W ¢]Z N M c 0 m m d a� N N c N U � N 6 � N �p Z L O Z N C O 01 N C O) N N ❑ X N d d Q f� VJ a1 7 O L s H �L C N L O y Q C Fn m p N 3 t dv c m N m� F d fn J M M C d L a 0 n 0 c N c m N N L 0 c i w Q N U N O O d O U C d w O O N C � O O � O C C N O) N d ❑ L d � � � C C L � � N U � o C N = p Z Mm t L � ro ill d Z 0 m N C m N d X N d O. Q VI V/ C .y l6 J w C 41 CL Q i V/ m %d N E L m L d U c F3 IV z m J N « d � N o E _� L M _O L N L L e U O C V t0 d c c c m rnrn� M !4 J N N a c m c c m 0 0 O O � O C N N _U o 0 rn0 Z C Y L U 0 W ¢]Z M N 0 rn m c o� N N d C N U N n� Z 0 r CpfN O Z N 0 m N C O) I X C N a .N m CD j W V_ O Y tm 3 L 4Lm N mL t L � m L t L U e U oc� in r i6 N E Ec � d wm�c ✓n 41JZ 3 L 4Lm j(I mL L L ry 01�L L L V U C C OCR � N I� t0 N U O Y m E c m�� m V1JZ N d v 3 L QL m iN OIL t L N L L L C e V .- O C N N I� fO Y N N � c ° E Nu1JZ � rnr Y Y 01Nr 00 N L V .0 l0 F N N N N t7 Y Y c d E c c o� Z N ) _rn fnJ d 0 3 L 4L L N 01dt L L C e V .- O cN h n � h N � � N m z pJJ c 0 u 0 m Y C Ol N L m L N N C L Ed N `E E z Z L C h N E Z N N N a 7 0 c m a c m 0 0 m O O O � -N O N U W0, 0 M1 O U) O m0 Z c - Y L U � X O o W ttIZ N C O O) O C W N O N C) U N N � Z L r O Z Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations 5. Lighting a. The exterior lighting at new commercial and residential development should be compatible with and enhance the existing lighting of the sub -area. b. Light fixtures at walkways and parking lots should be coordinated in height, color, and style. C. Light fixtures should not cast off -site glare. d. Building walls may be illuminated by downlights and uplights; light sources should not be visible from public view. e. Tops of buildings may be highlighted with bands of light. f Utilitarian light fixtures, such as floodlights and wallpacks, may only be used in service areas. g. Low sodium lighting is not allowed. h. ATM lighting shall conform to state code without causing offsite glare, such as through the use of bollards, tree lights, pole lights, and soffit lights, rather than floodlights and wallpacks. i. In pedestrian areas such as courtyards, plazas, and walkways, lighting fixtures should be pedestrian scale. Appropriate light bollard at Block 600 Non -glare producing lights at 888 San Clemente North Newport Center Design Regulations 36 4/26/116/5/12 Attachment No. PC 9 Development Agreement Amendment RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884 Attn: Citv Clerk DRAFT PROPOSED BYIRVINE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10: 00 AM (Space Above This Line Is for Recorder's Use Only) This Amendment is recorded at the request and for the benefit of the City of Newport Beach and is exempt from the payment of a recording fee pursuant to Government Code §§ 6103 and 27383. AMENDMENT TO ZONING IMPLEMENTATION AND PUBLIC BENEFIT AGREEMENT between CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH and THE IRVINE COMPANY LLC CONCERNING ADDITION OF PROPERTIES AND RESIDENTIAL UNITS TO ZONING IMPLEMENTATION AND PUBLIC BENEFIT AGREEMENT (PORTIONS OF NEWPORT CENTER BLOCKS 100, 400 AND 800 AND SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA) SD \848171.6 800855 -0000 DRAFT PROPOSED BYIRVINE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10: 00 AM AMENDMENT TO ZONING IMPLEMENTATION AND PUBLIC BENEFIT AGREEMENT THIS AMENDMENT TO ZONING IMPLEMENTATION AND PUBLIC BENEFIT AGREEMENT (the "Amendment ") is executed this day of , 2012, by and between: (1) CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ( "C "), and (2) THE IRVINE COMPANY LLC ( "Landowner ") (Landowner and City together shall be referred to as "Parties "). RECITALS 1. City and Landowner entered into Development Agreement No. DA 2007 -002, entitled Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement Between the City of Newport Beach and The Irvine Company LLC Concerning North Newport Center (Block 600, Fashion Island, and Portions of Block 500, and San Joaquin Plaza), ( "2007 Development Agreement "), which the City of Newport Beach adopted by Ordinance No. 2007 -21 on December 18, 2007. The 2007 Development Agreement provides for the Landowner's entitlement and transfer rights within the North Newport Center Planned Community (PC- 56). 2. This Amendment is intended to be an amendment pursuant to California Government Code Section 65868. This Amendment has been considered and approved in the same manner as the 2007 Development Agreement with public hearings pursuant to California Government Code Section 65867. 3. The 2006 City of Newport Beach General Plan ( "General Plan") established a development intensity of 450 residential units within the Newport Center Statistical Area Ll sub -areas designated MU -H3, including Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. The North Newport Center Planned Community has been assigned 430 such residential units, which could be built in any of the sub -areas of the North Newport Center Planned Community designated MU -H3. As of the Effective Date of this Amendment, fifteen such residential units within the General Plan have not been vested or assigned to a specific property. In light of market demand in the North Newport Center Planned Community, the Parties have decided to assign such residential units to San Joaquin Plaza. 4. As of the Effective Date of this Amendment, 79 unbuilt hotel rooms were assigned by the General Plan to Block 900 (Anomaly Location 43 in Statistical Area L1), located outside of the North Newport Center Planned Community. In light of existing development needs in Block 900 and the North Newport Center Planned Community, the Parties desire to convert such 79 unbuilt hotel rooms into 79 residential units. Subsequent to such conversion and pursuant to the terms of this Amendment, such 79 residential units shall transfer into the North Newport Center Planned Community and be allocated to San Joaquin Plaza sub -area. 5. Subsequent to the original adoption of the North Newport Center Planned Community in 2007, Block 800 and the portions of Blocks 100 and 400 have been added to the North -2- SD \848171.6 800855 -0000 DRAFT PROPOSED BYIRVINE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10: 00 AM Newport Center Planned Community through subsequent amendments. The legal descriptions of Newport Center Block 100, Newport Center Block 400, and Newport Center Block 800 are attached hereto as Exhibit A. 6. In light of the time that has passed since the adoption of the 2007 Development Agreement and the actions described above, the Parties have decided that portions of the 2007 Development Agreement should be amended to include 94 new residential units in the North Newport Center Planned Community, which include the 79 hotel units and the 15 residential units, and the addition of the Block 800 and the portions of Block 100 and 400, which have been added into the North Newport Center Planned Community. This Amendment is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan Policy LU 6.14.8, which applies to Newport Center and requires the execution of development agreements for residential projects and mixed -use development projects with a residential component. 8. The City Council has found, based on appropriate findings as required by the City of Newport Beach General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3 and the analysis included in the North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis (May 2012), that the inclusion of the 94 additional residential units in the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area of the North Newport Center Planned Community would not result in adverse traffic impacts. 9. The City Council has evaluated the potential environmental impacts of this Amendment and has determined that any potential impacts have been analyzed pursuant to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2006011119), the North Newport Center Addendum (Addendum No. 1), and the second Addendum (Addendum No. 2) to the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Final Program Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2006011119). There are no circumstances present that would require a new, subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report for this Amendment, under the provision of the California Environmental Quality Act. 10. On , 2012, City's Planning Commission held a public hearing on this Amendment, made findings and determinations with respect to this Amendment, and recommended to the City Council that the City Council approve this Amendment. 11. On , 2012, the City Council also held a public hearing on this Amendment and considered the Planning Commission's recommendations and the testimony and information submitted by City staff, Landowner [and members of the public]. On [insert date], pursuant to the applicable state law (California Government Code sections 65864- 65869.5) and local law (City of Newport Beach Municipal Code chapter 15.45), the City Council adopted its Ordinance No. , finding this Amendment to be consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan and approving this Amendment. AGREEMENT -3- SD \848171.6 800855 -0000 DRAFT PROPOSED BYIRVINE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10: 00 AM NOW, THEREFORE, City and Landowner agree as follows: 1. Property. The Parties hereby amend the term "Property" to add to its existing definition Newport Center Block 800 and the portions of Blocks 100 and 400, which are the parcels of real property that are described in the legal description attached to this Amendment as Exhibit A and depicted on the site map attached to this Amendment as Exhibit B, ( "Added Property'). All of the Added Property is owned by the Landowner. 2. Development Regulations. The following Development Regulations (as defined in Section 1.9 of the 2007 Development Agreement) shall apply: 2.1. Newport Center Block 600 and the portions of Block 500, San Joaquin Plaza, and Fashion Island covered by this Agreement shall remain governed by the Development Regulations in effect as of the Effective Date of the 2007 Development Agreement, as set forth in Section 1.9 of the 2007 Development Agreement, with the exception that the North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan that the City Council is adopting pursuant to Ordinance No. 2012- , shall apply. 2.2. Newport Center Block 800 and the portions of Blocks 100 and 400 covered by this Agreement shall be governed by the Development Regulations in effect as of the Effective Date of this Amendment, including without limitation the North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan that the City Council is adopting pursuant to Ordinance No. 2012 - 3. Landowner's Vested Rights. Section 6.2 of the 2007 Development Agreement, which regards Landowner's vested rights, is amended to apply to the Property as defined in this Amendment. 4. Affordable Housing Obligation. The Parties agree that Landowner's compliance with the amended 2012 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan attached as Exhibit C satisfies any obligation of Landowner to City under the City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Program 2.2.1 with respect to additional residential housing units provided for in this Amendment and the residential housing units provided in the 2007 Development Agreement. Should the additional units be developed as for sale units requiring a subdivision map, the amended 2012 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan shall be deemed to comply with the Inclusionary Housing requirements of Section 19.54.040. 5. Description of Certain Project Components. Concurrently with the adoption of this Amendment, City has approved the potential location of 524 residential units in San Joaquin Plaza under the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. Therefore, Section 6.3(2) of the 2007 Development Agreement is amended to read in its entirety as follows: "524 residential units in Newport Center Block 500, Newport Center Block 600, or San Joaquin Plaza; provided however, that to the extent Landowner desires to develop any of said residential units in Newport Center Block 500 or 600 it shall be required to comply -4- SD \848171.6 800855 -0000 DRAFT PROPOSED BYIRVINE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10: 00 AM with the Traffic Phasing Ordinance relative to potential impacts associated with such change in location." 6. Public Benefit Fee. The amount payable by Landowner to City for each of the 94 residential units added to the North Newport Center Planned Community pursuant to this Amendment shall be the sum of $63,000 per unit, for a total of $5,922,000. This fee shall be paid for each additional individual housing unit at the time the building permit for such unit is issued by the City. For purposes of implementation, the first 430 units applied for by Landowner will be subject to a public benefit fee in the sum of $31,500, as set forth in Section 4.2 of the 2007 Development Agreement. The public benefit fee for the 431 st unit and all subsequent units shall be the sum of $63,000. This fee is in addition to the other fees required by the City for these units under the Development Regulations. The dollar amount specified in this section shall not accrue interest if paid when due and shall not be increased or decreased by reason of any cost of living or other inflation/deflation adjustment. 7. Per Unit Public Benefit Fee For Parks. Prior to and as a condition to City's issuance of each building permit for residential development, Landowner shall pay to City a per unit fee that is a Public Benefit Fee for Parks in the sum of $26,046.51 for each of the 94 residential units added to the North Newport Center Planned Community pursuant to this Amendment, for a total of $2,448,372, to be paid to City by Landowner on or before July 1, 2013. This fee is in addition to the other fees required by the City for these units under the Development Regulations. City acknowledges that Landowner has advanced an Initial Park Fee in the amount of $5,600,000, entitling Landowner to a credit against payment of the Per Unit Public Benefit Fee for Parks for the first 215 residential units to be developed on the Property. In addition to the foregoing, at the time that Landowner advances the $2,448,372 Public Benefit Fee for Parks, Landowner shall be entitled to a credit against payment of the Per Unit Public Benefit Fee for Parks for an additional 94 residential units, for a total credit against payment of the Per Unit Public Benefit Fee for Parks for the first 309 residential units to be developed on the Property. The dollar amount specified in this section shall not accrue interest if paid when due and shall not be increased or decreased by reason of any cost of living or other inflation/deflation adjustment. This fee does not replace the fees that the City may charge for parks when and if the additional units were included in a subdivision map or otherwise converted to individually saleable housing units, but the City shall grant Landowner a credit against such parks fee in the amount of the net fee per unit that was previously paid to the City for such unit. 8. Reimbursement for Bayside Walkway Connection. Landowner shall pay to City up to $200,000 as a public benefit reimbursement for costs that the City may incur related to plans, specifications, permits, and/or construction for the Bayside Walkway Connection project. Payment by Landowner shall be made within 90 days after receipt of written notice from City that it has awarded a construction contract for the Bayside Walkway Connection project. The amount of the public benefit reimbursement shall be no more than $200,000 and shall be for the City's actual costs for plans, specifications, permits, and /or construction, as documented by the City in its written notice. 9. Expiration, Completion or Exhaustion of Certain Obligations. -5- SD \848171.6 800855 -0000 DRAFT PROPOSED BYIRVINE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10: 00 AM 9.1. The Parties agree that the obligations of both Parties under the following sections of the 2007 Development Agreement have fully expired or have been fully exhausted or fully completed: 9.1.1. Landowner's payment to City of the Initial Park Fee pursuant to Section 4.1 by a payment of $5,600,000 to the City by Landowner on March 10, 2009; 9.1.2. Landowner's payment to City of the Initial Public Benefit Fee pursuant to Section 4.2 by a payment of $13,345,000 to the City by Landowner on July 26, 2011 as a condition of the issuance of the First Building Permit, issued for 650 Newport Center Drive; 9.1.3. Section 4.5, "Dedication of Public Rights of Way "; 9.1.4. Section 4.6, "Open Space Dedication"; 9.1.5. Section 4.8, "City's Option to Purchase New City Hall Site; Parking Structure "; 9.1.6. Section 4.9A, "Retrofit Sprinkler Systems"; 9.1.7. Section 4. 10, "Cooperation of Landowner if City Hall Constructed on Property North of Library"; and 9.1.8. Section 4.11, "Dedication of Lower Castaways ". Therefore, no remaining obligations remain for either Party to complete under Section 4.5, Section 4.6, Section 4.8, Section 4.9A, Section 4. 10, and Section 4.11 of the 2007 Development Agreement. 10. No Conflicting Enactments. Except to the extent City reserves its discretion as expressly set forth in the 2007 Development Agreement, during the Term of this Amendment City shall not apply to the Project any ordinance, policy, rule, regulation, or other measure relating to development of the Project, as contemplated by this Amendment, that is enacted or becomes effective after the Effective Date to the extent it conflicts with this Amendment. No City moratorium or other similar limitation relating to the rate, timing, or sequencing of the development or construction of all or any part of the Project and whether enacted by initiative or another method, affecting subdivision maps, building permits, occupancy certificates, or other entitlement to use, shall apply to the Project to the extent such moratorium or other similar limitation restricts Landowner's vested rights in this Amendment or otherwise conflicts with the express provisions of this Amendment. 11. Compliance with Traffic Phasing Ordinance. The following provisions are added with respect to the Traffic Phasing Ordinance: 11.1. Scope of Traffic Study. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with this Amendment, entitled "North Newport San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis " and dated May 2012, covers all development authorized by this Amendment. -6- SD \848171.6 800855 -0000 DRAFT PROPOSED BYIR VINE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10: 00 AM 11.2. Sufficiency of Traffic Study. City acknowledges that the traffic study for the North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan Amendment project satisfies the provisions of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. The City shall not require any additional Traffic Phasing Ordinance traffic studies in conjunction with any application for approvals or permits necessary to construct development authorized by this Amendment as long as the application is consistent with the provisions of this Amendment and the relevant Development Regulations. 12. Effective Date. The Effective Date of this Amendment is 2012, the 31 st day following adoption of this ordinance approving this Amendment by the City Council. This Amendment does not change the Effective Date of the 2007 Development Agreement. 13. Term. The term of this Amendment ( "Term ") shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue thereafter until the earlier of the following: (i) the date that is twenty (20) years after the Effective Date; or (ii) the date this Amendment is terminated pursuant to Sections 12 or 15.1 of the 2007 Development Agreement. 13.1. Section 11 of the 2007 Development Agreement is amended at paragraph two to read as follows: "The term of this Agreement ( "Term ") shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue thereafter until the earlier of the following: (i) the date that is twenty (20) years after the Effective Date of the Amendment; or (ii) the date this Agreement is terminated pursuant to Sections 12 or 15.1 of this Agreement." 14. Conflicts. Except as otherwise set forth herein to the contrary, all terms and provisions of the 2007 Development Agreement shall remain unamended and continue in full force and effect. This Amendment and the 2007 Development Agreement, along with any previous or future amendments, shall be construed together and shall constitute one agreement. In the event of any inconsistency between this Amendment and the 2007 Development Agreement, the provisions of this Amendment shall prevail. 15. Notice of Intention to Amend. In enacting this Amendment, the City has provided for public notice and hearing in the manner provided by California Government Code Section 65867. 16. Compliance with California Government Code Section 65867.5. California Government Code Section 65867.5 provides that a development agreement is a legislative act that shall be approved by ordinance and subject to referendum. A development agreement shall not be approved unless the legislative body finds that the provisions of the agreement are consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan. These requirements of California Government Code Section 65867.5 have been satisfied by the City's finding that this Amendment is consistent with the City's General Plan and the City's approval of this Amendment by ordinance. -7- SD \848171.6 800855 -0000 DRAFT PROPOSED BYIRVINE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10: 00 AM 17. Compliance with California Government Code Section 66473.7. The area subject to the Amendment may include a future subdivision, and the City may, in its sole and absolute discretion, approve certain tentative maps for such subdivision. Any such subdivision will comply with all of the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act including, but not limited to, California Government Code Section 65867.5 in that any tentative maps will be approved by the City in compliance with California Government Code Section 66473.7. 18. Section Headings. All section headings are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect construction or interpretation of this Amendment. 19. Incorporation of Exhibits. Exhibits A, B and C are attached to this Amendment and incorporated by this reference as follows: EXHIBIT DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION A Legal Description of Property B Depiction of the Property C Updated 2012 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan 20. Authority to Execute. The persons executing this Amendment warrant and represent that they have the authority to execute this Amendment on behalf of the party for which they are executing this Amendment. They further warrant and represent that they have the authority to bind their respective party to the performance of its obligations under this Amendment. The City Manager or his /her designee has the authority to implement the terms of this Amendment and execute any documents in furtherance of the terms of this Amendment and the 2007 Development Agreement so long as they have been reviewed and approved as to form by the City Attorney. 21. Recordation. This Amendment and any amendment, modification, or cancellation to it shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of Orange, by the City of Newport Beach City Clerk in the period required by California Government Code section 65868.5 and City of Newport Beach Municipal Code section 15.45.090. [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS] M SD \848171.6 800855 -0000 DRAFT PROPOSED BY IRVINE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10 :00 AM SIGNATURE PAGE TO AMENDMENT TO ZONING IMPLEMENTATION AND PUBLIC BENEFIT AGREEMENT ATTEST: City Clerk VE AS 0 FORM: C. Harp lZ1l tz City Attorney "LANDOWNER" THE IRVINE COMPANY LLC By: Its: By: Its: "CITY" ILM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Its: Mayor SD1848171.6 800855.0000 State of California County of Orange On appeared before me, DRAFT PROPOSED BYIRVINE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10: 00 AM personally who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his/her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his /her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the persons) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature -10- (Seal) SD \848171.6 800855 -0000 State of California County of Orange On appeared before me, DRAFT PROPOSED BYIRVINE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10: 00 AM personally who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his/her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his /her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the persons) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature -11- (Seal) SD \848171.6 800855 -0000 Attachment No. PC 10 Traffic Study Stantec North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis May 2012 Prepared For: City of Newport Beach 2073006780 North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Cathy Lawrence, PE Joe Foust, PE Traffic Analysis City of Newport Beach May 16, 2012 Prepared for: City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Submitted by: Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 19 Technology Drive, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92618 Prepared by: h�C��Q�CVE A. Lq� cli Q W v � 0 No.TRW1635 Transportation Engineer * ExP,y -3o Stantec Consulting Services Inc. sTAr ^TRAW" Reviewed by: Princi al, Transportation Planning and Traffic Engineering St tec Consulting Services Inc. Stantec NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... ..............................1 2.0 TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE ANALYSIS ...................................... ..............................1 3.0 CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS ANALYSIS ............................................... ..............................6 4.0 GENERAL PLAN ANALYSIS ................................................................ .............................17 5.0 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................ .............................17 City of Newport Beach CAL,\ 2073\ active\ 2073006780 \san_joaquin_plazo_tpo \report \rpl_sonjooquinplaza Ipo_D51672 docx Stantec NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table of Contents List of Figures Figure 1 San Joaquin Plaza Project Description ...................................... ............................... 2 Figure 2 TPO Analysis Study Intersections ............................................. ............................... 3 Figure 3 General Project Trip Distribution and Project ADT ...................... ............................... 8 Figure 4 AM Peak Hour Project- Generated Trips .................................... ............................... 9 Figure 5 PM Peak Hour Project- Generated Trips ................................... ............................... 10 Figure 6 Peak Hour Project- Generated Trips ........................................ ............................... 11 List of Tables Table 1 Existing ICU Summary .............................................................. ..............................4 Table 2 Approved Projects Summary ..................................................... ..............................5 Table 3 Trip Generation Summary ........................................................ ............................... 7 Table 4 Existing -Plus- Project ICU Summary ........................................... ............................... 12 Table 5 One Percent Traffic Analysis Summary .................................... ............................... 13 Table 6 Year 2016 ICU Summary ...................................................... ............................... 15 Table 7 Cumulative Projects Summary ................................................. ............................... 16 Table 8 Cumulative ICU Summary ...................................................... ............................... 18 Appendices Appendix A: ICU Analysis Calculations Appendix B: One Percent Analysis Worksheets City of Newport Beach CAL, \ 2073\ active\ 2073006780 \san_joaquin_plazo_tpo \report \rpt_ son loaquinplaza 1po_051612 doox Stantec NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 1.0 Introduction This report summarizes an analysis performed for the proposed development of 524 residential units in the San Joaquin Plaza area of North Newport Center in the City of Newport Beach. A portion of the units (430 dwelling units) is currently entitled on the proposed site, a portion (79 units) is a conversion from unbuilt hotel rooms on a site within Newport Center to dwelling units, and the remainder (15 units) is unbuilt within Newport Center area (project location shown in Figure 1). The units which are not currently entitled on the site (94 units) are being analyzed in this report based on the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) methodology. In addition, this report summarizes the results of an analysis of cumulative conditions in compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements. 2.0 Traffic Phasing Ordinance Analysis The City of Newport Beach identified 20 intersections for analysis to determine the impact of the proposed residential project. These intersections are illustrated in Figure 2. Existing peak hour intersection volumes for the study locations were counted in March 2012 by Traffic Data Services, Inc., consistent with the TPO requirements. Existing intersection levels of service are based on intersection capacity utilization (ICU) values. The ICU values are a means of presenting the volume to capacity ratios, with a V/C ratio of .90 representing the upper threshold for an acceptable level of service (LOS D) in the City of Newport Beach. Existing lane configurations were assumed, and a capacity of 1,600 vph per lane with no clearance factor was utilized. The City methodology calculates the ICU value to three decimal places, and then reports the resulting ICU value rounded to two decimal places. Existing ICU values for the study intersections assuming existing lane configurations are summarized in Table 1 (actual ICU calculation sheets are included in Appendix A). As this table shows, the study intersections are currently operating at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours. An ambient growth rate of 1.0 percent per year was added to the existing volumes along Jamboree Road, MacArthur Boulevard, and Coast Highway. The project is assumed to be complete in 2015; therefore, the study year is 2016 consistent with the TPO guidelines. Traffic generated by approved projects in the study area (including the entitled 430 DU in San Joaquin Plaza), obtained from City Staff, were added to the existing -plus- growth peak hour volumes to obtain year 2016 background peak hour volumes for the intersections prior to the addition of project - generated traffic. Table 2 summarizes the approved projects included in this analysis. City of Newport Beach CAL v \2073\ active\ 2073006760 \saajoaquin_plazatpo\ report\ rpt_ sonjoaquinplazn_tpo_051612.docx JWfftc E 3 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 1 Existing ICU Summary Intersection 1. Jamboree & Ford/Eastblutt 74/C ,.61/B 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills .60 /A .70/13 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara .44/A .57/A 4. Jamboree & Coast H .56/A .65/B 5. Newport Center & Coast Hwy .36/A .44/A 6. Avocado & Coast Hwy .44/A .50 /A 7. MacArthur & Ford /Bonita Canyon .73/C .82/D 8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills .65/13 .80 /C 9. MacArthur & San Miguel .53/A .44/A 10. MacArthur & Coast H .66/13 .64/B 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills .26/A .36 /A 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente .14 /A .25/A 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center .15/A .31/A 14. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills .29/A .49/A 15. Newport Center & Santa Rosa .12/A .34/A 16. Newport Center & San Miguel .14/A .32/A 17. Avocado & San Miguel .31 /A .49/A 18. Newport Center & Newport Center .18/A .36/A 19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente .27/A .33 /A 20. Newport Center & Santa Barbara .12/A .21/A Level of service ranges: .00 - .60 A .61- .70 B .71- .80 C .81- .90 D .91 - 1.00 E Above 1.00 F City of Newport Beach CAL v \2073\ active \2073006780 \s.n i.aquin_pi.m tpo \report \rpt_s.,i..quinpi. tp. 051612.docx JWMK NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 2 Approved Projects Summary Fashion Island Expansion . . — 40 Temple Bat Yahm Expansion 65 CIOSA — Irvine Project 91 Newport Dunes 0 Hoag Hospital Phase III 0 St. Mark Presbyterian Church 77 OLQA Church Expansion 0 2300 Newport Blvd 0 Newport Executive Court 0 Hoag Health Center 75 North Newport Center 0 Santa Barbara Condo 0 Newport Beach City Hall 0 328 Old Newport Medical Office 0 Coastline Community College 0 Bayview Medical Office 0 Mariner's Pointe 0 4221 Dolphin Striker 0 City of Newport Beach CAL v \2073\ active \2073006780 \san_joaquin_plam tpo \report \rpt_sanioaquinplam_tpo 051612.docx JWMK NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Trip rates and the resulting trip generation for the proposed project are summarized in Table 3. These trips were distributed to the surrounding circulation system according to the general distribution shown in Figure 3. Figures 4 through 6 illustrate the peak hour project - generated trips at the study intersections. Existing - plus - project peak hour volumes were obtained by adding the project - generated peak hour trips to the existing peak hour volumes. The ICU values for existing - plus- project conditions are summarized in Table A. Similarly, background - plus - project peak hour volumes were obtained by adding the project - generated peak hour trips to the 2016 background peak hour volumes presented above. The TPO analysis consists of a one percent analysis and an ICU analysis at each study intersection. The one percent analysis compares the proposed project traffic with projected background peak hour volumes. To pass the one percent analysis, peak hour traffic from the proposed project must be less than one percent of the projected background peak hour traffic on each leg of the intersection. If the proposed project passes the one percent analysis, then the ICU analysis is not required for that intersection and no further analysis is necessary. If the proposed project does not pass the one percent analysis, then the ICU analysis must be performed for each intersection which fails to pass the one percent test. Table 5 summarizes the results of the one percent analysis for the proposed project (the one percent analysis sheets are included in Appendix B). As this table indicates, the proposed project does not pass the one percent analysis at 12 study intersections during the AM or PM peak hour; therefore, an ICU analysis is required for these 12 intersections. An ICU analysis was performed for the 12 intersections which did not pass the one percent test. Table 6 summarizes the existing, 2016 background, and 2016 background - plus - project ICU values during the AM and PM peak hours (actual ICU calculation sheets are included in Appendix A). As the ICU summary table indicates, each of the intersections will operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours. The project has no significant impact on the study intersections, and no mitigation is required. 3.0 Cumulative Conditions Analysis City Staff provided a list of six known but not approved projects for use in a cumulative conditions analysis. These cumulative projects are summarized in Table 7. Trip generation and distribution for each cumulative project was also provided by City Staff. The peak hour cumulative intersection volumes were added to the 2016 background peak hour volumes presented earlier, and the project peak hour trips were added to the resulting 2016 background - plus - cumulative City of Newport Beach CAL v \2073\ active \2073006780 \san_joaquin_pi.m tpo \report \rpt_s.,i..quinpi. tp. 051612.docx Stanle NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 3 Trip Generation Summary Land Use I AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Amount In Out .. Out ] Total ADT Trip Rates Residential ITE 232 DU .06 .28 .34 .24 .14 .38 4.18 Trip Generation Residential 94 DU 6 26 32 23 13 36 393 Source: Trip Generation 8.. Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers City of Newport Beach CAL v \2073\ active \2073006780 \s.n i.aquin_pi.m tpo \report \rpt_s.,i..quinpi. tp. 051612.docx JWMK 6% Me 11 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 4 Existing -Plus- Project ICU Summary Intersection 1. Jamboree & Ford /Eastbluff Existing [AM PM .74/C 1 .61/B • . - .74/C .61/B .00 .00 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills .60 /A .70/13 .60 /A .70 /13 .00 .00 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara .44/A .57/A .44/A .57 /A .00 .00 4. Jamboree & Coast H .56/A .65/13 .56 /A .65B .00 .00 5. Newport Center & Coast H .36/A .44/A .37/A .45/A .01 .01 6. Avocado & Coast H .44/A .50 /A .44/A .50 /A .00 .00 7. MacArthur& Ford /Bonita Canyon .73/C .82/D .73 1C .82/D .00 .00 8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills .65/13 .80 /C .65 /B .80 /C .00 1 .00 9. MacArthur & San Miguel .53/A .44/A I .53/A .44/A .00 .00 10. MacArthur & Coast H .66/B .64/13 .66/13 .641B .00 .00 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills .26/A .36/A .27/A .37/A .01 .01 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente .14/A .25/A .14/A .26/A .00 .01 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center .15/A .31/A .15/A .31/A .00 .00 14. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills .29/A .49/A .29/A .50 /A .00 .01 15. Newport Center & Santa Rosa A 2/A .34/A .12/A .34 /A .00 .00 16. Newport Center & San Miguel .14 /A .32/A .1 VA .32/A .00 .00 17. Avocado & San Miguel 1/A 49/A 31/A 49/A .00 .00 18. Newport Center & Newport Center 1 g/A !36 /A 18/A .36/A 00 DO 19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente .27/A .33/A .27/A .33/A .00 .00 20. Newport Center & Santa Barbara .12/A .21/A .12/A .21 /A .00 .00 Level of service ranges: .00- .60 A .61- .70 B .71- .80 C .81- .90 D .91 - 1.00 E Above 1.00 F City of Newport Beach CAL v \2073\ active \2073006780 \san_joaquin_plam tpo \report \rpt_sanioaquinplam_tpo 051612.docx JWWK h J a Z a V L6 W H O a N Q a Z a O Z Q H W F Z W V a 3 W Z 2 a O Z m E E 7 y N T N s= Q _U t m H c d U a) a m c 0 Lo _N Q m H 0 S V 0 N m a a) ►F4 0 V CD U 0) 0 0 y 0 a) a) 0 a) a) • �• 00 00N N N1- NN cO3o Cl) LLoM O 04 L00 04 M 03 11, N r d' N O M 70 0O Cl) M V �h Or LO �N 04N N nM 113 NO O (D C-4 co cNi It W O N O n CO c- a) Lo M O V c- co 0 0 a W r C V M 10 0 O M O • �• • r N r r N 0 M N co N L0 a q O 00 LD N Cl) O 00 W N O Cl) N N co cc O LO O' O '• • 0�'-' mM 00 04 ryN N p0 p0 r- 0 N pN 1-7 1 N N Lo too m MO O Lp0 m Ln 00 N � M7 10 ,N 03 0L0 0 L LDS .. N N cco • L• r- N N O N O N O Cl) N N O O (p � co N <p LLo O N O N N c- Lh M c e '• N W O co V 00 0 Lo wO OO 0O Cl) co V Cl) �O L0O OO V M N E n E E E E E E W E E E o = 0 m 0 0 0 o V O 2 0 0 0 •> d0 y 0 y 'j 0 O y o 0 0 y 3 0 0 y 2 0 0 y 0 O y �= 0 O y > O y a7 7 0 0 y 2 0 0 y m 2, m 2._ lb 2,_= 2 « 2 _ 3 2 0 p x m 2 _ Lu� 0H� m� m L0� (ate O L0� L0� m m� � `a LU gcagcn LU }' m 3oa3Vn A m o m 3Laa�on N (D N V � LU 0 3ma c LU w =An C LU 3�a� O LU LL 'p ° H 'O ° N 'O ° U 'p ° ca '0 0 O V .° O LL .p 0 W 'p 0 N .p 0 m 06 'p O ad �YaS a) �YL�tS a) r y1Y dY°ia y3YA'S dY°ia �Y .m+Y a) a) a7 N N a) a7 a) U a) N a) N N L N N i) 'O L1 E 'O CL i 'o IL 'O d v 'O Ll °p 'o d L 'o L1 L 'o d L 'E TEL �' O LL as Asa Asa °a �aa 0a Em a3 Eco.d 6�a Em.m Eco.d 3: 9L 0a 0co.a) �Qa pm a3 L3m.d �Qa pm a3 mccoo m m ' 0 o m 0 O a m 0 O m 0 O a a) Z 0 0> a 0 O a l0 0 0 La 0 0 a l0 0 p a ON p a M N d N M N d N N d N N d N N o N r N M a N w ri 00 m .- 0 S V 0 N m a a) ►F4 0 V h W) J a z a V W W a H N J a z �ry V a 0 z H W z W V 0 a 3 z 2 o: 0 z a) 7 c c O U i E E 7 _N N T m c Q U w w m H c a1 U 0) CL a) c 0 _N Q m H S U O m [O 0 m I4 0 V O O 0 O O O O O Z Z Z } Z Z Z Z Z .• �F N I� n tb (n M N to 00 O (O OO c- (o Lo OO O r 0) r I-_ O O' 7O 4i to Cl) r-_ to (o N V' V O > " M (o O m O Il d' O m I� I+ co Cl) M co N O co r-- M 1--o N 7 M 0 Cl) r-- O to M O O CO N U a) O a " O , (O N O V co O N O co O O m O co N O N ' Cl) N co O CL " co N I-- r.- C14 V (nom I-- 0)O 0) O Cl) NO O NO co N 7 O cc) m m I- to N r— to V I- V V N m m .0 MO r- O p Lo 0 O co O ry 0 0) O Lo (o 0 O O) m C O " Mtn to m to �O co to �O co o0 co NN 00 O� cm 0) Lo N N a) " NO coots co C0 �O O� cc NO �O N NO �� O> 0 Cl) N r •N X .. 00 It O O CO O m (OO V' 00 to Lo O 0O w O O co Lo �-- w 0 c- N N M It N N y H N N m a) m a) a) a) m m m .y 00 E E E = E E E E E C E (`o E c 2 c o c 7 o o c 7 o o 7 0 7 0 7 o N E 7 o a 7 o a) E g> m> > >> Lm,) > 'o m0 E v 20 (o= o �� _� —yam U� m m= > 0 w d O N 0 2 to O O to (p O 2 to O 2_ N 7 0 2 y a 0 2 N C m2 O y m O 2_ N cl 7 '2 Y _(�2 H Y _ H Y _�2 H C Y— H m Y— H c m Y H Y— H 3 d m H H m m H L V)a m m 3Via m m �za m m 3 m U) m m a Dana V% m m �paa V% m m 0 c ma m m �paa Z m 0 as ma m m �paa U) a) 7 Y m ad 0 M: o 0 =atfo= 0 ca 0 0 ="o=�� 0 0 M :Mo="'0 0 0 =m'o2"'0= 0 0 a) a N d U Y N M ya) U Y N M a)) U Y m tl) a) U Y r' U y1 U Y U a) U Y a) U Y U y) U Y d U Y U m U Y 'O U . ) m d V . O m a) V O m d O O m a) r . m m d r. O m a) 0 v . 0 m a) r. o m a) m m . m m dr. o m d N oa oa oa oa o oa o oa m oa o oa 0a o oa a0 cEL d ca ca d ca" 3a" 3a" oa" d 3a" ca" d 3a ° m No c0 2V)o m c0 .d two m c0 2V)o m W .d azo d CO .m ozo m c0 .d Qao > c0 2zo m c0 .d QNo m c0 2zo m c0 .d Qa5im a N a N N a (,. j N I l a N I l Ld N a cd N 11 ^ N I L N a� N O_ p N a 0 0 N Z N S U O m [O 0 m I4 0 V NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 6 Year 2016 ICU Summary Intersection 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills 3111!11111!11111111 65/13 11111211111111111 !!I I .80 /C 111%11111!111111!11111�1� .65/13 0 1 .80 /C - . .00 .00 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara .48 /A .61/B .48/A .61/B .00 .00 5. Newport Center & Coast Hwy .39/A .48/A .39/A .49/A .00 .01 8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills .69/13 .86/D .69/13 .87 /D .00 .01 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills .29/A .38 /A .30 /A .38/A .01 .00 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente .14/A .26 /A .14/A .26/A .00 .00 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center .15/A .31/A .15/A .31/A .00 .00 15. Newport Center & Santa Rosa .15 /A .40 /A .15 /A .40 /A .00 .00 16. Newport Center & San Miguel .15/A .34/A .15/A .34/A .00 .00 18. Newport Center & Newport Center .18/A .38/A 18 /A .381 .00 .00 19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente .28/A 33 /A .28/A .33/A .00 .00 20. Newport Center & Santa Barbara .13/A .22/A .13/A .22/A .00 .00 Level of service ranges: .00- .60 A .61- .70 B .71- .80 C .81- .90 D .91 - 1.00 E Above 1.00 F City of Newport Beach CAL v \2073\ active \2073006780 \san_joaquin_plam tpo \report \rpt_sanioaquinplam_tpo 051612.docx JWMK NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 7 Cumulative Projects Summary Project L. Use 1 . Mariner's Medical Arts Medical Office 12.25 TSF Banning Ranch Single Family Detached 423 DU Condominium/Townhouse 952 DU Retail 75.00 TSF Hotel 75 Rm Sunset Ridge Park Park 13.67 Acre Marina Park Marina /Park 10.45 Acre Koll - Conexant Apartment 974 DU Newport Coast TAZ 1 — 4 Single Family Detached 954 DU Condominium/Townhouse 389 DU Multi-Family Attached 175 DU City of Newport Beach CAL v \2073\ active \2073006780 \s.n i.aquin_pi.m tpo \report \rpt_s.,i..quinpi. tp. 051612.d... JWMK m NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS peak hour volumes. The previous one percent analysis without cumulative volumes represents the worst -case one percent analysis since the addition of cumulative traffic to the background volumes increases the chances of a project passing the one percent analysis. If an intersection passes the one percent analysis prior to the addition of cumulative traffic, then the intersection will pass the one percent analysis with the addition of cumulative traffic and no further analysis is required at that location. The results of the cumulative ICU analysis are summarized in Table 8 (actual ICU calculation sheets are included in Appendix A). As the cumulative ICU table indicates, the proposed project will have no significant impact on the study intersections, each of which will operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours, and no mitigation is required. 4.0 General Plan Analysis The TPO analysis evaluates a project's potential short -term impacts. The project's consistency with the General Plan was also evaluated. San Joaquin Plaza has 430 DU currently entitled on the project site. Newport Center has 79 hotel rooms and 15 DU that are currently unbuilt but are identified in the General Plan. The proposed project consists of converting the 79 hotel rooms to 79 dwelling units, and developing 94 DU (79 DU + 15 DU) not currently entitled in San Joaquin Plaza. The peak hour and daily trips generated by 79 DU are less than the trips generated by 79 hotel rooms; therefore, the impact of residential units in Newport Center is less than the impact of an equivalent amount of hotel rooms. The proposed project will have less impact than the uses identified in the General Plan; hence the project is consistent with the General Plan. 5.0 Conclusion The proposed 94 DU will generate 32 AM peak hour trips, 36 PM peak hour trips, and 393 daily trips. The marginal impact of project traffic on the street system was determined at 20 intersections in the vicinity. Of the 20 intersections, 12 did not pass the City's one percent analysis; however, the project had no marginal impact on the ICU values at these 12 intersections, which will continue to operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours under 2016 conditions. Consequently, the proposed project has no significant impact on the study intersections, and no additional intersection improvements are required. The impact of traffic from known but not approved projects was included in a cumulative conditions analysis. Under cumulative conditions, the project had no marginal impact during the City of Newport Beach CAL v \2073\ active \2073006780 \san_joaquin_pi.m tpo \report \rpt_s.,i..quinpi. tp. 051612.docx Ran/K m NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 8 Cumulative ICU Summary Intersection 1. Jamboree & Ford /Eastbluff Existing + Growth + Cumulative Approved .82 /D 70/13 + ... r .82/D -. act .70/13 Project .00 .00 2. Jamboree & San Joa uin .68/13 .83/D .68/13 .83/D .00 .00 3. Jamboree & Santa Barba .50 /A .63/13 .51/A .63/B .01 .00 4. Jamboree & Coast H 3Hwy .66/13 .83/D .67 /B .83/D .01 .00 5. Newport Center & Coast .42/A .5 3/A .42/A .53 /A .00 .00 6. Avocado & Coast H .56/A .59/A .56/A .59/A .00 .00 7. MacArthur& Ford /Bonita Canyon .78/C .89/D .78/C .89/D .00 .00 8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills .71/C .89/D .71/C .89/D .00 .00 9. MacArthur & San Miguel .60 /A .50 /A .60 /A .50 /A .00 .00 10. MacArthur& Coast H .78 /C .75/C .78/C .75/C .00 .00 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills .29/A .38 /A .30 /A .39/A 1 .01 .01 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente .15/A .26 /A .15/A .26 /A .00 .00 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center .16/A .32/A .16/A .32/A .00 .00 14. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills .35/A .54 /A .35/A .54 /A .00 .00 15. Newport Center & Santa Rosa .16 /A .40 /A .16/A .40 /A .00 .00 16. Newport Center & San Miguel .16/A .35/A .16/A .35/A .00 .00 17. Avocado & San Miguel .34/A .55/A .34/A .55/A .00 .00 18. Newport Center & Newport Center .19/A .38/A .19/A .39/A .00 .01 19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente .28 /A .33/A .28/A .33/A .00 .00 20. Newport Center & Santa Barbara 1 .13/A I .23/A .13/A .23/A .00 1 .00 Level of service ranges: .00- .60 A .61- .70 B .71- .80 C .81- .90 D .91 - 1.00 E Above 1.00 F City of Newport Beach CAL v \2073\ active \2073006780 \s.n i.aquin_pi.m tp. \report \rpt_s.,i..quinpi. tp. 051612.d... JWMK NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AM or PM peak hour on the ICU values at all of the study intersections. Therefore the proposed project has no significant impact on the study intersections under cumulative conditions, and no intersection mitigation measures are required. The proposed project will generate less peak hour and daily traffic than the land uses identified in the General Plan; therefore the project is consistent with the General Plan. City of Newport Beach CAL v \2073\ active \2073006780 \san_joaquin_plam tpo \report \rpt_sanjoaquinplam_tpo 051612.docx SWWK m NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS APPENDIX A ICU Worksheets City of Newport Beach CAL v:\ 2073\ active\ 2073006760 \sao_jooquin_plaza_tpo \mport\rpt sonjoaquinplom_tpo_051612.docx Stantec m NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS APPENDIX 6 1% Analysis Worksheets City of Newport Beach CAL v:\ 2073\ active\ 2073006760 \saojooquin_plaza_tpo \mport\rpt sonjoaquinplom_tpo_051612.docx Stantec Attachment No. PC 11 Amended Affordable Housing Implementation Plan NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Prepared For: The City of Newport Beach June 2012 Contents I. Introduction .................................................................................................... ..............................1 Background.................................................................................................... ............................... l II. Affordable Housing Plan ................................................................................ ..............................3 ProposedPlan ................................................................................................. ..............................3 Number of Affordable Units /Income Levels .................................................. ..............................5 Implementation.............................................................................................. ............................... 5 Conclusion..................................................................................................... ............................... 5 III. Consistency with Housing Element...... ............................. - ......................................................... 6 IV. Amendments to the AHIP ............................................................................... ..............................7 V. Authority ......................................................................................................... ..............................7 Figures Exhibit 1 - North Newport Center Planned Community Exhibit 2 - The Bays Apartment Complex Locations.... North Newport Center Planned Community Affordable Housing Implementation Plan 2 4 I. Introduction The North Newport Center Planned Community (Planned Community) approval by the City of Newport Beach includes a Planned Community Development Plan that implements the goals and policies of the City's General Plan. The Planned Community, as shown on Exhibit 1, consists of seven sub -areas within North Newport Center, a regional center comprised of major retail, professional office, entertainment, recreation, hotel, and residential development. Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza are designated in the General Plan as MU -H3, a designation that allows for a mixed -use area combining commercial, office, entertainment, and residential uses. The Planned Community Development Plan for North Newport Center allows construction of 524 residential units in these blocks, and affordable housing units must be provided in accordance with the City Housing Element. This Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) outlines how the required affordable housing will be provided. Background The City's Housing Element includes a goal that 15% of all new housing units in the City be affordable to very low, low, and moderate income households. The Housing Element identifies moderate income households as those with annual incomes between 80% and 120% of the county median household income. Low income households are those with annual incomes between 51% and 80% of the county median household income. Very low income households are those with annual incomes of 50% or less of the County median household income. Projects with more than 50 units are required to prepare an AHIP that specifies how the development will meet the City's affordable housing goal. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) prepares the state - mandated Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). The RHNA quantifies the need for housing within each jurisdiction during specified planning periods. The City's General Plan Housing Element must include its "fair share" regional housing needs allocation for all income groups which must be updated periodically. The most recently published SCAG RHNA identifies the City allocation as follows: • Total allocation between 1/1/06 and 6/30/14 —1,769 • Very low income allocation — 22% (389 units) • Low income allocation — 18% (319 units) • Moderate income allocation — 20% (359 units) North Newport Center Planned Community Affordable Housing Implementation Plan O San Joaquin Plaza '.14 P III /Ilh p CLE py ,9Z Y O� Blo C 60 y 600 800 800 r SQ / 54NTP ROSA DR Fashion Island Bloch Reg I onal Center 500 Q \ \] rt A00 O Y WP 1 � 4�2 E� 2 N U y IM 100 i q0 /•t�C G L J�v y,CH P 4P hqy, �p FP i P ❑North Newport Center Planned Community Exhibit 1 - North Newport Center Planned Community North Newport Center Planned Community Affordable Housing Implementation Plan II. Affordable Housing Plan Proposed Plan The City's General Plan Housing Element allows for sale or for rent options in order to meet the obligation for affordable housing units. In addition, affordable housing may be provided off -site, with City approval. Consistent with these Housing Element provisions, this Affordable Housing Implementation Plan includes the following plan. The location of the site is included on Exhibit 2. A. Covenants on Existing Units The Irvine Company owns The Bays, an apartment complex consisting of three buildings known as Baywood, Bayview, and Bayport, which is shown on Exhibit 2. The total number of units in The Bays is 556. Forty-six units in Baywood are restricted as low- income units through 2011. The Irvine Company will restrict tenant incomes and rental costs for housing units located in The Bays complex for a period of 30 years with a recorded document. The number of restricted units will be sufficient to provide the number of affordable units described later in this AHIP, depending on the income level to be served. The Irvine Company will identify which apartments are proposed to meet the affordable housing obligation, and will not use units that are under any other affordable housing covenant at the time they are proposed to meet the obligation for North Newport Center. The City will inspect the apartments designated to meet the affordable housing requirement to ensure compliance with relevant codes, proper maintenance, and adequate common areas. The Irvine Company will agree to make improvements, if necessary, to ensure viable housing for the 30 year period. The units must be rented to households qualifying as very low, low, or moderate income households. The annualized rents chargeable for occupancy of the Affordable Units shall not exceed thirty percent (30 %) of the Very Low, Low or Moderate Income limits. North Newport Center Planned Community 3 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan Exhibit 2 - The Bays Apartment Complex Locations North Newport Center Planned Community 4 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan 3i. i� � ' r) - f3�nilq Qrg? p� Harbor View fi Kss r s 0 4D � O G A� Fashion Island I � � "%n p° ,r lC`'� �z y {o r kA The Bays Apartment Complex Exhibit 2 - The Bays Apartment Complex Locations North Newport Center Planned Community 4 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan The restriction on these units — for example, tenant selection procedures, monitoring — will be included in an affordable housing agreement, which shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Attorney and recorded against the property(ies). B. Concentration of Units Affordable units shall not be concentrated in any one building in The Bays. Number of Affordable Units /Income Levels The requirement for affordable housing shall be based on income categories. The Irvine Company will provide very low, low, or moderate income housing, or a combination of income categories, using the percentages shown in the table below. Income Category Percentage Required Total Amount Very Low 10% 52 units Low 15% 79 units Moderate 20% 105 units Implementation The affordable housing units required under this AHIP will be provided incrementally. The affordable units shall be phased as follows: • Certificate of use and occupancy for 100th market rate unit / one -third of required units • Certificate of use and occupancy for 200`b market rate unit / one -third of required units • Certificate of use and occupancy for 3001h market rate unit / one -third of required units Affordable housing agreements shall be executed and recorded at each phase identified above for designated affordable units in The Bays apartment complex prior to the point where a certificate of use and occupancy is issued for the related market rate units. Conclusion Implementation of this AHIP will result in the availability of affordable housing units as identified above within the City of Newport Beach in accordance with the City's Housing Element. North Newport Center Planned Community 5 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan M. Consistency with Housing Element The City of Newport Beach adopted a General Plan in 2006. A Housing Element was included in the General Plan in accordance with State law. The Housing Element was updated in 2011. The Housing Element identifies goals and programs for the provision of affordable housing in the City. The AHIP is intended to meet the specific goals of the Housing Element as follows: Policy 112.1 Encourage preservation of existing and provision of new housing affordable to extremely low, very low, low and moderate income households. Program 2.1.2 Take all feasible actions, through use of development agreements, expedited development review and expedited processing of grading, building and other development permits, to ensure expedient construction and occupancy for projects approved with low and moderate income housing requirements. The AHIP supports the City's requirement for the provision of affordable housing for all new development with more than 50 residential units. The Irvine Company has prepared a Development Agreement in accordance with this Policy /Program. Policy H2.2 Encourage the housing development industry to respond to housing needs of the community and to the demand for housing as perceived by the industry, with the intent of achieving the Regional Housing Needs Assessment construction goals within six years. Program 2.2.1 Require a proportion of affordable housing in new residential developments or levy an in -lieu fee. The City's goal over the five-year planning period is for an average of 15 percent of all new housing units to be affordable to very low, low and moderate - income households. The City shall either (a) require the payment of an in -lieu fee, or (b) require the preparation of an Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) that specifies how the development will meet the City's affordable housing goal, depending on the following criteria for project size: 1. Projects of 50 or fewer units shall have the option ofpreparing an AHIP or paying the in -lieu fee. 2. Projects where more than 50 units are proposed shall be required to prepare an AHIP. Implementation of this program will occur in conjunction with City approval of any residential Tentative Tract Maps. To insure compliance with the 15 percent affordability requirements, the City will include conditions in the approval of Tentative Tract Maps to require on -going monitoring of those projects. Program 2.2.6 All required affordable units shall have restrictions to maintain their affordability for a minimum of 30 years. As described in Section H, the affordable housing provided per the AHIP will meet the Housing Element requirement for the total affordable units required. The units will be deed restricted to remain affordable for a period of 30 years. In addition, the developer will provide periodic reports in North Newport Center Planned Community 6 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan the form required by the City. The provision of the affordable housing units will assist the City in meeting the RHNA construction goals. In conclusion, the AHIP is consistent with the relevant goals and programs in the City's 2011 General Plan Housing Element. IV. Amendments to the AHIP This AMP may be amended with the approval of the City Council. No modification of the General Plan requirement for affordable units is allowed, unless the requirement is reduced through an amendment to the General Plan prior to implementation of development. V. Authority The AHIP has been adopted by the City of Newport Beach per Resolution No. 2012 -_ on the day of , 2012. North Newport Center Planned Community 7 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan Attachment No. PC 12 Water Supply Assessment WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92658 -8915 June 13, 2012 �Y,w rpk a � s Prepared by: T &B Planning, Inc. Submitted By: /� a eor Murd ch General Manager, Municipal Operations Department City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Table of Contents Section Water Supply Sources 10 Imported Water from Metropolitan via the MWDOC .................................... ............................... 12 Groundwater from the Lower Santa Ana River Groundwater Basin ......... ............................... 16 RecycledWater ............................................................................................................. ............................... 17 Reliabilityand Supply ................................................................................................................ ............................... 18 Water Conservation Programs and Requirements ......................................................... ............................... 19 Analysis and Conclusions Figures Figure 1, Location Map 21 Figure 2, Aerial Photograph of Existing Urban Setting ................................................. ............................... 7 Tables Table 1, City of Newport Beach Water Demand Projections ...................................... ............................... 10 Table 2, City of Newport Beach Water Demand by Source ........................................ ............................... 11 Table 3, City of Newport Beach Water Demand Percentage by Source ................ ............................... 11 Table 4, Metropolitan's Water Supply Capacity .............................................................. ............................... 13 Table 5, Historic Groundwater Supplies 2005- 2009 ...................................................... ............................... 15 Table 6, City of Newport Beach Projected Normal Year Water Supply and Demand ...................... 18 Table 7, City of Newport Beach Projected Single Dry Year Water Supply and Demand ................ 19 Table 8, City of Newport Beach Projected Multiple Dry Years Water Supply and Demand.......... 19 Table 9, Water Demand for 79 Multi - Family Residential Units ................................. ............................... 22 Table 10, Water Demand for 15 Multi - Family Residential Units ............................... ............................... 22 Table 11, Water Demand for430 Multi - Family Residential Units .............................. ............................... 22 Table 12, Total Residential Water Demand in San Joaquin Plaza ............................. ............................... 22 Table 13, Anticipated Water Demand Eliminated from Hotel Rooms .................... ............................... 23 Appendices City of Newport Beach Water Conservation Ordinance City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 1 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Preface California Senate Bill 610 (Costa) and Senate Bill 221 (Kuehl) amended California State law effective January 1, 2002, to improve the link between information on water supply availability and certain land use decisions made by cities and counties. SB 610 and SB 221 are companion measures that promote more collaborative planning between local water suppliers and cities and counties. Both statutes require detailed information regarding water availability to be provided to the city and county decision - makers prior to approval of specified large development projects. Both statutes also require that this detailed information be included in the administrative record that serves as the evidentiary basis for an approval action by the city or county on such projects. The City of Newport Beach provides water service to the Project site evaluated in this Water Supply Assessment. Therefore, the Newport Beach City Council serves as the lead agency with authority to approve this Water Supply Assessment as well as the lead agency that will consider approval of the proposed Project described below.' Project Description The proposed Project evaluated in this Water Supply Assessment is located in the City of Newport Beach, Orange County, California. Specifically, the subject property is located in the Newport Center Statistical Area (Statistical Area 1-1), commonly known as Newport Center /Fashion Island, which is a mixed use district that includes major retail, professional office, entertainment, recreation, and residential uses in a master - planned development. The Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element describes the City's existing and planned development pattern. It includes maps and tables that specify where certain land uses can occur and assigns maximum development limits (also called development "intensity') to specific locations. Specific areas of the City are identified on the General Plan Land Use Map as "Anomaly Locations," where a maximum development intensity is allowed pursuant to General Plan Tables LU1 and LU2. The General Plan recognizes that although Newport Beach is mostly built -out, growth and change will continue to occur; therefore, to allow flexibility, the City Council may allow transfers of un -built development intensity. In February 2012, Irvine Company (hereafter "Project Applicant ") submitted an application to the City's Planning Division requesting that the development intensity allowed by the General Plan for 79 un -built hotel rooms in Statistical Area Ll, Anomaly Location 43, be converted from "hotel rooms' to "multi- family residential units" and transferred to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the North Newport Center Planned Community ( NNCPC). The Project Applicant also requests that 15 un -built multi - family residential units allowed by the General Plan in MU -H3 designated portions of Statistical Area Ll be specifically assigned to the NNCPC in San Joaquin Plaza. If the requested development intensity conversion, transfer, and assignment are approved by the City, a total of 94 additional residential units would be allowed in San Joaquin Plaza. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 2 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Under existing conditions, there is no residential development in San Joaquin Plaza, but 430 multi - family residential units are allowed there pursuant to the City's General Plan and the NNCPC Development Plan. With the addition of 94 units, the maximum number of multi - family residential units allowed in San Joaquin Plaza would increase from 430 to 524 units. No specific subdivision map or development project is proposed at this time. The proposed Project is limited to the requested development intensity conversion, transfer, and assignment and, in total, the vesting of 94 units of residential development intensity to San Joaquin Plaza (79 converted and transferred units and 15 units previously unassigned) and the reallocation of 430 multi - family residential units already allowed within the NNCPC's Block 500, Block 600, and the San Joaquin Plaza solely to the San Joaquin Plaza. In order for the Project Applicant's application to be approved, the City of Newport Beach would need to approve the following: 1) Convert un -built non - residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms) to multi - family residential development intensity (79 multi - family units) and transfer the converted development intensity into the NNCPC; 2) Assign 15 residential units currently allowed by the General Plan within the MU -H3 portions of the Newport Center to San Joaquin Plaza; 3) Amend the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the allowable residential development intensity by a total of 94 units and to allocate the 94 units plus the 430 residential units currently allocated to the MU -H3 portions of the NNCPC solely to San Joaquin Plaza; 4) Amend the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company concerning North Newport Center to vest the revised development intensities and allocations; 5) Approve a traffic study for 94 units pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance; and 6) Amend the Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP). An exhibit showing the location of San Joaquin Plaza (outlined in red) in relation to the NNCPC (highlighted in yellow) is shown on Figure 1. Purpose of this Water Supply Assessment The purpose of this Water Supply Assessment (Assessment) is to satisfy the requirements under Senate Bill 610 (Costa) (California Public Resources Code Section 21151.9 and Water Code Section 10910 et seq.) and Senate Bill 221 (Kuehl) (California Government Code Section 66473.7), which require that an assessment be conducted to demonstrate that adequate water supplies are or will be available to meet the water demand associated with proposed projects. SB 610 focuses on the content of a water supply agency's Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). It also stipulates that, when an environmental impact report (EIR) is required in connection with a project, the appropriate water supply agency must provide an assessment of whether its total projected water supplies will meet projected water demand associated with the proposed project. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 3 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Senate Bill 221 requires a water supply verification when a tentative map, parcel map, or development agreement for a project is submitted to a land use agency for approval. Senate Bill 221 applies to proposed residential developments of more than 500 dwelling units with some exceptions. Section 66473.7(1) exempts residential projects proposed on a site located within an urbanized area that has been previously developed for urban uses, or where the immediate contiguous properties surrounding the residential project site are, or previously have been, developed for urban uses. The San Joaquin Plaza is currently developed with multi- tenant commercial office land uses, surface parking lots, a parking structure, and ornamental landscaping. As shown on Figure 2, abutting the site on the Northwest is the Newport Beach Police Department, the Newport Beach Fire Department Station 3, and an automotive dealership. To the South is a commercial office building and the Orange County Museum of Art, beyond which and further to the South is the Fashion Island shopping mall. To the Southwest is a commercial office building and a rental apartment complex. To the Northeast, across San Joaquin Hills Road, is a single - family residential neighborhood. To the Southeast, across Santa Cruz Drive are multi- tenant office /commercial land uses, a hotel with 295 rooms presently operated as the Island Hotel, and several parking structures. As such, the City of Newport Beach is not required to issue a written water supply verification pursuant to Senate Bill 221 because the proposed Project site is in an urbanized area, is currently developed with urbanized uses, and is surrounded by urbanized uses. The City can still opt to issue a written verification, but the verification is not required because the Project site is currently developed with urban uses, is surrounded by developed urban uses, and the proposed Project is clearly an infill project. Senate Bill 610 applies to a proposed residential development of more than 500 dwelling units, or large commercial, industrial or mixed -use development. The need for a water supply assessment is determined by the lead agency for the project. For the proposed Project evaluated in this Water Supply Assessment, the City of Newport Beach serves as the lead agency, which required that this Water Supply Assessment be prepared. In accordance with Water Code Section 10910(d) — (f), the Water Supply Assessment shall: 1) Identify any existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts relevant to the identified water supply for the proposed Project, and a description of the quantities of water received in prior years by the public water system, under existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts; 2) If no water has been received in prior years by the public water system, identify the other public water systems or water service contract holders that receive a water supply or have existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts to the same source of water as the public water system. 3) If groundwater is included in the proposed supply, identify the groundwater basin or basins from which the Proposed Project will be supplied; any applicable documentation of adjudicated rights to pump; if the basin is not adjudicated, whether the basin has been identified as over - drafted; a detailed description and analysis of the amount and NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 4 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT location of groundwater pumped by the public water system for the past five (5) years from any groundwater basin from which the proposed Project will be supplied; a detailed description and analysis of the amount and location of groundwater from the basin or basins from which the proposed Project will be supped to meet the projected water demand associated with the Proposed Project. Under existing conditions, the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC contains no residential units. However, the City's General Plan and NNCPC Development Plan currently allow for 430 multi - family residential units. Should the development intensity transfers requested by the Project Applicant be approved by the City of Newport Beach, 94 additional residential units would be permitted in San Joaquin Plaza, bringing the maximum number of permitted multi- family residential dwelling units allowed in this area to 524 units. Although no specific development project to build these units is proposed at this time, because: 1) the number of permitted residential units in San Joaquin Plaza would exceed 500, 2) approval of the Project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and 3) San Joaquin Plaza is located in the NNCPC, which is the subject of a development agreement titled "Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company Concerning North Newport Center," the City of Newport Beach, serving as lead agency, is required to conduct a Water Supply Assessment in compliance with Senate Bill 610 (Costa) (California Public Resources Code Section 21151.9). In addition to meeting the requirements of Senate Bill 610, this Water Supply Assessment also will be used by the City of Newport Beach as part of the proposed Project's environmental review process under CEQA. This Assessment evaluates water supplies that are or will be available during normal year, dry year, and multiple dry -year conditions over a 20 -year projection period, considering existing demands, expected demands from the proposed Project, and reasonably foreseeable future demands in geographic areas that are supplied water by the City of Newport Beach. This Assessment is a technical, informational, advisory opinion only. The information included is based on information available at the time this Assessment was prepared and changing circumstances could affect the water supply evaluation presented in this document. This Water Supply Assessment does not explicitly entitle the San Joaquin Plaza to receive additional water rights, water service, or any water rights or service priorities and allocations. It also does not affect the City's obligation to provide services to its existing water customers and future customers. City Council approval of this Water Supply Assessment is not an entitlement to water rights or service to San Joaquin Plaza, nor is it a commitment to serve the area with increased water service capacities and /or supplies. Because the proposed Project that is the subject of this Water Supply Assessment is limited to a request to vest permitted development intensity to San Joaquin Plaza and because no specific development project is proposed at this time, this Assessment is a general evaluation of water supply and is not an engineered analysis related to any particular or specific residential development project. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 5 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Figure 1, Location Map San J .... I. vlua SANTA CRUZ OR o-: ObaA 000 800 S 800 P SANTAR09ADR. Fashion Island BI Regional Cants, ui IlYnoe Bbd 900 Rari n Am,uly v) 100 Q p �S PQ llocM 100 1 � c�F'F e 0 �O I O1Z y�cy� V or q � c LEGEND C3 Newport Center / Fashion World (S1afidical Area Ll ) North Newport Center Planned Community �MarroBt Hotel Blook 900 Q Proposed Proieot Site (San Joaquin Plaza Portion of NNCPC) NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 6 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Figure 2, Aerial Photograph of Existing Urban Setting NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 7 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT CEQA Compliance Background In 2006, the City of Newport Beach approved an update to its General Plan and certified the General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR (SCH No. 2006011119) as adequately addressing the potential environmental impacts associated with planned buildout of the City of Newport Beach, inclusive of the property encompassing the NNCPC and San Joaquin Plaza. Section 4.14 of the General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR addressed "Utilities and Service Systems," including the topic of water supply. The Final Program EIR concluded, based on substantial evidence cited in the EIR and the City's Administrative Record for the EIR, that with the implementation of mandatory regulatory requirements applicable General Plan goals and policies, impacts associated with water supplies would be less than significant. Similarly, Addendum No. 1 to the General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR, which addressed City adoption of the NNCPC Development Plan and related actions, concluded that water supply impacts would be less than significant with adherence to regulatory requirements and the General Plan. The General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR relied on the City of Newport Beach's 2005 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). UWMPs are required by Senate Bill 610 and serve as important source documents for cities and counties as they update their General Plans. Conversely, General Plans are used as source documents as water suppliers update their UWMPs. The City of Newport Beach General Plan and UWMP are linked and their accuracy and usefulness are interdependent. As discussed later in this document, the City of Newport Beach published an updated UWMP in 2010, which is currently pending final approval by the California Department of Water Resources. Because the proposed Project involves a request to transfer development intensity permitted by the City's General Plan from one location to another location, the City's General Plan and 2010 UWMP are used as a primary reference documents in this Water Supply Assessment. Findi The Project involves the proposed conversion of permitted development intensity for 79 un- built hotel rooms to 79 multi - family residential units and the transfer of those 79 units and the assignment of an additional 15 un -built units of residential development intensity permitted by the General Plan to the San Joaquin Plaza area of the NNCPC. If the Project is approved, the Project Applicant would have entitlement to construct up to 524 multi - family residential units in San Joaquin Plaza (the 79 transferred units, 15 assigned units, plus 430 units already allocated to the NNCPC). Future residential development in San Joaquin Plaza, if and when it is proposed, would be subject to the development standards, design guidelines, and administration procedures required by the NNCPC Development Plan, which serves as the controlling zoning ordinance for activities within its boundaries, including San Joaquin Plaza. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 8 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Water demand for the City of Newport Beach, including anticipated demand associated with buildout of the City's General Plan (inclusive of the NNCPC), is included in the water demand forecasts identified in the City's 2010 UWMP and within the planning documents of water districts, authorities, and agencies that directly or indirectly supply and /or manage the City's water supplies. These include the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (hereafter, "Metropolitan "), the Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC), and the Orange County Water District (OCWD). As such, water demand and supply evaluations conducted by Metropolitan, MWDOC, OCWD, as well as the City of Newport Beach itself are directly applicable to the proposed Project. Given the characteristics of the Project (the proposed conversion and transfer of development intensity permitted by the City's General Plan from one location to another location (79 units) and the assignment of previously unassigned development intensity (15 units) to a specific properly in Newport Center, the primary subject of this Water Supply Assessment is to determine if the City has adequate water supplies to serve 79 multi - family residential units instead of 79 hotel rooms, and to confirm that water supplies are available to serve 524 residential units in San Joaquin Plaza (94 additional residential units (79 +15) and the 430 units already permitted). As set forth in this Water Supply Assessment, the City's water supply comes from three sources: 1) imported water from Metropolitan as wholesaled to the City by the MWDOC, 2) local groundwater pumped from the Lower Santa Ana Groundwater Basin by wells owned and operated by the City and managed by the OCWD, and 3) recycled water wholesaled by OCWD through its Green Acres Project (GAP). As such, the analysis and conclusions reached herein rely exclusively on the water supply projections and reliability information contained in the following documents: a) Newport Beach, 2011. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. May 2011. b) Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, 2010. Regional Urban Water Management Plan. November 2010. Q Municipal Water District of Orange County, 2011. 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan. June 2011. d) Orange County Water District, 2009. Groundwater Management Plan 2009 Update. July 9, 2010. In the four documents listed above, the City of Newport Beach, Metropolitan, MWDOC, and OCWD all conclude that there are sufficient water supply capacities to serve their respective service areas through year 2035, including projected water demand in the City of Newport Beach associated with buildout of the city's General Plan. As discussed in more detail in the "Analysis and Conclusions" section of this document, this Water Supply Assessment concludes NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 9 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT that adequate and reliable water supplies are and will be available to serve the proposed Project (the addition of 94 units of development intensity and a maximum overall development intensity of 524 units in San Joaquin Plaza) for the next 20 years. Summary of Existing and Projected Demand The City of Newport Beach provides water service to a population of approximately 67,000 throughout its 35.77 square mile service area. Based on data available in the City of Newport Beach's 2010 UWMP, the total 2010 water demand for retail customers served by the City was approximately 16,645 acre -feet per year (AFY) .2 Between 2005 and 2010, the City's water demand decreased by about 5 percent while population increased by 1.5 percent. This illustrates the City's proactive efforts in promoting water use efficiency. In addition to documenting existing demand, the UWMP also calculates the City's future water demand, using population and land use buildout assumptions from the City's General Plan. Water demand projections for years 2005 to 2035 by land use type are given in the table below. Table 1, City of Newport Beach Water Demand Projections Fiscal Water Demand b Water Use Year Ending Single Family Multi- Family Commercial /Industrial Institutional Landscape Total Demand 2005 7,482 2,597 3,300 734 3,719 17,831 2010 7,297 2,308 2,960 370 3,710 16,645 2015 7,258 2,300 2,947 378 4,140 17,023 2020 7,411 2,348 3,009 386 4,268 17,422 2025 7,565 2,397 3,072 394 4,346 17,774 2030 7,718 2,446 3,134 402 4,424 18,124 2035 7,872 2,494 3,196 410 4,502 18,474 Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 2 -4. Water Supply Sources The City of Newport Beach receives its water from three sources: 1) Imported water from Metropolitan as wholesaled to the City by the MWDOC, 2) Local groundwater stored in the Lower Santa Ana River Groundwater basin, which is managed by the OCWD and based on basin pumping percentages (BPP) drawn from four (4) active wells owned and operated by the City of Newport Beach, and 3) Recycled water from the OCWD's Green Acres Project (GAP).3 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 10 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT The City's UWMP projects that water demand in the City of Newport Beach will increase by 11% over the 25 period of 2010 — 2035, to 18,474 acre -feet by 2035 as shown on the following table and listed by the source of supply.' Table 2, City of Newport Beach Water Demand by Source Water Supply Sources Fiscal Year Ending 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 -opt MWDOC (Imported Treated Full Service (non- int.)) 6,161 6,298 6,430 6,564 6,697 6,830 BPP Groundwater 10,052 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 Recycled Water 432 450 500 500 500 500 Total 16,645 17,023 1 17,422 1 17,774 1 18,124 1 18,474 Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 2 -9. As shown in the graph below, in 2010 the City's total water demand of 16,645 acre -feet was supplied by approximately 37% imported water, 60% local groundwater, and 3% recycled water.' These percentages are expected to remain relatively the same though 2035. Table 3, City of Newport Beach Water Demand Percentage by Source lao% eo% eo% )0% W% sox .0x 10% 20% 10% 0% 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 i Yea [chin, ■MWDOC OPVGroundwe r ■OecKkd Wr r NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 11 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT The City's three (3) main sources of water supply are described below. 1. Imported Water from Metropolitan via the MWDOC Overview The City of Newport Beach relies on imported water wholesaled by Metropolitan through the MWDOC. Metropolitan's principal sources of water originate from two sources - the Colorado River via the Colorado Aqueduct and the Lake Oroville watershed in Northern California through the State Water Project (SWP). This imported water is treated at the Robert B. Diemer Filtration Plant located north of Yorba Linda. Typically, the Diemer Filtration Plant receives a blend of Colorado River water from Lake Mathews through the Metropolitan Lower Feeder and SWP water through the Yorba Linda Feeder. The City of Newport Beach has six (6) connections to the imported water system along the Orange County Feeder and the East Orange County Feeder No. 2. The total available capacity is 104 cubic feet per second (cfs). Supply Capacity and Reliability — Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Metropolitan's 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan (RUWMP) reports on water supply reliability and identifies projected supplies to meet the long -term demand within its service area. It presents Metropolitan's demand and supply capacities from 2015 through 2035 under three hydrologic conditions: average year, single dry-year, and multiple dry- years. Additionally, Metropolitan completed an updated Integrated Water Resources Plan (IRP) in 2010 that reports on water use efficiency measures and local resource developments that are projected to meet future water needs. Metropolitan also publishes annual reports that provide information about water supplies, water initiatives, and resource management and operations in addition to other topics. The most recent annual report available is for 2011. Metropolitan receives its water supplies from three (3) primary sources: the Colorado River Aqueduct, the State Water Project, and Storage. Colorado River Supplies A number of water agencies within California have rights to divert water from the Colorado River. Metropolitan is one of those agencies. The water is delivered to Metropolitan's service area by way of the Colorado River Aqueduct, which has a capacity of nearly 1.3 million AFY. The Aqueduct conveys water 242 miles from its Lake Havasu intake to its terminal reservoir, Lake Mathews, near the city of Riverside. Metropolitan is appropriated 550,000 AFY of Colorado River Water per an agreement with the federal Bureau of Reclamation. Up to an additional 842,000 AFY are available to Metropolitan when there is surplus water or when water remains unused by Arizona, Nevada, and higher priority users in California. Metropolitan is party to several agreements regarding the supply, delivery, transfer, and conservation of water from the Aqueduct.' NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 12 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Fiscal year 2010111 began with concerns of prolonged drought conditions in the Colorado Basin. However, the winter of 2010111 saw record - breaking snowfall in much of the Colorado River Basin which substantially raised water levels in Lake Powell and Lake Mead. The increased storage has postponed the risk of shortage for several years and increased the chance that surplus water could be made available to Metropolitan in the near future .7 State Water Project The State Water Project (SWP), which is owned by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), is the second source of Metropolitan's imported water supplies. The SWP conveys water from Northern California to the north and south of the San Francisco Bay Area and areas south of the Bay Delta region. That water, along with all additional unused water from the watershed, flows into the Sacramento /San Joaquin Delta. Water from the Delta is then either pumped to water users in the San Francisco Bay area or transported through the California Aqueduct to water users in Central and Southern California. The amount of entitlement DWR approves for delivery varies annually with contractor demands and projected water supplies from tributary sources to the Delta, based on snowpack in the Sierra Nevada, reservoir storage, operational constraints, and demands of other water users. Historically, the SWP has been able to meet all of its contractors' requests for entitlement water except in a few years when there was a shortage. The most recent shortage occurred in 2007 -09, requiring Metropolitan to draft water from its storage supplies; but, a combination of improved SWP supplies and continued investments in water conservation and recycling have allowed Metropolitan to meet demands while also reducing its requirements for SWP water in recent years. Going forward, a primary factor affecting the future reliability and supply of SWP water is the listing of several fish species in the Sacramento /San Joaquin Delta (Delta) under both state and federal Endangered Species Acts. Future SWP deliveries will continue to be impacted by restrictions placed on SWP and Central Valley Project (CVP) Delta pumping required by the biological opinions issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (December 2008) and National Marine Fisheries Service (June 2009).8 SBx7 -7 (Senate Bill 7 as part of the Seventh Extraordinary Session), "The Water Conservation Bill of 2009 ", was signed into law on February 3, 2010, as part of a comprehensive statewide water legislation package to reduce pumping out of the San Francisco Bay Delta. The bill sets a goal of achieving a 20% statewide reduction in urban per capita water use, which is being complied with in Newport Beach through local water conservation efforts discussed below under "Water Conservation Programs and Requirements." NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 13 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Storage A key component of Metropolitan's water supply capability is the amount of water in Metropolitan's storage facilities. Storage is a major component of Metropolitan's dry- year resource management strategy. Metropolitan is party to numerous voluntary Central Valley storage and transfer programs, aiming to develop additional dry -year water supplies. To date, Metropolitan's Central Valley /SWP storage programs consist of partnerships with Central Valley agricultural districts. These partnerships allow Metropolitan to store its SWP supplies during wetter years for return in future drier years. Metropolitan's Central Valley transfer programs include partnerships with Sacramento Valley Central Valley Project (CVP) and SWP settlement contractors. They allow Metropolitan to purchase water in drier years for delivery via the California Aqueduct to Metropolitan's service area .9 The end -of -year storage for calendar year 2011 was approximately 2.5 million AF, the highest level of dry-year storage reserves in Metropolitan's history. These increases improve Metropolitan's supply and demand outlook for future years.io Metropolitan's RUWMP concludes that Metropolitan has supply capabilities that are sufficient to meet expected water demands from 2015 through 2035 under the single dry-year and multiple dry-year conditions, as charted below in Table 4. As shown, imported water supplies from Metropolitan as wholesaled to the City of Newport Beach by the MWDOC, is a reliable source of water through at least 2035. In the event of a water shortage, Metropolitan has comprehensive plans for stages of actions it would undertake to address up to a 50 percent reduction in its water supplies and a catastrophic interruption in water supplies through its Water Surplus and Drought Management and Water Supply Allocation Plans. Metropolitan also developed an Emergency Storage Requirement to mitigate against potential interruption in water supplies resulting from catastrophic occurrences within the Southern California region, including seismic events along the San Andreas fault. In addition, Metropolitan is working with the State of California to implement a comprehensive improvement plan to address catastrophic occurrences that could occur outside of the Southern California region, such as a maximum probable seismic event in the Delta that would cause levee failure and disruption of SWP deliveries u NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 14 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Table 4, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California's Projected Water Supply Capacity 45 4.0 3.5 3.0 Million 2.5 Acre -Feet per Yea 2.0 r 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Supply Capability Single Dry Year Supply Capability Multiple Dry Years Total Demands on Metropolitan Single Dry -Year — Total Demands on Metropoliton Mulfiple Dry Years Source: Metropolitan Water District of Southern California 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan, Figure ES -1 Supply Capacity and Reliability — Municipal Water District of Orange County MWDOC is a member agency of Metropolitan and a regional water wholesaler and resource planning agency. It receives imported water from Metropolitan and then wholesales that water to its member agencies, including the City of Newport Beach. MWDOC's 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan ( RUWMP) addresses the water demand and supplies for all of Orange County, except for the cities of Anaheim, Fullerton, and Santa Ana, which are not MWDOC member agencies. The regional approach to urban water management planning via the RUWMP allows MWDOC to provide a comprehensive assessment of water resource needs in its service area, but also coordinate the implementation of water conservation programs and determine how to maximize the beneficial use of recycled water and local groundwater supplies, providing the region with new sources of local water to reduce the need for imported supplies from the Metropolitan. As a wholesaler, MWDOC develops and implements regional water use efficiency and water conservation programs on behalf of its retail water agencies and their customers, including the City of Newport Beach. The RUWMP concludes that the MWDOC service area will have sufficient existing and planned supplies from Metropolitan, groundwater, surface water, and recycled water to meet full service demands under average year, dry year, and multi dry year scenarios from 2015 through 203512 During water shortages, MWDOC works with its member agencies to manage the water supply in the region to ensure it meets the demands of its member agencies. During a severe water NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 15 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT shortage (Stage 7 supply reduction as defined in Metropolitan's Water Surplus and Drought Management [WSDM] Plan), the MWDOC Board is responsible for allocating imported water from Metropolitan according to a specific formula.13 2. Groundwater from the Lower Santa Ana River Groundwater Basin The City of Newport Beach uses approximately 10,000 acre -feet of groundwater annually, drawn from the Lower Santa Ana River Groundwater Basin (Orange County Basin). As of 2010, this local source of supply met approximately 60% of the City's total annual demand. The Lower Santa Ana Groundwater Basin underlies the north half of Orange County, covering an area of approximately 350 square miles, and is managed by the Orange County Water District (OCWD). The OCWD manages the Basin's water supplies pursuant to a Groundwater Management Plan, the most recent update of which was published in 2009. The 2009 OCWD Groundwater Management Plan addresses several topics, including but not limited to: 1) Basin hydrogeology; 2) groundwater monitoring; 3) groundwater recharge; 4) groundwater quality management; and 5) efforts to protect water supplies and water quality.14 OCWD reports that although the amount of recharge and total pumping from the Basin may not be the same each year, over the long -term the amount of recharge needs to be similar to total pumping.15 The Basin is assured an adequate supply of water by a managed recharge system fed by natural recharge (rainfall and infiltration), water from the Santa Ana River and Santiago Creek, water released into the Santa Ana River at Prado Dam by the Western Municipal Water District, and imported and supplemental water released into recharge basins by Metropolitan, San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District, and from the Arlington Desalter.16 The Santa Ana River is the largest coastal stream in southern California with a length of 80 miles and a drainage area of 2,470 square miles. OCWD has legal rights to and permits from the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to collect and store water from the Santa Ana River and Santiago Creek. OCWD operates 1,067 acres of recharge facilities located in and adjacent to the Santa Ana River and Santiago Creek. 17 The City of Newport Beach obtains groundwater pumped from four (4) wells owned and operated by the City and managed by OCWD. Groundwater production from these wells from 2005 to 2009 is shown below. During certain seasons of 2005, 2006, and 2007, OCWD operated an In -lieu program with Metropolitan by purchasing water from Metropolitan to meet demands of member agencies rather than pumping water from the groundwater basin. In 2008 and 2009, OCWD did not utilize in -lieu water because such water was not available to purchase from Metropolitan,l8 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 16 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Table 5, Historic Groundwater Supplies 2005 -2009 Basin Name(s) Fiscal Year Ending 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 BPP GW 4,984 3,446 3,605 14,338 11,309 10,047 9,574 In -Lieu for OCWS 6,652 7,682 8,553 -- -- -- -- Subtotal OCWD Basin GW 11,636 11,228 12,158 14,338 11,309 10,047 9,574 Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 3 -6 for years 2005 -2009; City of Newport Beach Water Production Division for years 2010 -2011. The City's wells are located in the City of Fountain Valley, approximately five (5) miles north of the City. The only constraints affecting groundwater supply to the City of Newport Beach are the pumping capacity of the wells and pumping limitations established by OCWD to maintain the groundwater basin.19 Each year the OCWD determines the optimum level of water storage for the following year. The primary mechanism used by OCWD to manage pumping is the Basin Production Percentage (BPP), defined as "the ratio that all water to be produced from groundwater supplies with the district bears to all water to be produced by persons and operators within the District from supplemental sources as well as from groundwater within the District." In other words, the BPP is a percentage of each producer's water supply that comes from groundwater pumped from the basin. The BPP is set uniformly for all producers.20 OCWD uses a pricing approach that serves to discourage, but not eliminate, production above the BPP. Raising or lowering the BPP allows the District to manage the amount of pumping from the basin. The BPP is lowered when basin conditions necessitate a decrease in pumping. A lower BPP results in the need for Producers to purchase additional, more expensive imported water from Metropolitan 21 In summary, Lower Santa Ana Groundwater Basin serves as a safe, reliable buffer, sufficient source of groundwater for the City of Newport Beach. OCWD manages recharge of the Basin and implements measures that encourage withdraw amounts that secure the Basin's water supply.22 Additionally, the Groundwater Replenishment System jointly implemented by the OCWD and the Orange County Sanitation District secures stability of the groundwater basin by taking highly treated wastewater otherwise released into the ocean and purifies it to augment groundwater supplies. 3. Recycled Water The City of Newport Beach participates in a reclaimed /recycled water program and uses recycled water supplies available to irrigate greenbelts, parkways, golf courses, and other landscape areas that may otherwise use potable water. This reclaimed /recycled water is wholesaled by OCWD through its Green Acres Project (GAP). In 2009/10, usage of recycled water within the City's Water Utility service area was about 400 acre feet. Recycled water usage meets approximately 3% of the City's water demand. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 17 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT As reported by the OCWD, the region collects nearly 313,000 AF of wastewater per year and 35% of that wastewater is used for recycled water supply. That the amount of recycled water supply will increase in the future. The amount of wastewater is expected to grow to approximately 440,000 AFY in 2035, with 37% expected to be treated for recycled use. As stated by the MWDOC, recycled water is a significant, reliable source of supply.23 Reliability of Supply in Normal Year, Single Dry Year and Multiple Dry Year Conditions Every urban water supplier is required to assess the reliability to provide water service to its customers under normal, dry, and multiple dry years. As stated above, the City is assured a reliability of supply from Metropolitan as wholesaled to the City by the MWDOC (Imported), local groundwater pumped from the Lower Santa Ana Groundwater Basin managed by the OCWD (BPP Groundwater), and recycled water wholesaled by OCWD through its GAP (Recycled Water). The RUWMPs of Metropolitan and MWDOC document a reliable supply through year 2035. Additionally OCWD's Groundwater Management Plan documents a reliable supply of groundwater through 2035. The tables below show supply and demand for the City of Newport Beach under normal year, dry year, and multiple dry year conditions. Because water supplies are projected to be available from all sources (Metropolitan, MWDOC and OCWD), supply and demand numbers are identica1.24 Table 6, City of Newport Beach Projected Normal Water Supply and Demand (AFY) Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 3 -16. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 18 Fiscal Year Ending 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Total Demand 17,023 17,422 17,774 18,124 18,474 BPPGW 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 Recycled Water 450 500 500 500 500 Imported 6,298 6,430 6,564 6,697 6,830 Total Supply 17,023 17,422 17,774 18,124 18,474 Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 3 -16. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 18 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Table 7, City of Newport Beach Projected Single Dry Year Water Supply and Demand (AFY) Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 3 -17. Table 8, City of Newport Beach Projected Multiple Dry Year Period Supply and Demand (AFY) Fiscal Year Ending 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Total Demand 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 BPP GW 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 Recycled Water 450 500 500 500 500 Imported 7,081 7,232 7,382 7,531 7,680 Total Supply 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 3 -17. Table 8, City of Newport Beach Projected Multiple Dry Year Period Supply and Demand (AFY) Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 3 -18. Water Conservation Proqrams and Requirements MWDOC Water Conservation Programs MWDOC works with its member agencies, including the City of Newport Beach, on water use efficiency programs. In terms of water management, MWDOC became a signatory to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in 1991, monitored by the California Urban Water Conservation Council (CUWCC), which outlines 14 Best Management Practices (BMP) for urban NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 19 Fiscal Year Ending 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Total Demand 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 iuppl Year BPP GW Recycled Water 10,275 450 10,492 500 10,710 500 10,927 500 11,144 500 S Supply Imported 7,081 7,232 7,382 7,531 7,680 Total Supply 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 Total Demand 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 BPP GW 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 Second Year Supply Recycled Water 450 500 500 Soo 500 Imported 7,081 7,232 7,382 7,531 7,680 Total Supply 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 Total Demand 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 BPP GW 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 Third Year Supply Recycled Water 450 500 500 500 500 Imported 7,081 7,232 7,382 7,531 7,680 In Total Supply 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 3 -18. Water Conservation Proqrams and Requirements MWDOC Water Conservation Programs MWDOC works with its member agencies, including the City of Newport Beach, on water use efficiency programs. In terms of water management, MWDOC became a signatory to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in 1991, monitored by the California Urban Water Conservation Council (CUWCC), which outlines 14 Best Management Practices (BMP) for urban NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 19 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT water use efficiency. The urban water use efficiency practices are intended to reduce long -term urban demands from what they would have been without implementation of these practices, and are in addition to programs that may be instituted during occasional water supply shortage S.25 City of Newport Beach Water Conservation Ordinance A Water Conservation Ordinance was adopted by the Newport Beach City Council in 2009 and is included in the City's municipal code as Chapter 14.16, "Water Conservation and Supply Level Regulations." The Ordinance creates a Water Conservation and Supply Shortage Program that established four levels of water supply shortage response actions to be implemented during times of declared water shortage. Additionally, the City of Newport Beach has been a signatory to the California Urban Water Conservation Council's (CUWCC) Best Management Practices (BMPs) Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) since August 2005 and implements Demand Management Measures (DMMs) to satisfy the requirements of MOU Section 10631 (f) & 0). Many DMMs also are administered by the MWDOC on behalf of its member agencies, including the City of Newport Beach. SBx7 -7 (Senate Bill 7 as part of the Seventh Extraordinary Session), "The Water Conservation Bill of 2009 ", was signed into law on February 3, 2010, as part of a comprehensive statewide water legislation package in response to legal action brought by the National Resources Defense Council to reduce pumping out of the San Francisco Bay Delta. The bill sets a goal of achieving a 20% statewide reduction in urban per capita water use, and directs urban retail water suppliers to develop targets to meet a 20% reduction in per capita water use by 2020, and an interim 10% reduction by 2015. As the wholesale water supplier to the City of Newport Beach and other member agencies, MWDOC is not required to establish and meet these reduction targets. MWDOC's role in implementing the legislation is to assist each retail water supplier in analyzing the requirements and establishing their baseline and target water use, as guided by the California Department of Water Resources.26 The retail agency may choose to comply with SBx7 -7 as an individual or as a region in collaboration with other water suppliers. MWDOC and 26 of its member agencies, including the City of Newport Beach, as well as the cities of Anaheim, Fullerton, and Santa Ana have created the Orange County 20x2020 Regional Alliance in an effort to help these agencies meet the water use reduction targets required by SBx7 -7. With MWDOC's assistance, the City of Newport Beach selected to comply with Option 1 of the SBx7 -7 compliance options, which requires a 20% reduction from baseline water usage by 2020 and 10% by 2015. The City's baseline, calculated from the ten year period July 1, 1995 to June 30, 2005, is 253 gallons per capita per day (GPCD). Thus, the City's 2015 interim water use target is 228.1 GPCD and the 2020 final water use target is 202.8 GPCD .27 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 20 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT and Conclusions The proposed Project evaluated in this Water Supply Assessment is a request to convert permitted development intensity associated with 79 un -built hotel rooms in the City of Newport Beach's Statistical Area Ll from "hotel rooms" to "multi- family residential units" and transfer those units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. The proposed Project also involves assigning previously unassigned development intensity for 15 un -built multi - family residential units permitted by the General Plan in MU -H3 designated areas to the NNCPC in San Joaquin Plaza. If the requested development intensity conversion, transfer, and assignment is approved by the City of Newport Beach, a total of 524 units would be permitted in San Joaquin Plaza (94 additional residential units and 430 units already permitted by the General Plan and NNCPC Development Plan). Buildout of the City of Newport Beach's General Plan was considered in the water demand projections calculated by Metropolitan, MWDOC and OCWD. Therefore, Metropolitan's Regional Urban Water Management Plan. (2010), MWDOC's Regional Urban Water Management Plan (2011), and OCWD's Groundwater Management Plan 2009 Update evaluate the supply that would be required to service the 430 residential units already permitted in San Joaquin Plaza and the 15 un -built units allowed by the General Plan that are proposed to be assigned to San Joaquin Plaza. Metropolitan, MWDOC and OCWD all conclude that there will be adequate supplies in the average year, dry year, and multiple dry year scenarios through 2035. Therefore, Metropolitan's Regional Urban Water Management Plan (2010), MWDOC's Regional Urban Water Management Plan (2011), and OCWD's Groundwater Management Plan 2009 Update evaluate the supply that would be required to service the 430 residential units already permitted in San Joaquin Plaza and the 15 un -built units allowed by the General Plan that are proposed to be assigned to San Joaquin Plaza. Thus, the focus of this Assessment primarily involves the proposed conversion of 79 hotel units to 79 multi - family residential units, and whether supplies are sufficient to service 524 units of multi - family residential development that would be vested to the location of San Joaquin Plaza. The water demand for this Project is calculated below for planning purposes only. This estimate is for planning purposes and shall not be construed as guaranteed water rights for the project. Actual water use would likely be reduced through water conservation programs being implemented in the City of Newport Beach and the continued use of recycled water where possible. The demand calculation is based on 228.1 GPCD, which is the City's target goal for year 2015. Because no specific development project is proposed as part of the Project, this Assessment assumes that the number of persons expected to reside in each multi - family residential is 2.19 persons per household, which is the average number of persons per household cited in the General Plan EIR. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 21 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Table 9, Water Demand for 79 Multi - Family Residential Units (not considered by the General Plan) Table 10, Water Demand for 15 Multi - Family Residential Units (considered by the General Plan) Units /Population Gallons /Day /Capita Gallons /Day Acre- Feet/Year Multi - Family 524/1,148 Residential 79 units /173 228.1 39,463 44.20 Units persons Table 10, Water Demand for 15 Multi - Family Residential Units (considered by the General Plan) Table 11, Water Demand for 430 Multi - Family Residential Units (considered by the General Plan) Units /Population I Gallons /Day /Capita Gallons /Day Acre- Feet/Year Multi - Family 524/1,148 Residential 15 units /33 228.1 7,527 8.43 Units persons Table 11, Water Demand for 430 Multi - Family Residential Units (considered by the General Plan) Table 12, Total Residential Water Demand Proiected in San Joaquin Plaza Units /Population Gallons /Day /Capita Gallons /Day Acre- Feet/Year Multi - Family 524/1,148 Residential 430 units /942 228.1 214,870 240.58 Units persons Table 12, Total Residential Water Demand Proiected in San Joaquin Plaza As mentioned above, the proposed Project involves a request to convert permitted development intensity associated with 79 un -built hotel rooms in Statistical Area Ll from "hotel rooms" to "multi- family residential units" and transfer those units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. Therefore, this analysis also calculates the projected demand reduction associated with the elimination of 79 hotel rooms. Water use in hotels is highly dependent on occupancy rate, the number of persons occupying each room, the water conservation features incorporated into the hotel building, the water conservation operational practices of the hotel's management and the amount of water conservation practiced by hotel guests. In the City of Newport Beach, the MWDOC encourages water use reduction conservation programs for hotels in its service area, which has some effect on water use reduction. For purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that the water demand of a hotel room equates to the same demand as a residential unit housing one (1) person. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 22 Units Gallons /Day /Capita Gallons /Day Acre- Feet/Year Multi - Family 524/1,148 Residential Units persons 2281 261,858 293.2 As mentioned above, the proposed Project involves a request to convert permitted development intensity associated with 79 un -built hotel rooms in Statistical Area Ll from "hotel rooms" to "multi- family residential units" and transfer those units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. Therefore, this analysis also calculates the projected demand reduction associated with the elimination of 79 hotel rooms. Water use in hotels is highly dependent on occupancy rate, the number of persons occupying each room, the water conservation features incorporated into the hotel building, the water conservation operational practices of the hotel's management and the amount of water conservation practiced by hotel guests. In the City of Newport Beach, the MWDOC encourages water use reduction conservation programs for hotels in its service area, which has some effect on water use reduction. For purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that the water demand of a hotel room equates to the same demand as a residential unit housing one (1) person. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 22 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Table 13, Anticipated Water Demand Eliminated from Hotel Rooms (considered by the General Plan) Comparing Table 9 and Table 13, the proposed Project would result in an increased water demand of 24.02 acre -feet per year (AFY), which is less than one -tenth of one percent of the City's projected year 2035 total demand of 17,474 AFY. Based on the information contained in this Water Supply Assessment regarding the existing and future availability and reliability of imported water supplies as surmised from the Urban Water Management Plans of Metropolitan (2010), MWDOC (2011) and the City of Newport Beach (2010), and the OCWD Groundwater Management Plan (2009), there is an availability of sufficient supplies from imported water, local groundwater, and recycled water to service the proposed Project and other existing and projected development in the City of Newport Beach in normal year, single dry year and multiple dry year conditions. Additionally, there has been a trend of per capita water use reduction since 2005 and that trend is expected to continue to reach the City's water usage reduction goal of 202.8 GPCD by year 2020. These further reductions are not reflected in the calculated water demands above. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 23 Rooms Gallons /Day /Unit Gallons /Day Acre- Feet/Year Hotel Rooms 1 - 79/ -79 persons 228.1 - 18,019 -20.18 Comparing Table 9 and Table 13, the proposed Project would result in an increased water demand of 24.02 acre -feet per year (AFY), which is less than one -tenth of one percent of the City's projected year 2035 total demand of 17,474 AFY. Based on the information contained in this Water Supply Assessment regarding the existing and future availability and reliability of imported water supplies as surmised from the Urban Water Management Plans of Metropolitan (2010), MWDOC (2011) and the City of Newport Beach (2010), and the OCWD Groundwater Management Plan (2009), there is an availability of sufficient supplies from imported water, local groundwater, and recycled water to service the proposed Project and other existing and projected development in the City of Newport Beach in normal year, single dry year and multiple dry year conditions. Additionally, there has been a trend of per capita water use reduction since 2005 and that trend is expected to continue to reach the City's water usage reduction goal of 202.8 GPCD by year 2020. These further reductions are not reflected in the calculated water demands above. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 23 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT UffT-XTffTRY-Vj Consultant Tracy Zinn, AICP, Principal T &B Planning, Inc. 17542 East 17`h Street, Suite 100 Tustin, CA 92780 City of Newport Beach George Murdoch; General Manager, Municipal Operations Department Kathryne Cho; Junior Engineer, Public Works Department ENDNOTES 1 California Department of Water Resources, 2003. Guidebook for Implementation of Senate Bill 610 and Senate Bill 221 of 200. Page iii. October 8, 2003. 2 Ibid. 3 Newport Beach, 2011. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. Available online at http: / /www.newportbeachca.gov/ Modules /ShowDocument.aspx ?documentid= 10182. Pagel. May 2011. 4Ibid. Page 2 -10 and Table 2 -9. 5 Ibid. Page 2 -10. 6 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, 2010. Regional Urban Water Management Plan. Available online at http: / /www.mwdh2o.com /mwdh2o /pages /yourwater /RUWMP /RUWMP 2010.pdf. Pages A.2 -12 to 13. November 2010. 7 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, 2011. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Annual Report 2011. Available online at http: / /www.mwdh2o.com /mwdh2o /pages /about /ar /arll.htmi. Pages 27 -29. 8 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, 2010. Page 2 -15. 9Ibid. Section 3.3 10 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, 2011. Pages 7 -10. 11 Ibid. Page ES -5. 12 Municipal Water District of Orange County, 2011. 2010 Final Regional Urban Water Management Plan. Available online at http: // www.mwdoc.com /filesgalleWMWDOC Final 2010 RUWMP.pddf. Page 2. April 2011. 13 Ibid. Page 6. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 24 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT 14 Orange County Water District, 2009. Groundwater Management Plan 2009 Update. Available online at http: / /www.ocwd.com/ Publications - -- Reports /ca- 43.aspx. Pgs. ES -1 to ES -17. July 9, 2010. 15 Ibid. Page 4 -1. 16 Ibid. Page 4 -11. Table 4 -2. 17 Ibid. Page 4 -1. 18 Ibid. 19 Newport Beach, 2011. Page 3 -13. 20 Orange County Water District, 2009. Section 6.7 21 Ibid. 22 Ibid. Section 6. 23 Municipal Water District of Orange County, 2011. Page ES -5. 24 Newport Beach, 2011. Pages 3 -18 to 3 -19. 25 Municipal Water District of Orange County, 2011. Page 1 -6. 26 Ibid. Pages 3 to 4. 27 Newport Beach, 2011. Pages 2 -6 to 2 -8. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 25 APPENDIX A — City of Newport Beach Water Conservation Ordinance APPENDIX B — City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Attachment No. PC 13 Addendum No. 2 to Program EIR for 2006 General Plan Update ADDENDUM NO. 2 TO THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN 2006 UPDATE FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) SCH No. 2006011119 I'WP6 F J 4> ��CIpOK „' Lead Agency City of Newport Beach Community Development Department Planning Division 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92658 CEQA Consultant T &B Planning, Inc. 17542 East 17” Street, Suite 100 Tustin, California 92780 June 15, 2012 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Number/Title Page 1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... ............................... 1 -1 1.1 Project Summary ............................................................................................... ............................... 1 -1 1.2 The California Environmental Quality Act ................................................. ............................... 1 -2 1.3 Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update and Final Program EIR ..... ............................... 1 -2 1.4 Addendum No. I to the Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update and Final ProgramEIR ....................................................................................................... ............................... 1 -3 1.5 California Environmental Quality Act Requirements ............................... ............................... 1 -3 1.6 Type of CEQA Compliance Document and Level of Analysis .............. ............................... 1 -4 1.7 Format and Content of this EIR Addendum .............................................. ............................... 1 -7 1.8 Preparation and Processing of this EIR Addendum .................................. ............................... 1 -8 2.0 Project Description ............................................................................................................ ............................2 -1 3.0 Project Information ............................................................................................................ ............................3 -1 4.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis ............................................... ............................4 -1 4.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected .................................................. ............................4 -1 4.2 Determination (To Be Completed By the Lead Agency) ........................ ............................... 4 -1 4.3 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts .............................................................. ............................4 -2 4.3.1 Aesthetics ............................................................................................... ............................4 -2 4.3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ............................................... . ............................ 4 -6 4.3.3 Air Quality .............................................................................................. ............................4 -9 4.3.4 Biological Resources ........................................................................... ...........................4 -18 4.3.5 Cultural Resources .............................................................................. ...........................4 -21 4.3.6 Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources.. ..... ...................................... 4-24 4.3.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................... ...........................4 -29 4.3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ................................................... ...........................4 -35 4.3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality .......................................................... ...........................4 -40 4.3.10 Land Use and Planning ........................................................................ ...........................4 -45 4.3.1 1 Noise ...................................................................................................... ...........................4 -49 4.3.12 Population and Housing ....... ......................................................................................... 4 -61 4.3.13 Public Services ............................ ..................................................................................... 4 -62 4.3.14 Recreation and Open Space .............................................................. ...........................4 -66 4.3.15 Transportation/ Traffic ........................................................................ ...........................4 -68 4.3.16 Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................. ...........................4 -81 5.0 References ............................................................................................................................ ............................5 -1 6.0 Persons Contributing to Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Preparation........................................................................................................................ ............................... 6 -1 6.1 Persons Contributing to Initial Study /Addendum Preparation .... ......................................... 6 -1 6.2 Resumes for Key Personnel .............................................................................. ............................6 -1 7.0 Technical Appendices ........................................................................................................ ............................7 -1 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Number /Title Page Figure I Proposed Development Intensity Transfer ................................................... ............................2 -3 Figure2 Project Location Map ....................................................................................... ............................... 3 -3 Figure 3 Existing and Surrounding Land Uses. ................................................................ ............. 3-4 Figure 4 TPO Analysis Study Intersections ................................................................... ...........................4 -70 Figure 5 General Project Trip Distribution and Project ADT .............................. ... ........................... 4 -72 LIST OF TABLES Table Number /Title Paae Table I Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the SCAB ............................... ...........................4 -10 Table 2 Summary of Peak Operational Emissions ...................................................... ...........................4 -13 Table 3 Global Warming Potentials and Atmospheric Lifetime of Select GHGs ..........................4 -31 Table 4 Total Annual Project GHG Emissions ........................................................... ...........................4 -33 Table 5 Allowable Exterior Noise Levels ...... .............................................................. ........................... 4 -51 Table 6 Allowable Interior Noise Levels ...................................................................... ...........................4 -51 Table 7 Existing Off -Site Project - Related Traffic Noise Impacts ............................ ...........................4 -54 Table 8 Year 2016 Off -Site Project - Related Traffic Noise Impacts ....................... ...........................4 -56 Table 9 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment ............................... ...........................4 -58 Table 10 Approved Projects Summary ........................................................................... ...........................4 -71 Table I I Trip Generation Summary ..... ............................... . ...........................4 -71 Table 12 Cumulative Projects Summary ........................................................................ ...........................4 -73 Table 13 Existing ICU Summary ....................................................................................... ...........................4 -73 Table 14 Existing -Plus- Project ICU Summary ............................................................... ...........................4 -74 Table 15 One Percent Traffic Analysis Summary ......................................................... ...........................4 -75 Table 16 Year 2016 ICU Summary .................................................................................. ...........................4 -76 Table 17 Cumulative ICU Summary .......... ................................................................................................. 4 -77 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 LIST OF ACRONYMS Acronym Definition AB Assembly Bill ADT Average Daily Traffic AELUP Airport Environs Land Use Plan AFY Acre -Feet per Year AHIP Affordable Housing Implementation Plan ALUC Airport Land Use Commission APS Alternative Planning Strategy AQMP Air Quality Management Plan BMPs Best Management Practices CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards CARB California Air Resources Board CBC California Building Code CDC California Department of Conservation CDFG California Department of Fish and Game CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CH4 Methane CGS California Geological Survey CMP Congestion Management Program CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level DAMP (Orange County) Drainage Area Master Plan dB Decibels EIR Environmental Impact Report EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAA Federal Aviation Administration FAR Federal Aviation Regulations FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FHWA Federal Highway Administration FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program GCC Global Climate Change GHG Greenhouse Gas(es) GWP Global Warming Potential HCP Habitat Conservation Plan HFC Hydrofluorocarbon ICU Intersection Capacity Utilization IPPC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change JWA John Wayne Airport NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Acronym Definition Ell? Addendum No. 2 LIST OF ACRONYMS (cont'd) Leq Equivalent Level (noise) LOS Level of Service MFR Multi - Family Residential Uses mgd million gallons per day MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization MRZ -3 Mineral Resources Zone 3 MTCO2e Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent MU -H3 Mixed -Use Horizontal 3 MWDOC Municipal Water District of Orange County NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NAHC Native American Heritage Commission NAVD 88 North American Vertical Datum of 1988 NBFD Newport Beach Fire Department NBPD Newport Beach Police Department NBPL Newport Beach Public Library NCCP Natural Community Conservation Plan NMUSD Newport Mesa Unified School District NNCPC North Newport Center Planned Community NOx Oxides of Nitrogen NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System OCSD Orange County Sanitation District OCTA Orange County Transportation Authority OCWD Orange County Water District PC -56 North Newport Center Planned Community PFC Perfluorocarbon PM2.5 Fine Particulate Matter PMio Inhalable Particulate Matter pph person(s) per household REMEL Reference Energy Mean Emission Level RM Multiple Residential RTP Regional Transportation Plan SB Senate Bill SCAB South Coast Air Basin SCAG Southern California Association of Governments SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District SCGC Southern California Gas Company SCH State Clearinghouse (Governor's Office of Planning & Research) SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy SIP State Implementation Plan NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Acronym Definition Ell? Addendum No. 2 LIST OF ACRONYMS (cont'd) SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board TPO Traffic Phasing Ordinance USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service UWMP Urban Water Management Plan V/C Volume to Capacity Ratio VdB Vibration Decibels VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled VOCs Volatile Organic Compounds vph vehicles per hour WQMP Water Quality Management Plan NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 1.0 Introduction The City of Newport Beach (hereafter "City ") received an application from the Irvine Company (hereafter "Project Applicant ") in February 2012 requesting to assign un -built development intensity permitted by the City's General Plan to the North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC) and to vest that development intensity to the NNCPC subarea named "San Joaquin Plaza" (hereafter "proposed Project site "). Specifically, the application (hereafter "Project" or "proposed Project ") proposes the following: 1) convert 79 un -built hotel units to 79 multi - family residential units and transfer and vest those 79 units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC; 2) assign and vest 15 un -built multi - family residential units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC; and 3) reallocate 430 units already allowed within the NNCPC's Block 500, Block 600 and the San Joaquin Plaza, solely to the San Joaquin Plaza. The proposed Project is the subject of analysis in this document pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15367, the City is the lead agency with principal responsibility for considering the proposed Project for approval. This Introduction will discuss: 1) the requirements of CEQA; 2) the Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse No. 200601 1 19) certified by the Newport Beach City Council for the General Plan 2006 Update (hereafter "General Plan EIR ") in compliance with CEQA; 3) Addendum No. I to the General Plan EIR that supported the approval of the NNCPC Development Plan and associated actions; 4) the primary purpose of an EIR Addendum; 5) the standards for adequacy of an EIR Addendum pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines; 6) the format and content of this EIR Addendum; and 7) the City's processing requirements to consider the proposed Project for approval. 1.1 Prolect Summary The proposed Project evaluated in this EIR Addendum is located in the City's Newport Center Statistical Area (Statistical Area LI). This area is commonly known as Newport Center /Fashion Island, which is a mixed use district that includes major retail, professional office, entertainment, recreation, and residential uses in a master - planned development. The Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update (hereafter, "General Plan" or "2006 General Plan ") describes the City's existing and planned development pattern. It includes maps and tables that specify where certain land uses can occur and assigns maximum development limits (also called development "intensity ") to specific locations. The General Plan recognizes that although Newport Beach is mostly built -out, growth and change will continue to occur; therefore, to allow flexibility, the City Council may allow transfers of un -built development intensity. The Project Applicant is requesting the following: a. The conversion of development intensity associated with 79 un -built hotel rooms in Statistical Area LI from "hotel rooms" to "multi- family residential units" and the transfer and vesting of the converted units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC; b. The assignment and vesting of 15 un -built multi - family residential units currently allowed by the General Plan within the MU -H3 portions of Newport Center to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC; and c. The reallocation of the 430 residential units currently allocated to the Mixed -Use Horizontal 3 (MU -H3) portions of the NNCPC (Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza) solely to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1 -1 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 The above actions, combined, would result in a net increase in the number of multi - family residential dwelling units allowed within San Joaquin Plaza by 94 dwelling units (from 430 units to 524 units) and would eliminate residential unit allocations from NNCPC Blocks 500 and 600. The above actions do not, however, increase the overall intensity currently allowed by the General Plan. A General Plan Amendment is not required to accomplish transfers of development intensity, but the transfers must be approved by the City Council pursuant to Land Use Policy LU 6.14.3 of the General Plan (Transfers of Development Rights). The following actions require consideration by the Newport Beach City Council in order to approve the proposed Project: I) Convert un -built non - residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms) to multi - family residential development intensity (79 multi - family units) and transfer the converted development intensity into the NNCPC; 2) Assign 15 residential units currently allowed by the General Plan within the MU -H3 portions of the Newport Center to San Joaquin Plaza; 3) Amend the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the allowable residential development intensity by a total of 94 units and to allocate the 94 units plus the 430 residential units currently allocated to the MU -H3 portions of the NNCPC solely to San Joaquin Plaza; 4) Amend the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company concerning North Newport Center to vest the revised development intensities and allocations; 5) Approve a traffic study for 94 units pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance; and 6) Amend the Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP). Additional detail regarding the proposed Project and the six (6) actions listed above is provided in Section 2.0 of this document. 1.2 The California Environmental Quality Act CEQA, a statewide environmental law contained in Public Resources Code §§21000-21177, applies to most public agency decisions to carry out, authorize, or approve actions that have the potential to adversely affect the environment. The overarching goal of CEQA is to protect the physical environment. To achieve that goal, CEQA requires that public agencies inform themselves of the environmental consequences of their discretionary actions and consider alternatives and mitigation measures that could avoid or reduce significant adverse impacts when avoidance or reduction is feasible. It also gives other public agencies and the general public an opportunity to comment on the information. If significant adverse impacts cannot be avoided, reduced, or mitigated to below a level of significance, the public agency is required to prepare an EIR and balance the project's environmental concerns with other goals and benefits in a statement of overriding considerations. 1.3 Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update and final Proaram EIR In 2006, the City of Newport Beach prepared an update to its General Plan, which required the preparation of a program EIR. As defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15168, a program EIR is "an EIR which may be prepared on a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project and are related...." To reduce duplicative paperwork, program EIRs are intended to be used with later activities if the CEQA lead agency finds that no new adverse environmental effects could occur or no new mitigation measures would be required. See CEQA Guidelines § 15168. In that case, the agency can approve the NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1 -2 ME M❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 implementing activity as being within the scope of the project covered by the program EIR, and no new environmental document would be required. The City's General Plan EIR (SCH No. 200601 1 1 19) was certified by the Newport Beach City Council on July 25, 2006, as adequately addressing the potential environmental impacts associated with planned buildout of the City of Newport Beach, inclusive of the property encompassing the NNCPC and the specific area of the NNCPC that is the subject of evaluation in this document (San Joaquin Plaza). The location of the NNCPC, previous approvals granted, and the actions addressed as part of the proposed Project evaluated in this EIR Addendum are further addressed in Section 2.0, Project Description. On July 25, 2006, the Newport Beach City Council adopted Resolution No. 2006 -75 in association with certifying the General Plan EIR, making associated Findings and Statement of Facts, and adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations in compliance with CEQA. The General Plan EIR and Resolution No. 2006 -75 are herein incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150 and are available for review at City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663 and online at www.newportbeachca.gov. 1.4 Addendum No. 1 to the Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update and Final Program EIR When the 2006 General Plan was adopted by the City, a certain amount of development intensity was allocated to the Newport Center Statistical Area (Statistical Area LI). In 2007, the Irvine Company proposed to assign a portion of the development intensity allocated to Statistical Area LI through the approval of a zoning amendment that would result in the City adopting the NNCPC Development Plan. Associated actions also were proposed, including but not limited to a Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City and the Irvine Company concerning North Newport Center and an AHIP. In compliance with CEQA, the City prepared and approved Addendum No. I to the General Plan EIR (hereafter, "Addendum No. I ") in association with the City's approval of that project. Addendum No. I is herein incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150 and is available for review at City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663. 1.5 California Environmental Quality Act Reauirements The CEQA Guidelines allow for the updating and use of a previously certified EIR for projects that have changed or are different from the previous project or conditions analyzed in the certified EIR. In cases where changes or additions occur with no new significant environmental impacts, an Addendum to a previously certified EIR may be prepared. See CEQA Guidelines § 15164. The following describes the requirements of an Addendum, as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15164: a. The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an Addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a Subsequent EIR have occurred. b. An Addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the Final EIR. c. The decision - making body shall consider the Addendum with the Final EIR prior to making a decision on the project. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1 -3 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 d. A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a Subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an Addendum to an EIR, the lead agency's findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence. As noted above, CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(a) allows for the preparation of an Addendum if none of the conditions described in Section 15162 are met. CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 describes the conditions under which a Subsequent EIR must be prepared, as follows: a. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; b. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or c. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete, shows any of the following: I. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR; 2. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; 3. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternatives; or 4. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. If none of these circumstances are present, and only minor technical changes or additions are necessary to update the previously certified EIR, an Addendum may be prepared. See CEQA Guidelines § 15164. As described in detail herein, none of the above circumstances that warrant the preparation of a Subsequent EIR are present. 1.6 Type of CEQA Compliance Document and Level of Analysis This document is Addendum No. 2 to the previously - certified City of Newport Beach General Plan EIR (SCH No. 2006011119). As such, this Addendum analyzes the potential differences between the impacts in the General Plan EIR and those that would be associated with the proposed Project described in Section 2.0, Project Description. CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(a) states that a Program EIR is appropriate for a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project and are related either: 1) Geographically, NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1 -4 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 2) A logical parts [sic] in the chain of contemplated actions, 3) In connection with issuance of rules, regulations, plans, or other general criteria to govern the conduct of a continuing program, or 4) As individual activities carried out under the same authorizing statutory or regulatory authority and having generally similar environmental effects which can be mitigated in similar ways. CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c) states that subsequent activities undertaken pursuant to a Program EIR must be examined in the light of the Program EIR to determine whether an additional environmental document must be prepared. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c)(4), "Where the subsequent activities involve site specific operations, the agency should use a written checklist or similar device to document the evaluation of the site and the activity to determine whether the environmental effects of the operation were covered in the Program EIR." This EIR Addendum provides the environmental information necessary for the City to make an informed decision about the proposed Project, which consists of the actions summarized above in Section 1.1 and more fully described in Section 2.0, Project Description. The City has determined that an Addendum to the General Plan EIR should be prepared, rather than a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR, based on the following facts: a. As demonstrated in the accompanying Environmental Checklist Form and its associated analyses (refer to Section 4.0), the proposed Project would not require major revisions to the previously - certified Program EIR because the Project would not result any new significant impacts to the physical environment nor would it create substantial increases in the severity of the environmental impacts previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. In summary, the proposed Project consists of assigning un -built development intensity within the General Plan's Newport Center Statistical Area (Statistical Area LI), as summarized above in Section 1.1 and described in detail in Section 2.0. Although the total number of multi - family residential dwelling units allowed within the NNCPC would increase by 94 units, the total number of dwelling units (including hotel rooms) allowed within the Newport Center Statistical Area would remain unchanged. b. Although the Project would convert 79 un -built hotel rooms to 79 multi - family residential units, hotel rooms have a higher peak hour traffic generation rate as compared to multi- family residential; thus, the conversion of un -built hotel rooms to multi - family residential dwelling units would have a reduced impact on transportation and traffic as compared to that evaluated in the General Plan Update Final Program EIR. c. The Project's related discretionary actions, including but not limited to an amendment to the NCCP Development Plan, an amendment to the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City and the Irvine Company, and an amendment to an existing AHIP, would not result in any new significant environmental impacts beyond those disclosed in the General Plan EIR. d. Subsequent to the certification of the General Plan EIR, no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken have occurred. e. Subsequent to the certification of the General Plan EIR, no new information of substantial importance has become available which was not known at the time the General Plan EIR was prepared. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1 -5 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 f. Technical reports that evaluate the proposed Project were prepared for the subject areas of air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, traffic, water supply, and local sewer capacity. Copies of these reports are contained within the appendix of this document. These technical reports do not identify any new impacts or substantial increases in impacts to the environment beyond that which was disclosed in the General Plan EIR. Specifically, these technical reports concluded as follows: 1. The Air Quality Impact Analysis (Technical Appendix A), prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. and dated June 6, 2012, concludes that the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe impacts associated with air quality than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR; 2. The Greenhouse Gas Analysis (Technical Appendix B), prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. and dated June 6, 2012, concludes that the proposed Project would not generate substantial amounts of greenhouse gases that could result in a new impact or more severe significant impact on the environment than would otherwise occur with implementation of the City's General Plan, nor would the Project conflict with any plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions; 3. The Noise Impact Analysis (Technical Appendix C), prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. and dated June 6, 2012, concludes that the proposed Project would not generate a new impact or more severe impact related to construction or operational noise than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. Additionally, the Project would not generate a substantial permanent increase in transportation- related ambient noise levels or expose persons to noise levels in excess of City standards; 4. The North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis (Technical Appendix D), prepared by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. and dated May 2012, concludes that the proposed Project would not result in a significant impact to any study area intersection and finds that the proposed Project would generate less traffic than currently allowed under the General Plan; 5. The Water Supply Assessment (Technical Appendix E), prepared by T &B Planning, Inc. and dated June 13, 2012, concludes that the City will receive a sufficient supply of water from imported, groundwater, and recycled sources in average year, single dry year, and multiple dry year conditions to service the proposed Project and other existing and planned development in the City with domestic water through the horizon analysis year of 2035. As such, the Project would not create a new impact or more severe impact than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. 6. The Assessment of Sewer Capacity Availability Relative to Increase Allocation of Residential Development (Technical Appendix F), prepared by RBF Consulting and dated May 10, 2012, concludes that the proposed Project would not result in or require any physical upgrades to the local sewer system. As such, the Project would not create a new impact or more severe impact than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. g. Mitigation measures identified in the General Plan EIR would be appropriate and feasible for the proposed Project. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1 -6 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Based on these facts, the City determined that an Addendum to the previously certified General Plan EIR is the appropriate type of CEQA document to prepare for the proposed Project. The purpose of this Addendum is to evaluate the proposed Project's level of impact on the environment in comparison to the approved 2006 General Plan and its accompanying Final Program EIR. 1.7 Format and Content of this EIR Addendum The following components comprise the EIR Addendum in its totality: a. This Introduction (Section 1.0) and the Project Description (Section 2.0). b. The completed Environmental Checklist Form and its associated analyses (Sections 3.0 and 4.0), which concludes that the proposed Project would not result in any new significant environmental impacts or substantially increase the severity environmental impacts beyond the levels disclosed in the General Plan Update 2006 Final Program EIR. c. Six (6) technical reports that evaluate the proposed Project, which are attached as EIR Addendum Technical Appendices A — F. Appendix A: Air Quality Analysis Appendix B: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis Appendix C: Noise Study Appendix D: Traffic Report Appendix E: Water Supply Assessment Appendix F: Assessment of Sewer Capacity Availability d. The General Plan EIR, accompanying Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), Technical Appendices to the General Plan EIR, Findings and Statement of Facts, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and City Council Resolution No. 2006 -75, which are all herein incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150 and are available for review at City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663 and online at www.newportbeachca.gov. e. Addendum No. I to the General Plan EIR, which is herein incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150 and is available for review at City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663. f. The Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County staff report, entitled "City of Newport Beach: Request for Consideration of Proposed Planned Community Zoning Amendment" and dated November 15, 2007, which is herein incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150 and is available for review at City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663. g. An analysis conducted by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., entitled "San Joaquin Plaza — Trip Generation Comparison" and dated May 16, 2012, which is herein incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150 and is available for review at City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1 -7 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 1.8 Preparation and Processing of this EIR Addendum The City of Newport Beach Planning Division directed and supervised the preparation of this EIR Addendum. Although prepared with assistance of the consulting firm T &B Planning, Inc., the content contained within and the conclusions drawn by this EIR Addendum reflect the sole independent judgment of the City. This EIR Addendum will be forwarded for review, along with the previously certified General Plan EIR and Addendum No. I to the General Plan EIR, to the Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council for review as part of their deliberations concerning the proposed Project. A public hearing(s) will be held before the City of Newport Beach Planning Commission, which will provide a recommendation to the City Council as to whether to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the proposed Project. A public hearing(s) will then be held before the City Council to consider the proposed Project and the adequacy of this EIR Addendum. Public comments will be heard at the hearing(s). At the conclusion of the public hearing process, the City Council will take action to approve, conditionally approve, or deny approval of the proposed Project. If approved, the City Council also will adopt findings relative to the Project's environmental effects. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1 -8 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 2.0 Project Description The Project evaluated by this EIR Addendum is located in the City of Newport Beach, within the City's Newport Center Statistical Area (Statistical Area LI). This area is commonly known as Newport Center /Fashion Island, which is a mixed use district that includes major retail, professional office, entertainment, recreation, and residential uses in a master - planned development. The Newport Center Statistical Area consists of several sub -areas with separate and distinct zoning designations, including multiple planned communities. The sub -areas involved in this Project include: 1) the NNCPC, which is the largest planned community and includes Fashion Island (located in the central portion of Statistical Area LI), as well as Blocks 100, 400, 500, 600, 800, and San Joaquin Plaza (located northerly, southerly, and easterly of Fashion Island); and 2) the Newport Beach Marriott Hotel (a 532 -room resort hotel located immediately west of Fashion Island). Other sub -areas within Newport Center include the Newport Beach Country Club and golf course (located westerly of Fashion Island), existing single - family neighborhoods (located westerly and southwesterly of the golf course), other professional office complexes (located northerly and southerly of Fashion Island), and the Corona del Mar Shopping Center and future Civic Center (located along the eastern edge of the Newport Center boundary). In February 2012, the Project Applicant submitted an application to the City's Planning Division requesting to assign un -built development intensity permitted by the City's General Plan in the Newport Center Statistical Area to the NNCPC, and to vest the resulting additional development intensities through an amendment to an existing Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement. That application is the subject of analysis in this document pursuant to CEQA. The Newport Beach City Council will consider the following actions requested by the Project Applicant. In advance of the City Council's consideration, advisory recommendations regarding the actions listed below will be considered by the City's Planning Commission. I. Convert un -built non - residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms) to multi - family residential development intensity (79 multi - family units) and transfer the converted development intensity into the NNCPC; 2. Assign 15 residential units currently allowed by the General Plan within the MU -H3 portions of the Newport Center to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC; 3. Amend the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the allowable residential development intensity by a total of 94 units and to allocate the 94 units plus the 430 residential units currently allocated to the MU -H3 portions of the NNCPC solely to San Joaquin Plaza; 4. Amend the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City and the Irvine Company concerning North Newport Center to vest the revised development intensities and allocations; 5. Approve a traffic study for 94 units pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance; and 6. Amend the Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP). Each of the proposed actions is described in more detail below. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2 -1 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 ♦ Convert Un -built Non - Residential Development Intensity (79 Hotel Rooms) to Multi - Family Residential Development Intensity (79 Multi- Family Units) and Transfer the Converted Development Intensity to the NNCPC The Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element describes the City's existing and planned development pattern. It includes maps and tables that specify where certain land uses can occur and allocates maximum development limits (also called development "intensity ") to specific locations. Certain areas of the City are identified on the General Plan Land Use Map as "Anomaly Locations," where a maximum development intensity is allowed pursuant to General Plan Tables LU I and LU2. The General Plan recognizes that although Newport Beach is mostly built -out, growth and change will continue to occur; therefore, to allow flexibility, the City Council may allow transfers of un -built development intensity. Anomaly Location 43 in Statistical Area LI is developed with a 532 room resort hotel presently operated by Marriott Hotels and Resorts. General Plan Table LU2 allows a maximum of 611 hotel rooms in Anomaly Location 43; therefore, 79 hotel rooms allowed by the General Plan are un- built. The Project Applicant requests to convert the 79 un -built hotel rooms to 79 multi - family residential units and then transfer them to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. Pursuant to General Plan Policy LU 4.3(d), transfers of development rights or development intensity in Newport Center are governed solely by General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3. General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3 allows development rights or development intensity to be transferred within Newport Center, subject to a finding that the transfer is consistent with the intent of the General Plan and that the transfer will not result in adverse traffic impacts. A General Plan Amendment is not required to accomplish the proposed conversion and transfer of development intensity, but the conversion and transfer must be approved by the City Council. Refer to Figure I for a graphic depiction of the proposed development intensity transfer. ♦ Assign 15 Residential Units Currently Allowed by the General Plan within the MU -H3 Portions of Newport Center to San Joaquin Plaza In addition to the land use and development intensity designations assigned to certain locations of the City by the 2006 General Plan, several areas of the City are regulated by planned community development plans. The NNCPC Development Plan, which is applicable in the case of the proposed Project, specifies more detail than the General Plan and includes development standards, design guidelines, and administration procedures that must be adhered to when development actions occur within the NNCPC boundaries. The NNCPC serves as the controlling zoning ordinance for activities within its boundaries. The NNCPC Development Plan currently allows for 430 multi - family residential units to be developed in areas of the NNCPC designated MU -H3 by the General Plan. In comparison, the General Plan allows a maximum of 450 units in the MU -H3 category throughout the Newport Center Statistical Area. In other words, of the 450 MU -H3 residential units allowed by the General Plan in the Newport Center Statistical Area, 430 are allowed to be developed within the areas of the NNCPC designated by the NNCPC Development Plan as Block 500, Block 600 and San Joaquin Plaza and are vested through an existing Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement. The additional 20 units are allowed to be developed in any MU -H3 designated area in the Newport Center Statistical Area. The City previously assigned five (5) of the 20 MU -H3 units to the Golf Realty Fund Tennis Club development, which are vested to that property through a development agreement. The other 15 MU -H3 units have not been NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2 -2 No 0171 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No, 2 LEGEND C3 Newport Center/ Fashion Island (Statistical Area Ll ) / 0 North Newport Center Planned Community ( NNCPC) Marroitt Hotel Block 900 San Joaquin Plaza Portion of NNCPC Donor Sites / Receiver Site Development Limit Before Transfer or Vesting Development Limit After Transfer or Vesting Marriott Hotel Block 900 (General Plan Anomaly 611 Hotel Units 532 Hotel Units Location 43 Un -Built and Un- vested Mutti- Family Units 15 Multi - Family Units 0 Multi - Family Units Allocated Statistical Area Ll By General Plan San Joaquin Plaza (General Plan Anomaly 430 Residential Units 524 Multi - Family Units Location 48 Figure 1 HE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY TRANSFER NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2 -3 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 assigned to any particular property in Newport Center. As discussed below, the Project Applicant requests to assign and vest the 15 un -built MU -1-13 multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC through an amendment to the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement, consistent with General Plan Policy LU 6.14.8 (Development Agreements). Refer to Figure I (previously presented) for a graphic depiction of the proposed development intensity transfer. ♦ Amend the NNCPC Development Plan to Increase the Allowable Residential Development Intensity by 94 Units and to Allocate the 94 Units Plus the 430 Residential Units Currently Allocated to the MU -H3 Portions of the NNCPC Solely to San Joaquin Plaza As described above, the Project Applicant proposes to increase the residential development intensity allowed in the NNCPC by transferring 79 converted hotel units and assigningl5 un -built multi - family units from outside the NNCPC to inside the NNCPC. In addition, the Project Applicant seeks to modify NNCPC Table 2, Development Limits, to specifically allocate 524 residential units to the San Joaquin Plaza. These 524 units consist of the 430 residential units already allocated to the NNCPC's MU -1-13- designated areas (Block 500, Block 600, and the San Joaquin Plaza), the 79 converted and transferred hotel units, and the 15 un -built units of allowed MU -1-13 development intensity that are proposed to be assigned to the NNCPC. The proposed increase in the maximum number of residential units would require that the City approve an Amendment of the NNCPC Development Plan. Specifically, NNCPC Table 2, Development Limits, is proposed to be amended as follows: Table 2 — Development Limits (A) A. Square footage indicated in Table 2 may not reflect current development limits because of the transfer of development rights provision described in Sections II.0 and IV.0 herein. Transfers may result in increased or decreased development limits, so long as the transfers are consistent with the General Plan and do not result in greater intensity than allowed in the Newport Center statistical area. A transfer of development rights must be approved by the City Council and is recorded on the City's Tracking Development Rights table for North Newport Center Planned Community. B. Hotel rooms are permitted in Fashion Island through the transfer of development rights. 8C. The maximum development for Block 100 may not exceed 121,114 square feet Transfers of development rights shall be permitted, provided the maximum development limit of 121,114 square feet is not exceeded. Transfers have resulted in no remaining intensity in Block 100. D. Per City Council Action on 11/8/11 via Resolution 2011 -102, the maximum permitted office/commercial development for Block 500 is 599.659 Sq. ft.. Block 600 is 1.340.609 sq. ft., and for San loaquin Plaza is 95.550 sq. ft. No specific development project is proposed at this time. A proposal to develop a specific residential project in the San Joaquin Plaza would be subject to the procedures for development specified in the NNCPC Development Plan. The Project does not propose to change the boundaries of the NCCPC Development Plan area or any constituent blocks or sub - districts, and there would be no change in the permitted types of land uses, development regulations, or design guidelines resulting from approval of the proposed NCCPC Development Plan Amendment. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2 -4 Fashion San Joaquin Land Use Island Block 100 Block 400 Block S00 Block 600 Block 800 Plaza Total Regional 1,619,525 sq. 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,619,525 sq. ft. Commercial ft. Movie Theater 1,700 seats 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,700 seats (27,500 sq. (27,500 sq. ft.) ft.) Hotel (B) 0 0 0 295 0 0 295 Residential 0 0 0 439(6)0 (C)0 245 524(0 673769 Office/ 0 -0- sq. ft. 91,727 sq. ft. 599,659 sq. 1,340,609 sq, 286,166 95,550 sq. ft. 2,413,711 sq. ft Commercial (emu ft Q ft. (D1 I a A. Square footage indicated in Table 2 may not reflect current development limits because of the transfer of development rights provision described in Sections II.0 and IV.0 herein. Transfers may result in increased or decreased development limits, so long as the transfers are consistent with the General Plan and do not result in greater intensity than allowed in the Newport Center statistical area. A transfer of development rights must be approved by the City Council and is recorded on the City's Tracking Development Rights table for North Newport Center Planned Community. B. Hotel rooms are permitted in Fashion Island through the transfer of development rights. 8C. The maximum development for Block 100 may not exceed 121,114 square feet Transfers of development rights shall be permitted, provided the maximum development limit of 121,114 square feet is not exceeded. Transfers have resulted in no remaining intensity in Block 100. D. Per City Council Action on 11/8/11 via Resolution 2011 -102, the maximum permitted office/commercial development for Block 500 is 599.659 Sq. ft.. Block 600 is 1.340.609 sq. ft., and for San loaquin Plaza is 95.550 sq. ft. No specific development project is proposed at this time. A proposal to develop a specific residential project in the San Joaquin Plaza would be subject to the procedures for development specified in the NNCPC Development Plan. The Project does not propose to change the boundaries of the NCCPC Development Plan area or any constituent blocks or sub - districts, and there would be no change in the permitted types of land uses, development regulations, or design guidelines resulting from approval of the proposed NCCPC Development Plan Amendment. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2 -4 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 ♦ Amend the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company to Vest the Revised Development Intensities and Allocations to the San Joaquin Plaza Consistent with General Plan Policy LU 6.14.8 (Development Agreements), the Project Applicant proposes an amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, entitled Amendment to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement Between City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company LLC Concerning Addition of Properties and Residential Units to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement (Portions of Newport Center Blocks 100, 400 and 800 and San Joaquin Plaza) (Amendment). Pursuant to this Amendment, the Project Applicant would have a vested right to develop the 94 new residential units, of which IS currently are not assigned to a specific property within North Newport Center and 79 currently are assigned to Block 900 as hotel rooms. Such 79 hotel rooms would be converted to residential units and transferred from Block 900 into North Newport Center Planned Community and allocated to San Joaquin Plaza subsequent to conversion, as reflected in the amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan. The Amendment also specifies public benefit fees to be contributed by the developer, pursuant to General Plan Policy LU 6.14.8. ♦ Approve a Traffic Study for 94 Units Pursuant to the Traffic Phasing Ordinance The Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO), as set forth in Chapter 15.40 of the City's Municipal Code, is the City's primary tool for analyzing the short -term traffic impacts associated with new development. The TPO is intended: "I) To provide a uniform method of analyzing and evaluating the traffic impacts of projects that generate a substantial number of average daily trips and /or trips during the morning or evening peak hour period, 2) To identify the specific and near -term impacts of project traffic as well as circulation system improvements that will accommodate project traffic and ensure that development is phased with identified circulation system improvements, 3) To ensure that project proponents, as conditions of approval pursuant to [Chapter 15.40], make or fund circulation system improvements that mitigate the specific impacts of project traffic on primary intersections at or near the time the project is ready for occupancy, and 4) To provide a mechanism for ensuring that a project proponent's cost of complying with traffic related conditions of project approval is roughly proportional to project impacts." i A traffic study was prepared for the proposed Project in compliance with the TPO methodology and requirements. See Appendix D of this document. A total of 430 multi - family units already are permitted within the San Joaquin Plaza pursuant to the General Plan and NNCPC Development Plan; accordingly, and in conformance with the TPO, the traffic study evaluates only the proposed assignment of 94 additional un -built multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza. As part of its consideration of the proposed Project, the City Council will consider whether to approve the traffic study and make appropriate findings pursuant to § 15.40.030 of the Municipal Code. ♦ Amend the Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) Housing Program No. 2.2.1 of the City's General Plan Housing Element includes a goal that IS% of all new housing units in the City of Newport Beach be affordable to very low, low, and moderate income households. New residential projects with more than 50 units are required to prepare an Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) that specifies how the project will meet the city's I S% goal. The General Plan Housing Element allows for the affordable units to be for -sale or for -rent, to be provided on either the same site or a different site than the proposed market -rate units, and to be encumbered ' City of Newport Beach Municipal Code, Section 15.40.020 (Objectives). Available on -line at: htto:// www. codepublishing .com /CA /Newl2ortBeach /. Accessed June 4, 2012. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2 -5 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 with restrictions that maintain their affordability for a minimum of 30 years. Although the Project Applicant's proposal is limited to a development intensity conversion, transfer, and assignment and does not involve the construction of a residential project, the Project Applicant proposes to amend their existing AHIP to demonstrate how the City's 15% affordable housing goal would be satisfied as it applies to the 524 residential units that would be allocated to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. The NNCPC AHIP was originally approved by the City of Newport Beach in December 2007, when the NNCPC Development Plan was adopted. The proposed AHIP Amendment specifies that the Project Applicant will restrict rental costs for existing apartment units located in The Bays, a nearby apartment complex owned by the Project Applicant located at the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Road. No physical changes at The Bays apartment complex would occur as a result of the proposed AHIP Amendment. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2 -6 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 3.0 Project Information 1. Project Title North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions 2. Lead Agency Name and Address City of Newport Beach Community Development Department Planning Division 3300 Newport Boulevard, Building C Newport Beach, CA 92663 3. Contact Person and Phone Number Mr. Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner (949) 644 -3209 4. Project Location The proposed Project involves the transfer of development intensity for 79 multi - family units (which would be converted from hotel units as part of the Project) from Anomaly Location 43 in the Newport Center Statistical Area (Statistical Area LI) to the NNCPC and specifically to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. The Project also involves the assignment of 15 residential units currently allowed by the General Plan within the MU -H3 portions of Statistical Area LI to San Joaquin Plaza. Statistical Area LI is commonly known as Newport Center /Fashion Island, which is a mixed use district that includes major retail, professional office, entertainment, recreation, and residential uses in a master - planned development. The Newport Center Statistical Area is bounded on the southwest by Coast Highway, on the southeast by MacArthur Boulevard, on the northeast by San Joaquin Hills Road, and on the northwest by Jamboree Road. The Newport Center Statistical Area consists of several sub -areas with separate and distinct zoning designations, including multiple planned communities. The sub -areas involved in this Project include: 1) the NNCPC, which is the largest planned community and includes Fashion Island (located in the central portion of Statistical Area LI) and Blocks 100, 400, 500, 600, 800 and San Joaquin Plaza (located northerly, southerly, and easterly of Fashion Island); and 2) the Newport Beach Marriott Hotel (a 532 -room resort hotel located immediately west of Fashion Island). Other sub- areas within Newport Center include the Newport Beach Country Club and golf course (located westerly of Fashion Island), existing single - family neighborhoods (located westerly and southwesterly of the golf course), other professional office complexes (located northerly and southerly of Fashion Island), and the Corona del Mar Shopping Center and future Civic Center (located along the eastern edge of the Newport Center boundary). The NNCPC comprises the northern portions of the Newport Center Statistical Area, including Block 100, Block 400, Block 500, Block 600, Block 800, Fashion Island Regional Center, and San Joaquin Plaza. San Joaquin Plaza, which is the proposed Project site evaluated in this Initial Study and EIR Addendum, is generally bounded on the south by San Clemente Drive, on the east by Santa Cruz Drive, on the northeast by San Joaquin Hills Road, and is located just southeasterly of jamboree Road. The Newport Beach Marriott Hotel (also referred to herein as General Plan Anomaly 43) is located at the southwestern corner of Santa Barbara Drive and Newport Center Drive, and abuts the Newport Beach NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 3 -1 ME M❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Country Club golf course on the east. Figure 2, Project Location Map, depicts the Newport Center Statistical Area, the Newport Beach Marriott Hotel, the NNCPC area, and the San Joaquin Plaza. 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address Irvine Company c/o Mr. Dan Miller 550 Newport Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 6. General Plan Designation Mixed -Use Horizontal 3 (MU -H3) 7. Zoning North Newport Center Planned Community (PC -56) 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the Project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Please refer to Section 2.0 for a detailed description of the proposed Project. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the Project's surroundings: As previously noted, the Project site consists of the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. The Project site and surrounding land uses are depicted on Figure 3, Existing and Surrounding Land Uses. The San Joaquin Plaza is approximately 23 acres in size. It is currently developed with multi- tenant commercial office land uses, surface parking lots, a parking structure, and ornamental landscaping. Abutting the site on the northwest is the Newport Beach Police Department, the Newport Beach Fire Department Fire Station 3, and an automotive dealership. To the south is a commercial office building and the Orange County Museum of Art, beyond which and further to the south is the Fashion Island shopping mall. To the southwest is a commercial office building and a rental apartment complex. To the northeast of the San Joaquin Plaza, across San Joaquin Hills Road, is a single - family residential neighborhood. To the southeast, across Santa Cruz Drive, is Block 600 of the NNCPC, which is developed with multi- tenant office /commercial land uses, a hotel with 295 rooms presently operated as the Island Hotel, and several parking structures. 10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement) The proposed Project would require review by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for Orange County for consistency with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport U WA). NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 3 -2 No 0171 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Marriott Hotel Black 900 iGeneral Plan Anomaly 43) Vr Pl:vn V Block 600 Block 800 G C Q a LEGEND C3 Newport Center/ Fashion Island (Statistical Area Ll ) 0 North Newport Center Planned Community = Marroitt Hotel Block 900 0 Proposed Project Site (San Joaquin Plaza Portion of NNCPC) Fashion Island R.,onal Center Block 100 Black 500 SANTA ROSA DR. It Figure 2 HE PROJECT LOCATION MAP NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 3 -3 No 0171 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Figure 3 HE EXISTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 3 -4 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 4.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis 4.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ❑ NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" not identified in the previous EIR as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ADDENDUM to a previously - certified EIR or Negative Declaration will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture and Forestry ❑ Air Quality I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ❑ Resources I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology /Soils ❑ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ❑ Hazards & Hazardous ❑ Hydrology/ Water Quality ❑ potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE Materials DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to ❑ Land Use and Planning ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population and Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/ Traffic ❑ Utilities/ Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance 4.2 Determination (To Be Completed By the Lead Agency] On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a ❑ NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although all potentially significant effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable legal standards, some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15162 exist. An ADDENDUM to a previously - certified EIR or Negative Declaration will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not ❑ be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ❑ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless ❑ mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all ❑ potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature Date Signature Date NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -1 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 4.3 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 4.3.1 Aesthetics The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on aesthetics /visual quality if it would result in any of the following: • Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista • Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway • Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings • Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Aesthetic and visual impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista As noted in the General Plan EIR, there are no officially designated scenic vistas in the City. However, the General Plan EIR notes that many areas in the City provide open coastal views, which are local scenic vistas.z The General Plan EIR identifies prominent coastal viewing locations throughout the City. Major roadway corridors near the proposed Project site include San Joaquin Hills Road and Jamboree Road. San Joaquin Hills Road and segments of jamboree Road within close proximity of the Project site are not identified in the General Plan EIR as providing for public scenic coastal views.3 Although the General Plan EIR identifies nearby segments of Coast Highway, jamboree Road, MacArthur Boulevard, and Newport Center Drive as providing scenic coastal views, the Project site is located inland relative to these roadway segments and future residential development in San Joaquin Plaza would therefore have no potential to interfere with coastal views from these roadway segments. Furthermore, the General Plan EIR states that "...existing and future development would be regulated by the proposed General Plan Update policies, and scenic vistas would not be adversely affected. Therefore, impacts to scenic vistas would be less than significant" Future development within the San Joaquin Plaza would be subject to the General Plan policies regulating scenic views and aesthetics. Finally, development within San Joaquin Plaza would be subject to the NNCPC Development Plan and North Newport Center Design Regulations, which incorporates the following requirement related to view corridors: z General Plan EIR, Page 4.1 -16. 3 Ibid, Page 4.1 -9. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -2 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 "a. New development should preserve views of major retail tenants in Fashion Island from Newport Center Drive. "4 Mandatory compliance with the NNCPC Development Plan and North Newport Center Design Regulations would further ensure that adverse effects to scenic vistas would not occur with implementation of the proposed Project. Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not have the potential to cause a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway There are no officially designated scenic highways in the City of Newport Beach, although State Route I (Pacific Coast Highway or Coast Highway) is eligible for a State Scenic Highway designations The Pacific Coast Highway is not contiguous to the proposed Project site, nor is San Joaquin Plaza visible from Pacific Coast Highway. Furthermore, because San Joaquin Plaza is already developed with multi- tenant commercial office uses, surface parking lots, a parking structure and ornamental landscaping with species typically found in urbanized areas of Newport Beach and Orange County, development on the Project site would not substantially affect any scenic trees, rock outcroppings, historic buildings, or other scenic resources that may be visible from Pacific Coast Highway. The Project site does not contain any such scenic resources. In addition, the General Plan EIR concludes as follows: "if in the future, the City decides to pursue these actions [pursue designation of Pacific Coast Highway as a State scenic highway], it would also be required to take actions to preserve views within the corridor. However, these procedures are beyond the scope of the proposed General Plan Update. Consequently, because no scenic highways are currently designated within the City, implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would have no impact."6 Since certification of the General Plan EIR in 2006, Pacific Coast Highway has not been formally designated as a State scenic highway. Accordingly, a significant impact to scenic resources that may be visible from a State scenic highway could not occur with implementation of the proposed Project and residential development in San Joaquin Plaza would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings The General Plan EIR states that Newport Center /Fashion Island (which includes the proposed Project site): `...might be considered to have high overall visual quality. In these areas, new development allowed under the proposed General Plan Update would be done in such a way as to fit into the existing visual " North Newport Center Design Regulations, Page 23 General Plan EIR, Page 4.1 -13. 6 Ibid, Page 4.1 -17. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -3 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 setting. [General Plan] Policy LU 1.1 requires that new development 'maintain and enhance' existing development. "r New development within the San Joaquin Plaza would be required to demonstrate consistency with General Plan Policy LU 1. 1. Additionally, all development within the NNCPC would be subject to the NNCPC Development Plan and North Newport Center Design Regulations, which establish design regulations related to building location, building massing, landscape design, streetscapes, and orientation /identity (gateways, view corridors, signage, etc.). Mandatory compliance with the North Newport Center Design Regulations would ensure that any future residential development resulting from approval of the proposed Project would be compatible with, and of similar quality to, existing development within the NNCPC. Furthermore, the NNCPC Development Plan restricts buildings within San Joaquin Plaza to 65 feet in height. Accordingly, buildings constructed within San Joaquin Plaza would not have a potential to create shade or shadow impacts on the existing residential uses north of San Joaquin Hills Road. As concluded in the General Plan EIR: "in general, the proposed General Plan Update would provide development opportunities which would complement and enhance the City's existing visual character. Development would be required to conform to '[a] development pattern that retains and complements the City's residential neighborhood, commercial and industrial districts, open spaces, and natural environment' (Proposed General Plan Update, Goal 3 of the Land Use Element). Therefore the proposed General Plan Update would have a less - than - significant impact on the visual character of developed urban areas." 8 With mandatory adherence to the requirements given in the General Plan and the NNCPC Development Plan, implementation of the proposed Project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views Glare Impacts General Plan Policy LU 5.6.2 requires "...that new and renovated buildings be designed to avoid ... the use of surface materials that raise local temperatures [or] result in glare and excessive illumination of adjoining properties and open spaces..." In addition, the North Newport Center Design Regulations Policy D.S.c. requires that "Light fixtures should not cast off -site glare." 9 Future residential development on the proposed Project site would be required to demonstrate compliance with General Plan Policy LU 5.6.2 and would be reviewed for conformance with the Design Regulations of the NNCPC Development Plan. Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not have the potential to create any new sources of substantial glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views. Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or Ibid, Page 4.1 -18. e Ibid, Page 4.1 -19. s North Newport Center Design Regulations, Page 36. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -4 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Lighting Impacts As noted in the General Plan EIR, "...the majority of new development would be located in areas that commonly experience at least minimal impacts from existing light sources. "10 The proposed Project site is fully developed under existing conditions with commercial office land uses containing urban -scale lighting. Although the General Plan EIR notes the potential for lighting impacts due to new construction and the co- location of residential and commercial uses as allowed by the General Plan, the General Plan also includes several policies to address these lighting concerns. General Plan Policy LU 5.6.3 (Ambient Lighting) requires that outdoor lighting "...be located and designed to prevent spillover onto adjoining properties or significantly increase the overall ambient illumination of their location." Other policies, such as LU 5.1.1 (Compatible but Diverse Development), LU 6.1.3 (Architecture and Planning that Complements Adjoining Uses), and LU 6.2.5 (Neighborhood Supporting Uses), require new development to be compatible with existing land uses, which would preclude incompatibilities due to artificial lighting. Any new development in San Joaquin Plaza also would be subject to Municipal Code Section 20.30.070 requirements for lighting, which require lighting to be shielded and confined within site boundaries to prevent spillage. As concluded in the General Plan EIR, "with implementation of the above- mentioned policies, nighttime lighting impacts and potential spillover would be less than significant "' In addition, future development on the proposed Project site would be subject to the North Newport Center Design Regulations, which includes the following design guidelines related to lighting (refer to NNCPC Design Regulations Section D.S., Lighting): "d. Building walls may be illuminated by downlights and uplights, light sources should not be visible from public view. f Utilitarian light fixtures, such as floodlights and wallpacks, may only be used in service areas. i. In pedestrian areas such as courtyards, plazas, and walkways, lighting fixtures should be Pedestrian scale." 12 Future development on the proposed Project site would be required to demonstrate compliance with General Plan policies related to lighting and land use compatibility, and would be reviewed for conformance with the Design Regulations of the NNCPC Development Plan. Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not create any new sources of substantial light that could adversely affect day or nighttime views. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimizes impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. 0 General Plan EIR, Page 4.1 -21. " Ibid, Page 4.1 -22. " North Newport Center Design Regulations, Page 36. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -5 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which states, "...all other project impacts associated with aesthetics and visual resources would be less than significant under the proposed Newport Beach General Plan Update. "13 Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to aesthetics. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to aesthetics, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the Initial Study to the General Plan EIR (General Pfan EIR Appendix A), which states: "7n determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (199 7) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: • Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? • Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? • Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use ?" In addition, since certification of the General Plan EIR in 2006, Appendix G to the State CEQA Guidelines was revised to include thresholds of significance related to forestry resources, as follows: "7n determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project, and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: • Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51 104(g))? • Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non - forest use? " Visual impacts associated with Banning Ranch were found to be unavoidable. The proposed Project is not located within Banning Ranch. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -6 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 • Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of forest land to non - forest use? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. A detailed analysis of potential impacts to Agricultural Resources was not included in the General Plan EIR because a) the City of Newport Beach contains no designated farmland by the California Department of Conservation (CDC), Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), b) no designated Farmland would be converted to non - agricultural use as a result of implementing the 2006 General Plan, c) no sites in the City are zoned for agricultural use, and d) no sites would be affected by a Williamson Act contract. Although impacts to forest resources were not evaluated as part of the 2006 General Plan EIR, the City of Newport Beach similarly does not have any lands zoned for forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production, and implementing the General Plan would not directly or indirectly result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non - forest use. Summary Analysis Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use The proposed Project site consists of urban, developed land that is not designated by the FMMP as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance14. Accordingly, no impact to agricultural resources would occur as a result of future residential development in San Joaquin Plaza. As such, the proposed Project is in conformance with the conclusion reached in the Initial Study to the 2006 General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract The NNCPC Development Plan serves as the controlling zoning ordinance for development activities within its geographical boundary. The NNCPC Development Plan designates San Joaquin Plaza for development with residential and office /commercial land uses. No area of the NNCPC contains an agricultural zoning designation. Additionally, the Project site is not subject to a Williamson Act contract. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use No Farmland exists in the vicinity of the proposed Project site that could be converted to nonagricultural use as a result of the Project. All lands within the Project vicinity already are designated by the General Plan for non - agricultural use15. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not involve changes to the existing environment which, due to its location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result " California Department of Conservation, 2010. Orange County Important Farmland 2010. Available on -line at: ftp: / /ftp.consrv.ca.gov /pub /dlrp /FMMP /pdf /2010 /oraIO.pddf. Accessed May 10, 2012. 15 City of Newport Beach 2006 General Plan, Figures LU 10 and LU 13. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -7 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g)) City of Newport Beach Municipal Code Title 20, Planning and Zoning, Part 2, Zoning Districts, Allowable Land Uses, and Zoning District Standards, sets forth the zoning districts throughout the City and does not include any zoning for forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. Additionally, the NNCPC Development Plan does not designate any forest areas or timberlands within its boundaries. Accordingly, the proposed Project would have no potential to conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non - forest use The proposed Project site comprises a fully developed site that contains no forest land resources. Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non - forest use. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of forest land to non - forest use No forest land exists in the vicinity of the proposed Project site that could be converted to non - forest use, and no lands in the Project vicinity are designated for forest land production16. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not involve changes to the existing environment which, due to its location or nature, could result in conversion of forest land to non - forest use. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program As indicated above, an analysis of impacts to Agricultural Resources were focused out of the General Plan EIR based on substantial evidence that no farmlands or agriculturally zoned properties are located in the City of Newport Beach; accordingly, no mitigation measures related to Agricultural Resources were included in the General Plan EIR. In addition, the issue of forestry resources was not previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR; as such, no mitigation related to forestry resources was identified in the General Plan EIR. Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the Initial Study to the 2006 General Plan EIR, which states, "The City of Newport Beach does not contain any significant agricultural resources as the City is almost entirely built out. No impact would occur on agricultural resources and this issue area will not be analyzed in the EIR." 161bid. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -8 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to agriculture and forestry resources. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to agriculture and forestry resources, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.3 Air Quality The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on air quality if it would result in any of the following. • Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan • Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation • Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard • Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations • Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Air quality impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis In order to evaluate whether the proposed Project would result in air quality impacts that were not examined in the General Plan EIR, an air quality impact analysis was prepared for the proposed Project by Urban Crossroads, Inc. This study, entitled, North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis, and dated May 29, 2012, is provided as Appendix A. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan The Project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB or 'Basin "). The SCAB encompasses approximately 6,745 square miles and includes Orange County and the non -desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties. The SCAB is bound by the Pacific Ocean to the west; the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east, respectively; and the San Diego County line to the south. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is principally responsible for air pollution control in the SCAB. The SCAQMD works directly with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), county transportation commissions, local governments, and state and federal agencies to reduce emissions from stationary, mobile, and indirect sources to meet state and federal ambient air quality standards. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -9 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Table I, Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the SCAB, summarizes the current state and federal attainment status of the SCAB for criteria pollutants. As shown, state and federal air quality standards are not attained in most parts of the Basin for Ozone (I -hour and 8 -hour standard), Inhalable Particulate Matter (PM10), Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5), and Nitrogen Dioxide (NOx). In response, the SCAQMD adopted a series of Air Quality Management Plans (AQMPs) to meet the state and federal ambient air quality standards. The AQMPs are updated regularly in order to more effectively reduce emissions, accommodate growth, and to minimize any negative fiscal impacts of air pollution control on the economy. The SCAQMD Governing Board adopted the Draft Final 2007 AQMP for the SCAB on June I, 2007. In September 2007, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) adopted the SCAQMD's 2007 AQMP as part of the State Implementation Plan (SIP). On September 27, 2007, the CARB Board adopted the State Strategy for the 2007 State Implementation Plan and the 2007 South Coast Air Quality Management Plan as part of the (SIP). On November 22, 2010, U.S. EPA published its notice of proposed partial approval and partial disapproval of the 2007 AQMP PM2.5 Plan. The proposed disapproval is primarily due to the fact that the attainment demonstration relies heavily on emissions reductions from several State rules that have not been finalized or submitted to U.S. EPA for approval. No timetable for full adoption of the 2007 AQMP is available at this time. The SCAQMD is currently working on a 2012 AQMP but it is not yet adopted so the SCAQMD 2007 AQMP remains the applicable air quality plan for the proposed Project. Table 1 Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the SCAB Criteria Pollutant State Designation Federal Designation Ozone - 1 hour standard Nonattainment No Standard Ozone - 8 hour standard Nonattainment Extreme Nonattainment PM" Nonattainment Serious Nonattainment PIV12 6 Nonattainment Nonattainment Carbon Monoxide Attainment Attainment/Maintenance Nitrogen Dioxide Nonattainment Attainment/Maintenance Sulfur Dioxide Attainment Attainment Lead Attainment/Nonattainmenta AttainmenttNonattainment4 All others Attainment/Unclassified Attainment/Unclassified Source: California Air Resources Board 2010 ( htto : / /www.arb.ca,gov /rezact/2010 /area l0 /area l O.htm, htto:// www .arb.ca.gov /desig/feddesig.htm) I The USEPA approved re- designation from Severe 17 to Extreme Nonattainment on May 5, 2010 to be effective June 4, 2010. 2 The SCAB was reclassified from attainment to non - attainment for nitrogen dioxide on March 25, 2010. 3 Los Angeles County was reclassified from attainment to nonattainment for lead on March 25, 2010; the remainder of the SCAB is in attainment of the State Standard. 4 The Los Angeles County pomon of the SCAB is classified as nonattainment; the remainder of the SCAB is in attainment of the State Standard. The 2007 AQMP is based on assumptions on motor vehicles provided by CARB and on demographics information provided by SCAG. These assumptions are reflected in the most recent EMFAC2007 computer model. The air quality levels projected in the 2007 AQMP are based on several assumptions. For example, the 2007 AQMP assumed that development associated with general plans, specific plans, residential projects, and wastewater facilities would be constructed in accordance with population growth projections identified by SCAG in its 2004 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The 2007 AQMP also assumed that such development projects would implement applicable regulatory requirements to reduce air emissions generated during the construction and operational phases of development. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -10 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Criteria for determining consistency with the 2007 AQMP are defined in Chapter 12, Section 12.2 and Section 12.3 of the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook (1993). The indicators for consistency are discussed below: • Consistency Criterion No. I: The proposed Project will not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP. According to the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook, the proposed Project would be consistent with the AQMP if the Project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emission reductions specified in the AQMP. Construction Emissions Discussion No specific development project is proposed as part of the Project at this time; therefore, it is not possible to calculate specific emission quantities that may be associated with future construction activities. Nevertheless, it is recognized that construction effects would be expected to follow approval of the Project (see CEQA Guidelines Section 15146). Construction - related impacts to air quality were previously evaluated as part of the General Plan EIR, which concluded that buildout of the General Plan would result in construction activities that would exceed the SCAQMD's construction - related air quality standards. As such, the General Plan EIR disclosed construction - related air emissions as a significant and unavoidable impact17. Any future Project - related construction activities would be required to comply with General Plan policies NR 8.1 through 8.5, which when implemented would help to reduce construction - related air pollutant emissions. Further, construction activities that may be associated with future residential development on the proposed Project site would be required to comply with all applicable SCAQMD Rules and current California Building Code requirements (California Code of Regulations, Title 24), some provisions of which are more stringent now than when the General Plan EIR was certified in 2007. Construction - related air emissions and resulting impacts associated with the proposed allocation of 524 multi - family residential units to San Joaquin Plaza clearly fall within the scope of analysis previously provided in the General Plan EIR. Of the 524 units, the General Plan EIR assumed that 430 of those units would be constructed within the NNCPC and also assumed that an additional 15 multi - family units would be constructed within the Newport Center Statistical Area. The remaining 79 units were assumed by the General Plan EIR to consist of hotel units. Therefore, the conversion of 79 hotel units to multi - family residential units and the conduct of construction activities to the specific location of San Joaquin Plaza represent the Projects only potential to create new construction - related air quality impacts because construction of the remaining 445 multi - family units in Newport Center were assumed and previously evaluated by the General Plan EIR. The construction of 79 multi - family residential units instead of 79 hotel units would not represent any measurable difference in construction - related air emissions. The types of construction equipment, material use, and duration of construction activities would be very similar for hotel units or multi - family units. Additionally, the conduct of construction activities in San Joaquin Plaza would not have the potential to generate air emissions that would be different or more severe than the conduct of construction activities in other parts of Newport Center. Accordingly, future Project - related construction emissions would not result in any new impacts or "General Plan EIR, Pages 4.2 -13 and 4.2 -14. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -11 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 substantially increase the severity of the significant and unavoidable construction - related air quality impact previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR.18 Operational Emissions Analysis Although the General Plan EIR identified a significant and unavoidable impact due to a conflict with the applicable AQMP, the conflict was related only to the increase in population that would be associated with buildout of the General Plan (and is discussed below under the analysis of Consistency Criterion No. 2). As indicated in the General Plan EIR: "Another measurement tool in determining consistency with the AQMP is to determine how a project accommodates the expected increase in population or employment Generally, if a project is planned in a way that results in the minimization of vehicle miles traveled (VMT), both within the project area and the surrounding area in which it is located, and consequently the minimization of air pollutant emissions, that aspect of the project is consistent with the AQMP." 19 The General Plan EIR determined that VMTs would be reduced through compliance with the General Plan goals and policies, and that the reduction in VMTs would be consistent with the AQMP. For example, the General Plan would "...promote a mixed -use pedestrian - friendly district for Balboa Peninsula, Airport Area, Newport Center /Fashion Island, Mainers Mile, and which would contribute to decreases in vehicle miles traveled." 20 Additionally, the General Plan EIR identifies several other policies, including Policies LU 3.3 (Opportunities for Change), LU 6.15.9 (Subsequent Phase Development Location and Density), 6.14.5 (Urban Form), NR 6.1 (Walkable Neighborhoods), NR 6.2 (Mixed -Use Development), NR 6.3 (Vehicle -Trip Reduction Measures), NR 6.4 (Transportation Demand Management Ordinance), and NR 6.5 (Local Transit Agency Collaboration), that would serve to reduce VMTs within the City. The proposed Project would contribute to the mixed -use nature of Newport Center /Fashion Island by locating multi - family residential uses within the San Joaquin Plaza where commercial and office land uses exist. The Project also would be required to comply with all applicable General Plan goals and policies. Furthermore, the proposed Project would not increase the amount of daily trips as compared to what was assumed under the General Plan EIR21. Accordingly, VMTs associated with the proposed Project would be within the scope of analysis as presented in the General Plan EIR, and would not contribute to a substantial increase in the severity of the General Plan's significant and unavoidable impact due to a conflict with the applicable AQMP. Project - related air quality emissions were calculated to determine whether the proposed Project could result in a direct increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP. To provide consistency with the Project's traffic study (Appendix D) that was prepared in accordance with the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO), the air quality analysis (Appendix A) assumes that the Project would result in a net increase of 94 multi - family units in San Joaquin Plaza. This represents a "worst case" (conservative) assumption of potential operational air quality impacts associated with allowed development in Newport Center as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR because no credit is taken in the Project - specific analysis for reducing by 79 the number of hotel units allowed within Statistical Area LI, nor credit for the 15 MU -H3 units 18 Ibid. '9 Ibid, Page 4.2 -12. 20 Ibid, Page 4.2 -12. " Stantec Consulting Services, 2012b. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -12 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 already allowed in Newport Center by the General Plan. An analysis of operational impacts associated with the other 430 multi - family residential units allocated to San Joaquin Plaza is not necessary because these 430 multi - family units are already allowed in San Joaquin Plaza under existing conditions and were assumed in the General Plan EIR and Addendum No. I. Table 2, Summary of Peak Operational Emissions, summarizes the proposed Project's estimated operational emissions of criteria pollutants associated with assigning an additional 94 multi - family residential units to San Joaquin Plaza for both summer and winter months, and compares those emissions to the SCAQMD Regional Thresholds. (Refer to Section 3.5 of the Project's Air Quality Impact Analysis [Appendix A] for a discussion of the operational activities assumed in the analysis.) As shown in Table 2, air emissions associated with the allocation of 94 additional multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza would not exceed the SCAQMD regional thresholds for NOx, VOC, PMIO, or PM2.5; therefore, it follows that the Project's emissions would not substantially contribute to a cumulative exceedance of a pollutant for which the SCAB is in nonattainment (ozone, nitrogen dioxide, PMIO, PM2.5). Because Project emissions would not substantially contribute to a cumulative exceedance of a pollutant for which the Air Basin is in nonattainment, operation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts due to a conflict with the AQMP, nor would the Project's operational emissions create a substantially more severe impact due to conflict with the AQMP than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. Table 1 Summary of Peak Operational Emissions Summer Months Operational Activities VOC NOx CO SO, I PM,o I PM2.5 Area Source Emissions a 12.32 0.55 39.07 0.08 5.01 5.01 Energy Source Emissions" 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 0.05 0.05 Mobile Emissions t 1.92 3.47 18.87 0.04 4.64 0.33 Maximum Daily Emissions 14.31 4.63 58.20 0.12 8.70 5.39 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Significant? NO NO NO NO NO NO Winter Months Operational Activities VOC NO, CO SO, I PM,a I PMz.s Area Source Emissions a 12.32 0 55 39.07 0.08 5.01 501 Energy Source Emissions° 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 0.05 0.05 Mobile Emissions t 2.03 3.84 18.37 0.04 4.64 0.33 Maximum Daily Emissions 14.42 5.00 57.70 0.12 9.70 5.39 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Significant? I NO I NO NO NO NO NO Note: values shown are pounds per day. Please refer to Appendix A to the Air Quality Impact Analysis (see Appendix A) for the CalEEMod TM output files and additional supporting information for the estimated emissions. a. Includes emissions of landscape maintenance equipment and architectural coatings emissions b. Includes emissions of natural gas consumption C. Includes emissions of vehicle emissions and fugitive dust related to vehicular travel On the basis of the preceding discussion, the proposed Project would be consistent with the scope of analysis as presented in the General Plan EIR and is determined to be consistent with Consistency Criterion No. I. • Consistency Criterion No. 2: The proposed project will not exceed the assumptions in the AQMP or increments based on the years of project build -out phase. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -13 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 The General Plan EIR identified a significant unavoidable impact due to a conflict with the applicable AQMP because buildout of the General Plan "...would result in population levels above those uses in the 2003 AQMP" 22 Assumptions of the AQMP used in projecting future emissions levels are based in part on land use data provided by lead agency general plan documentation. Projects that propose general plan amendments and changes of zone may increase the intensity of use and /or result in higher traffic volumes, thereby resulting in increased stationary area source emissions and /or vehicle source emissions when compared to the AQMP assumptions. If however, a project does not exceed the growth projections in the applicable local General Plan, then the project is considered to be consistent with the growth assumptions in the AQMP. As discussed under the analysis of Consistency Criterion No. I, construction - related emissions that may be associated with future development at the proposed Project site would be consistent with the assumptions previously evaluated and disclosed in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the proposed Project would not exceed growth assumptions for construction - related activities. The proposed Project does not involve a General Plan Amendment, but it does involve a zoning amendment associated with a proposed amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan, which serves as the controlling zoning ordinance for properties within its geographic boundaries. The amendment proposes to allocate a total of 524 multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of NNCPC, including 430 units already allowed within the San Joaquin Plaza, the assignment of 15 un -built units to the San Joaquin Plaza, and through the conversion of 79 hotel units to multi - family units and the transfer of those units to the San Joaquin Plaza. Population growth associated with the 430 multi - family residential units already allowed within the San Joaquin Plaza and the 15 un- assigned and un -built multi - family units within Statistical Area LI are consistent with the growth projections assumed in the General Plan EIR, and are therefore accounted for as part of the significant and unavoidable conflict with the 2003 AQMP as disclosed by the General Plan EIR. By contrast, the conversion of 79 un -built hotel units to residential units would result in an estimated increase in the City's permanent population by 173 persons (based on a person per household [pph] value of 2.19 cited in the General Plan EIR) 23 It should be noted that the increase in the permanent population would be somewhat off -set by the reduction in transient population (i.e., hotel patrons) due to the reduction in the number of hotel units allowed within the City (79 units). The 79 residential units proposed by the Project to be converted from hotel room units would not result in a net increase in daily trips24, and therefore would not result in increased operational air emissions beyond emissions that would be associated with the 79 hotel rooms that already were assumed in the General Plan EIR. Accordingly, because the 2007 AQMP relied on land use and demographic data from the General Plan and the proposed Project would generate fewer emissions than assumed for General Plan buildout, the Project would not exceed the growth assumptions in the AQMP. Based on the discussion presented above, the proposed Project is in compliance with Consistency Criterion No. 2 and would not result in greater emissions than what is already assumed in the General Plan or evaluated in the General Plan EIR. 22 General Plan EIR, Page 4.2 -13. 21 Ibid, Page 4.10 -5 ' Stantec Consulting Services, 2012b NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -14 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Since the project satisfies Consistency Criterion No. I and Consistency Criterion No. 2, the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts due to a Project - specific conflict with the AQMP, nor would the proposed Project result in a substantial increase in the severity of the General Plan's significant and unavoidable conflict with the AQMP. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard The current attainment status for criteria pollutants within the SCAB was previously presented in Table I. As shown, the SCAB violates the CAAQS and /or NAAQS standards for ozone, NOx, PMio, and PM2.5. Provided below is a discussion of construction and operational emissions associated with the proposed Project, and an analysis of whether those emissions would violate any air quality standards, contribute to any existing or projected air quality violations, or cumulatively contribute to the net increase of a criteria pollutant for which the SCAB is in non - attainment (as presented in Table 1). Emissions Associated with Construction Activities Emissions associated with construction activities resulting from buildout of the General Plan were previously evaluated and disclosed as a significant unavoidable impact as part of the General Plan EIR due to their potential to violate the SCAQMD construction - related air quality standards25 and because it could not be assured that the General Plan policies would achieve the performance standard for annual emissions reductions determined necessary by the SCAQMD to obtain attainment status for criteria pollutants.26 Because no specific development project is proposed in San Joaquin Plaza at this time, it is not possible to calculate air emissions that may be associated with future construction activities. Regardless, construction activities that may be associated with future residential development on the Project site would clearly fall within the scope of analysis provided in the General Plan EIR because the General Plan EIR anticipated the construction of 430 multi - family units within the NNCPC, 15 multi - family units within Newport Center, and 79 hotel units at General Plan Anomaly Location 43. Therefore, the conversion of 79 hotel units to multi - family residential units and the conduct of construction activities to the specific location of San Joaquin Plaza represent the Project's only potential to create new construction - related air quality impacts because construction of the remaining 445 multi - family units in Newport Center were assumed and previously evaluated by the General Plan EIR. The construction of 79 multi - family residential units instead of 79 hotel units would not represent any measurable difference in construction - related air emissions. The types of construction equipment, material use, and duration of construction activities would be very similar for hotel units or multi - family units. Additionally, the conduct of construction activities in San Joaquin Plaza would not have the potential to generate air emissions that would be different or more severe than the conduct of construction activities in other parts of Newport Center. Accordingly, future Project - related construction emissions would not result in any new impacts or substantially increase the severity of the significant and unavoidable construction - related air quality impact previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. " General Plan EIR, Page 4.10 -5. 26 lbid, Page 4.2 -I5. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -15 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 As previously stated, the General Plan EIR disclosed a significant and unavoidable impact because the City could not assure that the General Plan policies would achieve the performance standard for annual emissions reductions determined necessary by the SCAQMD to obtain attainment status for criteria pollutants.27 Long -Term Operational - Related Emissions Operational impacts were not specifically evaluated in the General Plan EIR because the SCAQMD does not recommend calculation of operational emissions for a planning document, such as a General Plan Update.28 Emission quantities associated with operational activities that may result from allocating an additional 94 multi - family residential units to San Joaquin Plaza were previously presented in Table 2. As previously noted, in order to provide consistency with the Project's traffic study (refer to Appendix D) that was prepared in accordance with the City's TPO, the values presented in Table 2 relate only to the proposed increase of 94 dwelling units allocated to San Joaquin Plaza. The values presented in Table 2 reflect a "worst case" (conservative) analysis because no credit was taken for reducing by 79 the number of hotel units that are allowed within Statistical Area LI, nor credit for the 15 MU -113 units already allowed in Newport Center by the General Plan. An analysis of operational impacts associated with the other 430 dwelling units allocated to San Joaquin Plaza is not necessary because these 430 multi - family units are already allowed in San Joaquin Plaza under existing conditions and were assumed in the General Plan EIR and Addendum No. 1. As presented in Table 2, the addition of 94 units to San Joaquin Plaza would not result in any exceedances of the SCAQMD regional thresholds during either summer or winter months. Accordingly, Project - related emissions would not violate the SCAQMD standards for criteria pollutants. Furthermore, if Project emissions do not exceed the SCAQMD regional thresholds for NOx, VOC, PMio, or PM2.5, it follows that the emissions would not substantially contribute to a cumulative exceedance of a pollutant for which the SCAB is in nonattainment (i.e., ozone, NOx, PMio, and /or PM2.5). Additionally, and according to the Project's Air Quality Impact Analysis (Appendix A), operational activities associated with the proposed Project would not result in a violation of the CAAQS or NAAQS standards for CO "hot spots. "29 There are no other air quality standards or violations relevant to Project operational activities. Accordingly, operational emissions associated with the proposed Project would not result in the violation of any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation beyond that previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. Additionally, Project - related operational emissions would not result in a new or more severe impact associated with a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is in non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. Therefore, long -term operation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations Sensitive receptors can include uses such as long term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, retirement homes, residences, schools, playgrounds, child care centers, and athletic facilities. The only sensitive receptors within the Project vicinity include the existing multi - family and single - family residential uses located south, west, northwest, and northeast of the proposed Project site (refer to 27 Ibid, Page 4.2 -15. 28 Ibid, Page 4.2 -14. ' Air Quality Impact Analysis (Appendix A), Pages 28 -29 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -16 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Figure 3). None of these uses directly abut the Project site and all nearby sensitive receptors are separated from the Project site by public roadways and some also are separated from the Project site by intervening land uses. As previously discussed, because no specific development project is proposed in San Joaquin Plaza at this time, it is not possible to calculate air emissions that may be associated with future construction activities. Regardless, construction activities associated with future residential development on the Project site fall within the scope of analysis provided in the General Plan EIR. The General Plan EIR anticipated the construction of 430 multi - family units within the NNCPC, 15 multi - family units within Newport Center, and 79 hotel units at General Plan Anomaly Location 43. Therefore, the conversion of 79 hotel units to multi - family residential units and the conduct of construction activities to the specific location of San Joaquin Plaza represent the Project's only potential to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. The remaining 445 multi - family units in Newport Center were assumed and previously evaluated by the General Plan EIR. The construction and operation of 79 multi- family residential units instead of 79 hotel units would not represent any measurable difference in pollutant concentrations. Airborne pollutants associated with hotel room construction and operation and multi - family dwelling unit construction and operation are similar. Additionally, the conduct of residential construction and operational activities in San Joaquin Plaza would not have the potential to generate airborne pollutant concentrations that would be different or more severe than the conduct of similar activities in other parts of Newport Center. As indicated in the General Plan EIR, with respect to potential air quality impacts to sensitive receptors, "...the SCAQMD is primarily concerned with high localized concentrations of CO" also known as CO "hotspots. "30 As concluded in the Air Quality Impact Analysis, even very busy intersections within the SCAB do not result in any CO "hotspots" since the region has achieved attainment status for CO since 2007, and because CO "hotspots" do not occur at the busiest intersections within the SCAB (where traffic volumes are much greater than those that would ever occur in the Project area).31 Furthermore, the proposed Project would not exceed the applicable regional thresholds during long -term operational activity. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not result in or contribute to the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people The General Plan EIR acknowledges that construction activities would result in the generation of airborne odors (e.g., odors from architectural coatings), but concludes that such odors would not represent a significant impact because "...these odors are not generally considered to be especially offensive" since they would occur only during daytime hours and only would occur in close proximity to construction activities.32 Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, construction activities that may be associated with the proposed Project would occur only during daytime hours, and any odors generated would only affect a limited number of people who are living and working in close proximity to construction activities. Therefore, construction activities in San Joaquin Plaza would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. ° General Plan EIR, Page 4.2 -16 Air Quality Impact Analysis (Appendix A), Pages 28 -29. "General Plan EIR, Page 4.2 -17. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -17 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 The General Plan EIR also acknowledges that under long -term operating conditions some odors could be generated from residential cooking activities or through the use of trash receptacles. Odors associated with residential cooking are not considered to be "objectionable." As noted in the General Plan EIR, trash "...receptacles would be stored in areas and in containers as required by City and Health Department regulations, and be emptied on a regular basis, before potentially substantial odors have a chance to develop. "" There are no characteristics of the proposed Project that would introduce any new sources of objectionable odors that could affect a substantial number of people. Therefore, long- term operation of residential units in San Joaquin Plaza that may result from approval of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that there are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce the impact of increased population on implementation of the Air Quality Management Plan; to reduce cumulative impacts associated with construction emissions; or to reduce operational activities. These impacts would be significant and unavoidable. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to air quality. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to air quality, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.4 Biological Resources The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on biological resources if it would result in any of the following. • Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or indirectly through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or the CDFG or USFWS • Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the CDFG or USFWS " Ibid. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -18 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 • Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means • Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites • Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance • Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Biological resources impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or indirectly through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or the CDFG or USFWS The proposed Project site consists of a fully developed parcel of land that includes commercial office buildings, parking lots, and ornamental landscaping. The Project site does not contain any sensitive biological resources, nor is the site identified within an Environmental Study Area that has the potential to contain candidate, sensitive, or special status species.34 Although ornamental landscaping existing within the Project site includes several species of trees, these trees are small in stature and do not have the characteristics to serve as habitat for migratory birds or raptors. Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or indirectly through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or the CDFG or USFWS. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the CDFG or USFWS Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means The proposed Project site consists of a fully developed parcel of land comprising existing commercial office buildings, parking lots, and ornamental landscaping. All drainage from San Joaquin Plaza is currently diverted into man -made drainage structures (i.e., storm drains), thereby precluding the presence of any riparian habitat or wetlands. Additionally, the only vegetation community existing on the proposed Project site consists of ornamental landscaping, which is not a sensitive natural community identified in any local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and 34 Ibid, Figures 4.3 -1 and 4.3 -2. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -19 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Game (CDFG) or the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would have no effect on any riparian habitats, sensitive natural communities, or wetlands. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites The proposed Project site comprises a fully developed parcel of land surrounded by existing urban development and roadways that exhibit moderately high traffic volumes. The proposed Project site does not provide for any wildlife movement corridors under existing conditions, nor does the site comprise a wildlife nursery site. In addition, there are no wildlife corridors or native wildlife nursery sites within the Project vicinity that could be impacted, either directly or indirectly, by Project development. As such, development of the proposed Project site would not substantially interfere with the movement of any native resident or migratory wildlife species, nor would it impede the use of any native wildlife nursery sites. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance The proposed Project site consists of a fully developed parcel of land comprising existing commercial office buildings, parking lots, and ornamental landscaping, including low stature trees. Abutting public roadways also include trees in the public right -of -way ( "City trees "). Applicable Newport Beach policies and ordinances related to the protection of biological resources include City Council Policy G -1 (Retention or Removal of City Trees) and Chapter 7.26 of the City's Municipal Code (Protection of Natural Habitat for Migratory and Other Waterfowl). Council Policy G -1 was adopted to establish definitive standards for the retention, removal, maintenance, reforestation, tree trimming standards, and supplemental trimming of City trees. If construction activities occur in San Joaquin Plaza to implement the permitted residential development intensity proposed by the Project, such activities would be required to comply with the provisions of Council Policy G -1, which includes a requirement to preserve all existing City trees to the extent practical; if trees must be removed, the approval of a tree removal request would be required from the City's Municipal Operations Department Director addressing the replacement of any such trees. As such, the proposed Project would not conflict with City Council Policy G -1. Municipal Code Chapter 7.26 provides for the protection of natural habitat for migratory waterfowl and other birds, such as ducks, gulls, terns and pelicans. The proposed Project site does not contain any natural habitat for migratory waterfowl or other water - related bird species. As such, the proposed Project would have no potential to conflict with Municipal Code Chapter 7.26. The proposed Project also would not conflict with any General Plan policies related to biological resources, which are primarily contained within the General Plan Natural Resources Element. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -20 ME M❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan The proposed Project site is located within the Orange County Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) & Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for the County of Orange Central & Coastal Subregion (July 17, 1996). Policy NR 10.1 of the General Plan requires the City to cooperate with state and federal resource protection agencies and private organizations to protect terrestrial and marine resources, which would require compliance with local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans. In addition, according to NCCP Figures 9 and 10, NCCP Habitat Evaluation Map, the proposed Project site is not identified as having any conservation value. Additionally, and according to NCCP Figure 12, Proposed Habitat Reserve System, the proposed Project site is not identified for inclusion within the NCCP /HCP Reserve System. There are no other policies of the NCCP /HCP that are applicable to the proposed Project; accordingly, the proposed Project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that compliance with existing federal, State, and local regulations would mitigate biological resources impacts to a level considered less than significant. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to biological resources. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to biological resources, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.5 Cultural Resources The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on cultural resources if it would result in any of the following: • Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -21 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 • Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 • Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature • Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Cultural resources impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed, to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5 Nationally, state, and locally recognized historical resources within the City of Newport Beach are identified in the Historical Resources Element of the General Plan. None of the existing historical resources identified by the Historical Resources Element occur within the proposed Project site or in areas immediately adjacent to the proposed Project site.35 In addition, the proposed Project site has been fully disturbed by development activities that have occurred over the past 40 years, indicating that there is no potential for previously undiscovered historical resources in San Joaquin Plaza. Furthermore, none of the existing buildings in San Joaquin Plaza are recognized as historical resources, nor are they eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. As such, no historical resources would be impacted by the proposed Project. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature San Joaquin Plaza is fully developed with commercial office buildings, parking lots, and ornamental landscaping. When the property was developed approximately 40 years ago, native soils were graded and disturbed, indicating that there remains no potential for the presence of any surficial archaeological resources or paleontological resources. Although the property was previously subjected to mass grading and the likelihood to discover subsurface resources is low, there is still a potential for previously undiscovered subsurface resources to be uncovered in the event that future grading activities to implement permitted residential development intensity on the property extend to depths of previously undisturbed subsurface soils. The City's General Plan contains several goals and policies that are intended to ensure that archaeological and paleontological resources are protected and preserved. General Plan Policies NR 18.1 and HR 2.1 require that new development protect and preserve paleontological and archaeological resources from destruction, and avoid, minimize, and /or mitigate impacts to such resources in accordance with the requirements of CEQA. General Plan Policy HR 2.2 requires "...a qualified paleontologist/archaeologist to monitor all grading and /or excavation where there is a potential to affect cultural, archaeological, or paleontological resources..." Policy HR 2.3 requires notification of cultural organizations of any proposed developments with the potential to adversely impact cultural resources, 35 City of Newport Beach General Plan, Figure HR I. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -22 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 and Policy HR 2.4 requires that any recovered resources be donated to an appropriate organization for preservation. The Newport Beach City Council has also established "Paleontological Guidelines (K -4)" requiring that the City prepare and maintain sources of information regarding paleontological sites. As concluded in the General Plan EIR, compliance with General Plan Goals NR 18 and HR 2 would ensure that potential impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources are reduced to less than significant levels. The proposed Project is consistent with the assumptions made in the General Plan EIR with respect to impacts to archaeological and /or paleontological resources. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries The proposed Project site has been fully disturbed by past grading and development, indicating that there is no potential for the presence of any surficial human remains. Although the site has been subject to previous mass grading and the likelihood to discover buried human remains during future construction activities is low, there is still a potential for previously undiscovered human remains to be uncovered in the event that grading activities encounter previously undisturbed subsurface soils. The California Health and Safety Code §7050.5, as well as Public Resources Code §5097 et. seq., require that in the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a formal cemetery, no further excavation of disturbance of the site or site vicinity can occur until the County Coroner has examined the remains and makes a report. The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) is required to be notified within 24 hours if the Coroner determines or suspects the remains to be of Native American descent. Additionally, further development of the proposed Project site would be required to comply with General Plan Goals HR 2 and NR 18, which are intended, in part, to protect human remains. Accordingly, in the event that human remains are discovered during Project grading or other ground disturbing activities, the Project Applicant would be required to comply with the applicable provisions of California Health and Safety Code §7050.5, Public Resources Code §5097 et. seq., and General Plan Goals HR 2 and NR 18, which would ensure that any discovered human remains are properly treated. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources, and human remains could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to cultural NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -23 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 resources. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to cultural resources, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.6 Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "Implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would result in a significant impact if the project would. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving. o Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault o Strong seismic ground shaking o Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction o Landslides • Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil • Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or offsite landslide, lateral spreading subsidence, liquefaction or collapse • Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 1 B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property • Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water • Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State • Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Geology, soils, and mineral resources impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -24 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Summary Analysis Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault ♦ Strong seismic ground shaking ♦ Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction ♦ Landslides There are no Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones within the City of Newport Beach.36 Accordingly, and consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts due to the rupture of an Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. However, and as also noted in the General Plan EIR, the City of Newport Beach is located in the northern part of the Peninsular Ranges Province, an area that is exposed to risk from multiple earthquake fault zones. The highest risks originate from the Newport - Inglewood fault zone, the Whittier fault zone, the San Joaquin Hills fault zone, and the Elysian Park fault zone, each with the potential to cause moderate to large earthquakes that would cause ground shaking in Newport Beach, including the proposed Project site.37 As concluded in the General Plan EIR, policies contained in the General Plan's Safety Element would attenuate impacts associated with strong seismic ground shaking. Specifically, Policy S 4.1 requires the City to conduct regular updates to the building and fire codes to address fire safety and design. Policy S 4.7 requires further seismic studies for new development in areas where potentially active faults may occur. In addition, the construction of new residential buildings in San Joaquin Plaza that could occur to implement the residential development intensity proposed by the Project would be required to comply with the seismic safety standards of the California Building Code, which requires compliance with special structural design standards to attenuate hazards associated with credible seismic ground shaking events that are anticipated in the Project area. Accordingly, with mandatory compliance with General Plan Goal S4 and the California Building Code, impacts associated with strong seismic ground shaking would not be significant. Areas within the City of Newport Beach subject to strong seismic ground shaking associated with liquefaction hazards are limited to West Newport, Balboa Peninsula, the harbor islands, and lands adjacent to these areas. The proposed Project site is located in the Newport Center portion of the General Plan, and is not identified as being subject to liquefaction hazards.38 Accordingly, a significant impact associated with seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction, would not occur. The proposed Project site consists of a fully developed parcel that does not contain significant areas of slopes. The General Plan EIR notes that landslide conditions are possible in the area between Los Trancos Canyon and the Crystal Cove State Park boundary, the sedimentary bedrock that crops out in the San Joaquin Hills, along stream banks and coastal bluffs (e.g., Big Canyon), around San Joaquin 36 General Plan EIR, Page 4.5 -13. 37 Ibid, Page 4.5 -3. 38 lbid, Page 4.5 -14 and Figure 4.5 -2. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -25 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Reservoir, Newport and Upper Newport Bays, and Corona del Mar.39 The proposed Project site is located in Newport Center and is not located in any of the areas that are identified as having the potential for hazards associated with landslides. Accordingly, a significant impact due to landslide hazards would not occur. As concluded in the General Plan EIR, "With compliance of applicable regulations as well as policies identified in the General Plan Update, impacts would be less than significant." The proposed Project is consistent with the assumptions made in the General Plan EIR with respect to seismic - related hazards. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil Soil erosion and the loss of topsoil can occur when soils are exposed to erosive elements (i.e., wind and water) and in the absence of stabilizing vegetation. Under existing conditions, substantial soil erosion and /or the loss of topsoil does not occur in San Joaquin Plaza because the proposed Project site is developed with commercial office buildings, parking lots, and ornamental landscaping. Construction activities that could be associated with the proposed Project to implement the residential development intensity proposed in San Joaquin Plaza would be subject to compliance with state, regional, and local regulations that would serve to minimize the potential for erosion of topsoil, including, but not necessarily limited to, California Building Code (CBC) standards, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit and associated Best Management Practices (BMPs), and the provisions of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations concerning the discharge of eroded materials and pollutants from construction sites. Additionally, any future construction activities would be subject to compliance with General Plan Policies NR 3.1 through NR 3.22, and Policies NR 4.1 through NR 4.4, which address water quality and soil erosion and would further serve to prevent substantial erosion or the loss of topsoil during Project construction. Near -term impacts due to substantial soil erosion and /or the loss of topsoil would be consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which concluded that such impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Under long -term operating conditions, the Project site would continue to be fully developed with buildings, parking lots, and ornamental landscaping, and would not be subject to substantial amounts of soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. As such, a significant impact associated with erosion would have no potential to occur. Therefore, long -term operation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. 39 lbid, Pages 4.5 -9 and 4.5 -I5. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -26 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in on- or offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property Potential impacts associated with liquefaction hazards are addressed above under the analysis of the first threshold under Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources, which concludes that such impacts would not be significant. Construction activities that could be associated with the proposed Project to implement the residential development intensity proposed in San Joaquin Plaza would be required to comply with California Building Code (CBC) requirements for soil stability and grading plans are required to incorporate remediation measures for any expansive or compressible materials (e.g., replacement, grouting, compaction, drainage control, etc.). Additionally, the design of structures must conform to CBC criteria for foundational design and support. Furthermore, the City's Municipal Code requires the provision of a detailed site - specific soils engineering report and engineering geology report prior to the issuance of grading permits and further requires that measures be incorporated into the grading plans to address potential unstable soil conditions such as landslide, lateral spreading, liquefaction, or collapse. Construction activities that could be associated with the proposed Project to implement the residential development intensity proposed in San Joaquin Plaza would be consistent with the assumptions in the General Plan EIR, which concluded that with compliance with the CBC and Municipal Code requirements, impacts due to unstable geologic units or soils (including expansive soils) would be less than significant. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water The proposed Project site is fully developed under existing conditions and is served by a sanitary sewer system?0 Future residential development that could occur in San Joaquin Plaza resulting from approval of the proposed Project would not require the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems. As such, and consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State The California Geological Survey (CGS) classifies the proposed Project site as Mineral Resource Zone 3 (MRZ -3), which is applied to areas containing known mineral occurrences of undetermined mineral resource significance?1 Although portions of the City contain active oil wells and oil fields, these areas are concentrated in the western portions of the City within the Banning Ranch subarea. Although General Plan EIR Figure 4.5 -3 identifies one existing oil well near the proposed Project site (near the " Ibid, Figure 4.14 -2. 41 Ibid, Figure 4.5 -4. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -27 ME O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 intersection of Newport Center Drive and Corporate Plaza Drive), there are no active oil wells present within San Joaquin Plaza and the Project site is not located in an identified oil field. General Plan policies related to oil fields generally encourage continued oil production within the Banning Ranch portion of the City, while General Plan Policy NR 19.1 and Section 1401 of the City's Charter prohibit any new drilling for exploration or extraction of oil resources within the City.42 Accordingly, and as concluded in the General Plan EIR, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in the loss of the availability of any known mineral resources that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State, and a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan" The City of Newport Beach General Plan indicates that the only important mineral resources within the City are related to oil; however, Section 1401 of the City's Charter does not allow new drilling or production or refining of oil, gas, or other hydrocarbon substances within the City.43 Additionally, the discussion on the previous threshold regarding the lack of impact to known mineral resources would be equally applicable to locally important mineral resource recovery sites. As such, the proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts to any locally important mineral resource recovery sites, and a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that impacts to geology and soils could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. No impacts to mineral resources were identified. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to geology, soils, and mineral resources. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to geology, soils, and mineral resources, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. " City of Newport Beach General Plan, Page 10 -16. 43 Ibid. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -28 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 4.3.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Since certification of the General Plan EIR in 2006, Appendix G to the State CEQA Guidelines was revised to include thresholds of significance related to greenhouse gas emissions, as follows: "Would the project: • Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? • Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases ?" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Although climate change impacts due to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were not specifically evaluated as part of the 2006 General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR analyzed air quality impacts associated with buildout of the City, inclusive of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other GHG emissions. The General Plan EIR also addressed vehicle emissions (both construction and operational) and operational emissions from energy consumption, which are the most common sources of greenhouse gas emissions. As such, GHG emissions and the issue of global climate change (GCC) do not represent new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known at the time that the General Plan EIR was certified. Information on the effect of GHG emissions on climate was known long before the City certified the General Plan EIR. GCC and GHG emissions were identified as environmental issues since as early as 1978 when the U.S. Congress enacted the National Climate Program Act (Pub L 95 -367, 92 Stat 601). In 1979 the National Research Council published "Carbon Dioxide and Climate: A Scientific Assessment," which concluded that climate change was an accelerating phenomenon partly due to human activity. Numerous studies conducted before and after the National Research Council report reached similar conclusions. Information also was widely published in a series of reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC) dating back to the 1990s, including IPPC's "2001 Third Assessment Report." California adopted legislation in 2002 requiring the California Air Resources Board to develop regulations limiting greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles. As such, information about GCC and GHG emissions was available with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the General Plan EIR was certified in 2006. During the public review period and public hearings associated with the General Plan EIR, no objections or concerns were raised regarding the EIR's analysis of GHG emissions, and no legal challenge was filed within the statute of limitations period established by Public Resources Code §21 167(c). Similarly, no objections were raised on the topics of GHG emissions and GCC as part of Addendum No. I to the General Plan EIR in 2007. Pursuant to CEQA case 1aw44 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3), the issue of project - related GHG emissions does not provide new information of substantial importance or substantial evidence of a new impact to the environment that was not or could not have been known at the time General Plan EIR was certified; thus, minor additions are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis In order to evaluate whether the proposed Project would result in GHG impacts that were not examined in the General Plan EIR, a GHG analysis was prepared for the proposed Project by Urban Crossroads, Inc. This study, entitled, North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis, and dated May 29, 2012, is provided as Appendix B. Refer to Appendix B for a detailed discussion of 44 See Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development v. City of San Diego, 196 Cal. App. 4`" 515 (2011). NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -29 ME M❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 GHGs, the regulatory context for GHG emissions, and for a description of the methodology utilized to calculate the proposed Project's GHG emissions. Would the Project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Introduction to Global Climate Change and Greenhouse Gases GCC is defined as the change in average meteorological conditions on the earth with respect to temperature, precipitation, and storms. Scientific evidence suggests that GCC is the result of increased concentrations of greenhouse gases in the earth's atmosphere, including CO, methane (CH4), NOx, and fluorinated gases. Many scientists believe that this increased rate of climate change is the result of GHGs resulting from human activity and industrialization over the past 200 years. Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are often referred to as GHGs. GHGs are released into the atmosphere by both natural and anthropogenic (human) activity. Without the natural greenhouse gas effect, the Earth's average temperature would be approximately 61 ° Fahrenheit (F) cooler than it is currently. The cumulative accumulation of these gases in the earth's atmosphere is considered to be the cause for the observed increase in the earth's temperature. GHGs have varying global warming potential (GWP) values; GWP values represent the potential of a gas to trap heat in the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is utilized as the reference gas for GWP, and thus has a GWP of 1. The atmospheric lifetime and GWP of selected greenhouse gases are summarized in Table 3, Global Warming Potentials and Atmospheric Lifetime of Select GHGs. As shown in Table 3, GWP range from I for carbon dioxide to 23,900 for sulfur hexafluoride. For the purposes of this analysis, emissions of CO, CH4, and NOx are evaluated because these gasses are the primary contributors to GCC from development projects. Although other substances such as fluorinated gases also contribute to GCC, sources of fluorinated gases are not well defined and no accepted emissions factors or methodology exist to accurately calculate these gases. A detailed description of GHGs and their associated health effects is provided in Sections 2.4 and 2.6 of the Project's Greenhouse Gas Analysis (Appendix B). Regulatory Setting The State of California, through its Governor and its legislature, has established a comprehensive framework for the substantial reduction of GHG emissions over the next 40 -plus years, primarily through the implementation of Assembly Bill (AB 32) and Senate Bill (SB 375), which address GHG emissions on a statewide cumulative basis. AB 32 requires that statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020. SB 375 aligns regional transportation planning efforts, regional GHG reduction targets, and land use and housing allocation. SB 375 requires metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to adopt a sustainable communities strategy (SCS) or alternative planning strategy (APS) that will prescribe land use allocation in that MPO's regional transportation plan. Other statewide and federal regulations related to GCC and GHG emissions are discussed in detail in the Project's Greenhouse Gas Analysis (Appendix B). Threshold of Significance for Evaluating Project - Related GHG Emissions GCC is not confined to a particular project area and is generally accepted as the consequence of global industrialization over the last 200 years. A typical development project, even a very large one, does not generate enough greenhouse gas emissions on its own to influence global climate change significantly; hence, the issue of global climate change is, by definition, a cumulative environmental impact. However, development activities may participate in the potential for GCC by incremental contribution of GHGs NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -30 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 combined with the cumulative increase of all other sources of greenhouse gases, which when taken together constitute potential influences on GCC. Table 3 Global Warming Potentials and Atmospheric Lifetime of Select GHGs Gas Atmospheric Lifetime (years) Global Warming Potential (100 year time horizon) Carbon Dioxide 50 -200 1 Methane 12+3 21 Nitrous Oxide 120 310 HFC -23 264 11,700 HFC -134a 14.6 1,300 HFC -152a 1.5 140 PFC: Tetrafluoromethane (CH4) 50,000 6,500 PFC: Hexafluoroethane (C2F6) 10,000 9,200 Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) 3,200 23,900 Source: EPA 2006 (URL: http:// www. epa. gov /nonoo2lecon- inv/table.htmi) Note: nrU = nyarotmorocaroon; rrU = rertworocaroon. For purposes of analyzing the cumulative significance of the proposed Projects GHG emissions, the City relies on guidance from the SCAQMD. Currently, the SCAQMD has not adopted thresholds for GHG emissions for residential development projects within the SCAQMD region. However, the SCAQMD has convened a Working Group to identify GHG thresholds for use by jurisdictions in the SCAB. For projects where the SCAQMD is serving as the CEQA Lead Agency and that are not exempt from CEQA, or where no qualifying GHG reduction plans are directly applicable, SCAQMD applies a screening level threshold of 3,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) annually for all land use types. This threshold is based on a review of the Governor's Office of Planning and Research database of CEQA projects. Based on their review, 90 percent of CEQA projects would exceed 3,000 MTCO2e per year and require additional technical analysis to determine the level of significance. Although the City is not required to utilize the SCAQMD screening threshold, the SCAQMD screening threshold is used in this analysis to determine whether the proposed Project's GHG emissions require additional analysis41 If the proposed Project's GHG emissions are below 3,000 MTCO2e, then such emissions do not represent a substantial increase as compared to the level of GHG emissions that would otherwise occur from implementation of the City's General Plan. Analysis of Project Impacts due to GHG Emissions As discussed in detail in Section 2.0, the Project proposes to vest 524 multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. The General Plan EIR assumed that 430 of those units would be constructed within the NNCPC, and also assumed that an additional 15 multi - family units would be constructed within the Newport Center Statistical Area. The remaining 79 units were assumed by the General Plan EIR to consist of hotel units. Therefore, the conversion of 79 hotel units to multi - family residential units represents the Project's only potential to change the level of greenhouse gas emissions that would otherwise occur from implementation of the General Plan, since the remaining 445 multi- family units were assumed by the General Plan EIR. In order to provide consistency with the Project's 45 Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development v. City of Chula Vista, 197 Cal. App. 4th 327 (2011). NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -31 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 traffic study (Appendix D) that was prepared in accordance with the City's TPO, the greenhouse gas analysis (Appendix B) assumes that the Project would result in a net increase of 94 multi - family units, which represents a "worst case" (conservative) assumption of potential impacts to the environment because no credit is taken for the reduction of 79 hotel rooms or for the IS units already allowed by the General Plan. No specific residential development project is proposed in San Joaquin Plaza at this time; therefore, it is not possible to calculate GHG emissions that may be associated with future construction activities. However, construction - related emissions associated with the assignment of 524 multi - family residential units to San Joaquin Plaza clearly fall within the scope of the analysis provided in the General Plan EIR because the General Plan EIR assumed 430 multi - family units within the NNCPC, 15 multi - family units within the Newport Center Statistical Area, and 79 hotel units at General Plan Anomaly Location 43. There would be no substantial difference in GHG emissions when comparing buildout of the General Plan with and without the proposed Project. The types of construction equipment, material use, and duration of construction activities for hotel units and multi - family units are similar. Also, GHG contributions to GCC are cumulative in nature and thus the specific location of the emissions source, whether it be Newport Center generally or San Joaquin Plaza specifically, has no material bearing. Accordingly, construction - related emissions of GHGs would not represent new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known at the time that the General Plan EIR was certified. There would be no new or more severe construction related GHG emissions impact than would otherwise occur with implementation of the City's General Plan, as analyzed in the General Plan EIR. GHG emissions generated by long -term operation of the Project would be associated with area sources (natural gas use, landscape equipment, etc.) to serve residential units, transportation emissions associated with vehicles traveling to and from the Project site, and indirect emissions associated with purchased energy, energy associated with water (conveyance, treatment, distribution, and treatment of wastewater), and waste disposal. GHG emissions from Project - related operational activities are summarized in Table 4, Total Annual Project GHG Emissions. As noted above, Table 4 reflects a conservative analysis and depicts future GHG emissions associated with the implementation of 94 multi- family units. As shown in Table 4, the proposed Project would generate approximately 935.04 MMTCO2e per year. Because the GHG emissions associated with the Project would be below the SCAQMD's proposed screening threshold of 3,000 MMTCO2e, the proposed Project's cumulative contribution to GHG emissions would be less than significant and would not comprise a new significant environmental effect. Additionally, because the Project's GHG emissions would be below SCAQMD's screening threshold, the Project's GHG emissions would not represent a significant increase as compared to the level of GHG emissions that would otherwise occur from implementation of the City's General Plan. In conclusion, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Would the Project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases ?" CARB adopted a Scoping Plan on December 11, 2008, which is California's GHG reduction strategy to achieve the state's GHG emissions reduction target established by AB 32 (i.e., 1990 levels of GHG emission by year 2020). Statewide strategies to reduce GHG emissions include the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), California Appliance Energy Efficiency regulations, California Renewable Energy Portfolio standard, changes in the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards, and other early action measures that would ensure the state is on target to achieve the GHG emissions reduction goals NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -32 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 of AB 32. GHG emissions in the City, including development activities on the Project site, would be thereby reduced from mandatory compliance with these statewide measures. Table 4 Total Annual Project GHG Emissions Emission Source co, Emissions (metric tons per year) CH4 N20 Total CO,E Area Source Emissions 69.88 0.03 -- 71.00 Energy 244.28 0.01 — 245.79 Mobile Sources 556.77 0.02 -- 557.25 Waste 8.78 0.52 -- 19.67 Water Usage 35.74 0.19 0.01 41.33 Total CO2E (All Sources) 935.04 Threshold MT CO2EtYr 3,000 Significant? NO Source: CalEEMod T'" model output, See Appendix "A" to the Greenhouse Gas Analysis (Appendix B) for derailed model outputs. Note: Totals obtained from CalEEMod- and may not total 100% due to rounding. Development activities in the state of California are currently regulated by the 2008 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards and the 2010 Green Building Code, which require a greater degree of energy efficiency than the 2005 version of the state building code that was in effect when the General Plan EIR was certified in 2006. Although no specific development project is proposed at San Joaquin Plaza at this time, future construction activities would be required to comply with all applicable building codes. Currently, development activities are required to achieve the energy efficiency standards of the 2008 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards. The 2008 Standard is 15 percent more energy efficiency compared to the 2005 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards (which were the standards in place at the time the General Plan EIR was certified). CARIB and the EPA have also adopted new vehicle fuel efficiency standards for model years 2012 through 2016. The CARIB Scoping Plan also calls for more stringent fuel efficiency standards model years 2016 through 2020 under Pavley 11. Because the proposed Project would not exceed the SCAQMD's proposed screening threshold for GHG emissions (refer to Table 4) and residential development in San Joaquin Plaza would be required to achieve efficiency standards mandated as part of the state building code in effect at the time of future construction, the proposed Project would not have the potential to interfere with the State's ability to achieve GHG reduction goals and strategies. Furthermore, the proposed Project would result in fewer GHG emissions than would have been assumed in the General Plan EIR since the 2008 efficiency standards and other statewide measures to reduce GHG emissions were not in place at the time the General Plan EIR was certified. Various characteristics of the Project serve to render its contribution to GCC less than cumulatively considerable. One of the main issues raised by those concerned about the effect of greenhouse gases on climate change is that "leap frog' -type development would potentially increase the number of vehicle miles traveled and consequently increase vehicular emissions (i.e., CO2 that contributes to GCC). The Project is an infill, mixed use development in an urbanized setting, thereby providing opportunities to reduce vehicle trips. In conclusion, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -33 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Mitigation Program As noted, the General Plan EIR analyzed air quality impacts associated with the buildout of future development in the City, inclusive of the NNCPC area. The analysis included carbon dioxide (CO2) and other GHG emissions. No mitigation measures specifically related to GHG emissions were identified in the General Plan EIR. However, the General Plan includes several policies that would serve to reduce GHG emissions, including, but not limited to, the following Policies: LU 6.4.6 (Approaches for a Livable Neighborhood); LU 6.15.19 (Walkable Streets); LU 6.15.20 (Connected Streets); NR 6.1 (Walkable Neighborhoods); NR 6.2 (Mixed -Use Development); NR 6.3 (Vehicle -Trip Reduction Measures); NR 6.4 (Transportation Demand Management Ordinance); NR 6.5 (Local Transit Agency Collaboration); NR 6.6 (Traffic Signal Synchronization); NR 6.7 (City Fleet Vehicles); NR 6.8 (Accessible Alternative Fuel Infrastructure); NR 6.9 (Education on Mobile Source Emission Reduction Techniques); NR 7.1 (Fuel Efficient Equipment); NR 7.2 (Source Emission Reduction Best Management Practices); NR 7.3 (Incentives for Air Pollution Reduction); NR 7.4 (Use of Blowers); NR 8.1 (Construction Equipment); NR 8.2 (Maintenance of Construction Equipment); NR 8.3 (Construction Equipment Operation); NR 9.1 (Efficient Airport Operations); NR 9.2 (Aircraft and Equipment Emission Reduction); CE 1.1.1 (Comprehensive Transportation System); CE 1.2.2 (Shuttle Service); CE 1.2.4 (Public Transit); CE 4.1.1 (Public Transit Efficiency); CE 4.1.4 (Land Use Densities Supporting Public Transit); CE 4.1.5 (Airport Shuttles); CE 4.1.6 (Transit Support Facilities); CE 5. 1.1 (Trail System); CE 5.1.2 (Pedestrian Connectivity); CE 5.1.3 (Pedestrian Improvements in New Development Projects); CE 5.1.4 (Linkages to Citywide Trail System and Neighborhoods); CE 5.1.5 (Bikeway System); CE 5.1.6 (Bicycle Supporting Facilities); CE 5.1.9 (Integrated Bicycle Improvements); CE 5.1.1 1 (School Access); CE 5.1.12 (Pedestrian Street Crossings); CE 5.1.14 (Newport Harbor Trails and Walkways); CE 6. 1.1 (Traffic Signals); CE 6.1.2 (Intelligent Transportation Systems); CE 6.2.1 (Alternative Transportation Modes); CE 6.2.2 (Support Facilities for Alternative Modes); and CE 6.2.3 (Project Site Design Supporting Alternative Modes). Additionally, and although the proposed Project would not create a new GHG impact or increase the level of GHG emissions that would otherwise occur from buildout of the City's General Plan, the Project would be required to comply with all mandatory regulatory requirements imposed by the State of California and the SCAQMD aimed at the reduction of air quality emissions. Those that are particularly applicable to the Project and that would assist in the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions are: • Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB32) • Regional GHG Emissions Reduction Targets /Sustainable Communities Strategies (SB 375) • Pavley Fuel Efficiency Standards (AB 1493). Establishes fuel efficiency ratings for new vehicles. • Title 24 California Code of Regulations (California Building Code). Establishes energy efficiency requirements for new construction. • Title 20 California Code of Regulations (Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards). Establishes energy efficiency requirements for appliances. • Title 17 California Code of Regulations (Low Carbon Fuel Standard). Requires carbon content of fuel sold in California to be 10% less by 2020. • California Water Conservation in Landscaping Act of 2006 (AB188I). Requires local agencies to adopt the Department of Water Resources updated Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance or equivalent by January 1, 2010 to ensure efficient landscapes in new development and reduced water waste in existing landscapes. • Statewide Retail Provider Emissions Performance Standards (SB 1368). Requires energy generators to achieve performance standards for GHG emissions. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -34 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 • Renewable Portfolio Standards (SB 1078). Requires electric corporations to increase the amount of energy obtained from eligible renewable energy resources to 20 percent by 2010 and 33 percent by 2020. Level of Significance After Mitigation The General Plan EIR did not include any mitigation measures related specifically to GHG emissions. However, policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City. Mandatory compliance with the General Plan policies and regulatory requirements summarized above would ensure that Project - related emissions would not create a new GHG impact or increase the level of GHG emissions that would otherwise occur from buildout of the City's General Plan. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to greenhouse gas emissions. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to greenhouse gas emissions, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact to the public or the environment through hazards and hazardous materials if it would result in any of the following. • Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials • Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment • Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school • Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials site compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment • For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been developed, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area • For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area • Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -35 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 • Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Hazards and hazardous materials - related impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials The General Plan EIR acknowledges the potential for increased transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials due to an increase in the amount of commercial development. However, although the Project is consistent with the scope of analysis in the General Plan EIR, the proposed Project consists of a proposal to increase the permitted residential development intensity in the NNCPC by 94units and to vest 524 total dwelling units to the San Joaquin Plaza (including the 94 additional units and 430 units already allocated to the NNCPC). Residential uses are not associated with the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Furthermore, the transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials is fully regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), State, Orange County, and /or City of Newport Beach. Additionally, General Plan Policy S 7.3 provides for the education of City residents to reduce or eliminate their use of hazardous materials, which further serves to reduce the potential for significant health hazards associated with residential - generated hazardous materials. As such, and in conformance with the findings of the General Plan EIR, impacts associated with the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment No specific development project is proposed as part of the Project at this time. Nevertheless, it is recognized that construction effects would be expected to follow approval of the Project, which may include but not be limited to demolition, ground preparation, and new construction. Construction - related impacts associated with hazardous materials were previously evaluated as part of the General Plan EIR, which concluded that impacts would be less than significant. Construction activity that could be associated with the proposed Project falls within the scope of analysis contained in the General Plan EIR, which concludes that impacts due to reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment would be less than significant. Of the 524 units proposed to be vested to San Joaquin Plaza, the General Plan EIR assumed that 430 of those units would be constructed within the NNCPC and also assumed that an additional 15 multi - family units would be constructed within the Newport Center Statistical Area. The remaining 79 units were assumed by the General Plan EIR to consist of hotel units. The General Plan EIR acknowledges that implementation of the General Plan Land Use Plan would require the demolition of existing structures, which could result in exposure of construction personnel and the public to hazardous substances such as asbestos or lead -based paints. The General Plan EIR also acknowledges the potential for exposing construction workers to contaminated soils, if present, during earthwork activities. The General Plan EIR concludes that compliance with existing regulations and General Plan NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -36 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 policies would ensure that such potential impacts are less than significant. Specifically, the General Plan EIR notes that demolition activities would be subject to: "South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rules and Regulations pertaining to asbestos abatement (including Rule 1403), Construction Safety Orders 1529 (pertaining to asbestos), and 1532.1 (pertaining to lead) from Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations, Part 61, Subpart M of the Code of Federal Regulations (pertaining to asbestos), and lead exposure guidelines provided by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development" 46 Since the certification of the General Plan EIR, revisions and additions were made to SCAQMD Rules and Regulations applicable to hazardous materials, which would apply to the proposed Project. SCAQMD Rules and Regulations are standard regulatory requirements of all construction projects in the South Coast Air Basin, including the City of Newport Beach. Any potentially contaminated sites, including contamination that may be encountered during construction activities on the Project site are required to be remediated in accordance with federal, state, and regional standards. The General Plan EIR also evaluated the potential for future impacts that may be associated with the operation of businesses that handle hazardous materials. However, the proposed Project involves an increase to the permitted residential development intensity in San Joaquin Plaza and does not involve any business operations. Operational characteristics associated with residential uses are not identified with upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment; accordingly, a significant operational impact would not occur. In conclusion, the construction and operation of residential uses on the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials site compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment The General Plan EIR identified and disclosed a number of hazardous materials sites in EIR Tables 4.6 -1 through 4.6 -5. None of the hazardous materials sites occur on the proposed Project site. Accordingly, because San Joaquin Plaza is not on a list of hazardous materials site compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, future residential development on the property would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment, and a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, operation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school The nearest school to the proposed Project site is the Corona Del Mar High School, which is located 0.5 mile to the north at 2101 Eastbluff Drive in the City of Newport Beach. The proposed Project consists of an application to increase the permitted residential development intensity in the NNCPC by 94 units and vest development rights for 524 units (the 94 additional units and 430 units already permitted in the NNCPC) to the San Joaquin Plaza. As such, the proposed Project does not involve the use or storage of any hazardous materials; and, the use, storage, and handling of hazardous materials are not typically associated with residential development projects. Furthermore, because the nearest school site is 0.5 miles away, the Project is not located within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed 46 General Plan EIR, Page 4.6 -20. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -37 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 school. Accordingly, the proposed Project would have no potential to emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school, and a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been developed, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area The proposed Project site is located within the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport QWA). Although the General Plan was previously reviewed by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), the ALUC requires additional review whenever the City considers projects that require zoning (or planned community development plan) amendments that are located within the AELUP. Pursuant to standard City requirements, the proposed Project will be forwarded to the ALUC for a review of consistency with the AELUP prior to final Project approval by the Newport Beach City Council. In addition, the proposed Project site is subject to notification requirements and height regulations pursuant to Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77, Obstruction Imaginary Surfaces and Notification Area for ]WA. The "notification surface" is defined by the AELUP by extending a slope at a gradient of 100:1 (horizontal to vertical) from the airport facility. If a development application would protrude into the notification surface, then notification to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is required. Although buildings that may be proposed on -site in the future have the potential to penetrate the Part 77 notification surface, a significant environmental effect would not result since notification to the FAA would be required pursuant to FAA FAR Part 77. In addition, a precise and definitive review and assessment will be provided when building plans are submitted, and if any buildings penetrate the notification surface then the required FAA notification would be assured by the City. Based on a prior review of the NNCPC by the ALUC, the FAA FAR Part 77 Obstruction Imaginary Surface for the JWA is approximately 1,050 feet (North American Vertical Datum of 1988, hereafter "NAVD 88 "). The maximum height of buildings allowed within the NNCPC would be 375 feet above finished grade, which equates to a maximum elevation of approximately 575 feet (NAVD 88).47 Furthermore, buildings within the San Joaquin Plaza are restricted by the NNCPC Development Plan to a maximum height of 65 feet, equating to a maximum elevation of approximately 265 feet (NAVD 88)48 Accordingly, future buildings on -site have no potential to penetrate the FAA FAR Part 77 Obstruction Imaginary Surface, and a significant impact would therefore not occur. Based on the foregoing analysis, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. 47 Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County, 2007. City of Newport Beach: Request for Consideration of Proposed Planned Community Zoning Amendment November 15, 2007. Available for review at the Newport Beach Planning Department, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915. 4e NNCPC Development Plan, Page 16. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -38 ME M❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area As concluded in the General Plan EIR, there are no existing private airstrips within the City of Newport Beach or within the immediate vicinity of the proposed Project site.49 Accordingly, the proposed Project would not expose people residing or working in the Project area to safety hazards associated with a private airstrip, and a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan The Newport Beach Fire Department Emergency Services Office maintains the City of Newport Beach Emergency Management Plan, which was most recently updated in 2011. The Emergency Management Plan is intended to provide guidance for the City of Newport Beach's response to extraordinary emergency situations associated with natural disasters, technological incidents, and national security emergencies in or affecting the City of Newport Beach 50 According to the Emergency Management Plan, Jamboree Road is identified as an evacuation route for tsunami hazarcl Although the proposed Project site is located near this evacuation route, there are no components of the proposed Project that would interfere with the use of jamboree Road in the event of an evacuation. Additionally, the Project site is not identified within any of the primary hazard zones identified by the Emergency Management Plan (e.g., tsunami inundation zones, wildfire hazard zones, etc.).52 Accordingly, the proposed Project would have no potential to impair implementation of or physically interfere with the City of Newport Beach Emergency Management Plan. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands The City of Newport Beach Emergency Management Plan includes a "Wildfire Susceptibility Map" that indicates areas of the City that are subject to wildland fires. According to this map, the proposed Project site is identified as having a "Low /None" susceptibility to wildfires.53 Accordingly, the proposed Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, and a significant impact would not occur. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in San Joaquin Plaza. 49 General Plan EIR, Page 4.6 -1. 50 City of Newport Beach Emergency Management Plan (2011), Page 3. Available on -line at: http:// www .newportbeachca.gov /index.aspx ?pa2e =506. Accessed May 17, 2012. si Ibid, Page 101. 52 Ibid, Pages 41, 44, 45, 48, 50, 54, 55, 69, 70, and 100. 53 Ibid, Page 50. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -39 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that impacts to hazards and hazardous materials relevant to the Project could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. No impacts to hazards and hazardous materials were identified for the proposed Project. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to hazards and hazardous materials. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to hazards and hazardous materials, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on hydrology and water quality if it would result in any of the following: • Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements • Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g, the production rate of pre - existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted) • Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite • Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site • Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff • Require or result in the construction and/or expansion of new storm drain infrastructure that would cause significant environmental effects • Otherwise substantially degrade water quality • Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map • Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flows • Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of a levee or dam NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -40 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 • Expose people or structures to significant risk or loss, injury or death involving inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Hydrology and water quality - related impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements Otherwise substantially degrade water quality The General Plan EIR acknowledges that buildout of the City in accordance with the General Plan would increase the potential for degradation of water quality during both construction and long -term operation of planned land uses. Construction activities throughout the City are required to comply with state, regional, and local regulations, including, but not limited to, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit 99- 08 -DWQ, which requires preparation of and compliance with a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and /or a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and the incorporation of best management practices (BMPs) to help reduce the potential for polluted runoff exiting construction sites. The mandatory SWPPPs also are required to incorporate an erosion control plan to prevent runoff of excessive amounts of sediment from construction sites. Additionally, construction activities that could be associated with the proposed Project to implement the residential development intensity proposed in San Joaquin Plaza would be subject to Chapter 14.36 of the City's Municipal Code, which prohibits the discharge of any runoff that would contribute to degradation of water quality. Construction activities also would be subject to compliance with the 2003 Orange County Drainage Area Master Plan (DAMP), which sets forth management strategies (including the incorporation of BMPs) to protect the beneficial uses of the receiving waters in the Santa Ana drainage area. Finally, the City's General Plan includes policies that are designed to minimize stormwater and erosional impacts during construction, including Policies NR 3. 10, NR 3.11, NR 3.12, and NR 4.4, which require the preparation and enforcement of WQMPs and the incorporation of BMPs to prevent or minimize erosional hazards. Compliance with the regulations and policies described above would ensure that construction - related water quality impacts are less than significant, when and if construction activities occur in San Joaquin Plaza to implement permitted residential development intensity. Such activities would be consistent with the construction - related water quality effects identified and disclosed by the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Under long -term operating conditions, the potential development of residential uses in San Joaquin Plaza is not anticipated to substantially increase the amount of impervious surfaces relative to existing conditions; however, no specific development project is proposed at this time so the coverage percentage is unknown. As disclosed in the General Plan EIR, the potential for infill development (such as the proposed Project) to contribute to polluted runoff "...would be minimal. "54 54 General Plan EIR, Page 4.7 -30. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -41 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 With implementation of the proposed Project and the residential development intensity that would be permitted in San Joaquin Plaza, there would be an increase in residential population producing a concomitant increase in the amount of wastewater contaminated with household chemicals. Wastewater conveyed from San Joaquin Plaza is treated by the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) Treatment Plan No. 2, which treats the collected effluent as required to meet applicable State and Federal standards prior to being discharged into the Pacific Ocean. Furthermore, all development in the City of Newport Beach is subject to Municipal Code Chapter 14.35 (Water Quality), which prohibits discharge that would contribute to the degradation of water quality. Operation of residential uses in San Joaquin Plaza would be subject to the provisions of the DAMP, including requirements to incorporate nonstructural BMPs to control typical runoff pollutants. General Plan policies also are established to promote water quality, including General Plan Policies NR 3.1 through 5.4. Mandatory compliance with the Orange County DAMP, the City's Municipal Code, and General Plan policies would ensure that operational impacts to water quality are less than significant, and such effects would be consistent with the water quality effects identified and disclosed by the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new operational impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre - existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted) The proposed Project would be served by a potable water system and would not involve the use of any groundwater wells, and would have no effect on groundwater supplies. General Plan EIR Figure 4.7 -1 depicts areas within the City that are underlain by the Coastal Plain of Orange County Groundwater Basin (Basin), which provides groundwater for much of central and north Orange County, including the City of Newport Beach. According to Figure 4.7 -1, the proposed Project site is not located above the Basin, indicating that water infiltrating the Project site does not substantially contribute to groundwater resources. In addition, the General Plan EIR notes that "...the City of Newport Beach is in the pressure area of the Basin, which is an area that is not used for recharge. There are no designated recharge areas in the City." 55 The proposed Project could involve an increase in the City's population should the residential development intensity proposed by the Project and vested to San Joaquin Plaza be implemented. As such, the proposed Project could result in an increased demand for potable water (including domestic water received from local groundwater resources). The City's 2010 Urban Water Management Plan indicates that the projected use of groundwater supplies, combined with imported and recycled domestic water supplies, will meet projected water demand throughout the City through the Plan's horizon year of 2035.56 The Water Supply Assessment prepared for the proposed Project (refer to Appendix E of this document) similarly concludes that sufficient water supplies are available and the implementation of the proposed Project would not have an adverse effect on local groundwater. In addition, the General Plan includes several goals and related policies addressing water conservation (Goal NR 1) and water supplies (Goal NR 2) that will help ensure that future demand for potable water does not result in a deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in 55 Ibid, Page 4.7 -7. s6 City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan, Section 3.3 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -42 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Require or result in the construction and /or expansion of new storm drain infrastructure that would cause significant environmental effects Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff The proposed Project site is fully developed with commercial office buildings, parking areas, and ornamental landscaping. Under existing conditions, the existing storm drain infrastructure is adequate to handle runoff from the site during periods of heavy rainfall. Pursuant to the Residential Open Space Requirements set forth in the NNCPC Development Plan, future residential development on the Project site to implement permitted residential development intensity would be required to provide for common outdoor open space comprising 5 percent of the residential lot area, of which 10 percent must comprise landscaped areas. Additionally, the NNCPC Landscaping Development Standards require that surface parking lots must contain a minimum of one 24 -inch box tree for each five parking spaces 57 Compliance with the NNCPC Development Plan requirements for landscaping would ensure that impervious surfaces do not substantially increase, thereby ensuring that peak runoff from the site does not substantially increase as compared to existing conditions. As such, implementation of the proposed Project would not require new or expanded storm drain infrastructure beyond that assumed by the General Plan EIR. The General Plan EIR acknowledges that new stormwater infrastructure may be needed to support new development within the City. Policies contained in the General Plan would ensure that residential development, when and if implemented in San Joaquin Plaza, can be adequately supported by utilities such as storm drainage infrastructure. The General Plan EIR concludes that although the installation of storm drain facility upgrades could result in short -term construction impacts, construction of storm drainage upgrades in and of itself would not result in impacts not already identified in association with buildout of the General Plan Land Use Plan. As such, the General Plan EIR concludes that such impacts would be less than significant. The proposed Project is consistent with the assumptions made in the General Plan EIR with respect to hydrology and water quality impacts. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. 57 NNCPC Development Plan, Pages 19 and 24. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -43 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flows Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site The City of Newport Beach Emergency Operations Plan identifies areas subject to flood hazards as part of the Flood Hazard Areas and Local Flooding Map exhibits. The proposed Project site is not identified as an area subject to regional or local flood hazards. In addition, according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the proposed Project site is located within Flood Zone X, which is defined as "Areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain." S8 Accordingly, the proposed Project would not have the potential to place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area, nor would the Project place structures within a 100 -year flood hazard area that would impede or redirect flows. Impacts due to flood hazards would not occur. Under existing conditions, the proposed Project site is fully developed with commercial office buildings, parking, and ornamental landscaping. With implementation of residential development in San Joaquin Plaza as would be permitted by the proposed Project, it is not anticipated that the site's existing drainage pattern would be substantially altered, and any such alterations would not affect the course of any streams or rivers. In addition, and as discussed under the analysis of the previous thresholds, any future residential development associated with the proposed Project would be required to maintain landscaped areas that would ensure that runoff from the site does not substantially increase over existing conditions, thereby preventing any potential for substantial increases to long -term erosion hazards off -site. Furthermore, all runoff from the site is diverted to the City's storm drain system. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not alter the existing drainage pattern of the site in a manner that increases the potential for flooding either on- or off -site, nor would the revised drainage pattern result in substantial erosion or siltation either on- or off -site; accordingly, a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of a levee or dam The City of Newport Beach Emergency Management Plan includes a Dam Failure Inundation Map that identifies areas within the City that are subject to inundation in the event of a dam failure. According to this exhibit, the proposed Project site is located south of the Big Canyon Reservoir Inundation Pathway and east of the Prado Dam Inundation Pathway.59 Accordingly, the proposed Project site is not subject to flooding associated with any levees or dams, and a significant impact to people or structures would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or " FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) No. 06059C0382J, December 3, 2009. Available on -line at www.fema.go . Accessed May 16, 2012. " City of Newport Beach Emergency Management Plan, Page 69. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -44 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Expose people or structures to significant risk or loss, injury or death involving inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow The City of Newport Beach Emergency Management Plan includes an exhibit entitled, Tsunami Inundation Map for Newport Beach, which indicates that the proposed Project site is not subject to tsunami hazards, nor would future residents of the Project be subject to evacuation in the event of a tsunami hazard 60 Seiche hazards are associated only with enclosed bodies of water. The only enclosed bodies of water located upstream from the proposed Project site is the Big Canyon Reservoir; as noted in the previous threshold, the proposed Project site is not located within the inundation pathway for the Big Canyon Reservoir. Furthermore, mudflow hazards are primarily associated with steep slopes, which are not prevalent in the Project area. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not expose people or structures to significant risk or loss, injury or death involving inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that impacts to hydrology and water quality could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to hydrology and water quality. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to hydrology and water quality, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.10 Land Use and Planning The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on land use and planning if it would result in any of the following: • Intensify development within the Planning Area that creates incompatibilities with adjacent land uses • Physically divide an established community 60 Ibid, Page 100. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -45 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect • Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Land use and planning - related impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Intensify development within the Planning Area that creates incompatibilities with adjacent land uses The proposed Project has the potential to intensify residential development in the NNCPC and would vest development rights for an additional 94 residential units in the San Joaquin Plaza where only commercial office, parking lots, and ornamental landscaping exist today. With the addition of 94 units of residential development intensity and allocation of 430 units of residential development intensity already permitted in the NNCPC to San Joaquin Plaza, the Project site would have the maximum development potential of 524 multi - family residential units. Property surrounding the Project site has a mixed -use character. Residential uses occur immediately to the southwest and to the northeast of the San Joaquin Plaza, with additional residential uses located westerly of Jamboree Road. Other land uses in the area include office, commercial retail, public facility, and commercial lodging (hotel). As concluded in the General Plan EIR's discussion of Newport Center /Fashion Island: "Residential units have existed in this area since the 1970s, and increased through the 1990s. No conflicts of use between the residential and commercial uses have existed previously in this area, as evidenced by the lack of complaints by area residents." 61 Although the proposed Project would incrementally increase the number of residential units allowed within North Newport Center and consolidate those units to San Joaquin Plaza, such an increase would not result in any incompatibilities with adjacent land uses. Accordingly, a significant impact due to incompatible adjacent land uses would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Physically divide an established community The proposed Project site is located within the Newport Center portion of the City of Newport Beach, which consists of an existing, established mixed use district. The proposed Project involves an increase in the permitted residential development intensity for San Joaquin Plaza (from 430 units to 524 units). Under existing conditions, San Joaquin Plaza contains a multi- tenant commercial office development with parking and landscaping. No residential units are currently constructed on the Project site. San Joaquin Plaza is approximately 23 acres in size and no major public roadways traverse the site. It is generally bounded on the south by San Clemente Drive, on the east by Santa Cruz Drive, on the northeast by San Joaquin Hills Road, and is located just southeasterly of Jamboree Road. On the opposite sides of these roadways, an established apartment complex occurs to the south and an established residential neighborhood occurs to the northeast. The proposed Project would not physically divide either of 61 General Plan EIR, Page 4.8-11. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -46 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 these residential areas, nor any other established community. Accordingly, a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect The proposed Project site is located within the NNCPC and the NNCPC Development Plan, which serves as the controlling zoning ordinance for properties within its boundaries, is proposed to be amended as part of the Project to increase permitted residential development intensity by 94 units. There would be no change to the boundaries of the NCCPC Development Plan area or any constituent blocks or sub - districts, and there would be no change in the permitted types of land uses, development regulations, or design guidelines resulting from approval of the proposed NCCPC Development Plan Amendment. Future residential development within San Joaquin Plaza, if and when it occurs, would be required to demonstrate consistency with the NNCPC Development Plan; accordingly, no conflict with the NNCPC Development Plan would occur with implementation of the proposed Project. The NNCPC Development Plan was previously evaluated as part of Addendum No. I to the General Plan EIR (dated November 2007), which included an extensive analysis demonstrating how existing and planned development in the NNCPC is consistent with all applicable land use plans, policies, and regulations of other agencies with jurisdiction over the NNCPC area. Provided below is a consistency analysis for the proposed Project. As part of the proposed Project, 79 un -built hotel rooms presently allocated to General Plan Anomaly Location 43 would be converted to residential units and then transferred to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. In addition, the Project proposes to assign 15 un -built and unassigned multi- family residential units permitted in the MU -H3 designation of the Newport Center Statistical Area to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. Pursuant to General Plan Policy LU 4.3(d) (Transfer of Development Rights), transfers of development rights or development intensity in Newport Center are governed by Policy 6.14.3. General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3 allows development rights or development intensity to be transferred within Newport Center, subject to a finding that the transfer is consistent with the intent of the General Plan and that the transfer will not result in any adverse traffic impacts. The proposed Project would be consistent with General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3 as follows: LU 6.14.3 Development rights may be transferred within Newport Center, subject to the approval of the City with the finding that the transfer is consistent with the intent of the General Plan and that the transfer will not result in any adverse traffic impacts. Project Consistency: Consistent. The Newport Beach Marriott site (General Plan Anomaly 43) has a General Plan Land Use designation of CV (Visitor Serving Commercial) and the reduction of allowable development intensity by 79 hotel units would not result in any physical changes at the Newport Beach Marriott site nor would it result in a change in land use. With approval of the proposed Project, the hotel would continue operating with 532 rooms and serve visitors to the City consistent with the intent of the General Plan's CV land use designation. The San Joaquin Plaza sub -area of NNCPC is designated MU -H3 (Mixed Use Horizontal), which allows residential uses. Both the General Plan and the NNCPC Development Plan identify the San Joaquin Plaza for potential development with multi - family residential uses. The Project's proposal to assign additional multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza would not result in a conflict with the General Plan's MU -H3 land use designation. Although the proposed Project NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -47 ME M❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 would allow for the development of 79 more multi - family units than currently anticipated in that location by the General Plan and 94 multi - family units more than anticipated in the NNCPC Development Plan, this increase in the number of permitted multi - family units would be consistent with General Plan allowed intensity, goals and policies, including, but not limited to, the following: • General Plan Policy LU 3.3, which encourages the provision of residential uses in proximity to jobs and services. • General Plan Policy LU 5.3.4, which encourages the provision of appropriate acreage for the mixture of residential and nonresidential uses. • General Plan Policy 6.14.2 which encourages provisions for limited residential development in accordance with General Plan Tables LU I and LU2. • General Plan Goal H 2.2, which encourages the provision of housing units that assist in achieving the Regional Housing Needs Assessment construction goals. • General Plan Goal H 2.3, which encourages mixed residential and commercial use developments that improve the balance between housing and jobs. • General Plan Housing Program Policy 3.2.1, which directs the City to make appropriate provisions for the development of housing within the Newport Center. Furthermore, and as concluded in Section 4.3.15, no significantly adverse traffic impacts would result from implementation of the proposed Project. Additionally, and as indicated under the analysis of Hazards and Hazardous Materials in Section 4.3.8, mandatory compliance with the development standards included in the NNCPC Development Plan and Design Regulations and review of the Project by the ALUC would ensure that the proposed Project is fully consistent with the AELUP for the John Wayne Airport. Based on the foregoing analysis and the analysis contained in Addendum No. I to the General Plan EIR, the proposed Project would not conflict with any applicable plans, policies, and /or regulations, and a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan As indicated under the analysis of Biological Resources in Section 4.3.4, the proposed Project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Accordingly, a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that land use and planning impacts could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -48 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to land use and planning. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to land use and planning, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.11 Noise The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse noise impact if it would result in any of the following: • Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies • Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels • A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project • A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project • For a project located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels • For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Noise impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis In order to evaluate whether the proposed Project would result in noise impacts that were not examined in the General Plan EIR, a noise impact analysis was prepared for the proposed Project by Urban Crossroads, Inc. This study, entitled, North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis, and dated May 29, 2012, is provided as Appendix C. Refer to Appendix C for a discussion of noise fundamentals, noise standards, and for a detailed description of the methodology utilized to calculate the proposed Project's traffic- related noise. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -49 ME M❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project Methods and Procedures In evaluating the proposed Project's potential for impacts due to noise from vehicular traffic, the projected roadway noise impacts were calculated using a computer program that replicates the FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model. The FHWA Model arrives at a predicted noise level through a series of adjustments to the Reference Energy Mean Emission Level ( REMEL). Adjustments are then made to the REMEL to account for: the roadway classification (e.g., collector, secondary, major or arterial), the roadway active width (i.e., the distance between the center of the outermost travel lanes on each side of the roadway), the total average daily traffic (ADT), the travel speed, the percentages of automobiles, medium trucks, and heavy trucks in the traffic volume, the roadway grade, the angle of view (e.g., whether the roadway view is blocked), the site conditions ( "hard" or "soft" relates to the absorption of the ground, pavement, or landscaping), and the percentage of total ADT which flows each hour throughout a 24 -hour period. Please refer to Section 5.1 of the Project's Noise Impact Analysis (Appendix C) for a description of the noise prediction model inputs used in the analysis. Threshold of Significance for Evaluating Noise Impacts Noise standards within the City are established by the General Plan Noise Element and the City's Noise Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 10.26, Community Noise Control, and Municipal Code Section 10.28.040, Construction Activity — Noise Regulations). Project - related construction activities would be required to comply with General Plan Policy N 4.6 (Maintenance or Construction Activities) and Policy N 5.1 (Limiting Hours of Activity). Policy N 4.6 directs the City to enforce the City's Noise Ordinance limits on hours of maintenance or construction activity in or adjacent to residential areas, while Policy N 5.1 directs the City to enforce the limits on hours of construction activity. Municipal Code Section 10.28.040 restricts the timing of construction activities within the City to weekdays between 7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m., Saturdays between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., and prohibits "loud noise that disturbs, or could disturb, a person of normal sensitivity" on Sundays and holidays. Land use compatibility for noise is governed by General Plan Goal NI, which requires analysis of new development to ensure compatibility with existing land uses. General Plan Policy N 1.5, which addresses "Infill Projects" such as the proposed Project, establishes an interior noise level standard of 45 dBA CNEL. General Plan Noise Policy N 1.8 requires the employment of noise mitigation measures for existing sensitive uses when a significant noise impact is identified. A significant noise impact occurs when there is a substantial increase in the ambient CNEL produced by new development impacting existing sensitive uses. Due to the nature of the proposed Project (i.e., multi - family residential uses), only future traffic generated by the proposed Project warrants analysis for compliance with Policy N 1.8 since multi - family residential development is not anticipated to result in any stationary noise sources that could exceed the noise level limits established by the policy. For purposes of analysis (and as required by General Plan Policy N 1.8), off -site transportation- related noise increases would be considered "substantial" if Project - related traffic results in any of the following: a noise level increase of 3 dBA CNEL where the existing without project ambient noise levels range from 55 to 60 dBA CNEL; a noise level increase of 2 dBA CNEL where the existing without project ambient noise levels range from 60 to 65 dBA CNEL; a NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -50 ME M❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 noise level increase of I dBA CNEL where the existing without project ambient noise levels range from 65 to 75 dBA CNEL; and /or any off -site transportation project related noise level increase where the existing without project ambient noise levels are over 75 dBA CNEL. If the Project's transportation - related noise increases are substantial and impact sensitive receptors that were previously identified by the General Plan EIR as being impacted by traffic- related noise, then the Project's contribution would be considered to comprise a substantial increase in the severity of a significant effect (CEQA Guidelines §15162(3)(b)). If the Project's transportation - related noise increases are substantial and impact sensitive receptors that were not previously identified by the General Plan EIR as being impacted by traffic- related noise, then the Project's noise contribution would be considered a significant effect not discussed in the General Plan EIR (CEQA Guidelines § 15162(3)(a)). Municipal Code Section 10.26.025 (Exterior Noise Standards) establishes allowable exterior noise standards for sensitive land uses, as shown in Table 5, Allowable Exterior Noise Levels. In cases where ambient noise levels exceed the allowable exterior noise level shown in Table 5, then the ambient noise level is the exterior noise standard. Municipal Code Section 10.26.030 (Interior Noise Standards) establishes allowable interior noise level, as presented in Table 6, Allowable Interior Noise Levels. In cases where ambient noise levels exceed the allowable interior noise levels presented in Table 6, then the ambient noise level is the interior noise standard. Table 5 Allowable Exterior Noise Levels Land Use Allowable Exterior Noise Level (Leq) 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. Residential Single- two- or multiple family 55 dBA 50 dBA residential 50 dBA Commercial 65 dBA 60 dBA Residential portions of mixed- 60 dBA 50 dBA use properties Industrial or manufacturing 70 dBA 70 dBA Source: Municipal Code Section 10.26.025. Table 6 Allowable Interior Noise Levels Land Use Allowable Interior Noise Level (Leq) 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. Residential 55 dBA 50 dBA Residential portions of mixed- use properties 60 dBA 50 dBA bounce: Municipal Code bectlon Iu.2b.uju. Impact Analysis Since no specific development project is proposed at this time, it is not possible to calculate noise levels that would be associated with future construction activities at the proposed Project site. However, construction activity is an expected secondary effect of the Project and therefore considered in this analysis (see CEQA Guidelines Section 15146). Consistent with the conclusions of the General Plan EIR for construction impacts, mandatory compliance with Municipal Code Section 10.28.040 would ensure that construction activities on the proposed Project site do not result in a significant noise impact that would exceed any established and applicable standards governing construction - related noise. Furthermore, NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -51 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 construction - related noise that may be associated with the proposed allocation of 524 multi - family residential units to San Joaquin Plaza clearly fall within the scope of analysis provided in the General Plan EIR because the General Plan EIR assumed future construction in Newport Center, inclusive of the proposed Project site. Of the 524 units proposed to be vested to San Joaquin Plaza, the General Plan EIR assumed that 430 of those units would be constructed within the NNCPC and also assumed that an additional 15 multi- family units would be constructed within Statistical Area Ll. Therefore, constructing 79 residential units instead of 79 hotel units and the construction of an additional 94 units in the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC represent the Project's only potential to create construction - related noise impacts beyond the level previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. However, the construction of additional multi - family residential units at the San Joaquin Plaza would not result in a substantial increase in the amount of construction- related noise as compared to what was assumed in the General Plan EIR. As noted in the General Plan EIR, construction activities would be subject to compliance with Municipal Code Section 10.28.040, which regulates the allowable days and hours of construction. Any construction noise generated during the days and hours permitted by Municipal Code Section 10.28.040 would otherwise be exempt from the Noise Ordinance requirements, and thereby has no potential to result in any new or more severe impacts as compared to what was assumed in the General Plan EIR's analysis. Furthermore, the construction of 94 additional units at the San Joaquin Plaza would only increase the duration of construction activities and would not measurably increase the intensity of construction - related noise, as it is reasonable to conclude that residential units would be constructed using the same types of construction equipment and building materials. Since the General Plan EIR concludes that mandatory compliance with Municipal Code Section 10.28.040 would result in less than significant construction - related noise impacts, future Project - related construction noise would not result in any new noise impacts or substantially increase the severity of construction - related noise impacts previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. Operational noise impacts associated with implementation of the General Plan were previously evaluated as part of the General Plan EIR, which identified significant and unavoidable impacts due to the exposure of existing development to future traffic related noise that would exceed the General Plan noise standards and /or would represent a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels. The General Plan EIR notes that compliance with General Plan Goal N -2 (Transportation Noise) would reduce this impact, but not to a level below significant 62 Although the proposed Project would involve the allocation of 94 additional units to the San Joaquin Plaza, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in a net increase in the amount of traffic beyond what was assumed in the General Plan EIR.63 To substantiate this conclusion, future noise conditions for study area roadway segments were calculated based on the Project's Traffic Impact Analysis (Appendix D) to determine whether traffic generated by the Project would cause or contribute to transportation- related noise levels that could exceed the General Plan standards and /or result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. Under existing entitlements, the proposed Project site could be developed with up to 430 multi - family residential units. Accordingly, the analysis presented herein focuses on the Project's proposal to allocate an additional 94 dwelling units to the San Joaquin Plaza (as was done for the Project's traffic study prepared in accordance with the City's TPO; see Appendix D). 62 Ibid, Page 4.9 -42. 61 Stantec Consulting Services, 2012. San Joaquin Plaza Trip Generation. May 16, 2012. Available for review at the City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -52 ME M❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Existing noise contours without the addition of Project traffic are presented in Table 6 -1 of the Noise Impact Analysis (Appendix C), while Noise Impact Analysis Table 6 -2 presents the existing plus Project traffic noise contours. Table 6 -3 of the Noise Impact Analysis presents the year 2016 without Project noise contours, while Table 6 -4 presents the year 2016 noise contours with the addition of Project traffic. It should be noted that noise contours presented in the Noise Impact Analysis do not take into consideration the noise reducing effect of any existing noise barriers or topography that may affect ambient or projected noise levels. Table 7, Existing Off-Site Project- Related Traffic Noise Impacts, presents a comparison of the existing conditions noise levels for study area road segments for with and without the addition of Project traffic associated with adding 94 residential dwelling units to San Joaquin Plaza. Table 8, Year 2016 Off Site Project- Related Traffic Noise Impacts, presents a comparison of year 2016 conditions noise levels for study area road segments for with and without the addition of Project traffic. As previously noted, a significant noise impact occurs when there is a substantial increase in the ambient CNEL produced by new development impacting existing sensitive land uses. According to the significance thresholds specified by Noise Element Policy N 1.8 and shown in Table 7 and Table 8, 72 of the 73 roadway segments within the Project's study area are not expected to be significantly impacted by off -site transportation related noise. According to the noise impact analysis, the Newport Center segment north of San Miguel is the only roadway identified with a potentially significant impact. However, the land uses neighboring this roadway segment consist primarily of commercial retail and office uses that are not considered existing sensitive uses that would require additional off -site noise mitigation. As such, a significant impact for this roadway segment does not exist for future Year 2016 conditions (as shown in Table 8). For all of the 73 study area roadway segments, Project - related noise level increases are expected to be less than 1.0 to 3.0 dBA CNEL in year 2016, which is considered "barely perceptible." All noise level increases attributable to Project - related traffic are also below the thresholds established by General Plan Policy N 1.8, or the projected increase would not impact a sensitive receptor. As such, the proposed Project's contributions to off -site roadway noise increases for both existing and year 2016 conditions would not result in the exposure of persons to or result in the generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the General Plan, City Noise Ordinance, or applicable standards of any other agencies. Additionally, Project - related traffic would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. For General Plan buildout conditions, noise level increases attributable to Project - related traffic would be less than the noise level increases presented in Table B. This is because buildout of the General Plan would result in an overall increase in background traffic volumes, which would thereby result in an increase in background noise levels as compared to year 2016 conditions. As background traffic- related noise levels increase, noise increases attributable to Project traffic would decrease. Therefore, since Project - related noise increases would be less than the values presented in Table 8, Project - related traffic under General Plan buildout conditions would not result in the generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the General Plan, City Noise Ordinance, or applicable standards of any other agencies, nor would it result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. Based on the analysis presented above, traffic associated with the proposed project would not result in any new significant effects not discussed in the General Plan EIR, nor would Project traffic result in a NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -53 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Table 7 Existing Off -Site Project - Related Traffic Noise Impacts Roadway Segment CNEL at 100 Feet (dBA) Signifoance Threshold dBAr Potential Significant Im actT No Protect W1th Project Project Addition Jamboree North of Eastbluff 68.8 68.9 0.0 1.0 No Jamboree Eastbluff to San Joaquin Hills 69 8 698 0.0 1.0 No Jamboree South of Sen Joaquin Hills 68.0 68.0 00 10 No Jamboree North of Santa Barbara 68.3 68.3 0.0 1.0 No Jamboree South of Santa Barbara 67.8 67.8 0 0 1 1.0 No Jamboree North of Coast Highway 675 67.5 0 0 1.0 No Jamboree South of Coast Highway 63.3 633 0.0 1.0 No Santa Cruz North of San Joaquin Hills 54.5 54.5 0 0 3.0 No Santa Cruz Souh of San Joaquin Hills 63.0 63.4 OA 1.0 No Santa Cruz North of San Clemente 62.9 62.9 0.0 LO No Santa Cruz South of San Clemente 61.9 61.9 0.0 1.0 No Santa Cruz North of Newport CTR 613 61.7 00 1 0 No Santa Cruz South of Newport CTR 58.5 58.5 0.0 2.0 No Newport CTR West of Newport CTR 60.9 60.9 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR South of Santa Barbara 61.3 61.3 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR North of Santa Barbara 60.5 60.6 0.0 U No Newport CTR South of Santa Cnrz 60.2 60.2 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR North of Santa Cruz 59.9 59.9 0 0 2 0 No Newport CTR North of Santa Rosa 60.6 60.6 0.0 10 No Newport CTR South of Santa Rosa 62.0 62.1 0.0 LO No Newport CTR North of San Miguel 610 62.1 11 LO Yes Newport CTR South of San Miguel 62.7 62.7 0,0 1.0 No Newport CTR East of Newport CTR 61 9 61.9 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR South of Newport CTR (Cirde 63.6 63.6 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR North of Coast Highway 64.2 64.2 0.0 1.0 No Santa Rosa North of San Joaquin Hills 58.0 58.0 0.0 2,0 No Santa Rosa South of San Joaquin Hills 63 8 63.8 0.0 1.0 No Santa Rosa North of Newport CTR 63.0 63,0 0.0 1.0 No Santa Rosa South of Newport CTR 60.5 60.5 0.0 1.0 No Avocado North of San Miguel 57.0 57.0 0,0 2.0 No Avocado South of San Miguel 62.0 62.0 0.0 1.0 No Avocado North of Coast Highway 604 1 60.4 0.0 1.0 No Macarthur North of Bonita Canyon 71.1 71.1 00 1.0 No Macarthur South of Bonita Canyon 703 70.3 0.0 1.0 N0 Macarthur North of San Joaquin Hills 70.3 70.3 0.0 1.0 No NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -54 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Table 7 Existing Off -Site Project - Related Traffic Noise Impacts (Cont'd) Roadway Segment CNEL at 100 Feet (dBA) Signifcance Threshold dBA' Potential Significant Im act?' No Project With Project Project Addition Macarthur South of San Joaquin Hills 68.3 68.3 0.0 1,13 No Macarthur North of San Miguel 67.9 67.9 0.0 1.0 No Macarthur South of San Miguel 67.0 67,0 00 1.0 No Macarthur North of Coast Highway 67.0 67.0 00 1 0 No Eastbluff(Ford/Bonits Cyn West of Jamboree 63.8 63.8 0.0 1.0 No Eastbluff/Ford/Bonita Cyn East of Jamboree 623 62.8 0.0 1 0 No EastblufNFord/Bonita Cyn West of Bonita Canyon 62.1 62.2 0 0 1 0 No EastblufNFord/Bonits Cyn East of Bonita Canyon 67.9 67.9 00 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Jamboree 593 59.3 0.0 2.0 No San Joaquin Hills East of Jamboree 154,9 65.0 00 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Cruz 65.9 65.9 0 0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Cruz 63.8 63.9 00 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Rosa 64.4 64.4 0 0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Rosa 65.8 65.8 0.0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Macarthur 553 65.7 00 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills East of Macarthur 65.6 65.6 0 0 1 0 No San Clemente East of Santa Barbara 58.3 58.3 01 2.0 No San Clemente West of Santa Cruz 584 58.5 0.1 2.0 No Santa Barbara West of Jamboree 54 0 54.0 00 3.0 No Santa Barbara East of Jamboree 61.6 61.7 0 0 1.0 No Santa Barbara North of San Clemente 61.6 61.6 00 1 0 No Santa Barbara South of San Clemente 59.4 59.4 0.0 2.0 No Santa Barbara West of Newport CTR 58.8 58.8 0.1 2.0 No Santa Barbara East of Newport CTR 56.0 56.0 0.0 2.0 No San Miguel West of Newport CTR 61.1 61.1 0 0 1 0 No San Miguel East of Newport CTR 63.2 63.2 0.0 10 No San Miguel West of Avacado 64.3 64.3 0 0 1.0 No San Miguel East of Avacado 66.0 66.0 0 0 1 0 No San Miguel West of Macarthur 650 65.6 0.0 1.0 No San Miguel East of Macarthur 62.9 62.9 0.0 1.0 No Coast Highway West of Jamboree 70.2 70.2 0.0 10 No Coast Highway East of Jamboree 69.2 69.2 0.0 1.0 No Coast Highway West of Newport CTR 68.9 68.9 0.0 10 No Coast Highway East of Newport CTR 68 0 68.0 00 1.0 No Coast Highway West of Avacado 67.8 67.8 0.0 1.0 No Coast Highway East of Avacado 68 1 68.1 00 10 No Coast Highway West of Macarthur 68.1 68.1 0.0 1.0 No Coast Highway East of Macarthur 69.5 69.5 00 1.0 No I. Significant noise impact threshold defined by the City of Newport Beach Policy N I.B. 2. Potential noise impact for existing noise sensitive uses. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -55 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Table 8 Year 2016 Off -Site Project - Related Traffic Noise Impacts Roadway Segment CNEL at 100 Feet (dBA) Signifcance Threshold rdBA� Potential Significant Impact?' No Project With Project Project Addhon Jamboree North of Eastbluff 69.6 69.7 0.0 1.0 No Jamboree Eastbluffto San Joaquin Hills 70.5 70.5 00 1.0 No Jamboree South of San Joaquin Hills 68.8 68.8 00 1.0 No Jamboree North of Santa Barbara 690 59.0 0 0 1.0 No Jamboree South of Santa Barbara 68.6 68.6 0 0 1 1.0 No Jamboree North of Coast Highway 68.3 68.3 0.0 to No Jamboree South of Coast Highway 63.6 63.6 0.0 1.0 No Santa Cruz North of San Joaquin Hills 545 54.5 00 3.0 No Santa Cruz Souh of San Joaquin Hills 63.1 63.2 0.1 1.0 No Santa Cruz North of San Clemente 63.1 63.1 0 0 1.0 No Santa Cnrz South of San Clemente 62.1 62.2 0.0 1 0 No Santa Cruz North of Newport CTR 62.0 62.0 u 0 1.0 No Santa Cnrz South of Newport CTR 58.8 58.8 2 0 No Newport CTR West of Newport CTR 61.1 61.1 0 0 1 A No Newport CTR South of Santa Barbara 614 61.4 00 1.0 No Newport CTR North of Santa Barbara 60.8 60.8 0 0 1.0 No Newport CTR South of Santa Cruz 60.5 60.5 0 n 1.0 No Newport CTR North of Santa Cn t 60.1 i 1 1 _ 1 1.0 No Newport CTR North of Santa Rosa 61.1 61.1 0 0 1.0 No Newport CTR South of Santa Rosa 62.5 62.5 00 1 0 No Newport CTR North of San Miguel 61.3 61.3 0 0 1.0 No Newport CTR South of San Miguel 62.8 62.8 0,0 1.0 No Newport CTR East of Newport CTR 620 62.0 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR South of Newport CTR (Circle 640 64.0 00 1.0 No Newport CTR North of Coast Highway 64.6 64.6 0 0 1.0 No Santa Rosa North of San Joaquin Hills 58.0 58.0 00 2.0 No Santa Rosa South of San Joaquin Hills 64.4 64.4 00 1.0 No Santa Rosa North of Newport CTR 63.7 63.7 0.0 1.0 No Santa Rosa South of Newport CTR 612 61.2 0 0 10 No Avocado North of San Miguel 57 8 57.8 00 2 0 No Avocado South of San Miguel 62.7 62.7 00 1.0 No Avocado North of Coast Highway 61.2 61.2 0.0 1.0 No Macarthur North of Bonita Canyon 71.5 71.5 0.0 1 1.0 No Macarthur South of Bonita Canyon 70 ..9 70.9 0.0 10 No Macarthur North of San Joaquin Hills 70.8 70.8 0.0 1 0 No NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -56 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Table 8 Year 2016 Off -Site Project - Related Traffic Noise Impacts (Cont'd) Roadway Segment CNEL at 100 Feet (dBA) Signifcance Threshold (dBA)' Potential Significant Impact?" No Project With Project Project Addition Macarthur South of San Joaquin Hills 68.8 68.8 0'a 1 0 No Macarthur North of San Miguel 683 68.3 0 0 1.0 No Macarthur South of San Miguel 67 6 67.6 00 1 0 No Macerthur North of Coast Highway 67.6 67.6 0.0 1 0 No Eastbluff/FordBonita Cyn West of Jamboree 64 0 64.0 0.0 1 0 No EastblufNFord /Bonita Cyn East of Jamboree 63.0 63.1 0.0 1.0 No EastblufUFord/Bonita Cyn West of Bonita Canyon 62A 62.4 0.0 10 No EastblufP/Ford /Bonita Cyn East of Bonita Canyon 68.1 68.1 0.0 1,0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Jamboree 694 59.4 0.0 2,0 No San Joaquin Hills East of Jamboree 65 5 65.6 00 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Cnrz P r._ 662 00 1 0 No San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Cruz 54.2 64.2 0 0 1 0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Rosa 64 8 64.8 00 1 0 No San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Rose 66.0 66.1 0.0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Macarthur 66.2 66.2 0.0 1.0 No Son Joaquin Hills East of Macarthur 65.7 65.7 0,0 1.0 No San Clemente East of Santa Barbara 58.3 58.3 of 2.0 No San Clemente West of Santa Cruz 584 58.5 0.1 2.0 No Santa Barbara West of Jamboree 54A 54.4 0.0 3.0 No Santa Barbara East of Jamboree 61 9 619 00 1.0 No Santa Barbara North of San Clemente 61.8 61.8 0.0 1 0 No Santa Barbara South of San Clemente 59.8 59.8 0.0 2.0 No Saute Barbara West of Newport CTR 59.2 59.2 0.0 2.0 No Santa Barbara East of Newport CTR 56.5 56.5 0.0 20 No San Miguel West of Newport CTR 61.8 1 61.8 0.0 1.0 No San Miguel East of Newport CTR 63.8 63.8 0,0 1.0 No San Miguel West of Avocado 64.8 64.8 0.0 1.0 No San Miguel East of Avocado 1 66.5 1.0 ray San Miguel West of Macarthur 66.. 66,2 1 0 N San Miguel East of Macarthur 63.1 63:1 0.0 1 0 No Coast Highway West of Jamboree 71 0 71.0 OD 1 0 No Coast Highway East of Jamboree 70.1 70.1 0.0 ! No Coast Highway West of Newport CTR 698 69.8 0.0 10 No Coast Highway East of Newport CTR 69.0 69.0 00 1 0 No Coast Highway West of Avocado 689 68.9 00 1.0 No Coast Highway East of Avocado 690 69.0 00 1 0 No Coast Highway JWost of Macarthur 68.7 69.0 0.3 1 0 No Coast Highway JEast of Macarthur 70.4 70,4 00 10 No I. Significant noise impact threshold defined by the City of Newport Beach Policy N I.B. 2. Potential noise impact for existing noise sensitive uses. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -57 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 substantial increase in the severity of any noise impacts previously identified in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, long -term operation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential for exposure of persons to or the generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels, which were considered significant if they exceeded 72 vibration decibels (VdB). Impacts associated with the exposure of existing residential developments to noise levels in excess of 72 VdB were disclosed in the General Plan EIR as a significant and unavoidable impact, and indicated that mitigation measures for such impacts are not available. Table 9, Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment, presents the typical vibration levels for common types of construction equipment64 Existing residential uses within close proximity to the proposed Project site include existing single - family residential uses to the west (across Jamboree Road), multi - family uses to the northwest (across Jamboree Road and San Joaquin Hills Road), single - family uses to the northeast (across San Joaquin Hills Road), and immediately south of the proposed Project site (across San Clemente Drive). Of theses existing residential land uses, and based on the values presented in Table 9, only the existing multi - family uses to the south of the site are located in close enough proximity to the Project site (i.e., approximately 90 feet) to be affected by vibration from future Project construction, as the remaining residential uses are located more than 150 feet from the proposed Project site. As shown in Table 9, the existing multi - family land uses located south of the site could be exposed to vibration - related noise levels approaching 77 VdB (which is the vibration level given for large bulldozers at a distance of 75 feet). Table 9 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment Equilloment ximwe van 25 Feet 50 Feet 75 Feet 100Feet Large Bulldozer 87 81 77 75 Loaded Trucks 86 80 76 74 Jackhammer 79 73 69 67 Small Bulldozer 58 52 48 46 SOURCE: Federal Transit Administration 1995; EIP Associates 2006 Although future construction activities that may occur as a result of the proposed Project have the potential to expose the existing multi - family residential uses to the south to noise levels in excess of 72 VdB, construction activities that would result from implementation of the proposed Project fall within the scope of analysis presented in the General Plan EIR. The addition of up to 94 additional multi - family units on the Project site, in addition to the 430 multi - family units already assumed by the General Plan EIR, would not result in a substantial increase in the amount of construction equipment that would be required, and thus would not result in a substantial increase in vibration - related impacts as presented in the General Plan EIR. With respect to long -term operating conditions, multi - family residential uses are not associated with the generation of vibration - related noise. As such, a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. w General Plan EIR, Table 4.9 -7. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -58 ME M❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project Since no specific development is proposed at this time, it is not possible to calculate noise levels that may be associated with future construction activities at the proposed Project site. However, construction activities that may be associated with future development at the proposed Project site are within the scope of analysis for the General Plan EIR, since the General Plan EIR assumed future construction on the proposed Project site and because the construction of additional units on -site (i.e., 94 multi - family units) would not substantially increase daily noise levels. As concluded in the General Plan EIR, "...existing and future construction noise levels at individual construction sites may not substantially differ, but previously unexposed areas could experience new sources of construction noise. Both existing and future noise would be exempt from the [Municipal Code] and when construction occurs, impacts would be considered less than significant." 65 Accordingly, since construction activities that may be associated with future construction activities allowed as a result of the proposed Project would be regulated by Municipal Code Section 10.28.040, and because impacts associated with construction activities at the proposed Project site were assumed in the General Plan EIR, construction activities would not result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. Therefore, construction of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. For long -term operating conditions, the General Plan EIR notes the following: Other sources of noise that occur on a periodic or temporary noise could involve neighborhood or commercial landscape maintenance equipment, street and parking lot maintenance vehicles, loudspeakers, alarm systems, and automobiles and motorcycles with modified exhaust systems. Noise from these uses may be dealt with on a case -by -case basis through enforcement of the City Noise Ordinance provisions.16 The General Plan EIR concludes that such impacts would be less than significant. Operational characteristics that may be associated with future development pursuant to the proposed Project would be within the scope of the analysis provided in the General Plan EIR, since the long -term operation of 94 additional multi - family units on -site (in addition to the 430 multi - family units already allowed by the NNCPC Development Plan) would not result in a substantial increase in the need for landscape maintenance equipment, use of street and parking lot maintenance vehicles, loudspeakers, alarm systems, or automobiles with modified exhaust systems. Moreover, to the extent that the Project would result in an increase in these sources (e.g., increased vehicles with modified exhaust systems), such sources would be addressed through enforcement of the provisions of the City's Noise Ordinance. Accordingly, long -term operation of the proposed Project would not result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. Therefore, long -term operation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. 65 Ibid, Page 4.9 -34. 66 Ibid, Page 4.9 -35. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -59 ME M❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 For a project located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels According to General Plan EIR Figures 4.9 -5 and 4.9 -6, and the John Wayne Airport Impact Zones exhibit contained in the AELUP,67 the proposed Project site is subject to airport- related noise levels that are less than 60 dB CNEL. As indicated in the AELUP, areas located outside of the 60 dB CNEL contour are not subject to significant airport- related noise levels.68 Accordingly, the proposed Project would not result in the exposure of people residing or working in the area to excessive airport- related noise levels. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels As concluded in the General Plan EIR, there are no existing private airstrips within the City or the vicinity of the Project site.69 Accordingly, the proposed Project site would not expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels associated with a private airstrip, and a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that impacts to noise impacts related to John Wayne Airport and construction activities could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. Groundborne construction vibrations and long -term exposure to increased noise levels were identified to remain significant and unavoidable. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to noise. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to noise, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. " Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport, Orange County Airport Land Use Commission (April 17, 2008), Appendix D (Impact Zones Map). Available on -line at: http: / /www.ocair.com/ commissions /aluc /docs /IWA_AELUP- April- 17- 2008.pdf. Accessed May 17, 2012. Ibid, Page 12. 69 General Plan EIR, Page 4.6 -1. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -60 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 4.3.12 Population and Housing The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on biological resources [sic] if it would result in any of the following: • Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure) • Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere • Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Population and housing impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure) The Project's proposal to assign 15 un -built multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza would not result in an increase in the City's population beyond the projected population for North Newport Center previously evaluated and disclosed as part of the General Plan EIR. The conversion of 79 un -built hotel units to residential units would, however, result in an estimated increase in the City's permanent population by 173 persons (based on a person per household [pph] value of 2.19 cited in the General Plan EIR).70 It should be noted that the increase in the permanent population would be somewhat off- set by the reduction in transient population (i.e., hotel patrons) due to the reduction in the number of hotel units allowed within the City (79 units). The General Plan EIR disclosed that buildout of the land uses allowed by the General Plan Land Use Plan would result in a future 2030 population of 103,753 persons, while SCAG projected a future 2030 population of only 94,167 persons, or a difference of approximately 9,586 persons. The General Plan EIR identified this increase in the City's population as compared to SCAG's 2030 forecast to be a significant and unavoidable impact of the 2006 General Plan. The future development of residential uses in San Joaquin Plaza as a result of implementing the proposed Project would result in an estimated increase in the City's projected population by 173 persons, which would be in addition to the projected population identified in the General Plan EIR. However, the increase in permanent population attributable to the proposed Project would not represent a substantial increase in the severity of the City's unavoidable cumulative impact to population and housing, considering the proposed Project's population increase of 173 persons would comprise less than two- tenths of one percent (0.17 %) of the projected and estimated General Plan buildout population. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or substantially increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. J0 Ibid, Page 4.10 -5 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -61 ME O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Displace substantial numbers of existing housing necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere Under existing conditions, the San Joaquin Plaza is developed with commercial office land uses, and does not include any housing units or residents. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not displace substantial numbers of existing housing or people, and would not require the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program No policies were identified in the 2006 General Plan to reduce the substantial increase in growth in the City. Measures were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with resource impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including increases in population and the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that impacts to population and housing would remain significant and unavoidable. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to population and housing. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to population and housing, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.13 Public Services The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on [public services] if it would result in any of the following. • Result in substantial adverse environmental impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives • Result in substantial adverse environmental impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered police protection facilities, the need for new or physically altered police protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives • Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered schools, need for new or physically altered schools, the construction of which could cause significant NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -62 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for schools. • Result in substantial adverse environmental impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered libraries, the need for new or physically altered libraries, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives for libraries." It should be noted that impacts to parks, although included as a public service in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, are analyzed separately in Section 4.3.14 (Recreation) of this Initial Study /EIR Addendum. No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Public service impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Result in substantial adverse environmental impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives The proposed Project site is served by Newport Beach Fire Department (NBFD) Fire Station 3, which is located at 868 Santa Barbara Drive and immediately adjacent to the proposed Project site.71 The desired personnel to population ratio for fire protection services is 0.48 firefighters for each 1,000 residents.72 According to this standard, the Project's projected future population increase of 173 persons73 would result in the need for 0.08 new firefighters. However, as stated in the General Plan EIR, "irrespective of the personnel to population ratio, in the NBFD's estimation, the NBFD's current staffing level adequately suits the current needs of the City's residential population "74 In addition, NBFD's desired response time for emergency response (including a three- to four - person engine company) is five minutes for 90 percent of all structure fire calls within the City75. According to General Plan EIR Table 4.11 -4, Fire Station 3 had a response time of 4 minutes 32 seconds in 2002, which meets the NBFD's five minute standard. It should be noted that given the San Joaquin Plaza's close proximity to Fire Station 3, service times to the proposed Project site would be substantially less than the average response time. Furthermore, it should be noted that the construction of 1,201 dwelling units within Newport Center was assumed in the General Plan EIR (which assumed 751 units allocated to portions of the Newport Center designated as Multiple Residential [RM] and 450 units allocated to portions designated as MU- H3), and the General Plan EIR also assumed the construction of 79 more hotel units than were actually constructed at Anomaly Number 43 (Marriott Hotel). Thus, the construction of 524 multi - family dwelling units at the San Joaquin Plaza, which includes 445 of the 450 dwelling units allocated to the MU- 71 Ibid, Table 4.1 1 -I. 12 Ibid, Page 4.1 1 -5. " Ibid, Page 4.10 -5. Based on a pph value of 2.19. " Ibid, Pages 4.1 1 -5 and -6 Slbid, Page 4.11 -6. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -63 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 H3 portions of Newport Center and the conversion and transfer of 79 hotel units, would not represent a substantial increase in demand for fire protection services. Accordingly, and consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the proposed Project would not result in or require the provision of new or physically altered fire protection facilities, or new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the construction of which would result in substantial adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result in substantial adverse environmental impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered police protection facilities, the need for new or physically altered police protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives As discussed in the analysis of the previous threshold, implementation of the proposed Project could result in an increase in the City's projected permanent population by 173 persons as compared to what was estimated in the General Plan EIR; 76 however, it should be noted that this increase in the estimated permanent population would be partially off -set by a reduction in the City's transient population because the proposed Project also would result in a reduction of 79 hotel units allowed within Newport Center. Nonetheless, the potential increase in the estimated permanent population would require additional police protection services. The Newport Beach Police Department (NBPD) has a ratio of 1.7 officers per 1,000 residents77. When and if residential development occurs in San Joaquin Plaza to implement the proposed Project, there would be an estimated 173 person population increase, which would require an additional 0.29 officers to maintain the City's service ratio. Maintaining the NBPD's current ratio of 0.60 non -sworn personnel per sworn officer78 would require the addition of 0.18 non -sworn personnel. Although the General Plan EIR identified that buildout of the General Plan would require new or expanded police facilities, the Project- related demand for 0.29 sworn officers and 0.18 non -sworn officers would not result in or require any new or physically altered police protection facilities beyond what was evaluated and disclosed as part of the General Plan EIR. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not result in nor require new or physically altered police protection facilities or the need for new or physically altered police protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered schools, need for new or physically altered schools, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for schools. The proposed Project is located within the Newport Mesa Unified School District (NMUSD), and any future school -age children residing in San Joaquin Plaza would attend the Lincoln Elementary School, Corona Del Mar Middle School, or the Corona Del Mar High School should they attend public schools. J6 Ibid, Page 4.10 -5. Based on a pph value of 2.19 " Ibid, Page 4.11-16. 78 Ibid. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -64 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Utilizing the ratios provided in the General Plan EIR, the conversion of 79 hotel rooms to 79 multi- family residential proposed by the Project would result in 35 more students than were assumed in the General Plan EIR (consisting of 17 elementary school students, 9 middle school students, and 9 high school students) 79 As indicated in the General Plan EIR, implementation of the General Plan would result in approximately 4,347 total students within NMUSD, which would require the construction of new school facilities 80 However, the General Plan EIR concludes that adherence to policies contained in the General Plan would ensure that impacts related to the provision of new educational facilities would be less than significant. Furthermore, the 35 additional students generated by the proposed Project would not result in the need for additional school facilities beyond those assumed by the General Plan EIR. Accordingly, demand for school facilities associated with the proposed Project in conjunction with the cumulative demand throughout the entire school district would be consistent with the level of impacts identified and disclosed as part of the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result in substantial adverse environmental impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered libraries, the need for new or physically altered libraries, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives for libraries." As concluded in the General Plan EIR, it is increasingly difficult to project the potential need for resources required to adequately serve the future population because the types of resources used at Newport Beach Public Library (NBPL) is changing (i.e., hardcopies vs. electronic documents). "...[I]ncreased development in the City does not necessarily immediately equate to an increase in total volumes or square feet of library space. "81 Accordingly, although the proposed Project could result in an increase in the projected future population of the City by 173 persons as compared to what was assumed in the General Plan EIR,B2 if and when residential development occurs in San Joaquin Plaza to implement the proposed Project, such population increase would not directly result in the need for new or expanded library facilities that would have a significant effect upon the environment. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including increased public service demands associated with the City's projected population, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. J9 Ibid, Page 4.11 -23. The General Plan EIR assumes that the 14,215 dwelling unit increase associated with the General Plan Update would result in 6,230 new students, consisting of 3,115 elementary school students, 1,557 middle school students, and 1,558 high school students. This represents a ratio of 0.219135 elementary students 0.109532 middle school students, and 0.109603 high school students per household. 80 Ibid, Page 4.11-23. 81 Ibid, Pages 4.11-27 and 4.11-28. ez Ibid, Page 4.10 -5. Based on a pph value of 2.19. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -65 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that impacts to public services would be less than significant. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to public services. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to public services, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.14 Recreation and Open Space The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on parks and recreational facilities if it would result in any of the following. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment • Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government services, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives for parks" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Park and recreational facility impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -66 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Summary Analysis Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government services, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives for parks At the time the General Plan EIR was certified (2006), the City had a deficit of approximately 38.8 acres of park and beach acreage citywide. The proposed Project site is located within Service Area 9 (Newport Center), which is identified as having a projected need for 10.9 acres of parkland to serve the future population with buildout of the Service Area. The Service Area contains a total of 19 acres of existing parkland, which represents a surplus of 8.1 acres s3 Based on the standards provided in Municipal Code Section 19.52.040 (Parkland Standard), the City requires five acres of parkland for each 1,000 residents. Implementation of the proposed Project could result in an estimated increase of 173 persons as compared to what was projected by the General Plan 84 If and when residential development is constructed in San Joaquin Plaza to implement the proposed Project, the resulting increase of 173 persons beyond that previously assumed by the General Plan would result in a demand for 0.9 acres of parkland. With implementation of the Project, total demand for parkland within Service Area 9 would increase to 11.8 acres, which would be more than accommodated by the 19 acres of existing parkland within the Service Area. Although the Project would not result in the need for new or expanded recreational facilities, per the General Plan Open Space policies, a Per -Unit Public Benefit Fee for Parks would be paid for each of the 94 additional units in exchange for vested development rights as stipulated in the Amendment to the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement. The in -lieu fees would be used to maintain existing or acquire new parkland within the City. Accordingly, because there is more than adequate parkland to serve the projected population within Service Area 9, and because a Per -Unit Public Benefit Fee for parks would be required to be paid as an additional public benefit to assist the City in maintaining or expanding parkland within the City should residential development occur in San Joaquin Plaza, the proposed Project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. Additionally, the proposed Project would not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse effect on the environment. The proposed Project also would not result in any substantial adverse physical impacts to the environment associated with the provision of, or need for, new or physically altered government facilities. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. e3 Ibid, Table 4.12 -1 (Parkland Acreages). Ibid, Page 4.10 -5. Based on a pph value of 2.19. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -67 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including increases in parkland and the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that impacts to parks and recreational facilities would be less than significant. Finding of Consistencv with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to recreation and open space. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to recreation and open space, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.15 Transportation/Traffic The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on transportation or circulation if it would result in any of the following: • Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections) • Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways • Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in locations that results in substantial safety risks • Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g, farm equipment) • Result in inadequate emergency access • Result in inadequate parking capacity • Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Transportation impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -68 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Summary Analysis Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections) As required by the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO), a TPO traffic analysis was prepared for the proposed Project. This study, entitled, North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis, and dated May 2012, is provided as Appendix D. The TPO traffic analysis includes an analysis pursuant to the TPO, a cumulative conditions analysis, and a General Plan analysis. Provided below is a summary of the methodology used in the TPO traffic analysis, an overview of existing conditions for study area intersections, and a summary of the findings for the TPO analysis, cumulative conditions analysis, and General Plan Analysis. TPO Traffic Analysis Methodology The proposed Project involves conversion of 79 hotel units to multi - family units, which would then be transferred to the San Joaquin Plaza. The Project also would result in the assignment of 15 un -built and un- assigned units to the San Joaquin Plaza. These 94 units, along with an additional 430 dwelling units already allowed in the MU -H3 portions of the NNCPC, would be allocated specifically to the San Joaquin Plaza. However, since the 430 dwelling units already are allowed within the San Joaquin Plaza, and impacts associated with transportation and traffic associated with such allocation was evaluated as part of the General Plan EIR and Addendum No. I thereto, the analysis of impacts to traffic in this section focuses on impacts associated with the increased development intensity within San Joaquin Plaza (i.e., 94 multi - family units) that would be allowed as a result of the proposed Project. Based on the scope of the proposed Project, the City's traffic engineers identified a total of 20 intersections requiring analysis, as depicted on Figure 4, TPO Analysis Study Intersections. Existing intersection levels of service were calculated based on existing traffic counts collected in March 2012 and utilizing intersection capacity utilization (ICU) values. The ICU values are a means of presenting the volume to capacity ratios (V /C), with a V/C ratio of .90 representing the upper threshold for an acceptable level of service (LOS D) in the City of Newport Beach. The analysis assumes existing lane configurations and a capacity of 1,600 vehicles per hour (vph) per lane with no clearance factor. Although no specific development project is proposed at this time, the proposed Project is assumed for purposes of the traffic analysis to be complete in 201 S; therefore, the study year is 2016 consistent with the TPO guidelines. An ambient growth rate of 1.0 percent per year was added to the existing volumes along Jamboree Road, MacArthur Boulevard, and Coast Highway. Traffic generated by approved projects in the study area (including the 430 dwelling units currently allocated to the San Joaquin Plaza) were added to the existing - plus - growth peak hour volumes to obtain year 2016 background peak hour volumes for the intersections prior to the addition of Project - generated traffic. Table 10, Approved Projects Summary, summarizes the approved projects included in the analysis. Trip rates and the resulting ADT for the proposed Project are summarized in Table 11, Trip Generation Summary. These trips were distributed to the surrounding circulation system according to the general distribution shown in Figure 5, General Project Trip Distribution and Project ADT. Existing -plus- Project peak hour volumes were obtained by adding the Project - generated peak hour trips to the existing peak hour volumes. Similarly, background -plus- Project peak hour volumes were obtained by adding the project - generated peak hour trips to the 2016 background peak hour volumes discussed above. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -69 No M❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Nor scams ,o NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach f Igure 4 TPO ANALYSIS STUDY INTERSECTIONS June 2012 Page 4 -70 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Table 10 Approved Projects Summary Project Fashion Island Expansion Percent Complete 40 Temple Bat Yahm Expansion 65 CIOSA — Irvine Project 91 Newport Dunes 0 Hoag Hospital Phase III 0 St. Mark Presbyterian Church 77 OLQA Church Expansion 0 2300 Newport Blvd 0 Newport Executive Court 0 Hoag Health Center 75 North Newport Center 0 Santa Barbara Condo 0 Newport Beach City Hall 0 328 Old Newport Medical Office 0 Coastline CommunitV College 0 Bayview Medical Office 0 Mariner's Pointe 0 4221 Dolphin Striker 0 Source: Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (May 2012). Table 11 Trip Generation Summary Land Use I AM Peak Hour Amount In Out PM Peak Hour .. Out .. Trip Rates Residential (ITIE 232 DU .06 .28 .34 .24 .14 .38 4.18 Trip Generation Residential 94 DU 6 26 32 23 13 36 393 Source: Trip Generation 8 Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -71 No M❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Nor scams ,o NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach f Igure b GENERAL PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND PROJECT ADT June 2012 Page 4 -72 ME M❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Cumulative traffic volumes were determined based on trip generation and distribution characteristics associated with a list of known but not approved projects compiled by City staff. These cumulative projects are summarized in Table 12, Cumulative Projects Summary. The peak hour cumulative intersection volumes were added to the 2016 background peak hour volumes discussed above, and the proposed Project's peak hour trips were added to the resulting 2016 background- plus - cumulative peak hour volumes. Table 12 Cumulative Projects Summary Ptoject Land Use Amount Mariner's Medical Arts Medical Office 12.25 TSF Banning Ranch Single Family Detached 423 DU 44/A Condominium/Townhouse 952 DU 561A Retail 75.00 TSF .36 1A Hotel 75 Rm Sunset Ride Park Park 13.67 Acre Marina Park Marina /Park 10.45 Acre Koll - Conexant Apa rtment 974 DU Newport Coast TAZ 1 - 4 Single Family Detached 954 DU 66113 Condominiumrrownhouse 389 DU .26 /A Multi-Family Attached 175 DU Source. Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (May 2012). Existing Conditions Existing ICU values for the study area intersections are summarized below in Table 13, Existing ICU Summary. As shown in Table 13, all study area intersections operate at an acceptable LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours under existing conditions. Table 13 Existing ICU Summary 1. Jamboree & Ford/Eastblutt 74/C 61B 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills .60 /A .70B 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara 44/A .57/A 4. Jamboree & Coast Hwy 561A _65/B 5. Newport Center & Coast Hwy .36 1A .441A 6. Avocado & Coast Hwy 44/A .50 /A 7. MacArthur & Ford/Bonita Canyon 13/C .8210 8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills .658 .80 /C 9. MacArthur & San Miguel 531A .44/A 10. MacArthur & Coast Hwy 66113 .6411B 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills .26 /A .36/A 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente .14/A .25/A 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center .15 /A .31/A 14. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills .291A .49/A 15. Newport Center & Santa Rosa .121A .341A 16. Nevvport Center & San Miguel .141A .321A 17. Avocado & San Miguel .31/A .49/A 18. Newport Center & Newport Center .18/A .361A 19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente .27/A .33/A 20. Newport Center & Santa Barbara .12/A I .21/A Level of service ranges. 00- .60 A .61- .70 B .71- .80 C .81- .90 D .91 -100E Above 1.00 F Source., Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (May 2012). NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -73 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 TPO Analysis Summary The ICU values for existing - plus - Project conditions are summarized in Table 14, Existing -Plus- Project ICU Summary. The TPO analysis consists of a one percent analysis and an ICU analysis at each study intersection. The one percent analysis compares the proposed project traffic with projected background peak hour volumes. To pass the one percent analysis, peak hour traffic from the proposed Project must be less than one percent of the projected background peak hour traffic on each leg of the intersection. If the proposed project passes the one percent analysis, then the ICU analysis is not required for that intersection and no further analysis is necessary. If the proposed Project does not pass the one percent analysis, then the ICU analysis must be performed for each intersection which fails to pass the one percent test. Table 14 Existing -Plus- Project ICU Summary Intersection 1. Jamboree & Ford/Eastbluff AM 74IC .61 /B .00 00 • '•- 11lllllll�V 74/C 61 113 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills 60 1A 70/B .601A .70/13 .00 .00 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara 441A .57/A .441A .57/A .00 .00 4. Jamboree & Coast Hwy .561A .6513 .561A 65113 .00 .00 5. Newport Center & Coast H .361A .441A .371A .45/A .01 .01 6. Avocado & Coast Hwy .44/A .50/A .441A .501A .00 .00 7. MacArthur & Ford/Bonita Canyon .731C .821D .73/C .82/D .00 .00 8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills .65/1 .801C .65/13 .80/C .00 .00 9, MacArthur& San Miguel .53/A .441A .531A .441A .00 .00 10. MacArthur & Coast Hwy .66/13 .6413 .66/13 .64113 .00 .00 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills 26/A .36/A .271A .37/A .01 .01 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente .14/A .25/A .141A .26/A .00 .01 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center .15/A .31/A .15/A .31/A .00 .00 14. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills .291A .49/A .291A .50/A .00 .01 15. Newport Center & Santa Rosa .12/A .341A .12/A .34/A .00 .00 16. Newport Center & San Miguel .14/A .32/A .14/A 32/A .00 .00 17. Avocado & San Miguel .31 /A .49/A .31/A .49 /A .00 .00 18. Newport Center & Newport Center ASIA .36 1A .18 /A I .36/A .00 .00 19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente .27/A .331A .27/A I .331A 1 .00 .00 20.NewportCe nter & Santa Barbara .12/A .21/A .12/A I 21/A 1 .00 .00 Level of service ranges: .00- .60 A .61- .70 B .71- .80 C .81- .90 D .91 -1.00 E Above 1.00 F Source: Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (May 2012). Table 15, One Percent Traffic Analysis Summary, summarizes the results of the one percent analysis for the proposed Project. As this table indicates, the proposed Project does not pass the one percent analysis at 12 study intersections during the AM or PM peak hour; therefore, an ICU analysis is required and was performed for the 12 intersections that did not pass the one percent test. Table 16, Year 2016 ICU Summary, summarizes the existing, 2016 background, and 2016 background - plus- project ICU values during the AM and PM peak hours. As indicated in Table 16, each of the study area intersections would operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours with the addition of Project traffic. Accordingly, the proposed Project would have no significant direct impact on the study intersections, and no mitigation would be required. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -74 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Table 15 One Percent Traffic Analysis Summary MOMMEMEM e - A r. 1. Jamboree 8 Ford /Eastbluff 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1 1.892 2,207 865 1 697 1 2,766 1 1,891 614 386 Project Peak Hour Tn 10 2 0 1 5 7 0 2 Yes 2. Jamboree S San Joaquin Hills 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume I 1 406 2,219 395 199 1,644 250 143 912 Pro ect Peak Hour Tn 8 2 0 3 6 9 0 1 No 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbaro 2016 Pro ected Peak Hour Volume 1,528 1,819 60 1 181 1 1,481 1 1.687 1 81 1 726 Project Peak Hour Trips 2 0 0 1 14 1 8 1 1 1 0 1 7 1 No 4. Jamboree & Coast Hwy 2016 Projected Peak Four Volume 465 1,243 2,596 1,194 1 432 1 1.599 1 Z6M I Z284 Project Peak Hour Trips 0 7 1 1 1 0 1 3 1 4 1 2 1 Yea 5. Newpod Ctr & Coast Hwy 2016 Pro ected Peak Four Volume 0 113 2,188 1,292 0 1 849 1,704 1 1,690 Project Peak Hour Trips 0 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 No S. Avopdo 8 Coast Hwy 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 361 191 1 1.374 1 1 455 1 295 1 603 1 1,456 1 1,548 Project Peak Hour Trips 0 1 0 1 4 1 2 1 0 1 0 1 2 1 3 1 Yes 7. MacArthur 8 Ford/Bonito Cvn 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1 2,133 3,156 1 415 1 2,080 1 2.773 1 3,744 425 1,165 Project Peak Hour Trips 1 4 1 1 2 1 0 1 2 1 5 2 1 Yes 8. MacArthur 8 San Joaquin Hills 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1 1, 493 309 509 1,071 1.613 811 1.172 728 Pro ect Peak Hour Trips 0 1 5 0 1 0 1 4 1 3 1 1 1 No B. MacArthut 8 San Miguel 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1,554 1,536 330 470 1 1,125 1,513 1 1,225 455 Pro ect Peak Hour Trips 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 Yes 10. MacArthur & Coast Hwy 2016 Projected Peak How Volume 1 0 1 1,092 1 1 653 1 2.092 1 0 1 1.369 1 1.680 1 2.028 Project Peak Hour Trips 0 1 1 1 4 1 2 1 0 1 0 1 2 1 4 1 Yes 11. Santa Crut 8 San Joaquin Hills 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 118 1 82 932 1 399 1 781 1 39 1 783 584 Project Peak Hour Trips 4 0 5 1 1 1 2 1 0 1 7 1 1 5 1 No 12. Santa Cruz 8 San Clemente 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 144 60 3 95 35 677 315 336 102 Project Peak Hour Trips 0 3 5 0 2 6 3 0 No 13. Santa Cruz 8 Newport Ctr 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 60 269 140 178 254 255 280 317 Project Peak Hour Trips 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 1 No 14. Santa Rosa 8 San Joaquin Hills 2016 Projected Peak How Volume 169 132 583 1 015 797 143 789 767 Project Peak Hour Tri 0 0 5 1 1 0 0 3 5 1 Yes 16. Newport Ctr 8 Santa Rosa 2016 Projected Peak How Volume 204 1 107 84 400 1 609 320 270 508 Project Peak Hour Tri ps 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 No 16. Newport Ctr 6 Son Ml uel 2016 Projeded Peak How Volume 255 1 106 39 288 1 423 298 347 609 Pro ect Peak Hour Trips 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 No 17. Avocado S San Migutl 2016 Projected Peak Four Volume 381 1 120 218 1 1,212 1 720 1 321 1 734 1 893 Project Peak Hour Trips 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 Yes 18. Newport Ctr a Newport Ctr 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 461 24 128 191 428 192 361 472 Project Peak Hour Trips 1 0 2 1 0 1 1 li 0 1 1 0 1 No 18. Santa Barbara S San Clemente 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 100 724 0 65 404 278 0 406 Project Peak Hour Trips 1 0 0 1 6 1 1 1 2 1 0 1 4 1 No 20. Newport Ctr & Santa Barbara 2016 Projected Peak How Volume 256 1 146 204 40 281 334 280 148 Project Peak Hour Tn 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 I No Note 2016 Projeoted peak how volume corelsts of exmbng volume, regional growth, and approved projects volume. Source. Stontec Consulting Services, Inc. (May 2012). NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -75 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Table 16 Year 2016 ICU Summary Intersection 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills Existing AM .65/13 + Growth PM .80 1C Existing + AM .65/1 Growth + PM .80 /C Project AM .00 PM 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara .48/A .61/B .48/A .6113 00 5. Newport Center & Coast H .39/A .48/A .39/A .49/A .00 8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills .69/13 .86/D .69/13 .87/D .00 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills .29/A .381A .30 /A .381A .01 12 Santa Cruz & San Clemente .1 WA .261A .14/A 26/A 00 Roo 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center .15/A .31/A .15/A 31/A .00 15 Newport Center & Santa Rosa .151A 40 /A .15/A 40 /A .00 16 Newport Center &San MI uel .151A 341A .15/A .341A .00 18. Newport Center & Newport Center .18/A .38/A .181A 38/A 00 19. Santa Barbara & San Clemerte .281A .33/A .28/A 33/A 00 1 .00 20.NewportGe nter &Santa Barbara .1 WA I .221A I .131A I 221A 1 .00 1 .00 Level of service ranges: .00- .60 A .61- .70 B .71- .80 C .81-.90 D .91 - 1.00 E Above 1.00 F Source., Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (May 2012). Cumulative Conditions Analysis The previously - presented one percent analysis without cumulative volumes represents the worst -case one percent analysis since the addition of cumulative traffic to the background volumes increases the chances of a project passing the one percent analysis. If an intersection passes the one percent analysis prior to the addition of cumulative traffic, then the intersection will pass the one percent analysis with the addition of cumulative traffic and no further analysis is required at that location. The results of the ICU analysis for cumulative conditions are summarized in Table 17, Cumulative ICU Summary. As indicated in Table 17, all study area intersections would operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact to study area intersections, and no mitigation would be required. General Plan Analysis The proposed Project's consistency with the General Plan also was evaluated. San Joaquin Plaza is currently allocated up to 430 multi - family units by the General Plan and NNCPC Development Plan. The General Plan also allows a total of 79 un -built hotel rooms to General Plan Anomaly 43, and allows 15 multi - family units within the portions of Newport Center that are designated for MU -H3 land uses. As discussed in Section 2.0, the proposed Project would result in the conversion of the 79 un -built hotel rooms from "hotel rooms" to "multi- family residential units" and the transfer of the converted units to the San Joaquin Plaza. In addition, the proposed Project would assign 15 un -built multi - family residential units to the San Joaquin Plaza. The peak hour and daily trips generated by 79 multi - family dwelling units would not be greater than the trips generated by 79 hotel rooms.as " Stantec Consulting Services, 2012. San Joaquin Plaza Trip Generation. May 16, 2012. Available for review at the City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -76 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Table 17 Cumulative ICU Summary ... 1. Jamboree & Ford/Eastbluff .820 .70 /B Existing + Approved .82/D +Growth -.- .7016 .00 .00 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills -6816 .83/D M/B .83/D .00 .00 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara .50/A .6318 .51/A .6316 .01 .00 4. Jamboree & Coast HwV .66 /B .83 /D .67/B .831D .01 .00 5. Newport Center & Coast H .42/A .531A .42/A .53/A .00 .00 6. Avocado & Coast Hwy .56/A .59/A .56 /A .59/A .00 .00 7. MacArthur & Ford/Bonita Canyon .781C .89 1D .78/C .89/D .00 .00 8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills .71/C .89/D .711C .89/D .00 .00 9. MacArthur& San Miguel .60 /A .50 /A .60 /A 50 /A .00 .00 10. MacArthur & Coast H .78/C 75/C .78/C 75/C .00 .00 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills .29/A .381A .30 /A .39/A .01 .01 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente .15/A .26/A .15 /A .26/A 00 .00 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center AM .321A .16 /A .32% .00 .00 14. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills .35/A .541A .35/A .541A .00 .00 15. Newport Center & Santa Rosa .16/A .401A .16 /A .40/A .00 .00 16. Newport Center & San Miguel 16/A .351A .16 /A .35/A .00 .00 17. Avocado & San Miguel 34/A 55/A 34/A 55lA .00 .00 18. Newport Center & Newport Center .19 /A .38/A 19 /A 39/A .00 .01 19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente I .281A I .33/A .28/A I .33/A 1 .00 .00 20. Newport Center & Santa Barbara I .131A I .231A .13 /A I .23/A 1 .00 .00 Level of service ranges: DO- .60 A .61- .70 B .71- .80 C .81- .90 D .91 -1.00 E Above 1.00 F Source: Stontec Consulting Services, Inc. (May 2012). Traffic- related impacts associated with buildout of the General Plan were evaluated in the General Plan EIR, which concluded that, with the improvements identified in the General Plan Circulation Element, and without consideration of regional growth, buildout of the General Plan would result in a less than significant impact associated with the projected increase in the number of vehicle trips, volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections compared to existing conditions B6 Because the proposed Project would generate less traffic than was assumed in the General Plan EIR, Project traffic under General Plan buildout conditions would not result in any new significant effects, nor would it substantially increase the severity of any significant effects. Conclusion As demonstrated in the above analysis, the proposed Project would not result in any direct or cumulatively significant impacts to study area intersections. In addition, implementation of the proposed Project would result in an increase in the amount of average daily traffic generated within the Newport Center, thereby demonstrating that the proposed Project would be consistent with the assumptions used in the General Plan EIR's analysis of impacts to traffic, which were determined to be less than significant with implementation of the improvements identified in the Circulation Element. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. " General Plan EIR, Page 4.13 -32. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -77 ME M❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) serves as the congestion management agency for Orange County. The OCTA publishes and regularly updates a Congestion Management Program (CMP) for Orange County, which identifies level of service standards and designates regionally significant intersections, highways, and freeways. The CMP requires that all CMP highway system facilities must maintain a LOS grade of "E" or better.87 Accordingly, a project would have a significant adverse effect on the level of service standards established by the CMP if it would cause or contribute to a LOS below LOS E at any CMP- designated intersection. The 2011 CMP identifies the following facilities within the City of Newport Beach as part of the CMP highway system:88 I. Coast Highway (SR -1) throughout the City 2. MacArthur Blvd from Coast Highway to Jamboree 3. Newport Boulevard (SR -55) from north City limit to Coast Highway 4. Jamboree from northern City boundary to MacArthur Boulevard As indicated previously on Figure 4, portions of all of these CMP facilities occur within the study area for the proposed Project's traffic impact analysis, with exception of Newport Boulevard. As indicated previously in Table 15, the proposed Project contributes less than I% of projected 2016 peak hour volumes to all intersections along Coast Highway, with exception of the intersection of Newport Center Drive and Coast Highway. As indicated in Table 17, this intersection would operate at an LOS A during all study scenarios; therefore, Project traffic would not result in or contribute to the exceedance of a CMP level of service standard for Coast Highway. As indicated previously in Table 15, the proposed Project contributes less than I% of projected 2016 peak hour volumes to all intersections along MacArthur Boulevard, with exception of the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills. As indicated in Table 17, this intersection would operate at an LOS D or better during all study scenarios; therefore, Project traffic would not result in or contribute to the exceedance of a CMP level of service standard for MacArthur Boulevard. As indicated previously in Table 15, the proposed Project contributes less than I% of projected 2016 peak hour volumes to the intersections of Jamboree Boulevard at both Coast Highway and Ford /Eastbluff, but contributes more than 1% to the intersections with San Joaquin Hills and Santa Barbara. As indicated in Table 17, the intersection of Jamboree at San Joaquin Hills would operate at LOS D or better during all study scenarios, while the intersection of jamboree at Santa Barbara would operate at LOS B or better during all study scenarios; therefore, Project traffic would not result in or contribute to the exceedance of a CMP level of service standard for MacArthur Boulevard. Impacts to CMP facilities associated with buildout of the General Plan were evaluated in the General Plan EIR, which concluded that such impacts would be less than significant since all such facilities would " Orange County Transportation Authority (2011). 2011 Orange County Congestion Management Program, Page S. Available on -line at http: / /www.octa.nettpdf /201 I- CMP.pdf. Accessed May 18, 2012. ' Ibid, Figure 2 (201 1 Congestion Management Program Highway System). NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -78 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 operate at LOS E or better.89 Because the proposed Project would not cause any new impacts to CMP facilities, and because the General Plan EIR concluded that buildout of the General Plan also would not impact any CMP facilities, the proposed Project would not exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in locations that results in substantial safety risks As indicated under the discussion and analysis of the AELUP for the JWA in Section 4.3.8, the proposed Project would have no potential to penetrate the FAA FAR Part 77 Obstruction Imaginary Surface. If future buildings proposed in San Joaquin Plaza protrude into the FAA FAR Part 77 notification surface, then notification to the FAA would be required; however, this would not result in a significant impact to air traffic patterns since the buildings would be well below the Part 77 Obstruction Imaginary Surface. There are no other components of the proposed Project that would have the potential to affect air traffic patterns in a manner that would result in substantial safety risks; accordingly, a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g, sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g, farm equipment) Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in or require any design features that could pose a significant hazard to the public. The proposed Project site is currently surrounded by fully improved roadways, and would not require any improvements or expansions to the existing roadway network. Future access points serving on -site multi - family residential units would be subject to review by the City's Transportation and Development Services Division for compliance with Municipal Code standards related to intersection safety and traffic control. Accordingly, the proposed Project would have no potential to substantially increase any hazards due to a design feature, such as sharp curves or dangerous intersections. The proposed Project would consist of increasing the allowable residential development intensity in Newport Center, which is a mixed -use development that includes commercial, office, public facilities, and residential uses under existing conditions. The potential future addition of new multi - family residential units would not represent an incompatible use that could increase safety hazards in the area. Accordingly, safety impacts would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result in inadequate emergency access The proposed Project would not result in any changes to existing access routes providing emergency services to the Project site or surrounding area. Future applications for development within the San Joaquin Plaza in accordance with the amended NNCPC Development Plan would be subject to review by the NBFD for compliance with Municipal Code Chapter 9.04 (Fire Code), thereby ensuring that 89 General Plan EIR, Page 4.13 -42. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -79 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 future development provides for adequate emergency access routes. Accordingly, a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result in inadequate parking capacity Future plans for development within the San Joaquin Plaza pursuant to the proposed Project would be subject to the parking requirements of the NNCPC, which establishes requirements for off - street parking spaces associated with new development. All future development plans would be required to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the NNCPC. Accordingly, a significant impact related to inadequate parking capacity would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g, bus turnouts, bicycle racks) The General Plan incorporates a number of policies related to alternative transportation modes, transportation systems management, and transportation demand management, including the following policies that are applicable to the proposed Project: Policy CE 4.1.4 (Land Use Densities Supporting Public Transit); Policies CE 5. 1.1 through CE 5.1.12 (Trail System, Pedestrian Connectivity, Pedestrian Improvements in New Development Projects, Linkages to Citywide Trail System and Neighborhoods, Bikeway System, Bicycle Supporting Facilities, Bicycle Safety, Bicycle Conflicts with Vehicles and Pedestrians, Integrated Bicycle Improvements, Bicycle Trail Signage, School Access, Pedestrian Street Crossings); Policy CE 5.1.16 (Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety); Policy CE 6. 1.1 (Traffic Signals); and Policies CE 6.2.1 through CE 6.2.3 (Alternative Transportation Modes, Support Facilities for Alternative Modes, Project Site Design Supporting Alternative Modes). The proposed Project consists of a proposal to assign 15 previously un -built multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza, and to convert 79 previously un- built hotel units to residential units which would be transferred to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. As such, although the Project would not conflict with any of these policies, a review for consistency with alternative transportation policies would be conducted by the City in association with precise development plans (e.g., site plans, building permits, etc.), if and when a specific development proposal for residential use in San Joaquin Plaza is submitted to the City Newport Beach for review and consideration. The only policy listed above that is directly applicable to the currently proposed Project is Policy CE 4.1.4, which encourages the provision of residential densities that support public transit. The proposed Project would result in an increase in the residential density allowed within the San Joaquin Plaza, and would thereby be consistent with Policy CE 4.1.4. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not conflict with any adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation, and a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -80 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project would be consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that traffic impacts related to intersections, Congestion Management Plan arterials, air traffic patterns, design hazards, emergency access, and parking would be less than significant with mitigation. No feasible mitigation has been identified in the General Plan EIR to reduce impacts to freeway mainlines and ramps; this impact remains significant and unavoidable. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to transportation and traffic. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to transportation and traffic, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.16 Utilities and Service Systems The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on [utilities and services systems] if it would result in any of the following. • Require or result in the construction and/or expansion of water supply facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts • Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed • Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board • Require or result in the construction /expansion of wastewater treatment facilities or recycled water conveyance systems that could cause significant environmental effects • Be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs • Fail to comply with applicable Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste • Require or result in the construction of new energy production and /or transmission facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects • Require or result in the construction of new natural gas production or transmission facilities, the construction of which could cause a significant environmental impact" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Utility and service system impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -81 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Summary Analysis Require or result in the construction and /or expansion of water supply facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed The water demand for development in the City of Newport Beach, including development within Newport Center and the NNCPC, is included in the water demand forecasts for the City as identified in the City's 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) and within the planning documents of water districts, authorities, and agencies that directly or indirectly supply and /or manage the City's water supplies, including the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan), the Municipal Water District of Orange County ( MWDOC), and the Orange County Water District (OCWD). As such, water demand and supply evaluations conducted by Metropolitan, MWDOC, OCWD, as well as the City of Newport Beach itself are directly applicable to the proposed Project. The General Plan EIR relied on water management plans in effect at the time the General Plan EIR was certified (2006), but because updated information is now available in the form of revised Urban Water Management Plans, that updated information is used as the basis of analysis in this EIR Addendum. A Water Supply Assessment was prepared for the proposed Project, which is included as Appendix E. The Assessment determined that increasing the permitted residential development intensity in San Joaquin Plaza would result in an increased water demand of 24.02 acre -feet per year (AFY), which is less than one -tenth of one percent of the City's projected year 2035 total demand of 17,474 AFY (refer to Technical Appendix E for a detailed discussion of the increased water demand that would result from Project implementation). Based on the information contained in the Water Supply Assessment regarding the existing and future availability and reliability of imported water supplies as surmised from the Urban Water Management Plans of Metropolitan (2010), MWDOC (201 1) and the City of Newport Beach (2010), and the OCWD Groundwater Management Plan (2009), there is an availability of sufficient supplies from imported water, local groundwater, and recycled water to service the proposed Project and other existing and projected development in the City of Newport Beach in normal year, single dry year and multiple dry year conditions. Additionally, there has been a trend of per capita water use reduction since 2005 and that trend is expected to continue to reach the City's water usage reduction goal of 202.8 GPCD by year 2020. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not conflict with any adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation, and a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board Require or result in the construction /expansion of wastewater treatment facilities or recycled water conveyance systems that could cause significant environmental effects Wastewater Treatment Facilities The Project Applicant's engineering consultant, RBF Consulting, conducted an analysis of existing localized sewer facilities that would serve the proposed Project site with implementation of the proposed Project. A copy of this analysis is provided as Technical Appendix F. The results of this analysis conclude that the addition of 94 residential units to the San Joaquin Plaza would equate to approximately 15 percent of the most constrained pipe segment capacity within the existing sewer system proximate to the proposed Project. Since the subject segment of the sewer system serves only NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -82 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 the subject site and the existing Orange County Museum of Art, RBF Consulting concludes that there is adequate capacity within the most capacity constrained portion of the existing sewer system in the vicinity of the Project to serve the additional units. Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not require or result in the construction or expansion of any localized sewer conveyance infrastructure, and a significant environmental effect would not occur. Wastewater generated by the proposed Project would be conveyed via the City of Newport Beach's existing collection system, and would be conveyed via existing pump stations to the OCSD's Plant No. 2 for treatment. Using the wastewater generation rates provided in General Plan EIR Table 4.14 -12 for multi - family residential uses, the 79 additional multi - family residential units that would be permitted within the NNCPC (beyond those already assumed by the General Plan EIR) would generate approximately 16,827 gallons of wastewater per day. The 79 hotel units that would no longer be constructed (but that were assumed in the General Plan EIR) would generate 11,850 gallons per day. Therefore, with implementation of the proposed Project, total wastewater generated within the City of Newport Beach's wastewater service area would increase by 4,977 gallons per day as compared to what was assumed in the General Plan EIR. Treatment Plant No. 2 maintains a design capacity of 276 million gallons per day (mgd), and treated an average flow of 153 mgd as of 2003 (55% of total design capacity) 90 As concluded in the General Plan EIR, if "...the entire City's sewage were directed to Treatment Plant No. 2, its average flow would increase to approximately 157 mgd, an increase of 2.8 percent, and the plant would operate at 57 percent of its design capacity. "91 With an additional increase of 4,977 gallons per day (or 0.005 mgd), Treatment Plant No. 2 would continue to operate at approximately 57 percent of its design capacity. Accordingly, and similar to the conclusion reached in the General Plan EIR, because the increase in wastewater generation that would result from implementation of the proposed Project can be accommodated within the existing treatment infrastructure, expansion would not be required. As such, the proposed Project would not require or result in the construction /expansion of wastewater treatment that could cause significant environmental effects. Wastewater that would be treated by the OCSD would be required to be treated in accordance with federal, state, and regional requirements for water quality prior to being discharged into the Pacific Ocean. The incremental increase in wastewater generated by the proposed Project would not inhibit the ability of the OCSD to achieve required water quality objectives. Accordingly, a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts related to wastewater treatment or facilities, or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact related to wastewater facilities, as compared to what was previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Recycled Water Conveyance Systems The proposed Project site consists of a fully developed site that contains ornamental landscaping. With implementation of the proposed Project, the amount of area devoted to ornamental landscaping would not change substantially from existing conditions. Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in a substantial increase in the demand for recycled water, nor would it require the construction of any new recycled water conveyance systems. Furthermore, and as concluded in the General Plan EIR, if "...expansion or creation of new recycled water infrastructure is necessary, further w Ibid, Page 4.14 -23. 91 Ibid, Page 4.14 -32. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -83 ME M❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 environmental review would be required when specific details are known regarding the infrastructure."92 Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not require or result in the construction /expansion of recycled water conveyance systems that could cause significant environmental effects. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts related to recycled water conveyance infrastructure, or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact related to recycled water conveyance infrastructure, as compared to what was previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs Fail to comply with applicable Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste Based on the solid waste generation rates presented in General Plan EIR Table 4.14 -14 for multi - family residential uses (MFR), the 79 additional units that would be transferred to the San Joaquin Plaza as part of the proposed Project would result in the generation of approximately 506.39 pounds per day of solid waste. The 79 hotel units that would no longer be constructed (but that were assumed in the General Plan EIR) would generate approximately 197.5 pounds per day of solid waste. Therefore, with implementation of the proposed Project, the total amount of solid waste generated within the City of Newport Beach would increase by 308.89 pounds per day as compared to what was assumed in the General Plan EIR. The analysis contained in the General Plan EIR concluded that buildout under the General Plan would result in a future generation of 21,659.10 tons of solid waste per year, while the remaining capacity of the Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill (prior to the proposed expansion) was 44.6 million tons. Furthermore, the solid waste generation rates presented in General Plan EIR do not take into consideration Assembly Bill (AB) 939 mandates to divert a minimum of 50% of solid waste from Iandfil Is.93 The projected increase of 308.89 pounds per day associated with the proposed Project, which would represent 0.26% of the City's total daily solid waste generation, would not exceed the planned capacity of any regional landfill facilities on a direct or cumulative basis. Accordingly, a significant direct impact to permitted landfill capacity would not occur with implementation of the proposed Project. However, buildout under the General Plan, when considered in the context of cumulative development within the region, would incrementally contribute to the ultimate need for new or expanded landfills, which the General Plan EIR identifies as a significant and unavoidable impact. Consistent with the finding of the General Plan EIR, the proposed Project would contribute to this significant and unavoidable impact. However, the increase in solid waste attributable to the proposed Project would not represent a substantial increase in the severity of the City's unavoidable cumulative impact to solid waste, considering the annual increase in solid waste attributable to the proposed Project would represent only 0.00013% of the remaining capacity at the Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill. Public Resources Code §40000 et seq. requires that local jurisdictions divert at least 50 percent of all solid waste generated. The City of Newport Beach consistently meets the objective of Public Resources Code §40000 et seq 94 In addition, the proposed Project would be subject to the City's Recycling Service Fee pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 2.30, which is intended to assist the City in meeting 92 Ibid, Page 4.14 -33 9' Ibid, Page 4.14 -44 94 Ibid. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -84 ME M❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 the 50 percent diversion objective. Commercial waste haulers within the City are subject to Municipal Code Section 12.63.120 (Recycling Requirement), which states, "No person providing commercial solid waste handling services or conducting a solid waste enterprise shall deposit fifty (50) percent or more of the solid waste collected by the person in the City at any landfill." Furthermore, the proposed Project would be required to comply with Municipal Code Section 20.30.120 (Solid Waste and Recyclable Materials Storage), which mandates that all multi -unit projects with five or more dwelling units ..provide enclosed refuse and recyclable material storage areas with solid roofs." Accordingly, the proposed Project would be fully compliant with all applicable Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste, and significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Require or result in the construction of new energy production and /or transmission facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects As indicated previously, implementation of the proposed Project would result in a net increase of 79 multi - family residential dwelling units and a net decrease of 79 hotel units within the City, indicating that the proposed Project would result in only a slight incremental increase in the amount of electricity consumed within the City. As indicated in the General Plan EIR, all land uses within the City would be subject to compliance with Title 24 energy efficiency standards. Development within the City also would be subject to General Plan Goal NR 24.1, which requires increased efficiency in private developments. Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, mandatory compliance with current Title 24 energy efficiency standards and adherence to General Plan Goal NR 24.1 would ensure that no impacts related to electricity supply occur with implementation of the proposed Project. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Would the project require or result in the construction of new natural gas production or transmission facilities, the construction of which could cause a significant environmental impact As noted in the General Plan EIR, the Southern California Gas Company (SCGC): "...declares itself a "reactive" utility and will provide natural gas as customers request its services. SCGC has also indicated that an adequate supply of natural gas is currently available to serve additional development, and that the natural gas level of service provided to the City would not be impaired by buildout under the proposed General Plan Update. Any expansion of service necessitated by implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would be in accordance with SCGC's policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission at the time contractual agreements are made. "95 Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not exceed available or planned supplies of natural gas, and new or upgraded natural gas infrastructure would not be needed to serve the proposed Project. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. 9s Ibid, Page 4.14 -50. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -85 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that all utility and service system impacts can be mitigated to a level of, less than significant with the exception of cumulative impacts to landfill capacity; this impact remains significant and unavoidable. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to utilities and service systems. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to utilities and service systems, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -86 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 5.0 References Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County (2008). Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport. April 17, 2008. (Available on -line at: http: / /www.ocair.com/ commissions /aluc/ docs /[WA_AELUP- April- 17- 2008.pddf. Accessed May 17, 2012). Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County (2007). City of Newport Beach: Request for Consideration of Proposed Planned Community Zoning Amendment. November 15, 2007. (Available for review at City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663). California Department of Conservation, 2012. Orange County Important Farmland 2010. (Available on- line at: ftl2: / /ftp.consrv.ca.2ov /pub /dlrp /FMMP /pdf /2010 /ora I O.pddf. Accessed May 10, 2012.) Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development Y. City of Chula Vista, 197 Cal. App. 4th 327 (2011). Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development v. City of San Diego, 196 Cal. App. 4th 515 (2011).. EIP Associates (2006). City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Draft Environmental Impact Report ( "General Plan EIR "). April 21, 2006. (Available on -line at: htto:// www .newportbeachca.gov /index.aspx ?page =196. Accessed June 6, 2012). Federal Emergency Management Agency (2009). FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) No. 06059CO382J. December 3, 2009. (Available on -line at www.fema.gov. Accessed May 16, 2012). Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. (2011). City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. May 2011. (Available on -line at: http://www.newportbeachca.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid= 10 182. Accessed June 5, 2012). National Climate Program Act. IS U.S.C. § 2901 (2000). Newport Beach, City of (2012). Newport Beach Municipal Code. As amended through April 10, 2012. (Available for review online at: htto:// www. codepublishing .com /CA/NewportBeach /. Accessed June 4, 2012). Newport Beach, City of (2011). North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan (and Desigr, Regulations). As amended on May 24, 2011. (Available on -line for review at: htto:// www. newportbeachca. gov/ PLN /MAP_DOCUMENTS /PC_TEXT /PC_56 North Newport Center.pdf. Accessed June 5, 2012). Newport Beach, City of (2007). Addendum to the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Final Program Environmental Impact Report. November 2007. (Available for review at: City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663). NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5 -1 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? Addendum No. 2 Newport Beach, City of (2006). City of Newport Beach General Plan ( "General Plan'). Adopted July 25, 2006. (Available on -line at: http: / /www. newportbeachca .gov /index.aspx ?pave =173. Accessed June 5, 2012). Newport Beach Fire Department (2011). City of Newport Beach Emergency Management Plan. (Available On -line at: http: / /www. newportbeachca. gov / Modules /ShowDocument.aspx ?documentid= 11179. Accessed June 5, 2012). Orange County Transportation Authority (2011). 2011 Orange County Congestion Management Program. (Available on -line at http: / /www.octa.netlpdf /201 I- CMP.pd Accessed May 18, 2012). RBF Consulting (2012). North Newport Center Assessment of Sewer Capacity Availability Relative to Increased Allocation of Residential Development. May 10, 2012. (Technical Appendix F). Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (2012a). North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis. May 16, 2012. (Technical Appendix D). Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (2012b). San Joaquin Plaza — Trip Generation Comparison. May 16, 2012. (Available for review at: City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663). T &B Planning, Inc. (2012). Water Supply Assessment - North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions. May 17, 2012. (Technical Appendix E). Urban Crossroads, Inc. (2012a). North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis. May 29, 2012. (Technical Appendix A). Urban Crossroads, Inc. (2012b). North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis. May 29, 2012. (Technical Appendix B). Urban Crossroads, Inc. (2012c). North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis. May 29, 2012. (Technical Appendix C). NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5 -2 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No 2 6.0 Persons Contributing to Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Preparation 6.1 Persons Contributing to Initial Study /Addendum Preparation City of Newport Beach (Lead Agency) James W. Campbell, Principal Planner, Community Development Department Planning Division Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner, Community Development Department Planning Division T &B Planning. Inc. (Primary CEQA Consultant and Water Supply Assessment Preparer) Tracy Zinn, AICP, Principal Jeramey Harding, AICP, Project Manager Urban Crossroads. Inc. (Air Ouality. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. and Noise Technical Consultant) Haseeb Qureshi, Senior Associate (Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Consultant) Bill Lawson, Principal (Noise Technical Consultant) Stantec Consulting Services. Inc. (Traffic Engineering Consultant) Joe Foust, PE, Principal Cathy Lawrence, PE, Transportation Engineer RBF Consulting (Sewer Capacity Assessment) John Nagle, PE, Senior Associate /Senior Engineer 6.2 Resumes for Key Personnel Resumes for the technical consultants responsible for preparing the Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 and /or its associated technical studies are provided on the following pages. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 6 -1 ' I I TmcY ZINN, AICP lI J PRINCIPAL P IAN NING Phone: (714) 397 -4224 E -Mail: tzinn(oDtbplanning.com Tracy Zinn, AICP, joined T &B Planning in 1993 and became a Principal in 2006. She is responsible for providing quality control for a majority of the company's environmental documents, as well as preparing and managing specific plans, design guidelines, zoning ordinances, and other planning documents. Summary of Experience Proiect Management & Public Meeting Facilitation: Tracy takes a strong leadership role in project team meetings, represents clients at public hearings and workshops, manages coordination efforts among public agencies, and directs a staff of analysts, planners, and technical support personnel. Tracy is often looked to by T &B Planning's staff and clients, as well as government officials, to provide overall project management and bring focus to the task at hand. Tracy also is highly experienced with leading large project teams and facilitating public meetings. She is respected for keeping projects within budget and on schedule. Environmental Compliance Documents: Tracy prepares, edits, and directs the preparation of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents and supporting technical studies. Over her career, Tracy has prepared over 100 CEQA documents and has directed the preparation of several hundred technical studies for a wide range of project types, including residential, commercial, and industrial land uses, for both public and private clients. She is respected for preparing environmental documents that are easily understood, accurate, and legally defensible. Master Planning /Historic Preservation PlanninVermitting: Tracy's working knowledge of local and regional planning issues, design standards, zoning laws, and public policies are invaluable. She has processed hundreds of land use permits and prepared dozens of Specific Plans and zoning ordinances in Southern California, in addition to design guidelines and development standards for a variety of project types. She has also prepared several historic preservation action plans, and roadway corridor plans. Due to her experience in both planning and environmental projects, Tracy can critique a project's feasibility comprehensively, saving her clients' time and money. Design Guides: Tracy is skilled in assisting communities with managing their eco- tourism and geo- tourism assets. She has directed the preparation of several regional and local Design Guides in established communities as well as Design Guides for Specific Plans and Master Plans for new construction in Southern California. In 2008, she was recognized by the Pennsylvania Chapter of the American Planning Association for her authorship of The Pennsylvania Wilds Design Guide for Community Character Stewardship. The Urban Land Institute endorsed the Design Guide as "one of the best and most comprehensive regional design guides" and the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR) has identified the Design Guide as a model for other regional initiatives. Certifications American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) Affiliations American Planning Association • Green Building Alliance • Indiana University of Pennsylvania Planning Department Accreditation Committee • Municipality of Murrysville Zoning Hearing Board • California Association of Environmental Professionals Education Bachelor of Science — Urban and Regional Planning, Indiana University of Pennsylvania ' I I JERAMEY HARDING, AICP lr I J SENIOR PROJECT MANAGER PLANNING Phone: (760) 452 -2300 E -Mail: ihardingptbplanning.com Jeramey joined T &B Planning in 2002 and provides supervision, oversight, and management of the firm's environmental services in Southern California. He is primarily focused on ensuring project compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Serving as a Senior Project Manager, Jeramey is responsible for managing the production and review of technical studies and leading project teams in the preparation of all forms of CEQA documentation. Jeramey is a results- oriented manager with a record of successful team coordination and leadership. His problem - solving skills and technical accuracy often exceed the expectations of clients, agencies, and project applicants. Summary of Experience Project Management: Jeramey effectively and efficiently manages project teams during the preparation of CEQA documents. He represents clients at public hearings and workshops and manages coordination efforts among public agencies. Jeramey is also experienced with reviewing technical reports for adequacy pursuant to local and state requirements and directs teams of technical experts to ensure projects are completed on -time and on- budget. Environmental Compliance Documents: Jeramey prepares and edits CEQA documents, including Initial Studies /Environmental Assessments (IS /ES), EIRs, Mitigated Negative Declarations (MNDs), Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Programs (MMRPs), CEQA legal notices, and other environmental documents for residential, commercial, industrial, mixed -use, and public facility projects for both public and private clients. Recent CEQA documents managed by Jeramey include the San Lorenzo Sewer Lift Station EIR in the City of Santa Ana, the Batiquitos Bluffs Residential Project EIR in the City of Encinitas, and the El Sobrante Landfill Expansion Supplemental EIR in the Temescal area of Riverside County. The knowledge and talent that Jeramey brings to each project results in an effective and efficient process and an environmental compliance document that is accurate and defensible. Visual Quality and Lighting Analysis: Jeramey has prepared several visual quality analyses for projects throughout Southern California. These analyses are often utilized in CEQA documents, such as EIRs, to analyze a proposed project's potential impacts to aesthetics, dark skies, and community character. This analysis addresses topics such as visual quality from surrounding public roadways and lighting issues. Planning /Entitlement Documentation: In addition to environmental compliance documentation, Jeramey prepares planning reports and processes entitlement permits for new construction. Most often, this work is performed in combination with CEQA compliance documents for the same project. He has prepared Change of Zone, Specific Plan, and General Plan Amendment applications; Specific Plans; Zoning Ordinances; and public notices. Certifications American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) Affiliations California Association of Environmental Professionals (AEP) American Planning Association (APA) Building Industry Association (BIA) Education Masters in Urban Regional Planning - Eastern Washington University, 2001 Bachelor of Science in Natural Resources Planning - Natural Resources Planning /Humboldt State University, 1999 Hasel Qureshi, MES URBAN Senior Associate/ Senior Air Quality & 41 Corporate Park, Suite 300 Climate Change Specialist Irvine, CA 92606 ph: (949) 660.1994 Since joining Urban Crossroads in June 2004, Mr. Qureshi has worked on a Areas of Expertise variety of projects, including mobile source (cancer) health risk assessments, Air Quality Analysis/Permitfing air quality impact analyses, and air quality conformity analyses for Dispersion Modeling, Health transportation improvement projects. Risk Assessment Air Quality Conformity Since 2006, Mr. Qureshi has been actively involved in responding to various Analysis for Interchange project's needs to address Global Climate Change in their CEQA Documents. Projects Mr. Qureshi co- authored an informational newsletter detailing the passage of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assembly Bill 32 (AB32) and how it will continue to impact development Evaluation/Inventory projects. Climate Action Planning Mr. Qureshi has a strong technical background in utilizing various air - quality Education models such as the Urban Emissions Model (URBEMIS), the California Line M.S./ECental ScienceIe /CSOFSUF Source Dispersion Model (CALINE -4), U.S. EPA - approved CAL3QHC, the Industrial Source Short Term (ISCST3) Model, and the AMS /EPA Regulatory Design UCIrvitalAnalysis& Model (AERMOD). Design / UC Irvine Affiliations At Urban Crossroads, Inc., Mr. Qureshi has participated in hundreds of air American Planning quality analyses studies including numerous mobile source and air toxics Association (APA) health risk assessments for various residential, commercial, and industrial Association of Environmental developments in Orange, Imperial, Kern, Los Angeles, Riverside, San Professionals(AEF) Bernardino, and San Diego Counties. He is a current member of the Air& Waste Management American Planning Association (APA), Association of Environmental Association(A &WMA) Professionals (AEP), and the Air & Waste Management Association Prof. Accomplishments (A &WMA). San Diego County Approved Consultant List —Air Quality In addition, Mr. Qureshi is an active participant of the South Coast Air Quality Certification-Air Dispersion Management District, San Diego County, and Orange County Association of Modeling s Environmental Professionals workin g groups that are collaborating to Environmental establish guidance on establishing climate change thresholds for CEQA Certfication- AB2588 documents. Mr. Qureshi was also an active participant in the South Coast Air Regulatory Standards— Trinity Quality Management District's working group on establishing PM2.5 Consultants significance thresholds for CEQA projects. Certificate of Completion - Principles of Ambient Air Monitoring - California Air Resources Board Certificate of Completion - Planned Communities and Urban Infill– Urban Land Institute Prof. History Urban Crossroads. Inc. Sr. Associate /Sr. Air Quality and Climate Change Specialist 2007 – Present Urban Crossroads, Inc. Air Quality and Climate Change Specialist 2004 –2006 Bill Lawson, P.E., AICP, PTP, INCE uRSaN Principal cwossnonos Areas of Expertise Traffic Impact Analyses During his career, Bill Lawson has developed a wide range of expertise that Parking analysis includes transportation planning, traffic engineering, neighborhood traffic Transportation Planning control, and community noise impact analysis. As a founder of Urban Noise Impact Modeling& Crossroads, Inc. he works with public and private sector clients to provide Analysis planning and engineering consulting expertise. His work efforts focus on the GIS larger more complex technical studies or sensitive projects that increasingly Database Development require coordination with the project legal team, the applicant and the Education decision makers. MS 11993/Civil & Environmental Eng. /Cal In his current role, Mr. Lawson serves as the contract City Traffic Engineer for Poly, San Luis Obispo Rancho Santa Margarita providing guidance on complex traffic issues and BS /1992ICity &Regional presenting policy changes to ensure uniform application of the legal authority Planning /Cal Poly, San Luis provided by the municipal code and the California Vehicle Code. Obispo Prof. Registration Mr. Lawson is a Registered Professional Traffic Engineer ( #2537), a member P.E. of the American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP), a certified Professional PTP Transportation Planner and an associate member of the Institute of Noise AICP Control Engineering INCE His educational background includes a Master's INCE 9� 9 ( )• 9 Degree in Civic and Environmental Engineering and a Bachelor's Degree in Affiliations Professional Transportation City and Regional Planning from Cal Poly San Luis Obispo. Planner (PTP) - Institute of Transportation Engineers In addition to his transportation expertise, Mr. Lawson is a Certified (ITE) Acoustical Engineer (INCE) and has worked on hundreds of noise studies American Institute of throughout Southern California for both public and private sector clients. His Certified Planners (AICP) work as a noise consultant focuses on helping communities identify and American Planning control noise impacts by developing meaningful solutions to complex noise Association (APA) issues. Institute of Noise Control Engineering (INCE) Mr. Lawson has served as member of the Rancho Santa Margarita Planning Prof. History Advisory Committee, Cityhood executive committee member, and political Urban Crossroads. Inc. action committee chairperson for Cityhood 2000. He previously served on Principal the Ladera Ranch Maintenance Corporation LARMAC from 2000 through 2002 — Present P ( ) 9 Senior Associate 2006, serves today as President of the Santa Margarita Water District 2000 -2002 (SMWD) Board of Directors and the Ladera Ranch Civic Council (LRCC). RKJK & Associates, Inc. Senior Planner 1996 —2000 Planner 1993 —1996 John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer John Nagle has practiced in the field of civil engineering for over Registration: 20 years, and he has extensive experience in planning, designing, 1991, Civil Engineer, CA, 46972 and providing construction support services for major water and 2001, Civil Engineer, NV, 14762 wastewater facilities. He has been responsible for the preparation of 2009, Civil Engineer, UT, numerous construction plans, specifications and cost estimates for 7214109 -2202 water and sewer pipelines, water pumping stations, wastewater lift 2009, Civil Engineer, AZ, 49684 stations, wells, and reservoirs. He has also prepared master plans Professional Affiliations: for both municipal and private- sector clients for potable water, 2001, State Water - Right sanitary sewer, and recycled water systems. Mr. Nagle has used his Surveyor, NV, 1101 combination of planning and design experience to prepare capital Member, American Water Works improvement programs, condition assessment studies, engineering Years of Experience: 25 feasibility studies, and connection fee and utility rate studies. The Member, American Public Works following summarizes Mr. Nagle's specific project experience: Education: LACCD Sewer System Management Plans (Los Angeles, CA) 2010 - Senior Project Engineer for preparation of the Sewer System Management Plans for the Los Angeles Community Colleges District's nine campuses. The State of California recently added legislation to the General Waste Discharge Requirements requiring all wastewater collection system operators (of collection systems greater than one mile) in the form of sanitary sewer order no. 2006- 0003. The studies included condition assessment using Closed - Circuit Television (CCTV) inspection and hydraulic model analysis using computer simulation techniques to ensure capacity for future campus expansion. The CCTV inspections documented the internal condition of each sewer pipeline televised, and this information was used to develop rehabilitation and replacement WF CONSULTING R�(nmpsnV B.S., 1987, Civil Engineering, Loyola Marymount University RELEVANT EXPERIENCE: M.S., 1996, Civil Engineering, Rio Vista Valve #2 Vault Modifications (Santa Clarita, CA) Loyola Marymount University 2011 - Project Manager. The Rio Vista Valve #2 (RV -2) is a 72- inch diameter butterfly valve, owned and operated by CLWA, Professional Affiliations: located on the primary transmission main. CLWA determined that American Society of Civil after approximately 15 years in service, the valve needed to be Engineers (ASCE) replaced because the valve seat was damaged and the valve did not Member, American Water Works fully seal. CLWA also needed to identify the probable cause of the Association damage to the valve to prevent the damage from reoccurring. RBF Member, American Public Works conducted a detailed analysis of existing conditions and operational Association data, including various site investigations and a detailed system Member, National Society of hydraulic analysis to determine the cause of damage to the valve; Professional Engineers identified and evaluated project alternatives for replacing the 72- Member, Orange County Water inch diameter valve, including different types of valves; and Association recommended facility improvements (e.g. modifications and/or replacement of equipment), as well as operational modifications to ensure that the valve is not damaged again. LACCD Sewer System Management Plans (Los Angeles, CA) 2010 - Senior Project Engineer for preparation of the Sewer System Management Plans for the Los Angeles Community Colleges District's nine campuses. The State of California recently added legislation to the General Waste Discharge Requirements requiring all wastewater collection system operators (of collection systems greater than one mile) in the form of sanitary sewer order no. 2006- 0003. The studies included condition assessment using Closed - Circuit Television (CCTV) inspection and hydraulic model analysis using computer simulation techniques to ensure capacity for future campus expansion. The CCTV inspections documented the internal condition of each sewer pipeline televised, and this information was used to develop rehabilitation and replacement WF CONSULTING R�(nmpsnV John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer plans. Other particulars, such as sewer overflow response plans, legal authority, and chains of communication were also identified to cover the requirements of the order. Southwest District Pipeline Replacement Projects (Gardena, Hawthorne and Inglewood, CA) - Project Manager for Imperial Highway and Prairie Avenue pipelines. As part of the implementation of Golden State Water Company's capital improvement program, GSWC contracted with RBF to provide professional engineering services for their Southwest District Pipeline Replacement Project. The project includes pipeline replacements in four separate areas. Work completed as part of this project included extensive utility research and field investigation to confirm locations of existing service connections and other appurtenances, preparation of final construction drawings, coordination with the Department of Health Services for utility waivers, and coordination with Caltrans for encroachment permits as required for the temporary closure of connector ramps to I -105. Recycled Water System Tank Siting Study (Santa Clarita, CA) - Project Manager. The Castaic Lake Water Agency (CLWA) owns a 5.5 -acre hillside site where they proposed to construct two projects: 3.5 MG of recycled water storage, and a large array of solar panels. With the solar project moving forward first, CLWA contracted with RBF to prepare a siting study so the land required to construct the tanks could be reserved. RBF considered two alternative tank configurations (1 - 3.5 MG tank; and 2 - 1.75 MG tanks), developed preliminary site and grading plans, and prepared preliminary cost estimates. In addition, RBF coordinated a geotechnical field investigation to determine remedial grading and slope setback requirements. Whittier Pumping Plant No. 2 Replacement Project (Pico Rivera, CA) - Project Manager. RBF was contracted to provide engineering, surveying, and construction phase services to the Whittier Utility Authority (WUA) for the replacement of its Pumping Plant No. 2, which provides 100% of the potable water supply to WUA's 48,000 customers. Extensive preliminary engineering studies were completed, including: comprehensive hydraulic analyses of the supply and distribution systems; evaluation of pump station operations and control schemes; life -cycle cost analyses for alternative configurations of pumps, primary power, and backup power; project phasing to ensure the existing facility remains in operations throughout construction; and evaluation of remedial soil treatment alternatives to mitigate potential liquefaction to depths of 30 feet below grade. Final design is underway, and upon completion, the new facility will include: an 18.9 MGD Pumping Station (with 17,500 gpm capacity to enable WUA to pump during off -peak periods); two 2.2 MG reservoirs; a new 6,400 s.f. pump building, including office space for operations personnel. Cook -Riolo Tank and Booster Station (Sacramento County, CA) — QA / QC. This project included design of a 2.75 -MG potable prestressed concrete water storage tank and 3,500 -gpm booster station. Orangethorpe Transmission Main (Anaheim /Placentia, CA) 2009 - Project Manager. RBF is providing professional engineering and surveying services to Golden State Water Company for the design and construction of approximately 6,500 LF of 16" DIP pipeline, in the cities of Placentia and Anaheim. This pipeline will provide a connection between GSWC's Placentia and Yorba Linda Service Areas, and will include three pressure regulating stations. The scope of services includes extensive utility research, topographic survey and right -of -way verification, preparation of PS &E's, and traffic control plans. The project also requires coordination with the Orange County Flood Control District for crossing of the Atwood Channel, and coordination with Orange County Transportation Agency for the future grade separation project at Lakeview Avenue. PF CONSULTING R�(nmpsnV John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer LVVWD C1244 - Frias 2635 Zone Reservoir and 2745 Zone Pumping Station (Clark County, NV) 2007 to Present - Project Manager. RBF is currently contracted to provide engineering, surveying, and construction phase services to Las Vegas Valley Water District for the design of the Frias 2635 Zone Reservoir and 2745 Zone Pumping Station. The major project elements include: a 30 million gallon (MG) buried, reinforced concrete reservoir; a 53 MGD pumping station (expandable to 106 MGD); pumping station building and buried wetwell (forebay) design; yard piping and valves ranging from 42 -inch to 90- inch in diameter; disinfection facilities; associated electrical and instrumentation & control system design; and off -site street improvements on Cactus Avenue. The project required extensive coordination with Clark County, the Bureau of Land Management, the Mountains Edge Master Planned Community, NV Energy, and the Clark County Regional Flood Control District. SNWA 190 -A Horizon Ridge Reservoir Expansion (Henderson, NV) 2003 - 2005 - Project Manager. RBF Consulting provided engineering services to Southern Nevada Water Authority for the expansion of their existing Horizon Ridge Reservoir Facility. The Project included a 10 MG buried, cast -in- place, reinforced concrete reservoir, and associated inlet, outlet, overflow and drain piping. Other project elements include 42 -inch and 60 -inch valves and valve vaults, telemetry system modifications, chlorine sampling and washdown system modifications and piping, and all related electrical and instrumentation & control works. RBF also completed a stray current analysis for the site, which is located next to a NV Energy substation. Northeast Interceptor Gravity Sewer (Las Vegas, NV) 2008 - 2009 — QA / QC Manager. RBF, as a subconsultant, is currently providing preliminary engineering and surveying services to the City of North Las Vegas for the Northeast Interceptor, an influent gravity sewer to the City's Water Reclamation Facility (WRF). The major project elements include extensive research of existing utilities, a Route Study of alignment options from North Las Vegas to the WRF site on Nellis Air Force Base, a hydraulic analysis to determine sewer pipeline size requirements, and an opinion of probable construction costs for each alignment alternative. Aerial topography, surveying, and right -of -way research will be performed for the chosen alignment to produce base maps. The preferred alignment will be further detailed to 30% construction drawings. SNWA 3401 - McCullough Lateral Project (Clark County, NV) 2007 - Deputy Project Manager in charge of reservoirs, cathodic protection, and environmental support. As a subconsultant, RBF provided professional engineering and environmental services for the planning and preliminary design of the McCullough Lateral (MCL) Project in Clark County, Nevada. The MCL Project is a proposed 407 million gallon per day (MGD) water transmission system, which will serve the southerly portion of the Las Vegas Valley. Facilities include a 407 MGD pumping station, a Regulating Reservoir, Rate of Flow Control Stations, and approximately 25 miles of transmission main ranging from 72- inches to 120 - inches in diameter. RBF's responsibilities included planning & predesign of the reservoir facilities and cathodic protection analysis and environmental support services for the entire project. Wigwam / US -95 24 -inch 2120 PZ Main and PRV (Henderson, NV) 2008 - 2009 — QA / QC Manager. RBF Consulting is providing professional engineering and surveying services for the design and construction of 1,700 LF of 24 -inch DIP pipeline and a 10,000 gpm PRV Station, which will supply water to the City's 2007 pressure zone. Project elements include: a cut -in 30- inchx24 -inch Tee at Wigwam Avenue; construction of 24 -inch pipeline beneath a US -95 overpass and across the Pitman Channel to Eastgate Road, while parallel to an active Union Pacific Railroad right -of -way. The construction PF CONSULTING R�(nmpanV John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer documents included alternative designs for the PRV station. Extensive agency coordination was required with UPRR, NDOT, NV Energy, Basic Management Incorporated (BMI), and BMI's industrial tenants. In -State Groundwater Development Project (Clark, Lincoln, White Pine Counties, NV) 2004 - 2005 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional surveying services to the Southern Nevada Water Authority to establish a Geodetic Control Network for the In -State Water Resources Development Project. The project covered an area approximately 250 miles long from Northern Clark County across Lincoln County and extending into White Pine County. The specific project requirements included mobilization of field survey personnel over unfamiliar locations and terrain in order to establish control monuments along the proposed Corridors / Springs by way of GPS Static Surveys. The data was processed, tied and adjusted to the Continuous Operating Reference Station (CORS) monuments. A 17 -page Record -of -Survey was prepared and recorded by RBF to memorialize all of the various components of this extensive ground survey. This Geodetic Control Network is being utilized for the current planning and design phases of the SNWA In -State Groundwater Project. SNWA 340 -C Hacienda Pumping Station On -site Improvements (Clark County, NV) 2005 - 2007 - Project Manager. RBF provided engineering services and construction phase assistance to SNWA for this project. Preliminary and final design services included: an expanded plant telephone system; a new compressed air piping system (with nine 3/a inch service drops located on all three levels of the pumping station); on -site drainage improvements; sub -drain and sump pump installation; grading and soil compaction for a new on -site substation; an 8 -foot high perimeter block wall, and on -site retaining walls; property boundary verification; preparation of 22 legal descriptions and exhibits for wall easements and construction easements; technical support for coordination with I l adjacent property owners and attendance at Town Board and Clark County Planning Commission meetings; and construction phase services. MacDonald Highlands Potable Water Master Plan Update (Henderson, NV) 2008 - 2009 - QA / QC Manager. The Master Plan Update addresses development changes within MacDonald Highlands since the previously prepared Utility Master Plan. MacDonald Highlands is a Master Planned community consisting of multi - family, and single- family development parcels. RBF developed projections for potable water demands and also completed an extensive analysis of the potable water system and water age with in the master plan development. The WaterCAD software was used to model the on -site distribution system. An extended period simulation was performed to evaluate water age concerns. The Canyons Utility Master Plan Update (Henderson, NV) 2006 - Project Manager. RBF prepared a comprehensive potable water and sewer master plan update for this 632 -acre Master Planned community consisting of commercial, multi - family, and single- family development parcels. RBF developed water and wastewater projections for the development and identified the on -site and off -site utility infrastructure requirements for the development. The project included extensive analysis of the City's off -site water and wastewater infrastructure. Hydraulic models were developed for the City's 2630 potable water pressure zone, the Horizon Ridge Parkway Trunk Sewer System, and the Green Valley Parkway Trunk Sewer System. The analyses included research and investigation of undeveloped parcels, development of water and wastewater generation projections, and analysis of multiple development scenarios to determine off -site system capacity constraints. R13F worked with the City of Henderson Department of Utility Services and the Project PF CONSULTING R�(nmpanV John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer Developer to identify the off -site utility upgrades that would most improve the City's ability to serve this development area. LVVWD C1106 - Montessouri 2745 Zone Pumping Station Discharge Pipeline (Clark County, NV) 2005 - 2006 - Project Manager. This project for the Las Vegas Valley Water District included: the design of approximately 4,800 LF of 42 -inch CML &C welded steel pipe; cut -in of a 42 -inch x 42 -inch tee connection at the intersection of Buffalo Drive and Badura Avenue; two 42 -inch diameter in -line valves and valve vaults; a 4,900 glint temporary pressure reducing station located on the property of Sierra Vista High School; and all appurtenant facilities. Additional work included: aerial topographic survey; right -of- way coordination; preparation of legal descriptions and exhibits for 14 pipeline and construction easements; corrosion engineering; and scour analyses at drainage channels crossing the pipeline alignment. LVVWD C1012 - Charleston Heights 2420 Zone Pump Station Discharge Pipeline (Las Vegas, NV) 2002 - 2003 - Project Manager. RBF provided engineering services to Las Vegas Valley Water District for design of approximately 7,000 LF of 20 -inch diameter domestic water main. Services included: preparation of construction drawings, specifications, and cost estimates; coordination with the City of Las Vegas for bore andjack crossing of Decatur Boulevard; scheduling coordination with the Nevada Department of Transportation for a nearby freeway improvement project; and alignment and scheduling coordination to minimize impacts with local businesses, including a regional shopping mall. LVVWD C1198 - Multi -Site Surge Tank Upgrades (Las Vegas, NV) 2007 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional engineering services to evaluate nine putnping stations at five LVVWD sites (Gowan, Underhill, Rice, Ronzone, and Grand Canyon). RBF's Team conducted a pressure surge analysis of each pumping station and provided recommendations for required improvements to convert from manual to automated surge control systems. Included in the scope of services were site visits, review of record and shop drawings to verify the accuracy of existing information, and review and verification of L V V WD's hydraulic model data, which was used in the surge analysis. R -28 Reservoir, P -27 Pumping Station and PRV Stations 123,124, and 125 (Henderson, NV) 2009 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional engineering, surveying, mapping, and construction phase services for the design of a potable water pumping station, reservoir, and associated inlet/outlet transmission main to serve the 2760 and 2630 Pressure Zones within Planning Areas 13 and 20 in MacDonald Highlands, in the City of Henderson. The project elements include: a 600,000- gallon prestressed concrete reservoir; a 24 ft x 50 ft pump building; disinfection facilities; installation of a mechanical mixing system and automated sampling system in the existing R -27 Reservoir; three pressure reducing stations; and 2,600 LF of 16 -inch DIP inlet outlet pipeline; and hillside grading for the reservoir site and access road. LVVWD Pipeline Failure Analysis and Root Cause Training (Las Vegas, NV) 2005 - 2008 - Project Manager. RBF provided consulting services to Las Vegas Valley Water District to develop a Pipeline Failure Root Cause Training Program, and conduct training sessions for the District's Distribution System staff. In addition to developing the training program, other services included: Forensic engineering services on an "as- requested" basis. These services included field investigations of pipeline failures, collection and testing of pipe material and soil samples, preparation of field investigation reports, and the preparation of an annual summary report. INKM- CC NBULTINB Company John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer Conducting a pressure monitoring study on portions of the District's distribution system. The purpose of the study was to investigate whether there is a correlation between cyclical pressure transients and asbestos cement (AC) pipeline failures. Coastal Water Project (Monterey County, CA) 2007 - Project Engineer. Mr. Nagle performed alignment studies and extensive analysis of potential alternative alignments for 24 miles of pipeline in connection with the CWP. The overall project consists of a 10 million- gallon per day Desalination Plant near the Moss Landing Power Plant, conveyance pipelines, Aquifer Storage and Recovery facilities, and related facilities. This $200 million project will include two booster stations, 24 miles of pipelines, and two reservoirs. A significant portion of the 36 -inch diameter conveyance pipeline will be constructed along the former Southern Pacific Railroad alignment that was acquired by the Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC). WS -1 and WS -2 Wellhead Improvements (Apex, NV) 2005 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional civil and electrical engineering services for the equipping of two raw water /fire flow supply wells (WS -1 and WS -2) and Duke Energy facility near Apex, Nevada. This project included an analysis of different alternatives of equipping the wells to meet project objectives, including the use of variable frequency drive motors versus motor operated control valves. The project also includes the design of the pump controls and instrumentation. Ivanpah Airport Utility Planning Study (Primm, NV) 2006 - Project Manager. RBF, as a subconsultant, provided utility planning and right -of -way investigation services to the Clark County Department of Aviation, for the proposed Ivanpah Valley Airport (IVP) near Primm, Nevada. RBF's Water Resources Department identified the IVP infrastructure requirements for potable water supply and transmission, wastewater collection and treatment, recycled water, and jet fuel delivery systems for this site. Planning for the requisite wet utility infrastructure required incorporating data from and basing calculations upon IVP activity projections summarized in the 2004 Conceptual Airport Layout Plan Validation Report. Local agency facility planning projections and recommendations, as well as national existing airport activity, utility and facility capacity requirement research all provided the framework for RBF's design. Comprehensive services were provided for right -of -way research to determine facility easement requirements, capital cost estimates, and development of a facility implementation plan. Extensive communication and coordination efforts were required with local agencies (including the Southern Nevada Water Authority, Las Vegas Valley Water District, Clark County Department of Aviation, Clark County Water Reclamation District, NV Energy, and Kinder Morgan). EM -21 Turnout Facility and 1305 Zone Pipeline Improvements (Temecula, CA) 2006 - 2008 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional engineering and surveying services to the Rancho California Water District for construction of a new 80 cfs turnout facility from San Diego Pipeline No. 6 - a Metropolitan Water District of Southern California facility. As part of the turnout facility design, RBF provided electrical and instrumentation design, structural design, surge analysis, and operational evaluation. The project also included the conversion of 31,000 LF of existing 48" diameter raw water supply pipeline to a potable water transmission main, abandonment of RCWD's existing EM -19 Turnout Facility, design of 6,300 LF of new 48" diameter transmission main in Ynez Road, 1,400 LF of 36" transmission main in Butterfield Stage Road, and 1,500 LF of 24" transmission main in Margarita Road and La Paz Roads. PF CONSULTING N�(nmNnV John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer EM -20 Turnout and Transmission Main (Riverside County, CA) 1999 - Project Engineer. Design engineering services for approximately 20,000 lineal feet of 54 -inch diameter welded steel pipeline and 100 -cfs turnout from MWD aqueduct. The project will supplement its treated imported water supply by bringing an additional 100 -cfs capacity to its service area in southwestern Riverside County. El Segundo Mitigation Monitoring Program (El Segundo, CA) 1995 - 2000 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional consulting services for the City of El Segundo's Mitigation Monitoring Program of the City of Los Angeles' Hyperion Wastewater Treatment Plant to full secondary treatment. During this project, RBF's duties included: 1) Coordinating and moderating a monthly community meeting between Hyperion staff and neighboring residents; 2) Maintaining a 24 -hour "hotline" to receive, document, and respond to complaints related to odor, light, and noise impacts during Hyperion Secondary Treatment Expansion Project; 3) Periodic site visits to monitor mitigation measures implemented at the Hyperion W WTP, including conducting complaint follow -up with Hyperion staff. Sea Launch Home Port Facility - Sewer Rehabilitation (Port of Long Beach, CA) 1998 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional design and construction inspection services to The Austin Company, the designfbuild contractor for the project site owned by the Boeing Company. The project included rehabilitation of the on -site gravity sewer collection system consisting of the following: closed circuit television inspection of sewer pipelines; verification of sewer hydraulic capacity; on -site pipeline rehabilitation using cured -in -place pipe (CIPP) lining system -- 950 linear feet of 6 -inch, 400 linear feet of 8 -inch, 900 linear feet of 12 -inch, 350 linear feet of 15 -inch; replacement of 500 linear feet of sewer 12- inch sewer beneath pier; replacement of ship -to -shore sewer connections; on -site manhole rehabilitation using air - placed concrete and polyurethane lining system; and construction inspection services. EI Dorado Colonia Sanitary Sewer System Improvements (EI Centro, CA) 1998 - 2000 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional engineering services for the conversion of homes in El Dorado Colonia from private septic tank systems to the City's public sewer collection system. The project included the construction of approximately 15,000 LF of 8 -inch sanitary sewer and the extension of sewer laterals to approximately 200 residential parcels. The work for this project included utility research and the preparation of digital base maps by compiling survey data from the County of Imperial. R13F also provided professional surveying services to provide topographic data for areas not covered by the County survey and to verify the County survey data. The project also required extensive coordination with the Imperial Irrigation District and the California Department of Transportation. El Dorado Colonia Potable Water System Improvements (EI Centro, CA) 1997 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional engineering and surveying services under the Corps of Engineers 219 Program. The work for this project included preparation of digital base maps by compiling survey data from the County of Imperial. RBF also provided professional surveying services to provide topographic data for areas not covered by the County survey and to verify the County survey data. The project included the construction of 8 -inch, 10 -inch and 12 -inch potable water distribution system and the installation of water meters, and the extension of service laterals to residential parcels. The project also required extensive coordination with the Imperial Irrigation District and the California Department of Transportation. Arcadia and Sierra Madre Water Infrastructure Restoration Special Study and Final Design (Arcadia and Sierra Madre, CA) 1997 - Project Manager. Final design engineering services (PS &E) for water infrastructure restoration for the cities of Arcadia and Sierra Madre that included the following: 4.3 MG reservoir seismic rehabilitation; 1.2 MG reservoir demolition and reconstruction; new 2000 gpm well; three new 8 -inch pressure reducing stations; a water system inter -tie between cities (incl. 12 -inch pipeline); WF CONSULTING R�GmpanY John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer new 8 -inch pipeline; conversion of a standby engine from natural gas engine to diesel fuel at an existing pumping station; and emergency electrical generator backup power performance specifications for sewer pumping station sites. A seismic vulnerability and earthquake safety evaluation for the entire water delivery system was performed, which included pipelines, valves, pump stations, emergency generators, and reservoirs. Dyer Road Surge Analysis (Santa Ana, CA) 2000 - Project Engineer. The Dyer Road Well Field (DRWF) provides one of the two major sources of supply of potable water to the Irvine Ranch Water District's (IRWD) Zone I Central System. RBF performed a surge analysis for the Dyer Road Well Field and the Zone 1 Central System. The surge analysis modeled three flow scenarios for both year 2000 and year 2025 demands for a total of six different runs, and considered the implementation of future District projects, such was the Deep Aquifer Treatment System (DATS) project. These six runs used pump curve data from IRWD and correlated it with the District's WaterCAD model to determine the flow provided by the well field. The surge analysis showed that surge protection will definitely be required for year 2025 demands with addition of the DATS project. Santa Margarita Water District South County Pipeline (Orange County, CA) - Project Engineer. RBF prepared a detailed analysis of alignment alternatives for the Santa Margarita Water District's South County Pipeline Project. The analysis considered over 30 alternative alignments for a regional water transmission main, and evaluated the environmental, traffic, and institutional impacts to the City of Mission Viejo. Provided overall master planning, environmental documentation, permit processing, and design of this large - diameter pipeline project. RBF prepared plans and specifications, provided construction staking and management for a major portion of this project, including over 13 miles of 66 -inch diameter pipeline, five service connections, five flow facilities, and a regulating reservoir. RBF received the 1990 California Council of Civil Engineers and Land Surveyors Grand Award of Excellence for the outstanding design and coordination efforts on the 100 million dollar construction project. Lake Mead Drive Raw Water Transmission Main (Henderson, NV) 2003 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional engineering, surveying, and mapping services for approximately 4,000 LF of 16 -inch ductile iron pipeline constructed along Lake Mead Drive in Henderson, Nevada. The purpose of the project is to provide additional raw water transmission capacity to the Lake Las Vegas development from the City of Henderson's connection to the BMI pipeline. This project also included the design of metering facilities, pressure relief facilities, and a technical drainage study update for the extension of existing culvert crossings at Lake Mead Drive. In addition, the project required extensive coordination with the City of Henderson and NDOT for construction permitting along Lake Mead Drive. Lake Las Vegas Raw Water System Modifications (Henderson, NV) 2003 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional engineering, surveying, and mapping services for the design of approximately 3,900 LF of 16 -inch and 20 -inch raw water pipelines. The facilities are intended to increase the transmission capacity of the existing raw water delivery system, which provides irrigation and lake fill water to the Lake Las Vegas development. Also included in this project is the relocation of the Southshore R -1 pressure reducing station. RBF is responsible for the design of valving, piping and associated equipment for a new pressure reducing station, as well as the abandonment of the existing facility. Legal descriptions and exhibits for two municipal utility easements were also required for this project. Brooks Avenue Waterline Replacement (North Las Vegas, NV) 2001 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional civil engineering services for the relocation of approximately 1,600 LF of cement mortar -lined CONSULTING N�(nmNnV John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer and coated steel water main. The project required close coordination with City engineering department and operations staff to determine the best method for isolating the portion to be relocated, while maintaining the integrity of the existing connections and protecting an adjacent 36 -inch City transmission pipeline. Preston Waterline Replacement (Ione, CA) 2001 - Project Manager. Design engineering services to the State of California, Project Management Branch for approximately 16,500 LF of 10 -inch pipeline and pressure reducing station. Project responsibilities included coordination with multiple landowners for easements, resolution of conflicting record surveys, and coordination with numerous agencies, including Caltrans, the City of lone, the County of Amador, and the Amador Water Agency. Wastewater Utility Rate Study (El Centro, CA) 1997 - Project Engineer. RBF prepared a 5 -Year Wastewater Utility Rate Study for the City of El Centro. This analysis included a review of the City's operating, administrative, and debt service costs. A final rate program was developed which implemented by the City, thereby enabling the City to proceed with their proposed five year Capital Improvement Program. RBF worked closely with City's engineering and administrative staff in developing the rate study and prepared the final presentation to City Council. Steel Tank Retrofit and Seismic Stability (Irvine, CA) - Project Manager. Analysis and design of seismic retrofit for three of the District's flat - bottom, welded steel tanks ranging from 2.5 mg to 15.0 mg capacity. The tanks include: Zone 1 - 15.0 mg domestic reservoir; Zone 4 - 2.5 mg domestic reservoir; and Zone 8 - 2.5 mg domestic reservoir. The reservoirs were originally constructed between 1983 and 1985. RBF's scope of work included: review of available record information, field verification of existing reservoir elements (such as tank dimensions, shell and floor thicknesses), comparison of original design criteria to current seismic design parameters, geotechnical investigation, preparation of a preliminary design report summarizing seismic retrofit recommendations, and contract documents, including construction drawings and a project manual, for the seismic retrofit of all three tanks. Santa Margarita Water District Master Planning (Orange County, CA) - Project Engineer. Mr. Nagle has prepared numerous Plan Of Works Reports for several communities within the Santa Margarita Water District, including Rancho Santa Margarita, Coto de Caza, Rancho Trabuco, portions of Mission Viejo, and Talega. The Plans of Works included development of water and wastewater planning criteria for both residential and commercial land uses, hydraulic analyses and computer modeling of both water and sewer systems, and development of capital improvement plans and facility financing programs. Santa Margarita Water District ( Talega Development Wastewater Collection and Treatment Alternatives Study) (Orange County, CA) - Project Engineer. This Study evaluated the feasibility of an on -site wastewater treatment and reclamation facility versus the conveyance of wastewater to an off -site regional facility for treatment and disposal. The project included a cost benefit analysis for each alternative. Santa Margarita Water District, Industrial Waste Discharge Permit Review (Orange County, CA) 1987 - 1992 - Project Engineer. RBF provided Industrial Wastewater Engineering services for the Santa Margarita Water District, and developed the Industrial Wastewater Discharges Regulations for the District. RBF reviewed all industrial permit applications for regulatory compliance, evaluated the industrial treatment process, and made recommendations for permit conditions and monitoring. The industrial wastewater treatment permits analyzed by RBF have included laboratory facilities, research and development facilities, manufacturing, and plating, among other industrial applications. PF CONSULTING R�(nmpsnV John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer County of Orange, James Musick Facility Expansion Sewer Capacity Analysis (Orange County, CA) - Project Engineer. This preliminary hydraulic analysis for the County of Orange determined the available capacity in the existing Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) sewage collection system. The analysis included verification of existing IRWD facilities, estimating current and ultimate wastewater generation tributary to the IRWD system, and development of phasing criteria for the Musick Facility expansion. Rancho California Water District Water Facilities Master Plan (Riverside County, CA) - Project Engineer. The Master Plan, for 100,000 -acre service area, included detailed land use and population inventory and projections, development of water use factors, development of a hydraulic model and analysis of the RCWD's 19 different pressure zones. The Master Plan also identified proposed capital improvements and funding requirements. Santa Margarita Water District South County Pipeline (Orange County, CA) - Project Engineer. RBF prepared a detailed analysis of alignment alternatives for the Santa Margarita Water District's South County Pipeline Project. The analysis considered over 30 alternative alignments for a regional water transmission main, and evaluated the environmental, traffic, and institutional impacts to the City of Mission Viejo. Provided overall master planning, environmental documentation, permit processing, and design of this large - diameter pipeline project. RBF prepared plans and specifications, provided construction staking and management for a major portion of this project, including over 13 miles of 66 -inch diameter pipeline, five service connections, five flow facilities, and a regulating reservoir. RBF received the 1990 California Council of Civil Engineers and Land Surveyors Grand Award of Excellence for the outstanding design and coordination efforts on the 100 million dollar construction project. Santa Margarita Water District, Bond Issue Reallocations (Orange County, CA) - Project Engineer. RBF prepared a reallocation report for $360 Million in general obligation bonds for the Santa Margarita Water District. This analysis included verifying actual construction costs for existing water and wastewater facilities and verifying the funding capacity for remaining capital improvement projects. Jack Rabbit Trail Specific Plan (Beaumont, CA) - Project Engineer. Prepared opportunity and constraints study and subsequent master plan for water, wastewater, and reclaimed water facilities required to service the proposed Jack Rabbit Trail Project. The Project consists of approximately 1,500 dwelling units. The preliminary alignments and sizes of all onsite and offsite water, sewer, and reclaimed water facilities were identified in a report for incorporation into the Specific Plan document. Catellus Development - Miarides Development Water and Sewer Master Plan (Chino Hills, CA) - Project Engineer. This study determined the water and sewer facilities required for a remote 300 -unit residential development in the City of Chino Hills. RBF was responsible for identifying not only on -site collection facilities, but off -site needs as well. The investigation resulted in alternative off -site collection scenarios, including up to one - and - one -half miles of sewer; these scenarios were developed from extensive research of record drawings, existing sewers, and discussions with City Staff. City of Douglas Water Master Plan (Douglas, AZ) 1996 - Project Engineer. R13F prepared a Water System Master Plan for the City of Douglas, Arizona. This Master Plan evaluated the existing water supply and distribution systems at the existing and ultimate conditions, identified areas of deficiency, recommended proposed capital improvements, and developed a phased implementation program. W CONSULTING N�. l mOanV John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer Poe Colonia (Imperial County, CA) 1998 - Project Manager. Under the Corps 219 program, RBF prepared an analysis of wastewater collection, treatment and disposal alternatives for the Poe Colonia, a low- income residential community in Imperial County. The Project included an evaluation of onsite treatment methods, such as package plants and stabilization ponds, versus exporting the sewage to the City of Brawley. Specific tasks included wastewater flow projections, preliminary facility layouts, evaluation of regulatory and institutional issues, and preparation of cost estimates. University of California, Irvine Utilities Master Plan (Orange County, CA) - Project Manager. This study entailed extensive research to develop a map of existing UCI onsite water, reclaimed water, and wastewater facilities. RBF was responsible for the computer analysis, using the EPANET software for the existing and proposed water and reclaimed water distribution systems. The Master Plan included a summary report of findings and recommendations. Santa Margarita Water District, Debt Service Allocations (Orange County, CA) 1987 - 1994 - Project Engineer. RBF prepared annual debt service analysis and allocation reports for the Santa Margarita Water District's (SMWD) active general obligation bond issues. The studies identified the capital costs, operation and maintenance costs and developed the corresponding facility charges and rate fees for each of the eight Improvement Districts that comprise SMWD. The charges were based on a detailed assessment of the facilities related to each Improvement District and formulated a prorata capacity, where facilities common to more than one Improvement District are applicable. Rancho California Water District Capital Improvement Program (Riverside County, CA) 1990 - Project Engineer. RBF conducted a comprehensive analysis and prepared a capital improvement program for $350 million in facility requirements. Costs were allocated between developed and undeveloped properties. The study also evaluated capital replacement and allocations between service zone areas. The program determined funding and requirements on a yearly, five -year, and ultimate buildout basis. City of Culver City - Sewer Facilities Charge Program (Culver City, CA) 1998 - Project Manager. RBF prepared a Sewer Facilities Charge Fee Program, which will update the City's existing fees. The study includes a comprehensive review and analysis of the City's wastewater flows, user rates, five -year capital improvement program, operation and maintenance costs, capital improvement and replacement costs, and the City of Los Angeles' pass - through costs for the regional conveyance, treatment, and disposal system. Santa Margarita Water District, Las Flores Trunk Sewers and Zone II Water Mains (Orange County, CA) - Project Engineer. This Project included the preparation of plans, specifications and estimates for the construction of approximately 6,100 linear feet of 10 -inch and 12 -inch trunk sewer and 8,900 linear feet of 16 -inch and 30 -inch water main. The Project included coordination with the California Fish and Game Department and the Orange County Flood Control District for a creek crossing. City of Beverly Hills, Water System Capital Improvement Projects (Beverly Hills, CA) 1993 - 2000 - Project Manager. RBF is currently providing complete design engineering and construction staking services for the City of Beverly Hills Public Works Department's capital improvement program, which includes water transmission main replacements, pressure reducing stations installation, street improvements, and traffic signalization. RBF has coordinated with City staff, local merchants, residents and Caltrans to select pipeline alignments and establish construction schedules which minimize disruption to traffic, local businesses and local residences. CONSULTING R�.n p... John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer Santa Margarita Water District, Oso Trunk Sewer Relocation (Orange County, CA) 1991- Project Engineer. This project included the preparation of construction plans, specifications and estimates for the relocation of a 27 -inch trunk sewer and the installation of a flow diversion structure and parshall flume metering station. The project also included coordination with Caltrans for a 350 -foot long jack-and-bore across the Interstate 5, coordination with the Mission Viejo Country Club for the realignment, and extensive utility investigation. Irvine Ranch Water District, Jeffrey Road (Zone A) Parallel Reclaimed Water Pipeline (Irvine, CA) 1995 - Project Manager. This Project included the preparation of construction drawings, specifications and cost estimates for three miles of 30 -inch reclaimed water pipeline. The Project included preliminary engineering and alternative alignment analyses, which considered 15 alternative alignments. The Project also required coordination with: Caltrans for a bore-and-jack crossing of Interstate 405; the Orange County Department of Harbors, Beaches and Parks for construction in Mason Regional Park; the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and California Department of Fish and Game for the crossing of the San Diego Creek; and the City of Irvine for traffic control. PF CONSULTING R�(nmpanV No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 7.0 Technical Appendices The various reports identified below are included within the Technical Appendices to this EIR, and are herein incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150. Appendix Document /Reference Title A Air Quality Impact Analysis B Greenhouse Gas Analysis C Noise Impact Analysis D North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis E Water Supply Assessment F Assessment of Sewer Capacity Availability Relative to Increase Allocation of Residential Development NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 7 -1 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Technical Appendix A Air Quality Impact Analysis Urban Crossroads, Inc. June 6, 2012 June 2012 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Technical Appendix B Greenhouse Gas Analysis Urban Crossroads, Inc. June 6, 2012 June 2012 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Technical Appendix C Noise Impact Analysis Urban Crossroads, Inc. May 29, 2012 June 2012 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Technical Appendix D North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. May 2012 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Technical Appendix E Water Supply Assessment T &B Planning, Inc. June 13, 2012 June 2012 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? Addendum No. 2 Technical Appendix F Assessment of Sewer Capacity Availability Relative to Increase Allocation of Residential Development RBF Consulting May 10, 2012 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Attachment No. PC 14 Draft resolution for denial RESOLUTION NO. ## ## A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DENYING PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. PD2012 -001, TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY NO. TD2012 -002, AN AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. DA2007 -002, TRAFFIC STUDY NO. TS2012 -004, AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENT, AND WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT FOR THE NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY AMENDMENT PROJECT (PA2012 -020) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: 6-1:10 KQ.`M- -1r_1ra�aa.rr•»y_X"1601 An application was filed by the Irvine Company with respect to its property located in North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC) Development Plan to allow future development in NNCPC, which consists of seven sub -areas that include Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800 and portions of Blocks 100, 400, 500, and San Joaquin Plaza ( "Property "). 2. The Irvine Company has applied to the City of Newport Beach for approval of the following project (the "Project "): a. Transfer of Development Intensity (TD2012 -002)- Conversion of un -built non- residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms assigned to General Plan Anomaly Site No. 43) to multi - family residential development intensity (79 multi- family units) and transfer of the converted development intensity into the North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC); b. Planned Community Development Plan Amendment (PD2012 -001)- Amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the allowable residential development intensity by a total of 94 units and to allocate the 94 units plus the 430 residential units currently allocated to Blocks 500, 600, and San Joaquin Plaza sub -areas of the NNCPC solely to San Joaquin Plaza. Of the 94 units, 79 units result from the conversion and transfer of development intensity, and the remaining 15 units are currently unassigned by the General Plan within the MU- H3 portions of the Newport Center Statistical Area L1; c. Amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002- Amend the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City and the Irvine Company to vest the revised development intensities and allocations within NNCPC and to establish public benefit contributions to the City; d. Traffic Study (TS2012 -004)- Preparation of a traffic study for 94 units pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance; Planning Commission Resolution No. ##I## Paqe 2 of 3 e. Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP)- Amendment to an AHIP specifying how the Irvine Company will address the City's affordable housing goals; and f. Water Supply Assessment (WSA)- Evaluation of water supply availability for the project. 3. The sub -areas of the NNCPC include General Plan land use designations of Mixed - Use Horizontal (MU -H3), Regional Commercial Office (CO -R), Medical Commercial Office (CO -M), Regional Commercial (CR); Multiple -Unit Residential (RM), and Open Space (OS). 4. The subject property is not located within the coastal zone. 5. A Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 5, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time the Planning Commission considered all project - related applications. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting, including the evidence and arguments submitted by the City staff, the Irvine Company, and all interested parties. SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. 1. Pursuant to Section 15270 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves are not subject to CEQA review. SECTION 4. DECISION. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach does hereby deny without prejudice Transfer of Development Intensity No. TD2012 -002, Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2012 -001, Amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, Traffic Study No. TS2012 -004, and the proposed Amendment of the Affordable Housing Implementation Plan. 2. This action shall become final and effective fourteen days after the adoption of this Resolution unless within such time an appeal is filed with the City Clerk in accordance with the provisions of Title 20 Planning and Zoning, of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Tmplt: 05/16/2012 Planning Commission Resolution No. #### Paqe 3 of 3 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 5th DAY OF JULY, 2012. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: BY: w Michael Toerge, Chairman Fred Ameri, Secretary Tmplt: 05/16/2012 Exhibit B Depiction of Added Property 0 San Joaquin Plaza .44, 00 o GIE.... 9� Bloc k m 600 1 S / SANTA ROSA OR Fashion Island Block Regional Center 500 P 44 9Z R V � Z W qqC U ,O. �F Y co �� icy v oP lygY 47 Added Property !\ ►L 1►l 12 ORK• I Newport Center Statistical Area L1 2006 General Plan Update created new development ' ]d ° opportunities in ,r Newport Center, including 450 IF,� l� � residential units ` . ' J& _ J_3 ED • • North Newport Center Planned Community a g R D • Background o North Newport Center Planned Community ( NNCPC) adopted in 2007 o Establishes development allocations and development standards for Irvine Company owned properties in Newport Center a 430 residential units were assigned to NNCPC and allocated to either Block 500, 600, of San Joaquin Plaza a Development agreement, traffic study, and AH I P also approved iNNCPC Amendment o Increase allowable residential development intensity from 430 units to 524 units (94 unit increase) 0 15 units allowed but unassigned by General Plan 0 79 units result from conversion and transfer of un- built non - residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms) Hi The 524 units will be allocated solely to San Joaquin Plaza Hi Clean up revisions to NNCPC text o Existing development standards remain unchanged Transfer of Development Intensity o Policy LU 6.14.3 - Development rights /intensity may be transferred within Newport Center subject to finding that: ■ Transfer is consistent with General Plan ■ Not result in adverse traffic impacts a Relocated un -built development intensity, while maintaining balance of uses envisioned by GP o Trip Generation Comparison- less trips o Traffic Study- no impact Traffic Phasing Ordinance Hi Traffic Study prepared by Stantec Consulting pursuant to the TPO and its implementing guidelines 0 94 units forecasted to generate 393 trips /day 0 32 a.m. trips and 36 p.m. trips 0 430 previously approved units included in cumulative analysis o Analyzed 20 intersections Hi Concludes that all intersections would continue to operate at satisfactory levels of service and no improvements are necessary Amendment to Development /agreement o "Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement" o Vests development rights for 94 units o Extends term 20 years o Provisions for affordable housing o Public Benefit Fee for Parks ($2,448,390) o Public Benefit Fee ($5,922,000) o Reimbursement for Bayside Dr Walkway Connection ($200,000) Amendment to Affordable Housing Implementation Plan E HP 2.2.10 — Goal of 15% of new units be affordable to lower- and moderate - income households a Expands previously approved option of recording 30 -year affordability covenants at The Bays Apartments Income Category Very Low Low Moderate 524 Units: Number of Affordable Units and Income Levels Percentage Required 10% 15% 20% Total Amount 52 units 79 units 105 units -Water Supply Assessment Hi California Senate Bill 610 (2001) 0 500+ unit projects to evaluate water supplies that will be available to the project over a 20 year period Hi City is water provider and must approve the WSA and certify prepared in accordance with SB610 o Prepared by T &B Planning in conjunction with Municipal Operations Department o Concludes sufficient water supply capacity to serve project and projected build out of General Plan through 2035 Environmental Review E Addendum No. 2 to the General Plan Update 2006 Program EIR o Purpose to analyze the potential differences between the impacts evaluated in the GP Program EIR and those that would be associated with project o Concludes potential impacts would be the same or less than the anticipated levels described in GP Update Program EIR