Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout89-117 - Final Environmental Impact Report 144• RESOLUTION NO. 89 -117 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CERTIFYING AS COMPLETE AND ADEQUATE THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 144 FOR THE 28TH STREET MARINA PROJECT WHEREAS, the Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 144 provided environmental impact assessment for the proposed 28th Street Marina Project; and WHEREAS, the DEIR was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines and Council Policy K -3; and review; and WHEREAS, the DEIR was circulated to the public for comment and WHEREAS, written comments were received from the public during and after the review period; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach conducted a public hearing to receive public testimony with respect to the DEIR; and WHEREAS, such comments and testimony were responded to through Response to Comments and staff reports submitted to the Planning Commission and City Council; and WHEREAS, such comments and testimony were fully and adequately responded to in the manner set forth in California Administrative Code Section 15088 (b); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach has reviewed all environmental documents comprising the EIR and has found that the EIR considers all environmental impacts of the proposed 28th Street Marina Project and is complete and adequate and fully complies with all requirements of CEQA and the • CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the certified final EIR in making its decision on the proposed 28th Street Marina Project; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to approve the project; and WHEREAS, the City Council by this Resolution adopts the Statement of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations as required by Sections 15091 and 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, Section 21002.1 of CEQA and Section 15091 of the State identifying one or more significant effects of the project, along with Statements of Facts supporting each Finding: FINDING 1 - Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects thereof as identified in the EIR. FINDING 2 - Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction or another public agency and not the agency making the Finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. FINDING 3 - Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR; and WHEREAS, Section 15092 provides that the City shall not decide to approve or carry out a project for which an EIR was prepared unless it has (A) Eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects on the environment where feasible as shown in the findings under Section 15091, and (B) Determined that any remaining significant effects on the environment found to be unavoidable under Section 15091 are acceptable due to overriding concerns as described in Section 15093; and WHEREAS, Section 15093 (a) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires the City Council to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable • environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project; and WHEREAS, Section 15903 (b) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires, where the decision of the City Council allows the occurrence of significant effects which t' 2 CEQA Guidelines require that the City Council make one or more of the following • Findings prior to the approval of a project for which an EIR has been completed, identifying one or more significant effects of the project, along with Statements of Facts supporting each Finding: FINDING 1 - Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects thereof as identified in the EIR. FINDING 2 - Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction or another public agency and not the agency making the Finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. FINDING 3 - Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR; and WHEREAS, Section 15092 provides that the City shall not decide to approve or carry out a project for which an EIR was prepared unless it has (A) Eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects on the environment where feasible as shown in the findings under Section 15091, and (B) Determined that any remaining significant effects on the environment found to be unavoidable under Section 15091 are acceptable due to overriding concerns as described in Section 15093; and WHEREAS, Section 15093 (a) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires the City Council to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable • environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project; and WHEREAS, Section 15903 (b) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires, where the decision of the City Council allows the occurrence of significant effects which t' 2 are identified in the EIR but are not mitigated, the City must state in writing the reasons to support its action based on the EIR or other information in the record. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that: 1. The City Council makes the Findings contained in the Statement of • Facts with respect to significant impacts identified in the Final EIR, together with the Finding that each fact in support of the Finding is true and based upon substantial evidence in the record, including the Final EIR. The Statement of Facts is attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth. 2. The City Council finds that the Facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations are true and supported by substantial evidence in the record, including the Final EIR. The Statement of Overriding Considerations is attached hereto as Exhibit 2 and incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth. 3. The City Council finds that the Final EIR has identified all significant environmental effects of the project and that there are no known potential enviromnental impacts not addressed in the Final EIR. 4. The City Council finds that all significant effects of the project are set forth in the Statement of Facts. 5. The City Council finds that although the Final EIR identifies certain significant environmental effects that will result if the project is approved, all significant effects that can be feasibly avoided or mitigated have been avoided or mitigated by the imposition of Conditions on the approved project and the imposition of mitigation measures as set forth in the Statement of Fact and the Final EIR. 6. The City Council finds that potential mitigation measures and project alternatives not incorporated into the project were rejected as infeasible, based upon specific economic, social and other considerations as set forth in the Statement of Facts and the Final EIR. 7. The City Council finds that the unavoidable significant impact of the • project, as identified in the Statement of Facts, that has not been reduced to a level of insignificance has been substantially reduced in impact by the imposition of Conditions on the approved project and the imposition of mitigation measures. In making its decision on the project, the Planning Commission has given greater weight to the adverse environmental impact. The City Council finds that the remaining unavoidable significant impact is clearly outweighed by the economic, social and other benefits of the project, as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. 8. The City Council finds that the Final EIR has described all • reasonable alternatives to the project that could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project, even when those alternatives might impede the attainment of other project objectives and might be more costly. Further, the City Council finds that a good faith effort was made to incorporate alternatives in the preparation of the draft EIR and all reasonable alternatives were considered in the review process of the Final EIR and ultimate decisions on the project. 9. The City Council finds that the project should be approved and that any alternative to this action should not be approved for the project based on the information contained in the Final EIR, the data contained in the Statement of Facts and for the reasons stated in the public record and those contained in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. 10. The City Council finds that a good faith effort has been made to seek out and incorporate all points of view in the preparation of the Draft and Final EIR as indicated in the public record on the project, including the Final EIR. 11. The City Council finds that during the public hearing process on the 28th Street Marina Project, the Environmental Impact Report evaluated a range of alternatives. The project, as approved by this action, is included in that range of alternatives. The City Council has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission in its decision on the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby certify the Final Environmental Impact Report No. 144 for the 28th Street Marina Project as complete and adequate in that it addresses all environmental effects of the proposed project and fully complies with the requirements of the California • Environmental Quality Act and the State CEQA Guidelines. Said Final Environmental Impact Report is comprised of the following elements: 1. Draft EIR and Technical Appendices 2. Responses to Comments 3. Planning Commission Staff Reports 4 • • 4. Planning Commission Minutes 5. Planning Commission Findings and Conditions for Recommended Approval 6. City Council Staff Reports 7. City Council Minutes 8. City Council Resolutions and Findings and Conditions for Approval 9. Comments and Responses received prior to final action and not contained in 1 through 8 above. All of the above information has been and will be on file with the Planning Department, City of Newport Beach, City Hall, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92659 -1768, (714) 644 -3225. ADOPTED THIS 30th ATTEST: PLT /WP50 ED \EIR144.RS1 day of October , 1989. 5 Exhibit 1 CEOA STATEMENT OF FINDINGS AND FACTS SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 52, JSE PERMIT NO. 3361 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 14025, COAS7CAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 18 AND TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 59 28TH STREET MARINA PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 144 • SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED, FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO SAID EFFECTS AND STATEMENT OF FACTS IN SUPPORT THEREOF, ALL WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPOSED CERTIFICATION OF AN ENVIRONMEN- TAL IMPACT REPORT, APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT WITH MODIFICA- TIONS AND A TRAFFIC STUDY FOR THE 28TH STREET MARINA PROJECT, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA., BACKGROUND The California Environmental Quality Act (CE,QA) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Guidelines) promulgated pursuant thereto provide: "No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been completed which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are: 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. 2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. 3. Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR (Section 15091 of the Guidelines)." The City of Newport Beach is considering ,approval of a request to permit the construction of a mixed use residential /commercial development which includes two buildings containing 35 residential condominium units and 22,500 sq.ft. of commercial floor area on property located in the Recreational and Marine Commercial area of the Cannery Village /McFadden Square Specific ]Plan Area. The project includes the certification of an Environmental Impact Report, review of a site plan, and approval of a use permit to allow a building height in excess of 26 feet but not exceeding 35 feet, the commercial component of the project to be less than 0.25 FAR and providing incentive uses in conjunction with general commercial uses, tentative tract map, coastal residential development permit, and a traffic study. Because the proposed actions constitute a project under the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). This EIR has identified certain significant effects which may occur as a result of the project on a cumulative basis in conjunction with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects. Further, the City desires to approve this project and, after determining that the EIR is complete • and has been prepared in accordance with CEQA and the Guidelines, the findings set forth are herein made: Ultimate development of the project will result in certain significant unavoidable adverse impacts to the environment, as indicated below and in the Final EIR. With respect to those impacts, the City Council of Newport Beach makes the findings as stated on the following pages. EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE INSIGNIFICANT NOISE • * Increases in noise levels generated by project- related traffic are less negligible. LAND USE * The proposed project will result in demolition of existing under - utilized office /marine commercial uses and a large vacant asphalt lot. AESTHETICS * The proposed project will result in replacement of single -story office /marine commercial uses with two three -story buildings (35 feet in height) with a subterranean parking garage. TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION * Two of eight intersections analyzed exceed the one percent volume criteria when project traffic is added to 1991 traffic conditions. Of these, the Intersection Capacity Utilization ratio will not be increased to a level over 0.9 by project traffic. PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES * The project will add to area -wide demand for fire protection and paramedic services. The project will not require an additional fire station, equipment or personnel. * Demand on police services will not increase significantly due to the project. No additional personnel or equipment will be needed. * The project will not adversely impact the park and recreation services. * The project will generate a maximum of 7.2 students. This increase in student population will not adversely effect schools serving the site. AIR QUALITY * There is a slight potential for nuisance odors to affect the project site generated from adjacent boatyard activities. * The proposed design of the subterranean parking garage contains two vents which will release air from the garage at the roof top level. This is the most desirable location for venting underground parking areas. • 3 EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE MTTIGABL:E TO LEVEL OF INSIGNIFICANCE TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION Significant Effect ' Construction activity will increase truck traffic during some periods. This increase • could conflict with summer and non - summer peak traffic periods. Finding 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Findin The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies and Requirements and Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. These measures include the following: 1. Traffic control and transportation of equipment and materials shall be conducted in accordance with state and local requirements. A traffic control plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department prior to issuance of demolition, grading, or building permits. 2. No construction storage or delivery of materials shall be allowed within the Newport Boulevard right -of -way. 3. Prior to issuance of any Grading Permits, a parking plan showing how workers will be able to park without using on -street parking must be submitted and approved by the Public Works Department. 4. No earthwork hauling operations, major concrete placement and other construction operations requiring more that 32 trips per day or 4 trips /hour by trucks with more than 3 axles be scheduled to occur between June 1 and September 15, and one week before and after Easter. 5. Construction staging, materials storage, and worker parking shall be provided on the adjacent site owned by the applicant which is located on the northwest corner of 28th Street and Newport Boulevard. AIR QUALITY Significant Effect During the grading /excavation phase, there is a potential for increased dirt and dust on and along the truck haul routes. Findine 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified • in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies and Requirements and Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. These measures include the following: 1. A dust control program in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 shall be implemented during demolition, excavation, and 3 construction. This program shall include; such measures as: containing soil on- site until it is hauled away; periodic watering of stockpiled soil; and, regular vacuum sweeping of streets used for the haul operation to remove accumulated material. [Illy y • Significant Effect The project will be exposed to noise levels from Newport Boulevard in excess of standards. Fin in 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies and Requirements and Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. These measures include the following: 1. All exterior living areas (e.g. balconies and patios) which lie within the 65 CNEL contour shall be constructed with 6 -foot :high noise barriers. The noise barrier shall be continuous (no opening or gaps) and have a minimum density of 3.5 pounds per square foot. The walls may be stud walls with cement ;plaster exterior, 1.4 inch plate glass, 5.8 inch plexiglass, any masonry material, or any combination of these materials. Wood and other materials may be used if specifically designed as noise barriers. 2. All units exposed to exterior noise levels higher than 65 CNEL shall be constructed so as to achieve interior noise levels no greater than 45 CNEL. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a qualified acoustical engineer shall review final architectural plans to determine what building upgrades will be necessary to achieve this standard. The City Engineer shall require that such upgrades be incorporated into the plans prior to issuance of the Building permit. Most likely the only building upgrade that will be required is higher rated windows such as 3.16 inch single pane glass for all windows that are exposed to Newport Boulevard. 3. All units that have a window exposed to Newport Boulevard, shall be required to install mechanical ventilation. Air conditioning is an acceptable substitute for mechanical ventilation as long as it meets the Uniform Building Code requirements. 4. Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit, the City Engineer shall require that an acoustical analysis be conducted by a qualified acoustical engineer (at the developer's expense). This analysis shall determine if all noise mitigation has been installed as required and that noise levels will meet City standards. The • noise measurements shall be taken at that point in the worst case unit where the highest noise levels are expected. If different noise attenuation methods are used for different units, then a worst case unit for each method shall be tested. Significant Effect Dupng construction, dewatering and excavation activities may cause high noise levels impacting surrounding areas. 5 Finding 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. • Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies and Requirements and Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. These measures include the following: 1. Construction activities will be conducted in accordance with Newport Beach City Uniform Building Code, which limits the hours of construction and excavation work to 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on weekdays, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. 2. The applicant shall apply for a waiver of City noise abatement regulations to allow for dewatering and pouring of the basement slab. The continuous concrete pour shall be scheduled on a non - summer weekend outside of the peak traffic period. 3. At the time the City removes the requested waiver of City noise abatement regulation to allow for dewatering and pouring of the basement slab, the City Engineer shall determine if it is necessary to require barriers or baffles to reduce noise from construction equipment so as not to exceed 55 dBA at the property lines. If required, the developer shall install such measures prior to beginning any activities for which a waiver was granted. 4. Electric pump motors shall be required for dewatering equipment to reduce noise levels. GEOLOGY /SOILS Significant Effect The site may be subject from an earthquake on a regional fault. The site is subject to moderate to high risk of liquefaction. Existing fill is not suitable to build on. Existing beach /alluvial soils are not suitable to build on. Finding 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies and Requirements and Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. These measures include the following: • 1. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit to be approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 2. That grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a Civil Engineer and based on recommendations of a soils engineer and an engineering geologist subsequent to the completion of a comprehensive soil and geologic investigation of the site. Permanent reproducible copies of the "Approved as Built" grading plans on standard size sheets shall be furnished to the Building Department. ri 3. Recommendations included in the 1989 South Coast Geologic Services' Geotechnical Report and the subsequent study required by the following mitigation, shall be incorporated into project design where appropriate. The Building Department shall verify the application of the appropriate recommendations prior to issuance of grading permits. • 4. A supplemental subsurface investigation shall be performed subsequent to demolition of the existing buildings to obtain subsurface data in those areas inaccessible during previous studies. 5. The upper ten feet of soil material (primarily unsuitable fill) shall be removed. Remaining soil to a distance at least five feet below and beyond the proposed structure shall be densified as described in the Geotechnical Report contained in Appendix D (and verified or amended by the required subsequent subsurface investigation). Significant Effect The project will require excavation of soil to a depth of 10 feet. The project site is subject to high groundwater. Finding 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. acts in Sunnort of Findin The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies and Requirements and Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. These measures include the following: 1. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit to be approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 2. That grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a Civil Engineer and based on recommendations of a soils engineer and an engineering geologist subsequent to the completion of a comprehensive soil and geologic investigation of the site. Permanent reproducible copies of the "Approved as Built" grading plans on standard size sheets shall be furnished to the Building Department. 3. Recommendations included in the 1989 South Coast Geologic Services' Geotechnical Report and the subsequent study required by the following mitigation, shall be incorporated into project design where appropriate. The Building Department shall verify the application of the appropriate recommendations prior to issuance of grading permits. 4. A supplemental subsurface investigation shall be performed subsequent to demolition of the existing buildings to obtain subsurface data in those areas inaccessible during previous studies. • 5. That the grading plan shall include a complete plan for temporary and permanent drainage facilities, to minimize any potential impacts from silt, debris, and other water pollutants. 6. The grading permit shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, watering, and sweeping program designed to minimize the impact of haul operations. 7 7. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan, if required, shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the Building Department and a copy shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 8. The groundwater level shall be lowered to a depth at least five feet beneath the excavation bottom (about 15 feet below existing ground level). The dewatering system shall be designed and performed by qualified engineers with previous experience in this type of construction. Selection of the engineer shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. 9. The upper ten feet of soil material (primarily unsuitable fill) shall be removed. Remaining soil to a distance at least five feet below and beyond the proposed structure shall be densified as described in the Geotechnical Report contained in Appendix D (and verified or amended by the required subsequent subsurface investigation). 10. Prior to issuance of grading permits, a national pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit shall be obtained from the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water extracted from dewatering wells shall meet current Environmental Protection Agency requirements prior to discharging into the bay. If necessary, the water shall be desilted prior to discharge. Significant Effect ' Effects of dewatering and lateral deflection of the excavation shoring may cause ground settlement and /or lateral movement of soils on adjacent properties. Finding 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Sumuort of Findin The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies and Requirements and Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. These measures include the following: 1. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit to be approved by the Building and Planning Departments. , 2. That grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a Civil Engineer and based on recommendations of a soils engineer and an engineering geologist subsequent to the completion of a comprehensive soil and geologic investigation of the site. Permanent reproducible copies of the "Approved as Built" grading plans on standard size sheets shall be furnished to the Building Department. 3. Recommendations included in the 1989 South Coast Geologic Services' Geotechnical Report and the subsequent study required by the following mitigation, shall be incorporated into project design where appropriate. The Building Department shall verify the application of the appropriate • recommendations prior to issuance of grading permits. 4. A supplemental subsurface investigation shall be performed subsequent to demolition of the existing buildings to obtain subsurface data in those areas inaccessible during previous studies. 5. A detailed preconstruction survey shall be prepared to document the present condition of all building and facilities within the zone of influence of the dewatered investigation. Photographs, crack surveys, and installation of a reference benchmark beyond the zone of influence shall be included in the f:3 preconstruction survey. Areas within at least 30 feet of the proposed excavation shall be monitored for any settlement and lateral movements due to possible deflection of the shoring system. Groundwater observation wells within the zone of influence shall be installed. The specific parameters of the study shall be provided to the City Engineer for review prior to issuance of the grading permit. 6. If found necessary by the City of Newport Beach, based upon the geotechnical • information described above, the project applicant will be required to enter into an agreement and post a bond guaranteeing the repair of the public street system, utilities or other public property that might be damaged during the dewatering excavation process and the construction of subterranean improvements. 7. If found necessary by the City of Newport Beach, based upon the geotechnical information described above, the project applicant will be required to enter into an agreement and provide a policy of insurance guaranteeing the repair of all damage to private property caused by the dewatering excavation process and the construction of subterranean improvements. WATER RESOURCES Significant Effect * Extracted water resulting from dewatering will be discharged into Newport Bay. The discharge of water could significantly impact the water quality of Newport Bay. Findine 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies and Requirements and Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. These measures include the following: 1. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a national Pollutant Discharge Elimination system Permit shall be obtained from the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water extracted from dewatering wells shall meet current Environmental Protection Agency requirements prior to discharging into the bay. If necessary, the water shall be desilted prior to discharge. 2. Treatment of extracted water shall be conducted in a manner and at a location approved by the City of Newport Beach City Engineer and the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. 3. Suspended solids (e.g. sand) shall be separated from extracted water in accordance with applicable water quality standards and disposed of at a location approved by the City of Newport Beach Director of Public Works Department and the Grading Engineer. • 4. Provision shall be made, as necessary, for the treatment of hydrogen sulfide to comply with water quality standards and to control odors from the dewatering process. Significant Effect * The project site may be subject to minor flooding during the uncommon simultaneous occurrence of extremely high tides and heavy rain. OJ Finding 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding • The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies and Requirements and Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. These measures include the following: 1. Existing on -site drainage facilities shall be improved to the satisfaction of the City of Newport Beach City Engineer. A hydrology and hydraulic study and a master plan of water, sewer, and storm drain for on -site improvements shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Public Works Department prior to recording of the tract map. Any modifications to the existing storm drain system shall be the responsibility of the developer. 2. Drainage facilities and architectural features shall be designed to prevent runoff from entering the garage structure, keep the garage floor slab dry from seepage, and remove oil and grease from runoff prior to discharge into public storm drains. Verification of these design features shall be made by the City Engineer prior to issuance of building permits. 3. Six (6) inches shall be added to the bulkhead cap to bring it to an elevation of nine feet above mean low water as required by the Cannery Village /McFadden Square Specific Plan. Significant Effect Construction of the project may result in short -term water quality impacts associated with erosion, litter, and debris. Finding 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies and Requirements and Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. These measures include the following: 1. An erosion, siltation, and dust control plan shall submitted and be subject to the approval of the Building Department (prior to approval of the grading permit). A copy shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 2. Prior to demolition of existing structures, a complete plan for litter and debris • control for the demolition, grading, and construction phases to ensure that no debris is permitted to enter Newport Harbor shall be approved by the Directors of the Planning and Marine Departments. Significant Effect Disposal of excavated materials at an ocean disposal site could have adverse impacts on water quality. 10 Finding 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding • The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies and Requirements, and Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. These measures include the following: 1. If the applicant intends to use an ocean disposal site for excavated materials, the City of Newport Beach Public Works Department shall be provided with evidence that all appropriate permits from the Anny Corps of Engineers and the City of Newport Beach have been obtained. Such evidence shall be submitted to and verified by the Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Significant Effect Surface runoff from the site may contain urban pollutants affecting the water quality of Newport Bay. Finding 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies and Requirements and Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. These measures include the following: 1. Drainage facilities and architectural features shall be designed to prevent runoff from entering the garage structure, keep the garage floor slab dry from seepage, and remove oil and grease from runoff prior to discharge into public storm drains. Verification of these design features shall be made by the City Engineer prior to issuance of building permits. 2. Landscaped areas shall be irrigated with a. system designed to avoid surface runoff and over - watering. 3. A landscape plan shall be submitted which includes a maintenance program that controls the use of fertilizers and pesticides. PUBLIC SERVICES Significant Effect The project will require the use of domestic water and the sanitary sewer system. • Finding 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. 11 Facts in Support of Finding The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies and Requirements and Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. These measures include the following: 1. Final design of the project shall provide for the incorporation of water- saving • devices for project lavatories and other water -using devices. 2. Landscaped areas shall be irrigated with a system designed to avoid surface runoff and over - watering. 3. Prior to issuance of building or grading permits, a Master Plan of water and sewer facilities shall be prepared for the site. The applicant shall verify the adequacy of existing water and sewer facilities and construct any modification or facilities necessary for the project. This Master Plan shall include provision for the relocation of existing water and sewer facilities. • 12 SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED The following effects are those determined by the City of Newport Beach to be significant environmental effects which cannot be avoided if the project is implemented. All significant environmental effects that can be feasibly avoided have been eliminated or substantially lessened by virtue of mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and is incorporated into the project as set forth above. The remaining, unavoidable significant effects are acceptable when balanced against the facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations made below, giving greater weight to the remaining, unavoidable environmental effect. TRAFFIC /NOISE /AIR QUALITY Significant Effect * The project will incrementally result in increased traffic, air pollutant emissions, and noise levels in the immediate vicinity. In concert with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects, the proposed project is expected to incrementally contribute to a significant cumulative adverse impact on traffic, air pollution, and noise levels in the vicinity of the project. Findings 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. 3. Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the project alternatives identified in the Final EIR (Section 15091 of the Guidelines). Facts in Support of Findings The significant effect has been substantially lessened by virtue of the Standard City Policies and Requirements and Mitigation Measures identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project. These measures include the following: 1. Traffic control and transportation of equipment and materials shall be conducted in accordance with state and local requirements. A traffic control plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department prior to issuance of demolition, grading, or building permits. 2. No construction storage or delivery of materials shall be allowed within the Newport Boulevard right -of -way. 3. Prior to issuance of any Grading Permits, a parking plan showing how workers will be able to park without using on- street parking must be submitted and approved by the Public Works Department. 4. No earthwork hauling operations, major concrete placement and other construction operations requiring more that 32 trips per day or 4 trips /hour by trucks with more than 3 axles be scheduled to occur between June 1 and September 15, and one week before and after Easter. • 5. Construction staging, materials storage, and worker parking shall be provided on the adjacent site owned by the applicant which is located on the northwest corner of 28th Street and Newport Boulevard, 6. Pursuant to Section 15.45 of the Municipal Code (Fair Share Traffic Contribution Ordinance), the applicant shall contribute funds towards traffic and circulation improvements. 13 7. A dust control program in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 shall be implemented during demolition, excavation, and construction. This program shall include such measures as: containing soil on- site until it is hauled away; periodic watering of stockpiled soil; and, regular vacuum sweeping of streets used for the haul operation to remove accumulated material. • 7. Construction activities will be conducted in accordance with Newport Beach City Uniform Building Code, which limits the hours of construction and excavation work to 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on weekdays, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. 8. The applicant shall apply for a waiver of City noise abatement regulations to allow for dewatering and pouring of the basement slab. The continuous concrete pour shall be scheduled on a non - summer weekend outside of the peak traffic period. 9. At the time the City removes the requested waiver of City noise abatement regulation to allow for dewatering and pouring of the basement slab, the City Engineer shall determine if it is necessary to require barriers or baffles to reduce noise from construction equipment so as not to exceed 55 dBA at the property lines. If required, the developer shall install such measures prior to beginning any activities for which a waiver was granted. 10. Electric pump motors shall be required for dewatering equipment to reduce noise levels. Changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the one making the finding. 1. The State Department of Transportation has the overall responsibility for major roadways and freeways in the region. 2. The State Air Resources Board is responsible for the attainment of national air quality standards. 3. The South Coast Air Quality Management District is responsible for basin air quality. 4. The Southern California Association of Governments in association with the SCAQMD is responsible for the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the airshed. The significant effect has been substantially lessened to the extent feasible, however, specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR. 1. The project represents the best balance and mix of uses for the project area, all factors considered. 2. The alternatives set forth for the site were rejected for the reasons as set forth below and in the subsequent sections of this statement. • The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations and in view of the fact that the impact identified is considered significant only on a cumulative basis, resulting from the proposed project in association with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects. 14 NOISE Significant Effect Temporary noise levels related to pouring concrete for the foundation cannot be mitigated to an insignificant level. • Findings 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. 3. Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR (Section 15091 of the Guidelines). Facts in Su000rt of Findings The significant effect has been substantially lessened to the extent that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental. effect as identified in the Final EIR. 1. Pouring of the basement slab shall be scheduled so as to encompass only one nighttime period. 2. The applicant shall apply for a waiver of City noise abatement regulations to allow for dewatering and pouring of the basement slab. The continuous concrete pour shall be scheduled on a non - summer weekend outside of the peak traffic period. 3. At the time the City removes the requested waiver of City noise abatement regulation to allow for dewatering and pouring of the basement slab, the City Engineer shall determine if it is necessary to require barriers or baffles to reduce noise from construction equipment so as not to exceed 55 dBA at the property lines. If required, the developer shall install such measures prior to beginning any activities for which a waiver was granted. The significant effect has been substantially lessened to the extent feasible, however, specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR. 1. The project represents the best balance and mix of uses for the project area, all factors considered. 2. The alternatives set forth for the site were rejected for the reasons as set forth above and in the subsequent sections of this statement. The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations and in view of the fact that the impact identified is considered significant only on a short -term basis. • 15 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES Findings _ 1. The project has been designed in a manner so as to provide the greatest public involvement in the planning and CEQA process. • 2. The following provides a brief description of project alternatives. 3. The alternatives were rejected in favor of the current project proposal. 4. The rationale for rejection of each alternative is provided below. 5. The rejection rationale is supported by the public record including, but not limited to, the Certified Final EIR. NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE The No Project Alternative provides for no new development on the site. Findings Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the No Project Alternative described in the Final EIR in that: 1. The No Project Alternative does not provide for a revitalization of the site which is consistent with the goals and development standards of the Cannery Village /McFadden Square Specific Area :Plan. 2. The No Project Alternative would not provide for increased marine - related commercial opportunities. 3. The No Project Alternative would not provide for increased residential uses. 4. The No Project Alternative would not provide increased physical and visual access to Newport Harbor. HOTEL ALTERNATIVE The Hotel Alternative assumes development of a three -story 150 -room hotel totalling 94,000 s.f. Findings Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the six-story office alternative described in the Final EIR in that: 1. The alternative would generate more traffic than the proposed project. 2. The scale of the development would appear more intense. 3. No visual access to the Newport Harbor would be provided. • 4. The project would provide visitor- serving facilities, but no marine - commercial or residential uses. RESIDENTIAL ALTERNATIVE A residential alternative could be: 1) 20 units on about 4500 s.f. lots; 2) 36 units in a two story structure with a combination of above grade and subterranean parking; and, 3) 50 units with subterranean parking or a parking structure. 16 Findings 1. Development of solely residential uses is not allowed on the site by the Land Use Element and Cannery Village /McFadden Square Specific Area Plan unless it is in conjunction with marine commercial on the ground floor of the structure. 2. The smaller 20 -unit, more traditional subdivision would be significantly out of • character with the surrounding area. 3. Noise attenuation for the 20 -unit subdivision would required a noise wall that would block views to the Newport Harbor. 4. If parking is not subterranean, views across the site would be effected by the light /glare from parked cars and security lighting. 5. This alternative would not provide increased marine commercial uses. COMMERCIAL ALTERNATIVE This alternative would include a mix of marine commercial /office uses. Depending on the uses proposed, the FAR could range from .50 to 1.0. This intensity of development would require either subterranean parking or above ground parking garages. Findings 1. This alternative would generate significantly more traffic than the project. 2. This alternative would cause a greater incremental contribution to cumulative impacts related to traffic, noise, and air quality. 3. The alternative would not provide additional residential uses in the area. ALTERNATIVE LOCATIONS The project could be developed in other locations of Newport Beach. Findings 1. Given the orientation of the project to marine commercial use and view- oriented residential, any other location would remain in the vicinity of Newport Bay. 2. The contribution of the alternative to cumulative traffic, air quality, and noise impacts would remain the same. REDUCED INTENSITY This alternative would be a two -story version of the proposed project with marine- commercial on the ground floor and 18 residential units on the second floor. Findings 1. The reduced density of the project might make construction of the subterranean parking garage economically infeasible. If so, then an above ground parking • structure and parking lot would be necessary. This would create a project with greater mass and visual impact. 2. The project could provide less visual access to the Newport Harbor than the project. • Exhibit 2 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS The California Environmental Quality Act requires a public agency to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. The City of Newport Beach has determined that the unavoidable risks of this project, giving greater weight to the unavoidable environmental risks. In making this determination, the following factors and public benefits were considered or decisions made: l proposed project is consistent with other existing uses in the vicinity of the project and the community in general. 2. The proposed project represents infill development located in an urban area where adequate facilities and services exist. 3. The density and intensity of the project is appropriate. 4. The proposed project will contribute to a fair share of local and regional roadway improvements, specifically the City's Fair Share Traffic Contribution Ordinance. 5. The project will provide commercial space which will serve marine- related businesses. 6. The project will provide increased housing; opportunities. 7. The project has been designed to be sensitive to the surrounding neighborhood by: • including a 'view corridor" • providing adequate parking • dedicating a 10- foot" public walkway along the bayfront • providing an architecturally aesthetic project that upgrades the area while blending into the existing neighborhood PLT /WP50 ED \EIR144.FDG