Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
18 - Bayside Residential Planned Community
TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: APPLICANT: ISSUE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 18 January 10, 2006 HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL David Lepo, Contract Planner 949 - 553 -1427, dlepo @hogleireland.com Bayside Residential Planned Community (PA2004 -072). 919 Bayside Drive UGS Development Inc. Should the City Council approve the Bayside Residential Planned Community allowing an existing 64 -unit apartment complex to be demolished and the development of a 17- lot, single - family residential subdivision? RECOMMENDATION Review the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, the Code Amendment, the Tentative Tract Map, and the Coastal Residential Development Permit, receive public comments, and: 1. Adopt Resolution No. _ adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH No. 2005 - 061019) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, approving Tentative Tract Map 2004 -001 (Tract 15323), and approving Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 2005 -001 for property located at 919 Bayside Drive; and, 2. Introduce Ordinance No. , approving Code Amendment No. 2005 -007 and adopting the Bayside Residential Planned Community, and set Ordinance No. for second reading on January 24, 2006. Bayside Residential Planned Community January 10, 2006 Page 3 of 11 DISCUSSION Background UGS Development Inc. submitted an application for a Code Amendment, a Conditional Use Permit, and a Tentative Tract Map to allow construction of 17 single - family homes on a 3.92 -acre parcel on the south side of Bayside Drive, adjacent to Promontory Bay and Newport Bay. The existing 64 -unit Newport Marina apartments on this site would be demolished. A floating walkway and 34 private boat docks located at the North Channel of Newport Bay would remain. At a public hearing on August 18, 2005, the Planning Commission discussed revisions to the proposed development that could be set forth as Conditions of Approval. As staff prepared revised Conditions of Approval, the City Attorney advised that the surface waters of the Bay should not be subdivided as proposed. With deletion of the water surface lots, the project site area was reduced and the project no longer complied with the maximum permissible 40% lot Bayside Coverage restriction of the Planned Residential Development (PRD) Overlay District zoning requested for the site. As an alternative to the PRD Overlay, a change in zoning from "Multi- Family Residential' to 'Planned Community' was requested. The Planned Community zoning would be accompanied by the "Bayside Residential Planned Community District Development Regulations ". At a continued public hearing on November 3, 2005, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed Bayside Residential Planned Community District Development Regulations (PC Text). With additional revisions to the PC Text, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending City Council approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, the Code Amendment, the Tentative Tract Map, and the Coastal Residential Development Permit for development of the 17 -lot, single - family subdivision at 919 Bayside Drive. Protect Setting The Promontory Bay area where the project is located includes the area bounded by Newport Bay, Marine Avenue /Jamboree Road, and East Coast Highway. Property north of the project site across Bayside Drive is developed as a neighborhood retail shopping center (Bayside Center) anchored by a supermarket. The Bayside Cove Condominium (multiple - family residential dwellings) adjoins the property on the east. Promontory Channel abuts the west side of the property with the Balboa Yacht Basin on the opposite side of the channel. Newport Bay and Balboa Island lie to the south. The project site is designated Multi - Family Residential by the Land Use Element of the General Plan and MFR (Multi - Family Residential) by the Zoning Map. These designations permit both single - family and multiple - family dwellings. The property is Bayside Residential Planned Community January 10, 2006 Page 4 of 11 also within the Coastal Zone and the project, if approved by the City, will require a Coastal Development Permit from the California Coastal Commission. Vehicular access to the site is provided from Bayside Drive. A bulkhead provides sufficient water depth at the south property line for 34 private boat docks and access to the North Channel of Newport Bay. A twelve- foot -wide sidewalk/bike path adjoins the property frontage at Bayside Drive. An existing 10 -foot wide easement and sidewalk provide public access from Bayside Drive along the westerly property line of the project site to the bay front. The easement and sidewalk are situated at the top of an existing bulkhead along Promontory Bay and are grade- separated from the elevated project site by a retaining wall. The easement and sidewalk lead to a six - foot -wide gangplank that connects the easement to a 6 -foot- wide floating walkway parallel to the waterfront. The walkway is 18 feet south of the existing bulkhead along the south property line of the project site. The walkway provides access to the boat docks and continues along the waterfront of the adjoining property on the east and terminates at the Newport Beach Yacht Club at Marine Avenue. Project Description The 3.92 -acre project site is proposed to be subdivided into 17 buildable lots (numbered lots on Tentative Tract Map) for development of a gated community of custom - designed, single - family homes. Buildable lots range in size from 5,818 square feet to 10,754 square feet. Typical building footprints would range from approximately 3,172 square feet to 6,230 square feet. Assuming all two -story dwellings and applying MFR floor area restrictions, homes would range in size from 6,195 square feet to 10,902 square feet of living area. Common area facilities to be shared by residents and maintained by a homeowners' association are indicated on Lots "A ", "C ", "D ", "E ", and "H" on the Tentative Tract Map. Lot "A" encompasses an area of 8,279 square feet near the center of the project site and is designated for recreation and /or pool uses. Lots "C ", "D ", and "H" accommodate landscaped areas proposed along the Bayside Drive frontage and at the driveway entrance to the subdivision. Lot "E" encompasses 29,639 square feet including the driveway entrance from Bayside Drive and the private loop road which encircles the recreation area of Lot "A ", and includes all vehicular access roadways to the buildable lots. The Tentative Tract Map indicates that the 6 -foot walkway at the bay front, and the gangplank between the walkway and the existing 10- foot -wide easement and sidewalk along Promontory Channel, will be dedicated to the City of Newport Beach. Public access between the gangplank and Bayside Drive will be maintained through the existing easement. Lot "B" on the Tract Map is coterminous with this easement. Bayside Residential Planned Community January 10, 2006 Page 5 of 11 On -Site Vehicular Circulation and Parking A gated vehicular entrance to the subdivision is proposed from Bayside Drive within the easterly one -third of the Bayside Drive frontage and to the west of the existing curb cut. A 22- foot -wide driveway comprised of two in -bound lanes would provide access: one lane for guests' automobiles stopped at the security gate callbox; one bypass lane allowing residents to drive directly to the security gate without stopping at the callbox. An eighteen- foot -wide landscaped island separates the in -bound driveway from the 20- foot -wide outbound driveway. Beyond the security gate vehicular entrance, a loop road (Lot "E" on the map) would provide direct access to nine of the buildable lots. Loop road Lot "E" is 36 feet wide through the straight roadway segments and accommodates a curb -to -curb roadway width of 35 feet with parking on both sides. A total of 18 on- street parking spaces are shown. No sidewalks or parkways are proposed. Three dead -end roadways extend outward from the loop road at turns near the northwesterly, southwesterly, and southeasterly portions of the loop. The roadway extension at the northwesterly turn in the loop road projects a distance of approximately 130 feet and provides access to driveways at Lots 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16. The roadway extension at the southwesterly turn is approximately 65 feet in length and provides access to Lots 8 and 9. Lots 3 and 4 take access from a 40 -foot long roadway extension at the southeasterly turn in the loop road. All three roadway extensions are 24 feet in width, curb -to -curb, within 25- foot -wide portions of Lot "E ". Residential driveways to Lots 2, 6, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, and 17 are to be 18 feet in width to accommodate two -car attached garages. Lot 1 at the northeasterly turn in the loop road would have a 16 -foot wide driveway. Three -car garages are contemplated for Lots 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15 with driveway widths between 25 and 31 feet. The distance from face of garage to street -side property line at each lot is at least 18 feet to allow driveway parking. The subdivision map indicates a total of 48 covered parking spaces and 48 driveway parking spaces in addition to the 18 on- street spaces. Bayside Planned Community District Regulations The Zoning Code establishes 10 acre minimum for PC district creation and the project site is 3.92 acres in size. A waiver of the minimum acreage requirement is necessary to implement the project and no specific criterion for a waiver is specified in the Zoning Code. The purpose and intent of the PC district is: • To provide for the classification and development of parcels of land as coordinated, comprehensive projects so as to take advantage of the superior environment which can result from large -scale community planning; Bayside Residential Planned Community January 10, 2006 Page 6 of 11 • To allow diversification of land uses as they relate to each other in a physical and environmental arrangement, while insuring substantial compliance with the spirit, intent, and provisions of this code; • To include various types of land uses, consistent with the General Plan, through the adoption of a development plan and text materials which set forth land use relationships and development standards. Although the project is a single land use, the Planning Commission believes that the proposed Bayside Residential Planned Community achieves these objectives. The attached "Bayside Residential Planned Community District Development Regulations" provides all development standards to implement the project and the draft PC text is recommended for adoption. Issues to be Resolved Public Access along Bayfront Public access to the waterfront is required by the California Coastal Act. Policy 3.1.1 -13 of the City's recently adopted Coastal Land Use Plan requires a direct dedication or an offer to dedicate (OTD) an easement for lateral public access for all new shorefront development causing or contributing to adverse public access impacts. The location of the dedication or easement is between the current limits of public ownership (i.e. below the mean high tide line) and the primary extent of development, which is determined on a project by project basis. Access to the waterfront is currently provided by a ten foot -wide walkway that extends from Bayside Drive along Promontory Channel to a gang plank that leads to a floating six foot -wide dockway at the boat slips. The floating dockway extends eastward from the land walkway and continues over water to its termination near the Balboa Island Bridge. An easement for the walkway along Promontory Channel has been dedicated to the public and accepted by the City. There are no other public pedestrian connections with the dockway. The floating dockway and gangplank are required to be accessible to the public pursuant to a pre- existing agreement between The Irvine Company and the City of Newport Beach. The applicant desires to maintain this existing public access and it is their belief that the project does not impact public access as a result. Given that the existing floating walkway is on the water over a third parry's property and the fact that the project would preclude any future land based access, the Commission considered reasonable alternatives to the existing access that included providing a dedicated walkway landward of the bulkhead or requiring an irrevocable offer to dedicate an easement for a future walkway. Bayside Residential Planned Community January 10, 2006 Page 7 of 11 The Commission found that the existing public access is adequate and is unique in that there is no public access to floating walkways in the harbor other than this area. Additionally, the Commission concluded that a land based walkway was not feasible in the near term due to the fact that the development directly to the east ( Bayside Cove Condominiums) physically blocks continuation of a land based walkway to the east. Furthermore, a majority of Commissioners felt that it was unlikely that the Bayside Coves would be redeveloped in the near term where the possibility to secure a land based easement to the east would be created. The Commission by a 5 -1 vote did not endorse the notion that the project without a direct dedication of land or an OTD for an easement for public access landward of the bulkhead would create an additional adverse impact to public access even after considering the impact of the prior construction of the existing bulkhead that effectively precludes land based public access below the mean high tide today. The Commission then focused on physically improving the floating walkway and securing it with an agreement, an easement or irrevocable offer to dedicate an easement and a new Harbor Permit to ensure its permanent maintenance. The City Attorney advised that public access over the existing dockway could be secured and maintained through the Harbor Permit process and an agreement with the applicant that would bind the leasehold interest. The conditions of approval require the applicant to obtain a new Harbor Permit and access agreement because the status of the existing Harbor Permit is unclear due to changes in property ownership and leasehold interests over time. The City Attorney advised that a new Harbor Permit and access agreement would be necessary and the applicant has agreed to take steps necessary to satisfy these requirements. If the City Council determines that public access should be provided on land for a finding that the project is consistent with the Coastal Act and the City's Coastal Land Use Plan, the Council should direct the applicant to revise the project accordingly and direct staff to prepare the necessary conditions to implement the desired change. Should the Council desire to preserve the future opportunity to have public access on land if the adjacent Bayside Coves Condominiums are redeveloped such that a land based public walkway can continue to the east, the Council may require an irrevocable offer to dedicate a public access easement. Staff believes that such a walkway should be a minimum of 6 feet in width and the area should be a separate lot from the individual residential lots. The lot should be held by the homeowners association and landscaped and not used by the residents as yard space. This would avoid the expectation of use that would lead to conflicts when the public walkway is implemented in the future. The City Attorney, in consultation with the project applicant, has prepared a draft condition should the Council choose to pursue this course. The draft condition of approval is as follows: "An additional lettered lot shall be created across the bay front of the numbered lots of Tentative Tract No. 15323 with a width of six feet from the bayside edge of Bayside Residential Planned Community January 10, 2006 Page 8 of 11 the bulkhead (commencing with the land) to be leased, landscaped and maintained by the Homeowner's Association (HOA) in a manner that is separate from the numbered lots. The fee owner and leasehold owner (or HOA if the common area lease has been assigned) shall submit to the City an irrevocable offer to dedicate a public easement over this lettered lot to be improved as a public walkway in the event of either: (1) The condominium project to the east of the Bayside Planned Community is redeveloped with a requirement that public access be provided landward of the existing bulkhead and such public access is constructed; or (2) The then existing public access on the floating walkway is eliminated. Within 12 months of the earlier of either event stated in (1) or (2) above, and upon acceptance by the City of the irrevocable offer to dedicate, the HOA (or fee owner if all leases have terminated by such time) will be required to provide, at its (as applicable) sole cost and expense, a concrete walkway within such lettered lot, complying with ADA standards and with lighting substantially equivalent to that provided on the floating walkway." In addition to this new condition, Condition No. 34 would need to be replaced as follows: 34. The Developer of the Bayside Planned Community shall obtain and maintain a valid Harbor Permit for the continued operation and maintenance of the existing or future docks, gangplanks and other dock related improvements. This Harbor Permit shall be transferred to the Homeowners Association (HOA) for the Bayside Planned Community upon its creation. As a condition to the Harbor Permit, the fee owner and leasehold owner shall execute an agreement to provide and maintain public access as identified within these Planned Community District Regulations, consistent with any condition which may be required regarding dedication of a walkway landward of the existing or future bulkhead. Should the Council choose to incorporate these changes in the project; the draft PC district regulations will need to be amended accordingly. These additional changes can be incorporated and submitted at the next meeting for adoption. City Council Actions Mitigated Negative Declaration The Planning Commission recommended that City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) prepared for this project should be adopted. The change in entitlement for this project, from a code amendment applying a Planned Residential Bayside Residential Planned Community January 10, 2006 Page 9 of 11 Overlay to a code amendment changing from Multi - Family Residential to Planned Community, does not change the scope or manner of development of the site. Accordingly, the analysis of potential environmental impacts, the conclusions, and the mitigation measures are not changed. Conclusions based on the Initial Study analysis indicated "no impact' or "less than significant impact' in the following topical areas: • Aesthetics • Agricultural Resources • Air Quality • Biological Resources • Cultural Resources • Hydrology and Water Quality • Land Use and Planning • Mineral Resources • Population and Housing • Public Services • Recreation • Transportation /Circulation • Utilities and Service Systems • Mandatory Findings of Significance The Initial Study indicated the need for mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level in the following topical areas: • Geology and Soils • Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Noise With mitigation measures and standard conditions of approval indicated in the Initial Study and set forth in the mitigation monitoring and reporting program included with the Mitigated Negative Declaration, all potential impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level. Potentially significant impacts and corresponding mitigation measures and standard conditions for proposed residential subdivisions are paraphrased in Table 1 of the attached staff report to the Planning Commission. Code Amendment Code Amendment No. 2005 -007 would change the zoning map designation of the project site from "Multi- Family Residential' to 'Planned Community ". The Code Amendment would include adoption of the "Bayside Residential Planned Community District Development Regulations" (PC Text) which set forth use and development standards for the property. The full text of the Code Amendment is included in the draft Ordinance included with this report for introduction by City Council. Tentative Tract Map The 3.92 -acre project site is subject to a ground lease and the Tentative Tract Map will create transferable leasehold interests, rather than fee simple ownership, in the 17 buildable lots. The Tentative Tract Map allocates land area among the proposed uses as shown in the proposed PC text. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Bayside Residential Planned Community January 10, 2006 Page 10 of 11 Council approval of the Tentative Tract Map for this project. The required findings and facts to be made by City Council in approving the Tentative Tract Map are included in the draft Resolution accompanying this report. Coastal Residential Development Permit A Coastal Residential Development Permit (CRDP) was processed for this project to implement Government Code Section 65590 (Mello Act) relative to displacement of low and moderate income households within the Coastal Zone. As this project proposes to remove 64 apartment units, the City required the management of the apartment complex to identify low and moderate income households in possession of any of the apartments proposed to be demolished. Apartment managers sent questionnaires to current residents to determine income levels and family sizes. Based on the survey results and other private financial information provided by the applicant, City staff concluded that none of the resident families or individuals is low or moderate - income as defined in State law and no replacement affordable housing units is required. A Coastal Residential Development Permit: therefore, may be approved for this project through adoption of the resolution included with this report. CONCLUSION After reviewing the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Code Amendment including the Bayside Residential Planned Community District Development Regulations, Tentative Tract Map, and after receiving public comments, the City Council needs to provide direction relative public access to the bay front and take action on the project by adopting the attached draft Resolution and introducing the attached Ordinance. The PC District regulations attached and conditions of approval reflect the recommendation of the Planning Commission and should the Council modify the project, changes to the regulations will need to be directed prior to adoption of the resolution this evening and adoption of the ordinance at the next meeting should the Council choose to approve the project. Should the Council choose to accept the recommendations of the Planning Commission and approved the project as designed and conditioned, the draft resolution and ordinance attached can be adopted and introduced without modification. Prepared by: Submitted by: For David Lepo Hogle- Ireland, Inc. Patricia Temple Planning Director Bayside Residential Planned Community January 10, 2006 Page 11 of 11 Exhibits 1. Bayside Residential Planned Community District Development Regulations 2. Planning Commission Resolution recommending approval 3. Planning Commission Staff Report dated November 3, 2005 4. Planning Commission Staff report dated August 18, 2005 5. Excerpt of Planning Commission minutes from November 3, 2005 and August 18, 2005 6. Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigating and Monitoring and Reporting Program 7. Resolution Adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration, Coastal Residential Development Permit and Tentative Tract Map 8. Ordinance No. Enacting Code Amendment No. 2005 -007 and Adopting the Bayside Residential Planned Community District Regulations 9. Project Plans This page is blank �a Exhibit No. 1 13 This page is blank d Bayside Residential Planned Community District Development Regulations Newport Beach, California Adopted by Ordinance No. 2005 - <insert date> 0 TABLE OF CONTENTS Bayside Residential Planned Community District Regulations Page Introduction.............................................................................. ..............................1 ProjectDescription .................................................................. ..............................1 Section I Statistical Analysis ..................................... ............................... 5 Section 11 Development and Use Regulations ........... ............................... 5 Section III Conditions of Approval .............................. ............................... 9 List of Figures Figure I General Site Location ................................. ..............................3 Figure II Land Use Plan ............................................ ..............................4 Figure III Site Plan .................................................... ............................... 22 i 1(D INTRODUCTION The subject of this document is a 3.92 -acre parcel on Bayside Drive that has been designated as "Bayside Residential Planned Community District' on the Districting Map for the City of Newport Beach. The designation was adopted to allow subdivision of the parcel into 17 single - family lots and subsequent construction of custom - designed, luxury homes. The Bayside Residential Planned Community District designation and "Bayside Residential Planned Community District Development Regulations" have been adopted consistent with Chapter 20.35, 'Planned Community District', of the Newport Beach Zoning Code. The project site is designated Multi - Family Residential in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. This designation permits both single - family and multiple - family dwellings, however the Bayside Planned Community does not permit more than one units per number lot within the subdivision. The 3.92 -acre parcel will be developed consistent with the General Plan and with regulations set forth herein and with all applicable ordinances, standards, and policies of the City of Newport Beach. All terms within this document shall be defined herein or they shall derive their meaning from the Newport Beach General Plan and /or Municipal Code. Where this document is in conflict with similar provisions of the Municipal Code, this document shall control. Where this document does not address a particular land use, zoning or development issue, the Municipal Code shall control. Nothing within this document shall be construed to relieve any party from compliance with all applicable laws, guidelines, policies of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. The subject property is located within the Coastal Zone and development pursuant to this PC Text will require a Coastal Development Permit from the California Coastal Commission. The general site location and land use plan for the subject property are set forth in Figure I and Figure 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Promontory Bay area of Newport Beach is bounded by Newport Bay, Marine Avenue /Jamboree Road and East Coast Highway where the project site is generally located. The Bayside Residential Planned Community District is within this area and is located on the south side of Bayside Drive between Promontory Channel, Newport Bay and the Cove Condominiums across from a neighborhood retail shopping center (Bayside Center) anchored by a supermarket. The Cove Condominiums (multiple - family residential dwellings) are located to the east of the subject property. Vehicular access to the planned community is provided from Bayside Drive by a single gated access. A bulkhead provides sufficient water depth at the south property line for I 0 34 private boat docks and access to the North Channel of Newport Bay. A twelve -foot- wide sidewalk/bike path adjoins the property frontage at Bayside Drive. An existing 10- foot -wide irrevocable public access easement and sidewalk generally consisting of a 4 -foot wide landscaped area and a 6 -foot wide sidewalk provide public access from Bayside Drive along the westerly boundary of the planned community to the North Channel of Newport Bay that separated the site from Balboa Island. The easement has a viewing platform at the southwest corner of the planned community that is connected to a 6 -foot wide gangplank that is connected to a 6- foot -wide floating walkway parallel to the waterfront. The walkway provides access to the boat docks and continues along the waterfront of the adjoining property on the east and terminates at bayward of the Newport Beach Yacht Club that abuts Marine Avenue to the east. The easement and walkway provide unobstructed public access to the waterfront The 3.92 -acre project site is to be developed as a gate community of custom - designed, single - family homes. Newport Tentative Tract Map No. 2004 -001 (Tract 15323) was approved with this PC Text and accommodates creation of 17 single - family lots represented as numbered lots on the Tract Map. All lettered lots are in common and are intended to accommodate common amenities and other improvements and are not developable for residences. Common area facilities include the private driveway providing access to all lots, a recreation lot, which may include a pool, landscaped areas, and shared access to the Promontory Bay walkway located between Lots 9 & 10. A 6 -foot wide fire access easement, that must remain open and unobstructed at all times, connects the private loop road to a gangplank and to the walkway at the boat docks. Adoption of the Bayside Residential Planned Community District zoning designation and corresponding Bayside Residential Planned Community District Development Regulations for the subject property was deemed an appropriate means of integrating a gated community of single - family, detached homes within the context of gated, attached apartment and condominium communities within the immediate area. Adoption of the PC designation and text provided the City the means to maintaining and enhancing public access to the waterfront. Development standards incorporated in the PC Text accommodate residential development consistent with the General Plan Multi - Family designation, yet of reduced scale than might otherwise be allowed, as a suitable transition from Bayside Drive to the waterfront. 2 J� VICINITY MAP BAY HARBOR - T.M. 15323 PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT NOT TO SCALE ADAMS • STREETER CIVIL ENGINEERS, INC. 15 Corporate Park, Irvine, CA 92606 Ph: (949) 474 -2330 Fax: (949) 474 -0251 CONTACT: FELIX GONZALEZ We- H CJ t'� w FUG' Aer U N S e c W d W n I �1 O cc ZdHS Z Z i Cl1 as ti A a J Q Q ~ �y Z � W F p J W cr W W / W � U j � ui N U } J cr Cl) J 3..::o. Q m Z N 0 U CL Z AV9 1Z10iNOVIONd 03HDVJ30 _M083NNOO 031VN91S3ONn kllViV3 3N18M V 310NIS WNOLLV38038 SECTION I STATISTICAL ANALYSIS 1. Area of Development Total Area: 3.92 acres 2. Site Area and Usage A. Individual residential leases 2.82 acres (Lots 1 -17) B. Common recreation area: 0.19 acres. (Lot "A ") C. Irrevocable public access 0.14 acres (Lot "B ") D. Common open space & landscape 0.10 acres. (Lots "C ", "D ", & "H ") E. Vehicular driveways 0.67 acres (Lot "E ") SECTION II DEVELOPMENT & USE REGULATIONS 1. Permitted Uses A. Single- family, detached dwellings B. Accessory structures (i.e. garages, gazebos, barbeques, fences, walls, etc.) C. Recreation facilities ancillary to residential uses D. Model homes and on -site sales office E. Home occupations pursuant to the Zoning Code 2. Intensity of Development Maximum permissible number of units: 17 single - family, detached dwellings 4. Minimum Lot Area and Minimum lot areas are as indicated in Table 1, "Bayside Planned Community District Regulations." 5. Maximum Buildable Area Maximum buildable areas are as indicated in Table 1, "Bayside Planned Community District Regulations." 6. Maximum Floor Area The maximum allowable floor area is 1.75 times maximum buildable area as indicated in Table 1, 'Bayside Planned Community District Regulations." 5 �l 7. Minimum Yards Minimum yards are as indicated in Table 1, "Bayside Planned Community District Regulations." Table 1 Bayside Planned Community District Regulations Minimum Maximum Maximum Buildable 3 Minimum Yards Lot Lot Area Floor (Sq. Ft.) Area .)l (Sq. Ft.)' Area Front Side Rear 1 6,550 4,048 7,084 35r4 5r5.6 10i5 2 5,818 3,172 5,551 20' 5' 10' 3 10,754 6,230 10,902 18'7 5' 1V 4 7,800 4,649 8,135 25i7 5' 5i8 5 8$47 5,124 8,967 25i7 5'9 5'8 6 6,500 3,740 6,545 25i7 5' 5i8 7 8,125 4,899 8,573 25i7 5' 5'8 8 6$00 3,649 6$86 25i7 5' 5'8 9 8,148 4,666 8,166 20i7 5' 5'8,10 10 7,155 4,113 7,198 W7 5' 5'8,e 11 6,000 3,540 6,195 20'7 5' 5'8 12 6,000 3,540 6,195 20'7 5' 5'8 13 6,000 3,327 5,822 20'7 5'/10' 5'8 14 6,720 3,564 6,237 20'7 5'/10' 5'8 15 8,400 3,856 6,748 15/'20'7'" 5'S 106'8 16 6,640 3,851 6,739 20' 5'5 10'5 17 5,800 3,364 5,887 20' 5'5 10'5 ' Lot area less minimum front, side, and rear yard areas 2 1.75 X Maximum buildable area and not including maximum 400 sq. ft. attributable to required, enclosed parking 3 Minimum 18' required between face of garage wall and back of curb 4 Minimum 20' front yard if merged with Lot 2 5 Lots 1, 15, 16, & 17, minimum 10' yard required parallel to Bayside Drive and measured from the respective landscape Lot "C" or Lot "D ". 6 Minimum 10' side yard required between building wall and easterly tract boundary. 7 Water -side yard deemed "front yard" for Lots 3 -15 (see Tract Map) 8 Minimum 5' rear yard required between each one -story building wall and curbside property line; minimum 10' rear yard required between each two -story building wall and curbside property line. 9 Minimum 5' side yard required adjacent to "Fire Access Easement" shown on Tract Map 70 Minimum 5' side yard adjacent to "pedestrian access easement" on Tract Map Minimum 20' required at southerly 55' of front yard; minimum 15' required at northerly 42' per Tract Map to 8. Building Height The baseline for measuring height shall be finished grade. The maximum permissible height of any dwelling shall be 28 feet to the mid -point of a sloping roof or to the top of a flat roof. The peak of a sloping roof shall not exceed 33 feet. If a roof -top deck is proposed, the height of any protective railing shall be no higher than 28 feet. The maximum permissible height of any accessory structure shall be 12 feet. 9. Building Pad Elevations Building pads adjacent to the bulk -head along Newport Channel may be raised to elevations as shown on Newport Tract Map No. 2004 -001 (Tentative Tract Map No. 15323) approved in conjunction with adoption of this text. 10. Vehicular Access Vehicular access to all buildable lots within the Bayside Community shall be provided by a private driveway that shall comply with City Council Policy L -4 except that sidewalks are not required. The minimum width of the private driveways shall be 36 feet measured curb to curb when parking is allowed on both sides of the private driveway and 32 feet curb to curb when parking is allowed on one side or no parking is allowed. Curb -side parking spaces within on Lot "E" shall be 8' x 22' minimum. The Bayside P -C development may be a private (gate guarded) community with secured vehicular access. 11. Parkin The size of open and enclosed parking spaces and areas shall be as specified by the residential parking standards contained in the Newport Beach Zoning Code. A minimum of two (2) garage parking spaces shall be provided per dwelling. In addition, a minimum of two parking spaces (side -by -side, not tandem) shall be provided on the driveway approach to each garage of each single - family dwelling. A total of 19 curb -side parking spaces shall be provided on the common, private driveway that provides access to each buildable lot. Driveway approaches to each dwelling shall not exceed 20 feet for a two -car garage, 25 feet for a three -car garage, and 32 feet for a four -car garage. A maximum of 1 driveway approach is permitted dwelling. 12. Signs All signs shall conform to the all applicable sign standards of the Municipal Code. A sign program for the Bayside Planned Community shall be submitted pursuant F �3 to Section 20.67 of the Zoning Code for review and approval by the Planning Director. 13. Lighting All lighting within the development shall be implemented and maintained in accordance with applicable City Standards and shall be designed and maintained in a manner which minimizes impacts on adjacent land uses. Nighttime lighting shall be limited to that necessary for security. All plans for lighting shall be prepared and signed by a licensed electrical engineer and shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning Director. 14. Fences, Hedges and Walls Fences, hedges and walls shall be limited to three (3) feet in height in all front yards and in the rear yards of waterfront lots (Lots 3 -15). Fences, hedges, and walls shall be limited to six (6) feet in height in all other rear yards and side yards including the perimeter wall at Bayside Drive. Exception: Hedges along the perimeter wall along Bayside Drive shall be limited to twelve (12) feet in height. Exception: Open -work walls and fences that are ninety - percent of the wall plane open (wrought iron in combination with pilaster) up to a maximum of six (6) feet in height are permitted at the side property line of each waterfront lot (Lots 3 -15) and extending into the front yard from the setback line to the waterfront property line. Walls that extend in the same plane as the front (common driveway -side) wall of a dwelling into a required side yard for purposes of enhancing the entrance of an entry courtyard may be up to twelve (12) feet in height. 15. Arbors and Trellises Arbors and trellises may project into yards abutting the common driveway provided no such structure is closer than four (4) feet to the property line. The footprint area of such structures shall not exceed forty (40) square feet with a maximum height of ten (10) feet. Arbors and trellises must be at least 50% open. I Ii 16. Barbeques Freestanding barbeques may project into all residential side yards, into rear yards of non - waterfront lots (Lots 1, 2, 16, 17) and front yards of waterfront lots (Lots 3 -15) provided a minimum distance of four (4) feet is maintained between the barbeques and the respective side, rear, or front property lines. No barbeque including chimney may exceed five (5) feet in height. Barbeques shall be located so as not to impede emergency access. 17. Structures in Common Areas Freestanding structures such as entry arbors, trellis, and colonnades are permitted in common areas. Said structures are limited to twelve (12) feet in height. Entry arbors, trellises, and colonnades must be at least 50% open and shall be located at least four (4) feet from the nearest property line or lines. Freestanding fireplaces or barbeques in common areas are permitted with a maximum height of ten (10) feet and subject to compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. Fireplaces and barbeques must be located at least four (4) feet from the nearest property line or lines. SECTION III CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The following conditions shall apply to all development pursuant to the Bayside Planned Community Development Regulations: 1. Water service to the Planned Community will be furnished by the City of Newport Beach. Each dwelling unit/building shall be served with an individual water service lateral connection to the public water system unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department and the Building Department. 2. Sewage disposal service facilities to the Planned Community will be provided by the City of Newport Beach and the Orange County Sanitation District. Each dwelling unit/building shall be served with an individual sewer service lateral connection to the public sewer system unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department and the Building Department. 3. Grading and erosion control shall be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the City of Newport Beach Grading Ordinance and shall be subject to permits issued by the Building and Planning Departments. 4. The developer shall comply with the City's water quality and on -site non -storm runoff retention requirements by the preparation and approval by the City of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Existing drainage outlets within 6 �,5 the existing seawalls that discharge on -site runoff into the Bay shall be modified to meet the City's on -site runoff water quality requirements. 5. Fire equipment access walkways, streets, gangplanks, and dock ways shall be designed to meet exiting and fire protection requirements as specified by the Uniform Building Code and shall be subject to review and approval by the City Newport Beach Building and Fire Departments. 6. Street, drainage and utility improvements shall be submitted on City standard improvement plan formats. All of the plan sheets shall be prepared by California licensed professionals responsible for the designs shown on the Plans. 7. All improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the current edition of the City Design Criteria, Standard Special Provisions, and Standard Drawings. 8. The California Vehicle Code shall be enforced on the private streets and drives, and delineation acceptable to the Police Department and Public Works Department shall be provided along the sidelines of the private streets and drives. 9. Curb -side collection of refuse shall be subject to City of Newport Beach approval. 10. The design of public access improvements shall provide for full public access 24- hours a day, 7 -days a week to 100% of the bay frontage. The minimum width for all public access along the water front shall be six (6) feet clear and shall be upgraded to meet all ADA standards. The public gangplank shall also be designed to meet ADA standards. 11. A 12 -foot wide concrete sidewalk/bike path behind the street curb face shall be provided along the Bayside Drive frontage. 12. All on -site common area improvements such as parks, docks, entry gates and entry, all on -site drainage, sanitary sewer, water, and electrical systems shall be owned or leased, operated and maintained by the HOA. 13. All overhead utilities serving the P -C shall be made underground. 14. The developer shall be required to submit a sign plan for review by the Planning Department for conformity with Chapter 20.67 of the Zoning Code. 15. The project is subject to all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards, unless specifically waived or modified by the Planned Community District Regulations. 10 -�(D 16. The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Tract as Exhibit No. 1 and the Preliminary Plan marked as Exhibit No. 2 to Planning Commission Staff Report for PA 2004 -072 dated August 18, 2005. 17. The applicant is required to obtain all applicable permits from the City Building and Fire Departments. 18. The applicant shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws. Material violation of any of those laws in connection with the use may be cause for revocation of this Use Permit. 19. This approval was based on the particulars of the individual case and does not in and of itself or in combination with other approvals in the vicinity or Citywide constitute a precedent for future approvals or decisions. 20. Should this site be sold or otherwise come under different ownership or be operated by a different entity than the applicant, any future owners, assignees or operators shall be notified of the conditions of this approval by the current owner or leasing company. 21. No dwelling other than one, single- family, detached dwelling may be constructed on any buildable lot created by Tentative Tract Map 53232. No dwelling may exceed a height of twenty -eight (28) feet as measured consistent with Municipal Code Section 20.65.030, "Measurement of Height". These restrictions shall be included in the Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC &R's) which shall be prepared and recorded with the County Clerk at the time a Final Map is recorded. 22. Boat slips fronting the project site shall be operated as a residential marina for the 17 residential leaseholds of the Bayside Residential Planned Community. The slips shall not be rented to anyone who is not a resident of the Bayside Residential Planned Community. These restrictions shall be noted on the Final Map and incorporated into Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC &R's) which shall be prepared and recorded with the County Clerk at the time a Final Map is recorded. 23. The applicant shall prepare architectural guidelines that will apply to the design of all dwellings proposed for construction on lots created by Tentative Tract Map 15323 approved together with this Use Permit. The architectural guidelines shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning Director. The architectural guidelines shall be incorporated into Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC &R's) which shall be prepared and recorded with the County Clerk at the time a Final Map is recorded. The CC &R's shall require that all dwellings and improvements comply with the architectural guidelines. 24. The applicant shall prepare plans for gangplank and dockway improvements and for related improvements necessary to comply with handicapped access requirements of the California Building Codes and to enhance pedestrian safety II �I and improve the visual character of the gangplank and dockway through inclusion of lighting, railings, and other appropriate improvements. The plans shall be developed in consultation with the City's Harbor Resources Division and subject to final approval by Harbor Resources, Public Works, and Planning. 25. The gangplank and dockway shall be designed to meet exiting and fire protection requirements as specified by the applicable Codes and shall be subject to review and approval by the Newport Beach Building, Fire, and Harbor Resources Departments. 26. The proposed project shall conform to the requirements of the Uniform Building Code, any local amendments to the UBC, and State Disabled Access requirements, unless otherwise approved by the Building Department. 27. All work conducted within the public right -of -way shall be approved under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 28. All mechanical equipment shall be screened from view of adjacent properties and adjacent public streets within the limits authorized by this permit, and shall be sound attenuated in accordance with Chapter 10.26 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, Community Noise Control. 29. A sign plan shall be submitted for review for conformity with Chapter 20.67 of the Zoning Code. The final location of the signs shall be reviewed by the City Traffic Engineer and shall conform to City Standard 110 -L to ensure that adequate sight distance is provided. 30. Temporary signs shall be prohibited in the public right -of -way unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department in conjunction with the issuance of an encroachment permit or encroachment agreement. 31. The Developer shall file one (1) Final Tract Map (Map). 32. The Map shall be prepared on the California coordinate system (NAD88). Prior to recordation of the Map, the surveyor /engineer preparing the Map shall submit to the County Surveyor and the City of Newport Beach a digital - graphic file of said map in a manner described in the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual. The Map to be submitted to the City of Newport Beach shall comply with the City's CADD Standards. Scanned images will not be accepted. 33. The Final Map shall include reconfigured Lots C and D that accommodate the perimeter wall to be reconstructed along the Bayside Drive and a minimum 4- foot -wide landscaped setback between the Bayside Drive right -of -way and the perimeter wall. 12 ag 34. The applicant shall execute an agreement to ensure that public access as identified within the Planned Community District Regulations will be permanently provided and properly maintained. The applicant shall record an irrevocable offer to dedicate (IOD) a public access easement for a floating walkway landward of the U. S. Bulkhead Line or obtain a public access easement for the existing floating walkway that is located bayward of the U. S. Bulkhead line from the current property owner. The form and content of the public access agreement, IOD and public access easement shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Attorney. Prior to the issuance of a building permit or recordation of the final map, the applicant shall: a) obtain and maintain a Harbor Permit for the continued operation and maintenance of the existing or future docks, gangplanks and other dock related improvements fronting the project site, and b) record the public access agreement, and c) record the IOD or public access easement as described in this condition. The Harbor Permit shall be transferred to the homeowners association for the Bayside Residential Planned Community upon its creation. 35. Prior to recordation, the Map shall tie the boundary of the map into the Horizontal Control System established by the County Surveyor in a manner described in Sections 7 -9 -330 and 7 -9 -337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual, Subarticle 18. Monuments (one inch iron pipe with tag) shall be set On Each Lot Corner unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Monuments shall be protected in place if installed prior to completion of construction project. 36. A hydrology and hydraulic study shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Public Works Department, along with a master plan of water, sewer and storm drain facilities for the on -site improvements prior to recording of the Map. 37. Submit written documentation from the holders of the various existing easements shown on the Tentative Trace Map as being relocated or replaced ore relinquished that they have reviewed and agreed with the quitclaim of their respective easements as proposed by the Developer. 38. Easements for public emergency and security ingress /egress, weekly refuse service, and public utility purposes on all private streets shall be dedicated to the City. Said easements shall be shown on the tract maps. 39. No structures shall be constructed within the limits of any utilities easements. 40. All applicable fees shall be paid prior to the City approval of the Final Tract Map. 41. Construction surety in a form acceptable to the City, guaranteeing the completion of the various required public improvements, shall be submitted to the Public Works Department prior to the City approval of the Final Tract Map. 13 RI 42. All improvements within the public right -of -way shall be designed and constructed per City Standards. 43. In the event that private construction work damaged existing public improvements surrounding the site, the Public Works Inspector at his discretion will require additional public works reconstruction work as needed. 44. The centerline of the curb access ramps proposed at the development site entrance shall parallel with the Bayside Drive roadway alignment. 45. The construction of bulkhead and gangways requires separate plan check and permits. 46. The construction of bulkhead and gangways shall be performed only during periods of low tide. Plastic sheeting shall be placed below the work location to collect the fallen construction debris. The collected debris shall be removed and disposed of at the end of each workday. 47. Prior to the construction of bulkhead and gangways, a determination shall be made by a qualified biologist as to the existence of eelgrass surrounding /nearby the work site. In case of eelgrass, the Developer shall coordinate with the City's Harbor Resources Division to apply for and obtain the required permits from The US Army Corps of Engineers, The US Fish and Wildlife Service, The California Coastal Commission, and other agencies for the work. 48. All improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the current edition of the City Design Criteria, Standard Special Provisions, and Standard Drawings. 49. Street, drainage and utility improvements shall be submitted on City standard improvement plan formats. All of the plan sheets shall be prepared by California licensed professionals responsible for the designs shown on the Plans. 50. The entry gate, when fully opened, shall stay clear of the travel path of vehicles making right turns into the Tract. 51. All on -site drainage, sanitary sewer, water, and electrical systems shall be owned, operated, and maintained by the Homeowners Association. 52. There are existing drainage outlets within the existing seawalls that discharge on- site runoff into the Bay. Submit details on the disposition of these existing drainage outlets. If these outlets are to remain in place, submit details as to how these outlets will be modified to meet the City's on -site runoff retention water quality requirements. 14 50 53. Details shall be provided as to how the development will comply with the City's water quality and on -site non -storm runoff retention requirements. 54. All storm drain and sanitary sewer mains shall be installed with MacWrap. 55. ADA compliant curb access ramps shall be constructed at all interior curb returns. 56. Each dwelling unit/building shall be served with an individual water service and sewer lateral connection to the public water and sewer systems unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department and the Building Department. 57. The intersection of the driveways with Bayside Drive shall be designed to provide sight distance for a secondary roadway per City of Newport Beach Standard Drawing STD - 110 -L. Slopes, landscaping, walls, signs and other obstructions shall be considered in the sight distance requirements. Landscaping within the sight lines (sight cone) shall not exceed 24- inches in height and the monument identification sign must be located outside the line of sight cone. The sight distance may be modified at non - critical locations, subject to approval by the Traffic Engineer. 58. The project shall provide 45 feet of vehicle stacking distance prior to the entry call box measured from the property line. Two entry lanes shall be provided, one lane for guest call box use and one for residential use. 59. Provide details on the vehicular turnaround area for garaged vehicles exiting Lots No. 3, No. 9 and Lot No. 15 and revise as required by the City Engineer.. 60. On -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation system shall be subject to further review by the City Traffic Engineer. 61. Provide Class III standpipe system at existing dock. Remove 2%connections at bulkhead. 62. Provide fire department connection for docks on Bayside Drive. Fire Department connection shall be located within 150 feet of a public hydrant on same side of street. 63. Automatic fire extinguishing system required for residential units when the total floor area exceeds 5,000 square feet. 64. Minimum width at entrance shall be 14 feet clear; preliminary plans shows less than 14 feet at two locations. 65. Turning radius for fire apparatus shall not be less than 20 feet inside radius and 40 feet outside radius. Show on plan. ]5 �1 66. Any obstructions in required fire access roadways, including speed bumps and speed humps, are prohibited. 67. Provide on -site public fire hydrants. 68. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the site shall be examined to determine the existence and extent of archaeological and paleontological resources in accordance with adopted City policies. 69. Prior to the issuance of grading /building permits, the final design of all required off -site right of way improvements shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department and Traffic Engineer. 70. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall prepare a construction phasing plan and construction delivery plan that includes routing of large vehicles. The plan shall include a haul route plan for review and approval of the Public Works Department. Said plan shall specify the routes to be traveled, times of travel, total number of trucks, number of trucks per hour, time of operation, and safety /congestion precautions (e.g., signage, flagmen). Large construction vehicles shall not be permitted to travel narrow streets and alleys as determined by the Public Works Department. Traffic control and transportation of equipment and materials shall be conducted in accordance with state and local requirements. 71. Prior to the issuance of individual building permits, the applicant shall provide designs for building foundations and slabs appropriate to mitigating liquefaction hazard. 72. Prior to the issuance of grading, the applicant shall provide results from an inspection by a qualified engineer indicating the condition of the seawalls and tiebacks and make repairs to same as necessary. 73. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP) shall be prepared and approved by the City of Newport Beach as the local permitting agency in accordance with the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The SWPPP shall include BMPs to eliminate and /or minimize stormwater pollution prior to, and during construction. The SWPPP shall require construction to occur in stages and stabilized prior to disturbing other areas and require the use of temporary diversion dikes and basins to trap sediment from run -off and allow clarification prior to discharge. 74. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) specifically identifying the Best Management Practices (BMP's) that will be used on site to control predictable pollutant runoff. The plan shall identify the types of structural and non - structural measures to be LG p used. The plan shall comply with the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP). Particular attention should be addressed to the appendix section "Best Management Practices for New Development." The WQMP shall clearly show the locations of structural BMP's, and assignment of long term maintenance responsibilities (which shall also be included in the Maintenance Agreement). The plan shall be prepared to the format shown in "Attachment C" of the DAMP title "Water Quality Management Plan Outline" and be subject to the approval of the City. 75. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall obtain a NPDES permit. The applicant shall incorporate storm water pollutant control into erosion control plans using BMPs to the maximum extent possible. Evidence that proper clearances have been obtained through the State Water Resources Control Board shall be given to the Building Department prior to issuance of grading permits. 76. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit evidence to the City Building Official that the applicant has obtained coverage under the NPDES statewide General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. 77. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall document to the City of Newport Beach Building Department that all facilities will be designed and constructed to comply with current seismic safety standards and the current City - adopted version of the Uniform Building Code. 78. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a geotechnical report shall be submitted with construction drawings for plan check. The Building Department shall ensure that the project complies with the geotechnical recommendations included in the " Geotechnical Investigation" (Petra, 2004), as well as additional requirements, if any, imposed by the Newport Beach Building Department. 79. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide written evidence to the Planning Director that a qualified archaeologist has been retained to observe grading activities and conduct salvage excavation of archaeological resources as necessary. The archaeologist shall be present at the pre - grading conference, shall establish procedures for archaeological resource surveillance, and shall establish, in cooperation with the applicant, procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, identification and evaluation of the artifacts as appropriate. If additional or unexpected archaeological features are discovered, the archaeologist shall report such findings to the applicant and to the Planning Department. If the archaeological resources are found to be significant, the archaeological observer shall determine appropriate actions, in cooperation with the applicant, for exploration and /or salvage. These actions, as well as final mitigation and disposition of the resources, shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Director. ]7 33 80. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide written evidence to the Planning Department that a qualified paleontologist has been retained to observe grading activities and salvage fossils as necessary. The paleontologist shall be present at the pre - grading conference, shall establish procedures for paleontological resource surveillance, and shall establish, in cooperation with the applicant, procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, identification and evaluation of fossils. If major paleontological resources are discovered which require long term baiting or redirecting of grading, the paleontologist shall report such findings to the applicant and to the Planning Department. The paleontologist shall determine appropriate actions, in cooperation with the applicant, which ensure proper exploration and /or salvage. These actions, as well as final mitigation and disposition of the resources, shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Director. 81. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a detailed acoustical analysis shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant and submitted to the City. This acoustical analysis shall describe and quantify the noise sources impacting the area and the measures required to meet the 65 CNEL exterior residential noise standard. The final grading plans shall incorporate the noise barriers required by the analysis and the property owner /developer shall install these barriers. 82. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building demolition permit, the applicant shall submit an asbestos abatement and removal plan to the City Building Official for approval. The abatement and removal plan shall comply with notification and asbestos removal procedures outlined in SCAQMD Rule 1403 to reduce asbestos related health issues. 83. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the applicant shall submit a lead - based paint abatement and removal plan in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local regulatory requirements to the City Building Official for approval. 84. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit, the applicant shall submit an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) in a manner meeting approval of the City Building Official, to demonstrate compliance with local and state water quality regulations for grading and construction activities. The ESCP shall identify how all construction materials, wastes, grading or demolition debris, and stockpiles of soil, aggregates, soil amendments, etc. shall be properly covered, stored, and secured to prevent transport into local drainages or coastal waters by wind, rain, tracking, tidal erosion, or dispersion. The ESCP shall also describe how the applicant will ensure that all Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be maintained during construction of any future public right -of -ways. A copy of the current ESCP shall be kept at the project site and be available for City of Newport Beach review on request 85. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect for review and W �q subsequent approval by the Planning Director upon determination that the landscape plan is consistent with City standards and policies. The landscape and irrigation plan shall include landscaping and irrigation within the Bayside Drive right -of -way between the back of public sidewalk and the boundary of the Tract Map. These plans shall incorporate drought tolerant plantings and water efficient irrigation practices, and the plans shall be approved by the Planning Department, General Services Department and Public Works Department. All planting areas shall be provided with a permanent underground automatic sprinkler irrigation system of a design suitable for the type and arrangement of the plant materials selected. The irrigation system shall be adjustable based upon either a signal from a satellite or an on -site moisture - sensor. Planting areas adjacent to vehicular activity shall be protected by a continuous concrete curb or similar permanent barrier. Landscaping shall be located so as not to impede vehicular sight distance to the satisfaction of the Traffic Engineer. 86. Prior the issuance of a building permit, the project shall be reviewed by the Building Department to verify compliance with the following requirements: a. Project design must comply. with the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC) seismic design criteria. b. Structure setback must comply with either the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC) or the Orange County Grading Manual. c. Any imported soil for general grading shall have an Expansion Index of less than 60. d. Control site drainage. e. Design footing embedments to resist the effects of expansive soil. f. Maintain a proportionately high dead load component on foundations. g. Over - excavate and moisture soils condition below foundations, floor slabs and hardscape. h. Use of articulation and reinforcement of concrete slabs and footings. i. Use of rigid foundation and floor slabs. 87. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the project shall be reviewed by the Building Department to verify compliance with the following requirements: a. Provide on -site hydrants; b. All gates to property shall be automatic and provided with opticom and knox key. 88. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupant, the applicant shall schedule an inspection by the Code and Water Quality Enforcement Division to confirm that all landscaping materials and irrigation systems have been installed in accordance with the approved plans. 19 35 89. Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy or final of building Permits, the applicant shall schedule an evening inspection by the Code and Water Quality Enforcement Division to confirm control of light and glare as specified in these conditions. 90. During construction of the proposed improvements: a. construction vehicles shall not block roadways on any roads adjacent to the project site or any of the roads leading to or from the project site; b. construction equipment will be properly maintained at an off -site location and includes proper tuning and timing of engines. Equipment maintenance records and equipment design specification data sheets shall be kept on -site during construction; C. all contractors will be advised not to idle construction equipment on site for more than ten minutes; d. on -site diesel fueled construction equipment will be fueled with aqueous diesel fuel; e. cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials, or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard; f. pave, water (three times daily), or apply non -toxic soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites; g. sweep all paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites daily with water sweepers; h. Sweep streets daily with water sweepers if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets; i. Hydro seed or apply non -toxic stabilizers to inactive construction areas; j. enclose, cover, water (twice daily), or apply non -toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.); k. limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour; I. install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways during; M. replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible; n. all construction equipment shall be properly tuned and maintained; o. contractors shall maintain and operate construction equipment so as to minimize exhaust emissions; P. trucks and vehicles in loading or unloading queues shall not idle; q. construction activities shall be staged and scheduled to avoid emissions peaks, and discontinued during second -stage smog alerts 91. Durinq construction of the proposed improvements, in accordance with Public Resources Code 5097.94, if human remains are found, the Orange County coroner must be notified within 24 hours of the discovery. If the coroner determines that the remains are not recent, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission in Sacramento to determine the most likely descendent for the area. The designated Native American representative then 20 3 (0 determines in consultation with the property owner the disposition of the human remains. 92. The applicant shall be responsible for the payment of all administrative costs identified by the Planning Department within 30 days of receiving a final notification of costs or prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. 93. All landscape materials and landscaped areas shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the approved landscape plan. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and growing condition and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing and trimming. All landscaped areas shall be kept free of weeds and debris. All irrigation systems shall be kept operable, including adjustments, replacements, repairs, and cleaning as part of regular maintenance. 94. Prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, applicant shall provide an agreement, in form acceptable to the City Attorney, which provides for maintenance of landscaping within the Bayside Drive right -of -way between the back of public sidewalk and the boundary of the Tract Map. The agreement shall include right of entry to the right -of -way for the benefit of the applicant, the Homeowners association, and any successors for purposes of maintaining the landscaping. 95. Prior to issuance of anv Certificate of Occupancy, applicant shall complete improvements to the gangplank and dockway required herein. 96. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the first dwelling constructed in the tract, applicant shall provide an agreement, in form acceptable to the City Attorney, which provides for maintenance of the pedestrian accessway on Lot "B ", the gangplank and dockway and related improvements by the Homeowners Association. The agreement shall include right -of -entry to the City's property for the benefit of the applicant, the Homeowners Association, and any successors for purposes of maintaining the improvements. 97. Prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, applicant shall provide a disclosure statement, in form acceptable to the City Attorney and to the Planning Director, which shall be provided to each prospective lessee of one of the 17 lots in the subdivision advising of the potential noxious characteristics of the nearby boatyard which could adversely affect the prospective lessee's enjoyment of the property. The disclosure statement shall be included and recorded with the Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions at the County Recorder's Office and each lessee shall be required to acknowledge receipt of the disclosure statement, in writing, prior to executing a lease and the written acknowledgement shall be recorded together with the lease agreement with the County Recorder. 21 31 nl N C N a d d a� LL 3� h S e? [ R! lr E' III flit ag i. fl! it :7 is I� I. 2 t f rs I _ f i E 9 qi All ti• V - I I Jx �� h: i 4 l' .B p �a a ..�la a y�'. ?•3�g,� y 8 i a E S K I K O 2 1 h ": `mot � tpp , lr E' III flit ag i. fl! it :7 is I� I. 2 t - - -I- LL... -i -J tE z4 a NORTH 8 A Y FRONT H�)I o�;l ©G- GR`Y$_p MORE DESIG N^rQl _ f p ti• I h: i 4 � p �a - - -I- LL... -i -J tE z4 a NORTH 8 A Y FRONT H�)I o�;l ©G- GR`Y$_p MORE DESIG N^rQl This page is blank qo Exhibit No. 2 Ltv This page is blank 43, RESOLUTION NO. 1679 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (SCH NO. 2005- 061019) AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM AND APPROVE CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2005 -007, PLANNED COMMUNITY TEXT NO. 54, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2004- 001 (TRACT 15323), AND COASTAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 2005 -001 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 919 BAYSIDE DRIVE (PA 2004 -072). WHEREAS, an application was filed by UGS Development Inc. for a 3.92 -acre property identified as 919 Bayside Drive. The application requests approval of. a Code Amendment to change the zoning district of the subject property from Multifamily Residential to Planned Community and adopting Planned Community Text No. 54; a Tentative Tract Map subdividing the subject property into 17 single - family lots for lease purposes and 6 lots for recreation and swimming pool facilities, for public pedestrian access, for landscaped areas, for private roads, and for private boat docks; and a Coastal Residential Development Permit ensuring compliance with State law relative to low and moderate income housing opportunities within the Coastal Zone. WHEREAS, in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements, an Initial Study and a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration were distributed to all responsible and trustee agencies and other interested parties for a 30 -day public review period commencing on June 3, 2005 and ending on July 5, 2005. WHEREAS, on August 18, 2005, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing at which time the Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with comments received thereon, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program were considered. Notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with law and testimony was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at the hearing. WHEREAS, the public hearing was continued and at the continued public hearing on November 3, 2005, the Planning Commission considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with comments received thereon, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. WHEREAS, the City maintains and implements development standards through the Zoning Ordinance which enables adoption of a Planned Community district. WHEREAS, adoption of the Planned Community district and the Bayside Residential Planned Community District Development Regulations accommodates development of single - family dwellings which are permitted within the General Plan Multi - Family Land Use designation and is thus consistent with the General Plan. City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. 1671 Page 2 of 19 WHEREAS, the Tentative Tract Map subject to conditions of approval includes required information including legal description of property, ownership, existing and proposed uses and improvements, proposed lot sizes, existing and proposed infrastructure, and public and private easements in compliance with the Subdivision Code and will not result in a detriment to the public health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or welfare of persons residing or working in or adjacent to the neighborhood of such use, and will not be a detriment to the properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the City for the following reasons: 1. Finding The proposed subdivision is consistent with and serves to implement the policies and provisions of the General Plan. Facts The General Plan Land Use Element directs that all subdivisions be consistent with the Subdivision Code. Subject to Conditions of Approval, the Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the Subdivision Code. 2. Finding The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan. Facts Consistency with the City of Newport Beach Land Use Element. The proposed project site lies within the Promontory Bay Area, as defined in the City's Land Use Element. The Promontory Bay Area includes Harbor Island, Linda Isle, and all the area bounded by Newport Bay, Marine Avenue /Jamboree Road, and East Coast Highway. Existing land uses within the Promontory Bay Area are diverse and include Single - Family Detached Residential, Multi - Family Residential, Neighborhood Commercial, Recreational and Marina, and Recreational and Environmental Open Space land uses. The proposed project would be consistent with existing and allowed land uses within the Promontory Bay Area. The Land Use Element designates the proposed project site as Multi - Family Residential to reflect the existing apartment complex. As previously stated, the proposed project would establish 17 residential lots. Single- family residences are a permitted use within sites designated for multi - family residences (page 23 of the Land Use Element). Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the Multi - Family Residential land use designation. It would also be consistent with applicable policies of the Land Use Element. Consistency with the City of Newport Beach Harbor and Bay Element. Policy HB -1.1.2 of the Harbor and Bay Element requires that potential impacts on qJ City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution N06-n Page 3 of 19 water - dependent and water - related land uses and activities be considered when reviewing proposal for land use changes. Land use changes associated with the proposed project would be limited to the project site. No adjacent properties would be impacted by the proposed project. Since no water - related or water- dependent uses occupy the site, no impact to these uses would occur. Consistency with the City of Newport Beach Housing Element. The project will eliminate 64 apartments and replace them with 17 single - family residences for an overall reduction of 47 units. The City has approximately 14,600 rental units out of approximately 37,500 total housing units (2000 Census), and the reduction and change in housing type is not considered significant. Goal 2 of the Housing Element states that the City will "provide a balanced residential community, comprised of a variety of housing types, designs, and opportunities for all social and economic segments, including very low -, low -, moderate- and upper- income individuals and households." The proposed project is consistent with this goal and is not inconsistent with any other goals or policies in the Housing Element. Consistency with the City of Newport Beach Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan. According to the City's Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan ( LCPLUP), the proposed project is located in the Coastal Zone. Therefore, a coastal development permit (CDP) is required from the California Coastal Commission. The LCPLUP references the fact that the project site is designated for Multi - Family Residential Use and is allowed one unit for each 2,178 square feet of buildable lot area. As previously discussed, the proposed project is consistent with this designation. Section 30210 -30212 of the California Coastal Act (CCA) requires that public access and recreational opportunities be provided for all the people of the state, that development not interfere with the public's right of access, and that new development provide public access to the shoreline. As previously discussed, the proposed project would provide public access to Promontory Bay and North Bay Front via public walkways, and would improve elements within those walkways to meet current ADA requirements. The proposed project is not a recreation or visitor - serving facility. It would not require diking, dredging, filling or shoreline structures, and it does not propose construction or expansion of public works facilities. The LCPLUP does not identify the proposed project site as an environmentally sensitive habitat area or hazard area. Water and marine resources adjacent to the proposed project site would be protected through implementation of the Standard Conditions listed in the Hydrology and Water Quality section, above. The proposed project would q5 City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. 1679 Page 4 of 19 preserve and provide for continued operation of the existing dock areas along North Bay Front. Sections 30244, 30250(a), 30252, and 30253(3) and (4) of the CCA provide criteria for the location of new development. These criteria specify that new development should generally be concentrated in areas of existing development, preserve public access, provide adequate support facilities including provisions for recreational facilities, and preserve archaeological and paleontological resources. The proposed project, as conditioned by the standard conditions and mitigation measures contained within this document, would fully comply with these criteria. The LCPLUP does not list the proposed project site as a primary view area. Consequently, it is not subject to Sections 30251 and 30253(5) of the CCA. Since the proposed project is not a new visitor - serving facility or coastal - dependant use and it does not require an oceanfront encroachment, the LCPLUP's policies specific to new development are not applicable to the proposed project. 3. Finding The site is suitable for the type of development. Facts The site is generally level and currently developed with multiple - family dwelling units at densities greater than that proposed. No problems or adverse site conditions have been identified on the site as currently developed. Consequently, the site is determined to be physically suited for the development proposed. 4. Finding The site is physically suitable for the density of development. Facts The site is generally level and currently developed with multiple - family dwelling units at densities greater than that proposed. No problems or adverse site conditions have been identified on the site as currently developed. Consequently, the site is determined to be physically suited for the density of development proposed. 5. Finding The design of the subdivision and type of improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. Facts Q� City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. /679 Page 5 of 19 An Initial Study prepared in conjunction with this project and included in the administrative record was the basis for adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project which indicated that all environmental impacts, including those to fish, wildlife or their habitat, are less than significant or, with mitigation, are reduced to a less than significant level. 6. Finding The proposed subdivision is not likely to cause serious public health problems. Facts An Initial Study prepared in conjunction with this project and included in the administrative record was the basis for adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project which indicated that all environmental impacts, including those that could affect human health, are less than significant or, with mitigation, are reduced to a less than significant level. 7. Finding The proposed subdivision will not likely conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. Facts The proposed subdivision is proposed to be gate - guarded and generally not accessible to the public. An existing easement providing access to the bay front along the westerly edge of the property is preserved with this tract map and upgrades to physical improvements on this easement are included as part of this project. in addition, the tentative tract map dedicates an easement to the public for passage over a walkway along the bayfront. WHEREAS, a Coastal Residential Development Permit processed for this project to implement provisions of the California Coastal Act relative to displacement of low and moderate income households within the Coastal Zone indicated that demolition of existing multiple family residential dwelling units on the project site will not result in displacement of any low or moderate income households. `O City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. /671 Page 6 of 6 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach does hereby find, on the basis of the whole record, that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment and that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the Planning Commission's independent judgment and analysis. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration SCH No. 2005 - 061019 and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program included therewith. The documents and all material which constitute the record upon which this decision was based are on file with the Planning Director, City Hall, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. Section 2. Based on the aforementioned findings, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve Code Amendment No. 2005 -007, Planned Community Text No. 54, Newport Tract Map No. 2004 -001 (TTM15323), and Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 2005 -01 subject to Conditions of Approval as set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made part hereof. Section 3. The Zoning Map is revised as indicated in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and made part hereof. ADOPTED THIS 3rd DAY OF NOVEMBER 2006. AYES: Eaton, Hawkins, Cole, McDaniel& Henn NOES: Toerge ABSENT: Tucker BY: Michael Tye e, Chairman BY: !� Barry Eato V Secretary qS City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. 1679 Page 7 of 19 Exhibit "A" Conditions of Approval The following conditions shall apply to all development pursuant to the Bayside Planned Community Development Regulations and are adopted as conditions of approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 2004 -001 (Tract 15323): 1. Water service to the Planned Community will be furnished by the City of Newport Beach. Each dwelling unit/building shall be served with an individual water service lateral connection to the public water system unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department and the Building Department. 2. Sewage disposal service facilities to the Planned Community will be provided by the City of Newport Beach and the Orange County Sanitation District. Each dwelling unit/building shall be served with an individual sewer service lateral connection to the public sewer system unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department and the Building Department. 3. Grading and erosion control shall be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the City of Newport Beach Grading Ordinance and shall be subject to permits issued by the Building and Planning Departments. 4. The developer shall comply with the City's water quality and on -site non -storm runoff retention requirements by the preparation and approval by the City of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Existing drainage outlets within the existing seawalls that discharge on -site runoff into the Bay shall be modified to meet the City's on -site runoff water quality requirements. 5. Fire equipment access walkways, streets, gangplanks, and dock ways shall be designed to meet exiting and fire protection requirements as specified by the Uniform Building Code and shall be subject to review and approval by the City Newport Beach Building and Fire Departments. 6. Street, drainage and utility improvements shall be submitted on City standard improvement plan formats. All of the plan sheets shall be prepared by California licensed professionals responsible for the designs shown on the Plans. 7. All improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the current edition of the City Design Criteria, Standard Special Provisions, and Standard Drawings. 8. The California Vehicle Code shall be enforced on the private streets and drives, and delineation acceptable to the Police Department and Public Works 41 City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. 1679 Page 8 of 19 Department shall be provided along the sidelines of the private streets and d rives. 9. Curb -side collection of refuse shall be subject to City of Newport Beach approval. 10. The design of public access improvements shall provide for full public access 24- hours a day, 7 -days a week to 100% of the bay frontage. The minimum width for all public access along the water front shall be six (6) feet clear and shall be upgraded to meet all ADA standards. The public gangplank shall also be designed to meet ADA standards. 11. A 12 -foot wide concrete sidewalk/bike path behind the street curb face shall be provided along the Bayside Drive frontage. 12. All on -site common area improvements such as parks, docks, entry gates and entry, all on -site drainage, sanitary sewer, water, and electrical systems shall be owned or leased, operated and maintained by the HOA. 13. All overhead utilities serving the P -C shall be made underground. 14. The developer shall be required to submit a sign plan for review by the Planning Department for conformity with Chapter 20.67 of the Zoning Code. 15. The project is subject to all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards, unless specifically waived or modified by the Planned Community District Regulations. 16. The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Tract as Exhibit No. 1 and the Preliminary Plan marked as Exhibit No. 2 to Planning Commission Staff Report for PA 2004 -072 dated August 18, 2005. 17. The applicant is required to obtain all applicable permits from the City Building and Fire Departments. 18. The applicant shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws. Material violation of any of those laws in connection with the use may be cause for revocation of this Use Permit. 19. This approval was based on the particulars of the individual case and does not in and of itself or in combination with other approvals in the vicinity or Citywide constitute a precedent for future approvals or decisions. 20. Should this site be sold or otherwise come under different ownership or be operated by a different entity than the applicant, any future owners, assignees or 60 City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. 1679 Page 9 of 19 operators shall be notified of the conditions of this approval by the current owner or leasing company. 21. No dwelling other than one, single - family, detached dwelling may be constructed on any buildable lot created by Tentative Tract Map 53232. No dwelling may exceed a height of twenty -eight (28) feet as measured consistent with Municipal Code Section 20.65.030, "Measurement of Height ". These restrictions shall be included in the Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC &R's) which shall be prepared and recorded with the County Clerk at the time a Final Map is recorded. 22. Boat slips fronting the project site shall be operated as a residential marina for the 17 residential leaseholds of the Bayside Residential Planned Community. The slips shall not be rented to anyone who is not a resident of the Bayside Residential Planned Community. These restrictions shall be noted on the Final Map and incorporated into Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC &R's) which shall be prepared and recorded with the County Clerk at the time a Final Map is recorded. 23. The applicant shall prepare architectural guidelines that will apply to the design of all dwellings proposed for construction on lots created by Tentative Tract Map 15323 approved together with this Use Permit. The architectural guidelines shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning Director. The architectural guidelines shall be incorporated into Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC &R's) which shall be prepared and recorded with the County Clerk at the time a Final Map is recorded. The CC &R's shall require that all dwellings and improvements comply with the architectural guidelines. 24. The applicant shall prepare plans for gangplank and dockway improvements and for related improvements necessary to comply with handicapped access requirements of the California Building Codes and to enhance pedestrian safety and improve the visual character of the gangplank and dockway through inclusion of lighting, railings, and other appropriate improvements. The plans shall be developed in consultation with the City's Harbor Resources Division and subject to final approval by Harbor Resources, Public Works, and Planning. 25. The gangplank and dockway shall be designed to meet exiting and fire protection requirements as specified by the applicable Codes and shall be subject to review and approval by the Newport Beach Building, Fire, and Harbor Resources Departments. 26. The proposed project shall conform to the requirements of the Uniform Building Code, any local amendments to the UBC, and State Disabled Access requirements, unless otherwise approved by the Building Department. 27. All work conducted within the public right -of -way shall be approved under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. `J, City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. 1679 Page 10 of 19 28. All mechanical equipment shall be screened from view of adjacent properties and adjacent public streets within the limits authorized by this permit, and shall be sound attenuated in accordance with Chapter 10.26 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, Community Noise Control. 29. A sign plan shall be submitted for review for conformity with Chapter 20.67 of the Zoning Code. The final location of the signs shall be reviewed by the City Traffic Engineer and shall conform to City Standard 110 -L to ensure that adequate sight distance is provided. 30. Temporary signs shall be prohibited in the public right -of -way unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department in conjunction with the issuance of an encroachment permit or encroachment agreement. 31. The Developer shall file one (1) Final Tract Map (Map). 32. The Map shall be prepared on the California coordinate system (NAD88). Prior to recordation of the Map, the surveyor /engineer preparing the Map shall submit to the County Surveyor and the City of Newport Beach a digital - graphic file of said map in a manner described in the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual. The Map to be submitted to the City of Newport Beach shall comply with the City's CADD Standards. Scanned images will not be accepted. 33. The Final Map shall include reconfigured Lots C and D that accommodate the perimeter wall to be reconstructed along the Bayside Drive and a minimum 4- foot -wide landscaped setback between the Bayside Drive right -of -way and the perimeter wall. 34. The applicant shall execute an agreement to ensure that public access as identified within the Planned Community District Regulations will be permanently provided and properly maintained. The applicant shall record an irrevocable offer to dedicate (IOD) a public access easement for a floating walkway landward of the U. S. Bulkhead Line or obtain a public access easement for the existing floating walkway that is located bayward of the U. S. Bulkhead line from the current property owner. The form and content of the public access agreement, IOD and public access easement shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Attorney. Prior to the issuance of a building permit or recordation of the final map, the applicant shall: a) obtain and maintain a Harbor Permit for the continued operation and maintenance of the existing or future docks, gangplanks and other dock related improvements fronting the project site, and b) record the public access agreement, and c) record the IOD or public access easement as described in this condition. The Harbor Permit shall be transferred to the City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. 1679 Page 11 of 19 homeowners association for the Bayside Residential Planned Community upon its creation. 35. Prior to recordation, the Map shall tie the boundary of the map into the Horizontal Control System established by the County Surveyor in a manner described in Sections 7 -9 -330 and 7 -9 -337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual, Subarticle 18. Monuments (one inch iron pipe with tag) shall be set On Each Lot Corner unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Monuments shall be protected in place if installed prior to completion of construction project. 36. A hydrology and hydraulic study shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Public Works Department, along with a master plan of water, sewer and storm drain facilities for the on -site improvements prior to recording of the Map. 37. Submit written documentation from the holders of the various existing easements shown on the Tentative Trace Map as being relocated or replaced ore relinquished that they have reviewed and agreed with the quitclaim of their respective easements as proposed by the Developer. 38. Easements for public emergency and security ingress /egress, weekly refuse service, and public utility purposes on all private streets shall be dedicated to the City. Said easements shall be shown on the tract maps. 39. No structures shall be constructed within the limits of any utilities easements. 40. All applicable fees shall be paid prior to the City approval of the Final Tract Map, 41. Construction surety in a form acceptable to the City, guaranteeing the completion of the various required public improvements, shall be submitted to the Public Works Department prior to the City approval of the Final Tract Map. 42. All improvements within the public right -of -way shall be designed and constructed per City Standards. 43. In the event that private construction work damaged existing public improvements surrounding the site, the Public Works Inspector at his discretion will require additional public works reconstruction work as needed. 44. The centerline of the curb access ramps proposed at the development site entrance shall parallel with the Bayside Drive roadway alignment. 45. The construction of bulkhead and gangways requires separate plan check and permits. 55 City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. 1679 Page 12 of 19 46. The construction of bulkhead and gangways shall be performed only during periods of low tide. Plastic sheeting shall be placed below the work location to collect the fallen construction debris. The collected debris shall be removed and disposed of at the end of each workday. 47. Prior to the construction of bulkhead and gangways, a determination shall be made by a qualified biologist as to the existence of eelgrass surrounding /nearby the work site. In case of eelgrass, the Developer shall coordinate with the City's Harbor Resources Division to apply for and obtain the required permits from The US Army Corps of Engineers, The US Fish and Wildlife Service, The California Coastal Commission, and other agencies for the work. 48. All improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the current edition of the City Design Criteria, Standard Special Provisions, and Standard Drawings. 49. Street, drainage and utility improvements shall be submitted on City standard improvement plan formats. All of the plan sheets shall be prepared by California licensed professionals responsible for the designs shown on the Plans. 50. The entry gate, when fully opened, shall stay clear of the travel path of vehicles making right turns into the Tract. 51. All on -site drainage, sanitary sewer, water, and electrical systems shall be owned, operated, and maintained by the Homeowners Association. 52. There are existing drainage outlets within the existing seawalls that discharge on- site runoff into the Bay. Submit details on the disposition of these existing drainage outlets. If these outlets are to remain in place, submit details as to how these outlets will be modified to meet the City's on -site runoff retention water quality requirements. 53. Details shall be provided as to how the development will comply with the City's water quality and on -site non -storm runoff retention requirements. 54. All storm drain and sanitary sewer mains shall be installed with MacWrap. 55. ADA compliant curb access ramps shall be constructed at all interior curb returns. 56. Each dwelling unit/building shall be served with an individual water service and sewer lateral connection to the public water and sewer systems unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department and the Building Department. City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. 1679 Page 13 of 19 57. The intersection of the driveways with Bayside Drive shall be designed to provide sight distance for a secondary roadway per City of Newport Beach Standard Drawing STD- 110 -L. Slopes, landscaping, walls, signs and other obstructions shall be considered in the sight distance requirements. Landscaping within the sight lines (sight cone) shall not exceed 24- inches in height and the monument identification sign must be located outside the line of sight cone. The sight distance may be modified at non - critical locations, subject to approval by the Traffic Engineer. 58. The project shall provide 45 feet of vehicle stacking distance prior to the entry call box measured from the property line. Two entry lanes shall be provided, one lane for guest call box use and one for residential use. 59. Provide details on the vehicular turnaround area for garaged vehicles exiting Lots No. 3, No. 9 and Lot No. 15 and revise as required by the City Engineer.. 60. On -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation system shall be subject to further review by the City Traffic Engineer. 61. Provide Class III standpipe system at existing dock. Remove 2 Y= connections at bulkhead. 62. Provide fire department connection for docks on Bayside Drive. Fire Department connection shall be located within 150 feet of a public hydrant on same side of street. 63. Automatic fire extinguishing system required for residential units when the total floor area exceeds 5,000 square feet. 64. Minimum width at entrance shall be 14 feet clear; preliminary plans shows less than 14 feet at two locations. 65. Turning radius for fire apparatus shall not be less than 20 feet inside radius and 40 feet outside radius. Show on plan. 66. Any obstructions in required fire access roadways, including speed bumps and speed humps, are prohibited. 67. Provide on -site public fire hydrants. 68. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the site shall be examined to determine the existence and extent of archaeological and paleontological resources in accordance with adopted City policies. 55 City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. 1679 Page 14 of 19 69. Prior to the issuance of grading /building permits, the final design of all required off -site right of way improvements shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department and Traffic Engineer. 70. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall prepare a construction phasing plan and construction delivery plan that includes routing of large vehicles. The plan shall include a haul route plan for review and approval of the Public Works Department. Said plan shall specify the routes to be traveled, times of travel, total number of trucks, number of trucks per hour, time of operation, and safety /congestion precautions (e.g., signage, flagmen). Large construction vehicles shall not be permitted to travel narrow streets and alleys as determined by the Public Works Department. Traffic control and transportation of equipment and materials shall be conducted in accordance with state and local requirements. 71. Prior to the issuance of individual building permits, the applicant shall provide designs for building foundations and slabs appropriate to mitigating liquefaction hazard. 72. Prior to the issuance of grading, the applicant shall provide results from an inspection by a qualified engineer indicating the condition of the seawalls and tiebacks and make repairs to same as necessary. 73. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP) shall be prepared and approved by the City of Newport Beach as the local permitting agency in accordance with the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The SWPPP shall include BMPs to eliminate and /or minimize stormwater pollution prior to, and during construction. The SWPPP shall require construction to occur in stages and stabilized prior to disturbing other areas and require the use of temporary diversion dikes and basins to trap sediment from run -off and allow clarification prior to discharge. 74. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) specifically identifying the Best Management Practices (BMP's) that will be used on site to control predictable pollutant runoff. The plan shall identify the types of structural and non - structural measures to be used. The plan shall comply with the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP). Particular attention should be addressed to the appendix section "Best Management Practices for New Development." The WQMP shall clearly show the locations of structural BMP's, and assignment of long term maintenance responsibilities (which shall also be included in the Maintenance Agreement). The plan shall be prepared to the format shown in "Attachment C" of the DAMP title "Water Quality Management Plan Outline" and be subject to the approval of the City. 5 ko City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. 1679 Page 15 of 19 75. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall obtain a NPDES permit. The applicant shall incorporate storm water pollutant control into erosion control plans using BMPs to the maximum extent possible. Evidence that proper clearances have been obtained through the State Water Resources Control Board shall be given to the Building Department prior to issuance of grading permits. 76. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit evidence to the City Building Official that the applicant has obtained coverage under the NPDES statewide General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. 77. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall document to the City of Newport Beach Building Department that all facilities will be designed and constructed to comply with current seismic safety standards and the current City - adopted version of the Uniform Building Code. 78. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a geotechnical report shall be submitted with construction drawings for plan check. The Building Department shall ensure that the project complies with the geotechnical recommendations included in the "Geotechnical Investigation" (Petra, 2004), as well as additional requirements, if any, imposed by the Newport Beach Building Department. 79. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide written evidence to the Planning Director that a qualified archaeologist has been retained to observe grading activities and conduct salvage excavation of archaeological resources as necessary. The archaeologist shall be present at the pre - grading conference, shall establish procedures for archaeological resource surveillance, and shall establish, in cooperation with the applicant, procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, identification and evaluation of the artifacts as appropriate. If additional or unexpected archaeological features are discovered, the archaeologist shall report such findings to the applicant and to the Planning Department. If the archaeological resources are found to be significant, the archaeological observer shall determine appropriate actions, in cooperation with the applicant, for exploration and /or salvage. These actions, as well as final mitigation and disposition of the resources, shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Director. 80. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide written evidence to the Planning Department that a qualified paleontologist has been retained to observe grading activities and salvage fossils as necessary. The paleontologist shall be present at the pre - grading conference, shall establish procedures for paleontological resource surveillance, and shall establish, in cooperation with the applicant, procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, identification and evaluation of fossils. If major paleontological resources are discovered which require long term baiting or redirecting of r)l City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. 1679 Page 16 of 19 grading, the paleontologist shall report such findings to the applicant and to the Planning Department. The paleontologist shall determine appropriate actions, in cooperation with the applicant, which ensure proper exploration and /or salvage. These actions, as well as final mitigation and disposition of the resources, shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Director. 81. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a detailed acoustical analysis shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant and submitted to the City. This acoustical analysis shall describe and quantify the noise sources impacting the area and the measures required to meet the 65 CNEL exterior residential noise standard. The final grading plans shall incorporate the noise barriers required by the analysis and the property owner /developer shall install these barriers. 82. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building demolition permit, the applicant shall submit an asbestos abatement and removal plan to the City Building Official for approval. The abatement and removal plan shall comply with notification and asbestos removal procedures outlined in SCAQMD Rule 1403 to reduce asbestos related health issues. 83. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the applicant shall submit a lead - based paint abatement and removal plan in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local regulatory requirements to the City Building Official for approval. 84. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit, the applicant shall submit an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) in a manner meeting approval of the City Building Official, to demonstrate compliance with local and state water quality regulations for grading and construction activities. The ESCP shall identify how all construction materials, wastes, grading or demolition debris, and stockpiles of soil, aggregates, soil amendments, etc. shall be properly covered, stored, and secured to prevent transport into local drainages or coastal waters by wind, rain, tracking, tidal erosion, or dispersion. The ESCP shall also describe how the applicant will ensure that all Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be maintained during construction of any future public right -of -ways. A copy of the current ESCP shall be kept at the project site and be available for City of Newport Beach review on request 85. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect for review and subsequent approval by the Planning Director upon determination that the landscape plan is consistent with City standards and policies. The landscape and irrigation plan shall include landscaping and irrigation within the Bayside Drive right -of -way between the back of public sidewalk and the boundary of the Tract Map. These plans shall incorporate drought tolerant plantings and water efficient irrigation practices, and the plans shall be approved by the Planning Department, City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. 1679 Page 17 of 19 General Services Department and Public Works Department. All planting areas shall be provided with a permanent underground automatic sprinkler irrigation system of a design suitable for the type and arrangement of the plant materials selected. The irrigation system shall be adjustable based upon either a signal from a satellite or an on -site moisture - sensor. Planting areas adjacent to vehicular activity shall be protected by a continuous concrete curb or similar permanent barrier. Landscaping shall be located so as not to impede vehicular sight distance to the satisfaction of the Traffic Engineer. 86. Prior the issuance of a building permit, the project shall be reviewed by the Building Department to verify compliance with the following requirements: a. Project design must comply with the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC) seismic design criteria. b. Structure setback must comply with either the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC) or the Orange County Grading Manual. c. Any imported soil for general grading shall have an Expansion Index of less than 60. d. Control site drainage. e. Design footing embedments to resist the effects of expansive soil. f. Maintain a proportionately high dead load component on foundations. g. Over - excavate and moisture soils condition below foundations, floor slabs and hardscape. h. Use of articulation and reinforcement of concrete slabs and footings. i. Use of rigid foundation and floor slabs. 87. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the project shall be reviewed by the Building Department to verify compliance with the following requirements: a. Provide on -site hydrants; b. All gates to property shall be automatic and provided with opticom and knox key. 88. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall schedule an inspection by the Code and Water Quality Enforcement Division to confirm that all landscaping materials and irrigation systems have been installed in accordance with the approved plans. 89. Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy or final of building permits, the applicant shall schedule an evening inspection by the Code and Water Quality Enforcement Division to confirm control of light and glare as specified in these conditions. 5q City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. 1679 Page 18 of 19 90. During construction of the proposed improvements: a. construction vehicles shall not block roadways on any roads adjacent to the project site or any of the roads leading to or from the project site; b. construction equipment will be properly maintained at an off -site location and includes proper tuning and timing of engines. Equipment maintenance records and equipment design specification data sheets shall be kept on -site during construction; C. all contractors will be advised not to idle construction equipment on site for more than ten minutes; d. on -site diesel fueled construction equipment will be fueled with aqueous diesel fuel; e. cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials, or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard; f. pave, water (three times daily), or apply non -toxic soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites; g. sweep all paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites daily with water sweepers; h. Sweep streets daily with water sweepers if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets; i. Hydro seed or apply non -toxic stabilizers to inactive construction areas; j. enclose, cover, water (twice daily), or apply non -toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.); k. limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour; I. install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways during; M. replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible; n. all construction equipment shall be properly tuned and maintained; o. contractors shall maintain and operate construction equipment so as to minimize exhaust emissions; P. trucks and vehicles in loading or unloading queues shall not idle; q. construction activities shall be staged and scheduled to avoid emissions peaks, and discontinued during second -stage smog alerts 91. During construction of the proposed improvements, in accordance with Public Resources Code 5097.94, if human remains are found, the Orange County coroner must be notified within 24 hours of the discovery. If the coroner determines that the remains are not recent, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission in Sacramento to determine the most likely descendent for the area. The designated Native American representative then determines in consultation with the property owner the disposition of the human remains. Is City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. 1679 Page 19 of 19 92. The applicant shall be responsible for the payment of all administrative costs identified by the Planning Department within 30 days of receiving a final notification of costs or prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. 93. All landscape materials and landscaped areas shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the approved landscape plan. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and growing condition and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing and trimming. All landscaped areas shall be kept free of weeds and debris. All irrigation systems shall be kept operable, including adjustments, replacements, repairs, and cleaning as part of regular maintenance. 94. Prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, applicant shall provide an agreement, in form acceptable to the City Attorney, which provides for maintenance of landscaping within the Bayside Drive right -of -way between the back of public sidewalk and the boundary of the Tract Map. The agreement shall include right of entry to the right -of -way for the benefit of the applicant, the Homeowners association, and any successors for purposes of maintaining the landscaping. 95. Prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, applicant shall complete improvements to the gangplank and dockway required herein. 96. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the first dwelling constructed in the tract, applicant shall provide an agreement, in form acceptable to the City Attorney, which provides for maintenance of the pedestrian accessway on Lot "B ", the gangplank and dockway and related improvements by the Homeowners Association. The agreement shall include right -of -entry to the City's property for the benefit of the applicant, the Homeowners Association, and any successors for purposes of maintaining the improvements. 97. Prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, applicant shall provide a disclosure statement, in form acceptable to the City Attorney and to the Planning Director, which shall be provided to each prospective lessee of one of the 17 lots in the subdivision advising of the potential noxious characteristics of the nearby boatyard which could adversely affect the prospective lessee's enjoyment of the property. The disclosure statement shall be included and recorded with the Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions at the County Recorder's Office and each lessee shall be required to acknowledge receipt of the disclosure statement, in writing, prior to executing a lease and the written acknowledgement shall be recorded together with the lease agreement with the County Recorder. u6 Exhibit `B" . —._._ .____........ _.....- ...- .._._._..- - -... .: av e:,v avrevaum .a3. --- -- -- ----- ._--- '...._ -1 I I I ax. �1 Ci z s 1 a � a F TA %�i `�gc�i ! lye e ¢¢ Aii$�S�a3R i y q v4 € r j Qp QQ :go 4 8o, - �Sy95 � J I.mz� m a w O a I Q a asp JJ��LVb $ �I FI V ra Ci.T i; m i >. Q Z i Wo m��izr v JI _a a� 84 A a : �I I Q 1 9 cq a 3I Vv o3Y . tz fll C Fv MR 9N,[Jd +ISq ]3L �'/ DN dY/Y 33s Exhibit No. 3 N, This page is blank Lo A CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 2 November 3, 2005 TO: Honorable Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: David Lepo, Contract Planner 949 - 553 -1427, dlepo @hogleireland.com SUBJECT: Bayside Drive Subdivision (PA2004 -072) LOCATION: 919 Bayside Drive APPLICANT: UGS Development Inc. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached draft resolution recommending City Council adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration SCH No. 2005061019 and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approve Code Amendment No. 2005 -007 (Planned Community Text No. 54), Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 2005 -001 and Tentative Tract Map No. 2004 -001 (Tract 15323) for development of a 17 -lot, single - family residential subdivision at 919 Bayside Drive. DISCUSSION Background On August 18, 2005, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on an application to permit development of a 17 -lot, single - family subdivision proposed on a 3.92 -acre parcel on the south side of Bayside Drive, adjacent to Promontory Bay and Newport Bay (See Attached August 18, 2005, staff report). After receiving testimony at the public hearing, the Planning Commission discussed potential revisions to the proposed development and corresponding entitlements that could be required and set forth as Conditions of Approval. The Planning Commission directed Staff to prepare a summary of the issues to be resolved and proposed Conditions of Approval addressing these issues. The Planning Commission continued the matter to September 8, 2005 and the applicant subsequently requested a continuance to October 6, 2005. U�) Bayside Planned Community Page 2 of 20 In preparation for subsequent Planning Commission review of the proposed project, staff requested clarification from the City Attorney on issues related to creation of subdivision lots over the water surface in Newport Bay. The City Attorney indicated that the surface waters of the Bay could not be subdivided or included within the Tentative Tract Map for the Bayside project. With deletion of the water surface lots, the project site area was reduced and the project no longer complied with the maximum permissible 40% lot coverage restriction of the Planned Residential Development (PRD) Overlay District that had been proposed to accommodate single - family development on this site. As an alternative to adopting the PRD Overlay to accommodate the proposed development, staff proposed a Code Amendment to change the zoning map designation of the property from "Multi- Family Residential" to "Planned Community ". The Code Amendment is to be accompanied by " Bayside Residential Planned Community District Development Regulations." Approvals of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Coastal Residential Development Permit, and Tentative Tract Map would be required as in the initial development application but a Use Permit is no longer required. The Bayside Residential Planned Community District Development Regulations were prepared to accommodate the project as previously proposed, while incorporating revisions in response to issues raised by the Planning Commission on August 18, 2005. Required changes to the project are reflected in the text. A narrative of issues raised by the Planning Commission follows, together with proposed PC text provisions and Conditions of Approval responding to those issues. Issues Development Standards At the August 18, 2005, meeting, Planning Commission members considered the option of changing the zoning of the project site from "Multi- Family Residential" to "Single - Family Residential" consistent with the proposed uses. A Single - Family designation was suggested as a means to preclude construction of multiple - family dwellings and to foreclose the potential for increasing allowable building heights from 28' to 32' to accommodate 3 -story dwellings. Rather than change the zoning to Single - Family, the list of permitted uses and a cap on the number of units are set forth in the PC Text as follows: Bayside Planned Community Page 3 of 20 SECTION II DEVELOPMENT & USE REGULATIONS 1. Permitted Uses A. Single- family, detached dwellings B. Accessory structures (garages, gazebos, barbeques, fences, walls, etc.) C. Recreation facilities ancillary to residential uses D. Model homes and on -site sales office E. Home occupations pursuant to the Zoning Code 2. Intensity of Development Maximum permissible number of units: 17 single - family, detached dwellings SECTION III CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 21. No dwelling other than one, single - family, detached dwelling may be constructed on any buildable lot created by Tract Map 15232. No dwelling may exceed a height of twenty -eight (28) feet as measured consistent with Municipal Code Section 20.65.030, "Measurement of Height ". These restrictions are included in the Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC &R's) which have been prepared and recorded with the County Clerk at the time a Final Map is recorded. . This PC Text language should adequately address the issue of potentially converting a home to multiple units raised earlier. Only one single family home on each leased lot will be permitted. Minimum Yard Requirements The tract map included with this application indicated yards of 5 -feet and 10 -feet on lots adjacent to Bayside Drive. Staff proposed that a minimum 4 -foot setback be included between the Bayside Drive right -of -way and the proposed replacement privacy wall and an additional 10 -foot yard between the replacement wall and dwellings on lots adjacent to Bayside Drive. The Planning Commission and the applicant agreed that the additional setbacks were appropriate. The required wall setback is reflected in the PC Text as follows: SECTION II DEVELOPMENT & USE REGULATIONS 7. Minimum Yards Table 1 Bayside Planned Community District Regulations 141 Bayside Planned Community Page 4 of 20 As indicated in Footnote 5, "Lots 1, 15, 16, & 17, minimum 10' yard required parallel to Bayside Drive and measured from the respective landscape Lot'C' or Lot 'D "' SECTION III CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 33. The Final Map shall include reconfigured Lots C and D that accommodate the perimeter wall to be reconstructed along the Bayside Drive and a minimum 4- foot -wide landscaped setback between the Bayside Drive right -of -way and the perimeter wall. The tract map for this project includes a fire access easement from the bayside frontage within a 6 -foot side yard on Lot 5. Dual use as both sideyard and fire access was determined to be infeasible since no obstructions, including plant materials, are allowed in fire accessways. The Planning Commission directed that the fire access be provided in addition to a 5 -foot side yard on Lot 5. This is reflected in the PC Text as follows: SECTION II DEVELOPMENT & USE REGULATIONS 7. Minimum Yards Table 1 Bayside Planned Community District Regulations As indicated in Footnote 9, "Minimum 5' side yard required adjacent to 'Fire Access Easement' shown on Tract Map." 6'� Bayside Planned Community Page 5 of 20 Table 1 Bayside Planned Community District Regulations Minimum Maximum Maximum 3 Buildable Minimum Yards Lot Lot Area Floor (Sq. Ft.) (Sq. Ft )1 Areal Front Side Rear 1 6,550 4,048 7,084 35'4 5'5'6 10'5 2 5,818 3,172 5,551 20' 5' 10' 3 10,754 6,230 10,902 18'7 5' 10'8 4 7,800 4,649 8,135 25'7 5' 58 5 8,547 5,124 8,967 25'7 58 5'8 6 6,500 3,740 6,545 25'7 5' 5i8 7 8,125 4,899 8,573 25'7 5' 5'8 8 6,500 3,649 6,386 25'7 5' 5'8 9 8,148 4,666 8,166 20'7 5' 5i810 10 7,155 4,113 7,198 20'7 5' 58.9 11 6,000 3,540 6,195 20'7 5' 5'8 12 6,000 3,540 6,195 20'7 5' 58 13 6,000 3,327 5,822 20'7 5710' 5'8 14 6,720 3,564 6,237 20'7 5710' 5'8 15 8,400 3,856 6,748 15/20i7•11 5'S 106.8 16 6,640 3,851 6.739 20' 5'S 10'5 17 5,800 3,364 5,887 20' 55 10'5 ' Lot area less minimum front, side, and rear yard areas 2 1.75 X Maximum buildable area and not including maximum 400 sq. ft. attributable to required, enclosed parking 3 Minimum 18' required between face of garage wall and back of curb 4 Minimum 20' front yard if merged with Lot 2 5 Lots 1, 15, 16, & 17, minimum 10' yard required parallel to Bayside Drive and measured from the respective landscape Lot "C" or Lot "D ". 6 Minimum 10' side yard required between building wall and easterly tract boundary. 7 Water -side yard deemed "front yard" for Lots 3 -15 (see Tract Map) 8 Minimum 5' rear yard required between each one -story building wall and curbside property line; minimum 10' rear yard required between each two -story building wall and curbside property line. 9 Minimum 5' side yard required adjacent to "Fire Access Easement" shown on Tract Map 10 Minimum 5' side yard adjacent to "pedestrian access easement" on Tract Map " Minimum 20' required at southerly 55' of front yard; minimum 15' required at northerly 42' per Tract Map bcV Bayside Planned Community Page 6 of 20 The tract map with this application shows minimum yard widths of 5 -feet adjacent to the private driveway for waterfront Lots 3 through 15. Staff proposed 5 -foot yards between the driveway and each one -story building wall and 10 -foot yards between the driveway and each two -story wall. This is reflected in the PC Text as follows: SECTION II DEVELOPMENT & USE REGULATIONS 7. Minimum Yards Table 1 Bayside Planned Community District Regulations As indicated in Footnote 8, "Minimum 5' rear yard required between each one - story building wall and curbside property line; minimum 10' rear yard required between each two -story building wall and curbside property line." Sidewalks Because the proposed subdivision will be a gated community with a private driveway providing vehicular access to the dwellings, the tract map does not include sidewalks within the tract. After discussion, the Planning Commission decided that the sidewalks are not necessary. This is reflected in SECTION II of the PC Text: SECTION II DEVELOPMENT & USE REGULATIONS 10. Vehicular access to all buildable lots within the Bayside community shall be provided by a private driveway. The project shall comply with City Council Policy L -4 except that sidewalks are not required adjacent to the private driveway on Lot "E" within the gated community. Minimum widths for the private driveway shall be 36 feet curb to curb when parking is allowed on both sides of the private driveway and 32 feet curb to curb when parking is allowed on one side or no parking is allowed. Curb -side parking spaces on the private driveway on Lot "E" shall be 8' x 22' minimum. The private driveway shall meet City standards. The Bayside P -C development may be a private (gate guarded) community with secured access surrounding the development. Public Access & Dockway and Gangplank Improvements Access to the waterfront is currently provided by a ten foot -wide walkway that extends from Bayside Drive along Promontory Channel to a gang plank that leads to a floating six foot -wide dockway at the boat slips. This portion of public access is a dedicated easement and Lot B is coterminous with the easement. The dockway, which currently provides public access, extends eastward and continues over water and terminates near the Balboa Island Bridge with no connection to other public areas. The floating dockway and gangplank are required for public access pursuant to an agreement between the Irvine Company and the City of Newport Beach. 1b Bayside Planned Community Page 7 of 20 The Planning Commission considered whether or not an offer to dedicate an easement across the property above the bulkhead, rather than across the dockway, would be appropriate. Given that there seemed to be little likelihood of securing public access across private property to the east of the project site to allow for continuation of a dry land walkway, the consensus was that public access could continue across the floating dockway and gangplanks. Implementation of this access is accomplished through the Harbor Permit process that can include a new access agreement with the permit holder and the City to ensure that public access across the dockway is permanently provided and maintained. Requiring a new Harbor Permit and access agreement is important in that the status of the existing Harbor Permit is unclear and the original access agreement was between the Irvine Company and the City, and the Irvine Company assigned the agreement with the Harbor Permit to others without City authorization, which is a violation of the Municipal Code. The applicant is willing to take any steps the City desires to guarantee access across the dockway and gangplanks, and a new Harbor Permit and access agreement is what has been advised by the City Attorney. The Planning Commission discussed enhancements that the applicant could make to the walkway, gangplank, and dockway that would make them more attractive and accessible to the public. These included new lighting and safety railings. The potential for widening the existing dockway was mentioned, but no final direction given. To facilitate public access, the PC Text includes the following: SECTION III CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 10. The design of pedestrian facilities shall provide for full public access 24- hours a day, 7 -days a week to 100% of the bay frontage along Promontory Bay Channel and Balboa Channel as shown on Exhibit - -. The minimum width for all public access along the water front shall be six (6) feet clear and shall be upgraded to meet all ADA standards. The public gangplank shall also be designed to meet ADA standards. 25. The gangplank and dockway shall be designed to meet exiting and fire protection requirements as specified by the applicable Codes and shall be subject to review and approval by the Newport Beach Building, Fire and Harbor Resources Departments. 34. The Developer of the Bayside Planned Community shall obtain and maintain a valid Harbor Permit for the continued operation and maintenance of the existing or future docks, gangplanks and other dock related improvements. This Harbor Permit shall be transferred to the Homeowners Association (HOA) for the Bayside Planned Community upon its creation. As a condition to the Harbor Permit, the Developer shall execute an agreement to provide and maintain public access as identified within this Planned Community District Regulations. 11 Bayside Planned Community Page 8 of 20 96. Prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, applicant shall complete improvements to the gangplank and dockway required herein. 97. The walkway extending from Bayside Drive adjacent to Promontory Bay, the gangplank connecting this walkway to the dockway, and the dockway itself are dedicated for access and use by the general public and shall be maintained as to be readily accessible to the public. The applicant has indicated that widening of the dockway will be difficult and may require approval of the Coastal Commission and California Department of Fish and Game because of potential impacts, including a decrease in the amount of sunlight reaching the bay bottom. The applicant has prepared conceptual plans for improvements to the gangplank and dockway. These are included as an attachment to this report. The Planning Commission should provide direction on the extent of improvements to be required for the dockway and gangplank. Boat Slip Rental Because the project does not include public parking required for a public marina, the Planning Commission suggested restrictions on use and rental of the boat slips. These are included in SECTION II of the PC Text: SECTION 111 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 22. Boat slips fronting the project site shall not be rented to anyone who is not a resident of a dwelling on one of the 17 lots in this subdivision, not a resident of the Cove Condominium, or not entitled to rent a slip at this location through terms of the existing agreement or a new agreement with the Newport Beach Yacht Club. This restriction shall be incorporated into Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC &R's) which shall be prepared and recorded with the County Clerk at the time a Final Map is recorded. Landscaping In the absence of a landscaping plan for the proposed project, the Planning Commission weighed the need for a condition requiring subsequent review and approval of a landscaping plan by the Planning Commission. The need for landscaping on City -owned property adjacent to the northwesterly corner of the project site was also considered. After deliberation, the consensus was that a landscaping plan should be submitted for review and approval of the Planning Director as a condition of project approval. The landscaping plan is to include the City -owned property with planting to be accomplished by the developer and maintenance to be assumed by the homeowners' association: �- Bayside Planned Community Page 9 of 20 SECTION III CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 86. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect for review and subsequent approval by the Planning Director upon determination that the landscape plan is consistent with City standards and policies. The landscape and irrigation plan shall include that portion of City -owned property adjacent to the northwesterly corner of Lot "B ". These plans shall incorporate drought tolerant plantings and water efficient irrigation practices, and the plans shall be approved by the Planning Department, General Services Department and Public Works Department. All planting areas shall be provided with a permanent underground automatic sprinkler irrigation system of a design suitable for the type and arrangement of the plant materials selected. The irrigation system shall be adjustable based upon either a signal from a satellite or an on -site moisture - sensor. Planting areas adjacent to vehicular activity shall be protected by a continuous concrete curb or similar permanent barrier. Landscaping shall be located so as not to impede vehicular sight distance to the satisfaction of the Traffic Engineer. 94. All landscape materials and landscaped areas shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the approved landscape plan. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and growing condition and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing and trimming. All landscaped areas shall be kept free of weeds and debris. All irrigation systems shall be kept operable, including adjustments, replacements, repairs, and cleaning as part of regular maintenance. 95. Prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, applicant shall provide and execute an agreement, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, which provides for maintenance of landscaping on City -owned property adjacent to the northwesterly corner of Lot "B" by the Homeowners Association. The agreement shall include right -of -entry to the City's property for the benefit of the applicant, the Homeowners Association, and any successors for purposes of maintaining the landscaping. Proximity to Boatyard Concern was expressed that residents of the proposed development would be annoyed by noise from the commercial boatyard across the bay to the west of the project site. In order to put future residents on notice, SECTION II of the PC Text and the draft Planning Commission Resolution Conditions of Approval includes the following: -3 Bayside Planned Community Page 10 of 20 SECTION III CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 98. Prior to issuance of anV Certificate of Occupancy, applicant shall provide a disclosure statement, in form acceptable to the City Attorney and to the Planning Director, which shall be provided to each prospective lessee of one of the 17 lots in the subdivision advising of the potential noxious characteristics of the nearby boatyard which could adversely affect the prospective lessee's enjoyment of the property. The disclosure statement shall be included and recorded with the Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions at the County Recorder's Office and each lessee shall be required to acknowledge receipt of the disclosure statement, in writing, prior to executing a lease and the written acknowledgement shall be recorded together with the lease agreement with the County Recorder. Dedication of Lot F and Lot G A suggestion was made that the project applicant be required to dedicate Lot F and Lot G as shown on the prior map to the City. Both lots encompass surface waters adjacent to the bulkhead. As indicated previously, the City Attorney has determined that surface waters of the bay or privileges granted through harbor permit activities transferred by deed cannot be subdivided or included as part of the Tentative Tract Map for this project. The revised tentative map does not include any submerged lands or surface privileges to use the abutting waters or docks. Supplemental Development Standards The applicant has added design features and amenities which are addressed in SECTION II of the PC Text. The applicant proposes to include the option of 6 -foot high, openwork walls on waterfront lots that extending from the building setback line to the waterside property line. The Zoning Code allows only 3 -foot high walls in this circumstance. The proposed PC Text includes the following regulation for this circumstance: SECTION II DEVELOPMENT & USE REGULATIONS 14. Fences, Hedges and Walls Fences, hedges and walls shall be limited to three (3) feet in height in all front yards and in the rear yards of waterfront lots (Lots 3 -15). Fences, hedges, and walls shall be limited to six (6) feet in height in all other rear yards and side yards including the perimeter wall at Bayside Drive.. Exception: Open -work walls and fences i.e. that ninety- percent of the wall plane is open (wrought iron in combination with pilaster) up to six (6) feet in height are permitted at the side property line of each waterfront lot (Lots ,-�4 Bayside Planned Community Page 11 of 20 3 -15) and extending into the front yard from the setback line to the waterfront property line. Walls that extend in the same plane as the front (common driveway -side) wall of a dwelling into a required side yard for purposes of enhancing the entrance to an entry courtyard may be up to twelve (12) feet in height. The applicant proposes to allow arbors and trellises as architectural features be allowed to project up to one (1) foot into yards adjoining the common driveway. Proposed language accommodating these components is as follows: SECTION II DEVELOPMENT & USE REGULATIONS 15. Arbors and Trellises Arbors and trellises may project into yards abutting the common driveway provided no such structure is closer than four (4) feet to the common driveway curb. The footprint area of such structures shall not exceed forty (40) square feet with a maximum height of ten (10) feet. Arbors and trellises must be at least 50% open. The potential for outdoor fireplaces and barbeques to project into side yards, into rear yards of non - waterfront lots, and into front yards of waterfront lots is addressed as follows: SECTION II DEVELOPMENT & USE REGULATIONS 16. Fireplaces and Barbeques Freestanding fireplaces and barbeques may project into all residential side yards, into rear yards of non - waterfront lots (Lots 1, 2, 16, 17) and front yards of waterfront lots (Lots 3 -15) provided a minimum distance of four (4) feet is maintained between the fireplace or barbeques and the respective side, rear, or front property line. No fireplace, or barbeque including chimney may exceed ten (10) feet in height. In each circumstance described, the Planning Commission should determine if the requested development regulations which differ from otherwise applicable Zoning Code provisions are appropriate given the location, site plans, adjacent uses, and impact on the surrounding community especially as to property line walls extending to waterside property lines. The PC Text recommended to City Council will reflect the direction of the Planning Commission on these issues. 'L 5 Bayside Planned Community Page 12 of 20 Planning Commission Actions Mitigated Negative Declaration The Planning Commission will recommend to the City Council as to whether or not the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) prepared for this project should be adopted. The MND was distributed to the Planning Commission and reviewed at the August 18, 2005, Planning Commission meeting. The change in entitlement for this project, from a code amendment applying a Planned Residential Overlay to a code amendment changing from Multi - Family Residential to Planned Community, does not change the scope or manner of development of the site. Accordingly, the analysis of potential environmental impacts, the conclusions, and the mitigation measures are not changed. Conclusions based on the 1S analysis indicated "no impact' or "less than significant impact' in the following topical areas: • Aesthetics • Agricultural Resources • Air Quality • Biological Resources • Cultural Resources • Hydrology and Water Quality • !_and Use and Planning • Mineral Resources • Population and Housing • Public Services • Recreation • Transportation /Circulation • Utilities and Service Systems • Mandatory Findings of Significance The Initial Study indicated the need for mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level in the following topical areas: • Geology and Soils • Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Noise With mitigation measures and standard conditions of approval indicated in the Initial Study and set forth in the mitigation monitoring and reporting program included with the Mitigated Negative Declaration, all potential impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level. Potentially significant impacts and corresponding mitigation measures and standard conditions for proposed residential subdivisions are paraphrased in Table 1. 1� Table 1 Potential Impacts and Mitigation Measures IMPACT Geology and Soils Potential strong seismic ground shaking Location on unstable soils or soils that could become unstable resulting in landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse Hazards and Hazardous Materials Significant hazard through transport or disposal of hazardous materials Significant hazard involving the release of hazardous materials Bayside Planned Community Page 13 of 20 MITIGATION MEASURE Standard Condition G -1 Standard Condition G -2 Building Department verification that all facilities are designed and constructed to comply with current seismic standards Standard Condition H -1 Building Official approval required for asbestos abatement and removal plan in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 1403 prior to issuance of permits Standard Condition H -2 Building Official approval of lead -based paint abatement and removal plan required prior to issuance of permits Standard Condition H -3 Building Official approval of Erosion and Sediment Control Plan to identify how all construction materials, wastes, debris will be handled and transported required prior to issuance of permits Standard Condition H -4 Project proponent to store, transport, and dispose of waste generated on -site in accordance with CCR Title 22 subject to Building Official approval 11 Bayside Planned Community Page 14 of 20 Table 1 Potential Impacts and Mitigation Measures IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE Noise Exposure of persons to noise from demolition, grading, and construction activities and from construction truck traffic Standard Condition N -1 Limitation of construction activities to the hours between 7 AM and 6:30 PM Monday through Friday and between 8 AM and 6 PM on Saturdays. No construction on Sundays or legal holidays Code Amendment— Zone Change and Planned Community Code Amendment No. 2005 -007, included as part of the project application, would change the zoning map district for the subject property from "Multi - Family Residential District' (MFR) to 'Planned Community" (PC) and would include adoption of the " Bayside Residential Planned Community District Development Regulations." As indicated in Chapter 20.35 of the Zoning Code, the Planned Community (PC) District is established: • To provide for the classification and development of parcels of land as coordinated, comprehensive projects so as to take advantage of the superior environment which can result from large -scale community planning; • To allow diversification of land uses as they relate to each other in a physical and environmental arrangement, while insuring substantial compliance with the spirit, intent, and provisions of this code; • To include various types of land uses, consistent with the General Plan, through the adoption of a development plan and text materials which set forth land use relationships and development standards. In order to meet the objectives set forth in Section 20.35.010 of the Municipal Code, an application for a planned community district must contain a minimum of 25 acres of unimproved land area or 10 acres of improved land area. The property is 3.92 acres in size, and a waiver of the minimum acreage requirement is necessary to implement the project. No specific criteria are specified in the Zoning Code for a waiver, even though the Planning Commission is permitted the ability to waive the minimum acreage for a PC. It can be inferred that should the overall intent of the Planned Community concept as articulated above be achieved with a smaller PC, a waiver can be approved. The project, when viewed alone, does not provide for the coordination of parcels to take advantage of the superior environment that can result from large -scale community 11' Bayside Planned Community Page 15 of 20 planning. It does not allow for the diversification of land uses, nor does it include various types of land uses within the development plan. However, if the project is considered in the larger context of the surrounding neighborhood, the basic intent of PC zoning may be achieved. The PC will facilitate integration of the project into the existing neighborhood by establishing the relationships between the project and its surroundings (i.e. proximity to the boatyard, public access and marina - usage) and will provide development standards that will promote a superior environment. Consistent with these provisions, adoption of the Bayside Residential Planned Community District zoning designation and corresponding Bayside Residential Planned Community District Development Regulations is proposed as the means to integrating a gated community of single - family, detached homes within the context of gated, attached apartment and condominium communities within the immediate area. Adoption of the PC designation and text provided the City the means to maintaining and enhancing public access to the Bay through conditions of project approval. Development standards incorporated in the PC Text accommodate residential development consistent with the General Plan Multi - Family designation, yet reduced in scale from what might otherwise be allowed, as a suitable transition from Bayside Drive to the bay front. The Planning Commission will provide direction to staff as to each Bayside Residential Planned Community District Development Regulations provision included above under "Issues" and under "Supplemental Development Standards." Traffic Phasing Ordinance Based on rates in the City of Newport Beach Circulation Element, occupancy of the proposed seventeen single - family dwellings would generate approximately 187 vehicle trips per day. This traffic is off -set by the traffic generated by the existing 64 apartments which is approximately 416 trips per day. Section 15.40.030.0.1 of the Municipal Code exempts any project that generates fewer than 300 daily trips from the provisions of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. Consequently, a traffic analysis was not required or prepared for this project. Tentative Tract Map The 3.92 -acre project site is subject to a ground lease and the Tentative Tract Map will create transferable leasehold interests, rather than fee simple ownership, in the 17 buildable lots. The Tentative Trace Map allocates land area among the proposed uses as shown in Table 3. 'JA Bayside Planned Community Page 16 of 20 Table 3 Uses and Sizes of Tract Map Lots LOT USE LAND AREA Lots 1 -17 Residences 2.62 acres Lot A Recreation /Pool Facility 0.19 Lot B Public Pedestrian Access 0.14 Lots C -D Landscaped Area 0.09 Lot E Private Road 0.68 3.92acres The Planning Commission may recommend City Council approval of the Tentative Tract Map for this project by adopting a Resolution setting for the following findings and facts supporting these findings: 1. Finding The proposed subdivision is consistent with and serves to implement the policies and provisions of the General Plan. Facts The General Plan Land Use Element directs that all subdivisions be consistent with the Subdivision Code. Subject to Conditions of Approval, the Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the Subdivision Code. 2. Finding The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan. Facts Consistency with the City of Newport Beach Land Use Element. The proposed project site lies within the Promontory Bay Area, as defined in the City's Land Use Element. The Promontory Bay Area includes Harbor Island, Linda Isle, and all the area bounded by Newport Bay, Marine Avenue /Jamboree Road, and East Coast Highway. Existing land uses within the Promontory Bay Area are diverse and include Single - Family Detached Residential, Multi- Family Residential, Neighborhood Commercial, Recreational and Marina, and Recreational and Environmental Open Space land uses. The proposed project would be consistent with existing and allowed land uses within the Promontory Bay Area. The Land Use Element designates the proposed project site as Multi - Family Residential to reflect the existing apartment complex. As previously stated, the proposed project would establish 17 residential lots. Single- family residences are a permitted use within sites designated for multi - family residences (page 23 3 Bayside Planned Community Page 17 of 20 of the Land Use Element). Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the Multi - Family Residential land use designation. It would also be consistent with applicable policies of the Land Use Element. Consistency with the City of Newport Beach Harbor and Bay Element. Policy HB -1.1.2 of the Harbor and Bay Element requires that potential impacts on water - dependent and water - related land uses and activities be considered when reviewing proposal for land use changes. Land use changes associated with the proposed project would be limited to the project site. No adjacent properties would be impacted by the proposed project. Since no water - related or water- dependent uses occupy the site, no impact to these uses would occur. Consistency with the City of Newport Beach Housing Element The project will eliminate 64 apartments and replace them with 17 single - family residences for an overall reduction of 47 units. The City has approximately 14,600 rental units out of approximately 37,500 total housing units (2000 Census), and the reduction and change in housing type is not considered significant. Goal 2 of the Housing Element states that the City will "provide a balanced residential community, comprised of a variety of housing types, designs, and opportunities for all social and economic segments, including very low -, low -, moderate- and upper- income individuals and households." The proposed project is consistent with this goal and is not inconsistent with any other goals or policies in the Housing Element. Housing Element Policy 2.2.1 requires inclusion of affordable housing units in new residential developments or payment of an affordable housing in -lieu fee. The proposed project will replace 64 multiple - family units, none of which is occupied by low or moderate income households as those income classes are defined by State law, with 17 detached, single - family dwellings. This finding is based upon a survey conducted by the owners of the property of current residents, a copy of which has been provided to the City. Policy 2.2.1 previously has been determined not to apply to projects that do not result in a net increase in the number of units. Housing Element Policy 2.2.3 requires inclusion of affordable housing in residential developments in the Coastal Zone comprised of 10 or more units. Again, consistent with previous implementation of this policy, a development such as this that does not result in an increase in the number of units is not subject to Policy 2.2.3. Consistency with the City of Newport Beach Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan. According to the City's Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan (LCPLUP), the proposed project is located in the Coastal Zone. Therefore, a coastal development permit (CDP) is required from the California Coastal Commission as the City does not have a certified Local Coastal Program. Bayside Planned Community Page 18 of 20 The 1990 LCPLUP designates the site for Multi - Family Residential Use and is allowed a maximum of one unit for each 2,178 square feet of buildable lot area. As previously discussed, the proposed project is consistent with this designation. The recently adopted comprehensive update to the LCPLUP designates the site RM -B — Medium Density Residential with a density range of between 10 and 15 dwelling units per gross acre. This density range was applied, based upon the existing apartment complex. The proposed density is 4.3 dwelling units per acre and it is important to note that the minimum density identified is not considered a regulation. Staff believes the project to comply with the 2005 LCPLUP. Section 30210 -30212 of the California Coastal Act (CCA) requires that public access and recreational opportunities be provided for all the people of the state, that development not interfere with the public's right of access, and that new development provide public access to the shoreline. As previously discussed, the proposed project would provide public access to Promontory Bay and Newport Harbor via public walkways, and would improve elements within those walkways to meet current ADA requirements. The proposed project is not a recreation or visitor - serving facility. It would not require diking, dredging, filling or shoreline structures, and it does not propose construction or expansion of public works facilities. The LCPLUP does not identify the proposed project site as an environmentally sensitive habitat area or hazard area. Water and marine resources adjacent to the proposed project site would be protected through implementation of the Standard Conditions listed in the Hydrology and Water Quality section, above. The proposed project would preserve and provide for continued operation of the existing dock areas along the southerly project boundary within Newport Harbor. Sections 30244, 30250(a), 30252, and 30253(3) and (4) of the CCA provide criteria for the location of new development. These criteria specify that new development should generally be concentrated in areas of existing development, preserve public access, provide adequate support facilities including provisions for recreational facilities, and preserve archaeological and paleontological resources. The proposed project, as conditioned by the standard conditions and mitigation measures contained within this document, would fully comply with these criteria. The LCPLUP does not list the proposed project site as a primary view area. Consequently, it is not subject to Sections 30251 and 30253(5) of the CCA. Since the proposed project is not a new visitor - serving facility or coastal - dependant use and it does not require an oceanfront encroachment, the LCPLUP's policies specific to new development are not applicable to the proposed project. Bayside Planned Community Page 19 of 20 3. Finding The site is suitable for the type of development. Facts The site is generally level and currently developed with multiple - family dwelling units at densities greater than that proposed. No problems or adverse site conditions have been identified on the site as currently developed. Consequently, the site is determined to be physically suited for the development proposed. 4. Finding The site is physically suitable for the density of development. Facts The site is generally level and currently developed with multiple - family dwelling units at densities greater than that proposed. No problems or adverse site conditions have been identified on the site as currently developed. Consequently, the site is determined to be physically suited for the density of development proposed. 5. Finding The design of the subdivision and type of improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. Facts An Initial Study prepared in conjunction with this project and included in the administrative record was the basis for adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project, which indicated that all environmental impacts, including those to fish, wildlife or their habitat, are less than significant or, with mitigation, are reduced to a less than significant level. 6. Finding The proposed subdivision is not likely to cause serious public health problems. Facts An Initial Study prepared in conjunction with this project and included in the administrative record was the basis for adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project, which indicated that all environmental impacts, including those that could affect human health, are less than significant or, with mitigation, are reduced to a less than significant level. 7. Finding The proposed subdivision will not likely conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. <�5 Bayside Planned Community Page 20 of 20 Facts The proposed subdivision is proposed to be gate - guarded and generally not accessible to the public. An existing easement providing access to the bay front along the westerly edge of the property is preserved with this tract map and upgrades to physical improvements on this easement are included as part of this project. In addition, the tentative tract map dedicates an easement to the public for passage over a walkway along the bayfront. Coastal Residential Development Permit A Coastal Residential Development Permit (CRDP) was processed for this project to implement Government Code Section 65590 (Mello Act) relative to displacement of low and moderate income households within the Coastal Zone. As this project proposes to remove 64 apartment units, the City required the management of the apartment complex to identify low and moderate income households in possession of any of the apartments proposed to be demolished. Apartment managers sent questionnaires to current residents to determine income levels and family sizes. Based on the survey results and other private financial information provided by the applicant, City staff concluded that none of the resident families or individuals is low or moderate - income as defined in State law and no replacement affordable housing units is required. A Coastal Residential Development Permit, therefore, may be approved for this project. Prepared by: C�1& - Por �DAid Lepo, Hogle- Ireland, Inc. Exhibits: 3. Tentative Timt Map Submitted by: 14A SAG" Patricia Temple, Planning Director c6 q manatt manatt I phelps I phillips October 26, 2005 Mr. Tom Utman UGS Development, Inc. 537 Newport Center Drive, #380 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Susan K. Hod Manatt, Phelps & Phillips. LLP Direct Dial: (714) 371 -2528 E -mail: shori@manalt.com Re: Analysis of Public Access Policies for 919 Bayside Drive Dear Tom: Client -Mara: 77079-030 Dennis O'Neil and I thought that it would be helpful to summarize the various public access policies that pertain to your proposed development at 919 Bayside Drive and to provide an analysis of how the project addresses and satisfies those policies. Background UGS Development, Inc. has filed applications that are currently pending before the City of Newport Beach ("City) requesting approvals to subdivide and develop property located at 919 Bayside Drive consisting of 3.92 acres (the "Property) into 17 single - family lots (the "Project'). The 64 -unit Newport Marina Apartments currently occupies the Property. The Property is located within the California coastal zone. As the City does not have a certified Local Coastal Program, in addition to the City's land use entitlement approvals, the Project will require approval of a coastal development permit from the California Coastal Commission. Public Access Considerations A significant issue under review by the City relating to development of the Project is public access to the bay and waters of Newport Beach. Public access is presently provided from Bayside Drive along approximately 500 fed of paved walkway adjacent to the Promontory Bay entrance channel on the westerly boundary of the Property and along an approximately 480 -foot floating dock traversing the Newport Bay frontage of the Property. When discussing the notion of public access, it is generally understood that there are two basic types of public access: `vertical" access, that is, access from the nearest public roadway to the sea, and "lateral" or "horizontal" access, that is access along the coast, ocean, bay and waterfront. The public walkway running from Bayside Drive along the Promontory Bay entrance channel constitutes both vertical and lateral access. 695 Town Center Drive.14th Floor, Costa Mesa, Ca@fi0mia 92628.1924 Telephone: 714.3712500 Fax 714.3712550 Albany I Los Angeles I Mexico City I New York I Orange County I Palo Alto I Sacramento I Washington, D.C. manatt manatt I Phelps I philfips Mr. Tom Utman October 26, 2005 Page 2 In listing the various shoreline areas in the City, the draft Newport Beach Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan, describes the ` Bayside" area as a shoreline consisting mainly of bulkheads, with a few small beaches. Beacon Bay Beach (Lot 1) is accessible from Beacon Bay Drive via walkways at the Cape Cove, Shelter Cove, and Reef Cove Street ends. Bayside Drive County Beach is accessible from Bayside Drive via the Orange County Harbor Patrol facility. Lateral access to Promontory Bay is provided by a walkway along Bayside Drive and a public access easement along the bulkhead adjacent to your Property, the Newport Marina Apartments. This public access easement connects to a quarter mile walkway on a floating dock in the Balboa Island Channel which is also adjacent to the Property. Lateral access is also provided around the Balboa Yacht Basin. There has been some consideration of re- locating the lateral public access that currently is provided along the bayfront from its present location on the floating dock onto the adjacent property. It is understood, however, that any lateral land access could not extend beyond the easterly boundary of the Property because the adjacent condominium project blocks the right -of- way. It is further understood that if constructed, it is highly unlikely that such a re- located public walkway would ever be extended to the can in the near, or even distant, future because of the difficulty in redeveloping the condominium property with its many individual owners and because of the inter -tidal wet zone to the east of the Property in front of the condominiums. Public Access Under California Law The best source of understanding the principle of providing public access to the ocean, bayfront or other public waters is found in the California Constitution, the California Coastal Act and the Subdivision Map Act. CALIFORNIA CONSTPIION Article Y, Section 4 of the California Constitution provides: No individual, partnership or corporation, claiming or possessing the frontage or tidal lands of a harbor, bay, inlet, estuary, or other navigable water in this State, shall be permitted to exclude the right of way to such water whenever it is required for any public purpose nor to destroy or obstruct the free navigation of such water; and the Legislature shall enact such laws as will give the most liberal construction to this provision, so that access to the navigable waters of this State shall be always attainable for the people thereof. manatt Mwaa I phelps I pMlpps Mr. Tom Utman October 26, 2005 Page 3 CALIFORNIA COASTAL ACT Section 30210 of the California Coastal Act provides: In carrying out the requirement of Section 4 of Article X of the California Constitution, maximum access, which shall be conspicuously posted, and recreational opportunities shall be provided for all the people consistent with public safety needs and the need to protect public rights, rights ofprivate property owners, and natural resource areas from overuse. Section 30211 of the California Coastal Act provides: Development shall not interfere with the public's right of access to the sea where acquired through use or legislative authorization, including, but not limited to, the use of dry sand and rocky coastal beaches to the first line of terrestrial vegetation. Section 30212 of the California Coastal Act provides: (a) Public access from the nearest public roadway to the shoreline and along the coast shall be provided in new development projects except where (1) it is inconsistent with public safety, military security needs, or the protection of fragile coastal resources, (2) adequate access exists nearby, (emphasis added) or (3) agriculture would be adversely affected. Dedicated accessway shall not be required to be opened to public use until a public agency or private association agrees to accept responsibility for maintenance and liability of the accessway. Section 30214 of the California Coastal Act provides: (b) The public access policies of this article shall be implemented in a manner that takes into account the need to regulate the time, place, and manner of public access depending on the facts and circumstances in each case including, but not limited to, the following: (1) Topographic and geologic site characteristics. 0I manatt manatt I Phelps I Phillips Mr. Tom Utman October 26, 2005 Page 4 (2) The capacity of the site to sustain use and at what level of intensity. (3) The appropriateness of limiting public access to the right to pass and repass depending on such factors as the fragility of the natural resources in the area and the proximity of the access area to adjacent residential uses. (4) The need to provide for the management of access areas so as to protect the privacy of adjacent property owners and to protect the aesthetic values of the area by providing for the collection of litter. (c) It is the intent of the Legislature that the public access policies of this article be carried out in a reasonable manner that considers the equities and that balances the rights of the individual property owner with the public's constitutional right of access pursuant to Section 4 of ArticleX of the California Constitution. Nothing in this section or any amendment thereto shall be construed as a limitation on the rights guaranteed to the public under Section 4 of Article X of the California Constitution. (d) In carrying out the public access policies of this article, the commission and any other responsible public agency shall consider and encourage the utilization of innovative access management techniques, including, but not limited to, agreements with private organizations which would minimize management costs and encourage the use of volunteer programs. SUBDIVISION MAP ACT Section 66478.1 of the California Government Code states: It is the intent of the Legislature by the provisions of Section 66478.1 through 66478.10 of this Article to implement Section 4 of Article X of the California Constitution as applicable to navigable waters. Section 66478.2 of the California Government Code states: M manatt manan I whelps I phIMp5 Mr. Tom Utman October 26, 2005 Page 5 The Legislature finds and declares that the public natural resources of this state has grown at a rapid rate and will continue to do so, thus increasing the need for utilization of public natural resources. The increase in population has also increased demand for private property adjacent to public natural resources through real estate subdivision developments which resulted in diminishing public access to public natural resources. Section 66478.3 of the California Government Code states: The Legislature further finds and declares that it is essential to the health and well -being of all citizens of this state that public access to public natural resources be increased. It is the intent of the legislature to increase public access to public natural resources. Section 66478.4 of the California Government Code states: (a) No local agency shall approve either a tentative or a final map of any proposed subdivision to be fronted upon a public waterway, river or stream which does not provide, or have available, reasonable public access by fee or easement from a public highway to that portion of the bank of the river or stream bordering or lying within the proposed subdivision. (b) Reasonable public access shall be determined by the local agency in which the proposed subdivision s to be located. In making the determination of what shall be reasonable access, the local agency shall consider all of the following: (l) That access may be by highway, foot trail, bike trail, horse trail, or any other means of travel. (2) The size of the subdivision. (3) The type of riverbank and the various appropriate recreational, educational and scientific uses, including, but not limited to, swimming, diving boating, fishing, water skiing, scientific collection and teaching. (4) The likelihood of trespass on private property and reasonable means of avoiding these trespasses. b0� manatt manatt IPhelps I phallps Mr. Tom Utman October 26, 2005 Page 6 Discussion Clearly the mandate set forth in Article X, Section 4 of the California Constitution as cited in the California Coastal Act and the Subdivision Map Act, that owners of property fronting on public waterways shall not exclude the right to access the water areas whenever required for a public purpose, is undeniable. As it applies to the Project, there is no question that public access is being provided. The issue to be considered is whether the public access existing and proposed for the Project satisfies the Constitutional and other applicable statutory requirements. A reading of the key words in those provisions proves helpful. Article X, Section 4 of the California Constitution states that no individual, etc. possessing the frontage of tidal lands of a harbor, bay, inlet, estuary, or other navigable water in this State, shall be permitted to exclude the right of way to such water whenever it is required for a public purpose. Surely, with the existing access provided by the Property, no one is questioning that the Project proponent is in any way violating any provision of Article X, Section 4 of the Califomia Constitution. Section 302I0 of the Califomia Coastal Act requires the public access to be conspicuously posted. The Project proponent is already in compliance with this requirement and is willing to post additional signs as approved by the City and Coastal Commission. Section 30211 of the Coastal Act states that development shall not interfere with the public's right of access to the sea. The development of the Project will not violate this section. Section 30212 of the Coastal Act provides that public access from the nearest public roadway to the shoreline along the coast shall be provided in new development projects. Again, the development of the Project complies with this section. In determining the amount and types of uses appropriate for providing public access, Section 30214 of the Coastal Act states that such a determination depends on the facts and circumstances of each case. Consideration should be given to habitat values of the site, topographic constraints of the site, the recreational needs of the public, and the privacy rights of the landowner. It has been pointed out that placing the access on "the property" is undesirable for a public access way because the condominium project to the east prevents further extension of the public access on the land due to the configuration of existing residential condominium development. Further, access on the land would invade the privacy rights of the homeowners without providing any real benefit to the public that is not already provided by the public access currently provided on the dock. Section 66478.3 of the Subdivision Map Act states that the City shall not approve a tentative or final map of a proposed subdivision to be fronted upon a public waterway which E manatt manatt I phelps I phfllps Mr. Tom Utman October 26, 2005 Page 7 does not provide or have available reasonable public access by fee or easement from a public highway. The Project does now and will in the future continue to comply with this requirement. In determining what constitutes reasonable access, Section 66478.4 of the Map Act provides guidance. The City shall consider the type of access, the size of the subdivision, and the likelihood of trespass on private property, together with the reasonable means of avoiding these trespasses. Providing public access along the dock would be consistent with a determination of providing reasonable public access thereby avoiding trespass on private property. In addition to these statutory mandates, we have also examined the public access policies in the recently approved Newport Beach Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan. Policy 3.1.1 -1 states: Protect, and where feasible, expand and enhance public access to and along the shoreline and to beaches, coastal waters, tidelands, coastal parks and trails. The Project protects the existing vertical and lateral public access, and enhances public access by (1) providing new signage; (2) improving the access to make it ADA- compliant; and (3) ensuring its protection by offering to dedicate an easement for public access to the City across the gangplank and dockway. The offer to dedicate an easement is also consistent with Policies 3.1 -11 and 3.1 -12 which requires new development to provide an easement for lateral and vertical public access. It should be noted that Policies 3.1 -11 and 3.1 -12 apply only to "new development projects causing or contributing to adverse public access impacts." This Project does not either cause or contribute to adverse public access impacts, and therefore, would not be required, under these policies, to grant an easement. This Project, however, has gone beyond what would be required by these policies and has offered voluntarily to provide an easement to assure the continuing use of these walkways for public access. Conclusion This 3.92 acre Property and Project will provide nearly 1,000 feet of lateral and vertical public access to the bays of Newport Beach. This would be nearly twice as much as provided by the Balboa Bay Club which is several times larger in land area After our review of the applicable public access provisions set forth in the California Constitution, the Coastal Act and the Subdivision Map Act, Dennis O'Neil and I concluded that the public access that will be provided by the Project complies with all of the requirements of the State Constitution. We believe that both the Coastal Act and Subdivision Map Act would support the maintenance of the current continuous lateral access along the docks as opposed to relocating the lateral access to the land only to have it terminate at the eastern boundary of the Property. Finally, we believe that the Project also complies with the public access policies that were recently approved by the Coastal Commission for the City's Land Use Plan. qt manatt mama I Phelps I phillips Mr. Tom Utman October 26, 2005 Page 8 We hope you find this brief summary helpful in providing an overview of access policies and their applicability to your Project. If you have any questions regarding our analysis, please contact either Dennis or myself. Very truly yours, Susan K.Hori Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP SKH:cmy cc: Planning Commissioners, City of Newport Beach Jim Campbell Patty Temple Carol Mentor McDermott Lou Sabatasso Jim Hann Dennis O'Neil Exhibit No. 4 C�2) This page is blank Q�q CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 5 August 18, 2005 TO: Planning Commission FROM: David Lepo, Contract Planner 949 - 553 -1427, dlepo @hogleireland.com SUBJECT: Bayside Drive Residential Development (PA2004 -072) Code Amendment No. 2005 -007, Use Permit No. 2005 -026, Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 2005 -001 & Newport Tract No. 2004 -001 (TTM No. 15323). LOCATION: 919 Bayside Drive APPLICANT: UGS Development Inc. REQUEST The application requests approval of a Code Amendment to add the Planned Residential Development Overlay to the Multifamily Residential District zoning district designation of 919 Bayside Drive. A Use Permit and a Tentative Tract Map subdividing the subject property into 17 single - family lots for lease purposes and 7 common lots for recreation /open space, public pedestrian access, landscaped areas, private roads and for surface waters of Newport Bay and private boat docks is also requested. Lastly, a Coastal Residential Development Permit ensuring compliance with State law relative to low and moderate income housing opportunities within the Coastal Zone is sought. RECOMMENDATION Review the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration, Code Amendment, Use Permit, and Tentative Tract Map, receive public comments, and adopt Resolution No. recommending City Council adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration SCH No. 2005061019 and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approve Code Amendment No. 2005 -007, Use Permit No. 2005- 026, Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 2005 -001 and Tentative Tract Map No. 2004 -001 (Tract 15323) for development of a 17 -lot, single - family residential subdivision at 919 Bayside Drive. 0�5 �� a ..:� ry a SAW- Sh" t o„h t2 11 e Its yy�� . 9 � QE•: 5 Y �. ;r 4 Bayside Drive LLC. (PA2004 -072) Page 3 of 20 DISCUSSION Background UGS Development Inc. submitted an application for a Code Amendment, a Conditional Use Permit, and a Tentative Tract Map to allow construction of 17 single - family homes on a 4.78 -acre parcel located on the south side of Bayside Drive, adjacent to Promontory Bay and Newport Bay. The property is currently developed with the 64 -unit Newport Marina apartments in 12 buildings and including five multi -car garage buildings. A floating walkway and 34 private boat docks are located at the North Channel of Newport Bay beyond a bulkhead at the bay -side property line. The apartment structures are to be demolished to accommodate the proposed subdivision. The project site is designated Multi - Family Residential by the Land Use Element of the General Plan and MFR (Multi - Family Residential) by the Zoning Map. These designations permit both single - family and multiple - family dwellings. The property is also within the Coastal Zone and the project, if approved by the City, will require a Coastal Development Permit from the California Coastal Commission. An Initial Study prepared for the proposed development indicated that all potential environmental impacts were less than significant, or could be mitigated to a less than significant level. Consistent with this determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Project Setting The Promontory Bay area of Newport Beach includes the area bounded by Newport Bay, Marine Avenue /Jamboree Road, and East Coast Highway where the project site is located. Property north of the project site across Bayside Drive is developed as a neighborhood retail shopping center (Bayside Center) anchored by a supermarket. The Cove Condominium (multiple - family residential dwellings) adjoins the property on the east. Promontory Channel abuts the west side of the property with the Balboa Yacht Basin on the opposite side of the channel. Newport Bay and Balboa Island lie to the south. Vehicular access to the site is provided from Bayside Drive. A bulkhead provides sufficient water depth at the south property line for 34 private boat docks and access to the North Channel of Newport Bay. A twelve- foot -wide sidewalk/bike path adjoins the property frontage at Bayside Drive. An existing 10- feet -wide easement and sidewalk provide public access from Bayside Drive along the westerly property line of the project site to the bay front. The easement and sidewalk are situated at the top of an existing bulkhead along qq Bayside Drive LLC. (PA2004 -072) Page 4 of 20 Promontory Bay and are grade- separated from the elevated project site by a retaining wall. The easement incorporates a six - foot -wide gangplank connecting the sidewalk to a 6- foot -wide floating walkway parallel to the waterfront. The walkway is 18 feet south of the existing bulkhead along the south property line of the project site. The walkway provides access to the boat docks and continues along the waterfront of the adjoining property on the east and terminates at the Newport Beach Yacht Club at Marine Avenue. Proiect Description The 4.78 -acre project site is proposed to be subdivided into 17 buildable lots (numbered lots on Tentative Tract Map) for development of a gated community of custom - designed, single - family homes. Buildable lots range in size from 5,818 square feet to 10,754 square feet. Dashed lines on the Tentative Tract Map show the maximum permissible building footprint for each lot complying with proposed minimum yard requirements. Building footprints range from approximately 3,172 square feet to 6,230 square feet. Proposed front yards range in depth from 5 feet to 20 feet. Side yards are to be a minimum of 5 feet and rear yards are 10 feet. Assuming all two -story dwellings and applying MFR permissible building, homes would range in size from 6,195 square feet to 10,902 square feet of living area. Approximately 39% of the site would be covered by buildings (70,011 = 178,268) exclusive of streets and consistent with the 40% maximum permitted for a residential project pursuant to the PRD Overlay (Planned Residential Development) sought by the applicant. Common area facilities to be shared by residents and maintained by a homeowners' association are indicated on Lots "A ", "C ", "D ", "E ", and "F" on the Tentative Tract Map. Lot "A" encompasses an area of 8,279 square feet near the center of the project site and is designated for recreation and /or pool uses. Lots "C" and "D" accommodate landscaped areas of 2,247 and 1,591 square feet, respectively, proposed along the Bayside Drive frontage and at the driveway entrance to the subdivision. A sidewalk along the easterly side of the driveway entrance from Bayside Drive connects the public sidewalk with the interior of the subdivision through a pedestrian security gate. Lot "E" encompasses 29,638 square feet including the driveway entrance from Bayside Drive and the private loop road which encircles the recreation area of Lot "A ", and includes all vehicular access roadways to the buildable lots. Lot "F" encompasses 8,008 square feet at the water's surface between the existing bulkhead and the existing 6- foot -wide walkway that parallels the bay front. Lot "G" is 29,627 square feet in area and includes the 6 -foot walkway and the water's surface between the walkway and the existing pierhead line at the Tract Map boundary on the bayside of the site. Dedication of the 6 -foot walkway to the City of Newport Beach is proposed on the map. j6� Bayside Drive LLC, (PA2004 -072) Page 5 of 20 Pedestrian access from the interior of the proposed gated community to the boat docks and walkway is proposed between Lots 9 and 10 on the westerly side of the site. A 9- foot -wide easement for the benefit of residents of the gated community leads from the end of the roadway at Lot 9 to the existing public easement and 10 -foot sidewalk on Lot "B ". A six - foot -wide fire access easement is shown between Lots 5 and 6, connecting the private loop road with a gangplank and with the walkway outside the existing bulkhead. The Tentative Tract Map indicates that the 6 -foot walkway at the bay front, and the gangplank between the walkway and the existing 10- foot -wide easement and sidewalk along Promontory Channel, will be dedicated to the City of Newport Beach. Public access between the gangplank and Bayside Drive will be maintained through the existing easement. Lot "B" on the Tract Map is coterminous with this easement. The project proponent will replace the existing stairs at the Bayside Drive entrance with a ramp that will comply with Americans with Disabilities requirements. The gangplank will be widened as part of this project to accommodate wheelchair access. On -Site Vehicular Circulation and Parking A gated vehicular entrance to the subdivision is proposed from Bayside Drive within the easterly one -third of the Bayside Drive frontage and to the west of the existing curb cut. A 22- foot -wide driveway comprised of two in -bound lanes would provide access: one lane for guests' automobiles stopped at the security gate callbox; one bypass lane allowing residents to drive directly to the security gate without stopping at the callbox. An eighteen- foot -wide landscaping island separates the in -bound driveway from the 20- foot -wide outbound driveway. Approximately 50 feet of "stacking" distance from the Bayside Drive curb to the visitor callbox is provided in each of the two in -bound lanes. The in -bound and out -bound driveways merge and narrow to 24 feet in width at the entry gate set back approximately 87 feet from Bayside Drive. Beyond the security gate vehicular entrance, a loop road (Lot "E" on the map) would provide direct access to nine of the buildable lots. Loop road Lot "E" is 36 feet wide through the straight roadway segments and accommodates a curb -to- curb roadway width of 35 feet with parking on both sides. A total of 18 on- street parking spaces are shown. A five - foot -wide public utility easement is proposed, at back of curb, along both sides of the loop road including the perimeter of the recreation /pool area at the hub of the loop. No sidewalks or parkways are proposed. Three, dead -end roadways extend outward from the loop road at turns near the northwesterly, southwesterly, and southeasterly portions of the loop. The roadway extension at the northwesterly turn in the loop road projects a distance of approximately 130 feet and provides access to driveways at Lots 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16. The roadway extension at the southwesterly turn is approximately 65 '01 Bayside Drive LLC. (PA2004 -072) Page 6 of 20 feet in length and provides access to Lots 8 and 9. Lots 3 and 4 take access from a 40 -foot long roadway extension at the southeasterly turn in the loop road. All three roadway extensions are 24 feet in width, curb -to -curb, within 25 -foot- wide portions of Lot "E ". Five - foot -wide public utility easements adjoin both sides of the roadway extensions. No on- street parking will be allowed and no sidewalks are provided within each of the driveway extensions. Residential driveways to Lots 2, 6, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, and 17 are to be 18 feet in width to accommodate two -car attached garages. Lot 1 at the northeasterly turn in the loop road would have a 16 -foot wide driveway. Three -car garages are contemplated for Lots 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15 with driveway widths between 25 and 31 feet. The distance from face of garage to street -side property line at each lot is at least 18 feet to allow driveway parking. The subdivision map indicates a total of 48 covered parking spaces and 48 driveway parking spaces in addition to the 18 on- street spaces. Preliminary Plan Various proposed site improvements are indicated on the "Preliminary Plan" submitted with this application. The existing privacy wall at the Bayside Drive frontage is to be replaced with a new, 6 -foot high site wall. A 30- inch -high site wall is to be added atop the existing retaining wall that separates the westerly project site from the adjacent public access easement and sidewalk along Promontory Bay. The existing planter on the bulkhead side of the public access easement along Promontory Bay will be removed and a new raised planter segment will be constructed to join the existing raised planters along the base of the existing retaining wall. Additionally, improvements to the pedestrian walkway along Promontory Channel (ADA ramps and a new gangplank) are planned. Planning Commission Actions Mitigated Negative Declaration The Planning Commission will recommend to the City Council as to whether or not the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) prepared for this project should be adopted. The MND is accompanied by an Initial Study that includes analysis of potential environmental impacts that could result from development and occupancy of the proposed residential subdivision. Conclusions based on the IS analysis indicated "no impact' or "less than significant impact' in the following topical areas: • Aesthetics • Agricultural Resources • Air Quality • Biological Resources • Cultural Resources • Mineral Resources • Population and Housing • Public Services • Recreation • Transportation /Circulation 'b� • Hydrology and Water Quality • Land Use and Planning Bayside Drive LLC. (PA2004 -072) Page 7 of 20 • Utilities and Service Systems • Mandatory Findings of Significance The Initial Study indicated the need for mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level in the following topical areas: • Geology and Soils • Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Noise With mitigation measures and standard conditions of approval indicated in the Initial Study and set forth in the mitigation monitoring and reporting program included with the Mitigated Negative Declaration, all potential impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level. Potentially significant impacts and corresponding mitigation measures and standard conditions for proposed residential subdivisions are paraphrased in Table 1. Table 1 Potential Impacts and Mitigation Measures IMPACT Geology and Soils Potential strong seismic ground shaking Location on unstable soils or soils that could become unstable resulting in landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse Hazards and Hazardous Materials Significant hazard through transport or disposal of hazardous materials Significant hazard involving the release of hazardous materials MITIGATION MEASURE Standard Condition G -1 Standard Condition G -2 Building Department verification that all facilities are designed and constructed to comply with current seismic standards Standard Condition H -1 Building Official approval required for asbestos abatement and removal plan in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 1403 prior to issuance of permits Standard Condition H -2 Building Official approval of lead -based paint abatement and removal plan required prior to issuance of permits 707 Table 1 Potential Impacts and Mitigation Measures IMPACT Noise Exposure of persons to noise from demolition, grading, and construction activities and from construction truck traffic General Plan Bayside Drive LLC. (PA2004 -072) Page 8 of 20 MITIGATION MEASURE Standard Condition H -3 Building Official approval of Erosion and Sediment Control Plan to identify how all construction materials, wastes, debris will be handled and transported required prior to issuance of permits Standard Condition H -4 Project proponent to store, transport, and dispose of waste generated on -site in accordance with CCR Title 22 subject to Building Official approval Standard Condition N -1 Limitation of construction activities to the hours between 7 AM and 6:30 PM Monday through Friday and between 8 AM and 6 PM on Saturdays. No construction on Sundays or legal holidays The project site is designated "Multi- Family Residential' in the General Plan. Single- family, detached dwellings, as proposed, are permitted uses on properties so designated. Proposed dwellings will be constructed subject to development standards of the Multi - Family Residential district and those included in conditions of approval for this project pursuant to the RPD Overlay. The proposed use, therefore, is consistent with the General Plan. Conformity with General Plan policies are detailed at "Finding 2" under the Code Amendment narrative of this report and at "Finding 1" and "Finding 2" under the Tentative Tract Map discussion. Code Amendment Code Amendment No. 2005 -007, included as part of the project application, would add the "Planned Residential Development Overlay District' (PRD) jp`y Bayside Drive LLC. (PA2004 -072) Page 9020 designation to the existing "Multifamily Residential District" (MFR) zoning designation of the project site. The PRD designation may be applied to any residential zoning district designation to facilitate new developments that are compatible with and integrated into surrounding communities. Each development in the PRD Overlay district is subject to approval of a Use Permit. Single- family detached units as proposed in this application are permitted in the MFR District, with or without the PRD Overlay. Approval of the PRD Overlay for the project site would allows flexibility in establishing minimum front, rear, and side yard dimensions, as determined appropriate by the Planning Commission, and set forth in conditions of the Use Permit. Building height may not exceed the MFR maximum of 28 feet. Maximum site area coverage by buildings in the PRD Overlay is limited to 40% of site area exclusive of the streets. The Tentative Tract Map indicates compliance with this limitation. At least two, covered off - street parking spaces for each dwelling are required pursuant to the PRD Overlay. At least two additional, uncovered parking spaces for each dwelling are required unless the Planning Commission determines that on- street spaces, and spaces in private driveways, provide an equivalent number of spaces. The proposed project includes the required parking. A comparison of zoning standards for single - family residences in the MFR zone with those proposed for each buildable lot pursuant to a PRD Overlay for this project are indicated in Table 2. All development standards in this PRD as approved by the Planning Commission will be included as Conditions of Approval of the requisite Use Permit. Table 2 MFR Regulations vs. Proposed PRD Overlay Regulations Maximum Minimum Buildable Maximum Lot Area Area Floor Minimum Yards (Sq. Ft.) (Sq. Ft.)' Areal Front Side Rear (bay) (street) (See Footnote (See 8% of MFR 5,000 20' lot 10' 1) Footnote 2) width PRD Lot 1 6,848 4,237 7,415 35' 5'' 10' Lot area less minimum front, side, and rear yard areas 2 1.75 X Maximum buildable area and not including maximum 400 sq. ft. permitted for enclosed parking 3 Lots 1, 15, 16, 8 17, minimum 10' yard required adjacent to public right -of -way 105 Bayside Drive LLC. (PA2004 -072) Page 10 of 20 2 5,818 3,172 5,551 20' 5' 10' 3 10,754 6,230 10,902 18'4 5' 10' 4 7,800 4,649 8,135 25' 5' 5' 5 8,547 5,124 8,967 25' 5'/6'5 5' 6 6,500 3,740 6,545 25' 5' 5' 7 8,125 4,899 8,573 25' 5' 5' 8 6,500 3,649 6,386 25' 5' 5' 9 8,148 4,666 8,166 20' 5' 5'6 10 7,155 4,113 7,198 20' 5' 5' 11 6,000 3,540 6,195 20' 5' 5' 12 6,000 3,540 6,195 20' 5' 5' 13 6,000 3,327 5,822 20' 5'/10' 5' 14 6,720 3,564 6,237 20' 5/10' 5' 15 8,505 3,907 6,837 15/'20" 5' 5' 16 7,004 4,076 7,133 20' 5' 5' 17 6,182 3,578 6,261 20' 5' 5' Use Permit Residential developments pursuant to PRD zoning standards require approval of a Use Permit by the Planning Commission. Conditions of approval for the Use Permit are required to include appropriate zoning standards as determined by the Planning Commission. Proposed "Conditions of Approval" for the Use Permit for this project include development standards as in Table 2, above, and are included as an attachment to this report for Planning Commission consideration. These include a requirement that the replacement privacy wall indicated along Bayside Drive be at least four feet from the back of the public sidewalk to allow for adequate perimeter, common area landscaping. The distance from the sidewalk to the existing wall varies from a few inches to three feet. Lots C and D would be required to be reconfigured and expanded to incorporate both the landscaped area and new wall as common areas for purposes of future maintenance and repair. Use Permit Conditions of Approval indicate a minimum 10 -foot yard dimension adjacent to the reconstructed Bayside Drive privacy wall. With the additional setback proposed for the replacement privacy wall at this location, no dwelling would be nearer than 14 feet to the Bayside Drive tract boundary. The Tentative Tract Map for this project, however, indicates only a five - foot -wide yard on Lot 15 and ten - foot -wide yards at Lots 1, 16, and 17 adjacent to the Bayside Drive tract boundary. If developed according to the zoning standards for the MFR zoning 4 Water -side yard deemed "front yard' for Lots 3 -15 (see Tract Map) 5 6' required to accommodate 6' "Fire Access Easement" per Tract Map b Lots 9 & 10, side yard adjacent to "pedestrian access easement" per Tract Map measured from easement ' Minimum 20' required at southerly 55' of front yard; minimum 15' required at northerly 42' per Tract Map job° Bayside Drive LLC. (PA2004 -072) Page 11 of 20 designation for this property, a minimum 20- foot -wide front yard would be required along this frontage. Consistent with the stated purpose of the Planned Residential Development Overlay requested for this project, minimum yard requirements are intended to make new development compatible with and integrated into the surrounding community. For comparison purposes, a typical single - family home along the south side of Bayside Drive between Coast Highway and the project site has a front yard of between five and ten feet between an attached garage and the public sidewalk. Most of the homes have "L- shaped" floor plans with two -car garages forming the leg of the "L" that extends forward toward the street. As a result, approximately half of the front wall surface of each home is more than 25 feet behind the public sidewalk at Bayside Drive. The nearest building at the Cove Condominium on the east side of the project site is three stories high and approximately 35 feet behind the public sidewalk. Cove Condominium buildings further to the east are set back greater distances from the street. A 10 foot high privacy wall extends along much of the Cove frontage; however, at distances varying from a few inches to as much as 25 feet. Although garages are set back a minimum of 18 feet, yards adjacent to the curb at the loop street are proposed to be 5 feet in depth on Lots 4 through 8 and Lots 10 through 14. With no sidewalks along the private loop road, walls of dwellings will be five feet from the street on these lots. Yards at the private street are a minimum of 20 feet in depth on the balance of the lots. Consideration should be given to the character of the streetscape with portions of two -story dwellings located 5 feet behind the curb. A fire access easement from the private driveway to the docks is shown across a 6- foot -wide side yard on the westerly side of Lot 5. Dual use as both side yard and access easement may not be feasible since obstructions including plant materials and fences are prohibited in an emergency access easement. A five- foot side yard on Lot 5, in addition to the 6 -foot easement, should be considered. After consideration, the Planning Commission should determine the appropriate minimum yard dimensions for inclusion in conditions of approval for the Use Permit. A recommendation to City Council for approval of the Use Permit requires Planning Commission adoption of a resolution that includes findings together with facts supporting those findings as follow: 1. Finding The proposed location of the use is in accord with the objectives of this code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. �>51 Bayside Drive LLC. (PA2004 -072) Page 12 of 20 Facts The Tentative Tract Map and Preliminary Plan provided with this application and subject to development standards of the Multi - Family zoning district and the Planned Residential Development Overlay zoning district and subject to conditions of approval set forth by the Planning Commission provide sufficient assurance that development will be consistent with the character of the existing neighborhood and will promote the social and economic vitality of the neighborhood consistent with the objectives of the Zoning Code. The proposed project is located on property designated Multi - Family Residential in the Land Use Element of the General Plan and Multi - Family Residential in the Zoning Code, both of which allow single - family dwellings, and is in a predominantly residential area. Incorporation of the Planned Residential Development Overlay (PRD) zoning district to the underlying Multi - Family zoning district provides for residential development subject to Use Permit conditions so that the project is consistent with the purposes of the Multi - Family zoning district and the PRD Overlay zoning district. 2. Finding The proposed location and design of the proposed use and facilities and the proposed conditions under which the use would be operated or maintained: 1) will be consistent with the General Plan and the purpose of the district in which the site is located; 2) will not be detrimental to the public health, safety; peace, morals, comfort, or welfare of persons residing or working in or adjacent to the neighborhood of such use; and 3) will not be detrimental to the properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the City Facts General Plan Housing Element Policy 2.2.1 requires inclusion of affordable housing units in new residential developments or payment of an affordable housing in -lieu fee. The proposed project will replace 64 multiple - family units, none of which is occupied by low or moderate income households, with 17 detached, single - family dwellings. Policy 2.2.1 previously has been determined not to apply to residential developments such as this that do not result in a net increase, or a reduction, in the net number of units. General Plan Housing Element Policy 2.2.3 requires inclusion of affordable housing in residential developments in the Coastal Zone comprised of 10 or more units. Consistent with previous implementation of this policy, a development such as this resulting in no increase, or a net decrease, in the number of dwellings is not subject to the Policy 2.2.3. All potentially significant environmental effects will either be avoided or reduced to a less than significant level through the implementation of mitigation measures as identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program proposed for adoption as part of the approval process for this project. 1 °� Bayside Drive LLC. (PA2004 -072) Page 13 of 20 Potential impacts to nearby residential uses from construction generated noise will be reduced to less than significant levels through standard Conditions of Approval included with the Use Permit. Nighttime lighting of the proposed residences will be substantially similar as that of the existing residential uses on the project site and consistent with that of nearby residential uses. Adequate vehicular access to the site can be provided from Bayside Drive as indicated in the Transportation /Circulation analysis in the Initial Study prepared for this project. The project will result in a reduction in vehicular trips to and from the site for existing levels. Minimum yard dimensions between dwellings, between dwellings and the private street, and setbacks from the perimeter of the tract have been considered by the Planning Commission and set forth in the conditions of approval of the Use Permit as appropriate within the context of the surrounding community. The volume of each single - family dwelling anticipated for the project site will be less than that of each existing multiple - family residential structure on the site and less than that of multiple - family structures on the adjoining property to the east and across Bayside Drive to the west and, and comparable in volume to existing single- family dwellings on the south side of Bayside Drive to the west of the subject site. Design and materials will be of a quality comparable to that of buildings in the vicinity and commensurate with the highly - valued water front site for this project. Public Works Department "Findings and Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map (NT2004- 001)" requiring inclusion of sidewalks within the subdivision brings the project into conformity with City Council Policy L -4. 3. Finding The proposed residential use will comply with the provisions of the Zoning Code including any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located. Facts Single- family dwellings as proposed are a permitted use in the MFR and PRD Overlay zoning districts. Maximum permissible building height of 28 feet is included in the Conditions of Approval consistent with the underlying MFR zoning district for this property. The proposed project includes on -site parking as required by Chapter 20.65 of the Zoning Code. Bayside Drive LLC. (PA2004 -072) Page 14 of 20 The proposed project reflects a density of approximately 1 unit per 6,700 square feet which is less dense than the permitted MFR density of one unit per 1,200 square feet. Building coverage for the project site is 39% which is consistent with the maximum permissible coverage for development in the PRD Overlay district of 40 %. Development standards for the project including minimum yard dimensions as deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission are included as Conditions of Approval of the Use Permit consistent with requirements of the Planned Residential Development Overlay district. Public Access Access is presently provided from Bayside Drive along Promontory Channel and the across a floating dock system connecting to the east of the project. This means of public access was created and approved by the Coastal Commission and the City when the Cove Condominiums and the last phase of the existing apartments were developed in the early 1970's. The Coastal Act requires "maximum access" to the shoreline for the public. New developments must provide public access unless adequate access exists nearby. Lot B of the proposed subdivision will be dedicated for public access and the applicant plans to provide an easement for access across the existing floating docks. The Planning Commission may want to consider requiring access along the south side of the project to be provided at the bulkhead rather than along the floating dock. This requirement could maximize access. In evaluating this issue, several additional facts should be considered. The floating walkway presently connects to a walkway along the adjoining property (Cove Condominiums) to the east. A walkway at the bulkhead could not physically extend onto the Cove Condominium until such time that the Cove Condominiums are redeveloped. A psychological barrier may exist with public access across a floating dock as they are not typically public. As a compromise, the Commission may want to reserve the future right to have a public access walkway at the bulkhead through requiring an irrevocable offer to dedicate an easement along the water above the bulkhead. Maintaining the existing access along the docks until such time as a connecting walkway at the bulkhead is developed would be necessary. If an irrevocable offer to dedicate is required, the Planning Commission may want to reconsider minimum building setbacks adjacent to the future easement. The Planning Commission should determine the whether public access proposed by the applicant is consistent with the Coastal Act and provide direction as to any changes to access that is considered desirable. III Bayside Drive LLC. (PA2004 -072) Page 15 of 20 Traffic Phasing Ordinance Based on trip generation rates of the Newport Beach traffic model (NBTAM), occupancy of the proposed seventeen single - family dwellings would generate an average of approximately 187 vehicle trips per day. This traffic is off -set by the traffic generated by the existing 64 apartments, which is approximately 416 trips per day. Section 15.40.030.0.1 of the Municipal Code exempts any project that generates fewer than 300 daily trips from the provisions of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. Consequently, a traffic analysis was not required or prepared for this project. Tentative Tract Map The 4.78 -acre project site is subject to a ground lease and the Tentative Tract Map will create transferable leasehold interests, rather than fee simple ownership, in the 17 buildable lots. The Tentative Tract Map allocates land area among the proposed uses as shown in Table 3. Table 3 Uses and Sizes of Tract Map Lots LOT USE LAND AREA Lots 1 -17 Residences 2.62 acres Lot A Recreation /Pool Facility 0.19 Lot B Public Pedestrian Access 0.14 Lots C -D Landscaped Area 0.09 Lot E Private Road 0.68 Lot F Water Front 0.18 Lot G Private Boat Docks 0.68 4.78 acres Infrastructure on the project site indicated on the Tentative Tract Map includes existing bulkheads along the west and south property lines. The map indicates that these are to remain and be repaired, as necessary. Public utilities crossing the site will be relocated within a proposed 20- foot -wide easement crossing the west property line between lots 13 and 14 and then extending to Bayside Drive. This will replace an existing utilities easement crossing east to west from property line to property line along the northerly portion of the property. A private storm drain easement is proposed to extend from the easterly interior section of the subdivision to the east property line. This easement will provide a connection between a private storm drain from this site to an existing 36" public storm drain within a 20- foot -wide easement parallel to the easterly map boundary on the adjacent property to the east. T� Bayside Drive LLC. (PA2004 -072) Page 16 of 20 No sidewalks are proposed along the private loop road within the subdivision. City Council Policy L -4 requires that private streets be constructed to the same standards as public streets and including sidewalks. The Planning Commission may recommend City Council approval of the Tentative Tract Map for this project by adopting a Resolution setting for the following findings and facts supporting these findings: 1. Finding The proposed subdivision is consistent with and serves to implement the policies and provisions of the General Plan. Facts The General Plan Land Use Element directs that all subdivisions be consistent with the Subdivision Code. Subject to Conditions of Approval, the Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the Subdivision Code. 2. Finding The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan. Facts Consistency with the City of Newport Beach Land Use Element. The proposed project site lies within the Promontory Bay Area, as defined in the City's Land Use Element. The Promontory Bay Area includes Harbor Island, Linda Isle, and all the area bounded by Newport Bay, Marine Avenue /Jamboree Road, and East Coast Highway. Existing land uses within the Promontory Bay Area are diverse and include Single - Family Detached Residential, Multi - Family Residential, Neighborhood Commercial, Recreational and Marina, and Recreational and Environmental Open Space land uses. The proposed project would be consistent with existing and allowed land uses within the Promontory Bay Area. The Land Use Element designates the proposed project site as Multi - Family Residential to reflect the existing apartment complex. As previously stated, the proposed project would establish 17 residential lots. Single - family residences are a permitted use within sites designated for multi - family residences (page 23 of the Land Use Element). Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the Multi - Family Residential land use designation. It would also be consistent with applicable policies of the Land Use Element. Consistency with the City of Newport Beach Harbor and Bay Element. Policy HB -1.1.2 of the Harbor and Bay Element requires that potential impacts on water - dependent and water - related land uses and activities be considered when reviewing proposal for land use changes. Land use changes jIa- Bayside Drive LLC. (PA2004 -072) Page 17 of 20 associated with the proposed project would be limited to the project site. No adjacent properties would be impacted by the proposed project. Since no water - related or water - dependent uses occupy the site, no impact to these uses would occur. Consistency with the City of Newport Beach Housing Element. The project will eliminate 64 apartments and replace them with 17 single - family residences for an overall reduction of 47 units. The City has approximately 14,600 rental units out of approximately 37,500 total housing units (2000 Census), and the reduction and change in housing type is not considered significant. Goal 2 of the Housing Element states that the City will "provide a balanced residential community, comprised of a variety of housing types, designs, and opportunities for all social and economic segments, including very low -, low -, moderate- and upper- income individuals and households." The proposed project is consistent with this goal and is not inconsistent with any other goals or policies in the Housing Element. Plan. According to the City's Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan ( LCPLUP), the proposed project is located in the Coastal Zone. Therefore, a coastal development permit (CDP) is required from the California Coastal Commission. The LCPLUP references the fact that the project site is designated for Multi - Family Residential Use and is allowed one unit for each 2,178 square feet of buildable lot area. As previously discussed, the proposed project is consistent with this designation. Section 30210 -30212 of the California Coastal Act (CCA) requires that public access and recreational opportunities be provided for all the people of the state, that development not interfere with the public's right of access, and that new development provide public access to the shoreline. As previously discussed, the proposed project would provide public access to Promontory Bay and North Bay Front via public walkways, and would improve elements within those walkways to meet current ADA requirements. The proposed project is not a recreation or visitor- serving facility. It would not require diking, dredging, filling or shoreline structures, and it does not propose construction or expansion of public works facilities. The LCPLUP does not identify the proposed project site as an environmentally sensitive habitat area or hazard area. Water and marine resources adjacent to the proposed project site would be protected through implementation of the Standard Conditions listed in the Hydrology and Water Quality section, above. The proposed project would `i� Bayside Drive LLC. (PA2004 -072) Page 18 of 20 preserve and provide for continued operation of the existing dock areas along North Bay Front. Sections 30244, 30250(a), 30252, and 30253(3) and (4) of the CCA provide criteria for the location of new development. These criteria specify that new development should generally be concentrated in areas of existing development, preserve public access, provide adequate support facilities including provisions for recreational facilities, and preserve archaeological and paleontological resources. The proposed project, as conditioned by the standard conditions and mitigation measures contained within this document, would fully comply with these criteria. The LCPLUP does not list the proposed project site as a primary view area. Consequently, it is not subject to Sections 30251 and 30253(5) of the CCA. Since the proposed project is not a new visitor - serving facility or coastal - dependant use and it does not require an oceanfront encroachment, the LCPLUP's policies specific to new development are not applicable to the proposed project. 3. Finding The site is suitable for the type of development. Facts The site is generally level and currently developed with multiple - family dwelling units at densities greater than that proposed. No problems or adverse site conditions have been identified on the site as currently developed. Consequently, the site is determined to be physically suited for the development proposed. 4. Finding The site is physically suitable for the density of development. Facts The site is generally level and currently developed with multiple - family dwelling units at densities greater than that proposed. No problems or adverse site conditions have been identified on the site as currently developed. Consequently, the site is determined to be physically suited for the density of development proposed. 5. Finding The design of the subdivision and type of improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. �t� Bayside Drive LLC. (PA2004 -072) Page 19 of 20 Facts An Initial Study prepared in conjunction with this project and included in the administrative record was the basis for adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project which indicated that all environmental impacts, including those to fish, wildlife or their habitat, are less than significant or, with mitigation, are reduced to a less than significant level. 6. Finding The proposed subdivision is not likely to cause serious public health problems. Facts An Initial Study prepared in conjunction with this project and included in the administrative record was the basis for adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project which indicated that all environmental impacts, including those that could affect human health, are less than significant or, with mitigation, are reduced to a less than significant level. 7. Finding The proposed subdivision will not likely conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. Facts The proposed subdivision is proposed to be gate - guarded and generally not accessible to the public. An existing easement providing access to the bay front along the westerly edge of the property is preserved with this tract map and upgrades to physical improvements on this easement are included as part of this project. In addition, the tentative tract map dedicates an easement to the public for passage over a walkway along the bayfront. Coastal Residential Development Permit A Coastal Residential Development Permit (CRDP) was processed for this project to implement Government Code Section 65590 (Mello Act) relative to displacement of low and moderate income households within the Coastal Zone. As this project proposes to remove 64 apartment units, the City required the management of the apartment complex to identify low and moderate income households in possession of any of the apartments proposed to be demolished. Apartment managers sent questionnaires to current residents to determine income levels and family sizes. Based on the survey results, City staff concluded that none of the resident families or individuals is low or moderate - income as defined in State law and no replacement affordable housing units is required. A Coastal Residential Development Permit, therefore, may be approved for this project. i�5 Bayside Drive LLC. (PA2004 -072) Page 20 of 20 CONCLUSION Issues to be resolved: 1. Are the setbacks proposed appropriate? Staff recommends increased setbacks between the tract boundary along Bayside Drive and the reconstructed privacy wall, between the privacy wall at Bayside Drive and residences on Lots 1, 15, 16, and 17, and a larger side yard setback for Lot 5. 2. Should public access along the south side of the project be changed? Staff recommends an irrevocable offer to dedicate an easement along the bulkhead. 3. Should sidewalks be provided? Staff recommends a sidewalk be provided adjacent to the buildable lots. 4. Should the areas of Lots C and D (common landscaped areas) be increased to accommodate a greater setback between Bayside Drive and a reconstructed privacy wall? Staff recommends the widths of these lots be sufficiently wide to accommodate a minimum 4- foot -wide landscaped setback between the Bayside Drive tract boundary and the face of the privacy wall. After reviewing the Tentative Tract Map and Preliminary Plan and considering the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Code Amendment, and Use Permit, and after receiving public comments, the Planning Commission may adopt a resolution recommending that City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the project subject to Conditions of Approval as deemed appropriate. Prepared by: t/q/Lun Dav Lepo, Hogle -I eland, Inc. Exhibits: Submitted by: Patricia L. Temple, P► nning Director ft� Exhibit No. 5 1-1 This page is blank WK Planning Commission Minutes 1 1/03/2005 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Planning Commission Minutes November 3, 2005 Regular Meeting - 6:30 p.m. Page I of 35 file: / /H: \Plancomm \2005\ 110305.htm 11/21/2005 INDEX ROLL CALL Commissioners Eaton, Hawkins, Cole, Toerge, Tucker, McDaniel and Henn Commissioner Tucker was recused and appeared on the dais at 9:00 p.m. STAFF PRESENT: Patricia L. Temple, Planning Director aron C. Harp, Assistant City Attorney Rich Edmonston, Transportation and Development Services Manager James Campbell, Senior Planner Rosalinh Ung, Associate Planner Ginger Varin, Planning Commission Executive Secretary Larry Lawrence, contract planning consultant David Lepo, contract planning consultant PUBLIC COMMENTS: PUBLIC COMMENTS None POSTING OF THE AGENDA: POSTING OF THE AGENDA The Planning Commission Agenda was posted on October 28, 2005. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM NO. 1 SUBJECT: MINUTES of the regular meeting of October 20, 2005. Minutes Motion was made by Commissioner Cole to approve the minutes as amended. Approved Ayes: Eaton, Hawkins, Cole, Toerge, McDaniel and Henn Noes: None Absent: Tucker Abstain: None HEARING ITEMS UBJECT: Bayside Residential Planned Community (PA2004 -072) ITEM NO. 2 919 Bayside Drive PA2004 -072 The project involves the redevelopment of the Newport Marina Apartment comple Recommended located at 919 Bayside Drive. The existing 64 -unit apartment complex, located on for Approval approximately 3.92 acres, will be demolished and replaced with a 17 -unit, gated Ntot file: / /H: \Plancomm \2005\ 110305.htm 11/21/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 11/03/2005 residential community. The tentative tract map proposes to establish 17 individu esidential lots for custom home construction, 1 common recreational lot with possibly ool and shade structure, 2 landscape /open space lots. Private streets are proposed. ?quest to re -zone the site from MFR (Multi - Family Residential) to PC (Plann( .:ommunity) is sought, which is accompanied with Planned Community Developme (Plan text that will establish development and use standards for the proposed project. Coastal Residential Development Permit is required to ensure compliance with the ;overnment Code Section 65590 (Mello Act) and the Housing Element of the Genera Ian. The project includes the demolition of existing structures, grading, installation o tilities, private streets, landscaping, site lighting, site walls, storm water improvements ublic access easements and upgrades to the public right of way adjacent to the roject site. ,avid Lepo of Hogle Ireland, contract planner, gave an overview of the staff repor oting that this item was first heard in August. During that hearing, the Planninc ommission raised several issues and asked staff for a review. One of the issue: Dncerned the subdivision of water surface in the bay. The City Attorney advised staff iat those properties that were on the surface of the water included originally in the ubdivision Map could not be included in the Map and could not be subdivided, an( ,ere to be taken out of the area that was ultimately included in the Tentative Trac lap. As a result of that determination, the land area and the water area were reducef the point that the Development Overlay that had been proposed for this particula roperty reduced the lot area for the development to comply with the maximum 40% Ie rea coverage that applies in the Planned Residential Development Overlay Zone. The nderlying land use designation is multi - family residential and the overlay was going b a applied to the zoning to allow for the development of single family homes. With tha etermination, and absent the Planned Residential Development Overlay, stal included the best procedure was to prepare a Planned Community Text and change ie zoning on that particular site to Planned Community, leaving the underlying lane se designation in the General Plan as mufti- family residential. Therefore, we are hen might with a proposed Planned Community Text and a proposed Zoning Amendmen change the land use designation to Planned Community. With that the Planner .esidential Development Overlay goes away as does the Use Permit that was requires )r development pursuant to the Planned Residential District. nuing, he noted: . The Planned Community text includes development standards and conditions approval that address the issues raised at the last meeting. Those issues are: . Land Use designation and zoning of multiple family - the concern was that tl might be an attempt to develop more than one unit on each of the residential being created by the Tentative Tract Map. . Concern with the MFR zoning - somebody might try to develop three stories up to 35 feet in height. Staff has included a development code section in the text and conditions of approval in the PC text that clearly state one unit for e of the residential lots not to exceed 28 feet in height. . Concern that setback between the new property line wall at Bayside Drive w; not adequate. Staff has included conditions and standards in the PC text th require a minimum of four foot setback between the right -of -way at Bayside Drip Page 2 of 35 1P file: //11\Plancomm \2005 \l 10305.htm 11/21/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 11/03/2005 Page 3 of 35 and the new property line wall that would allow for a minimum of 4 feet landscape area then the wall and then 10 feet of yard on the private property of the Bayside wall. The right -of -way beyond the sidewalk on the private prop side of Bayside Drive varies from 1 -2 feet to 6 feet, so the affect will be that tt will be between 5 1/2 and 10 feet of actual landscape setback between the b of the sidewalk at Bayside and the new property line wall. . Concern with the setback of the private driveway serving all the residences. Staf has proposed that where there is a single story element adjacent to the driveway a minimum setback of 5 feet be provided; where there is a two -story element, e 10 foot setback be provided. That is included in the development standards o the PC Text. . Concern with sidewalks adjacent to the private street within the tract. Staff determined that since this is a private, gated community, the sidewalks would be necessary. Conditions are included in the PC text. . Other conditions of approval deal with access to the water and easements the floating dockway. Landscaping was a consideration, particularly the piece of property that adjoin: this site on the n/w corner of Bayside that does not belong to the property owner it belongs to the City. The decision was the Planning Director shall have the righ to approve a landscape plan for this property including having the Homeowner: Association maintain that property. This is included in the conditions of approva in the PC text. . Concern of noise and noxious effects from the boat yard across the channel h� been addressed in the provision that requires the applicant to submit a form to provided to the lessee of the lot informing them of those concerns. . There will be no dedication of lots F and G on the surface of the water to the City. . Design amenities that the applicant has asked be included are indicated it staff report and deal with fences, hedges, walls, arbors, trellises, fire places barbecues. . The action asked for tonight is for approval of the Negative Declaration w revised copies of the first two pages (distributed) resulting in reference to t Planned Residential Development rather than the PC text; the Tentative Tr; Map, the Code Amendment changing the zoning of the site to PC Plann Community and adopting a Planned Community Text; a Coastal Residen' Development; no traffic analysis will be required as this resulting project will ha less traffic impact to this site. ommissioner Cole asked why should the Planning Commission consider the r this site. "1r. Lepo answered that the Planned Community text allows for a mix of uses within -he site. It allows the City to make certain that those different uses are compatible with one another in this development. This site is to be re- developed with single family homes to replace an apartment building and the use of the PC text is to make sure it is integrated with what is there now including the condos to the east, single family home p_1 file: //H: \Plancomm \2005 \110305.htm 11/21/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 11/03/2005 Page 4 of 35 o the west, and the commercial across the street. You have the opportunity to use the PC text to make sure that the access to the waterfront is maintained and enhanced with ome of the conditions of approval. He then noted other areas where a similar process has occurred. Hawkins asked what the smallest parcel is that the PC text has bee plied to? Campbell noted the smallest size was 4 acres and this is 3.92 acres. missioner Hawkins asked about the analyses of the land use impacts of the proj n the Mitigated Negative Declaration and are the changes reflected in the revis louts? The project as proposed now will have impacts due to the change in ig going from multi - family to Planned Community, is there an analysis of that? Lepo answered the physical changes associated with this development we lyzed as well as consistency with plans. We have noted that the underlyii feral Plan Land Use designation of multi - family does included single family uses , proposed here. Therefore, this plan is consistent with the General Plan and the F does allow development of single family homes. As far as policy document ai i documents, it is consistent with that change in the front. Physical impac aciated with physical changes are no different than what was analyzed. ssioner Hawkins asked about the change in the Project concerning the and how those changes were or were not reflected in the Mitigated Negs ition for the Project. Lepo noted this can be adjusted for technical accuracy. r. Campbell noted: . The land use section mentions the PRD Overlay in the initial study and we cal make the change to agree with the project description. Referencing a handout he continued. . The marina was permitted in 1973 as a commercial marina with parking. . Subsequent addition to the apartments in the early 70's eliminated that pE and the City conditioned the Parcel Map that created those additional units that the marina would only be used by the Upland properties (project site, Condominiums and the Shark Island yacht club). . If this was to be continued as a commercial marina, parking would have to provided. . The original draft conditions maintained that this marina would be operated by those Upland properties. . Staff has changed their position on this matter and with the applicant's approval, we are requiring that the slips in front of this project site be used only for the residents of this project and discontinue the policy of sharing with the other two properties. Change to the condition has been made to specifically require that as reflected in amended condition 22. This restriction is to be noted on the map and I file: //H: \Plancomm\2005 \110305.htm 11/21/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 11/03/2005 in the CC and R's and in the Planned Community Text. . Public access - The PC text in condition 34 requires the applicant to execute a agreement that ensures public access as identified be maintained permanently a well as an irrevocable offer to dedicate a public access easement. Thi dedication will be on the property that they actually control as the existin walkway is on property owned by the Irvine Company. If the access is eliminate in the future because it is now on somebody else's property, we would then hav this offer to dedicate and the easement that could be moved landward of th Irvine Company property onto the applicant's property. Should the access acros the Irvine Company submerged land be eliminated, then we could require it to b relocated six feet closer to the bulkhead creating a new floating walkway at th< location and then ensure that access across the docks is still maintained. Thi offer of dedication will be required prior to the issuance of a building permit an prior to recordation of the map. . The applicant is required to obtain a new Harbor Permit. The historic transfers this particular permit has been discontinuance or 'murky'. So, we want to clef this up with a new permit in the applicant's name which then would be transferrE to the Homeowner's Association upon its creation so that the Homeowner Association controls the Harbor Permit and then the rights to use the docks wou be transferred with the sale of the individual leaseholds. The residents will be tt only ones able to use those slips and therefore it will be a private marina. . He then noted condition 10 has a changed reference to the improvements on docks. . Condition 12 has a reference as to who owns those improvements as by the applicant. t Commission inquiry, Mr. Campbell noted the term 'landward' shows direction. ThE re 18 feet between the bulkhead line and the actual physical bulkhead that is wa nd the submerged land is owned by the underlying owner and is under the control ie applicant. What this does is repositions that walkway onto the land that t pplicant and the property owner control. If The Irvine Company decides that in t iture the docks can not be tied into the submerged land, which we don't expect appen, then the applicant would be required to move the floating walkway six ff loser to the bulkhead to be used for public access. person Toerge noted that the map shows an existing bulkhead at the If the floating walkway was moved 'landward', it would be on the land. Campbell explained the tract boundary runs along the bulkhead because staff want to subdivide those submerged lands and make them part of leasehold e of these lots. He then discussed the boundaries. Or. Aaron Harp noted that on the map it is referred to in two ways. It is referred to a; :he US Bulkhead line and next to that a notation referencing existing bulkhead line -tich runs along side where the floating walkway is now. Page 5 of 35 Mr. Campbell noted a change will be made to clarify as the intent refers to the US Bulkhead line. Discussion continued. l file: /!H: \Plancomm \2005 \110305.htm 11/21/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 11/03/2005 Mr. Harp noted the reason for this condition is to resolve the issue of the fact that t alkway is currently not on the proponent's property, it is on a third party's who has t rights. This offer is done in case of the loss of the right to have it on the third pa ,roperty, then they could shift it over. iissioner Eaton asked about the enhancements to the existing walkway and are covered; precedence for free - standing fireplaces. Lepo noted if those are the improvements that are required, then that plan wou to be reviewed and any changes to conditions will be made. Campbell noted the free - standing fireplaces issue would require a Modificatior nit in most cases because a fireplace would be higher than three and a half feet. Zoning Administrator could not come up with any current permitted free standinc laces in bulkhead locations. Free - standing barbecues have been done, but not f high chimneys. imissioner Hawkins noted the slip provision and the walkway provision rlematic and presented a scenario. He suggested that there is a better way to in the conditions such as requiring the applicant to go ahead and get that easerr the existing walkway so that you don't have this potential problem. Harp answered that if the Irvine Company revoked the right to have the walkway would probably also revoke the right to have the slips. The main intent of the Jition is to ensure that the public has access to walk along, not so much as tr :ss the slips. Typically, we don't make a condition where a third party approval is sssary. A condition could be edited that the offer to dedicate, or obtain, easement: eby giving the option of one or the other, that way you are not conditioning it on I party. uing, Commissioner Hawkins asked what sort of agreement is there now for use of the slips. Is there a written agreement? 1r. Campbell answered that there is not necessarily an agreement but the City in th '0's as a condition of the Parcel Map that is underlying this piece of property arrange iat be done. So, we are requiring it to be that way. Staff does not know if there is rivate agreement between the entities. The adjacent Cove Condominium has a ver imilar provision with its Tract Map that the Coves and the Yacht Club get to use whs ; front of them as a shared arrangement. That was required of that development i 972. When they added on to this project, they took away the parking that wa lanned for the commercial marina so they recognized there was not parking. The gain extended the same kind of shared relationship that was started with the first tw roperties (Coves and Shark Island Yacht Club) to encompass all three propertie ecause there is one Harbor Permittee which is The Irvine Company at the time; the ras the arrangement of the City. Harp noted he concurs with the analysis. Page 6 of 35 "'.arol McDermott of Government Solutions, representing the applicant, noted the i'Ilowing contained within a PowerPoint presentation: . An aerial of the project site depicting the property line as mapping the land ownership; however, the area controlled goes out 18 feet seaward of the existing ) �� file: / /H:\Plancomm \2005 \l 10305.htm 11/21/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 11/03/2005 bulkhead. The US bulkhead is seaward 18 feet of the existing bulkhead. control was granted to the applicant through a Grant Deed from The Ir Company. The submerged land portion is not subdivided and that is why property line is shown on the land portion of the site and not out 18 feet. . The project consists of replacing the existing apartments with custom home and the bayfront public walkway. We are ensuring that public access is prov and enhanced. . In the event that this were to be removed and the walkway was moved, then would allow for some additional water area that would allow for slips of a sligh' different configuration. That would have to go through the City and the Coast Commission in order to occur. We understand that. . If has been confirmed that the triangular piece of land at the end of the walkway owned by the applicant. The walkway will be straightened out allowing I landscaping and a sign that enhances the availability of the public walkway. It v also provide for ADA access. . The existing walkway will be enhanced by the remounting of lighting along tf existing handrails and the removal of the cleats that allow for the side ties. V� will construct an additional hand rail so there will be handrails on both sides with clear access of 6 feet along with the handicap access ramps. . She noted a submitted letter indicating the dock walkway meeting the intent a requirements of the Coastal Act, the Subdivision Map Act, the Califon Constitution as well as the City's Local Coastal Plan. . Two exhibits showing grade elevations of the proposed homes on the Prom Bay Front and the North Bay Front facing Balboa Island were discussed. . An exhibit showing the vehicular turning areas on lots 9 and 15 was discussed. . A Harbor Permit requires the boat slips to be operated as a residential mari and restricted to these lots. We accept that condition and understand it. T Permit will be transferred to the Homeowners' Association with the provision maintenance and permanent public access. . The site plan depicting the gating at the entrance with public access along th entire site was discussed. nmissioner Eaton noted the concern of more open space between Bayside C I the homes to be outside of the walls as opposed to behind the walls. If nmission agrees to have 10 feet outside the wall and allow a 5 foot setback be wall, would that be agreeable? Page 7 of 35 �Ms. McDermott answered that they had agree to a 10 foot setback behind the wall, a he Commission had determined at the last meeting, and also we would have a iinimum of 4 feet along the street. We have found out subsequently that where w .iad assumed the property line was immediately behind the existing sidewalk on Bayside we found that the City's property line varied and we had between 2 and 6 fee ehind the sidewalk before the property line. What we discussed with staff is that w ould have an agreement that would allow us to landscape the City's property in file: //H:\Plancomm \2005 \110305.htm 11/21/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 11/03/2005 conjunction with our property and add 4 feet to that. It would result in between 2 and feet of existing area that can be landscaped adding 4 feet to that so it would I between 6 and 10 feet of landscape area along that frontage. Allowing the 10 fo -tback for the property owner would set the homes further away from Bayside Dri, ,And that is what we would prefer. person Toerge asked about the heights of the pads and if the conditions stent with those. McDermott answered the text in the PC refers to these conditions. She noted language describes the existing conditions so that they would be replicated with r development. She offered to clarify the language if it would be helpful. . Campbell noted the Tentative Maps show pad elevations and they are within tens the existing elevations. The interior pad elevations are not included. Referring n 9 on handwritten page 30, it was decided that this language will be re- worked dude the existing conditions and the interior lot pad elevations. missioner Cole asked about the landscape on the parkway on Bayside Drive. Campbell noted that we will add a provision about the landscape in the conditions. missioner Henn asked about the floating walkway and the docks. Is Downer's association responsible for the maintenance of the walkway and 1s. McDermott answered that is correct. nmissioner Henn noted that if The Irvine Company decides there can not be <way over their property I clearly understand the concept of moving the walkway -et, but, doesn't that raise perhaps an untenable burden on the homeowne :)ciation to have to move the walkway and the docks because they are responsit .he maintenance of the docks and the walkway? It seems the solution as propos s not make sense and I would propose to add an 'or' to that the applicant wot k to get an easement from The Irvine Company to maintain the current positioni ie walkway and the docks. McDermott noted this could be a burden on the homeowners association. TI ie is we have various documents that have given us the right to this. We think tl nce of losing that right from The Irvine Company because of the way they ha, ited those rights, is minimal. However, the City wanted a fail safe and as a result we felt we could live with the condition as it was written. To the extent we a ig to re -do the Harbor Permit and possible relocation of docks would be done arate action. Harp noted they have a significant argument that they have the right to maintain kway as is. What we were looking for was a condition that basically the City d have to be involved with rights issues. Page 8 of 35 ommissioner Henn noted that if their rights do seem to be substantially, but perhaps not absolutely defined, it seems reasonably like it wouldn't be a big leap for the asement to be granted. a 1P j file://H:\Planconun\2005\1 10305.htm 11/21/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 11/03/2005 Mr. Harp answered that it may have been the intent for The Irvine Company to give he rights to it so it may not be difficult for them to obtain the easement but there is t restriction as far as posing obligations where a third party needs to consent to it 'iat is why we didn't leave it as just an easement alone. r Hawkins, referring to condition 12, asked who will own th McDermott noted their request was to add language, 'leased or owned' because ownership condition and lessee condition. Campbell noted we can use the language that is suggested. imissioner Hawkins noted he was in favor of that as some of the utilities can ad by separate companies. He wants it to be clear that the ownership is not as the lease is held by the HOA and there will be no liability to the City. rson Toerge noted his notes from the last meeting (with a straw vote) show tl access was to be widened concurrent with an offer of dedication of land as of compromise. He asked why there wasn't a dedication of land and tl I is for 6 feet widening. 1s. McDermott noted that the width of the dock was based on the Coastal Commiss reference that structures not be added to increase the shadow that goes over rater which would effect the life of the plant material and /or the setting of the wild iat lives in the water. Our thought was that if we could effectively increase it .moving the obstructions that perhaps that met the intent of what the Commission H >oking for. So, we added to the safety and to the width without actually widening ock, which would then necessitate a separate Coastal Development Permit for b ie Harbor Resources and the Coastal Commission. It was our proposal in the hor iat would meet with what you were asking for, but ,it clearly did not increase hvsical reasons for those reasons. linuing, she noted that she did not understand that the straw vote indicated ig support for a dedication of land. When we worked with staff and the C may's office there was a sense that provided we strengthen the access, that may met the intent of what the Commission was saying. Perhaps you need to seek tt fication, but that is the way I read it. imissioner McDaniel noted the condition referring to minimal lighting. H Ilection about the discussion on the widening would be to have some lighting s it would be useable as opposed to just security. Page 9 of 35 Ms. McDermott answered that the intent was to make it so minimal as to be both safe and attractive at night time. It is such the people along Balboa Island facing our property, or people who live in proximity on our side, don't want a lot of lights down here. The intent was to place them on the dock railing in such a way that they would e out of the way from a walking standpoint but provide the appropriate amount o "ght. It is clearly the intent to make it safe and appropriate for those purposes. We can pork with staff to make sure that happens. Public comment was opened. 1 �a file : //H: \Plancomm \2005 \l 10305.htm 11/21/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 11/03/2005 Page 10 of 35 �ublic comment was closed. hairperson Toerge then identified key topics for purposes of organizing the discussion: 1. lateral access - land or floating 2. setbacks 3. landscape plan and architectural guidelines 4. turn - around designs for lots 9, 15 and 3 5. include in the PC Development Regulations the disposition of Lot A 6. pad elevations 7. FAR and how to calculate 8. improvements allowed in the setback areas 9. condition 4 regarding drainage on the property ommissioner Hawkins noted: 1. Lighting study that is approved by the City. 2. Ownership or lease verbiage in condition 12. Chairperson Toerge addressed the first issue, lateral access: The issue of lateral access is whether it is provided on land or on the floating access and whether the floating access is adequate and meets the requirements of the Coastal Act. He then cited from the Coastal Commission summary of staft report Chapter 3, 43.3.1.1 -11. Require a direct dedication or an Offer to Dedicate an easement for lateral public access for all new shorefront development causing or contributing to adverse public access impacts. Such dedication or easement shall extend from the limits of public ownership (e.g. mean high tide line) landwar to a fixed point seaward of the primary extent of development (e.g. intersection o sand with toe or top of revetment, vertical face of seawall, dripline of deck, or to of bluff). This tells me the access has to be on land, regardless of what other people have suggested. He then discussed the possibility of redevelopment o the subject and adjacent properties. He disagreed with the applicant's assertion that there is a remote chance that the Cove condominium development would ever be redeveloped. He countered that the Cove Condominium development will certainly be redeveloped at some point in the future because 'ever' is a long time. He pointed out that just 10 short years ago the thought that the subject project, which contemplates the demolition of 65 high end rental units to be replaced with 17 custom home sites, was at that time considered infeasible. Who is to say when the Coves and the Newport beach Yacht Club will be redeveloped, enabling a continuous land based bay front walkway from Bayside Drive to the Marine Avenue bridge? He then referenced an exhibit depicting the lateral coastal access easements throughout the City, sever of which currently end in dead ends, but one day will connect to one another. This body is responsible for planning and lad file: //H: \Plancomm \2005 \l 10305.htm 11/21/2005 Planning Commission Minutes l ]/03/2005 this chairman is attempting to do that with this by requiring this easement across the land enabling it to connect with other land based bay front easements that wil be developed in the future. Staff then showed the exhibit that was explained an( discussed. In conclusion, he noted it is the Commission's responsibility for thf benefit of the community to follow the Code and to maintain this lateral access of the land despite for it's potential in the short term, to look somewhat disjointed. There are some people who don't want to walk down a ramp to use the access. (he gave examples). His objection to the floating access is that it is not consisten with our charge to uphold the requirements of the Coastal Act as they apply t( new development. As I recall the straw vote taken last time, the Commissiof voted for 10 feet in width and an offer of dedication on the land so that some poin in time when future land access was available it could be built on the land. imissioner Henn noted his recollection of the straw vote did not include iirement for a conditional dedication on the land for the walkway, but perhaps sl verify that one way or the other. Harp noted it may be best to take another straw vote on this issue. ,ontinuing, Commissioner Henn noted that the floating walkway is a superior solutic :) the location of a walkway on the land. If the walkway is located on the land with ead end at the far end, there will still be a ramp. The language in the Local Coast 'Ian may or may not be the same language. I am sure there will be a sentiment for mg time that we preserve and enhance public access to the shoreline and I agree iat. As to the specific language that interprets that thought, that may change ov me. For all of those reasons I am less concerned that the walkway be located I,ovided for a dedication on land. immissioner McDaniel noted as a member of the Local Coastal Committee he ite aware of how much they have gone through to have access available to water 1 eryone here in Newport Beach. 1 am happy that we have the access so long as it 11 lit, the fact that it is no longer 10 feet wide, I can accept that. I just want it wif ough so that everyone can use it and enjoy that aspect. Whether it floats, landwa seaward, I don't care, it is access and adequate to me. I am happy with the way it ommissioner Cole noted his concurrence with comments of Commissioner McDaniel. his project provides significant access both vertical and lateral. The enhancement: roposed are good ones and will create an attractive walkway for the community. It is large burden to ask the applicant in effect to what would basically be a redesign o ie entire plan when the alternative seems to be relatively reasonable and attractive. missioner Hawkins noted the previous comments. He stated that the City's Di I Coastal Plan Section 3.1.1 -11 requires an offer to dedicate an easement c lateral access for all new shorefront development causing or contributing rse public access. What we have here is existing adequate public access t are enhancing. I don't believe we can make those findings. I would be concert t requiring the access on land due to the proximity of the public ace( �diately adjacent to a residential community. He affirmed he is in favor of na walkwav with the enhancements. Page l l of 35 ommissioner Eaton noted he agrees with the other Commissioners. He added that he this project will have to go in front of the Coastal Commission and if their interpretation of their language is different than our interpretation, then the applicants file: //H: \Plancomm \2005 \l l 0305.htm 11/21/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 11/03/2005 ill have to deal with that. Docks and slips. :ommissioner Cole affirmed with staff that the residents of the Cove Condominiu omplex can not rent the slips associated with this project due to the limited availabili f parking and that anyone who is currently renting slips will have to move. nmissioner Hawkins noted his concern of the irrevocable offer to dedicate (IOD) lic access easement for a floating walkway landward. He suggested the followii luage to comply with the suggested changes by the City Attorney: "The applica II record either an irrevocable offer to dedicate a public access easement for ting walkway landward of the bulkhead line (to be identified) or, an easement ov existing floating walkway." The alternative is important to have. r. Harp noted the language will be re- worked if the Commission allows for the opt an easement in the existing condition as opposed to the irrevocable offer n Toerge noted the two bulkhead lines need to be clearly identified to prevent further confusion. agreed. from Bayside. )ommissioner Eaton noted the following: . Referring to the exhibit he stated that at one point the setback is zero at the end and along the entirety of lot 1 on the east end it is actually 1 1/4 whereas most of the project setback is 5 -6 feet total. . Frontage along Bayside is important and he wants to have at least 10 feet between the City right -of -way and the property in front of the wall without ht to require the houses to be moved further back. . He suggested language, 'Without requiring additional home setbacks requiring at least 10 feet of landscaping be provided between the back of sidewalk in front of the wall." Toerge asked about the disposition of the current City trees on site now. Campbell answered those trees will be removed to put in the plan provements. Henn asked who is correct? The applicant stated that there was between 2 and of distance between the sidewalk and the property line; or, is Commissioner Eat( Page 12 of 35 Ms. Temple noted Commissioner Eaton is correct in the sense that at exactly one poin he sidewalk and the property line are co- terminus and it is at the far western part of th roperty. For the greater portion of the property it is a minimum of 2 feet. Lot 1 asterly of the entrance appears to be 1.25 feet for that stretch. l 3 file: //BAPlancomm \2005 \l 10305.htm 11/21/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 11/03/2005 arol McDermott noted that 1.25 is accurate and that at the westerly end the way hich their landscaping and the property line connect with the enhancement of 1 landscaping where the sign will go, that point where it reaches zero is expanded h ;hat we are going to be providing anyway. So, it is not zero at that point in effect. C ,,�oposal is 4 feet plus the 1.25 at the easterly end and then it gets larger as it gc Pest resulting in a total width of 9 -10 feet at some points. visions of the landscape being 10 feet from the sidewalk with 5 feet setb the homes. Following the discussion a straw vote was to approve as proposed. iew the landscape plans and the architectural design scheme. a discussion, the straw vote was to designate the Planning Director review of the turn - around plans for lots 9 and 15. McDermott, referring to the exhibit, explained lot 9 at the southwesterly corner site configuration. owing a discussion on the driveway lengths, turning radii, and distances it v .d that a condition is included whereby the Public Works Department will review rnal circulation and parking scheme that will be conducted by the applicant. d Commission inquiry, Mr. Edmonston noted the reason the condition is there is ssure that the standards the City require are to be met. What is shown for the first day be suitable, but the one shown for the second lot is rather contorted as it is off ,om the garage door and makes the backing maneuver like an 's' curve. irperson asked if the lot configuration had to change to accommodate this, woul then come back to the Planning Commission? Campbell answered it would depend on the nature of the change. This lot could le wider to accommodate and it could be determined to be in substan formance and would not need to be brought back. However, if there was a lari nge to the plan, staff would make that judgment after review of the plan. ;. McDermott added that they will be happy to work with the Traffic Engineer in resolve the issue. Commission agreed. person Toerge noted in the PC Development regulations for the use of lot A vritten page 29 does not include lot A. Should it be included in this table ; nated for the use that is planned for? Page 13 of 35 IMr, Campbell answered this can be done. It is referenced on handwritten page 29 in he Statistical Analysis that refers to lot A as a common recreation area and it i escribed in the project description that all the lettered lots are common and ar "tended to accommodate common amenities and other improvements and are no evelopable for residences. We could do something if you want. It was determined no necessary. � file: //H: \Plancomm \2005 \l 10305.htm 11/21/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 11/03/2005 Building pad elevations to be within 112 foot of existing grade. he Commission was satisfied. i /he floor area ratio issue. Ir. Campbell affirmed that the floor area is calculated by deducting from the gross reas, the setbacks and then multiplying it times the FAR. The proposed FAR for roject is 1.75. ommissioner Eaton noted the language was not in the PC text, which becomes perating document. Lepo noted it was on handwritten page 29 in footnote 2. 2 -foot walls. Campbell answered the provision is the exception to the height of fences and w ire the front wall of the house could extend perpendicular to the side property I i the front wall of the house to the side property line a maximum of 12 feet. It is iitectural feature the applicant wants to provide. s. Temple added that this type of feature has become very popular with side ya itrances. The material used for these features would be R2 rated. and barbecues 4 feet in setbacks from side yards and /or ommissioner Henn clarified that this also includes the ability to build a 10 -foot iimney. Staff clarified. He noted that would not be appropriate due to s missioner McDaniel noted he could not support this. hairperson Toerge stated this should be subject to a modification permit. To e blanket approval here is not the appropriate maneuver. Campbell noted that built -in barbecues are typically taller than the maximum heig are fairly common with the outdoor living spaces people are providing. It is imon modification request and are permitted more often. The fireplaces are !rent matter. Staff is not comfortable with those either and feel that modificatii nits should be required. However, adding the low built in gas barbecues that a y common, staff asks that this be included as they generally do not present ai Toerge noted there is a mechanism for the fireplaces to be reviewed merits. Page 14 of 35 , ommissioner Henn suggested that any structure above five foot would require a odification. r. Campbell noted this can be established with the PC text regulation. Today's file://H:\PIancomm\2005\I 10305.htm 11/21/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 11 /03/2005 Page 15 of 35 tandard could accommodate that and the typical barbecues meet that height. fireplaces would be regulated. Rs. Temple noted this has come up during discussion with the Councilmembers. jirection has been given to staff, but much commentary has been given to alto, barbecues up to a limit height of 5 feet. ollowing a discussion on permanently installed barbecues, it was determined th replaces will be dealt with separately through the modifications process and up to ve foot height with a four foot setback from the property line would not. TI .ommission agreed. ndition 4 - on site drainage. drain pipe apparent at low tide water source is undetermined. Staff offered it r a storm drain and following a brief discussion noted that all requirements and Wa ality Control Board and NPDES regulations will be met so that no drainage will > the bay. access completion. noted, and the applicant agreed, that there will be a condition including time and prior to the certificate of occupancy. ition 12 suggested language change. AI on -site common area improvements such as parks, docks, entry gates and entry, in -site drainage sanitary sewer, water, and electrical systems shall be leased )wned, operated and maintained by the HOA. missioner Hawkins noted his concern of the lighting on the floating dock and of idual residents that may create spill /glare problems across the bay. He asked I come up with a condition. Temple noted there is a condition of approval in the City's standard requirement: Wring a Photometric Study to make sure that light spillage and glare are addressed. :)mmissioner Hawkins noted his concern of the environmental document. He asked e Planning Commission agreed that land use analysis will include the change for It text? The Commission agreed. Temple noted staff will prepare an addendum and have it completed for Aeration. fid Lepo noted the following changes during the Commission's discussion to uded in the motion: Environmental document language will be edited on pages 26 and 27. . Changes on the handout materials: Conditions 10, 12, 22 and 34 changes will be made. file: //H: \Plancomm \2005\ 110305.htm 11/21/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 11/03/2005 • U.S. Bulkhead line determination. • Add /change /delete provisions where previously called for applicant to and maintain the weed lot that is now part of the applicant's lot. . Add condition requiring applicant to landscape area at Bayside Drive on lots and D as maintained by the HOA. . Planning Director will review landscaping and architectural design guidelines. . Quantify condition requiring Public Works to approve the turn arounds for lots 3, and 15. . Pad elevation - language in PC text as in Tentative Tract Map. . Provision in PC text relative to barbecues within 4 feet of property line and up to feet in height. No fireplaces. Added condition requiring enhancements on dock in reference to the exh regarding timing. . An irrevocable offer of dedication will be provided regarding the frontage area. ion was made by Commissioner McDaniel, using the recommended language with changes proposed by the Commission, to recommend approval of C( !ndment No. 2005 -007, Use Permit No. 205 -026m Tract Map No. 2004 -001 (T 15323) and Coastal Residential development No. 2005 -001 to the City Council. rperson Toerge noted that this is a quality project; however, the City has ation to follow the Coastal Act and given my interpretation of it, I won't orting the motion. sioner Henn asked if we are violating the terms of the Coastal Act by as proposed. . Harp answered the language is added to the plan. The focus is whether or not the w shorefront development is contributing or causing adverse public access impacts. e determination could go either way. This will go to the Coastal Commission fo proval /denial and they will require what access they deem appropriate if differen in Citv's determination. It is not a violation to proceed with this action. 'es: Eaton, Cole, McDaniel, Hawkins and Henn yes: Toerge isent: Tucker istain: None Following a brief intermission the Commission resumed with Commissioner Tucker taking his place. John Walter Velardo (PA2004 -274) 3809 Channel Place Page 16 of 35 ITEM NO. 3 PA2004 -274 13A file://H:\Plancornm\2005\1 10305.htm 11/21/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 08/18/2005 Page 5 of 17 UBJECT: Newport Marina LLC ITEM NO. 5 919 Bayside Drive PA2005 -072 he applications would allow the redevelopment of the Newport Marina Apartment Continued to omplex located at 919 Bayside Drive. The existing 64 -unit apartment complex, located 09/08/2005 on approximately 4.78 acres, would be demolished and replaced with a 17 -unit, gated residential community. The tentative tract map proposes to establish 17 individual residential lots for custom home construction, 1 common recreational lot with possibly a pool and shade structure, 2 landscape /open space lots and waterfront lot containing floating docks (existing). Private streets are proposed. A request to re -zone the site by applying the PRD (Planned Residential Development) overlay to the existing MFR (2178) zoning designation is also included. The proposed PRD overlay and ccompanying Use Permit would establish development regulations related to lot overage and setbacks specifically for this planned residential development. The coastal residential development permit is required as 64 residential units are proposed to be demolished within the coastal zone and the project must be reviewed for compliance with the Government Code Section 65590 (Mello Act). The project also includes the demolition of the existing apartment building and all associated structures, grading, installation of utilities, private streets, landscaping, site lighting, site walls, water quality improvements, access easements and upgrades to the public right of way adjacent to the project site. Commissioner Tucker recused himself from deliberation on this item. hairman Toerge noted his proposed areas of discussion: . City and applicant's notice requirements and compliance. . Boundary of the project. • Consider a General Plan Amendment for single family residential. . Height limit of the proposed houses. • Entry drive design and landscape details. . Specific location and design of the perimeter wall along Bayside Drive. . Building setbacks from Bayside for all buildings, setbacks between buildings on site and setbacks between the streets and the buildings. • Minimum yard dimensions. . Visitor parking requirements for both single family residential zone and multi- family residential zone. . Public access through the site, gated private streets, sidewalks, gang ways to the docks. . Lateral access to the coast on the land or on the floating dock as proposed by the applicant. . Design of the access to the walkway at Bayside Drive and Lot B. • Elevation differences and wall height between Lot B and project elevation. . Dedication of Lots G and F, which are both submerged lots below the mean high tide line. • Ownership of the slips and related parking. • Partial dock dedication for public access and use. • Review comprehensive landscape plan for Bayside frontage, Lot B, entry and disposition of current trees. • Site drainage provisions and water quality concerns. • Statement concerning the operating characteristics of the neighboring Balboa Marine boat yard. rite: //H:\Plancomm \2005 \081805.htm 09/23/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 08/18/2005 Page 6 of 17 Commissioner Eaton added: • Intent of the PRD zone without elevations. • Nature of the permanency of existing easement over the docks, which is relied upon by the applicant to provide their coastal access. Temple introduced: David Lepo, of Hogle Ireland as the project manager. Pat Alford, Senior Planner is present to offer assistance on questions of the Coastal Act, LCP and provisions of the implementation plan, etc. m Campbell, Senior Planner, discussed the first four items: The City sent out the appropriate notices as required by law for both the meeting and the environmental document. At Commission inquiry, he added that the condo conversion ordinance and special notices related there to does not apply to this project. Boundary - referencing an exhibit on the screen, noted the tract map does extend into the bay. Staff sought a General Plan amendment to single - family from multi - family when the application originally came forward. The applicant had submitted an application for a general plan amendment to put it into the single family zone as well as a zone change to put it in the R -1 zone. However, the applicant is not pursuing that application and has chosen to leave the project in the multi - family zone. The differences between the two zoning standards are setbacks and building heights. The difference in the building height limits between the R -1 and MFR zones is 4 feet. The applicant was originally seeking a height limit that was even in excess of the multi - family zone at that time. Staff had indicated that would not work. The applicant then decided not to pursue a general plan amendment and zone change and to leave it in the multi - family zone. A subsequent application on this project came in for the Planned Residential Development Overlay. This overlay allows the City to provide flexibility in setbacks standards only. discussion followed on future traffic conditions due to the change of use from multi - mily site as opposed to single family site. oner McDaniel asked if there was a possibility for two or three units on a lot? Campbell answered that if they could park it, they could increase units. The licant has indicated that they plan for CC and R's that would prohibit that kind of . Temple noted that regardless of what is contained in the CC and R's, those are ,ate agreements and covenants. If a person came to the City with a building permit uest that met all the development standards for more than one unit including king, the City would still issue that permit regardless of what the CC and R's said. I ild be up to the homeowners' association to make sure that their covenants are Discussion followed on visitor parking requirements that is addressed in the Planned Residential Development overlay that requires 4 parking spaces per unit and the MFR [31O file: //H: \Plancomm \2005 \081805.htm 09/23/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 08/18/2005 Page 7 of 17 one that requires 2.5 spaces per unit. t Commission inquiry, staff noted that the height limits for a single family is 24 feet to he midpoint of the sloping roof or flat roof, and in multi - family zone it is 28 feet to the :Inidpoint of the sloping roof or flat roof. The peak of a sloping roof can be 5 feet higher. Carol McDermott, of Government Solutions, representing the applicant noted the following referencing a PowerPoint presentation: . Location of project in proximity to the Bayside Cove Condominiums, Promontory Channel, Balboa Yacht Basin, Newport Beach Yacht Club, homes and shopping center. Bayside Drive realignment and development with Coastal Commission review. . Walkway on the floating docks. . The need of the property for significant improvements that would require extensive renovations. . Due to financial issues, it was determined to replace these 64 -unit apartments with 17 custom lots creating a single family area in what was a multi - family area. . The dedication of the bay front public walkway easement that exists now across the front of the property on a floating headwalk at the desire of the Coastal Commission to carry this across to the east. . The site plan displaying an entrance, drive aisles with gate. . Lot A in the center will be a combination of open space and /or pool and would be a private recreational area open to residents of the community. . An easement down to the docks. . Access for residents to the walkway exists in two forms. . The architecture of Carl Aitkin's will create design standards and guidelines that will be imposed upon the owners for cohesiveness and flexibility conforming to the height limits of a maximum of 28 feet with a feeling of old Newport. . The project entry design. 13 homes have water frontage and will have either sloping lots to the water or small retaining walls allowing grade change with landscaping. . Reduction of density from 64 units, creating a new custom lot community with design guidelines. . Water quality issues were discussed and due to the mitigation proposed will be less of an impact. Existing trees will need to be removed due to the extensive root system and the additional setback to be provided. . A fully landscaped open front area in the middle of the project is an important amenity to the community. . Dedication of the bay front public walkway easement will be re- designed to accommodate ADA access at Bayside Drive. An easement for the front of the property for the public walkway will be given. . The walkway along Bayside extends down the bay front and the Promontory Channel across the front of the property on to the east. If this was placed on the land, because of the complication of the land to the east, the fact that they are owned by over 50 separate owners, and the ability to redevelop that site suggests that providing the walkway along the entire frontage along the floating dock is in fact providing the appropriate access to the community. Our only proposals are the ADA upgrades as well as the proposed easement over the floating walkway. . A portion of the walkway within the ten foot easement was less than 6 feet in 31 file: //H: \Plancomm \2005 \081805.htm 09/23/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 08/18/2005 Page 8 of 17 width. Part of this area is planted and Public Works noted that as long as the planter was modified to allow a minimum clearance of 6 feet, they felt that would meet the requirement and intent at that location. • She then gave a description of the gangplank and walkway and the ADA requirements needed. • There was then a lengthy discussion on the location and design of the public access and the existing wall line, retaining walls, bulkheads, pad elevations and changes in grade. • The zoning allows for up to 78 units but a determination was made for this project and would agree to any conditions assuring that single family development. • We are proposing no interior sidewalks in order to minimize the impervious surfaces. • The Coastal Development Permit will require this project to go on to the City Council and then to the Coastal Commission for approval. • There may be two or three car garages that may be 18 feet back from the curb and the building portion could conceivably be 5 feet from the curb as it is the rear yard with the front facing on the water. It would not be the whole yard, as we are preserving a requirement that there be parking on the driveway. • Environmental analysis concluded there were no impacts that could not be mitigated to a less than significant. We have met the requirements. • Community outreach - the tenants were notified of a proposed change in use by letter April 19th 2005. The notices were mailed and delivered as well. The letter included the option to extend the lease period. A community meeting notice to each of the residents was sent out and that was held June 23, 2005. All tenants and surrounding property owners were invited. A full presentation on the project with a tentative schedule was made. • We understand the additional conditions that are being proposed relative to additional setbacks along the street and we are in agreement with the 4 foot additional setback for landscaping and the additional 10 foot setbacks behind the wall along Bayside Drive. • With regard to condition 4 on page 34 it refers to how the use permit might be modified or revoked. Because this is a custom lot program we were concerned, assuming that we get approval, once there are private property owners, we would hope that any revocation would apply on a lot by lot basis. It would be difficult once there are individual homes to revoke a use permit on all the properties for a particular violation on one property. • Condition 38 that relates to the sidewalk, we had requested the elimination of sidewalks because of the small nature of the community and our desire to reduce the impervious surfaces and to add to the charm of the community. • The height limit to be used is 28 feet and we feel that gives more variation in the types of roof treatments on a project of this type. • Regarding the characteristics of the neighboring marine boat yard, we recognize that and there will be a series of disclosures and that will be made very clear to the purchasers. We would work with staff regarding the wording on those disclosures. • A comprehensive landscape plan had been submitted with the application. • In terms of the ownership of the slips, the clients have a 80 year lease. The Irvine Company owns the slips to the east and her client owns the slips on this site. • The Coastal Commission has a condition on their prior approval that recognized that these private docks were located such that parking was not particularly convenient for the public. As a result the condition required that the slips must be utilized by people who either live in the apartments or the Cove or are a member `3c� file: //H: \Plancomm \2005 \081805.htm 09/23/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 08/18/2005 Page 9 of 17 of the yacht club. That was designed to ensure that there was parking in proximity to those slips. We have tried to conform to that. Discussion ensued on parking in driveways, and 19 visitor spaces available; hydrology .4nd water quality noted in the negative declaration; project proponents providing residents sufficient notice to vacate the premises and /or be relocated. The applicant plans to prepare a booklet that will assist the tenants with a listing of similar apartment; ith rental rates, floor plans, contact names and numbers, etc. components of the project discussed were: . Dock condition of the Coastal Commission. • Internal sidewalk system within the subdivision- . Public easements and storm drains. • Single family versus multi - family designation and the differences in possible zoning. comment was opened. May, resident of Newport Marina, noted: • He is concerned about losing his home. • The deterioration of the project has occurred recently under new management. • A lot of elderly residents live there. Hurly, resident of Newport Marina, noted his opposition to the project: • It is hard to understand what the project wants to do and may be in violation of the California Environmental Quality Act and there may be some deficiencies. • He asked that this item be continued for further review, May, resident of Newport Marina, noted: • What is the timeframe for current residents to vacate? • There are not many openings for rent. Daly, resident of Corona del Mar, noted: . The development will be a wonderful addition to the community. O'Hill, owner of the grounds of the proposed project, noted: • The lease will be 80 years only if this plan is approved in the near future. The current lease is substantially less. • There is one lease now to the tenant, Newport Marina LLC, and at the time the property is subdivided into 17 lots, then there will be 17 leases to each of the homeowners. • What they are selling is a spec custom home on leased hold land or, they are selling a leasehold interest in Lot 5 or Lot 6, which someone could design and build their custom home. • There is a master plan attached to the lease that states the development has to be done in a certain way. There is no clause that says an 8 foot sidewalk can be placed at the top of bulkhead on the north front, so that would be a violation of file: //H:\PIancomm \2005 \081805.htm 09/23/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 08/18/2005 Page 10 of 17 the lease. • The public access onto the dock along the south side of the project is preferable to one up on the bulkhead. • The bulkhead line is 18 feet beyond where the bulkhead is for Newport Marina and the bulkhead could be extended to this line. • The idea of a sidewalk along the front of the houses would take away from the aesthetics of the community. If there has to be a sidewalk, the place for it is around Lot A where it would provide access. At Commission inquiry, he added: • Lots A, C and D belong to the Community Association and there is a tiny lease payment for those lettered lots. • The current lease would expire if this project is not approved and the landowner would have the option at the end of the lease of requiring the tenant either to take down all the buildings, take down some of the buildings, or take down none of the buildings. • The term of the existing lease is 25 years with a 15 year extension. Chairperson Toerge noted that the plans were not clear. Caroline Mesgner, resident of Bayside Drive, noted she just moved in two years ago and it is a beautiful place to live and is heartbroken that they are tearing it down. Paul Ranty, one of the owners of Newport Beach Yacht Club, noted this project will be beautiful addition to the neighborhood and is in support of it. arol McDermott, representing the applicant, added: • Requesting the elimination of condition 38, and a clarification of 4. • The wall along the westerly property line will stay in the same format as exists today. • The trees along the bayside frontage will be replaced with new trees as the wall needs to be moved back and a planter added along the front of it. • Potential setback increase along the street frontage between the wall and the back of the houses. Discussion followed on the types and numbers of potential setback requirements. • Proposed agreement on the height restriction on the walkway along the floating dock. Mr. Campbell noted: • Staff is suggesting a minimum 4 foot wide landscape area behind the sidewalk and the perimeter wall along Bayside Drive to be located within the common Lots C and D. • Setbacks are incorporated in a table attached to the resolution. • Draft language requiring an easement across the floating walkway that is noted on the Tentative Map. • Access along the southside of the project site can be provided through an irrevocable easement up on dry land with a walkway provided in the future when it could connect to the east. arol McDermott, in answer to Commission inquiry noted: I file: //H: \Plancomm \2005 \081805.htm 09/23/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 08/18/2005 Page 11 of 17 • The applicant would accept a permanent easement in connection with the walkway along with the maintenance. • It would be difficult in terms of the lease to accept a condition regarding a sidewalk on the properties. Campbell noted at Commission inquiry: The bulkhead could not be moved to the south of the bulkhead line as findings under the Coastal Act could not be made. The Coastal Act requires that developments provide maximum public access. rperson Toerge asked Ms. McDermott what would get redeveloped sooner, the Condominiums or the subject property? McDermott answered there is public access to the property already. If we are ired to continue this access on land then we would be the only property for 50 - 80 s that would have that easement whether it was exercised now or later. This erty is now under one ownership and has little opportunity to redevelop as those owners would hold onto it. Because there are 50 or more owners in The Cove will ,idual ownerships, the likelihood of them giving that up is highly unlikely. She then orated upon the project referencing the exhibits. comment was closed. Commission inquiry, staff stated: . The City standards call for a 5 foot sidewalk width where it is adjacent to the street; and a minimum of 4 feet if there is a parkway between the sidewalk and the street. It must also comply with the American With Disabilities Act (ADA). . The public utilities easement under the sidewalk does not present any problems. . Lots 15, 16 and 17 minimum 10' yard required adjacent to public right -of -way. Alford, Senior Planner, at Commission inquiry noted: • A goal of the Coastal Act is to provide maximum public access to and along the coast which is reflected in the policies of the Coastal Act and our current certified Land Use Plan, which is a component of our Local Coastal Plan (LCP). • There are two forms of access, vertical which is access to the shoreline, and lateral which is access along the shoreline. • This project has all lateral access. • The policies of the Coastal Act and the LCP state that development shall not interfere with the public's right to access to the sea. The general concept is that the public has access below the mean high tide line. Because of the current design of the bulkhead that type of access is feasible. If that was a natural shoreline, you would have the right to walk below the mean high tideline. • It could be argued that the current development interferes with the public's right of access and that the proposed project perpetuates this impact. The public's right of access is to be protected and enhanced and expanded where feasible. . Another provision in the Land Use Plan is that public access be provided from the nearest public roadway to or along the coast with new development. • What you have to consider are issues of public safety, military needs and so forth and impacts to agriculture that is not relative in this case and whether adequate access exists nearby. file: //H: \Plancomm \2005 \081805.htm 09/23/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 08/18/2005 Page 12 of 17 • It could be argued that the existing floating access may not be adequate in the sense that there is some ambiguity to the public's right to that currently, also, it is apparently 6 feet wide and has a dual purpose of providing access and has to be a dock. Normally, under new development we would require a minimum of a ten foot wide lateral access. • There are potential issues of public safety that might be eliminated by having a wider public access on land. • It has been stated several times that this was an agreement made by the Coastal Commission. I believe it was stated that this was circa 1974 and it essentially pre -dates the Coastal Act and may not meet today's standard to provide adequate lateral access. • The issue of a gated community is not directly addressed in the Coastal Act or the Land Use Plan. It has been an issue of increasing concern with the Coastal Commission. If you look at the Public Access Action Plan it specifically mentions stretches of coastline that are inaccessible due to private development in Orange County. It did not specify Newport Beach and is not singled out as being an issue. • Their concern is vast stretches of land being excluded from providing either vertical or lateral access. This is a small project and there is some form of access currently that could be enhanced, so a project of this scale being private or gated, is not a major impact to the access policies of the Coastal Act. Chairperson Toerge noted that there are various items that need to be addressed. He hen went through his list: . Single family residential versus multi - family residential. This is a single family development with a multi - family height. This project does not comply with the multi- family development of a 20 foot setback requirement from Bayside. Any one of these property owners will have the right to re -apply for multi - family permit of development on each of their lots. We are classifying this as a multi- family project and for all other analysis that might be done this property will be inaccurately characterized as multi - family when it is not. The more appropriate action is a General Plan Amendment to single family and a re -zone to single family residential. To be discussed are the 28 foot high overlay and the setbacks associated with single family. I would direct staff to process this project as a single family residential. Commissioner Eaton noted: Does not understand what the differences would be in the height and the setbacks between single family and not sure the applicant/lessee has the ability to ask for a zone change to a single family. Commissioner Hawkins noted: • The lease will affect what the applicant can do. • He is concerned that the Commission is giving direction to go back to the earlier application. • The multi - family versus single family, we can discuss conditions that preserve and protect the City's ability to restrict the multi - family to what we are approving today. r. Campbell added: file: //H: \Plancomm \2005 \081805.htm 09/23/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 08/18/2005 The application originally came forward with a general plan amendment and a zone change going to single family. The application was signed by the lease holr interest but was not signed by the property owner. Following meetings with the property owner it did not appear that was the direction they wanted to go. This application tonight includes leave the site in the MFR zone and add the PRD overlay. The overlay allows the flexibility in the setback standards so the 20 foot setback to Bayside Drive can be modified. The setback flexibility comes at a cos of a 40% open space requirement and a four spaces per unit parking requirement, and those two items have been met. We can not re- process the application as a single family because that application is not complete and is not before the Commission. If it is deemed appropriate to put this in a single family zone, I would suggest that this application is not ripe for approval. sioner Cole note the PRD overlay gives flexibility to the City. He noted his of setbacks and height issues. nmissioner McDaniel noted his concern of the multi - family designation and would to see the single family designation. nmissioner Henn stated this is a single family development. He is concerned about ambiguity about what could happen to these properties in the future. His erence would be a solution that involves a single family designation but that also rus findings for flexibility to address some of the setback issues. Campbell noted the Use Permit associated with the request for the Planned ;idential Development (PRD) can be conditioned limiting it to be a single family ommissioner Henn noted that he is less concerned about single family versus multi - mily if he felt there was absolute assurance that under the multi - family PRD solution ere would be no further subdivision of the properties. Campbell noted it would be difficult to add those units because with the PRD May comes the requirement of 4 spaces per unit. The way this is designed, it would almost impossible to subdivide them. The only way to do it absolutely is to >ignate the site single family by the Land Use Element. iscussion continued on the entry drive re- design, entry to the lateral access at ayside and the location of the wall. Commissioner Hawkins suggested that when the pplicant has finalized a detailed landscape plan, it could come back to the ommission for approval as we have done on other projects, e.g., the wall required for ie St. Andrews project. There was a straw vote split 3 to 3 on whether to have a etailed landscape plan brought to the Commission for deliberation. rperson Toerge noted the building setbacks from Bayside, between dwellings een the houses and the internal streets. Following a discussion on the MFR irement of 20 feet, it was determined that the PRD gives flexibility for setbacks. Page 13 of 17 David Lepo, consultant, noted that in the body of the staff report, it refers to the 5' r0 tback adjacent to the interior streets. mmissioner Henn noted the fire access to the bay and staffs recommendation to 03 file: //H: \Plancomm \2005 \081805.htm 09/23/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 08/18/2005 ,den it. Mr. Lepo noted it was between Lots 5 and 6, and the applicant agreed to have the fire access 6 feet wide paved plus the 5 foot wide setback. straw vote was taken on the appropriate setback from Bayside Drive, MFR is 20 feet, applicant is proposing 5 feet, and staff is recommending 10 feet measured from the DDertv line at the common lot ommissioner Eaton agreed with the 10 feet with sidewalks. ommissioner Hawkins, no sidewalks and the setback 10 feet. ommission Cole, setback 10 feet, no sidewalks. hairperson Toerge, setback 10 feet, no sidewalks. ommissioner McDaniel, setback 10 feet, no sidewalks. ommissioner Henn, setback 10 feet, no sidewalks. hairperson Toerge then noted the visitor parking requirement. MFR requires visitor irking, the SFR does not. The MFR requires guest parking that is being satisfied with irking behind garages. Temple added that there are 19 guest parking spaces in addition to the parking ided in the garages, driveways, and explained the PRD available street parking hairperson Toerge then noted the water front walk on land or on the floating dock. le are to attempt to provide maximum public access, expand and enhance it when asible unless there is adequate access elsewhere providing that access on the water not adequate and potentially unsafe. As the project is completely removing the cisting buildings, it is feasible to put this access on the land, thereby expanding and chancing the access. One of the most sought after attractions is to walk around alboa Island, and for us to create access on the land that might one day create a mtinuous on -land access to the bridge to Balboa Island is our responsibility. He >ted his concern of safety in directing people down to a floating dock that is six feet ide with a hand rail on one side. This access should be put on the land and at the rminus of the proposed access at the easterly property boundary, a similar gangway imp be added there to allow the pedestrians to get to the floating access and continue i the current floating access to the east. The handicap ramp down to the existing )ck should also be included in the project to provide ADA access that might not .herwise be granted given the limitations on the slope for a ramp that might occur on e easterly end. The access should be generated on the land. ommissioner Henn noted the walkway on land would be walkway to no where and wil fora long time when and if the property to the east is developed. However, it is an iportant issue to be addressed. We should provide for the future ability to do that but >t require it now. I don't believe putting that access on the land is an enhancement. I ink having an easement that can be executed in the future, if it becomes appropriate at the walkway on land can be made continuous, in a way that makes sense. I would chance the public dock walk way to widen and add safety features to it. Page 14 of 17 .:ommissioner McDaniel noted his agreement with Commissioner Henn's statement. He would like to see the floating walkway expanded and enhanced such as lighting, DA access and handrails. aA file: //H: \Plancomm \2005 \081805.htm 09/23/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 08/18/2005 Commissioner Cole agreed with the previous statements. He added that the dockway would create better access then something up higher on the bulkhead. " ommissioner Hawkins said he had no problem with the proposed coastal access Toting that there are three sides for coastal access, along Promontory Channel, along Balboa Island Channel and along the Coves Condominium. The proposed project is offering more than two thirds of the perimeter is dedicated to coastal access, which maximizes coastal access. He is comfortable with the floating dock and believes that he inland marsh land will require that sort of on the water walkway. The only way here will be an extensive stretch of walkway is to have it on the water. He is concerned about placing a walkway on the land and then transitioning it to the other Palkway on the water as another safety issue can arise. Eaton noted that the enhanced dock is the better solution. iairperson Toerge noted that there is a majority that the dock access with some sort enhanced safety measure would be appropriate as opposed to the on land access. then brought up the dedication of Lot G and Lot F. Temple noted that Lot G is public tidelands, Lot F is still waters of the United es. In referencing Lot G, it is to the leasehold interest to the docks and not the al water and land beneath, as those belong to the people of California. The :ss to the docks is within Lot G according to the Tract Map. ierson Toerge then noted the ownership of slips and parking for those slips. He for a condition on this project to ensure that only residents can access and use slips. Campbell noted that there is a private agreement attached to the leasehold interest at restricts the use of the docks to the residents of the three adjoining properties. ese are treated as residential docks so parking is not required. There is no condition approval that would restrict the use of the docks; however, it can be added. straw vote on a condition to restrict the use of the docks: ommissioner Eaton, yes ommissioner Hawkins, yes ommissioner Cole, yes ommissioner McDaniel, yes ommissioner Henn, yes hairperson Toerge noted there was no drainage plan or water quality plans. Campbell noted that a Water Quality Management Plan and a Storm Water ution Prevention plan were prepared and reviewed by staff in conjunction with the >aration of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The measures ensure that no idards are being violated. Page 15 of 17 " hairperson Toerge suggested that a condition be included that provides a statement and a requirement for the applicant to inform all owners about the operational characteristics of the neighboring Balboa Marine boat yard and its impacts. The rest of`j he Commission agreed. file: //H: \Piancomm \2005 \081805.htm 09/23/2005 Planning Commission Minutes 08/18/2005 Page 16 of 17 Chairperson Toerge noted the maintenance of the walkway. Staff answered that a condition can be crafted by staff to reflect the upgrade and maintenance. brief discussion ensued on housing issues related to the Coastal Residential ,Development Permit application. on was made by Chairperson Toerge to continue this item to September 8th to F staff time to formalize conditions as suggested during the deliberations. He J he would like to review the condition and resolutions as this project has many !s to it. Lepo, noted he has 11 provisions based on what he has heard tonight. imissioner Henn noted the there is an issue as to what kind of application this is hopes that during the continuance period some clarity could come about between and the applicant. vote to continue to get to a vote: issioner Cole - continue issioner McDaniel - continue erson Toerge - continue arson Toerge noted that the motion is to continue and to take the input from the and the straw votes and incorporate them into a modified staff report and a !d resolution at September 8th. ,yes: Eaton, Hawkins, Cole, Toerge, McDaniel and Henn loes: None ,bsent: None ,bstain: None DDITIONAL BUSINESS: ADDITIONAL BUSINESS City Council Follow -up - Ms. Temple noted that City Council held an adjourr regular meeting that started at 4 on the Comprehensive Sign Code Update e Sign Design Guidelines manual. There were some requests for minor changes e this item will be heard again Tuesday the 23rd. The City Council was provided v an update of the Local Coastal Program. The Council held another adjourr meeting on August 11th on the St. Andrews Presbyterian Church expansion t was concluded at 1:30 a.m. The project was approved with a decrease additional gross floor area to 15,000 square feet; required the Church to provide student passes and added a condition prohibiting future increases in floor area. ) Report from Planning Commission's representative to the Economic Development Committee - Commissioner Henn noted that they completed their deliberation on the Land Use Element recommendations. Ms. Temple noted that the schedule for review is to be compressed; the meeting dates have not been set yet; however, there will be two adjourned meetings during the month of December. ) Report from Planning Commission's representatives to the General Plan Updat Committee - no meeting. file: //H: \Plancomm \2005 \081805.htm 09/23/2005 Exhibit No. 6 t �� This page is blank 1�� MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 919 BAYSIDE DRIVE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT State Clearinghouse Number 2005061019 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 Responses Prepared by: BonTerra Consulting City of Newport Beach Planning Department June 2005 Blank 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: 919 Bayside Drive 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Newport Beach, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Gregg Ramirez, Planning Department, (949) 644 -3219 4. Project Location: 919 Bayside Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: UGS Development Inc., 537 Newport Center Drive Suite 380, Newport Beach, CA 92660 6. General Plan Designation: Multi - Family Residential (MFR) 7. Zoning Designation: MFR (2178), 2,178 Square Feet of Lot Area per Unit 8. Discretionary Actions Required • Code Amendment No. 2005 -007 • Use Permit No. 2005 -026 • Tentative Tract Map No. 2004 -001 (TR15323) • Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 2005-001 9. Description of Project: The applicant requests approval of a code amendment, tentative tract map, use permit and coastal residential development permit to allow the development of a gated residential community. The site is approximately 4.78 acres. The site is currently occupied by a 64 -unit apartment complex and private boat docks. Tentative Tract Map No. 15323 proposes to establish 17 individual residential lots, 1 common recreational lot with a possible pool and trellis structure, 2 landscape /open space lots, and waterfront and dock lots. A request to re -zone the site by applying the Planned Residential Development (PRD) overlay to the existing MFR (2178) is also included. The proposed PRD overlay and accompanying use permit would establish development regulations related to lot coverage and setbacks. Approval of the coastal residential development permit is required as 64 residential units are being demolished within the coastal zone and the project must be reviewed for compliance with the Mello Act. The project also includes the demolition of the existing Newport Marina Apartments, grading, installation of, utilities, private streets, landscaping, site lighting, site walls, water quality improvements, access easements and upgrades to the public right -of- way adjacent to the project site. Access to the docks is provided via the existing gangplanks. The existing bulkhead is not proposed to be altered; however, prior to construction, the bulkhead and tieback system will be inspected by the Building Department to determine if routine repair and maintenance of the existing fixture is required to ensure stability of the project site. With respect to Fire Department improvements, the proposed project would remove the four (4) existing 2.5 -inch Fire Department connections at the bulkhead and replace them with a Class III standpipe. The proposed project shall also ensure that any gates provided on fire access roadways are automatic with strobes and Knox key switches, which are keyed for the City of Newport Beach. R: NrOjB ClsWe�pMUOD'NSMND-0eDi05.0oc 1 City of Newport Beach 5' 919 Baycide Drive Initial StudY/Mitipated Netlative Declaration Public access to North Bay Front would be preserved via a 6 -foot walkway, which would be dedicated to the City of Newport Beach. The proposed project would also reconstruct the existing concrete steps within the northerly portion of Lot B, which provides public ingress /egress between Bayside Drive and Newport Bay, and the existing concrete walkway within the southerly portion of Lot B to meet current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. A request to re -zone the site by applying the Planned Residential Development (PRD) overlay to the existing MFR zoning (2178) is also included. The proposed PRD overlay and accompanying use permit would establish development regulations related to lot coverage and setbacks. As detailed in TTM 15323 (May 10, 2005), the proposed project would provide 19 on- street parking positions as well as 48 covered parking positions. Front yard setbacks from interior streets would range between 5 and 18 feet, setbacks from the bay would range between 15 and 25 feet, and side yard setbacks would be a minimum of five (5) feet. The proposed project would involve demolition of the existing Newport Marina Apartment complex, relocation of existing sewer and water lines internal to the site, relocation of existing and installation of new utilities on -site, grading, construction of private streets internal to the project site, landscaping, installation of site lighting, removal of existing site walls and entrances, construction of 6 -foot high walls around the perimeter of the site, construction of a new gated entrance providing access to /from Bayside Drive, water quality improvements and access easements. All proposed utilities to the 17 homes would be underground. Off -Site Proiect Features The proposed project would install a new 24" water line in the public right of way on the south side of Bayside Drive parallel and adjacent to the project site. It would also install a new 8" water line within the public right of way on the south side of Bayside Drive to connect to the existing 24" water line. In addition, the proposed project would move existing gas lines within public right of way northwest of project site and relocate those gas lines to a utility easement within the site. The proposed project would also upgrade the public right of way adjacent to the project site by reconstructing broken /damaged curbs and gutters, sidewalks and driveway approaches fronting the development and installing parkways, driveway returns, and handicap ramps (curb cuts) in the public right of way on the south side of Bayside Drive. The existing street trees along Bayside Drive shall be retained or replaced in accordance with applicable street tree ordinance and policies. 10. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The proposed project is located in the Promontory Bay area of the City of Newport Beach, an area characterized by residential and marina related land uses. The Promontory Bay area includes Harbor Island, Linda Isle and all the area bounded by Newport Bay, Marine Avenue /Jamboree Road and East Coast Highway and is fully contained in the City of Newport Beach's Statistical Area G1. R: 199a,s OAIS_MNMSMNO OBM105.d 2 City or Newport Beach J*l 919 Sayside Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Current Development: Newport Marina Apartments (64 units) To the north: Bayside Drive, Bayside Center (Neighborhood Retail) To the east: Cove Condominiums (Residential) To the south: Newport Channel, Balboa Yacht Basin, Balboa Island To the west: Promontory Bay With the exception of the off -site improvements noted in Section 9 above, the proposed project would have no impacts on adjacent or surrounding land uses. 11. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): Approval of the proposed project would not necessitate approvals by other agencies. Future implementation of the project would require a Coastal Development Permit from the California Coastal Commission. R1Vrop clslNerporM11001V5AANPOfA105.tla 3 City of Newport Beach Y 919 Bayside Dnve Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaretion ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources j Geology /Soils Hazards & Hazardous Materials ❑ HydrologyNVater Quality ❑ Land Use /Planning ❑ Mineral Resources q Noise ❑ Population /Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance 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. J 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 be 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 al 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. Submitted by: Gregg Ramirez, Senior Planner City of Newport Beach Prepared by---,Cindy Krebs, Senior Project Manager BonTerra Consulting W/ /o Date Date Me 15� I Local Vici.ni 919 Bayside Drive E OS 0 0.5 Miles Exhibit 2 CON 0 m .L 5� 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact' answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact' answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project - specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project - specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project - level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate If there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from "Earlier Analysis," as described in (5) below, may be cross - referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site - specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. a: woiennue .ca+uoorus+m+ooso+as.eo� 5 City of Newport Beach t. • 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration This checklist form is used to assist in evaluating the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project. The checklist form identifies potential project effects as follows: (1) Potentially Significant Impact; (2) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated, (3) Less Than Significant Impact, and, (4) No Impact. Substantiation and clarification for each checklist response is provided (Narrative Discussion commencing on page 13). Included in each discussion are mitigation measures, as appropriate, that are recommended for implementation as part of the proposed project. Rv`roje MNev OOQWNS -MNO-0 105 doo 6 City of Newport Beach �� ENVIRONM�NTALISSUES huamply_ 5(gn{flcalYi MitltYo)t Le"T18° SIgnHlcam .. Nom ,,. (See attachments for �gtormatlon `sources)'.., . lmpayY, meorpnrate4' ;, , impact .- AE$THETIGS; Would t6e:Ii " pt :. a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic ❑ ❑ ❑ J vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, ❑ ❑ ❑ but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character ❑ ❑ ❑ J or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare ❑ ❑ ❑ J which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? II AGRICULTURE RESOURCES In deiermrpmg whether am(3s , t�ti �agncultytaL �es�iC�ce��Cl� ef�eGts, sfgt]tficani envtronmenia;. lead- agencies fray �e�aC k�a�G�1ta. %�9rlctlfC�iFa��n� �[ aluahogand' StteL+ sse�smeniili [tl�e'�9�ITkpte�aFed�t� �fo�;tlepTrnorrsatva„ angptlonat model td use fn es���ssing fimpac °on agnculiuC� ar�dfarrriiartSj �.Woglii �1� prdj��r a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or ❑ ❑ ❑ J 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 non - agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or ❑ ❑ ❑ J a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment ❑ ❑ ❑ J which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use? Ip AIRQUA1JT e esfall�hed "qhe applicable arwrfivahtt; rrta%jagetnenY :or a� ittu c4ntroil mad 6e teher Upon, to make the fof(viYjgi �dusCoc de(imina6ons "Wou1dtFlpmtect a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Li ❑ J applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute ❑ ❑ J ❑ substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase ❑ ❑ J ❑ of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ❑ ❑ J ❑ concentrations? Rv`roje MNev OOQWNS -MNO-0 105 doo 6 City of Newport Beach �� 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration - _ FpterNehy ENi/IRf3N14jNA1 ISSUES aotaepellyuvles} u��stnmu = (See attaahmeh f0[�`p tiFirieklolS SOUfC@S) ',.. *stgrwNtcanF Mi aOon. - SlgnlflcriM 1�Dec? , , In'corporatec, .: Impaet ;Iro1piC' e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial ❑ ❑ ❑ number of people? .lOXQGlGA. ESQ�13CE3_Would:ihe protect• a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or ❑ ❑ ❑ through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian ❑ ❑ ❑ habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) 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? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any ❑ ❑ ❑ 4 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? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances ❑ ❑ ❑ 4 protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinances? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat ❑ ❑ ❑ 4 Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the El significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ❑ ❑ 4 ❑ significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique ❑ ❑ 4 ❑ paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those ❑ ❑ 4 ❑ interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI GEGtL�'� ANiS SQILS �?I19ult# fh�}i1b1a .. � . , - c,` a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: R:�Prgecuwavp�in100M5NW 0-0601 eS.EOc City of Newport Beach .\ b, M 919 Sayside Dnve initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as ❑ J ❑ ❑ delineated on the most recent Alquist - Priolo b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ❑ J ❑ ❑ environment through reasonably foreseeable upset Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or State Geologist for the area or based on other acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of ❑ ❑ J ❑ hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to to Division of Mines and Geology Special Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result would it create a significant hazard to the Publication 42. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan ❑ ❑ ❑ J or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ J ❑ ❑ iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including ❑ J ❑ ❑ liquefaction? people residing or working in the project area? iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ J b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of ❑ ❑ J ❑ topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is ❑ J ❑ ❑ unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table ❑ ❑ ❑ J 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) 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? a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ❑ J ❑ ❑ environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ❑ J ❑ ❑ environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or ❑ ❑ ❑ J acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of ❑ ❑ J ❑ hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan ❑ ❑ ❑ J or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ❑ ❑ ❑ J would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? R,1 ropds\NewpwM1 VIS -MND 10.,. a City of Newport Beach VV 919 Bayside Driva Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ENVIRONMENTALI#0 .. , . -� : Set a#as "8nts fof {nforrrratlgtt soUNA - :. vaenuetAt unraR to, 01 taasmss - Sfyetflcant :MH . mpaa _' iieoorponted.., : fmp.a,''. tmpaa,: g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with ❑ ❑ ❑ J an adopted emergency response plan or such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table emergency evacuation plan? level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of El 11 El J loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of ❑ ❑ ❑ J the site or area, including through the alteration of including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or areas or where residences are intermixed with off- site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of wildlands? the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially a) Violate any water quality standards or waste Li L1 Li J discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or ❑ ❑ ❑ J 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)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of ❑ ❑ ❑ J 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? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of ❑ ❑ ❑ J 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 in which would result in flooding on- or off- site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would ❑ ❑ ❑ J exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ❑ J g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area ❑ ❑ ❑ J as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area ❑ ❑ ❑ J structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ❑ ❑ ❑ J loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑ J R:le1*=WewporlU0oNSA ND- M105.dW City or Newport Basch 1(�'J 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration R.%G*d.%NawpoTl00NS$ M601 05.a 10 City or Newport Beach (D ` 14 v " ` t P9t8hUe1 stgpupTe�. °: ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES " PO,fentraltY LeBS Than. §ee attachments forinformatiorii `sources sgpineam Mnngbbch' `,'stgotrtcarc No f' IX . - LAND'USE ANd PLANNING. U1fou(d,the projecft ;' a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ J ❑ b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or ❑ ❑ J ❑ 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? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation ❑ ❑ J ❑ plan or natural community conservation plan? MINERALAIE J 13E&1Noutdtheproject a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ❑ ❑ ❑ J resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- ❑ ❑ ❑ J important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? N4 SE, Wouldthe it At project`result a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise Li ❑ levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ❑ J ❑ ❑ groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise ❑ J ❑ ❑ levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ❑ J ❑ ❑ ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan ❑ ❑ ❑ J or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ❑ ❑ ❑ J would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, ❑ ❑ ❑ J either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ❑ ❑ ❑ J necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? R.%G*d.%NawpoTl00NS$ M601 05.a 10 City or Newport Beach (D ` 14 v 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study /MNgated Negative Dectaration ' ENVIRONMEMTA 185UES PotOaltRt�'� '1.as�TS{Aw' r'X pk� ' . ,r (See a�tasii" rrmePtafttrlAfatSna�larr„soUxcesi i' slpaNkaM signineaar :Nat Impact : t�emnntet�__.' try cr imet�c c) Displace substantial numbers of people, ❑ ❑ ❑ 4 necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XIII , PItBLIC SERVICES' a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire Protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ J Police Protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ 4 Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ J Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ 4 Other Public Facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ J X..RECREATIOIJru R ! R4FnK F . z a) Would the project increase the use of existing ❑ ❑ ❑ J neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or ❑ ❑ ❑ 4 require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? ;_Xft TRANSP„RTIF1fO�I moo-Um. a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in LI Li U q 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)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level ❑ ❑ ❑ 4 of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including ❑ ❑ ❑ 4 either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design ❑ ❑ ❑ 4 feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ 4 f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ❑ 4 R:WrandMewpmiLNIOnISWND%0105.E 11 City of Newport Beach \Ip5 T✓ 919 Bayside Dave Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration a. �p�geas�Hr «portuoor�s- r.+HO-05a�os.ea 12 City of Newport Beach l�� EN�Va�(ztiC1AMENTAC 1_ArUES si4n f Na . r. x�"$ LONOlrli' e71t ,5�fOttllfOIRId�tOLkShcll'C@S� _. 1lnpptC, ItiCf(1poMted� ` ImpatL� :Im0. g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs ❑ ❑ ❑ J supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? XVL� U(�;11 , AIV[T S��i1�IC�;SSfSTE . �, V�(oul��he'project � ,' a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ❑ ❑ J applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water ❑ ❑ ❑ J or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects ?? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm ❑ ❑ ❑ J water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects and /or would the project include a new or retrofitted storm water treatment control Best Management Practice (BMP), (e.g., water quality treatment basin, constructed treatment wetlands), the operation of which could result in significant environmental effects (e.g., increased vectors and odors)? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve ❑ ❑ ❑ J the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater ❑ ❑ ❑ J treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it does not have adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted ❑ ❑ ❑ J capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and ❑ ❑ ❑ J regulations related to ss^olid waste? M a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the Lj ❑ J quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or animals, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have impacts that are individually ❑ ❑ ❑ J limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) a. �p�geas�Hr «portuoor�s- r.+HO-05a�os.ea 12 City of Newport Beach l�� 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration d. Does the project have environmental effects which ❑ ❑ ❑ J l will cause substantial adverse effects on human I beings, either directly or indirectly? RVtoiaswewpmWOU Ss Nnoeolas.a 13 City of Newport Beach 919 Bayside, Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration NARRATIVE DISCUSSION OF CHECKLIST EVALUATION AESTHETICS —Would the proposed project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? C) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? No Impact The proposed project site is located on Bayside Drive, immediately north of Newport Channel and Balboa Island. The environment in which the proposed project site is situated is characterized by a variety of land uses, including Single- Family Detached, Mufti- Family Residential, Neighborhood Commercial, Recreational and Marina, and Recreational and Environmental Open Space land uses. The proposed project would be consistent with the existing visual character and quality of the project site and its surroundings. The proposed project would not result in any coastal views being obstructed, as no views through the project site are presently afforded due to the existing apartment complex. Additionally, Bayside Drive is not a designated Scenic Highway. The City's Local Coastal Program does not list the proposed project site as a primary view area, and public views of Newport Channel are currently obstructed by the existing on -site land use, the Newport Harbor Apartment complex, as well as mature vegetation and a concrete block wall along Bayside Drive. The proposed project would demolish the existing two -story apartment complex and build in its place 17 residential units. The height of these units would not be greater than the height of the existing on -site land use based upon zoning standards. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially alter views from surrounding land uses. The proposed project would install landscaping at the entrance to the community for aesthetic purposes and on -site street lighting for safety purposes. The effects of night lighting would generally be the same as under existing conditions. In summary, the proposed project would not result in aesthetic impacts. No mitigation required. It. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES —Would the proposed project: a) 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 non - agricultural use? R rgeasWe porN00NSWND 105 .0 14 City of Newport Beach 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? C) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use? No Impact. The site is not under agricultural production or use. The City's General Plan and the California Division of Land Resources Protection 2002 Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program do not identify any prime or unique farmlands within the City of Newport Beach. Additionally, there are no areas in the City that are under existing Williamson Act contracts. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in adverse impacts to agricultural resources. No mitigation is required. III. AIR QUALITY —Would the proposed project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? C) 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 (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Newport Beach is located within the South Coast Air Basin and is subject to the requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), the California Clean Air Act and the federal Clean Air Act. The AQMP provides the framework for determining whether air quality standards and objectives are being achieved. Short-Term Construction Impacts As illustrated in Table 1, demolition, grading, and construction activities associated with the proposed project would generate short-term air quality impacts. Air pollutants would be emitted by construction equipment and construction workers' vehicles; fugitive dust would be generated during demolition of the existing facilities and grading of the site. For the purposes of preparing the air quality impact analysis, it was assumed that construction activities would occur over a 10 -month period. Demolition of the existing on -site buildings would occur over 30 to 40 working days. A total of seven pieces of equipment and up to 12 workers per day would be required during the demolition phase. Approximately 20 truck trips per day would be required to haul a maximum of 9,293 cubic feet of debris per day to an off -site waste disposal facility approximately 15 miles from the project site. Site grading would occur over a two -month period, with up to five pieces of equipment and fewer than 10 employees at the site each workday. Building activities, including lot preparation, internal roadway construction, and external roadway and sidewalk improvements, would occur over a six -month period, with a maximum of five pieces of equipment and ten employees on the site daily. It was also assumed that R: I.,W.Wewportl100TIfr N0.060iMtl is City of Newport Beach to jq- 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration diesel particulate filters would be installed on construction equipment to minimize particulate matter emissions. As illustrated in Table 1, which presents the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD's) thresholds of significance for daily construction and operation activities, as well as the anticipated pollutant emissions that would result from project implementation, project- related emissions would not exceed SCAQMD's daily significance thresholds. Therefore, project— related construction activities would not result in significant air quality impacts. TABLE 1 SCAQMD REGIONAL POLLUTANT EMISSION THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE AND ESTIMATED PROJECT IMPACTS Long -Term Operational Impacts The proposed project involves demolition of an existing apartment complex, occupied by 95 people, and construction, on the same site, of 17 single - family residential lots which, based on the City's residential occupancy assumptions, would house approximately 38 residents. Because the proposed project would reduce the number of residents living on -site, fewer traffic trips would be generated by the proposed project than by the existing land use. This would result in fewer vehicle tailpipe emissions. In addition, because the proposed project would reduce the number of on -site residential units from 64 to 17, total household emissions would be lower than under existing conditions. Therefore, long -term operation of the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan (i.e., the 2003 South Coast AQMP), violate any air quality standard, contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation, result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant, or expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollution concentrations. Additionally, because the project would not increase traffic at any intersection, it would not have any adverse impact on local carbon monoxide, PM10, or PM2.e concentrations. No operational impacts would occur. The proposed project would not result in significant air quality impacts. No mitigation is required. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? No Impact. Neither the construction nor the long-term operation of the proposed residential project would result in objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. R'�rq SWa+GO'n 10 7113 ND�60105, DOC 16 City o / Newport Beach ��� s Construction 550 75 100 150 150 Operation 550 55 55 150 150 Max Lbs/Day 99.13 13.22 89.55 43.38 0.21 Significant? NO NO NO NO NO Sources: SCAQMO CEQA Air Quality Handbook 1993 URBEMIS 2002 Long -Term Operational Impacts The proposed project involves demolition of an existing apartment complex, occupied by 95 people, and construction, on the same site, of 17 single - family residential lots which, based on the City's residential occupancy assumptions, would house approximately 38 residents. Because the proposed project would reduce the number of residents living on -site, fewer traffic trips would be generated by the proposed project than by the existing land use. This would result in fewer vehicle tailpipe emissions. In addition, because the proposed project would reduce the number of on -site residential units from 64 to 17, total household emissions would be lower than under existing conditions. Therefore, long -term operation of the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan (i.e., the 2003 South Coast AQMP), violate any air quality standard, contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation, result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant, or expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollution concentrations. Additionally, because the project would not increase traffic at any intersection, it would not have any adverse impact on local carbon monoxide, PM10, or PM2.e concentrations. No operational impacts would occur. The proposed project would not result in significant air quality impacts. No mitigation is required. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? No Impact. Neither the construction nor the long-term operation of the proposed residential project would result in objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. R'�rq SWa+GO'n 10 7113 ND�60105, DOC 16 City o / Newport Beach ��� 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES —Would the proposed project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? C) 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? d) 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? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinances? f) 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 Impact. A site visit on October 19, 2004, confirmed that the project site is currently developed as an apartment community with associated parking. The majority of the site consists of asphalt -paved surfaces and residential buildings. There are limited areas within the project site that are landscaped with ornamental plant species that would be removed and replaced in conjunction with the proposed project. Likewise, ornamental trees outside of the project boundaries along Bayside Drive would be removed and replaced by the proposed project. The site does not support sensitive biological resources or contain any jurisdictional waters or wetlands. In addition, the developed site does not serve as a wildlife corridor or native nursery site. Implementation of the proposed project would not be in conflict with any conservation plan goals or policies. No mitigation is required. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES —Would the proposed project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? C) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? R:1FM*"t NeWPO JeeTIS ND l05.tl 17 City of Newport Beach 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less Than Significant Impact. According to the Conservation of Natural Resources Element of the City's General Plan, over 30 archaeological sites have been discovered and recorded in Newport Beach, most of which are adjacent to and around Upper Newport Bay. The majority of the sites have been developed with roads, housing, and other building activities. Prehistoric remains of man in Newport Beach have been dated from 8,000 to 10,000 years ago. In addition, there are indications that man may have inhabited the area 20,000 years ago. The City also contains unique paleontological localities, especially along the bluffs of the east shore of the bay and adjoining foothills. As the proposed project site is currently developed, previous grading would have impacted potentially occurring cultural resources. Therefore, it is unlikely that the proposed project would result in a significant impact to cultural resources. However, the following standard conditions would be required in the event that any archaeological or paleontological resources are encountered during construction of the proposed project. Standard Conditions SC C -1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide written evidence to the Planning Director that a qualified archaeologist has been retained to observe grading activities and conduct salvage excavation of archaeological resources as necessary. The archaeologist shall be present at the pre - grading conference, shall establish procedures for archaeological resource surveillance, and shall establish, in cooperation with the applicant, procedures for temporarily hafting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, identification and evaluation of the artifacts as appropriate. If additional or unexpected archaeological features are discovered, the archaeologist shall report such findings to the applicant and to the Planning Department. If the archaeological resources are found to be significant, the archaeological observer shall determine appropriate actions, in cooperation with the applicant, for exploration and /or salvage. These actions, as well as final mitigation and disposition of the resources, shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Director. SC C -2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide written evidence to the Planning Department that a qualified paleontologist has been retained to observe grading activities and salvage fossils as necessary. The paleontologist shall be present at the pre - grading conference, shall establish procedures for paleontological resource surveillance, and shall establish, in cooperation with the applicant, procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, identification and evaluation of fossils. If major paleontological resources are discovered which require long term baiting or redirecting of grading, the paleontologist shall report such findings to the applicant and to the Planning Department. The paleontologist shall determine appropriate actions, in cooperation with the applicant, which ensure proper exploration and /or salvage. These actions, as well as final mitigation and disposition of the resources, shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Director. SC C -3 In accordance with Public Resources Code 5097.94, if human remains are found, the Orange County coroner must be noted within 24 hours of the discovery. If the coroner determines that the remains are not recent, the R1Pmpga VNexporlV00TI5MNe-060105.00C 18 City of Newport Beach �/�� all 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declarah'on coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission in Sacramento to determine the most likely descendent for the area. The designated Native American representative then determines in consultation with the property owner the disposition of the human remains. With implementation of the standard conditions listed above, the proposed project would not result in adverse impacts to cultural resources. No mitigation is required. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS —Would the proposed project: a) 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; or ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction; or Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The following analysis is based upon the Geotechnical Investigation prepared for the proposed project by Petra Geotechnical, Inc. in December 2004. The proposed project site is located in southern California, a tectonically (seismically) active region which faces an ongoing threat from major earthquakes. There are no active faults on the site according to the Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map. However, the Newport- Inglewood (L.A. Basin) Fault, which extends from the offshore area of Newport Beach northwest to the southern edge of the Santa Monica Mountains, is located approximately 1.6 miles southwest of the site. This fault zone has a history of moderate to high seismic activity and has generated numerous earthquakes greater than magnitude 4. In addition, the San Joaquin Hills Thrust (SJHT) fault, a blind thrust fault, extends below the Los Angeles Basin, including the proposed project site. Blind thrust faults are concealed beneath the earth's surface and are defined as dip -slip faults which tend to fold and /or uplift the near surface sediments during moderate to large earthquakes. Structural models and seismicity values of the SJHT blind thrust system present a low probability of surface rupture, according to the California Geological Survey probabilistic seismic hazard model, which was updated in April 2003. Therefore, impacts as a result of fault rupture at the proposed project site are considered less than significant. The potential for strong seismic ground shaking which may affect the proposed project site is dependent on both the distance to causative faults and the intensity and duration of the seismic event. According to the Safety Element of the City's General Plan, the proposed project site is located on soils that are considered at moderate risk for ground shaking. Although the probability of primary surface rupture is considered low, ground shaking hazards caused by earthquakes along regionally active faults do exist and would be considered in the design and construction of the proposed project, consistent with Mitigation Measure G -1 (MM G -1). With implementation of Mitigation Measure G -1, impacts as a result of strong seismic ground shaking at the proposed project site would be considered less than significant. R:MPropMWaxport NS-MND 105.tl 19 City of Newport Beech C� V� 919 Boyside Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Liquefaction is a seismic phenomenon in which loose, saturated, fine-grained granular soils behave similarly to a fluid when subjected to high - intensity ground shaking. Based on generalized California seismic hazard maps, the potential for liquefaction exists in the vicinity of the proposed project. With implementation of Mitigation Measure G -1, impacts as a result of liquefaction at the proposed project site would be considered less than significant. iv) Landslides? No Impact. According to the Safety Element of the City's General Plan, the proposed project site is not situated in a location that is susceptible to slope stability issues such as landslides or expansive soils. Therefore, no impacts as a result of landslides are anticipated. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project site is currently developed and paved with non - porous materials and would continue to be after the construction of the proposed development. According to the City of Newport Beach's Safety Element, the potential risk of erosion on the site is not considered significant. However, during construction, there would be temporary exposure of soils. Potential erosion during construction of the proposed project would be managed through the preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) as discussed below, in the Hydrology and Water Quality section. C) 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 off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated. According to the Geotechnical Investigation prepared for the site by Petra Geotechnical, Inc. in 2004, potential impacts related to lateral spread are not considered significant in the northern portion of the project site; however, they are a concern in the southern portion of the site. The presence of a stable seawall at this location would eliminate this concern and is, therefore, recommended as Standard Condition G -1 (SC G -1). d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1004), creating substantial risks to life or property? No Impact The on -site soils at the proposed project site consist of clean, uniformly graded fill and marine sand materials that exhibit a very low expansion potential, as classified in accordance with UBC Table 18 -1 -B. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in significant related soil expansion. e) 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? No Impact. The proposed project would be connected to existing sewer systems managed by the City of Newport Beach and would not involve the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems. rt:wryeaewe,.onnroan4 MND-0 105.a 20 City of Newport Beach V 1 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Standard Conditions SC G -1 A geotechnical report shall be required with the submittal of construction drawings for plan check. The Building Department shall ensure that the project complies with the geotechnical recommendations included in the " Geotechnical Investigation" (Petra, 2004), as well as additional requirements, if any, imposed by the Newport Beach Building Department. SC G -2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall document to the City of Newport Beach Building Department that all facilities will be designed and constructed to comply with current seismic safety standards and the current City- adopted version of the Uniform Building Code. With implementation of the standard condition and mitigation program listed above, the proposed project would not result in adverse impacts to geology and soils. No further mitigation is required. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS —Would the proposed project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) 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? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. EBI Consulting prepared an Environmental Site Assessment Report for the project site in November 2003. When inspecting the site, EBI observed friable potential asbestos - containing materials (ACM) in the form of textured ceiling surfacing and.non - friable potential ACM in the form of vinyl floor tile and construction mastics at the proposed project site. The potential ACM was noted as being intact and in good condition except in the laundry room of existing Building G, in which some of the ceiling surfacing exhibited water damage. Ten representative samples of potential ACM in the form of insulation, ceiling surfacing material, and drywall were taken from the project site and were submitted to Environmental Hazards Services LLC for analysis of asbestos content by polarized light microscopy (PLM). Ceiling surfacing and drywall were found to contain asbestos, although it should be pointed out these materials were observed to be in good condition. According to the Environmental Site Assessment Report, project implementation should include the development and implementation of an asbestos operations and maintenance plan. With implementation of MM H -1, asbestos - related impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels. Based on the dates of construction for the current use on the proposed project site (1959 and 1975), a limited qualitative lead screening was performed on selected painted surfaces within the existing property. Painted surfaces were observed to be in good -to- fair condition. Areas of chipping or peeling paint were sampled for the presence of lead by applying a colorimetric lead- sensitive chemical Lead Check Reaction Swabs (LCRS) to the painted surface. Eight samples were found to contain lead. However, only one of the eight paint samples submitted for analysis contained lead in a concentration greater than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) threshold value of 0.5 percent lead -by- weight. According to the Environmental Site Assessment Report, project h R:Wr.pM N&.p.rNWnla -MND 105,tl 21 City of Newport Beach 11 J u 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration implementation should include the development and implementation of lead -based paint operations and maintenance plan. With implementation of MM H -2, lead -based paint - related impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels. The proposed project site would involve the demolition of an existing multi - family apartment complex. There is the possibility that an accident could occur during demolition and result in the release of hazardous materials into the environment. However, this potential would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of Mitigation Measures H -1, H -2, H -3, and H-4. C) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? e) 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, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) 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 Impact The proposed project involves the creation of 17 residential lots in a private, gated residential community in Newport Beach, Califomia. The project site is not located within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. Nor is the project site located within the boundaries of an adopted Airport Land Use Plan or the vicinity of a private airstrip, heliport, or helistop. The proposed project is situated in an area that is urbanized but not located near, or intermixed with, wildlands. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated and no mitigation is required. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Less Than Significant Impact. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report was completed for the immediate vicinity of the project by EnviroBusiness, Inc., on November 18, 2003. Two previous environmental site assessments were prepared for the site, one dated December 8, 2000, and performed by URS /Dames & Moore, Inc., and the other dated October 25, 1999, and performed by Dames & Moore, Inc. An EDR Radius Map was also prepared by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. on October 28, 2003. Eighteen potentially contaminated sites were identified by EDR as being located within a one -half mile vicinity of the proposed project. Four sites were identified by the CORTESE database identifying potential soil contamination. Ten sites were identified by the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Report database (LUST), and four sites were identified by the California Hazardous Materials Incident Report System (CHMIRS). a:w.geUM.wp� S-Mr+�IMs. 22 City of Newport Beach `/w ,y 919 Bayside Drive Negative Declaration As stated above, four properties were identified on the CORTESE list. Three of these sites lay down - gradient or beyond the study radius of one -half mile and are not believed to represent an environmental concern. The one up- gradient property lies approximately 1,250 feet northeast of the proposed project site, and is currently being remediated. In all cases, leaking underground storage tanks and contaminated soils were excavated and remediated to the satisfaction of the Orange County Health Agency or other responsible agency. None of the identified LUST listings is suspected of having an adverse environmental impact on the subject property because of their distance from the property, their downcross - gradient location with respect to the assumed shallow groundwater flow direction, the nature of the reported release (e.g., soil only), and /or because of their regulatory status (e.g., case closed, remediation underway). None of the CHMIRS listings identified is suspected to have an adverse environmental impact on the property based on their distance from the property, their down /cross - gradient location with respect to the assumed shallow groundwater flow direction, and /or their regulatory status as being closed or having remediation under way. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation is required. Mitigation Program MM H -1 Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit, the applicant shall submit an asbestos abatement and removal plan to the City Building Official for approval. The abatement and removal plan shall comply with notification and asbestos removal procedures outlined in SCAQMD Rule 1403 to reduce asbestos related health issues. MM H -2 Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit, the applicant shall submit a lead -based paint abatement and removal plan in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local regulatory requirements to the City Building Official for approval. MM H -3 Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit, the applicant shall submit a Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) in a manner meeting approval of the City Building Official, to demonstrate compliance with local and state water quality regulations for grading and construction activities. The ESCP shall identify how all construction materials, wastes, grading or demolition debris, and stockpiles of soil, aggregates, soil amendments, etc. shall be properly covered, stored, and secured to prevent transport into local drainages or coastal waters by wind, rain, tracking, tidal erosion, or dispersion. The ESCP shall also describe how the applicant will ensure that all Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be maintained during construction of any future public right -of -ways. A copy of the current ESCP shall be kept at the project site and be available for City of Newport Beach review on request. MM H-4 The applicant/operator shall store, manifest, transport, and dispose of all on- site generated waste that meets hazardous waste criteria in accordance with California Code of Regulations Title 22 and in a manner to the satisfaction of the City Building Official. The applicant/operator shall keep storage, transportation, and disposal records on site and open for inspection to any government agency upon request. R WrgWSV lawporN00TISMN0.a601p5.EOC 23 City of Newport Beach t11 VIII. 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study /Miiigated Negative Declaration With implementation of the mitigation program listed above, the proposed project would not result in adverse impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials. No further mitigation is required. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY —Would the proposed project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? C) 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? d) 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 in which would result in flooding on- or off -site? e) 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? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? k) Result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during or following construction? 1) Result in a potential for discharge of stormwater pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas? m) Result in the potential for discharge of stormwater to affect the beneficial uses of the receiving waters? n) Create the potential for significant changes in the flow velocity or volume of stormwater runoff to cause environmental harm? o) Create significant increases in erosion of the project site or surrounding areas? Less than Significant Impact. The following analysis is based upon the Hydrology Report and Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared by Adams - Streeter Civil Engineers Inc. in August 2004 and September 2004, respectively. The project site is currently developed with 64 apartments and 80 percent of the site is covered with impervious surfaces. In the existing condition, the site has split drainage pattems on its northern and southern portions. With the proposed project, the northern portion of the site would produce approximately 6.17 cubic feet per second (cfs) of storm water runoff during 100 -year storm events. The southern portion of the site would produce approximately 11.13 cfs of storm water runoff during 100 -year storm events. R:tGrcyecLWexpwNeeTISMND -0 a0105.EOC 24 City of Newport Beach \1 rm 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Currently, in the northern portion of the site, stormwater flows are trapped through the use of catch basins and inlets within the parking area which drain to a 36 -inch Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP) that runs under the sidewalk along Bayside Drive connecting to a catch basin in the northeast comer of the site. A system of tributaries within the northeast portion of the site drains via surface flow out onto Bayside Drive. They are ultimately captured by the catch basin noted above. Drainage flows from this catch basin flow via a 36 -inch storm drain directly into North Bay Front. The southern portion of the site is divided into five sections. In each, stormwater is collected via drains through a series of pipe networks which eventually drain directly into North Bay Front via outlets through the bulkhead. Short-Term Hydrology and Water Quality Impacts Construction activities such as grading, excavation, and trenching for site improvements would result in disturbance of soils on the project site. Runoff from the project site during construction could transport soils and sediments from these activities. In addition, spills or leaks from heavy equipment and machinery, staging areas, or building sites could also enter the catch basins and inlets. Typical pollutants could include petroleum products and heavy metals from equipment and products such as paints, solvents, and cleaning agents, which may contain hazardous constituents. Potentially significant short-term water quality impacts could result if polluted runoff enters downstream receiving waters. The Federal Clean Water Act establishes a framework for regulating potential water quality impacts from construction activities through the EPA's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) program. The Phase II Stormwater Program regulations provide that discharges of storm water to waters of the United States from construction projects that result in land disturbance of equal to or greater than one acre or less than five acres are prohibited unless the discharge is conducted in compliance with a NPDES permit. The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) (Region 8) oversees the implementation and enforcement of the general permits. Consistent with permit requirements, potential erosion, siltation, and other water quality impacts during construction of the proposed project would be managed through the preparation of a SWPPP. This plan would be a joint effort of the proposed project developer, agencies, and contractor. The plan would describe the measures or practices to control pollutants during both the construction and post - construction phases of the project. A SWPPP typically contains a list of target structural and non - structural BMPs, which would be used to control, prevent, remove, or reduce pollution. The project applicant has submitted to the City a WQMP, which includes BMPs for internal erosion control, good housekeeping, waste containment, management of disturbed areas, and site perimeter control. Specifically, the WQMP requires that: • Landscape areas are designed to bio- filter as much as possible prior to discharge to the storm drain system, • Irrigation systems are installed with state -of- practice controllers to avoid excess runoff, • Plants are grouped in accordance with their watering and fertilization needs and properly maintained, • All catch basins are stenciled with the phrase "No Dumping — Drains to Ocean' or equivalent, R'.v,v�..yomiooNSenraosuw5 aoc 25 City or Newport Beach \_0 rA 919 Bayside Onve Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Dedaration • Residents and tenants receive information on general good housekeeping practices that contribute to the protection of stormwater quality, • The homeowners association (HOA) conditions, covenants, and restrictions address surface water quality protection and assign responsibility for ongoing inspection, implementation, and maintenance of the BMPs to the HOA, • Landscape areas are properly maintained, • The BMP maintenance schedule, as presented in the WQMP, is adhered to, • Property management retain all maintenance records for a period of three years and make such records available for review by government agencies, • Community litter is controlled, • Catch basins and grated inlets are inspected and, if necessary, cleaned prior to the storm season (October 1) each year, and • Roadways and parkways are cleaned on a monthly basis to reduce the discharge of pollutants from paved surfaces into the storm drain system. Long -Term Hydrology and Water Quality Impacts With implementation of the proposed project, the site would be developed with private streets, 17 single - family residential units, common lots, sidewalks, and a storm drain system. These improvements would decrease the amount of pervious surface at the site by approximately 30 percent. The proposed storm drain system would consist of drop - inlets, catch basins, and RCPs to convey storm water run -off through the private street. Drainage on the proposed developable pads would be installed by the homeowners and connected to the provided storm drain stubs. Each lot would be rough graded and would drain via surface flow into a drop inlet within the street gutter. Any flows entering the private street would be captured by catch basins, which would also be connected directly to the storm drain system. The system would eventually connect to the existing 36 -inch RCP, which runs parallel with the east property line and located within its own 20 -foot easement. The entire site's runoff would be filtered by employing a "First Flow" filter system to treat site runoff prior to entering the public system. According to the City's Public Safety Element, the proposed project is not located within a potential flood hazard area. However, the project site is adjacent to the Newport Bay, a water body with the potential of tsunami and seiche. Tsunamis are seismically induced sea waves generated by offshore earthquake, submarine landslide, or volcanic activity. Seiches are another type of water - related seismically induced hazard involving flooding resulting from the overtopping of an inland water body's banks by seismically induced waves. According the Public Safety Element, the risk to the pubic safety of tsunamis and seiche has been evaluated and found to be remote within the City. b) 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)? g) 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? q: VrgaUSWe «�prfUDe]115.MND.W010..00[ 26 City of NewpoA 9eacT `vim' {�`^ -� 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? No Impact The proposed project would receive water supply from the City of Newport Beach; therefore, it would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table. The proposed project site is not located within a 100 -year flood hazard area. Consequently, it would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flood. Standard Conditions SC W -1 Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall submit evidence to the City Building Official that the applicant has obtained coverage under the NPDES statewide General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. SC W -2 Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall obtain a NPDES permit. The applicant shall incorporate storm water pollutant control into erosion control plans using BMPs to the maximum extent possible. Evidence that proper clearances have been obtained through the State Water Resources Control Board shall be given to the Building Department prior to issuance of grading permits. SC W -3 Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall submit a SWPPP to the City for review and approval. The SWPPP shall be maintained on -site throughout the construction phase and shall be made available to the public for review, upon request. SC W-4 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit a WQMP specifically identifying the BMPs that will be used on site to control predictable pollutant runoff. The plan shall identify the types of structural and non - structural measures to be used. With implementation of the standard conditions listed above, the proposed project would not result in adverse impacts to hydrology and water quality. No mitigation is required. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING —Would the proposed project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) 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? Less Than Significant Impact. The site of the proposed project is designated for Multi - Family Residential land use, and is currently improved with a private 64 -unit apartment R:W jec We.pMVO NSWN6e6010 d. 27 Ciry of Newport Beach 1 919 Sayside Drive Initial Studv/Mitioated Negative Declaration complex. The existing Newport Marina apartment complex includes 12 individual apartment buildings, 5 parking garage buildings, an auxiliary parking lot, and 34 docks along north - channel Newport Bay. The project applicant proposes to demolish the existing apartment complex and build, in its place, 17 single - family residences. The following provides a discussion of the proposed project's consistency with applicable plans, policies, and regulations. Consistency with the City of Newport Beach Land Use Element. The proposed project site lies within the Promontory Bay Area, as defined in the City's Land Use Element. The Promontory Bay Area includes Harbor Island, Linda Isle, and all the area bounded by Newport Bay, Marine Avenue /Jamboree Road, and East Coast Highway. Existing land uses within the Promontory Bay Area are diverse and include Single - Family Detached Residential, Multi - Family Residential, Neighborhood Commercial, Recreational and Marina, and Recreational and Environmental Open Space land uses. The proposed project would be consistent with existing and allowed land uses within the Promontory Bay Area. The Land Use Element designates the proposed project site as Multi- Family Residential to reflect the existing apartment complex. As previously stated, the proposed project would establish 17 residential lots. Single- family residences are a permitted use within sites designated for mufti- family residences (page 23 of the Land Use Element). Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the Multi - Family Residential land use designation. It would also be consistent with applicable policies of the Land Use Element. Consistency with the City of Newport Beach Zoning Code. Section 20.10 of the City's Zoning Code establishes residential districts and sets forth regulations applicable to them. Multi - Family Residential Districts are required to provide a minimum of 1,200 square feet of living space per unit. The Zoning Code also includes specifications related to setbacks, lot size and width, yard size, building heights, distances between detached buildings, floor area ratios, maximum coverage, open space, and off - street parking and loading. As previously discussed, TTM 15323 (May 10, 2005) shows that the proposed project would provide 19 on- street parking positions, as well as 48 covered parking positions. Minimum lots of 5,000 square feet or larger would be provided throughout the project site. Minimum lot widths would be 50 feet or greater. The approval of the proposed PRD overlay and accompany Use Permit would allow for the establishment of setbacks different from the MFR regulations. Front yard setbacks from interior streets would range between five and 18 feet, setbacks from the bay would range between 15 and 25 feet, and side yard setbacks would be a minimum of five feet. The approval of the PRD overlay and accompanying use permit would allow the site to be developed with a water orientation while maintaining adequate clearance along the private streets. Consistency with the City of Newport Beach Harbor and Bay Element. Policy HB -1.1.2 of the Harbor and Bay Element requires that potential impacts on water - dependent and water - related land uses and activities be considered when reviewing proposal for land use changes. Land use changes associated with the proposed project would be limited to the project site. No adjacent properties would be impacted by the proposed project. Since no water - related or water - dependent uses occupy the site, no impact to these uses would occur. Consistency with the City of Newport Beach Housing Element. The project will eliminate 64 apartments and replace them with 17 single - family residences for an overall reduction RWIcitl.WeWPW AIS_MND i05 Cac 28 City o / Newport Beach 1 � 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration of 47 units. The City has approximately 14,600 rental units out of approximately 37,500 total housing units (2000 Census), and the reduction and change in housing type is not considered significant. Goal 2 of the Housing Element states that the City will 'provide a balanced residential community, comprised of a variety of housing types, designs, and opportunities for all social and economic segments, including very low -, low -, moderate - and upper- income individuals and households." The proposed project is consistent with this goal and is not inconsistent with any other goals or policies in the Housing Element. Consistency with the City of Newport Beach Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan According to the City's Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan ( LCPLUP), the proposed project is located in the Coastal Zone. Therefore, a coastal development permit (CDP) is required from the California Coastal Commission. The LCPLUP references the fact that the project site is designated for Multi - Family Residential Use and is allowed one unit for each 2,178 square feet of buildable lot area. As previously discussed, the proposed project is consistent with this designation. Section 30210 -30212 of the California Coastal Act (CCA) requires that public access and recreational opportunities be provided for all the people of the state, that development not interfere with the public's right of access, and that new development provide public access to the shoreline. As previously discussed, the proposed project would provide public access to Promontory Bay and North Bay Front via public walkways, and would improve elements within those walkways to meet current ADA requirements. The proposed project is not a recreation or visitor- serving facility. It would not require diking, dredging, filling or shoreline structures, and it does not propose construction or expansion of public works facilities. The LCPLUP does not identify the proposed project site as an environmentally sensitive habitat area or hazard area. Water and marine resources adjacent to the proposed project site would be protected through implementation of the Standard Conditions listed in the Hydrology and Water Quality section, above. The proposed project would preserve and provide for continued operation of the existing dock areas along North Bay Front. Sections 30244, 30250(a), 30252, and 30253(3) and (4) of the CCA provide criteria for the location of new development. These criteria specify that new development should generally be concentrated in areas of existing development, preserve public access, provide adequate support facilities including provisions for recreational facilities, and preserve archaeological and paleontological resources. The proposed project, as conditioned by the standard conditions and mitigation measures contained within this document, would fully comply with these criteria. The LCPLUP does not list the proposed project site as a primary view area. Consequently, it is not subject to Sections 30251 and 30253(5) of the CCA. Since the proposed project is not a new visitor - serving facility or coastal - dependant use and it does not require an oceanfront encroachment, the LCPLUP's policies specific to new development are not applicable to the proposed project. Consistency with the City of Newport Beach Subdivision Code. Section 19.08.010 of the City's Subdivision Code requires approval of a tentative tract map and final tract map for new subdivisions. Consistent with this requirement, the project applicant has submitted R; Wro�eclsWmvpon000TISMND -060105.tloc 29 City of Newport Beach \\X 1 919 Sayside Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration TTM 15323 to the City. It serves as the basis for the environmental analysis contained herein. The proposed project is consistent with all applicable land use plans, policies, and regulations. C) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? No Impact. The project site is not included within a habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. The proposed project would not result in adverse impacts related to land use or planning. No mitigation is required. X. MINERAL RESOURCES —Would the proposed project: a) 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? b) 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 Impact. According to the Conservation of Natural Resources Element of the City's General Plan, oil deposits constitute the only significant extractable mineral in Newport Beach. Section 20.52.010 of the Newport Municipal Code prohibits extraction of oil in all areas of the City, except the section in West Newport where slant drilling is permitted under a 1943 lease. The proposed project site has been developed as a Multi - Family Residential community for 50 years and the proposed project would continue residential use on the site. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in adverse impacts to any significant mineral resource. No mitigation is required. XI. NOISE —Would the proposed project result in: a) 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? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? C) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The existing noise environment in the vicinity of the proposed project is dominated by automobile traffic and py R Nrape sWmvpwU0 [S -MND-0 IQ5000 30 City of Newport Beach - (CV p�<.1In`�' I` 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration recreational marine uses. The project site is located directly adjacent to Bayside Drive and less than one - quarter mile north of Jamboree Road /Marina Avenue. Both are heavily traveled roadways. To the south, the project site is bounded by Newport Channel, a busy area for recreational marine activities. The City of Newport Beach's Noise Ordinance establishes 55 decibels (dBA) as the daytime exterior noise standard and 55 dBA as the nighttime exterior noise standard for Residential areas within the City. The daytime and nighttime interior noise standards are 45 dBA and 40 dBA, respectively. During demolition of the Newport Marina Apartments and grading and construction of the proposed Multi - Family Residential neighborhood, the project site and immediate vicinity would experience short-term demolition- and construction- related noise impacts. Noise levels would fluctuate depending on construction phase, equipment type, maintenance, and duration of use, distance between noise source and listener, and presence or absence of barriers to attenuate noise levels. During construction, trucks are expected to enter and leave the site on a regular basis, but only during working hours. The number of truck trips traveling along the haul route will vary daily, depending on the nature of the construction activity. The daily transportation of construction materials is expected to cause increases in noise levels along Bayside Drive. However, this traffic would not be a substantial percentage of daily volumes in the area and is not expected to significantly increase noise levels. Section 10.28.040 of the City's Municipal Code sets forth noise regulations for construction activity. The applicant/operator would be required to comply with these regulations as reflected in SC N -1 below, during demolition, grading, and construction. The proposed project would reduce the number of residents living on -site and, therefore, generate fewer vehicle trips and less noise overall than the existing land use. Therefore, there would be no noise increase associated with implementation of the proposed project. Policy 4.1.2 of the City of Newport Beach's Noise Element requires the use of walls, berms, or other noise mitigation measures in the design of new residential or other noise sensitive land uses that are adjacent to major roads. The existing perimeter wall along Bayside Drive, which provides noise attenuation to current residents, would be replaced by the proposed project. The proposed project would install a new, six - foot -high perimeter wall to provide noise attenuation to future residents. Policy 4.2.2 of the Noise Element requires acoustical design in new construction. The mitigation program described below would ensure that the proposed project meets these requirements. Standard Condition SC N -1 Consistent with City of Newport Beach Noise Ordinance, noise - generating project construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 AM to 6:30 PM Monday through Friday and 8:00 AM and 6:00 PM on Saturdays. No demolition or Construction activities shall be permitted on Sundays or legal holidays. The City Building Official shall be responsible for ensuring that the applicant/operator complies with these requirements. R 31 City of Newport Beach C l 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Mitigation Program MM N -1 Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, a detailed acoustical analysis shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant and submitted to the City. This acoustical analysis shall describe and quantify the noise sources impacting the area and the measures required to meet the 65 CNEL exterior residential noise standard. The final grading plans shall incorporate the noise barriers required by the analysis and the property owner /developer shall install these barriers. MM N -2 Prior to issuance of any building permit, a detailed acoustical study using architectural plans shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant and submitted to the City Building Official. This report shall describe and quantify the noise sources impacting the proposed Multi - Family Residential units, the amount of outdoor -to- indoor noise reduction provided in the architectural plans, and any upgrades required to meet the City's interior noise standards (45 CNEL for residences). The measures described in the report shall be incorporated into the architectural plans for the buildings and implemented with building construction. With implementation of standard condition and mitigation measures listed above, the proposed project would result in less than significant noise impacts. No further mitigation is required. XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING —Would the proposed project: a) 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)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? C) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. The project site is fully developed with an existing 50- year -old, 64 -unit Multi - Family Residential apartment complex (known as the Newport Marina Apartments), auxiliary parking lot, and parking garages. The proposed project would replace the existing Multi - Family Residential complex with 17 single- family residential lots. The current population of the Newport Marina apartments consists of approximately 95 individuals. Using City planning assumptions of 2.25 persons per residential unit, the projected population for the proposed project would be approximately 38 individuals. This represents a total population reduction of approximately 68 as compared to existing on -site population. As such, the proposed project would not induce substantial population growth. As stated above, approximately 95 tenants would be displaced as a result of project development. While this number is not considered substantial, the proposed project would comply with Public Law 91 -646, the "Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real H'1Prgecb \Naxpot1000TISJAND W01 QS.ticc 32 City of Newport Beach TILI 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970" (Uniform Act), by providing residents sufficient notice to vacate the premises and /or be relocated. City Housing Element Policy 1.1.5 requires replacement of housing units demolished within the Coastal Zone when housing is (or has been) occupied by low,- and moderate - income income households. Section 20.86 of the City's Zoning Code establishes a permit requirement for demolition of low- and moderate - income dwelling units within the Coastal Zone. Neither of these policies applies to the proposed project as a Resident Income Survey conducted in April 2005 by Western National Property Management, the current property manager, revealed that no low- or moderate - income households are present. The proposed project would not result in any impacts related to Population and Housing. No mitigation is required. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire Protection? Police Protection? Schools? Parks? Other Public Facilities? No Impact. The proposed project would replace an existing 64 -unit Multi - Family Residential complex with a 17 -unit Single - Family Residential community. The current population of the Newport Marina Apartments is approximately 95 tenants. Using City planning assumptions of 2.25 persons per Multi - Family Residential unit, the projected population for the proposed project would be approximately 38 individuals. This would represent a population reduction of approximately 68 percent compared to existing conditions. Public services in the vicinity of the project site are considered to be adequate, and a population reduction would only serve to reduce future demand. As such, the proposed project would not result in impacts to fire, police, schools, parks, or other public facilities. Standard Condition SC P -1 Prior to issuance of any grading or building permit, the applicant shall submit all project - specific plans to the Planning Department, Public Works Department, and Fire Department for review. R '.Mgo[1s \NexygNODNSMND-0e01p5,Ex 33 City or Newport Beach 1 4 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration XIV. RECREATION a) Would the proposed project 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? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact. The proposed project is located in Service Area 5 (Lido Isle -Lower Say), as designated in the City's Recreation and Open Space Element. This service area contains only one public recreational facility, Myrtle Park (Mini Park) which is located across the North Front Bay to the west of the proposed project site. This facility is approximately 0.1 acre and includes a turf area, benches, and a pay phone. Across North Bay Front to the south of the proposed project site is Balboa Island, which is located in Service Area 6 (Balboa Island). Directly across the channel is one of the public Balboa Island Beaches, which provide access for swimming, beach play, and boating. The City of Newport Beach City Park Dedication Ordinance requires new residential development to be responsible for the "...dedication of land, or payment of fees, or both..." It further specifies that development "...shall not exceed a proportionate amount necessary to provide three acres of parkland per one thousand persons residing in a subdivision... unless the amount of existing neighborhood and community park area... exceeds three acres per one thousand persons" (Municipal Code Section 19.50.030). The City's park dedication requirement is five acres per one thousand persons. The proposed project would result in a total population reduction of approximately 68 persons as compared to existing on -site population. This decrease in residents can reasonably be expected to lower the use of existing nearby public parks. In addition, the proposed project proposes to include a private recreation area, with a possible pool, on site. The proposed project would not increase expansion of City parks. No significant anticipated. No mitigation is required. Standard Condition the use of or require the construction or project- related impacts to recreation are SC R -1 Prior to recordation of the final tract map, the applicant will be required to pay an in -lieu fee in accordance with the Park Dedication and Fee Ordinance. XV. TRANSPORTATION /CIRCULATION —Would the proposed project: a) 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)? R.Wroje MNe«pariKK7UI ND-0e1 E 34 City Of Newport Beach b 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? C) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? No Impact. The proposed redevelopment of the project site from 64 apartments to 17 single - family residential units would reduce the amount of traffic impacting the local circulation on a daily basis. According to the trip generation rates used in the City of Newport Beach's Circulation Element, the existing Newport Marina apartment complex would be expected to generate approximately 416 daily vehicle trips and the project would be expected to generate approximately 187 daily vehicle trips — a reduction of approximately 55 percent. Even during demolition, grading, and construction activities, fewer daily trips to and from the project site are expected than occur under existing conditions. Consequently, the proposed project would not increase traffic, or exceed an established level of service standard. Nevertheless, a construction phasing plan and construction delivery plan shall be required, pursuant to the Standard Conditions listed below. The proposed project would be designed consistent with City standards relating to safety, emergency access, parking capacity, and alternative transportation. Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce a safety risk or hazard, result in inadequate emergency access, inadequate parking capacity, or conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. The proposed project would not result in any impacts to transportation or traffic. No mitigation is required. Standard Conditions SC T -1 Disruption caused, by construction work along roadways and by movement of construction vehicles shall be minimized by proper us of traffic control and flagmen. SC T -2 Traffic control and transportation of equipment and materials shall be conducted in accordance with state and local requirements. SC T -3 Prior to the issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall prepare a construction phasing plan and construction delivery plan that includes routing of large vehicles for review by the City Public Works Department. Large av' �ganswc*wmioo'n�s- mnoaeo�as.aoc 35 City of Newport Beach 919 Sayside Drive Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration vehicles shall not be permitted to travel narrow streets and alleys, as determined by the Public Works Department. With implementation of the standard conditions listed above, the proposed project would result in less than significant traffic impacts. No mitigation is required. XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS —Would the proposed project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? C) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects and /or would the project include a new or retrofitted storm water treatment control Best Management Practice (BMP), (e.g., water quality treatment basin, constructed treatment wetlands), the operation of which could result in significant environmental effects (e.g., increased vectors and odors)? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which services or may serve the project that has adequate capacity to serve the projects projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? No Impact. The current utility providers for the project are Southern California Gas Company (gas): Southern California Edison (electric); City of Newport Beach (water and sewer); Pacific Bell Telephone (telephone); and Adelphia (cable television and Internet). A variety of cellular telephone providers (i.e., Verizon, Cingular, Sprint, Nextel, and AT &T) also serve the project site. The proposed project would replace an existing 64 -unit multi - family residential complex with a 17 -unit single - family residential community. The current population of the Newport Marina Apartments is approximately 95 individuals. Using City planning assumptions of 2.25 persons per Multi - Family Residential unit, the projected population for the proposed project would be approximately 38 individuals. This would represent a population reduction of approximately 68 percent compared to existing conditions. The resulting population reduction would effectively reduce future demand on all utilities and service systems at the project site. Development of the proposed project would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Santa Ana RWQCB. Sufficient water supplies are available to service the existing Newport Marina Apartments, and no new or expanded entitlements would be needed for the proposed project, which is a lower intensity use. The wastewater treatment provider, the City of Newport Beach, has adequate capacity to R 36 City o /Newport Beach 979 Bayside Drive Initial Study /Miligated Negative Declaration treat the current project site and there would not be an increased demand for wastewater treatment as a result of the proposed project. As previously stated, the proposed project would remove and replace existing water and sewer lines on -site and on the south side of Bayside Road, adjacent to the site boundary. In addition, the proposed project would implement a privately- maintained storm drain system. These improvements are necessary to more efficiently serve the proposed project and to improve the quality of runoff that drains from the site into the public system. They are not capacity enhancing and would not therefore cause significant environmental effects. All residential solid waste in the City of Newport Beach is collected by various solid waste contractors and sent to a transfer station in Stanton, California, and then distributed among three Orange County Landfills: Brea Olinda, Prima Deshecha, or the Frank R. Bowerman Landfill. These landfills have sufficient capacity to serve the proposed project's decreased demand on solid waste disposal needs from the current condition. SC U -1 Prior to issuance of any grading or building permit, the applicant shall submit all project- specific plans to the City Utilities and Public Works Departments for review. The proposed project would not result in significant impacts to utilities and service systems. No mitigation is required. XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major period of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) C) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? No Impact. The proposed project would result in a lower level of land use intensity and lower occupancy rates than the existing on -site land use. Therefore, the proposed project's long -term environmental impacts would not be considered significant. As identified above, the proposed project could result in short-term environmental impacts during the demolition and construction phases. However, implementation of standard conditions and the proposed mitigation program would reduce those impacts to a level considered less than significant. No further mitigation is required. F]PF0j WSWewpM"711S- MN0-000105.tl 37 City of Newport Beach -l1 919 Bayside Drive Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration References Adams - Streeter Civil Engineers Inc. Hydrology Report for Tentative Tract Map 15323, Newport Beach, CA. August 2004. Public Access Plan for Tentative Tract No 15323 in the City of Newport Beach, State of California. September 21, 2004. Record Encumbrance Map in the County of Orange, State of California, Parcel 1 of City of Newport Beach Lot Line Adjustment No. 94-3. April 2004. Tentative Tract Map 15323 in the City of Newport Beach, State of California, Subdivided for Lease Purposes. May 10, 2005. Utility Exhibit for T T. M. 15323 - 919 Bayside Drive. Water Quality Management Plan for Tentative Tract Map No. 15323, Site Development Permit PA 2004 -072. September 2004. EBI Consulting. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report. Newport Marina Apartments, 919 Bayside Drive, Newport Beach, California, 92660. November 18, 2003. Seismic Report, Newport Marina Apartments, 919 Bayside Drive, Newport Beach, California. November 6, 2003. Newport Beach, City of. General Services Department. Personal conversation with Mr. Jeremy Hammond, Management Assistant, on October 27, 2004. City of Newport Beach General Plan Circulation Element. Adopted by the Newport Beach City Council. Resolution No. 88 -101. October 24, 1988. City of Newport Beach General Plan Conservation of Natural Resources Element. Adopted by the Newport Beach City Council. Resolution No. 8174. January 14, 1974. City of Newport Beach General Plan Harbor and Bay Element. Adopted by the Newport Beach City Council. Amended by General Plan Amendment No. 2002- 002(C). Resolution No. 2001 -45. June 12, 2001. City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Element. Adopted by the Newport Beach City Council. Amended by General Plan Amendment No. GP2003 -04. Resolution No. 2003 -45. August 13, 2003. City of Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element. Adopted by the Newport Beach City Council. Resolution No. 88 -100. October 24, 1988. Amended by General Plan Amendment 2004 -001. August 10, 2004. City of Newport Beach General Plan Noise Element. Adopted by the Newport Beach City Council. Resolution No. 8366. Amended by General Plan Amendment No. GPA 87 -1(B). Resolution No. 94 -96. October 10, 1994. City of Newport Beach General Plan Public Safety Element. Adopted by the Newport Beach City Council. Insert Resolution No. 908. March 10, 1975. R. 38 City or Newport Beech 1q� L Aa- 919 Bayskle Drive Initial Study /Miiigaled Negative Declaration City of Newport Beach Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan, including Amendments 1- 40. Certified by the California Coastal Commission. January 9, 1990. City of Newport Beach Title 19. Subdivision Code. Adopted by the Newport Beach City Council. Ordinance No. 2001 -18. September 25, 2001. City of Newport Beach Municipal Code. City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance. Adopted by the Newport Beach City Council. Ordinance No. 99 -17. 1999. City of Newport Beach Zoning Code. Adopted by the Newport Beach City Council. Ordinance No. 97 -09. March 24, 1997 as amended. Petra Geotechnical, Inc. Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed 19 Custom Single - Family Lots (North Bay), 919 Bayside Drive, Tentative Tract 15323, City of Newport Beach, Orange County, California. December 6, 2004. Southern California Association of Governments. www.scag.ca.gov. Last accessed on October 26, 2004. Western National Property Management. Letter to Newport Marina Tenants. April 19, 2005. a.wrcj e04ewpaVJDo>\isrnNOasolos.e 39 City ofNewpwt Beach �q'J Blank RESPONSES TO COMMENTS MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 919 BAYSIDE DRIVE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT State Clearinghouse Number 2005061019 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 Responses Prepared by: BonTerra Consulting City of Newport Beach Planning Department July 2005 ,C�,S Blank pumm SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 1.1 INTRODUCTION 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project Mitigated Negative Declaration The purpose of this document is to present responses to public comments received on the Negative Declaration for the 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project (State Clearinghouse Number 2005061019). The project is located the city of Newport Beach. The Negative Declaration was circulated for a 30 -day review and comment period beginning June 3, 2005 and ending July 5, 2005. Responses to comments received during that comment period have been prepared and are included in this document. Public Resources Code Section 21092.5 requires the lead agency to provide a copy of the written response to each public agency that commented on the EIR. The response must be provided to the agency a minimum of 10 days prior to the lead agencies' certification of the final EIR. Consistent with this requirement, the City of Newport Beach will send copies of the Responses to Comments to all parties that commented on the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) at least 10 days prior to the date the Planning Commission holds its public hearing on the project. This Response to Comments document contains three sections and includes two appendices. Section 1.0 is the Introduction and Summary. Section 2.0 contains the comment letters received for the MND with each comment bracketed and numbered. Section 3.0 presents responses to the comments received during the public review period for the 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project MND. Appendix A presents the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for Tentative Tract Map No. 15323 (the proposed project). Appendix B provides the Hydrology Report for Tentative Tract No. 15323. 1 -1 Response to Comments SECTION 2.0 COMMENTS RECEIVED ON 919 BAYSIDE DRIVE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project Mitigated Negative Declaration The following section contains the comment letters received for the MND with each comment bracketed and numbered. These numbers correspond to the responses found in Section 3. 14 2 -1 Response to comments 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project Mitigated Negative Declaration Response to Caltrans District 12 Comments Dated June 24, 2005 Comment Caltrans -1: Caltrans District 12 status is a reviewing agency on this project and has no comments at this time. However, in the event of any activity in Caltrans' right -of -way, an encroachment permit will be required. Applicants are required to plan for sufficient permit processing time, which may include engineering studies and environmental documentation. Please continue to keep t any future developments, the transportation facilities. is informed of this project and which could potentially impact Response Caltrans -1: The proposed project would not involve any activity in Caltrans' right -of -way. Should there be any changes in the project that would require any actions by Caltrans, the City of Newport Beach will coordinate with Caltrans, as necessary. '11� 2 -2 Response to Comments 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project Mitigated Negative Declaration Response to California Coastal Commission Comments Dated July 5, 2005 Comment Coastal -1: Coastal Access and Recreation The Mitigated Negative Declaration states that public access to North Bay Front would be preserved by the proposed project via a 6 -foot walkway, which would be dedicated to the City of Newport Beach. In addition, the proposed project would reconstruct concrete steps and walkways within Lot B, which provide ingress /egress between Bayside Drive and Newport Bay. Where would the public park in order to get to these access areas if the new development is private and gated? Response Coastal -1: Current public access to Promontory Bay and North Bay Front is provided via public walkways. The current land use on the proposed project site, the Newport Marina Apartments, does not provide parking for the public. Rather, public parking is provided within public rights of way near the site. As stated in the Land Use and Planning section of the Initial Study /MND, the proposed project would preserve walkway access to Promontory Bay and North Bay Front and improve elements within the existing walkways to meet current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. It is assumed that public parking will continue to be provided within public rights of way near the project site. Comment Coastal -2: Coastal Views The project is located in the Promontory Bay area of the City of Newport Beach. The City's current Land Use Plan (LUP) designates Promontory Bay at Harbor Island Drive, Promontory Bay at Bayside Drive, and Promontory Point East as coastal view areas. The project site is located near these coastal view areas. Please explain how the project site does not affect these coastal view areas defined in the current LUP. Response Coastal -2: As stated in the Aesthetics portion of the Initial StudyIMND, the proposed project would not result in any coastal views being obstructed, as no views through the project site are presently afforded due to the existing apartment complex. Additionally, the City's Local Coastal Program does not list the proposed project site as a primary view area. Views of the Newport Channel are 2 -3 Response to Comments 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project Mitigated Negative Declaration 2-4 Response to Comments A14— currently obstructed by the existing on -site land use, the Newport Marina Apartment complex, as well as by mature vegetation and a concrete wall along Bayside Drive. It should be noted that this area of the coastal zone is fully built out and has an urbanized character. Views from the proposed project site are dominated by existing development (homes, shops and roadways) on Balboa Island, which lies directly across the bay from the proposed project site. Comment Coastal -3: Water Quality The Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) discussed water quality in terms of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements and Regional Board requirements. In addition to CEQA, Regional Board and other regulatory requirements, the proposed project will undergo review based upon water quality provisions of the Coastal Act. Sections 30230 and 30231 of the California Coastal Act provide the broad basis for protection coastal waters, habitats, and biodiversity from degradation of water quality associated with new development and redevelopment. Sound water quality management utilizes a three - pronged approach: site design, source control, and treatment Best Management Practices. A successful program would first incorporate site design measure to minimize impact to the hydrolic landscape and source control Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce dry weather flows and the generation and introduction of pollutants into runoff. A few examples of site design practices include minimizing impervious surfaces, using porous pavements or alternative pavers in parking areas, preserving native vegetation and root systems, minimizing erosion and sedimentation, and reducing roadway or parking lot length. Some examples of source control BMPs include planting native, drought - tolerant, non - invasive vegetation; minimizing pesticide and fertilizer use; using efficient irrigation systems; and implementing parking lot and street sweeping programs, among other measures. After site design and source control BMPs have been designed, treatment control BMPs (typically in a treatment train approach for an extensive development like the one proposed) should be designed for the development. Treatment control BMPs should be designed to treat the specific pollutants generated on each portion of the site. 2-4 Response to Comments A14— 919 Sayside Drive Residential Project Mitigated Negative Declaration ail 2 -5 Response to Comments In addition, the proposed measures must be sized and designed to mitigate water quality impacts generated by the development. As a goal, the Commission has required post- construction structural BMPs (or suites of BMPs) should be designed to treat, infiltrate or filter the amount of stormwater runoff produced by all storms up to and including the 85th percentile, 1 -hour storm event, with an appropriate safety factor (i.e., 2 or greater), for flow - based BMPs. Based on Section 30230 and 30231 of the Coastal Act, the Coastal Commission must ensure that a development minimizes to the maximum extent feasible polluted runoff and its impact to coastal waters. Even where there is existing development on a site, a redevelopment project needs to demonstrate that is minimizing to the maximum extent feasible the impact to coastal water quality. Therefore, the development should incorporate, and the Mitigated Negative Declaration should discuss, these site design, source control, and treatment control (Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used in association with the entire site. Parking lots, landscaped areas, loading and unloading docks, dry weather flows, and trash and debris are common constituents in commercial and residential areas, and BMPs should be designed to address these constituents. Finally, Commission staff suggest use of catch basin inserts throughout the development, use of filtration systems near areas with especially high risk of pollutant eneration arking lots, etc. ) and the use of biofiltration. Response Coastal -3: As detailed in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for Tentative Tract Map No. 15323 and the Hydrology Report for Tentative Tract Map No. 15323, the project applicant has considered and incorporated appropriate site design, source control and BMPs to protect coastal waters, habitats and biodiversity from degradation. In fact, when compared to the present on- site land use, the proposed project would result in less runoff as well as cleaner runoff, thereby resulting in net beneficial effects. Complete copies of the WQMP and Hydrology Report are included as Attachments A and B, respectively, to this Res onse to Comments document. Comment Coastal -4: City of Newport Beach Draft Revised Land Use Plan L( UP) ail 2 -5 Response to Comments 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project Mitigated Negative Declaration ab3 2 -6 Response to Comments Currently, Commission staff is reviewing the City of Newport Beach Draft Revised Land Use Plan (LUP). The proposed project consists of demolition of an existing apartment complex and construction of a new private gated community for 17 single - family residences. Upon review of the Draft Revised LUP, it appears that the proposed project may be inconsistent with policies found within the Draft Revised LUP relating to new private gated communities. Therefore, please explain how the proposed project would be compatible with these LUP policies. Response Coastal -4: The policies to which the writer is referring are specific to a few private residential communities within the City where public access to and along the shoreline is impeded. As stated in the LCPLUP, these communities are Balboa Coves, Bay Island, Bayshores, Bayside Place, Collins Island, De Anza Bayside Village, Linda Isle, and Harbor Island. As stated in the Land Use and Planning section of the Initial Study /MND, the proposed project would preserve walkway access to Promontory Bay and North Bay Front and improve elements within the existing walkways to meet current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. As such, the proposed project would not be inconsistent with Policy 3.1.5 -1 of the LCPLUP which seeks to `Prohibit new development that incorporate gates, guardhouses, barriers or other structures designed to regulate or restrict access where they would inhibit public access to and along the shoreline and to beaches, coastal parks, trails, or coastal bluffs when there is substantial evidence that prescriptive rights exist." Comment' Coastal -5: Proposed Project What was the reason for the proposed development? Why could the existing development on -site (apartment complex) not remain? Why were single - family residences pro osed instead of apartments? Response Coastal -5: The landowner of 919 Bayside Drive proposed the change. The City is processing the Tentative Tract Map, and associated documents, at the landowner's request. ab3 2 -6 Response to Comments APPENDIX A WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT REPORT FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15323 (On file with the Planning Department) .�ty Response to Comments APPENDIX B HYDROLOGY REPORT FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15323 (On file with the Planning Department) P Response to Comments 'I Blank 919 BAYSIDE DRIVE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background and Purpose In accordance with the requirements of the CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE §21081.6, and as part of its certification of the adequacy of the Negative Declaration for the 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project (SCH No. 2005061019), the City Council ( "Council ") of the City of Newport Beach (the "City "), adopts the following "Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan" ( "MMRP" or "Plan ") for the mitigation measures which are summarized in this Plan. The mitigation measures contained in this MMRP reflect the measures that have been incorporated through preparation of the Negative Declaration and response to comments during the public review process. The Council adopts this MMRP in its capacity as the lead agency for certification of the Negative Declaration for the 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project in accordance with the provisions of the CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ( "CEQA ") (CAL.PUB.RES.CODE § §21000, et seq.) and its implementing guidelines (14 CAL.CODE REDS. § §15000, et seq.) (the "CEQA GUIDELINES "). The principal purpose of the MMRP is to ensure that the Council- approved mitigation measures for the adopted Project are implemented and monitored to ensure compliance during subsequent planning stages and, ultimately, during project implementation. In general, UGS Development, Inc. (the "Applicant ") is responsible for overseeing implementation and completion of the adopted mitigation measures. This includes the review of all monitoring reports, enforcement actions, and document disposition, unless otherwise noted in the attached MMRP table. However, the Council retains overall responsibility for verifying implementation of all adopted mitigation measures. 2.0 MITIGATION MONITORING PROCEDURES The City is the designated lead agency for the MMRP and, as such, is responsible for review of all monitoring reports, enforcement actions, and document disposition, unless otherwise noted in the Mitigation Monitoring Table below. 3.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN The MMRP is provided in tabular format to facilitate effective tracking and documentation of the status of mitigation measures. The attached MMRP table provides the following monitoring information: Standard Condition — The City's "Standard Conditions of Approval" apply to all City projects, including the Proposed Project, and are meant to assist the City in mitigating significant adverse impacts of development projects which require City approval of discretionary permits, such as area plans, use permits, site development permits, tentative tract maps and tentative parcel maps. The Standard Conditions applicable to the Proposed Project are listed in this MMRP. 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) Page 1 3611 • Mitigation Measure -- A list or inventory of all the mitigation measures for the Project from the Mitigated Negative Declaration. • Timing of Verification -- The appropriate time or phase for the implementation of each mitigation measure; and • Approving or Verifying Authority -- The City Department or Departments responsible for overseeing the implementation and completion of each mitigation measure. 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) P�, Page 2 i . - The following are acronyms used in the Mitigation Monitoring Matrix: BMPs Best Management Practices CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level ESCP Erosion and Sediment Control Plan MM Mitigation Measure NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System SC Standard Condition SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program WQMP Water Quality Management Plan 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) Page 3 1�6Q 1' 919 Bayside Drive Residential MITIGATION MONITORING TABLE 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) Page 4 9lb Trigger (T) and Approving or Mitigation Measure Implementation (1) Verifying Authority Cultural Resources SC C -1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant (T) Prior to Planning shall provide written evidence to the Planning Issuance of a Director Director that a qualified archaeologist has been Grading Permit retained to observe grading activities and conduct salvage excavation of archaeological resources as (1) Ongoing During necessary. The archaeologist shall be present at the Construction pre - grading conference, shall establish procedures for archaeological resource surveillance, and shall establish, in cooperation with the applicant, procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, identification and evaluation of the artifacts as appropriate. If additional or unexpected archaeological features are discovered, the archaeologist shall report such findings to the applicant and to the Planning Department. If the archaeological resources are found to be significant, the archaeological observer shall determine appropriate actions, in cooperation with the applicant, for exploration and /or salvage. These actions, as well as final mitigation and disposition of the resources, shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Director. SC C -2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant (T) Prior to Planning shall provide written evidence to the Planning Issuance of a Director Department that a qualified paleontologist has been Grading Permit retained to observe grading activities and salvage fossils as necessary. The paleontologist shall be (I) Ongoing During present at the pre - grading conference, shall establish Construction procedures for paleontological resource surveillance, and shall establish, in cooperation with the applicant, procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, identification and evaluation of fossils. If major paleontological resources are discovered which require long term baiting or redirecting of grading, the paleontologist shall report such findings to the applicant and to the Planning Department. The paleontologist shall determine appropriate actions, in cooperation with the applicant, which ensure proper exploration and /or salvage. These actions, as well as final mitigation and disposition of the resources, shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Director. 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) Page 4 9lb 919 Bayside Drive Residential 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) Page 5 a�` Trigger (T) and Approving or Mitigation Measure Implementation (1) Verifying Authority SC C -3 In accordance with Public Resources Code 5097.94, (T) If Human Planning if human remains are found, the Orange County Remains are Director coroner must be notified within 24 hours of the Found discovery. If the coroner determines that the remains are not recent, the coroner will notify the Native (1) Ongoing During American Heritage Commission in Sacramento to Construction determine the most likely descendent for the area. The designated Native American representative then determines in consultation with the property owner the disposition of the human remains. Geology and Soils SC G -1 A geotechnical report shall be required with the (T) Submittal of City Building submittal of construction drawings for plan check. Construction Department The Building Department shall ensure that the project Drawings for complies with the geotechnical recommendations Plan Check included in the " Geotechnical Investigation' (Petra, 2004), as well as additional requirements, if any, (1) Prior to Initiation imposed by the Newport Beach Building Department. of Construction Activities SC G -2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project (T) Prior to City Building applicant shall document to the City of Newport Issuance of a Department Beach Building Department that all facilities will be Grading Permit designed and constructed to comply with current seismic safety standards and the current City- (1) Prior to Initiation adopted version of the Uniform Building Code. of Construction Activities Hazards and Hazardous Materials SC H -1 Prior to the issuance of any grading or building (T) Prior to City Building permit, the applicant shall submit an asbestos Issuance of Any Official abatement and removal plan to the City Building Grading or Official for approval. The abatement and removal Building Permit plan shall comply with notification and asbestos removal procedures outlined in SCAQMD Rule 1403 (I) Ongoing During to reduce asbestos related health issues. Construction SC H -2 Prior to the issuance of any grading or building (T) Prior to City Building permit, the applicant shall submit a lead -based paint Issuance of Any Official abatement and removal plan in accordance with all Grading or applicable federal, state, and local regulatory Building Permit requirements to the City Building Official for approval. (1) Prior to Initiation of Construction SC H -3 Prior to the issuance of any grading or building (T) Prior to City Building permit, the applicant shall submit a Erosion and Issuance of Any Official Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) in a manner meeting Grading or 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) Page 5 a�` 919 Bayside Drive Residential 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) Page 6 �t l- )i Trigger (T) and Approving or Mitigation Measure Implementation (I) Verifying; Authority approval of the City Building Official, to demonstrate Building Permit compliance with local and state water quality regulations for grading and construction activities. (1) Priorto The ESCP shall identify how all construction Initiation of materials, wastes, grading or demolition debris, and Construction stockpiles of soil, aggregates, soil amendments, etc. shall be properly covered, stored, and secured to prevent transport into local drainages or coastal waters by wind, rain, tracking, tidal erosion, or dispersion. The ESCP shall also describe how the applicant will ensure that all Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be maintained during construction of any future public right -of -ways. A copy of the current ESCP shall be kept at the project site and be available for City of Newport Beach review on request. SC H-4 The applicantloperator shall store, manifest, (T) IfiWhen City Building transport, and dispose of all on -site generated waste Hazardous Official that meets hazardous waste criteria in accordance Waste is with California Code of Regulations Title 22 and in a Generated On manner to the satisfaction of the City Building Official. Site The applicantloperator shall keep storage, transportation, and disposal records on site and open (1) Ongoing During for inspection to any government agency upon Construction request. Hydrology and Water Quality SC W -1 Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the (T) Prior to City Building applicant shall submit evidence to the City Building Issuance of Any Official Official that the applicant has obtained coverage Grading Permit under the NPDES statewide General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit from the State Water (1) Prior to Initiation Resources Control Board. of Construction Activities SC W -2 Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the (T) Prior to City Building applicant shall obtain a NPDES permit. The Issuance of a Department applicant shall incorporate storm water pollutant Grading Permit control into erosion control plans using BMPs to the maximum extent possible. Evidence that proper (1) Prior to Initiation clearances have been obtained through the State of Construction Water Resources Control Board shall be given to the Activities Building Department prior to issuance of grading permits. SC W -3 Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the (T) Prior to City Building applicant shall submit a SWPPP to the City for review Issuance of Any Department and approval. The SWPPP shall be maintained on- Grading Permit site throughout the construction phase and shall be made available to the public for review, upon request. (1) Ongoing During 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) Page 6 �t l- )i 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) Page 7 Trigger (T) and Approving or Mitigation Measure Implementation (1) Ve ltging Authority Construction SC W-4 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the (T) Prior to City Building applicant shall submit a WQMP specifically Issuance of a Department identifying the BMPs that will be used on site to Grading Permit control predictable pollutant runoff. The plan shall identify the types of structural and non - structural (I) Prior to Initiation measures to be used. of Construction Activities Noise SC N -1 Consistent with City of Newport Beach Noise (T) Initiation of Any City Building Ordinance, noise - generating project construction Construction Official activities shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 AM to Activities 6:30 PM Monday through Friday and 8:00 AM and 6:00 PM on Saturdays. No demolition or (1) Ongoing During construction activities shall be permitted on Construction Sundays or legal holidays. The City Building Official shall be responsible for ensuring that the applicant/operator complies with these requirements. MM N -1 Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, a detailed (T) Prior to City Building acoustical analysis shall be prepared by a qualified Issuance of Any Official acoustical consultant and submitted to the City. This Grading Permit acoustical analysis shall describe and quantify the noise sources impacting the area and the measures (1) Prior to Initiation required to meet the 65 CNEL exterior residential of Grading noise standard. The final grading plans shall Activities incorporate the noise barriers required by the analysis and the property owner /developer shall install these barriers. MM N -2 Prior to issuance of any building permit, a detailed (T) Prior to City Building acoustical study using architectural plans shall be Issuance of a Official prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant and Building Permit submitted to the City Building Official. This report shall describe and quantify the noise sources (1) Prior to Initiation impacting the proposed Multi - Family Residential of Construction units, the amount of outdoor -to- indoor noise Activities reduction provided in the architectural plans, and any upgrades required to meet the City's interior noise standards (45 CNEL for residences). The measures described in the report shall be incorporated into the architectural plans for the buildings and implemented with building construction. Public Services SC P -1 Prior to issuance of any grading or building permit, (T) Prior to City Planning the applicant shall submit all project- specific plans to Issuance of Any Department, 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) Page 7 919 Bayside Drive Residential 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) Page 8 I Trigger (T) and Approving or Mitigation Measure Implementation (1) Verifying Autf9oiity, the Planning Department, Public Works Department, Building Permit City Public and Fire Department for review. Works (I) Prior to Initiation Department, of Construction City Fire Activities Department Recreation SC R -1 Prior to recordation of the final tract map, the (T) Prior to City Park applicant will be required to pay an in -lieu fee in Recordation of Department accordance with the Park Dedication and Fee the Final Tract Ordinance. Map (I) Recordation of the Final Tract Map Transportation /Circulation SC T -1 Disruption caused by construction work along (T) Initiation of Any City Public roadways and by movement of construction vehicles Construction Works shall be minimized by proper us of traffic control and Activities Department flagmen. (I) Ongoing During Construction SC T -2 Traffic control and transportation of equipment and (T) Initiation of Any City Public materials shall be conducted in accordance with state Construction Works and local requirements. Activities Department (I) Ongoing During Construction SC T -3 Prior to the issuance of any building permit, the (T) Prior to City Public applicant shall prepare a construction phasing plan Issuance of a Works and construction delivery plan that includes routing of Building Permit Department large vehicles for review by the City Public Works Department. Large vehicles shall not be permitted to (I) Prior to Initiation travel narrow streets and alleys, as determined by of Construction the Public Works Department. Activities Utilities and Service Systems SC U -1 Prior to issuance of any grading or building permit, (T) Prior to City Utilities the applicant shall submit all project - specific plans to Issuance of Any Department, the City Utilities and Public Works Departments for Grading or City Public review. Building Permit Works Department (I) Prior to Initiation of Construction Activities 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) Page 8 I Exhibit No. 7 ��5 This page is blank gyp RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (SCH NO. 2005 - 061019) AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 2004 -001 (TRACT 15323), AND COASTAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 2005 -001 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 919 BAYSIDE DRIVE (PA 2004 -072). THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS, RESOLVES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, an application was filed by UGS Development Inc. for a 3.92 -acre property identified as 919 Bayside Drive. The application requests approval of: a Code Amendment to change the zoning district of the subject property from Multifamily Residential to Planned Community and adopting Planned Community Text No. 54; a Tentative Tract Map subdividing the subject property into 17 single - family lots for lease purposes and 6 lots for recreation and swimming pool facilities, for public pedestrian access, for landscaped areas, for private roads, and for private boat docks; and a Coastal Residential Development Permit ensuring compliance with State law relative to low and moderate income housing opportunities within the Coastal Zone. WHEREAS, in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements, an Initial Study and a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration were distributed to all responsible and trustee agencies and other interested parties for a 30 -day public review period commencing on June 3, 2005 and ending on July 5, 2005. WHEREAS, on August 18, 2005, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing at which time the Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with comments received thereon, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program were considered. Notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with law and testimony was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at the hearing. WHEREAS, the public hearing was continued and at the continued public hearing on November 3, 2005, the Planning Commission considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with comments received thereon, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. WHEREAS, the City maintains and implements development standards through the Zoning Ordinance which enables adoption of a Planned Community district. WHEREAS, adoption of the Planned Community district and the Bayside Residential Planned Community District Development Regulations accommodates _�o City of Newport Beach Council Resolution No. Page 2 of 21 development of single - family dwellings which are permitted within the General Plan Multi - Family Land Use designation and is thus consistent with the General Plan. WHEREAS, the Tentative Tract Map subject to conditions of approval includes required information including legal description of property, ownership, existing and proposed uses and improvements, proposed lot sizes, existing and proposed infrastructure, and public and private easements in compliance with the Subdivision Code and will not result in a detriment to the public health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or welfare of persons residing or working in or adjacent to the neighborhood of such use, and will not be a detriment to the properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the City for the following reasons: 1. Finding The proposed subdivision is consistent with and serves to implement the policies and provisions of the General Plan. Facts The General Plan Land Use Element directs that all subdivisions be consistent with the Subdivision Code. Subject to Conditions of Approval, the Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the Subdivision Code. 2. Finding The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan. Facts Consistency with the City of Newport Beach Land Use Element. The proposed project site lies within the Promontory Bay Area, as defined in the City's Land Use Element. The Promontory Bay Area includes Harbor Island, Linda Isle, and all the area bounded by Newport Bay, Marine Avenue /Jamboree Road, and East Coast Highway. Existing land uses within the Promontory Bay Area are diverse and include Single - Family Detached Residential, Multi - Family Residential, Neighborhood Commercial, Recreational and Marina, and Recreational and Environmental Open Space land uses. The proposed project would be consistent with existing and allowed land uses within the Promontory Bay Area. The Land Use Element designates the proposed project site as Multi - Family Residential to reflect the existing apartment complex. As previously stated, the proposed project would establish 17 residential lots. Single- family residences are a permitted use within sites designated for multi - family residences (page 23 of the Land Use Element). Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent City of Newport Beach Council Resolution No. _ Page 3 of 21 with the Multi - Family Residential land use designation. It would also be consistent with applicable policies of the Land Use Element. Consistency with the City of Newport Beach Harbor and Bay Element. Policy HB -1.1.2 of the Harbor and Bay Element requires that potential impacts on water - dependent and water - related land uses and activities be considered when reviewing proposal for land use changes. Land use changes associated with the proposed project would be limited to the project site. No adjacent properties would be impacted by the proposed project. Since no water - related or water- dependent uses occupy the site, no impact to these uses would occur. Consistency with the City of Newport Beach Housing Element. The project will eliminate 64 apartments and replace them with 17 single - family residences for an overall reduction of 47 units. The City has approximately 14,600 rental units out of approximately 37,500 total housing units (2000 Census), and the reduction and change in housing type is not considered significant. Goal 2 of the Housing Element states that the City will "provide a balanced residential community, comprised of a variety of housing types, designs, and opportunities for all social and economic segments, including very low -, low -, moderate- and upper- income individuals and households." The proposed project is consistent with this goal and is not inconsistent with any other goals or policies in the Housing Element. Consistency with the City of Newport Beach Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan. According to the City's Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan ( LCPLUP), the proposed project is located in the Coastal Zone. Therefore, a coastal development permit (CDP) is required from the California Coastal Commission. The LCPLUP references the fact that the project site is designated for Multi - Family Residential Use and is allowed one unit for each 2,178 square feet of buildable lot area. As previously discussed, the proposed project is consistent with this designation. Section 30210 -30212 of the California Coastal Act (CCA) requires that public access and recreational opportunities be provided for all the people of the state, that development not interfere with the public's right of access, and that new development provide public access to the shoreline. As previously discussed, the proposed project would provide public access to Promontory Bay and North Bay Front via public walkways, and would improve elements within those walkways to meet current ADA requirements. The proposed project is not a recreation or visitor - serving facility. It would not require diking, dredging, filling or shoreline structures, and it does not propose an City of Newport Beach Council Resolution No. Page 4 of 21 construction or expansion of public works facilities. The LCPLUP does not identify the proposed project site as an environmentally sensitive habitat area or hazard area. Water and marine resources adjacent to the proposed project site would be protected through implementation of the Standard Conditions listed in the Hydrology and Water Quality section, above. The proposed project would preserve and provide for continued operation of the existing dock areas along North Bay Front. Sections 30244, 30250(a), 30252, and 30253(3) and (4) of the CCA provide criteria for the location of new development. These criteria specify that new development should generally be concentrated in areas of existing development, preserve public access, provide adequate support facilities including provisions for recreational facilities, and preserve archaeological and paleontological resources. The proposed project, as conditioned by the standard conditions and mitigation measures contained within this document, would fully comply with these criteria. The LCPLUP does not list the proposed project site as a primary view area. Consequently, it is not subject to Sections 30251 and 30253(5) of the CCA. Since the proposed project is not a new visitor - serving facility or coastal - dependant use and it does not require an oceanfront encroachment, the LCPLUP's policies specific to new development are not applicable to the proposed project. 3. Finding The site is suitable for the type of development. Facts The site is generally level and currently developed with multiple - family dwelling units at densities greater than that proposed. No problems or adverse site conditions have been identified on the site as currently developed. Consequently, the site is determined to be physically suited for the development proposed. 4. Finding The site is physically suitable for the density of development. Facts The site is generally level and currently developed with multiple - family dwelling units at densities greater than that proposed. No problems or adverse site conditions have been identified on the site as currently developed. p City of Newport Beach Council Resolution No. Page 5 of 21 Consequently, the site is determined to be physically suited for the density of development proposed. 5. Finding The design of the subdivision and type of improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. Facts An Initial Study prepared in conjunction with this project and included in the administrative record was the basis for adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project which indicated that all environmental impacts, including those to fish, wildlife or their habitat, are less than significant or, with mitigation, are reduced to a less than significant level. 6. Finding The proposed subdivision is not likely to cause serious public health problems. Facts An Initial Study prepared in conjunction with this project and included in the administrative record was the basis for adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project which indicated that all environmental impacts, including those that could affect human health, are less than significant or, with mitigation, are reduced to a less than significant level. 7. Finding The proposed subdivision will not likely conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. Facts The proposed subdivision is proposed to be gate - guarded and generally not accessible to the public. An existing easement providing access to the bay front along the westerly edge of the property is preserved with this tract map and upgrades to physical improvements on this easement are included as part of this project. In addition, the tentative tract map dedicates an easement to the public for passage over a walkway along the bayfront. WHEREAS, a Coastal Residential Development Permit processed for this project to implement provisions of the California Coastal Act relative to displacement of low and moderate income households within the Coastal Zone indicated that demolition of existing multiple family residential dwelling units on the project site will not result in displacement of any low or moderate income households. �a\ City of Newport Beach Council Resolution No. Page 6 of 21 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission voted (5 -1) to recommend approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, of Tentative Tract Map 2004 -001, and Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 2005- 001 for property located at 919 Bayside Drive (PA 2004 -072). WHEREAS, on January 10, 2006, the City Council held a public hearing in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the aforesaid meeting was given. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the City Council at this meeting. WHEREAS, the General Plan requires that the City maintain suitable and adequate standards for landscaping, sign control, site and building design, parking and other development standards to ensure that commercial projects are aesthetically pleasing and compatible with surrounding land uses. The City maintains and implements development standards through the Zoning Ordinance which enables adoption of Planned Community District Regulations and through the Subdivision Ordinance which enables approval of Tentative Tract. The Bayside Residential Planned Community District Development Regulations include permitted uses, regulations that ensure that the size and scale of the building, the number of parking spaces provided, the building setbacks provided, the areas of landscaped yards, and the design and placement of signs result in a project that is aesthetically pleasing and compatible with surrounding land uses consistent with objectives of the Municipal Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED Section No. 1: The City Council hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the 919 Bayside Drive Residential Project (SCH# 2005061019) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Section No. 2: The City Council hereby approves Newport Tract Map No. 2004- 001 (Tentative Tract Map No. 15323) and Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 2005 -001 subject to conditions as in Exhibit "A" provided that Planned Community Development Plan No. 2004 -003 (Bayside Residential Planned Community) is adopted by ordinance. Section No. 3: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption; however this resolution shall be null and void is Planned Community Development Plan No. 2004 -003 (Bayside Residential Planned Community) is not adopted by ordinance. City of Newport Beach Council Resolution No. Page 7 of 21 Passed and adopted by the City Council of Newport Beach at a regular meeting held on the 10th day of January, 2006, by the following vote to wit: AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT, COUNCIL MEMBERS MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK `)� City of Newport Beach Council Resolution No. Page 8 of 21 Exhibit "A" Conditions of Approval The following conditions shall apply to all development pursuant to the Bayside Planned Community Development Regulations and are adopted as conditions of approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 2004 -001 (Tract 15323): 1. Water service to the Planned Community will be furnished by the City of Newport Beach. Each dwelling unit/building shall be served with an individual water service lateral connection to the public water system unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department and the Building Department. 2. Sewage disposal service facilities to the Planned Community will be provided by the City of Newport Beach and the Orange County Sanitation District. Each dwelling unit/building shall be served with an individual sewer service lateral connection to the public sewer system unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department and the Building Department. 3. Grading and erosion control shall be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the City of Newport Beach Grading Ordinance and shall be subject to permits issued by the Building and Planning Departments. 4. The developer shall comply with the City's water quality and on -site non -storm runoff retention requirements by the preparation and approval by the City of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Existing drainage outlets within the existing seawalls that discharge on -site runoff into the Bay shall be modified to meet the City's on -site runoff water quality requirements. 5. Fire equipment access walkways, streets, gangplanks, and dock ways shall be designed to meet exiting and fire protection requirements as specified by the Uniform Building Code and shall be subject to review and approval by the City Newport Beach Building and Fire Departments. 6. Street, drainage and utility improvements shall be submitted on City standard improvement plan formats. All of the plan sheets shall be prepared by California licensed professionals responsible for the designs shown on the Plans. 7. All improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the current edition of the City Design Criteria, Standard Special Provisions, and Standard Drawings. ��1 City of Newport Beach Council Resolution No. Page 9 of 21 8. The California Vehicle Code shall be enforced on the private streets and drives, and delineation acceptable to the Police Department and Public Works Department shall be provided along the sidelines of the private streets and drives. 9. Curb -side collection of refuse shall be subject to City of Newport Beach approval. 10. The design of public access improvements shall provide for full public access 24- hours a day, 7 -days a week to 100% of the bay frontage. The minimum width for all public access along the water front shall be six (6) feet clear and shall be upgraded to meet all ADA standards. The public gangplank shall also be designed to meet ADA standards. 11. A 12 -foot wide concrete sidewalk/bike path behind the street curb face shall be provided along the Bayside Drive frontage. 12. All on -site common area improvements such as parks, docks, entry gates and entry, all on -site drainage, sanitary sewer, water, and electrical systems shall be owned or leased, operated and maintained by the HOA. 13. All overhead utilities serving the P -C shall be made underground. 14. The developer shall be required to submit a sign plan for review by the Planning Department for conformity with Chapter 20.67 of the Zoning Code. 15. The project is subject to all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards, unless specifically waived or modified by the Planned Community District Regulations. 16. The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Tract as Exhibit No. 1 and the Preliminary Plan marked as Exhibit No. 2 to Planning Commission Staff Report for PA 2004 -072 dated August 18, 2005. 17. The applicant is required to obtain all applicable permits from the City Building and Fire Departments. 18. The applicant shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws. Material violation of any of those laws in connection with the use may be cause for revocation of this Use Permit. 19. This approval was based on the particulars of the individual case and does not in and of itself or in combination with other approvals in the vicinity or Citywide constitute a precedent for future approvals or decisions. _� '�5 City of Newport Beach Council Resolution No. Page 10 of 21 20. Should this site be sold or otherwise come under different ownership or be operated by a different entity than the applicant, any future owners, assignees or operators shall be notified of the conditions of this approval by the current owner or leasing company. 21. No dwelling other than one, single - family, detached dwelling may be constructed on any buildable lot created by Tentative Tract Map 53232. No dwelling may exceed a height of twenty -eight (28) feet as measured consistent with Municipal Code Section 20.65.030, "Measurement of Height ". These restrictions shall be included in the Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC &R's) which shall be prepared and recorded with the County Clerk at the time a Final Map is recorded. 22. Boat slips fronting the project site shall be operated as a residential marina for the 17 residential leaseholds of the Bayside Residential Planned Community. The slips shall not be rented to anyone who is not a resident of the Bayside Residential Planned Community. These restrictions shall be noted on the Final Map and incorporated into Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC &R's) which shall be prepared and recorded with the County Clerk at the time a Final Map is recorded. 23. The applicant shall prepare architectural guidelines that will apply to the design of all dwellings proposed for construction on lots created by Tentative Tract Map 15323 approved together with this Use Permit. The architectural guidelines shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning Director. The architectural guidelines shall be incorporated into Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC &R's) which shall be prepared and recorded with the County Clerk at the time a Final Map is recorded. The CC &R's shall require that all dwellings and improvements comply with the architectural guidelines. 24. The applicant shall prepare plans for gangplank and dockway improvements and for related improvements necessary to comply with handicapped access requirements of the California Building Codes and to enhance pedestrian safety and improve the visual character of the gangplank and dockway through inclusion of lighting, railings, and other appropriate improvements. The plans shall be developed in consultation with the City's Harbor Resources Division and subject to final approval by Harbor Resources, Public Works, and Planning. 25. The gangplank and dockway shall be designed to meet exiting and fire protection requirements as specified by the applicable Codes and shall be subject to review and approval by the Newport Beach Building, Fire, and Harbor Resources Departments. City of Newport Beach Council Resolution No. _ Page 11 of 21 26. The proposed project shall conform to the requirements of the Uniform Building Code, any local amendments to the UBC, and State Disabled Access requirements, unless otherwise approved by the Building Department. 27. All work conducted within the public right -of -way shall be approved under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 28. All mechanical equipment shall be screened from view of adjacent properties and adjacent public streets within the limits authorized by this permit, and shall be sound attenuated in accordance with Chapter 10.26 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, Community Noise Control. 29. A sign plan shall be submitted for review for conformity with Chapter 20.67 of the Zoning Code. The final location of the signs shall be reviewed by the City Traffic Engineer and shall conform to City Standard 110 -L to ensure that adequate sight distance is provided. 30. Temporary signs shall be prohibited in the public right -of -way unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department in conjunction with the issuance of an encroachment permit or encroachment agreement. 31. The Developer shall file one (1) Final Tract Map (Map). 32. The Map shall be prepared on the California coordinate system (NAD88). Prior to recordation of the Map, the surveyor /engineer preparing the Map shall submit to the County Surveyor and the City of Newport Beach a digital - graphic file of said map in a manner described in the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual. The Map to be submitted to the City of Newport Beach shall comply with the City's CADD Standards. Scanned images will not be accepted. 33. The Final Map shall include reconfigured Lots C and D that accommodate the perimeter wall to be reconstructed along the Bayside Drive and a minimum 4- foot -wide landscaped setback between the Bayside Drive right -of -way and the perimeter wall. 34. The applicant shall execute an agreement to ensure that public access as identified within the Planned Community District Regulations will be permanently provided and properly maintained. The applicant shall record an irrevocable offer to dedicate (IOD) a public access easement for a floating walkway landward of the U. S. Bulkhead Line or obtain a public access easement for the existing floating walkway that is located bayward of the U. S. Bulkhead line from the current property owner. The form and content of the public access agreement, aa� City of Newport Beach Council Resolution No. Page 12 of 21 IOD and public access easement shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Attorney. Prior to the issuance of a building permit or recordation of the final map, the applicant shall: a) obtain and maintain a Harbor Permit for the continued operation and maintenance of the existing or future docks, gangplanks and other dock related improvements fronting the project site, and b) record the public access agreement, and c) record the IOD or public access easement as described in this condition. The Harbor Permit shall be transferred to the homeowners association for the Bayside Residential Planned Community upon its creation. 35. Prior to recordation, the Map shall tie the boundary of the map into the Horizontal Control System established by the County Surveyor in a manner described in Sections 7 -9 -330 and 7 -9 -337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual, Subarticle 18. Monuments (one inch iron pipe with tag) shall be set On Each Lot Corner unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Monuments shall be protected in place if installed prior to completion of construction project. 36. A hydrology and hydraulic study shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Public Works Department, along with a master plan of water, sewer and storm drain facilities for the on -site improvements prior to recording of the Map. 37. Submit written documentation from the holders of the various existing easements shown on the Tentative Trace Map as being relocated or replaced ore relinquished that they have reviewed and agreed with the quitclaim of their respective easements as proposed by the Developer. 38. Easements for public emergency and security ingress /egress, weekly refuse service, and public utility purposes on all private streets shall be dedicated to the City. Said easements shall be shown on the tract maps. 39. No structures shall be constructed within the limits of any utilities easements. 40. All applicable fees shall be paid prior to the City approval of the Final Tract Map. 41. Construction surety in a form acceptable to the City, guaranteeing the completion of the various required public improvements, shall be submitted to the Public Works Department prior to the City approval of the Final Tract Map. 42. All improvements within the public right -of -way shall be designed and constructed per City Standards. City of Newport Beach Council Resolution No. Page 13 of 21 43. In the event that private construction work damaged existing public improvements surrounding the site, the Public Works Inspector at his discretion will require additional public works reconstruction work as needed. 44. The centerline of the curb access ramps proposed at the development site entrance shall parallel with the Bayside Drive roadway alignment. 45. The construction of bulkhead and gangways requires separate plan check and permits. 46. The construction of bulkhead and gangways shall be performed only during periods of low tide. Plastic sheeting shall be placed below the work location to collect the fallen construction debris. The collected debris shall be removed and disposed of at the end of each workday. 47. Prior to the construction of bulkhead and gangways, a determination shall be made by a qualified biologist as to the existence of eelgrass surrounding /nearby the work site. In case of eelgrass, the Developer shall coordinate with the City's Harbor Resources Division to apply for and obtain the required permits from The US Army Corps of Engineers, The US Fish and Wildlife Service, The California Coastal Commission, and other agencies for the work. 48. All improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the current edition of the City Design Criteria, Standard Special Provisions, and Standard Drawings. 49. Street, drainage and utility improvements shall be submitted on City standard improvement plan formats. All of the plan sheets shall be prepared by California licensed professionals responsible for the designs shown on the Plans. 50. The entry gate, when fully opened, shall stay clear of the travel path of vehicles making right turns into the Tract. 51. All on -site drainage, sanitary sewer, water, and electrical systems shall be owned, operated, and maintained by the Homeowners Association. 52. There are existing drainage outlets within the existing seawalls that discharge on- site runoff into the Bay. Submit details on the disposition of these existing drainage outlets. If these outlets are to remain in place, submit details as to how these outlets will be modified to meet the City's on -site runoff retention water quality requirements. Vl City of Newport Beach Council Resolution No. Page 14 of 21 53. Details shall be provided as to how the development will comply with the City's water quality and on -site non -storm runoff retention requirements. 54. All storm drain and sanitary sewer mains shall be installed with MacWrap. 55. ADA compliant curb access ramps shall be constructed at all interior curb returns. 56. Each dwelling unit/building shall be served with an individual water service and sewer lateral connection to the public water and sewer systems unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department and the Building Department. 57. The intersection of the driveways with Bayside Drive shall be designed to provide sight distance for a secondary roadway per City of Newport Beach Standard Drawing STD - 110 -L. Slopes, landscaping, walls, signs and other obstructions shall be considered in the sight distance requirements. Landscaping within the sight lines (sight cone) shall not exceed 24- inches in height and the monument identification sign must be located outside the line of sight cone. The sight distance may be modified at non - critical locations, subject to approval by the Traffic Engineer. 58. The project shall provide 45 feet of vehicle stacking distance prior to the entry call box measured from the property line. Two entry lanes shall be provided, one lane for guest call box use and one for residential use. 59. Provide details on the vehicular turnaround area for garaged vehicles exiting Lots No. 3, No. 9 and Lot No. 15 and revise as required by the City Engineer.. 60. On -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation system shall be subject to further review by the City Traffic Engineer. 61. Provide Class III standpipe system at existing dock. Remove 2 % connections at bulkhead. 62. Provide fire department connection for docks on Bayside Drive. Fire Department connection shall be located within 150 feet of a public hydrant on same side of street. 63. Automatic fire extinguishing system required for residential units when the total floor area exceeds 5,000 square feet. 64. Minimum width at entrance shall be 14 feet clear; preliminary plans shows less than 14 feet at two locations. 3P City of Newport Beach Council Resolution No. _ Page 15 of 21 65. Turning radius for fire apparatus shall not be less than 20 feet inside radius and 40 feet outside radius. Show on plan. 66. Any obstructions in required fire access roadways, including speed bumps and speed humps, are prohibited. 67. Provide on -site public fire hydrants. 68. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the site shall be examined to determine the existence and extent of archaeological and paleontological resources in accordance with adopted City policies. 69. Prior to the issuance of grading/building permits, the final design of all required off -site right of way improvements shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department and Traffic Engineer. 70. Prior to the issuance of -grading permits, the applicant shall prepare a construction phasing plan and construction delivery plan that includes routing of large vehicles. The plan shall include a haul route plan for review and approval of the Public Works Department. Said plan shall specify the routes to be traveled, times of travel, total number of trucks, number of trucks per hour, time of operation, and safety /congestion precautions (e.g., signage, flagmen). Large construction vehicles shall not be permitted to travel narrow streets and alleys as determined by the Public Works Department. Traffic control and transportation of equipment and materials shall be conducted in accordance with state and local requirements. 71. Prior to the issuance of individual building permits, the applicant shall provide designs for building foundations and slabs appropriate to mitigating liquefaction hazard. 72. Prior to the issuance of grading, the applicant shall provide results from an inspection by a qualified engineer indicating the condition of the seawalls and tiebacks and make repairs to same as necessary. 73. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP) shall be prepared and approved by the City of Newport Beach as the local permitting agency in accordance with the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The SWPPP shall include BMPs to eliminate and /or minimize stormwater pollution prior to, and during construction. The SWPPP shall require construction to occur in stages and stabilized prior to City of Newport Beach Council Resolution No. Page 16 of 21 disturbing other areas and require the use of temporary diversion dikes and basins to trap sediment from run -off and allow clarification prior to discharge. 74. Prior to the issuance of a gradinq permit, the applicant shall prepare a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) specifically identifying the Best Management Practices (BMP's) that will be used on site to control predictable pollutant runoff. The plan shall identify the types of structural and non - structural measures to be used. The plan shall comply with the Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP). Particular attention should be addressed to the appendix section "Best Management Practices for New Development." The WQMP shall clearly show the locations of structural BMP's, and assignment of long term maintenance responsibilities (which shall also be included in the Maintenance Agreement). The plan shall be prepared to the format shown in "Attachment C" of the DAMP title "Water Quality Management Plan Outline" and be subject to the approval of the City. 75. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall obtain a NPDES permit. The applicant shall incorporate storm water pollutant control into erosion control plans using BMPs to the maximum extent possible. Evidence that proper clearances have been obtained through the State Water Resources Control Board shall be given to the Building Department prior to issuance of grading permits. 76. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit evidence to the City Building Official that the applicant has obtained coverage under the NPDES statewide General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. 77. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall document to the City of Newport Beach Building Department that all facilities will be designed and constructed to comply with current seismic safety standards and the current City- adopted version of the Uniform Building Code. 78. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a geotechnical report shall be submitted with construction drawings for plan check. The Building Department shall ensure that the project complies with the geotechnical recommendations included in the " Geotechnical Investigation" (Petra, 2004), as well as additional requirements, if any, imposed by the Newport Beach Building Department. 79. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide written evidence to the Planning Director that a qualified archaeologist has been retained to observe grading activities and conduct salvage excavation of archaeological resources as necessary. The archaeologist shall be present at the pre - grading conference, shall establish procedures for archaeological resource surveillance, ��3a- City of Newport Beach Council Resolution No. Page 17 of 21 and shall establish, in cooperation with the applicant, procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, identification and evaluation of the artifacts as appropriate. If additional or unexpected archaeological features are discovered, the archaeologist shall report such findings to the applicant and to the Planning Department. If the archaeological resources are found to be significant, the archaeological observer shall determine appropriate actions, in cooperation with the applicant, for exploration and /or salvage. These actions, as well as final mitigation and disposition of the resources, shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Director. 80. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide written evidence to the Planning Department that a qualified paleontologist has been retained to observe grading activities and salvage fossils as necessary. The paleontologist shall be present at the pre - grading conference, shall establish procedures for paleontological resource surveillance, and shall establish, in cooperation with the applicant, procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, identification and evaluation of fossils. If major paleontological resources are discovered which require long term baiting or redirecting of grading, the paleontologist shall report such findings to the applicant and to the Planning Department. The paleontologist shall determine appropriate actions, in cooperation with the applicant, which ensure proper exploration and /or salvage. These actions, as well as final mitigation and disposition of the resources, shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Director. 81. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a detailed acoustical analysis shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant and submitted to the City. This acoustical analysis shall describe and quantify the noise sources impacting the area and the measures required to meet the 65 CNEL exterior residential noise standard. The final grading plans shall incorporate the noise barriers required by the analysis and the property owner /developer shall install these barriers. 82. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building demolition permit, the applicant shall submit an asbestos abatement and removal plan to the City Building Official for approval. The abatement and removal plan shall comply with notification and asbestos removal procedures outlined in SCAQMD Rule 1403 to reduce asbestos related health issues. 83. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the applicant shall submit a lead - based paint abatement and removal plan in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local regulatory requirements to the City Building Official for approval. a33 City of Newport Beach Council Resolution No. Page 18 of 21 84. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit, the applicant shall submit an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) in a manner meeting approval of the City Building Official, to demonstrate compliance with local and state water quality regulations for grading and construction activities. The ESCP shall identify how all construction materials, wastes, grading or demolition debris, and stockpiles of soil, aggregates, soil amendments, etc. shall be properly covered, stored, and secured to prevent transport into local drainages or coastal waters by wind, rain, tracking, tidal erosion, or dispersion. The ESCP shall also describe how the applicant will ensure that all Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be maintained during construction of any future public right -of -ways. A copy of the current ESCP shall be kept at the project site and be available for City of Newport Beach review on request 85. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect for review and subsequent approval by the Planning Director upon determination that the landscape plan is consistent with City standards and policies. The landscape and irrigation plan shall include landscaping and irrigation within the Bayside Drive right -of -way between the back of public sidewalk and the boundary of the Tract Map. These plans shall incorporate drought tolerant plantings and water efficient irrigation practices, and the plans shall be approved by the Planning Department, General Services Department and Public Works Department. All planting areas shall be provided with a permanent underground automatic sprinkler irrigation system of a design suitable for the type and arrangement of the plant materials selected. The irrigation system shall be adjustable based upon either a signal from a satellite or an on -site moisture - sensor. Planting areas adjacent to vehicular activity shall be protected by a continuous concrete curb or similar permanent barrier. Landscaping shall be located so as not to impede vehicular sight distance to the satisfaction of the Traffic Engineer. 86. Prior the issuance of a building permit, the project shall be reviewed by the Building Department to verify compliance with the following requirements: a. Project design must comply with the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC) seismic design criteria. b. Structure setback must comply with either the 1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC) or the Orange County Grading Manual. c. Any imported soil for general grading shall have an Expansion Index of less than 60. d. Control site drainage. e. Design footing embedments to resist the effects of expansive soil. f. Maintain a proportionately high dead load component on foundations. a3`� City of Newport Beach Council Resolution No. Page 19 of 21 g. Over - excavate and moisture soils condition below foundations, floor slabs and hardscape. h. Use of articulation and reinforcement of concrete slabs and footings. i. Use of rigid foundation and floor slabs. 87. Prior to the issuance of a buildinq permit, the project shall be reviewed by the Building Department to verify compliance with the following requirements: a. Provide on -site hydrants; b. All gates to property shall be automatic and provided with opticom and knox key. 88. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall schedule an inspection by the Code and Water Quality Enforcement Division to confirm that all landscaping materials and irrigation systems have been installed in accordance with the approved plans. 89. Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy or final of building permits, the applicant shall schedule an evening inspection by the Code and Water Quality Enforcement Division to confirm control of light and glare as specified in these conditions. 90. During construction of the proposed improvements: a. construction vehicles shall not block roadways on any roads adjacent to the project site or any of the roads leading to or from the project site; b. construction equipment will be properly maintained at an off -site location and includes proper tuning and timing of engines. Equipment maintenance records and equipment design specification data sheets shall be kept on -site during construction; C. all contractors will be advised not to idle construction equipment on site for more than ten minutes; d. on -site diesel fueled construction equipment will be fueled with aqueous diesel fuel; e. cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials, or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard; f. pave, water (three times daily), or apply non -toxic soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites; g. sweep all paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites daily with water sweepers; off" 5 City of Newport Beach Council Resolution No. Page 20 of 21 h. Sweep streets daily with water sweepers if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public streets; i. Hydro seed or apply non -toxic stabilizers to inactive construction areas; j. enclose, cover, water (twice daily), or apply non -toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.); k. limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour; I. install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways during; M. replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible; n. all construction equipment shall be properly tuned and maintained; o. contractors shall maintain and operate construction equipment so as to minimize exhaust emissions; p. trucks and vehicles in loading or unloading queues shall not idle; q. construction activities shall be staged and scheduled to avoid emissions peaks, and discontinued during second -stage smog alerts 91. During construction of the proposed improvements, in accordance with Public Resources Code 5097.94, if human remains are found, the Orange County coroner must be notified within 24 hours of the discovery. If the coroner determines that the remains are not recent, the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission in Sacramento to determine the most likely descendent for the area. The designated Native American representative then determines in consultation with the property owner the disposition of the human remains. 92. The applicant shall be responsible for the payment of all administrative costs identified by the Planning Department within 30 days of receiving a final notification of costs or prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. 93. All landscape materials and landscaped areas shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the approved landscape plan. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and growing condition and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing and trimming. All landscaped areas shall be kept free of weeds and debris. All irrigation systems shall be kept operable, including adjustments, replacements, repairs, and cleaning as part of regular maintenance. 94. Prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, applicant shall provide an agreement, in form acceptable to the City Attorney, which provides for maintenance of landscaping within the Bayside Drive right -of -way between the back of public sidewalk and the boundary of the Tract Map. The agreement shall include right of entry to the right -of -way for the benefit of the applicant, the Homeowners association, and any successors for purposes of maintaining the landscaping. City of Newport Beach Council Resolution No. Page 21 of 21 95. Prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, applicant shall complete improvements to the gangplank and dockway required herein. 96. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the first dwelling constructed in the tract, applicant shall provide an agreement, in form acceptable to the City Attorney, which provides for maintenance of the pedestrian accessway on Lot "B ", the gangplank and dockway and related improvements by the Homeowners Association. The agreement shall include right -of -entry to the City's property for the benefit of the applicant, the Homeowners Association, and any successors for purposes of maintaining the improvements. 97. Prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, applicant shall provide a disclosure statement, in form acceptable to the City Attorney and to the Planning Director, which shall be provided to each prospective lessee of one of the 17 lots in the subdivision advising of the potential noxious characteristics of the nearby boatyard which could adversely affect the prospective lessee's enjoyment of the property. The disclosure statement shall be included and recorded with the Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions at the County Recorder's Office and each lessee shall be required to acknowledge receipt of the disclosure statement, in writing, prior to executing a lease and the written acknowledgement shall be recorded together with the lease agreement with the County Recorder. a3 1 This page is blank .a3'K Exhibit No. 8 �3� This page is blank �0 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2004 -003 AMENDING THE ZONING DISTRICTING MAP AND ADOPTING THE BAYSIDE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 919 BAYSIDE DRIVE (PA 2004 -072). WHEREAS, on August 18, 2005, and on November 13, 2005, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach held a noticed public hearing regarding this code amendment. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission voted 5 to 1 to recommend approval of this code amendment to the City Council. WHEREAS, on January 10, 2006, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held a noticed public hearing regarding this code amendment. WHEREAS, the proposed Planned Community Development Regulations set forth use and development standards for the Bayside Residential Planned Community. The proposed regulations provide suitable and adequate standards including those relating to uses, setbacks, building height limits, floor area limits, and signs. WHEREAS, the proposed Planned Community Development Regulations (Zoning) are consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Multi - Family Residential for the proposed 17 -unit subdivision approved concurrently with this ordinance. WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH NO. 2005 - 061019) that identifies potential significant impacts to the environment and certain mitigation measures designed to avoid such impacts or reduce them to a less than significant level was approved relative to the Planned Community text. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Zoning Districting Map No. 15 shall be revised as depicted in Exhibit "B ". SECTION 2: The Bayside Residential Planned Community District Regulations as provided in Exhibit "A" is hereby adopted. SECTION 3: All property and uses within the planned community shall be subject to the regulations contained in the Bayside Residential Planned Community District Regulations. City of Newport Beach Ordinance No. _ Page 2 of 2 SECTION 3: The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this Ordinance. This Ordinance shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City, and the same shall become effective thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption. This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held on January 10, 2006, and adopted on the 24th day of January 2006, by the following vote, to wit: AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT COUNCIL MEMBERS u� •: ATTEST: CITY CLERK a`�� Exhibit "A" <<Insert final Bayside Residential PC District Regulations>> aA� Exhibit "B" ry Ai e Y d O sit 23iC�� 0 1 r I i Z ao a;W � e, � J- yyt LLV�i rlyy' " Ua ; 5 � Jt i —a ao Ih o o i A ., ii I yVir t l Jfti u w e�w vxrt�� sp 33s £/ oN d bW 33s ry Ai Exhibit No. 9 a45 This page is blank aatD all iii i An - Van_ z rfl tJT lvz May 0 too jj" x Zoo OWNS 1h HIP I o KIM Q Of up TO in q �jt �'l in I Q N af in- fr- T, ;4 11 N fy 1 a vs it;m i ii win 1 IN 17 911 U!" 1k 0, hi T TH, K 1 a :f1 gig is in i .1 a1) rzo ;> Rio 1 1 in i! WA 10 1 An - Van_ z rfl tJT lvz May 0 too jj" x Zoo OWNS 1h HIP I o KIM Q Of up TO in q �jt �'l in I Q N af in- fr- T, ;4 11 N fy 1 a vs it;m i ii win 1 IN 17 911 U!" 1k 0, hi T TH, K 1 a :f1 gig is in i .1 a1) N I w o e s Pi C, j I AY jYiY ill _ ti P2 CIP CD uj C) W a. I V Z cn (0 a_ T < (3 U L'i < LLJ 0 < < 0 0 � � < LLJ L'i U � 0 Ln U5 c7) < < C) oz cn0 0 0O -F U LLJ m T I-- I-- < (a- (�f Ld 0 LJ < 0 L'i C�nH - V5 G M • <L� UO VII 01-- ZT <.0 (h is I- U LLJ T < n— Elf LLJ0 mLv , <(D o [:� F-- LLJ >- ('� – Fn u < Uo zT F7- J C-) cn m 0 x N LLJ T U LLJ co CD CD <CL Q 0 J dJ M LLJ Nm 0 .nF-- T1 � U / / (L<a w U cn 0 Li n- 0 N �< u rr Ln oz LL V! Np co C\l co U-) d Z F- rr cr- F— Q w LU F- )-� - as Ln < 07 W Ln F- ch as Ln a. 0 07 CD �A— – z 0 w zr) o w 4 00 co U31NV-ld r 3 t1 , !� :1'r cozal yell V31NVI ;g !)N]IlVtj w U) LC) V31NVId co Lo )1004 313HON0�0 - ..I Z� 9 tl II 0 ,� 9 014Z 11 7 t MUll I 1� I L Ji yell ;g co LO 4 X Cl) 0 00 (tD Cl) <� V) co cr- F F- < LL, w U > F= Ld O Z < +1 2: Lr < => Lw Lo D IL - z z d R4 - z oz _...Mooct 3r3MJNOO\ W Y W y i W } 3NI 3}"tp11FY� —j E° 1[ 5 -live �,iDjvS > ti Q ce> XVN 10'� ¢ € m �.0 E NIVW3b Ol IIVM '13b 'X3 Q Cl- a, Q !l31NVld I 0 Z IIVM '19H M3N co -- j c6�a N @) �a i� co OV3HNlna x a W r! Ww� a O CO m r < Z p Q W W U �II I « p W a 3II II I1 �� CL / 1 w- �al �UW Z CL > O- 1 n,II O9 tn U Z ym IL i0 a I �I J fry L ,F TI �11: -I I IL (b O It F L , Lr) Lr) W L) D 0- O U) X LLJ Cf) cli LO Cf) >< z w If w z w LL Oz 4. 4)- 13 60 4*. V) E �w W LJ to 3 - a Ow z a 24 E =I %= 0 ?: 0< 3: Ln u all us Y LJ -J bi u m Im- < Li 3: D 0 U =) < C- C) U) m Of o U) OW Q <0 LLJ Ld U") In t,<- Li CS) x 0 TI �11: -I I IL (b O It F L , Lr) Lr) W L) D 0- O U) X LLJ Cf) cli LO Cf) >< z w If w z w o� Y e4 a O mz ELI Q V) "upIFB U� Ln Li w� >$ J U W W W d j y m r r a p_ E> �v OQ �Q Q U) qu vs p ? V) p (D W in Y Y m z O�, LL wQ UQ Q 0 W� Q� M O �-m� m Q J U) m Q (nom O Op �w Ln �UU Q SOH UQ wQ UUCP w0U z cn UZ CO 0 _ O 0 0 0 LLI CD c -. J w m co rod Q vl co N M co i y L /` LUFI I'- I 1.1 kit I U .i...l F V � Q I r I 1! w y Z N �t X w W ,;'� •.,` ` ,: is �..,, ae>5 r. 80 m n @Z Oy N� o P cow 1: 0 mw sp ol Of U Y ° 3 oa Oo <w F- J L N >Y O Of o °U0 w Yzz a o o w ° < r Jo 0 wN Ln Z_wY °Z w0°Z —� �' ° cli o CD a-Z �� �m� �z •'.! z O - C, W Y LO a_<<t00 Z i m( T 6' W O W W ,Yp. G ° J as as �Q I— _ o W > CLL r > a °tea \. -_ .•.. w w 00�� (D w \ DJ w F cr)mZa a O J OJ N U �� r �4 w IIA 4 3 4 CU a a N U m 3� 6 I Z Z Lu D W K O Q N K M, v 0 S 0 U Z F O J 0:7E Q W W J O O < LLJ J p W a'QZ~ a a Q U ) p =O Z - O Q X a d =w0 O �— LI U Q Q � W J U J O] W 7 F a W W O � Z nQ O Fw � J Z W p w Z � Q S w m FO p CD a U) S�wzaCn U F w W = J J U U F W J cn Q U) — W w W H Q O J a r U Li p w Cl- CD Y J X J u � J O � d p Z W = to 0 W p J � } p OO W C ~ > 7 a J O O } m W Q J F- W W LZi J F W C I m aw X D C� O0 wU U)1 � �o m o CD z CD U Q m W O W J O F- pZ pF- U)MO w U) > W J U) � <a- pW Q Oa ODf Oa ��U) pw Ul> d a U) ap..,...._ aaU UOU)> Oa o-a ......_ O z a O _ _... _... a a a� a F U) -. m I X W z z W W U z TQ i z W Y U O C) S� eY U� 5% i0 H :l aE N C) LO T Z U LLQ f� W f� W a5� (6K } \� E: zm > m > ro m m 0 z Z� z Nil m G. GRISAMORE DESIGN INC. /\ } \ {\ _ 7 (6K } \� E: zm > m > ro m m 0 z Z� z Nil m G. GRISAMORE DESIGN INC. -IV, ...iv � -Rqr 4.4W - qW I 0 it Fi -IV, ...iv � -Rqr 4.4W - qW I 0 w p ISO.a UW� .3 � J C h Y U O %l O E Q) a a> 42 a Z C7 W D W Q V V u� 0 0 N d G d 0 3 10 &4h, LAO. M.LAW V, WEI z. (3 U LaLJ m Q~ a- 0 w0 mw Jw 4 ono w oou N Ln w� Q w U� O Q� z~ Q= J � m c� Z U' Ov m 1 �x . U w m Q ~ n 0 w x mW a- \z J w Q O O3 ° W � N o U') U w Q LL UU � I D � z= Q O U O nm Ox N w Z Q w w O O _ z Z = Q U U r Uw Qw 10 J C 7 m Q Q Z �O z 0 W _O � cr- Q h LL- NU�U zo �° Qw �w U n n Cn (n a U� oQ �Q m Qm UU U (-oz cnz 10 �-O �Q oQ U LaLJ m Q~ a- 0 w0 mw Jw 4 ono w oou N Ln w� Q w U� O Q� z~ Q= J � m c� Z U' Ov m 1 �x . U w m Q ~ n 0 w x mW a- \z J w Q O O3 ° W � N o U') U w Q LL UU � I D � z= Q O U O nm Ox N w Z U w m _ 0:� O Z <� U w0 J Nm M W J LL Q O 0 W L O�� NU�U ON q Gi N Qi Z < o UW V W 60, 4r m § W N W LL Z YO Z a° M mW N Emti J oa a �U uok cc Q 'r a a0 0 W a a W 0. a W w m /R 04 v O Oz Q J z O rr H R LO C'7 C ) LO O z U Q W Q z Q� 0 N Z D� O ._ M: Q� Cy L C'7 C ) LO O z U Q W Q z we C04 Co z -C 't ci W LU 7 k Lu -b Uff J 0 IL C9 U) W pN E 0 o < cn O0- 00 < LLJ [.T rr- cn U .. ....... . LLJ 0 n C) < LL- c) CD .-j U 0 LLJ YZZ a_ -j < a_ C� C) LLJ < < Z < U < C) C() LLJ cn o < LLJ 0 > LLJ C)2 x N cn Z LLJ z LLJ 0 Z -J ly- 0 — -j < -j LLJ < CD :�i Q < LLJ LLJ 0 0 - 0 —j D LL- LLJ 00 LLJ- LO _j a_ < moo z m z D LLJ z �j r -j Cc LLJ z < U) < cy- C, O Q— (I- 0 L ........... Ln => N<< o O > 0 > cl < 1 A < fy O LLJ................ LL Od O . n J .... . .. .. Z 0 ::5 0 U < T= LLJ n� U � LIJ LLJ m LLJ < n 0 J 0 ui) LO => +1 0 C04 ----- - ---------- - --- -- - ------------- 40 Z 0 N00a 313HONkb-'-.. . 3 to z ILM N sw 0 3NII aV3H)II.. LL I L z lu Ln z Lu < i F CO -Ji co 9 co 1131NVId LU z Z z X W I 1 3 Iy� �`' �,, z oc) Cf) Cf) ��_U .3i LLJ =R Lu as ; N m � � ,I Q T LLJ < w 33 Ln 1131NVId . . ...... .. LU -bZ�S �t �,yl 'I � — U +1 '` iii co < w in >- F- CN Ln OL LU 1131NVId I —Z LU U) '40 CD = V S a F-Z ++U wa -.. __..✓ (,o W Qi 2 <'t - ��tJ ©4 313a�NflO w C-) *' W LU ........�, Z L La Z � O Z aN 3NI"1 d13x"n NW �d >- EJ aY XdW N i 10' a iNIVW3a O1 '13a 'X3 Q a31Nd-ld I 0 QI Z IIVM '13a M3N Ne �� Z c� CO z 00 Q N ad3HNina I X ° 0 W ,- { W INNLI U _ a O w o cn rn 00 m < - V ♦ 0 Q w YQ U _I Q II jj I Q 311 I I I I ii w z 0 v _Z I II 3 I ° z xWp g 11 J I I 0 > wo�F}I a 3 ;- 1 II I I Q j Ln 0� 09 II C Ln z m IL II o O 'j a \ 4 f^Y See File 68 for Tentative Tract Map No. 15323 Ot O�e Amended conditions and a new condition to implement the change to public access Revised conditions per your request: 10. The design of public access improvements shall provide for full public access 24 -hours a day, 7 -days a week to 100% of the bay frontage. The existing walkway along the Promontory Channel shall be improved to provide a minimum width of 6 feet. A new public walkway along the southerly proiect boundary including a connecting ganeplank to the existinq dockwav shall be a minimum of 10 feet in width. The minim — • dth f ^r all publiG asGeSs alGRg the water 4 shall be /�Teet GI d shall t all t The pubrio fren� sea„ earz.,;�sha Qed-te ^,ee. standards. gaRgplaRk Shall also be designed fn mppt APIA ;tnndardo 24. The applicant shall prepare plans for gangplank - and - dockway improvements and for related improvements necessary to comply with handicapped access requirements of the California Building Codes and to enhance pedestrian safety and improve the visual character sfl -the gangplank —and - dockway through inclusion of lighting, railings, and other appropriate improvements pursuant to the dock enhancement exhibit prepared for this project. The plans and improvements pursuant to this condition only apply to the portion of the dockwav that would publicly accessable. The plans shall be developed in consultation with the City's Harbor Resources Division and subject to final approval by Harbor Resources, Public Works, and Planning. 98. Public access across the southerly boundary of Tentative Tract No. 15323 shall be provided per Exhibit "B" of this resolution. The final map shall include an additional lettered lot across the southerly boundary of the tract and it shall be a minimum of ten (10) feet in width. The Property owner and lease holder shall dedicate a public access easement affecting the lease lot and the underlying land to the City of Newport Beach. The lettered lot shall be improved as a public walkway similarly to the existing public walkway within Lot B. The public walkway shall connect to the existing walkway within Lot B and it shall connect via a gangplank to the existing floating walkway frontinq the project site near the easterly edge of the project. 34. The Developer of the Bayside Planned Community shall obtain and maintain a valid Harbor Permit for the continued operation and maintenance of the existing or future docks, gangplanks and other dock related improvements. This Harbor Permit shall be transferred to the Homeowners Association (HOA) for the Bayside Planned Community upon its creation. As a condition to the Harbor Permit, the fee owner and leasehold owner shall execute an agreement to provide and maintain public access as identified within these Planned Community District Regulations— and these conditions of approval. c ^^° St'nP.4 ,. ^ *h -afy fatdre bulkhead. (Re change f.em the revised n4nd tier; PFeseRted iR the staff roped, 33. The Final Map shall include reconfigured Lots C and D that accommodate the perimeter wall to be reconstructed along the Bayside Drive and a n=' ^g ^ feet wide landscaped setback between the Bayside Drive right -of -way and the perimeter wall. A new perimeter wall shall not be located any closer to the existing sidewalk on the southerly side of Bayside Drive and the minimum width of the landscape setback of the wall shall be 4 feet. Exhibit B rt; � � ,' • =cos_ = _ . -; �, � 1� i j Ito J - 'T r - - _ - - -- L ao v ul cc ... .. D L- r- - -__ -_ - �nO g' �v X Z ✓-� "' O"d C ti J v1 Y ll�, � > A in z w 'J'1 J p CIO v " r =� z ➢ r -< — -. 1 � Y New Findings: 1. Section 664778.4 of the California Government Code prohibits a City from approving a tentative or final subdivision map that fronts on a public waterway that does not provide or have available reasonable public access by fee or easement from a public highway to that portion of the public waterway bordering or lying within the proposed subdivision. The tentative tract map does not provide reasonable public access along the southerly boundary of the project site from a public highway by way of fee or easement. Although public access is proposed across a floating dockway and gangplank, this access is not within the boundary of the project and is across another property by permit. As such, the proposed subdivision is inconsistent with Section 664778.4 of the California Government Code. A pedestrian walkway can be accommodated along the southerly boundary of the project site (lots 3 -9) given that there is 12 -15 foot wide terrace that runs parallel to and adjacent to the existing bulkhead. The existing terrace is sufficiently wide to provide a 10 -foot wide pedestrian walkway that would connect to the existing 10 -foot wide pedestrian access easement along the Promontory Channel frontage of the project site. A 10 -foot wide easement and walkway is necessary to effectively accommodate two groups of two people to pass by each other without having one person of each couple forced to step behind the other. The terrace is also 4 -5 feet below the grade of the existing and proposed building pads. The lower grade, along with security gates planned by the applicant, enhances the ability to provide security from trespass for project residents. Additionally, the size of the subdivision (3.24 acres) is sufficient to accommodate the area necessary for a public access easement. The affected lots range in size from 6,500 to 10,754 square feet and would be reduced between 500 to 650 square feet, and the resulting area of each lot would exceed the 5,000 square foot minimum required by the Zoning Ordinance. For these reasons, the City Council finds that a 10 -foot wide pedestrian walkway and public access easement is reasonable to be required landward of the existing bulkhead. Additionally, widening the existing public walkway within Lot B (along Promontory Channel) is necessary to accommodate free flowing pedestrian traffic. Requiring the easement and improvement of the walkways, that connect to adjacent public access, is necessary to find the proposed subdivision consistent with Section 664778.4 of the California Government Code. 2. Policy 3.1.1 -13 of the Coastal Land Use Plan requires a direct dedication or an offer to dedicate (OTD) an easement for lateral public access for all new shorefront development causing or contributing to adverse public access impacts. The location of the dedication or easement is between the current limits of public ownership (i.e. below the mean high tide line) and the primary extent of development. Lateral access within the project site can only be provided landward of the bulkhead and the proposed subdivision map does include a direct dedication or an offer to dedicate an easement landward of the bulkhead and proposes lateral access across the water off -the project site. The proposed project represents an adverse impact to public access as it would eliminate the opportunity to provide public access landward of the bulkhead for the duration of the development, which may be permanent. The tentative tract map is not consistent with Policy 3.1.1 -13 without including an easement or an offer to dedicate lateral access across Lots 3 -9. 3. Policy HB -2.1.2 of the Harbor and Bay Element indicates the need to expand and improve existing public waterfront access. Demolition of existing improvements on the project site to accommodate new residential development provides the appropriate opportunity to expand and enhance the existing public access by providing an on -land, improved public walkway along the bay front. An on -land public walkway along the bay front is more readily accessible by the public than the existing or improved on -water walkway that relies on a sloped gangplank leading to a floating walkway that extends to private boat slips. This physical configuration and the psychological and visual cues associated with this configuration suggest that the access is not open to the public and deters public access. Inclusion of an on -land easement at the bay front and improvement of the easement with a pedestrian walkway is necessary to enhance and expand public pedestrian access consistent with this General Plan Policy. Moreover, an on -land pedestrian walkway will ensure that access to the bay front is maintained in the long term as an on -land improvement will be more readily maintained and less subject to degradation from the elements than on -water access. The expense of replacement of existing on -water access could result in future loss of bay front access at the project site. Therefore, public access landward of the bulkhead must be provided. d -� y oF-C L fV = > L1.1 = �. 4 0 O > d 4- o a � - 1- tr-� f41r = -1 IsTt { I � O -�If 1,i V Q Q •, I 7 CL I' li I I Imo` x 3 ffi I I > r M o Lt Tea' M V H O `N d V d i �- } J a am p JesnoH O L V a O c d i N v- v- } s rn 2 N I[I O } LO R O o ° a O y } t fn Y N 5 — 0 O O 3 a v p2 O CL I° d n n °u E a S o < " Z u M � J xa a I i. Q 0 Z O m H C) Q H v V) H O Z U W Q V) awn OW I gym°' -4t= V) Q �YV) O X O 0 W 0 J W Q O W Q V) V) W O O Q _Q J m W O V) V) X W Q W J Y O� m .< N O Q C) ?� V)Q ?� 10>. 0 ° w _J w Q _J 3 °y 0 Q W Q Q V O V) V) ° Q V) Q < u J V) Q Z Q m V) LLj o< O J e < V) �LLJ CD 4-Q + ZQ wQZ V)Q c$ Q oQ0 AX J W m � p :D J M ! Ln 00d 0 ±i Q 0 Z O m H C) Q H v V) H O Z U W Q V) awn OW I gym°' -4t= V) Q �YV) O X O 0 W 0 J W Q O W Q V) V) W O O Q _Q J m W O V) V) X W